| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Unknown | I'll be |
| 00:00:01.03 | Unknown | I'd walk in a moonlight solitude And I thought romance really felt |
| 00:00:05.03 | Richard Graef | Love was just an interview |
| 00:00:09.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:10.54 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:00:10.60 | Unknown | Da ba ah, la ba do, da ba do do |
| 00:00:16.82 | Unknown | Bye. I'm ready. Thank you. |
| 00:00:24.33 | Kristina Feller | meeting. Terrific, thank you so much, Maria. And good evening everybody. Welcome to our regularly scheduled planning commission hearing of a very wet and rainy Wednesday, October 20th. I'd just like to take a moment to also welcome our Interim Community Development Director, Heidi Scoble. And Director Scoville, I'd like to ask that you please call the roll. |
| 00:00:49.49 | Director Scoble | Thank you. Good evening, Chair Feller and Commissioners. This meeting is being held pursuant to government code section 54953, subsection E, and in light of the declared state of emergency, the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 20th, 2021, will be conducted telephonically through the Zoom and broadcast live on the city's website. With that, I will call roll. Commissioner say it say it. here. DIRECTOR HAMPSON- Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:01:16.85 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:01:17.89 | Director Scoble | from the Missionary Juniors. Thank you. |
| 00:01:19.33 | Andrew Junius | President Trump. |
| 00:01:19.68 | Director Scoble | Thank you. Vice Chair, Graf. Yeah. Thank you. Cheerfeller. |
| 00:01:23.44 | Kristina Feller | here. |
| 00:01:25.81 | Director Scoble | All commissioners are present. |
| 00:01:27.92 | Kristina Feller | Perfect. Thank you very much. um item number two on our agenda is the approval of the agenda this evening So unless there's any comments, I'm looking for a motion to approve and a second. |
| 00:01:42.21 | Brett McDonald | Don't move. |
| 00:01:45.55 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg and Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:01:52.47 | Director Scoble | Commissioner said, say I'd It's sad. No worries. |
| 00:01:56.06 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:01:56.08 | Nastassya Saad | No worries. |
| 00:01:59.34 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:01:59.83 | Richard Graef | Thank you. your luck. |
| 00:02:01.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | MR PRICEFERSON, I'm sorry. |
| 00:02:02.31 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Junius? |
| 00:02:03.42 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:02:04.45 | Director Scoble | Vice Chair Grass. Yeah. Kira Feller. Yes. Motion passes five, zero. |
| 00:02:10.44 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you very much. So item number three on our agenda this evening is public comment from any member in the public who would like to comment on items not on the agenda this evening. And Director Scoble, if you could give some Zoom direction here to our public, please. |
| 00:02:30.27 | Director Scoble | Yes, this is the time for the planning commission to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda, except in very limited situations, state law precludes the planning commission from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the planning commission may refer matters not on the agenda to the staff or direct the subject be agendized at a future meeting. That said, if you would like to provide comments this evening, video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application and you'll be called upon when it's your time to speak. To raise your hand from the phone, press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. |
| 00:03:14.01 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Director Scoble. I'm just going to give everyone a moment to find that way to raise their hand in the Zoom application or by cell phone. I'm just looking for hands in the audience. Seeing none. Director Scoville, can you just confirm that to me? |
| 00:03:31.86 | Director Scoble | Chair Feller, you are correct. There are no hands raised at this time. |
| 00:03:34.88 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's go ahead and close public comment for items not on the agenda this evening. and move on to our next item which is item number four which is approval of the meeting minutes and these are from October 6th um do i have any comments from any commission |
| 00:03:54.53 | Nastassya Saad | Fishing. |
| 00:03:55.94 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Saad, do you have comments? |
| 00:03:58.15 | Nastassya Saad | Sorry, no, I was gonna motion to approve, no comment. |
| 00:04:00.63 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Junius. No comments? |
| 00:04:03.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | COMMENTS? Thank you. |
| 00:04:04.09 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Luxembourg. |
| 00:04:05.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No comments. I'll second. And Commissioner Saad's motion |
| 00:04:10.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay, hold on, let's just, I do have one comment, but let me just place the chair part off. |
| 00:04:13.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No problem. |
| 00:04:17.17 | Richard Graef | I'm going to abstain because I was not at that meeting. |
| 00:04:21.63 | Kristina Feller | Oh, right. Yes. Thank you for reminding me. I forgot. Um, The only comment I have is on page five of five. Uh, line 18. I think that's the only comment that I have. Other than that, I think that's the only comment that I have. Um, if staff you have that that one correction I believe Commissioner Saad made a motion to approve And Commissioner Luxenberg seconded that motion. So let's take the roll call. |
| 00:04:54.97 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Saad? MS. Yes. Commissioner Luxenberg. Thank you. |
| 00:04:59.73 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:04:59.83 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:04:59.98 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:05:00.61 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Arginia. |
| 00:05:01.87 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:05:03.11 | Director Scoble | rice chair grass. I'm staying. Purefeller. Motion passes 4-0-1. |
| 00:05:11.07 | Kristina Feller | Terrific. |
| 00:05:11.46 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:05:11.49 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:05:11.53 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:05:11.56 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. So we're going to move into item five of our public hearing this evening, but Just before we do that, this would be the time that commissioners make any disclosures or declarations about any ex parte discussion. So yes, Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:05:32.49 | Nastassya Saad | Um Chair Feller I don't have any um ex parte communications for any of the agenda items but for this particular one I'm within 1000 feet. Um so I believe Mary if I understood I will recuse myself from this agenda item. |
| 00:05:48.69 | Kristina Feller | Which item, Commissioner Saad? |
| 00:05:50.85 | Nastassya Saad | for the first |
| 00:05:53.50 | Kristina Feller | Friday. |
| 00:05:54.10 | Nastassya Saad | 5A sorry I just lost my agenda for 5A yes. |
| 00:06:00.87 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So you're recused for 5A? I believe I need to be. |
| 00:06:04.72 | Nastassya Saad | I believe. |
| 00:06:05.04 | Mary Wagner | I NEED TO BE. |
| 00:06:06.30 | Nastassya Saad | you |
| 00:06:06.56 | Mary Wagner | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:06:08.41 | Kristina Feller | Mary is part Correct. |
| 00:06:10.00 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Chair Feller, and thank you, Commissioner Sud. |
| 00:06:10.01 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:06:14.18 | Mary Wagner | as you all know, you know, if you're within 500 feet of a project that's in front of you, you're presumed to have a conflict under the political reform act if you're within a thousand feet There are criteria that have to be analyzed Commissioner Saad has reviewed those criteria and believe that there could be a financial impact on her property, then it would be appropriate for her to abstain. from tonight's discussion and to recuse yourself, which in Zoom world means turning off your sound and your camera. You have the opportunity to return during public comment time, if you would so choose and would like to comment. And then again, recuse your, you know, leave the room, if you will, until the item is completed. |
| 00:06:56.27 | Nastassya Saad | ELLIE WILSON- Okay so thank you Mary for confirming. I think I'm always a little confused between the 500 and the 1,000 so I think I'm in the 1,000 beat based on the email I received. So then if I don't have to, cause I don't feel like I meet that criteria, then I will join if that's acceptable. Okay thank you. Thanks. Thanks for clarifying. |
| 00:07:16.06 | Kristina Feller | Thanks. No, no, it's important to do that. I know there's another commissioner that might have a conflict as well. Sure. Real quick, Commissioner Sider, is there any other... |
| 00:07:23.59 | Nastassya Saad | SURE. but no ex parte communications, yes. |
| 00:07:29.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you, thank you. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:07:32.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I have no expert at communication. |
| 00:07:34.96 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:07:35.52 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:07:37.48 | Andrew Junius | No ex parte communications. |
| 00:07:39.82 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Vice Chair Graham. |
| 00:07:41.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:07:42.00 | Richard Graef | I know it's part of communication. |
| 00:07:44.74 | Kristina Feller | but do you need to recuse from one of our items? |
| 00:07:47.62 | Richard Graef | Well, yes, I do. I need to recuse myself from the leverageship Schoonmaker. discussions since I'm I'm not sure. in your backyard or there in my backyard. So yes, I'm not quite sure I understand how |
| 00:08:02.00 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Okay. |
| 00:08:06.42 | Richard Graef | Ahem. |
| 00:08:06.49 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:08:07.18 | Richard Graef | Um, If I wanted to make some comments, would I, be able to do that back in the public comment after their presentation or how does that work? I haven't done that before. |
| 00:08:25.01 | Kristina Feller | I'll allow our city attorney to explain that one more time for clarity. Thank you. |
| 00:08:29.98 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Chair Feller and Vice Chair Grimes. Yes, you have the opportunity to return as a member of the public during public comment time. |
| 00:08:29.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:08:38.47 | Mary Wagner | So you would, you know, the equivalent of leave the room during the staff report and the questions from the commission. And then when public comment is called, you're welcome to return and provide your comment. And then again, leave the room, turn off your camera during the planning commission's deliberation and action. |
| 00:09:02.50 | Richard Graef | Okay. Mm-hmm. So then how would I, I would, Thank you. I guess I would, during a public comment, I would turn my audio and video back on |
| 00:09:13.62 | Mary Wagner | And raise your hand. |
| 00:09:13.73 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:09:16.10 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:09:16.62 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:09:16.64 | Mary Wagner | and you'll be called on just as any other member of the public who wishes to come. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. |
| 00:09:22.52 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 00:09:23.13 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:09:24.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you also Mary for the clarification. I do not have anything to declare. So with that, Director Scoble, let's go ahead with item 5A. |
| 00:09:35.79 | Director Scoble | Thank you, Chair Feller. The first public hearing item is a request for a design review permit and a recommendation of an encroachment permit at 139 Bridgeway. Assistant Planner Mike Junicek will be providing the presentations. So, Mike, if you'd like to join us and present, we welcome you. |
| 00:09:55.47 | Mike Junicek | Okay. Thank you, Heidi, and thank you, Chair Fuller. Good evening, commissioners. I'll take a moment to share my screen. We get the right screen. um, broadcast. |
| 00:10:17.72 | Mike Junicek | Okay, one moment, bear with me. |
| 00:10:35.83 | Mike Junicek | All right, seems to be frozen. |
| 00:10:39.58 | Kristina Feller | That's okay. We see your computer screen, the blue computer screen. |
| 00:10:43.93 | Mike Junicek | Okay. |
| 00:10:44.91 | Kristina Feller | Now we can. |
| 00:10:52.10 | Mike Junicek | Okay, so item 5A, 1309 Bridgeway. This is, as Heidi mentioned, a designer view permit. an encroachment agreement This is also known as project ID number 2021-0021. 05 The site location, this is in the central waterfront portion of the the Newtown neighborhood. It's zoned mixed residential and commercial. The CR zone THE Surrounding properties consists of a mix of commercial and mixed-use buildings, including the adjacent property Um, to the north, 1311, which is Um, also a mixed use building, um, ground floor restaurant with two residential units on the second floor. the requests before the planning commission tonight or for a design review permit, THE FAMILY IS And The request is isolated to a single awning structure. partially located within the public right away. So the designer view is for the 122 square foot awning above the public sidewalk and also the portion above a private entryway. AT THE MIXED-USE BUILDING. And then that portion above the public sidewalk, 80 square feet, is a part of the encroachment agreement. on January 14th, 2021. Community Development issued temporary COVID-19 outdoor activities and encroachment agreement for the awning, which is located at the business at Sausalito Animal Hospital. THE FAMILY IS And so tonight the request will make this temporarily approved structure a permanent improvement. On March 1st, CDD received an application for a designer view and an encroachment agreement. to to make the request permanent. On September 16th, 2021, the Historic Preservation Commission conducted A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE HISTORIC RESOURCE DETERMINATION. And HPC determined that the property does not qualify as a historical resource under CEQA. And this final advisory, historic resource determination, is forwarded to the planning commission tonight and you should have gotten an attachment three in your packets that staff report and also the information packet submitted by the applicant. No correspondence has been received. whatsoever for this item. The notice was posted on site and mailed to property owners and residents within 300 feet. on October 8th, 2021. A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. The awning is installed. As of now, it's approved under the temporary COVID-19 agreement. The building itself, it's a mixed use building. It's 2,100 square feet. the The veterinarian clinic, the Sausalito Animal Hospital is 1,475 square feet. and then the residential unit is 625 square feet. To the left hand side of the image there's various vegetation and trees on that southern facade. AND THEN, The Animal Hospital has a use permit from 1999, and that's the time that the ground floor space was converted to the animal hospital and then also the the upstairs used to be two units and it was turned into a single residential unit. the proposed site plan So you see the awning is L-shaped. and you'll see the property line is here. the majority of the surface area is uh, projects out above the public sidewalk. and then about 42 square feet of it is in this public entryway. I'm not sure. Here you see kind of a partial floor plan of it. It extends six feet in this private portion. and it's more or less flush with the southern facade of the building. And then – And that's... the public right of way area, it only extends four feet. as the projection. and you can see it's eight feet above the sidewalk. |
| 00:15:42.08 | Mike Junicek | So there's 13 required findings for the design review permit. And there's five required findings for the encouragement agreement and I'll highlight A couple of each. for the designer view. Design review criterion one states The proposed project is consistent with any applicable design guidelines? AND Staff finds the awning is consistent with specific awning requirements in SMC 1042-06. This includes the awning is located at least eight feet above the private and public walkways. the vertical clearance of it. The portion above the public sidewalk projects no more than five feet. out into the public right of way and is more than two feet from the face of the curb line. criterion two, states the proposed design complements the surrounding neighborhoods. Staff finds the awning maintains a prevailing design character of the neighborhood and other properties on the street have fabric awnings. And the audience also for a screen matches the existing window trim and matches the roof eaves. as for the encroachment agreement. Criteria, criteria B states The encroachment will not adversely affect the enjoyment Joining Properties. that finds that the proposed encroachment does not uh, adverse, uh, does not, decrease the existing side yard setback? And then Criterion D states the proposed encroachment does not adversely affect the public circulation nor create or constitute a safety hazard to public safety. And again, back to those dimensional standards, there's eight feet of clearance and it meets the other specific requirements of 1042.06. So staff's recommendation tonight is that the Planning Commission approve the attached draft resolution. on an attachment one, which takes the following actions to approve the design route permit for 122 square foot awning above the public and private blockways at the mixed use building. And then also recommend to the city council approval of an encroachment agreement for the 80 square foot portion of the awning above the public sidewalk. within the right-of-way along Bridgeway. Alternatively, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing for additional information and or project provisions or direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial stating specific reasons and he was one or more of the required findings cannot be made. So happy to answer any questions and thank you for your time. |
| 00:18:25.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Mike. Thank you for yet another excellent presentation, and thank you for walking everybody through that. for providing all the backup material to make these findings this evening Um, At this time, let me open this up for any questions that commissioners might have of staff. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have any questions for staff? Look, you're on mute. |
| 00:18:53.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sorry about that. I think the report covered it fully, so I do not have any questions. |
| 00:18:58.59 | Kristina Feller | Great. Commissioner Junius? Can I share some? |
| 00:19:02.65 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:19:02.84 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:19:02.97 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:19:03.03 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:19:03.26 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:19:03.84 | Kristina Feller | Spice chair for us. No questions. Great, thank you very much. I do not have any either at this time. So again, thank you, Mike. Let's go ahead and ask the applicant to come up here. |
| 00:19:10.37 | Tom Hoover | And. |
| 00:19:15.71 | Kristina Feller | provide a presentation or a discussion regarding their project application. Mike, do you see who that might be in the audience so we can give them |
| 00:19:28.09 | Mike Junicek | Yes, and that's Dr. Ray Dieter, the veterinarian is in the crowd. Um, And I think he's been able to, yeah, there you go. |
| 00:19:39.44 | Kristina Feller | Great and welcome Dr. Dieter this evening. If I could ask staff just before we get you started there, You have 15 minutes to present anything you'd like regarding your application. You're welcome to reserve any of that time for any closing comments after we take public comment or after you hear some of the commissioners. comments as well. So staff, could we get our timer clock up here? on the screen, there we go. Hopefully, Dr. Dieter, you can see that. in your tiled screen. There's a plan. |
| 00:20:19.18 | Dr. Ray Dieter | See what? |
| 00:20:20.46 | Kristina Feller | There's a timer clock that's set at 15 minutes, and once I hand this over to you, that will just help you keep time. if you'd like. |
| 00:20:30.32 | Dr. Ray Dieter | OK, I can't see it. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your consideration. I don't really have any comment. I'll be available for any questions if you have any. Thank you. |
| 00:20:40.12 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. Thank you very much. Um... Commissioners, do you have any Questions of the applicant at this time, I'll just quickly go through Commissioner Junius. Commissioner Luxenberg. AND I THINK IT'S A PART OF THE Place your grasp. |
| 00:20:56.88 | Richard Graef | Not really. |
| 00:20:58.59 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I do not have any either So at this time, let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. And as directed earlier by Director Scoble, you can raise your hand in the Zoom application or press star nine if you're calling in from a cell phone. We do have a comment timer on the tile screen view if you can see that. So each member of the public has three minutes to make comment on this item. So I, at this time, I'm looking for hands or anybody indicating they might want to make public comments. |
| 00:21:38.51 | Kristina Feller | Seeing none, I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment. And, Commissioner Junius, do you want to kick off any Discussion? |
| 00:21:48.01 | Andrew Junius | I've moved to approve. |
| 00:21:50.38 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Luxembourg. |
| 00:21:52.11 | Andrew Junius | Second. |
| 00:21:52.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:21:54.80 | Kristina Feller | I don't know I think vice chair graph might have beat you to it. Commissioner Todd you have any comments. |
| 00:21:57.60 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. No comments, pretty straightforward. |
| 00:22:01.95 | Kristina Feller | Neither do I. So it sounds like Commissioner Junius made a motion Vice Chair Graff seconded that. So Director Scoble, if I could ask you to please take the roll call. |
| 00:22:14.96 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Saad. Thank you. Yes. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:22:18.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:22:19.60 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:22:20.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:22:21.66 | Director Scoble | Vise pierograph. Yeah. Cheerfeller. |
| 00:22:24.58 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:22:24.93 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:22:24.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:22:25.49 | Director Scoble | Motion passes five zero. Please note that any action of the planning commission may be appealed within 10 days of the action And it would be brought to the city council for appeal. You must complete the required appeal form and pay the appeal fee within 10 days of this action for the appeal to be filed in a timely manner. Questions regarding how to file an appeal may be directed to the project planner or the community development department staff. |
| 00:22:51.06 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you so much. So let's move on to item 5B on our agenda, which is 310 Harbor Drive. |
| 00:22:59.26 | Director Scoble | Okay, so the next public hearing item that we have is a designer view permit, conditional use permit, and non-conformity permit to remove and replace existing boat docks at the Clipper Yacht Harbor Basins 3 and 4 at 310 Harbor Drive. Our planner tonight that will be presenting to the planning commission, This evening will be Tricia Stevens from MIG, and she is our contract planner. So with that, I see Ms. Stevens is on the video, and I will leave you to it. |
| 00:23:39.08 | Trisha Stevens | Good evening, Chair Fell and members of the Planning Commission. My name is Trisha Stevens with MIG, working on behalf of the city as a I'm a contract planner and I'll be presenting this item. And I have here with me Barbara Beard, also at the MYG, who has been the lead MND PREPAR. |
| 00:24:05.93 | Trisha Stevens | The purpose of this public hearing is to hear testimony and take action on the following entitlements. First, design review permit. to remove and replace the existing boat docks at the Clipper Yacht Harbor Basins 3 and 4. a conditional use permit to recognize existing liveaboards, A non-conformity permit to recognize the overall existing facility and a mitigated negative declaration to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. As a reminder, the Planning Commission held a study session on June 2nd. And this presentation will refresh you on the project components. And then I'll focus on responses to comments made as part of the MND and comments made at the study session. |
| 00:25:08.37 | Trisha Stevens | The Clipper Yacht Harbor is at the, located at the Indian Harbor Drive, and the project deals with basins three and four It's part of a larger 33.8 acre marina. So in this slide you can see I'm not sure. Basins 3 and 4. The Clipper Yacht Harbor also includes basin two and a gas dock and other facilities. It's located in the waterfront zoning district in the Marin ship and it's currently developed with the existing docks. Just a note on surrounding uses to the Northwest is the S-40 houseboat. docks northeast is Richardson Bay. To the southwest is the clipper Yacht. harbor marine facilities and other commercial uses And to the southeast, as I mentioned, is Basin 2 and the Fuel Dog. These are a few photos of the existing dock system. In this upper right slide, you can see the houseboats to the north. |
| 00:26:32.96 | Trisha Stevens | This is the a site plan of the proposed project and Most of the construction will be in the water. and some of the construction staging will be landslide. So, AND I THINK THAT'S A This is Basins 3 and 4 and there's existing parking on this particular Peninsula. |
| 00:26:57.79 | Dr. Ray Dieter | it. |
| 00:26:59.14 | Trisha Stevens | And then there's the open space staging area to the south. And this is the existing public dock. And the existing marine facilities are here, which is actually to the west. There's currently 427 slips and it's going to be reduced to 426. THEIR OWNERS. And again, this use permit recognize existing liveaboards and the existing marina. |
| 00:27:33.21 | Trisha Stevens | I just wanted to also point out that the new dock system will include a gray concrete decks and we'll be replacing the existing brown wooden decking Thank you. doc system. |
| 00:27:51.06 | Trisha Stevens | This slide shows a little bit more detail on the size of the dock system, the number of piles. on the slip count and the liveaboard count, and as you can see, there's 27 liveaboard So, and there's some changes in the THEIR OWNERS. total square footage of the dock structure system decrease in the pile. count. |
| 00:28:22.19 | Trisha Stevens | of. There's been a mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project. the MND was released on May 22nd. and the comment period ended on June 21st after an extended period review period as requested by the Planning Commission The findings is that the And he said, excuse me, significant impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. with the mitigation measures consistent with CEQA And there's mitigation measures related to I THINK IT'S A LOT OF mammals and eelgrass, archaeological monitoring for shell mounds, and unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources. Um, We have prepared a response to comments and that was an attachment to your staff report. And I'll be talking about some of those responses later on in my presentation. |
| 00:29:33.42 | Trisha Stevens | Well, the project is subject to the 1995 general plan because it was deemed complete prior to the adoption of the new general plan. We did analyze the project. consistency with both plans for informational and so Steph finds that The project is consistent with both general plans uh... The general plan allows for dock replacement in existing marinas. and the stock replacement supports economic vitality and maritime uses. It also addresses sea level rise and habitat protections. |
| 00:30:18.50 | Trisha Stevens | The project also complies with the Marin ship specific plan and the marineship overlay and the zoning ordinance. which allows for dock replacement if the number of births do not increase. and the existing marina has a public doc for rent and THEIR OWNERS. New boat tie ups would not be required and the project meets parking standards and all the development standards. |
| 00:30:56.15 | Trisha Stevens | With regard to the LIVA boards, the existing 25 LIVA boards are to remain. And right now, the total number of liveaboards in the entire Clipper Yacht Harbor do not exceed 10% the BRRRRs, and under the city zoning ordinance, they are not able to exceed 10%. There was some discussion about whether or not They can put more liveaboards in. and we I'm not sure. found that The live boards comply with all the standards relating to safety and sewer and mooring navigable vessels, commercial uses, and charters. and the Marine Oprys operators do give preference to low and moderate income tenants when vacancies occur. |
| 00:31:52.68 | Trisha Stevens | Just in terms of So now I want to focus on the response to comments. an overview of the comments that we received. As mentioned, the review period was extended to include additional agencies and we also included other marinas, floating home association, city officials and other committees and commissions, Marin County and other cities and environmental organizations. So we did make sure that everybody that might be interested had an opportunity to comment. |
