| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Congratulations. of September 13th. |
| 00:00:03.04 | Unknown | Recording in progress. |
| 00:00:04.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to order. With that, I will turn over to the director |
| 00:00:10.34 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Chair Luxenberg, Planning Commissioners, staff, and members of the public. This evening's meeting is being held at City of Sausalito Council Chambers at 420 Litho Street and is open to members of the public. Members of the public may also access this meeting and provide public comment through Zoom. With that, I will move to call roll. Commissioner Saad? Here. Commissioner Graff? Here. Commissioner Feller? Here. Vice Chair Junius? |
| 00:00:30.73 | Vicki Nichols | here. Sure. you |
| 00:00:34.51 | Kristina Feller | here. |
| 00:00:38.81 | Director Phipps | Chair Luxenberg. Here. We have achieved quorum. Back to you, Chair. |
| 00:00:44.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you very much, Director Phipps. First, next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion to approve? |
| 00:00:51.63 | Unknown | So moved. Second? |
| 00:00:54.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Director Phipps, please call roll. |
| 00:00:56.51 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Saad? Yes. Commissioner Graff? |
| 00:00:57.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. Yes. |
| 00:01:00.73 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:01:01.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. Yes. Next item on the agenda is public comments for items not on the agenda. Director Phipps, if you could explain the procedure. |
| 00:01:13.08 | Director Phipps | Happy to give some explanation. This is time for the Planning Commission to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the Commission from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the Commission may refer matters not on the agenda to staff or direct the subject be agendized at a future meeting. Video or audio public comment is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand in person or in the Zoom application, and you will be called upon when it is your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. Back to you, Chair. |
| 00:01:55.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Is there any members on Zoom? There's no members in the audience. Thank you. |
| 00:02:04.91 | Commissioner Fowler | Yep. |
| 00:02:05.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | With that, we'll move on to item number four, Planning Commission Minutes from the July 26th meeting. I'll look for a motion to approve. |
| 00:02:15.47 | Kristina Feller | So move to the next. |
| 00:02:16.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Is there a second? |
| 00:02:17.97 | Kristina Feller | Second. |
| 00:02:18.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Any discussion about those minutes? No, I just wanted to mention to Director Phipps, I thought those minutes were well done, better than previous minutes actually. So just wanted to note that. Thank you. With that, could you call the roll? |
| 00:02:31.87 | Director Phipps | I think. |
| 00:02:31.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:34.28 | Director Phipps | Yes, Commissioner Sott. Yes. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:02:35.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:02:38.93 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. |
| 00:02:40.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:02:41.90 | Andrew Junius | I'm sorry. |
| 00:02:43.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:02:43.55 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:02:43.57 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:02:43.58 | Director Phipps | Motion passes. |
| 00:02:45.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Next item is business items. We have item 5A, 446 to 448 Sausalito Boulevard and 77 Crescent Avenue. This is a final map, I believe. And Rob is here to present. Thank you. |
| 00:03:02.89 | Director Phipps | Yeah, Chair, we have Senior Planner Robert Busick joining us this evening to provide some background info and connection with the item. Mr. Busick, the floor is yours. |
| 00:03:11.65 | Robert Busick | evening chair luxenburg members of the commission my name is robert busik senior planner here at the city of sausalito and this is my first time in front of the commission that the applicant david s holub is requesting the planning commission certification of this parcel map uh case 20 20 22 dash zero zero one seven one uh for four four six46 and 448 Sausalito Boulevard and 77 Crescent Avenue. The action, this action is required in accordance with Sausalito Municipal Code section 9.55.040, prior to recordation of the parcel map. This parcel map application has been reviewed by the Southern Marin Fire District, the Planning Division, the Public Works Department, and the City Surveyor, and has been found to be consistent with the approved tentative map for this project. SMC section 9.55.040 requires the planning commission to give final approval of the personal map prior to the applicant submitting this document for signature and recordation. And this certification is a procedural formality associated with an already approved project. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. |
| 00:04:33.83 | Rob | All right. |
| 00:04:39.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Rob. Questions from the Commission? Okay, my only quick question was the staff report said it was in substantial completion. I'm stencil compliance with the tentative map. Were there any changes at all or is it just the same? |
| 00:04:55.50 | Robert Busick | No, the parcel map is exactly the same as was proposed. And further, a condominium project for three units is associated with this parcel map. |
| 00:05:10.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you very much with that. Do we do need doing a motion to approve or what's the appropriate motion? I will defer to sorry at the public comment for this. We should take public comment. Yes, we'll take public comment first. At this time, we'll have public comment on item 5a. Anybody in the audience should fill out a speaker card and anybody on zoom should raise your hand. |
| 00:05:19.14 | Director Phipps | I will defer to- We should take public comment, yes. |
| 00:05:37.68 | Director Phipps | Looking to the audience for raised hands, seeing none. Looking to the Zoom application, seeing none. |
| 00:05:43.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Director Phipps. At this, I'll look for a motion. Is it for approval or what's the actual motion that we need? |
| 00:05:51.12 | Director Phipps | I will defer to city attorney on this one, but I believe it would be approval to certify. |
| 00:05:55.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Yeah. Approval of the parcel. |
| 00:05:58.96 | City Attorney Rudin | Thank you. |
| 00:05:59.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'll be right back. |
| 00:05:59.33 | City Attorney Rudin | Thank you. |
| 00:05:59.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Approval of the parcel map. So I'm looking for a motion for approval of the parcel map. |
| 00:06:04.88 | Kristina Feller | I'll make a motion to approve the parcel map for APN 065-222-60 as presented this evening. |
| 00:06:15.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:06:15.13 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:06:15.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you Director Phipps, if you could take roll, please. Thank you. |
| 00:06:18.25 | Director Phipps | Happy to share. Commissioner Saad. Yes. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:06:19.95 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:06:21.96 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:06:21.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:06:22.00 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:06:22.01 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:06:22.08 | Director Phipps | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:06:22.13 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:06:22.17 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:06:22.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:22.35 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Feller yes Vice-Chair Junius yes chair Luxenberg yes motion passes |
| 00:06:23.72 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.75 | Unknown | you |
| 00:06:23.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:24.09 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:06:25.54 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:06:25.86 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:06:29.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | At this time, we'll move on to item six communications of director Phipps. So look for a presentation from the department if there is one. |
| 00:06:38.48 | Director Phipps | Yeah, I just had one communication item this evening. Earlier this week, I had the pleasure of presenting a CDD update as staff liaison to the Economic Development Advisory Committee. The presentation touched on past, present, and future actions, improvements, and identified priorities taken within CDD with a particular focus on economic development, improvements to the department, and expressed council priorities for the coming year. So as this is the Planning Commission, I wanted to briefly touch on permitting and discretionary project approvals. So when I joined the city about 11 months ago, I estimate that there were over 90 outstanding planning project permit applications that were in need of processing. Much of them were associated with what I'd call potentially impactful projects, which required discretionary review. That number stands at 34 today. And we actually crossed a few more off of our list at our planning meeting earlier. So let's call it 31, representing a reduction of approximately two-thirds within less than a year. From a more general level, inclusive of planning, building, and certain public works permits, we have not only processed but issued around 810 permits within the last 11 months, which have a total project valuation of approximately $40 million. The most common permits issued in the last year are related to residential buildings and encroachments. So these efforts, in my opinion, reflect greater efficiencies within the department, address previous backlogs that have challenged the department, and represent a strong foundational form of economic development through bringing value to our city to the tune of around 40 million. All while helping to change the tides of perception of our department from the perspective of efficient permit processing. So this would not have been possible without CDD's excellent planning staff, admin staff, and city attorney, Neil Toft, Kristen Tyke, Robert Busick, Matthew Mandich, Katherine Spalding, Maria Hernandez, and Sergio Rudin. I am extremely grateful for all of their efforts and hard work. So thank you staff for your continued commitment to improving our department and this beautiful city. And this goes without saying, but I will also say it. This would not have been possible without the valuable input and decision-making abilities of our planning commission. We have made progress on a number of complicated discretionary review projects over the last year, and I am grateful for our ability to collaborate for the benefit of this city. Thank you all, as well, for your collaboration, expertise, and commitment. If you'd like to review a copy of the presentation, I'm happy to share it with the commission or any interested members of the public. That does it for me, Chair. Thank you. |
| 00:09:29.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Dr. Phipps and I second the excellent work you and your staff have been doing over the last 10 months 11 months or so With that, we'll move on to a presentation from the city attorney if any City Attorney Rudin is there any items of that you have on for this evening? |
| 00:09:49.86 | City Attorney Rudin | No, I do not. Thank you. |
| 00:09:51.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you, City Attorney Rudin. With that, I will have report outs from the planning commissioners on various working groups that we have. Ferry Landside Working Group, Commissioner Feller, Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:10:06.89 | Kristina Feller | Well, I think there's nothing to report since we haven't been meeting. It's here at the Planning Commission, so the working group has not been meeting. |
| 00:10:16.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I need to do it. It's on the list. So the housing element working group, commissioner, fellow commissioner side. |
| 00:10:24.29 | Kristina Feller | There's nothing specific for the working group to report out on. I know that Director Phipps and Community Development Department are working hard on the environmental impact report and we can report out on objective design and development standards and where that stands in a moment here. |
| 00:10:44.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. I'm going to add a couple items to the housing element because it seems to be the logical place. There are two legislative laws that are in the process at the moment. AB 976, which eliminates the homeownership provision for ADUs, which was approved by the legislature in the last week or so, and is on the governor's desk, and AB 1033, which allows the sale of ADUs as condominiums. And that has also been approved by the legislature and on the governor's desk. So therefore, I'm guessing the ADU ordinance that we just amended will need to be amended in the future. So I'm just flagging that for the commission and the CDD. Uh, with that, um, move on, uh, do any further items on the housing element working |
| 00:11:38.35 | Kristina Feller | Not at this time. |
| 00:11:39.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, Parklet's, that's Commissioner Fowler and myself. We're gonna be having a meeting of the working group soon, I think. Is there a date set for that or? We don't know yet. Not yet, okay. Okay, so there's nothing else to report. The master plan working group, Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Saad, any updates on that? |
| 00:11:52.46 | Commissioner Fowler | Not yet. |
| 00:12:00.54 | Kristina Feller | We'd just like to request that meeting, that we hold that meeting with yourself, Director Phipps, and City Attorney Rudin as well. This is incredibly time-sensitive and important, so we'd like to move that forward. |
| 00:12:15.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Next item is the landslide task force. Have there been any meetings in the August hiatus? |
| 00:12:22.21 | Kristina Feller | No further meetings since the last time we met and nothing scheduled at this time. |
| 00:12:26.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, and do any commissioners have any other items to report out on? |
| 00:12:33.47 | Kristina Feller | Um... |
| 00:12:39.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sensing a pause. Is there something to report or no? Not at the stop. Thank you. |
| 00:12:44.79 | Kristina Feller | at this time. |
| 00:12:45.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. With that, we'll move on to item seven, which is our public hearing portion of tonight's presentation. Prior to that, I'll go and ask for any ex parte communications. Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:13:00.52 | Nastassya Saad | I did meet with Pat Zuck and John Flevin on August 21st and listened to some of the comments that are also on public record for the evening. We did not engage in any merits of the project for the ferry landslide, but I'd like to declare that. And I don't have anything else to report besides visiting the other site. As a walk by 46 Curry, no conversations with the, property owner. |
| 00:13:29.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Graff. |
| 00:13:32.71 | Richard Graef | I'm not sure. |
| 00:13:32.78 | Kristina Feller | Amen. |
| 00:13:33.02 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:13:33.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. Mr. O'Feller. |
| 00:13:35.68 | Kristina Feller | Nothing to declare. |
| 00:13:37.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Junius. Nothing to declare. I also met with John Flavin and Pat Zuck on a different day than you did, Commissioner Saad. And I also just listened and told them I can only tell them things I had said at the previous meeting, which I, so there were no ex parte communications. And I also walked by the site on Curry but not Interact with anybody during that visit With that, let's go to item 7a, which is the very landslide and turn it over to mr. McGowan |
| 00:14:16.49 | Kevin McGowan | Good evening, Chair Luxembourg and members of the Planning Commission. I'm Kevin McGowan, the Public Works Director for the City of Sausalito. It's good to see everybody this evening. And this evening we are returning to the Planning Commission seeking approval for the Ferry Land Site Improvement Project. which is a city capital improvement project. Becky Dower from BKF Engineers will be making the presentation regarding the changes requested by the Planning Commission on July 26, 2023. Thank you. We have an updated presentation, which, to be honest, some of the colors in the original one, they didn't pop out as much, so we had to make some changes. But regardless, we've got an updated presentation for this evening, and I apologize for an error on one of the attachments, attachment three in particular. The last sentence of the memo should read, based on this analysis, the implementation of this project does not. violate the intent of ordinance 1128 oops I forgot I missed that one So many thanks to a member of the public for catching it I can't catch everything So I will turn the presentation over to Becky at this point to review the changes you have requested as well as some of the Interactions we have had with Golden Gate Bridge Highway Transportation District in the last month I will have some additional comments towards the end of the presentation as well. Becky, are you with us this evening to lead us through the presentation? |
| 00:15:43.04 | Becky Dow | I am here, Kevin, and I'm ready to go. |
| 00:15:44.98 | Kevin McGowan | Great. Thanks, Becky. Go ahead. |
| 00:15:47.80 | Becky Dow | All right, next slide, please. Thank you, Kevin, for the introduction. As Kevin noted, my name is Becky Dow and I'm with BKF Engineers. I'm a civil engineering consultant to the city. I've been working on this project with Kevin and other staff for a number of years now. Next slide. This is the third time that we have taken this project to the planning commission, but nonetheless, I'll give everybody a rundown of generally what we're trying to do here with this project. The graphic that you see in front of you, this is our current site plan project. The project involves the expansion of the Ferry Plaza in parking lot one. in place, removing some of the parking stalls in parking lot one to expand that plaza. There's also improvements that include some circulation enhancements, some additional sidewalks improvements and an area to queue and park bicycles during the summer months for patrons who choose to get on the ferry with their bicycle. As I know that I've been working on this project with the city for a number of years, since 2019, in fact. Um, and the city as well as a design staff have taken this project out to the public for feedback since January, 2021. I silver on the right hand side of the slide, you can see all the various public engagements that the project has gone through. Um, most recently we brought this project to the planning commission in July of 2023. after meeting with a Planning Commission subcommittee It was at that July, 2023 meeting where we got some feedback that changed some of the layout of the site. Following that meeting, we also re-engaged with the Columbia Bridge and Harbor Transportation District to review the modified site plan and get some feedback from them on improvements that they would need in order to support the project. Next slide, please. So the city of Sausalito has received grant funding from FTA. It's being administered through Golden Gate and the funds are approximately $2.5 million, including $100,000 that the city is putting into the project through local match. The grant requires that the project enhance circulation for pedestrians and cyclists through increasing the size of the plaza. So that is the goal of the project is increase the size of the plaza and develop enhancements to improve circulation and queuing. So the purpose of this meeting today, we're here to show you our revised site plan based on feedback that we received in July. And we are looking to gain support of the project and this new layout so that we can commence final design bidding and ultimately construction of the plaza improvements. Next slide, please. Great. There's a lot here to read. Don't worry about diving into this. Um, subsequent slides, we're going to go topic by topic and we're going to cover specifically the feedback that we had received from the planning commission in July. And then we will review the modifications that we made to the project plan or enhancements that we added to address each one of these topics here. So in general topics included trees on the plaza, ways to control bicycle queuing and wayfinding. discussions around, um, plaza size and the amount of parking that the plot that the parking lot should have, excuse me. We talked about the existing kiosk and then what to do with Tracy way, whether to keep it open in traffic or close it. We talked benches and bioretention. We talked ways to keep the cues separated and controlled, and we discussed lighted bollards. Um, so with that, let's go ahead and jump into each one of these topics and more detail on the following slides. Right next slide. Great. So let's start with trees. So we had received feedback from the Planning Commission in July that trees should be included on the plaza. should not be placed in front of the Yacht Club. So you can see on the graphic to your right at the top, the Yacht Club parking lot We previously had trees shown on a widened sidewalk in front of the Yacht Club. That sidewalk has been removed and also the trees in that area have been removed. We also received feedback that the number of trees should be reduced, the spacing should be increased, and we should be considerate of finding a tree species where the canopy can be quite high so that we do not obstruct views. So in response to that, we have modified our layout. We've gone down from, I think we had nearly a dozen trees to four trees that you see there. It's a green circles on the right. spaced out and we have picked a Chinese pistache tree that has a relatively tall canopy. It has a canopy that you can see through even at that when it hasn't reached its mature height. So we believe that these modifications address the planning commission requests to include the trees, but be more considerate sight lines, not only at the Yacht Club on the Plaza. Right next slide, please. The next topic that we talked about is bicycle queuing. And this topic admittedly, you know, ties into other topics that we're going to cover in more detail throughout this presentation. But I'm just taking these in the order in which we receive feedback from Planning Commission So bicycle queuing. Commission had requested that we look for an alternative to queuing such that we did not need to queue bicycles in front of the Yacht Club. And by queuing, I mean patrons standing with the bicycle in their hands in a line waiting to get on the ferry. So we have moved the queuing away from the Yacht Club. We're no longer queuing bicycles on that sidewalk in front of the Yacht Club. And we are instead directing bicycles as shown in that dashed green line on the image below. along the plaza and down Tracy Way. So this queuing route, assuming that we have a combination of people standing two to three abreast with their bicycles, can accommodate somewhere between 200 and 250 people standing queued in line with their bicycles. All right, next slide, please. Wayfinding was a big discussion topic when we met back in July. We'd received some feedback that planning commission was interested in seeing some specifics on how we intend to strike and sign the plaza and the areas adjacent to the parking lot one. so that we can direct users, particularly cyclists to the correct location on the plaza and then help to keep those cues orderly. and well-structured on the plaza itself. In response to that comment, we have developed, I have a number of slides here, we've developed signage and striping approach that we would like to implement on the plaza. These improvements are generally consistent with what Golden Gate is currently doing out on the Golden Gate Bridge, for instance. Some of these images that you see over here on the right hand side, these are images of signs and stripes that Golden Gate is currently using. So these will be familiar to people who have used their bikes to cross over the bridge and who are endeavoring to get on the ferry in Sausalito. Next slide, please. So there's a number of different way finding elements here. And the first one we're going to talk about is signage. So this graphic has a number of different signs and sign types that we're going to walk |
| 00:22:54.20 | Unknown | through. |
