| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:04.03 | Andrew Junius | . |
| 00:00:07.69 | Kristina Feller | Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the regular Planning Commission hearing for Wednesday, April 20th. I'd like to wish everyone a good evening and call this meeting to order. I'd also like to take a moment to welcome our new interim community development director Dan Hortert, welcome. if you could kindly call Roll for us. and provide any instruction to the public as well. |
| 00:00:32.45 | Dan | AND, Yeah, let me do that first. So good evening Chair Feller and members of the uh planning commission this meeting is being held pursuing to government code section 54953 subsection 8 or E, sorry. And in light of the declared state of emergency, the regular meeting of the planning commission on April 20th, 2022, will be conducted telephonically through Zoom and broadcast live on the city's website. And with that, would you like me to call Rome? Thank you. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:01:06.18 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:01:06.23 | Dan | Here. Commissioner Luxembourg. Yeah. Commissioner Saab. here? Vice Chair Juney. Yes. Chair Feller. |
| 00:01:17.27 | Kristina Feller | . |
| 00:01:18.13 | Dan | We have a quorum. |
| 00:01:19.61 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Item number two is the approval of the agenda for this evening. And as a point of privilege, I'd like to make a recommendation . if my fellow commissioners would indulge me on this. Could we please switch 6B and 6A 6B is 209 West. We did hear this at our last hearing and it's just a formality due to a noticing issue. And I would like to move that first. So the applicant does not have to sit through other other hearings and move 6a to the 6b slot if that's acceptable I would um, like to hear any comment on that or a motion to approve as recommended. |
| 00:02:07.64 | Andrew Junius | So moved. |
| 00:02:09.19 | Kristina Feller | back. |
| 00:02:13.18 | Dan | ROLL CALL. Commissioner Ralph. Commissioner Luxenberg. you |
| 00:02:18.14 | Mr. Dufour | us. |
| 00:02:18.52 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Saad. Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Chair Feller. |
| 00:02:24.68 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:02:25.90 | Dan | Motion carries unanimously. |
| 00:02:28.50 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. The next item on our agenda is public comment and And if you don't mind providing a little bit of instruction to the public as well, how they could make public comment at this time. |
| 00:02:42.34 | Dan | Sure, I can do that. This is 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 and taking action. on or engaging in discussion concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, The planning commission may refer matters not on the agenda to staff and direct the subject be agendized at a future meeting. Video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. in the Zoom application and you will be called upon when it is your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. |
| 00:03:32.64 | Kristina Feller | Great. And I'd also, as people are looking to raise their hand at this time, I'd like to Note that we did receive several pieces of correspondence in written form. which are on the record, I believe at last count we had four . folks that wrote in, is that correct Stan? |
| 00:03:52.06 | Dan | I'm showing three on the agenda, on my agenda. |
| 00:03:55.22 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Three it is. |
| 00:03:57.26 | Dan | Would you like me to read them off? |
| 00:03:58.91 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:03:58.93 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:03:59.03 | Kristina Feller | Please. |
| 00:03:59.28 | Dan | Thank you. Um, public comment from Sausalito merchants. Public comment from Hanson Gallery Fine Arts. And public comment from Flavin. |
| 00:04:09.80 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Okay, I don't see. Chair Feller, there's one more. |
| 00:04:12.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | There's a fourth item on the agenda. Something about a public comment from community catalyst preserving local control. |
| 00:04:19.52 | Kristina Feller | about |
| 00:04:24.36 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So there are four. Okay, thank you. |
| 00:04:27.37 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:04:27.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:04:28.11 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:04:28.70 | Kristina Feller | No problem. Thank you. Commissioner Luxenberg for keeping us up to date. Thank you. I am not seeing any hands in the public at this time. So I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment. and move on to our next item, which is item number four, communications. So over to you, Dan. |
| 00:04:46.89 | Dan | Okay, so city staff does not have anything at this time. Um, We will have stuff next time, I'm sure. But there is report out from subcommittees regarding the objective design and Development Standards Subcommittee Planning Commission reps on housing on the HEAC or the Housing Element Advisory Committee. and the on ombudsman. and the liaison to EDAC enforcement. |
| 00:05:12.96 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's let me, the last two have been disbanded. They do not, they no longer exist. So if I could ask vice chair Junius. Chair Fuller, may I? |
| 00:05:20.17 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 00:05:20.81 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:05:20.86 | Mary Wagner | All right. |
| 00:05:20.98 | Andrew Junius | I've been here. |
| 00:05:23.78 | Mary Wagner | Chair Fuller, may I interrupt just for a moment? I apologize. |
| 00:05:27.81 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:05:28.72 | Mary Wagner | A quick announcement from me as part of your staff team. I wanted to let you know that Sergio Rudin has joined your planning commission meeting tonight. As I indicated last planning commission meeting, he's gonna be taking over responsibility for community development and including attending these planning commission meetings. And we're very lucky to have him. I'm happy that he's willing to and able to, to take on this role for the city. He's a partner at Burke Williams, does a lot of transactional and land use work. And I just wanted to briefly introduce him to the committee and let you know to the commission, excuse me, and let him say hi. And then sorry for the interruption. Thank you. |
| 00:06:10.34 | Kristina Feller | Not at all. Thank you, Mary and welcome Sergio. |
| 00:06:14.13 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you for having me. |
| 00:06:17.24 | Kristina Feller | Great. Okay, let's go ahead and move on to objective design standards and report out on that. Vice Chair Junius, could I ask you to do that? All right. |
| 00:06:26.57 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. Still not a lot to talk about here. I don't think I missed any emails, but I'm I think the staff issues have slowed us down a bit. Before the next meeting, I assure you, I will reach out to Bob Brown check in on what's happening with with our consultant Opticos. So that's that one. And then also not on the list, but at the last meeting, Chair Feller, you appointed Jeffrey, Commissioner Luxenberg and myself to the SB9. little mini working group and we're I think we're making great progress Hopefully by the next meeting, we'll have a nice detailed red line to review with the commission and the public. and then moving on after that. So I think we've made some great progress and I want to thank Commissioner Luxenberg for all his hard work with me on this one as well. So there we go. |
| 00:07:11.31 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Yes. Thank you both for taking that on and, We'll just keep moving forward with the objective design standards. Thank you. Commissioner Saad, do you want to update us on the housing elements? |
| 00:07:23.47 | Nastassya Saad | Absolutely. Thank you, Chair Feller. So we had a HIAC meeting on March 28th. We reviewed 75 sites that were presented by the consultant. We did vote yes on a handful of sites. And I think just to take a moment to be clear with any of the public that's listening, that was really to just continue the conversation around those sites. our consultant is also going to do a lot more legwork to analyze those sites. Our consultant is also going to do a lot more legwork to analyze those sites. Some of the public comment that's been coming in has been really great and helpful to see. But just for anyone that is listening, Those were not a yes vote for final site selection. So there's still a lot of work to do and we intend to continue our work on our next TEAC meeting, which is on Monday, April 25th at 6 p.m. And just another call out for anyone who is interested in the town hall, which hopefully is everybody. It has moved to Monday, May 9th at 6 p.m. versus end of April, just to give our consultant and team a little bit more time to present. So I'm sure communication will go out in the currents about the date and time for the town hall, but a call out there. And we definitely can encourage to continue all of the public comment that we've received. You can email the HEAC PDL and I believe Heidi Scoble, our former Interim Community Development Director amongst many other titles is going to be our main liaison now and staff member for HIAC as well. So thank you to Heidi for that work. And I don't wanna take the liberty to say email her. I think the HIAC email address is the right way to go, but Heidi's graciously taken on our task as well. So. I don't know if I'm missing anything, Chair Feller. |
| 00:09:26.32 | Kristina Feller | No, thank you for all your hard work on this. I just, again, want to commend the public for all of the comments that have been written in. I mean, we asked and you answered and please keep all that communication coming, it really does make a difference. It really does impact the work we're doing. It shapes the solution, so please don't stop. writing in. We're looking forward to getting more comments and everything should be on the table at this point. And also to those that did complete the surveys, thank you for doing that as well. That is, we haven't gotten all the results yet. The consultant is still helping pull those together. but I'm looking forward to hearing more about that. a critical piece of work for our community, not just now, but for the next eight years and beyond. So now's the time for us to hear from you. So thank you very much for that. Okay, Commissioner Luxenberg, did you have anything to report out? |
| 00:10:26.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I just, I wanted to add to a commissioner and junior. So we have worked on this red line. We sent some questions to the city attorney's office, which we hope to have the answers by the end of the week in our plans to finalize this information. I also drafted some diagrams to go with the frontage analysis. And we want to get all that out to the commission next week. So hopefully we'll get answers back from the city attorney's office at the end of this week. So, but that's moving along. And I think we can make the schedule that we had for the May 4th meeting. |
| 00:11:00.91 | Kristina Feller | Excellent, excellent. And for those of you listening, that's specific to the SB9 issue. which we are hoping to hear at our next commission hearing or the one after that, if we can't make it. So thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg for all your hard work. Commissioner Graff, do you have anything to report out |
| 00:11:21.02 | Richard Graef | No, I don't, not this evening, thank you. Right. |
| 00:11:25.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's go ahead and take any public comment on our communications. Again, to do so, if you could please press star nine. in the Zoom application. Excuse me, raise your hand in the Zoom application or star nine if you're calling in from a cell phone. Forgive me for my error. I'm just looking for raised hands at this time. Seeing none, I will go ahead and close public comment and let's move on to item number five, which is the approval of the minutes. And this is specific to the April 6th. So do I have any comments on the notes at this time? I'll just look for raised hands from the commissioners. If not, I will take a motion to approve. |
| 00:12:10.52 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:12:10.55 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:12:10.62 | Dan | more Sorry. |
| 00:12:14.53 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I think commissioner Luxenberg was motioned to approve. Vice Virginia is second. Is that right? Okay. Dan over to you for a roll call. |
| 00:12:19.14 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:12:24.44 | Dan | Yeah, I got a little excited there. Sorry. Thank you. |
| 00:12:28.35 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 00:12:29.57 | Dan | Commissioner Luxembourg. |
| 00:12:31.04 | Richard Graef | Yes. |
| 00:12:31.41 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Sot. |
| 00:12:33.10 | Nastassya Saad | Yes. |
| 00:12:34.14 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:12:41.99 | Dan | Yes. Thank you. Sorry, that's your filler. |
| 00:12:43.95 | Kristina Feller | Sorry. Yes. |
| 00:12:47.27 | Dan | The motion carries five zero. |
| 00:12:49.08 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Okay, let's move on to item number six, which are our public hearing items. Dan, any direction from you would be great to the public. And again, uh moving 209 west into the 6a slot and 1 10 4th into the 6b slot The other two items remain as 6C, 6D. |
| 00:13:12.04 | Dan | This is a time for any commissioners to declare any ex parte communications. |
| 00:13:18.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:13:20.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, I'm also going to pursue into section 18702.2 materiality standard. I hereby disclose as I did last meeting that my home is located greater than 500 feet, but less than 1000 feet from the projects at 114th street and 209 West street that are on the agenda this evening. Neither of these projects will affect my properties, development potential, income producing potential, the highest and best use of my property. And given the location of my property up the hill and off and a side street would not change the character of my property by substantially altering traffic levels, intensity of use, parking view, privacy, noise levels or air quality further would not affect the market value of my property. Thus any decisions regarding these projects are not material. As I mentioned at the previous hearings, I viewed 110 4th Street from abutting properties, but no contact with those abutters at any time were ex-parte communications. I also briefly met the owner when I visited 430 B Street, but did not have any ex-parte communications at that time either. Thank you. |
| 00:14:35.17 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Saad? |
| 00:14:40.40 | Nastassya Saad | No ex parte communications to declare. I just as a note, I am within 500 feet of the 430 B project. So I will be recusing myself for this evening from that project, but no, nothing else to declare. |
| 00:14:54.93 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you very much. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:14:59.01 | Richard Graef | Um, |
| 00:14:59.65 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:14:59.71 | Richard Graef | No ex parte communication. |
| 00:15:02.57 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:15:05.27 | Andrew Junius | Thanks for our take communications. Thank you. |
| 00:15:07.35 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I have no ex parte communication. Thank you. report. Thank you. |
| 00:15:12.82 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:15:16.11 | Kristina Feller | So let's move ahead into here, 209 West. |
| 00:15:21.79 | Dan | Yes, this is the first public hearing item and it's regarding a design review permit and a lot line adjustment. |
| 00:15:34.74 | Dan | changes to approve project and a design review permit with heightened review design review Um, project was moved continued from April 6 to April 20th meeting due to noticing I'm noticing error. With that, I'll turn it over to Cecilia Jaroslawski. contract planner. |
| 00:15:57.20 | Mary Wagner | Chair Feller, may I ask you a quick point of clarification and I apologize, Commissioner Saad, Was your recusal for this project or the next project? |
| 00:16:07.24 | Nastassya Saad | Mine is for, let me just pull the agenda. It was for 430B, so 6D for. Okay, thank you, apologies. |
| 00:16:13.90 | Mary Wagner | Apologies. |
| 00:16:18.68 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Cecilia, over to you. |
| 00:16:20.74 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Oh, thank you. Good evening, Chair, Fellow, Commissioner, Cecilia Jaroslavsky, Contract Planner, presenting this item before you today with your permission, I would like to share my screen. |
| 00:16:38.90 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Can everyone see that? |
| 00:16:41.06 | Kristina Feller | Yes. this hold on hold on this is the wrong project cecilia |
| 00:16:46.54 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | 209 West Street. Thank you. |
| 00:16:48.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:16:48.70 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Yeah. |
| 00:16:48.72 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 00:16:51.87 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. |
| 00:16:52.68 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:16:55.82 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | How about that? |
| 00:16:57.73 | Kristina Feller | Oh, we don't see anything yet. |
| 00:16:59.62 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. OK. Are we there? |
| 00:17:06.44 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, thank you. |
| 00:17:07.57 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay, thank you, apologies for that. . Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Good evening. The subject property is located at 209 West Street in Old Town on the west side of West Street between Richardson and Main Street. The neighborhood consists of single family and two family dwellings consistent with the R2 zoning district. |
| 00:17:33.15 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The project includes the modification to the previously approved design and size of the detached garage. The total length of the detached garage would be increased from 22 and a half feet to 39 and a half feet. No additional changes to the previously approved project are proposed. project would be modified to reduce the garage front setback from 15 feet to 4 feet. inside side yard setbacks would remain the same. The roof design and height would be modified by eliminating the turret-like feature centrally located on the roof and installing a flat roof with a deck above reducing the height from 14 and a half feet to 12 feet, 10 inches. including the roof railing. The roof deck above would be 21 feet. by 23 feet, eight inches. project requires approval of design review and consistency with the intent of the original project. |
| 00:18:27.74 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Planning Commission reviewed the project on April 6th, 2022. and comments were received at that hearing, but due to noticing error, the project was continued to tonight's hearing for finalization. Staff recommends planning commission approve the resolution, approving the design review permit. subject to conditions of approval. That concludes my presentation commissioners. Thank you. |
| 00:19:01.71 | Andrew Junius | You're muted. Hey Maria, I think, did you accidentally mute Christina? |
| 00:19:11.70 | Andrew Junius | Heidi, Maria, anybody out there? |
| 00:19:12.05 | Maria | Maria, anybody out there? Your co-host functions were taken away somehow. |
| 00:19:17.54 | Kristina Feller | That's okay, that's okay. Cecilia, thank you so much for the presentation. Appreciate that very much. And for bringing that back this evening. Um, By a show of hands, do any commissioners have any questions for staff at this time? Yes, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:19:35.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Feller. I have two questions. One, have you contacted the Department of Public Works and the Marine Fire Department regarding this change to this project? |
| 00:19:48.03 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | No, I have not contacted anyone. |
| 00:19:51.74 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, typically the, I saw attached to your report, the recommended, I think it's attachment, maybe it's attachment one exhibit, which has the conditions There are no conditions from Marin Fire and from Public Works which is highly unusual. |
| 00:20:10.63 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The project as proposed was routed to all city agencies. So all the comments that were received were included in the conditions of approval So if we didn't receive conditions of approval, then they weren't included in the document. |
| 00:20:25.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I see. Okay, my second question is, |
| 00:20:31.97 | Kristina Feller | Forgive me, Commissioner Luxenberg for interrupting you. I see that Heidi Scoville has her hand up that might, and she might want to weigh in on responding to your first question. |
| 00:20:41.66 | Heidi Scoville | Yeah, thank you, Chair Feller. And thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg for asking that question. So this project is a changes to an approved plan. The project has been routed to public works and the fire department. And the discussion that staff had with those departments and agencies is that because this project is tied to a project that was previously vetted and approved by the planning commission with specific conditions of approval related to public works and fire. This is just going to carry over those same conditions of approval that were approved as part of that original resolution. And I do believe the resolution is written in such a way that requires those conditions of approval to apply to this project as well. I hope that makes sense. Sorry if I sound inarticulate right now. |
| 00:21:28.20 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let me ask, Cecilia, can you bring up that attachment one on a share screen and bring up that attachment? |
| 00:21:42.46 | Heidi Scoville | And if the language is not included in that resolution, then it'd be easy enough to provide another under a now four be it resolved to identify that all conditions of approval associated with resolution, then we can pull up that number. are carried over. But that's the intent of this project is just to again, carry through those original conditions of approval. that were approved and listed in that resolution. |
| 00:22:11.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand. I just want to see it on the screen so that in case it doesn't have that, we could solve that. And I also have one other error in that in the list of conditions. Are you able to bring that up? |
| 00:22:26.74 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Commissioner, I am. If it's okay, I'll share my screen with everybody now. |
| 00:22:31.06 | Kristina Feller | Please. |
| 00:22:35.58 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Let's see. Oh, that's the wrong one. |
| 00:22:49.98 | Andrew Junius | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:23:00.25 | Kristina Feller | We're just seeing the list of files. There we go. There we go. |
| 00:23:00.86 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. Can we see that? Yeah. |
| 00:23:06.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. So if I guess for Ms. Scoville's comments, if we can go back to the beginning of that attachment, there should be a reference to the prior attachment that makes all the conditions in that one. go with this one, I guess. So that would be in the first part, the other direction. |
| 00:23:28.30 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I actually believe that it's included as a separate condition of approval that all of the previous conditions continue to apply to this project. |
| 00:23:38.71 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:23:38.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Oh. Thank you. So you think that's an exhibit B? |
| 00:23:45.06 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I think that's part of the condition of approval. I can look for it quickly. |
| 00:23:53.28 | Heidi Scoville | It's either in the now for be it resolved section or It should be in this section. So, um, Cecilia, if you could scroll up to the top of the resolution. |
| 00:24:06.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. |
| 00:24:06.98 | Sergio Rudin | I was worried I suggested. And for reference, it is a condition of approval number 12. |
| 00:24:18.00 | Heidi Scoville | Thank you. |
| 00:24:18.03 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay, so that's how we did it. Yeah, it's a condition of approval. |
| 00:24:22.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so we could go to conditions while we appreciate it. |
| 00:24:37.00 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | There we go. |
| 00:24:40.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. If you can scroll down further, advisory note number eight, This is the third time I've raised this issue that this, this is a cotton place, boilerplate. That's just wrong with regard to city holidays. It makes no sense that a contractor can work from nine to seven on a city holiday, but the app, the owner can only go from nine to six. It is supposed to read prohibited. If you go to item 6D on the agenda tonight, you can see what the wording Cecilia should be for this provision here. I don't know what we need to do. This is like the third time that you have raised this. |
| 00:25:27.83 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Noted, Commissioner. I will be sure to modify that from here on out. |
| 00:25:28.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | VOTED. |
| 00:25:33.02 | Heidi Scoville | Yeah, and just if I can jump in, I know staff has been working on standard conditions of approval so we can get past this. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get that project over the goal line. So many apologies for us being short staffed at the moment and not being able to be consistent with this condition. |
| 00:25:51.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Those are the questions that I have at this time, Chair Feller. |
| 00:25:56.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Commissioner Luxenberg. Commissioner Saad, any questions for staff? |
| 00:26:01.93 | Nastassya Saad | No questions for staff. |
| 00:26:03.40 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Graff? |
| 00:26:04.65 | Richard Graef | No questions. |
| 00:26:05.68 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:26:07.55 | Nastassya Saad | AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT |
| 00:26:08.22 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:26:08.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Very well. I have none either. So at this time, if the applicant would like to make a presentation, they're welcome to do so. I think, I don't know if the Dufourts are in the, There we go. I see them in the. of the Burton's are in the audience if they would like to make a presentation at this time you have 15 minutes. to do that and Maria will put up a timer if you would like to do so. |
| 00:26:40.07 | Kristina Feller | Um, I see Deborah Burton here. There we go. You're just on mute there, Mrs. Burton. There we go. Although again, |
| 00:26:54.43 | Deborah Burton | I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT THE For commissioner Luxenberg, I do have both the letters from the public works and the fire prevention that they had reviewed these. |
| 00:27:09.33 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:27:09.36 | Deborah Burton | Thank you. |
| 00:27:09.38 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 00:27:09.40 | Deborah Burton | Okay. |
| 00:27:09.41 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 00:27:10.26 | Deborah Burton | So those should be in the stacks. Remember we've been going through planner by planner. So that should be in the stack. And the only thing it says, everything was satisfactory. And then it says final approval of occupancy based on, I guess, inspection or something. So that was, I guess that goes with the permit. Thank you. |
| 00:27:35.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. We were not provided with that information. So thank you for that. |