| 00:32:41.14 | Trisha Stevens | So we had a few comments from state and federal agencies. I'm not gonna go through all those comments. The staff report includes a summary of those comments and the response to comments has a very thorough responses but I wanted to note a couple of items. California Department of Fish and Wildlife they had wanted more clarification on hydroacoustical measures, that is the noise from the pile driving underneath the water THEIR OWNERS. And so we made some changes to the document, to the mitigation to make sure that all the mitigating measures such as soft start, bubble curtain, cushion blocks. are all part of the project in order to minimize effects on fish and marine mammals. BCDC THE END OF THE END OF THE I've commented on public access and amenities and sea level rise, which I'm gonna talk about in just a minute. And they wanted to ensure that any construction would not impact existing amenities, And they also commented on sea level rise, which again I'll talk about in just a moment. I'm Mr. Eric Gulichan, who owns the SS and I think that's a great question. which is to the southwest of the building. the project right here. He's made a number of comments. of to the effect that he wants to uh, He wants provisions made for navigational channel so that the SS Vallejo can navigate THROUGH HERE. Um, He prefers 60 feet. Right now there's only about 36 feet here. And while this need is very understandable, oh, I wanted to mention that for many years, SS Vallejo was not navigable, but he has fixed it up enough so that it is navigable. So we understand that this need is very understandable, but staff concluded that his recourse is not the responsibility of the Klipper Yacht Harbor. There is a, 60 foot submerged right of way called Monterey Street which is right in this location here. that's in the unincorporated County, the city boundaries are right along the edge of Clipper Yacht. So the S40 docks are in the unincorporated county I THINK I'M GOING TO BE And again, because of the protrusion of the houseboats in this area, that 60 feet is impeded. However, we recognize that the city nor the Klupper Yacht Harbor has any control on this and we've referred the matter to the county. There was also comments about the need for this project to conduct a navigational risk assessment we may comment with a contact with the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Coast Guard. and about their regulatory issues. powers in this situation, in particular whether or not they would require a navigational risk assessment And, um, the And the conclusion of all those discussion was that it's not required. that's not the responsibility of this project, and the project has received their federal permits And there's also comments about setbacks and the project does meet THE FAMILY. their nonconformity permit recognizes existing setbacks that the docs will be replaced in kind. |
| 00:37:08.49 | Trisha Stevens | Commission members made other comments or had questions that are allowed in, outlined in the staff report covering the topics on this slide. I'm going to talk about sea level rise in public access. in just a moment, but I'd like to touch on some of these other items briefly. Um, There was a question about the use of drill, a drill auger for pile driving. And overall, We believe the applicant has explored the least impactful methods for pile driving and has looked at all kinds of Thank you. different alternative And they've noted that the DRILL. pile driving is used for hard rock drilling. It's not feasible for this location. And then we also explored vibration hammer, and it has some of its own negative impacts. So the conclusion of all that was that the use of the impact hammer is the most feasible method due to the fact that it's quicker, it'll get the job done faster, and it's most suitable for the type of soils in this location. And on the LIFA boards, as I mentioned earlier, there was some question about increasing the number of LIFA boards, but they are at their max right now. There was also a question about using the existing piles to reduce any disturbance and the applicant has provided considerable evidence that the They can't use the existing piles and they need to install the new concrete piles in order to meet all applicable codes and also to carry the wind and wave load of the new dock system. |
| 00:39:13.01 | Trisha Stevens | On public access revegetation, as I mentioned, there's the existing peninsula where there are existing Um, pathways, pedestrian bicycle pathways, and some existing landscaping pedestrian amenities such as trash receptacles THEIR OWNERS. and benches. and the commission had asked whether or not they can enhance some landscaping, especially around the entrance to the public dock and the applicant has agree to install additional landscaping. And we propose a new condition of approval to be added to what you have before you that calls for the applicant to submit a final landscaping plan for approval by the Community Development Director that provides new native tree and shrub plantings in this area. consistent with BCDC guidelines. So we propose a new condition. |
| 00:40:25.68 | Trisha Stevens | So with regard to sea level rise, so the applicant provided a sea level rise analysis consistent with the direction of the BCDC based on the Coastal Commission guidelines THE CITY IS A LITTLE BIT OF And they did this in 2019. and BCDC subsequently requested that the 100-year storm event be accounted four. based on concerns with overtopping the docks by mid-century. Yeah, so that resulted in raising the pile design from 12 and a half feet to 13 and a half feet above mean low or low water level. AND, With regard to the Bay Wave model, that is the model for Marin County. we inquired whether or not the Bay Wave model is different Thank you. enough from the, um, Also, commission modeling. to warrant a new analysis. We learned that there are some differences in the methodology. but both are science-based, And in checking with Marin County, the result would not have a would be different based on the two types of modeling so We feel that the project adequately addresses sea level rise and The analysis that was done is essentially equivalent to the Bay Wave model. |
| 00:42:22.40 | Trisha Stevens | So staff recommendation that you adopt the resolution attached to your staff report based on the findings found in that resolution. to approve the design review permit, use permit, a nonconformity permit to remove and replace existing boat docks. And, um, The resolution also makes findings that the mitigated Negative declaration is adequate and complete, and the project complies. with the California Environmental Quality Act. So that concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions. And as I mentioned, Barbara Beard is here to help answer questions as well. And thank you, commissioners. |
| 00:43:11.66 | Kristina Feller | Patricia, thank you so much for all the heavy lifting and hard work I know you've been doing behind the scenes to get this back here. at the commission tonight, so thank you for that. I just want to thank the applicant also for working with you diligently to do that. I want to open this up to questions to the commissioners before we go to public comment, because there's quite a lot of information in there. and some clarifications. I also, for the benefit of the public and our public record, want to make sure that it's very clear what some of those responses were to the MND. So let me go ahead and start with Commissioner Luxenberg. Do you have any questions for staff? |
| 00:43:59.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, thank you. Ms. Stevens, thank you for your presentation and also thank you for providing it in advance. That was very helpful. Can we go back to slide number six? which is the proposed project |
| 00:44:43.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's perfect. Thank you. Thank you for working with the applicant to respond to my comments at the study session regarding the landscaping. I want to make sure and I want to adjust the language a little bit. The intent of my comments at the last meeting where it says open space staging area, that was the area that we wanted to have landscape, which includes at the existing public dock, but it goes all the way back to where it says existing parking. So that entire area is the area that my intent was. Is that your understanding from them? |
| 00:45:22.95 | Trisha Stevens | My understanding that the intent is to landscape around the entrance to the public boat dock in this area. here. I THINK I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO in our discussions with the applicants AND I THINK THAT'S A They were not proposing additional landscaping along the pedestrian path. There is some landscaping there. I THINK I'M GOING TO BE So we're happy to have a discussion on what you I THINK THAT'S WHAT I FEEL NEEDS TO BE DONE. |
| 00:45:57.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I don't think it needs a lot, but I think they're going to be ripping it up, so to speak, a little bit in order to use it as a staging area. So just some, you know, rather than the sort of the gravel and the dirt that's there, it needs, it's really unattractive, and that's public open space, so to speak, or people use it that way. So I think it really does need to go all the way to where it says existing parking up to the entrance between the two walkways. So that's the area that I think should be in that condition. And we can ask them when they present about that. But that was the intent of my comments at the last meeting. |
| 00:45:57.05 | Trisha Stevens | Yeah. |
| 00:46:38.02 | Barbara Beard | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:46:39.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | My second question, if we can go to slide seven. I just want to understand which is that one. I want to understand what the 10% number is if they've got 426 slips and there are 426 bumps. 10% would be 42. So where does the 10%, what is the 10% off? of the |
| 00:47:04.43 | Trisha Stevens | of all the docks in Clipper, uh... Yacht Harbor. I don't have the total number of slips in the overall project, right at my fingertips. But from the information that we got is the 27 is at about 10% of the total. |
| 00:47:33.36 | Ushmita | We have total 568 clips in base 2, 3, and 4. |
| 00:47:38.93 | Kristina Feller | hold on we're not here to listen to that this is a time to question staff |
| 00:47:45.25 | Trisha Stevens | OK. |
| 00:47:45.44 | Kristina Feller | So, um, the, |
| 00:47:46.43 | Trisha Stevens | Yeah. |
| 00:47:46.76 | Kristina Feller | that we're going to be able to do that. has asked you to put up here. If I'm correct, under slip count, you've got Basin 3, Basin 4, and then you've totaled it under overall. I think he's looking at this 426 proposed and wondering how 10% of that equals 27 instead of 42. |
| 00:48:10.77 | Trisha Stevens | Oh, I'm sorry, I misspoke a little bit. There are more liveaboards in the other AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT in the other So if you add the 27 to the liveaboards and the other basins. And I don't have that number right now, but I could find it out or perhaps the applicant can help with that. My information is if you look at the total number of slips in all the basins and the total number of liveaboards is at about 20 at about 10 percent And I can figure out the, I can get those numbers in just a moment. |
| 00:48:50.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | If I heard the number I heard was 500 and something, that means there's 50 something totally for all of them. But given the vast housing shortage, I think if 10% is allowable, we should be getting the 10%. I'm having trouble with the map here, so hopefully we can clarify that with the applicant. |
| 00:49:11.55 | Trisha Stevens | Okay, I do have the numbers, but I just don't have them up right now. And I can get those in just a moment. |
| 00:49:18.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That would be great. Chair Keller, those are the questions I have at this time. Thank you. |
| 00:49:24.06 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Commissioner Saad, do you have any questions for staff? |
| 00:49:29.37 | Nastassya Saad | I think one is for staff and maybe one for the applicant. It was just something, thank you, Trisha, for the presentation. Just a comment about the SS Vallejo in the, Thank you. |
| 00:49:42.86 | Unknown | THE END OF THE |
| 00:49:43.06 | Nastassya Saad | regards to the response to one of I think it was comment one Gulli Shen's comment number the first one about Monterey Street and the 60 feet is is there anything if it's been referred to the county that can ultimately affect a determine if we were to make a determination in this project barring not knowing what the county may say about that matter. Maybe it's more of a procedural question but would anything be able to override a determination this evening from the county? I THINK I'M GOING TO BE |
| 00:50:24.57 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 00:50:24.61 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:50:25.95 | Trisha Stevens | The county would need to determine if the S40 houseboats violate anything And we asked them if they can look back in some of their old environmental documents and permitting And I don't think that they've had a chance to look at that research yet. I think in staff's opinion that doesn't affect this project. because the The 60 feet is in the unincorporated county, as well as the S40 docks are in the county. in our minds that doesn't affect this project. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:51:15.67 | Nastassya Saad | OK. Thank you for clarifying. I think my other question will be for the applicant. So that's all I have right now Chair Feller. |
| 00:51:23.40 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Saad. Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:51:27.90 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. I only have one question and it's really just a request for some additional explanation and I'm not sure if staff was better to do this or the applicant but the eelgrass mitigations are pretty complex I've read through them a couple of times. I think I understand them, but I sure would appreciate just kind of a high level This is the timing of things, the timing of the survey, it's time of the construction, you know, a little bit more for normal people as to how the veal grass is protected. where it is, things like that. Just, and I'm not looking for an enormous amount of detail, just an overview would be appreciated. So don't know if that's you, Tricia, or Barbara, or somebody on the applicant's team. |
| 00:52:07.63 | Trisha Stevens | I'd like to turn that one over to Barbara. |
| 00:52:12.94 | Barbara Beard | Good evening, everyone. The initial study does have the documentation showing where the eelgrass locations are based on surveys that the applicant conducted. I believe in 2019. There's some small pockets or groupings of eelgrass somewhat off the dock area. and So the. Survey protocols are that you do the pre-construction survey And then you do a lot of measures during construction, which are a lot of the ones that were amplified based on comments from California Department of Fish and Wildlife in our response. And then there's post-construction surveys. to ensure that the eelgrass remains. healthy. after construction. And I don't know if that's giving you enough detail. That's so cool. |
| 00:53:11.48 | Andrew Junius | So just one follow up, if you will. So is there, there are clearly periods where the eelgrass is more vulnerable than others? I'm not sure. any that would actually prohibit construction during a period of vulnerability, or is it more kind of, depending on what the survey say, that's what you how you base your construction schedule on. |
| 00:53:36.14 | Barbara Beard | Uh... You know, I should probably refer to the exact language of the mitigation measure because there is a timing criteria in that language and I wouldn't want to misspeak at this particular moment. I did have that file open. |
| 00:53:53.16 | Nastassya Saad | MAY I? I WAS JUST LOOKING AT IT. SO IF IT'S HELPFUL. IT'S ON PAGE 8 AND IT'S THE QUALITATIVE SURVEY |
| 00:53:55.64 | Barbara Beard | Okay. |
| 00:53:56.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:54:01.13 | Nastassya Saad | is conducted prior to construction within the April to October growing season. |
| 00:54:08.18 | Barbara Beard | Correct, okay, that's the time period that I was thinking of. |
| 00:54:11.89 | Andrew Junius | that construction could still occur during that period. it. |
| 00:54:14.97 | Barbara Beard | Yeah. |
| 00:54:15.03 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Okay. OK, thank you. |
| 00:54:18.53 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Genius. Uh, vice chair grant. |
| 00:54:23.08 | Richard Graef | I have no questions at this point. |
| 00:54:25.45 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great, thank you. I do have a couple, and so Barbara and Tricia, I want to follow up on something Commissioner Junius has brought up regarding the eelgrass and that is Um, the language was not clear, and sometimes this doesn't actually reach to the commission. It goes through DPW and of CDD. who actually oversees the construction implementation at these different phases? whether it's monitoring the eelgrass, is that fish and wildlife, does um the Coastal Commission get involved when, you know, I'd like to understand who exactly is overseeing that at what time. |
| 00:55:09.86 | Barbara Beard | A very good question because it is a regulatory interweaving of overlapping agency jurisdiction. the Army Corps permit. and the BCDC permit both will want to be able to monitor the eelgrass pre-construction survey results and then the post-construction survey results. And they have permit conditions in those permits specific to the eelgrass that you're seeing in the ISMND. California Department of Fish and Wildlife does not actually have permit authority. BUT THEY WANT... to make sure that the survey follow Cal Fish and Wildlife protocols. And so they're asking to be provided the reports and opportunity to review the results of the surveys. |
| 00:56:03.74 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And so I might need a director Scoble here to help with sort of the follow up with you and Tricia, and that is. Is it necessary or is this part of standard procedure through CDD that all these different permits, is there a comprehensive permit sequence oversight, sign off and everything just because this is so environmentally sensitive and I completely appreciate what the applicant is trying to do here but let's make sure that there's also no stop and start and stop and start. So I'd like to figure out if this is streamlined now or if there's a condition of approval that can require that this be managed ahead of time or everybody's benefit. So I don't know, Trisha or Barbara or Director Scoble, who's best to answer that. |
| 00:57:02.18 | Director Scoble | You know, that typically happens before a building permit is issued. a planner would review all the conditions of approval and determine or establish the findings relative to the regulatory agencies. If you wanted to ensure that that is actually done and memorialized, then a condition of approval is the best instrument to do that. So that would be my recommendation, but we also have our city attorney that popped up. Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.27 | Mary Wagner | . |
| 00:57:31.31 | Director Scoble | I've been... |
| 00:57:31.53 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.54 | Director Scoble | Bye. |
| 00:57:31.63 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.64 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.66 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.68 | Director Scoble | Yeah. |
| 00:57:31.96 | Mary Wagner | and |
| 00:57:32.23 | Director Scoble | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:57:32.82 | Mary Wagner | If it helps, Chair Feller, as you know, when the mitigation measures are adopted and the CEQA document is approved, There's also a mitigation monitoring plan that's approved. that includes who's responsible for ensuring that certain conditions are met. I know that your question went beyond that, but you had kind of started with the eelgrass question and then that evolved into the overall kind of permitting and ensuring |
| 00:57:51.24 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I know that. |
| 00:57:59.72 | Mary Wagner | that things are sequenced properly. But for what it's worth, you'll also have that mitigation monitoring program in place that will assign responsibility to particular agencies. I think too and perhaps this is more of something for director Scoble or for your consultants. You know, the work in the water is pretty highly regulated, as you know, and I think that the other jurisdictions, you know, the Army Corps, BCDC, are very in tune to what's happening and on top of their their game when that happens. You know, BCDC won't even act until after the city's acted and the environmental document is in place. |
| 00:58:39.28 | Director Scoble | Yeah, and I'd like to add that we did include a condition of approval that required agency coordination and that's typically through what they call a jargon point of permit it's a joint agency regional permitting. and So that could address that as well. |
| 00:58:53.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:58:53.28 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 00:58:53.39 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:58:53.40 | Trisha Stevens | And then... |
| 00:58:53.44 | Director Scoble | Good. |
| 00:58:53.84 | Kristina Feller | and then, |
| 00:58:54.28 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:58:54.31 | Trisha Stevens | That condition is number 25 in your resolution, yeah. |
| 00:58:58.33 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, and I appreciate the conversation around this. And I think we're getting there. I mean, this is not meant to be to tighten some screws on the applicant or anything like that. This is meant to ensure that there's actually not just the permits, and everyone's kind of working in a silo. I want this to kind of be working kind of more collaboratively, which is why I'm asking if we can please further condition it to ensure that there's an actual sequence and management plan. the purpose is really to streamline this and make sure that this can be successful. I've seen many situations where everyone has the best intentions and every agency is, you know, on deck ready to roll, but they're not talking to each other. And that creates a problem. Um, this, you know, this, uh, This harbor is very important to Sausalito and it's a big one and I want to make sure that we have, you know, all the safeguards in place that we can to make sure it's successful. So, if staff, if you're willing to sort of take that on and as a further condition of approval, I think that would be really just helpful to streamline the process. |
| 01:00:11.59 | Director Scoble | Yeah, we can connect the dots between the mitigation monitoring plan and the regional coordination with other permitting. Right. |
| 01:00:17.88 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:00:19.16 | Director Scoble | And just for institutional background, about 15 years ago, Clipper Yacht Harbor did a similar project where they did, because due to subsidence, they did do fill and went through a similar process. And that was a super successful project as well that we didn't bolt them up. So the applicants know what they're doing and staff will ensure that we're doing our part as well. |
| 01:00:45.08 | Kristina Feller | Great. Yeah, thank you for that. And I know the applicant has been Um, very judicious and sort of getting to the bottom of some of this and looking at alternative construction and execution. And I guess I just want to ask this question again for avoidance of any doubt at all. um, I know that the pile count is less than what is going to be ultimately in place. BUT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED OR IN THE STAFF REPORT if any of the existing pile locations can be reused, again, to further mitigate disruption. |
| 01:01:28.43 | Director Scoble | I would suggest that is a great question for the applicant. Yes. |
| 01:01:33.28 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.54 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.59 | Kristina Feller | No. |
| 01:01:34.63 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.64 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 01:01:34.64 | Kristina Feller | They've been. |
| 01:01:34.66 | Director Scoble | I think. |
| 01:01:34.90 | Trisha Stevens | They can explain that a little bit better. |
| 01:01:39.00 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, all right, I'm just making a note and then Um, Director Scoble or Tricia, could you just confirm again, just to be absolutely clear that that that there's no that is not necessary for a full renewal of the nonconforti nonconformity permit that the original nonconformity will Um, convey with this new project. I just want to make sure that we're not forgetting anything. |
| 01:02:11.92 | Director Scoble | Yeah, well, I believe that the intent of the staff report includes that background. So this would not supersede any past actions, but if the council wanted to, make sure and double check that. There could also be another condition of approval that states that this permit does not supersede past approval if you just wanted to memorialize it. But I don't think it's necessary, but if you wanted to do that. |
| 01:02:36.19 | Kristina Feller | I'm looking for your direction. I just want to make sure that it's clear one way or the other. I don't care. additional language is needed or not. I just want to make sure there's no vulnerability in that, that we're, we're good to go. That's, that's my goal. |
| 01:02:51.07 | Director Scoble | You're good to go. |
| 01:02:52.52 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. And then, um, I know I submitted a question ahead of time about Bay Wave and I want to go back to that because I think that's a good Whereas I, again, I completely understand what the applicant is trying to do here. some very well documented issues throughout Richardson Bay, which is not unique to Sausalito necessarily, But one thing that is rather unique is our is our rate of subsidence, because a lot of this area is filled. And, um, And so one of the reasons I've asked for this to be modeled in Bay Wave, which was a comment I made back in June at the study session, was specifically for that. I mean, um, you know, BCDC, NOAA and all that kind of stuff. there are different methodologies of modeling And those capture sea level rise, but they don't necessarily capture the subsidence and the rate of that here in Richardson Bay specifically. And again, this is a large and very important component to Sausalito. And the reason I brought that up in June is because I want to ensure that we are dotting our I's and crossing our T's and not creating a situation where this applicant has to come back to us in another 10 or 15 years. 10 years is really what they're projecting for a substantial subsidence within that timeframe. and that they're spending all this money to improve this, and then they have to deal with something else, particularly knowing that there's additional fill there. So, I want to ask again, was this modeled by the county through Bayway? |
| 01:04:39.64 | Trisha Stevens | No, it was not. The modeling was done based on the Coastal Commission 2018 guidelines. But we did check with the county of Marin And I got from them that they didn't necessarily see in me to remodel. the project based on BayWave that the results would be the same. But I don't have any details about subsidence. |
| 01:05:08.52 | Director Scoble | And if I could add just a little bit, and I agree, I don't think we have enough detail about or information regarding subsidence, but in November or on November 8th of 2019, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission wrote the applicants a letter regarding this proposal. So in order to, as you know, get a project through, it does require other agencies to review and authorize it. And so the Clipper Yacht Harbor proactively reached out to San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. And as part of their review letter, there was an item that um recommended that they use the state guidance for sea level rise projections. And so the VCDC group uses a NOAA-based model, whereas the Bay Wave, as you know, uses the USPS model. And in speaking with the applicants yesterday, they do have information relative to supporting the fact that they did use the BCDC model, and they can speak to that as part of their presentation and or follow-up. questions. |
| 01:06:16.86 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I'll ask this of the applicant again, you know this is a big project i want to be absolutely sure and again no one doesn't look at the subsidence that's why i was specifically asking in june about bay wave because they do And I don't think that this applicant ever since June spoke to the county except for maybe yesterday when I had brought it up. So I'm a little bit concerned about that, but let's see what they have to say and make sure that, you know, this is going to be successful. Okay. Um... Commissioners, do you have any other questions for staff at this time? I'll just look for hands real fast. |
| 01:07:00.16 | Trisha Stevens | I just wanted to follow up on the liveaboard and I think I can't put my finger on the total count in the entire harbor. So I think that's a good question for the applicant to clarify Okay. |
| 01:07:14.20 | Kristina Feller | Bye. but we're gonna go ahead and ask the applicant to turn their camera on and share their screen if they need to How are you, Casey? Good to see you, Mr. Peterson. Let's unmute you. Do you need to share your screen this evening? |
| 01:07:35.90 | Casey Peterson | I do not. I do not. |
| 01:07:38.05 | Kristina Feller | Okay, does anyone on your team need to? |
| 01:07:41.00 | Casey Peterson | Ushmita might, but she will talk after me, so. |
| 01:07:46.13 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, so let me just real quick, Mr. Peterson, before I hand it over to you, staff, if I could ask you to put the timer clock |
| 01:07:47.51 | Casey Peterson | so |
| 01:07:54.82 | Kristina Feller | up here. um, on screen. So the applicant can see that again, Mr. Peterson, there's 15 minutes for you and your team. to present your design, your application. You've heard some of the discussion here you are either welcome to address that or any questions that commission asks you will not be counted against your 15 minutes. And if you want to leave any time at, you know, for, for the end, after we hear public comment and further discussion or questions from us, you're welcome to do that. Just let us know. And with that, I will turn it over to you. And thank you for being here this evening. |
| 01:08:32.25 | Casey Peterson | Thank you, Ashley. Thank you all of you for listening as well. nothing that i've heard tonight is a deal breaker for us i think we're getting there um i'll start with the liveaboard percentage we're just under 10 percent um we have most of our liveaboards are on basin two So, Basin 2 were higher than 10%, but throughout when you add that were probably 30 liveaboards in basin two, but there's only a hundred slips there. Um, So we're under 10%, which I know there's a need for housing but living boards are we're 99% occupant or occupied. So it's hard to have the liveaboard on the list with the right size boat, because we have very little turnover. But we do prioritize of the boards coming into the marina. So we are under 10%, but we do prioritize them coming in and we have nothing No reason to not have them, but we are, that's how the math works out. as landscaping was the first thing brought up, we do have some plans for over by the gate, as Tricia said. One issue we've seen that is an emergency driveway, which is a lot of the things that we've seen the fire department, Um... Coast Guard us getting out to that dock. That is the reason it's gravel is because boats do need to go back and forth. um so we do have landscape plans for the end the driveway is kind of hard to landscape as well as the cycle of droughts we've been in. We're trying to do anything we can to conserve water. but we are willing to work on that. I'm not sure. Again, it's conditional to get this so we can show a plan for that. Um, Next. Let's see, eelgrass. I think we resolved that a little bit. Let's see. That's mostly what I have for, yeah, I think Yushmita could to the rest, oh, existing piles. We would love to, it would be cost effective for us too, but they're just not in the right locations. We've changed our docs just enough one you feed it one way or the other, changing the size of slips, not the number of slips, but the size of slips. that those will not suffice so unfortunately. there are none that we can reuse, although we would like to. That's my time. Mishmita might have some questions to answer for the last few questions. Thank you. |