| 00:22:54.89 | Becky Dow | So we'll start, if you see the legend over there on left, we'll just go top to bottom through that legend The green squares, these represent by wayfinding signs. So these are signs, they look like roadside signs along bridgeway and along anchors. To help direct people who are coming into town on their bike to understand that they need to turn up anchor and then ultimately turn. onto Tracy way to either park their bike or enter the queue of bikes to get on to the ferry. The next set of signs that we show on this graphic here, they are pedestrian cyclist pavement markers in science to help direct the cues. So this will be a combination of ground markings, those symbols that we saw a moment ago that show you know, people on bicycles, Don't people understand where they need to line up and where they shouldn't be. as well as some signs that could be posted along that same route to reinforce above ground level where we intend bikes and pedestrians to be. There's additional signs that we would intend to place on the plaza as well. So these signs, they're shown by the red star. These would be areas that we'd consider conflict points, areas where you might have a lot of people congregating in a tight area, or you might have paths of people crossing And so these signs would make people aware that this is a place to queue, but this is also a place for people to walk through. And then last but not least, we want to make sure that we connect ferry riders with the ticket booth. So we are looking at placing signs, graphic signs that illustrate where you would go to get your ticket so that we avoid confusion and have people potentially with bikes circumnavigating the entire parking lot. So the sign will help people connect directly to the ticket booths. I do want to note that we understand that during peak seasons, when we see a lot of the bike traffic, when we see a lot of the queuing happen. And so we understand that |
| 00:24:49.89 | Robert Busick | No. |
| 00:24:52.71 | Becky Dow | city might be interested in pursuing temporary signs rather than permanent signs for some of these sign locations interior to the plaza. So this could take the form of either sandwich board style signs that get put out, or more likely these would be, you know, metal signs on a standard sign post that would then be fitted into a sleeve in the concrete that could then be removed outside of peak use time so that there was not sign clutter in the plaza. Next slide, please. Let's take a look at some of the bike wayfinding signs in particular. So these again are the signs that we would have as roadside signs on Bridgeway and Anchor. We understand that a lot of the bicycle traffic that we have coming to the Plaza are tourists who may or may not speak English. So we are looking for signs that are easily recognizable. They are similar or, or in general conformance with other Marin County bicycle rights route signs, excuse me. And they provide information in a very simple fashion. So on the right hand side, you can see a couple of the signs that we intend to use to help direct people who are riding their bike into town so they can get over onto the plaza. Right, next slide, please. The pavement markers, the circles that we had looked at on the previous graphic, Those are again pavement Like, markers on the pavement, they could be integral to the concrete or they could be striped onto the concrete, but these would be markers that would indicate where we intend the different users. of the plaza to queue as they're waiting in line to get on the ferry. Um, we are partial to really simple, really simple looking markers so that it's not, you know, it doesn't visually obstruct the plaza when there's not a queue, but that it's obvious enough for people to understand that all these subsequent markers mean that this is an area to queue here. And again, we'd have different markers for bikes versus pedestrians and where we intend to queue those two different users. Next slide, please. And then some of the signs, so these are, we're talking about signs that are interior to the plaza here, the ticketing and queuing signs. We have a few graphics of different signs that we intend to use. The sign that you see in the blue circle with the two users, Again, that's a sign that Golden Gate's already using on the bridge. That's going to be a familiar sign for patrons by the time they make it to the plaza. Excuse me, so we would intend to have a very similar sign or the same sign that would help people understand that there's a lane over here for cyclists to line up in, there's a line over here for pedestrians. For the ticketing, a real simple graphic, sort of the, you know, sign for a ticket, something similar to that would be used so that people could understand along with the directional arrow which way they go to get their ticket. In addition to the signs, in addition to the pavement markers, we would also like to consider stanchions and removable separators to help keep the queues separate. These items are not integral to the design. They're not features that would be constructed with the project. They don't necessarily show up on a construction document set. These would be basically administrative features that would be deployed by Golden Gate when they have the peak usage season. Um, and so those stanchions or, or separators will work well with some of the features that we have on the Plaza to help better define and sort of corral users into two separate queues. Um, we have subsequent slides that will show those cues. And so we'll, we'll circle. We will circle back on the stanchions in just a moment. All right, next slide, please. |
| 00:28:43.63 | Becky Dow | We had received feedback from planning commission in July that the size of the plaza seemed too large for what we were trying to accomplish, which is improving circulation and queuing. for patrons endeavoring to get on the ferry. Um, We have, we understand that planning commission views this project as a very transportation terminal, um, project and, and wanted to streamline the design to address. that component that it is a transportation terminal. Also looking to conserve as much parking as possible by minimizing the size of the plaza. So we have made some design revisions and reduce the size of the plaza. So I have several subsequent slides here that we're going to run through. It's going to take us from existing conditions to where we were in July to where we are now. And then I have some comparison slides. So we'll walk through those one at a time here. Next slide, please. All right. So this first graphic, this is the plaza under current conditions today. It shows the parking lot one and the plaza. over there on the right hand side You can see there's a line of greenery over near the right hand side. that more or less represents the edge of your existing plaza All right, next slide. This is a site plan that we have prepared and presented to Planning Commission back in July. So, This layout included a large expanded plaza. It also included a 20 foot wide walkway that went along the front edge of the Sausalito Yacht Club and then subsequently went along the northern edge there of parking lot one before tying back over towards Spinnaker and Humboldt Street, that intersection there. Um, this was the plan that, that planning commission had reviewed and had feedback on in July. Next slide. Following feedback from the Planning Commission that they wanted to look at reducing the size of the plaza, they wanted to look at queuing of bicycles on the plaza instead of in front of the yacht club, we prepared this modified version of the site plan which we are presenting to you today. So this has reduced the size of the plaza, that port plaza by about 2,500 square feet. So a pretty significant reduction in size. It has also omitted the new walkway in front of the Sausaluto Yacht Club. There is an existing sidewalk in front of the Yacht Club. We intend to retain that sidewalk, but we are not proposing any sidewalk improvements in front of the Yacht Club. We are, however, proposing a five foot sidewalk that would run along the Northern side of parking lot one and connect over towards the Spinnaker and Humboldt intersection. This walkway is intended to provide pedestrian circulation. We understand that a lot of fair users don't necessarily park in parking lot one, they can park in parking lot two or subsequent lots and that the prevailing path to travel is down humbled. towards Gabrielston Park and then what is currently, they ultimately cut right through the middle of parking lot one to get over to the ferry terminal. So that narrow sidewalk that you see my north side of the parking lot there. That is intended for pedestrian circulation, not intended for standing and queuing. If we direct our attention down to the south side of the plan adjacent to Vena Del Mar, You were, we are looking at Tracy Way, but we are looking at Tracy Way being elevated now. to function more as like a pedestrian promenade. So you see that concrete hatch along Tracy Way just north of the park Um, that's representing elevating Tracy way up to the parking, uh, excuse me, up to sidewalk or up to plaza level. so that we have a consistent surface and we don't have any grade differences. We don't have any change in surfacing between the former Tracy way and the plaza. So what this approach does is it helps us to narrow up the plaza quite a bit, but to lengthen it so that the plaza shape conforms more to how we would intend to queue bicyclists and pedestrians. Next slide, please. |
| 00:32:50.54 | Kevin McGowan | Becky, before you go too far, the sidewalk on the east side wasn't necessarily included in your recommendations from the Planning Commission. This came up from our interactions with Golden Gate Bridge Highway Transportation District and our observations in the field. We're finding that a lot of patrons who need to go to the ferry or that plaza area, and who park in maybe lots two, three and four They walk down the middle of the roadway and in the parking lot behind parked cars or cars that are out there. are backing up, which is an unsafe condition. And so installing a sidewalk in this location was recommended by the district. and it is also recommended from a safety perspective. I just wanted to bring that up of where that came from, and it wasn't necessarily what you brought up in our last interactions. Thanks, Becky. And if I may direct. |
| 00:33:46.84 | Director Phipps | And if I may, Director McGowan and excuse me, Becky, just want to clarify what we mean when we say the sidewalk on the east side. I think you can see my cursor on the screen here. And this is the sidewalk that we're referring to. Is that correct? That's correct. All righty. Thank you, Director. |
| 00:34:00.03 | Becky Dow | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:34:04.99 | Becky Dow | All right. Thank you for that clarification. That is an important point. So this exhibit that you're looking at now, this is an overlay of the existing conditions and our current site plan that we're presenting here to Planning Commission today. The existing conditions just show up as the imagery and the light gray line work in the back. And so the blue color that you see on top, that is the current proposed site plan. So that gives you a quick comparison of the changes that we are proposing. If you can direct your attention over to the very edge of the blue line work, where you can see on the area below, there's, there's a row of vegetation |
| 00:34:37.07 | Robert Busick | Thank you. |
| 00:34:37.28 | Commissioner Fowler | Bye. |
| 00:34:40.65 | Becky Dow | That is not quite, but that is generally the edge of the existing plaza for reference. So that gives you an idea of how much we're expanding the plaza. In some cases, it's feet. In other cases, it goes out about an additional 20 feet. Um, then you can also see, um, Tracy way very clearly there elevated up, essentially working as an extension to the plaza or promenade into the plaza. |
| 00:35:03.65 | Kristina Feller | Becky, sorry to interrupt you, but could you explain where you are describing again, or Director McGowan, can you use maybe the laser just to make sure we know where you're referring to? Thank you, sorry for the interruption. |
| 00:35:16.48 | Becky Dow | Sorry for the interruption. Yeah, of course we can do that. Whoever has a presentation, if you hold down control on your keyboard and then your left mouse, you should get a cool laser pointer. |
| 00:35:25.69 | Kevin McGowan | Okay, so I'll try to step in here. They give me a laser, which might not be a good idea. So Becky is describing Tracy Way, which is right here. This is a street that comes into it as well. and the wider sections that she's talking about have to do with this little bulb out right in here that's a little bit different than the original ones that we actually presented. |
| 00:35:50.38 | Becky Dow | Thank you. |
| 00:35:50.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:35:50.45 | Becky Dow | KILLING. |
| 00:35:50.63 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:35:53.30 | Becky Dow | All right, any other clarifications before we go to the next slide? Great. This right here, this is an overlay of The site plan that we brought to commission back in July and the site plan that we are bringing forth to you today. So in this case, the blue or the purple lines that you see, those are the, that's a previous site plan. and the really dark lines that you see, it's a black color. That is our current proposed site plan that we are bringing forth today. So you can see the wide walkway in front of the Yacht Club, as well as that wide walkway that was on sort of the north and east side of the parking lot has been omitted and replaced with a portion of five foot sidewalks If you go down towards the main plaza where we have the loading area, generally the area where Kevin was just highlighting with the laser pointer there. you can see that we have We have narrowed up the plaza considerably. Um, in the realm of 20 feet or so. And then you can also see that we have included now Tracy way into the plaza. We used to leave Tracy way from the previous iteration at existing grade and now it's elevated up to closet elevation to better facilitate queuing in that area. All right, any questions or anything that Kevin can point out with the laser pointer here? |
| 00:37:17.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just one quick one. If I understood your striping plan for the bicycles and the pedestrian ways, that is to the right of the bollards on the water side of the bollards. |
| 00:37:30.95 | Becky Dow | on the water side of the bollards. And I have a graphic that's gonna make that clear here in just a minute. That is correct on the water side |
| 00:37:36.56 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:37:36.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you for that clarification. |
| 00:37:38.61 | Kristina Feller | One other question, and I'm looking down at where El Portal sort of is a, in essence, a roundabout, a turnaround there. Are you infringing into El Portal, into that street area? Thank you. |
| 00:37:57.08 | Becky Dow | No, the curb line is staying outside of El Cortal in that area. We are tying into an existing sidewalk. Oh, Kevin, if you have your laser pointer, this could be a handy one. There's this little sidewalk sliver between Vina del Mar and El Portal. Yes, whoever has a cursor. Great. We're tying into that existing sidewalk there. That's existing sidewalk that we're connecting into. And then we're just filling that little area between the sidewalk there and the plaza. So all of that is currently outside of that turning radius of El Quartal. |
| 00:38:28.19 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 00:38:29.00 | Becky Dow | Thank you. |
| 00:38:29.02 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:38:29.07 | Becky Dow | Thank you. |
| 00:38:29.49 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:38:29.51 | Becky Dow | Thank you. Of course, anything else? |
| 00:38:33.74 | Kevin McGowan | So keep going, Becky. |
| 00:38:35.26 | Becky Dow | Great. Okay. Next slide, please. The next item that we had received feedback on was the removal of parking or rather the request to limit how much parking is going to be removed with the increased plaza. We understand that we need to increase the plaza. That is the purpose of the project. That is the aim of the grant is to increase the size so that we can better accommodate tourists queuing and circulating. So there is some amount of parking loss that is going to be a trade off to increasing the size of the plaza. The site plan that we had presented back in July entailed the removal of 38 parking spaces in lot one. as well as 11 parking spaces on Tracy Way. The site plan that we brought back in July didn't actually modify Tracy way per se, like you could still, you know, park a vehicle on there, but the plan was to close off Tracy way to, um, to vehicle traffic. So those parking spaces would essentially be, um, non accessible for you. The site plan that we bring forward today includes removal of 22 parking spaces, so considerably less than the original proposal and it still involves removing those 11 parking spaces on Tracy way. However, with elevating the Tracy way up to the plaza level, those parking spaces would be not usable year round. There'd be no vehicle access to that area indefinitely. |
| 00:39:39.05 | Robert Busick | and, |
| 00:39:48.82 | Robert Busick | Nice. |
| 00:39:54.41 | Becky Dow | Next slide. All right, planning commission had also requested that the existing kiosk will maybe not requested. They had they conceded that the existing kiosk can remain on the plaza in place. |
| 00:39:57.78 | Robert Busick | right? |
| 00:40:08.53 | Becky Dow | So our site plan accommodates that that kiosk in place, we understand. that that kiosk has some plans to be used in the future for, you know, brochures or, or, or tourist information. So we have made some updates to our site plan to build around that kiosk, to make that more of more of a hub essentially for information, getting. So you can see in the graphic on the right, Near the kiosk, which is shown in purple, we are relocating the Sally Stanford water fountain. That's shown in blue. That's going to be adjacent to a currently landscaped area. We intend to keep that area landscape. There's a bunch of utility boxes there. that's shown in green. And then we would put the new ferry ticket vending machines in that area as well. So this would become sort of the hub for getting, you know, your tickets or your information and a drink before you hop in line. Next slide, please. All right, at our last meeting, we received feedback that Commission would be okay with closing off Tracy way to vehicle traffic indefinitely. In response to that, and as well as in response to the need to queue bikes on the Plaza and on Tracy Way, We have decided to elevate Tracy way to make it essentially like a really wide sidewalk in this area. |
| 00:41:21.87 | Robert Busick | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:41:21.94 | Commissioner Fowler | Bye. |
| 00:41:21.99 | Robert Busick | WELL, WELL, |
| 00:41:28.06 | Becky Dow | So the image that you see there, I've got a screenshot of what it looks like today. at tracy way it is it is level it is at vehicle elevation you could drive in and out of that area although it is typically cordoned off so that there is no vehicle access. Under our proposed plan that would all be elevated. So it would be like having a continuous wide sidewalk down Tracy way. It'd be like driving next to a six inch curb. If you were going up Anchor street, it'd feel just like a continuation of a sidewalk in that area. Now we do intend to get cyclists off of the road here at Tracy way. They'll be coming up bridgeway, turning on anchor and then making that right onto Tracy way. Um, so we have rolled curve in our current design. I've got an example image of rolled there over on the far right. So you can take a bicycle up that curb easily. You could take an emergency vehicle up that curb as well. Uh, but what this curve doesn't do is it doesn't look like a driveway. So we don't get motorists accidentally turning onto Tracy way and driving where we have bikes queued. And it doesn't look like a curb ramp or a place where pedestrians would be encouraged to cross the street. So that's why we went with the road curb in that location there. Next slide, please. Benches, we've received feedback that the bench selection should be more comfortable and ideally consistent with adjacent parks and downtown areas. We intend to have benches around the four trees. So the benches would surround the tree wells. Um, so in that case, having a bench that you could miter so that you can get a continuous bench would be beneficial. We also are going to propose to have benches near the waterfront, replacing the existing rock benches near the waterfront with new benches. Uh, so the bench that we showed down, um, on the bottom left, it says proposed bench. That is the bench style that we are proposing. It's can have that miter fit to go around the trees. It has a back on it. So it's, it's a more comfortable bench. That's, that's a current proposal. And alternative bench, I mean, there's a, there's a ton of alternative benches, but, um, events that we see often in the downtown area and in the adjacent parks is the one that you see on that bottom, right. This is a more standard Park Lake bench with the curved back and the curved seat. and like ornate raw iron supports. That picture is actually at Vena Del Mar. So it's, there's several benches of that same flavor and style, right adjacent to the plaza. All right, next slide. Bioretention. All right. The city has a permit from the state water board to operate their storm drain system. That permit known as the MS4 permit requires the city or anybody who gets a development permit through the city to provide bio treatment of their stormwater runoff before it enters the city storm drain system. The trigger for needing to comply with that permit is if you have over 5,000 square feet of new or replaced impervious area. So in the case of our project, Even though the entire parking lot and the plaza are currently paved, they're hardscape If we replaced that hardscape with new different hardscape and thereby change the drainage patterns. We are required under this MS4 permit to provide bio treatment of the runoff from the newer replaced impervious, in this case the plaza, before the water enters the storm drain system. So all that being said, the project previous iterations of the project had us over that 5,000 square foot threshold with newer replaced impervious surface area. Our current iteration is right at the crux of that threshold. And so in, in light of that staff recommends that we have this bioretention system to enhance the stormwater filtration. so that there's no issues with the permit and just for good practice. These bioretention areas, they are, they're not very mystical. They are landscape based features. I've got like a rendering graphic there on the bottom to show what they typically look like. They have gentle side slopes down to a basin. They do allow for the ponding of water during storm events up to six inches. These are planted typically with flowering plants and grasses and such, so they can be quite attractive. They again are landscape based. |
| 00:45:46.99 | Robert Busick | Thank you. |
| 00:45:53.86 | Becky Dow | like structures or, you know, anything dangerous. They're not, they don't treat wastewater. It's for stormwater runoff. So there's no concerns with odors or there's no real trip fall hazards here. However, we do understand that Bye. With the incorporation, the buyer retention area system does have slope. that we should look at including a fence or perhaps bollards with ropes, so much style that we have at the Sausaleno Yacht Club around this area just to prevent people from wandering into this area because it does have some topography, so to speak, As for the location of the buyer retention area, if you look at the graphic over on the right, you can see a blue circle. over there outside of the Northern or North Eastern limits of parking lot one. That represents the area where we intend to put the bio retention area. The blue line that blew the polygon that surrounds the greater area. That is the property line that is associated with parking lot one. So that is, that is a boundary of city property. And so the buyer retention area, although it might appear to be. encroaching a partner to Gabrielson Park is actually on you know, parking lot one city property, Kevin, if you have anything to add to that, please do jump in. |
| 00:47:08.59 | Kevin McGowan | I think you covered it, Becky. I think the intent of that one particular picture off to the right-hand side is that it appears that Gabrielson Park is encroaching into the property that is generally owned by the city and was donated by, not necessarily donated, but we received it from the State Lands Commission back in the 50s. It's not part of Gabrielson Park, which is the upper triangle that I haven't highlighted in the picture. |
| 00:47:36.88 | Nastassya Saad | Right. Great. Next slide. May I ask one quick question here? Just back on that. Thank you. |
| 00:47:41.90 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 00:47:41.95 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:47:41.96 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 00:47:42.28 | Nastassya Saad | trigger Becky, just from the last meeting, it was explicitly stated that it's a 10,000 square feet change to impervious service that would trigger it, not the 5000. Is that just an updated notation or? |
| 00:48:00.14 | Becky Dow | Yes, very, very astute observation. The previous iteration of the permit and the guidance that City of Sausalito follows was 10,000 square feet. So the project initially would be covered under that 10,000, but the limits have been changed down to 5,000 square feet. This project has been going on through a number of years. And so we've now fallen into a tighter threshold for that. and |
| 00:48:22.75 | City Attorney Rudin | And I can also confirm that i've looked at the terms of ms4 permit and it does have a trigger for treatment of runoff surface water at 5 000 feet square feet those are termed regulated projects however even projects below that threshold um uh 2500 square feet to 5 000 square feet have to take some steps uh but not as comprehensive of steps to address water quality issues. So there are even requirements for smaller projects, but typically those can be, you know, addressed by other listed items that are not a bioretention facility. |
| 00:49:01.73 | Kristina Feller | Just a follow on to that, Commissioner Saad. Becky, you mentioned we're right on the threshold of the 5,000. How far over are we? |
| 00:49:10.59 | Kevin McGowan | The we have impervious surface of 4,757, or is that right, Becky? |
| 00:49:17.86 | Becky Dow | Yeah, I think so. It's around around 46 or 4700. So a couple hundred square feet under. |
| 00:49:24.50 | Kevin McGowan | It's in attachment three as well. |
| 00:49:26.55 | Kristina Feller | So we are currently under the 5000. Yes, correct. Thank you. |
