| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:01:47.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm going to call to order the meeting of the Sausalito Planning Commission for July 10, 2024. Director Phipps, can you please give an introduction and call the roll? |
| 00:01:59.94 | Director Phipps | Yes, thank you, Chair, and good evening to you, Vice Chair, Planning Commissioner, staff, and members of the public. This evening's meeting is being held at City of Sausalito Council Chamber at 420 Litho Street and is open to members of the public. This evening's meeting is also being held at 9 Milbank, London, England, SW1P3AN and is open to members of the public. Commissioner Feller, cheerio cheerio welcome members of the public may also access this meeting and provide public comment through zoom and with that i will call roll commissioner merlot let the record show commissioner merlot is not present |
| 00:02:24.46 | Michael Rex | Members of the public. |
| 00:02:35.03 | Director Phipps | Thank you. Commissioner Junius. Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:02:39.53 | Kristina Feller | Here. |
| 00:02:40.38 | Director Phipps | Vice Chair Saad. Thank you. |
| 00:02:41.57 | Kristina Feller | here. |
| 00:02:41.63 | Director Phipps | Here. Chair Luxenberg. Here. All right. We have achieved quorum. Back to you, Chair. |
| 00:02:46.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. I'll look for a motion. |
| 00:02:52.44 | Andrew Junius | moved. |
| 00:02:54.86 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:02:54.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:02:54.92 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:02:55.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Any discussion? Yes, Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:03:00.86 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair. I would like to pull item 6A from consent. In no way does this indicate my thoughts about this project at all, but from a procedural matter, I'd like to pull that onto our regular agenda for public hearing. |
| 00:03:21.57 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, that would be item 7B then. We'll make that item 7B. |
| 00:03:28.57 | Kristina Feller | Correct. Thank you. |
| 00:03:29.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You're welcome. Any other changes to the agenda? Can we have a director of hips? Can we take role? |
| 00:03:41.50 | Director Phipps | Just want to confirm that that motion was seconded. |
| 00:03:44.62 | Andrew Junius | I'll amend my motion to include Commissioner Fowler's addition. Thank you. |
| 00:03:48.89 | Director Phipps | Wonderful. Thank you, Commissioner Junius. And with that, I will call roll. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Saad. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:03:54.90 | Kristina Feller | Yes. you |
| 00:03:56.57 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 00:03:56.72 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:03:59.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, next item on the agenda planning commission minutes for the last meeting on June 12. Look for a motion to approve. |
| 00:04:13.76 | Kristina Feller | So moved. Second. |
| 00:04:15.82 | Director Phipps | Thank you. Sorry, Chair, just want to back it up. I believe item three is public comment on items not on the agenda. We may have gone one step further. |
| 00:04:22.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, we did skip over that item. So we will go back to item three. Thank you, Director Phipps. At this time, we're going to have public comments for items that are not on the agenda. Director Phipps, if you can give instructions, please. |
| 00:04:34.86 | Director Phipps | Yeah, I'll just say video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment, please submit a speaker card to me and or my colleagues to my right, Matthew Mandich and Maria Hernandez. If you'd like to make a comment in the Zoom application, please raise your hand 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 their time has elapsed. Thank you. And Chair, I have not yet received any speaker cards, but I will allow a grace period if folks in the chamber would like to provide one, seeing no interest. Looking to the Zoom application. And I am seeing no hands raised. So back to you, chair. |
| 00:05:21.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Director Phipps. We'll go now to the Planning Commission minutes that we were talking about before. Can we have a new motion just because we'll do it in proper order. So moved. |
| 00:05:34.19 | Lisa | I'll see you next time. |
| 00:05:34.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Any discussion on those minutes? Director Phipps, please take a roll. |
| 00:05:40.16 | Director Phipps | Missioner Genius. Thank you. |
| 00:05:41.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:05:41.92 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:05:43.44 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:05:44.62 | Director Phipps | Vice Chair Assad? Yes. Chair Luxenberg? Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:05:45.63 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:05:50.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, item five is communications. At this time, is there any update from CDD, Director Fitz? |
| 00:05:59.81 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Chair. I'd just like to inform the Commission that we have a new member of legal counsel from BBK joining us this evening. The gentleman's name is Matt Cody. Matt, welcome to Sausalito Planning Commission. We're happy to have you here. And I just wanted to give you the floor to provide a brief introduction, if you so please. And just wanted to make sure Commissioners are aware. Thank you. That'll do it for me. Matt, the floor is yours if you like. |
| 00:06:29.00 | Matt Cody | Hi there, and thank you, Director Phipps. My name is Matt Cody. I'm of counsel with Best, Best, and Krieger. Glad to be here with you all this evening. I am actually physically located in Portland, Oregon. I spent most of my time practicing in the Bay Area, and I was just down there in Sausalito for my brother's wedding. so it's good to be back and in spirit at least in Sausalito. So nice to meet you all. |
| 00:07:01.38 | Director Phipps | Very good, Matt. Thank you for the introduction. Again, happy to have you. |
| 00:07:04.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Mr. Cody. At this point, are there any updates from any of the commissioners on any other matters? Seeing none, let's move on to declarations for... |
| 00:07:14.51 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:07:17.19 | Kristina Feller | I'm sorry. |
| 00:07:17.23 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:07:17.33 | Kristina Feller | All right. |
| 00:07:17.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I missed you raising your hand. Please go on. |
| 00:07:24.64 | Kristina Feller | That's okay. And I appreciate it very much chair. I don't really have, |
| 00:07:26.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I appreciate it very much, Chair. |
| 00:07:27.40 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:07:29.31 | Kristina Feller | I don't really have a readout or update. I would just like to ask that before our summer break in August, that Director Phipps maybe provide an update to the commission about the excellent work that enforcement has been doing And we had talked about maybe getting those updates quarterly, but I think it's really important that the community understand the impact that CDD has made and the great work that Director Phipps and his team have done to actually get enforcement under control. So it's just a request on my part. But thank you, Chair. |
| 00:08:06.20 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. The director of Oaks acknowledged that. Thank you. uh with that we'll move on to um uh consent calendar item has been removed and moved on to the public hearing uh portion of our agenda uh so at this point we'll be looking for any ex parte communications uh commissioner feller |
| 00:08:28.48 | Kristina Feller | None to declare. |
| 00:08:30.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Juniors. None to declare. Vice Chair, sub. |
| 00:08:34.41 | Nastassya Saad | None to declare, but just a note that I'm within a thousand feet of 304 Caledonia Street, but I do not foresee any conflicts, so I will participate in the hearing. |
| 00:08:44.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Vice Chair Saad. I also have no expert communications. With that, we'll move on to item seven a. |
| 00:08:57.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Item 7A is 304 Caledonia Street. The applicant, Nina Manzo, on behalf of owners Ian and Peter Hebert and Paige McCargo, is requesting a conditional use permit to change the land use from a nursery school with ancillary off-the-street parking to a restaurant use and a minor use permit for the on-site sale and consumption of beer and wine at 304 Caledonia Street. Mr. Manage, welcome. Again, congratulations on your promotion, the senior planner, and you'll present this evening. Thank you. |
| 00:09:33.44 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you, Chair. All right, yes, as already mentioned, this is for a conditional use permit and a minor use permit for 304 Caledonia Street. Next slide, please. Just to get everyone familiar with the location here, the property right here between Caledonia and Bridgeway, Litho right here, so we're very close to City Hall in our commercial residential zoning district. This is a mixed residential and commercial land use zone, and then here again is the property here on Google Earth and you can see the large backyard area right there. Next slide please. |
| 00:10:06.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Before we go on, I just want to note that Commissioner Marlott has joined the panel this evening. |
| 00:10:12.44 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Merlot I know you just joined us we're just introducing 304 Caledonia Street I'm wondering if you have any expert take communications associated with the item |
| 00:10:21.05 | David Marlatt | I do not, thank you, and I apologize for it. |
| 00:10:23.66 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:10:24.17 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:10:24.20 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:10:24.24 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:10:25.65 | Matthew Mandich | All right. Thank you. So, yeah, project summary here. Request for a conditional use permit to change the land use from a nursery school to a restaurant use. A CUP was granted to the nursery school by the Planning Commission in 1974 for that use. And pursuant to our code, Table 1024-1, a conditional use permit is required for a restaurant use in the commercial residential zone a minor use permit is also being requested tonight typically this would go through the zoning administrator but because it is coupled with a conditional use permit has been elevated to the planning commission this permit is for the on-site sale and consumption of beer and wine at a restaurant in the commercial residential zone as required by our code next slide please So just a little bit of background on the site. As you can see here, 304 Caledonia was constructed as a single family home in 1940. In 1975, it was converted to a nursery school, the Sparrow Creek Montessori School. And the CUP, as mentioned, was issued for this use by the Planning Commission at that time. The Sunrise Window, which is a very unique and kind of flagship part of building here. It was also built in 1975 when the nursery school came into use. And the current owners who are with us tonight, Paige and Ian, purchased this building in 2022. I have attached to the staff report their vision for this property as a neighborhood garden, restaurant, and coffee kiosk, which hopefully some of the commissioners were able to read as well. I'm not going to go into that full statement right now, but they do have quite a grand vision for the space that we will touch on this evening. Next slide, please. Just to familiarize everyone. So with the site plan, here's the survey right here. 6,000 square foot, roughly lot between Caledonia and bridgeway mostly flat um currently developed with uh around 1 125 square foot of building coverage this includes the main building right here which was the house and later the nursery school a small garage single car right here and a small shed in the rear this is kind of