| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 00:00:05.50 | Maria | And then once I hit that, then I let everybody in. And once everybody joins, then I said, Chair Feller, I hand it over to you and it takes over. Okay, Chair Feller, if all the public is in, I hand it over to you. |
| 00:00:21.11 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you so much, Maria, and for all your support for tonight. Good evening everybody and welcome to our regular planning commission hearing for Wednesday, July 20th. I would like to call this meeting to order. And I'd like Interim Director Dan Hortert to please call roll and orientate the public to our proceedings virtually this evening. |
| 00:00:43.18 | Dan | Thank you. Good evening, Chair Feller and Planning Commissioners. This meeting is being held pursuant to government code section 54953, subsection E. And in light of the declared state of emergency, The regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 20th, 2022 will be conducted telephonically through Zoom and broadcast live on the city's website. |
| 00:01:06.75 | Kristina Feller | Excellent, thank you. Can you please call the roll? |
| 00:01:11.14 | Dan | Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:01:12.90 | Kristina Feller | here? |
| 00:01:13.20 | Dan | Thank you. COMMISSIONER GRAFFIT. |
| 00:01:14.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:01:14.91 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF |
| 00:01:14.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sorry. |
| 00:01:15.11 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:01:15.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:01:15.61 | Dan | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:01:16.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | here. |
| 00:01:17.76 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. Thank you. Chair Feller. |
| 00:01:21.25 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:01:21.88 | Dan | We have a forum. |
| 00:01:23.09 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Moving on to item number two, we might have a motion or comment to approve the agenda as published. |
| 00:01:33.64 | Maria | So if I moved? |
| 00:01:36.22 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I think that was motioned by Commissioner Saad and seconded by Commissioner Braff. Director Hortert, can you take roll call? |
| 00:01:43.64 | Dan | Commissioner Saad? Yes. Commissioner Graff? Commissioner Luxenberg? Thank you. |
| 00:01:48.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:01:48.96 | Dan | Thank you. Vice Chair Junius? Yes. Chair Feller? |
| 00:01:52.55 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:01:53.31 | Dan | Motion carries. |
| 00:01:54.65 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Moving on to item three, this is the time to take public comment on any items not on the agenda this evening. Director Horter, can you please advise the public how they can raise their hand in the Zoom application or by cell phone? |
| 00:02:09.50 | Dan | Yes, thank you, Chair. This is the time for the Planning Commission to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. except in very limited situations, state law precludes the planning commission from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the Planning Commission may refer matters not on the agenda to staff or direct the subject to be agendized in 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 9. Each speaker will be notified when the time is elapsed. |
| 00:02:57.44 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. So at this time, I'm just looking for raised hands in the audience. I will call upon you in the order I see you on my screen. Don't be alarmed, it might be different than the order on your screen, but I will get to everybody with a raised hand. I am not seeing any raised hands, so I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment. And I'll move on to item number four, which is the approval of the Planning Commission meeting minutes. We have two items in front of us this evening. We have June 29th. as 4A and July 6 as 4B. I will take those separately. Let's start with 4A, June 29th. Are there any comments on those meeting minutes or requested edits? Just by a show of hands, I will ask if anyone has comments. Seeing no hand, I'll take a motion to approve the minutes as published. |
| 00:03:55.01 | Maria | MAKE THE MOTION. |
| 00:03:57.23 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I'm not going to be a good one. Thank you, Vice Chair. Dan, can you take roll call? |
| 00:04:03.32 | Dan | Commissioner Saad? COMMISSIONER GRAFF? Thank you. |
| 00:04:06.35 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:04:06.47 | Dan | Thank you. COMMISSIONER LUXENBERG. Thank you. |
| 00:04:08.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | See you guys. |
| 00:04:09.61 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Mayor Feller? |
| 00:04:12.85 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:04:13.46 | Dan | Motion carries. |
| 00:04:14.56 | Kristina Feller | Great, let's move on to 4B, which is the July 6th meeting. Again, by show of hands, any comments on those meeting minutes? Yes, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:04:25.42 | Jeffery Luxenberg | uh... uh... i have a series of comments on page one uh... line forty five we indicate that the minutes were approved as amended but the amendments are not shown there uh... and um... the I looked for those minutes online to see if the changes were made. Those minutes are not online. I then look for the resolution that Interim Director Holbert said he would correct, along with the minutes. And I note the following, that the resolution is incorrect in a number of instances. So I want to add the following statement in line 43, which is as follows. Commissioner Luxenberg described several conditions for the el portal project that were recorded incorrectly interim director hortard indicated that he would make sure that those conditions in the resolution were corrected prior to being posted and the meeting minutes were amended to reflect those changes so i want to add that language i want to note that i went to the resolution number 22 20 22-13 which was the reference in those meeting notes and condition 23 is uh is wrong it says that we wanted to take out the tables closest to Bridgeway. That was just incorrect and that is not what we approved at the time. So that needs to be corrected. Condition 29 still doesn't have the additional wording that says that the number of laboratory facilities has to be sufficient for both the indoor and outdoor seats. So that is still incorrect. And I think there may be others that are not correct. So I want to first add that those notes and I want assurances that we were not only fix the minutes, but fix fix the resolution. In addition to those comments on page three, line 17 and 18, it's hard, but the line numbers don't line up exactly. So it's hard to know which one is whether it's 17 or 18. But I made a reference to that SB 9 went through a first reading and a second reading. I did not say that the Parklets have had a first reading and a second reading. That's just incorrect. And so I suggest just taking that line out because it's just wrong. On page 3, line 20, to the discussion about a fee, not a sewer fee. Thank you. on page three line 20 to the discussion about uh there was a discussion about a fee not a sewer feed so it was a fee it was a dollar amount that we were talking about not uh some sort of piping so the word feed should be changed to fee on line page 3 line 20. I'm also going to recommend until we get a resolution that we have had the L. Portel approval resolution corrected properly that we not approve these minutes until the next meeting and we see both the revised minutes from the last meeting as well as these revised as well as the resolution at the next meeting before we approve the minutes so that that'll be my recommendation but i'm interested in what others may want to do so those are the comments i have at this time i'm sure others may have other comments |
| 00:08:07.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg, and always appreciate your attention to detail on that. Commissioner Saad? |
| 00:08:13.79 | Nastassya Saad | I just accidentally scrolled, so I've lost my page number, but in the condition of approvals as well, there's a mistake on the, timing that we decided on for the outdoor dining and I will find it. but it said that we had approved for 11 PM for outside dining, but we had agreed upon 1030. So I'll look for that. but just a note, it was one of the final conditions of approval. So it was indoor dining till midnight, outdoor dining to stop at 10.30 PM. Thank you. Not 11 as listed. |
| 00:08:56.40 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Graff, do you have any further comments on these meeting notes for an item 4B? No, I don't. Okay, Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:09:06.34 | Andrew Junius | No comments, but I do support Commissioner Luxembourg's desire to |
| 00:09:06.66 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I'm not. |
| 00:09:09.92 | Andrew Junius | push this out. |
| 00:09:11.17 | Kristina Feller | Yes, I agree. I would like to make a motion to defer this to our next hearing in September. And I would like to request our city attorney, Sergio Rudin, assigned to the Planning Commission to please review these resolutions. We had directed our attorney to do so before they are finalized and published. And I would like to, nominate if I can Commissioner Luxembourg to work with you to help identify the areas that he has |
| 00:09:44.53 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:09:45.32 | Kristina Feller | listed this evening on pages one, pages, and a couple on page three. to make sure that we get this right. And then director Hortert, if you could defer to Sergio and Commissioner Luxenberg and work with them to come back with a revision That is correct, including the meeting minutes from July 6th at our September 7th hearing, which is our next hearing since we're on August recess. I would like to take a roll call to defer these with those conditions. And you would. |
| 00:10:21.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Chair Feller, I would like to second that motion. I would like to also note that I would like to get the resolution fixed before meeting in September, because that project's under construction and these conditions have to be on any revised building plans they submit. So if we could get the resolution fixed, should the resolution should not wait until the meeting. I just wanna make that note in the motion, if you would allow. |
| 00:10:21.54 | Michael Lappert | CHAIRMAN BRYANT. |
| 00:10:21.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:10:21.98 | Michael Lappert | Bye. |
| 00:10:22.09 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:10:47.59 | Kristina Feller | Fair enough, fair enough. Sergio, if you are there and listening, If you could come up on camera and just confirm that you're available to help correct these resolutions per the commission's direction at our hearing, that would be great. Yeah, absolutely. |
| 00:11:04.91 | Unknown | as Thank you. |
| 00:11:06.04 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, absolutely. |
| 00:11:06.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:11:07.79 | Kristina Feller | Appreciate that. Thank you. Okay, so we have a motion, we have a second. Any other comment? If not, Director Horturk, can you? Oh, yes, Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:11:17.61 | Nastassya Saad | I just found it's, Condition 30 online, excuse me, on page 24. That's the hours of operation, just to call that out. Okay. Okay, that's all. |
| 00:11:28.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, so if Director of Court, Sergio, if you could make note of that, page 24, line 30. regarding the hours of operation. Let's get that fixed. Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Dan, can you take roll call, please? |
| 00:11:45.10 | Dan | Yes. Commissioner Graff? Yes. Commissioner Luxembourg? |
| 00:11:48.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Bye. |
| 00:11:49.17 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:11:49.20 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:11:49.24 | Dan | Vice Chair Juniast? Yes. Chair Feller? |
| 00:11:52.46 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:11:52.48 | Dan | Yes. Motion carries. |
| 00:11:54.16 | Kristina Feller | Right, thank you. Moving on to item number five, communications. This is a time really for one way communications. We will take public comment at the end of communications for those of you in the audience listening. either here on Zoom or at home Director Hordrick, can I start with you, with city staff, any report outs that you'd like to make? |
| 00:12:17.42 | Dan | We just recently brought on a housing policy planner, Luke Dell and Leonard Bush. to help with the HE Act. Um, And we are starting a new code enforcement officer next week, Eric Stevens. He will begin on Tuesday. part-time, a couple days a week to start maybe three ultimately. |
| 00:12:39.79 | Kristina Feller | outstanding we look forward to to meeting him i've had the pleasure of meeting luke he's a wonderful And I know we'll all look forward to working with him Any other items to report out? And we had requested some information in our last hearing. I'm not sure if you're prepared to report out on those. |
| 00:12:56.86 | Dan | I'm not. I'm not at this time. |
| 00:13:00.38 | Kristina Feller | All right, Sergio from the city attorney's office. Is there anything to report out on at this time? |
| 00:13:06.88 | Sergio Rudin | No, nothing from the city attorney's office. Thank you. |
| 00:13:09.19 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much. Let's move on to report out from subcommittees. I'd like to start actually with a report out on the housing element advisory committee. And we are fortunate enough to have Our consultant, Beth Thompson here with us this evening from DeNovo, who has been working with us tirelessly for quite some time. Our initial meeting was in October of last year. And the purpose of asking Beth just to is. come this evening to provide a more in depth summary of where we are and specifically where we need to go and what the planning commission as different than the two commissioners, including myself and Commissioner Sada been working on with the HEAC on the committee but Beth can help orientate us to sort of the future requirements and what we're looking for. So if I can, if Maria, if you have co-hosted Beth, then she can also share her screen and just report out to the commission on where we are, where we need to go and how we need to engage. Beth, over to you. |
| 00:14:20.10 | Beth Thompson | Good evening Chair Fowler and members of the Commission. It's great to be at my first Planning Commission meeting with the city and I'm excited to give you an update on the housing element and I will try to keep it brief. Housing elements are pretty meaty documents, so there's a lot to talk about. |
| 00:14:33.90 | Sergio Rudin | a lot to talk about. |
| 00:14:35.47 | Beth Thompson | Yeah. |
| 00:14:36.15 | Sergio Rudin | before we actually dive in on this, this isn't on our agenda. |
| 00:14:39.73 | Unknown | So. |
| 00:14:41.29 | Sergio Rudin | Well, so with respect to report out from subcommittees, this is you know, really impended, this works under the exception of the Brown Act for brief reports on the activities of commissioners themselves. So the way that this is listed on our agenda, it is really intended to be a brief report on by by the commissioners on their own activities and you know the the activities that they are undertaking under their own subcommittees. So you know to the extent that we're going to have a you know our consultant make an in-depth presentation on the housing elements have a policy discussion on you know where we need to go from here that is something we actually really do need to agendize in order to properly move forward under the brown hat. |
| 00:15:24.17 | Kristina Feller | Okay, well, thank you, Sergio, for interrupting. Is it okay for Beth just to let the commission know when she needs us to be engaging with her in the future or is that still not acceptable? |
| 00:15:40.25 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, let's keep this very, very brief. The Brown Act does allow for us to have unagendized brief comments from staff, unagendized brief comments from commissioners, brief reports on their own activities. So as long as we can keep this very brief, I think that will be fine. |
| 00:15:57.26 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, appreciate you defining the guardrails and Beth, if you can play within there and just let the commission know what's coming down the pike and when they need, you know, you need us on deck as a commission to input. |
| 00:16:11.02 | Beth Thompson | Absolutely, and as the Commission does, since you and Commissioner Saad have been reporting back the. He has been working toward getting a draft housing element available for the community to review and so. I'll just quickly highlight what will be included in the draft housing elements so you're aware of what the he is working on and will be looking at it will include a housing plan. That's the meat of the housing element it identifies this goals policies and programs the city is committing to. So when the HEAC is reviewing this document, as well as the planning commission, we're really wanting you to pay close attention to the housing plan because that's really the commitment component of the housing element. It will also include socioeconomic and demographic information addressing the city's housing needs, an overview of the city's regulatory requirements that may constrain housing production as well as well as non-governmental constraints. It will include the inventory of sites and resources for housing, and I'll get to that in a couple of slides. It includes an analysis of the city's efforts to further fair housing as well as conditions in the city that may be constraining fair housing opportunities. And it also addresses the previous housing element and will also be asking the commissioners to look closely at the implementation of the previous housing elements since a lot of the housing element implementation are items that come up with the commission. So, WHERE WE'VE BEEN, So far, a lot has been done. Last fall, we started a series of focus group meetings. There have been plentiful opportunities for the community and stakeholders to engage. So we've held four focus group sessions with a variety of stakeholders. We've had several surveys to get input and these are all of this information is reflected in the draft housing element of the town hall was held as well as the initial. He act meetings to identify the vision for the housing element and begin establishing vision existing conditions. Winter through summer 2022 we began identifying the opportunity sites, these are areas where. densities may be increased and may be rezoned to accommodate the city's housing requirements, which I'll also discuss in a few more slides. And the HIAC has reviewed these in depth at many, many five hour meetings. So meetings four through seven of the HIAC went through those sites in great detail. So when those sites are coming forward to the planning commission, the HIAC has looked at those in detail, the public has commented on them, and I'm anticipating we'll still receive a lot of comments from the public. We also worked to identify property owner and development interest called a second town hall to present the initial draft sites to the community and get feedback and also went to the city council with the he act recommendation to get the. some direction from the city council on the final list of sites to be included in the draft housing element, so we are currently. have the HEAC review draft housing element available. So this is available for the planning commission to begin taking a look at, it's available for the community to begin taking a look at, and the HEAC will begin discussing it at its next meeting. And so we anticipate getting HEAC review as well as a lot of public review and comment on this initial draft, and this is a preliminary draft. Following the review of this draft, and I have a slide, a few more slides in, we'll go through a process to refine that for public review, then state review, and then to bring it to the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption hearings. So. The city is in the process of uploading the draft housing element materials to the website that will be on the he acts July 25 agenda, it will be posted in the he act virtual binder and we anticipate that will also be advertised in Friday's current newsletter. Now this isn't the formal public review draft that will be available for a 30 day public review period, this is a preliminary draft for he act review and input. prior to publication of the public review draft housing element. The community, however, is still invited to comment on this preliminary draft so that we can get it right and really reflect what the community's needs are. As you're probably all well aware, the city has received a, large increase, you know, hundreds of percent more increase in its rena than any of your previous cycles. So you have 724 units we're working to accommodate. And when we bring this to the Planning Commission, we'll go through the site suitability criteria and how those sites were identified. An important thing to keep in mind when we're looking at the very low and low income sites, those sites need to be typically at least a half acre in size. And Sausalito has very few sites that are large enough to accommodate that very low income rena. And so when we're looking at the sites, we also look at the densities that are needed to accommodate those lower income units and looking at the city's current Lower income housing, we've identified that your current lower income housing is typically at 40 to 71 units per acre. So where we're identifying sites to accommodate the city's future lower income needs, we're looking at sites that will be rezoned to accommodate about 49 to 70 units per acre. to accommodate your regional housing need allocation. I apologize, the RENA is the regional housing need allocation the number of units the city's been allocated from the association and bay area governments through the hcd review process to to accommodate during this sixth cycle And in accommodating those units, there are a number of paths forward to accommodating those units. city has sites that have existing capacity under your current zoning so those will accommodate about 118 units we've we've identified sites that will accommodate about 613 additional units through the opportunity site process you currently have approved and permitted projects that accommodate about 25 units and then looking at the accessory dwelling unit law and at the law for senate bill nine units we're anticipating about 64 |