| 00:49:35.65 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:49:35.68 | Becky Dow | Okay, Becky. Please. All right, cueing separation. So commission had requested that they understand features that could be used to control the queues and keep the queues separated. So at this site, we do have a few different traffic patterns essentially that we're working with. One is bicycles. So those are people who are queuing, standing in line with their bicycles. Another is pedestrian queue. So people standing in line, trying to get on to the ferry. And then the third traffic pattern is patrons who are circulating, who might be disembarking or who might be enjoying the plaza but not actively standing in a queue. So we have those three distinct traffic patterns, circulating about the plaza. We also have loading area. It's shown there with that crosshatch on the graphic over to the left, and there's a curb ramp. from the loading area up to the plaza That's a very special type of area, circulation area, that we want to be sure to protect as well. If you look at the two graphics near the bottom of the slide, Those illustrate what that loading area generally looks like. This graphic isn't detailed to our specific situation, but it's pretty similar. Um, so a vehicle would stop and they would let their passengers out into that, that cross hatched area. And then they would go up a curb ramp, like a ramp up to the plaza and then be into the plaza. For people who are getting either dropped off or picked up at the loading zone, we want to make sure that they are separate and protected from everything else going on on the plaza in terms of queuing and circulation. So we are proposing a row of bollards, they're lighted bollards, that are going to sit back 12 feet from the curb. There's space such those very tight spacing so that you can get through, it's accessible, you can get a wheelchair through those, but it would discourage people from trying to get into that area for queuing. Uh, so the, I have an image of some bollards there at the bottom. We have a much, much greater separation between the curb and the bollards in our case, but the separation between the bollards in that image and what we show on plan is, is pretty consistent. So it's essentially a robot to protect and preserve that loading area so that you can freely circulate without being impacted by people who are queuing. |
| 00:51:57.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Becky, can I ask you, I see that there are wheelchairs for in the graphic on the bottom left, but is this also if somebody were to just drop somebody off, would they be allowed to drop off in that area as well? |
| 00:52:10.78 | Becky Dow | Yeah, absolutely. You could drop off in this area and walk up that ramp. We don't intend to put out any signs or striping that indicate this is only for people with accessibility needs. This would be anybody could drop off here. And in fact, we have enough real estate, we have enough with there in the vehicle travel lane to, you can actually facilitate drop off on the plan north of that dashed area. So if you were able-bodied and willing to step up a curb, you could drop somebody off outside of that dashed area and they could simply step up a curb. they would still be afforded the same protections with the bollards we have Um, the lighted bollards that run the entire length of that curving. I don't know if you see my hand, if I'm just doing this. in my own world here, but that curving, plaza edge there. The bollards follow that whole plaza edge. So that whole area would be a loading zone. |
| 00:52:57.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I ask you, the graphic on the left seems to be a trapezoid, the graphic on the right is a rectangle. Are those the same items? |
| 00:53:07.13 | Becky Dow | Yep. Same exact items. It's just a little bit different layout. We've got a lot more space here. |
| 00:53:07.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | See? |
| 00:53:12.55 | Becky Dow | Um, so we didn't need to like have that bump out that created the trapezoid on the graphic on the bottom. Um, we just dedicated a space that would be like a patch space for people who who need a dedicated loading area and need an accessible path Um, it's the same thing though, just slightly different configuration. Cause we have a little bit more real estate in the parking lot. |
| 00:53:35.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So if somebody was dropping somebody off that wasn't in a wheelchair that needed that much room They would they would drop off in the hatch space so that somebody could pass them Somebody could drop off and somebody could get by them correct |
| 00:53:48.18 | Becky Dow | We have enough space actually outside of that crosshatch to have a vehicle parked next to the crosshatch, as you see in that graphic at the bottom. And there's still enough space for vehicles who are circulating and not dropping off to continue around. |
| 00:53:59.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:54:01.99 | Andrew Junius | I have a question to follow up on this slide, please. So all those lines there, this represents the three different movement patterns of people at the time that a ferry has docked. People are waiting to get on with their bikes and regular people and people are starting to come off. And that blue line is supposed to represent the people with their bikes and or just people coming off the ferry and splitting and just kind of getting off the ferry and heading into the parking lot, right? Thank you. |
| 00:54:31.33 | Commissioner Fowler | Correct. |
| 00:54:31.37 | Andrew Junius | THE FAMILY. Thank you. Thank you. And one way that they'll do that is to cross right in front of the zone we just talked about, right? So is it? I mean, in the bollard photograph at the bottom, I understand there'll be more space between the curb and the bollards, but there'll be people getting off the ferry likely walking right in front of that loading zone, right? So as people are trying to get out of their cars, they're gonna be weaving their way through people getting off the ferry, right? |
| 00:54:58.39 | Becky Dow | There could be, there could be people entering the loading zone who are waiting for a ride, you know, to get picked up at the loading zone, who would be basically, you know, an inverse path of somebody who's trying to get onto the plaza. I don't think we see a lot of people with bikes getting off of the ferry at this location necessarily. So I don't think that we would have a lot of people like queuing bicycles in this area, but, but pedestrians who disembark could certainly circulate through that area. |
| 00:55:25.00 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:55:26.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:55:26.09 | Andrew Junius | of, |
| 00:55:26.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:55:26.35 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:55:26.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you |
| 00:55:26.41 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:55:26.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Follow-up question on that Becky that blue line is also in addition of people getting off the ferry people that are walking along the shoreline Along from Gableson Park could also use the blue line basically to avoid the queuing that's going for the boats, correct? |
| 00:55:43.78 | Becky Dow | They could. There would be no controls to prevent people from, you know, who are just circulating from walking into that area. That's correct. |
| 00:55:51.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:55:52.70 | Kevin McGowan | Becky's got some additional slides that show just that. So you're ahead of us just a little bit. |
| 00:55:57.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Head of a head. Thank you, Becky. If you could continue. Thank you. |
| 00:55:59.32 | Becky Dow | Thank you. Absolutely. We have the same train of thought here. Our next slide, please. We're going to go through each of these, you know, traffic patterns or user groups sort of step by step, although it sounds like commissions already got the hang of this, um, this first graphic with the dash green, this shows bicycle queuing. |
| 00:56:12.35 | Robert Busick | Thank you. |
| 00:56:12.45 | Teresa Ancona | Thank you. |
| 00:56:12.62 | Robert Busick | Thank you. |
| 00:56:17.60 | Becky Dow | The queuing starts on Tracy Way, and then the queue would progress along the plaza and up towards a ferry terminal. We have a number of site features that we intend to use to help reinforce where that queue goes in addition to the signage and the payment markings that we talked about earlier. |
| 00:56:29.61 | Robert Busick | and it's just, |
| 00:56:33.59 | Becky Dow | Uh, so there's a couple of trees that you can see. Maybe Kevin's got his laser pointer. We can get the little cursor out here. There's a couple of trees near the ferry terminal. The edges of those trees, they help to separate areas the trees do in addition to the pavement markings and signs. So that's a physical feature as well as the water fountain and the ticket vending machines down towards the south. Those are just physical obstructions that keep the bike queue in one area rather than starting to like get too wide or spill over into more of the plaza. So that's our intended. No, we're not routing it directly next to the waterfront. We do want to keep the area near the waterfront open so that, you know, pedestrians who are circulating |
| 00:57:03.45 | Commissioner Fowler | Yeah. Okay, before we... |
| 00:57:14.70 | Becky Dow | they have the ability to walk up and get a good view at the waterfront. |
| 00:57:18.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Becky can I ask you on the bicycles? If you're if it's peak season and they're going down Bridgeway You would have them to turn right on the Tracy way in non-peak season Would the bicycles be allowed or is the with the curbing work if you went down El portal? Or you're gonna discourage people from going down El portal because it's obviously shorter |
| 00:57:43.02 | Becky Dow | Yeah, we're going to discourage people from going down El Portal. The roadside signs for the cyclists, we intend those to be permanent signs so that we can always reinforce the behavior that we want people to go on a Tracy way. either get in the bike racks or start your queue there. Cause we don't want to direct bikes to El Portel. There's just, there's too much pedestrian circulation and in some vehicles that we would like to discourage that movement. |
| 00:58:06.30 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:58:06.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 00:58:06.57 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:58:06.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:58:06.68 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. However, people are people, and so they will end up using El Portal. I think one of the intentions is to try to have them dismount before they get into the plaza itself. So that's why Becky is mentioning the rolled curbs and try to get people to get off of their bike before they start riding through the plaza itself. |
| 00:58:28.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So there will be a curb, uh, rather than a ramp at the end of El Portal. |
| 00:58:35.31 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, it's a rolled curve that she mentioned before on the previous slides. Thank you. |
| 00:58:39.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:58:39.68 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:58:40.56 | Becky Dow | And that rolled the curve would be on Anchor Street. if the person with the cursor He's doing a really good job. Could point out over by the corner of Anchor and Bridgewick, there's a little section of curb there that would be the rolled curb. So if you were coming up Bridgeway and made the right on the anchor, you'd make the hard right on a Tracy, that would be rolled curb. You could ride your bike up that, although I would imagine most people would get off their bike to go over the rolled curb. along El Cortel, the little turning, you know, like the cul-de-sac on El Cortel, That area we have as just standard curb. So you'd be, unless you are pretty good on bike, you probably wouldn't go over that curb with your bike. |
| 00:59:18.38 | Kevin McGowan | So she's corrected me that it is a straight curb at the end of El Portal and not a rolled curb. So my apologies. |
| 00:59:25.63 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So if somebody's in a wheelchair they would stay on the opposite side on El portal because there's ramps to get To the sidewalk there and they would come up that side because that will equal the plaza without any barriers, correct? |
| 00:59:41.12 | Kevin McGowan | Both sides should have connectivity. So you'll have connectivity on both sides of El Portal. You've got a sidewalk that should be at the same elevation, same as here. So there shouldn't be any issues if somebody's in a wheelchair coming from Bridgeway over. If you're parking in the parking lot one, |
| 00:59:53.63 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 00:59:56.43 | Kevin McGowan | You have accessible parking over here and here. Connectivity is around the outside for these parking areas. And then same with this one, you'll have a ramp that brings you up to the plaza elevation so that you have access. |
| 01:00:09.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. |
| 01:00:12.68 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:00:12.70 | Becky Dow | Next slide, please. So these purple lines that you see on here, this represents pedestrian queuing. So these are people actively waiting to get on the ferry themselves. This queue is not so obstructive as the bicycle queue. You know, the people are a little bit more flexible and it's common and easier to get through because they're not carrying a bicycle with them. I show the pedestrian queue ending before we get over to the former trace away, because this amount, this length of line, and assuming that we have people generally, two to three, sometimes four breasts in their groups, this area here, you can queue up about 250 people, which is generally what we would see get on the ferry on a busy day. So this is what we would imagine to be the extent of the length of that queue. Certainly there's additional space for pedestrians to queue if they needed to down Tracy or to congregate, you know, a little wider over near the kiosk or the ticket booth area. But this accommodates what Golden Gate has indicated is pretty typical for peak season on a busy day. |
| 01:01:21.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And, and as you showed in the earlier slides, this would be on the actual pavement, you would see similar to the bridge or whatever, whether it's in color or white, uh, would be a bicycle on one side and then this pedestrian on the other side. Uh, so the, it would be, it's going to be obvious, not only with signage, but because those were not in the plans that were submitted for this meeting. but you would intend in the final set of plans to have actual pavement markers as you showed as an example in the previous slide is that correct |
| 01:01:54.94 | Becky Dow | Yes, yeah, thank you for pointing that out. I failed to mention some of the ways that we're gonna control this queue. Again, the pavement markers. So where we have this purple line, that's where we would see the pedestrian markers and medallions on the ground. where we showed the green dash line a minute ago for the bike queue, that's where you would see the bike symbols on the ground. And then signage, we'd like to deploy signage that is, you know, not ground mounted, elevated signage that signage would be placed between the trees. So those same two trees that we had looked at earlier, we looked at the bike queuing. On the other side of the trees is where we would put the pedestrian queue. So the pedestrian queue would be sandwiched between our row of trees and our row of bollards. So it really helps to channelize that group. Um, between the trees and along where we would intend to route the pedestrian queue and the bike queue. is where we'd want to deploy signage that could be removed during non-peak times. So that would likely take the form of um, you know, pictorial sign on a metal post that would be mounted into a sleeve in the plaza. |
| 01:02:48.69 | Unknown | you know. |
| 01:02:54.41 | Becky Dow | and then could be lifted out of that sleeve when that sign was not needed during the winter months or off-peak seasons. And that those graphics on those side would match the graphics that were on the ground to reinforce you know, bikes over here, pets over here. |
| 01:03:10.85 | Kevin McGowan | So I'd like to add a little bit to that. Even though you see a graphic in front of you that shows A purple line, or for those of us who are colorblind a little bit, that looks green. But regardless, Becky had mentioned we are intending to put some stencils down on the concrete. I'm not suggesting that where you see every single triangle in this depiction, we're going to have a stencil. We are going to work with our traffic engineer to take a look at where would be the appropriate places to actually put the stencils. We don't want to put over signage in. We don't want to. deter from the beauty of the area by having too many signs. So that is something that we have to be concerned about. So that's one of the reasons why Becky is also suggesting some of these temporary signs that you put in a sleeve. So if you do have a heavy season in the summertime, During the week, you can put a temporary sign in place to help delineate where things are going, where people need to go. And in the off-season, take them out. take them away so they're not there. Thanks, Becky, sorry, go ahead. |
| 01:04:17.91 | Becky Dow | Thank you, Kevin. Next slide, please. Unless we have any additional questions. All right, so this slide, this depicts one of the many routes that people were disembarking or who are otherwise circulating around the plaza could take. This is really infinite because if you are, if you're not standing in a queue, you can, you know, access any part of the plaza that you choose. What this is trying to show is if you were leaving the ferry, the likely routes that you would take. And so those would include taking the existing sidewalk along the Yacht Club, our new sidewalk that's over there on the northeast side of the parking lot and heading out of parking lot one. or likely heading down to the loading area to wait for your ride or your ride share. or even potentially heading down plan south, down in the walkway towards El Portal and out towards the downtown Again, if you, you know, you could certainly there would be nothing stopping you from crossing across the bicycle queue and getting over to the waterfront and enjoying the view from the waterfront. there'd be nothing physically stopping you from walking I'm not sure. down Tracy way, although since we will be queuing bicycles there, we have a parallel pathway, it's a narrower five foot sidewalk there. just planned north of Tracy Way. that would be the preferred route for pedestrians to take if they were leaving the plaza or entering the plaza. So they're not commingling with like the bike area essentially that is Tracy Way. Questions on... this here. |
| 01:05:50.23 | Kevin McGowan | Keep going, Becky. |
| 01:05:51.58 | Becky Dow | All right, next slide. Okay, and this is a composite of all those circulation areas to show that we are The plaza feels right size. We can fit these cues in here, the length. We're not really demonstrating the width well, but these arrows are pretty big, so they do represent something that's about four or five feet wide. about. The closet feels right size. really, you know, if we go much smaller, we start to lose the ability to really keep people here without impacting the circulation And then we do have alternative routes, including the route where you see the purple line on the plan south there. That's a pedestrian only sidewalk for, you know, egress or ingress to the plaza that's separate from the bike queue. there on Tracy Way. Next slide. All right, the last. The word with Planning Commission in July had to do with lighted bollards. We asked what Planning Commission thought of the lighted bollards. So these would be those same bollards that would line the loading area. I Commission was supportive of delighted brawlers, not only to help with providing pedestrian lighting, but to help create a separation between the drop off pickup area and the adjacent queuing areas. Right, next slide. Kevin, I'd like to turn it back to you to wrap this up |
| 01:07:12.57 | Kevin McGowan | Okay, thank you, Becky. I do have a few comments for the Commission, so I'm going to kind of run through these. Many thanks to Becky and her team for working through this process and working with the Commission's comments. Also working behind the scenes on the project are representatives from RHAA, who is a landscape firm, as well as Parametrics, who was formerly Parisi Transportation Consulting. We went with them today as well to review some of the wayfinding issues and how to address them. I also want to acknowledge Michael Rex, Jacques Ullman, and Bill Hines, who made significant efforts with developing the first concept that was reviewed and changed by the commission in July. Their efforts and professionalism regarding this project are very appreciated. It may be pertinent for the commission to allow some additional time in the public comment period for each of these individuals to make a comment on their their ideas on the Existing plan. Excuse me, on the present plan that's presented this evening. and the one that was Davila. Chair Luxembourg had some specific questions regarding this project. Is that me squeaking? No. Okay. Chair Luxembourg has some specific questions regarding this project, which also needs clarification. There has been confusion regarding the project naming in the past. This project is simply the Ferry Landside Improvement Project. Not phase one, not phase two, not phase three, not anything. Just the Ferry Landside Improvement Project. Other efforts being pursued to develop conceptual ideas for the downtown parking areas will not be named phase two or phase three or anything else. since this is causing some confusion on which part we're talking about. Becky presented a signage plan and some innovative concepts related to- |
| 01:09:15.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just to further clarify that. So in the drawings, there is a phase one and phase two. In the phase one and phase two are construction phases for this project, not to be confused with phase one or phase two of future projects. Those were construction phases as opposed to anything else. |
| 01:09:36.66 | Kevin McGowan | Okay. We can also rename them as if they're construction phases, that's just fine for a B or C or one, two, and three. But when we're talking about other work occurring here in the city to take a look at conceptual ideas for downtown, We may have named them in the capital improvement program as phase two. And I think that's causing some confusion. Thank you. |
| 01:09:57.70 | Commissioner Fowler | Right. |
| 01:09:58.55 | Kevin McGowan | So. Thank you. Becky presented a signage plan and some innovative concepts that are included with this specific plan. At this time, we are not presenting alternatives to this specific plan. The one you see in front of you is the proposed project without specific alternatives, even though there can be alternatives. The drop off area |
| 01:10:19.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | is included with just to clarify that so on the drawings the repaving is considered an alternate number three and alternative number three which is something you do when you're doing bidding you have a series of you have bid and then you have extras and the plans are showing that are you saying that there we're not using that now because those are in the drawings |
| 01:10:45.14 | Kevin McGowan | The alternative is basically if the city has additional money to put into resurfacing the parking lot, we need a bid from a contractor to know what that cost is. And so I think that's why, Becky, you have included it in the plan set. So if the city decides to fully resurface a lot, grind it, take it out, put it back in, and there's enough money to do so, we'll have a price to do that. Other than that, the original plan is to do a micro seal across the parking lot itself. |
| 01:11:15.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, but there is also, there's an alternative two in the drawings, and I'm not sure what alternative one is in the drawings. Becky, can you go over those? |
| 01:11:24.07 | Becky Dow | Yeah, I can. Those are landscape based alternatives. They included some planting along Anchorage Street. and I believe perhaps some irrigation work as well. Again, if there was additional funding in the project budget, then that would be additional landscaping improvements that could be You know, price could be solicited from a contractor and awarded during construction if funding allowed. |
| 01:11:41.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:11:46.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And I saw that was an alternative two. Is there an alternative one? |
| 01:11:51.71 | Becky Dow | Yeah, alternative one, I believe, is an irrigation alternative. |
| 01:11:56.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | irrigation okay So the plan is now the base price of this would include micro-sealing. And then if there was funds available, you would do the stripping and complete repaving. |
| 01:12:12.87 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, if we can. |