| 01:11:20.24 | Ushmita | Thank you, Casey. I think I have the SLR comments on my list that I would like to address. And I think Heidi and all of us had a meeting yesterday and discussed it all over yesterday as well. Like she explained, SLR concern on the project was brought back in 2019 when the application was started with all these agencies and They recommended we use state guidance for SLR design and modeling, and that's what our SLR response and SLR modeling was based off of, but all our designs, dog designs and pile designs do consider all the sea level projections and 100 years storm surge. The files were initially designed at 12 and a half mean low, low water elevation, but DCDC had a concern about 1% storm overtopping the pile, so it was redesigned to a 13 and a half mean low water elevation. So I would just like to ensure that our design needs all the requirements for SLR, that's required in the Bay Wave model as well as FLR 2018 modeling that we have used for the project. Thank you. Other than that, I am here to answer any more questions you guys might have for us. Thank you. |
| 01:12:50.67 | Kristina Feller | Let's just stop the clock for just a minute, staff, if we could. I mean, I think what would be helpful is if you actually walked us through what you're proposing. And again, I'm going to stress this. I know I sound like a little bit of a broken record, so bear with me. but, Again, just for clarity, Bay Wave does not just model sea level rise. There's sea level rise in subsidence throughout Richardson Bay, which is the concern. So let's not just talk about sea level rise. We do need to address subsidence, which is more substantial in Sausalito than many, just because it's all filled. So do you wanna walk us, do you wanna share your screen and just walk us through where your pile locations are and how this has been adjusted just a little bit and please identify where the Fire Department and Emergency Driveways, is and if this is where Commissioner Luxembourg is asking about the open space and staging area. Can we, can you please walk us through that? So not just the commission is clear, but members of the public are clear what you're referring to. |
| 01:13:59.96 | Ushmita | Absolutely. Give me one second. I don't have the screen ready yet. |
| 01:14:05.40 | Kristina Feller | staff if we could Please allow her to share her screen. MS. Forgive me, but can you pronounce your name one more time for me? Because I really don't want to mispronounce it. |
| 01:14:17.48 | Ushmita | No problem with Ushmita. |
| 01:14:19.45 | Kristina Feller | Ushmata, okay, thank you. |
| 01:14:20.52 | Ushmita | Thank you. |
| 01:14:50.54 | Casey Peterson | In the meantime, I'll just point that out. I think I can try and clarify that. driveway that I've been talking about that's hard to landscape is from the, that on the peninsula, the staging area, where it shows existing parking to the guest dock out there. if anything ever were to happen out on that guest doc, Their fire department has a key to the gate. There's emergency shutoff there that they know about. So that needs to be able to be driven upon. the landscape in the middle of that would be very difficult as well as it's used for overflow parking for fleet week and the few occasions that We do need her. |
| 01:15:36.72 | Kristina Feller | And is there a requirement for a vehicle to turn around there or is it just... you know, drive in and back up out for emergency vehicle? I mean, can... I think It would just help understand better, I think, for the commission that I'm not sure what we're doing here. what it is used for and how you are solving that use with landscape and And being environmentally sensitive there. |
| 01:16:06.56 | Casey Peterson | We could put landscape around at the very end, near the dock, And then around where the close to the path, but the middle would be hard to do because it's driven upon a lot. |
| 01:16:18.20 | Kristina Feller | Can we see it on the screen? |
| 01:16:21.02 | Casey Peterson | Oh. Um... you slide up. |
| 01:16:24.98 | Kristina Feller | it. |
| 01:16:25.52 | Casey Peterson | Over picture. |
| 01:16:27.79 | Kristina Feller | I think if you go up a couple slides, |
| 01:16:30.86 | Casey Peterson | to the peninsula. |
| 01:16:32.11 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 01:16:42.74 | Casey Peterson | Yes, that staging, that financial on the right is what we're looking at. There's a dock there and existing parking. So that it's not very wide, but that middle lane There's a gate right at the base of that that is driven to the dock. when needed. And then there's like paved pathway around the peninsula. And landscaping can be done out towards the end at the entrance of the dock. And we can follow it close to the path as well. |
| 01:17:18.72 | Kristina Feller | So, Ushbita, can you use your, um, not, well, can you use your mouse or something to show everybody here Yeah, where's the gate? |
| 01:17:31.73 | Casey Peterson | Uh, no, sorry, used me to the Peninsula Gate, the staging area gate. |
| 01:17:36.72 | Unknown | Oh, okay. right here. Thank you. |
| 01:17:53.85 | Casey Peterson | Right. Yeah. I don't think you need to zoom in or anything. Just put the right there. Exactly. Gate is right there. |
| 01:17:59.48 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay. And there is a gravel road around the peninsula? Is that what you're describing? |
| 01:18:07.67 | Casey Peterson | No. We have a paved walking path around the peninsula, but straight from the middle, straight down the middle of it, car needs to be able to drive to the end. |
| 01:18:20.58 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, okay. |
| 01:18:23.85 | Casey Peterson | We will submit some plans. for that condition for you. |
| 01:18:28.09 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg, does that help you with your comments on landscape? |
| 01:18:33.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand what your issue is. My issue is I think the gravel is unacceptable. I think that if you want to put in some pervious pavers or something that makes that attractive that the fire trucks can drive on and other people can drive on and can park on, it's that it looks leftover and just not complete. I think there's a way to finish that that's drivable. The walkways on both sides, you could put some landscape in the middle. You have benches on the side of that. So it can be designed so that it looks finished. And when there are a lot of examples where areas are grassed or whatever, and then when they need parking, they have parking. And I'm not suggesting suggesting anything that's water intensive and I'm not even suggesting it has to be plants it just needs to not be gravel and dust going up so I think it needs to be finished so I think the landscape plan for that whole area needs to show that you know when you're done that it was intended to be there and it serves the purpose you need. I don't mind trucks or parking or whatever. It's the gravel, but it looks dusty, and there are some planters in there. It just looks unfinished. |
| 01:19:51.28 | Casey Peterson | Okay. Cool. and make that look finished with pathway signs in the middle or something but we'll have our landscape look into that. It's a move out for four, obviously. of the conditional. |
| 01:20:06.52 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. Let me, I'll hand it back over to you guys to just quickly walk us through design in sort of pile locations versus old, just to get a basic sense of it. |
| 01:20:19.99 | Ushmita | Right, so... This is a general pile layout for Basin 3. The piles are located at the finger ends and also on the main walks as needed. We don't have a final file design yet, but We know for a fact that the pile is going to be designed at at the top of the pile to be at plus 13 and a half, mean low, low water. So what that means is I'm not sure. The pile elevation above the dock is going to be at 13 and a half feet. above the dark, so even And since all these dogs are floating dogs, even when the level rises, our dogs have three board of 16 to 18 inches and it can withstand up to 36 inches of SLR, because it has the ability to move up and down with the tide. |
| 01:21:21.63 | Kristina Feller | So this says 12 feet, seven inches mean low, low. Thank you. |
| 01:21:26.91 | Ushmita | Thank you. |
| 01:21:26.93 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:21:26.95 | Ushmita | Yeah. |
| 01:21:27.98 | Kristina Feller | I have five. |
| 01:21:29.66 | Ushmita | It's 13.5. I think I can show you a place where we revised it on the MND. I think we just have the wrong set of flags here. |
| 01:21:38.99 | Kristina Feller | I just wanna make sure that community development has the correct plans because |
| 01:21:39.89 | Ushmita | We're there. |
| 01:21:44.53 | Kristina Feller | any approval has to have the correct plans with it. Absolutely. |
| 01:21:50.84 | Unknown | Absolutely. |
| 01:21:51.97 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:21:52.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:21:52.07 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:21:53.98 | Unknown | you will have that in the file. Sorry about that. |
| 01:22:05.12 | Ushmita | Did you have any more questions on the... |
| 01:22:08.02 | Kristina Feller | No, I thought you were going to present |
| 01:22:10.37 | Ushmita | Oh, okay. I think that's pretty much it. So the pile is going to be at plus 13 and a half. mean low, low water elevation, and our docks have capability to move along with the tide. So even at the sea level, up to 36 inches, the dock is still gonna be usable and it's not gonna impact the Marina et al. there's the pile elevation at plus 13.5. Chad, do you have anything to add on to what I just said? |
| 01:22:55.27 | Chad | Yeah. With the sea level rise and storm surge, we can design the pile longer if we have. And, uh, Just like we were saying with the Bay Wave, it'll meet that. With the Bay Fill you're speaking of, there's nothing we can do to design that old mitigate that. And So no, we haven't looked at that model. That's not a standard practice for us. |
| 01:23:29.00 | Kristina Feller | I'm sorry, what's not a standard practice? I didn't understand that. |
| 01:23:33.48 | Chad | On the Bay Wave, you were talking about the Bay Phil, correct? You weren't talking about the sea level rise, you're talking about Bayfield. I'm telling you. |
| 01:23:42.79 | Kristina Feller | I'm talking about the subsidence element that is Partially, you know, sea level rise is partially to blame for that, of course. |
| 01:23:54.53 | Chad | Right. So subsidence would be the Bay fill bringing up the Bay bottom. So there's nothing we can do to design to mitigate around that on the scope of work in this project. but it does. the pile design is high enough where it will It is high enough for the sea level rise on the Bay Wave model. At the 13 and a half. |
| 01:24:24.64 | Kristina Feller | I just have one more question, and I don't want to monopolize this. I think our, my, you know, and fellow commissioners have questions also, Could you just quickly explain to us what happens with the old piles? Are any of them left in place or shaved down, or are they all removed? MR PALLADINO- They're all – |
| 01:24:45.43 | Chad | They're all removed and recycled. |
| 01:24:53.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's go ahead and if that's your presentation, let's stop the share screen just so Um, We can yeah there we go. We can see everybody here Um, let's see if any commissioners have any any questions at this time. Commissioner Junius, do you have any QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? Okay. Commissioner Saad, do you have any questions for the applicant? |
| 01:25:17.66 | Nastassya Saad | I do. Thank you, Chair Feller. I just wanted maybe since you guys as the expert if you can make a comment just for public record on the. safety of the floating docks are there any safety concerns considering how high they're able to move with potential sea level rise or move with the tides. I just wanted to make a comment there. |
| 01:25:46.45 | Casey Peterson | The current plan would be no different than any other doc and The Bay Area. Thank you. Thank you. Are you talking about moving at the waves? I don't understand the question, sorry. |
| 01:26:01.06 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah just in terms just from what the floating dock is able to achieve just for the public that's here and if If there's any comments around just the general safety of a floating dock with the movement of |
| 01:26:10.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:26:10.97 | Casey Peterson | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:26:16.00 | Casey Peterson | Yes, definitely. |
| 01:26:16.07 | Nastassya Saad | That's great. |
| 01:26:17.43 | Casey Peterson | The piles hold it in place with the time moving up. It's always level. These concrete docs are going to be way more, um, secure and safe than the existing wood ones. So what we're doing would only increase the safety of the docks. |
| 01:26:35.69 | Nastassya Saad | Okay great thank you and I have kind of a specific question so bear with me because I had to reread this a few times. I'm going to be looking at attachment three it is a response to the comment from the from Fish and Wildlife and they were looking at they had a comment and a recommendation if you need a second to get there it's page 28 And their recommendation on mitigation measure BIO2 was around, this is in relation to the, eelgrass mitigation plan. So the department recommends that the qualitative and quantitative survey examines an area of 45 meters. And they had mentioned that the MND describes that the survey is going to occur within the project footprint plus a 10 meter buffer. And it wasn't clear if that is sufficient. And in the response to the comment, one page down, the response was that the 10 meter buffer, is acceptable as a survey area. And I just, but scrolling down a little bit further when you get to the, just make sure I'm still on page 28. From what I understood with the underline, that would be, that would be an edit and a change under implementation. The 10 is crossed out and the 45 meter has been placed in. So I'm just not clear if you guys have decided to go with a 45 meter buffer. or if you're sticking with the but seems to be approved or qualified 10 meter, Can you clarify that? |
| 01:28:39.81 | Casey Peterson | Yeah, I believe Trish or Barbara would be able to clarify that one. |
| 01:28:42.69 | Nastassya Saad | TODAY. |
| 01:28:43.10 | Casey Peterson | Thank you. |
| 01:28:43.15 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:28:48.67 | Kristina Feller | Let's go ahead and trick Trisha can hear us. There you are. |
| 01:28:52.53 | Trisha Stevens | Yeah. I'll turn that over to Barbara. |
| 01:28:57.00 | Barbara Beard | I'm not sure. Yes, and I'm also looking at the MMRP |
| 01:28:58.23 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 01:29:01.24 | Barbara Beard | which will have the ultimately adopted mitigation measure language. And, um, I am scrolling through that to find the survey distance. I believe the intent was to stick with the original 10 meters. I'm not sure. And I'm just looking to make sure that I am accurate |
| 01:29:29.99 | Trisha Stevens | I mean, the mitigation bio too, |
| 01:29:30.40 | Barbara Beard | Thank you. |
| 01:29:33.28 | Trisha Stevens | It says, says 10 meter buffer at low tide. |
| 01:29:39.16 | Barbara Beard | That's when I thought that Yeah. INTENT WAS. |
| 01:29:44.05 | Nastassya Saad | SO... I think |
| 01:29:50.26 | Nastassya Saad | I think then perhaps that should just be clarified on. |
| 01:29:59.31 | Nastassya Saad | Page 28 with that underline that I'm seeing because it's The language basically says you're sticking with 10 but then the edit looks like you've gone to take the recommendation of 45. And so I think it can be a little confusing. |
| 01:30:23.10 | Barbara Beard | I agree. |
| 01:30:23.44 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:30:23.47 | Barbara Beard | Thank you. |
| 01:30:23.57 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:30:29.65 | Nastassya Saad | Would you be open to the 45 given that, I mean, it's coming as a recommendation from Fish and Wildlife? as a measure of protection for the eelgrass. |
| 01:30:45.97 | Barbara Beard | my instinct would be to allow the distance to be determined by the qualified biologists doing the survey. and I think that's a good question. survey protocols. and the 10-meter survey radius is consistent with the protocols. So, uh, were in safe territory there. we could add language if you, we're interested in doing so about or as determined by the qualified biologist in consultation with the permit agencies because the, the condition of approval well, this condition, you know, this measure is also going to show up on the BCDC permits and the Army Corps permits. So, We want consistency. within the conditions across the permits. I'm not sure. I'm rather hesitant at this hearing stage to change what the And Army Corps has in the I'm provisional permit. and it's the 10 meters in the provisional permit. |
| 01:32:03.66 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you for, well, thank you for clarifying first and foremost. So I think for the record, it's the 10 meters as of right now, and maybe we can potentially when we... discuss as a group for potential additional language. Thank you. That was all I had, Chair Feller. Thank you. |
| 01:32:17.17 | Unknown | . |
| 01:32:17.21 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:32:17.31 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:32:17.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:32:17.53 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:32:17.58 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:32:17.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:32:19.55 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Excellent question and just follow on. Is it a minimum of 10 meters? Just is that what the language is saying? Or is it just 10? Because maybe what you're asking for, Commissioner Saad, is a minimum of 10. |
| 01:32:34.23 | Nastassya Saad | So, Well, that's a good question. Quite specifically, it says for presence or absence of eelgrass shoots by examining the project footprint and immediate vicinity. So it sounds like project scope plus 10 but maybe that's a great clarifying question. Could be for you, maybe Barbara. |
| 01:32:56.93 | Barbara Beard | Correct. Yeah, just making sure my mic is still on, sorry. On page 27 of the response to comments, at the top of the page. uh, were quoting that permit language. which is confirming the 10 meters And there's italicized text that says specifically A qualitative survey would be conducted prior to construction within the April to October growing season for presence. absence of eelgrass shoots by examining the project footprint and immediate vicinity the 10-meter buffer at low tide. So that 10 meter buffer is consistent with the protocol surveys. |
| 01:33:54.26 | Barbara Beard | Okay, cool. |
| 01:33:54.27 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:33:55.02 | Barbara Beard | If you are interested in adding language, or as determined by the qualified biologist. in consultation with the permit agencies that that would be something that would indicate that they would set the buffer based on the conditions that they're seeing in the field. and possibly it would be a bigger buffer at that point. |
| 01:34:19.05 | Nastassya Saad | SURE. I understand not to override a authoritative agency so I understand what you're saying about keeping the 10 but I I'm just happy to hear that you're open to that language because you don't know what you'll see when you get down there. So I just don't want it to be restricted to the 10 if it's discovered that it has a greater buffer. And I'm sorry if I'm just on that what what Chair Feller just said can you what you just read is exactly what I am looking at page 27 but I Thank you. just to clarify for the record so that does mean your project the footprint plus plus 10 meters out. Okay yes. Okay thank you. Just making sure I'm understanding. Wonderful. Thank you for clarifying. Now I'm all set, Chair Feller, thank you. |
| 01:35:08.37 | Kristina Feller | I'm on. Thank you. It's a great question. Thank you for asking it. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 01:35:16.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Mr. Peterson answered the question about the liveaboard, and I think I understand he's willing to include the full area in a landscape plan subject to the ability to get access or whatever is needed for fire trucks or whatever. So we can address changing that language a little bit to cover that during our discussion with AnimalSapp. Thank you. |
| 01:35:42.29 | Kristina Feller | Right, thank you. I'm sure graph Thank you. |
| 01:35:45.36 | Richard Graef | Um, no, no more questions. |
| 01:35:47.71 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay. I think I've asked all the questions I had made certainly comments on the modeling. Um, which I'm still not comfortable with, to be honest, and I'm not trying to belabor it, but it's a really important element here um, So, Unless there's any other questions from commissioners, let's go ahead and thank the applicant for their presentation. You do have a little bit of time left. later if you'd like any final comments now you're welcome to use it now Otherwise, we will start our deliberation and discussion here, which you'll be able to listen to. And don't go too far because we might ask for some clarifications from you as well. |
| 01:36:36.05 | Mary Wagner | um madam chair did i miss public comment |
| 01:36:39.24 | Kristina Feller | No, no you didn't. We'll go to public comments, sorry. My mistake, my mistake. Thank you both for keeping me in line, Director Scoble and our wonderful city attorney, Mary Wagner. Forgive me. All right. At this time, We'll go ahead and open this up for public comment. This item five B. Um, You will have three minutes to make public comment. and you'll be called upon and asked to unmute yourselves. So if you would like to raise your hand either in the Zoom application or if you are joining us by cell phone, you can hit star nine. and we'll open this up for public comment. |
| 01:37:23.66 | Kristina Feller | I am not seeing any hands at this time. I will go ahead and close public comment. And now we can bring this back up to our virtual dais. So forgive my misstep there earlier. Um, who'd like to start us off this evening? Um, It seems to me like there are several areas that we've narrowed down to. So why don't I try to tee it up that way? One is a landscape solution in what is referred to as the open space and staging area on the plan. The second was additional language around of more consolidated management plan and sequencing specific to eelgrass and the execution of the work. And the third area is, we should confirm even perhaps the staff right now, this, if the drawings that you have on record, identify the 13 and a half foot mean low low on your set of plans. It seems like there's a bunch of plans circulating here, and I want to make sure that the staff report has been prepared with the right set of drawings. So I'm looking at those. major areas that I think we've identified. There might be others, but we'll start with that. |
| 01:38:58.80 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Luxembourg, you want to start us off? |
| 01:39:01.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | with regard to the landscape area, I'm sort of looking at it. I don't know if it's helpful to bring it back up on the screen. There was a slide, number 16, that Tricia had done for an additional condition. Tricia, can you bring that slide up? |
| 01:39:33.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So I think what it needs to say is submit a final landscape plan And after the word landscape plan, it should say for the open space and staging error or whatever was on, I don't think that's on their plans, that was on Tricia's plans, but some words to that effect for approval and then add something at the end there that provides for native treatment at the guest dock area, as well as finishing off the area between the pavement while allowing for necessary fire and other access or something along those lines. I don't know, Tricia, is that language that you or Ms. Scoville can develop? |
| 01:40:26.04 | Trisha Stevens | Yeah, I was writing something up here. and let me take a shot at it here. So it would say prior to the issuance of any building of any permit, the applicant shall submit a final landscaping plan for approval by the community development director that provides new native tree and shrub plannings in the guest dock entrance area. as well as appropriate landscaping around the gravel driveway and the pathways to achieve a finished look. all consistent with BCDC guidelines. |
| 01:41:10.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'd like to eliminate gravel. I don't want them to have gravel at all. And I think that we want We want to define the area, but the gravel should go away. It should be replaced by pervious pavers or whatever they need to do, but it should not be something that has dust, that creates dust. |
| 01:41:32.72 | Trisha Stevens | Okay, and add, so after the tree and shrub plantings and the guest dock entrance, we can say, and landscaping and impervious surfaces, around or to replace the existing gravel driveway and landscaping around the path in order to achieve a finished look. |
| 01:42:00.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I don't think it needs to be impervious. It can be impervious, because that might create some other environmental issues. I think if we can go back and add something about referring to the landscape plan Describe the area after the word final landscape plan So a final landscape plan for the entire peninsula from the existing parking to the guest dock. for approval by the Community Development Director that provides native tree and shrub plantings in the guest parking area entrance and a finished look for the remainder of the fence and insula or something like that. Make it simple. |
| 01:42:43.52 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Luxenberg, if I may jump in, and we can also include at the end of the sentence that gravel would be strictly prohibited. It does. |
| 01:42:51.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That would be good. |
| 01:42:56.38 | Kristina Feller | Are you comfortable with that, Commissioner Luxenberg? I think that's a good suggestion. |
| 01:43:00.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think putting that at the end in the comments I just made would be good. So that we, the landscape plan refers to the area that we, you know, so it's clear what the plan, the area of the plan should come up. |
| 01:43:19.16 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Are there any other comments from the commission regarding the landscape in this area? Okay, hearing none. Um Actually, well, Director Scoble and Tricia, we have you up here. real quick. Can you confirm that you have the right set of drawings? that referenced the 13 and a half foot mean logo. |
| 01:43:45.27 | Director Scoble | Yeah, Chair Feller, what was attached to the agenda shows the 12 foot seven inch high line. um i would recommend either in your motion or a condition of approval to require the 13 and a half |
| 01:43:58.85 | Kristina Feller | Well, I agree with you. My concern is, you know, what else is different on these drawings? If you guys do not have the correct drawings, then we cannot, we will have no choice but to continue this until you get them. which is unfortunate with the discussion we're having here this evening, but it's really critical. |
| 01:44:22.14 | Trisha Stevens | I was going to suggest that we amend condition number three THE FAMILY IS where it says the project shall be designed as shown in the set of plans, date stamp, May 13, 2020, and amended to show the 13 and a half foot pile height above mean low, low water. So we specifically reference to make sure that when, who's ever looking at the final plans, they know to make sure they look for a plan that has that height in it. |
| 01:44:57.97 | Dr. Ray Dieter | AND I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT |
| 01:45:08.90 | Trisha Stevens | That makes sense. |
| 01:45:10.44 | Kristina Feller | I understand what you're saying. I just in my concern is I do not know if that's the only thing that's been changed. from. what you're looking at and what the applicant says it is. I don't know if there are any other differences in the drawings and I think that this commission and community development should not be in a position to guess. |
| 01:45:40.63 | Kristina Feller | So- Can I speak on it, Chair Feller? Hold on. |
| 01:45:41.28 | Ushmita | Can I say? |
| 01:45:45.01 | Kristina Feller | No, we are deliberating right now. We'll come back to you. We'll have the applicant come back up as we clarify everything, but we're in the process of deliberating at the moment, if you could just hold on. I'd appreciate it. Um, |
| 01:46:03.93 | Kristina Feller | So you do not have the most – what is the date stamp? I don't have it in front of me because I've got the screen here. What is the date stamp, Trisha, on what you're looking at? |
| 01:46:13.57 | Trisha Stevens | Um, |
| 01:46:21.99 | Director Scoble | If I may jump in as to what's on the agenda, the plans that were attached to the agenda are day-stamped May 13, 2020. |
| 01:46:30.97 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. Yeah, May 13, 2020 is the correct. date stamp and that's what was attached. and I'm looking at those plans. and The pile height does not show it. 13 and a half feet. I THINK IT'S A LOT OF I... don't have any knowledge of anything other discrepancies or any other changes that were made. Again, the applicant might be able to help clarify that. |
| 01:47:11.84 | Kristina Feller | but but yours say May 13 2020 not 2021 |
| 01:47:20.75 | Trisha Stevens | 2020. |
| 01:47:22.43 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So even after our, study session. There was no update of drawings. |
| 01:47:33.94 | Trisha Stevens | No, there weren't. There wasn't anything in the construction that changed as a result of all the response to comments. |
| 01:47:43.21 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, I, you know, unfortunately, I think we're going to have to get to the bottom of these drawings I don't know that we would be in a position to make up a motion tonight, but let's, Let's finish out the deliberation. So I think there's clarity in terms of what it is we're looking I would like to go ahead and ask the applicant when we're finished Um, in concurrence with what we're recommending. Um, Let's see, Commissioner Junius, do you have any further comments about what we're discussing here, any comments on SOME OF THE RECOMMENDED conditional approval items. |
| 01:48:30.71 | Andrew Junius | I'm supportive of all the commissioner's ideas. I think commissioner Luxembourg's ideas landscaping are good ones. I support those. I do hope there's a way we can figure this out tonight. Um, um, I have a question. and the plan is just surrounding the detail on the Is that what I'm hearing or is there more than that? |
| 01:48:52.58 | Nastassya Saad | That's what we're saying, we're not sure. |
| 01:48:54.40 | Andrew Junius | Okay, that's a problem. |
| 01:48:54.69 | Kristina Feller | You know, |
| 01:48:54.91 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:48:54.98 | Kristina Feller | I'm not. We are not in a position to guess these drawings are over a year old and that makes me extremely uncomfortable. even though I think that there's, in principle, a meeting of the minds here. cannot take the liberty of making assumptions. So I think that we'll have to continue one way or the other, but let's, we've made such good progress here, and I think we're all clear on and I think that's a good question. Um, the only other item was the further language around, further condition about sort of the, and overall management sequencing plan. We're clear of the conveyor belt of all these different permits required |
| 01:49:40.27 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 01:49:40.30 | Unknown | I'm not sure if you're not sure on the other side. |