a concept design that was drawn up by Michael Rex Architects. This design is not under the Planning Commission's purview tonight. We're here to change the use. This is not a design review project or any kind of development project. We're just changing the use from nursery school to restaurant. However, they have provided a nice concept design here of what this space could look like once the tenant is established. You can see here the main building, several tables, curved bar, the coffee kiosk in this area right here, some outdoor seating, which would require an additional minor use permit, which we'll touch on later, and some ADA accessible bathrooms to be installed in the rear. Next slide, please. So looking at the conditional use permit as mentioned, this was is required for a restaurant use in the commercial commercial residential zoning district. The main building which we were just looking at would provide lunch and dinner and be open from 11am to 9pm. It also would feature that large outdoor garden space to the rear of the building. There will be eventual seating in that area as mentioned, a minor use permit will be required for. exterior outdoor seating on private property however the applicants are waiting for a tenant to apply for that and figure out what kind of seating needs they would need for that outdoor area so right now we're just looking at the conditional use permit to change the use and the minor use permit for the sale of beer and wine the garage would serve as a coffee kiosk for mostly breakfast brunch lunch 7 a.m to 3 p.m The driveway that's currently there would be reconfigured and turned into a more welcoming patio space with plantings and pavers and perhaps a bike rack too to accommodate some of the bikers that we get through Sausalito. The restaurant would be open seven days a week. The max occupancy for the site is 50 people for the California Building Code. And of course, the city's noise ordinance would be adhered to at all times. And that can be read through in our municipal code in chapter 10 or 12. Excuse me. Next slide. The minor use permit is required for the sale of beer and wine pursuant to the municipal code. I've just included that table here for the requirements for alcohol use. As you can see, the district commercial residential here and MUP for beer and wine only, no hard alcohol. Service for the alcohol sales would be from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. The idea right now, concept is to have two rotating beers on draft, wine by the glass and cans and bottles of beer and cider. On-site consumption will be for both indoor and outdoor use. However, there will be no outdoor service. I just want to touch on this a little bit. One of the conditions of approval for the minor use permit would be that alcohol is served indoors. I'm going to amend that after this hearing to be both for indoor and outdoor. However, there will be no service out there. There'll be no one would be able to sit at a table and order alcohol outside. They would have to order it inside and then they could take it out to the back garden. Once a minor use permit is approved for outdoor seating, then of course they would be able to order outside. And as mentioned right here, that additional minor use permit is required for that when an attendant is established and their outdoor seating needs are described. Next slide, please. So zoning consistency, there are no proposed changes to the structure at this time. It's only a concept design. This is really just about changing the use to attract tenants, restaurant use. The existing structures on site comply with our zoning ordinance as far as lot size, floor area ratio, building coverage, setbacks, height, et cetera. So nothing going on there. There's no nonconformities with the existing site parking requirements are kind of the main issue here however those will be waived due to ab 2097 which came into effect a couple years ago because this project is within a half mile of the ferry landing we can see on a map right here i'm seeing now that that line that our consultant gave us here it's not super visible but they've calculated that it is actually 0.498 miles or 2630 feet from the ferry landing to the site. And again, this was conferred by our third party consultant Robert L. Harrison out of Tiburon. He's done a lot of work with the city over the years. We've used him multiple times and his interpretation was agreed upon by city staff and the director. And I'm happy to discuss this more in questions if we want to talk about it. Next slide, please. |
| 00:16:41.19 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:16:41.24 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:16:48.18 | Matthew Mandich | So just a little bit on the neighborhood context, excuse me. As you can see in here, very mixed use zone, a lot of different things going on in several restaurants, retail uses, and some residences and apartments as well. So definitely this block in particular, very much a vision of what the commercial residential zone is. There are several restaurants located within 500 feet of the proposed use, which include a Japanese restaurant, caviar restaurant, Greek deli, grocery store grab-and-go, and a breakfast cafe. These are all restaurant uses located within the area, so it would certainly fit into that repertoire. Also in the near vicinity are several public parks, including Dunphy Park and Robin Sweeney, public institutions such as City Hall and the Public Library, as well as three public parking lots one on Locust Street one at City Hall and one at Duffy Park. There's also numerous transport options, including several breath lines that run across along bridgeway, as well as the aforementioned ferry landing next slide please. Just a snapshot here of some of the neighborhood outreach that's been done. A lot of letters of support. I attached a packet to the staff report that included the extensive neighborhood outreach that the applicants have engaged in. So again, this is just a snippet of that. Received a lot of support from neighbors and neighbors, the neighborhood, business owners, tenants, residents in the area. A lot of people very excited about this project and its potential. We also received several public comments. Afterwards, we had actually a total of six. Five of those were very supportive of the project. A sixth one came in today that was due to technical difficulties with the Granicus website. We were not able to load in time. That one was indeed in opposition, and I believe the the public commenter is here tonight in the room so you will hear from them but overwhelming amount of support for this project overall. Next slide please. So that brings us to our final recommendation. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve application 2024-00106 for 304 Caledonia Street and adopt the attached draft resolution approving the conditional use permit and the minor use permit. Staff finds that the proposed findings from the municipal code have the project is in conformance with those, both for the conditional use permit findings and the minor use permit findings. And of course, all approvals are subject to conditional approval listed in the draft resolution or any additional conditions that the commission wishes to apply this evening. Thank you very much and happy to open the floor to questions. |
| 00:19:16.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Mr. Manage. At this point, we'll look for questions from the dais. Commissioner Junior. |
| 00:19:25.62 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Matthew. Good presentation. Kind of a future question. So the minor use permit is to control for the zoning for the future alcohol, the anticipated future alcohol use. Correct. Yes. And then the final step is more of a state step with ABC. Do you know if that comes to the planning commission or does that go to the city? It does not. |
| 00:19:47.26 | Matthew Mandich | Does not go to planning commission. Once they, once they obtained the required use permits for the alcohol sales, whether that be a CUP as it is for the CC or an MUP for the CR, then they're free to go ahead and apply for that ABC license. And there's no more further process. |
| 00:20:00.03 | Andrew Junius | here locally for the license transfer to that location? Great. Thank you for clarifying. |
| 00:20:06.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Junius. Commissioner Feller, any questions for Mr. Nancy? |
| 00:20:12.40 | Kristina Feller | Yes, thank you, Chair. And thank you, Matthew. And again, congratulations on your promotion. I'd like to dive a little bit more into the map to the Oh. and the issues of the parking. It was a little bit hard to read the map, but it appeared that the line only went to a parking lot, which is city owned and not to the actual ferry. So can we have a look at that? |
| 00:20:46.06 | Matthew Mandich | Absolutely. Can we go back to that slide, please? Thank you. THERE IT IS. |
| 00:20:49.52 | Kristina Feller | And maybe zoom in a little bit if- Yeah, if we can. |
| 00:20:50.28 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah. Yeah, if we can. I know that's, I'm seeing it now on PowerPoint. It looks a little bit worse than it did on my computer. Apologies. But yes, that's accurate. Great eye. So we are using a parcel to parcel map here. And this is something that we're going to be planning on using every time AB 2097 is invoked. So going parcel to parcel. There's a lot of cities in California that are just using a 0.5 radius. If that were the case, this building would fall within that 0.5 radius. However, this is actual walking path from the parcel to parcel here. So twists and turns a little bit that move along there. So that's how that calculation was made. And this is something that we're supportive of and spoken to the director about this as well. It gives us a little bit of leeway to help with parking for new businesses coming in in Caledonia and the central commercial zone. It's just something we want to promote and we don't want parking to be an encumbrance to new business activation in the city. We're taking a parcel to parcel approach on that. |
| 00:22:04.19 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Mr. Feller, we lost you there for a second. Are you back on? |
| 00:22:09.39 | Kristina Feller | Yes, I am here. |
| 00:22:10.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Other questions of Mr. Mayor? |
| 00:22:14.47 | Kristina Feller | . Just a point on that is that this is a little bit inconsistent with how we've measured this before. or the assumptions we've made before. And, And... you know, I really have no issues with this project and excited about it, but you know, in the spirit of being fair and transparent to every applicant in front of us and not have different rules for different applicants. this is just inconsistent. So that's why I've asked for a further clarification about it. |
| 00:22:45.27 | Matthew Mandich | to do. Do you mention any other projects that we've invoked AB 2097 on that used a different metric? |
| 00:22:51.44 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, basically, I'd have to look back to look, but we also had a look at this when we were doing our housing elements and what the impacts would be to parking. And so the way that we were measuring anything that we were looking at was specifically to the actual very, a peer. or that area right on between the land and what would be over the water that is controlled by the ferry companies. which is not city owned property. That's how we've measured it before. We've measured it that way when we're talking about expansions to people's residential units, ADUs, et cetera, et cetera. So, I'm only interested in being fair and consistent with everybody. I have no issue with this project, but this is different than what we've used before. |
| 00:23:48.87 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Commissioner. If I may, I think the decision by staff to use this method moving forward is one that we have arrived at after some in-depth discussion with a number of our planning staffers as well as legal counsel. one of the reasons we've chosen this method is a risk management strategy as the city is wishing to be more sensitive to risk management moving forward. One of the issues that I believe you can run into in the case that you call out the ferry landing as far as, you know, the physical piece of that as the point at which you begin to measure that half miles is, where does actually start and where does that actually end. That becomes a little bit more confusing when we take into account the ferry landing project and the improvements associated with the ferry landing project, which span throughout the entirety of that parcel. So with those things in mind, staff has decided to take on, I think, an approach that we think is very objective and consistent. And we will be using this approach uniformly across all future projects. This is also complementing other parts of our code, as you mentioned, related to ADUs and the housing element, which do not use a radius. They do use distance from parcel. So we thought it was consistent, something that we can hang our hat on, as well as informed by some recent return to sensitivity to risk management. Thank you. |