| 01:12:13.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:12:17.12 | Kevin McGowan | The drop-off area is included with the plan. Bicycle queuing is on the opposite side of the plaza, which should have minimal conflicts with people being dropped off in lot one. I think we discussed that with the slides. New benches are proposed with the project, which include backrests. Becky included comparison plans in her presentation for review. In other words, comparing what was originally shown in July 26 compared to what is proposed now. So she's shown those. Also included with your agenda is an updated summary from me regarding 1128. And I mentioned that earlier that I made a mistake on the last sentence. This has been amended to address the modified design. In short, it's my opinion that the design Does... It does not contradict Ordinance 1128. This week we received additional correspondence, which is included with your packets and needs some recognition. As noted by Becky, we have met with Golden Gate Bridge Highway Transportation District over the last few weeks, and they have submitted a letter to the city supporting the proposed design. The district also points out. the importance of moving this project forward with the intent of not forfeiting the funding from FTA. You also have a memo from our city attorney who provided a legal opinion of whether voter approval is necessary for the proposed project. Lastly is a letter from Robert Harrison, who gathered traffic data for those accessing the Sausalito Yacht Club. Hopefully you have that in your package. Just checking. The data provided requires some interpretation, but in general, the data indicates that there is a limited use of the driveway during certain times of the day. This data has not been compared to ferry boarding schedules to illustrate whether there is a conflict point at the Yacht Club entrance or whether this is just a perceived issue. A note, as noted by Becky, on the plan includes some innovative concepts, such as temporary signs that can be installed during heavy tourist seasons to help direct patrons to boarding the ferry. We also have noted that signage in this area should be in conformance with the district's signage. In other words, whatever the ferry uses in San Francisco, we want to try to make sure that we have the same signage, more uniform. Our traffic engineer will help finalize the wayfinding concepts and the signage as we get closer to construction. couple more comments for you. While we have provided a plan set that details the general concepts for this project, we still have a little more work to develop the bid set. finalization of the drainage sheets, for instance, on Tracy way will need to be finalized. If we're gonna backfill that whole roadway, we're gonna have to figure out how do we get water into the drainage systems. Those plan sets don't influence generally what you're seeing tonight. They have no, you can't see the drainage systems themselves. So they don't have really an impact on your decisions this evening. We also have some interaction that we have to proceed with with the district and their electrical systems. They have a video monitor system and they might need to have some more conduits placed in the parking lot in order to get more power to their systems. So again, this happens under the ground, you won't see it in the final product, but we still have a few more steps to go through. Council approval for closing Tracy Way will be necessary, and staff anticipates presenting this project to them when the bid set is ready for advertisement, if not sooner. I'm pretty sure that they would like an update after this meeting as well. We are pursuing at least one regulatory permit for the project as well, which could... which could not be initiated until we obtain approval from your commission. So with that, this concludes our presentation. And I want to thank the council and Becky and everybody else who helped us with this at this point. And I look forward to receiving your input and public input as well into this very important project. So thank you very much. |
| 01:16:51.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Director McGowan. At this point, we will have questions of you and Becky from the Commission. I don't know who wants to start. Richard? |
| 01:17:04.35 | Richard Graef | I had a question about the proposed bike racks, I guess those are. on Tracy Way, are those permanent or |
| 01:17:15.04 | Kevin McGowan | Those are the, well, Becky, you can go ahead and answer too, but I think those are the same type of racks we have now so that they are temporary. There are permanent racks installed in the plaza area. We initially had them closer to the actual parking lot, but they were have been moved based off of the kind of the conflict points between those disembarking and those getting on the ferry to a place closer to the kiosk that's there now. |
| 01:17:44.62 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 01:17:44.79 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:17:45.34 | Richard Graef | Thank you. And I was curious as to the location of the ticket vending now down far away from the access pier. I don't understand the reason for that. Could you explain that, please? |
| 01:18:10.52 | Kevin McGowan | Becky, didn't this come up in our conversations with Golden Gate? And we were looking to them to kind of dictate where they thought it would be best to put the ticket kiosks. |
| 01:18:20.24 | Becky Dow | Yeah, that's correct, Kevin. So we had reviewed the best place for the ticket vending machines with Golden Gate on a few occasions. They wanted to get the ticket vending machines further away from the terminal because what that causes a lot of people go up to the terminal to get their tickets and then they think they can wait there. So they wanted to pull the ticket vending machines further away from the terminal. get it into an area that's a little bit more wide open so that the line that occurs at the ticket vending machine periodically doesn't impact any of the queues. And so that it's more obvious to people when they first show up to the plaza where the ticket vending machine is. So this was Golden Gates preferred location for those machines. |
| 01:18:59.04 | Richard Graef | Okay, great, thank you. Um, uh, The bioretention feature, Um, Mm-hmm. Is there going to be any adjacent landscaping around that, or is it just going to be sort of sitting out there all by itself? |
| 01:19:23.84 | Kevin McGowan | I'll let Becky answer the details, but I'm pretty sure that it has a gravel base to it and there's landscaping all around it because it's got to filter the water before it gets into the basin itself. |
| 01:19:35.62 | Richard Graef | I'm in landscaping, Mike. Like right now, there's a separation between the parking lot and the park with some significant vegetation. So, but, Is that that's gonna be removed in favor of the bioretention or how is that going to work? |
| 01:19:59.08 | Kevin McGowan | Are you asking if the existing vegetation is going to be removed? |
| 01:20:03.40 | Richard Graef | I'm assuming much of it would have to be removed, right? To achieve the bioretention feature? But is any of that plant to be replaced as a visual screen? |
| 01:20:15.82 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, most of it is vegetation. It will be planted. |
| 01:20:20.81 | Richard Graef | From what I've seen, that's mostly low planting. |
| 01:20:24.31 | Kevin McGowan | So are you suggesting that we put larger plants |
| 01:20:27.06 | Richard Graef | I was asking the question if that had been considered, because right now there's a nice separation between the park and the parking lot because of the vegetation and so I was, wondering whether there was some thought to, uh, kind of. holding on to some of that or recreating some of that. |
| 01:20:48.15 | Kevin McGowan | I think our intent is to provide a bioretention, and that's generally low-growing foliage. |
| 01:20:52.98 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 01:20:53.97 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:20:54.01 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 01:20:54.02 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. So we hadn't considered putting in larger vegetation, but we can definitely talk to our park maintenance to see if we can get some in. |
| 01:21:00.88 | Richard Graef | Yeah, I mean, between the sidewalk or on the other side of it, it just seems to me that there's an opportunity there too. Sure. screen the two functions. Okay. |
| 01:21:20.48 | Richard Graef | I think that's all I have right now. Thank you. |
| 01:21:23.57 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Graff. Commissioner Saad? |
| 01:21:29.56 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the presentation, Becky, and thank you, Director McGowan. Since this commission had suggested the closing of Tracy Way, and like you just mentioned, it's not our purview, so it doesn't need to go to council. Is there an alternative or backup plan if they were not to agree with to that suggestion. |
| 01:21:52.41 | Kevin McGowan | You know, I think I've mentioned to this commission, as well as the council in the past, that the acute angle at which Tracy way intersects anchor is problem, not anchor, but bridgeway is problematic. So, If we are not allowed to close Tracy way, I, at a minimum, I would change the, uh, the characteristics by only allowing a right turn onto anchor. |
| 01:22:16.59 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 01:22:17.82 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:22:17.86 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 01:22:17.88 | Kevin McGowan | and make sure that Tracy Way is a one-way street, and you can only turn right when you get to Anchor. |
| 01:22:18.06 | Commissioner Fowler | and how to do it. |
| 01:22:24.32 | Kevin McGowan | So that could be the alternative. But at this point, since the city has used this particular road during the summertime and closed the whole thing off, it seems unlikely that there would be too much opposition to closing it. |
| 01:22:38.26 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. Thank you. In terms of the ticketing kiosks for the parking lot specifically, nothing to do with ferry, are they impacted in any way with any of this? Because I think there's a ticketing kiosk right next to Tracy Way. Would those be... |
| 01:22:55.29 | Kevin McGowan | So with this project, no. However, we are embarking on other projects in this area. We're on the next council meeting, we're talking about a downtown parking study, and we might be getting into whether those projects are going to be a downtown parking study. excuse me, parking kiosk, are they in the right spot? Do they need to be upgraded in some way? So with this project, no, not specifically. But that doesn't mean it's not off the table in the next year or so to make some changes. |
| 01:23:24.31 | Nastassya Saad | Sure. Okay, thank you. I think I understand the trigger now for the bioretention, so I'll leave that one. |
| 01:23:38.76 | Nastassya Saad | Sorry, my notes are terrible here. In your conversation recently with Golden Gate that suggested the sidewalk on the east side, Did they give any feedback? um, I don't know if we can maybe pull it up in the drawing, but the way that the queuing was working with the the bikes, the pedestrians. I believe if I didn't mishear that Becky said that, general pedestrians that have nothing to do with the ferry also have the ability to to go down through Tracy way. and essentially have a flow there for foot traffic, regardless if you're using the terminal or not. Did they give any feedback that that would suffice their circulation flow concerns? Or could you just expand on the conversation around the east parking, excuse me, sidewalk that came out of that conversation? |
| 01:24:40.87 | Kevin McGowan | So our conversations with the district, initially when we had the plan that was developed by the local professionals group, we presented that to them and they were excited about that plan because it did split the bicycle queuing flows. And it added some more clarity for those getting on the ferry. However, based off of this commission's input, that plan was changed. And the idea with this new plan is to route bicycle queuing towards Tracy way, as well as the pedestrians who are getting on the ferry. to the, is that West? I think it's West. So towards the plaza. Now, I think what Becky is suggesting and the design is suggesting that as you get off the ferry, as you come off the ferry dock here, you have the ability to go towards the plaza. or you have the ability to go, to the right. and then over to parking lots three, four, two, three, and four. And so that was the intent. Now, when we brought this to Golden Gate's attention, They didn't have objections to this plan, and you can see that in their letter. They suggest, yes, this will work, and it is in compliance with the grant. Hopefully that answers your question. |
| 01:26:01.52 | Nastassya Saad | It does. The last one is just really for the avoidance of doubt just from these plans. Can can you or Becky expand on so these 12 spaces, which I think does not include Tracy Way, that's an additional percentage. Can you just show it on the plan just so we can all see? I'm assuming then that those spaces are coming out where that east sidewalk is going in. |
| 01:26:34.02 | Becky Dow | The presentation would be a good place, whoever's pulling presentations to start with one of the overlays. |
| 01:26:34.41 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:26:39.91 | Kevin McGowan | Which slide do you think, Becky? |
| 01:26:42.36 | Becky Dow | There's a slide that is blue and black with an area on the background, and it says like existing conditions overlaid with current site plan. I think that graphic is going to answer the questions that we have here. |
| 01:26:56.60 | Kevin McGowan | Try slide 17. |
| 01:27:08.53 | Kevin McGowan | We were kind of anticipating this question while she's trying to find it, and we were working on the graphics to try to show it as well. So hopefully we can depict it. No, I think we're going with |
| 01:27:19.35 | Becky Dow | Yeah, go back towards the beginning. |
| 01:27:28.29 | Becky Dow | Okay, right here. |
| 01:27:29.93 | Kevin McGowan | How's that, Becky? |
| 01:27:30.97 | Becky Dow | This is good. Actually, forward one more. Sorry, there was a little. |
| 01:27:35.06 | Kevin McGowan | There you go. |
| 01:27:36.19 | Becky Dow | Yes. Okay. So this right here, this is an overlay of the existing conditions and the current site plan. So we're losing parking in a few spots. Let's start up at the very top of the image there. where we have the five foot sidewalk to provide connection over to parking lot 234. Um, That new sidewalk is staying within the hardscape limits of the parking lot. So it does require that we remove those. There's 18 parking spaces there. However, we don't need to remove the entire space. We have replaced those 18 parking spaces with six parallel parking spaces there. So that's some of the parking lots. And then if you go down to the opposite side of the screen and then over towards the right next to the accessible parking, you can see if you go into the plaza there, you can see yes right there where the cursor is underneath the concrete. There were some existing parking stalls in that area as well. which are being removed at this time. And then directly north of that area, if you take the cursor directly up north where we have a little arrow and the cross hatched loading zone. There's a couple of parking spaces in that loading zone that are being kind of over to the left of that loading zone that are being removed, that we're removing them so that we can have that area be a drive aisle |
| 01:28:52.16 | Kevin McGowan | over. |
| 01:29:00.16 | Kevin McGowan | So, Becky, the numbers may not match exactly. We're saying that there are 12 within lot one that are being reduced. And I'm seeing the 18 up here reduced to is it seven or is it eight on the top? And then you've got three down here as well. And then you had mentioned some others. |
| 01:29:17.07 | Robert Busick | Thank you. |
| 01:29:17.08 | Becky Dow | And, |
| 01:29:22.01 | Becky Dow | Yeah, so there's it's 18 reduced to six. There's I don't have the can't quite see on the screen number that are reduced down by accessible parking and two in the drive aisle. It's 22 parking spaces removed and then 11. on Tracy way so the 11 on Tracy way that are the parallel parking stalls are separate from the count of 22 in the parking lot. |
| 01:29:44.47 | Kevin McGowan | Okay. I thought we were conveying 12 are removed in lot one. |
| 01:29:48.35 | Unknown | That's what the staff report does say. |
| 01:29:50.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. So I'm confused by the numbers to Commissioner Saad. |
| 01:29:55.44 | Nastassya Saad | and the other. |
| 01:29:55.61 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF |
| 01:29:55.63 | Unknown | to |
| 01:29:56.03 | Nastassya Saad | But while we're at it, just one second, we'll hold. Give me have a second, because that was your last point, because I was going to ask a follow up question on Tracy way. So 12 or 22. Let's put a pin in that for the moment for the lot. But can you just say what you mentioned on Tracy way? How many. How many are there? 11. That's 11. Okay. So 11 on Tracy way. And we're now saying 22 in the lot. tonight. |
| 01:30:27.49 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. Because from the plans, it looks... more than what was mentioned in the staff report, but I wasn't able to quite see it laid out. So I think that's a good graphic to keep up maybe, but I'll let you know. |
| 01:30:41.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I ask a follow on question in that regard? So there was a, Becky, there was a graphic you had that showed 38 in the first one and 22 in the second one. So that's the differential of 16, I think. But actually, Brandon, can you go back to that other slide that showed a zoom in on the sidewalk on the north side, so to speak, northeast side, whatever we want to call it. |
| 01:31:09.34 | Director Phipps | From the presentation chair or from the plan center? |
| 01:31:11.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The one you had up just before this, which showed 30 feet, was the distance between the parallel parking and the parking opposite to it. You had that up. That was the one right before that one. We can go back to that one. |
| 01:31:26.58 | Kristina Feller | Where we were looking at the east side where the new sidewalk is, Alon Gabrielson is what he's referring to. |
| 01:31:34.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | um, |
| 01:31:35.85 | Kristina Feller | There you go. |
| 01:31:36.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, that one. So Becky, just a question. Did you consider when you went to this plan, the other aisles are 22 feet and they're two way. This aisle appears to sort of be one way. It could be two way, but have you, did you look at possibly fair angled parking instead of the parallel parking? And cause you probably could get, instead of the six, you could probably get 10 or 11 maybe. |
| 01:31:36.76 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:32:05.18 | Becky Dow | You know, we did look at that, but I can admittedly take another look to see how we can fit that in. Something that we're dealing with at this point here is vehicle turns. So if we need to accommodate like an emergency vehicle or a fire apparatus in this area due to emergency, and since we have the curves here, the width that you actually need to allow that vehicle to turn gets a little bit bigger than just the 20 or just the width of some of these dry vials. So that actually ended up being the limiting factor |
| 01:32:29.43 | Commissioner Fowler | Absolutely. |
| 01:32:32.70 | Becky Dow | But we can follow up and confirm if there's maybe some configuration that we can do with the angled parking. We had done a study and we had determined that we can't get the angled parking and the emergency vehicle turning movement at the same time. But we could certainly revisit if the Commission would like to see that. |
| 01:32:50.74 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I have seen sometimes angle parking at an angle that's not as, I don't know how to say this, not as deep or whatever, where you would have a wider aisle. And you obviously have to come in from that one direction. But there might be a way to do that and further save a few parking space. |
| 01:33:12.81 | Becky Dow | Yeah, we'll take a look at that. Another thing to factor in here is typically when you have those angled parking, you allow a vehicle overhang over the sidewalk. And so typically you have a pretty wide sidewalk where you have those angled parking in the vehicle overhang. And in this case here, we've got this current sidewalk drawn at five feet. And so a standard two foot vehicle overhang. would not leave enough space. And so the trade-off could be that to get the angled parking and allow the emergency vehicle movement that we would need to look at also widening the sidewalk essentially so that you can use a portion of the sidewalk for overhang. But could you all |
| 01:33:46.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Could you also use curbs, curb stops? We could put wheel stops in. Wheel stops, yeah. |
| 01:33:51.81 | Becky Dow | Yeah, you could put wheel stops in, but then the required length of the parking stall then gets shifted back towards that 30-foot dimension. which is sort of our limiting factor here when we're looking at getting the emergency vehicle turn. |
| 01:34:05.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, you just need to look at the geometry. I think there might be a way to get some more spaces out of it and still have the emergency vehicles work, so. Commissioner Saad. That's all I have. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Fellow. |
| 01:34:16.73 | Kristina Feller | That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Luxenberg, and thank you, Director McGowan and Becky and the rest of your team who isn't here tonight. Thank you for that. I do have a series of questions and some of them I did issue over the weekend. So I want to go back over those because I'm, I'm unclear about the legal briefing or legal analysis of 1128. And the reason I keep bringing that up is I'm no more a lawyer than you are. rely on attorneys to interpret things. So I don't know where Sergio your memo is in all of this and I don't know if it was posted sometime this week and not last week. So can you just go over that for me please? |
| 01:35:07.65 | City Attorney Rudin | Yeah, short issue is there was a memo included in your agenda materials today from the City Attorney's Office. I don't believe that these improvements that are being proposed by staff require voter approval. They're relatively minor in nature, and the language of Ordinance 1128 is pretty vague. It doesn't specify or impose any requirements with respect to how the city regulates or uses its parking lots, but rather requires the city... maintain that parking lot for a public parking lot use. that gives the city a fair amount of control as to how it configures the parking wall. So, and then lastly, I will say that, you know, the issue of ordinance 1128 is not something that the planning commission has jurisdiction over or should even really be considering as part of his decisions because under chapter 1054, the municipal code, you really are limited to the making or determining whether you can make the relevant findings. respect to approval design review permit that is that is what is being presented And the Planning Commission is being asked to do today is to see whether or not it can make those specific findings for assurance of a design review permit. |
| 01:36:17.46 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I'm not claiming we have jurisdiction over it, but I need to understand what it is because it keeps it's mentioned in what we're doing here. And then. Um, At the last hearing in July, I asked, you know, what is this phase one of, and it wasn't clear to me what that was. So this goes back to. what I was able to find was the January 2022 City Council approval of fate, what they called phase two, I believe of this of where there was going to be a parking study of lots one through four. And so what I'm unclear on and a little bit uncomfortable with is how we are making determinations here about reduction of parking without that body of work being done because clearly the intention by the city council was that it was supposed to be looked at collectively. And maybe that's part of this downtown plan, Director McGowan that you're referring to, but what I don't wanna do is circumvent what the city council has is, you know, it's their jurisdiction to you know, direct staff this way, and I don't want to undermine what they've done, inadvertently. So can you comment on that piece? I recognize what you mentioned in terms of your clarification about this just being a project and not phase one of something else, but It's been presented as phase one, so I just want to clear up that confusion. |
| 01:37:48.72 | Kevin McGowan | So I think the original label was phase one Um, And we had mentioned that The city is moving forward with utilizing a consultant to look at concepts. And originally in previous capital improvement programs, in order to track projects, I gave the label of phase two to that conceptual Thank you. professional services agreement to look at concepts. It doesn't have the concepts don't necessarily have anything to do with this specific project in my eyes right now, they are looking at what can be done in downtown. what can be done to improve parking lot two, three and four and how they interact with each other. We have moved forward with a preliminary traffic, preliminary parking study, which is going to be heard at Council |
| 01:38:34.26 | Commissioner Fowler | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:38:42.04 | Kevin McGowan | on next Tuesday. And so we have a consultant that's helping us with that. |
| 01:38:43.91 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 01:38:46.56 | Kevin McGowan | I don't think that that will answer all of our questions yet. There's more to come. But So it may have been my fault to actually list it in the capital improvement program as phase one and phase two. In reality, the phase two that I'm referring to is simply a conceptual investigation on what can be done in the downtown parking lot areas and how to improve parking for residents and visitors to Sausalito. |