| 00:27:38.83 | Deborah Burton | Okay. Yeah. So I wanted to show you that it did happen. It was probably misplaced between in the files somewhere. Um, The other thing that we wanted to let you know, there should be another letter of support from a neighbor who's also building and who had concerns at the original project and is now very excited to have our project finished. And so that could be from Lauren Eskenazi. And then planner Cecilia Jaroslawski had given us a note from a neighbor, Karen Desson, that was our neighbor, not concerned about the design, but concerned about the building. how it will be built, excavation. And so we met with her. And we've also spoken to our civil engineer who has a staging plan. for water runoff if it ever rains and that kind of stuff during the building. So that's in, should be in your files. We also spoke to our engineer, a soil engineer and had our soil engineer work with our structural engineer to make sure that we can do this safely. So there's no movement of neighboring houses. So we just wanted to put that in the forefront. So we think that we've covered all of our bases. So we've covered all of our bases. but I just wanted to let you know other information from neighbors, okay? That's all I have. |
| 00:29:25.26 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Mr. and Mrs. Burton. Thank you for helping to fill in some of the blanks and for being here again this evening. Let's go ahead and stop the clock and I'll just know 12 minutes and |
| 00:29:37.12 | Ms. Miranda | in it. |
| 00:29:38.13 | Kristina Feller | Excuse me, 20 seconds, or 21 seconds. Thank you, Maria. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS. Let me ask the commissioners if they have any questions for the applicant at this time. COMMISSIONER ASSAD? |
| 00:29:51.11 | Nastassya Saad | No, none from the applicant. Thank you. |
| 00:29:53.79 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Who is the one? |
| 00:29:54.38 | Nastassya Saad | and you're going to be |
| 00:29:54.45 | Kristina Feller | MR. |
| 00:29:55.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I have questions for the applicant. Thank you for noting the information from Public Works from the fire department thinking. |
| 00:30:04.86 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Commissioner Graff? |
| 00:30:07.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:30:07.63 | Richard Graef | questions. |
| 00:30:08.88 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:30:10.33 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:30:11.77 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I have no questions either at this time. So let's just note that 12 minutes, 21 seconds, should the Burton's want to use that time Again. And I'm gonna go ahead and open this up for public comments. So if you could please. raise your hand in the Zoom application. or press star nine on your cell phone if you're calling in from a cell phone. And Cecilia, while I'm looking for hands, I believe we only had one public comment that was written in. but I note that Mrs. Burton mentioned it, potentially a second note is that in our packet? Cause I did not see that before I was evening. |
| 00:30:51.44 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | No, it's not in your packet, Chair. The resident didn't ask for it to be forwarded. She just had some questions of concern regarding the project so I forwarded it on to the applicant. |
| 00:31:03.00 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I'm not seeing any hands raised at this time. So I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment on this item. Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Burton. Don't go too far away. Let's bring this up to our virtual dais here for any discussion. or I'm happy to entertain a motion. |
| 00:31:24.92 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:31:24.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We have. |
| 00:31:25.34 | Andrew Junius | approve. |
| 00:31:26.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Second, with a second with, with an amendment to revise advisory number eight to the correct word. |
| 00:31:37.09 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I see Vice Chair Junius is nodding his head in approval of that. So Dan, could you kindly take roll call? |
| 00:31:44.80 | Dan | Christian McGrath. Yeah. Mission of Luxembourg Yes. Commissioner Saad. Yeah. |
| 00:31:51.88 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:31:52.74 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Chair Feller. |
| 00:31:56.93 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:31:58.30 | Dan | Motion carries, 5-0. |
| 00:32:00.12 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Burton. Thank you very much. Okay, let's move on to what is now item 6B, which is 110 4th Street. And I believe that this is Celia again, So I'll hand it to you. |
| 00:32:18.53 | Dan | I have a little opening, but if you want to just take it, it's basically I'm just going to give a synopsis here. Second public hearing item is regarding a designer review permit and a lot line adjustment. at 110 4th street. The item was continued from April 6th, 2022, planning commission meeting. big contractor planner, Cecilia Jaroslawski is, will be providing the staff presentation on this item. |
| 00:32:47.22 | Kristina Feller | Terrific, welcome Cecilia. |
| 00:32:59.69 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you, commissioners and chair Feller. With your permission, I would like to share my screen. |
| 00:33:05.71 | Mary Wagner | Please. |
| 00:33:10.66 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:33:10.69 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:33:10.83 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 00:33:11.50 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | And can everybody see that? |
| 00:33:14.00 | Kristina Feller | We can, yes. |
| 00:33:15.95 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Great. The item before you is 110 fourth street This slide is located within the general plan, medium high density residential land use designation. and within the two family residential zoning districts The project was reviewed by the historic preservation commission, the planning commission, most recently on April 6 2022 where it was determined that additional information was required to more thoroughly review the project. |
| 00:33:48.81 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Items specifically requested were to go back to a standard ridge roof line at the front structure. the fig tree to be substantially trimmed, plans to be submitted that were a full set of plans and complete. The roof structure to be a standard roof or a true green roof. conditions of approval to be included that would protect the existing culvert on site. the on the onsite trees as well as clarification of structure heights. Um, conditions of approval to address car lift maintenance as well. |
| 00:34:29.21 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The front structure roofline has been reconfigured to a barrel shape. The applicant determined the barrel roof would more adequately address few impacts to the neighbors. rather than a ridge roof at this location on the structure. as a ridge roof would increase the height of the front of the building rather than reducing it. The applicant installed the location of the barrel roofline on the story poles. And this photo is taken from across the street. I hope that the commissioners can see that it's a little bit difficult to read. |
| 00:35:02.35 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Staff has received communications from residents concerned about loss of use. I believe these were forwarded to the commission. These are photos submitted from the resident located at 103 4th street. LOOKING TO THE BAY. I think you can see the barrel roof there on the top. |
| 00:35:22.75 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The applicant has reconfigured the roofline to a barrel roof. The fig tree has been trimmed to allow better view analysis. A full set of plans has been submitted with renderings The applicant has determined that the rear roof structure will be a standard roof type and not an artificial green roof. Conditions of approval have been added to address the car lift maintenance as well as non-use. on-site tree protection during construction, including the requirement of the submittal of an arborist report. prior to the approval of a building permit and protection of the onsite culvert during construction. Heights are cited as a book finished grade clarification. and demonstrated in submitted photographs, negative view impacts would be minimal if any. Both structures would remain in the style of modern architectural design, per the commission's comments both structures would incorporate consistent materials These renderings show the structures from various views. |
| 00:36:27.88 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | This slide demonstrates the roofline modification history |
| 00:36:35.18 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | This slide demonstrates renderings of the project modification history. |
| 00:36:42.72 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The staff believes findings can be made for approval of the design review and lot line adjustment and detached dwelling units and recommends approval of the requested permits with conditions of approval That concludes my presentation, commissioners. I'm available for questions and I believe the applicant is in attendance as well. |
| 00:37:03.01 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Cecilia, for bringing this back to us this evening. This is the time for commissioners to ask staff any questions. So let's see, Commissioner Saad, let's go ahead and start with you this evening. |
| 00:37:18.20 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. I had one question. Um, I believe in the public comment in attachment five, there was a correspondence between Karen, I think the last name is Shelton at 411 Maine. And she was, asking about the shrub plan in between the properties. Has that been resolved? Was there another correspondence following up from that or? because, staff had any more conversation around that. |
| 00:37:51.03 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | my last communication with her commissioner, she was, um, She was in support of the project. She was happy with the idea of a condition of approval requiring a tree protection plan and she was in support of the modification. |
| 00:38:04.77 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Okay. um, I may say this one again for the applicant, but that would be all my questions right now, Chair Feller. |
| 00:38:14.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Luxembourg? |
| 00:38:18.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Uh, thank you, Chair Fowler. As usual, I do have a series of questions. I apologize. Thank you. First, the commissioner graph at the last meeting expressed concerns, which I seconded that regarding the study and the carport with the materials that they were sort of being on a sort of a step backwards from the previous design. Was that, did you have any conversations with the applicant? Because they don't seem to have changed that. And it is still somewhat inconsistent with the rest of the building and inconsistent with the neighborhood. And were there any discussions with the applicant in the garden? |
| 00:38:56.70 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | No commissioner, there were no discussions about modifying the carport. not much to modify it has a wall on three sides for safety. So there really isn't too much to modify with the carport. It's a below grade carport. with a wood trellis above. |
| 00:39:15.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm talking about both the carport and the study room above it, which is the primary facade for this building, which is very plain. And it has some sort of stucco windows on the corner. And it is, we've answered the question. I'll ask that when we get to the applicant part of this. Can you also bring up attachment one to your report for this project, because there are a series of problems with that attempt. |
| 00:39:47.88 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'd be happy to do that commissioner. If you'll just give me a couple of them. |
| 00:40:22.59 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Great. With your permission, I'll share my screen. |
| 00:40:25.36 | Kristina Feller | Please. |
| 00:40:34.00 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Can everybody see that? |
| 00:40:35.40 | Kristina Feller | We can. |
| 00:40:36.19 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Great. And where did you? |
| 00:40:37.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Where did you? So if you could go to exhibit B, |
| 00:40:38.18 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | So if you... |
| 00:40:50.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so my first question is with regard to the first statement, these conditions apply to the project plans prepared dated March 5th. I believe that the current date is now April 12th. Is that correct? |
| 00:41:07.05 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | That's correct, Commissioner. |
| 00:41:08.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So we would need to modify this to say April 12th. |
| 00:41:12.47 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | That's correct. |
| 00:41:12.98 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:41:13.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. So the next question I have is in condition three, It says the projects will submit a full set of plans to match modifications in the plans. First of all, the date would be April 12th, but second of all, you said in your presentation that they have modified the plans. Are we asking them to do further plans? that will be submitted in the future because the way this number three is typically written it just says the project needs to be per the approved plans and the date of the plans are you looking for them to submit further plans here or what is your intent by number three |
| 00:41:55.57 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The intent is to ensure that all of the plans approved tonight are consistent with what's approved. So all of them need to be stamped the exact same date. |
| 00:42:06.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And so you're saying that the plans that we received aren't all the same day? |
| 00:42:12.02 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I believe that there are two that were updated at the very last minute that were landscape plans, a combination of site and landscape plan that might have a different date on it. So everything needs to be submitted with the exact same |
| 00:42:28.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So So, probably, yeah. Can we just, can you research that while we're doing this tonight and get whatever it is you want corrected? Because this just doesn't, isn't very clear and it also doesn't have the right date. So if you could get wording. that really I think they've modified most of them. So if there are specific plans, let's indicate what they are and they should be in conformance with April 12th, I guess. Is that your intent? |
| 00:43:07.64 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm just taking a quick look at the plans now commissioner. |
| 00:43:10.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:43:31.78 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The plans submitted that were uploaded and part of the agenda are all dated April 12th, but I believe that there was a more recent plan that was sent to you that was a combination site plan and landscape plan. that might have a different day. |
| 00:43:46.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Right, so if that's the case, then if that's substituting, we just need to be clear about what plans are which. So if you can work on language for that, while we do this. If you could go continue to share a screen that would be good. I'll move on to number five. It says a building, it says the existing fig tree shall be removed. I think we talked about something to the fact that a building permit will not be issued until the tree is removed. So if you could draft something along that lines, when we get to that part of this, Um... Condition number six, Uh... It says you're indicating that you want prior to issuance from a building permit, which is what I am suggesting for five, you want all landscaping installed. If you install all the landscaping, before they build the project, the landscaping is going to get destroyed. I think that you're really looking to say something in the effect that, I think you're looking for prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, maybe. I'm not sure what you were thinking there, but that doesn't make any sense to me. What was the idea there? |
| 00:45:11.22 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | How about prior to finalization of the building permit? |
| 00:45:16.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, because if they construct, if they're building on the property, They're going to trample all the landscape. you usually put in landscaping at the end. I mean, cause it doesn't get trampled on. |
| 00:45:29.63 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | prior to obtaining certificate of occupancy, |
| 00:45:32.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think that makes sense and we can talk about it later. I was just asking what your intent was. |
| 00:45:39.16 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The intent was to ensure that this met the requirement or the request for the resident at 411 Main Street. She wanted to be sure. that all of the landscaping along her rear yard was going to be properly installed. She was worried The construction will be completed. but the landscaping would not be installed. So she wanted, this was for Karen Shelton. |
| 00:46:05.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so I think you need to parse it out then if that can be installed and then protected. But we can leave that to when we get back to the dais and talk about this, but I don't think as worded right now, it makes a whole lot of sense. Can we go to number 15? you Uh... |
| 00:46:35.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So my understanding from the last time is we want to not only protect the trees on site, we want to protect the trees adjacent to the site that are not on their property. The protection would go on their property, but they need to protect other trees i don't know is that uh is that now you remember that |
| 00:46:57.18 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | No, my recollection and Heidi, please correct me if I'm incorrect was to protect all of the onsite trees. |
| 00:47:13.01 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm not sure how you would go about protecting a tree that's not on your property. |
| 00:47:18.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you would put up the same tree protection on your property line. If the tree, there are a couple of trees that are partially on both properties or one that's right adjacent to the property but on a budding property, you would put the tree protection at the property line and it would protect that tree from the construction going on. That's how you would do it. Same way to do any tree protection. Um... I wanted the question on it. This is the type of question. So I'll come back with suggested wording later, but also, I'll come back with suggested wording later, Thank you. Um, The applicant also has no control over the approval of a building permit. So asking them to do something prior to something they don't have control on. I think you want to indicate that the building permit can't be issued until we have a tree protection plan has been approved as opposed to putting the onus on the applicant there. But we can get back to language later on. I have some suggested language for that later on. Number 16, you have a number 16 under CCDD and you have a number 16 under public works. Is there, I think you need to renumber from 16 onward. |
| 00:48:44.20 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | That was a typo. My apologies. |
| 00:48:44.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Those type of. Yeah. Now the other thing here, and I know you mentioned in this case, have you talked to Marin Fire about this project? Unlike the last one, which was just an amendment to a prior project. This is a complete renovation and a new building. Have you contacted Marin Fire about this project? |
| 00:49:07.40 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Yes, this project has been routed to all of the agencies and all of the agencies that had any comments or conditions of approval are part of this exhibit B. |
| 00:49:16.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So Marin fire and my experience in the board is never not provided a set of standard conditions and you don't have any here. And even if they don't want them, I think we should put in at least their standard conditions that we typically see. Is there, did they, do you have, did they indicate they had no conditions or you just didn't get anything. And this has been going on for over a year and you didn't get anything and you just didn't put them in. I'm not sure why. you wouldn't have then called them and said, don't you want your standard condition? |
| 00:49:52.61 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | No, I did not receive any conditions from fire, but I certainly will double check you know, with staff. |
| 00:50:00.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I mean, maybe they're somewhere and you just don't have them. If you scroll down to the bottom, you've got the same error on advisory number eight. |
| 00:50:17.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So if you could amend that rule of wording to the wording that's in C6D for this evening. And that's the same. Those are the questions that I have chair fell or I have language that I suggest we would include to fix some of the problems. I just let, but I wanted to understand what the intent was before doing that. I can do that later on when we get to that part of the meeting. |
| 00:50:45.43 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. These are, thank you for bringing all these up and going through the detail here, Commissioner Luxenberg. THANK YOU. Okay, Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:50:59.74 | Richard Graef | Um... I don't have... Well, there's one question I have, on the drawings on the roof plan of the rear structure. Um, There are some couple of rectangles that I was wondering, INDICATE or something, That's new. I understand that the roof material has been changed, yes. but I just wondering about those rectangles. about the We're failing. |
| 00:51:37.93 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Commissioner, I will defer that to the applicant. |
| 00:51:40.47 | Richard Graef | All right. fine. No other questions. |
| 00:51:45.54 | Kristina Feller | Okay. THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR JUNIUS. |
| 00:51:49.13 | Andrew Junius | No other questions, but I would like to thank Commissioner Luxembourg diving into the conditions in that detail. I support all of those comments. Thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:51:59.46 | Kristina Feller | I echo that and probably have a little bit of additional language myself that I'd like to add into some of these conditions of approval. but we'll do that when we get to that point. Cecilia, I was corresponding with you asking questions about this and particularly the tree protection plan and Commissioner Luxembourg did hit on this, about the concern about root structure particularly for mature trees and heritage trees as it's defined here in Sausalito. And I'm just a little bit concerned that I know we rushed to get this here, but There's still a lot of information that we had asked for at the last hearing that we still do not have. And if we can handle that in conditions, fine, but this should not be a regular practice here. for these kinds of hearings. So we want to make sure that the information is complete, it's correct, it's consistent. So there's no need for any applicant to keep coming back over and over again, or So supplying future information to the planning department that isn't clear here. It's an effort to try to make this as concise and complete as possible. But the issue that Commissioner Luxenberg and Commissioner Graff mentioned at the last hearing about the design. I would like to hear a little bit more from you about your discussions with the applicants because we were unclear, again, why the design was going backwards. And after we had expressed with how it had changed and now it's gone a little bit backwards, so I want to understand the rationale behind that. |
| 00:53:44.61 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Chair Feller, it's my understanding that the applicant felt that going back to a ridge line roof WOULD um, make the structure a little bit taller than it is now. So he was trying to avoid doing that. but I will let the applicants speak to that. |
| 00:54:04.84 | Kristina Feller | And what about the materials? Cause I think that's what we were really had honed in on it last hearing as well. |
| 00:54:13.92 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I will let the applicant speak to the materials as well. |
| 00:54:16.84 | Kristina Feller | OK. |
| 00:54:17.21 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. There was substantial conversations about that. Okay. |
| 00:54:21.56 | Kristina Feller | And then I had just a quick question for our city attorneys here. So I don't know, Sergio or Mary, which of you can answer this. But with the car lift, the cloud system, that is technically considered a conveyance system based on the California Building Code. And so I would like to understand if we can condition the use for only vehicles, because my understanding is that the warranty is voided if you use it for storage or anything like that. I want to avoid using it for anything but its intended purpose of parking. And since it's not a carport, it is a conveyance system, can we do that? |
| 00:55:08.83 | Sergio Rudin | I would have to look into into that a little bit, I think. Off the top of my head, I don't see why not, but I want to think about it a little bit more before I say yes. |
| 00:55:21.89 | Kristina Feller | Okay, because that would need to be a condition of approval so we can come back to that. Okay, thank you, Sergio. Thank you. I don't have any other questions at this time. Let me just look for a show of hands. Any other questions from any commissioner for staff at this time? Seeing none, okay, I'm going to go ahead and invite THE APPLICANT, up here. virtually to provide a presentation to us if they would like to do so. As before, you have 15 minutes to make a presentation. In the event that we stop you in the presentation to ask you a question, the timer would be stopped and that time does not work against your 15 minutes. So Maria, if we can get the timer ready. And Mr. Rempel, you are there. And Ms. Miranda, if you could unmute and share your screen if you'd like, or the floor is yours. but we can't hear you. |
| 00:56:23.01 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. Thank you. I understand that. I make sure my wife can hear. Um, Okay, can you share screen with you, please? |
| 00:56:35.74 | Kristina Feller | Maria? Does Mr. Rumpel have share screen capability? |
| 00:56:42.34 | Maria | He has a co-host, so he should be able to share his Thank you. |
| 00:56:45.61 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:56:49.24 | Mr. Rempel | Okay. |
| 00:56:49.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 00:56:53.05 | Mr. Rempel | All right, so let's go up here. Thank you. Come here, nurse. |
| 00:56:59.78 | Kristina Feller | your screen. |
| 00:57:01.98 | Mr. Rempel | Okay, you can't see my screen. Well. Well, where is this? |
| 00:57:10.60 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 00:57:11.88 | Deborah Burton | Okay. |
| 00:57:12.09 | Mr. Rempel | Is that it? |
| 00:57:12.10 | Deborah Burton | Thank you. |
| 00:57:12.64 | Mr. Rempel | How's that? |
| 00:57:13.72 | Deborah Burton | going to be a little bit. |
| 00:57:14.70 | Mr. Rempel | OK. Good, technology is working again. I'm going to try to your questions as I go through this. So, Basically, following the last Commission hearing we went back with Pardon me, I want to apologize for getting a little emotional at the end of last session. We had a call for, but it's, we've been going on this now. for almost three years and, uh, Uh. We would love to have you guys find the right decision this evening for us so we can move on and build our home. Following the last issues of the last hearing, basically it came down to the front building volume and the geometry And I know there were some commissioners who spoke about the previous roof geometry. And I will I'm putting up this slide here, Thank you. iterations of roots that we've actually brought the building down. continuous data So it started over 15 feet to dropping a foot to 14 to the gable to 13 and a half approximately to still 13 and a half. But we're going to a full barrel, which is more my |