| 00:21:47.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:21:59.79 | Beth Thompson | Thank you. ADUs will be accommodated during the sixth cycle and 52 about SB9 units will be accommodated. So that gets you to a total of 872 units. So there's definitely some wiggle room. So when this comes to the plan, back to the HIAC and to the Planning Commission, there's definitely some opportunities to refine the sites. So there is some excess capacity, about 148 units. You'll notice there is not excess capacity for the above moderate income category. And that's because we can carry over the excess and the lower income, the very low, low, and moderate income toward that above moderate. So that's the only income bracket where you can kind of carry forward some of your capacity. |
| 00:22:02.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | AND I THINK IT'S A |
| 00:22:42.81 | Beth Thompson | And I won't go through the map in detail that as I said, the he act draft housing element will be available for review. It has all of the sites identified in detail. There's an inventory of sites, which is a intensive spreadsheet with a lot of data about each site and there's several maps that show the sites and classify the sites. So coming forward to where you're really interested in, where we are in the process, we're anticipating the HEAC will review the draft housing element at two meetings. So July 25th, and then a second meeting in early August. Following the HEAC comments, we'll revise the housing element, and that will go out for a 30-day public review period. So we're going to get a lot of comments from the community on that draft, Once we have those comments, we will address those comments and create a HCD housing element review draft. So that draft will go to the state for 90 days. During that time period, we'll check in with the planning commission. You'll see what has gone to the state for review. The state has been commenting in detail on almost every single housing element that's come their way in the last year or so. So we expect to get a lot of comments from the state. And as we address those comments, we'll come back to the planning commission to get your input on the revisions that are being made to address the comments, as well as revisions being made to address public comments, because we anticipate receiving a chunk of public comments during that time as well. Following the refinements to the housing element to address the state's comments, it will then come to the planning, we'll create an adoption draft housing element. It will show all the revisions and track changes. And that will come to the planning commission early next year for a recommendation to the city council. And then we'll go to the city council. So you'll see it a couple of times. It will be a large document, a lot of data, and we are pretty fast paced. There's a deadline to adopt the housing element at the end of January. There's a... kind of a grace period, about 120 days, where you adopt it within that period after the January deadline, you aren't penalized following that period, you then get penalized with a shorter time frame to rezone your sites. So, With that, um, I, That's the presentation. |
| 00:24:57.97 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Beth. That certainly helps Commissioner Saad and I, the Planning Commission's liaisons to the Housing Element Advisory Committee, or HEAC as we call it. Um, we, as you mentioned, uh, we do have our next. HIEAC meeting on Monday the 25th, so this coming Monday. at 6 p.m. It's a virtual meeting. I encourage everybody to please look for the draft housing report. to review. Prior to that, we will be taking public comment on that Monday. and certainly the August date that you've mentioned as well. Commissioners, I would recommend the great way to sort of get up to speed on HIAC Commissioner Thott, anything to add on that report? |
| 00:25:54.32 | Nastassya Saad | I don't think I can outdo Beth, so I will defer to her, but yes, just to the public to continue to come and join us on Monday and all of our future meetings. Thank you. |
| 00:26:06.94 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Thank you, Beth. |
| 00:26:09.78 | Nastassya Saad | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:26:10.10 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Let's move on to the next item, which is the objective design and development standards subcommittee. |
| 00:26:17.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Chair Fowler, before we move on, can I just request that the consultants send the Planning Commission a one-way communication when the public draft goes out with the actual draft so that we don't have to go fishing for it? |
| 00:26:35.58 | Kristina Feller | Yes, we can organize that through Director Hortert for sure. . And I believe that document's live, so that just today. |
| 00:26:41.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and I'm just... |
| 00:26:46.03 | Kristina Feller | So absolutely. |
| 00:26:47.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I'm looking for the one that goes out to the public and not this one, the next one. |
| 00:26:50.06 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:26:52.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 00:26:53.48 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's move on to objective design development standards subcommittee or odds as we call it. Vice Chair Junius, if you wanna update on that, some of this does sort of teeter on the edge of HIAC as well. So let's keep rolling on that. |
| 00:27:09.24 | Andrew Junius | Yep, thank you, Chair Feller. So our little subcommittee met on the 16th of July Bob Brown. and gave an update as to where we were with the are I think gonna take longer than we thought. I think a lot of that has to do with the interaction with the housing element as well. It was a very robust discussion. We're still dealing with a variety of issues regarding views and parking. both. and trying to make sure that the objective program matches up with the housing elements And then I frankly turn it back over to you Chair Feller since there was a subsequent meeting that I was unable to attend regarding some of the studies that are underway So you can certainly update the community on that. |
| 00:27:52.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. As part of the objective design standards, there is some overlap actually with what the housing element is needing and requiring as well to help communicate to the public the impact of densities in in certain parts of town. So for the objective design standards, we've identified six different sites here in Sausalito that have varying different elements and considerations different parts of town and so on And OptiCoast is gonna help us develop three-dimensional massing studies so the public can and study those and understand the impact of density and the impact of 724 units throughout Sausalito. we've identified some of the more difficult sites to help sort of the conversation and consideration around that. And we're looking for Opticos to start that even as early as next week. And I think that's going to be a very, very helpful and robust tool to help the conversation and to help really understand the three dimensional impacts of these housing requirements. So that's that. Vice Chair Junius, do you wanna update us on the legislative committee? |
| 00:29:18.83 | Andrew Junius | Sure, thank you, Chair Feller. update from the last report on AB AB 2011 is still pending before the Appropriations Committee That really is, I think the largest piece of new legislation out of Sacramento that will be affecting every city in California. if it passes. related to and expanding the the reach of these pro-housing laws and into non-residential districts. district's office and retail and parking are committed. we're continuing to track that. and in September I'm sure there'll be some more to report |
| 00:29:56.09 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have anything to add? |
| 00:30:01.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, not on the legislative working thing. |
| 00:30:05.76 | Kristina Feller | Great, then let's move on to carklets. Commissioner Luxenberg, would you like to update everybody on our parklet program? |
| 00:30:15.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Nothing's changed since the last meeting. We need to have another meeting of the working group to address some of the items that came out with the chamber and then we can develop an implementation program with the working group and with Sergio Rubin. |
| 00:30:31.49 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:30:31.51 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:30:31.53 | Kristina Feller | Very good. Um, let's see with that, there are A couple initiatives that I'm hoping that we can get some report outs on in terms of status. The first is a working group. that was identified for 110 4th Street, Commissioner Sodden, Commissioner Graff, Do you have an update for us at this time? Thank you. |
| 00:30:52.40 | Nastassya Saad | I'm. Chair Feller, actually I'd like to ask, I did ask for some clarification and instructions from our Community Development Director, Dan, do you have, were you able to be in touch with them? |
| 00:31:04.80 | Dan | I have not, but I offered to reach out to them to follow through with their conditions. So I have not been able to get a hold of them yet. I'm either one of the ones that you're working with on. |
| 00:31:17.39 | Nastassya Saad | THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DAN. I THINK WE'LL WAIT FOR THE connection to be made and then Commissioner Graf and I have connected so we're ready to go as soon as the applicant is for either or both projects |
| 00:31:34.55 | Dan | Madam Chair, as soon as I get a hold of them, I'll connect them via email. |
| 00:31:38.40 | Kristina Feller | Excellent, excellent, thank you very much. Um, How about 12 El Portal? Again, Commissioner Saad and Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:31:49.52 | Nastassya Saad | Same pattern, so we'll wait for a connection from Community Development Director Horses. |
| 00:31:49.89 | Kristina Feller | STATE. |
| 00:31:55.83 | Kristina Feller | Okay, very good. Um, then I was remiss in assigning a working group at our last hearing for 52 Barta landing. Although on the record, we did commit to doing that. I just was remiss in actually assigning that And just to refresh to everyone's memory, that was a working group. to work with the applicant on the the color and the finish of the exterior siding of that structure. So if I could, I would ask Commissioner Stott and Commissioner Braff if they would be willing to sit on that working group. Again, you both work so well. if you're willing to do so. |
| 00:32:38.31 | Nastassya Saad | Be happy to. |
| 00:32:40.64 | Kristina Feller | Great. |
| 00:32:40.69 | Nastassya Saad | Great. |
| 00:32:41.80 | Kristina Feller | Thank you both, thank you both. Director Horchert, let's identify that Commissioner Saad, Commissioner Graff, will be the working group for 52 BARDA Landing, and let's connect them with the applicants. |
| 00:32:54.25 | Dan | WILL DO. |
| 00:32:55.30 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you for that. And then if you recall, we did receive a presentation by Director McGowan of Department of Public Works regarding the land side ferry terminal landing |
| 00:33:10.03 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 00:33:12.80 | Kristina Feller | Since our meeting with him, he has reached out and requested a Planning Commission working group to work with him and his consultant team to finalize what needs to be done there at the ferry landslide area So I'm gonna assign a working group and I'd like to ask vice chair Junius if he is willing to sit on that. working group with me. |
| 00:33:39.88 | Andrew Junius | Absolutely. |
| 00:33:40.00 | Kristina Feller | Absolutely happy to help. Terrific, thank you. So Director Horchert, let's issue a communication to Director McGowan confirming their working group assignment. Okay. Yeah. Okay, and the last item that we have here under communications before we take public comment is standard conditions of approval for resolutions. This is something that this commission has been talking about quite a bit and really has been spearheaded by Commissioner Luxembourg. And I would like to focus on this and perhaps assign a working group to work with CDD to standardize those conditions of approval and resolutions. Commissioner Luxembourg, would you be willing to... to lead that working group. |
| 00:34:31.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'd be happy to. |
| 00:34:32.94 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and would anybody else like to volunteer to work with Commissioner Luxabur? Thank you, Vice Chair Junius. Happy to help. Great. Great, so Director Horchert, if we could make note of that as well. Okay. Um... Are there any other items for one-way communication just by a show of hands before I open this up for public? Okay, I see none. Let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. To do so, you can raise your hand in the application or you can press star nine on your cell phone. Again, this is public comments on item five communications. I will call upon you in the order I see you on my screen. It might be different than your screen, but do not worry, I will get to everybody. Um, First public speaker I see is Michael Rex. Welcome this evening you all three minutes for public comment if the zoom team can unmute Mr. Rex. |
| 00:35:37.16 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Rex, you're still muted. |
| 00:35:41.22 | Michael Rex | There you go. |
| 00:35:42.51 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:35:42.90 | Michael Rex | Hi, thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak. I wanted to briefly touch upon the city's effort to adopt objective and measurable design standards, okay? My firm has been engaged by several property owners who are terribly concerned about this, one up on Spencer, where a house is about to be built with no public notice prior notice no story polls no landscape plan completely shocking to them in fact the wife was in tears all day a couple days ago so I've looked into it come up to speed of course I started with Senate bill 9 I reviewed this council's more recent interim previous and then interim ordinance and, |
| 00:35:42.92 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:35:42.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:35:43.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:36:34.95 | Michael Rex | We see lots of areas that need attention. There are quite, while the state's very restrictive with no hearings and ministerial approval, that sort of thing, There's many portions of our development standard that can be measured and are objective. Such things as putting up story polls. I can see no reason not to because they're measurable. this project up on Spencer. They're gonna cut down a heritage oak tree that's 48 inches in diameter. and no one can say anything about it because there's nothing in our ordinance that protects it. And yet you can measure the diameter of an oak tree Those are just two real simple examples, and I hope the committee's looking into that. I would suggest that it'd be good to talk to some architects that are familiar with Sausalito's standards. I'm willing to certainly weigh in on such thinking because we're very familiar with those standards and how they apply in the real world. And I think there's a lot we can do to protect Sausalito from unreasonable development that has drastic and permanent impacts on our neighborhoods and our residents. So let me know if I can help and please, wherever we can measure and be objective, we need to protect those standards that are already in place and have been for decades. Thank you. |
| 00:38:04.23 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. Rex. I'm looking for any other members of the public that would like to comment on number five communications. Any public comments? |
| 00:38:18.73 | Kristina Feller | Seeing none, I'm going to go ahead and close public comment, and let's move on to our public hearing items. Director of Hortert, please. |
| 00:38:29.73 | Dan | This is a time for any commissioners to declare any ex parte communications. |
| 00:38:37.09 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Saad, any ex parte? |
| 00:38:39.87 | Dan | Thank you. |
| 00:38:39.91 | Nastassya Saad | Nothing to declare. |
| 00:38:40.66 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Graff? |
| 00:38:43.04 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:38:43.06 | Richard Graef | No communication. Thank you. |
| 00:38:44.92 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 00:38:46.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, as I mentioned at the last meeting, 201 Bridgeway is more than 500 feet and less than a thousand feet from my home. I won't reiterate all of this stuff, but there is, as I indicated in the last meeting, there is no materiality in that regard. With regard to 47 Prospect Street, I did meet with the owner, Mr. Payne, in order to be able to see the tree because it was in the backyard, but I did not have any ex parte communications. |
| 00:39:15.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Vice-Chair Junius. |
| 00:39:18.63 | Andrew Junius | Nothing to declare. |
| 00:39:19.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:39:20.12 | Kristina Feller | I do have nothing to declare. So back over to you, Director Horchard. |
| 00:39:24.81 | Dan | Thank you. The first public hearing we have tonight is 47 Prospect Avenue. It's a tree removal permit. Magda Gonzalez, contract planner, will present. |
| 00:39:37.13 | Magda | I could have been. Let me shut my screen. |
| 00:39:53.61 | Magda | I am presenting a tree removal permit record 2022-00089. 447 Prospect Avenue. The applicant is Jane Payne, the owner. And the arborist is Mr. James Nascott. The request is to remove one Canary Island form. |
| 00:40:16.78 | Magda | that palm tree is located on the rear yard of the property. As you can see from this picture, It, the palm trees, the one circled and white and it's at close proximity to the property. The following pictures are from the Arbor's report, from his visit to the property where he assessed that palm tree. this picture shows that the trunk of the palm tree is within one inch of the resident's patio. and the trunk is actually two feet away from the upper deck. |
| 00:40:55.92 | Magda | So the applicant has brought forth their request because of the close proximity of the palm tree to the property. It is within two feet of the upper deck and within an inch of the patio. and because it has the potential to cause property damage. The tree is considered a heritage tree because it is 40 inches in diameter of breast height. There are a few key factors to know from the Arborist Report. One of them is that it has significant truncline the down slope, again, the proximity to the property. and that... No. And because of the close proximity of the roof overhang, it creates a risk of excessive trunk movement and proper damage during high winds. It's also, the arborist also recommends for the entire tree and the trunk to be removed. And he recommends that if there are a replacement is recommended by the planning commission, that you consider as issues that's under 25 feet tall. |
| 00:42:06.89 | Magda | This proposal is exempt from the CEQA Um... from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15304 regarding gardening and landscaping. And this request also meets tree removal criteria Um, For criteria number one, the tree removal will eliminate the potential hazard to life and property. because of the close proximity to the patio and the upper deck, it has the potential to cause damage. Also, there's existing vegetation that will benefit from competing for less for resources. the property owner indicated that there are seven other mature trees on that property. So there's, um, There was some love. vegetation on there. Also the removal of the tree will allow the enjoyment of the property because right now there's a risk. It's so close to the patio that it makes the property uncomfortable to be around it. criteria 2A and 2B is also met. for criteria to a, if a planning commission requires a replacement of the tree, As I previously indicated, the arborist suggests that a tree be planted if it's under 25 feet tall. the property owner has suggested a patent in a magnolia tree. and the Planning Commission waives the requirement to have the owner replace a tree, they can you guys can request the applicant to contribute to the tree fund. And based on the of this tree, which is approximately 40 inches the property owner would have to contribute a fee of $1,250. |
| 00:44:05.07 | Magda | The staff recommends that the planning commission review the tree removal request and required findings. adopt the tax resolution, which makes the required determination for approval of the tree removal permit to allow the removal of the canary Island Palm subject to conditions. or alternatively approve the tree removal permit modifications. continue consideration of the item for additional information or move to deny the true removal permit identifying one or more findings for denial. That concludes my presentation. The property owner is on the call, Mr. Jean Payne. I'm not sure if the arborist is on the call. but that concludes my presentation I'm only looking for any questions |