| 01:49:44.72 | Kristina Feller | that we're not going to be able to do that. We want some additional language in there to ensure that there is actually a management sequencing plan and we're clear who's who's overseeing what, when, so it makes it much more streamlined for the applicant, for the city, and for everybody who wants to enjoy a clipper. Staff, are you comfortable with what we discussed before and can wrap some language around that? |
| 01:50:19.06 | Trisha Stevens | Yeah. |
| 01:50:19.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:50:19.33 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. So the language that we talked about is Um, under the after the 10 meters or as determined by a qualified biologists in consultation with the appropriate agency. |
| 01:50:38.89 | Kristina Feller | No, no, well, what we discussed earlier was, you know, who oversees the construction and execution And of course, it's different agencies at different times. |
| 01:50:49.49 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Oh. |
| 01:50:52.54 | Kristina Feller | and And so I think what we're asking for is condition of the permit is that the applicant that submit that or works with those different agencies to make sure that that's sequenced properly So there are no stops and starts, particularly when there's some seasonal impacts and environmental impacts because of that. |
| 01:51:10.58 | Mary Wagner | Oh, my God. |
| 01:51:14.47 | Kristina Feller | We want to make sure it's really streamlined for everyone's benefit. |
| 01:51:21.79 | Trisha Stevens | I'm sorry, it was one step ahead. So the condition that we had added I'll put it in a sec, let me get it here. |
| 01:51:36.03 | Unknown | I think it was condition 25 that Right. |
| 01:51:38.87 | Trisha Stevens | Right. |
| 01:51:39.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:39.49 | Trisha Stevens | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:51:39.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:39.59 | Trisha Stevens | Uh-huh. |
| 01:51:39.76 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:51:40.94 | Trisha Stevens | It says prior to the issuance of any permit, The applicant shall complete a joint aquatic resource permit application, Jarpa. and submit the necessary and submit the JARPA to the necessary regulatory agencies, including the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, BCDC, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for review and approval of all on-site improvements within 100 feet of the shoreline. project. applicant shall comply with all the necessary permit conditions identify by the regulatory agencies regarding mitigation for the project's impact to the Richardson Bay |
| 01:52:33.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:52:33.66 | Trisha Stevens | So you're thinking about adding to that condition, but that's coordinated with the MMRP? |
| 01:52:33.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:52:33.74 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:52:40.53 | Kristina Feller | I'm not talking about the permits. I'm talking about the actual execution of the work. |
| 01:52:45.56 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 01:52:45.61 | Unknown | So, |
| 01:52:46.38 | Kristina Feller | assuming all the permits have all that. I want to have sort of a comprehensive management plan on the execution because you've got some very sensitive environmental issues here, not to mention, you know, you're moving boats and slips and all of those things. It's complicated. It's complex. And I think that, you know, sort of nipping it in the bud here now is really, it's meant to help streamline the process and require that the applicant sort of think through these things ahead of time and ensures all parties that are part of this through the entire execution are real clear about it, and so should the applicants. So that's what I'm asking for. It's a management plan, not the permits. We know about that. |
| 01:53:35.84 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 01:53:35.86 | Barbara Beard | management. |
| 01:53:36.30 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 01:53:39.56 | Kristina Feller | the actual management plan. So, um, |
| 01:53:44.59 | Barbara Beard | Would something along the lines of a construction implementation management plan, something along those lines, that the applicant prepares with a sequence engagement engagement of the various agencies in relation to the real-time construction that's occurring. so that you know, they're, outlining which conditions of which permits are being implemented or applied during that particular phase of construction. Uh, you know, |
| 01:54:18.13 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. So you're mitigating delay. as well. |
| 01:54:22.25 | Barbara Beard | Right. So if there's proactive outreach to a particular agency, for example, using eelgrass, if there's proactive outreach in relation to getting approval for the survey buffer, let's say, for example. they have that in a plan and their construction project manager. is following this plan. |
| 01:54:45.11 | Kristina Feller | Right. |
| 01:54:45.34 | Barbara Beard | Thank you. |
| 01:54:45.37 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:54:45.98 | Barbara Beard | Okay. |
| 01:54:47.14 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, and again, the goal here, if the applicant's listening, and the public as well, is we really want this to be successful and streamlined. And I think that's a major piece that sometimes goes sideways. and fingers start going that way. So let's make sure that this is successful. It's worth the time up front. So if we could add language, I'd be comfortable with that, unless there's any comment from any other commissioner. |
| 01:55:07.37 | Unknown | You can add. |
| 01:55:17.14 | Barbara Beard | would you envision reporting to the city as this construction management plan is being implemented. |
| 01:55:24.25 | Kristina Feller | I'd be great. |
| 01:55:24.79 | Barbara Beard | Please. |
| 01:55:28.08 | Kristina Feller | That would be great. |
| 01:55:32.10 | Kristina Feller | Um, okay. So are there any other comments from commissioners at this, at this time? Yes, vice chair grad. |
| 01:55:41.34 | Tom Hoover | Thank you. |
| 01:55:41.36 | Richard Graef | Um, hard. and everybody and thanks the applicants for, How pretty thorough. Uh, vetting of of their project there. I'm not. too nervous about it. I think with the, I see three things that we're looking for. a management plan, a correction to the drawing showing a plow height I'm not sure. a foot higher than I was on the drawing. in Alaska plant. which has been pretty thoroughly discussed. All those three things, I think, could Could be. condition. I'd like to see us manage an approval on this project this evening. I think it's so close to being there. I think that the mitigation measures and we've all been working pretty much addresses I think It's a pretty thorough job, and I'm comfortable with the way it's going. with these minor changes that we would ask for in the I'm going to go ahead and So that's kind of where I'm seeing this. |
| 01:57:03.95 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, I think that's very, very helpful. And I think it's important, you know, we all need to feel comfortable with this. My only point about the drawings is that this commission cannot take that liability and assuming it's just one number on one page. We just simply don't know. and There's no way that we can now. And that's the only reason that I would make a motion to continue this. We can continue it to a date certain. we can pre-approve. with the applicant, all the additional language and conditions. So, you know, they can come back in two weeks with new drawings, assuming that they can turn that around and that staff can turn that around or whatever that might be. But we really cannot take on that responsibility and liability not knowing. what else is changed from drawings from May 2020. We can't do that. |
| 01:58:05.54 | Director Scoble | Chair Feller and Planning Commissioners, if I may just jump in as another solution just to Tibet this. What, If the planning commission or the majority of the planning commission did want to move forward tonight, one thing that will happen is when the applicant finally submits for his building permit plan, there's a comprehensive check of the plans and we could require it if there is a deviation of the plan that are substantive that they go back to the Planning Commission for vetting. And that's just another suggestion just to throw out there. At the same token, coming back in two weeks is also very acceptable. |
| 01:58:45.53 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:58:45.77 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 01:58:46.24 | Kristina Feller | Yes, Commissioner Giuse. Thank you, Director Scoble. |
| 01:58:48.79 | Andrew Junius | Director Scoble, thank you for that clarification. Are you basically saying we would approve the 2020 plans and then if there's any significant changes, then it comes back? |
| 01:58:58.58 | Director Scoble | If the Planning Commission finds that the current plans, which are those 2020 plans, are acceptable, with the exception of the detail of the piling. If they come back, if Clipper Yacht Harbor submits plans that deviate from those approved plans, then they could go back to the commission. |
| 01:59:18.56 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, that's an interesting idea. I mean, I appreciate Chair Feller, your caution here. It's an important point. I'm not sure. That said though, you know, if the, if the, if the applicant is okay with approving the plans that were in front of us, which are apparently not exactly right, but. but they're willing to come back if they need to come back for a change. if they want the approval tonight, I don't know, it's a little, you know, two weeks, Probably not that big a deal either, so I'm kind of on the fence. |
| 01:59:46.79 | Trisha Stevens | So I just for clarification, I just got some communication from the applicant that there's at least from their perspective, there's nothing else that has changed in the plan since May of 2020. if you're comfortable taking their word for it, we could amend condition number three Um, to say, as shown in the set of plans, date stamps, May 3, 13, 2020 updated to show the 13.5 foot Um, a pile height above mean low water. and consistent with any conditions of approval. Um, I think that we have a fairly high confidence level that everything else is okay. |
| 02:00:44.15 | Kristina Feller | Well, Trisha, I mean, we're going to be asking the applicant after we deliver right to go over some of this with us. So I appreciate that they. I don't want to communicate with you, but we are in the deliberation Okay. Faith here, and unfortunately this commission has run into the problem before, |
| 02:00:56.64 | Unknown | Facebook. |
| 02:01:01.36 | Kristina Feller | where what we see in a staff report is not exactly what the current or most updated drawings are, and it's created a conflict and a problem back in community development. we don't have the bandwidth to constantly put out those kinds of fires at the city and community development. So my goal is to try to get this correct for once and for all and not, you know, run around after, after drawings. It just gets extremely confusing. And so what I want to do, ask Director Scoble is if you know and we will bring up the applicant here in a minute to go over all this but if we identified a date certain Do we have room on our agenda in two weeks? should the applicant be able to come back, submit drawings to staff for review and all that, Is that possible? |
| 02:01:57.32 | Director Scoble | Yes, there is room on the agenda. And as I'm new here, there is another item that we could do is we can implement a consent calendar So if the project has been designed and meets all the conditions of approval and there's really no discretion but for taking action, we can also create a consent calendar item as well. |
| 02:02:20.06 | Kristina Feller | Well, I like that idea, but I'd like to hear the commissioner's feelings about that. |
| 02:02:27.29 | Nastassya Saad | Chair Feller, can you clarify what the consent calendar is, or Director Scopel, just for my own clarification? |
| 02:02:35.61 | Director Scoble | or would you like to explain it or would you like me to? |
| 02:02:38.04 | Kristina Feller | Got no head. |
| 02:02:38.97 | Director Scoble | Okay, so typically on every item or action that a decision-making body needs to make needs to be agendized. And to facilitate a more streamlined review of projects, those projects that require little or no thought or action other than approving the project are typically placed on this item. So essentially you're taking action on that project without any formal public presentations from either side or deliberation. Okay, thank you. The consent calendar is also still subject to public comment, so we would still accept public comment on it. Thank you. |
| 02:03:17.17 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Junius? |
| 02:03:18.42 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Sheriff Eller, and thank you, Director Scoble. I'm a big fan of consent calendars. They do move things along for simple stuff or in the case of this, a continued matter that is one step away from approval with everything else resolved, people want to consent calendar. that we're going to be my experience is also that You know, consent calendars don't force you to not have a hearing. If something happens the day of the hearing and you really do, you know, one of the commissioners wants to pull it off and have a full hearing, we can. So it really is just a, way to move things along a lot quicker. For example, I think that the awning issue like this evening might've been on the consent calendar didn't seem to be a lot of the I think it's a lot of concern about a lot of and that would be a great example for me of something that could have been on a consent contract. I'm a big fan of consent contract. |
| 02:04:04.52 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 02:04:07.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I also am a big fan of consent calendars. If I understand it correctly, in this particular case, these changes would be made. We'd see the wording for these various items that would go on a consent calendar. And if for some reason whatever came out, the commission can vote to take it off the consent calendar if there's some issue. If there's not, it just gets approved as part of the consent calendar. Is that the way I'm understanding it? |
| 02:04:36.15 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:04:37.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. So yeah, I think that's a useful tool for going forward, not just for this, but for other items as well. I agree with Commissioner Junius that the audit could have been on a consent calendar as well. |
| 02:04:50.49 | Mary Wagner | Madam Chair, if I may, and I'll just work with your director to ensure that public hearing items you know, we can't include obviously public hearing items on your consent calendar because by their very nature, they need a public hearing. But you know, in this instance, if the public hearing is closed, and it's really just a cleanup item for the commission to see. I think that that would be a great tool. I, too, am a huge fan of the consent count. |
| 02:05:16.06 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay, do the commissioners have any other comments specific to the application? and the comments or conditions that we've come up with. I'll ask that first and I'm just gonna look for hands or nods. I won't call on anybody, okay. Oh yeah, yes. |
| 02:05:33.96 | Nastassya Saad | I just am not clear if we captured the the condition for the eelgrass I think we started it and then diverted to another topic so I just want to make sure the condition |
| 02:05:52.86 | Kristina Feller | IN THE END OF THE END change, did we, I don't believe that we were recommending any change to that language. But I could have missed something. |
| 02:06:00.35 | Nastassya Saad | I... Sure. So this was for that they are going with the 10 meter per, I have to pull this up now. Sorry, I only have one screen here. And I think Trisha captured it quite eloquently, but this was to |
| 02:06:26.91 | Nastassya Saad | add language. Now, I don't know where the... I don't know which one to add this to is the thing just yet. I have to find it in the conditions of approval but this was about the qualitative survey. Eelgrass shoots shoots by examining the project footprint. an immediate vicinity of a 10 meter buffer. And the language was to be something around along the lines of or whatever is determined. by the Acting |
| 02:06:55.31 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I know. |
| 02:06:55.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:55.52 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 02:06:57.32 | Nastassya Saad | I can't say quite clearly as Trisha captured it. I don't know if we can bring her back up here for that, to add that in as a condition of approval if they find that there is any kind of eelgrass past the 10 meter mark. Just like broaden the scope basically. |
| 02:07:15.70 | Kristina Feller | Barbara, I don't know, that might have been you that had- |
| 02:07:18.21 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 02:07:18.23 | Barbara Beard | Or maybe. Thank you. |
| 02:07:19.33 | Kristina Feller | Um, |
| 02:07:20.20 | Barbara Beard | I think. |
| 02:07:21.27 | Kristina Feller | some additional language. |
| 02:07:23.93 | Barbara Beard | That's correct. Oh yes, I'm sorry Barbara. We're on target for being able to have that language. |
| 02:07:25.89 | Kristina Feller | Yes, I'm sorry, Barbara. |
| 02:07:30.30 | Barbara Beard | So it would be 10 foot buffer, or as determined by the qualified biologist. Thank you. |
| 02:07:36.07 | Nastassya Saad | Yes, thank you. |
| 02:07:36.66 | Barbara Beard | And then that would account for them taking into consideration real time field conditions. Oh. at the time of the survey. So we can easily insert that language |
| 02:07:45.55 | Unknown | So we can... |
| 02:07:45.97 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 02:07:48.25 | Barbara Beard | And that would change. the mitigation monitoring and reporting plan and that would, um, need to be incorporated into the response to comments, the new language that we inserted there. |
| 02:08:01.95 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you, and thank you, Commissioner Saad. misunderstood, so I'm glad you corrected me. Um, okay. Any other additional conditions? by any commissioner this evening? Okay. I'm going to ask Mr. Peterson if you could come back on camera and unmute yourself. I want to we want to make sure that First of all, it's clear what our discussion is and what the conditions are and how we're going to approach. um continuing tonight but moving forward to approve this Um, Hopefully at our next hearing, if we can identify a date certain that you're comfortable with. So staff, can you help Mr. Peterson unmute and Oh, there we go. |
| 02:09:01.66 | Casey Peterson | Sorry, there. |
| 02:09:03.31 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:09:03.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:03.58 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. So hopefully you've heard the discussion that we have here and why we're not able to give you a full approval this evening. However, I think we're right in striking distance. So I wanted just to go back through are conditions to make sure that you are accepting of them or if there's any more discussion that's needed So again, it's that landscape area. around the open space and staging area. that we discussed. So the second item is the eelgrass and 10 foot buffer or whatever biologists might determine if it's larger than that, it's larger than that. if you're comfortable with that. Okay. We just want that management plan for the execution beyond just, you know, who the permanent agencies are. I think this is going to, Um, definitely save you a couple bottles of Advil in the future and probably everybody else involved too. So I hope you're comfortable with that. And then the final is we need your team to submit the current drawings And with that, if you're comfortable with all of those conditions, we're going to Um, we can look at continuing this item to a date certain but we can do this on a consent calendar, as you heard. I don't know if you are comfortable with two weeks from now, if that gives you and your team enough time to submit to staff and with enough time for them to review what you submitted and ensure it's correct and all of that. So that's what we're looking at here. I'd love to hear back from you if you're comfortable with the direction that we're moving this |
| 02:11:01.60 | Casey Peterson | Yeah, we're comfortable. I mean, I can have the plans for you in five minutes, and then the rest. Tricia will take care of it. Sounds like she had it under control. |
| 02:11:10.38 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And will that include whatever landscape idea you have for that peninsula? |
| 02:11:16.13 | Casey Peterson | Yeah, I can get that done in a week. |
| 02:11:18.98 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. Um, |
| 02:11:21.06 | Casey Peterson | Do you want the plans or the wording? You want both. for two weeks. the wording will be changed in that condition. |
| 02:11:31.17 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, the wording will definitely be changed that all the conditional approval that we've talked about here this evening will be included and incorporated into a revised staff report. |
| 02:11:39.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:44.92 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:11:45.23 | Kristina Feller | and we're happy to allow you to work directly with community development on any final plan. I just didn't know if you had something in mind. |
| 02:11:55.10 | Casey Peterson | We have half of it then, but I'll work on getting that. |
| 02:11:57.98 | Kristina Feller | Okay, well the language will be there and you know, we'll get permission for you to work with community development for something final. Um, If you're comfortable with that, I know director Scoble has just come up on camera as well. Do we want to lock into a date certain in two weeks? That's two weeks is our hearing. So, Director Scoble, when would you require Mr. Peterson to submit? for time for staff to review. |
| 02:12:26.60 | Director Scoble | Yeah, so we would need the plans by early next week. October 26th as a drop dead date. And what staff would then do is we would prepare a staff memo analyze the plans that you submitted, identify any discrepancies, and if everything's copacetic and and we just come back with the um the exact wording of the conditions of approval then we can put this on the consent calendar and then the the motion or the action ethics planning commission tonight would be to close the public hearing continue to a date certain for the adoption of a resolution |
| 02:13:08.17 | Casey Peterson | And then that would be an agenda item. at the beginning and it would be approved or not |
| 02:13:13.25 | Unknown | That would be correct. |
| 02:13:14.12 | Casey Peterson | Thank you. |
| 02:13:14.23 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:13:14.56 | Casey Peterson | Thank you. |
| 02:13:14.65 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:13:14.95 | Kristina Feller | That's correct. Okay. Yes, Trisha. |
| 02:13:19.52 | Trisha Stevens | I've just one really quick clarification on the landscaping. I just wanted to be clear that we're looking for the revised language for the condition, not necessarily a landscape plan. |
| 02:13:32.65 | Kristina Feller | That's correct because in the language it says for the applicant to work with CDD on that, yeah. Thank you. Okay. So, Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Don't go too far. We're going to make a motion here. |
| 02:13:49.80 | Kristina Feller | I guess, would anyone like to make a motion? I think we're looking, yes, Commissioner Junius. |
| 02:13:54.83 | Andrew Junius | I would like to move that we continue this matter to November 2nd, or November 3rd. |
| 02:13:59.79 | Kristina Feller | and that we're closing public comment Um, with the revised conditions. |
| 02:14:08.56 | Andrew Junius | Well, that's all, there's just a motion to continue. I mean, the rest of it's kind of going to happen. I think when the paperwork's done for the next hearing. Right. Right. move to continue this to November 15th. |
| 02:14:19.67 | Director Scoble | Okay. And if I could just jump in. It would be to move continue to date certain and direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval. |
| 02:14:30.89 | Andrew Junius | And the date's certain is November 3rd. |
| 02:14:32.76 | Director Scoble | Yes. |
| 02:14:34.53 | Kristina Feller | Do I have a second? |
| 02:14:35.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:14:37.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Yes, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:14:42.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I guess this might be obvious, but I just want to encourage that the staff report we get from this identify what the new language is, says Commission 3 has changed, Commission 4 has changed, whatever the number is, 25 has changed. but does not reiterate a lot of other stuff. So in other words, it's a very simple short, these are the only changes that have occurred since the last meeting, because sometimes six months passes and we get a whole new staff report and have to read it all. So if we could simplify it to just the changes, that would be helpful. |
| 02:15:17.97 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Director Scoble, could you please take the roll call? |
| 02:15:22.12 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:15:22.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:15:22.15 | Director Scoble | Yes, Commissioner Saad? . Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:15:28.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 02:15:29.07 | Director Scoble | Commissioner Arginia. Vice chair of grass? And Chair Feller. Yes. And before we go on to our next item, and this is out of order, so I will need direction from the planning commission. I was remiss in acknowledging a member of the public during public comment that was having challenges raising their hand. So I've reached out to the commenter to let them know that I will bring this up to the planning commission and I can identify what the general comments were. The question I have for you is, Would you be willing to hear the general gist of the public comment? And if so, when you would like that to be heard this evening? |
| 02:16:16.96 | Kristina Feller | Is that for this item 5B that we just heard or is it 5A? |
| 02:16:20.24 | Director Scoble | Thank you. It was actually for public comments not on the agenda. So early on in this meeting. |
| 02:16:25.62 | Kristina Feller | Oh. |
| 02:16:29.54 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, we absolutely want to hear public comments for anything not on the agenda is everyone comfortable hearing that now before we move on to item six on our agenda i think we have consensus so director Scoble yes please |
| 02:16:45.16 | Director Scoble | Fantastic and apologies for missing this. So William known as Bill Versace provided the planning commission with a letter regarding some concerns that he had the. the general subject related to the comment was that he was concerned with some irregularities, code violations, and public hazards in the main street right of way adjacent to the Valhalla. He has reached out to our city manager and our director of public works. And he wanted to just reiterate the letter that he provided to the Planning Commission. And just to let you know that he is still concerned and he wanted his comments to be put on record. |
| 02:17:29.48 | Kristina Feller | Thank you for putting that on the record now, and appreciate you bringing that to our attention. And I guess I would just like to further direct staff to please work with the city manager and DPW and if I could ask that if there's anything related to uh, the planning department CDD or planning commission that that you report back to us at our next hearing, if you could. |
| 02:17:58.38 | Director Scoble | They can do that for children. |
| 02:18:00.83 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much for that. |
| 02:18:03.75 | Director Scoble | Yes, and definitely apologies to Mr. Versace for missing it and to the Planning Commission. |
| 02:18:09.86 | Kristina Feller | No, no. |
| 02:18:10.25 | Director Scoble | Yeah. So our next item on our agenda is a second study session. for 70-74 Liberty ships. The purpose of a study session is to familiarize the commissioners and the public with proposals under review and to provide an opportunity to provide questions and comments. The study session is open to the public and will include a public comment period and no decisions or actions on the requested entitlements. will be taken at the study session this evening. As for this item, tonight's agenda item relates to a design review and conditional use permit to redevelop a 3.9 acre site and to construct a two story building at 7070 Broad Liberty Shipway. are, Staff contract planner is Tricia Stevens, and she will be giving a presentation this evening. Again, the purpose of this study session is to update the commissioners and the public with responses from the March study session on issues not related to the initial study and mitigated negative declaration. It is important to note that a recirculated initial study mitigated negative declaration is under review with a comment period ending on November 1st, 2021. A complete response to comments to the initial study slash mitigated negative declaration will be provided at the close of the comment period on the recirculated and prior to the public hearing. So with that, I will hand this over to Ms. Stevens. |
| 02:19:37.62 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. Okay, good evening again. I will share my... |
| 02:19:43.95 | Kristina Feller | Yes, excuse me, Tricia, hold on. Yes, Vice Chair Graff, you are recused from this. |
| 02:19:50.18 | Richard Graef | Yeah, so how do I manage that. |
| 02:19:54.91 | Kristina Feller | So let's turn off your video and turn off your microphone. |
| 02:19:55.48 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:19:58.97 | Kristina Feller | for now. |
| 02:19:59.85 | Richard Graef | But I can't watch, right? |
| 02:20:01.67 | Kristina Feller | All right. THE END OF THE END OF THE You can watch definitely. And should you want to make public comment as a member of the public, you may do so. There we go. Tricia, over to you. Thank you. |
| 02:20:13.72 | Trisha Stevens | OK. |
| 02:20:22.48 | Trisha Stevens | CAN EVERYBODY SEE MY SCREEN OKAY? |
| 02:20:25.77 | Kristina Feller | Yes, thank you. |
| 02:20:26.66 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 02:20:26.71 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:20:26.97 | Trisha Stevens | OK, great. As Director Schoble, indicated the purpose is to report back on updates from the first study session and I think the director went through these items as far as the purpose of the study session just a quick refresher The property is the redevelopment of a 3.9 acre site at the end of Liberty ship way to a project with three two-story buildings. It's in the industrial and waterfront zoning districts in the Marin ship. And it's currently developed with boat storage and It's adjacent to the Monomarsh Bike and Pedestrian Trail. The first issue that I wanted to talk about is the remnant tracks as a historic resource that was commented on at the first study session. And since the first study session, it was clarified that the tracks are actually on the project site at the edge of the entrance here. And so subsequently the city engaged the services for blank. consulting to investigate and write a report and the result was that the remnant tracks do qualify as a contributing feature to a potential historic district. I'm encompassing the Wren ships outfitting zone. And so we took it to the Historic Preservation Committee for an advisory recommendation on whether it's the historic RESOURCE. And they did make a recommendation that the tracks be considered as a historical resource. Um, and that they agreed with the proposed mitigation in the MND. that's being circulated right now. And they also did recommend that there be interpretive signage added to the site, similar to other signage within the city. And the proposed mitigation has two parts to it. First, that if the tracks are covered and in this case, the tracks are being proposed to be covered with asphalt as part of the driveway. AND THAT THEY BE documented with historic documentation And then the second part has to do with investigating Thank you. of the area, metal detector, and assessing of the track, where the track is present and the extent of that. And as it was mentioned, the comment, we would like to hear any oral comments from the commission on this matter or questions and then The comment period ends on November 1st. |