| 01:39:13.14 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I'm asked only because the agenda title from January 11th, 2022 was the Sausalito Ferry Landslide Improvement Project Phase 2. Okay. And so if they're looking for that review of, and this identifies what the two phases are, I just, I don't wanna be in a position where were undermining what their intention is. it's their intention, not mine or mine necessarily Um, undermined. So I just want to make sure that you don't believe that what they approved in January 2022 is actually part of what we're talking about here as it relates to that you're looking at reducing parking in lot one. And I wanna make sure they clearly had their eye on all four lots. As it related to 1128 in any parking reduction, so I just want to make sure that. whatever we decide here tonight, is not inadvertently undermining their intention. for that body of work to be done or that work to be done before we make a decision here. That's what I wanna know. |
| 01:40:27.34 | Kevin McGowan | My interpretation is that the other work that's going on is conceptual. It's trying to establish what can be done with the downtown parking lots. It doesn't have anything to do with the actual construction that we're dealing with now or what we're trying to present you. It's conceptually looking at the overall parking and how it's functioning. I'm not sure if I'm on the same page with you. I'm not sure if I really understand why you're asking the question. So my answers may be, |
| 01:40:57.62 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I mean, that's okay. And I mean, that's why we're here tonight. I am just looking at the staff report from January 11th. I copied it to Director Phipps. I'm just reading what's in it. That's all I'm doing. I'm just trying to connect the dots is what I'm trying to do. And I'm, I'm not sure I just want to make sure that whatever we decide here tonight, because this directly is talking about the phase two of this project. And, I understand what you said in terms of clarification. you know, It's at the city council's direction. And so it's not our place either. to change what their direction is or Um, shove it to the side. So I would just want to make sure that, that both you, and the city attorney and director Phipps feel confident that What is in front of us tonight is not inadvertently undermining what they've approved specifically as Sausalito Ferry landslide improvement project phase two. to look at lots one through four specifically regarding 1128. That's what I want to make sure of. That's all that's, Thank you. |
| 01:42:11.90 | Kevin McGowan | I don't believe it does. |
| 01:42:13.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And city attorney, are you cool with that? As well. |
| 01:42:22.19 | City Attorney Rudin | Yeah, I mean, I agree with Kevin. My understanding is there's still a lot of work to determine what phase two is going to look like. And if they're, I mean, it's still up to the city council to determine if there ever will be a phase two. You know, they've directed city staff to work on the planning work. But that project may or may never come to fruition. ultimately. So, and this is the only project that's before the Planning Commission Knight decision and obviously the council when they're making further decisions on this project, including you know approving bids etc they will have the opportunity to review and consider all of your comments commissioner feller |
| 01:42:57.11 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. So they've tied the two together, but we're saying they're not tied together and that's the direction. So I'm that's, that's what we'll deal with tonight. Um, Okay. So, There were quite I just want to acknowledge all the public comments that we received for this hearing tonight and obviously the last hearing we had. And I just wanted to ask where all of those comments new information to you about you know the varying ideas about. reducing parking or Tracy way or any of that. I just want to know if Any of that's new. |
| 01:43:36.38 | Kevin McGowan | I don't understand what you're asking. We've had a lot of comments. That's true. Have I reviewed all of them? No, not particularly. |
| 01:43:43.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:43:44.14 | Kevin McGowan | Can you specifically tell me what you're asking about? |
| 01:43:47.50 | Kristina Feller | No, I'm just asking, there's a lot of consistent feedback. And I'm just asking if that is consistent with what your public outreach was before. |
| 01:43:59.04 | Kevin McGowan | I still don't understand public outreach before. |
| 01:44:02.18 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, you had identified, and Becky talked about the public outreach that you performed regarding this project. |
| 01:44:08.35 | Commissioner Fowler | Yeah. |
| 01:44:09.16 | Kristina Feller | And there was a timeline that was put up on a slide. |
| 01:44:11.53 | Commissioner Fowler | Yeah. |
| 01:44:11.91 | Kristina Feller | And I'm asking if the types of feedback you received at those meetings or hearings or what have you is pretty much the same as what you've heard in comments tonight. |
| 01:44:23.71 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, pretty much. In other words, when I'm looking at some of these comments, we've had comments in the past about leaving parking counts alone. We've had comments about I'm only closing Tracy way for the summer months. We've had those comments. |
| 01:44:36.62 | Commissioner Fowler | Okay. |
| 01:44:37.02 | Kevin McGowan | We've had grind and repave and re-stripe the parking lot. Yes, we've had those comments too. And we've answered those in years past of there is limited budget. And we can only do so much with what we have at this point in time. So these seem very similar. A lot of the comments we've seen with this planning commission meeting seem to be repetitive. In other words, they seem to be form emails with the exception of one or two. |
| 01:44:49.80 | Robert Busick | So. |
| 01:44:57.97 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:45:02.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Um, you Moving on to the next question, I'm just curious if this project anyway triggers a requirement for EV charging in the parking lot. |
| 01:45:16.12 | Kevin McGowan | You know, I'm not aware of... whether there is a state requirement or a federal requirement for EV charging. Sure, we would like to do that. We would like to find some spaces for EV charging. In fact, we're trying to put some EV charging stations in lot two. And we've had some pushback on that particular project from our consultant, but we are trying to move forward with that. I'm not too sure if specifically in lot one is the best spot. But we are looking at that from a larger perspective. |
| 01:45:49.74 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Oh, good. That's good. You mentioned that the bridge district is looking at a video monitor system. Is that something there's not one there now? |
| 01:46:01.69 | Kevin McGowan | I think there is, Becky. Isn't there a video system out there now? |
| 01:46:05.16 | Kristina Feller | there is, |
| 01:46:06.02 | Becky Dow | one now it's on top of the ticket booths over by the terminal. Thank you. |
| 01:46:09.64 | Kristina Feller | Wow. them. No wonder I didn't notice it. Sorry. Then, well, let me just ask you then regarding the ticket machines, because I think Commissioner Saad was sort of maybe getting to this earlier. it seems to me that Um, you have all the ticket machines in one place, obviously further away from where they are now, towards the parking or in the plaza, but, would you consider or would the bridge district consider maybe moving one or two of them, to other locations. So for example, that intersection of Tracy way, Bridgeway anchor over there where you actually do have a parking machine. and where you're starting to cue people it might be a good idea to think about putting one there, you know, at the beginning of where you would normally cue or where you're directing people. That could just start to free up some space in the plaza. And I don't know if that's at your discretion or probably the bridge district's discretion, but I would just offer that unless you haven't looked at that before, maybe you have, maybe dispersing them. |
| 01:47:21.39 | Kevin McGowan | On the original plan, they were dispersed. They were spread out. On this particular plan, when we presented it to the district, they basically said, try to get the machines in the area where people start to queue up. figure out where they're going to start to line up and then stagger them in certain areas. |
| 01:47:36.62 | Alice Merrill | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:47:36.96 | Robert Busick | and then, |
| 01:47:39.76 | Kevin McGowan | I don't think that the district would object to putting a ticket machine where you're suggesting. We can convey that to them and ask them if they would like that. Getting electricity to that area might be tricky as well, but we can figure it out. |
| 01:47:52.76 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Yeah, I figured just because you had a parking machine there that maybe there was already power there. Um, Let's see, I know that there was a lot of discussion uh at the last hearing about the kiosk um uh Did we figure out who actually owns the kiosk? |
| 01:48:11.69 | Kevin McGowan | I think it's on city property. |
| 01:48:13.84 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, it's definitely on city property, but is it a city building? And do we know really what it's going to be used for? Because it's a little bit unsightly. It takes up a lot of space. And I'm just thinking of trying to free up more space in the plaza for circulation or people to enjoy the views. |
| 01:48:32.82 | Kevin McGowan | I have not explored that. I just know it's on city property. I don't know who maintains the interior of it. I know that we probably maintain the exterior. |
| 01:48:39.97 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. And since we're below that 5,000 square foot threshold, would you consider no bioretention at all? |
| 01:48:53.15 | Kevin McGowan | You know, from a professional perspective, it's a good idea to do so, to put one in. Here we have a parking lot where you get a lot of people. You have a lot of folks who... You know, my kids are grown up now, but I could see them with the ice cream cone walking down and dropping it in the parking lot. |
| 01:49:07.50 | Commissioner Fowler | Yeah. |
| 01:49:08.69 | Kevin McGowan | That's the greatest place to put one of these bioretention areas in order to filter out all the pollutants that could get to the bay. |
| 01:49:15.50 | Commissioner Fowler | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:49:15.68 | Kevin McGowan | So my professional opinion is even though we're below the threshold, let's put one in. This is a good idea. |
| 01:49:22.23 | Kristina Feller | Could we pull up that slide that we were looking at earlier that shows that sidewalk in the bioretention area? Because I also want to maybe poke a little further and see if it has to be that size. |
| 01:49:36.44 | Kevin McGowan | Becky, maybe you can respond to that. |
| 01:49:39.73 | Becky Dow | Yeah, I can. This bioretention area was sized to accommodate the runoff that would have been generated from the previous iteration of the plaza. Thank you. We have reduced size by about 2,500 square feet, which could reduce the size of this bioretention area slightly if we're trying to size this to meet requirements, even though we're slightly... very slightly under the requirements. So there is some right sizing that could happen to this fire retention area, although it'd be pretty modest and not something that would look significant on plan view. |
| 01:50:03.64 | Kristina Feller | So, it's, |
| 01:50:08.62 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And then I think Commissioner Graff was asking about the planting around there. And Director McGowan, you said it was sort of lower planting and all that, although I see a bunch of trees here. which I know is something I want to hear the public's comment on. And obviously that's something for the commission here to discuss, but I would really like to discourage trees here. It blocks the views that we're trying to preserve. And you have it hanging over the stage, which is used often. Uh, and I just, I just think it's a missed opportunity. And, you know, I would like to consider removing this sidewalk here. and actually using this wonderful signage program that you've identified to maybe direct people to meander through the park. And if that's all low planting, because it's not low planting now. And so it's hard for someone who's not familiar with the area to know that there actually is a sidewalk for them to walk on. I just think that we could set this up for better success if we were a lot more sensitive and aware of those view corridors. And I think that we could get people I think that this sidewalk is redundant with what goes through Gabrielson Park, to be honest. had better sight lines than I think people would actually use what's already there. And that would free up more space for parking. because I think, you know, question about the number of parking spaces that we're losing here. You know, 22 in this lot is significant. I mean, maybe it's below a certain percentage threshold, but I think it's still significant and it would be nice to maybe think about the angled parking here to get more in if we could reduce the sidewalk here, in fact, eliminate it. So is that something that we can consider? |
| 01:52:11.23 | Kevin McGowan | I... Thank you. I am not in favor of it. And the Golden Gate Bridge District is not in favor of removing that sidewalk either. Most of the pedestrians walk within the the roadway or the parking lot, and it's not a safe situation. |
| 01:52:26.93 | Kristina Feller | I think they do that because they don't know that there's a sidewalk in the park or they're not, they can't see where that sidewalk goes. Um, Did you show the Bridge District any other drawing but this drawing? |
| 01:52:38.11 | Kevin McGowan | They've been out there several times. They know what it looks like. |
| 01:52:41.51 | Kristina Feller | Right, but I mean, with the imagination of no visual blockage of plants between the parking lot and- and Gabrielson. Was that discussed or explained or described? |
| 01:52:55.01 | Kevin McGowan | No, this came up because it was observed that you have people walking in the parking lot in an unsafe situation. and a sidewalk as needed in order to convey that. |
| 01:53:04.52 | Kristina Feller | I agree people walk through there. All I'm saying is, was it discussed with the Bridge District? I'm asking the question. |
| 01:53:12.40 | Kevin McGowan | No alternatives were discussed with the bridge district. |
| 01:53:15.19 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. And in, in this parking layout, I'm assuming that none of the. spaces would be taken up by containers and |
| 01:53:28.08 | Kevin McGowan | That's a good question. |
| 01:53:28.52 | Kristina Feller | question. |
| 01:53:29.82 | Kevin McGowan | You know, that's our that's our parks and rec department. They do have a container down there. And, you know, technically, it shouldn't be there. But that's something we have to work out internally between departments. |
| 01:53:44.18 | Kristina Feller | OK. All right. And then I just want to reconfirm that the micro seal on the parking lot is the base option for bid. |
| 01:53:55.44 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 01:53:56.19 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And, um, all the trees in the parking lot currently would stay as is. |
| 01:54:05.98 | Kevin McGowan | I think, Becky, don't we have one or two that have to be removed? |
| 01:54:10.39 | Becky Dow | Yeah, that's correct. There's, so in the parking lot adjacent to where you park your vehicles, all of those trees are to remain except for I think one would have to come down. And then we're also proposing to remove one tree that's over near the kiosk that's not in good health. |
| 01:54:27.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Just one last question, and I my other my fellow commissioners still have questions as we want to hear from the public so sorry about the last question here but on the drawings where you're showing the the three circulation paths heading towards the the ferry dock. uh, Becky, you had them sort of kind of weaving through, if I can use that term, through some of the tree areas and the plant, the The planter stands, I guess, would be the best way. And my understanding is that there are benches around the trees and that's the only location for benches. Is that right? |
| 01:55:07.15 | Becky Dow | No, that's incorrect. There's benches proposed around the trees and then there's would be benches proposed near the waterfront where the Plaza sort of bulbs out towards the waterfront there's there's benches are currently that Commission has indicated are horrendous and need to be replaced. Um, So those would be the two locations of benches. The cues don't weave between the trees. The trees actually help to define the two cues which are relatively straight lines until we get down towards tracing which in case they both arc. |
| 01:55:35.77 | Kristina Feller | Okay, because I know that Vice Chair Junius brought up a point about, you know, the drop off in the parking lot and the, the, proximity to the bollards. And I think that this is why El Portal becomes that much more important and potentially an equally as good or almost better drop off for some of that and should be. open and maintain to ensure that circulation there and the potential for drop off as well. Thank you. |
| 01:56:04.46 | Becky Dow | Yeah. |
| 01:56:04.82 | Kristina Feller | I think it's... |
| 01:56:05.03 | Becky Dow | Anything that we're doing with this project is prohibiting use of El Portal for drop off. It's not accessible per se. A lot of areas where you get out of your vehicle, there's not a curb ramp. readily available to take you from El Portal up the six inches to plaza level, I don't think there's anything that would preclude that. that area being used for drop-off at this time. |
| 01:56:26.69 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. And thank you, Cherry. |
| 01:56:28.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. Commissioner Junius, do you have any questions at this time? Okay. Richard. Richard. At this point, we're going to go to open the floor for public comment. I'm going to turn this over in a second to Director Phipps. I encourage speakers, you can have an opportunity to speak for up to three minutes. If somebody else says what you want to say, you can just say you concur, because we did get a number of comments. They've all been posted to the website and all of the commissioners have received those. There will be a timer put up. With that, I'm going to turn it over to Director Phipps to manage. Thank you. |
| 01:57:31.49 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much, Chair. Video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment in person, please fill out a speaker card and submit it to myself or my colleague to my right. If you'd like to make a comment in the Zoom application, please raise your hand. To raise your hand from a phone, press star nine, and everybody will be called upon when it is their time to speak. Thank you very much. And with that, we will start with speaker cards. First speaker I have is Jacques. Jacques, welcome. Please approach the dais. State your name and address for the record. You will have three minutes to speak. |
| 01:58:12.78 | Jacques Almond | Jacques Almond 423A, Litho Street. The plan being reviewed in the Is the planning commission planned? It's not the one that is the result of years of work by a professional group in collaboration with the city. This project affords a huge opportunity to remove the blight and congestion of bicycle parking and cueing from, the downtown area around Vina del Mar Park and turn it into a pedestrian friendly area for residents, businesses and tourists. The proposed Planning Commission plan Wind addresses the current situation but does not does nothing to address the basic issues that the grant was intended to be used for, and is a death blow to any meaningful improvements to the entire Vina del Mar Park area. The Ferry Landing Plaza would be dominated by a wall of bicycles that would isolate it and cut off views from neighboring areas. And you seem to be interested in views. The bicycle queue and parking on Tracy Lane would compromise any possibility of having a beautiful pedestrian promenade that could accommodate a variety of activities such as art exhibits, mobile food vendors, music events, etc., activities that would attract residents and tourists. The Planning Commission plan does nothing positive, fails to solve the issues that the funding was intended to address and permanently destroys the possibility of turning the Vina El Mar area into a kind of gracious civic space. this unique site and the citizens of Sausalito deserve. The plan totally disregards the public interest and capitulates to a perceived inconvenience to a private small parking lot. The plan being reviewed is not really a plan. is simply a repetition of the existing condition with some new pavement and curbs. Years ago when I served on the design review board, I understood my task was to serve the general community, not a special interest. What is happening here is a tragedy, and I hope that you will Seriously reconsider what you're doing. Don't be responsible for destroying an opportunity for us to finally have a ferry landing area that we can be proud of and want to spend time in. We can work on mitigating the private concerns of the Yacht Club and help them understand that a small compromise on their part can allow all of us to finally have a public pedestrian-oriented space that we have been dreaming of for decades. The Planning Commission plan destroys that possibility. And since the last hearing, We on the professional group have re-looked at our plan and we can adjust to accommodate a number of your other concerns, but you cannot have bicycle queuing and pedestrians coming through the plaza. It won't work. |
| 02:01:31.99 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much for your comment. Next speaker is Cass Green. Cass, please perch the dais and restate your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes. |
| 02:01:44.07 | Cass Green | Thanks. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Cass Green and I own the Inn Above Tide with my brothers, Mike and Willie McDevitt. Our family has been in business in Sausalito for over 60 years. And last year, the Inn was responsible for approximately $940,000 of the TOT tax revenue received by the city of Sausalito. I really appreciate all the work that's been done on this project, especially the work you guys have put into it, Kevin's group, the professionals, the consultant. There's a lot of work and it's much appreciated. However, it was with dismay that I watched the July 26th Planning Commission meeting, which greatly amended the plans presented by staff to move the queuing for pedestrians and bicycles from the north of the ferry landing to the south, where it will cause confusion with vehicles on El Portal. And that is my concern. My dismay comes from my concern for the safety of the area. I mean, we live down there day and night. Our staff works with it. So does Sausalito Hotel. So will Cultivar when Cultivar opens up. And by putting all those cues together, and you could see today on the presentation that the cues are right up against each other. It's gonna cause a ton of confusion. And there's not just two cues we're talking about, pedestrians and bicycles. There will be a cue on the ticket kiosk also. So you've got the ticket kiosk, people coming off the ferries, the other two cues, all mixed, they're gonna end up mixed up together. And a ton of people coming down El Portal, I don't care what you say, they're gonna come down El Portal. They already walk in the middle of El Portal. They cross El Portal. I'm surprised that somebody hasn't been killed yet. Somebody will get killed. if we don't rationalize the queuing. So my concern is for the safety. I'm also concerned that there does not appear to be enough room in the circular of El Portales for a firetruck to be able to turn around. And that needs to be investigated. As you've seen, the proposed queues are very congested. And again, there will be three queues, not two, because you'll have one on the kiosk. Surely we can find a path forward that will produce a safer alternative than the one we're facing right now. then concentrating a small plaza area and following, which will fall into El Portal And what it also will do is it'll end up backing up into Bridgeway. Because remember, you've got cultivar opening up. And so there's going to be traffic backed up onto Bridgeway from El Portal if these plans go forward. I THINK IT'S A GREAT We especially urge you to retain the ticket kiosk in its existing position. So as to reduce chaos in the plaza. So please don't put the kiosk in the middle of existing two queues and creating a third queue. That's just going to make it worse out there. So again, my concerns aren't about the hotel. It's about the safety. And I'd love to see clarification on the parking numbers, because that scares me. Thanks very much. |
| 02:04:55.11 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much for your comment. Next speaker is Michael Rex. Michael, please come on down. Restate your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes. |
| 02:05:04.63 | Michael Rex | Well, I'm architect Michael Rex. I've served for two years on the design committee to study this in great detail, to talk to all the stakeholders and look at regional transportation plans. We've been ignored. Thank you. This whole process has been hijacked by the Planning Commission. and your designers have been ignored. The project's been handed off to the engineers to do your bidding, and we're ending up with a failed plan that doesn't even meet its objectives. Subjectives is an approved circulation, and this, to improve circulation, this preserves the poor circulation that's there now. The plaza is completely walled off by a line of bikes. That'll remain a queue of people. That'll remain. You won't be able to get out of your car at the loading zones. I, We understood from the very beginning that the bike circulations had to come from the East. to avoid the congestion on the West. And we've never had an opportunity to have a meaningful dialogue with you to explain why we reached that conclusion. For example, we were supposed to and are supposed to look at regional transportation. Uh, When you consider the plans for the North-South Greenway, which is envisioned to come along the east side of Lot 3, it'll funnel right into the ferry. It won't with this plan. The reason we talked about phase two and phase three is because we wanted this phase to dovetail with future planning. which this plan ignores. Okay. And why are we doing this? To serve a minority interest, the Yacht Club, a private party on public land. And if you read the analysis by Robert Harrison on the weekend and during the week, on the weekend, you'll have in 24 hours, about 100 cars coming and going out of there. But typically in one hour, it's six to 12 cars. The 12 are only at Saturday night dinner and Sunday lunch. And for that minor inconvenience, actually, David Parisi solved it. He's converting that sidewalk into a roadway. a paved railway so it won't look like a sidewalk. This plan keeps a narrow sidewalk. I would argue we'll have better circulation. But all that's being ignored. So if you're set on adopting this plan, please do so tonight. So we can move on to a venue where the people, decision makers, will actually consider the serious flaws to this plan and consider the careful input and study and the reasons behind the plan that you're rejecting was put together. Thank you. |