| 00:44:51.74 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Magda. Thank you for your presentation and for your report. Very well, so this would be the time for commissioners to ask staff any questions for clarification before we ask the applicant up here to make a presentation. Commissioner Graff, we'll start with you. them. |
| 00:45:11.74 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Yeah, I... the diameter It says 40 inches in diameter. That is huge. I have not been able to see the tree closely, um, That's not the circumference, but it's the diameter. Is that right? |
| 00:45:30.83 | Kristina Feller | Correct. |
| 00:45:32.13 | Richard Graef | All right. Very big. |
| 00:45:35.47 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:45:35.49 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:45:39.08 | Richard Graef | That's the only question I had. Um, Thank you. Chair Feller, thank you. |
| 00:45:46.81 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you very much. |
| 00:45:49.98 | Nastassya Saad | Just to clarify from the resolution is the suggestion that this is satisfying A, B, C, Andy. IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY. in the report. There's not. ONE PARTICULAR, UM, that's being made, am I reading that correctly, that they're saying that for removal Thank you. ensuring public safety, a reasonable enjoyment, advantage of views and pursue good forestry. |
| 00:46:22.25 | Magda | That is correct. |
| 00:46:22.26 | Nastassya Saad | That is correct. Thank you. |
| 00:46:23.68 | Magda | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:46:24.02 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 00:46:24.24 | Magda | Thank you. |
| 00:46:24.27 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. And then do we know if the arborist is with us this evening. |
| 00:46:37.06 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:46:37.08 | Magda | I know. |
| 00:46:37.15 | Nastassya Saad | See you. |
| 00:46:37.97 | Magda | Thank you. |
| 00:46:38.02 | Nastassya Saad | All right. Okay, I think I'll save the rest of my questions for the applicant. Thank you, Chair Feller. |
| 00:46:44.18 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 00:46:46.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fallor. I'd like to get the staff report corrected. You mentioned in your slide the possibility of the tree replacement fund, but the city council months ago has amended that section of the code, and there's actually three options, not two options. The tree fund is actually in the code language. Can we get that corrected for this staff report? And also, Director Horturd, for all future reports about trees, Can we get the proper for this staff report and also, Director Hort, for all future reports about trees? Can we get the proper language from the municipal code into the reports? |
| 00:47:20.99 | Dan | Yeah, we'll look into it for sure. |
| 00:47:23.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. That's all I had. |
| 00:47:25.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:47:26.69 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:47:29.14 | Andrew Junius | No questions for staff. Thank you. |
| 00:47:31.13 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, Magda, I just had one question, because we got the Arbor's report late, and I can't remember seeing in there if there was a, specific species recommended for replacement. |
| 00:47:45.10 | Magda | No, there was not. The arbors just stated a tree with a species that doesn't grow taller than 25 feet. Thank you. |
| 00:47:55.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners just by show of hands? OKAY, IF NOT, I'M GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANTS TO make their presentation. Um, Magda, if you can help identify who that is here in the audience. |
| 00:48:13.03 | Magda | Yes, Mr. Jean Payne, please on the phone. |
| 00:48:13.08 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:48:16.71 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Mr. Payne, welcome this evening. I think you've just been made co-host, so you should be able to... control your video and your sound And if I could ask our Zoom team to put the timer up here at 15 minutes, So if you're looking at full gallery, you can see the clock and monitor your time, Mr. Payne. So welcome this evening, you have 15 minutes for a presentation and You're welcome. Anyone from your team is welcome to make that presentation as well. So over to you. |
| 00:48:46.86 | Jean Payne | Great, thank you. And I will keep this well under the 15 minute allotment. That's a good evening, commissioners. Thank you for taking the time to consider our application this evening. As noted, my name is Jean Payne and the property owner 47 Prospect Avenue. My wife Michelle and our two children Chloe was nine and Charlie with seven are also in attendance on zoom on a separate screen. Michelle Payne you can see her on there. And so we're requesting your approval of the tree removal permit for a Canary Island Palm, which is a non-native tree that is located in the central area of our backyard. The roots are within a couple inches of our patio, and the trunk is within two feet of the depth on the floor above the patio. The tree also sheds considerable debris, which can be hazardous under windy conditions on our deck and in our backyard. As noted in the staff report, the tree meets several criteria for removal under the city code. First, it creates a hazard to life and property. Second, proximity to the patio and house creates a potential to cause property damage, including increased fire risk. Third, the removal of the tree will allow for our reasonable enjoyment of the property, notably creating a safe open area in our backyard for our kids, Chloe and Charlie to play. As also mentioned in the staff report, we're proposing to replace the palm tree with the Magnolia tree. I'd also like to point out that we would plan to add two additional Magnolia trees to our front yard at the same time. Thank you again for your time this evening. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. |
| 00:50:23.96 | Kristina Feller | Terrific. Thank you so much, Mr. Payne. Let's just make note that there's 13 minutes And 23 seconds left, should you want additional time after we take public comment? But this would be the time for any commissioners to ask questions of the applicant Commissioner Luxenberg, let's start with you. |
| 00:50:42.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No questions for the applicant, thank you chair fellow. |
| 00:50:45.65 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:50:47.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | of working. |
| 00:50:49.09 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Saad? |
| 00:50:51.34 | Nastassya Saad | THANK YOU, CHAIR FELLER. Hi, Jean, thank you for the presentation. I was just wondering from considering its height and do you know how old the tree is or how long it's been there has it |
| 00:51:05.88 | Jean Payne | I did not. We moved in in November, so we're relatively new. But I can tell you it's been there quite a while. |
| 00:51:17.14 | Nastassya Saad | Sure. Is there any existing damage down where the... a patio. I'm is let me just pull it back up. Sorry, I'm on one screen tonight. Is there any cracks or anything where the roots are that you're concerned about currently? Have you noticed any damage? |
| 00:51:39.21 | Jean Payne | nothing new in the last few months. There probably is a little bit of cracking right there, but it's literally kind of any additional movement or route spreading. And we'll start to see that in the patio. |
| 00:51:52.96 | Nastassya Saad | And then, okay, thank you. And then I was just wondering, so I was wondering about the arborist, but maybe you can interpret it from your own conversation. from the report, it had mentioned the swaying that's near the deck. Is that implying that that the tree is physically like the trunk of the tree is moving towards has it has it hit your balcony before? Is that the implication there in the staff or in the arborist report? |
| 00:52:18.66 | Jean Payne | Yeah, so as far as I know, it hasn't hit it yet, at least when we've been home. |
| 00:52:18.92 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 00:52:25.63 | Jean Payne | But you've probably seen palm trees and the wind. They do sway. And we're up on the hill a little bit, and we do get a little bit of the kind of hurricane gulch wind coming through. And so it certainly does sway. But I can't tell you yet that we have seen it. Fortunately, we have not seen it hit the deck yet. |
| 00:52:28.23 | Unknown | Right. |
| 00:52:28.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:52:45.41 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, sure, but that's the implication. I just wanna make sure I'm reading it right in the Arborist Report that the implication is it can physically sway in to hit the ground. |
| 00:52:52.85 | Jean Payne | to hit the balcony. Okay. |
| 00:52:53.73 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. Okay, thank you. I think those are my questions. Thank you, Chair Feller. |
| 00:53:00.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 00:53:04.16 | Andrew Junius | No questions, thank you. |
| 00:53:05.80 | Kristina Feller | Great, I do not have any questions either at this time OF MR. PAIN. SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE PRESENTATION. Well, I have noted the 13 minutes, 23 seconds. Don't go too far. We're gonna open this up for public comments. So please listen in to that and we'll come back for any discussion. and you can have any final comments that you want at that time. Okay, so this is the time to make public comment on the item 6A, which is 47 Prospect Avenue. To do so, you can raise your hand in the Zoom application. or press star nine on your cell phone. I will call upon you in the order I see you on my screen and you'll each have three minutes for any public comment. So I'm just looking for hands at this time. |
| 00:53:51.78 | Kristina Feller | Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close public comment. And Mr. Payne, if you'd like any final comments, final words, please, please. Feel free to use your time. |
| 00:54:02.56 | Jean Payne | Nothing else to add, thank you. |
| 00:54:04.42 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. So let me bring this back up to our virtual diasfer discussion and action by the planning commission. Any final comments from the commissioners or is there a motion on the floor? just by a show of hands. |
| 00:54:22.39 | Andrew Junius | well, I'll make a comment, I'll start it off. I can't make the findings for this permit, I'm sorry to say. I think it's a good thing. I'm looking at the arborist report and while It's certainly not a native species that apparently is a healthy tree. and uh The arborist specifically says that the trunk of the palm tree is not ideal, but it's not a significant risk of collapse. So, I think and arriving at the conclusion that there's a health and safety danger here, I just don't see that. I can't support this. |
| 00:54:59.11 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Junius. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:55:03.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I'm a little conflicted on this one also. My notes say that the tree is healthy and there's not a significant risk of collapse. And it's somewhat unique. There are not a lot of palm trees in Sausalito. On the other hand, I understand what the owner is trying to do. And I see for the enjoyment of this property that I can see that criteria being met. The one I'm struggling with is the one that says that the value of the treatment of the neighborhood is not greater than the inconvenience to the owner. So I'm on the fence on that. So that's where I am at the moment. |
| 00:55:43.17 | Kristina Feller | help. |
| 00:55:43.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | with all the complexities. CHRIS JERRAM. |
| 00:55:46.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:55:49.28 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I agree. I think that's why I was asking about the findings. I think it's almost a little difficult to make all of the findings. I would understand more if there was a view of concern. But if there's no existing damage to preemptively take out such a giant heritage tree that must have been there for years. WHO KNOWS HOW LONG TO BE AT THAT height and width without damage. I'm having the same sticking point as Commissioner Juniors that it is a healthy tree. So, SO I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M I'm not on the fence. I think I'm having a hard time making the findings if we're going to work FOLLOW THE REPORT THAT THEY'RE GOING FOR A THROUGH D. |
| 00:56:38.96 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Brown. |
| 00:56:43.35 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:56:43.36 | Richard Graef | Thanks, Chair Feller. I kind of concur with the reluctance of the other commissioners about that tree. was not able to get down to see it really, could see it from driving around and everything. And it's really quite lovely. And I was thinking it would be a shame to lose that Um... Uh, I'm not sure. tree canopy. anyway um I am of S. others. I'm a little on the fence. Um, I appreciate the desire to put in a magnolia tree. Those are lovely. Um, but I'm a little reluctant to see that tree go. |
| 00:57:32.93 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, thank you for that. Let me just ask our attorney, Sergio Rudin, he popped up on camera here. I didn't know if you needed to interject or advise the commission appropriately. |
| 00:57:46.63 | Sergio Rudin | No, the only comment that I had was it sounded like there was potential confusion about how many of the findings needed to be made. You need to grant, you need to make at least one of the four findings. need to determine at least one of those four bases apply. That is, they have to determine either the removal is necessary to accomplish one of the four objectives to ensure public safety as a result relates to the health of the tree, potential hazard of life of property, proximity to existing and proposed structure, and interference with utilities or sewers. or to allow for reasonable joining the property, including sunlight and right to develop, or to take it reasonable advantage of views, or to pursue good professional practices of forestry and landscape design. Um, So. However, you can't Um, approve. this particular permit if you find that removal of a healthy tree of a desired species can be avoided by reasonable design of the site plan prior to construction. thinning to reduce density, shaping to reduce height or spread using thinning pads, heading or topping, which is the least preferred method. And then additionally, there's four other bases in which you must deny. which is that there are adequate provisions for drainage erosion control, land stability, windscreen, visual screening, privacy, And for restoration ground cover or other foliage damaged by the tree have not been made in situations where such problems are anticipated as a result of removal or alteration. the treaty to remove is being a member of a group of trees in which each trees depend on others for survival or the value of the treaty in the neighborhood is greater than its convenience to the owner. Um, And lastly, a need for protection for privacy for the property on which the tree is located or for adjacent properties. So those are the factors that the commission is supposed to consider in this. |
| 00:59:45.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay thank you for that. Any questions for Sergio from the commission for any clarity regarding that? Okay. All right. I, um, I actually echo what Vice Chair Junius says. I, when I read this and we finally got the report it was pretty clear that this was a healthy tree. and quite a heritage species that is home to a lot of A lot of flora, fauna, you name it. So I don't think I could make the findings on this unless there are any other comments. from the commission. I think we should go through the findings and identify what we cannot make the finding on. And if you have those in front of you, Vice Chair Junius, those that you cannot find, |
| 01:00:44.56 | Andrew Junius | actually don't. I'm sorry. |
| 01:00:44.78 | Kristina Feller | don't. |
| 01:00:46.80 | Andrew Junius | Um, |
| 01:00:46.90 | Kristina Feller | I'm not sure. I know, Sergio, you had those in front of you. Let's just go through that. |
| 01:00:55.56 | Sergio Rudin | Sure. So... In order to grant the permit, you must determine that the removal or alteration is necessary to accomplish one of the following objectives. to ensure the public safety as it relates to the health of the tree a potential hazard to life or property, proximity to existing or post structures, and interference, utility or sewers. to allow reasonable enjoyment of the property, including sunlight and the right to develop property take reasonable advantage of views and to pursue good professional practices of forestry or landscape design. So if you can't fine for any of those, then you can't make the required findings. |
| 01:01:37.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay, with that, is there more comment from the commissioners or is there a motion on the floor to entertain? |
| 01:01:48.24 | Andrew Junius | move to deny the permit. |
| 01:01:50.78 | Kristina Feller | I'll second that. Dan, can you take a roll call please? |
| 01:01:55.94 | Dan | Madam Chair, before we continue, you want us to bring back a resolution of denial? |
| 01:02:02.52 | Kristina Feller | Yes, please. |
| 01:02:03.43 | Dan | Thank you. Can you put that, does that need to be in the motion, Sergio? |
| 01:02:07.04 | Sergio Rudin | Yes. Or at the very least I would recommend the motion include that the commission found that there that it could not make the required findings under. Um, to section 1112030 B1. Alternatively, the Commission could deny this permit if it determines the value of the tree to the neighborhood is greater than its inconvenience to the owner. So that would potentially be one other at the full ground the commission could consider. Thank you. |
| 01:02:38.28 | Andrew Junius | would think that's applicable as well i mean good i i we could face the denial and vote for those |
| 01:02:42.57 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 01:02:42.80 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:02:42.85 | Kristina Feller | I would say both. |
| 01:02:45.33 | Sergio Rudin | So Vice Chair Junos, is that your motion there to base denial on those two grounds? It is, thank you. |
| 01:02:51.95 | Kristina Feller | And I re-second on both Browns as well. |
| 01:02:56.20 | Dan | Okay, ready for roll? Thank you. |
| 01:02:58.41 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 01:02:58.43 | Dan | Yes. Commissioner Saad. |
| 01:03:00.49 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:03:00.50 | Beth Thompson | Yes. |
| 01:03:00.94 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Graff? |
| 01:03:02.65 | Beth Thompson | Thank you. |
| 01:03:02.68 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Luxenberg? Thank you. |
| 01:03:05.30 | Richard Graef | I'm sorry. |
| 01:03:05.53 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Junius, Vice Chair Junius, sorry. Yes, no worries. Chair Feller. |
| 01:03:07.47 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:03:07.49 | Richard Graef | Yes. |
| 01:03:07.76 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:03:08.84 | Richard Graef | Yes. I'm sorry. |
| 01:03:09.45 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:03:11.07 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 01:03:11.10 | Dan | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Motion carries. |
| 01:03:13.48 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Okay, moving on to item 6B, 813 to 817 Bridgeway Boulevard. Dan, over to you. |
| 01:03:27.64 | Dan | Give me one second, I gotta read my cheat sheet. |
| 01:03:30.57 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:03:31.43 | Dan | So before you tonight is 813-817 Bridgeway Boulevard, changes to an approved project? Magda Gonzalez, contract planner, will present. |
| 01:03:45.49 | Kristina Feller | Welcome, Magda. |
| 01:03:46.94 | Magda | Give me just a second to share my... Yeah. |
| 01:03:50.88 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:03:56.43 | Magda | Okay, I am presenting changes to an approved project record 2022-00052. The applicant is Mr. Michael Rex with Michael Rex Architects, and the owner is Michael Lappert. a little bit of background regarding this project. commonly known as fish and chips. It was originally built in 1954 for Ernie's Waterfront Restaurant and later it was transferred to the Lafford family The Lafberg family has made several improvements on the property, including obtaining a design review permit for the building facade, which you currently see on the screen. And then a minor use permit to include outdoor dining, which you also see on this picture. |
| 01:04:51.05 | Magda | Now, Mr. Lapper, the property owner, is bringing a request to modify those two permits. and include two more permits. He originally brought it to the Planning Commission in a study session that took place January 29 of this year. Part of his request is to modify the design review permit. to modify the building facade. These are the colors that he's proposing and the changes that they're proposing on the site. They're also proposing to amend the minor use permit to increase the number of tables and seating available outdoors. They're also proposing an encroachment agreement to construct a raised dining terrace on the sidewalk. and to relocate the existing sidewalk onto two parallel parking spaces. as well as a signed permit to add more signage. So the scope of work for the building facade includes new color schemes, windows and doors, a lot iron guard on the second building. I'm moving my cursor to show you those particular areas. the new iron on the bottom around the dining terrace, as well as planter boxes. three wall signs for business education. And as you can see them here, they're gonna read Ice cream and yogurt on fish and chips and hamburgers and they're going to be. 4.4 458 square feet. The background is going to be white and the lettering is going to be a green. and then they're also proposing two blade signs and those ones are gonna be located on the sides of the of the building and they're also for business identification purposes And those ones are smaller in size. They are 1.6 square feet. The background is also going to be white and the lettering is also going to be green. and they're including four gas lanterns and they're gonna be placed throughout the building on the lower side. Those ones are intended more for decorative purposes than they are for elimination. |