| 00:58:25.19 | Ms. Miranda | We're going to... |
| 00:58:28.90 | Mr. Rempel | flavor anyway. And Uh, We believe that Do you believe that this is geometry which give some more view to the neighbors. I like the geometry. There are two houses immediately in our street, one at the end of the block that has a barrel, one behind us on Fifth Street. that has a barrel, so it is a contextual. element. And it's very much here in the neighborhood. And I believe since it is an addition to the existing structure, Having a slightly different geometry, architecturally speaking, is perfectly appropriate. Um, So this is... This is a way of showing here in the lower part of the What happens if you even raise the roof of five, six inches? over the distance of 100 feet to your neighbor, their view plane actually decreases by you know, three, three and a half feet, et cetera. and try and maximize the, you know, minimize the, any blockages of the section that they've used I believe that the barrel roof provides that best option. And also I like it. so the Romans said, De Gussippus nonis despotantum, case can't be argued, Um... LEAVE IT AT THAT, WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE. opinion if the majority feels that they like to give them more we do like the narrow roof the two, the one on the right, is on this to be the one on the left is here. |
| 00:59:55.99 | Mary Wagner | Chair Beller, can we pause the applicant for just a second? I apologize, Mr. Rempel, and if we could stop the clock. |
| 00:59:56.03 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. call. |
| 01:00:01.22 | Mary Wagner | Your audio is very garbled and for purposes, if we could stop the clock, you guys, thanks. For purposes of preserving the record on this hearing, I wanna make sure that we hear you as clearly as possible. Again, Chair, apologies for the interruption. |
| 01:00:12.01 | Kristina Feller | Chair, our apologies for the interruption. Oh, thank you, Mary. you |
| 01:00:16.12 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:00:16.18 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:00:16.19 | Mary Wagner | you |
| 01:00:16.38 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 01:00:16.46 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:00:16.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:00:17.15 | Mary Wagner | Bye. |
| 01:00:17.24 | Mr. Rempel | Can you, is it possible to have my wife's audio on in my screen? |
| 01:00:18.98 | Mary Wagner | I'm going to have |
| 01:00:20.02 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 01:00:20.04 | Mary Wagner | Why don't you? |
| 01:00:23.78 | Mr. Rempel | Can you make two? |
| 01:00:23.94 | Mary Wagner | You just have to turn your audio off, Mr. Rempel. |
| 01:00:24.63 | Andrew Junius | Bye. |
| 01:00:27.06 | Mary Wagner | And then your wife has to turn her audio on. |
| 01:00:40.66 | Mr. Rempel | How was that now? That's much better. Okay. Sorry about that. |
| 01:00:42.21 | Mary Wagner | Much better. Thank you. |
| 01:00:45.00 | Mr. Rempel | I hope you thought it was better. |
| 01:00:45.20 | Mary Wagner | I hope you enjoyed it. |
| 01:00:46.58 | Mr. Rempel | So anyway, I just wanted a quick view of two local buildings within half a block that have the barrel. It's contextual roof geometry. The other issue was one of the materiality, secco, wood shingles, board form concrete. These are all local in the neighborhood. They're very contextual. trying to keep the existing building with its shingle look almost precisely as it is and only adding the stucco for this front volume, which is an addition accreted volume to the existing structure. Um, some 3D renderings. This is what it would look like in the street. Obviously computer renderings are somewhat flat. I do appreciate commissioner Luxenberger's comments and those of commissioner Grapp about a large face of stucco. This is actually a tiny building. And if you see this, the scale of the building, it's tiny. It's not that large. It seems larger here in this scale of the drawing, but it's not. I believe it's perfectly appropriately scaled with the window openings, with the materiality, we're intending to do an integral stucco color with this. We're recessing the windows as you can see with the shadow line of these windows and carrying the post of the window frame through so these float and then we were planning on putting pitosporum tenufolium hedge against the building and we can let that grow up right to blow the windows and trim it. Within about three years, since we'll be planting mature hippotisporum, this will have a nice green screen in front of it. And then the other plants in front of that. Moving up again, the face, sort of slightly zeroed out buildings on either side, the spruce tree on the left. direct on view and you can see the scale of this building. It's about 17 feet long and it's literally above grade about 12 and a half feet from grade to the E. in more detail. This shows here fairly clearly how you can look beyond, see the rear building, and the walkway to the rear building Down in the middle. Our rear building, which really hasn't been an issue. Nobody can really see this. It's sunken down into the Glen behind the building. Give you an idea of the materiality, the feeling of this building, the privacy issues. I think this is actually really well developed and designed example of infill housing for the city. putting two houses in close proximity putting window openings so they don't look at each other. That this rear window, these windows don't look at the front building. They look to the side there or they're looking at you green on the other side. another view of walkway and the rear building. from the rear, which you could never really see because you're sitting in a hedge of bay trees here, this up to the roof line or above the roof line, there's a grouping of bay trees. Yeah, I see it. The roof was after a back and forth. While we'd love to see the really beautiful artificial turf up there, I understand the humor of Commissioner Graff and others perhaps not finding it most appropriate. So we're gonna go to a ballasted and use that on both buildings since we have currently. And There are skylights, I'm sorry, they're not shown here on this. They are shown on the plan. Our, we had communication issues with the renderer. I didn't get those in. I wanted to assure commissioner, that the skylight has been on every single A2.1 Plan set from the beginning showing skylights on the roof. We'll get to that a little bit. So the skylights have always been on the back building, even though they're not shown on the rendering. This is sort of a rear aerial. |
| 01:04:28.86 | Mr. Rempel | and a front aerial, barrel roof at the front, the lower roof in the back and I'm assuming we would coordinate the rock tone on both roofs that they would match. Again, communication issues with an overseas renderer friend of ours. Getting to the site plan, really no changes here from what we've seen before. We did do one change here and move the walkway from the north side. of the garage back to the south side of the garage where it was in our first design submitted last year. And we did that. Uh, primarily out of consideration these two bay trees. So much comment was given to these. We want to be well out of the way, leave them protected. And regarding commissioner Feller's questions about the protection of this large spruce tree, just on the edge of the drip line. So I believe we're well out of the way of the drip line for the foundations of the garage building and our back structures. They're well out of the drip line. So I don't believe those should be an issue at all. A arborist should be able to confirm that. And on this rear building, while that's a bay tree does have a root system, our foundation on the rear tree comes back to the very first bay. So it is sitting back six or seven feet from the edge so it's cantilevered out again this was done from the get-go to keep the foundation structure away from these trees by the deference to the needs of those trees plans. I will zip through. Elevations would you seen the 3D rendering of I won't I won't stay there. And I'll get here to our neighbors and the view concerns. Okay. I believe we since we were finally allowed this year to go in and take photos We're, pretty much able to demonstrate that we have minimal impact on our neighbors views of the water. And we feel strongly that the view issue is not of any real significance. Mr. Dupour may beg to differ because from his yard, he has some occlusion of his views, but the yard view from the middle of his garden here on the left, would you see with, that's not a protected view. And I'm sorry about that, but I either am able to Fix my foundations, put insulation on my roof, raise my basement ceiling to an eight foot ceiling actually, because I'm doing three inches of rigid insulation on the roof to keep the nice wood structure we have here now. So we're raising it 18, putting 15 into below, three inches to the top, et cetera. Again, these are shots here. The ones below are from Mahoney. which were taken yesterday. And again, they show the barrel roof steady at the side is well out of his view shed. And we're barely, barely into the tree level at the front of the building. And for Dufour, I didn't enter his property, but I reached the camera over the fence and took some shots from Mahoney's property, the same level. And I believe it consistently shows what we last showed in our photos. |
| 01:07:28.87 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:07:29.49 | Mr. Rempel | This is Patrick Murphy. He took these photos himself and sent them here. I think again, in our position, The roof structure, our proposal, barely creeps into the bottom frame of his views, his beautiful view of Angel Island, and the vast majority of the water is still intact. We've touched the bottom of this view. These are the old photos, which I won't go through again. The culvert parking, I don't need to go into that now. I would like it possible. to quickly address the issues that were raised, Commissioner Saad about Karen Shelton. Shelton, we have, are planning on putting a mature Pittisporum tinifolium hedge at the bottom of the, the bottom of the site next to her property. We've communicated that to her. I believe she is supportive of the project now as a result. And we do intend to have a nice green hedge between us. um, regarding Luxembourg and others comments about the barrel group. I can take questions later again, because of the view issue, the barrel does in my opinion, looking at the sections, maintain greater view and less occlusion of the views from our neighbors. Finally, car lift storage. Finally, regarding Commissioner Feller's comment about the car lift and storage, it seems a little odd since any, any Sausalito here in town can choose to put storage in their garage If they so choose. nor are there garages approved with the limitation. You can't use your garage for storage. So it seems a little bit of a reach to suggest that to council to propose that. I'd like to stay, I want to comment. Okay, can we almost done here? to go back anyway, we encourage you to approve the project tonight. We'd love to have that here so we can go forward Get into construction dragons and build a building. Thank you. |
| 01:09:26.03 | Ms. Miranda | I just wanted to respond to a couple of comments. That was the questions. There was a comment about why we change our design If where we had the the Good. |
| 01:09:36.46 | Andrew Junius | in the future. Thank you. |
| 01:09:36.80 | Ms. Miranda | the gable roof. We had corrugated metal on the facade. And I think one or two commissioners did not like the corrugated metal. So we went to a more traditional, which is stucco. So that's why we made the change. And again, to emphasize the barrel roof is to provide more visibility for our neighbors. Second, in regards to the car lift, I want you all to be aware, we actually created a car lift for a project on Casno, 88 and 90, that was done maybe nine or eight years ago. |
| 01:10:04.77 | Mr. Rempel | 2009. |
| 01:10:05.42 | Ms. Miranda | and it's been successfully used. There were no issues at the time for carless And to comment on these restrictions that you're asking on the car lift, it's the same thing. Our neighbor across the street uses his garage as a as a workout room. And many people in the street don't even use their garage. They just use it for storage. So I think I really want to understand the restriction of a cartilage And lastly, we've been on this project for over two years, 10 months. We believe the design of our project is contextual and as staff has recommended, there are no grounds for denial. And we feel very strongly that we've done everything possible. We've made changes to design. And. That's it. So thank you for your attention. |
| 01:10:50.32 | Mr. Rempel | And if we can save the last two minutes for later, appreciate it. |
| 01:10:55.31 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you both so much. Yes, we have the clock stopped at 2.01. um, Thank you for your presentation and for being here tonight. If we could go ahead and stop the share screen right now. so we can have everybody up here. together. on the gallery view. That would be great. There we go. Thank you. I'm not going to be able to Great, so this would be the time for commissioners to ask the applicant any questions that they might have. Commissioner Luxenberg, let's start with you. Oh, you're on mute. |
| 01:11:33.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Feller. I have two questions. First, I want to clarify, I don't have an issue with the barrel roof. I have an issue with the stucco as it contrasts with the wood shingles. If you could, could you bring, share your screen again and bring up the barrel roofs that you had on before? |
| 01:11:59.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sorry. |
| 01:12:01.75 | Mr. Rempel | That's it. |
| 01:12:03.69 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:12:03.71 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:12:03.73 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:12:04.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | It's in your presentation. |
| 01:12:04.28 | Mr. Rempel | It's... |
| 01:12:04.69 | Ms. Miranda | your |
| 01:12:04.98 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:12:05.03 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:12:06.63 | Mr. Rempel | I've got a bunch of screens out so I'm just trying to see it share |
| 01:12:07.03 | Heidi Scoville | Yeah. |
| 01:12:07.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:12:11.34 | Heidi Scoville | No, that's not. |
| 01:12:11.78 | Mr. Rempel | That's not it. There we go. Okay, this is not it either. I'm gonna go here to preview. There we go. |
| 01:12:20.90 | Kristina Feller | HOLD ON. |
| 01:12:22.00 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:12:22.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. |
| 01:12:22.24 | Mr. Rempel | Bye. |
| 01:12:22.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:12:22.42 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:12:22.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Bye. |
| 01:12:22.54 | Mr. Rempel | see you. |
| 01:12:23.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:12:23.62 | Kristina Feller | I think you have to stop screen share and then do a show again. |
| 01:12:28.99 | Mr. Rempel | I have a wrong file tonight. Can you see anything on my desktop? Resumed care. |
| 01:12:34.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We see a weird distorted view of an elevation. |
| 01:12:34.39 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:12:40.01 | Andrew Junius | It looks like you've gone through a time warp or some type of |
| 01:12:42.71 | Mr. Rempel | I'm sorry, I'm trying to find this screen. It's right there. |
| 01:12:43.10 | Andrew Junius | I'm sorry. |
| 01:12:46.98 | Mr. Rempel | Can you see this? |
| 01:12:48.06 | Kristina Feller | If you stop sharing screen for just a moment and then reshare, usually it resets it. And that might help. |
| 01:12:54.57 | Mr. Rempel | Okay. How is that? There we go. |
| 01:13:02.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Yeah. So if you scroll back up to those two examples in the neighborhood. Sure. And, um, |
| 01:13:13.54 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:13:13.56 | Dan | Okay, so this is a rounded volume in the back. |
| 01:13:14.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so this |
| 01:13:14.99 | Mr. Rempel | So, |
| 01:13:15.04 | Ms. Miranda | Bye. |
| 01:13:17.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:13:17.17 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:13:17.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | These went from |
| 01:13:17.98 | Mr. Rempel | We'll be right back. |
| 01:13:18.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | from the left to, oh, you want to see. I just want to see, yeah. So you just show that picture. So in my mind, there's a detail in that, around that window with the wood lattice work, there's detail on the other one. My concern is the plainness of your, above the carport, so even if the, pit of storm or whatever landscaping we have grows up it's just a very blank facade and the windows are a little a little strange in that regard and compared to the shingles so that that's my question it's yeah I realize you took out the corrugated I appreciate that I just think that some level of detail above that carport, you know, rather than just a plain stucco, maybe it's not plain stucco, maybe it's aggregated stucco. I'm not exactly sure, but it looks very plain in this regard. And stucco is a fine material. It's just the contrast is my question is, |
| 01:13:55.07 | Mr. Dufour | Yeah. |
| 01:14:22.27 | Mr. Rempel | We actually looked at doing a groove stucco. We didn't present that. It was just a technical question of how to create samples for you at the time. But we were looking at how to do that with this building and maybe doing a regular traveling through this. But this, when that's done, it's not, Thank you. Anyway, it would take me a few months to come up with a sample to show you guys and Again, what I tried to do here to create detail, one is on the over, I don't know if you're familiar with some of Stephen Hall's work, Commissioner Luxembourg, but he did a beautiful project out of a very austere stucco, where he has great richness in the stucco itself because it's a hand-trailed stucco. I can't render that in the 3D. He also has a zinc, eave flashing which isn't flat against the building but is actually sticking out two or three inches so we have a gutter on the front which sticks out three inches and we have that same thing coming around the sides these are all details intended to give this a small hat minimal modern but still there not simply a piece of galvanized sheet metal which is pasted flat against the stucco that's not what the intention is here intention to have this look very rich through the materiality of the stucco, That's not what the intention is here. Intention to have this look very rich through the materiality of the stucco, through the recess of the windows, and through that zinc detail at the top of the roof. And I believe that would be adequate to convey high quality in this building. |
| 01:15:45.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I can show you that. Is that where you're proposing for the stucco or you haven't really decided what the stucco would be? |
| 01:15:45.52 | Mr. Rempel | Oh yeah. |
| 01:15:52.92 | Mr. Rempel | We haven't ultimately decided what the final skin of the stucco is, but we do know we want to use integral stucco, hand trowel, and the details that we're having here is the punched in window, and the zinc cornice at the top, which is a gutter turned into a roof detail at the edge of the roof. |
| 01:16:11.74 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I see. I mean, my concern is that we don't know exactly what it will be. And then right now it looks very plain. Well, let me move on to another question. If you can scroll in your presentation down to the garage, I'm a little confused of how this thing works, but you had some drawings that you did not go through. If you could go down to those. |
| 01:16:18.37 | Andrew Junius | Well, I'm sorry. but. |
| 01:16:18.66 | Mr. Rempel | I love it. |
| 01:16:35.70 | Mr. Rempel | I'll do that. In this photo you see here of the rendering, you'll see the garage lift actually coming up, has a slight bevel at the front. And at the back, there's a vertical column. That vertical column and this whole, platform is part of the car lift. by putting a trellis next to it and around it and then painting everything the same color to hide essentially the garage, the lift structure. It becomes part of, it becomes decoration then. The car lifts up, the trellis stays where it is and it goes past it. So I'll show you back to the bottom. to the car lift. So here is the car lift structure. This is fine. This is it. Thank you. |
| 01:17:16.34 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:17:16.37 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:17:16.40 | Ms. Miranda | That's it. |
| 01:17:16.64 | Mr. Rempel | So here's the car lift structure at the back, which we are painting the same color as a steel trellis, which goes around this thing and basically hides this from view from the public. Thank you. |
| 01:17:30.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Go to this slide, please. So let me ask you this while you're, so when it's in the down position, |
| 01:17:31.25 | Mr. Rempel | Oh. |
| 01:17:36.42 | Mr. Rempel | Yes. |
| 01:17:36.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Yeah. there could be a car on the little platform underneath and a car on what uh what what you're showing what you just showed me with the concrete wall around it when it when it uh when it's down uh is that room below have doors or can you get into that room when the uh can you walk around the car you were you made some comment about storage and I'm a little confused. How do you access that room? You were saying you wanted to, you didn't want a restriction on storage, but can you What? You lift the thing up and you put boxes in there. I don't understand how you get that. |
| 01:18:14.99 | Mr. Rempel | you could lift this thing up put motorcycles bicycles whatever you want on this platform and lower it down underground There is. |
| 01:18:21.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | There is. no door there's no |
| 01:18:23.43 | Mr. Rempel | No, never. There is a book and I will show you that. |
| 01:18:24.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Very cool. Bye. |
| 01:18:27.24 | Andrew Junius | Right. |
| 01:18:29.61 | Mr. Rempel | Here, is that it? Thank you. Right here. Okay so right here you see this lower bottom left of the screen There is a door which will have probably a ladder up to since it's up in the air three feet. This is a mechanical access door so that if something's wrong with the lift You can get into it. from inside, you can get at the mechanics by walking into the room. So this is basically a mechanical access door we put here. And that's the way you can get in, but it's not really easily accessible for everyday actions. |
| 01:19:00.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you Thank you. |
| 01:19:00.64 | Mr. Rempel | Uh, |
| 01:19:01.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's in the, let me just ask that's in the area where you said you removed the walkway. Thank you. |
| 01:19:06.50 | Mr. Rempel | Exactly. |
| 01:19:06.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:19:06.97 | Mr. Rempel | Yeah. |
| 01:19:07.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. So that's a landscaped area, but you would put a ladder in there or something? |
| 01:19:12.05 | Mr. Rempel | That's a landscape area the way you say have on industrial building. You have a galvanized ladder to the roof. You have a small three-foot ladder, four-foot ladder, or maybe none. You put a ladder against it, but it gives you access to the space. |
| 01:19:24.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. And so, and then when it's in the up position, you see a concrete platform. It's not just rails for the car. Cause the last version we saw rails, this is actually, Is that concrete or is that metal? What does that platform mean? |
| 01:19:42.49 | Mr. Rempel | Well, this one here is a diagram showing a metal railing. Right? Ours just has a three and a half foot guardrail of concrete around it. So what you would see in the up position would be in the up position, you would see this car up on top, you'd see this extended hydraulic and this front would stay the same. So all you're going to see when this is up is this leg here exposed above the concrete wall, which comes up half the distance between the lower platform and the upper platform. |
| 01:20:11.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm asking about the platform it's sitting on. Is it concrete or metal? No, it's metal. It's metal. So in that, when you showed me the 3D rendering, you said there was a concrete wall, the surface that the car is sitting on is metal. |
| 01:20:27.43 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. That's correct. It's a galvanized metal, tread, you know, slip resistant, Uh, Structured. |
| 01:20:35.26 | Ms. Miranda | The concrete wall, Commissioner Luxembourg, was the walls around the cartilage. But the landing itself is metal. |
| 01:20:40.79 | Mr. Rempel | Yeah, you had him. So that's what you see here. That's metal. What we're looking at is metal. That metal is galvanized. It'll be a galvanized metal, and this would be galvanized as well. until we paint it to match our trellis, et cetera. |
| 01:20:58.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. All right, well, I got, I have significant concerns about the plainness of that blank wall, both above the carport and on the street, which is probably the primary, even though you're saying it's small is 75% of what anybody will see as they drive down the street. So the details for what that's stuck in are, I think are important, but at this point, I'll turn it back over to Chair Feller. Thank you for answering those questions. |
| 01:21:29.85 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg. Commissioner Saad, do you have any questions for the applicants? |
| 01:21:36.09 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. Thank you to all the commissioners for last meeting. I'm sorry I was unable to attend. I did watch the entire video. So was able to hear all of the conversation and I did have some of the same comments at that time that have carried over into this meeting commissioner Luxembourg just touched on some of the design concerns that I had as well with that I would just echo what he just said in terms of the of the plainness it is Maybe to scale, but it still is. so plain, it looks more vast than perhaps it even maybe from the street. It just looks quite blank. I will say, you know, I'd like to thank you for the concessions that have been made. And I know there's been some redesign and an effort for the neighbors. I do have a sticking point. I realized, from what is defined as a primary view, not everyone is going to be happy with this ultimately, I do think, I have the address correctly at 107 fourth, which is the Dufours, Um, It does seem that it is an entire loss of the Bay View from that garden patio. I too went there to see, and I think I'm wondering what else may be able to be, concede in height specifically for that line of sight. I understand that Angel Island from those pictures, from what I'm understanding is definitely visible to huge mass, but to lose your entire water view seems really unfair and really harsh. So I don't know if you have any comments around that. I don't know if there's just a disagreement with what it actually is going to be. But from how I'm understanding those pictures all shot on the same lens at this stage, And, um, It seems like a quite a big visual impact. |
| 01:23:46.54 | Mr. Rempel | And I think it's unfortunate that this is one of the costs of providing necessary housing in the city. unless I'm willing to get by with seven foot ceilings in my lower floor. in order for him to have a view for his yard. And I frankly think that's not a fair trade off. I just don't think it's fair. for the view ordinance to knock down any addition we have. I need to raise the building to level it. I need to do that to get eight foot ceilings and put installation on the roof. And I really don't see a compromise possible so that his yard view, is protected and I frankly, while I understand your empathy with the due force, I would beg I would beg staff. and legal to really really direct planning commission towards, you know, what justice is in the community because this goes both ways. I didn't come in here and suggest a second floor on top of this building, which I'm legally entitled to. And I could have thought that out for four years. I came in with a perfectly reasonable 18 inch. edition. And then we lowered the front in order to protect the majority of the views. So we have to just leave it with a disagreement about that. Thank you. |