| 00:25:30.63 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Additional questions, Commissioner Fowler? |
| 00:25:33.66 | Kristina Feller | No, thank you. I'll take up the rest of it when we have deliberation. Thank you. |
| 00:25:38.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fallow. Commissioner Marlon. No questions. Thank you. Vice Chair Saad, any questions? |
| 00:25:45.06 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:25:45.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No questions, thank you. Okay, I have a couple questions. |
| 00:25:50.07 | Andrew Junius | Just to follow up to just to finish on the issue that chair felt or Commissioner fellow raised it. Is this the is this the first time we might have used AB 2097. Do you know Matthew. |
| 00:25:59.52 | Matthew Mandich | I'm going to go. |
| 00:25:59.72 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:25:59.74 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:25:59.79 | Andrew Junius | I'm sorry. |
| 00:25:59.97 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:26:00.02 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:26:00.06 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:26:00.11 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 00:26:00.16 | Matthew Mandich | I believe. |
| 00:26:00.50 | Andrew Junius | so |
| 00:26:01.00 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:26:01.04 | Andrew Junius | the first time that I've used it in the Planning Commission. And as far as you know, I mean, it's probably a pretty easy answer. There's no real definition in AB 2097. It just says the rate. |
| 00:26:10.70 | Matthew Mandich | It says from a major transit stop, which the ferry landing itself is a major transit stop, but there is no definition in there as far as what point within. |
| 00:26:14.60 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 00:26:19.72 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:26:19.73 | Matthew Mandich | you |
| 00:26:19.80 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. So, so it's clearly within the discretion of the staff to make this kind of call. |
| 00:26:24.80 | Director Phipps | And I'll just ask the question, did we do this for Taste of Rome? I think that was 2097, no? Yes. It was well within. |
| 00:26:30.87 | Matthew Mandich | Yes. It was well within. They were well within the. Very good. |
| 00:26:33.12 | Director Phipps | Period. |
| 00:26:33.98 | Andrew Junius | you're going to be able to get a Thank you. |
| 00:26:36.66 | Matthew Mandich | Okay. |
| 00:26:37.03 | Andrew Junius | Thank you for that. you Great. Thank you very much. And thank you, chair, for that for that courtesy. |
| 00:26:40.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I have a couple questions, but a follow-on to that question. I just want to note for the record, there are various laws that use the ferry terminal, and some of which say walking distance, and some of which say you could use the approach. So you need to be careful that I think some of the housing ones, you have to literally be able to walk. So some of the streets here, you can't literally get there, even though it was within a half a mile. So we just need to be cognizant. |
| 00:27:09.53 | Matthew Mandich | Yes, thank you. Thank you. And we have we have actually used the walking path here. This is not a radius. So I know it's hard to see, but there is a line here that meanders through and then makes the turn there. So it's not just, you know, a radius going spanning out. And yes, for the ADUs, for example, certain height limits and things like that are affected by, you know, their vicinity to the major transit stop. and obviously if you live on a hill and there's no direct path and you have to go around that's measured walking distance even if on a radius it was 0.5 it might be 0.7 walking therefore you're going to be outside And obviously, if you live on a hill and there's no direct path and you have to go around, that's the measured walking distance. Even if on a radius, it was 0.5, it might be 0.7 walking. Therefore, you're going to be outside. So we're still using walking path. Thank you. |
| 00:27:42.03 | Nastassya Saad | program. |
| 00:27:42.23 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah. |
| 00:27:42.88 | Nastassya Saad | you |
| 00:27:42.93 | Matthew Mandich | of the |
| 00:27:42.98 | Nastassya Saad | May I ask one more follow-up question? It's a good discussion. |
| 00:27:43.30 | Matthew Mandich | I'm not. Thank you. |
| 00:27:45.29 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:27:45.31 | Matthew Mandich | for a while. |
| 00:27:45.42 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:27:46.20 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. So just in staff's discussion then, and appreciate Director Fitz shedding some light on what you guys discussed, based on current understanding of Caledonia, we do have a lot of commercial residential, you've got, of course, tenants and business owners and other restaurants. Does staff then not have concern around the current parking or lack thereof of Caledonia specifically, especially with the closure towards the end of the street at Johnson. |
| 00:28:21.05 | Nastassya Saad | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:28:21.99 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, so I mean, I did mention in the report and presentation, there are several public parking lots in close vicinity to that location in Caledonia in general. I believe, you know, there's a small one on Locust, there's all the street parking on Bridgeway, it's a relatively large lot at Dunphy, relatively large lot at City Hall, and then of course, public transport. So I don't think that the parking issue is one that is too burdensome for Caledonia. I, you know, go down to Caledonia frequently. I don't have issues finding parking down there when I'm there personally. I know that may be depending on the time of day or what day and all that. But I've generally found that I can find parking within a block or two of where I want to go on Caledonia without any issues. But that's just a personal aside. But yeah, I mean, I think there's a lot of public parking in the area if things get maxed out and there's a lot of people can always turn to those lots. |
| 00:29:14.04 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:29:15.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So I do have two questions. The first is, is this intended, and this might be better for the applicant, but is this intended to be three different operations or two operations or one operations? In other words, there's the restaurant, there's the coffee kiosk, and there's the outdoor restaurant. Are we looking at one vendor for all three or two or three? |
| 00:29:40.38 | Matthew Mandich | Well, I'll let you defer that one to the applicant when the time comes in, but it sounds like we're looking at potentially two separate vendors, one for the coffee kiosk and one for the main restaurant. But great question to get further clarification on from them. |
| 00:29:53.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And then the second is sort of a light. So they're just confirming use at this time. Normally we would get the use and we would get the alcohol and we would get a design review and we would get signage. So there will be in the future a design review permit and a signage permit and an outdoor patio outdoor dining permit. And those will be coming back to us maybe in one piece, maybe in two if there's two tenants. Is that the understanding? |
| 00:30:22.30 | Matthew Mandich | Potentially. It depends, you know, what kind of, you know, tenant improvements are made on the property, you know, whether they trigger design review or not. So I, you know, at this time, I couldn't really say if a design review project will be coming back under your purview for this project. I think it depends on what kind of restaurant tenant they lock in, what they want to do with that space. I believe the concepts design provided by Micro X Architects would not trigger a design review based on what I was seeing with them just as far as square footage goes and things like that under the threshold. Those are just concept designs. We don't know what If you know if a new tenant wanted to add a space or do some changes that you know would require a design review and pull one of those triggers then obviously it would come back in front of the Commission. The minor use permit for outdoor seating is technically under the authority of the zoning administrator so would only come up to the planning Commission level if it were attached to other permits that required planning Commission approval. So yeah, that's |
| 00:31:19.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, that's the issue I'm having. I'm struggling with because if we were get this in the normal fashion, I would like these folks to be able to move ahead and get their tenants and whatever. But by doing it this way, I want to make sure we could do this by conditioning it. But I want to make sure that it comes back to us both for the outdoor dining. And if my understanding is most of the CR district requires design review. So I guess if they do nothing to the building whatsoever then maybe not but generally it's more more likely than not that it's going to require design review and we can do that through a condition but uh the benefit of doing this is the applicant can go out and get their tenants and and know that the use has been accepted but it would be i don't think we want to set a precedent that you come in for this and then you don't have to come back for the design itself uh you know if design review is required so anyway so that's my questions at this time any other questions from commissioners uh so at this point uh mr manage if you you could have the applicant come up, whoever is presenting on behalf of the owners or the owners presenting. Thank you very much. Please come to the... |
| 00:31:48.91 | Michael Rex | It's more. |
| 00:32:32.62 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. |
| 00:32:37.24 | Nastassya Saad | you |
| 00:32:37.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You have 15 minutes to do a presentation. We're going to, after you do a presentation, you'll have questions from the dais here, and then we will open it up for public comment. And if you want to save some of your time to respond to any public comment, you may want to do that. |
| 00:32:37.57 | Matthew Mandich | I'm not sure. |
| 00:32:37.97 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:32:37.99 | Matthew Mandich | you're just going to be |
| 00:32:38.04 | Nastassya Saad | I'm out. |
| 00:32:38.22 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:32:38.24 | Nastassya Saad | you. |
| 00:32:52.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Welcome. Happy to have you here this evening. |
| 00:32:54.83 | Paige | Thank you. We're happy to be here. Um, I'm Paige. This is my husband Ian and together we own, 304 Caledonia. We purchased this property two years ago with the vision of creating a backyard oasis and a community hub. We absolutely adore the existing building and the special place that it holds in this community's heart. And we want to open it up for the public to be able to use. Um, we aim to build a beautiful, cozy, dynamic garden in the backyard. a space where people can bring their children with friends, neighbors, share a meal. or maybe just grab a cup of coffee and enjoy the garden for five minutes on the way to work. I THINK I'M GOING TO BE I'm the owner of a local landscape design and build business called Edgelands Design. And we've worked in the Bay Area for the last eight years. We work all over Marin and San Francisco. We specialize in abundant, low water and native landscapes. And I'm really looking forward to tending this space into something beautiful. And Ian is looking forward to running the coffee shop himself, thinking of two different businesses there and engaging with the public on a daily basis. We think the combination of a restaurant and cafe is ideal because it allows the locals to utilize the garden morning through evening and hopefully return week after week. We want the garden... We're so excited to finally be sharing this with you all. It's been a long time coming and really hopeful for the potential to make something cool in this long, underutilized space. And quickly to the parking, we are trying to create the space for the people who live in Sausalito. And so we hope that most people will be biking and walking there and we'll create space for bikes. We're going to give the rest of our time to Michael Rex. |