| 01:07:10.22 | Magda | Um... THE FAMILY. the applicant updated the Thank you. the color scheme that he provided before. This presentation includes the latest version of it. They're more subtle colors. So along with the revised color schemes, they are also extending the depth of the Let me go back to this picture. of the Iron Guard right here of the balcony. So before it was only one foot, nine and a half inches. And now they're proposing to make it... three feet eight and eight and a half inches which will allow that door to actually open and for people to actually stand comfortably in that balcony before it would just be almost impossible for anyone to stand there. |
| 01:07:57.32 | Jean Payne | Thank you. |
| 01:07:57.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:58.21 | Magda | So those are the two changes that they're making. The first color that they're proposing is this like green. It's gonna go around the the entire stucco wall. The stucco trimming will be this Chantilly lace. The third color will be for the windows, the canopy, The windows, the doors and the canopies above the doors which will be right above the... the three wall signs. And the black color, it's gonna be for the metal railings and the planter boxes. And the last color is the concrete color. It's just basic gray, which, matches the city standard sidewalk color. To the right, you'll see the exterior lighting that they're proposing, the first one. will be placed. on the two blade signs they're proposing on each side of the buildings. The second picture that you see will go above the wall signs, the three wall signs. And the last one is, are the three, I'm sorry, the four, gas that they're proposing. I'm not sure. to the right of this slide. It just gives you more details of the colors. The last two items, the flagpoles, they're going to be painted white, and the flags or the pendants will vary in color. Currently the applicant's proposing a light yellow and a light orange. |
| 01:09:33.47 | Magda | So the other part of the proposal is to amend the MUP that they previously had approved, and that's to expand to add this dining terrace with a wheelchair with a wheelchair ramp and to increase the number of seats from nine to 25. One will be ADA compliant. to increase the number of tables from three tables to eight tables. to add the wraparound mainly. to add the plant to box it that I previously mentioned. and to relocate this existing sidewalk onto the two parallel parking spaces. This picture is zoomed in and it shows a better a better picture of what they're proposing. As you can see, there's two obsessing trees on the site. One is, immediately outside of the left side of the dining terrace. They're gonna keep that tree on there, as well as the tree that's located on the right side of the terrace. There's one within that site and they're gonna keep it as well. There's a street lamp. on the left-hand side of the dining terrace. They're gonna maintain that as well. Um, on the upper left hand side of this graphic, you can see the ramp. and the expanded door, which will be ADA accessible. a little to the further, to the right, you'll see the table, the ADA table. which will comply with the American Municipalities Act You can also see the proposal for the sidewalk. It's gonna be a minimum of five feet, which is a minimum requirement. the bike lane will remain, that will not be impacted at all. So the pedestrians will still be able to travel through here without any issues. And it actually creates a better flow because currently what they have Um... So when the pedestrian would walk, they would walk through the patio, outdoor patio section and the door of the restaurant. which could kind of be convenient for the pedestrian, patrons of the restaurant as well as staff that's coming out to serve. |
| 01:11:50.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Bye. |
| 01:11:50.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:11:51.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:11:53.99 | Magda | That way they can have this area in its entirety. strictly for the patrons of the restaurant and anybody that's walking around the that area can do so without any complications. This is a different angle with their proposing the there's a car, the bike lane, as I mentioned, that won't be impacted. the proposed sidewalk. the dining terrace, and then you can see the signs up here. that's how they will look from this, from the side angle, the gas lanterns. I'm not sure if you can see my cursor, but this is where the wall signs would be located. and then the blade signs identifying the business. |
| 01:12:50.69 | Magda | So this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. pursuant to section 15301 existing facilities. And this is just a summary of the findings for the minor use permit, the design review permit, the encouragement agreement and the signed permit. the project maintains the location and scale of the existing building. allowing the property owner and the visitors to enjoy the outdoor views. The project's architecture will not negatively impact the light and air to adjacent properties. No normal or positive view impact for surrounding properties due to the orientation of the existing structures. and the topography of the site. The proposed change to allow outdoor dining is encouraged in the municipal code. Furthermore, I will provide a safe, well-designed area the project architecture does not include external mechanical equipment or chimneys that will negatively impact the neighboring properties. The sidebar location has been reviewed and approved by regulating agencies. and the proposed signs will identify the business and the type of activity being conducted and comply with the Sausalito Municipal Code. As such, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to approve the changes to the approved project |
| 01:14:13.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:14:21.06 | Magda | to allow for the modification of the previously approved design. subject to the conditions of approval. Alternatively, the planning commission may continue the hearing for additional information or project revisions. or direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial stating the reason anyone or more of the findings to not be made. that concludes my presentation. I'm available for any questions. The owner, Mr. Michael Lappert, is on the call as well. The applicant, Mr. Michael Rex. |
| 01:14:56.19 | Kristina Feller | Terrific, thank you so much Magda for the report and the in detail presentation. I appreciate that very much. This would be the time for commissioners to ask any clarification questions to staff. before we invite the applicant up here. Commissioner Saad, do you want to start us off? |
| 01:15:14.65 | Nastassya Saad | I actually have one specific question, Chair Feller. Thank you. In the existing, in the conditions of approval, down on page 13, number 11 are the hours of operation. Are those within our remit? Thank you. Can we have discussions around the conditions of approval? Or are those not able to be discussed? |
| 01:15:43.12 | Magda | So we added them based on the previous determination that you had made for I can't remember the name of the El Portal. |
| 01:15:52.92 | Nastassya Saad | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:15:54.12 | Magda | But I took note of your comment earlier that it was actually a misunderstanding, right? And it should be 1030 indoors and 12 midnight outdoors, correct? Just the opposite. No, the other way around. |
| 01:16:05.34 | Nastassya Saad | No, just the other way around. Yes. So I just want to, yeah. So is that the current hours of operation that are listed in the conditions, did those come from the applicant or is that a staff, that's a staff condition? That's a staff condition. Okay. Okay, thank you. I think actually that's my only question for staff at this time. |
| 01:16:27.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. Commissioner Luxembourg. |
| 01:16:30.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Fella. I'm a little very disappointed in the staff report. There are a number of issues that I raised at the study session and they have not been addressed here, but I will save my comments until when we bring it back to the diocese. |
| 01:16:44.61 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Brough. |
| 01:16:48.66 | Richard Graef | No questions at this point. I'm sure that I'm not sure. the applicant will bring us up to speed on what the change is when the last time we saw this arm. |
| 01:17:03.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 01:17:07.60 | Andrew Junius | No questions at this time. Thanks, Chair Feller. |
| 01:17:10.23 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I just have one Magda. I'm curious if you had a chance to look back at the February 16th. A video recording of our hearing and study session with this applicant. I did. Okay. And since that time, I don't know when you took over as the planner on this project, but did you work with the applicant to incorporate some of the comments from this commission? |
| 01:17:40.05 | Magda | Yes. there were. There have been changes throughout the entire review process. |
| 01:17:53.97 | Kristina Feller | Um... Okay. All right, thank you for that. Um, Let's go ahead and invite the applicant up here to make a presentation. And Zoom team, Maria, if you don't mind putting the timer up at 15 minutes. And Mr. Rex, I'm assuming that you're doing the presentation or leading the presentation this evening. You were just made a co-host, if you could... |
| 01:18:18.62 | Unknown | you |
| 01:18:21.32 | Kristina Feller | unmute and turn your video on. |
| 01:18:29.19 | Michael Rex | Michael Lapper would like to speak first. |
| 01:18:31.82 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Zoom Team, can we unmute or co-host Mr. Michael Laffert as well? so he can turn his video on and microphone. There we go. Okay, so let's go ahead and start the clock. Mr. Laffert, welcome. |
| 01:18:52.62 | Michael Lappert | Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm Michael Lappert, the owner of the subject property. My father, Walter Lappert, started a business at this location. when there were three separate restaurants in that building, and his was a small crepe shop. That was 1965. I was 14. We've owned the building for 40 years now. June marks my family's 57th year at this location. My son Isaac is in the audience. He's the third generation and I have a picture of his son a four-year-old wiping down some tables he would be the fourth if he so desires the torture. The building is now over 70 years old and needs rejuination. We were well underway on this effort. THROUGH THE PERMIT THAT WAS GRANTED. And then the virus came and changed people's habits, changed everything, patterns changed, and suddenly it was all about outdoor dining. I asked our architect to propose the changes you will be hearing about tonight. And after seeing what you have approved at the old Petri Gallery and your desire to develop outside dining, he came up with what you will be presented. The Fish and Chips has always been primarily resident serving with the tourist season being the extra we need to be profitable. I wanted a look that would be pleasing to the community at the same time satisfy the public's desire to eat outdoors. With that in mind, I'll turn this over to Michael Rex and keep any remaining minutes that might be left over if there are any problems at the end. Thank you, Michael, go ahead. Thank you. |
| 01:20:23.92 | Michael Rex | Thank you, Michael. I first want to thank on Magda Gonzalez and Dan Hortard for their help with this, bringing this to you tonight and particularly Magda for your fine presentation. I'm going to share screen with you and try to wail through this as fast as I can. uh... Let's see, share screen. Here we go. Yeah. I presume you can see the screen, yes. |
| 01:20:56.20 | Kristina Feller | That's just there we go. Yes, we can see it now. |
| 01:20:59.61 | Michael Rex | Yeah, so this is what's there today, although they framed up the second floor that we have a building permit for. I'm showing you this because certainly it could look better. I also wanted you to see the neighbors to each side of us. On the right to the north is Piazza Trading Gallery, and on the left is the Casa Madrona Hotel and Spa. The wall behind the building is recently built to retain the hillside behind the second floor that's been added. Um, And then just as a little way of background, I'm gonna shrink it down a little bit. This is what the previous architect, John McCoy, had proposed and, this was uh modified during multiple hearings before the planning commission and what you see here is what resulted or what the john mccoy brought back to you and there was commissioners expressed concern about so much wall above the upper windows uh it the wood has been replaced um at the commission's request stucco, so it would tie together better. But the corners remain down on the second floor, not on the roof. That seemed kind of odd. Um, The commission asked, in fact, this is what it would have looked like. the commission tried to improve it. by notching the... wall up at the top like the original and adding the planner boxes on the facade. It still seems less than what it should be. Those planter boxes are not accessible, so the plans won't be maintained. Then the cornice is still in the wrong place. So, Michael came to me, brought the project to me after he had approval to expand his outdoor dining. And he told me he was very unhappy with what got approved. And I wondered why. And I looked at this plan, and I can certainly see room for improvement. I also had some functional questions. And I asked him what he wanted to look like. And he said, well, kind of of Caribbean and so I went and surfed the web for historic Caribbean villages and you see stucco walls with heavy white trim wrought iron balconies cornices etc of course we wouldn't propose such bright colors you also see muted colors this one particularly and the gas lamps that sort of thing seemed like it could adapt and provide a personality for this building so i sketched this up showed it to you in a study session mid-february five months ago now you seem to like it including the flat poles so i drew it up and that's what we submitted and and here you see comparing what was has been approved or what's now proposed certainly look a lot better functionally though also seemed to be a problem oh and here's the colors I won't go through that this is what we had previously submitted I thought it might be a little too bright this kind of mint green we really need a decision tonight because we're under construction we have to still amend the building permit so i We muted them so they're a little grayer and I'll blend in better. And then this is what it would be now, kind of softer, more seaside, become part of the streetscape. But the functional aspect, this is the floor plan on the bottom right. And a third of the store frontage, the most valuable part of the property, is given up to circulation and elevator. And a wheelchair would have to go up 15 inches in an elevator to get inside. And that's something the city actually partly contributed to, because there used to be only one step to get into the restaurant. The city went lower the sidewalk, and now there's three steps. Michael was very unhappy about that when it occurred. But also you can't find the front door. It's tucked away in this recess. Single door, get very congested getting in and out. There's only three feet between the bottom of the handrail. and the elevator. So I suggested why don't we push the elevator back. We still need an elevator to serve the restrooms upstairs. There isn't room for restrooms below. I said suggested how about putting a handicapped ramp out in the sidewalk and we actually drew it up to see how it fit and we didn't like it. It would still crowd the entry and we lose the outdoor dining that's been approved the tables and chairs that are already out there. But it also it would look more like it belongs in a hospital in downtown all these ramps and whatnot. We wanted to make it more subtle. In the study session back in February, I showed you this sketch for the parklet, and I explained why I don't think it's a good solution to expand the dining because it puts people dining right next to the travel lane of bicycles and cars, and it causes serving food between the restaurant and the diners, trying to cross over and through pedestrians. It's very hard to regulate. The tables tend to spill out. In fact, the tables aren't against the law. they're out further. And so because the sidewalk, when it got lowered, it didn't lower it all the way to the building. So this seemed to be very congested. We showed some palm trees and we suggested taking out the trees, the street trees there. You didn't like that in the study session. What we prefer is moving the dining against the building where it can be contained, where it'd be safer. We're not gonna spill hot coffee and soup on pedestrians carrying it across the sidewalk. It also requires less, enforcement because the chairs don't seem to find their way out into blocking pedestrians and that's really why the staff concluded that this is a better circulation pattern because it doesn't cause the pedestrians and and the diners to compete for for space when we presented this as a study session it seemed like the majority of the commission saw the merits of this. They also liked how it integrated the handicap ramp. And you could see we now have some dining inside that's against the windows where people want to sit, not a recess entry. So because it seemed like we might have a favorable feedback, a favorable response, we drew it up. And I got a shrinker down here. And what we're asking for is very similar to what's right down the street. Here's Porjo's where they have dining against the restaurant. Yes, it's partly recessed into the building. Ours is not. But the part that sticks out from the building facade is 7 foot 8 inches. And it only leaves 3 feet for pedestrians to get by between the planter boxes and the tree trunks. So you want in previous policy statements, five feet. Also right down the streets, capitos, they stick out seven feet, no, six feet and they leave about five foot six for the pedestrians to get around it. But again, it's the dining's up against the building, not out in the street. And it's very awkward though here to go up and down a curb cut for wheelchairs to get, if you want to pass by this dining area. And then another precedent besides these two that are right down the street is what has recently been approved for the new cultivar restaurant on El Portal. And... on that one uh the dining area uh extends out 12 feet from the building uh we're asking for 11 feet both cultivar and what we propose is a minimum of five feet uh clearance for the pedestrians to pass by the dining area so this was all approved again it's right down the street in downtown uh there's some question of course El Patel is not as uh busy for traffic than Bridgeway in fact in a recent workshop talking about parklets a commissioner said well there's no parklets on Bridgeway well that's certainly not the case This is Bridgeway in front of you, south of Princess Street. And I counted, I think five parklets all in a row And here we have cars bashing into this metal planter box on occasion. uh... and and and there is no bike path and yet this right away down at this end of Bridgeway is only 40 feet wide. The Bridgeway fronting Lappert's restaurant is 60 feet wide, another third in width. And so if it's good, you know, pushing the sidewalk out to get dining certainly is a precedent in town. and there's certainly more room at this end of bridgeway than Um, THE FAMILY IS I'm almost done here. than now at the Lappert's restaurant. You asked that we keep the street trees. So we redesigned the terrace for that purpose. And we kept the lamppost right where it is. Also that the balcony that we're asking to extend, that balcony, the way we had it, when the doors were closed, you only had 15 inches to stand there. Really restrictive. Michael asked that we make it a minimum of three feet and that's what we're now asking for. So it's the recent changes are the change to a more muted grayer color palette Thank you. Thank you. and the extension of that balcony 23 inches out further as part of the encroachment agreement. So, and here, oh, I got a shrink here a little bit. Yeah, so here you see what the balcony in section, the way it was, and here it is sticking out a little bit. I actually think it looks better. And then just to finish up, we have neighbor support. I met with Jim Gurney, who's the manager of the Cosma Drone Hotel and Spa. I also met with Doug Lang, who represents Piazza Trading both those property owners and neighbors the most important adjacent neighbors have told me they support the project in fact today I am not aware of any objections from anybody about this project and staff has in their staff report concludes that all the findings could be made. I do want to mention a couple conditions of the 24 conditions, There's two of them that I need to bring to your attention that are problematic for us. The first one is number five on page 12, where it talks about the light. Exterior lights will be shielded and downed. That's boilerplate. It doesn't work for us. We have these four gas lamps that are going to be low illumination, but we want to be able to see the flame. We don't want to shield that lamp source, and they don't point down where the lamps do but not the flame and then the um tiny little spots we have lighting the signs are not going to point down where they're going to point at the signs um the ones that the signs is only an inch in diameter and and are the ones that the blade signs are only an inch in diameter and the ones lighting the building signs are only an inch and a half. So they're really tiny and they have scoops on them to cut glare. So we ask that that condition be changed. The other condition is number 11 on page 13, and it says we have to be closed on Sunday. Well, we can't be closed on Sunday. That's one of the most important business days of the week I don't know how that made it in there. And the 11 o'clock we understood as what was approved for cultivar. It seems like if that's good for cultivar, it ought to be good for Lappert. But if you insist on the 1030, so be it. We do have a hotel next door. So... although cultivars has a hotel directly upstairs. We'd like to be treated equally. And then the last thing, I just want you to know that- |