| 01:25:06.98 | Ms. Miranda | Also, I just wanted to add, you know, our building is the smallest building in the entire area. And in regards to views, I think as the ordinance is written, it is primary views. You cannot protect every single area. What's most important is your living room. What you're denying us is the ability for us to have living space. And that to me is a significant deal. 13 inches isn't much more. That's about where we're at. and If you want to have the garden view, you basically mean you can't build anything. And that's not possible. in this condition. I mean, you have the trees to be concerned of. We're in a gully, et cetera, et cetera. Again, the ordinance reads the primary views of the structure. And I think we have more than satisfied that. |
| 01:25:55.19 | Nastassya Saad | I appreciate the response. That's the only comment I have right now, Chair Feller. |
| 01:25:59.01 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Graff. |
| 01:26:04.22 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:26:04.24 | Richard Graef | Um, Well, let's see, are we at questions? |
| 01:26:09.10 | Andrew Junius | QUESTION? |
| 01:26:09.55 | Richard Graef | Yeah. Yeah, I'm just, I'm looking at the rendering that's, being shown right now And it appears to in addition to the, barrel Vault Roo. that the remainder of the roof on the other part of the structure is one flat plane. But that, seems to be inconsistent with the drawings that show a slightly gaveled roof, you know, an angled roof. So. I'm wondering what are we looking at here? |
| 01:26:45.19 | Mr. Rempel | You're looking at basically this it's a low slope roof it's a one in one in twelve So it's not all along the globe. So you're seeing it rendering from above so it looks flat. |
| 01:26:52.21 | Adam East | I'll call all. |
| 01:26:56.58 | Mr. Rempel | That was an, that was an optical illusion of the rendering. This is what it looks like. Oh, it is flat. It's not a flat roof. This is a- It's not? This roof is not flat. Do you see the coursing of the |
| 01:27:09.27 | Richard Graef | No, no, I mean, what I mean is not flat, of course, yeah. And this view is obviously flat, but in the drawings, It has a peak. I'm not sure. |
| 01:27:21.42 | Ms. Miranda | Bye. |
| 01:27:21.44 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 01:27:21.46 | Ms. Miranda | Okay. |
| 01:27:22.30 | Richard Graef | really misunderstanding something. No. |
| 01:27:25.96 | Mr. Rempel | You're just seeing, I don't know, an issue of the rendering, who knows? |
| 01:27:30.87 | Ms. Miranda | Go to the elevation. |
| 01:27:35.12 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:27:35.14 | Mr. Rempel | Yeah. |
| 01:27:35.48 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 01:27:35.51 | Richard Graef | elevation. |
| 01:27:36.34 | Mr. Rempel | So here's the roof. |
| 01:27:37.18 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 01:27:38.90 | Mr. Rempel | Yeah, so it does have an angle. |
| 01:27:40.12 | Richard Graef | It does have a gate. Yeah, it's not hot. |
| 01:27:42.16 | Mr. Rempel | It's not hot. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:27:43.77 | Richard Graef | It's not flat. |
| 01:27:44.03 | Mr. Rempel | Yeah. |
| 01:27:44.26 | Ms. Miranda | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:27:47.70 | Richard Graef | Oh, okay. but the rendering shows it flat. So, okay. |
| 01:27:52.83 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:27:52.84 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:27:52.86 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. |
| 01:27:52.91 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:27:53.03 | Mr. Rempel | All right. |
| 01:27:53.10 | Richard Graef | All right. |
| 01:27:54.70 | Mr. Rempel | right reasonably accurately represents this. We did our best. |
| 01:27:59.71 | Richard Graef | Okay, so, the drawing rules. Correct. |
| 01:28:04.79 | Mr. Rempel | Yes, the hard line building rules over rendering always. |
| 01:28:04.86 | Richard Graef | Yes, we... |
| 01:28:09.38 | Richard Graef | to do that. |
| 01:28:10.23 | Mr. Rempel | As it should be. |
| 01:28:10.38 | Richard Graef | Bye. Okay, that's that question. Um, Mm-hmm. |
| 01:28:22.34 | Richard Graef | Well, I think I'll save the rest of my... comments. I think there are a few little um, missing number or letter references for materials on some of the elevations. but I'm not gonna make a big deal about that. Yeah. Um, So yeah, I'll pass on. Um, on my comments for now. |
| 01:28:48.78 | Kristina Feller | Right, thank you, Commissioner Graff. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 01:28:54.17 | Andrew Junius | no questions at this time, Chair Feller. |
| 01:28:56.65 | Kristina Feller | OK, GREAT. I don't have any further questions for the applicant at this time. So I still note that there's two minutes and one second left for the applicant that they can use after we move on to public comment. So thank you very much for sharing your screen. Let's go ahead and stop share screen at the moment. Thank you for using that for reference. And we're gonna open this up for public comment. So at this time, if any members of the public would like to comment, they can use your hand in the zoom application. OR PRESS STAR 9. on your cell phone. And Cecilia, I'd like to just confirm, if you could confirm to us the written public comments that we have received as of this evening. |
| 01:29:50.21 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I would have to defer to Maria on the public comments because they were coming in very late and they were forwarded by the city to the commission. |
| 01:29:58.26 | Mr. Rempel | but you can ask them for not only reviewing materials, |
| 01:30:03.12 | Kristina Feller | Can somebody mute there? Okay, Mr. Rempel, yeah. Okay, well, I've got you on mute now. I just wanna make sure that we are addressing the public comments that we have received. People have taken the time to write in, and it's a pretty important part of what we do. I believe we had public comment from a Mahoney There's a Dufour letter and those are the two that I have record of if there is anything different Maria or Cecilia if you can let us know So at this time I have one raised hand in the audience. So Mr. Dufour, I've got two. Mr. Dufour, you had your hand raised first. If you could unmute yourself, share your screen. You'll have three minutes for public comment and welcome. |
| 01:30:54.93 | Mr. Dufour | Great, thank you. Can you hear me? |
| 01:30:56.51 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 01:30:57.96 | Mr. Dufour | Can you see me on screen? I don't see my cell phone there. |
| 01:31:00.49 | Kristina Feller | We can. |
| 01:31:01.22 | Mr. Dufour | Okay, great. Would you allow me to share my screen, please? |
| 01:31:04.78 | Kristina Feller | Yes, Maria, could you please assistant Mr. Dufour? Just a moment. Okay, you are now co-host, so you should be able to share your screen. And you have three minutes for comments. |
| 01:31:16.95 | Andrew Junius | minutes. |
| 01:31:20.09 | Mr. Dufour | All right, please let me know when you can see my screen. |
| 01:31:22.33 | Kristina Feller | We can see it. |
| 01:31:23.04 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:31:23.71 | Mr. Dufour | Okay, thank you. So here's an illustration of my view impact from my patio area. This is also the view impact throughout my yard in different walkways. Patios are called primary views and the view regulations and walkways are secondary views. This is a very important part of my house. My house is 935 square feet. It is the actual smallest house on the block. I live here with three people. My yard is pretty important. I spend a lot of time there. I know if anyone on this call can attest to that. Here's the area that's affected. So I'm getting a complete view lost right here, just by this small race in the back of the building. Um, WHEN THEY SAY CHECK MY NOTES. I'm not asking for a panoramic view. You know, if they put a chimney up here, you know, that would not be great, but I would accept it. We're talking about blowing out my view completely. Going on to this next one. I just want to, I'm sure you guys are familiar with these, but I just want to remind folks, you know, the regs are some minor loss of view, maybe consistent with this policy, if necessary to protect property, right. And finally, this project has an ADU and it's my understanding that accessory dwelling units shall not block our structure primary views. |
| 01:32:10.34 | Ms. Miranda | Yeah. |
| 01:32:42.34 | Mr. Dufour | So I'm going to focus on the second one if necessary to protect property, right? So please keep this in mind as I move to the next slide. So here's the proposed development. So what I'm asking for is about it. 12 inch 16 inch reduction in this ridge line uh tim is talking about installation so on and so forth i look through the plans there's no identification of the height of this roof i mean my interpretation from looking at the drawing is that this is quite a tall roof it's at least substantially bigger than down here um it slopes downward so down here is lower i don't really understand why this element cannot be lowered to not blow out my view. You know, I don't think I'm in pidgey. down here is lower. I don't really understand why this element cannot be lowered to not blow out my view. You know, I don't think I've been pitching on anybody's property rights. You can still build this extra extra two store unit. You can still build this three store unit, including a study. You can have the car lift. Sorry, my cat's sitting in the way. You could do all the things that he wants to do. I'm just asking for this edit to the ridge line of |
| 01:33:42.36 | Andrew Junius | RU. |
| 01:33:43.05 | Mr. Dufour | I think that this is a pretty reasonable request considering all the things that the applicants are able to build here. I'm. You know, this is really unchanged, this view impact from the last iteration. I shared my photos before, it really hasn't changed. At the prior meetings, council person seemed to be acknowledged that I had these substantial view impacts, yet they hadn't changed. So I don't really understand why the discussion would change at the 11th hour. Um, Yeah, so, you know, Thanks for listening to me. Actually, one other thing I want to mention, I just learned about the pitosporum trees today. I'm very familiar with pitosporum trees. They grow very fast. They grow quite large. Given the history with the fig tree in front of this property, I have some serious qualms about there being a row of pitosporum trees across it there that they're supposedly going to maintain. So yeah, I hope you guys will consider these things. I know this has been going on for a long time. You know, we wouldn't be engaged in going to these extensive meetings if it wasn't a big deal to us. And you know, frankly, this is really the applicant's responsibility to get these things correct. It's not ours. It's not our fault it's lasting this long. |
| 01:34:45.67 | Patrick Murphy | Thank you. |
| 01:34:46.33 | Ms. Miranda | It was. |
| 01:34:55.66 | Mr. Dufour | So that's all I have to say. Thank you. |
| 01:34:57.84 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. Dupour. Thank you. The next public comment I have is from Patrick Murphy. Welcome this evening. If you could unmute yourself and share your screen. And Maria, if we could reset the timer clock for three minutes. Perfect. Welcome, Mr. Murphy. |
| 01:35:15.81 | Patrick Murphy | Hello, can you hear me? |
| 01:35:17.16 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 01:35:18.16 | Patrick Murphy | Okay, let me also share my screen. This is a |
| 01:35:22.24 | Kristina Feller | There's a comment. |
| 01:35:22.26 | Patrick Murphy | There's a comment. |
| 01:35:23.26 | Kristina Feller | Hold on, Maria, please. |
| 01:35:24.91 | Mary Wagner | I hear you. Thank you. |
| 01:35:25.53 | Patrick Murphy | I need to share. |
| 01:35:26.97 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:35:27.00 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Co-host there you go. You should be able to share now. |
| 01:35:36.79 | Patrick Murphy | Okay, can you see this? Talk to you again. Okay, this is a document that we sent on... April 13th. It didn't seem to make it into the packet or any, which is actually not the first time this has actually happened. We've actually written a document and it's never shown up. It's never been included. No one, nobody seems to be aware of it. So anyway. Here it is. This was sent on April 13th to watch this. And we're talking about the view impact from our property. Since the victory has been actually removed, we can actually see this much more clearly. and I'll show you two photographs. One is from our master bedroom. And I think the applicant said they were impinging six inches, which is either this, but practically it's a lot more than that. And this is the view from our porch. So it's not insignificant. And as our fourth meeting is the fourth time we've actually met to actually talk about this and we've shown up, or our Archmartini Quinn, my wife has, and we've spoken about this. I think the applicant's shown a fairly cavalier approach to the to the overall permit app, the overall process. So I would like to see that there's some oversight and checks and also conditions to actually make sure that the applicant bills exactly what they get actually approved for. and actually nothing more than that. That's it for me. Thank you very much. |
| 01:37:20.25 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. Murphy. If we could stop sharing screen there. Perfect. Thank you. |
| 01:37:30.85 | Maria | And Chair Feller, I would like to let you know that I received this late mail around 4.55. I quickly uploaded it to Grannicus and I forwarded it to the commission at 5.30 so I did make it to public comment. And this was actually the first time that I received it, Patrick, I'm sorry. I guess Cecilia didn't forward it to me when we did send it, so I apologize. |
| 01:37:31.02 | Kristina Feller | I'm sorry. |
| 01:37:54.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Maria, for clarifying that. And Mr. Murphy, thank you for taking the time to write in. as I would thank any of the other neighborhood and community members that did so as well and who are here this evening. I'm looking for any other raised hands at this time for public comment. Seeing none, I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment. So, um, Mr. Rempel, if you would like to use your two minutes at this time for any final thoughts, you can go ahead and do so. Let's see if there we go. Maria, there we go. |
| 01:38:39.78 | Mr. Rempel | Thank you. Hi. I do appreciate the the concerns that my neighbors have. I've appreciated it from the beginning. We're trying to do a sustainable building, which means, yeah, sure. If we scraped this whole building and built a brand new unaffordable house, which means we wouldn't be able to stay here, scratch it down to the foundations. I could probably build a new building into the hill that had a flat roof that would preserve Mr. DuPour's view and everything that would be hunky-dory, but I wouldn't be able to stay here. We're able to stay here because we're able to modify an existing building. It's a beautiful old building, even though it has some aches and pains. And we're trying to restore it. not throw it away not let it be part of that unsustainable aspect of our lives and to do so it requires a few compromises and one of them is that Mr. Murphy does lose a two by six worth to the bottom of his view of the bay and Mr. Dufour as well and that from the Mr. Dufour's yard he's can still see Angel Island he still has his his longest view out that way, but he's not gonna see the water from there. He has other parts of his home where he can still enjoy the bay. I'm sorry about that, but I think it's, It's a compromise that we've done from the get go to keep the building as low as possible. And we look forward to hearing your opinions on this. Thank you. And we're also willing if the commissioner so deem it to, to keep the building as low as possible. We'd be happy to come back in if we could receive some sort of tacit approval of the project now. We'd be happy to come back in and give an updated presentation of a stucco, a finish, etc., which we believe the entire planning commission would be happy with. What we're trying not to do is be in this limbo for submittal for a building permit. And we can certainly develop a very rich palette for the stuff of people are familiar with any buildings I've done in the past. I've won design awards, both national and international. And I believe we can come up with a pretty nice exterior finish that'll satisfy the planning commission. |
| 01:40:52.77 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, let's go ahead and bring this back up to our virtual dais here for deliberations. I'm not sure. Commissioner Luxenberg, would you like to start us off? |
| 01:41:09.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure. Well, at a minimum, I think the exterior elevation needs to be improved. I think we could write a condition that says that they, that it's approved subject to submit all the final details whether it's stucco or wood siding or whatever, we could draft a condition that says they need to come back for the pallet of approval of pallet of materials in more detail than they have. I think that that |
| 01:41:45.95 | Ms. Miranda | Yeah. |
| 01:41:47.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's a minimum, that's sort of a given. But that doesn't hold up the project. I think that we need to protect the trees on the property and the abutting property. And we need to fix those conditions. I think we need conditions from Marin fire, which if we don't have them, then we should, we should uh get them from uh another project because they they use the same conditions all the time but i am a little concerned and want to note that we we have consultants such as cecilia i think we want to make it incumbent upon the consultants to talk to cdd and get the information about the abutter comments the marine fire comments public works works that, you know, they're getting paid to do this. They need to make that happen. I'm a little dismayed that this has gone this long. We have a lot of consultants that they're not checking with CCD or not prepared when they come in here. So I make that comment with respect to Cecilia, but I think that needs to change. I think that the other comments that are substantive going back to my list, Landscaping is an issue. I agree that if the plants grow up again, like the fig tree, that's gonna be a problem. So the landscaping should be designed to not go above a certain height, although they wouldn't want that anyways, it would block the windows. So I agree that that needs to happen. And, |
| 01:43:34.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:43:41.88 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm just looking at my list. I apologize for a second here. |
| 01:43:44.86 | Andrew Junius | Okay, that's all right. |
| 01:43:45.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sorry. I think that the big treaty is to be removed before building permanent is issued. So I have suggested language for the conditions when we get to the point of a motion or whatever we want to do on specific language. I wish that we could somehow in the future, get these conditions written in advance of these meetings. And if we have them, we can send it off and get, get our concerns and have language, but they're not doing it on the fly for the future. But for this one, I think we have to do it here. |
| 01:44:10.94 | Ms. Miranda | Bye. |
| 01:44:18.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | uh... i don't have an issue with the bill room uh... if there's a way on the back side to reduce that by six inches or something that we might be able to condition it so that the back side of that roof comes down six inches to help with that view that would be helpful i do think that to get the height of the study has come down to uh... about what's minim needed. If there's going to be that study there. I mean, I was a little concerned that the applicant just said that they have to live there. I mean, they could build the building and back, move into that and build the front. I don't think construction scheduling is our concern. I do think that any building that's built is going to be there a long time so it's important to get it right not not worry about you know I mean we could have dropped it a few inches if we I'm not saying they should have to move out to build the building but I'm just saying that you know if we can the trade-off then is well maybe you don't have as high a ceiling as you would have had if you could dig farther into the ground. So maybe something on the backside, the barrel roof, I'm not sure it can go down much more. Anyway, so those are my thoughts at the moment. I think I'll have specific language when we get to that. Thank you, Joe. |
| 01:45:37.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, thank you. Commissioner Graff? |
| 01:45:42.52 | Richard Graef | Um, thank you, chair fellow. Pardon me. Um, Ah. I still have the same kind of concerns with the study. building. Yeah. it does still seem pretty plain for me. I appreciate what can be done with the work of the work or hand applied stucco, it can be a very nice surface. And so I think that that's I'm less concerned about the surface than I was before. However, I still feel that it's a relatively large volume and very simple compared to the structure that it sort of intersects. And, Um, I feel like those two parts are really not married yet. And I'm not quite sure how one might do that. I think the the barrel vault, the study, uh, addition there, maybe we've had Um, you know, another window or two in it or something to break that surface. Maybe there's some other Hmm. device. I'm just kind of grasping for possibilities here. Um... Also, this is sort of picky, but the front face of that the study building, the carport, You've got this kind of large, kind of massive Um, uh, sturdy looking, um, piece of architecture But it's. got this little skinny wall holding it up and I'm sure that structurally it will hold it up. It feels to me like it, uh, about wall. bills just It's like, It's like it's almost not there when you get down to lower level. It's just really odd. Um, The barrel roof, I'm getting used to it. I can't. |
| 01:48:02.31 | Ms. Miranda | Yeah. |
| 01:48:08.86 | Richard Graef | really make that much of an argument against it anymore. If I was looking at the elevations And I think actually one could make a big proof there. In fact, without even dropping the plate height inside. But... You know, that's... I mean, the designer needs to have some freedom to articulate his building. So Um, I'm just wishing that that kind of a big chunk of studio Um, were a little bit more articulated, a little finer piece because there's a lot of details surrounding it. in the rest of the building. Um, you know, surfaces and openings and things like that. I just, those are my main thoughts. The view issue, I think we kind of went through that last time. Um, I don't think there's any real significant view impairments Um, since the applicant has brought the roofs down, I think as much as he could. Um, the Yeah, the view from the patio, I did manage last week. last time around. to hobble up, you know, halfway up the pathway there. a little beyond where those chairs were. And I, There was still a water view, you know, maybe it's because I was standing. but from standing in the guard, you could still see the water. Sitting, of course, you would not be able to sit. but for clearly from up on, from the house itself There's really no significant new blockage. Um, Uh... |
| 01:50:16.55 | Dan | Uh, |
| 01:50:18.90 | Richard Graef | I don't know, the hedge, the pitosporum hedge in the front of the Um, study I think perhaps that's something that we might want to condition, you know, that that has to be kept trim Um, I understand, yeah, that stuff grows like a weed. But it's, you know, it does the job. It will cover a lot of that. structure. Anyway. That's my two cents. Thank you. |
| 01:50:48.46 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you very much. |
| 01:50:50.08 | Richard Graef | Maybe it was more than two cents. |
| 01:50:53.66 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Osan. |
| 01:50:57.20 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller and... my other commissioners, fellow commissioners have already spoken. I, I do think this project has been around a while and I do sympathize with the applicant. I do understand your frustration. I think there has been some efforts now with the neighbors lately. I still think I am, going to have a hard time with Finding four. in particular and to I think the applicant's point, you are correct. I mean, the code does not guarantee an unobstructed view and definitely appreciate what the Mahoney's are saying as well and I think that's where the difference is coming. from what I'm seeing and how I'm interpreting and my point of view is yes, there's definitely some blockage of course from their presentation as well. And there is some loss, but it is partial loss. They still have the advantage the, where their home is placed that they're not losing their entire water view, partial is frustrating for sure, but there's definitely still is view in the way it's designed for the Mahoney's, but I I don't. Be all. about an entire, you know, complete water view. I mean, |
| 01:52:21.22 | Ms. Miranda | I mean, |
| 01:52:23.16 | Nastassya Saad | Sausalito is, this is why people want to live here. It's our natural feature. So it's hard to justify. And I realize I'm sticking with a main thing I think neighbor's concern, the Dufour's, but it just seems to have a complete loss of your water view. Cause I two went up there and I might be smaller than you, shorter than you, Richard, but it looks obstructive to the entire water view. So I'm having concerns around that. And if, Nick Duford articulated it better than I. And if it's not that barrel roof and I can look at the drawings, if it's more of that ridge line, I'm just really hoping that the applicant will um, look to make that concession because I do think that You are asking for a lot. It is all within your right. I don't think we're really sticking on any other made point from any of the other building that you'd like to do. I think you did a great job on the privacy now with those other suggestions, the way the windows are oriented on the additional, living space in their rear yard. With all of that addition, I feel like one last concession may be of value to your neighborhood, to your home and to your surroundings. So that's my main sticking point. I agree. I mean, as both Commissioner Luxembourg and Commissioner Graff are saying, I would support if that's a condition to see some of the the facade, if there's a presentation in the future about what that facade may actually look like. I think some type of addition to that mass that is more visually impactful would be great. I don't know in terms if we condition for those, the hedges that are to be planted, how that's enforced. So that might just be a general question I have, but I would definitely, I would support that condition given the way the, the fig tree was allowed to over that maybe it is worth that condition. I'm just as a point of clarification down the line, we can figure out how is that enforced. but that's where I am at right now, Chair Beller. |
| 01:54:54.63 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, thank you, Commissioner Saad. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 01:54:58.97 | Andrew Junius | Sure, Feller. I really want to start out by saying it's, I think it's important for the commission to vote on this project tonight. We've had enough hearings that applicant here has been through a lot. And, For a lot of reasons, it's time to vote. So I hope at the end of this, somebody is gonna make a motion and log with the vote and this project can move forward because this really has been enough. I, |
| 01:55:20.05 | Ms. Miranda | Bye. |
| 01:55:21.53 | Andrew Junius | Frankly, you know, there have been a lot of issues with the plans and there's some been detailed questions and I, you know, I do think the applicant bears some responsibility for some of the. confusion coming down the pipe here, Overall, my impression is that the applicant has made an extraordinary effort to fit his wife's project into this space with absolutely the most minimal view impacts POSSIBLE. So it's hard for me to understand how anybody would really see what we've seen and consider forcing the developer, the owner here to do more. I certainly won't support any further reduction in height to this building. a lot more could have been proposed here. I would have probably supported a larger building. There's a massive structure directly next door. This applicant has worked hard to build, to design, I think a very sensitive project to preserve the existing views. I don't really see any view blockage that is meaningful to me from these perspectives. So I think there's a difference of opinion on the commission here. I think it's a fine project. I think that the applicant has done has been more than patient with the city, has been trying to work with the neighbors, change is difficult. But this change is something I think the neighborhood should be absolutely ecstatic about that somebody's not gonna propose something much more massive like the building next door. The height limit here is 30 or 40 feet. and the building here is less than 15 feet. This is to me and has been since I saw the project for the first time, a relatively straightforward Um, effort. for the property owner to basically rebuild what's already there and add to the rear. with virtually no impact on the neighbors. So I'm, I'm, Uh, That's where I stand on the view issue. I somewhat agree with the with Commissioner Graff and Commissioner Luxembourg on the front of the building. That said, I'm not an architect. And if they think this is going to work out, and I do believe I've seen some fine stuff of applications that would would look good. I'm not sure how we can craft a, you know, often jurisdictions will encourage their staff to work with the applicant going forward to advance a design. I'm not sure we want to do that at this point. And I'm also not sure we want to bring them back. in the future. Um, I'm happy with the design as it stands. with every aspect of it. So I, but I really do implore the commission to vote on this project this evening. Thank you, AAA. |