| 00:34:52.97 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:34:58.34 | Michael Rex | Hello, I'm local architect Michael Racks representing Paige and Ian. And I first want to thank Matthew for all his hard work and Kristen Tishe. She helped in the beginning in our planning effort. And We're actually also excited about seeing this building, which has sat empty for four years. to have it come alive. I think we got a lot of empty properties in town and We're seeking the city's support and we've got a lot of support, not only from the city, but for residents. in We bifurcated this process because we can't lease the space to a user without knowing we can lease it for the use we'd like to lease it for. And we didn't want to spend a tremendous amount of funds developing a full design review application. if we didn't know that the basic use is acceptable. So that's why we did it, not to skirt any kind of hearing process or public input. And in fact, we reached out to the public as best we could talking to every adjacent neighbor. and in the whole neighborhood. And in your packet, there's eight letters of support. Actually, we also passed around forms asking for them to sign consent forms. And there's... 10 of those farms in your package. It's the first time we heard tonight that there's any objection. And I haven't seen that objection. I don't know what that's about. The. Uh, to respond to some of the questions that came up. I, Do we come back to you to have this hurt again or not? I would be disappointed and very surprised you would make that a condition that would be in conflict with your zoning ordinance. Your zoning ordinance is very clear when projects must be brought to the Planning Commission. And if the improvements and the expansion is below a certain threshold, there's nothing in the code that requires to come back. And I would expect you to honor your own zoning ordinance. Okay. Okay. Just to be frank. In terms of parking, Paige mentioned this is not a visitor destination. It's never been intended for that. As she explained, And so we do expect its central location to be within walking and bike distance for many. As Matthew pointed out, there is parking lots across from Bridgeway. And if we did park on site, even for the small operation, there would be no garden. And that would be a serious loss, not only to the property owner, but to all the people who would enjoy that space. So there's tradeoffs. Once again, though, we did our due diligence. We brought in a traffic engineer. Those that diagram was not ours. That was by a traffic engineer. And, um, We made it very clear. First, we talked about a 50 radius. Because we're aware that because I work in other communities that that's almost a standard. But we thought in this case, because I agree with Chair Luxembourg, that some of the laws say walking distance. So when we went to the traffic engineer, we said, we want you to walk it. And we want you to use crosswalks. There's no jaywalks, nothing. And so I don't know how more careful we could do it than we have. And to get staff support and legal counsel support on this should mean something. Okay. Um, for everyone. The last one, and I got a few more minutes here. Um, the, um, The other thing on parking is this is lunch and dinner. So during lunch, there are a lot of people that work on Caledonia that could walk to lunch. When it's dinner, a lot of businesses are closed and some of those parking spaces be freed up. So you almost have to imagine it kind of joint use. In terms of use, we're only talking two uses. There's a restaurant, which is really a cafe, and the adjunct to that is the garden. The coffee kiosk or a hut or whatever you want to call it is converting this garage to a coffee station. And we envision it could be two different tenants. We never once discussed three, okay? And now I heard, Ian, you might be doing the coffee station. So there may be only one tenant. But we've talked to a lot of tenants. In fact, the layout in the kitchen has gotten input from some of the tenants. We went to the health department and a kitchen designer. So we're pretty confident that what we have can work. But until we have a tenant, they'll have their own needs and wishes. And we want to be nimble. And we don't want, like I said, get too far into planning and then have to go backwards once we have a tenant to redesign. Um, Let me see if I have anything else. So I just want to sum up that we've been at this two years. We worked very closely with staff. Staff supports it. There's a. We got a lot of community support. It meets all the zoning standards, according to staff, and all the findings can be made that you need to make for the conditional and minor use permits. That's all in your staff report, carefully analyzed by your staff. We... Paige and Ian and I have looked at the proposed conditions of approval. We find all of them acceptable. We looked at the resolution of approval and we find that also Acceptable. So for all these good reasons, so we can move on. and chase down a tenant and get into working drawings, get a building permit and get under construction. All this is going to take more time. take a whole nother year We ask that you approve this project as submitted tonight. I'm here for any questions. |
| 00:41:03.11 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Mr. Rex. I'll open up the questions before I give it on the other commissioners. Just a follow on. When did you submit this to staff? Because you talked about two years, but they've had this on a very good time. |
| 00:41:15.81 | Michael Rex | Thank you. We've been at two years. Staff hasn't had it two years. |
| 00:41:18.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I don't want to give the impression that you just recently submitted this to the city, right? |
| 00:41:24.89 | Michael Rex | I'm going to ask Nina Manzo, who's on my team. In fact, she gets a lot of credit for doing all the legwork on this. Nina, when did we submit? |
| 00:41:36.40 | Kristina Feller | The two years he's talked about is our entire time |
| 00:41:40.15 | Michael Rex | Yeah, I didn't mean to imply it's been in the city for two years. Sorry. Thanks for that clarification. make 20. So I hadn't been |
| 00:41:46.68 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think tiny. It hasn't been long here. I think the staff expeditiously has processed this, and I want that to be on the record. Thanks for pointing that out. They deserve that praise. |
| 00:41:54.41 | Michael Rex | Thanks for pointing that out. |
| 00:41:57.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. With that, before I have other questions, I'll turn it over to other commissioners. Commissioner Marlon, any questions of the applicant? |
| 00:42:04.03 | David Marlatt | No, not at this time. I may have a follow-up question later. |
| 00:42:07.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, not at this time. |
| 00:42:08.85 | David Marlatt | Okay. |
| 00:42:09.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner, Commissioner Feller |
| 00:42:11.91 | Kristina Feller | No, thank you, Chair. |
| 00:42:13.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Junior. Vice Chair of Sade. No. My only question I have a question for Paige if you could come up |
| 00:42:21.24 | Nastassya Saad | And so, |
| 00:42:27.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So you've been wanting to get this so you can go out and get tenants. Are you talking to tenants so that this could actually happen expeditiously or you're not quite other than your husband who will run the coffee? So that's one of the one of the uses is the other use. Do you have people you've been talking to? |
| 00:42:46.89 | Paige | You know, initially we spent a lot of time reaching out to people locally and trying to talk to different tenants. Um, but the process was taking so long that it didn't feel like we could continue down that path until we had a use. Um, and so we're really excited to, have a use in hand so that we can actually talk with, you know, holding a tenant on the line for two years was, was not a possibility. So we talked for a while with a friend in San Francisco who opened restaurants such as Pearl and worked at Pete set a two one, one, which are two of my favorite restaurants in the city. She was really engaged a year ago. Um, but you know, we had a lot of research to do around parking and things like that, and it just took too long. So once we have use, um, we're. you know, we're committed to this space and we are going to be spending a lot of time there and Ian will be sharing the property with them. So we want a tenant that really embodies our view of the space and we think will be a long term good fit for the community and for our vision. |
| 00:43:48.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you so much. |
| 00:43:51.05 | Nastassya Saad | May I ask a follow? May you, can you stay there just for a second? with that, um, Would you be open then to opening the coffee stand prior to securing a tenant just in the interest of- Yes, 100%. |
| 00:44:05.64 | Paige | Yes. In the interest of- Yes, 100%. Thank you. I think both for budget considerations, again, this has taken longer and more money than we had hoped. So most likely we will start with the coffee because we really want to start utilizing that backyard space. Thank you. |
| 00:44:21.32 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:44:23.36 | David Marlatt | Good question. Thank you. I'm just curious, are there other types of tenants, other uses that you continue to pursue that do not require the |
| 00:44:32.15 | Paige | You know, we thought long and hard about that, but I think in order to cover the costs for the property and to enable the most use throughout the day and people to be able to really enjoy the garden, we've decided that restaurant is the best use case to achieve all those goals. So that's what we're looking for. |
| 00:44:32.47 | David Marlatt | I thought, |
| 00:44:49.38 | David Marlatt | So you're exclusively focused. |
| 00:44:51.49 | Paige | We want there to be a food and beverage, able to get food and beverage there. You know, we would love to incorporate other elements like, um, some sort of acoustic music or like art show, you know, having art shows coming through or other ways that support people that are in the community locally, but we do want to serve food, um, on site. |
| 00:45:13.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:45:14.14 | Paige | Yeah. |
| 00:45:15.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. At this point, if there are no more questions from the Commission, we will open it up for public comment. So at this point, director Phipps if you can give instructions for public comment. |
| 00:45:28.77 | Director Phipps | Absolutely. Video or audio public comment is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment, please submit a speaker card to me and or my colleagues to my right. If you'd like to make a comment in the Zoom application, please raise your hand, and you will be called upon when it is your time to speak. To raise your hand from phone, press star 9, and you will be notified when your time has elapsed. Thank you. I have not yet received any speaker cards. Thank you. |
| 00:45:59.57 | Director Phipps | And anybody else interested in submitting, please bring the cards forward. But I will call you now to the dais. Lisa. Please, and apologies, could you pronounce your full name? |
| 00:46:12.19 | Lisa | At least the pure punk. |
| 00:46:12.95 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much. Welcome. And you will have three minutes to speak. |
| 00:46:16.49 | Lisa | OK, at first I don't like being characterized as oppositional. I live across the street in 309 Caledonia. And I just have some questions that have been answered. Many of them did involve the parking. |
| 00:46:32.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm sorry, if you can speak into the microphone because the people on Zoom can't hear. Thank you. |