| 01:33:55.52 | Kristina Feller | And then the last. Mr. Eckley, we were very nice out there. If you just want to finish your comment real quick and then- |
| 01:33:59.23 | Michael Rex | Yeah. |
| 01:34:03.23 | Michael Rex | Yeah, I'll finish it up. You saw in the staff report, the part of the public works wants the sidewalk more tapered at each end. So it wraps around more smoothly. The plans you see tonight include that. We made that change. So just to wrap up, if you approve it tonight, it's gonna result in a much more beautiful building. It's gonna enliven the downtown and it's gonna provide needed support to our downtown businesses that have struggled after two years of COVID. So I ask that you approve it tonight as submitted with those two minor revisions. Thanks a lot, and I'm here for questions. |
| 01:34:37.94 | Kristina Feller | Great, let's go ahead and stop us, Wainshner, if you don't mind. |
| 01:34:41.64 | Michael Rex | Sure not. |
| 01:34:42.47 | Kristina Feller | we might need to |
| 01:34:44.26 | Michael Rex | Amen. |
| 01:34:44.36 | Kristina Feller | I'll put that on here and there with questions. But I appreciate that. |
| 01:34:47.35 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:34:49.40 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Luxenberg, do you wanna start us off? I hope you're on mute. So this is any questions for the app? |
| 01:34:59.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I have no questions of the applicant at this time. |
| 01:35:02.67 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Saad? |
| 01:35:05.96 | Nastassya Saad | Yes, thank you, Chair Feller. What are the current hours of operation? AT THAT LOCATION. |
| 01:35:14.53 | Michael Lappert | Can you hear me? |
| 01:35:15.41 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:35:16.02 | Michael Lappert | Okay, currently we open at 10 o'clock in the morning and it's a lunch place that we close at five o'clock. 7 o'clock on the weekends during the summer. |
| 01:35:27.71 | Nastassya Saad | AND I'M GOING TO BE Um, and One of the comments that has been made was about serving, but I'm very familiar with your location. Come there often. So you don't currently have servers. What is the intention to change the? |
| 01:35:43.69 | Michael Lappert | No, there's no table service. It's self-serve. Exactly. I think what Rex was referring to is just people that are not capable of being good servers, walking out with a tray of soup and hot coffee, balancing it and walking across the sidewalk to sit down. That's the dangerous part. So, no, there are no servers. People take care of their own food. |
| 01:35:46.44 | Nastassya Saad | Exactly. |
| 01:35:47.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:02.00 | Nastassya Saad | OK. THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY POINT OF CLARIFICATION. Um, for your top balcony is And I can't tell from the drawings Is that standing only? Do you intend to have any seating out there? |
| 01:36:16.19 | Michael Lappert | Do you have any seating out there? No, no seating. That's where people will be able to walk out and look at that great view that's right there. |
| 01:36:21.73 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, and sorry, just to jump back to your hours of operation, do you intend to change the hours of operation? |
| 01:36:28.00 | Michael Lappert | At this point, As of today, no, but as we develop, as Isaac, who's actually in charge of this now, he runs the whole thing, as he develops that business and, and makes it what he wants it to be. He does envision doing more night business and having a night service for food, yes. |
| 01:36:46.65 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair Feller. I think those are my clarifying questions for now. |
| 01:36:52.35 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Graff. |
| 01:36:55.22 | Richard Graef | I'm kind of... really no major questions. I just wanted to to know if a particular typeface, letter style. has been identified for the signage It looks pretty generic to me, so I don't know whether that's a placeholder or whether that's the recommended uh, typography. |
| 01:37:18.58 | Michael Rex | I'm, You want me to answer that? |
| 01:37:21.62 | Richard Graef | are. |
| 01:37:22.17 | Michael Rex | What we show is what we intend. It's rather simple and clean. Um, Sans Sarah. I don't know. |
| 01:37:31.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:31.08 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:37:31.12 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:37:31.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:31.18 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:37:31.74 | Richard Graef | Exactly. |
| 01:37:31.96 | Michael Rex | much. Well, and also, During the study session, Commissioner Luxenberg asked about this kitchen capacity. When we add the 16 tables, we will be redoing the kitchen. We don't anticipate a major increase in capacity, but we will be having an upgraded kitchen that could be efficient. |
| 01:37:54.56 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, we've got a there are a couple more of us that have questions that are probably related to that. So let us get through. some of that. |
| 01:38:01.31 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:38:02.37 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Junius. Thank you. |
| 01:38:03.74 | Andrew Junius | No questions at this time. |
| 01:38:03.79 | Kristina Feller | No questions at the end. Okay. Um, the question I had was about the kitchen and the, and is there still a separate architect for the interior than there is for the exterior of the work that you're doing? |
| 01:38:16.80 | Michael Rex | No, we're the architect for the interior. We're rearranging the interior and we'll be applying for amendment to the building permit, hopefully applying for that in the early fall. |
| 01:38:29.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, And can you give us some idea what the scope of that would be? What the changes are in general? |
| 01:38:38.63 | Michael Rex | Yeah, we'd like to expand the kitchen a bit. We're not gonna be expanding the indoor dining much at all, but the kitchen is, there's really almost no storage. It's very cramped. There's no place to really put trash. To operate properly, we need bigger coolers. There's a retaining wall at the back that's sloping. And it's really in very bad shape. It's cracked. It leaks. It's been a nightmare for the restaurant. We're gonna replace it, but when we replace it, we're gonna make it vertical to get a little more room for the bigger coolers and trash. We're also gonna provide a new ADA restroom for the employees. The restroom for the employees now is not ADA and it's ridiculously small. So those are all changes to make it more efficient. The other thing we're doing is we're providing a lobby at the north end for a stairway that could lead to future residential units. We don't know if that will ever happen, but when we went to the planning department, Mr. Moore, who preceded Dan Hortert, asked us if there was some way we can allow for future residential use because the town needs and better to put it where there's good transit So we thought that might, that's a good idea. We should leave that opportunity open. And so we reworked the stairway and provide a lobby for a separate entry to some future residential use. In the interim, it allow us to provide food service if that ever happens to the upper floor. That's not proposed at the moment, but it does give it, we just thought that we should keep options open. |
| 01:40:22.94 | Kristina Feller | Well, the reason I'm asking is that we asked the question specifically |
| 01:40:24.68 | Michael Rex | We, |
| 01:40:27.44 | Kristina Feller | last time in February, if what you have existing or what the applicant has existing is is still constitutes a viable business and the answer was yes. And I think Commissioner Luxenberg was actually asking quite a lot of detailed questions about the interior So we're trying to figure out you have an existing permit, you have a viable business, And so are these changes that you're talking about based on the existing business or the business that the applicant hopes to have with additional seating. you |
| 01:41:06.22 | Michael Rex | Thank you. um the changes to the interior are not due to additional seating uh it's it's to uh bring it up to ada standards um which we are obligated to do by law uh and to make the um the back of the house uh more efficient uh to um uh so the restaurant can operate uh in a more professional manner. We don't plan on major changes to the menu or methods of service. That's all successful. But it's those two main reasons, ADA upgrades, and a more efficient, cleanly, workable back of the house. |
| 01:41:45.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:41:46.33 | Unknown | Okay, great. |
| 01:41:47.21 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:41:47.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Chair, can I just ask a question that relates to that question? So if you're gonna put an ADA accessible bathroom for employees, are you still gonna make people in wheelchairs go up in this elevator to go to the bathrooms upstairs? |
| 01:41:47.85 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 01:42:02.99 | Michael Rex | Yes, absolutely. The difference in size between an employee restroom for a wheelchair. and for the public, it's a huge difference in size. In fact, I'll just give you an example. The code requires we have a full baby diaper changing stations. And that can't get in the way of any wheelchair circulation for the restrooms. You know, that alone takes a lot of room. Also, we looked at the one thing that the outdoor dining did is it triggers into adding another toilet for the public. and to follow the building code. The project that's been approved, it wasn't expanding the outdoor dining. It had only nine seats and we're gonna have 25. And so we took a hard look at those numbers, because that's a question that came up for cultivar. And I think you might have mentioned it, I don't remember, We went and looked at the building code and we had to expand those restrooms upstairs. So these are the changes that we'll be showing on an amended building permit application we'll submit in the fall. |
| 01:43:17.95 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, Commissioners, do you have any additional questions for the applicant at this time before we move into public comments? |
| 01:43:27.82 | Michael Rex | If I can add, it's not unusual to get in an elevator to go to restrooms, POJO requires that. right next door. or down the street. Thank you. |
| 01:43:37.98 | Kristina Feller | Well, that's a different situation. It's part of a hotel, not a standalone restaurant. |
| 01:43:43.48 | Michael Rex | Well, yeah, but if you're a restaurant patron, you need to use the restroom. You have to go up in an elevator. |
| 01:43:49.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. |
| 01:43:49.61 | Michael Rex | Okay. I'm... |
| 01:43:52.14 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:43:52.39 | Michael Rex | Yeah. |
| 01:43:52.54 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I'll go ahead and move into public comment here. This would be the time for the public to comment on item 6B. |
| 01:43:53.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:44:01.13 | Kristina Feller | To do so, you can raise your hand in the Zoom application or hit star nine on your cell phone. and I'll call upon you in the order that I see you on my screen. Director Horter, while I'm looking for hands, can you just confirm the written public comment we've received on this item? |
| 01:44:20.64 | Richard Graef | Hold on. |
| 01:44:23.90 | Kristina Feller | or Magda, either one of you. |
| 01:44:31.76 | Dan | I don't recall one. |
| 01:44:33.50 | Kristina Feller | We received a comment from the neighbor, the next door. |
| 01:44:36.50 | Dan | Oh, yes, I'm sorry. Yes, a late letter came in from Mr. King. |
| 01:44:40.16 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 01:44:41.85 | Dan | Yeah. |
| 01:44:42.00 | Kristina Feller | want to make sure that that's clear and on the record. Um, Again, I'm looking for raised hands in the audience. This would be the time to comment on item 6B. Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close public comment and bring the discussion back up here to the virtual dais. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you want to start us off? |
| 01:45:02.88 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure, thank you Chair Fowler. I apologize, my comments will be long. I mean, this is an important project for downtown. I appreciate what they're trying to do. I do think the improvements to the facade, the toning down of the colors from what was submitted a week ago to now are better. I really encourage, figure out the inside, figure out the outside, and come in and don't keep coming in with multiple changes. because this is, I understand the pandemic changed something, but if we're sitting here today reviewing this and they don't know what the inside is uh and then when they do the inside they're going to come back and say well these windows have to move these have to move so i think that's an issue my biggest concern and i was very clear in the study session is that blocking the sidewalk and making people walk around will create unsafe conditions. They put up this structure in order to build the second floor, forcing people onto exactly what they're proposing. It was an inconvenience for people. I saw lots of people walking out into the street to avoid it at all if you look at that section that they showed you in the in the presentation the the arm of one of those people is hanging in the bike lane and the bikes go very fast by unlike a parklet oh and i understand the problems with the people taking their food across the sidewalk. But unlike a parklet, the parklets are required to have barriers that are required to be set back. uh al portel is a different situation in el portel we require them to bring the sidewalk all the way to bridgeway so you're not walking around you're not walking around this when you come from bridgeway you walk by the restaurant and then it narrows down after that but it's not like you're walking from uh uh from the other part of bridgeway where Salido's and everything is down here, walking around this and whatever. I can't speak to whether some people are encroaching. They should be five feet all the way along there, and we can look at those other restaurants, and I don't know what those permits were, whether those were temporary or not. But going and having this sort of terminate and people walking around this will create a disjoint between downtown and Caledonia Street. I would not be able to make the following findings. Design review item J, the proposal causes significant traffic safety and easy moving issues. design review item M, raising the outdoor aerial, we'll crowd that area, it's gonna overwhelm the neighboring properties. Nobody else on the bridgeway is lifting it up and privatizing the sidewalk there. the From a zoning standpoint, it indicates that in the sidewalk you should be able to take all the chairs away and there should be an orderliness to it. So building a structure for this is not what was intended. So the municipal use permit, I think this will material affect the surrounding properties. I think if this were a private outdoor dining, there's a 25% of the indoor dining, five tables with a capacity of 20 people. This exceeds that. So I think this is trying to overwhelm a small area. We have the authority to do it. I'm not questioning that. I'm just saying that if this were private, we would need a variance. On the encroachment findings, finding A, I think this will diminish the pedestrian experience between the downtown and the rest of Bridgeway and Caledonia. For finding B, I think constantly bumping out the sidewalk is an undesirable land use precedent. Finding C, there is an option of a parklet. In this case, I think it would have a less impact on pedestrian travel. I understand that from an operations point of view, it's not optimal. But in this particular location, I think it's a preferred option. Finding D, I think the proposed encroachment will adversely affect public circulation and will constitute a hazard to public safety while walking around the dining area towards the bike lane, which is a very fast bike lane. We get hundreds upon hundreds of bicyclists, especially on the weekends. Finding E, the substantial structure involved raising the outdoor dining areas will make it difficult to make public improvements in the future. And that last tree there, they're measuring the five feet, not where the grate is, but right to the tree trunk. And that's going to be a tight corner. So I understand what they're trying to do. I do not think this outdoor dining solution is correct in this thing. I do not see how we can make these findings. I don't have a strong feeling about the balcony. It's higher, so it would be above the pedestrian. So I'm okay with the balcony. I think the changes to the facade are good, and I think the color changes that came in the last day or so are good as well and I think this is an important project but I don't think I think the parklet solution is the right one would allow them the seats they need but it would not completely privatize this this part of the sidewalk so anyway those are my comments chair fellers thank you |
| 01:50:52.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you Commissioner Luxenberg. Commissioner Saad. |
| 01:50:59.26 | Nastassya Saad | Can you guys hear me? I was having a slight connection issue earlier. Yes. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Fowler. I have to agree with Commissioner Luxenberg. those were many of the same findings that I too noted that I was having difficulty making I think from the previous sketch from that study session conceptually I I had some leanings towards it but now seeing the final plans and seeing the full scope I definitely have concerns that the plans are final. I'm also having a really hard time. I appreciate the honesty for Mr. Rex that they're looking to come back later. AGAIN, It's good to note, but it really makes it hard to approve projects in piecemeal. So that's just a general note and concern. I think the existing project I think it works. I think there's some really good takeaways from this update. Personally, I actually didn't even mind that previous color. It was a little bright. I thought it was kind of fun. Appreciate trying to tone it down. I think those exterior changes... I take no issue with. I like the signage, I like the font. The balcony, my only note there was when it came down to the hours of operation, I agree we need to be fair and equitable. I also know it's a lunch place. Don't want to limit, do not want to limit this business to their current hours. So maybe we do note on the conditions to put appropriate hours. I also noted that Sunday was not listed. That's clearly, I would assume, an oversight or a mistake. They obviously should and can be open on Sundays. I would choose to have a similar hours to Cultivar if they wish to expand that late. My only concern there, the agreement in that condition was 10.30 p.m. for outside. if people are going to be up on that upstairs upstairs balcony I would want to cap that at 1030 like we did Cultivar just for an interest of the fact that there's you know residential up the hill noise does carry otherwise I really am struggling here with the findings. I find it, To the same point from both Commissioner Lux and Mr. Rex is saying that been done down the street, but El Portal is a very very different location. It's almost protected. It's almost not really even a street. So I think they they're just they're lucky to be in that location. I think it affords them the opportunity to expand the way that they did AND I JUST THINK THIS, this location. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT It can't bear it. It's very congested and pushing the sidewalk out. I think Commissioner Luxembourg kind of used the word that was, it's privatizing that sidewalk in a way that's really going to kind of burden the surroundings and pedestrians. So I have a safety concern as well with that bike lane. So, So I would hope we can see a fully engrossed project with an interior THE FAMILY. I don't think we intend to piecemeal this, but I just want to go on the record for the applicant Mr. Rex to real, I mean, your facade is great. I would support the balcony, support your colors. I support all your signage, but I am not supporting that outdoor dining the way it stands today. |
| 01:54:44.17 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU, CHAIR FELKER. |
| 01:54:44.51 | Nastassya Saad | THANK YOU, CHAIR FELLER. |
| 01:54:45.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Graham. |