| 01:58:01.22 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Vice Chair Junius. Um, I have a couple of comments that I'd like to make as well. I just wanted to check in with Sergio very quickly to see if he had time to research and we're not going to be the issue about the use, the use, the primary use of the conveyance system, which is a Klaus product. |
| 01:58:23.87 | Sergio Rudin | So with respect to that, If the lift is there because it is necessary to meet one of the city's parking standards, I have seen other jurisdictions impose conditions of approval that basically prohibit uses that would conflict with that. That being said, the city's ability to enforce this kind of restriction with respect to storage, it would be very difficult. You know, it's not like the city has a, you know, general practice of going into, you know, garages and check for conditions. And frankly, it'd be difficult to do without a warrant. And I think the applicant did raise some concerns about, you know, the fact that the city doesn't, generally do that sort of thing for other garages and for other projects. So You know, even though I think that sort of condition is likely legal, I think that it would be very difficult to enforce. So I would encourage the commission to think about the utility of doing something like that. |
| 01:59:23.60 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, So back to sort of my overall thoughts, I mean, going from macro to micro, I think Yes, we've heard this project a number of times, but I also feel pretty strongly that a lot of that would have been, not as necessary had we been provided proper information and correct information. And there was a little more cooperation between the applicant and the commission and the applicant and the neighbors, but we are where we are right now. And, um, we have to bring this to some sort of closure I'm a little underwhelmed with the project But, you know, focused mainly on the findings, there's really only one that is a little bit more difficult for me to make. And that is, you know, sort of the aesthetic and how it fits in with the neighborhood based on what we understand about the materials so far but I think we can get around that. um, I think that we need to focus, my thoughts are we need to focus a little more on how we condition moving this project forward. Because I think that is the opportunity to make sure that they're actually, is consistency and that what is potentially built is what is documented and there aren't changes or confusion or gray areas or things like that, because I think, you know, We've seen chronically that there's been some problems particular application with the clarity of what is really going on. So I'm, I, I agree Vice Chair Junius, we need to do something here. I don't think that The applicant has made it very easy on us to do that, and that's where the conditions come in. And I would really like to focus more on the conditions at this point and heavily condition anything we do here. Um, I do want to address the members of the public and particularly the neighbors here. You have been very consistent and I thank you for that. I appreciate you being part of this process. And as I actually said in two, two sessions ago. you know, there is no such thing as a protected view. a 100% fully protected view. None of us here in Sausalito have that. There's always room and potential for impact to views. But that being said, completely destroying views is not necessarily currently what is envisaged in in our municipal code. and I think that I appreciate the photographs that Mr. Murphy shared with us. And I don't think there are significant impacts. to be able to enjoy the majority of your view. It is impacted slightly, but it is not impacted significantly. Mr. Dufour, certainly the area from your patio garden area is going to be obstructed. that is not connected to to your home and I have looked and read and tried every which way to figure out a way to possibly protect that but I'm not sure that That is really the intent and spirit of the code. And I find that unfortunate, but I appreciate all your time and effort of being here and writing in and being clear about what your concerns are I do appreciate your comment about the pitosporum and I do agree that that is something that we can condition as well. to ensure that any of that vegetation is maintained below the roof line. And I think that that's important here. So that's sort of where I fall. fairly underwhelmed, but I think we have to move this forward and focus on the conditions. And, um, I think perhaps Cecilia, we might ask you to even get the conditions up on up on the screen because I believe As part of our deliberation here, I know Commissioner Luxenberg has some ideas about language or additional comments. Um, Kusher Graff, you've mentioned that Kusher saw it as well. Certainly I have, and I believe Vice Chair Junius has agreed that there might be some room to focus on some of that language there. So perhaps that should be our next step here. Yes, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:04:27.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I throw out an idea? Cause in order to move this ahead, I think we should do, I appreciate what commissioner Junius said about needing to address this tonight. I appreciate the comments of the other commissioners. We will, I think we should go through the conditions as you're saying and draft something, but I want to throw out an idea. I think we, if we can move this ahead tonight, the public hearing is closed. So we keep it closed, but we vote to approve with conditions subject to it coming back to the next meeting so we can see those conditions. Cause I'm a little worried about trying to draft conditions from the dias without actually having seen them. So we could vote to go ahead. It's subject to seeing it one, like a second read at the next meeting. I don't know the mechanics of that. Maybe Sergio can help with that. But so in my mind, there's going to be three steps here. We'll draft some conditions tonight, which is what we want. We, they write them up, we vote to, we take a vote on it. And then at the next meeting, we, if there are mistakes, we correct them. And then the final thing happens at the next meeting, but we don't open the public hearing back up. And then it's clear the applicant has agreed that they're willing to come back on the facade. So one of the conditions will be after they've addressed the concern, they come up with a more detailed facade at a future meeting. And that's one of the conditions that doesn't change the approval. It just means that the materials or whatever would have. So we would have a meeting in the future where they show us the details that these plans clearly don't have. And we write these conditions the best we can tonight and see it at the next meeting. Is that something that I'm asking Sergio that works mechanically? before we do the webinar. |
| 02:06:27.42 | Sergio Rudin | I think... Thank you. mechanically that would be very difficult because you would be voting to approve the project now and then I don't know how you would be going back to reconsider your prior decision. You know, it would be probably most appropriate for you to, you know, take your best you know, deliberation and consensus and come up with the conditions tonight. You know, unfortunately, I think we're in the scenario where you want to approve with the conditions that you are aware of. Um, you know, and that you decide on tonight. Yeah. |
| 02:07:06.18 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 02:07:06.30 | Sergio Rudin | um, |
| 02:07:06.65 | Kristina Feller | Can we use a consent calendar for a mechanism to allow the commission to have an opportunity to actually read the conditions after we sort of |
| 02:07:22.47 | Sergio Rudin | you |
| 02:07:22.84 | Kristina Feller | expound on them this evening. |
| 02:07:25.42 | Sergio Rudin | Short answer, no, because it's acting at another meeting. Um... And secondly, I think that it makes sense for us to, if we can, say put the conditions up on a screen so that before you vote, you can read them tonight. And that is typically what most agencies do. You know, you wanna be certain as to what you are voting on, what the conditions are, you know, that you're comfortable prior to your vote of yes, because you know, deferring the certainty it's sort of, makes unclear whether or not you've actually voted to approve this evening Um, You know, it's not, |
| 02:08:07.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:08:08.05 | Sergio Rudin | It is just not something that is done. |
| 02:08:10.22 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:08:10.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 02:08:10.95 | Kristina Feller | But, |
| 02:08:11.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think. Do we have to approve this? Can we approve? Let me just ask this question as a follow up to that. Chair fellow, I apologize for interrupting, but can we, could we draft it all tonight? And then don't reopen the public hearing and approve it at the next meeting, because as you've seen, there are so, we need conditions from Marin fire. There's no way a project of this size can't have conditions. So we're going to be right in |
| 02:08:13.19 | Andrew Junius | Bye. Hold on. |
| 02:08:36.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | very, very detailed we're gonna spend two hours trying to write these things. This is crazy. I mean, this shouldn't, this shouldn't happen by the way for the future. but I mean how do we is there any reason we can't just approve it at the next meeting |
| 02:08:51.65 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:08:52.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | without opening the hearing again. |
| 02:08:54.60 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Junius, do you want to weigh in here? |
| 02:08:57.37 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. On the Marin Fire, I mean, those appear to be just standard conditions. I think we can just, I agree to put in the standard conditions. I'm not at all concerned about that. With respect to the design, I do believe that we could spend the next few minutes talking about, you know, direction to, you know, we've got an architect, Commissioner Graff. you know articulate What type of Um, you know, materiality differences and things that we'd like to see. And because it really, you know, Bye. I just think it's, The architect still should design it for, cause it's his house, right? And it's his property. And the concern has been is to monolithic block of stucco with two small windows. if you know if the direction is to make two or three different materiality changes with some additional design detail that would break up the massing such that it doesn't look like a flat. You know, I think the architect can do something with that. And then we should just move on. I tend to agree with the city attorney If we vote on it tonight, it's got to be done. We could also, there are some jurisdictions that occasionally |
| 02:10:00.43 | Ms. Miranda | We could all... |
| 02:10:04.21 | Andrew Junius | will bring a project back in the future for some type of an informational hearing if we just want to see how it's going. But the project's already approved at that point. It really is just to keep us posted. So it's a bit of a binary situation. If we vote tonight, which I really didn't think we should and we must, we've got to get it all straight out. |
| 02:10:22.44 | Kristina Feller | So one idea regarding the design specifically that we have utilized this before, is to assign two commissioners to separately as a working group work with the applicant and we give them our proxy from the commission to approve colors, textures, material. I am totally willing to do that. AND, YOU KNOW, I see Commissioner Graff has his hands up. I don't know if that's because you're volunteering to be one of those commissioners, which I'm hoping you are. But maybe you have a comment or question about that as well. |
| 02:11:02.18 | Richard Graef | Well, my hand was up before you made your suggestion, it was up to make... Thank you. pretty much the very same suggestion. is that there have been times in the past when There were some ambiguities about color or finish or some kind of level of detail like that that Nobody could come up with words to condition. And it just, you know, in an effort to move the project ahead, Um, Um, they're there was an opportunity for somebody, a commissioner or a couple of the commissioners to look at Um, proposed materials or colors or whatever. later on down the line. And, and be able to pass on that. So I think that's a that's a good way that we can do this. If it would expedite things, yeah. |
| 02:12:02.71 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:12:06.74 | Kristina Feller | Well, in the interest of time, because we do have two additional hearings this evening, I'd like to move this along and Cecilia, |
| 02:12:11.77 | Richard Graef | And then, you know, the |
| 02:12:11.79 | Andrew Junius | Thanks. |
| 02:12:11.85 | Richard Graef | All right. |
| 02:12:12.06 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:12:16.18 | Kristina Feller | I'm still hoping you might have conditions that we can put up on the screen. So as she's doing that, Commissioner Luxembourg, back to your question point in terms of process, which I like your suggestions and ideas. Let's get through the conditions here. we do need to take action this evening. And then if we can have further discussion as a commission here about everyone's comfort level with, um, my assigning a working group of two to work with the applicant on the finishes. And we can define exactly what it is we should be looking at and what the scope of that is. |
| 02:13:02.26 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I am happy to do that Chair Feller. Would you like me to pull those up now? Thank you. |
| 02:13:05.82 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF And yes, Commissioner Buxton Burke, |
| 02:13:09.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think that's a good approach. I agree that having a committee later on that can look at this is where it makes sense. I would volunteer to work on that. If you would want me to do that. And I think commissioner has definitively worked on that because he's an architect, but I think we can, I have some written out some language so we can get the stuff that I talked about earlier. I will throw out another idea which is with regard to pulling the other the Marin fire and some of the language that I haven't drafted because it's coming up tonight that we might want to take a pause in this thing like we did last time because of technical reasons. After we do a little bit of this, let Cecilia to go write some of this while we're doing this and take item 6D up, get that one out of the way and then she'll come back with actual language. just so that we're not trying to fully write this from the doc. |
| 02:14:14.22 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Commissioner Luxenberg, we need to address this now. We have two other items on our docket this evening. So let's get through these as expeditiously and concisely as we possibly can. |
| 02:14:19.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | whether I'm not. |
| 02:14:28.14 | Kristina Feller | I'll let you take the first stab at these. |
| 02:14:31.11 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. Let's go back up to, are you going to edit this in real time? |
| 02:14:31.46 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:14:38.14 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Oh, yes, I am. |
| 02:14:38.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, I Thank you. Okay, so go back up to the top of, you know, the March 5th, change that to April 12th. |
| 02:14:39.39 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. |
| 02:14:58.72 | Kristina Feller | All right, let's keep going. |
| 02:15:00.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, next one is... Um... |
| 02:15:06.60 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | You mentioned the fig tree. |
| 02:15:08.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, condition three, uh, Um, I want to talk about the language here, change that to April 12. but the, uh, uh, I don't know what this means here. I think the architect I'm still not sure what we were trying to do here. Usually we say it must be built for the set of plans, but we don't, there's going to be a, we have to write this condition for this committee that the plan will be revised. And then the plan, those plans will be submitted to the bill. I'm not sure what's the intent. |
| 02:15:51.13 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:15:51.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:15:52.75 | Kristina Feller | I think that we're gonna edit as much of this in real time here. I would ask our city attorneys and CDD director to also take notes here. to make sure that this is correct. with item number three, Obviously it needs to, the full set of plans have to match. But if I recall here, we've gotten a couple of clarifications since those plans. for this evening's hearing. So it has to ensure that what was presented here this evening is also memorialized here somehow, Cecilia. So I'm hoping- |
| 02:16:28.32 | Andrew Junius | All of them. |
| 02:16:28.66 | Kristina Feller | All. Thank you. |
| 02:16:34.77 | Kristina Feller | please. We're in the midst of deliberations, Mr. Rumpel. This is not a time to chime in. that's a good question. |
| 02:16:43.83 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Would as modified at the hearings suffice or do we need a city attorney comment? |
| 02:16:48.72 | Kristina Feller | Well, they can certainly comment, but I'd like to keep going here. Yeah. |
| 02:16:52.99 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Bye. |
| 02:16:53.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Three, yeah, three, hold a vans three, because it doesn't make sense. Number four, front yard landscaping shell, not include trees or large shrubs. All landscaping must be kept trim below the level of windows, low below windows, something like that. |
| 02:17:19.62 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. below the sill. Perfect. |
| 02:17:22.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | below the cell for the study window. at all times. |
| 02:17:35.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, number five, replace it with the following. A building permit will not be issued until the existing fig tree located within the front yard is removed. |
| 02:17:56.04 | Kristina Feller | And I would just- |
| 02:17:56.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, no, a building permit will not be issued. I'm not prior to obtaining. It's not in the applicant's view. It's in the building commissioners, building inspectors. |
| 02:18:19.61 | Kristina Feller | And I would just hope this includes Commissioner Luxenberg, the entire stump as well, big trees do grow back. |
| 02:18:19.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I just hope this includes- |
| 02:18:26.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | OK, existing fig tree and its stump. |
| 02:18:31.14 | Richard Graef | Pig is not a proper noun. |
| 02:18:37.97 | Richard Graef | Okay. |
| 02:18:38.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. and fig tree and stum. Yep. |
| 02:18:46.31 | Kristina Feller | Okay, what do you have next? |
| 02:18:47.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, no, no, no, no, no. Six. Prior to the, to the issue, I assume that prior to the issue is an occupancy program. with the exception occupancy permanence, though the word building, Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:19:03.33 | Andrew Junius | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:19:03.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. And then with the exception at the end shall be submitted per plant with the exception of the hedge adjacent to four, I guess it's 11 or 10, 411. 411. |
| 02:19:19.92 | Andrew Junius | 4'11". |
| 02:19:21.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | 11 Main Street shall be installed prior to any construction. |
| 02:19:40.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | THE END OF |
| 02:19:40.83 | Andrew Junius | THAT WE ARE IN THE BUSINESS. |
| 02:19:41.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.67 | Kristina Feller | Well, and I would say that that |
| 02:19:44.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I would say that |
| 02:19:45.64 | Kristina Feller | that landscape between 411 main and this property needs to be maintained. |
| 02:19:52.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Um... |
| 02:19:53.39 | Kristina Feller | IT NEEDS TO BE KEPT ALIVE. |
| 02:20:12.67 | Kristina Feller | All right, what else do you have, Commissioner? |
| 02:20:13.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Going back to six, we still don't have, with the exception of the plant material located at the rear of the project site, which shall be installed prior to the construction. |
| 02:20:30.21 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Do you want the plant material installed prior to construction or not after? |
| 02:20:34.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I mean, you said that the voters need to hedge up before they start work. So that's what I'm trying to... Adios. |
| 02:20:42.75 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay, if you install it prior to construction, it's more than likely to get damaged. |
| 02:20:47.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I know that, but that's, that you said, that's what your intent was before. I'm just going with what you said earlier in the safety |
| 02:20:54.29 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. |
| 02:20:55.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, I don't know. Why are we accepting that? |
| 02:20:58.61 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. |
| 02:21:02.24 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm sorry, commissioner, how did you want number six to read? |
| 02:21:04.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Prior to the issuance and obviously all landscaping a a which will be installed submitted according to plan period. We know with the exception of plant material located adjacent to 411 Main Street. Um, with the adjacent plan material installed at 411 Main Street, which shall be installed prior to the start of construction and unprotected. throughout construction. |
| 02:21:46.06 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's keep moving on. |
| 02:21:48.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, okay, and then and And then you can take out the seven you just added. |
| 02:21:55.14 | Kristina Feller | Let's just keep going. It's fine. |
| 02:21:57.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I know it's hard to do this from the, from Diane's chair. Okay, number 15. I'm just gonna suggest the following. So you can start, just start typing at the number 15. 15. Applicant shall submit. |
| 02:22:23.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just start to leave that for me. Ableton shall submit a tree protection program for all onsite trees comma. and trees on a budding properties adjacent to the property line, comma, by a licensed arborist, comma, to be reviewed by CDD staff with the plans submitted for a building permit. the building permit, so not be issued. until the tree protection program as have been approved by CDD. |
| 02:23:13.02 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm sorry, building permit shall not. |
| 02:23:15.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | building permit shall not be issued until the tree protection program has been approved by CDD. |
| 02:23:37.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, and then there's a renumbering problem on, so 17, if you get the next 16, it should be 17. |
| 02:23:49.70 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I can change that when the meeting is back. |
| 02:23:51.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | later okay and then go to the advisory number eight |
| 02:23:57.77 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | And I can do that as well. I have a note to do that and I can take care of that. |
| 02:24:01.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, and then we need to draft this. this thing about a committee a working group that uh that the uh submission uh so i don't know where you want to put that probably off the top where the plan discussion was. keep going back up to like, whatever, three years. Yeah. Um, I can attempt to write something and others can amend this, but leave the what's there for now. Just start at number three again. We'll put in a new number three or something. Start at the beginning of number three. That's good. Okay. Final elevation drawings. shall be submitted. uh... It shall be reviewed by |
| 02:24:59.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | a Planning Commission working group and Seeing the to ensure that the facade. has requisite detailing and design |
| 02:25:17.66 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm sorry, has what kind of detailing? |
| 02:25:18.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Requisite detailing, detailing. uh, and design. to reflect the buildings on site and the neighborhood. |
| 02:25:37.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And we can talk, I mean, I'm trying to write this for me. |
| 02:25:40.91 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I think to help you out here, Commissioner Luxembourg, part of that working group is to also |
| 02:25:41.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I'm going to go. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:25:47.25 | Kristina Feller | approve material samples. |
| 02:25:51.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, yeah, that would be good. |
| 02:25:53.45 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 02:25:54.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So. |
| 02:25:54.26 | Kristina Feller | So. |
| 02:25:55.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And materials, let's see. |
| 02:25:55.57 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:25:58.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We were right to ensure. I would just put a new sentence with that. The working group will look at material samples as part of that review. |
| 02:26:13.95 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. |
| 02:26:15.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:26:15.37 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | So I have that in number three. Does that work for number three to ensure facade materials? |
| 02:26:15.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:26:20.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. ensure that the facade materials uh, have have the Yeah. Okay. Oh. And then uh, Go down below, I just want to make sure. uh, uh, Scroll down to about after public works and stuff. we need to add in conditions for Marin fire at a minimum about sprinklers. And so the entire standard Marin fire conditions So while we're talking, you have maybe Dan can look at other projects that we have approved in the past and bring up, you know, a combination of because they're not all standard. There are different, but see if we can make that. |
| 02:27:20.24 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Well, I know. |
| 02:27:22.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We have to vote on it tonight. |
| 02:27:22.58 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Right off the board. Commissioner, it's my understanding, and I know that I'm not the first planner on this project, but it's my understanding that A previous planner did receive some fire comments. This was reviewed by fire. and standard conditions were part of their comments, but it's not a condition of approval. |