| 02:23:51.78 | Trisha Stevens | And this is a photo of those tracks. Just going, the one on the left is going into the project. And this is a historic photo of the um, old, um, pipe yard being used during World War II. And this is the location of the remnant tracks as part of that whole rail system. |
| 02:24:22.98 | Trisha Stevens | AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT One of the main things that the commission wanted to see is revisions to the site plan and the building elevations. And so this is one of the main focuses of what we wanted to report back on this evening. The applicant made a number of changes to the site plan and building elevation. in particular to building A, which is more the industrial building, which faces the pedestrian bike trail and is most visible to the public. And I have two renderings of the revisions, which add increased articulation and more building materials and added a trellis feature and an archway on the roof. They also increased the slope of the roof. AND ADDED AN EVE overhang. This elevation shows it in a little more detail. of spilling more articulation and more in awnings being added, and just a more complete look. |
| 02:25:50.83 | Trisha Stevens | And this slide here shows the revised site plan with changes in the vicinity in building A, some of the features, increase the sidewalk width, and added bollards. They showed the public parking in this location and then they broke the uh, parking lot up and added additional trees and landscaping. And then they show some of the parking spots that are directly across from the loading docks as reserve parking. to allow for maneuvering of vehicles going into the loading docks. To provide some more articulation, they added a notch on the corner, and the roll-up doors were increased. So those are some of the main features of the changes that were made. |
| 02:26:54.30 | Trisha Stevens | There were a number of questions on the pedestrian bike trail next to the marsh, and we did clarify it's not part of the bay trail system. It's part of the city bicycle system, and there are... This exhibit here shows the five connections from the project to the trail and to the beach. So there's five access points and we have some updated plans that shows bollards and lighting at those entrance areas. |
| 02:27:31.76 | Trisha Stevens | And just more clarification at the request of the commission on the public parking. There's nine spaces that would be available to the public during normal business hours, as well as on weekends and in the evenings. And then there's eight additional spaces that would be available. during the weekends and evenings. And I know it's hard to see this exhibit here, but this shows the what the signage would look like, showing public access and showing the shared parking as well as the bollards. And these are all using BCDC signage guidelines. |
| 02:28:23.26 | Trisha Stevens | One of the commenters, AND I THINK THAT'S A made comments about property ownership and the relationship between this subject property and the Schumacher Marina to the north. So we did a fair amount of research on the prior entitlements. And just real quickly, Both these parcels were part of the Schumacher and the subject part. PARSA were part of the same PARSA when the Marina was approved back in the mid 1980s. Um, but this subject part property was shown as a future development. It wasn't, um, there wasn't a site plan for it. And then in 1985, there was a lot split. that separated this from the larger piece of property that Lotzfeld had a condition of approval that required coordinated planning in terms of access and driveways, and staff believes that coordinated planning has taken place. The comment that we received was that there was concern with stormwater runoff between the properties and the hope stormwater comments will be addressed in the response to comments on the mnd so i'm not going to talk about that right now but we did conclude that the subject property because it is a separate piece of property with separate ownership, doesn't have any obligations to address deficiencies on other properties. Some of the commenters talked about accessible parking. The applicant provided a new exhibit showing that accessible parking is dispersed and is in proximity to the beach and the and the trailway and that there's accessible paths of travel. that go internally. throughout the project and connecting to the trail and to the beach. and this was reviewed by the city's consultant, and changes were made as a result However, as is typical, of final compliance with ADA requirements will be done with building permits. There were questions about potential uses and to our knowledge the applicant doesn't have specific leases signed but these are the I'm not sure if you're typical uses that would be in each of the building, Building A, would be for storage and manufacturing and warehousing. It's more of an industrial building. Building B would... be manufacturing, repair and maintenances, and some medical services. |
| 02:31:43.55 | Dr. Ray Dieter | AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT |
| 02:31:46.20 | Trisha Stevens | and Berlin Sea would be a marine industrial, marine commercial, AND WE'RE IN and could include 1500 square feet of restaurant for a maximum of 20 people. And the Environmental Traveling Companions has expressed interest in this building, but a restaurant user has not been identified. |
| 02:32:15.38 | Trisha Stevens | I wanted to touch on some of the other issues that were brought up and I'm not gonna repeat everything that's in the staff report. I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have any questions and more details In terms of small boat tie up, AND Um, as we had talked about before, and we just wanted to confirm this, that a temporary tie up on the subject property is, staff does not feel it's feasible because if a tie up is along the beach, that's not compatible with the beach area. I mean with the trail area, the marsh area, And then the Schumacher the beach is actually part of the marina property. It's not part of the subject property. And so we did not feel it's feasible to add tie ups as part of this project. And just a clarification on parking from staff reports, there's actually 101 spaces that was further refined. And, That was down from the original plans that had 108 spaces and they were reduced, because of fire turning radiuses, but the number of spaces still complies with the zoning code. And we did confirm that there's adequate fire access and turning radiuses and that the fire department is satisfied. On applicable policies and standards, THEIR HIGHER. as a because the project was deemed complete prior to the adoption of the 2021 general plan. The 1995 general plan is the applicable or the prevailing policy document. And the staff had provided information on policies that are relevant from the 2021 for information purposes and When we come back for the public hearing, we wanted to make sure that we more clearly articulate compliance with the applicable policies and standards |
| 02:34:44.27 | Trisha Stevens | There were comments made about inadequate noticing, and we went back and reviewed all the noticing that took place for the original MND and then also for the recirculated and I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS. staff believes that all legal requirements have been met for noticing. There were mailed and emailed notices as published in Marin Independent Journal and posted on the property and that this complies. We went back and reviewed CEQA requirements, including special requirements during the pandemic and we believe it all the noticing requirements were met. And as was mentioned, the Recirculated MND is under review. that MND only addresses the historic resources. It's not updated to provide responses on all the other topics. We felt in our review that there THE CITY IS A LITTLE BIT OF none of the other responses on all the other topics require a a a recirculated mnd so when we come back after the review period for public hearing we'll have a more complete response to comments similar to what you had for the Harbor Drive property that will address all the MND comments, including the topics here on this page on traffic hydrology, hazardous materials, aesthetics and the views and lighting mitigation and habitat impacts and construction noise. will we'll also address the adequacy of the MND and why staff does not feel that there is a need for an EIR in this situation. So, um, As mentioned, the recommendation is for the commission to make comments and questions and hear public comments on these items here, but no decisions. And the next steps would be for the comment period. to end on November 1st and then respond to the M&D comments and then come back later at a public hearing and then before the public hearing story, polls would be set up. So that concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer. Any questions? So this is. more or less like an interim report. before we finish all the review of the MND. |
| 02:37:54.28 | Kristina Feller | Patricia, thank you so much for all your work with this applicant for doing double duty this evening. with the last design review and then this study session. Thank you very much for that, and also helping to manage the MND EIR issue that is yet to be determined. So I think at this point I want to ask if any commissioners have questions of staff. Commissioner Saad, I'm going to start with you, if you don't mind. |
| 02:38:28.47 | Nastassya Saad | Yes. Thank you, Chair Feller. I don't know if it's a direct question for her staff are part of our discussion. I was just curious around the the tracks that are now to be determined as part of the project site. If just to clarify that the Historic Preservation Commission is okay with the um, what's in the MND as they're okay with it being paved over. That's what I think I read. That's what I think I heard. I just want to make sure that I'm fully understanding that their recommendation clearly. |
| 02:39:19.03 | Trisha Stevens | Yes, the Historic Preservation Commission did talk about that quite a bit. And they really felt that paving over and doing the documentation was really the most practical thing to do. They felt that they agreed with the assessment that any other solution would be a safety or a maintenance issue. For instance, there are some situations where some resin has been used or other methods to still have the track show But they felt that in this circumstances, given the limited nature of the tracts, that that would not be practical and they, opted more for recommending that there be interpretive sign-in. |
| 02:40:10.55 | Nastassya Saad | Do you know if they had any discussion around including the tracks altogether because they're not such a They're so, they have such a presence in that area. I understand that they're not terribly long. I think it said it's like 94 feet, I just wasn't privy if they had any discussion around Just excluding that from the project as an option. Are you aware? When you say excluding the question? |
| 02:40:41.09 | Trisha Stevens | Like, just don't. |
| 02:40:42.68 | Nastassya Saad | to pave it at all, like to leave that part alone, just to protect that area. at in his as is state so not the resin or those other options that could be potentially detrimental but just to have the applicant essentially just exclude it. And just leave it in the sand. Just leave it. Right, exactly. |
| 02:41:02.52 | Trisha Stevens | Just leave. Well, it was felt that that would be a safety issue and would make for an uneven pavement for bicycles and cars. And that was kind of part of the whole discussion about alternative treatments, is that they felt that paving it over and documenting it was the best solution. |
| 02:41:11.33 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 02:41:11.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:41:11.47 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 02:41:28.37 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 02:41:28.42 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 02:41:28.80 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 02:41:29.08 | Nastassya Saad | OK, thank you for. Clarifying. Um, And then I think if I'm looking at the video was, was really helpful, so thank you to the applicant, thank you for the presentation as well. I think I'm just not entirely clear if Maybe it's building A in particular. that I'm looking at, I think we had some discussions around view blockage of Mount Tam. And it could just be that it's the rendering that's not showing anything in the background but. um, Are we able to determine based on the height because I think there were some changes to the the and the things of that nature, has that made a reduction? Are we still able to see Mount Tam from the path because there are certain areas leading from Galilee. looking straight, you have quite a clear shot. And I just am not seeing that in the rendering, but I don't know if that's |
| 02:42:33.73 | Trisha Stevens | HE, YOU KNOW, You know, I understand we're kind of bifurcating the CEQA and non-CEQA issues. So the view corridors is a for the response to comments on the MND. Okay. And we do have some new photo sims, and new exhibits that show the view corridors, but that's gonna be part of this M&D response. |
| 02:43:06.67 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. Okay. Thanks, Chair Feller. Those are all I have at the moment. |
| 02:43:11.28 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. Um, commissioner Junius, do you have questions of staff? |
| 02:43:15.72 | Andrew Junius | Not of staff, good report. I've got questions for the applicant. |
| 02:43:18.65 | Kristina Feller | Great, okay, thank you. I'm Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:43:22.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Sheriff Eller. Yes, I have a, can we go, can you bring back up slide 10, which is the pedestrian bike was. I do want to comment that I thought there was significant improvement for the elevation side. I thought that was good, and I concur with Commissioner Saad that the 3D rendering video was very helpful. with regard to this, until it comes up. So I raised this, and I think some other comments raised this at the last study session. If we're looking at the beach, and I did go out and look at this and measure this, so where the word beach is and those arrows are, the walkway along the beach, that's correct, is about nine and a half feet. And then it narrows down to, where the other arrows are along the property, along the marsh, to about 7 1⁄2 to 8 feet. So my question is, One, are they re, in some parts are deteriorated. Are they repaving this entire stretch, number one? And number two, can they widen it to the nine and a half feet so it matches what's at the beach? Because it's like a little narrow neck down, which given what was in the 3D video, there were lots of people on the path and it looked a little crowded. So is it possible, so my questions are, are they repaving it? Because there are parts that are deteriorated and can they widen it to the nine and a half feet? |
| 02:45:06.57 | Trisha Stevens | The information that we have is that there's no plans to repave it or widen it at this time. I think that's a question that we can explore a little bit further. in terms of who is actually responsible for doing that I THINK I'M GOING TO Yeah. are funds to do that i'm not absolutely sure it would be the responsibility of this applicant THEIR OWNERS. to do that, but I can We can explore that a little bit more. |
| 02:45:42.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Do they own the property? |
| 02:45:47.22 | Trisha Stevens | I believe they own the property, but there's a public easement over it. |
| 02:45:53.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. I mean, if they own the property, they should be able to do it. |
| 02:45:53.85 | Trisha Stevens | it. Maybe the application |
| 02:45:59.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, |
| 02:46:00.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:00.08 | Trisha Stevens | Okay. |
| 02:46:01.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I would think. I don't know. |
| 02:46:02.98 | Trisha Stevens | I think the ownership, the applicant can clarify exactly how that works. |
| 02:46:10.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, and again, I appreciated the changes in the elevation, Chair Feller. That's all I have at this time. |
| 02:46:16.83 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. Thank you very much. If you can leave it up and go to slide 12, which is the property ownership side. I just want to make sure. I was understanding what you're saying. SO THE Dash 06 and dash 04 used to be part of dash 07. |
| 02:46:39.25 | Trisha Stevens | I do know that 07 and 08 were part of the same property. The records weren't entirely clear on Thank you. how it all started out if all five properties are the same property and then split off but when the use permit for the marina was issued It was 07 and 06 were part of the same property. But some of the old records aren't really clear on whether or not like 04 was part of that as well. |
| 02:47:14.77 | Kristina Feller | And before it was split, You mentioned something that it was supposed to be master plan. |
| 02:47:23.54 | Trisha Stevens | Yes. |
| 02:47:24.00 | Kristina Feller | Yes. I'm not sure I fully understood it. So forgive me if you don't mind repeating it. |
| 02:47:32.54 | Trisha Stevens | I will try to do my best, but the records are not entirely clear. When the marina was issued at used permit back in the early 80s, what is now 07 and 06 were one piece of property And when the lot split occurred, um, there was a condition that said there needed to be coordinated planning between all the parcels in this area But it's not clear the sequence of events, but it talked about coordinated planning with both the marina and these other parcels in terms of access and parking and cross access easements and so forth. So that's the best that we could figure out with the history of it. |
| 02:48:34.23 | Kristina Feller | So based on that, what is the current built up area, and pluriary ratio of this property. |
| 02:48:49.67 | Trisha Stevens | I will need to go back and check if you want me to. |
| 02:48:57.22 | Kristina Feller | Well, yeah. |
| 02:48:57.87 | Trisha Stevens | I have the information. I just need to go back and double check it. |
| 02:49:02.14 | Kristina Feller | Sure. Um, yeah, cause I want to understand where we are. Um, you know. just where we are with that. Um, And then, as you're looking at that the question that Commissioner Luxenberg was asking about the bike path, I mean, it seems to me that this is something that, I would want to engage staff with to have a discussion with PBOC, which is the pedestrian bike advisory committee. here in the city, they may or may not have identified this area for some improvement to the bike path. I have no idea. So if I could please ask staff to double back with PBOC and ask them. That would be really helpful, or if they have There's standard guidelines. that. Forgive me, I've not memorized, but they might have some insight on that. Um, That would be helpful. Um, And then, I am really not convinced that HPC wants you to just pave over these historic train tracks. I believe that this should be on one of their agendas and I would like to request them to issue us some kind of certificate or confirmation of of the significance of these tracks. |
| 02:50:33.32 | Trisha Stevens | They had a meeting a couple of weeks ago and I apologize, I didn't, attach their meeting minutes to your staff report, but we can certainly get that. include a you know, the minutes of the meeting and their discussion. |
| 02:50:58.55 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I want some definitive something |
| 02:51:02.63 | Trisha Stevens | Okay. |
| 02:51:05.08 | Director Scoble | And if I may jump in, on October, Seventh, the Historic Preservation Commission did conduct a public meeting, and on that item they received a staff report, and I believe they made a recommendation that they were historically significant and that this was an appropriate mitigation measure. So they did actually review the mitigation measure related to this document. |
| 02:51:16.79 | Vicki Nichols | on that item. |
| 02:51:33.98 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:51:34.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:51:34.03 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 02:51:34.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:51:34.30 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. They reviewed everything. I think what chair you're asking for is to actually see the documentation of what they did and what they said. |
| 02:51:43.85 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I haven't seen it. That would be helpful. |
| 02:51:44.75 | Trisha Stevens | I haven't seen this. Yeah, just the timing didn't. Sure. |
| 02:51:50.03 | Director Scoble | together on that. |
| 02:51:51.20 | Kristina Feller | Understood, completely understood. |
| 02:51:52.19 | Director Scoble | And we can include that when the item comes back to the planning commission. But if you're interested in the meantime, if you go to the city's website under the historic preservation commission, October 7th, all the documentation is in there. |
| 02:52:01.39 | Kristina Feller | Bye. Perfect, I appreciate that and thank you, that is helpful. Um... And Tricia, were you part of the conversations that the applicant had with Galloway Harbor? |
| 02:52:17.79 | Trisha Stevens | No, no, I was not. |
| 02:52:20.59 | Kristina Feller | Do you know when they were conducted? |
| 02:52:22.99 | Trisha Stevens | It was earlier on. a couple, I think it was a couple of years ago. To my knowledge, there has not been uh... other meetings between the applicant and Galilee Harbor. Since the study session, I think the intent was to have the study sessions and have the discussions here in the context of the planning commission. |
| 02:52:52.96 | Kristina Feller | Sure. Well, I mean, one of the things we specifically requested this applicant to do as a result of the last study session Galley Harbor. So if they've not done that yet, then it's not really helpful to bring this back until we're actually making some progress here because If you go to all the trouble to and I think that's a good question. then it might be an exercise of futility. And we don't, I don't know that, but we don't want that to happen. We're trying to, could help. help an applicant through a study session to connect the dots So they can be more informed, and to be more informed, it's also sometimes, at least in this situation, engaging with the Yowli. So, um... just wanted to ask about that. Um, And then you mentioned regarding fire life safety. I know that came up at our last study session that it was the circulation was somewhat problematic And you said that that has now been redesigned and re-laid out and did you work What did the applicant sort of engage with? Southern Marin fire to review their proposed plan. |
| 02:54:16.88 | Trisha Stevens | Yes, the fire district did review the plan and signed off on their fire radius plan. And we will... provides documentation of that if you desire. |
| 02:54:30.29 | Kristina Feller | I just I want to make sure that it's happening was another request that came out of the last study session so I just wanted to go back and make sure that those conversations were happening. Um, So... Those are all the questions I have, unless you have the FAR and the built up area. We can come back to that too. |
| 02:54:54.44 | Trisha Stevens | Okay, I need a second to find all that. |
| 02:54:57.48 | Kristina Feller | that that's no problem. Um, do commissioners have any other questions for staff at this time? Nope. Trisha, why don't, I'm gonna ask the applicant to come up here and present before we take public comment. I'm not sure who that is in the audience here. who is making public comment, but if staff could assist |
| 02:55:25.12 | Trisha Stevens | Um, there is Brett McDonald. |
| 02:55:27.77 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:55:29.07 | Trisha Stevens | Brett McConnell is here. |
| 02:55:30.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So if we could unmute Mr. McDonald and ask him to share and if he needs the screen to share, he can do that too. Welcome Mr. McDonald this evening. if I'm not sure if you need to share your screen, but you'll have 15 minutes to present here. |
| 02:55:57.18 | Director Scoble | Mr. Feller, it is news that Mr. McDonald is unmuted, but he's... He's having microphone issues. Yeah. And he has been asked to share his video. He may need to reboot. Sometimes that is actually what happens Very. |
| 02:56:17.72 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I see Ms. McDonald, we see you on screen, but I think there's something wrong with your audio. |
| 02:56:28.91 | Kristina Feller | or you're muted. Let's see if we can get this fixed. Everyone could just be patient for just a moment. |
| 02:56:39.79 | Director Scoble | If we're unable to resolve the sound issue, it could be just having Mr. McDonald reboot computer and log back on. |
| 02:56:49.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So Mr. McDonald, if you heard Director Scoble if you wanna try to reboot and re-log back in, |
| 02:57:00.48 | Director Scoble | Another option would be to call into the meeting on his phone and then we can mute the Zoom call so you can speak on your cell phone. |
| 02:57:25.64 | Kristina Feller | Let's give Mr. McDonald just a second here. I don't, we see your phone, if you can hear us, we do see that. |
| 02:57:39.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:57:40.56 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. Hello? Hello? Okay, here we go. |
| 02:57:44.37 | Kristina Feller | Okay, if we can mute your computer. you. |
| 02:57:49.91 | Brett McDonald | Well, if my computer's working, I should be able to talk with it. But, okay, let me... |
| 02:57:55.54 | Director Scoble | So Mr. McDonald, your microphone on your computer is still picking up the sound. What you'll need to do is actually deactivate the audio on your computer and speak through your phone. |
| 02:58:03.14 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:58:06.40 | Brett McDonald | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:58:07.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:08.66 | Brett McDonald | Okay. |
| 02:58:09.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.38 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.40 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.43 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.57 | Director Scoble | Sure. |
| 02:58:09.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:11.14 | Director Scoble | So to do that on the bottom of your screen on the left hand side by the microphone, there's a carrot next to the microphone if you click on that. |
| 02:58:18.86 | Brett McDonald | I think I just did it. Yeah. Thank you. |
| 02:58:20.55 | Director Scoble | Yeah. |
| 02:58:21.09 | Unknown | you |
| 02:58:21.28 | Director Scoble | you Thank you. |
| 02:58:23.22 | Brett McDonald | Okay. All right. Welcome to the C- |
| 02:58:26.56 | Unknown | Welcome to CPP. |
| 02:58:29.18 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. So I was going to play the video, but apparently I heard people saw it. Do you want to play the video? I don't know, there's some requests or maybe that was just about the video. Okay. So in terms of the FAR and all that, it's shown on the cover sheet, sheet A1, I believe it's 20.5. We have a lot of and the building coverage is uh, 11.45. and that is in the industrial, you know, let's see, come on. At any rate, they're shown on the cover sheet. |
| 02:59:07.30 | Director Scoble | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:59:10.06 | Brett McDonald | THE FAMILY. The question about The views of Mount Tam, yes, I believe that they are still there, although setting storyfold will certainly tell the whole story. We have calculated them and presented them in the last meeting. So between buildings, A and B and C is a view corridor that exists to pick up a portion of Mount Tam. THE END OF THE END OF THE see um what else uh You know, I'm really just here to sort of answer questions. There was a question about the tracks, about just leaving them. |
| 02:59:40.37 | Unknown | I THINK IT'S A LOT OF |
| 02:59:47.36 | Brett McDonald | The fact of the matter is the tracks aren't really degraded within our property where they're degraded in and we have a and the director of public works asked us to extend any of the paving and construction over to 60D to resolve what is some uneven paving and a low point in the, |
| 03:00:03.25 | John DeRay | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:00:08.60 | Brett McDonald | overall site. |
| 03:00:08.67 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY IS A |
| 03:00:10.10 | Brett McDonald | of the whole point down there. And so that is what we did there. So what else? |
| 03:00:19.69 | Dr. Ray Dieter | . |
| 03:00:20.26 | Brett McDonald | Can I answer, oh, |
| 03:00:21.43 | Dr. Ray Dieter | here. |
| 03:00:22.25 | Brett McDonald | There was some question about the outreach to Galilee. We had our last meeting with Galilee in 2018. The project then was supposed to be fully ready for public review. We signed contracts to have a DUDEC, prepare their reports. but through a number of missteps, including contract not being forwarded, et cetera. Dudek's work got delayed and then came COVID. At any rate, we were always prepared. And after the last meeting I made several attempts to uh conduct that meeting that was to be participated in by and it wasn't until several months later that city planning told me that there would be no meetings |
| 03:01:11.18 | Dr. Ray Dieter | know. |
| 03:01:12.39 | Brett McDonald | And so I don't know. a little disturbing when when I'm but on the point to say that we're somehow being uncooperative. The only person who has reached out to me several times and I've had several phone conversations with them and exchanged multiple emails with |
| 03:01:31.81 | Dr. Ray Dieter | email. |
| 03:01:33.86 | Brett McDonald | That's the only person who's ever contacted me directly. |
| 03:01:34.04 | Dr. Ray Dieter | that. |
| 03:01:37.35 | Brett McDonald | and asked for my input and I've taken every one of his comments quite seriously and responded to them in detail. Um, I reviewed the meeting minutes in detail and produced a memo two days after our March 1st Planning Commission study session and And Commissioner Filler, I guess, I somehow missed going through minute by minute and I don't know. coming to the conclusion that there was some |
| 03:02:09.80 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:02:11.71 | Brett McDonald | aspects of the circulation that weren't adequate. In fact, we had met several times with |
| 03:02:15.92 | Dr. Ray Dieter | AND I THINK THAT'S A |
| 03:02:19.60 | Brett McDonald | Marin fire and have a a circulation diagram showing that the largest fire apparatus |
| 03:02:23.01 | Dr. Ray Dieter | the same. |