| 01:54:50.06 | Richard Graef | Thank you, Chair Feller. Well, first of all, I think the project is looking really I like the building colors I'm very glad to see the change to a little softer. collar. Um, That's exactly what I was going to recommend, and that's exactly what was done. Um, good. um, the signage, I... have a issue with the And, uh... applied plaque signs on the face of the building I think that makes it look busy and frankly just not up to quality. I would rather see some really nice three-dimensional or or not. heavily three-dimensional but applied letters right on the right on the building. I think it would look much, much better and be less cluttered. and certainly would be as Um, Thank you. Let's see. Yeah, it's mainly about the signage Um, I... not having such a struggle with the with the dining, um, console. Actually, I think that's pretty well thought out. probably would work pretty well. I... um, I just don't know what else to say about it except that I don't have any major quarrel with it. I certainly wouldn't. I certainly understand some of the concerns and you know, are probably valid. So generally speaking, I like the project. I like the building. I like the looks of it. I like the balcony. I think that whole part of it is. Excellent. So that's about it at this point. |
| 01:57:00.49 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, thank you, Commissioner Graff. of Australia University. |
| 01:57:05.78 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:57:05.80 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. Yeah, I think this all comes down to the, what's gonna happen in the right of way on that sidewalk. I'm not sure if we're fully on board advance of the design, the colors, You know, it all looks great. I'm not sure. I think I probably fall more in Commissioner Grafskamp. There's, you know, this is really, really tough one. I fully understand and respect Commissioner Luxembourg and Commissioner Saad position. But I also think IT'S... you know, it's just that it's a tough one. You know, this business is if there was just a bigger place, it would be a bigger place. but there isn't. And the only way this can work is with some and we're going to have a lot of Um... So I'm very much on the fence, but I certainly Again, I agree with Commissioner Graff. I think this could work. the But let's keep the discussion going. |
| 01:58:03.26 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Just a couple of my comments to share with you. I would add in terms of some of the findings, this is not consistent with the general plan in terms of basic circulate. circulation and transportation. Um, And there is not a world I could support this. I actually think it would be a little bit irresponsible of the planning commission to recommend to the city council to approve such a, such an encroachment and create such precedent It is not consistent with what our general plan is. It's not consistent with what our downtown district and historic district, which this is on the edge of, is defines. It's also in complete contravention with the proposed parklet program, which I know that Mr. Rex is aware of and it's commented on publicly in the town hall. So I don't think I could make the findings. So I'm just adding to Commissioner Luxembourg's list of the findings that he can't make. And I would just add to that the general plan. I know Magda, you referenced a couple other issues with the general plan where you find it consistent, but it is not consistent overall. with what our general plan update in 2020 is. So I cannot support this project I want to make it very clear on the record there is an approved permit on this project. Our decision this evening is not impacting the applicant's ability to complete the work that has already been approved and permitted. It is not impacting their business as it relates to the approved permit and the ongoing work there. I too take issue with getting projects like this that are significant because they're downtown, piecemealed. It's probably not the best way to get the best product And I would just ask which is all I can do is ask that maybe that be rethought moving forward. um, BUT YOU KNOW, I'M I can't I can't approve this project tonight and I would move to deny it. In fact, So let me ask, Commissioner Graff or Vice Chair Junius, if they have any further thoughts on this, since I know you were both on the fence. |
| 02:00:36.18 | Andrew Junius | Mr. Graff. Um, Yeah, why don't you start? |
| 02:00:40.10 | Richard Graef | Okay. I, I would have a hard time supporting a resolution for denial because I do think that All in all, a pretty good project. Um, I would. And I agree that that seeing these projects. develop. piece me off is It's problematic. Um, However, In many cases, these are improvements, and the projects are better because of it. So. But I would prefer... a continuance of some sort to try to resolve the issues surrounding the outdoor dining Um, Maybe there's another solution in there, or maybe there's some modification of the existing design. But basically, I still feel that it's a good approach and I don't find that it's Um, At least from my view, I don't see it as being so problematic. So... Yeah, I'd rather see a little more development of the concept before actually denying us. |
| 02:02:03.53 | Andrew Junius | I would agree. And I'd also be curious what the applicant thinks, because clearly we've got three commissioners that feel pretty strongly their position and, at this point a continuance to I mean, go around and around and around another study session or even keep speaking at this hearing now and try to understand because again, I, like I said, I, I just kind of think it works. I agree it's a bit of a stretch. This is a crowded part of Bridgeway. There are right-of-way issues. There are public safety issues. THE FAMILY. but, unless Commissioner Luxembourg or Sot or Chair Feller are like, there's just no way that they'd support the basic idea. you know, maybe we can continue to talk about it and to work through the details. Um, but, but I don't want to waste everybody's time. |
| 02:03:03.15 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:03:03.43 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:03:03.65 | Andrew Junius | This is a... a dead letter for at least three of the commissioners, then we should just move on. So that's kind of how I feel. |
| 02:03:10.49 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I appreciate that. And I know that we all always strive for some sort of compromise from the dais in a manner that also doesn't, it is not punitive to an applicant. But I'm pretty firm on this outdoor dining. There is no world where I can support that type of an encroachment permit on city property and rerouting traffic pedestrian or otherwise. I cannot support that. I absolutely cannot. This applicant, again, is more than welcome to wait for the proposed parklet program to be actually approved. But again, the principles that this represents is also a total contravention to that, let alone, the general plan that we also are here to uphold it. And I cannot, This really is an assault to both of those things. and there needs to be they can come back if they would like with another design. that actually could include the interior. And so it's getting all approved at once. But I think that the whole idea of this outdoor terrace and rerouting pedestrian traffic and encroaching on the sidewalk this way has got to be abandoned now. That's how strongly I feel about that piece of it. Not that there isn't merit to other parts of what is being shown to us tonight, but I think we must abandon that. |
| 02:04:42.42 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg, what are your thoughts? |
| 02:04:44.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, hearing the comments from Commissioner June Eius and Commissioner Graff, I think under no circumstance can I support moving the sidewalk in this case unless we were to take out the parking all one bridgeway and widen it the entire way. Then we could do that. But I don't think I want to do it for just one property um so i would you know or i i think if i understand how we have to do in the denial is we're going to request staff to prepare a resolution for denial and that would come up in our next meeting so why don't i throw this idea out as a compromise uh we should ask the staff to prepare that resolution for denial for the next meeting. Between now and then, hopefully the architect can finish the layout of the inside of what they want to do with our comments, knowing that they're not going to get approval for an encroachment permit on the sidewalk. And maybe they develop a parklet or a concept plan or whatever, and they come back, because I think we do need to approve the colors in the outside, and there's not a real way to bifurcate this. So if we were to continue this till our next meeting, with the understanding that the staff prepares a recommendation for denial, but at that meeting, if they come in with an alternative plan, which maybe it's a parklet, and they finalize the inside, then we can work with them so that they can finish the construction. I mean, I'm amazed they're under construction, and they don't know what the inside is going to look like, and they're not sure what the outside is going to look like so i'm not sure why they started construction but i wasn't here on the first hearings and i do strongly encourage anyone listening on future projects figure out what you want inside figure out what you want outside and you know occasionally things change but you know um this is that of these plans the study session is post pandemic so that really was not a function of of these constant changes of the colors or whatever but again i'm supportive of the balcony and the colors so anyway so i guess my my suggestion is we we recommend uh denial and for the staff to come back with a resolution for denial, but we continue this to our next meeting. And during that time, if they come in with an alternative plan, then they don't have to resubmit. And this thing is still open. I don't want to force them to close this and then resubmit. I just think they could just revise. |
| 02:07:26.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:30.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Anyways, that's my thoughts. |
| 02:07:32.14 | Kristina Feller | So real quick on that before I let the other commissioners comment is, yes, thank you, Sergio. I have a question for you about Um, what Commissioner Luxenberg has laid out regarding a continuance, because that puts it to a date certain, and I'm not so sure I'm comfortable with that either. because I don't wanna perpetuate piecemeal things in front of us. So Sergio, can you help walk us through how this could work with what Commissioner Luxembourg has laid out and then let's hear from the other commissioners. |
| 02:08:04.70 | Sergio Rudin | So, you know, either the commission can direct that the project be denied and a resolution be prepared denying the project tonight, in which case, you know, that would be something that, You know, we prepared the final resolution for the grounds that you identify. And I believe Commissioner Luxembourg identified a number of grounds as did you, Chair Feller, with respect to the consistency with the general plan. Alternatively, the suggestion that this item be continued, you know, obviously if the item is continued, you invite the applicant to prepare revisions to the project for your consideration. That would mean that you would likely need to reopen the public hearing. you know, consider the project as revised, you know, to the extent that there are revisions, you know, allow public comment. Um, And so with respect to that option, I think it would benefit the applicant and also staff in terms of their analysis of any sort of revised project you know, what sort of direction the commission is willing to give. with respect to what sort of revisions they would be willing to entertain. particularly with respect to the issue. It sounds like the main stumbling block here is the issues of the encroachment agreement and issues pertaining to use of the public right-of-way. Um, But taking those issues aside, you know, Is the commission willing to consider the remainder of the project? And does that need to be changed? Um, |
| 02:09:34.65 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, Well, let's hear from a couple other commissioners. So don't go far, Sergio. Yes, Vice-Chair Genius. |
| 02:09:43.42 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. At the risk of extending this into the evening here, you know, when I mean, I do think that you know, part of the real problem here is that the bump out that's being proposed really, it is a, it is just in front of this property owner and for the benefit of this store. Um, I mean, I personally, given the fact that there's a gigantic parking lot across the street, the loss of a handful of street spaces, in front of this store and then on either side, you know, to me is irrelevant and would, I would be very supportive of a broader you know, widening of the sidewalks on either side of the store. Maybe, obviously, I don't think we're gonna ask this Thank you. applicants who like pay for the whole sidewalk down you know, when you really look at how Bridgeway works, There's only this strip of bridgeway where there's street parking, right? Again, we are heavily parked in Sausalito, especially downtown. We've got plenty of places for people to pull in and park. So the loss of parking spaces, I think I don't think it certainly doesn't trouble me And if, if we can deal with the public safety issue that Commissioner Luxembourg has raised, bollards on the extended sidewalk or something You know, I agree when the when the sidewalk starts to bulb out people cut corners and they find themselves a lot closer to traffic than they would be otherwise. And under the current, configuration. maybe there's a way to address some of those kind of pedestrian safety issues. Because I mean, the way it works right now is you're walking, that parking a car on the street actually does protect the pedestrians, right? Because if a car runs into a car that's parked, you're not going to run over a pedestrian. I do understand, you know, Commissioner Luxembourg and Commissioner Saadz and your concern, Commissioner Feller or Chair Feller, about this issue. But there's gotta be a way to fix that. you know, and whether it's a I mean, I personally think, frankly, at the other end of the spectrum on the parklet side, sometimes those parklets seem a little, and they're everywhere all over the Bay Area now. And I find occasionally sitting in a parklet on a busy street not too safe. I'm sitting in a chair with traffic whizzing by me, right? That's where this proposal actually works better. The people that are actually sitting in eating food are safe and they're farther in we're just we're making compromises here one way or the other. I do think this is solvable. And I'd be curious about expanding the project to some extent by removing a few more parking spaces on either side and maybe putting some bollards up or some type of school. you know, you know, pedestrian safety feature. I'm not sure. And again, if the applicants would be willing to even entertain that, I know that's just more money out of their pockets. Anyway, those are my thoughts. |
| 02:12:27.45 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, Commissioner Stodd. I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO |
| 02:12:33.98 | Nastassya Saad | THAT it's very hard to design from the, I think we need to move away from trying to find the solutions up here. That's not to be inequitable to the applicant. I think we've sometimes gone down the road trying to find solutions. I think we're all on board with a lot of the proposed changes. If I'm hearing us all correctly, we're okay with colors. There might be a question on the signs, but I think overall, the sticking point like THAT SERGIO MENTIONED REALLY IS what's happening down on the sidewalk. And I think it's going to be really difficult to TO TRY TO AMEND THAT HERE AND NOW. I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE THE JOB OF THE ARCHITECT. AND I THINK THAT, We we need to not try to solution for that now. I wouldn't be opposed to a continuance if that is more helpful to staff and staff. and the applicant overall, but I think where it stands today, I'm not comfortable with I'm not comfortable with moving forward as is. I also think just to Commissioner Junius's point, I think you're right in terms of the safety of the diners, but what this is proposing, there's protection there, putting the pedestrians to come out into the street, now you're losing the protection for the pedestrians and we're in busy season it's already slammed downtown again, which is great. It's great to see, but got people on bikes, you've got our are renters of bikes who don't know the rules. You've got European tourists in the street. You've got locals trying to get down there. So you're creating a safety in one area potentially for their diners, but you're opening up a risk for everybody else and that's my concern. |
| 02:14:25.56 | Kristina Feller | Excuse me, Commissioner Zod. We see the hands, but we're in the middle of deliberation right now. Hold on. Sorry, commissioner. |
| 02:14:34.19 | Nastassya Saad | That's okay. That's where I'm at. Personally, I'd go with a resolution for denial this evening, unless we can sort out some kind of continuance, but I don't want to try to redesign. I think Mr. Rex has a lot of skill to potentially to do that himself, hearing our direction. |
| 02:14:54.01 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you for that. Commissioner Graff, any additional thoughts |
| 02:14:59.17 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 02:14:59.20 | Richard Graef | Mmm. Only that I do agree with Commissioner Junius of the Um, comment. about this. I think it's workable. Um, However, I would support a continuance because I'd like to see it solved. I wouldn't want to... Um, deny project and And then Because can you deny part of it and okay some of it? like the building collars and the signs, for example. I'd rather this project come back with um, whether with a solution to the dilemma that people find themselves in. Uh, |
| 02:15:49.24 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 02:15:50.10 | Richard Graef | So, I don't know what that is. As I said, I do feel that the that the concept that's been advanced is, sound. I just, maybe just not there yet. I'd be interested to see. what the applicant and and Michael Ratshapisack. but I'd like to see it continued. |
| 02:16:19.41 | Kristina Feller | Okay. We also know that this applicant is coming back, no matter what, with a different request for a permit. So hearing it again, it sounds to me Inevitable. So I would be in the camp to support a motion to deny this request this evening. the applicants had the benefit of hearing some of the input on the other elements about color flags. balconies. signage that they can then take along with staff support, into their future request anyway, since we know it's going to happen no matter what. I think that, Um, You know, this, again, it defies any basic urban planning principle. It defies the general plan that we are here to uphold. We are the line of first defense on that. We can't look the other way. This is in contravention to the proposed parklet program that yes, it is not ratified, yes, that's absolutely true. but it's probably about 95% there. And so it's not going to take a huge left turn away from what it is today. It just needs to be refined. I think, you know, that's a lot of reasons that this should probably be denied and then allow, allow the applicant to let go of the idea and then focus on what they need. need to do to get their interior renovation proposal to align with what the exterior proposal is. I don't think I've heard anybody who's completely against the color or the balcony or what have you. So that's all good news. So that's, I would support a motion to deny. at this point, I think it's a cleaner way to allow this applicant to come back with what they need to come back with |
| 02:18:15.55 | Sergio Rudin | And Chair, as I understand it from the planning director, the other pending avaltation, entirely concerns interior improvements or for the most part concerned interior improvements that doesn't include certain exterior changes to the facade here that are being presented to the commission. I would recommend that you recognize the applicant to see if they would like to try to consolidate these two applications and have them considered at once. Because I would say that they are entitled to a decision on the exterior changes that they are seeking right now. |
| 02:18:51.17 | Kristina Feller | We usually do that once we're finished deliberating. We always ask the applicant. |
| 02:18:51.67 | Sergio Rudin | I'm not sure. Thank you. |
| 02:18:56.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:18:56.36 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:18:56.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Chair Powell, can I ask Mr. Reardon, you're not saying we can buy for people, so we've always been told we can't buy for people. |
| 02:19:06.52 | Sergio Rudin | I'm not sure I understand what you mean by bifurcate, but that's |
| 02:19:09.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, we can't approve the facade changes and deny the dining facility tonight. We have to deny the application before us and they would come back with something else. That's what I'm trying to clarify. |
| 02:19:27.47 | Sergio Rudin | I'm not exactly sure I understand, you know, why it would be improper to approve one permit that pertains to some discrete scope of work and deny some other you know, permit or encroachment agreement that pertains to a different scope of work. Um, I have seen those decisions made by planning commissions in the past. Typically, it's difficult to parse a project in that way. And that's the reason why it's difficult to bifurcate a decision. I'm not saying it's impossible. |
| 02:19:57.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | um yeah ms wagner on other things that we've tried to do this before and she's told us no so maybe the the facts were different in those cases uh my only thought is if they don't have the outdoor they don't have the outdoor joining as proposed and they go back to the ramp or the or the interior thing then the interior changes then the windows change, then the facade changes. So as much as we could probably agree on the colors, We can't approve a plan for the outside until we know what the layout is with this ramp. So we have that issue. |