| 00:46:32.62 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:46:36.57 | Lisa | Okay. We do have questions, my husband and I, about the parking. And, um, We are very sensitive that the merchants need as much as they can get. And we have a very active meter maid. And the other thing is we are concerned about bicycles. If you go and look at equator coffee, It is a bake hub. which is exciting and terrific. but they do take up a lot of sidewalk space. And it's a deep sidewalk there and they have more accessible property right there. Whereas yours is in the back. Um, And then you just mentioned about music. We are very concerned that we do not want this to ever become an event venue. We had a very unpleasant reality at 333 Caledonia with an extreme entertainment and events space situation that developed there. with enormously loud music. And I just, I want to make sure that there's some sort of guardrails on that. because it's not fun to live next to that. Um, That's a primary thing. And the other thing is I'm curious about having worked in restaurants and I know your hours are sort of like seven in the morning till nine or at night, but that really is six o'clock for someone getting in there. and 11 o'clock for someone closing up. And I know that there are deliveries for products and services that and garbage and all that linens and all of that that happened in the off hours. And so there will be considerable noise for us in the neighborhood. And I didn't know if that had been considered. And the other thing I was just concerned about is if they're going to have fire pits or grill spaces or anything that might create smoke and how that might affect the air in the area. So those were my concerns. we are very excited. I mean, I loved your drawings and it was really dynamic. I don't want to just be a wet towel on this. It's just that having, it's a very tight neighborhood and people who are out entertaining themselves with wine and friends, it can get loud and boisterous. Thank you. |
| 00:49:05.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Other comments, Director? |
| 00:49:10.24 | Director Phipps | Chair, going to give the audience one more opportunity to submit speaker cards to me and or my colleagues to my right. Looking to the Zoom application for raised hands? Seeing none, back to you, Cher. |
| 00:49:21.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. At this point, I'm bringing it back to the applicant to respond if we could put up the timer of the number of minutes that were left. |
| 00:49:37.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:49:44.21 | Michael Rex | Mr. X. Thank you. I just wanted a moment to comment a few things that you just heard. Okay. These are all things we thought about. First of all, I'd like to point out that this is a very small cafe. It's under 50 people. The dining's all inside, except eventually when we come back for outdoor dining with a minor use permit. And we actually... Except eventually when we come back for outdoor dining with a minor use permit. And we actually didn't go very far designing that outdoor space because we thought a tenant would have a very definite idea about that. Um, uh, whatever occurs outside. is behind the building. So the building should muffle some of that sound. It's also surrounded. by two-story buildings in the back, which will also tend to focus the sound inward, okay? But also your code is very explicit about sound levels at decibels beyond your property line. Yes, that requires some enforcement. But there is that ability that if it's too loud, that can be addressed and would be addressed. We want to be a good neighbor. and that there's also conditions of approval uh, for, um, hours of operation. And we're not here tonight before you for any outdoor use and, uh, maybe some of those hours could be limited for the outdoor use. Cause we know sound can travel more when it's not in an enclosed building. Okay. Uh, so that's, uh, something to think about. Um, the, the, um, you'll have to ask, uh, Paige, um, or Ian about outdoor fire pits. It's something we've never talked about, but I do want to mention bicycles. Um, We don't want to crowd the sidewalk because those are our guests coming to the cafe. Plus, it's a liability question that we certainly wouldn't want. We will have adequate buy cracks in the back and not in front. Okay. And maybe page can address the fire pit or smoke question. you |
| 00:52:01.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:52:01.72 | Michael Rex | THANK YOU. |
| 00:52:01.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, you have three minutes, 36 seconds left. So plenty of time. |
| 00:52:06.97 | Paige | I would say quickly starting with the bike parking, we have the whole current parking spot in front of the garage space. is more than the length of a car. So we could easily have bike parking in the front and the back. That's fully off the sidewalk. Um, in terms of sound, we do know that the, um, We would have to get it approved to have any sort of music anyways. And we're envisioning something more along the lines of like Sandrinos where they have somebody playing the guitar sometimes for dinner. But that's something we would focus on later. It's just a concept or a dream at this point. We haven't talked about any fire pits or grilling. There'll be a kitchen inside and that's where the food will be. prepared, Um, Yeah. And I think ideally it's really warm and sunny there all day. It's protected from the wind. So we imagine it's going to have like a high afternoon use. Probably in the evenings, it's still chilly and people will be more likely to be inside. That's any of anything else? |
| 00:53:17.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Not at this time. Thank you very much. At this point, I will bring it back up to the dais. Before we get to any motions, we can get some thoughts or comments. Commissioner Marlow. |
| 00:53:32.95 | David Marlatt | I won't bring a motion yet, but generally, from everything I see and hear, I'm very supportive of the concept. I understand the reasons for it. In terms of potential conditions, the only one that I'm kind of hearing is perhaps conditioning on providing bike parking in that front driveway area before the coffee kiosk, as the applicant indicated they would, because I can see that that does address a neighborhood concern, and it's not specifically mandated in the code. Some of the other issues, like noise and so forth, I agree with the architect that those are all regulated by the code, and I don't see a reason for specifically conditioning those from the commission. |
| 00:54:07.41 | Michael Rex | need. |
| 00:54:14.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Marlock. Commissioner Feller? |
| 00:54:17.61 | Kristina Feller | Karen Hollweg, Thank you chair and Thank you, Commissioner marlott I agree with your comments, I am still. not fully on board with how the distance to our primary transportation hub has been measured. And I appreciate everyone's comments on that. I don't, I'm not trying to be a naysayer to this because I actually love this project and it's about time we had something in that spot. So this is not intended to be a deterrent, I, You know, we've long advocated as at the planning commission to be fair and transparent to absolutely every applicant. that comes in front of us, no matter who they are. And what I'm seeing in terms of how we're calculating that distance to primary transportation is a deviation from what we've used before. And so if we can't have one definition for one applicant and one for another, I don't think that that is fair. It's great if you're on the right side of that, but if you're on the wrong side of that, that's not good. So we have to be really straight down the middle and very academic with how we. calculate that to Director Phipps comments about the It's calculated to what's called the fairy land side. Well, even that boundary is not very clear. And just because we're getting a federal grant to improve the city's side of a ferry landing doesn't make it. a transportation hub because actually that parking lot one is not specifically necessarily solely for the purpose of the ferry. So I'm just trying to. figure out a fine line here. And maybe I'm not doing a good job of it, but I'm concerned about um, not not being fair or equitable to every applicant that comes in front of us. So that's what I'm grappling with right now. |
| 00:56:18.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. More comments before we get to any motions. Commissioner Genius. |
| 00:56:23.54 | Andrew Junius | Well, I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion and then I'll have some comments. I'm gonna move to approve as proposed by staff with the recommendation and the conditions with no additional conditions. Welcome. I hope we get you through here. Just to have a few comments. First off, this type of use of this type of building in a place like Sausalito, I think is really wonderful. This, I think, for a lot of people that have spent time in the neighborhoods in San Francisco, there are quite a few of these. They're not easy to figure out at times. At times, we do have neighborhood conflicts and we do have residents surrounding those backyards. and it's not easy to figure out at times. At times we do have neighborhood conflicts and we do have residents surrounding those backyards. And it's not easy, but I do think, with respect to the speaker, um that this is a great location for this i think i don't think actually any of the property surrounding it is residential and right behind it is commercial on bridgeway so i think it's a wonderful place to have this type of outdoor dining experience. It's very unique and very special and a great opportunity. I'm so glad to see this proposal here. I, you know, I do think to the, to, I think Paige's comment, I would anticipate a lot of people walking here, so I think the parking issue from a practical standpoint maybe not nearly as critical in real time when this actually gets moving. You know, I'll also say You know, with respect to AB 2097, I'm a little familiar with that, but maybe the staff, if we need to probe the staff a little bit more. This is exactly the kind of project that AB 2097 was intended to help. You know, cities like Sausalito and San Francisco, I think, is down the road farther than this, and a lot of communities in the Bay Area. We've got very old, clunky parking rules that if AB 2097 wasn't here'd we'd be getting a request for a variance or something we'd just simply be approaching it from a different direction so the idea here from the state is to we've been seeing a lot of legislation surrounding housing at the state and this is one that is across the board just trying to make it easier for communities that aren't willing to or have not yet come up with some parking streamlining or updating their parking codes. I mean, San Francisco doesn't require parking for any use. This is just not an issue anymore in a place like San Francisco. I know it's an issue here. I know every place is different. But this is, again, the policy that the state is trying to promote with a rule like AB 2097 is to help people. businesses, you know, like this one and Paige and Ian. So I fully support that and I'm |
| 00:59:02.85 | Michael Rex | THE END OF |
| 00:59:05.60 | Andrew Junius | Uh, that's where I stand on that. I don't really see an issue with the radius. Uh, like I say, if, and if it was past that, we'd be looking at a different, a different variance. And then the final thing on the process, um, I, you know, I, I, I understand where some of the questions are coming with respect to the sequencing of this. As, as a land use practitioner and frankly, you know, being in Michael Rex's shoes, a lot of times in a lot of different places, I actually welcome the idea of segmenting something like this for the exact reason that the applicants are here today. |
| 00:59:08.42 | Michael Rex | you know. |
| 00:59:08.47 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:59:08.51 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:59:36.28 | Andrew Junius | rather than spend a ton of money, on the hope that you get it all right and you get the approvals together so that then you can go out and find a tenant Or, God forbid, have the reverse happen where you've actually signed a lease and now you're trying to perform and get the permits that they're required to get or your tenant is trying to get that and people are getting angry about lease payments being missed or whatever. This, it sounds like it's gone relatively quickly, and I compliment the staff on that. This is going to give the applicant, you know, time to go out and say, we've answered one clear question. We can get a restaurant in here, which is, in my, another thing, I mean, I'm a big fan of simplifying, and I'm actually a little surprised that on a Caledonia commercial street, you actually need a conditional use for a restaurant. That's, to me, a little unusual. But here we are. I think it's a great project. I fully support the motion that's been, or the staff report and the recommendation made, and I'll leave it at that. Thank you. |