| 02:08:04.60 | Director Phipps | Mr. Rex, thank you very much for your comments. Next speaker is Alice Merrill. Alice, please approach the dais, restate your name and address for the record, and you will have three minutes. |
| 02:08:18.76 | Alice Merrill | Hi, I'm Alice Merrill, 117, where do I live? 117, Caledonia. I, of course, am on the other side of the speakers so far. The letters that came in, whether they're form letters or not, They are worth noting. They are worth recognizing that. you don't just look at a couple of them and decide, They all say that I read said no don't do this don't take away parking spaces. And these are local people who are talking. These aren't the bicycles they aren't the tourists. I am not against tourists, but I'm, I'm. I appreciate that Christine is really trying to stand up for me and the other people in town here. Why not fix it so that you can walk through the park to get to the ferry instead of put a whole other sidewalk in? For heaven's sakes, there's already one there. And if you can't find it because there are too many trees, fix that. Don't put a whole sidewalk in. Don't take away parking places. old people, I'm one. Dr. Dianne Saxe- drive there for all kinds of things and they want them, they want parking they need it and to to hear is talking about putting art projects and and food trucks and all this kind of thing. in the in the parking lot and on the plaza. Well, we don't need that. We have restaurants all over the place. We don't need that. We need parking. And the people who live here really want to be able to use that parking. And the people who are coming on their bikes, they are, they know that they're getting into, people all over the world know about Sausalito. all over the world. So they're coming to see Sausalito. We're lucky. We're not so lucky. You know, it's a combination of, um, But they must know that when they come, it's going to be crowded. Um, I, It isn't a minority interest that you guys are standing up for. It is a town, a locals, a big group of people. If people were paying attention, they would be here saying this, and they have written a lot of letters. And I just don't think that you're standing up for my interests and the other locals' interests. It's a minority interest, and thank you. |
| 02:11:06.90 | Director Phipps | Alice, thank you very much for your comment. Chair, that does it for speaker cards. As a reminder to the audience, if you would like to speak, please submit a speaker card to myself or my colleague, Maria Hernandez, to my right. Without any additional speaker cards, I will move to the Zoom application. Next speaker is John Flavin. John, please unmute yourself, and you will have three minutes to speak. Please state your address for the record. |
| 02:11:32.98 | Don Flavin | Don Flavin, 129 Prospect Avenue. I have a real concern about this number of parking spaces. Oops. It seems to have moved over from 12 to 22. We think it's 34. And then you add Tracy Way. So it is becoming a significant number, not a minor one or a minor change. the sidewalk. I learned a long time ago in parking lots, you do not tell people how to walk. They're going to pick, they're coming from probably lot three commuters. And they're going as fast as they can to get to the The boat. So they're not going to be directed to the left or the right or whatever. They're going to go a straight shot. So you're wasting a lot of time with that sidewalk on the side. It isn't going to solve the bridge district's issues. Finally, and I know you're not concerned about financials, but the city has essentially made the 1.9 million budget the floor. And for this project, and it's just going to go up from there. I can hear it every word that it said. So this project is going to be in Sausalito tradition way over budget. Thank you. |
| 02:13:05.92 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much, Mr. Flavin, for your comment. Next speaker is Sandra Bushmaker. Sandra, welcome. Please say your name and address for the record. You will have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:13:17.08 | Unknown | Sandra Bushmaker 317 Sausalito Boulevard. I sent a custom letter to you today. I don't think it made it to the agenda, uh, But I do want to reference the 80 other letters that were attached to your July agenda, along with probably at least 30 letters to this agenda that I think require your attention. I don't think this plan is ready to go to the council. We've already heard many issues raised tonight that are unanswerable. The largest among them is the delta in parking spaces. I personally counted the map or the drawing of 11 from November 22. 2022 and the current drawing. And I came up with the Delta of 34 spaces. So, um, I don't know, and I think that that fact has direct impact on 1128 considerations. So I think that this plan needs to get that straightened out before it goes to the city council. And I think the budget issue also needs to get real. I mean, I think we need to have a better issue. We don't want to see ourselves in a situation where our Measure F monies, which were $7 million, ended up costing us $13 million. The city's already in the red. given the new contracts that they have just entered into with staff. Um, I'm speaking against the bioretention field, If it's not triggered, why are we spending money to do it? And in addition, I just don't think it's necessary. Certainly, we're below the 5,000 threshold. I also wonder about the Gabrielsen meets and bounds that was shown in that one drawing, whether the deed from the Maddens was actually Uh, examined to determine the boundaries of Gabrielson Park. Lastly, second to the last, I would like to just bring to your attention that bike traffic is down in Sausalito. bike parking is down in Sausalito and I refer you to the city council meeting of the first meeting here in September, Under the consent calendar, there's a report about the reduction in bicycle parking. And I would like to also speak. I've been a member of the Salt Lake Yacht Club since 1987. And it's a long-term tenant. It's an asset to the city. The city has meetings in this facility. It is not a private club that excludes civic events. Many, many civic events occur there. The Yacht Club is also paying a tremendous amount of rent, very significant rent, and it just a few years ago negotiated a multi-decade lease with the city. So please do not mischaracterize that club as an elitist removed from the culture of Sausalito. It's very integrated into the culture of Sausalito. But I'd like you to consider, I think that's my time, So I'll stop there. |
| 02:16:24.10 | Director Phipps | Thank you. Thank you very much, Sandra, for your comment. Next speaker is Vicki Nichols. Vicki, welcome. Please state your address for the record and you will have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:16:36.52 | Vicki Nichols | Hi. Chair Letzenberg and commissioners, Vicki Nichols, 117 Caledonia. I think that everybody has their specific turfs, if you will, that they're taking care of tonight. So I'd like to speak to you as the chair of your historical preservation commission. Um, this project is somewhat located in the historic district, and I want to talk about the fountain which has been listed in your report the initial reports stated and I don't know who determined this that the fountain was not historic. Mr. McGowan did include us in some meeting we gave some feedback, but I want to be clear on the record. that the fountain is to be moved towards the existing kiosk. And I say this because at one point in an early staff report, they thought it would be fine to put it over in Gabrielson Park. which misses the whole point. It should be removed intact to the extent possible. And I've offered to help raise money if we needed to get a professional in there that can try to do that and restore it. In terms of the benches, I heard some reference to the benches at Vena Del Mar. Those marble benches were raised by private funds. I'm not sure what the correlation was to them that style on the plaza. But that again is also under the purview of the HPC. When we had to look at the park improvements, we had so much detail to consider to even match the color of the cement. You're surrounded by historic stone walls there and you're talking about Repaving the sidewalk and El pertel. I would like at least for this plan to come back to HPC. When you have more details, this is clearly in our purview. That park is on the California register as a point of historical interest. Let's see what else. Oh, the bioswell. Let's, let's consider that this project has gone on so long that the trigger was 10,000 feet. It is now down to 5,000 feet. Let's not quibble. This needs to be done. When I was on the planning commission, One of my pet peeves was impervious surfaces that cause runoff. As the site captain for coastal cleanup at the bay model for the last 13 or 14 years, I can tell you we need to be doing everything we can to prevent water getting into our bay. Not only from a jurisdictional legislative perspective, but just that it's good practice. So don't quibble on a few feet. This can be worked out. This is a modern solution. We should be embracing this. I think this is it. But I do want to have more input on what you're planning around El Portal and those walls and sidewalks and improvements. And even the existing hardware in the, Um, the areas around there. Traditionally, we've had some input. It's listed right in |
| 02:19:46.26 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much, Vicki, for your comments. Next speaker is Teresa Ancona. Teresa, please restate your name and state your address for the record. You will have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:19:59.04 | Teresa Ancona | Hi, thank you. My name is Teresa Ancona. I'm here as a chair for the Sausalito Chamber of Commerce. And we are located at 22 El Portal, And I just wanted to reiterate uh, like from the July meeting that we are in opposition to any loss of the parking spots in parking lot one, Also pertaining to the maintenance for the current kiosk that sits on the plaza. The chamber is responsible for maintaining the exterior and interior of the plaza. Thank you. |
| 02:20:38.98 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much, Teresa, for your comments. Chair, I am looking to my potential speaker cards for additional speakers, seeing none. Looking to the Zoom application for raised hands, seeing none. Back to you. |
| 02:20:39.30 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 02:20:52.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm going to close the public hearing portion of this item. With that, I'll bring it back up to the dais and look for comments. Richard. |
| 02:21:10.96 | Richard Graef | Thanks, Terry Luxembourg. I'm not quite sure where to start with this. from all the input and my looking at this project the last time around and this time, I'm not ready to sign off on the current proposal. I think there are some real unanswered questions. I'm, I'm not convinced that they um, Um, queuing situation is really Well thought out, I think there's some, while I was hoping last time around that there would be an ingenious solution to this. And I think the ingenious solution after much consideration just to separate them. And I really feel like the proposal from the last time around where the bikes came in around Gabrielson Park somehow or other was a better solution. And it freed the plaza up from all of that bike activity. So, I just, I'm not ready to go with this one. I think there's, I think the other... Bicycle queuing option ought to be looked at again to see if there's a, good way to do that. Um, I see that that Tracy way has been closed off. I think ultimately that's a good thing because that space could be much better utilized and how it's being used now. Yeah. But anyway, I think generally speaking, That's kind of the way I see it at this point. So I would just, I'd like to see the queuing reconsidered. That's basically it. |
| 02:23:31.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Graff, Commissioner Saad. |
| 02:23:35.02 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair. I, Don't want to put a motion yet, but I am definitely not ready to move forward tonight. My biggest concern, of course, is the parking here. Those numbers are not adding up. And I think given the public comment and what we're trying to achieve, I feel like with much respect to the professional working group, Thank you. I think their plan was very well designed for a different concept. And that's, I think, what my issue is. I think it was beautifully designed if the intention was a plaza and it was this community-centered, orientation but This grant has specific requirements. It's for bike and pedestrian queuing. It's to help. delineate the ferry terminal. And you know, to just note as someone who's born and raised here and has taken the ferry for over 10 years, I've seen the changes happen. Vice Chair Junior said it best last time. People will go where they're going to go. We are a tourist town. People are going to come here. regardless of what happens down there. I've seen it through all of its phases. And I'm going to go on record and say, I don't think we have a significant problem down there. I just don't think we do. We're also coming down to empty season here. It's, it's, The intention here is to figure out the queuing. If we're going to accept this grant, get this work done and not, overreach any further than we are. I think the only which I would consider an overreach because of the trigger on bio-retention being we're not hitting the 5000 mark, but I do agree with the professional opinion of Director McGowan, it's good practice. how that looks, less relevant if it's going to be in the park. but I completely had the exact same thought as Commissioner Feller when I was looking at these plans, We have an existing. structure in the park. we can guide people to go there. I or not, because they might still go through the parking lot anyway when they get off the ferry. So I think our best intentions for circulation, we should definitely utilize what we have. I think the reduction in the plaza was, was well designed. The direction was taken. from the last plans to these plans, and I appreciate what was done. And I just think we need to keep the scope to what is being asked of us and I can only say I can't move forward here because this parking question is of a concern. I would suggest to remove that east side parking lot move pedestrians into the park if needed. And let's lose our parking on Tracy way to one of the professional groups comments. It is a nice passageway. the, bike racks sound um, not permanent. So those can be removed during winter months and it can be opened up and people can walk there as well. So, um, I'm having a hard time. I think we're trying to shove a lot here and I think we just need to stick with what we're, what we're being asked for. And I think this new plan solves our issue on the queuing and, um, I wish I could move forward for other reasons. I can't with the parking, but I think this is a much better version than what we saw last time. So that's where I am. |
| 02:27:06.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Junius. Sure. |
| 02:27:11.12 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair. A long night. Hopefully it doesn't get too much longer. I do want to start at the beginning with what I think are the four key requirements of the grant, which is really where we should be starting, and it's stated pretty clearly in the... Staff materials, there are four bullet points that are critical here we're supposed to be improving and enhancing pedestrian and bicycle access routes to the shore side faza Plaza prominent modify existing city on parking lots. uses to better integrate the areas for vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle uses, and to improve circulation, safety, and efficiency. Increase the area available to safely stage and process ferry passengers and bicycles using the city parking lot areas. And finally, widen and expand pedestrian and bicycle access routes and improve wayfinding. So with all due respect to that letter we just got from the bridge district, I frankly think they'd probably say anything to get this thing across the line at this point. We're four years into this, remember? Frankly, I don't think the plans in front of us do any of these things. They do not achieve any of these goals. As Jacques Omen said at the very beginning, At best, this plan makes permanent the temporary measures that have been in place for years. Those large potted plants forming barriers to keep cars out of one small little pocket of the parking lot. and formalizing the closure of Tracy Way that's basically already effectively closed and reserved for bike parking. With the exception of the new signage that we saw tonight, which frankly is the first time I saw that, I don't think that staff presentation was in the materials. that the public had available and that we all had available before the hearing. I don't think that's a huge deal. I expected there to be signage and I think the signage and bike queuing has been clearly laid out tonight. And I think it's problematic, I think to Commissioner Graff's point. Some of those dotted lines, they looked a little scary. Um, But clearly bikes and non-bike people are all going to be in the same area, just like they are today. And our new plaza will continue to be a crowded holding pen for bikes and people waiting for the ferry. except we're going to have some new signage. And really importantly, with no changes to the narrow sidewalk in front of the yacht club. Forget the queuing for a second. You're still going to have people walking in the parking lot and continued conflicts between cars and people and bikes. That's one of the most dangerous spots in the entire city. I really am surprised somebody hasn't gotten hit by a car as they try to maneuver out of the parking lot and squeeze by the entrance to the yacht club. It's really bad. And this plan does nothing to address that. I mean, I very much appreciate the fact that at the direction of this commission, The staff and the consultants have really struggled mightily to try and fit 10 pounds into a five pound sack, but it just doesn't work. I objected to these changes when the commission gave staff this direction back in July, and I restated my objections. The proposal really doesn't do anything to achieve the goals of the grant and make the real and needed changes to the fair landing. I would like to again recognize, and I appreciate Kevin recognizing the three design professionals, our local professional group, that really did give an enormous amount of time to produce the July 26th plan. Michael Rex, Jacques Allman, and Bill Hines, they've worked really hard for years to come up with that design, and I supported it then and I support it today. And I said, as I said in the last hearing, there are really no perfect solutions here and there are a lot of competing interests, but our design team did a great job of balancing the various interests that would be impacted by changes at the ferry landing. They looked at their task from the perspective of what would be best on balance for all of Sausalito. And that did mean some potential inconvenience for the lot, yacht club for sure. And some loss of parking, but on balance, it's the right compromise. I also want to note, that there are a handful of other forward-thinking residents who followed this project for years and provided valuable input and support for the original design that was presented back in July. Kieran Culligan and Aaron Roller, I wanna specifically thank the video link that they included in their letter to us for this hearing, really make it clear that the design we saw on July 26 does address those issues. And what we're doing here tonight, if we move ahead with these plans, just don't. There will still be bike, auto, and pedestrian conflicts. |
| 02:31:16.33 | Robert Busick | presented by |
| 02:31:38.32 | Andrew Junius | And then finally about the parking, I want to... Acknowledge the comments about the parking. We got about 20 emails. that were identical. from people who really just seem to want to use this grant to get a better parking lot. I think Sausalito has a lot of parking. Frankly, Sausalito is one big surface parking lot that stretches from the ferry landing to Dumpy Park and beyond. We don't need any more parking. And in order to get some changes that benefit the broader community, we can afford to lose a few spaces. Preserving car parking is not the purpose of this grant. We don't need a better parking lot. We need a better ferry landing. We need a ferry landing the city can be proud of. visitors from all over the world come to Sausalito on the ferry. this is our front door and right now it's a parking lot. Sausalito deserves better. I urge my fellow commissioners to reconsider |
| 02:32:26.13 | Don Flavin | of. |
| 02:32:30.09 | Andrew Junius | this situation and support the original July 26 design. Thank you very much. |
| 02:32:34.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you Thank you, Vice Chair Junius, Commissioner Feller. |
| 02:32:41.54 | Kristina Feller | Karen Hollweg, Right Thank you Thank you chair. Karen Hollweg, i've got some concerns about the conflicts in the parking count and maybe that's something at some point, we can go back over because the difference between the number that was thrown out is 34 versus 22 and a lot definitely has an impact on that 5% Range. I also just want to go back and invoke the 2020 to 2026 strategic plan. that the city council adopted and its implementation plan which specifically called out this project and their intent to control any scope creep in this project. So I go back also to what the grant was originally for and with respect to at least two of the commissioners at this point who might not agree with me, I actually, I actually think that this does, from an urban planning standpoint and principles heavily rooted in that, this actually does address both the scope and issues with circulation. in a reasonable manner. There is no doubt that I'm not sure. a larger vision of this downtown area is ultimately what's needed, but that's not what's in front of us this evening. And that is not the intention of what this permit is for. So we have a limited scope for what that really is. And that scope is really what's defined in the grant. And I actually do feel strongly that we've addressed a lot of it. I don't think that there's a perfect plan here because I think that really we should be looking at a larger scope when we're visioning these things. But again, um, There's a bit of money here that we could certainly use to make improvements to parking, to circulation, et cetera. This also assumes, hopefully, well, the grant is not contingent on this, but we're also still hoping that we're going to get a better ferry. Uh, Doc. in the future and a larger one. So let's hope that that happens too, because I agree we need a better ferry landing. I'm not ready to approve this tonight because I think there's too many questions related to the parking. I would still like to appeal to the rest of you to consider taking out some of those trees to preserve view corridors. That that those are the money shots, those are the million dollar views that is a lot of reasons why people come. to Sausalito, and those are our public spaces, so I would love to see more thought being put into how we can actually preserve and and celebrate those areas in this area. specifically in the landing. um, you know, those that that's pretty much where I am now but I really want to get to the bottom of this parking count because I don't think this is something we can be incorrect about. So that's sort of my major holdup. I'd like to see ticket Susan Nemitz- machines dispersed and all of that kind of stuff, and I think that those are things that we can comment on and possibly condition with further discussion with the bridge district. Susan Nemitz- And just think through some of that a little bit better. Susan Nemitz- But again, I go back to invoking the strategic plan. and the implementation plan of the strategic plan and ensuring that in controlling scope creep on this what's in front of us tonight. Thank you. |