| 03:02:27.67 | Brett McDonald | that is in Southern Marin District can circulate through the site without going forward or backward. I mean, with all consistently moving forward. |
| 03:02:36.60 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:02:38.13 | Brett McDonald | And that diagram is in your documentation. It's the last sheet, I believe. |
| 03:02:38.86 | Dr. Ray Dieter | and that's what we're doing. |
| 03:02:43.26 | Brett McDonald | I think it's a little bit |
| 03:02:43.53 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:02:45.83 | Brett McDonald | in the larger PDF of the entire drawing project Um, And for Commissioner Luxembourg, I believe in the last comment, You were quite sure that the path wasn't eight feet wide. I assured you it was eight feet wide. Apparently you found a spot that's less than eight feet wide. |
| 03:03:04.86 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:03:04.95 | Brett McDonald | we're unaware of it, but the easement that's set up for the, uh, the combination bike and pedestrian path is set at eight feet. |
| 03:03:11.04 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I'm not sure. THE FEDERAL OF THE FEDERAL OF |
| 03:03:15.49 | Brett McDonald | And I don't know 100% sure the maintenance criteria, but I believe that |
| 03:03:16.17 | Dr. Ray Dieter | They don't. |
| 03:03:21.32 | Brett McDonald | either our parcel or the Marina parcel is responsible for the continued maintenance of that. |
| 03:03:21.38 | Dr. Ray Dieter | either. |
| 03:03:28.62 | Brett McDonald | If that's an issue, I think that there is, absolutely no reason why it wouldn't be a full eight feet all the way through the marsh side. |
| 03:03:35.66 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:03:38.44 | Brett McDonald | and the eight feet is the recommended width for a combination bike and pedestrian path. |
| 03:03:40.47 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. is. |
| 03:03:45.45 | Brett McDonald | under the state guidelines. I think that there will be Uh... some difficulties in making that wider. Obviously, if you went to the marsh side, that obviously could be done. but that could create some conflicts with people that believe it ought to go to the other side. And the other side is what's helping us |
| 03:04:02.71 | Dr. Ray Dieter | other |
| 03:04:04.75 | Brett McDonald | buffer our parking from Galilee. So I don't really want to do that either. |
| 03:04:04.85 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF |
| 03:04:09.73 | Brett McDonald | So Yeah. So I'm here to answer any other questions. Thank you. |
| 03:04:16.55 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:04:19.89 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. McDonald. I appreciate that. Um, Let me ask the commissioners here if you have any questions at this time for the applicant. for his representative, yes, Commissioner Junius. |
| 03:04:36.24 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. Mr. McDonald, nice to meet you. that we're going to have I apologize for being the new guy in the commission here. So I'm seeing this for the first time. THEIR OWNERS. I don't think there's any question this is an extremely important project is very visible. from trails that I think a lot of people, including myself, take on a regular basis. So, I guess I'm actually a little surprised development going to go on here. I can't. I mean, I'm just a little curious though. Can you bring up, or can somebody bring up figure eight which is on page 13 of the staff report. I just wanna make sure I understand the ownership of this property in relationship to the other larger buildings that are here in Liberty Ship. Are you familiar with, I mean, I guess my question is, is this a single owner that has nothing to do with Liberty ship 30, Liberty ship 26, Liberty ship 10, |
| 03:05:29.25 | Brett McDonald | Yeah. |
| 03:05:30.46 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 03:05:31.02 | Brett McDonald | So the ownership there is commonality between 04, 06 and 07. They are various, they are different, but they're various family entities. in terms of 60D and all that, that's a completely separate ownership. |
| 03:05:44.65 | Dr. Ray Dieter | in. |
| 03:05:49.29 | Brett McDonald | and 30D and 10D. and 10 30 Liberty Ship 30 and Liberty Ship 10 are completely different ownership. Got it. Okay. |
| 03:05:59.42 | Kristina Feller | Can, by the way, forgive me, Commissioner Junius, but I think it's important because there's a lot of public watching either from home or here on Zoom, Could I ask Tricia to please bring up the map, the figure that commissioner Junius requested So we can go over those numbers again for the benefit of anybody listening. There we go. |
| 03:06:23.50 | Andrew Junius | No, no, I want to go to figure eight. which is page 13 of the staff report. just the more general, the larger overview of the entire Liberty ship. uh, THE END OF THE END OF THE project site. I think Brent got it, but I think you're right. Chair Cutler, we should but they have to give it up. or maybe that actually might not have been part of her presentation, sorry, maybe it's not. |
| 03:06:47.09 | Trisha Stevens | I'm sorry, what figure in the staff report? |
| 03:06:50.19 | Andrew Junius | Figure eight, which is on page 13, |
| 03:06:53.52 | Trisha Stevens | That's the one with accessible paths |
| 03:06:56.64 | Andrew Junius | Yes, yes, but it also is also is a nice overview site plan of the entire area. |
| 03:07:00.69 | Trisha Stevens | Oh, okay, I can share that one. I've got that up. |
| 03:07:03.78 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. OK, so there you see across the top, you see Liberty. |
| 03:07:08.37 | Kristina Feller | Liberty, we're not there yet. |
| 03:07:09.30 | Brett McDonald | We're not there yet. Okay. |
| 03:07:12.28 | Kristina Feller | Okay, there we go. Thank you. |
| 03:07:16.76 | Brett McDonald | So across the top of the page, you see Liberty Ship 10, Liberty Ship 28. and leverage shift 30. Those are completely different ownership. No commonality. know history together. Um, And then you see Liberty Ship 60 and Liberty Ship 60D. That is a separate ownership. Um, And what you see on the lower left, are those three parcels, so that's Liberty Ship 80 that the cursor is on. moving to the left and up. THE END OF Liberty ship 80. that. And then our parcel is, has, common owners. they there. various family entities. three. families that HAVE. common interest. |
| 03:08:17.45 | Andrew Junius | Got it. And Liberty Ship 80, is that also separately owned or is that part of your client's? No. |
| 03:08:22.05 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. I don't know. Liberty Ship 80, Liberty Ship 85, and our parcel. THE CITY IS GOING TO BE family structures. Commonality Ownership. |
| 03:08:33.39 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, I appreciate that, that's clear to me. I'm just, again, very high level question and I apologize if I'm, again, coming to this pretty late. I'm not sure. You know, I literally walk down that accessible path on almost a daily basis along Bridgeway. And I walk by Liberty Ship 10, Liberty Ship 28, Liberty Ship 30. Now, admittedly, the last couple of years have been pretty slow and those parking lots are virtually never filled. That's very much a COVID issue, I'm sure. I've been in the city for a while and before COVID, I kind of noticed the same thing. um, I guess my question goes to our, you know, those buildings don't appear to be that occupied. And I'm just curious if your clients I'm not sure. I mean, it sounds like you don't have leases yet, you don't have any other I like the idea of a restaurant, frankly, but I think are you pretty confident that you're going to have tenants for these buildings? |
| 03:09:27.03 | Brett McDonald | Well, you know, that's a good question, and at times we have had. PEN. that we're interested. most of the people here may or may not be aware that I started this project in 2015. and actually made the first application to the city in 2016. There was a series of iterations and notice of incomplete applications where we continued to update things on and on and on, and 2018 is when the application was being complete. So I did hear Tricia say, 2018 was when we made the application 2018 is when The application is being complete. So to make a long story short, there's been various people over the years that have wanted to... least face but How can you leave space when you can't predict when and if anything will be constructed. |
| 03:10:18.99 | Dr. Ray Dieter | WIN. |
| 03:10:21.91 | Brett McDonald | that. where we've got some consistent is in the waterfront building. The buildings are typically termed A, B, and C. |
| 03:10:29.57 | Dr. Ray Dieter | and it's a good thing. I mean, |
| 03:10:32.59 | Brett McDonald | with on the diagram that's up on the page A is up on the top. B is directly below it. and C is the point building on the waterfront. because we've got... |
| 03:10:42.02 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:10:42.11 | Unknown | because, |
| 03:10:43.66 | Brett McDonald | traveling companions and a couple of the other groups that are, uh, or have been around the Schoonmaker Point for quite a while. They've continued to express interest and our clients are extending them |
| 03:10:48.71 | Unknown | Sure. THE FAMILY HAS BEEN AROUND |
| 03:10:56.30 | Brett McDonald | a very reasonable fortuitous opportunity. |
| 03:10:59.56 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THEIR OWNERS. Yeah. |
| 03:11:01.28 | Brett McDonald | I'm not sure. be or A, I'm sorry, is the top building. When we started this whole thing, it was really the impetus of the whole thing. There was such a demand for storage that that's one of the elements that started the project. Since then, the demand for storage in the Marin area has continued to evolve. I can't tell you where it is today because it's sort of become a new point. You know, you kind of have to kind of deal with that when you know the year of occupancy. B is kind of a mixed use building that we feel comfortable will obtain its tenant. And so. That's what I know about the history and |
| 03:11:45.98 | Dr. Ray Dieter | True. |
| 03:11:47.40 | Brett McDonald | why it becomes so difficult to say, oh, well, we're going to sign a lease with this guy. Nobody's got any leases signed. If we did, we'd be in noncompliance with any of the agreements that we would have signed. |
| 03:11:56.31 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:11:56.32 | Andrew Junius | I'm fine. |
| 03:11:58.08 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. |
| 03:11:58.10 | Andrew Junius | I totally get that, Mr. McDonald. Thank you. I appreciate that. And thanks for bearing with me. Really quickly. approximate building sizes for each of these A, B, and C. rough square footages. |
| 03:12:07.80 | Unknown | . |
| 03:12:07.88 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. Yeah, the total build out is roughly is between 50 and 55,000. I believe the waterfront is 18,000. and then you got about Well, let's see. Actually, I think I could be misspeaking. That's on the cover sheet, sheet A1. Let me just read it. |
| 03:12:33.62 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 03:12:36.22 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. |
| 03:12:36.23 | Andrew Junius | I'm sorry, I didn't catch that, yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. |
| 03:12:40.55 | Brett McDonald | The A building is... here. uh, just under 17,000 growth. The building is $18,000 gross. and the waterfront building is 11,500 growth. |
| 03:12:57.77 | Andrew Junius | Great, I appreciate that. And I think that is the conclusion of my questions at this point. Thank you very much. |
| 03:13:04.35 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Junius. Thank you very much. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 03:13:09.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Mr. McDonald, I just want to clarify what you were saying about this pedestrian death. This is property, your client's property, correct? |
| 03:13:21.19 | Brett McDonald | it I know there's easements through it. I don't know who's responsible for the maintenance of the easements. Thank you. |
| 03:13:28.55 | Bruce Huff | Thank you. |
| 03:13:28.66 | Brett McDonald | It was originally part of the parcel as |
| 03:13:28.70 | Bruce Huff | Right. |
| 03:13:32.04 | Brett McDonald | the marsh was and then they were I'm not sure. either separated from the parcel or by easement. the rights given away. I believe that the the path in front of on the South Shore. that fronts the marsh is still part of our parcel and is Uh... that has a eight foot easement running through it that's sort of a winding path. |
| 03:14:01.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. So |
| 03:14:02.92 | Brett McDonald | In fact, I'm sure I can actually see it now on the site plan. Yes, so we've still got the property corners. So the marsh is a and the and the landscape out there is all dedicated by easement. |
| 03:14:17.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So you have the rights to maintain that eight feet. If it's not eight feet because it's deteriorated, you go to make improvements to that. It's on your property. There's nothing that easement would stop you from improving that as part of your project. |
| 03:14:35.27 | Brett McDonald | I believe that and I've asked that question. Unfortunately, there's been too many years gone by. I believe that. the that. uh Our parcel is responsible for the maintenance of that. You have to read we and you and everybody would have to read the easement as it's written. but I believe it puts the responsibility of maintenance on our parcel. And it's supposed to be maintained at 8 feet wide. |
| 03:15:02.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So good to see you. |
| 03:15:05.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So between now and whenever you come back for an actual hearing, you could resolve what improvements you could make to this, including potentially widening it or not by having your lawyers review the easements and seeing it. Obviously, they widened it on the beach, so they should, because you can tell that it was widened. Because it was obviously insufficient. You can see the line where they widened. |
| 03:15:31.24 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. Of course we can consider it, but I know that last time we discuss this in the last meeting. And I mean this with all due respect. You challenged me on that it was eight feet wide, and it is eight feet wide. And that in that meeting, you said if it was eight feet wide, you were good with it. and now we're be suggested that it be widened. Well, I think that widening it is going to cause some compromises for, uh, the landscape buffer that's used to shield our project from Galilee or the marsh area itself. |
| 03:16:00.67 | Dr. Ray Dieter | the land. |
| 03:16:07.17 | Brett McDonald | So I, you know, I use that path. I bicycle everywhere I go, and I use that path often. That's how I come and go from the site and why the path is used. I've rarely had a conflict with anybody down there. |
| 03:16:17.45 | Dr. Ray Dieter | you know, to do. |
| 03:16:22.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | With the pandemic, it makes it a little harder because people try to have more of a distance. And when I went out, I did measure in some of the areas that are not at the, and then I realized the reason I thought it was too narrow is it is wider on the beach. And obviously the path doesn't really, it's not clear where one property line ends and another begins, but clearly the beach is wider and then it narrows down. |
| 03:16:36.95 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:16:52.14 | Brett McDonald | Yeah, no question. No question. |
| 03:16:54.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So if you could explore that between now and the hearing, |
| 03:16:59.64 | Brett McDonald | Yeah, we can do that. |
| 03:17:02.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Chair Croll, those are the questions I have at this point. |
| 03:17:06.07 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Saad, did you have any questions for the applicant? |
| 03:17:12.19 | Nastassya Saad | I think I just wanted to ask for clarification if I heard correctly. Did you say that the Department of Public Works Was the body that asked you to pave over the track specifically? Did I hear that correctly? |
| 03:17:27.58 | Brett McDonald | Well, what they asked us to deal with was the, One, the bottleneck at 60D to make sure that we were maintaining the 20 foot width. |
| 03:17:34.30 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:17:40.37 | Brett McDonald | And second was that we extended our repaving beyond our property line and Uh, the road between uh the entrance to 30D and the entry to our parcel. and It's, mainly because really 60Ds |
| 03:17:57.03 | Unknown | mainly |
| 03:17:59.96 | Brett McDonald | is a is a parcel that hasn't had a lot of improvements over the years and why 30D and our parcel have continued to |
| 03:18:02.65 | Unknown | is a |
| 03:18:03.24 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:18:11.44 | Brett McDonald | uh... pavement down and maintain things. there has been some that's not a continual subsidence Chair Feller was discussing about one of the problems of the of the whole Marin ship area. So that area has continued to drop in elevation. both sides of it have continued to maintain their property. |
| 03:18:34.41 | Dr. Ray Dieter | and |
| 03:18:36.06 | Brett McDonald | And so that has become a low point that Then the director of public work said, well, you've got to, You've got to make it a safe path all the way from 30 into your property, so we'd like you to extend the paving project. over that at that time. We were aware of the track. |
| 03:18:55.01 | Dr. Ray Dieter | WE WERE AWARE THAT WE WERE |
| 03:18:56.43 | Brett McDonald | and actually surveyed the track. for the presentation to the public work. and So, That's where it comes from. And so then the discussion probably, which I was not a party of, and maybe Tricia was, was the concept of of. saving over the tracks because that will provide the safest most durable path. and still will allow the, uh, fully documented rail tracks to be understood and then memorialized with some kind of a historic plaque that explains how they work |
| 03:19:27.73 | Dr. Ray Dieter | FULLY DOES. |
| 03:19:36.96 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. AND THEN, Did that conversation just because I think director Ms. Cobble just clarified that the Historic Preservation Commission had a had a recent hearing, I think it was the 7th, So was that |
| 03:19:52.37 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 03:19:55.98 | Nastassya Saad | Was that conversation with Department of Public Works prior to that hearing or? Um, I don't know if you've are aware. |
| 03:20:04.67 | Brett McDonald | Yeah. Yeah, yeah. the whole issue of paving over the tracks was probably about 2019, 2020, Trisha was on board and you guys got a new public |
| 03:20:14.64 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 03:20:14.96 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF |
| 03:20:19.66 | Brett McDonald | works director, his name escapes me right now. And that's when he brought it up. |
| 03:20:23.98 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:20:24.02 | Trisha Stevens | Sure. |
| 03:20:24.67 | Brett McDonald | It was before COVID. Before COVID. We actually had a sit-down meeting. |
| 03:20:24.68 | Trisha Stevens | I just was |
| 03:20:25.34 | Nastassya Saad | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:20:27.05 | Trisha Stevens | COVID. |
| 03:20:27.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:20:27.59 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. |
| 03:20:27.60 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:20:27.65 | Trisha Stevens | Thank you. Yeah, if I can insert in there, there was quite a few discussions with the public works director I'm not sure. as we were talking about the remnant tracks and the public work Director Haile. recommended that the paving over a curb due to safety. So there was early on discussions about the paving and then there were later discussions. |
| 03:20:49.14 | Nastassya Saad | I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT. |
| 03:20:53.69 | Nastassya Saad | OKAY, THANK YOU. IT JUST HELPS ME WITH THE TIMELINE. AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO ASK, I THINK, I think it was Commissioner Junius brought up in terms of potential tenants. If the staff report saying that 108 spaces are going to be added. And I'm just curious if you have, I mean, that automatically means at least 108 people, if not more, would be, you know, welcome in that area as an addition to, I'm |
| 03:21:28.91 | Nastassya Saad | Is there any idea about. what type of pedestrian traffic would be in that area for for the specific use of the for for the buildings, not for the path that you can't control. Um, I think, you know, Commissioner Alexenberg is making a point about COVID but And he's right, there are just fewer people out in general but I think one of the charming aspects of that area. As someone who's born and raised here it's always been very low foot traffic. It's kind of just a quiet little place so. just from an influx of new buildings and new businesses and all this parking just trying to get a sense of what you potentially envision of course not holding you to it just a rough idea and types of businesses that you'd like to see in those buildings and how many people that can be bringing to the area. |
| 03:22:23.15 | Brett McDonald | Yeah. So, uh, The number of stalls being provided is 101. 108 is a correction that Tricia made because that was the 2000 19 parking count. |
| 03:22:34.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:22:36.82 | Brett McDonald | So, Now, the 101 stalls is based on a maximum parking demand. So, THE we were required to set up the program uses that created the maximum parking demand on the build And that is what produces the requirement for 97 stalls. and so we're have four more stalls than what the maximum demand is. |
| 03:23:05.32 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I'm not sure. THE FAMILY. |
| 03:23:10.02 | Brett McDonald | What do I think? I think based on all of this, So let me go back one. their stuff. they're sort of a |
| 03:23:19.15 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:23:19.93 | Brett McDonald | As you're aware, the beach there and the sand and all that is quite attractive to a lot of people. And as people around the Bay Area figure out that that beach exists, it keeps getting more and more popular. We have been asked to put together a project that is a low traffic generator and not increase the demand on those kind of things. The A building is a storage building. It essence has |
| 03:23:44.96 | Unknown | THE A. |
| 03:23:45.51 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:23:49.95 | Brett McDonald | no occupancy. and there will be people coming and going and bringing things in and bringing things out. Now the lower level, the upper level is total |
| 03:23:56.40 | Unknown | Oh, |
| 03:23:56.62 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. the upper. |
| 03:23:59.27 | Brett McDonald | storage, uh, THE HIGHEST HIGHEST HIGHEST The lower level is designed to be sort of light industrial and perhaps dry storage of boats and things like that. And there will be people |
| 03:24:02.24 | Dr. Ray Dieter | that's a good idea. |
| 03:24:11.11 | Brett McDonald | working on their stuff and moving in and out, but that's a very low demand. |
| 03:24:11.40 | Dr. Ray Dieter | working on. |
| 03:24:17.24 | Brett McDonald | the The waterfront building, the C building, will put a demand on the beach. |
| 03:24:20.66 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO Thank you. |
| 03:24:23.94 | Brett McDonald | but some of that, demand is probably currently within the yard already. |
| 03:24:28.27 | Unknown | within |
| 03:24:30.91 | Brett McDonald | the traveling companions and some of the other there's two voting groups. |
| 03:24:35.14 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:24:36.49 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. that we've been courting and they've been courting. and until something happens otherwise. we intend to have them there. They will be using the beach, but they've been currently using the beach. |
| 03:24:45.28 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:24:49.42 | Brett McDonald | Um, The B building is a little bit of a crapshoot on who actually comes in and what they will do. I'm not sure. because it's a mixed use building and does have the opportunity |
| 03:25:01.69 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY IS GOING TO BE Thank you. |
| 03:25:05.03 | Brett McDonald | provide for uses that are legally allowed. |
| 03:25:07.91 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:25:08.07 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:25:14.09 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thanks for the input there. Chair Feller, those are all the questions I have at the moment. Great, thank you. Actually, no, I'm sorry, Chair Feller. |
| 03:25:21.41 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, guys. |
| 03:25:24.22 | Nastassya Saad | May I just follow up on the tracks? The background was really helpful to understand. I know I'm kind of stuck on them. I think I'm gonna be stuck on them for a while, Is it? IN THE PLANS. I don't even know if I should say this. Just ignoring what Department of Public Works is recommending per your original PLANS, THINKING, that I don't even know if these were your original plans, but originally from the MND when it was Thank you. proposed that those tracks were outside of the project footprint I suppose they were to be left alone then. Is it something that, I don't know if it's a question for staff. Is this something that this like does that need? Do those need according to you and what you're trying to achieve for your project? Do those tracks need to be covered with asphalt. |
| 03:26:23.28 | Brett McDonald | Yeah. Probably because of 60D, because it would end up collecting all the water of all of the lot. of all of the surrounding area, rather than being a controlled dissipation. I think there's something else you should understand a little bit about those tracks. Um, I studied historic preservation in Rome, Italy. In fact, it was one of my concentration. Uh, and when we started that project and, um, I THINK I'M GOING TO BE early on. |
| 03:26:54.38 | Dr. Ray Dieter | early on. |
| 03:26:55.39 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. railroad tracks were not being |
| 03:26:56.60 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FEDERAL. |
| 03:26:59.49 | Brett McDonald | in such a historical manner. And in fact, if you read some of the aspects of the Burke Planck report, you'll find out that It wasn't until he was... |
| 03:27:07.17 | Mike Junicek | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:27:07.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:27:07.46 | Mike Junicek | Thank you. |
| 03:27:09.31 | Brett McDonald | asked to do a study for the city of San Francisco in 2018. that he conceptualized the concept of maintaining, uh, |
| 03:27:16.10 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I'm going to go. |
| 03:27:19.72 | Brett McDonald | tracks at large and tracks in general, because you'll note that this is not considered an historic resource, this is considered Thank you. |
| 03:27:27.05 | John DeRay | to the |
| 03:27:28.11 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. |
| 03:27:28.15 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 03:27:28.18 | Brett McDonald | Thank you. |
| 03:27:28.19 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 03:27:28.57 | Brett McDonald | to historic district. So what does that mean? So when you have things like roundhouses where tracks are going in and out of buildings and the contiguous aspect of a historical history. |
| 03:27:42.73 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I'm not sure. |
| 03:27:45.98 | Brett McDonald | structure. that's when the track should be maintained. this. of track is a contributing factor and should be known and should be documented but it is actually, the existence of the tract is actually expressed by the curving of Liberty Ships And so. I think for a client, he did do a reasonable job in the end of his conclusions on what he felt about the significance of actually |
| 03:28:08.76 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. I'm sorry. |
| 03:28:12.24 | Dr. Ray Dieter | inclusion. |
| 03:28:16.58 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF |
| 03:28:18.70 | Brett McDonald | leaving the tracks exposed I don't think he felt that was necessary. I think he did feel it was necessary to not |
| 03:28:18.79 | Dr. Ray Dieter | leading |
| 03:28:26.35 | Brett McDonald | to in essence embalm them. |
| 03:28:26.70 | Bruce Huff | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:28:28.54 | Brett McDonald | Should anybody at any time decide to extract them or want to find out more information, they will always be there. So, uh, |
| 03:28:37.30 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I don't know. |
| 03:28:38.34 | Brett McDonald | The problem with, you know, there are other things that could have been done, their existence on the top of the surface. |
| 03:28:43.61 | Dr. Ray Dieter | mimic |
| 03:28:47.59 | Brett McDonald | Um, which is sometimes done with a decorative rail put up there, or maybe even a brick pattern or something. but I think that due to the subsidence issues in the Marin ship that the public works director was really against that is not my understanding and I guess I kind of got it I have to concur with him |
| 03:29:03.42 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I think it was really, |
| 03:29:09.34 | Brett McDonald | that there will be. continual location of payment breakdown. |
| 03:29:11.08 | Nastassya Saad | continue. |
| 03:29:11.45 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 03:29:14.47 | Brett McDonald | So. |
| 03:29:17.24 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. Thank you. |
| 03:29:19.82 | Kristina Feller | Thank you Commissioner Saad for your questions, those were excellent. Um, Ms. McDonald, I did have a couple of follow-on questions. If we could go back to building B, can you explain what you mean by mixed use, what the uses are in this building that you are anticipating. |
| 03:29:42.22 | Brett McDonald | Well, what we set it up for parking, for example, was a medical services clinics and laboratories. And because it had a higher demand load. I I personally believe it's going to be |
| 03:29:54.87 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:29:57.25 | Brett McDonald | more light industrial repair and maintenance kind of stuff. but, uh, We were asked to include medical services because it had a higher parking count. And it's possible that it could, I mean, we keep |
| 03:30:09.82 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. I'm good. |
| 03:30:13.18 | Brett McDonald | as a society, keep evolving in what's a necessary |
| 03:30:13.76 | Dr. Ray Dieter | AS A LONG TIME. |
| 03:30:18.82 | Brett McDonald | Uh, youth. in our daily lives and for all we know, We're going to be expanding medical clinics due to I don't know, increased presence of pandemics. I don't know. So medical. I don't, I don't. |
| 03:30:29.03 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Oh, man. |
| 03:30:30.48 | Unknown | So medical. |
| 03:30:32.15 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:30:33.01 | Brett McDonald | I don't anticipate medical services. but they are an allowed use. They are. |
| 03:30:38.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:30:39.10 | Brett McDonald | would be welcome. Yeah. |
| 03:30:41.63 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:30:41.84 | Brett McDonald | now that. |
| 03:30:43.88 | Kristina Feller | So, so your, so medical use and storage is what you mean by mixed use? I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'm just trying to understand what you're thinking of this mixed use. |
| 03:30:54.86 | Brett McDonald | Well, that's correct. So mixed uses, you know, |