| 01:00:31.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Junius, Vice Chair Saad. |
| 01:00:34.80 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your comments, Commissioner Junius. I completely understand Commissioner Fowler's point. I think the context of the conversation that we had this evening was helpful. I think in hindsight it would have been helpful to have that to be a little bit more robust, perhaps as part of the packet, only because the explanation that I think Director Phipps discussed with us this evening makes more sense, and it wasn't entirely clear because I had the same... take as commissioner feller on the parking until our discussion this evening i do think that with the context of the surrounding parking lots to michael rex's conversation and senior planner mandich it does make sense to take it into context as well especially as a local walking but to to Commissioner Feller's point about precedent. I mean, I think... it does make sense to take it into context as well, especially as a local walking. But to Commissioner Feller's point about precedent, I mean, I think to look back to Director Phipps, if this is going to be the future way of viewing this rule, then it makes sense to start now. If there's any wavering on how city staff is going to continue to look at this, then I think we should take a step back and have that discussion that Commissioner Feller is bringing up. So I am probably going to look to UCDD director just for that final take, because to Commissioner Feller's point, we did look at it differently prior with the housing element, and for her and I to be on the HIAC, take these things into consideration um we're sensitive to it so i will look there um and once that's made i'd be happy to continue with the motion um but um to commissioner junius you did mention you would make a motion to approve without any extra conditions and i would just hope that we would actually take um commissioner marlott's extra condition for the bikes into account because i think that makes a lot of sense just to have that tagged in to ensure pedestrian safety and sidewalk safety. |
| 01:02:48.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Vice Chair Saad. I love the use here. I love what's being proposed. I'm hopeful you'll find tenants to do that. And I like the fact you've got two uses. You can start one faster than the other. That would be good and get the site back into use. I do, to the fairness that Commissioner Fellow said about treating all projects equally, I do think strongly that we need to have a condition that requires that if design review is required, it will come back to the commission. That if the outdoor dining would come back to the commission, as well as approval of any signage. Had this not been bifurcated they would have all that today and when we do a cup we usually and have done this on many many projects approve all of those things uh and the staff is very has been able to now expedite projects that's why i raised that issue so as soon as this uh applicant has tenants, we will move forward quickly to get that approved. But I would want to add a condition that says that once plans have been developed to submit to the Planning Commission, if design review is required, and submit to the Planning Commission for the outdoor dining and approval of any signage also if the uses change if for some reason you can't find a restaurant you want to change it that would also come back to the planning commission and again that's the way we've done every other restaurant in in Sausalito so this isn't anything. And I just don't want to set up a process where somebody comes in for a CUP in order to expedite the thing and then purposely avoids coming back for design review if that's required. Again, if they don't do any changes to it, it might not be required. So anyways, that would be my additional use added to a motion when we get to motions. Thank you. |
| 01:04:57.50 | Andrew Junius | I've already made the motion. |
| 01:04:57.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I've already Pardon? I've already made the motion. You made a motion. |
| 01:05:00.23 | Andrew Junius | I've already made the motion. Correct. |
| 01:05:02.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So. So is there further discussion before we get to whether this is acting because we don't have a second Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:05:12.16 | Kristina Feller | Tara, I'm not sure I completely followed Um, everything that you mentioned there and forgive me for having having questions. I just want to make sure I'm clear in my mind. I mean, obviously, you know, design review is triggered based on our code. I really don't believe that we need to have a condition for that because that's already self-evident in, The code. Um, But You know, the other part about outdoor dining, this particular outdoor dining is on their property and not on a sidewalk. So I'm not sure about what you're looking for there. I just want to make sure I'm clear. |
| 01:05:57.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to the first issue, there is some design review that could be done either by the community development director or the zoning administrator. And we have added a provision and other changes to an approval. It would come back to us when some cases that can be done, if they're minor, that can be done by the community development director. So that's why I'm concerned about The first issue, outdoor dining. If I might read about the first issue, outdoor dining. If I might read of the code, there is a provision of the code for outdoor dining on private property. And so in order to have that, they need approval of that. And again, if that would, I think it's a minor use permit, but I'm not 100% sure. But if it was submitted today because it was part of the CUP, we would be reviewing it. If it's done later, we possibly would not be reviewing it. And that's why I like this process because we're going to let them go ahead if we were to approve this and move ahead and get a tenant. But on the other hand, I don't want to set a precedent given the fairness throughout of how we do this that we we we don't review this uh you know as we would normally so that that's the intent of that it's a standard condition we've added many times so uh i was it might have sounded different but that was i was just if there are any changes but if there are any changes to this but this is just a use permit so if there are any changes on the process. Okay. I either was there any changes, but there are any changes to this, but this is just a use permit. So if there are any changes on the project, I either as an actual plan because the drawing clearly say this is conceptual. We would like to see the plan. |
| 01:07:18.37 | Nastassya Saad | I was interested. |
| 01:07:25.85 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 01:07:26.20 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:07:32.11 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:07:32.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's good. |
| 01:07:32.71 | Kristina Feller | Karen Hollweg, yeah Thank Thank you chair thanks for the clarification I appreciate that very much. Um, And certainly I appreciate, you know, Commissioner Junius making the motion here. I'm wondering if there's just one last piece of discussion, because I agree with Commissioner Marlott's piece on the bike parking. And I would also, just for a note to the staff, if this is the new precedent, for how we are measuring these distances. you know, again, based on all the conversation we've had and in an effort to be fair and transparent, all the time to everyone equally. I'd like to ask staff to kind of memorialize how they are, you know, what they're defining as the fairy as our primary transportation hub. again, it is different than what we've done before. If this is the new normal, if this is a new definition, I really feel that we have an obligation to make that clear moving forward, both to the commission and to the public. again, for total clarity, and avoidance of any doubt. So I'm happy, like I said, I support this project completely. then I'm looking forward to having something at that corner But let's just clean up all these loose ends to make sure that this is bulletproof moving forward. So happy to support the motion. Happy to would request the friendly amendment that Commissioner Marlott mentioned regarding bike parking. |
| 01:09:10.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So just to clarify that issue, I think what we're saying, Director Phipps, is you're defining the ferry terminal to include the land that's included in the project that is called the ferry terminal project, which includes the parking lot and the ferry landing. And that's how you're defining the ferry terminal, if I understand it correct. |
| 01:09:36.68 | Director Phipps | I will just say that staff conducts a parcel to parcel measurement. for cases that trigger AB 2097. |
| 01:09:47.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So when you say parcel, we're asking for clarification. I think Commissioner Feller is asking for clarification, and I will follow on with that. The parcel that you're calling the ferry terminal includes parking lot one, because if it doesn't, then the measurement is incorrect. If it does, then it is correct. that's why for the sake of the AB whatever are you you're saying that parking lot one which is included with the ferry landing renovation or improvement project is part of the ferry terminal because that's where the the map was shown this evening |
| 01:10:27.69 | Director Phipps | I believe that parcel represents the transit stop. |
| 01:10:33.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The, the, the, the part, so the city owns was, uh, can, so for Marin maps, I guess you're talking about parcels is Marin maps include just parking lot one in the ferry terminal, or is it parking lot two and three all they're all owned by the city. |
| 01:10:50.03 | Director Phipps | I'm not sure ownership matters here. Thank you. |
| 01:10:52.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 01:10:52.92 | Director Phipps | Thank you. It's a singular parcel, however, which encompasses the ferry landing as well as parking lot one. |
| 01:10:58.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | OK, that was all I was clarifying is that that's what the person was. OK, thanks. All right, so we have a motion. There is an amendment to include the bike parking. There's also an amendment to require outdoor dining and signage and design review if required to come back to the Planning Commission. Are those amendments that the maker of the motion will allow? |
| 01:11:05.93 | Michael Rex | Oh. |
| 01:11:21.54 | Andrew Junius | I have a few questions for staff before we go there. First off, the question about the bike parking, what would be the process for removing a parking space on the street and replacing it with bike racks, if you might? |
| 01:11:33.65 | Director Phipps | Yeah, just to confirm, Commissioner, my understanding of this particular condition is related to the driveway space where the garage and future cafe is to be located and not related to public parking and the public right-of-way. |
| 01:11:51.37 | Andrew Junius | So in other words, it's bike parking that's off site, that's on the property off the street. |
| 01:11:51.64 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:11:57.95 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 01:11:58.04 | Nastassya Saad | I'm sorry. |
| 01:11:58.07 | Director Phipps | Correct. All contained on private property. So I appreciate you making that clarification. And I was actually going to make a request of the commission to make that condition subject to staff approval, because when we do review the site plan, you know, the proposed layout of this cafe and the adjacent business, we want to ensure that certain things related to health, safety, and accessibility are maintained and that that bike parking, you know, won't congest that area and won't get in the way of safe passage of travel. So that would be my request in connection with that condition. |