| 02:36:15.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Feller. All right, where are we? That's a good question. All right, we've been reviewing this for a year and a half. and uh or longer and there are people in Sausalito that don't want to lose any parking and there are people in Sausalito that would like to make it all pedestrian if they could there are uh if there are 7,000 people in Sausalito we might have 7,000 different opinions but this is a grant that the community has uh received with the GHTD, and they're going to improve the dock. This is not the end of, as we all know, there is another phase looking at the parking and long-term solutions. Nothing, I do not believe that what we do on this particular project will preclude future improvements. We will, we need to do work on the dock and we need to do work on the plaza. We need to deal with queuing. We need signage and we need it defined. Closing Tracy Way, I think, is a good idea, despite several comments received. It's closed in the summer. You'd have to take a right turn out of there. It's a safety hazard. The people that come from parking lot two or three to the ferry walk through the center of this parking lot. I walk through Gabelson Park many, many times a week. I walk through this parking lot many, many times. It depends on where I'm coming from. So there does need to be safety and there does need to be access. And the sidewalk that they're proposing is not what's removing the parking. It's's the configuration i think we can angle the parking and add a few spaces back in the reality is no matter what project we do we will lose some parking uh and it will be an improvement i give an example of if you have an existing stadium and you uh uh want to renovate that stadium and it holds 20,000 people, when you go and renovate it to modern standards, the aisles get wider. There are safety considerations. There are a bunch of ways, different access and exits. So therefore, you will, at the end of the day, lose some seats. So in order to do improvements, we will lose some parking. This bioretention is a requirement. If we don't do it today, we will eventually be required. We want to keep the bay with proper filtration and whatever, so the polluted water doesn't get into the bay. It'll eventually need to be done. Yes, we want to separate from Gabrielsen. There is no solution here, quite honestly, that's going to make everybody happy. And there are people that have been working on this a long time, and everybody has their opinion. I think that the engineers have done what was asked of them. I think we have a plan. Quite honestly, I think that on the bicycle queuing, which is the biggest issue here, moving it back the way it was in the July thing is going to be congested and a problem. I think that Tracy Way provides, closed, provides access for the bicyclists. If we don't do that, there will be bicyclists on Tracy Way and on that east part of the project because the bicyclists will go where they're going to go so this at least puts them all in one area I wish there was a perfect solution here where we could totally separate the bicycles from the pedestrians and not have any crossing of the people walking along the shoreline in the Gabrielson Park or the Yacht club or whatever there is no perfect solution here the real issue though is we need to go go somewhere from this we don't have consensus on either way to go but what is before us this evening is whether we can make findings on a project the funding for this is this is not a case where we're making a recommendation to the city council. We are here as any private entity coming to us and saying, is this safe? Is it appropriate? Can we make the findings? The city council can decide whether they fund it or don't fund it. That is not our purview. 1128 is also for the city attorney, not our purview that is the purview of the city council the city council's follow-on phase and evaluating all the parking in the city is also not before us this evening it would come back to us at some point but we need to get to some consensus here this is in my mind in my mind this is a compromise that, with some additional angled parking, addresses what, reduces the loss of parking the best we can get. It comes up with a plan with good signage that will work. It reduces the scope, which means we might have hope of improving and getting this under the existing budget. And I think that this is a good thing for this phase for this project at this time, and then the city council is going to look at parking lots one through four, and we can look at further processes can we. |
| 02:40:36.94 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:41:55.14 | Kristina Feller | Sure. Can we ask Director McGowan to, and perhaps Becky, just to clarify that the issue with the parking, because I mean, this is really sort of a debate here, And that's one of my major hangups is I now unclear about the real parking count that we're talking about here. Is it, are we losing 34, 22? That should be a quick question to answer. |
| 02:42:15.61 | Robert Busick | It was. |
| 02:42:21.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can we bring Becky back up and Director McGowan, and can you bring up Becky's slide that says they lose 22 and the 38, not counting the 11? There was a slide in the PowerPoint that addresses |
| 02:42:36.70 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, if we can just get this clarified, this is, I think, a big issue. |
| 02:42:41.22 | Kevin McGowan | Becky, can you help us with that? |
| 02:42:43.58 | Kristina Feller | Can you think? |
| 02:42:44.95 | Becky Dow | Absolutely, I can help with that. There's 22 parking spaces within the interior of lot one that would be removed. And in addition, there's 11 more parking spaces on Tracy way that would be removed. So that's 34 parking spaces. I believe that's in line with, there are some members of the public said 34. So 22 within lot one, 11 on Tracy Way, that's 34th. It sounds like there might be some technical |
| 02:43:09.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's 33. |
| 02:43:11.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:43:11.67 | Becky Dow | So, Oh, that is. |
| 02:43:14.03 | Kristina Feller | 33. Yeah. So where's this 34 coming from? we need to know that. And I guess while you're looking at that, the other question maybe, Chair, that we should clarify is, Um, you know, the designation of some of these handicapped parking spaces. I don't, I don't recall that we have that many currently. So are you, bringing up that requirement to current code. |
| 02:43:44.62 | Becky Dow | No, the number of ADA parking spaces is matching the current number of ADA parking spaces. Okay. I guess to clarify, there was a member of the public who said there was 30 something parking spaces, 33 or 34. There was 22. |
| 02:44:00.86 | Kristina Feller | There were a couple. |
| 02:44:03.86 | Becky Dow | And that number was 33 or 34. 34. 34. Yeah, so there's 22 interior to the lot and 11 on Tracy Way. |
| 02:44:12.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Becky, where's the 30? You had a slide that said there was 22 plus 11, which is 33. Yes. Is 33 the number? |
| 02:44:19.32 | Nastassya Saad | Yes. |
| 02:44:19.39 | Becky Dow | Yes. Thank you. |
| 02:44:21.16 | Nastassya Saad | We're ignoring the 34. That was a public comment. So she's confirming 33. |
| 02:44:23.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That was a public. 33. |
| 02:44:26.41 | Becky Dow | Yeah, sorry, I was thinking for some reason that added up to what the member of the public said, but it's 33 was my count that's in the slide. There's a slide early in the presentation with those numbers. |
| 02:44:37.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and 11 of those are on tracy way which during the summer aren't there to begin with which is the peak season when we have need parking yes i mean that's so we were losing 22 from parking lot one is in a week you're 100 convinced that's the number or i mean you were running through you were saying you took out some in this area and i wasn't following the math when you were doing it, but you know the but I'm sure you've done this multiple times so the numbers 22 out of the parking lot. |
| 02:45:10.19 | Becky Dow | Yeah, we beat that pretty well to death. And that's assuming that we have that parking lot on the Northeast side and that there's 18 stalls there to get removed and then replaced with six. um, parallel parking spaces. So that 22 number includes that loss and change of parking on the east side. |
| 02:45:29.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And if you were to add some angle parking there, if you could make it work with the turnaround and the turns for the fire trucks and all that, your professional guess on how many could be able to add there? Maybe three, four, five, six? |
| 02:45:47.67 | Becky Dow | Oh yeah. I mean, so if there's 18 now and we went to Engel, it would maybe be something like 14. That 18 would probably be replaced with something like 14 or 15 parking spaces. So you would end up losing maybe four up there. |
| 02:46:02.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so 14 and right now you're showing six parallel. So that's eight. So if we were able to do it, and again, I understand you have to check the geometry for trucks and stuff. The eight from the 22 is, |
| 02:46:23.01 | Unknown | 14. |
| 02:46:24.19 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So we would lose 14 spaces for the plan that we have right now with the Engelberg. |
| 02:46:32.66 | Becky Dow | Yeah, assuming that we could get like four, assuming the angle parking worked and we could get 14. |
| 02:46:37.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | assuming we can get that. And then we have, and we've added a drop-off that we don't currently have. That's correct. |
| 02:46:46.81 | Becky Dow | There, yeah, there is a drop off in the plan. |
| 02:46:48.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So we part of the loss is due to the drop off and in parts due to the that space on the south side where we're allowing some additional queuing. |
| 02:46:58.94 | Unknown | Correct. |
| 02:47:00.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, all right, thank you, Becky. I mean, so again, my thought is... trying to balance all these things. This is where we're at and this is probably the best we're going to get and we can refine it with these angled spaces we can deal with putting a ticket booth wherever uh you know ggbhtd wants it uh and maybe we split the two i think that is not a bad idea because they said people will queue to those and maybe one goes on tracy lane but that's the the location of the ticket booths a nuance here i mean i don't think that holds up the findings of where they locate tickets. Long term, most people are going to have a lot of... the location of the ticket booth is a nuance here. I mean, I don't think that holds up the findings of where they locate tickets. Long-term, most people are going to have, a lot of people have them on their phones, so they'll be logging in on their phones and not need the tickets eventually, even the tourists. I mean, that's a lot of where we're going. So I don't think the two, I do agree we should look at splitting the ticket booths. That's a good idea. But I think we really need to move this ahead. Thank you. So I don't think the two, I do agree we should look at splitting the ticket, Bruce, that's a good idea. But I think we really need to move this ahead. I really, you know, I don't think I'm convincing any of you, but if we can get three votes to move this ahead tonight, I would like to see. |
| 02:48:09.97 | Kristina Feller | THE FAMILY IS NOT A Commissioner Sun. |
| 02:48:13.59 | Nastassya Saad | I want to move it ahead as well, but I'm not going to vote on math that Becky needs to professionally. I mean, I appreciate what you're trying to do, but we need to come back with some hard numbers. It's a contentious issue. I know everyone has their own opinions here, but Saturday night, I circled that lot three times and I had to go. Back. to leave the lot to another lot. I mean, we have a parking issue. We don't have a master plan. We've got arena. Okay, we've got 724 units. |
| 02:48:45.94 | Commissioner Fowler | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:48:46.75 | Nastassya Saad | including some spaces that are right in that area. We've got cultivar that this whole commission voted on to stay open till midnight. We need... parking. So there's a big difference between 33. 12, 22, so I would be comfortable. I don't know how to solve for that. I don't know how to solve for that. |
| 02:49:09.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I ask you this question? I can't solve the math here, but the reality is, |
| 02:49:11.71 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 02:49:15.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The plan we had in July took out 38. And enlarging the plaza and providing drop off is going to take out spaces. The geometry of whether they can try to restripe it or get whatever that with Thank you. We're going to lose some spaces in order to do this, no matter what we do. And they came back and maximized the number of spaces, whether it's 14 or 13 or whatever. The only way to get more is to squeeze down the new plaza even more. That's the only way to get more. |
| 02:49:54.45 | Unknown | What about this east side lot or this east side sidewalk? |
| 02:49:57.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So- The East Side sidewalk is where we're gonna put angled parking in and we can narrow the sidewalk to make the angled parking work. But eventually, you know, There needs to be some sort of sidewalk there because people walk from parking lots. |
| 02:50:15.62 | Kristina Feller | So, Yeah. Can we just pull up the slide that shows that area again, just so we're all looking at the same thing and everybody in the audience or at home. is following us. If we can just zoom into that. the new sidewalk area. Thank you. Thank you. Whoever's piloting. Thank you, Director Phipps. So I think what we're, I think where we're going, and I'm paraphrasing, so everybody correct me, is either reduce the width of that sidewalk or eliminate that sidewalk to achieve or reclaim parking that's been lost. I know that that I recognize what director McGowan said in terms of he would not necessarily recommend that but If we could think about incorporating some of that way finding that was so well articulated in this presentation. on the sidewalk that leads to Gabrielson Park. And in conjunction with that, We have, low rise vegetation and perhaps no trees there. then maybe people would see that there's actually a path there to get where they need to go. um, I would certainly be in favor of that. It achieves what we're looking for to recover some lost parking. it. achieves, you know, our principal goal of, you know, celebrating view corridors that we've talked about over many years and many hearings. |
| 02:51:57.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Becky, can I ask you, what is the width of the sidewalk that you're calling the east side, which is really north side? |
| 02:52:03.94 | Becky Dow | It's five feet wide. |
| 02:52:06.11 | Jeffery Luxenberg | It's five feet wide. |
| 02:52:06.84 | Becky Dow | You can't go. |
| 02:52:07.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So we can't go any less than that. And there seems to be a gap between the sidewalk and the curbing. How wide is that? |
| 02:52:16.88 | Becky Dow | That gap that you're looking at there, that is the gutter pan and that's two feet. But that's counted for the width of the parallel parking that you have there. So that's not a feature that we can. |
| 02:52:25.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So that's not a feature that we can. you |
| 02:52:27.41 | Becky Dow | Thank you. |
| 02:52:27.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Okay. Um, |
| 02:52:29.72 | Kristina Feller | And this is one way traffic in this particular aisle. Is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. Okay. And what's the width of the other? |
| 02:52:36.44 | Becky Dow | Yeah, that's correct. |
| 02:52:40.99 | Kristina Feller | I see one like you have an arrow towards the bottom right What is the width of that 20? Is it 20 feet? I can't read it from here. you |
| 02:52:53.97 | Becky Dow | I guess I'm not sure where you're looking. Most of the drive aisles where you have vehicles backing out opposite each other, it's 22 feet is the distance that you need. |
| 02:53:02.42 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And you've got 30 here. We are, |
| 02:53:05.70 | Becky Dow | 30 here, correct? |
| 02:53:07.66 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:53:07.76 | Becky Dow | Right. |
| 02:53:08.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So I would think that that can be reduced. I mean, if the emergency vehicles can get through the 20 feet, then it's the turn that you're talking about. I mean, the more I look at this, commissioners, the lot is how big it is. Other than this sidewalk, whether it's in or out, they only can get so much parking out of the area. so to get more parking we're going to reduce the size of the plaza and so and i think we've already reduced the size of the plaza so i think you know we you know if we go back to july we're going to lose even more spaces uh this seems to be with some angled parking in this area uh the way the way to do this, you know, Becky, let me ask you this, is there a way to move that sidewalk a foot closer to the bioretention and then make the bioretention longer slightly? |
| 02:54:09.37 | Becky Dow | Well, yes and no like we could we could certainly construct we could push that sidewalk several feet plan north, if we wanted to, however, during a previous planning Commission meeting leaders and yeah it's planning Commission we'd receive feedback that. basically the edge of the existing parking lot, which is represented by, you see those little light gray dots. Those are like the rope fences. that we were not to do any hardscape improvements outside of that boundary. So if we wanna sort of walk back that limitation, then yeah, we could push that sidewalk a few feet north we can narrow up and reduce the size of that buyer retention a little bit. And that could buy us the real estate that we need for the angled parking. I'd wanna look at it though. We had studied with this configuration, the angled parking and we didn't do it. see a way to make that work readily. But we would have to encroach past that rope fence, which was previously sort of a line that was drawn in the sand. |
| 02:55:05.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | understand i mean my issue honestly is you're not going to get people to walk i i walk through gabelson park along the water and i walk along the thing from the spinnaker but once you get up to that corner you're going to cut through as as director mcgowan said you're going to cut right through the center of that parking lot if there's not a sidewalk and so you're not going to get people to to walk a walk around that that are coming off the ferry and getting to their cars. I mean, if somebody's a tourist and they're walking around, yeah, they'll go into Gabrielson Park, but that's not, you know, the sidewalk helps with that. |
| 02:55:41.25 | Kristina Feller | So Chair, where are we? I don't want to get too far in the weeds. |
| 02:55:44.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, I would like to try to convince a couple of you that we need to move ahead so we don't continue this yet again because we're going nowhere. So that's what I'm trying to do. But if I'm short of that, you know, we're not going to get it. We're not going to be unanimous on whatever we come out with. It's clear that two of us want to return back to where we were in July. It's clear that a lot of the public doesn't want us to go back to what was in July. It's clear the people that worked on the long-term plan don't want this plan or the one in July, and they want to go back to the phase one, phase two plan. So we're really nowhere. That's incorrect. Well, I think we're going to go back to the phase one, phase |
| 02:56:03.55 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 02:56:26.06 | Kristina Feller | Well, let me try to take a stab at something here. OK. So, um, If we were to condition an approval this evening to Um, first of all, recover parking that has been removed here. And we're going to particularly maybe identify the what we're calling the east side, where that new sidewalk is, that area seems to be the best area. So we want to recover as much parking as possible there. That is assuming that a loss of 22 spaces and not 34 or some other number. So that is based on that assumption. |
| 02:57:12.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let me just clarify what you're saying. So we're losing 22 now. We'd be losing less than 22. Correct. |
| 02:57:12.19 | Kristina Feller | You're right. |
| 02:57:17.76 | Kristina Feller | Correct, correct. But this is assuming the base of losing 22 and not some other number because- |
| 02:57:23.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We have to assume the consultants |
| 02:57:24.49 | Kristina Feller | We have to assume. Okay. So, so that, that would be the first condition, right? The, the, the second condition. And again, this is just the trial balloon here is to reduce the. The height of the plantings at the east side of the parking lot against Gabrielson so so we are main we are in we are. maintaining or improving, actually, we're improving the the view corridor there. to encourage people to use the park for pedestrian crossing in that area. We, this would also assume removing those trees. there as well. We would encourage any kind of, we could consider moving the drop off that is in the parking lot, moving that on to El Portal to maybe get a couple more spaces there if we wanted to do that. And I would also just try to convince the rest of the commissioners here, and I'm not trying to put my back to you, to minimize some of the trees in the plaza, again, to use that space more effectively. Is that enough of a condition regarding the parking to satisfy everyone's concerns? |
| 02:58:55.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I'm a little confused about one of those. To reduce the height of the plantings. Becky, isn't the bio retention area taking out the plantings between Gabelson Park? It is. |
| 02:59:06.54 | Kristina Feller | It is, but it's replacing... stuff. |
| 02:59:10.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | with low stuff. It's all about- |
| 02:59:11.87 | Kristina Feller | But you've got trees there too. Those aren't low, are they? They're high. |
| 02:59:15.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | some of those trees coming |
| 02:59:16.07 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:59:16.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:59:16.86 | Kristina Feller | That's what I'm proposing. |
| 02:59:18.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, but I think they're where the bioretention is. So that we'd be- |
| 02:59:22.25 | Kristina Feller | So, |
| 02:59:22.30 | Nastassya Saad | In the plans, it's showing trees that are not |
| 02:59:24.22 | Kristina Feller | to be able to get the |
| 02:59:24.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:59:24.37 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:59:24.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, |
| 02:59:24.73 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:59:24.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:59:25.01 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:59:26.72 | Nastassya Saad | currently in that location unless they're meant to be shrubs. |
| 02:59:28.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | unless they're |
| 02:59:29.15 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Yeah, I'm saying no trees there is what I'm saying. |
| 02:59:32.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I understand. But Becky, can you confirm that those trees that were on there were actually part of this project? Because I'm not sure that they are. I think they were just sort of illustrations, not actual. |
| 02:59:49.97 | Becky Dow | There, there's existing trees that would need to be removed and then we had proposed new trees in that area. And so it sounds like the solution here is continue to plan on removing the existing trees, but do not replace any trees in that area. |
| 02:59:55.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | it's a great day. |
| 03:00:04.89 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, your commission also asked to put trees in that area in the last meeting so that it would obscure the bioretention. |
| 03:00:11.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:00:11.67 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:00:11.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 03:00:11.89 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:00:12.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. |
| 03:00:12.59 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:00:12.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I looked at the planning plan and didn't see those trees. Are they on the planning plan or they're just drawn? Are they listed, the species and stuff? |
| 03:00:12.89 | Kevin McGowan | That's correct. |
| 03:00:25.76 | Becky Dow | They should be. I'd have to look back at the plan to understand what species they were, but those trees were intended to be put their plant there at the request of the commission. Okay. |
| 03:00:35.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I must have missed it on the planning plan, but okay. So you're suggesting- |
| 03:00:36.21 | Kristina Feller | you guys. And Becky and Director McGowan, you are correct. That was something that we talked about last time. But based on this new design, we're trying to be responsive to what we're talking about here. Karen Hollweg, In terms of the parking and the the last potential condition again, this is a trial balloon i'm putting out here is is is to actually include some of that. Karen Hollweg, circulation way finding. Becky and Director McGowan that you had identified in your slides to maybe encourage people to use the park to circulate towards Gabriel's sin. to be as safe as possible because we were concerned about that with Tracy way and we should be concerned about it everywhere. |
| 03:01:27.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, let me ask a question about the minimized trees in the plaza. There's four, Becky, there's four trees in the plaza. Is that correct? |
| 03:01:27.98 | Kristina Feller | So- |
| 03:01:28.37 | Becky Dow | Thank you. |
| 03:01:34.94 | Becky Dow | Yeah, correct. We reduced the number to only four trees at this point in the plaza. |
| 03:01:39.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And at the base of those trees, there was something in the planting plan that had shrubs. Are those not there anymore? |
| 03:01:45.79 | Becky Dow | I believe that there's some sort of ground cover that goes in the wells around the trees. |
| 03:01:50.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Right. Four trees is too many in your view. |