| 02:27:47.05 | Kristina Feller | So Cecilia, I think what we need to have is include number 45 as conditions of approval. It's Southern Marin Fire District is what we're looking at. and they do have standard conditions. |
| 02:28:00.40 | Sergio Rudin | So I will say that typically with respect to outside fire agencies at other cities and conditions of approval, typically that is verified by the fire agency at the building permit stage. And when we see, Other cities do address this issue by just imposing a condition of approval that says the applicant shall you know, obtain approval. Bye. or shall comply with any conditions of approval imposed by Southern Marin Fire District prior to issuance of building permitting. So that- |
| 02:28:33.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That isn't what we've done though. So I think we need to do what we've typically done. I don't want to create new things for this project. |
| 02:28:38.86 | Kristina Feller | Oh, I don't know. So commissioner Luxenberg again, in the, in the interest of time, I, I don't have two hours to go through every single word here, but what we do need to capture, |
| 02:28:45.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm... |
| 02:28:45.74 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:28:52.02 | Kristina Feller | the overarching issues that you've been so good at raising and ensuring are in here and I think that's what what we're doing here. |
| 02:28:59.66 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 02:28:59.70 | Richard Graef | Oh, yeah. |
| 02:29:00.08 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 02:29:00.35 | Kristina Feller | I would prefer to leave the sin. If it's redundant already, I'd rather it be redundant than not there at all. So let's- |
| 02:29:07.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So she's going to pull, Cecilia, you're going to pull it from another project and put it in the air. And we're going to make sure everything is consistent. You're going to do that. before we go or as we go |
| 02:29:19.52 | Andrew Junius | I think we should be relying on the city attorney's advice, the general condition saying you'll comply with the Southern Marin fire conditions is more than satisfying to me. |
| 02:29:29.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I can't vote for that. Not after what I've seen on other projects. I go out and can't support that. I don't see any reason not to treat this project different than every other project that we've done. It's easy to do. We shouldn't be doing this from the dais, but if we're going to do it, let's do it right. If you want, I will go in and edit this while we're talking and send language that we can put in. |
| 02:29:53.78 | Kristina Feller | No, now's the time. Okay. |
| 02:29:56.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You want me to pull some, I can pull files. I mean, I've got them. Oh, okay. we've got two other ones tonight |
| 02:30:05.85 | Kristina Feller | We do. So can we just agree then Commissioner Luxembourg Again, in the interest of time, I agree with you, this should not be this disorganized coming to the planning commission. However, this is what we have to work with if we can pull and reference one of the other approvals that we've already done or will be doing and that language is in there, then we can ask the planner to copy paste that because we already know that that is correct. Is that sufficient? |
| 02:30:35.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I'm asking Cecilia just to do it right now. |
| 02:30:38.55 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 02:30:38.57 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Commissioner, if I could make a suggestion, if there's any way to take a five minute break, we've got draft standard conditions ready to go and I can pop it in here. If we could take maybe a five minute break, would that be possible? And then I could bring it back to you with the draft conditions. |
| 02:30:53.62 | Kristina Feller | No, we really need to keep moving here. We've got two other items, Cecilia, on the agenda this evening. |
| 02:30:59.41 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | We do have draft conditions ready to go. |
| 02:31:02.41 | Kristina Feller | Okay, get them in there, let's keep going. If you can do that now, great. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have any other items? |
| 02:31:10.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm looking at my list. The other area one was commissioner saw talked about lower, possibly lowering the back roof six inches. I could support possibly lowering the back roof six inches. And we could have a condition to that effect. Do it by condition, we don't need revised plans. |
| 02:31:29.72 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Graff. |
| 02:31:31.89 | Richard Graef | back to the condition about They, um, the materials. Uh, where it says on the facade, I think it needs to say specifically the study facade or because that facade could mean any facade. So, Well, I think we have to be specific. |
| 02:31:53.66 | Kristina Feller | Okay, good point, good point. |
| 02:31:56.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I concur with that. |
| 02:31:59.77 | Kristina Feller | So Susunia, hopefully you can. |
| 02:31:59.79 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:31:59.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | with that. |
| 02:32:02.50 | Kristina Feller | reference that in the condition, please. |
| 02:32:05.63 | Richard Graef | All right. |
| 02:32:05.69 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 02:32:05.84 | Richard Graef | Um, yeah, I'll turn to be on that committee too, by the way. |
| 02:32:09.96 | Kristina Feller | So thank you, Commissioner Graff for volunteering and also for Commissioner Luxembourg for volunteering. Um, I would be very comfortable with appointing both of you. I want Commissioner Saad to have an opportunity though to weigh in on that. |
| 02:32:27.34 | Nastassya Saad | I would... I would... I think as the expertise, they would be a great commission if you only need two. If you need a third, I'd be happy to sit in, but would definitely support Commissioner Luxembourg and Commissioner Graff for that. Just wanted to say for Cecilia's assistance, the 430B project on page 13, Thank you. It has the fire conditions in there. If you want to. grab them from there. I also appreciate what commissioner- |
| 02:32:59.63 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I actually, I'm sorry. I actually have the conditions here. |
| 02:33:00.64 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Yes, yes. |
| 02:33:03.34 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | If you wanted to take a quick look at them. |
| 02:33:05.77 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 02:33:07.73 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Can everybody see that? |
| 02:33:09.55 | Kristina Feller | YOU CAN SEE IT. |
| 02:33:10.43 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. |
| 02:33:10.51 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:33:15.93 | Kristina Feller | I'm fine with all of it. Those are them. |
| 02:33:17.63 | Nastassya Saad | Those are them. |
| 02:33:18.93 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Yep, it's standard stuff. |
| 02:33:26.63 | Nastassya Saad | I just wanted to note, I appreciate what commissioner Luxembourg was trying to do with the condition of approval on the height, I stand behind what I said in terms of my comfort level, but I don't know if we should be conditioning the height. I don't know if I'm comfortable with that. It doesn't seem. for a condition. open to debate on that, but That's my view. |
| 02:33:50.98 | Andrew Junius | I would simply agree with that sentiment, Commissioner Saad. I think we're done with the volumetric discussion. At least I'm not gonna, I would not support a conditional. |
| 02:33:58.37 | Nastassya Saad | I just don't think it's appropriate to condition. |
| 02:34:00.71 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:34:04.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay, if everyone is okay with these conditions that Cecilia has put up, she will get that in our conditions of approval for which we can move on one way or the other this evening. Commissioner Luxenberg, did you have any other items for edit? |
| 02:34:21.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Uh, no, I just wanted to see again to support commissioner's graphs change to the one on the facade, uh, to just see what that looked like. Um, the wording that he added, I think that's a good idea. And I'd like to see the word. |
| 02:34:37.77 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay, is it okay to pull this off the screen? |
| 02:34:41.47 | Kristina Feller | Yes, if you can put those conditions into- |
| 02:34:43.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You got cut and paste those while you were doing them. |
| 02:34:46.28 | Kristina Feller | Hold on, hold on there, Commissioner Luxenberg. Let me just finish. If yes, if you can cut and paste those into the conditions of approval this evening, and then if we can also go back to, the item. where we were identifying a planning commission working group and be clearer about which elevation we are talking about. |
| 02:35:08.92 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay, so just to be clear, this has already been Um, inserted into the condition of approval of the Marin Fire District, these are all. Okay, so these are in, okay, so just the working group. |
| 02:35:22.32 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. So if you go back to the working group, let's just be specific about Um, |
| 02:35:29.12 | Sergio Rudin | is number three. |
| 02:35:30.71 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:35:30.73 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:35:30.77 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:35:30.88 | Kristina Feller | that we're focused on. |
| 02:35:30.89 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:35:33.14 | Kristina Feller | Mmm. Yeah. Okay. All right, Commissioner Brown. |
| 02:35:42.91 | Richard Graef | Oh wait, no, this is not the one. |
| 02:35:43.42 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:35:45.25 | Richard Graef | Oh, it's... |
| 02:35:47.84 | Andrew Junius | I think it is. Yeah, the word facade, you'd like to say, the facade limited to the study portion of the building. |
| 02:35:53.08 | Richard Graef | Oh, yes. Or the number jumped around. Correct. We're on number three. Yeah, the facade of the study structure or whatever we want to call that. |
| 02:36:04.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Right. 30 in carport maybe. |
| 02:36:07.11 | Richard Graef | Mm-hmm. Yeah. study slash car park. Yeah. |
| 02:36:20.03 | Richard Graef | Oh, yeah. |
| 02:36:20.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:36:20.17 | Richard Graef | Okay. |
| 02:36:21.47 | Kristina Feller | WHERE ARE YOU? |
| 02:36:22.26 | Richard Graef | I'm not quite sure. requisite detailing and design to reflect the buildings on site in the neighborhood. doesn't really Same to me. much to me. |
| 02:36:40.22 | Kristina Feller | Wait a minute. |
| 02:36:44.37 | Richard Graef | Oh. |
| 02:36:44.59 | Kristina Feller | What would you prefer here, Commissioner Graff? |
| 02:36:47.59 | Richard Graef | Well, you could just put a period after design, And, take the rest of it out because unless we because I don't think that really applies. I don't think that's what we're talking about here personally. Yeah. I think we're just, You know, we're looking at this at this building. |
| 02:37:12.43 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 02:37:12.99 | Sergio Rudin | supportive of that, absolutely. |
| 02:37:14.42 | Andrew Junius | Okay with that. |
| 02:37:15.74 | Richard Graef | Okay. |
| 02:37:15.99 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:37:16.45 | Sergio Rudin | My only suggestion is if you can further specify what you're looking at this building for with respect to Yeah. You know, facade to have the requisite detailing and design. that would likely be a good idea. Thank you. |
| 02:37:34.64 | Andrew Junius | I think the issue is breaking it up. I mean, you know, articulating it in such a way that it's not, such a homogeneous mass, whatever that works. Yeah. |
| 02:37:45.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, something like that. I think that insurance now a homogeneous mask would be fine. Because that's all the problems. |
| 02:37:52.31 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay, Cecilia, if you can add that, Commissioner Graff, as she's typing, any final comments on this? |
| 02:37:59.70 | Richard Graef | um, Yeah, I think this is something that we've talked about And is the applicant going to have an opportunity to respond True best. |
| 02:38:14.70 | Kristina Feller | Well, to what? We haven't made a motion yet, or we haven't talked about what that might be. So not yet, no. |
| 02:38:20.32 | Richard Graef | Okay, so I'm just saying. you know Um, We have not. We have not had about that. of applicants to weigh in on this. particular item. So... Okay, let's move on. Yeah. Um, |
| 02:38:36.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I would say math, not style. |
| 02:38:43.30 | Kristina Feller | So Cecilia, which one of these conditions was specific to the car lift and maintaining the car lift? |
| 02:39:03.94 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Number 15. |
| 02:39:05.42 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:39:11.99 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. All right. Commissioners, any other final comments or thoughts about conditioning this project? |
| 02:39:24.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I guess they have to address number four, which is highlighted in yellow, just to tweak the wording on it. |
| 02:39:35.31 | Sergio Rudin | I have looked at it, I have thought about it, and I think it is fine. |
| 02:39:42.48 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:39:45.11 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:39:45.13 | Andrew Junius | Number four. I'm |
| 02:39:48.44 | Kristina Feller | Well, actually, |
| 02:39:48.76 | Andrew Junius | Totally satisfied with number four. |
| 02:39:51.12 | Kristina Feller | I mean, not to sound semantical here, but it wasn't modified at the hearing, they were modified for the hearing. Like we got modifications just before, some clarifications. before the hearing. So they were modified for the hearing, not in this hearing. |
| 02:40:09.62 | Andrew Junius | Excellent point. Yes, thank you. Good catch. |
| 02:40:15.25 | Andrew Junius | I don't know. |
| 02:40:15.78 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:40:16.67 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Let's make sure you save that, Cecilia, most importantly. |
| 02:40:22.04 | Andrew Junius | most of the time. |
| 02:40:24.87 | Kristina Feller | Save documents. Okay. Commissioner Graff, do you have any other final amendments here? |
| 02:40:34.07 | Richard Graef | I don't think so. gone over the main one. |
| 02:40:39.79 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Commissioner Saad? |
| 02:40:42.79 | Nastassya Saad | No, nothing more on the conditions. |
| 02:40:44.74 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:40:47.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I just want to make sure I understand what number four is. I'm sorry to belabor this. Normally, we ask them to build the project for the plans that were submitted. Now we're asking for a full set of plans to match the modification on plans dated But the plans are already modified. |
| 02:41:11.28 | Kristina Feller | But they're not construction documents or anything. |
| 02:41:14.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I understand that, but normally a applicant, let me, let me, I'm just, I can pull up, let me just read what the normal condition says. The normal condition says the project shall be designed and constructed as shown in the set of plans, they stand dated stamped X. That's what it normally says. We put this in originally because they kept changing part of the plans, but not all of the plans. But now that all of the plans, |
| 02:41:42.13 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:41:45.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | except for this, except subject to number three. I think it almost would be better to say the projects will be designed and constructed as shown on the set of plans. Stay up. April 12, 2021, except for as identified in number three above or something. I mean, |
| 02:42:04.23 | Kristina Feller | I'm perfectly fine with number four. It's clear that it memorializes what it is we're approving. I'm perfectly fine with it. |
| 02:42:11.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So who do they submit that to other than a building permit? |
| 02:42:16.40 | Kristina Feller | Well, they have to develop construction documents, of course. And they have to be consistent with |
| 02:42:20.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and they have to be |
| 02:42:23.07 | Kristina Feller | what we're approving tonight. So I think we're going backwards here. Yeah. |
| 02:42:27.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | All right, I'll withdraw my objective. |
| 02:42:30.35 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Anybody else have, Vice Chair Junius, do you have any further comments? |
| 02:42:31.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | else. |
| 02:42:36.02 | Andrew Junius | No further comments. Ready to make a motion. |
| 02:42:38.37 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Cecilia, let's go ahead and stop screen share here. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. All right. I WILL entertain a motion. |
| 02:42:52.87 | Andrew Junius | Move to approve as conditions have changed and been modified. during the discussion. |
| 02:43:01.07 | Richard Graef | I have a... Thank you. just a point of order. um, We have made suggestions for certain refinements to the design. as submitted. And the applicant has not had an opportunity to respond to that. It seems that that should happen before we make a motion or take a vote. unless that's not correct. |
| 02:43:32.86 | Kristina Feller | Well, we haven't sat here and modified the design we've conditioned an approval. is what the motion is. I'm pretty sure the applicant doesn't want to I mean, we're not changing. |
| 02:43:47.36 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | I'm not changing. |
| 02:43:48.03 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 02:43:48.11 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. |
| 02:43:48.13 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:43:48.15 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. |
| 02:43:48.17 | Kristina Feller | The zone. |
| 02:43:48.22 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Okay. |
| 02:43:51.49 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So I've got a motion on the floor. |
| 02:43:54.98 | Sergio Rudin | So. |
| 02:43:55.05 | Kristina Feller | I have a second. |
| 02:43:56.40 | Sergio Rudin | Chair, to that point, I will say that typically, if any of the commissioners during deliberations raise an issue for the first time, it is typically appropriate for the applicant to be given a chance to respond to that. Given that the issue is relatively minor, it may be safer just to give the applicant a minute to respond to the proposed conditions of approval that have been modified. |
| 02:44:20.78 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:44:21.04 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:44:21.59 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:44:21.61 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:44:25.31 | Kristina Feller | All right, would the applicant like a minute to respond to the conditions of approval that we have a motion to approve your project? |
| 02:44:40.14 | Andrew Junius | Is Mr. Rempel still awake? |
| 02:44:41.91 | Ms. Miranda | No, no, we're still here. |
| 02:44:43.43 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 02:44:43.87 | Mr. Rempel | When you think about it, |
| 02:44:44.27 | Ms. Miranda | Yes. |
| 02:44:45.03 | Mr. Rempel | You can hear. |
| 02:44:45.05 | Ms. Miranda | Yes. Thank you. you |
| 02:44:45.86 | Mr. Rempel | Okay, yeah. The conditions are fine. Just to... |
| 02:44:46.03 | Ms. Miranda | Okay. |
| 02:44:49.19 | Mr. Rempel | The drawings were all submitted with an April 12th date. So they're all, all of them are date stamped the same date, okay? And we're fine with the conditions. I look forward to working on this with Commissioner Graff and Luxembourg to improve the quality. |
| 02:45:01.15 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Okay. Could I just elaborate one second? We made some suggestions that were, Um, beyond just surface and that had to do with other articulation of a of the building facade, changing the window pattern or adding window or doing some other Um, modification to, to, uh, break up that surface. Did you want to respond to that? |
| 02:45:34.16 | Mr. Rempel | I'm willing I believe I can work with the two of you to come to a mutually agreeable design solution |
| 02:45:40.60 | Richard Graef | Okay. Right. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:45:44.69 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so we've got a motion on the floor. DO I HAVE A SECOND? |
| 02:45:50.49 | Richard Graef | I'll say I got it. |
| 02:45:52.30 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Yeah. |
| 02:45:58.37 | Kristina Feller | DAN? |
| 02:45:58.78 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:45:58.80 | Dan | You're on mute. |
| 02:45:59.45 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:46:04.43 | Dan | Sorry. Apologize. Commissioner Graff. |
| 02:46:07.52 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:46:07.57 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 02:46:07.59 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 02:46:07.77 | Dan | Thank you. RETURN LUXEMBURG. Yes. |
| 02:46:10.88 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:46:11.45 | Dan | Commissioner Saad. |
| 02:46:12.80 | Nastassya Saad | No. |
| 02:46:14.47 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. |
| 02:46:18.22 | Kristina Feller | YOU'RE ON MUTE. Or Andrew. |
| 02:46:20.70 | Andrew Junius | and I Yes. Yes. |
| 02:46:24.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:46:24.40 | Dan | Yes. |
| 02:46:24.92 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 02:46:27.64 | Dan | MOTION CARRIES FOUR TO ONE. |
| 02:46:29.69 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you very much. Okay, let's move on to item 6C this evening. |
| 02:46:38.25 | Dan | Real quick, the third public hearing is design review permit. at 11 Bonita Street. Project proposes to add 300 and 60 square feet onto the rear of the existing structure. Again, our contract planner is Cecilia Jaroslowski. We'll be providing a staff presentation for the item. |
| 02:47:00.37 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:47:01.98 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Good evening chair and commissioner, Cecilia Jaroslavsky, contract planner, presenting this item before you, with your permission, I'd like to share my screen. |
| 02:47:15.59 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Can everyone see that? |
| 02:47:17.25 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 02:47:18.02 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you. Do you have a project before you at 11 Bonita Street? The project is located in the R2 zoning district that contains 1,450 square foot single family residents including an attached 200 square foot one car garage, The site is on the South side of Bonita Street. surrounding properties consist of single family residences ranging between single story to four story structures. containing residential uses. The area includes a variety of architectural styles. including modern, traditional, and coastal with a variety of materials, including stucco, wood shingle siding and horizontal siding, as well as a variety of roof styles, including ridged and flat. The existing floor area ratio on the project site is approximately 0.37. The subject parcel is 39.15 feet by 100 feet deep. containing 3,915 million square feet and is therefore a non-compliant law. This project application was filed on October 15th, 2020. for design review permit for the remodel and addition of 385 square feet onto an existing single family residence. The Historic Preservation Commission determine the subject property does not satisfy any of the qualifying criteria for historical resource. on August 19th, 2021. |
| 02:48:43.38 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | The project requires approval of design review permit confirming the project promotes the preservation of Sassolito's unique visual character. and thoughtful architectural site design. |
| 02:48:53.11 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:48:55.76 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | This project includes a 23 by 15 feet rear addition for a master bedroom located at the southwest portion of the lot and includes converting the existing rear bedroom into a master bathroom for the new addition, and enclosing the 25 square foot front portal. |
| 02:49:16.43 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | THE NORTH WALL. The proposed addition would be five foot six inches from the side property line. The location of proposed windows on the north wall addition include windows located close to the top of the new wall to avoid privacy impact. Materials proposed would be engineered wood siding. The applicants conducted neighborhood outreach on September 20th, 2020, contacting six neighbors, all of whom are in support of the project. To date, staff has not received any communications from residents regarding this project. Thank you, commissioners. That concludes my presentation. I'm available for questions. Applicants are also in attendance. |
| 02:50:02.88 | Kristina Feller | Perfect. Thank you so much, Cecilia. All right, commissioners, this would be the time to ask staff any questions you might have. on this project. Commissioner Graff, do you want to start us off? |
| 02:50:19.67 | Richard Graef | I have no questions for staff. |
| 02:50:22.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. |
| 02:50:26.64 | Nastassya Saad | Just to confirm there was no neighborhood neighborhood, uh, No, sorry, I'm tired from the last project. We have not received any communication from The neighbors, I think the staff report indicated that neighbors are in agreement, but just wanted to see if there was anything on the record. That's correct, commissioner. Okay, thank you. Nothing else for staff. |
| 02:50:50.33 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:50:53.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No questions, this is for staff. |
| 02:50:55.61 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Junius. |
| 02:50:57.91 | Andrew Junius | No questions for staff. |
| 02:51:00.11 | Kristina Feller | I have no questions either, Cecilia. So thank you. Thank you very much. Um, So I see the applicants here, Mr. Osborne is in the audience. Welcome, welcome this evening. Thank you for being here. You'll have 15 minutes to make any presentation or discussion of your project that you would like. Use that time however you would like. There is a timer clock if you're looking at gallery view up here. so you can help monitor your time. So welcome, the floor is yours. |
| 02:51:36.92 | Todd Osborne | Okay, well, thank you everyone. My name is Todd Osborne, my wife, Cindy. We're, if you know Sausalito, we're right here on Bonita Street, 11 Bonita between Johnson Street and Pine Street. We purchased the house in 1999. It was a rental for many, many years. We moved back four years ago. We were living in Idaho, Sun Valley, Idaho for six years, raising our son there. He really wanted to come back and spend time in California. He's an artist who's now at RISD, Rhode Island School of Design. So we moved back here. Our son just graduated from Tamal Pius High School, and we've decided to make this home again. The only challenge is our home here is just over 900 square feet. It's two bedrooms, one bath. The story I like to tell is my dad, Oh. My parents have been married for 68 years. People ask my dad, what's the secret to your long marriage? And he says, a long leash and separate bath And well, we want to preserve our marriage. We've only been married 25 years, but we only have one bathroom and it's not easy. So basically what we'd like to do is push out into the backyard. We're one of the few people in the neighborhood who actually have a substantial backyard and add 350 360 square feet turn what is now a small bedroom into a bathroom and a closet and then make a master bedroom out in the back. So it's pretty straightforward. We know all our neighbors, we've lived in this neighborhood on and off for 30 years. Personally, every neighbor on the street, we're all good friends. I've told them about it. They've come over into my yard. dinners and barbecues over here. Everyone is very much in support of the project and we're excited about doing it. It's been a long time coming, obviously, the challenges with COVID, et cetera, and doing these Zoom meetings and some of the things that have gone on in the city. It's, it's just a taken a long time, but we're just glad to be here and we're excited about moving forward with the project. Bob Hayes, who's lives here in Sausalito, did the architectural drawings. We really wanted to make sure what few people could actually look into our yard. There's really only two homes that even see into our yard. We wanted to make sure that there was no problem with views or roof lines. So we created a flat roof with more of a modern design, similar to what you were just listening to in your previous discussions with the hard troweled, stucco and engineered wood siding. So it will be more of a modern addition as opposed to the craftsman style that we see out front. But, um... |