| 02:20:36.94 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, and that issue that a lot of the improvements may be interrelated, that is actually one of the reasons why bifurcation is typically difficult. Why it's difficult to approve one permit but deny others. |
| 02:20:49.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Any other comments from the commission? Any other further deliberations? Commissioner Saad, did you have your hand up? |
| 02:20:57.55 | Nastassya Saad | I was just going to say, I think bifurcating, I think we're asking them not to come piecemeal. I think it's going to make it even more complicated to try to tear this apart. I think painting is far away. So noting that we're all on board with the colors, I think we don't want to surprise them on the next round and suddenly say we're not. So I feel like we just go on record saying that that looks good, but I would avoid us bifurcating anything. |
| 02:21:21.05 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, any other final thoughts or comments |
| 02:21:27.30 | Richard Graef | I'm not sure. |
| 02:21:27.72 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:21:27.77 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:21:27.78 | Kristina Feller | Otherwise, yeah, Mr. Garvey. |
| 02:21:27.80 | Richard Graef | Otherwise, yeah. This is kind of a tactical question. It sounds to me like there's probably three votes for denial. Um, and So, as I said, It's a little confusing because If I do not support the motion for denial does that mean What does that mean? in terms of |
| 02:21:58.57 | Kristina Feller | I'm going to go. It's just a score of a vote. |
| 02:22:02.70 | Richard Graef | Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. Um, How do I say it? |
| 02:22:15.24 | Richard Graef | Well, I guess I would say that As I said, my preference would be for a continuous to try to work out The box of that. overall project. And if that's not in the car. And then, Okay, so... |
| 02:22:34.25 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Graff, just to maybe help, I mean, bear in mind that this applicant has a fully approved permit. So there's nothing holding them up from buildings. you know, at this time, nothing from that. |
| 02:22:46.42 | Unknown | I'm sure. |
| 02:22:49.56 | Kristina Feller | If they elect to make changes, then that's at their election. But there's the fundamentally They have an approved permit. They confirmed at our last hearing in February that it's a viable business. There's nothing about this that affects their business or ability to run. So, This is just not that this isn't important, but that we are not holding them up. And I just wanna make sure that that's absolutely clear. Thank you. |
| 02:23:20.75 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:23:20.81 | Andrew Junius | Um, |
| 02:23:21.39 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:23:21.83 | Andrew Junius | of the |
| 02:23:21.91 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:23:21.98 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 02:23:22.16 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:23:23.38 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Junis, did you have your hand up? |
| 02:23:25.15 | Andrew Junius | I did just to kind of wrap it up and get a little bit more into the weeds here. Again, I know we're gonna hear from the applicant team here in a second. and get their thoughts about which way they'd like to go. I always think my preference in the world that I swim in usually You know, you want to avoid a denial at all costs if you're the applicant, you know, simply because if you get some time to go back amend, revise, change your permit and bring it back. you know, maybe that's just You know, that's a that's a different way to get to where some of the commissioners want to be here without flat out denying the permit. So I would just kind of hopefully we can leave that door open a little bit, possibly a continuance if there's if it would result in the same thing. So that's just a thought. |
| 02:24:12.10 | Kristina Feller | Well, I first... |
| 02:24:12.35 | Andrew Junius | I agree. |
| 02:24:13.55 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I mean, we always do try to find that. A lot of these same comments were made at the study session though. So unfortunately they weren't necessarily taken into account. There are no other comments at this time. Let me ask the applicant to come back up here. I know Mr. Ives, you're there with your hand. patiently with your hand up, you've heard conversations and comments from the commission. Do you have any comments at this time? What thoughts? |
| 02:24:45.17 | Michael Rex | yes thank you um i asked you to not that you do not deny the project I ask you to continue the project, but I wanna give you some clarity on some of the comments I heard and I'll keep it brief. um I, too, dislike piecemeal design. It makes it a lot more complicated. There's two good reasons why this is coming back. First of all, odd. What you approved last time was ugly. Okay? Period. And I'm not blaming anybody. I think it got designed by committee. And so I'm coming in late in the day after construction began and trying to bring it back to you. Okay? Seeking your help to make it look better and work better for everybody. All right? and in terms of piecemeal, we've... We are focused on the exterior Uh... and we're going to have a ahead of the interior. because we wanna take that awful plywood superstructure down as soon as we can. Okay. everything else is going to be inside. If we can get the facade approved, we can finish the facade and take all that plywood superstructure down so it'll look better downtown. Okay, because it currently that, temporary structures pretty horrible. if we're delayed and We need to detail that cornice. We need to detail that balcony. And if I don't know, I have that approved. That superstructure is going to stay up for much longer, OK? I also want you to know that we're very cognizant of the concern of piecemeal design such that The interiors we're proposing in no way whatsoever change the exterior. with one exception. That would be the case if you approved our outdoor dining terrace as proposed. Obviously. We got a problem there. in getting a majority vote. So the handicap ramp, if we can't raise that terrace, and we're gonna be stuck with that handicap ramp, because I don't think Michael's gonna wanna stay with losing a third of the storefront. And I don't think we should expect somebody in a wheelchair to get in an elevator to go up 15 inches. That's torture. or and whoever suggested hiding the front door made a mistake that needs correction. Now with that, if that handicap ramp uh, isn't integrated with the raised terrace. Well, then it begs the question, how's that work out? Now, I personally think the city has an obligation to allow a handicap wrap on the sidewalk because they're the ones that lowered the sidewalk. I also have the point of view that I think it's rather odd that in this case, we can't expect pedestrians to walk around an outdoor sidewalk cafe when the two restaurants just to the south of us, you have to do exactly that. Of course, the difference is sidewalk jobs. but I have a real hard time trying to understand the safety problem of putting a sidewalk next to a bike lane I could show you throughout urban designs everywhere. that that is not a strange juxtaposition, okay? What is? unsafe is putting diners right next to a travel lane and that's what we're trying to fix. What I'd like to suggest on safety because that's coming up as a big issue, if you would grant us a continuance, I would like to consult with some traffic engineers who are experts on such matters and see what they have to say. It might help inform all of us about whether this is a serious issue or not. Is it perception or is it fact? I think we need to study that more to answer that question. And a continuance will give them that opportunity Another reason I wish to ask for a, or I do ask for a continuance is if you deny it, We have to start all over again. We have a 30-day deemed complete application process. We have to pay the fee all over again. And for what? It just punishes us. When a continuance does exactly the same thing, as one of the commissioners just pointed out, thank you very much, that it buys us time to address the concerns that are raised. I respect those concerns and they warrant a thoughtful response. And a continuance will give us that opportunity. And I even suggest a date uncertain because I don't know how long it'll take for us to respond and get input from experts. So with that, I ask that you continue it to a date uncertain. We heard you. Give us a chance to respond without denying the project. |
| 02:29:43.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Mr. Brooks. Mr. Lappert, did you have anything to add to that? You're on mute. |
| 02:29:51.27 | Michael Lappert | Amen. |
| 02:29:51.89 | Magda | Thank you. |
| 02:29:55.54 | Michael Lappert | Am I unmuted? |
| 02:29:56.50 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, yeah. |
| 02:29:57.66 | Michael Lappert | Perfect. Of course I have something that I can't help myself. I just want to make sure that the commissioners understand that the one concern The constant term that was used was piecemeal. There's nothing piecemeal about this. The menu that you see in that restaurant today will be the exact same menu that will be there next year and the year after. Nothing is changing. The only thing that's changing on the interior is I wanted to get rid of that ridiculous idea of making somebody get in an elevator to go up 15 inches. That's absurd. And the only way we could do that was with a ramp, which we have to do because the city put us in a position where we have to. If we were dealing before they lowered the sidewalk, we would be having to talk about a six inch step. Now we have to talk about a much steeper one, which means a ramp. A ramp stuck to the side of that building with a parklet on the other side of the sidewalk is hideous. I don't know how else to say that. It's ugly. I'm a person who's driven by aesthetics. That's the reason why I decided to spend a hell of a lot more money and hire Michael Rex to provide something that's pretty. That was the whole idea of this. We are not the only person that you've allowed to raise us a sidewalk for the quote-unquote personal use. Kopita's sidewalk is raised for their benefit. Their seating area is raised above the sidewalk a little height. The reason they did that is for the same reason we need to do So they... customers get inside. So please, I hate seeing a decision made on incorrect assumptions. The idea of piecemeal, we had an architect before who had some serious personal problems, and so therefore we had to part ways. Michael Rex came in. And this is what he proposed when he saw the terrible thing that was like, in his words, designed by committee. I allowed myself to have my project designed by one of the members of the panel at that time who had his own ideas. And we came up with that ugly thing that you see before you. So that's why we wanted to redo it and make it nice. That's what we got today. I'm hoping that you can allow Michael to do what he needs to do to get that done. I think a park that is a terrible idea. It impedes traffic. The place there is busy. When you get the tables filled and people waiting in line, the sidewalk will be obstructed. That's why we want to put the pedestrians away from the diners. So they don't split the... the customers in half. That was the whole purpose of that. So anyway, that's all I have to say. Thank you very much. |
| 02:32:36.10 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, let's bring it back up here to the dais. Yes, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:32:47.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | very troubled by this uh i i'm hearing what the applicant just said and there i'm what i'm what between the lines i'm hearing they're going to get engineers to come in and tell us why their plan is better and i'm i'm very frustrated by that i was on board possibly the continuance but now i'm not because they they they just told us they're not going to do a park play |
| 02:33:01.23 | Beth Thompson | Yeah. |
| 02:33:14.19 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and they need the seating. They're not going to do a park, but this is a terrible idea. We've already told them it's a terrible idea. And I am very frustrated by this piecemeal stuff. I don't want to design from the diets. If we did that before, then we did that, but I don't think that's a good thing. If they have an elevator inside, they don't need the ramp, they have that approval. If they don't like that and they didn't want that then they should have withdrawn the project at that point and came in with the ramp if they don't like the ramp then then you know the the site's tough maybe there are vacancies elsewhere in downtown maybe they want to go to a place where where they have more room to be able to do what they want to do. So I think we're going around in circles. I think we need to deny this so that they can come in and figure out whether they want a ramp or not want a ramp. And we don't really know if they don't have the outside dining, and clearly the boats aren't there for that, then they either want to do a ramp or they don't. And the layout of the inside affects whether they have a ramp or not. I mean, they're going to have a ramp, and it affects what they do inside because they can get rid of this little lobby inside. So they should go back and figure out what they want the inside and outside to be, given that they're not going to get seats more than a couple against the building. Because if they're not doing a parklet, they'll have a couple of tables against the building and that'll be it. |
| 02:33:58.89 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:34:42.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:34:42.11 | Beth Thompson | Amen. |
| 02:34:47.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | or they'll come back with a parklet, but I mean, I think that continuing it is not solving the problem because they're going to come back and hire an engineer and tell us they think it's safe. So I think we should just deny this. They have a permit. They can keep building with the permit that they have and then come in with something that works, have their inside architect and outside architect that appears appears to both be Michael Rex right now, figure out without a raised dining area, how is he gonna solve the handicap problem? And I don't know about this thing about public works of lowering the sidewalk, I don't quite understand that. But I don't know when, does anybody know when the public works lowered the sidewalk? |
| 02:35:34.30 | Kristina Feller | It doesn't matter. I mean, no time recently. It doesn't really matter what- |
| 02:35:38.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I've never seen it other than this. |
| 02:35:40.09 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:35:40.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you |
| 02:35:40.99 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:35:41.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Anyways, those are my thoughts. I would suggest we move to have the staff come back with a resolution for denial. |
| 02:35:51.45 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, okay. I would support that. I'm a little frustrated by the response we got. I don't need engineers to explain all the different reasons why this doesn't work. And in the study session, there were actually two options that they showed us i i looked at the video again today and watched it and this this one that we're seeing tonight you know not everybody but the majority of of commissioners did not take to it i think everybody was supportive of of the ramp, I believe. I believe that's correct, but there was more support for it. So I think that we need to make a clean cut here and allow them to move on. If they wanna change the design, that's up to them. That's absolutely their prerogative. Um, But they have an approved permit, they have the ability to continue to build, they have the ability to continue to complete this project and be open for operations. So there's absolutely nothing that we're doing tonight that's denying them anything of that sort. Um, Any other comments from any other commissioners just by a show of hands? or I'm happy to entertain a motion |
| 02:37:04.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'll move that we ask the staff to come back with a recommended resolution for denial based on, and they can read it back in the video, all of the findings that I said, along with the finding on the general plan that you added to. |
| 02:37:20.55 | Kristina Feller | So I think at a minimum, it's A, C, D, E, J, M. And I think there are a couple others, but I've got to look back at the document. |
| 02:37:28.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Amen. I've got J and M for the design review. I've got H for the MEP, and I've got A, B, C, D, and E for the encroachment. |
| 02:37:38.00 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So staff, do you have note of that? Yes, I do. Is there a second? All the time. Okay. Are there any other motions on the floor? |
| 02:37:52.34 | Andrew Junius | I'll |
| 02:37:53.03 | Richard Graef | to continue. |
| 02:37:54.26 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Is there a second to continue? |
| 02:37:57.05 | Richard Graef | I'll continue, I'll second that motion. |
| 02:38:01.37 | Kristina Feller | So Dan, can you take a vote count for continuance and then we'll take a vote count for denial? MR. |
| 02:38:09.99 | Nastassya Saad | Sorry, this is to continue. No. |
| 02:38:13.69 | Dan | Thank you. Commissioner Graff? Yeah. Commissioner Luxembourg? |
| 02:38:19.64 | Andrew Junius | No. |
| 02:38:21.16 | Dan | Vice Chair Junius. |
| 02:38:23.22 | Andrew Junius | Yes, I'm continuing. |
| 02:38:24.23 | Dan | Thank you. Chair Feller? No. |
| 02:38:26.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:38:28.10 | Dan | Motion. does not carry three to two. |
| 02:38:32.20 | Kristina Feller | Okay, can you please take a vote count for a motion for denial? |
| 02:38:36.15 | Dan | Commissioner Saad? Yes. Commissioner Graff? All right. Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 02:38:43.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:38:43.74 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:38:43.98 | Dan | Thank you. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 02:38:45.95 | Andrew Junius | No. |
| 02:38:46.25 | Dan | Thank you. Chair Fowler. Thank you. |
| 02:38:48.16 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 02:38:48.64 | Dan | Thank you. Motion carries to deny. |
| 02:38:50.98 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Great, thank you very much. Let's go ahead and move on to item 6C this evening. And over to you, Dan. |
| 02:39:04.08 | Dan | Uh, hold on. Let me write that down. OK, thank you. Thank you, Chair, fellow members of the commission. Before you tonight, Dan Holdert, Interim Director of Community Development. Before you tonight is 201 Bridgeway Boulevard for an encroachment agreement, number 2022-00118. It's for encroachment agreement in the, in the main street. right away. The scope for tonight includes three 3x3x3 planner boxes, that are handmade from original planking from the Valhalla They're from the Valhalla building. They're painted white and they're planted with non fruit bearing trees. In this case, they're they're non fruit bearing olives. and they're surrounded by lavender at the base. I got to share my screen. |
| 02:39:54.80 | Kristina Feller | That would be, that would help. |
| 02:39:56.32 | Dan | Yeah, I apologize. |
| 02:40:02.61 | Dan | I was wondering why I wasn't changing anything. |
| 02:40:05.03 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. All right, we concede that. Thanks, Dan. |
| 02:40:10.95 | Dan | Okay, so I already went through this. So here it is, here's the site plan. You're looking at the overall site plan and the location of the proposed planners surrounded by the red cloud. Here's a closer view of the proposed placement. The distance from the curb to the lavender is five foot two. That's the, you can see my cursor and my mouse. That's five foot two from the edge of curb to the opening for the lavender. and it's six foot eight from the distance from the actual planter to the backup curve. Here's the current conditions and existing planters on site. They were installed already. Here you see the lavender and the olive trees. They're three by three lavender, planter boxes. So Public Works review, analyze the proposed planners for vehicle site distance they they. reviewed it for travel. pedestrian travel, the proposal, they looked at it for four feet of travel. The proposal is for 5 feet 2 inches. and they also reviewed it for tree species. In this case, they are the olive trees, fruitless olive trees, as I said. So Public Works does not object to allowing these planters to remain in place as long as they're adequately maintained by the property owner and completely comply with the following conditions. The property owner shall maintain all landscaping and planter boxes in good condition and shall replace repair said infrastructure upon request by the city. planting shall comply with the city's acceptable planting list including trees particularly non fruit producing olive trees which are allowed water to the plants identified in the encroachment agreement. so not overflow on the sidewalk. A minimum of four foot sidewalk path of travel shall be maintained at all time, as I mentioned. They're providing five foot two inches The applicant shall obtain a standard encroachment permit Any maintenance of the planter areas require the closure of the sidewalk area. and the planning shall not block site distance for vehicles. And all those conditions are included under the Department of Public Works in the resolution as well. positive encroachment agreement findings. Some of the findings include positive aesthetics along Main Street right-of-way, It is minor and does not impede pedestrian access. The encroachments ensure an aesthetically improved right away. They also do not adversely impact access or circulation. And the improvement does not impede the establishment of streets or pedestrian ways. It is exempt from CEQA under 15304, new gardening and landscaping. |