| 03:01:55.39 | Kristina Feller | Look, if you don't like it, take it out. I'm just trying to put a trial balloon here to move this along. And if it's not going to move, then that's fine, too. I'm just trying to bring it to some sort of reasonable conclusion. |
| 03:02:05.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | All right, so recover parking, reduce height of the plant, remove the trees that in the Gableson Park, what was the third one? |
| 03:02:13.66 | Kristina Feller | The way finding on, yeah. |
| 03:02:16.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Um, |
| 03:02:17.93 | Kristina Feller | that would lead people towards gabrielson park to circulate and of course if you've got If someone can actually see the sidewalk there and where they can go, then maybe they'll be more. more willing to go that way. And I would also, maybe I'd add one more condition and, uh, Director McGowan, this is about the parks and rec containers. I would just ask that all of this parking, because we're trying to get parking back, actually be used for parking and not for any of that storage, which I know is considered temporary because you can actually move it, but it's pretty much functionally permanent. So we'd like to just keep the parking as parking and maybe find a better or more convenient location for that stuff in the future. So, I'll put that out there. You guys let me know. |
| 03:03:12.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | her thoughts on those conditions. |
| 03:03:14.89 | Nastassya Saad | Can we just expand on the angled parking Are we still saying that sidewalk remains? |
| 03:03:24.42 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. but we maximize, we got the engineers to maximize. And it might include angling at a different angle than you typically have, it'd be like greater angles. They can make, get their fire trucks. |
| 03:03:30.95 | Robert Busick | it. |
| 03:03:39.37 | Kristina Feller | I would leave it to the engineers. If that has to be sacrificed for the parking, the parking is more important than the sidewalk. So that's the priority. If they can keep both great if they can't, you know that that loss of 14 spaces total would be I that would need to be. the minimum goal of getting parking back. That's where I am at least. |
| 03:04:04.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, well, another way to do this, rather than taking out the sidewalk, is to say that the plan is acceptable, provided we don't lose more than 14 spaces. |
| 03:04:17.56 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 03:04:18.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | um, because that'll give the engineers to work with Director McGowan and Director Phipps to make it work. Maximum of 14 parking space loss. Your thoughts on the reduction or removing the trees? Commissioner's thoughts? |
| 03:04:41.49 | Nastassya Saad | I think they should be removed from the plaza. |
| 03:04:44.68 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, from the plaza or from, we're talking about the one-ton Gabelson part. |
| 03:04:49.05 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, if we either misspoke or responding to how that sidewalk is now, then yeah, we could remove those. But I would also further reduce the four in the plaza as well. |
| 03:05:01.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | the |
| 03:05:03.07 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, shade is needed. There are other alternatives where we don't have more trees. down in that area. |
| 03:05:12.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Becky, can you clarify for me? I believe that there are trees, there are benches where you show the line, which are going to, there's trees that are going to come out. There's two or three trees near the kiosk. And those come out because that whole line in greenery comes out. Is that correct? |
| 03:05:35.44 | Becky Dow | Yeah, that's correct. Well, there's a bunch of little little mini trees and planters, I don't think we're talking about, but there is a tree. Couple trees near the kiosk that are being removed. So those, those are, would still be removed, I suppose, in this case. |
| 03:05:51.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, honestly, if you want any shade there, there was like one bench or two benches of trees. And those trees would come out. So four trees, to me, doesn't seem excessive. They originally had eight or 10 or something. |
| 03:05:57.27 | Commissioner Fowler | We can have |
| 03:06:06.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:06:06.74 | Kristina Feller | I'm not going to get hung up on the trees on the plaza. Just remember you're, you're on the water. |
| 03:06:06.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm not kidding. |
| 03:06:12.23 | Kristina Feller | There are lots of birds and they are going to go sit in that tree where there's a bench underneath and you can imagine what will happen. So I'm not for them, but that's, you know, I'm not going to get hung up. I'm not going to get, you know. |
| 03:06:21.73 | Commissioner Fowler | Oh, that's... |
| 03:06:26.01 | Kristina Feller | Someone wants to get bombed, then that's where they should go. But again, I don't want to get hung up on that. I want to know if we have the framework of something that is Um, palatable enough. I also value very much. Commissioner Graff and and Vice Chair Junius I know that they're not enthusiastic about any of this, and I want to know if any of these thoughts might encourage them one way or the other from their existing views on this. |
| 03:06:58.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | or juniors |
| 03:07:00.44 | Andrew Junius | No, I do hope |
| 03:07:01.37 | Kristina Feller | I do. |
| 03:07:03.36 | Andrew Junius | you get three votes to do something because this needs to move on, but I'm not going to vote for that. So, um, yeah, just not going to do it. |
| 03:07:10.26 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:07:12.20 | Richard Graef | I don't... Thank you. OK. Okay. |
| 03:07:17.03 | Commissioner Fowler | to find my guys. Okay. |
| 03:07:21.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | At this point, I think this is a balancing act, and I don't think we're going to, obviously, we're not going to have any nanospoke either way. So I'm okay with a requirement that they don't lose more than 14 spaces, and we let the engineers figure out how to make the, we're going to assume that's angled spaces where we've been talking about, and the engineers will work that out. i'm okay with not putting back trees where the bio retention area is uh uh i think we should leave the four trees and the other thing alone at this point um and i do i concur that if if the city is taking up spaces in this parking lot for containers that we should find another location for those containers so you know how. How big, let me ask Director McGowan how big are these containers that we're talking about. |
| 03:08:21.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And what are they for? |
| 03:08:23.21 | Kevin McGowan | I think our parks department has them there for the Jazz Festival for moving in equipment and moving out equipment. So I'll have a talk with Brian to see if we can get that moved. |
| 03:08:29.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So, Okay. I mean, probably not a great location, but if we do close Tracy way and maybe we don't need all of the rental bike things that we have, maybe you can put a container there, but let's make it, let's have it painted, make it look nice. As there are examples throughout the city of nicely painted pieces of equipment that don't look like pieces of equipment. So with those, uh, I did entertain a motion with the two. We don't think we need a motion on the containers for the parks and rec. I think they'll get the message on the two conditions. One, removing, you know, reducing the maximum loss of parking in the parking lot to 14 through use of angled spaces on the north side of the parking lot and not putting in. |
| 03:09:27.03 | Kristina Feller | So... uh, |
| 03:09:27.57 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Everyone keeps saying that, but I looked at a North Arrow. |
| 03:09:30.83 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's get back to the motion. Let's get back to the motion. |
| 03:09:34.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, in the location we've all been talking about, but it really is north. I'm sorry. In that area, and secondly, that we will not put back trees in Gableson Park. We will just put back low-lying landscaping in Gableson Park. With those two conditions, |
| 03:09:56.31 | Kristina Feller | I've got we've got more. We want to add the wayfinding to the sidewalks to encourage circulation through Gabrielson Park to lot two or other locations. |
| 03:09:57.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Oh, we've got more? the sidewalk. |
| 03:10:07.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I'm fine with that. We'd like to... |
| 03:10:09.89 | Kristina Feller | We'd like to |
| 03:10:10.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let's clarify, because I won't know what that means. Are we asking them to just identify Gabelson Park with an arrow or say pedestrians or what are you thinking so that they know what? I'm not sure. |
| 03:10:23.92 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, like, you know, Gabrielson Park or Lot 2, you know, you can go through this way, you know, in the park. I think we want to... |
| 03:10:28.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | this way, you know- |
| 03:10:28.98 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:10:32.51 | Kristina Feller | you know, ask and encourage Director McGowan to talk to the Bridge District to see if we can disperse the ticketing machines. to other locations other than just the plaza to make it more convenient and more legible for visitors that are here and where they would be queuing. |
| 03:10:54.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 03:10:55.03 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And, and then I just, I think we should stress that El Portal becomes that much more important and a drop off there. It doesn't have to be officially. a curb cut and all that kind of stuff, but want to want to make sure that that circulation is, is important and that there's signage directing people there. um, Southerman fire had already looked at that when cultivar was being contemplated, so I'm confident that there's plenty of circulation there for Southerman fire. um, And I think that's probably it. |
| 03:11:38.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Um... Well, are you suggesting you're gonna make a motion |
| 03:11:42.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I'd like to make a motion to approve DPW 03.01.001, which is also APN number 065-073-03. I'd like to make the motion to approve that with the following conditions. One, to recover some of the lost parking to a maximum of 14 lost spaces in the lot. Second, I would like to condition this to remove the trees, at Gabrielson Park around the bioswale. We want all of them removed, whether they're existing or proposed new. and maintain low level planting in that area. And the third is to continue your wayfinding signage program to the sidewalk area outside of the Yacht Club, but towards Gabrielson Park to encourage pedestrians or those walking their bikes away from the ferry to use that area instead of the parking lot to reduce any issues regarding concerns of safety, et cetera, And then finally just encourage and make note that El Portal becomes that much more important and potentially a second drop off location. Karen Baxter, she's a member of the board, not that that needs to be part of the scope of the work, but that that that would be encouraged as well as a second access to the area as it relates to I just want one clarification before we take a vote. The comment that was made by HPC and the location of the fountain. I would just like to ask Director McGowan and Director Phipps if you could just please confirm the location of that fountain as it relates to HPC or whatever they commented on regarding that. |
| 03:13:46.25 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Commissioner. The current proposed location of the fountain is in line with the HPC recommendation of the Commission. |
| 03:13:52.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you for the clarification. So with that, that is my motion on the floor. Thank you. |
| 03:13:58.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Feller. Is there a second? |
| 03:14:03.61 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:14:03.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You can second, can't you? I can. I will second the motion. |
| 03:14:04.56 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:14:07.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | further discussion about the motion. Thank you. Commissioner, Commissioner Director Phipps, can you take a roll call vote? |
| 03:14:19.41 | Director Phipps | Yes, thank you, Chair. Commissioner Saad. |
| 03:14:21.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 03:14:21.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:14:21.87 | Director Phipps | Thank you. Commissioner Graff. |
| 03:14:23.46 | Richard Graef | No. |
| 03:14:24.13 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Junius. No. Chair Luxembourg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 03:14:25.18 | Kristina Feller | Yes. Yes. Thank you. Okay. |
| 03:14:32.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We're now move on to item 7b. |
| 03:14:40.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | 46 curry Avenue and Matthew |
| 03:14:45.75 | Director Phipps | Yes, we have planner Matthew Mandich joining us this evening. He'll be leading the item in connection with 46 Curry Avenue. Matthew, I believe that you have a presentation. |
| 03:14:58.57 | Rob | Yes, I do. |
| 03:14:58.67 | Director Phipps | Yes, I do. And the floor is yours. |
| 03:15:01.04 | Rob | All right. wait for that to get loaded up. Thank you very much. Hello, commissioners. On to something very different. Um, Alex Blanchez- mix it up a little bit, hopefully a little bit more straightforward as well, so the item before you today or this evening is a design review permit and encouragement agreement for entry improvements in the right away at 46 curry avenue next slide please. Here's the project location. You can see there on the left the parcel and kind of how far scooted up on that parcel the house is to the front parcel line. And there is a view of it from Google Earth as well. Next slide, please. The request from the applicant is for the approval of a design review permit and a recommendation of approval for an encroachment agreement to the City Council. This is for exterior entry improvements in the public right-of-way at 46 Curry Avenue. These include replacing an existing 300-square-foot parking deck, replace a wooden staircase with a new metal staircase and landing, replace an existing paved entry courtyard with a stone-paved courtyard, clad existing retaining walls in wood, and construct a new six foot tall privacy fence, both at the front of the property on the west elevation and on the north side with the next to the neighbor at 50 Curry. Finally, there's also the request to construct a new 32 square foot trash enclosure that will be included in that front fence. Next slide please. These are just a few images of the existing conditions at the property right now. As you can see on the left-hand side, the parking deck there with a car park there, and then some shrubs that currently occupy the place where the new privacy fence would be installed. Next slide, please. As you enter into the property, as you can see on the left, this is the current entry conditions that we have entering in from the driveway deck. And you can see what state we have going into the entry of the house, which is one level below street level. You can see the original landing deck there has failed. And there's now some plywood and a wooden ramp leading down to a wooden staircase that enters into the concrete paved entry area. if you look real hard you can see the front door of the residence kind of between some of those railings there um on the right hand side next slide please um here's the existing site plan as you'll see the property line cuts through a bit of the garage which means that the driveway and the entire staircase and part of the entry court fall outside of the property line and therefore in the public right of way. So that is why an encroachment agreement is being requested for this project. The driveway and the height of the fence are what are triggering the design review for this in this instance. Next slide, please. This is the proposed plan, as you see here. Again, pretty simple. I guess I have a pointer with me. If Director McGowan was using, that's great. So here's the existing driveway right there. The new staircase will go down here. Landing right there. Entry courtyard. And then you have the new trash enclosure, the new front fence and the side fence. This railing will also be replaced as well. Next slide, please. some elevations for you here. This will be the new eastern elevation or the street-facing elevation. So where those shrubs were in that image, we'll have a new wooden privacy fence here with the trash enclosure built in. And here is the garage and driveway deck and new railing there. As you can see, we have the elevations looking east and west from inside the courtyard. So this is the current situation right here with the failing landing and the stairs coming down in the courtyard. This is the proposed here, as you'll notice in particular, you'll have the courtyard. So this is the current situation right here with the failing landing and the stairs coming down in the courtyard. This is the proposed here, as you'll notice in particular, you'll have the fence here on the top, the new landing here and a new metal staircase. Next slide, please. Just a couple more elevations for you. These are the north and south elevations. This is the current situation looking to the neighbor to the north at 50 Curry. There's currently just a wire fence right there. That'll be replaced by a six-foot-tall wooden fence here, as well. Staircase leading down. And as you can see here, current situation garage, current stair set, and proposed situation with back of the trash enclosure enclosure entryway gateway here leading down to the stairs new landing into the entrance of the residence next slide um it does fit with other fencing systems in the neighborhood this one in particular is really just down the street and it's very similar it's about um four or five houses down at 34 Avenue, same block. The new entry proposal will be similar to this coming off the garage and the driveway here. Privacy fence, gate going downstairs. As you can see, 244 and 210 Glen, which are down at the bottom around the corner from the end of Curry. Similar systems here. A lot of the houses, especially on the downsloping side of these blocks, because the residences are one below street level and the garages at street level, a lot of them have come to kind of fencing solutions with the gate coming off the driveway here leading down, just a safer and more aesthetically pleasing dynamic. Next slide, please. So based on that, staff recommends approval of the design review permit and a recommendation of approval to the city council for the encroachment agreement. Staff finds that the proposed project is in conformance with the required design review findings in the municipal code. And also that the project is in conformance with the encroachment agreements findings listed in the municipal code as well and support a recommendation to city council for approval of the encroachment agreement. Approval of course is subject to the conditions of approval that are listed in the draft resolution. And with that, we'll take questions. |
| 03:20:41.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. One clarification is there was a condition added with regard that it should be built to plans, the standard condition, and that was reposted. So for anybody that did it over the weekend, that has been changed. So that is now in there. The other question is, we had any comments from any neighbors, butters, anybody on the phone? Thank you. |
| 03:21:01.35 | Rob | No, no comments and any public notices went out or anything like that. No emails, nothing. |
| 03:21:05.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Thank you very much. With this, we'll have questions of staff before we have the applicant present. |
| 03:21:06.65 | Rob | to the next question. |
| 03:21:11.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Questions? No. With that, the applicant can come and present. You have 15 minutes to a presentation, or you don't need to present, but if you want to present, you can. |
| 03:21:28.94 | Drew Freeman | I'm Drew Freeman, owner of that house. And I've been living there for 35 years. And, you know, it's just kind of taken a long time to get this done, you know, because I we haven't had a front because when the house was built, it needed to be put closer to the street because the neighbors didn't want it obscuring their view. And so we ended up with a big backyard and no front yard. And so this is going to give us a little area that we can walk across and you can actually see over the house and see the bay. And so it's, you know, really pretty. And then it just opens up the area outside our front door. Cause right now we just have those stairs coming down right in, you know, in front of the door. And so it's just going to give us a larger area in the front. And so I'm just real anxious to get it done. |
| 03:22:18.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. Questions from the applicant? Go. Okay, I'll close that and we'll open it up for public comment. Are there anybody on Zoom? There's nobody in the room at the moment that's raising their hands. |
| 03:22:36.59 | Director Phipps | The audience has thinned out significantly, Chair. No raised hands, no speaker cards, looking at the Zoom application, seeing none. |
| 03:22:42.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, we'll close the public hearing portion, and I'll look forward to a discussion or motion. |
| 03:22:49.01 | Andrew Junius | I'll start. Thank you, Chair. I go by your house a lot. I live over on Toyon, off of Toyon, so I drive up and down Curry a lot, and I've always wondered, |
| 03:22:49.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'll say. Thank you. I think it's a good start. |
| 03:23:00.25 | Andrew Junius | you know, when you were gonna be here. So I didn't realize it was so cramped and crowded there, but I certainly think this is a pretty much of a no brainer. I hope the other commissioners agree. So I'm just going to go ahead and make a motion to approve with the conditions as outlined by staff. |
| 03:23:16.99 | Unknown | Yes, second that. |
| 03:23:19.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Lots of seconds. |
| 03:23:20.37 | Unknown | There you go. Okay. |
| 03:23:20.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. and any further discussion. With that, Director Phipps, please take the role. |
| 03:23:28.39 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Chair, Commissioner Saad. Thank you. |
| 03:23:29.90 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:23:31.05 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Graff. Thank you. |
| 03:23:32.15 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:23:32.45 | Director Phipps | Thank you. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Junius. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. Yes. Motion passes. Quickly. Quickly. |
| 03:23:33.85 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:23:34.24 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:23:41.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:23:41.72 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. |
| 03:23:41.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:23:42.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:23:42.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:23:42.78 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:23:42.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:23:42.93 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:23:46.46 | Kristina Feller | Okay, motion to adjourn. Second. uh, |
| 03:23:49.50 | Director Phipps | All those in favor. Aye. |
| 03:23:50.32 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 03:23:51.25 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you. |
| 03:23:52.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you all. See you in the program. |
| 03:23:52.99 | Commissioner Fowler | Thank you, staff. Thank you. |
| 03:23:54.07 | Director Phipps | Thank you, commissioners. Have a great evening. |
Cass Green — Against: Expressed safety concerns about combining bike/pedestrian queues causing confusion with vehicles on El Portal, potential blocking of fire truck turning radius, and the ticket kiosk location. Worried about severe accidents. ▶ 📄
Michael Rex — Against: Argued the commission hijacked the process and the engineers' plan ignores regional transportation goals, fails to improve circulation, and serves minority private interest. Urged moving on to city council for proper review. ▶ 📄
Alice Merrill — Against: Opposed losing any parking spaces, stated locals need parking, and dismissed the idea of art/food trucks on the plaza. Expressed frustration that residents' interests were being overlooked. ▶ 📄
Don Flavin — Against: Questioned the parking loss increase from 12 to 34, said the sidewalk won't be used as intended, and warned the project will go way over budget. ▶ 📄
Sandra Bushmaker — Against: Highlighted a 34-space parking loss, urged against bioretention if below threshold, referenced city in the red financially, and defended the Yacht Club as an integrated community asset. ▶ 📄
Vicki Nichols — Neutral: As HPC chair, requested the fountain be moved near the kiosk and valued historical preservation. Supported bioretention as good practice and asked for further historical review of El Portal and surroundings. ▶ 📄
Teresa Ancona — Against: Represented the Chamber of Commerce opposing any loss of parking in Lot 1. Also noted the chamber maintains the kiosk exterior and interior. ▶ 📄