| 01:12:09.23 | Michael Rex | Google. |
| 01:12:33.46 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. Thank you excellent response I appreciate that director Phipps so with with with that said I'd rather not have that condition because again. Maybe to some point point points raised by. Chair Luxembourg we're not quite there yet, and I don't know why we'd at we'd you know add a condition when we're we're you know we're don't see the site plan yet what we've seen is conceptual. The issue before us is, should this property be allowed to have a restaurant? And I think all of us agree that the answer is yes. I'm not sure. So I'm not gonna support that condition and we can keep talking about that. If you let me, do you wanna respond to that or? |
| 01:13:08.56 | David Marlatt | Sure. or not. Well, if I may just clarify a bit, my only my reasoning really behind potentially having this condition is because the applicant and the architect offered it. And as a means of addressing a concern by a member of the community. And we're all familiar with bikes and we'd like them to be in bike racks, but that doesn't always life isn't always like that. And since it would not otherwise be required by code and they did offer it, I thought it's appropriate to memorialize the offer that they made. Thank you. And since it would not otherwise be required by code, and they did offer it, I thought it's appropriate to memorialize the offer that they made. Because otherwise, there is no leverage. Unlike discretionary review and so forth, those are elsewhere in the code. I think that's a separate discussion. So that was purely the motivation, is that the bike parking was offered, and it would not otherwise be required. And this is the only opportunity to memorialize that offer that was made. |
| 01:13:57.87 | Andrew Junius | Okay, well, then I guess we're going to have to bring the sponsor back up to really clarify exactly what they're proposing because I'm not even sure what the condition would be, that they're going to put bike parking and it's going to be safe or located. So I just, again, think it's a design issue. |
| 01:14:10.63 | David Marlatt | I think it's a design in the current driveway. There's a current driveway in front of the coffee shop. Right, but then the staff |
| 01:14:13.72 | Andrew Junius | But then the staff just said, but then it would be subject to their review because we don't exactly know where it's going to be and how it's going to... |
| 01:14:18.19 | David Marlatt | Everything is subject to building code review. Well, not depending on it. Egress path of travel. Okay. |
| 01:14:20.57 | Andrew Junius | Well, not if it's not dependent. Yeah, well, okay, then why? |
| 01:14:24.38 | David Marlatt | not specifying the number of spaces. Maybe it's only going to be one. |
| 01:14:27.62 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, well, I hear you. All right, I'm still not comfortable with that condition, but I'd also like to move on to the other problem I have with conditions about requiring project sponsors and applicants to comply with law. I don't understand. I just don't understand. at this point, It'll be if we if we approve them tonight, they'll be allowed to have a restaurant. If later on they do something that triggers more design review and they have to come back here, well, then they'll come back here. I don't think we should be conditioning, and I'm not sure I agree that we've done this before for this type of situation. Thank you. we haven't really had a split entitlement like this that I can recall. I do know we've had a serial situation with a specific business on Bridgeway that has come back to us multiple times. And I totally agree. We've gotten to a situation where The next change needs to come back. I get all that. We've got a brand new approval. It's clear why they're asking for the the see you this way And, There may or may not be a need for further hearings in front of the planning commission. And I don't know why we would want to spell that out in a condition which doesn't, isn't needed because the law is the law as, as Mr. X, I've incorrectly said, Willie, the zoning code tells us what the next step is, depending on what the applicant does, not what we say. So I can't agree to that condition either, but I would go back to the bike one. And if we'd like to try to hammer that out, |
| 01:15:38.80 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:15:43.96 | Andrew Junius | I'm certainly happy to have the applicant come back up and give us a little more clarity as to what exactly that condition would be. And if the staff's okay with that, I'd be supportive of that. |
| 01:15:52.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So wait, wait, no, sit down, sit down. We're at the dais. We're not getting additional comment at this time. So to your, I think most of my comments, I think a condition would be warranted. But from what I understand from the code, this is likely the design review, if it's required, and the outdoor dining and the signage will come back to us. There are some areas where the Community Development Director has some discretion. I think we're sending a message to the director, I don't know if others are, that this should come back to us regardless of whether we have the condition. I think that it will. |
| 01:16:15.13 | Michael Rex | Thank you. back to us. |
| 01:16:32.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | people who are rather not ag conditions, then I understand that. But I think it is important, given things such as this bike rack idea that we've got some – that it comes back to us as part of that review. And the benefit of bifurcating is allow people to move ahead, not to avoid the design review. Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:16:54.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair and Commissioner Junius, I completely agree with you about not having to spell out law. I'm not supportive of that, so I support what you're saying completely. Regarding the bicycles, if I can maybe make a suggestion to think about, I don't think we need to be specific about where. the bike parking is, but because the applicant did offer it, just request that bicycle parking be accommodated within the site and not in the public right of way. in consideration for the use that and the clientele that they're expecting to get there. and just keep it at their discretion about where it's located. If that makes you more comfortable, I don't want to be very specific because we haven't seen enough to know what the layout of that restaurant or those areas are. |
| 01:17:49.06 | Andrew Junius | I would be supportive of that condition, which would be essentially, The applicant has agreed to put by parking on site and the location and number of spaces would be subject to review and approval by staff. |
| 01:18:01.07 | David Marlatt | Yeah. |
| 01:18:01.29 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:18:01.34 | David Marlatt | I would support that. |
| 01:18:02.56 | Kristina Feller | I would support that. Yes. |
| 01:18:04.45 | Nastassya Saad | second this motion just to get that on record to keep moving forward as stated. |
| 01:18:08.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And I concur with Director Phipps in front of the coffee area, which is really the only place that, if they don't put it in back, it is tight there. That is a small space. So I think we do want to be cognizant of safety. And it would be nice to have some biking parking there. But if there's a lot there, then it'd be hard to get to the coffee. I think the community. |
| 01:18:33.83 | Nastassya Saad | I think the condition that we just set probably takes care of. Yes, yes. |
| 01:18:38.75 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay. |
| 01:18:40.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I appreciate it. |
| 01:18:40.76 | Andrew Junius | I appreciate the dialogue, Commissioner. Thank you. |
| 01:18:42.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Are there further discussion on the motion and the second? |
| 01:18:49.60 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:18:50.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Director Phillips, please take care. |
| 01:18:50.45 | Director Phipps | Nothing. roll. Happy to. Thank you, Sheriff. Mr. Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:18:59.38 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 01:19:00.20 | Director Phipps | Vice Chair Assad. Yes. Chair Luxembourg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 01:19:01.13 | Kristina Feller | Yes. Yeah. |
| 01:19:03.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:19:06.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you all. We'll move on to what is now 7B. 7B is an item that was on the consent calendar this evening, the applicant is requesting approval for a revision to approve project 2022 00184 for design review conditional use permit minor use permit crotchman agreement and signed permit that allow for a new second story edition exterior modification is an expansion of a restaurant use to provide for food and beverage service on the new second level basically they are internally lowering The We'll be right back. |
| 01:19:48.84 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:19:48.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We have a silence. Can you, if you're going to have conversations, if you could do it in the hallway, please? Please? Can you do it in the hallway so we can get on with other business? Thank you. |
| 01:19:49.06 | Nastassya Saad | Have a silence. |
| 01:20:06.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Actually, some of that noise is outside, actually. So expansion of restaurant use to provide for food and beverage service on a new second level. That was the approval. So basically, they're here today because they are internally lowering the first floor on the inside, which eliminates the need for the ramp and the stairs on the sidewalk. Mr. Toph is here to do a presentation. I would encourage you, since we've heard this project at least five times or whatever we've heard it, to focus just on the changes. Don't give us the whole history, because we all know it pretty well. And it was well done, and your staff report was excellent. So I'll turn it over to you. Thank you. |
| 01:20:47.53 | Neal Toft | Okay. Thank you, Chair Luxembourg. I guess I can just throw out my notes here. Yeah, I think actually you've described the project pretty well. Basic summary, yeah. Is it changed to an application that you approved last year, which in itself was revisions to prior applications. But essentially there's a request to amend the design review permit for that application, lower the first level to sidewalk grade, and eliminate the large ramp, some seating and stairways that would have been encroaching into the sidewalk. Um, There are this could. retain the existing light pole that's out there, the trees that are out there. And there are a few other minor modifications to the to the facade, which I'll touch on briefly. But this is also to recommend to the city council and encroachment agreement to permit the 19 seat parklet. and the new signage wall lights and awnings that would project into the right of way. From that approval last year, We never did proceed to the plan it to the city council. or the encroachment agreement because the applicants were unable to resolve the requirement to replace the street light with street lights mounted on the facade. They were not able to really resolve that through the DPW administration Thank you. review process. And subsequently, and I will skip the background, but they did Um, uh, come in with this project earlier in April. And again, lowering the first level floor. Um, They have indicated there are deficiencies in the existing foundation. which revealed it may be more efficient to simply replace that foundation entirely. And in doing so, they can lower the floor in the process, largely resolve the accessibility issues into that first living, or excuse me, that first service level. And This also allows elimination of that wheelchair ramp. landing steps to be located on the sidewalk. And again, more room for pedestrian passage. and retention of the existing street lamp and trees. A few of the minor changes... They're going to add transom windows above the doors on the ground floor. with the floor lowering, the doors can come down and they'll have transom windows. They'll add some wood fixed shutters above the windows on the second floor. Thank you. They're relocating the closet, electrical closet and beaters. They're getting towards construction drawings. They're realizing a few more details at this point. to add to the plans. Um, And they are centering the double doors at the main entry to the ground floor. Um, No changes are proposed relative to the exterior finishes, colors, and lighting. And other than eliminating the new tree plantings, there are no changes to the previously approved parklet. Originally, they had trees proposed, small trees proposed in the ends of the parklet. Um, with the elimination of the ramp, The applicants will be retaining the sidewalk dining of three tables and six chairs. That was previously approved for the project. Thank you. in 2006. So that will be simply a carryover of that MUP. from that time. So, As we've discussed in the staff report, we think these changes, though fairly minor in scope, really represent a much superior project in terms of keeping the infrastructure in the sidewalk, the lamp and the trees, providing more room for pedestrian passageways. And a simpler approach for the for the project. probably would have been a lot simpler. from the get go, but certainly, you know, it's something they had to discover through engineering analysis. So, um, We recommend that the Planning Commission approve this request and modify the design review permit and encroachment agreement approvals accordingly. And we have provided a resolution with largely the same conditions of approval slightly tailored to this revised plan. Do you have any questions of staff? |