| 02:43:11.95 | Dan | and staff recommendation. The Planning Commission, our recommendation is that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to approve the application for an encroachment agreement to allow for the addition of three planters in the public right-of-way. along the north side of Main Street. Alternatively, the planning commission may continue the hearing for additional information and or project provisions for direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial, stating that the specific reasons, any one or more of the findings cannot be made. With that, I will stand for questions. And I did see the applicant and the property owner in the zone. |
| 02:43:59.64 | Kristina Feller | Terrific, thank you, Dan. Thank you for the report. and the presentation. This would be the time for commissioners to ask staff any questions for clarification. Commissioner Graff, do you have any questions for Dan at this time? |
| 02:44:15.69 | Richard Graef | Um... No, I don't. Thank you. |
| 02:44:18.54 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:44:20.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No questions as well. |
| 02:44:22.35 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Commissioner Saad. No questions? Okay, Vice-Chair Junius. |
| 02:44:27.10 | Andrew Junius | No questions. |
| 02:44:28.28 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I don't have any either. So thank you again. LET'S GO AHEAD AND INVITE THE APPLICANT UP HERE FOR HIS PRESENTATION. I see Dr. Kashef is in our audience. unmute him or co-host him, you'll have I think you've done this before, doctor. You've got 15 minutes for a presentation, and hopefully you can see the timer clock up on the screen. So I'll hand that over to you. |
| 02:44:57.56 | Dr. Kashef | Good evening, commissioners. Hopefully you're not tired of seeing me yet. This reminds me of the old days when we were trying to get approval and every two weeks I was in front of the planning commission and my wife saw the timer and she almost had a panic attack tonight, so. from the old days that we were doing it all the time. First of all, I want to thank you for your time. I apologize for putting the planters out. I'll give a brief history and I'll respect the time this evening. But if you all remember, that was a very ugly nine and a half foot wide sidewalk, one of the biggest sidewalks in town. |
| 02:45:11.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:45:29.16 | Dr. Kashef | When we were going through planning, obviously it was very long and complicated. We, the city actually recommended, maybe I should put some trees over there. It might make it nicer. I thought that was a wonderful idea. Uh, What as we started finalizing and starting getting our permits and everything, I went back to Danny and Calvin who were the planners at the time and the head of planning. And I shared with them, I was a little concerned that the grading might look a little too industrial with the bus pull out and they said, you know, we could visit it again later. And I kind of left it at that I didn't realize there was a need for an encroachment permit since we already had trees there and all of that. So that's how we got to where we are now. basically the decision to use those planters came once the bus pullout was built as I hope you've all seen it's it's really industrialized this area and this is a home and there's homes near us and next to us so we were hoping to soften it by putting planters and making it more vegetative around the property to kind of take away from that big bus pullout that's been built there. The grading just didn't accomplish that. You know, it's very downtown industrial look. Also there's a shortage of that rating as well. So supply chains is part of that as well. We had these beautiful, we built about 28 of those planters in different sizes. That's all the old ceiling from the Valhalla. So, you know, everyone's had dinner under that wood. We saved all of it, stored it on site, rebuilt those planters, you know, laboriously rebuilt. I mean, it was just painting all of those planters took about five weeks with a crew of three guys. I mean, it's so much work to build these things. We picked olive trees because we thought just having different fruit trees that are on the plans might not pretty in that area. The reason we picked the olive trees is if you look closely with next time you're at that area, it's very, it was thought out quite a bit. It's they're light green with a silver. And if you look at the bay on most days with the wind, it is a light green with silver. So it mimics that. Olive trees do well in the wind. This is Hurricane Gulch. And you also have the side effect of the wind coming. It brings the trees alive. So it makes the whole area alive instead of it just being big leaves that are being blown. It's small glimmers of shimmering hope I told my wife when they went in. THE END OF They're not trimmed. There's, you know, we still have to trim everything and perfect everything. Everything's just put in roughly now. But that's how we got to the planters. I thought it was a nice part of the history. I'll probably put a plaque on the planters once we're all done, so they know it's part of the original building. And I thought it's a nice solution to make it not so industrial over there next to the bus pull out. Um, That's the information I have in the backstory to it, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Well, I'll also add, It is five foot two, but they don't include the curb, but you know, the walking distance is five and a half feet and then it does expand to nine and a half feet really quickly around those so. It's more than is allowed on bridgeway from what I learned on the last talk. So hopefully we can approve this and continue finishing the project. Thank you for your time. |
| 02:48:50.06 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, doctor. I'll make note that we've got 11 minutes and five seconds left if you wanna use that time after we ask you some questions and take public comments. So thank you very much. for that. So this would be the time for commissioners to ask you any questions. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you wanna start us off? |
| 02:49:11.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I just have one quick question. I'm a little confused now. You keep talking about the industrial nature of the bus stop. The bus stop is on second, not on main. So I'm very confused. |
| 02:49:25.31 | Dr. Kashef | You're right, Commissioner Luxembourg. It's that whole corner. The bus stop ended up being a little more commercial looking than I thought it would because it's in concrete putting metal grades right around that as you drive down Bridgeway, uh, The Valhalla has always been kind of at the bottom of this theater of houses at Hurricane Gulch. It's kind of the jewel in that area. |
| 02:49:47.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | if, |
| 02:49:51.49 | Dr. Kashef | And as you come down Alexander and then onto 2nd Street, and the Valhalla opens up. It's a big bus stop now. And we're going to soften it up with lavender and rosemary along that area. If you look on the corner, if I felt that we put metal grading on Main Street adjacent to that, it would be a little too commercial. That's what I meant by that. |
| 02:50:15.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. I'll save my rest of my comments for when we get to that part. Thank you for my damn answer. |
| 02:50:23.78 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg, would looking at the site planning again help you get orientated? You look like you might- Well, no, I'm not. |
| 02:50:29.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, no, I mean, this thing is 520 feet from my house. I know where this is. There are, you have planters on 2nd Street too, right? Is that correct? |
| 02:50:42.14 | Dr. Kashef | Yes, we do, but that's on my property. |
| 02:50:44.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Right, I understand that. So that's why I was confused, because those that are on your property, and they soften the bus, whatever, but this is around the corner from that. So I've been here dozens of times, so I know it well, Chair Feller. |
| 02:51:01.55 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:51:01.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Thank you. Almost, thank you. |
| 02:51:04.28 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. I'm Commissioner Graham. |
| 02:51:08.23 | Richard Graef | No question. |
| 02:51:09.92 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Asad? No questions. Vice Chair Dukness. |
| 02:51:15.30 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 02:51:15.32 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:51:15.34 | Andrew Junius | No question. |
| 02:51:15.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I just had a quick question and that is, are these olive tree? I know olive trees grow slowly. But are they going to, are they the dwarf kind? Are they going to outgrow those planters or split those planters? |
| 02:51:31.17 | Dr. Kashef | No, they're not the dwarf type, but if you look at olive trees like Larkspur Landing, their planters are actually the same size as these, maybe a few inches bigger for some of them. They should do fine. I mean, this was put in by my landscaper who's very experienced with this. What we did to preserve the planters was instead of planting directly into the planter with a liner where the moisture goes into the wood constantly because there's no air circulating, we put a tub in. So there's air that could circulate. So the planters with regular painting should last forever. |
| 02:52:07.65 | Kristina Feller | Great. Okay. And then any kind of irrigation and I'm assuming is. being fed from behind, like off the, yeah. Okay. |
| 02:52:15.73 | Dr. Kashef | Yeah, it's all from Bahala, yes. Coming in from inside. |
| 02:52:17.79 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Great, I appreciate that. And I like the idea of where those planters came from. So thank you for that. |
| 02:52:25.50 | Dr. Kashef | Thank you. |
| 02:52:25.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:25.79 | Dr. Kashef | Thank you. |
| 02:52:26.90 | Kristina Feller | Unless commissioners had any more questions for the applicant, I'm going to go ahead and open this up for public comment. So if anyone in the public would like to make comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application or press star nine on your cell phone. I'm not seeing anybody in the public, of course, other than us, but somebody wanted to dial in. Okay, let's go ahead and close, close public comment. Doctor, would you like to make any final comments or statements or any other thoughts you had? that you'd like to add? |
| 02:53:02.58 | Dr. Kashef | you know, just thank you for your time. |
| 02:53:04.42 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. Thank you as well. Okay, let's pull it up to our virtual dais. Commissioner Graff, do you want to start us off? |
| 02:53:13.60 | Richard Graef | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I... I don't have any problem with the planters there. I think they look nice. are good there, so yeah, I'm I'm not sure. I'm able to make the findings for approval. |
| 02:53:31.01 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:53:32.97 | Nastassya Saad | on. |
| 02:53:33.37 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:53:34.45 | Nastassya Saad | I just wanted to note how cool it was that what was used for the planters. I think that's really special. And I think a plaque there would actually be, that would be great. So I would definitely support that. I'm happy to discuss, but I'd make a motion just to approve. I appreciate the explanation. um, as to why they were there without the encroachment permit. So now I'm all set. I'd be happy to make a motion to approve. |
| 02:54:02.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Yes, Director Horter. |
| 02:54:07.04 | Dan | I just want to clarify, I didn't say this earlier, there was one letter that came in a couple days back. I was added to the agenda. for Mr. Virsaci. |
| 02:54:18.55 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you for that. I think I did see that in my packet. Hopefully everybody else did as well. Thank you for that. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 02:54:29.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, I'm having trouble making the findings on this. I think that given the size of the planners, they do diminish the, for finding aid, the visual and physical enjoyment of the streetscape. I think simple street trees would be better. I think that the plannings on the model, they're going to start to grow out into the sidewalk and narrow it down. This is a word of the water. I think that finding C, I don't think the encroachment is necessary. Finding D, the planters, as well as the low-line planning at the base, do narrow the sidewalk, possibly creating a public hazard. These trees are very sort of sort of massive I don't seem to need especially because we want to get to the water it's nice that they came from the building itself but the plaque can go on the planters that are on second Street that's why I asked about that so I do agree with the comment we got from one of the neighbors that this is not this is not not necessarily necessary and it privatizes this sidewalk I think it makes it feel like the that sidewalk is not the public realm it's part of the Baha'u'llah property. So there's this nice bone walk that we have. I don't see why we need to clutter with the planter. So I don't think I can make the planter in this regard. |
| 02:56:02.51 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:56:03.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm probably in the minority, but it's just fine. |
| 02:56:05.91 | Kristina Feller | It doesn't matter. We, your, your comments are just as important as anybody else's so. So thank you for them. Vice Chair Junius. |
| 02:56:17.53 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, that actually surprised me a little bit. I can certainly make the findings. I mean, I don't think this is Thank you. |
| 02:56:32.98 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. surrounds the Valhalla and gets you back out on the bridgeway. That said, it's a pretty wide sidewalk I think there's still plenty of room. And I like the idea of |
| 02:56:52.97 | Andrew Junius | on Main. Thank you. I'm supportive. |
| 02:56:55.69 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you for that. I too can make the findings and I am supportive of it. I think that I appreciate your support. you know, the applicant taking an initiative to try to unify that area a little bit and needed it. Um... i i want to just review some some of the findings though dan i want to make sure I think in DPWs, they had a four foot minimum sidewalk clearance. It sounds like there's more than that anyway. |
| 02:57:29.47 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:57:30.01 | Kristina Feller | Typically throughout town, we're asking for a five foot minimum. It appears that that would not create any problem for this. I would just like to amend conditions of approval to five feet instead of four feet. Thank you. Um, if my fellow commissioners would be supportive of that. Sounds like the room is there anyway. I just want to make sure it's not further encroached upon. I'm just going to support that. And then Can you, Dan, can you just remind us about the requirements to keep everything pruned? I know if these are new trees, you kind of need to let them... settle in for at least a year before you start pruning them, but What are the requirements for pruning |
| 02:58:17.72 | Dan | The public works is requiring that the owner maintain all landscaping and planter boxes in good condition and shall replace or repair said infrastructure. So I'm really, it's limited to maintaining the landscaping and planter boxes in good |
| 02:58:33.85 | Kristina Feller | I think the only thing I would add to that, and hopefully this sounds logical to everybody, is that any of that vegetation is kept pruned back off the public right of way. within that five feet so you're not sort of ducking around catching yourself on a limb or anything like that. I mean, I think that's gonna be, that's not a difficult ask, anyway, and I hope not, but let's just keep it clean, keep these resolutions clean so there's no problems in the future. |
| 02:59:08.38 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:59:11.89 | Kristina Feller | Any other thoughts about those two requests or any other additional edits that anyone would like to make? |
| 02:59:21.07 | Nastassya Saad | May I ask, there's a pruning concept that you just brought up, Chair Feller. I walk there almost every day, so I'm familiar with how they're looking now, but to your point about them, sorry, I'm like off and on camera, it's weird lighting today, to, to Like any concern around views, the view corridor down to the water, with their growth or is that entangled into the pruning topic |
| 02:59:51.31 | Kristina Feller | It's a good question. I think it's kind of entangled into the pruning. Frankly, these kinds of trees, by the time that they start to impede any view quarters will probably all be dead and gone because they are slow growing. but I would just, if you maintain that five feet, I think you still have the view quarter. That's a pretty wide, |
| 03:00:14.21 | Nastassya Saad | It's a wide, definitely a wide sidewalk. |
| 03:00:17.04 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:00:17.55 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, okay, just checking, thank you. |
| 03:00:19.61 | Kristina Feller | I mean, this is actually a better solution than our normal street trees. |
| 03:00:22.75 | Nastassya Saad | I was gonna say, I prefer it to trees because I think otherwise they could be severely, the water can be blocked. |
| 03:00:22.76 | Kristina Feller | I was gonna say, |
| 03:00:28.95 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, this is a far better option than normal city street trees, much better. Okay. Okay. Any other comments from commissioners? Okay. Doctor, do you find those two amendments acceptable and are you in agreement with those? |
| 03:00:55.65 | Dr. Kashef | I am in agreement. I just know that normally the code is for four feet minimum. What I'm a little worried about is the, you know, like in Larkspur Landing, when you go and see that, you know, I could easily keep it clear for people to walk, but it may crown a little bit at the top to make the olive tree pretty. But again, I don't think these are going to get that large. I don't want to keep them that large. We will trim them back. |
| 03:01:14.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 03:01:16.85 | Dr. Kashef | but I mean I think that should be fine I don't see that being an issue we plan on maintaining everything so that'll be just part of the maintenance |
| 03:01:23.97 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, the five feet is on the sidewalk. I mean, you have more than that now. and DPW required four feet. So I figured if we're requiring five pretty much everywhere else and you have the space, It's not going to create a hardship for you. |
| 03:01:36.02 | Dr. Kashef | Okay. Sure. I don't think it'll be a hardship. |
| 03:01:40.62 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay, great. Well, thank you for that. Um, Would anyone like to make a motion? |
| 03:01:50.48 | Nastassya Saad | I'll make a motion to approve. |
| 03:01:53.35 | Richard Graef | I can. |
| 03:01:54.22 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:01:54.29 | Nastassya Saad | you |
| 03:01:54.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:01:54.97 | Nastassya Saad | We have the. Thank you. |
| 03:01:56.06 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:01:56.28 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:01:57.78 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, so it's project ID 2022-00118. |
| 03:02:04.08 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:02:05.09 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay, Dan, can you please, and that includes those two amendments we just and shit. |
| 03:02:12.52 | Dan | Thank you. It includes amending the condition of approval from four foot to five foot. Clear sidewalk. and that that vegetation be kept pruned back from the right of way. |
| 03:02:23.81 | Kristina Feller | Yep. Perfect. Okay. All right, can you please take roll call? |
| 03:02:29.71 | Dan | Commissioner Sott? Yes. Commissioner Graff. |
| 03:02:32.78 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:02:33.63 | Dan | Commissioner Luxenberg? No. Vice Chair Junius? Yes. Chair Feller? |
| 03:02:39.67 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:02:40.78 | Dan | Motion carries four to one. |
| 03:02:42.99 | Kristina Feller | Right, thank you. Thank you, Dr. Okay, so that concludes our public hearing items. I want to thank everybody for all their hard work. There's been quite a lot of long evenings. And just to remind the public that this commission is on recess for the month of August, we will reconvene. in September on September 7th, Wednesday, September 7th. Enjoy the rest of your summer and we'll see you in September. Thank you. I motion to adjourn. |
| 03:03:19.71 | Unknown | Second. Second. All right. Thanks, guys. |
| 03:03:19.88 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:03:21.06 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you, everybody. Have a good night. Thank you. |
| 03:03:22.53 | Unknown | Thank you. Have a good night. Thank you. See you later. Thank you. |
| 03:03:26.29 | Richard Graef | Good night. |
| 03:03:26.97 | Richard Graef | Good night. |