| 02:54:21.49 | Cindy Osborne | Yeah. Thank you. It relates to it really nicely. It's not jarring or jarring. |
| 02:54:26.29 | Todd Osborne | Yeah. |
| 02:54:28.03 | Cindy Osborne | Anyway, like I said, |
| 02:54:28.13 | Todd Osborne | Anyway, like I say, we're really excited about doing it. It's a long time coming, but We're excited about it. Cindy's very excited about having her own bathroom. So that's about it. That's it. |
| 02:54:42.51 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Great, well thank you Mr. and Mrs. Osborne. Let's stop the clock there at 1153. I'll just make note of that if you want to use that time going forward. Um, but don't go anywhere because this would also be the time for commissioners to ask you any questions that they have about your project. |
| 02:55:00.31 | Andrew Junius | Sure. |
| 02:55:03.28 | Kristina Feller | So commissioner side, Do you have any questions for the Osborne's? |
| 02:55:07.72 | Nastassya Saad | I think I was just curious about the choice for the engineered wood siding. I mean, it is in the back and it's obviously your design choice. I did see that you guys painted it a really nice blue and white, so I just didn't, Just more curious how you arrived at that, because it seems a little bit of a stark contrast to the way you've just painted the house. I think you're on mute there. |
| 02:55:33.52 | Andrew Junius | No. |
| 02:55:33.66 | Nastassya Saad | Mr. Osborne, thank you. I think you're on mute. |
| 02:55:33.68 | Todd Osborne | Mr. Osborne. |
| 02:55:34.69 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:55:37.64 | Todd Osborne | Sorry, there we go. Yeah, that's a very good question. Thank you. One of the things we really, like I said earlier, we really wanted to do is create a flat roof. So those who are behind us, We just didn't want any challenges from them. So we decided, well, since we're gonna do this flatter roof and more of a modern look to it, why not really change it up and add different materials to it too? We actually own a vacation rental in Sonoma where we did a very similar thing where we had two pitched roofs coming together in onto a flat roof that connects these two at right angles. And, the entire house is made of stucco, but the flat roof that's in between them, we put a rusted quartet steel in it. And we had some people kind of look at that and go, and that's kind of strange. Why are you doing that? Now that it's built, they look at it and they say, oh, okay, that looks great. It is... It is a different material. It is a different look and we have We're going to be using hard trowel stucco on one of the facades and then this engineered wood on another. And then the more traditional craftsman wood facing the public, facing the street. It's something that we think is going to look terrific, basically. We've studied it and researched it. And my wife has a great eye and actually has a location. She represents several hundred beautiful homes on a location site called Mint Locations. So she's really the one that's got the great eye for detail and design. And we both just think it's a terrific look. And I think you will too once we get it completed. |
| 02:57:02.47 | Ms. Miranda | you |
| 02:57:20.17 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. And I just had one final question because your neighbor to I believe the north. that property that seemingly abandoned Was there any communication? I know the mailers must have gone out to everyone. I'm not really entirely sure. I'm not sure if anyone is entirely sure what's going on with that property. |
| 02:57:40.19 | Andrew Junius | I'm pretty... |
| 02:57:41.88 | Nastassya Saad | But I think that if I understand your plans correctly, the addition is going towards... that side of the property. Did you get anything from- |
| 02:57:53.74 | Todd Osborne | No, they were there. They were here to wait. His name is Ray Hyatt. His wife, Linda, did he have owned the property since he was, I think he was raised in the property. |
| 02:57:53.87 | Nastassya Saad | No. Thank you. |
| 02:58:03.27 | Todd Osborne | It's very mysterious why he won't rent it, sell it, or fix it up. It's what we all call in the neighborhood an abandoned home. It's completely falling apart. It's being held together by a coat of paint. And that paint is peeling quickly. So I don't expect that house to be standing much longer. They were by here last month. I saw them cleaning up. The story poles were here. Obviously, if they had concerns or questions, I wouldn't think they would have contacted you. I did put something in their mailbox, whether they have a mailman or whether they get mail, I have no idea. But, uh, we'll just leave it at that. |
| 02:58:42.39 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Sure. |
| 02:58:42.62 | Todd Osborne | Thank you. |
| 02:58:43.18 | Cindy Osborne | I will say routinely they cut down the weeds and keep a very minimum maintenance on the house. So I know they are aware of our story poles and our intentions. You can't hide them. The story poles have been up. Um, and we have communicated with them as best as possible. |
| 02:59:02.66 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:59:03.03 | Cindy Osborne | It's not as if they're not, in their they're ignorant of the intentions for us to develop the back end a small portion of our property |
| 02:59:12.06 | Todd Osborne | And we are in good stead with him, by the way. I've contacted him occasionally and he's contacted me about certain things. You know, it's a bit at arm distance just because it's such a strange situation to have a beautiful home next door that's been literally abandoned for 40 years. But I have not heard from him and nor of any of the neighbors who are in contact with me. |
| 02:59:34.79 | Nastassya Saad | Sure, that was just a point of clarification. |
| 02:59:36.17 | Todd Osborne | Yeah. |
| 02:59:36.79 | Nastassya Saad | Appreciate that. That's all Chair Feller, thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:59:39.71 | Todd Osborne | Thank you. |
| 02:59:39.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:59:40.61 | Nastassya Saad | Next. |
| 02:59:40.98 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:59:43.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I think you've effectively solved your space problems without impacting your neighbors and appreciate that. But I don't have any questions at this time. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:59:54.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:59:54.70 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:59:56.05 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Graff. |
| 02:59:58.83 | Richard Graef | I don't have any questions. So I'll save mine. comments for our discussion. |
| 03:00:04.03 | Kristina Feller | Okay. VICE CHAIR JUNIUS. |
| 03:00:06.80 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. One quick question, how old is the home? |
| 03:00:10.63 | Todd Osborne | This was built, I believe, Ray Hyatt, actually the man in the abandoned home, came up with some drawings that he had in his basement. I guess the two homes were built virtually at the same time. And so he had told me 1911. of, But I really, other than that, I have no historical data to be exact. So that's what I've heard. Thank you much. |
| 03:00:34.47 | Kristina Feller | I don't have any further questions for you. I very much like what what your plan is so my other commissioners for |
| 03:00:41.31 | Andrew Junius | I'm good. |
| 03:00:44.02 | Kristina Feller | for asking some of the detailed questions that covered anything, so thank you. Um, So with that, I'm gonna open this up for public comment. And to do so, you can raise your hand in the Zoom application or you can press star nine on your phone. So I'm just looking for raised hands at this time. |
| 03:01:07.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Seeing none, |
| 03:01:08.83 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Bye. |
| 03:01:09.74 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:01:09.76 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Chair Feller, if I may, just a quick note for Commissioner Luxembourg, I will be sure to double check |
| 03:01:09.96 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:01:15.70 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | conditions of approval under advisory for this one as well. Make sure it's got the correct language under number eight. |
| 03:01:23.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, thank you that it doesn't and it should. And I was gonna add that as an amendment to, if we made a motion, so thank you. |
| 03:01:32.20 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Cecilia. Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment at this time. And, Yeah. Mr. and Mrs. Osborne, if you have anything else to add, you're welcome to use the rest of your your time to do so. So, I leave that to you. |
| 03:01:51.15 | Todd Osborne | have. Not really. Just thank you for your time and your consideration. Well, like I say, we're both very excited about it. We've had the plans drawn up for over two years now and we've look at them every so often, get excited It's one of those things where we're just, Really excited to move forward. |
| 03:02:08.64 | Cindy Osborne | I would just add if anyone has been driven by 11 Bonita, we recently painted the house and added trim and, Thank you. most people have commented looks exceptional and it's the same thoughtfulness and tasteful intention that we have to building out this with thoughtful and thoughtfulness, tension to the character of our neighborhood, you know, a nod to the nautical feel of Sausalito and also the history of are don't want anything that's overbuilt or everything to be tasteful in, in, with the rest of the beautiful homes on our little street of Bonita. We're just trying to expand so we can continue to live in the neighborhood and live comfortably as we live. age in this community. So thank you. |
| 03:03:05.72 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. And I wanna also thank you both for working closely with your neighbors and keeping those conversations and communications open. It makes all the difference in the world. by the time your project gets up here to the commission. So thank you for that. |
| 03:03:19.27 | Ms. Miranda | Thank you. |
| 03:03:20.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so at this time, let's pull our deliberations up to our virtual dais here. AND, UM, Let's see. Commissioner Graff, would you like to kick us off? |
| 03:03:36.37 | Richard Graef | or Well, first of all, I think, um, uh, It's a great plan. They're really a great use of your space. |
| 03:03:53.83 | Kristina Feller | Oh my goodness. Commissioner Graff, did you just freeze? I think he just froze. Okay, Commissioner Saad, would you like |
| 03:04:04.03 | Nastassya Saad | to- I can continue what he was going to say potentially. I think we're in alignment. I think it's a great design. I think it's a pretty straightforward project as well. And I, I also like that you're not utilizing the entire backyard. I mean, I think you have more room to expand there, but it's great to keep some open air, keep some space. Have, I know your pets run around, see them have some space. So I just, it's nice to leave some space. So I think it's a thoughtful design to also get what you'd like out of your home. I'd be in support of this project. Happy to hear what my fellow commissioners have to say, but I think it's quite straightforward and to code. |
| 03:04:52.58 | Kristina Feller | Great, great. Thank you very much. We have commissioner graph back. but you are on mute. Let's unmute you. |
| 03:05:06.50 | Kristina Feller | There you go. |
| 03:05:06.90 | Richard Graef | Yeah. Um, where was I? Yeah, I... As I said, I think it's a really great plan. But I... really question the the approach of putting such dissimilar materials and flat ropes and everything on such a lovely house. Ah. I understand the rationale for doing that, but I think, it's kind of a, I would look at it as a little bit of a, a shame to not just simply pick up the, the shapes and materials and, and room lines of the existing structure and just simply blend it in as if it was always there. So, So my issue is with the, um, the other materials I realized It's not going to show a whole lot from the street. Um, so it isn't as if it's a, um, A huge visual statement in the neighborhood. Um, Anyway, I'm just going to leave it right there. I think it could have been more harmonious with the lovely house you have. But, I'd like to hear from the other commissioners. Thank you. |
| 03:06:50.08 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Graff. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 03:06:53.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I concur that you've done a great job with the space planning. I understand Commissioner Graff's concerned about the different materials, although I do think the engineered wood is a nice material and and it's not all that visible. And I can see where having a dissimilar thing would work for you. So I'm sort of on the fence for that, but it's not all that visible to most of the butters. And so I respect your design decision on that. So I'm good with moving this project ahead, Chair Feller. |
| 03:07:36.35 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you very much. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 03:07:40.45 | Andrew Junius | GENERAL. I have to admit when I saw the address, I thought it was 15 and I said, wow, oh my God, somebody's gonna finally do something with the abandoned home. Maybe someday we'll get to see that, Yeah, I concur with all the other commissioners, obviously a very well thought out project and I wish you the best of luck with it. With respect to the design, I mean, you've got a house that's over a hundred years old and I know there's differing theories and thoughts about connecting old and new, but I do like the idea that you're using a lot of new materials to distinguish the new from the old and not really visible from the street. So I certainly respect Commissioner Graff's comment, but I think in this case, it's gonna be fine. I congratulate you on a great design, so best of luck. |
| 03:08:26.18 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. I too appreciate Commissioner Graff's comments. I actually liked that this did not mimic a 1911 Um, vocabulary, architectural vocabulary. I like that it's a little bit different, but I think it will work quite seamlessly in the back there and I think it'll be a lovely space so I totally support this project I don't have any any further issues or comments at this time. And if the commissioners do not, yeah, commissioner saw it. |
| 03:08:58.29 | Nastassya Saad | Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt, Chair Beller. I was gonna make a motion to approve, but when you're finished. |
| 03:08:59.66 | Kristina Feller | . |
| 03:09:03.39 | Nastassya Saad | Go for it. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to approve this. project. |
| 03:09:07.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I will second that with the again, the amendment to fix advisory note number eight. |
| 03:09:13.58 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. DAN? MISSION OF GRAPH. |
| 03:09:18.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Careful. |
| 03:09:19.35 | Dan | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 03:09:20.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to the next. |
| 03:09:20.97 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 03:09:21.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:09:21.83 | Dan | Commissioner Assad. Yes. Vice Chair Junius. Yes. CHAIR FELLER. |
| 03:09:28.30 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:09:29.88 | Dan | motion passes five to zero. |
| 03:09:32.21 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you to the Osbournes. Thank you very much. |
| 03:09:37.54 | Cecilia Jaroslavsky | Thank you, commissioners. |
| 03:09:40.11 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Cecilia. Thank you. Great, so let's move on to, thank you, to 6D this evening. And we have our esteemed planner, Adam East, here to walk us through that. |
| 03:09:54.23 | Nastassya Saad | Chair Feller, I'm just, as a point, just going to recuse myself, so I'll be. here. We have the camera off. |
| 03:10:00.85 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, perfect, thank you. You are welcome to make public comment, of course, but thank you for the reminder. Okay, Adam, over to you. |
| 03:10:10.48 | Adam East | Thank you, Chair Feller. I am going to share my screen now. And let me know once you are all able to see my presentation. |
| 03:10:18.43 | Kristina Feller | We can see it. |
| 03:10:20.00 | Adam East | Great. Just entering the presentation out here. |
| 03:10:22.09 | Kristina Feller | Hmm. |
| 03:10:26.89 | Adam East | Okay, thanks again, everyone. My name is Adam East. I am the assistant planner with the city of Sausalito. The request be. for you tonight is a design review permit application at 430 B Street. That is project number 2022-00036. Again, the address is 430 B Street and the applicant is Stuart Summers, who is the architect on the project on behalf of the owner, Tyler Stewart, who lives just next door at 514 Bonita Street. And again, this request before you is for the remodeling of the existing home and the addition of an enclosed staircase and a deck in the rear yard. And if you look at the references, the reference images just below the image on the right shows that this property is located at the corner of Bonita Street and B Street just across from City Hall here. And the image on the left is a grading plan from the plan set, but it gives a good idea of the overall scope of work that has to do with the site. You can see here the addition towards the rear of the building, towards the north end there, that's the enclosed staircase. And to the south of that would be the, I believe, 137 square foot deck with additional habitable space below. And the gray areas here are replacement retaining walls. The applicant is not proposing to change the building bulk or affect any of the side or setbacks to the north or the south. Those are all being maintained. This setback in the rear will still be about 40 feet from rear lot line. A little bit more info on the existing conditions. This house is located on a downhill sloping site. As you can see in that reference image there, It slopes from Bonita Street, kind of downhill towards the neighboring property to the north there. So the lower level elevation is not significantly visible from the street elevation from Bonita Street. This property is located in the R3, which is the multifamily residential zoning district. It is a single family residence that is currently over storage in a basement, as well as an enclosed garage there. The applicant was approved for a lot line adjustment last year. So the current lot size is 5,000 square feet. And that does meet our requirements for lot size requirements and then the existing square footage for the home is 1536 square feet I've included a couple more site photos just for your reference in case you were not able to visit the site. The image on the left shows the view from Bonita street. And you can see just at the rear of the structure, the story poles that were installed, these show the building bulk of the proposed enclosed staircase. They are located or the staircase would be located below the high point of the roof. And it does match the same pitch of the existing roof line. And then the proposed deck would be extended off of those story poles over to where this door would be on the south end there. And then the image to the right shows that when you're looking kind of flush on the existing building elevation, it is fairly screened due to the mature tree as well as on street parking that's located in the same area. |
| 03:13:39.06 | Adam East | So this is a bit more information on the total project scope and what that would include. It would include the remodeling of the entry, kitchen, living room, bedroom and bathroom at the upper level, which is the primary living space at the moment. The proposed new addition at the rear of the property for the enclosed staircase, which is about 69 square feet. And that would provide access to the lower level habitable space, which is being proposed and a new 137 square foot deck with living space below And then as I mentioned, they are planning to convert the lower storage and basement space to habitable space. And that's about 560 square feet of existing building coverage. And then site work would include replacement of the existing retaining walls. Um, new fencing would be installed on one of the retaining walls on the south side, that fencing is about 42 inches in height, I believe. landscaping and patio space at the side and rear yard. And then the facade remodel would include new siding, windows, materials on the stairs, as well as railing materials. Again, the roof, the roof lines are being maintained. The existing building bulk apart from the new addition is built is being maintained as well. But the applicant is proposing to modernize the overall facade design of the structure with new windows, doors, siding. So the reason this project is coming before you tonight is actually not relation to setbacks or building height or anything else, as far as building coverage. It's actually because of the scope of demolition that's occurring at the interior of the dwelling. So I've included a couple snippets that I also included in the staff report for you. So while the project meets the minister requirements for height setbacks, addition of floor area and building coverage, it's the scope of work at the interior that triggers that design review. Specifically Sausalito Municipal Code section 1054-050B15 states that demolition permits to demolish 51% or more of any single family structure as defined in 10-88 does require a design review permit. And then if you look at the definition below, you can see that that definition does include demolition of interior walls as well. So because of the extent of the, Renovations that are being proposed at the interior of the existing building coverage. This project was triggered for design review at the planning commission level. So to summarize the staff report, staff does believe that this application that the findings can be met to approve a design review permit. for this application. As I stated previously, the project maintains the overall scale of the existing dwelling while providing additional habitable space and functionality via the new enclosed staircase. It still meets all of those requirements for floor area building coverage, impervious surface. The proposed design while more modern will still compliment the existing or the architectural style of other properties that are located just to the west on Bonita Street. I mentioned the owner resides at 514 Bonita. style is more contemporary in design as well. And we do believe that the project has been designed to minimize any impacts on private and public views, as well as the additional landscaping plan will provide adequate screening building on site and the applicant has indicated that no protected trees will be removed as a result of the project. So we do recommend that the Planning Commission approve the request for the design review permit for the remodeling of this home at 430 B Street. And that concludes the presentation. |
| 03:17:13.32 | Kristina Feller | Excellent, thank you so much, Adam, for an excellent presentation and walking us through all the elements of the design. This would be the time for commissioners to ask staff any questions. Commissioner Luxembourg, do you have any questions for Adam? |
| 03:17:30.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I just wanted to comment. It was an excellent both presentation and your staff report. I also appreciated the fact that under design review permit, you just summarized in your staff report, what the issues are and left the attachment to go through all the details so that we don't see repetitive pages of reiterating the same stuff. So I appreciate that your staff report was succinct and it wasn't being repetitive, but I have no questions at this time. |
| 03:18:00.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. Commissioner Graff. |
| 03:18:03.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you know. |
| 03:18:03.96 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:18:04.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:18:04.39 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:18:05.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Vice Chair Junius. |
| 03:18:07.30 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF |
| 03:18:08.96 | Kristina Feller | I have just one question, Adam. You referred to the protected trees. Are any of those trees close enough to any new foundation work that we would require an arborist report? |
| 03:18:28.35 | Adam East | I may have to punt to Stewart, did an inspection on site last week and did confirm that no protected trees would be removed as a part of this. But any further information as far as foundation work, I might have to defer to Stewart for hopefully additional information on that. |
| 03:18:44.97 | Kristina Feller | All right, that sounds good. That sounds good. Well, if there are no other questions from the commission, let's go ahead and invite the applicant here. um, Ms. Stewart who is presenting or is your architect or both? Let's make sure Maria that, okay, both, Okay, so Tyler Stewart, you are now a co-host and Stewart Summers, you are now a co-host so you can share screen and the like. So let's get the timer up here, Maria, for 15 minutes and invite the applicant. and her architect to present whatever you would like to us this evening. So welcome. |
| 03:19:27.09 | Stuart Summers | Thank you for your time. And absolutely Tyler can chime in anytime as well. And then first of all, I kind of serve in your capacity in San Rafael. I've been on their design review board for 16 years. So I know you're all volunteers. So I appreciate you being here at this fourth hour that we're into this. So I'm gonna try to keep my comments short and sweet because Adam did such a great job on the presentation. First of all, the one tree that is gonna come out, which is next to that stairwell, it's a fruit tree. It's an apple tree, I confirmed with our landscape architect. So it's not a protected species of any sort. And we have no intention on removing other trees as part of this project. So hopefully that puts that question to rest. A little backstory on this. I got involved with this house five years ago. The former homeowner went and got a window replacement permit and proceeded to gut the entire interior of the house. Ken went over and red tagged her and across the street from city hall too so that was pretty pretty bold so she we performed working drawings for her to actually do essentially this identical project and we got all the way through a building permit ready to issue when she decided she wasn't going to do the project and and moved so here we are, we did not have to go through design review by error of the director and planning staff at the time. They ministerially approved it, which is why we were a little shocked that we ended up in front of you all here tonight with essentially the same project, but here we are. So to summarize, Adam's correct. What we wanted to do and what the former owner wanted to do and what Tyler wanted to do was to connect logically the upper and lower levels of this house. So because there was no interior circulation. So the addition to the home is simply that stairwell out the back to at the at the visible level in order to get to the lower level and then develop what was reasonable on the lower level into living space proper living space there was already a bathroom under there it was pretty it was pretty janky space so we're improving that and then as part of that on top of part of that developed space, in that space that Adam referred to, we're just doing a deck, a rear deck that's off the main living space. Other than that, she wanted to really modernize it. I could share a screen real quick here. Let me see if I can just... Take up a minute of your time. I mean, here's the site if, Am I sharing a screen? |