| 03:30:56.67 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:30:58.00 | Brett McDonald | manufacturing, wholesale and distribution. |
| 03:30:58.05 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 03:31:01.16 | Brett McDonald | THE FAMILY. and repair and maintenance. Uh... and medical services, those are sort of three different types of uses. That's what I would call a mixed use, yeah. |
| 03:31:11.70 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. in. to your knowledge, is there any affordable areas or areas for rent in this development or the ball market rate? |
| 03:31:28.70 | Brett McDonald | Well, the... There has been suggestions that the the traveling companions in the kayak group be offered a favorable rate, if that's what you mean by affordable. I think that the The A building will be providing affordable spaces for a lot of different uses that can occur on its ground level. And, The storage up above will be providing opportunities for a lot of different groups particularly probably are people who are in transition and whether it's transition by choice or transition by force, people need to temporarily store their things. |
| 03:32:16.37 | Kristina Feller | So like a public storage, is that what you're thinking? that I, |
| 03:32:21.25 | Brett McDonald | The top level, yes, is somewhat of a public storage. The bottom level is more of a... |
| 03:32:24.92 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:32:27.96 | Brett McDonald | is more of a dry dock kind of boat. could be automobile storage. In fact, that was somebody who came at us most recently was wanted to store automobiles in there. But unfortunately we hadn't told them, |
| 03:32:37.92 | Dr. Ray Dieter | recently. or automobile. |
| 03:32:44.01 | Brett McDonald | I'm not sure if you're make any promises right now. And, uh, Bill. Um, Okay. |
| 03:32:51.10 | Unknown | you |
| 03:32:52.68 | Kristina Feller | and then I wanted to ask you know this area has been identified by and others as a vulnerable area and there's a whole vulnerability assessment. So can you talk to us a little bit about what how your design responds to the findings of the vulnerability assessment in this area. Because to me, it looked like it was completely at grade and not built up and in, you know, sort of at the grade that is existing, but I could be wrong. You tell me. |
| 03:33:29.69 | Brett McDonald | YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN we've tried to make the pads as high as we can. Unfortunately, there's some existing buildings on its perimeter. Um, So we've got them more than a foot. So the requirement is that they be a foot above |
| 03:33:43.58 | Dr. Ray Dieter | requirement. |
| 03:33:46.50 | Brett McDonald | FEMA flood level, and they are more than a foot above, and I've continued to try and make them as high as possible. but you get limitations on entering and exiting the site. You get limitations for the ADA. |
| 03:34:05.48 | Dr. Ray Dieter | ADA. |
| 03:34:06.31 | Brett McDonald | Um, accessibility aspects. and So, |
| 03:34:11.00 | Unknown | So – |
| 03:34:12.25 | Brett McDonald | I believe the pads are up at around 12, and the flood elevation is like 10 and 10. 10 or 10 and three quarters or 11. |
| 03:34:20.35 | Dr. Ray Dieter | or less. |
| 03:34:22.10 | Brett McDonald | The foot above FEMA |
| 03:34:24.94 | Kristina Feller | So they're an extra quarter |
| 03:34:25.24 | Brett McDonald | So they're an extra foot above. |
| 03:34:28.11 | Kristina Feller | I think it requires a 100 foot flood as part of the vulnerability, at least the vulnerability assessment. I guess what I'm trying to figure out And I didn't quite see it in the drawings. Um, and maybe you have it somewhere else or maybe I overlook something, which is always possible. but I took some time looking at this, is I didn't really see how where that cross section was, where I could understand that because you I am trying to understand how you have these large garage doors at grade, and how a vehicle or large something on a pallet would come in and out in a light industrial area that you've identified the use to be in some of these areas. How how how it's functional. So I was just trying to figure that out based on the results of the vulnerability assessment and the design. |
| 03:35:27.50 | Brett McDonald | So the... In front of the doors, they have what's called a rolled curb. that allows you to enter and exit and still get the sidewalk above |
| 03:35:32.31 | Kristina Feller | Wow. |
| 03:35:36.61 | Brett McDonald | the elevations are at about and a half feet. and I believe 11 feet is one foot above the FEMA flood zone. So these buildings are higher than all the other buildings around them. |
| 03:35:46.82 | Dr. Ray Dieter | the city. |
| 03:35:51.63 | Brett McDonald | and then So, that is what we did. There's a, |
| 03:35:55.34 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:35:57.62 | Brett McDonald | Memo. that it's maybe before Trisha's time, I'm not sure where we went through all of the I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT and flooding assumptions. and depending upon which you use. THE FAMILY IS these buildings have potential issues in 50 years. And I think you saw that similar thing. I noticed the similarities in discussing up there at Clipper. Uh... that, depending upon which model you use, we're all in trouble. So, you know. I'm not sure. but we have got our floor elevations up to the 12 and a half level. And then our floor elevations are high. And our or slabs are being put on piles. which means if you had to, you could still put another foot. If you had to raise these floors, you could raise them up. There would end up being down there in the Marin ship an entire process. |
| 03:36:53.68 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:36:58.30 | Brett McDonald | of either dyking them or consistently raising the entire Marin ship. |
| 03:37:01.29 | Dr. Ray Dieter | and we're going to have a that we're going to be |
| 03:37:04.04 | Brett McDonald | or abandoning all the buildings and letting, you know, the water come over them. I don't know what the answer is to that, but... |
| 03:37:11.09 | Kristina Feller | Well, I just want to focus on, on this, this application and. make sure that this is a study session and not a design review. So there's no decision that we're making tonight, really trying to enter into the dialogue And I guess part of the question comes from it would be really helpful that you maybe in a future hearing or something would be able to address that through a diagram or actually walk us through your design and the plans and cross sections so we can actually have a better understanding and not just for the benefit of the commission, but, but anybody in the public here. how this would functionally work. Because you're talking about 10 feet, 10 1⁄2, 12 feet, whatever that might be. but, 10 and a half or 12 feet over what? And so we need to kind of understand what the baseline of that is and how that functions. And then I think commissioner Saad, hit on something that I think is important as well. This is not an area that has very heavily traffic buildings currently, but what you're proposing could |
| 03:38:13.97 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Currently. |
| 03:38:16.50 | Kristina Feller | impact that And so we'd also want to understand how that all worked with whatever that pedestrian circulation is. Um, So again, this is just feedback and comment for you to think about. And I'd want to understand if your fly-through, fly-by depicted this in a way that if these buildings are so much higher or somewhat higher than whatever buildings are around there. that that is you know, truly shown in what the flyby and fly through is because we're also interested in any view corridors And so these are all the things that we look at. And I just wanted to make sure that I put that out there, so as we are continuing this dialogue through study sessions, that you can address those either verbally with us, but most importantly, through however you're documenting and designing this. |
| 03:39:17.27 | Brett McDonald | THE DOCUMENTS. are in the set, there is an analysis of the flood zones in the civil drawing, And then each of the buildings has their finished floor elevation and the surrounding buildings also have their finished floor elevations. And the computer model is |
| 03:39:35.02 | Dr. Ray Dieter | that. |
| 03:39:38.68 | Brett McDonald | I think it's a good question. |
| 03:39:44.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and, um, Can you just maybe briefly for the benefit of the hearing, talk a little bit about the finishes and what materials you've used on the exteriors |
| 03:40:03.01 | Brett McDonald | Yeah. the One of the principal siding materials is a metal siding, which is complimentary to 80, and 85 Liberty ship as well as some of the other buildings up at Gatehouse 5 And it's a good light industrial a material that's complimentary with marine uses. I think you see it up there at the fish house too and some of the other things around Then there is a I'm not sure. precast concrete panel for the infill that may look a little bit like stucco on some of the other buildings. and then a metal roof. |
| 03:40:47.23 | Unknown | and, |
| 03:40:47.61 | Dr. Ray Dieter | No. Thank you. |
| 03:40:48.24 | Unknown | the metal. |
| 03:40:49.08 | Brett McDonald | that seems to be prevalent in the general area here. In terms of colors, right now we're rendering it with |
| 03:40:56.74 | Dr. Ray Dieter | right now. |
| 03:40:59.34 | Brett McDonald | uh, warmer tones and more of the earth tone, uh, I think we're not married to anything. The other thing is a little premature to start getting down to colors. I think for the moment we're taking a complimentary non-controversial or non-public not being overly expressive. But that doesn't mean that that isn't a good choice and we can even study that and putting some high impact colors on the buildings, but right now. They're just meant to sort of blend and be part of the |
| 03:41:31.81 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:41:34.24 | Brett McDonald | existing Schoonmaker Point area. |
| 03:41:34.36 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:41:34.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:41:34.54 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:41:38.12 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you for doing that. So everyone's on the same page with what you're proposing. The last question I have is, the development that we're looking at in your drawings and what we're talking about this evening is this Does this depict also a master plan of what the intention is for the, for the full build out of the site or. Is there some future plan that you're aware of? |
| 03:42:10.30 | Brett McDonald | I don't know. very built up. I mean, this is this is it. Yeah. And I don't think you could. all through the thing. I mean, you know, we get |
| 03:42:20.11 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Okay. |
| 03:42:21.76 | Brett McDonald | It's a highly engineered site with five biofiltration zones and you know, a parking count that only has right now, you know, four extra stalls. There's not a lot of room to. to do much. |
| 03:42:39.31 | Kristina Feller | Great. Okay. |
| 03:42:40.61 | Brett McDonald | I'm going to go. |
| 03:42:41.44 | Kristina Feller | I appreciate that. Um, Commissioners, do you have any questions for the applicant, any more questions at this time? before I open this up for public comments. |
| 03:42:54.43 | Andrew Junius | Sorry, I do, I, sorry. |
| 03:42:55.68 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Yeah, yeah. |
| 03:42:57.22 | Andrew Junius | Mr. Feather, thanks. Almost missed a button there. So, I think that's a good question. On the storage issue, I'm kind of fascinated by this It sounds like, Mr. McDonald, for building A, you might be considering what a lot of us would call personal storage, right? You rent a locker, rent a locker and you go and you put your stuff in it, yeah? |
| 03:43:17.30 | Brett McDonald | Well, yeah, to some degree, although this may be heavily filled with |
| 03:43:20.20 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:43:22.61 | Brett McDonald | boat accoutrements. uh, You know, a lot of boats require lockers at the foot of their docks and things like that. I'm not sure. I can tell you that in 2015, there was a substantial demand for storage in, the southern Marin County that who's of items were all over the board from contractors wanting to store things to businesses wanting to store records to personal property. |
| 03:43:43.28 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:43:50.51 | Brett McDonald | to THE FAMILY. as I said, you know, uh, the accoutrements that go along with your, your sailboat. So, uh, that. desire has since changed. |
| 03:43:59.97 | Dr. Ray Dieter | desire. |
| 03:44:02.15 | Brett McDonald | whether it comes back or not, I don't know. I can just tell you that the the queries. for And also I think the other thing that's gone on too is people have finally figured out that this thing isn't getting built immediately. |
| 03:44:15.51 | Andrew Junius | the building. Thank you. |
| 03:44:17.93 | Brett McDonald | you know, that tends to change the nature of the conversation too. |
| 03:44:20.95 | Andrew Junius | I understand, thank you. I just wanted to point out, there's no question, I'm very familiar with self storage. I'm very familiar how profitable it is and how a lot of people wanna put it in a lot of different places that in some cases do make sense. I would encourage you to relook at the planning code here. I'm a little nervous that you might be reading some of the accessory storage use provisions a little too broadly. Storage yards are permitted with a conditional use permit, but the storage that's permitted in the industrial districts, my reading of the code is that it's to the public. to an existing use, which makes a total lot of sense. renting individual storage units as a public storage or some type of personal property storage, I'm not sure there is a permitted use. Just an observation. |
| 03:45:04.22 | Brett McDonald | Okay, well, we should go through that. Well, not with you, but with the planners, but you know, I mean, Thank you. use has been in there since 2015 and we have abetted several uses for example i thought |
| 03:45:12.08 | Dr. Ray Dieter | that you're not going to be THEIR OWNERS. |
| 03:45:18.61 | Brett McDonald | a cabinet shop and a contractor would be a great use for some of these buildings. And they've decided that that's not an appropriate use. Yeah, so we'll have to bet that. |
| 03:45:27.91 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 03:45:29.36 | Brett McDonald | And I may be describing the wrong demand, but I don't think that uh, people, uh, for example, I have a kayak. |
| 03:45:38.51 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I AM. |
| 03:45:39.92 | Brett McDonald | and kayak storage. I have a kayak storage. My kayak is in that lot and that kayak could be I have a lot of storage you know, all kinds of equipment that goes along with that kayak and that's stuff that ends up in these storage things. I did not. |
| 03:45:55.99 | Dr. Ray Dieter | it. |
| 03:45:56.44 | Brett McDonald | At any rate, so we'll have to study the exact language and figure that out. I might have to be more definitive. |
| 03:45:56.50 | Unknown | ATTACK. |
| 03:46:02.64 | Brett McDonald | But at the end of the day, |
| 03:46:03.35 | Dr. Ray Dieter | THE END OF THE DAY. |
| 03:46:04.59 | Brett McDonald | The use has to be leaked. So, and then, We've been kind of discussing uses for years on this thing here. And the fact of the matter is, the use. The demand use changes over time and what is actually going to lease it is going to depend So we just recently had, and Tricia actually forwarded them to me, that people wanted to be a brewery. I said, that's great. You know, I think that would be a light industrial use, and that would be fine. And then he says, and then we want to hold beer parties on weekends. And I said, well, you just went over the line. We can't. We can't. Thank you. |
| 03:46:42.61 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:46:43.05 | Brett McDonald | And so. |
| 03:46:44.22 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. I appreciate it. It's definitely complicated, no question about it. But I thank you for the input. |
| 03:46:49.74 | Kristina Feller | Yep. Thank you. Uh, commissioners, any other questions? this time Okay. Seeing none. I'd like to go ahead and open this up for public comment. Thank you, Mr. McDonald. Definitely listen in, and then we might have some more questions for you or clarifications. But thank you very much. So to raise your hand in the Zoom application, you can go to reactions and hit raise hand. or if you are calling in from a phone it's star nine So I'm going to go ahead and call on you as I see you on my tiled screen here And if I could ask staff to help unmute and allow each person to share screen Each public commenter has three minutes to make public comment. and staff will provide a timer clock as well so you can monitor your time. So I have a hand up here, Mr. Bruce Huff. Welcome this evening. If you could unmute yourself. and turn your video on. There we go. Welcome. |
| 03:47:59.46 | Bruce Huff | Good evening, commissioners. I appreciate this opportunity. Um, first, let me say that I fully support the property owners. intention and right to improve his property. And I have no preconceived objections to the project. I do, however, have major objections to the mitigated NGDEC as it deals with traffic. Um, I was involved in the development THE END OF THE END OF THE 85 Liberty Shipway, which is Scunamica Marina, 80 Liberty Shipway. 10 and 20 Liberty Shipway and 28 and 30 Liberty Shipway. We still represent 10, 20, 28, and 30 Liberty Shipway, which represents 160,000 square feet of space on the western side of the southern marine ship. My objections to the mitigated neck deck stem from our experiences after I was also involved, by the way, in the dedication of the of Schoonermacher Beach to the Southern Marin Land Trust for public use. And after we had developed 85, 80, and remodeled 10 and 20 Liberty Shipway, it became extremely concerned with the pedestrian and vehicular impacts on the roadways in that portion of the Marineship. As you may know, The streets are privately owned. There is absolutely no provisions for maintenance of the streets. Each property owner is responsible for, I assume, their half of the street, and we've always assumed that. And when we developed 28 and 30 Liberty Shipway, the public works director and city engineer at the time Gordon Sweeney sat down with us. We had developed in the late 90s a an improvement district that would have improved the roadways and the pedestrian access from Thank you. Liberty Shipway all the way down through Maui Stones. It was the It was mentioned in three or four traffic studies. It was fully compliant with all the the state requirements for traffic. And we also added pedestrian improvements, sidewalks and street lighting. which are desperately needed in this area, the Marin ship. during the process of 20 30 Liberty Shipway, Gordon Sweeney, who was at that time the public works director and the city engineer and I sat down about what appropriate mitigation measures would be for traffic generation. And, the what we discussed is that the improvement district It was an appropriate goal of full traffic mitigation, We further discussed that any mitigation requirements of the project should be within the boundaries of the proposed improvement district. and should be an actual project. not a deposit. for a vague and potentially unattainable public project. The mitigation measures should benefit the public. The mitigation measures should benefit the area impacted by the project. and the mitigation measures should benefit the project itself. As a background to this, when we developed 10 or 85 Liberty Shipway. we were required to post a deposit with a city for a future project which by state law had to be revisited every five years or returned to the owner. The city of Sausalito failed to revisit the project every five years and ultimately that deposit was returned to the owners of 85 Liberty Shipway because the city failed to identify projects with interest, I might add. |
| 03:52:37.56 | Kristina Feller | I... |
| 03:52:37.75 | Bruce Huff | I'm sorry. And therefore, |
| 03:52:39.92 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Huff, forgive my interruption. Your three minutes is up. If you can just finish your thought real quick, then I've |
| 03:52:47.77 | Bruce Huff | Well, that is my thought. My thought is that the mitigation measures proposed in the mitigated neg deck |
| 03:52:47.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Mike. |
| 03:52:55.42 | Bruce Huff | ARE SIMPLY A DEPOSIT against a future public project. They don't benefit the area, they don't benefit the project and they don't benefit the improvement district. |
| 03:53:05.88 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I appreciate you bringing that up. What I'd like to do is with that comment, |
| 03:53:08.43 | Bruce Huff | I'm done. |
| 03:53:13.30 | Kristina Feller | Ask staff. Um, and we'll come back to this, but before I forget, ask staff if they have record of those conversations and those agreements, and perhaps we can reference those later on in the hearing or perhaps at a design review. Thank you very much for your comments and for being here tonight. |
| 03:53:31.97 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:53:38.03 | Kristina Feller | Um, It's very helpful, and I want to thank you, particularly at this late hour. But to be fair to the rest of the public, let me move on. The next person I see in my tiled screen is Vicki Nichols. If staff could unmute. Ms. Nichols and allow her to share a screen Welcome this evening. If we could put the timer clock back to three minutes. and WELCOME AND THE FLOOR, THE FLOOR IS YOURS. |
| 03:54:11.27 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. I just wanted to add a couple of comments that may have helped some of your discussion. In terms of the HPC review that was made on October 7th. I frankly had thought tonight was a hearing to do approval and not realize that it was a study session. I would ask of staff, this is related to my experience as a planning commissioner, that when HPC makes a recommendation that you attach this for the planning commission, this would have answered tons of questions tonight. it would have given you Mr. Van Verplank's suggestions that we had. It also needs to stay with this project in the written documentation as to how this got there. So we did review all of these options. The applicant summarized report accurately in terms of the recent appreciation for these kinds of infrastructure areas that are identified there This has been identified as a potential non-contiguous, historic district, even in the general plan. So of course, we're going to be looking at these things very carefully. there's tracks all over there. So there'll probably be more consideration, but I know you're just talking about this project. They can be, they can be, asphalted over they can be left open. We agreed with the mitigation that was recommended by Christopher. And the other thing I wanted to, I hope you can get your hands on that or see that. You guys should be able to read all that. The other thing is that people are forgetting is this project, that marina, has about a four inch file. from BCDC going back to the 80s. And that pathway, which was incorrectly identified last time as Bay Trail, I had called BCDC that day and got the documentation. That was a mitigation for the beach. THAT WAS FOR THE OWNERS TO MAINTAIN. And I would just be really careful about having an extension because I for one will be down there complaining about mono marsh. If you're trying to do an extension into the marsh area that's been restored. and is healthier than it was ever supposed to be, supposed to be done by the owners over there, but it's been being done by Galilee. SO I THINK EVEN YOUR STAFF PLANNER, IF SHE GOES BACK AND LOOKS AT extensive file from BCDC also may find that this area, these conditions were for the site, not individual parcels. So when they were talking about planning for the whole area, I don't think they were saying who owns what parcel. I think they were looking at it as a site. So I think there's been. maybe a couple of questions that have been raised here that are in those documents. I'm I'm sure they're not relishing reading them. They're pretty, it's pretty dense, but there were a lot of modifications made over the years. And I don't know anything about the other district that was discussed. interesting and curious to me about an improvement district. I've never seen any documentation on that. |
| 03:57:28.45 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:57:29.28 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 03:57:29.97 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Ms. Nichols. Thank you for your comments and being here tonight. I appreciate that. Okay, the next hand I see raised is John DeRay. Welcome this evening, if we can reset the clock. to three minutes and the floor is yours. |
| 03:57:49.58 | John DeRay | I thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss this today. I had a few comments. So I was a member of the general advisory commission. um, And I'm currently a member of the Economic Development Advisory Committee. |
| 03:58:02.54 | Dr. Ray Dieter | and, |
| 03:58:08.18 | John DeRay | and some of my comments are through that lens. I'm on a subcommittee that is tasked with |
| 03:58:08.21 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. I'm not. |
| 03:58:15.70 | John DeRay | uh, diversifying the Sausalito economy away from retail restaurants, and hotels, we found out the negative potential there during COVID So the area, of course, we're focused on is the Marin ship. And unfortunately, what's happened over the last 12 months is we've lost four industrial companies, two fabricators and two technology-related industrial companies, because it's mostly because the pricing, leases come up, prices go up. |
| 03:58:59.92 | John DeRay | to stay and also the space, their space in friendship for when these businesses are going to expand. |
| 03:59:00.84 | Unknown | and also, |
| 03:59:06.40 | John DeRay | So I like this project. I think the property owner is trying to do the right thing here. I'd like to get a little bit more clarification about |
| 03:59:20.37 | John DeRay | and buildings A and B. You know, I wanted to read one of the marineship specific plan goals that was carried over into the general plan. And that is preserve and enhance the industrial character and use of the marineship. So, Schoonmaker, as far as I can tell, is one of the properties in the Marinship that has no manufacturing now. Physical therapy, marketing, real estate software, warehousing, interior design, consulting, no manufacturing. It's disappointing. There is demand. Unfortunately, the pricing in Sausalito is more than double the industrial pricing for lease is |
| 04:00:00.19 | John DeRay | or else any other community in Marin and double the average, more than double the average of Marin. So, you know, i'd like to hear a little bit more about how they plan to get some of these manufacturing companies in there there's a great demand now micromanufacturing is coming back to this country And, um, It's, I think, something that we really need to strive for. and i think there should be in the analysis in the financial analysis of this project some kind of net weighted average lease rate that would make this a feasible project. You know, if you have a $25 million project, you need one lease rate. If you have a $5 million project, you need a different lease rate. So this is something that I'm quite concerned about. And, you know, |
| 04:00:32.48 | Dr. Ray Dieter | you know, |
| 04:00:43.93 | John DeRay | We're supposed to be moving towards an innovation zone. And we have these high grand hopes for the marineship. And I don't quite see it here. |
| 04:00:53.86 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:00:54.33 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 04:00:54.40 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Dorey, thank you very much, John, for being here tonight and for your comments. The next hand I see raised is Mr. Tom Hoover. If we could unmute him. And Mr. Hoover. I'll put your camera on. Let's reset the clock to three minutes. Welcome this evening. of. |
| 04:01:15.52 | Tom Hoover | Thank you. |
| 04:01:16.66 | Kristina Feller | The floor is yours. |
| 04:01:17.97 | Tom Hoover | Thank you. I only wanted to touch on a couple of things that I was reminded of. I had wanted to touch on the marsh and the marsh restoration And Vicki mentioned that also. And this would need, you know, she talked about the hugeness of the file and stuff. But I seem to remember that actually. This, I think, goes back before the separation of the of the various properties. AND THAT Whoever owns that property there actually has the responsibility to help maintain the restoration of the marsh and to maintain the path. As BCDC says, and to also help with the landscaping. between the upper tide line of the of the salt. Marsh. and the past. Now that's going to need to be researched because I got from listening to the, um, the the MIG lady. I'm sorry, I have bad times, bad things with names in my old age. And so that's something I think needs to be looked at in terms of |
| 04:02:32.96 | Kristina Feller | Oh, Mr. Hoover, I think we just lost you, lost your connection. |
| 04:02:41.60 | Kristina Feller | If you can hear me, you might want to dial back in. I will take any other public comments at this time and we can come back to Mr. Hoover. or staff. |
| 04:02:53.67 | Richard Graef | I don't know how to raise my hand, but I could... |
| 04:02:57.25 | Kristina Feller | Oh. Okay, Richard Graff will be next. Hold on just a moment. Staff, if there's a way to contact Mr. Hoover, Um, and we can have him come back to make his comments. For now, let's reset the clock to three minutes. We're going to move to Richard Graff. And then hopefully Mr. Hoover will come back because we want to hear the rest of his public comment. Um, So Richard, the floor is yours, about three minutes. Thank you. |
| 04:03:30.22 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:03:30.24 | Kristina Feller | Right. |
| 04:03:30.51 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. I'll try to be brief. I live right next door at Galilee Harbor. and have several kind of major concerns about the project. Um, largely has to do with the mass and the bulk that will be seen from the south vantage points. That is from our community and from all of the pedestrian and bike trails and and the park and the whole Southern end of this. And so there have been discussions about view corridors. And I noticed that there are important view corridors shown on the map. from Bridgeway and really those... in my opinion, don't seem to be very important to your corridors at all. because there's a lot of vegetation up there. The important ones are from the south and from the pedestrian point of view. And so I'm only saying that because I think the buildings are all facing the wrong way. I'll leave that there. to allow proper viewing from the south. Um... I think the arrangement of the buildings is really unfortunate in that there's a large building that is right out on the point, right next to the beach. I feel like that is a really unfortunate place for a large structure to be. It's going to be a huge visual impact on the whole landscape and the bayscape from surrounding areas. So I'm real concerned about that. I'm also concerned about traffic Um, I'm not sure. . I don't know what the traffic impact is going to be, but we all know that presently the turn from Bridgeway to go down to the Marin Ship area The Schoonmaker area treacherous frequently. That's very... Um... I think those are kind of the main things. I really, I think the scale, of the project is grander than it really ought to be. and that my recommendation would be to scale it back and certainly reconsider the position of building C. Excellent. for now. Thank you. |