| 03:22:11.87 | Kristina Feller | It's just coming on here. There we go. |
| 03:22:14.66 | Stuart Summers | So this is just street view. I mean, you guys can see the house. Here's the space between the homes. This is actually Tyler's current home. This is the house below that we're talking about, Project 430B. The stairwell is where Adam indicated. In terms of the vernacular of the neighborhood, we're keeping the form. It's got this charming kind of ranchy, uh, low profile form. We're keeping that form, but we're trying to kick the materials up to something a little more modernized, such that Tyler's done over here. You know, if we spin around the street, you know, we see examples of a boxy 70s building up the street. We see a house painted in a darker hue, black, essentially, like we're proposing up here. We've got a bright yellow house across the street. We've got City Hall across this other street from us and more kind of 70s boxes. So in terms of fitting in with the fabric of the neighborhood, I feel, you know, we have a pretty eclectic neighborhood here and kicking up the materials and have it being more modern seemed quite appropriate to us. And it's not modern in terms of form, but just more modernized in terms of materials. So if there's- |
| 03:23:31.39 | Tyler Stewart | I like to call it modern farmhouse. |
| 03:23:33.62 | Stuart Summers | There you go, modern farmhouse. So we have a little board and batten going on, a little bit of lap siding, and then some stone veneer and all we think blending together nicely. That's really it. You know, I think we've spoken to the forums and the trees and trying to bring this place back to life. Make Ken happy downtown since it's been sitting there gutted for five years. Get some housing back on the market here, you know? I think we need some housing. And if Tyler wants to add to it, it's been a, a bit of a journey for her as well. |
| 03:24:13.25 | Tyler Stewart | I love the place, so, and I love the neighborhood and I plan on going absolutely nowhere. So I really just wanna continue to improve the neighborhood We've got great neighbors and People are all cleaning up their houses around the neighborhood. And my intention is to build this house for my mom who currently is in a three level town home in Tiburon so that she could have a place close to me where I could keep an eye on her. And it's more kind of single level living where she could live upstairs. And I'd have the downstairs for extra storage since I don't have a whole lot in my little house. |
| 03:24:51.98 | Stuart Summers | And we didn't dare raise the roof. I advised against that five years ago. |
| 03:24:56.49 | Tyler Stewart | You know, I love all my neighbors in the neighborhood, and I just, like, I'm like, I don't want to fight. Like, I just want to build a little cute house for my mom and... Make the neighborhood better. That's it. |
| 03:25:10.99 | Kristina Feller | Well, great. What a wonderful project. Let's stop the clock there, Maria, if we could. So we've got a little over nine minutes there, nine minutes 11. That's your time if you wanna use it here in the future, that's If that's your presentation, then I think we're gonna go ahead and open it up to public comment. And you might wanna use that time after public comment And thank you for sharing your screen. It's nice to get a little tour um, of |
| 03:25:42.24 | Stuart Summers | I'm wondering how to turn it off. |
| 03:25:44.65 | Kristina Feller | I think you hit share screen again and you can stop sharing |
| 03:25:48.35 | Stuart Summers | Yeah, I just can't find the button and I'm supposed to be good at this. Oh, here we go. Okay, good. |
| 03:25:50.94 | Kristina Feller | Oh, here we go. Thank you. Okay. So I'll just make note that you've got some time left. Let me write that down. And I'm gonna go ahead and open this up for public Um, Well, actually, no, forgive me. I'm going to ask Ask the commissioners first if you have any questions for the applicant. Let's do that first. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have any questions for the applicant? |
| 03:26:13.54 | Maria | Thank you. Thank you. Can you give me one second? My presentation computer has frozen. |
| 03:26:19.80 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Yes, of course. |
| 03:26:20.41 | Maria | We're not streaming anything right now. |
| 03:26:23.36 | Kristina Feller | Okay, we'll hold. |
| 03:26:25.24 | Maria | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:26:27.77 | Kristina Feller | Everyone bear with us that's on here. Maria might need to reboot her computer so we live. |
| 03:27:48.93 | Maria | Chair Feller, we are back on. Thank you. |
| 03:27:50.83 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:27:50.98 | Maria | Okay. |
| 03:27:52.55 | Kristina Feller | Wonder if that's okay. Thank you very much, Maria, for catching that and rebooting. Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and ask Commissioner Luxenberg, if you have any questions for the applicant. |
| 03:28:03.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Collar. No questions for the applicant. |
| 03:28:06.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Graff. |
| 03:28:10.33 | Richard Graef | No questions. |
| 03:28:11.72 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Vice Chair Junius. |
| 03:28:14.06 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:28:16.10 | Kristina Feller | I do not have any either. And thank you for addressing the issue with the tree. That's really helpful. Okay, let's go ahead and open this up for public comments. So if you would like to comment, on this item this evening, if you could raise your hand in the Zoom application or press star nine on your cell phone. I will just start looking for raised hands While I'm looking for hands, Adam, can you just confirm any public comment we received in writing? |
| 03:28:43.68 | Adam East | Thank you, Chair Feller. We did receive one public comment submitted as late mail last night from a neighbor, Matt Smith at 416 Napa. If I could summarize, it would be that they believe that the findings could be met for this project. |
| 03:28:56.72 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Okay. I don't see any hands in the audience. So we're, I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment. Again, Ms. Stewart, if you wanna make any final comments, you're welcome to do that. You still have some time left. If not, we will start our, our deliberations on our virtual dais here. |
| 03:29:15.50 | Tyler Stewart | I think you guys all need to go to bed. I got nothing to say. |
| 03:29:18.58 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, would anybody like to start us off in the discussion or I'm willing to entertain a motion. Yes. |
| 03:29:33.07 | Andrew Junius | I had just a comment, really don't need anybody to respond to this, but it is kind of stunning to me that one of the triggers that why we're even hearing this is the fact of the interior removal of walls. The definition of demolition, not just in Sausalito, there's many other communities taken this route. I just personally don't agree with it. I think once you get inside somebody's house, you know, that's where the building code comes in and you should be able to design the house the way you want it. How the removal of interior walls Constitutes of demolition just seems silly to me. But anyway, with that, I would definitely make a motion to approve. Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.70 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Dan? |
| 03:30:16.12 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:30:16.22 | Richard Graef | I had a comment. |
| 03:30:16.27 | Kristina Feller | I know. |
| 03:30:16.30 | Andrew Junius | Oh, is that? |
| 03:30:17.20 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 03:30:18.97 | Richard Graef | Okay. |
| 03:30:19.33 | Andrew Junius | Bye. |
| 03:30:20.10 | Andrew Junius | That was my rant. Richard I thought I'd high. |
| 03:30:24.03 | Richard Graef | Yeah, no, it's okay. I think it's a great project. another winner. My, I was a little concerned about the, Um, all dark color. I mean, this is gonna end up being like a black out. And somehow that seemed to be Um, not appropriate. So that's my take on it, I think, you know, The materials, the overall design, everything looks great. Just the color, I think, is really disturbing to me. It's so dark. Well, I don't know if anybody else has that problem, Um, If nobody else has that problem, then otherwise, uh, I can make all the findings. |
| 03:31:18.76 | Kristina Feller | I don't have a problem with the color because it's such a small building on a larger lot. So I don't have a problem with it. but VICE CHAIR GENIUS, |
| 03:31:31.26 | Andrew Junius | I'm ready to move forward again. |
| 03:31:33.35 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxembourg? |
| 03:31:35.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand what Commissioner Graff is saying, but I don't have a problem with the color. |
| 03:31:43.40 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so we have a motion by Vice Chair Junius. We have a second by Commissioner Luxenberg. Commissioner Graff, your point is absolutely noted. Dan, if you can take roll call. |
| 03:31:58.52 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:31:58.53 | Dan | COMMISSION OF THAT. Yes. Commissioner Luxenberg? Vice Chair, Junior. Yes. Chair Filler. |
| 03:32:07.22 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:32:08.81 | Dan | Motion carries. Four to zero. Right. |
| 03:32:12.81 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. |
| 03:32:12.84 | Dan | Thank you very much. |
| 03:32:15.20 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:32:15.63 | Dan | You know, one refusal. |
| 03:32:17.01 | Kristina Feller | It's a recusal. |
| 03:32:17.99 | Dan | Yes. |
| 03:32:19.02 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good luck with your project. |
| 03:32:21.26 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:32:21.28 | Dan | Oh, man. |
| 03:32:21.62 | Andrew Junius | Bye. |
| 03:32:25.60 | Kristina Feller | OK. All right, so that concludes our public hearing. Let's move on to item seven, which is our business items. And Dan, I'll hand that to you. |
| 03:32:37.45 | Dan | So we have future agenda items. There should be a page in your agenda on the very last page. |
| 03:32:44.79 | Kristina Feller | Hold on, hold on, Dan, I'm sorry. There's a business item you have on our agenda. We're not quite to... |
| 03:32:44.97 | Dan | Come on. |
| 03:32:51.60 | Dan | Planning commission questions. I apologize. I was looking at future items. Um, So, Am I to refer to the questions that you wanted me to talk to the commission about? So, |
| 03:33:05.80 | Kristina Feller | So, |
| 03:33:06.76 | Dan | So we were. |
| 03:33:06.84 | Kristina Feller | So we were. Yes, we were issued several months ago an email from the former director asking for a priority list for budgeting purposes. And there was a initial list that was circulated with that one-way communication that we all received. And I don't know if anyone has any further thought or comment, I issued my own to to Dan, with one amendment to that list, including a master plan, THIS IS A for our time to decide what that priority list should be for budgeting. |
| 03:33:48.20 | Dan | And would you like me to read through them or would you like me to research later? |
| 03:33:51.70 | Kristina Feller | No, we need to decide that we can't keep not responding to this. |
| 03:33:52.10 | Dan | I... Okay. I have them open on my screen right now. |
| 03:33:57.84 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:33:58.82 | Dan | So the following list includes citywide master plan, Sausalito Municipal Code and Ordinance updates and revisions. I'm |
| 03:34:07.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sorry, Dan, can you just share your screen? It would be easier to see it when you read it. |
| 03:34:11.56 | Dan | Oh. Yeah, I didn't think about that. |
| 03:34:17.67 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:34:17.68 | Dan | I think it's this one. |
| 03:34:22.46 | Dan | And I'd share it over here. |
| 03:34:24.18 | Kristina Feller | There we go. |
| 03:34:25.75 | Dan | You can see it. |
| 03:34:26.92 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:34:28.37 | Dan | Oh, okay. So if you see down here, |
| 03:34:36.75 | Dan | Here are the items that Chair Feller sent to me. Those were based on, I did find Jim's email. And These are the ones that she sent. So citywide master plan. Municipal code and ordinance updates and revisions desperately needed. Objective design standards, design and development standards. They are current and ongoing. I had a meeting with Bob on them |
| 03:34:59.50 | Ms. Miranda | I had a... |
| 03:35:02.49 | Dan | have him bring me up to speed. The general plan update and implementation plan the development of the landscape and land side task force recommendations, including citywide GIS mapping, I design reviews and define geologic hazard areas and zones. citywide parking and circulation study. which definitely could be incorporated with the citywide master plan. Um, And then enforcement enforcement of CUP and MUPs, although not specifically, within the PC permit. the follow through of this is essential. And I think that becomes a code enforcement issue. |
| 03:35:46.16 | Dan | Is there any ideas or opinions on those? |
| 03:35:52.30 | Andrew Junius | I'll kick it off just to, if we're just doing a round table here, you know, the The odds thing, the objective design standards, you know, hopefully we're gonna be getting that wrapped up in the next couple months, which is the first incredibly important step you know, make sure we're in somewhat compliant with state law, the Housing Accountability Act and a lot of these other laws coming out of Sacramento objective standards for applicants to be able to look at when they first apply. So this is not going to be over when we're done with the first cut here. It's going to this is really probably going to just keep going and continue to be refined over the coming years. Um, So, I mean, I don't think we can get away with that. And I do think that's an interesting one because we've at least got some momentum. You know, we have a consultant on board. We've got some money for that. We're going to get a result. And then, I mean, I'm definitely committed to continuing to kind of nibble around the edges on that and keep the discussion going because it's not. It's so, it really is complex, especially when you talk about things like views and we're probably not going to get it right the first time. And so it's going to be an ongoing process. And so I think it is important for a variety of reasons. And then I was also, I mean, I'm very supportive of, you know, eventually getting around to updating the codes. They do need to, I think there's some opportunities here to simplify you know, and rationalize some of the codes a lot of times cities, municipal ordinances, you know, it's easier just to keep adding to it. It's like a geologic formation. It just gets deeper and more convoluted and complex. And I'm very familiar with that from San Francisco. And I think it's time to take a really close look at the, at least the zoning code here, the zoning ordinance, and try to see where we can start to slim things down. Because while, you know, I think at a high level I think the staff you know does a commendable job and tries to you know deal with all the detail Thank you. But it's I think a lot of the detail and processes is kind of you know, crushing us. We're a small town. We don't have a large staff. And I think if we can do things to simplify and streamline from the code standpoint, I think that would be extremely helpful. So those are going to be my two focuses in the coming year, you know, years while I'm on the commission. So thank you, Chair Ferling. |
| 03:38:14.52 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. Commissioner Saad. |
| 03:38:18.68 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller, and thank you for putting together that list, I definitely agree. Definitely agree with Commissioner Junius. I think the municipal code is critical. I don't know if you have these in order of importance by any means. Okay, I would just call out the enforcement to your note. I know it's not in our remit, but I do wanna highlight that I think it's really important. an area that and needs attention. So I just have my extra backing on that one, but I think that's a solid list. Happy to support all of these. |
| 03:38:51.01 | Kristina Feller | Right. Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 03:38:54.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I thank you, Chair Fowler. I concur that the code ordinance updates are a critical priority for the next year. And I actually think that the implementation plan for the general plan, the code will take care of some of that. So some of the implementation of the general plan is code revisions. And I want to second commissioner Saad's uh concurrence on enforcement. been sorely lacking in the last year and needs to be strongly addressed. over the next year. That's what thoughts it about. |
| 03:39:29.16 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you. Commissioner Graff? |
| 03:39:32.81 | Richard Graef | Yeah, I concur. These are all important items. I think the, yes to the codes, updating it can be very confusing. Um, Hmm. I would also support encouraging enforcement. Ah. throughout. I'm not quite sure what Um, the master plan, would consist of, but Um, Um, I'm a fan of master plan. Um, Parking and circulation, I think is another one that, uh, I think also is important. So it's a good group. of efforts, yeah. |
| 03:40:21.71 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Yeah, I mean, you know, if you just look at our state, you know, the state mandate, our sort of legislative mandate as a planning commission, you know, here in California, the fact that The Florida is so small, but we still don't have an actual master plan. for the city, I think, you know, It inherently sort of handicaps the planning commission So we are responsible for the overall master plan of the city. And so that's. you know, these are not in order, but I still think that it's the root of a lot of issues that could be easily solved if we actually had one. Um, And I think that that could easily be combined with the parking and transportation circulation that should just be a part of that master plan. But right now, we look at things and we approve things and we have zoning obviously. But there's no really vision or forethought into what things should be. So we're always being very reactive and not being very proactive. And I would love to see us move into a more proactive mode That can also inform our community a little bit about what's the bigger plan. So we know that you know, we just know what's going on. I think some of these could probably be combined together. but we really do need to be clear to the city council where where the priorities and efforts need to be in funding and supporting the tools that we need as a planning commission, or some of the initiatives that we should really be be pushing. So, but if there are more ideas, I mean, this is not meant to be an exhaustive list. I mean, if there's more ideas you know, special areas or thoughts that you might have we've got to respond to the city council. We can't continue to wait to give them our list because budgeting will be done will be done and there'll be no money for any of this. If we don't, if we're not clear with them. |
| 03:42:35.11 | Kristina Feller | So should we try to DAN, CAN YOU Can we try to maybe combine a couple bullet points on this list together and then issue to the city council. with the sentiments from the commission here with the priorities on municipal codes and things of that kind. |
| 03:42:56.30 | Dan | and to a memo to council to inform them on some needs of the planning commission. |
| 03:43:02.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:43:03.34 | Dan | I'll, you know, their charge to you is to, you know, upload the the zoning ordinance and then, you know, general plan and so forth and You need tools to do that. |
| 03:43:14.88 | Kristina Feller | Right. So perhaps maybe we can work along with vice chair Junius to prepare one-way communication to city council AND I THINK IT'S A and we're going to have a sort of summarizing the priorities and thoughts of this commission. and get that to them maybe by next week. |
| 03:43:39.71 | Andrew Junius | around to look at anything you guys prepare. |
| 03:43:42.39 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Any other thoughts or comments on this? |
| 03:43:48.43 | Dan | If you didn't see in the email, I did talk to Monica from EDAC and she's going to try to put something together. |
| 03:43:48.45 | Kristina Feller | Ah. |
| 03:43:55.50 | Kristina Feller | Oh, for the business and retail strategy. |
| 03:43:55.53 | Dan | Oh, for sure. Yeah, I will stay on top of that, try to get something done there. |
| 03:44:01.15 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, that's pretty, pretty important too. |
| 03:44:03.74 | Dan | Yeah. |
| 03:44:04.12 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and Sergio, do we have to take public comment on this item if it's a business item? That's a procedural question. |
| 03:44:13.02 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, basically you're supposed to take public comment on any item that's on an agenda. |
| 03:44:17.49 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Um, well, uh, okay, let's go ahead and stop share screen. Let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. So for any member of the public who would like to comment on this item, if you could raise your hand in the Zoom application or press star nine on your cell phone. Seeing no hands raised, I'm gonna close public comment. And I think we can probably move on to item number eight, future agenda items. |
| 03:44:47.98 | Dan | Okay, last page of your agenda is the May 4th planning commission. We have. five projects. We are hopefully going to get a new, uh, another go with this be nine from Mary. DPW has a design review for ferry landing. Um... Community Development has 253 Glen, changes to an approved project. MIG has 177 CAS new design review permit, encroachment agreement, accessory dwelling unit, tree removal permit, And then 201 Bridgeway changes to an approved project. And so far on the 18th, We only have two 5262 Varta landing, which is design review. And to start 2015 Bridgeway, which is a conditional unit. |
| 03:45:43.75 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. |
| 03:45:46.10 | Dan | We do have pending projects that are shown on there. And I know staff is meeting with 7074 in the near future. Liberty ship. |
| 03:45:59.03 | Dan | That's all for now. |
| 03:46:01.12 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um... Well, and we'll, we're resuming our normal agenda setting before we publish the agenda to make sure |
| 03:46:11.51 | Dan | Yes. |
| 03:46:12.29 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:46:12.46 | Dan | Yes, we are. |
| 03:46:13.64 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. |
| 03:46:14.30 | Dan | Absolutely, that would have helped me this week considerably. trying to get in there and answer everything. |
| 03:46:19.63 | Kristina Feller | I'm trying to- |
| 03:46:21.88 | Dan | Everything I could so that that'll help me considerably. So we'll meet next week |
| 03:46:25.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. Thank you. |
| 03:46:27.26 | Dan | Perfect. |
| 03:46:27.76 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:46:27.78 | Dan | you |
| 03:46:27.86 | Kristina Feller | No. |
| 03:46:28.71 | Andrew Junius | We're doing that on Thursday morning. Is that still the idea? |
| 03:46:28.84 | Dan | We're doing that. |
| 03:46:32.59 | Dan | Yeah, so next week's a little tight for me, but we can do it on Thursday morning. |
| 03:46:33.30 | Andrew Junius | Thanks, man. |
| 03:46:37.58 | Dan | I have to have the agenda and everything posted And, and, and, um, All the staff reports updated and gone through and approved. by Thursday. not Friday next week. So, Hopefully we'll have the agenda set. We can still talk about it and we'll get that done. |
| 03:46:55.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. you All right, this let Andrew and I know what time |
| 03:47:00.20 | Dan | Yeah. |
| 03:47:00.22 | Kristina Feller | that will happen and yeah, perfect. |
| 03:47:03.62 | Dan | Okay. |
| 03:47:05.09 | Kristina Feller | You know, just as a side note regarding future agenda items, I think maybe some of the takeaways from this evening is the quality of these reports and the the QAQC and just I think a lot of this could be avoided we obviously fully understand and recognize that CDD has been a bit topsy-turvy and and hopefully you're you're helping riding the ship I think you are |
| 03:47:20.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:47:39.15 | Kristina Feller | But particularly when we're dealing with some of the consulting and contracting firms, we're not really getting what we need. And let's just make sure that when it comes to the commission, that it's ready. We don't like continuing hearings if we don't have to. We don't certainly don't like continuing them because information's incorrect. Absolutely. So, you know, whatever we can do to help that, and maybe this agenda setting will continue to help that. |
| 03:48:03.12 | Patrick Murphy | Absolutely. |
| 03:48:10.57 | Kristina Feller | That's great, but I would rather postpone or delay or cancel something if it's not gonna be Fruitful. |
| 03:48:21.00 | Dan | You know that. |
| 03:48:23.00 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So I guess we have to take public comment on future agenda items, which is item number eight. Yes, Commissioner Buxton. |
| 03:48:31.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure. Before we do that, I just want to make a comment on SB9. Sergio is now taking over for Mary with regard to that item, my understanding. So I'm just, he's still on online here. If he can get Andrew and I comments on the questions we have by the end of this week, we can make that, we can make that agenda item. But so I just wanted to make him aware of that since he was, this was just given to him recently, so. |
| 03:49:02.69 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, thank you. |
| 03:49:03.98 | Andrew Junius | for making me aware of that. |
| 03:49:06.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 03:49:07.13 | Andrew Junius | And Commissioner Luxembourg, did we provide Sergio with our red line at this point? because we're in pretty good shape if we can get those questions answered. |
| 03:49:14.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, we were waiting to give them the red lines. We had the questions, but we might want to set up a Zoom call at some point. |
| 03:49:20.56 | Andrew Junius | Right, yeah, the questions might inform a few more tweaks to the suggestions we're making with the red line. Yeah. Sooner the better, Sergio. I know you're busy, but welcome aboard. |
| 03:49:30.01 | Dan | Okay. |
| 03:49:30.25 | Andrew Junius | award. Thank you. |
| 03:49:32.60 | Dan | For what it's worth, I forwarded a a draft application SB9 application and checklist for both urban law splits and SB9 structures to marry Heidi today, I guess I should probably send it to you too, Sergio. Um, So we're gonna try to work on that as well internally. |
| 03:49:55.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's go ahead and take public comment on item number eight, future agenda items. To make public comment, if you could raise your hand in the Zoom application. Alternatively, you can hit star nine if you have dialed in by cell phone. So I'm just looking for any hands in the audience. Seeing none, I will close public comment. And I would entertain a motion to adjourn. |
| 03:50:23.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, Thank you. |
| 03:50:25.45 | Kristina Feller | ALL IN FAVOR. |
| 03:50:25.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:50:27.07 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:50:27.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Right. |
| 03:50:27.24 | Kristina Feller | Exactly. |
| 03:50:27.59 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:50:27.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:50:27.91 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you everybody. Have a good evening. |
| 03:50:29.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sorry. |
| 03:50:29.70 | Andrew Junius | Thanks, everybody. |
| 03:50:30.71 | Nastassya Saad | Nice to see you guys. Have a good night. |
| 03:50:30.73 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 03:50:30.83 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:50:32.05 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
Patrick Murphy — Against: Mr. Murphy, a neighbor, shared a document and photographs showing view impacts from his master bedroom and porch, arguing the obstruction was greater than the applicant claimed. He urged the commission to impose strict conditions and oversight to ensure the project is built as approved without further impacts. ▶ 📄