| 04:06:19.86 | Kristina Feller | Terrific. Richard, thank you so much for your comments this evening. I also just want to acknowledge on the record that we did receive two sets of comments from Mr. Alan Levine of the Coast Action Group And those were not only in our packet, but those are also available to any members of the public that would like to read those. So I want to acknowledge that we've received those and read those as part of our sports. I see that Mr. Hoover is dialing back in here. So as soon as he is connected to audio, I'm going to ask ask for him to complete his public comment and staff if you could assist me with that i would most appreciate it Um... Mr. Hoover, can you hear us now? Can you hear us, Mr. Hoover? Okay, can we unmute Mr. Hoover? Staff, if you could assist me. Fairfeller, he needs to connect with audio. I can unmute him. Okay. Um, Mr. Hoover, if you can hear us. We cannot hear you. We need you to connect to your audio. While you are doing that, I'm gonna, I have one more hand up from Craig Merrily. Um, and we will come back to you, Mr. Hoover, as soon as you can connect to audio. So Mr. Merrilies, welcome this evening. Thank you so much for being here to comment. If staff, we can put the comment timer up at three minutes. then I will hand the floor over to you. Welcome. |
| 04:08:02.68 | Craig Merrily | Thank you, Chair Feller and Commissioner. I'm not sure. I wanted to extend appreciation to the applicants for conforming I think almost entirely, with one exception I'll raise in a moment, um, largely to the uses that are prescribed in the zoning. And that's something that you not all property owners in the marine ship have done and i think these applicants deserve credit for really playing by the rules and setting an example that others haven't always followed so points to begin with that. Um, Second, I want to applaud the the maritime use that was just explained, the storing of boats, whether it's motor boats or small sailboats or kayaks, there's a large need for these kinds of storage facilities. And that's part of what the Marine ship's mission is to have a maritime zone. That's what we're supposed to be doing there, along with the industrial. And those are uses that are compatible crosswise between industrial and maritime and working waterfront, all these fit together. So that's an ideal and an excellent use. And assuming those storage facilities are priced right, I have no doubt that they will be extremely popular with the public. Um, One area of concern I have, well there's two. One, the point about I guess in the previous meeting, there were comments from planning commissioners asking, I think, for different treatments for building exteriors and hoo-ha on the buildings and whatnot. And, you know, all that stuff adds up, and it starts to add prices, and it starts to increase the cost of these buildings. And the pricier those buildings get, the harder they are to host real industrial tenants. So, you know, if we want to gentrify the Marin ship, we're going to be spending a lot more on expensive buildings and then wondering why we can't afford to put people in industrial uses in those buildings. So, um, You know, I hope we can keep that in mind and keep the cost of these as low as possible so they're affordable for people that are doing great work and need facilities and want to work here in Sausalito and provide good jobs that young people need. The final thing is the restaurant. And I just, I have real concerns about this restaurant. I know I heard Commissioner Junius, who I think is new on the commission, and welcome and applaud your service, sir. But there is no place for a conventional restaurant in this zone. It is only conditionally allowed if it is there to serve the workers of the waterfront community. It is not a destination waterfront restaurant. And when you approve a restaurant on the water, whether it is limited to 20 seats, it doesn't matter because it will become a destination restaurant. |
| 04:11:25.01 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 04:11:25.45 | Craig Merrily | And you should not be surprised to find large numbers of people wanting to dine on the beach. |
| 04:11:30.47 | Kristina Feller | Greg, I'm sorry, but your time has elapsed. |
| 04:11:32.93 | Craig Merrily | Oh, well, thank you. |
| 04:11:35.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. Merrily. Thank you for being here this evening and for your comments. they're most appreciated and appreciate your perspective Let's go again to Mr. Hoover and let's hope the third time is a charm and that we I mute you and hear you, so welcome. |
| 04:11:52.54 | Tom Hoover | Can you hear me? |
| 04:11:53.79 | Kristina Feller | We can hear you, yes, the floor is yours. |
| 04:11:55.34 | Tom Hoover | Excellent. I just wanted really quickly, I don't know how much you heard about the fact that the The property line actually goes to the edge of Mono Street itself. And part of the marsh was in the old days was part of the original property owners before whatever separation of parcels there was. And I wanted to talk about and how that can be researched and their responsibility because we've done a lot there in Galilee along with the city and keeping the people out. And I think that part of that part of that needs to be discussed in terms of Thank you. uh, Thank you. the people who have responsibility for the marsh, which would be Galilee and that property owner with his new buildings and stuff. I don't want to say anything more other than two points. One that building on the spit is way, way outsized and is totally inappropriate as far as I'm concerned. The other one is I wanted to, the last point is I wanted to mirror. what the the previous speaker before me, before I got dumped. was talking about all of the things that they want to be doing for the economics in Sausalito. And it's something that I mentioned in my speech the first time about and that is that this project. would have would have probably been approved a lot sooner If the, who own the property and are making the project had actually worked with the same kinds of people that like the Economic Commission and stuff, and decided THEIR OWN HIGHER. A PROJECT. that included the community around it. rather than um, abstract economic I'm not going to be able to do that. computations. And so those are the three points I wanted, I thought I would like to make. And so rather than blither on. Those are the three points. Responsibility for the marsh. I'm not sure. and the, uh, TAKING IT use of the community in planning for that. And a last one is that the sighting of those buildings still requires being seen from as far away as Dunphy park and the cruising club. And those pictures are still to my mind. THE FEDERAL not adequate or they're just too big. So thank you. |
| 04:14:27.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. Hoover, and thank you for sticking in there and making sure you got all your comments in and redialing in. So thank you very much. Okay, I'm just looking for any final hands and anyone interested in making any final public comments. All right, I do not see any hands at this time, so I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment at this time. And I want to bring some of the dialogue back up here to our our virtual dais. I must say we've, we had a lot of really great comments, a lot of varying comments, a lot of focus on different issues of importance. So really appreciate everybody paying attention to what's happening in our community here. So thank you. Okay. Let's see. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you want to kick us off? Again, there's no decision this evening, just to say. |
| 04:15:31.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, Yeah, this is just discussion. This is our second study session, so I think the applicant needs to hear some of the things that have been said and work with staff to address some of those issues. |
| 04:15:46.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:15:46.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | at this point. |
| 04:15:49.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Junius. |
| 04:15:53.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. Yeah, I would just kind of reiterate my concerns. about storage uses from even a practical standpoint and a permitted use at this location. applicant goes and has a deep dive with staff on what that means. Um, And I heard a lot of interesting comments, and I agree, Commissioner Feller, or Chair Feller, excellent comments, and this is, I think, as this gets closer to a real hearing, I think a lot more people are gonna get more interested in this, really special site. It's got lots of visibility, I think, I do, you know, I do think this area is ripe for some intensification. but it does have to be done correctly. and a lot of issues here. I appreciate the scale of the building questions are pretty relevant here as well. You know, again, when you walk down the path and you go by Mono Marsh, You know, right now you're walking by kind of a junky looking storage yard, which is kind of what's been there forever and it's a permitted use in the code And to think of, you know, a large development there is a little unnerving and Looking forward to seeing how this all turns out. Interesting project and I'm looking forward to learning more |
| 04:17:08.18 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Saad. |
| 04:17:11.69 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. Yeah, I agree. I think I. haven't discussed much of the scale but I think I think the scale is quite large as well. I think it would be worth for the applicant to take some of the comments that they heard as well, especially particularly from their neighbors at at Galilee. I agree specifically with with the comment around the view corridor because while For example, I'm I'm on the hill. and I look down and I can see that area and that would be kind of a Thank you. obstructive view of Schoonemaker and you know, as a resident to see buildings there where there are none is a little off putting, but as a, as just a local to be down and make use of Schoonenlocker and Walk Galilee and Dunphy Park further down. I think the scale is quite massive and I think that it would be an good intentions for the applicant to just have some of those discussions before coming back here because I have a feeling that may end up being a little bit of a of a sticking point even though it didn't get fully fleshed out in a discussion this evening. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS. I think I just I disagree on the whole concept about the the railroads I'll say that from now I don't think my opinion is going to change there whether that sways anything one way or another I think that the that the rail, you know, the tracks, I really appreciate what the, Historic Preservation Commission has discussed and determined and I will go back and read THEIR OWNERS. read those minutes and go through all of that. It would have been helpful to have it prior But, I THINK THE I'm not saying I'm more qualified than Verplank, who is a very noted historian and has written excellent work that we look to from the city of Sausalito. I just think that the, THE USE OF THE railroad track in Sausalito and particularly in the Marin ship, um, You know, it was. BECHDELL. took that area from the Northwest Pacific Railroad. So even though the railroad had stopped right before the Marin ship was built, I mean, That was a ship, you know, that shipyard is sitting on what was um, a railroad repair yard as well. So I think it really is not a standalone historic contributing element but as a whole for the area I just feel that it would kind of hinder making the Marin ship into a historic district which is something that we had discussed when I was on the Historic Preservation Commission. So that I'm looking forward to the community discussion around that and whatever comes back from that for the next round. But I think those are my big takeaways right now for this particular project. |
| 04:20:14.01 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Some of my comments, you know, in no particular order, First of all, I think, and this is, you know, I'm looking to staff to really lead the way here. But we have got to get to the bottom of some of these issues regarding the history of these parcels and the parcelization and the master planning of this whole parcel. We need to be absolutely clear on that. The second thing is regarding sea level rise and subsidence. I really don't think, the due diligence has been done here to the level that it needs to for an actual design review hearing. Again, we know that this is in a vulnerable area based on the vulnerability assessment I would expect full modeling to be done by an authority the applicant is certainly able to do that as well. but we had previously asked at the last study session that this applicant approach and discuss this with the Sea Level Arise Task Force. that hasn't happened. And we also ask that they discuss this with Galilee Harbor that hasn't happened. what the breakdown there was, but I would ask staff to please assist. in that matter as well. these things have to get done before we go any further on this. um, I recognize that there's some thought or discussion by Mr. McDonald regarding the, the grade of the buildings and being built on piles and all those sorts of things. But I'm not really seeing that in the drawings or depicted somehow in some type of a breakdown which would be really important and really helpful here. as it relates to Um, the massing, again, we commented on this the last time. I mean, it's one thing to look at each building individually but collectively from certain vantage points in the city that are important it really does have a fairly monolithic, massive wall-like look. And I think we have to look at ways Even if these are light industrial, buildings a way to fit in better. with the surroundings and use this as an opportunity Um, and I appreciate some of the other comments that, that the public has made regarding costs, but this doesn't necessarily make it cost more. And I'm not pleased with the elevations as they stand today. They I think, you know, they just... They're very unappealing and don't appear to celebrate the character of Sausalito overall, the opportunity here at the, in the Marin ship, near the water, near Schumacher. I mean, none of that. It just, it seems very out of place to me. and a missed opportunity to really create a great sense of place this what a wonderful site what an incredible site we don't want to just mimic and copy or |
| 04:23:52.95 | Dr. Ray Dieter | you |
| 04:23:53.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:23:53.02 | Dr. Ray Dieter | Thank you. |
| 04:23:55.68 | Kristina Feller | copy paste another building, a substandard building in the area. So I would ask that we look at these things with a much closer lens and I would ask staff to please assist the applicant with these things, but I think some of the, the real work needs to be done with the due diligence of some of the historic record. And I completely echo what Commissioner Junius is also getting at regarding the uses Um, and, and what, what is the demand for, for all of this building? Is this being built all at once? Is it phased? And I'm just really suspect of boat storage being on the second story of a two story building. That doesn't make any sense. So let's just... figure out what we're really looking at here. I appreciate the applicant's time. I know there's continued work here, but I think we really need to you know work more listening to some of the feedback we're giving. It's meant to be constructive, it's meant to be helpful, it's meant to guide you. It's not meant to be frivolous or anything like that. So it really appreciates the applicant heeding some of our advice here. I think it will yield a much more successful project. Any other comments from any other commissioners at this time? Okay, Tricia, let me ask you if you don't mind coming back up here. on camera, I want to make sure that you've been able to capture the comments you've gotten from the four of us here. And of course the, um, the depth of the public comment we've gotten both written and the verbal comments we've received this evening. |
| 04:25:48.58 | Trisha Stevens | Yes, I have a lot of notes here and I, I may have to go back and listen to some portions of the video to get the better sense of what everyone's after, but yes. We have our list. |
| 04:26:08.24 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Great. Well, I appreciate it. I think that probably concludes this portion of the hearing in item six on our agenda. unless there are any other comments. So there's no motion needed here at this time, as long as staff has our notes. So I will ask. Director Scoble. to come back up here for our next item. And actually before we do that, if we could ask Vice Chair Graff to rejoin us. on our virtual dais or the next items on our agenda. |
| 04:26:52.52 | Kristina Feller | So direct. |
| 04:26:53.04 | Director Scoble | Well, over to you. Here we go. All right. Thank you, Chair Feller. It looks like we're in the home stretch, so this is exciting. Um, So the next item on our agenda is old business. There are. aren't really old business items per se. However, um, It was requested that I provide the commissioners with an update on a pre-trimming code enforcement case that started back in August of this year. Up on Platt, there were a stand of trees that were tops and overly trimmed. And so there is a code for active code enforcement case that was opened. Our code enforcement officer is diligently working on it. The last, update I received is that the CUNY Development Director and the Director of Public Works were working with internal staff to move this forward. As I'm being brought up to speed, I will be working on finding a resolution for this treaty incident moving forward. |
| 04:28:04.32 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you for the update. |
| 04:28:06.72 | Director Scoble | Do you have any questions regarding any aspects of the tree trimming? |
| 04:28:12.71 | Andrew Junius | I mean, personally, I thank you Heidi? I walk by that every day and it just it is kind of stunning I don't know if I that if somebody can get away with that, We need to see the enforcement. That's pretty bad. Thank you. |
| 04:28:29.43 | Director Scoble | And unfortunately, there's not an easy resolution to this. So it does require arborist reports and identifying any remedies that might be out there and there definitely are a few next steps in the process. So then moving on to new business, I just wanted to provide the commissioners with a brief update that at the last city council meeting, they heard an update on the park clip and outdoor dining. As you're well aware and very involved, the planning commission has done a really great job providing staff with a lot of helpful information. The city council members, and directed staff to start working on a visioning process and We will be working hopefully with the planning commission or members of the planning commission to create a plan, conduct some public charrettes or a workshop and provide the council with some recommendations um starting as early as in as april |
| 04:29:32.88 | Dr. Ray Dieter | in. |
| 04:29:34.30 | Director Scoble | and And hopefully with that information, it'll allow the council members to decide what to do with the existing permits that were issued for outdoor dining and parklets. Currently there are 34 permits that are active. Some of those do include outdoor retail. and by as it stands now, there is no final deadline for those parklets and after dining permits to expire. However, the council give direction that in April, they're going to reassess and see what to do and by June of 2022, we'll |
| 04:30:08.03 | Unknown | have more clear directions on that. Do you have any questions regarding that? |
| 04:30:15.34 | Kristina Feller | I just wanna make a note that, the, the, the planning commission will be working with staff to support that and focused on sort of a remit in scope that we all agree on based on the direction of city council. And so that will probably require that I appoint a fellow commissioner to work along with me and Director Scalper, you and your staff to sort of achieve what it is they're looking for. We'll probably need to agendize that for our next hearing, and I'll work with you on that as well. |
| 04:30:56.87 | Director Scoble | Perfect. And I forgot to let the commissioners know that the staff member that will be assigned to this project and will be Mike Janusek. You heard his presentation earlier with the awning. Mike is working on another project related to the objective development design standards and is definitely the right person to jump into this project And as we might need more staff, we'll move accordingly, but it's gonna be a really fun project moving forward. |
| 04:31:27.53 | Kristina Feller | He's been amazing on objective design standards, as Commissioner Junius and I can attest to. So we're looking forward to him being involved with parklets as well so it's great Thank you. |
| 04:31:39.61 | Director Scoble | to go. |
| 04:31:39.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:31:39.97 | Director Scoble | Thank you. And now we're moving on to communications. As this is my first meeting with the planning commission, do the commissioners go first or does staff jump in? |
| 04:31:52.96 | Kristina Feller | Go for it. Staff should jump in first. |
| 04:31:55.15 | Director Scoble | Okay, great. So the first item I have is the introduction of new staff. I was just going to initially state that the city has two new staff planning staff members. I'm Rosalyn Thompson. who is a principal planner and hails most recently from the city of Milpitas as a senior planner And we have Adam East who is coming from Michigan, and has roots in the midwest and michigan and chicago i'm looking at our participants and we actually have adam east here so adam i'm going to ask you to um unmute yourself and share your video I'm putting you on the spot. And if you can just pop in and say hi to everybody. |
| 04:32:38.23 | Adam East | Yeah, no problem, thanks, Heidi. It's nice to meet you all. Yeah, so to echo Heidi, I'm the new assistant city planner or here at the city of Sausalito. I worked most recently in Michigan for about five and a half years as a staff planner for a local government there and then I also went to school and worked a little bit in Chicago as well for about four years. So I'm excited to join you all and to get to know the community and to work with you all on future planning cases here in Sausalito. |
| 04:33:06.90 | Director Scoble | Yeah, we're really excited. Adam has this extensive resume and is, Just a great planner and will be a really amazing addition to the Sausalito community. So we're super excited. So thank you for joining us. And we'll be bringing Rosalind Thompson to the next Planning Commission meeting. |
| 04:33:26.28 | Kristina Feller | Well, Adam, you're already a champ for listening in to this whole... hearing so far so welcome to Sausalito welcome to planning and and the Commission and we're you know I'm really looking forward to working with you I've heard wonderful things about you. |
| 04:33:45.35 | Adam East | Well, thank you, Chair Feller. I'm looking forward to it as well, and I appreciate it. |
| 04:33:50.98 | Director Scoble | Well, thank you, Adam. Have a great night. |
| 04:33:53.08 | Adam East | Yeah, me too. Thank you. |
| 04:33:55.52 | Director Scoble | And then, Another item is to let the planning commissioners know, although I'm sure you already know that tomorrow night at 530, we are going to have our housing element advisory committee kickoff meeting. So we're very fortunate to have had the city council approve the funding and enter into a contract with DeNovo planning group. And Beth Thompson will be providing a presentation and facilitating the discussion at that committee meeting. And that meeting will be via Zoom. |
| 04:34:17.31 | Dr. Ray Dieter | I love you. |
| 04:34:29.53 | Director Scoble | This first meeting is just going to be recorded by Zoom, but as we move forward and train up staff, we will also be working on having those meetings shown on Granicus so that it could be live streamed on our website and possibly cable TV. So we'll be working with CMCM regarding that as well. This is a really important. project as you know you're gonna be working on and we're gonna have a very fast and robust timeline that we'll hear about tomorrow. So please attend if you're interested. We currently have and Chair Feller and Commissioner Junius who have been assigned to that committee. And we'll go from there. |
| 04:35:07.33 | Kristina Feller | Actually, it's just me. |
| 04:35:09.97 | Director Scoble | Oh, okay. Oh, I'm so sorry. I think I misread the minutes. |
| 04:35:14.63 | Andrew Junius | No worries. I've been trying to get out of it forever and I'm out. |
| 04:35:18.90 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, it's just me. |
| 04:35:20.03 | Director Scoble | Director Scogel. |
| 04:35:20.83 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:35:21.04 | Director Scoble | Okay, thank you for that clarification. and So please join and listen in if you can. It will be recorded and posted on our website after the meeting. And then our last item that I have to talk about is that we are working on our objective development standards And this project was initiated with an SB2 grant to promote and facilitate streamlined housing. We will be bringing an item to the Historic Preservation Commission on next Thursday, October 28th, as kind of an introduction as to what we're working on. And that's all I have to report. |
| 04:35:58.08 | Kristina Feller | That's perfect. Thank you for the updates. you're busy. You're very busy as, as our, um, as is the commission with a number of these, um, other. tasks at hand so with that, let me ask, did the commissioners have any, um, Anything to report out as one-way communication here any update? |
| 04:36:25.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I just wanted to ask Director Scoble, just for the November 3rd meeting, what are the anticipated items at this time? |
| 04:36:35.65 | Director Scoble | Well, we will have our consent calendar item for 310 Harbor Drive. We are also anticipating a study session for a VARTA landing project, 52 and 62. And then 265, I believe Gate 5 Road is one combined project. So we'll have that. We were originally anticipating scheduling a public hearing for 7074 Liberty Ship Away, but it appears based on tonight that project will be moved. So that's all we have. as of now. Thank you. |
| 04:37:08.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 04:37:08.42 | Director Scoble | Thank you very much. |
| 04:37:10.93 | Kristina Feller | Great, and we're still hoping that EDAC can come and present what their business and retail strategy is in Sausalito. |
| 04:37:25.03 | Director Scoble | Thank you. I will coordinate that with Chair Riley and see when he might be able to do that. And we're also working with our city attorney regarding a possible SB9, SB10 update. We're trying to figure out when we bring that to council. So we'll bring it first to council and then provide the commissioners with an update. from there. |
| 04:37:44.85 | Kristina Feller | That would be great. The only other thing that we've sort of talked about and around is we were supposed to have a joint city council planning commission. hearing this year. um, I'm wondering if that's going to happen. And then in addition to that, we just wanted to make sure that we somehow get on our agenda a briefing from Southern Marin Fire District on their new evacuation plans and issues and things that that have very direct impact on |
| 04:38:16.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:38:16.87 | Kristina Feller | and commission and our considerations and things we need to be aware of. |
| 04:38:16.90 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:38:21.25 | Kristina Feller | that we can assist with, and I think that's also a great topic. to have a joint. hearing with city council or sustainability or disaster preparedness or something. It doesn't just have to be Planning Commission, we can join with other Commission as well maybe historic or maybe all of those I just really think it's important that we get those briefings and that those are in a public hearing format. So the public has the opportunity to hear that as well. |
| 04:38:55.36 | Director Scoble | Great, I will coordinate with our administrative staff and the agenda setting committee to see if it's possible to schedule that joint meeting. And if we're not able to schedule a meeting with the fire department, our joint fire department meeting, I can also reach out to the Southern Fire Department to see if they would be willing to come individually. Commission as well. But I'll reach out and see where we go from there. And I can provide an update at the next meeting. |
| 04:39:27.06 | Kristina Feller | Okay, that sounds great. Any other items? All right. A motion to adjourn. |
| 04:39:39.52 | Andrew Junius | Don't move. Richard, I beat you to it. All right, well, a second. Thank you. |
| 04:39:45.22 | Kristina Feller | All in favor. Thank you. |
| 04:39:46.99 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 04:39:47.58 | Richard Graef | I know. |
| 04:39:48.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you everybody for your time tonight. Welcome. Thank you. |
| 04:39:53.98 | Richard Graef | Good night. |
| 04:39:54.89 | Andrew Junius | Have a great evening. |
| 04:39:54.98 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:39:54.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:39:55.04 | Director Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:39:55.16 | Unknown | All right. |
| 04:39:55.47 | Director Scoble | I'm not sure. |
| 04:39:55.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:39:56.04 | Director Scoble | Have a great evening. |
| 04:39:58.25 | Andrew Junius | I'm excited for everything. Bye. |
| 04:40:00.07 | Director Scoble | We're very excited, guys. |
| 04:40:01.73 | Richard Graef | Good afternoon. |
| 04:40:04.12 | Andrew Junius | . |
Vicki Nichols — Neutral: Clarified that the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the tracks and agreed to pave over with documentation. Noted the BCDC permit file from the 1980s requires property owners to maintain the path and marsh restoration, and warned against extending the path into the restored marsh. Suggested staff review the extensive BCDC file for conditions that apply to the whole site, not individual parcels. ▶ 📄
John DeRay — In Favor: Member of the Economic Development Advisory Committee. Expressed support for the project but stressed the need to preserve and enhance industrial character. Noted the loss of manufacturing tenants in the Marinship due to high lease rates and urged the applicant to clarify how manufacturing uses would be attracted, with a focus on affordability and feasibility. ▶ 📄
Craig Merrily — In Favor: Applauded the applicant for conforming to zoning and for maritime‑focused storage uses. Cautioned that expensive architectural treatments could raise costs and hinder true industrial tenants. Strongly objected to the restaurant component, stating it would become a destination use inconsistent with the waterfront’s intent and would draw crowds to the beach. ▶ 📄
Tom Hoover — Against: Raised concerns about the property line extending to Mono Marsh and the owner’s responsibility for marsh maintenance. Criticized the scale of the waterfront building as outsized and inappropriate. Called for community‑inclusive planning and stated the project should have engaged economic development groups earlier. ▶ 📄
Richard Graef — Against: Resident of adjacent Galilee Harbor. Identified major concerns about mass and bulk visible from southern vantage points, stating view corridors from the south are ignored, the placement of Building C on the point is unfortunate, and traffic from the Bridgeway turn is treacherous. Suggested scaling back the project and reconsidering the position of Building C. ▶ 📄