| 01:25:47.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Mr. Toff. This time will be a standard public hearing approach. We'll have questions of staff, followed by presentation by the applicant, followed by public comment. I do want to see Mr. Lappert in the audience, commend him for this approved project. This is far better. It saves the trees. It eliminates the ramp. It is much, much better. We greatly appreciate you moving ahead to submit this to us. With that, are there questions from the dais upstairs? Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:26:22.19 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair. Yeah, I just had a couple questions, and I'm going to refer to Mr. Rex's letter that sort of summarizes some of the changes, and I want to hone in on the exhaust for the kitchen. And the reason that I'm honing in on that is that we heard quite a lot of public comment from Casa Madrona next door, and there was a lot of concern about it. So can you just comment real quick about this new location and is it closer for the way? How, how different is it? I want to make sure we have that on the public record. |
| 01:27:02.00 | Neal Toft | Do you want me to go into that or do you want to review that with Mr. Rex? |
| 01:27:08.92 | Kristina Feller | If you're able to respond to it, that's great. I mean, if the applicant is more than welcome to go into greater detail or or answer that, but I really do want to make sure that we have an answer. Well, |
| 01:27:22.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I'm sorry you were gonna bring up the applicant nevermind Uh, Go on, go bring up the plan. I thought you were going to have the applicant come up. |
| 01:27:30.94 | Neal Toft | Yeah, I would need to get to the roof plan. Or if you go down a ways, we can see the existing and proposed elevations. Um, I'm trying to remember where that's located. Go to Let's see that planning commissions. Approved by Planning Commission. You can see the... the flue exhaust |
| 01:28:13.97 | Neal Toft | Thank you. Sir. started. |
| 01:28:18.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. You've got to talk into the microphone. |
| 01:28:20.23 | Neal Toft | Yeah, sorry. So you kind of see a dark circle centered towards the center, but a little bit off towards the rear and northwest corner. So go down another. |
| 01:28:28.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Uh. |
| 01:28:36.80 | Neal Toft | And Thank you. That looks, that's the section drawing I'm looking for. |
| 01:28:41.83 | Kristina Feller | No. |
| 01:28:44.19 | Neal Toft | Go back up. |
| 01:28:46.22 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I just want to compare the two locations because I believe it's a better location. But I want that clarified, and I want to make sure that we're clear on that. particularly because it was of great interest to the neighbor. |
| 01:28:58.45 | Neal Toft | Yeah, why don't I let the architect kind of clarify that? Because it was a detail. I think it was slightly shifted, not to a huge degree, but a better location. |
| 01:29:03.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:29:04.02 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 01:29:11.97 | Neal Toft | Relative to Casa Madrona. |
| 01:29:12.11 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. When they're |
| 01:29:15.24 | Neal Toft | Yeah. |
| 01:29:17.25 | Kristina Feller | when their time is to present, we'll certainly reiterate that question to them and give them the opportunity to The only other thing I wanted to ask you is the transom windows. Are those operable at all? |
| 01:29:32.15 | Neal Toft | I don't know if that detail was on the plans. They're more decorative, but they may be operable. They're right above the doorways. |
| 01:29:41.69 | Kristina Feller | Again, I'm only asking because of the last hearing and the concern about noise and the operating hours. So I just want to make sure that what we're looking at here. is within the spirit of what was agreed upon Um, you know, prior as well. So that's why I'm asking the question, because We also, you know, said all windows doors needed to be closed by a certain time, but that also the balcony would not be like an occupiable balcony. And so I just want to make sure that's all clear. The only other question I have for you |
| 01:30:20.77 | Neal Toft | If I may, we did carry over that condition. you |
| 01:30:24.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:30:24.97 | Neal Toft | Yeah. |
| 01:30:25.06 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:30:25.16 | Neal Toft | Thank you. Yeah, so that condition continues to be part of that resolution. And I know, of course, the transoms are on the lower floor and not the upper floor, which I think was kind of the larger concern about late night noise. But any windows, I think, it may be worth visiting whether that condition applies to any windows. And again, we can get the applicant to clarify on that. |
| 01:30:55.18 | Kristina Feller | Right. And then I know that that I believe the city council has still not taken action one way or another with the parklet and outdoor dining, program. that Chair Luxembourg and I were part of that. Working Group. So I don't believe that that has actually been ratified by the city council yet. Um, and if you could just, you know, give some guidance, I, I, you know, I, beyond delighted at what I see in this project here, but I want to make sure that the applicant is is completely eyes wide open and aware Thank you. that that there is potentially that forthcoming program I believe based on what chair Luxenberg and I had been a part of that the parklet that they are proposing here is pretty much no different than what we saw before. However, it could be subject to that program. in the future once it may or may not be ratified. So I really just want to make sure that that discussion has happened again with the applicant with this new new design, so they're completely aware of some of those things that are in the works and that could impact their parklet in the future. |
| 01:32:15.37 | Neal Toft | Yeah. And I think to respond to that, the city has for a couple of years now had a draft Parklet program and you were instrumental in reviewing and helping put that together, you and Chair Luxembourg. And in fact, In the initial application, we reviewed it relative to the standards. That's a pretty, the program is pretty far along, pretty refined, fairly complete. And we did review it relative to those standards and found it was consistent. When this goes to council, So we're confident it's consistent with that program as it stands in terms of design. And then when it goes to council, we'll be imposing typical standards for encroachments and similar to those for the outdoor dining as well. as part of the encroachment agreement. |
| 01:33:11.73 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you. |
| 01:33:12.12 | Neal Toft | And the hours of operation, of course, will apply. |
| 01:33:15.01 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Neil, so much. Appreciate it. |
| 01:33:19.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. Other questions? You know. Okay. At this time, the applicant, Mr. Rex or Mr. Lappert, you have 15 minutes. I'll give you the same encouragement I gave Mr. Toth. Focus on the changes. You don't need to give us a whole history. We're very aware of the history. You have 15 minutes as you see fit. |
| 01:33:54.14 | Michael Rex | I'm not sure if you're not If I'm Matthew, or yeah, could I get up on the screen? Sheet 11.1. I'm Michael Rex here representing The Lappert family, Isaac Lappert's in the room. Michael couldn't be here tonight. I'm pleased to tell you that I've been at it long enough. I'm now working for the grandkids. I used to, I knew and spent time with Walter Lappert, Michael Lappert's father. In fact, my wife used to work for Walter selling crepes before it was converted to fish and chips and ice cream by Michael Lappert. So it goes way back. I also want to thank Neil for his hard work, helping us get here and his excellent staff report. the, um, Uh, You know, I don't think any of us like changes, although we kind of like them when it gets better. I think I agree with that. the chair, um, Luxembourg that I think has gotten better. I wish we could have gone here sooner. I bet you do too. I proposed way in the beginning. Why are we doing this ramp? Why don't we lower the floor? And the cost was prohibitive at that time. And then when we got into working drawings and we did some in-depth analysis of footings initially and they seemed sound. But as we got further and further into it, to ensure that the building's well supported, we found it was much worse than we expected. And at that point, the scale started tipping. towards a whole new foundation. Well, if we're doing all now foundation, we might lower the floor. It adds to cost for sure. we'll have a better building, but the best thing is it's gonna work better for people in wheelchairs. They don't have to go up ramps and it's gonna work for everybody on that sidewalk. because what was approved was a sidewalk that was five foot three. between the ramp and the parklet. It's a 10-foot sidewalk. It's going back to a 10-foot sidewalk. the stairs that stick out about two feet that are there right now are coming out. The tables that are sitting there that have been approved long ago for outdoor dining, Um, uh, but we're basically those tables are only two feet wide. Um, so. We're going to end up with a net clearance of eight feet instead of five foot three. That's a huge benefit. Plus, we get to keep the trees. And we all kind of thought the tree at the north end would never survive. Well, guess what? It's getting new branches, and it seems to be surviving. And we can save the street lamp. It wasn't just the foundation, asil pointed out um that uh drove us to this current solution uh we brought in a lighting consultant to figure out how we can get street lights up on the building which was a condition of approval uh and um We ran into two serious problems. We couldn't get the lumens to be equal to the street lamp. without some very large spotlights on the building. And we thought looking up into these spotlights would just be awful. We also found out, and this was news to me, Thank you. The city, no one in the city manages our streetlights. It's a county agency. And so how do we, you know, somehow tie private property to street lighting when it's controlled by a separate entity that we don't, none of us regulate. So there were a number of reasons that drove us to the solution. I'm going to jump to some of the questions that came up to try to shorten this presentation. I asked for this to be on the screen because we did this CAD model to show you how beautiful it's going to look. And we're into working drawings now. In fact, we hope to submit this month for a building permit so we can get this back under construction. We'd like to start construction October 1. and have it ready for the visitor season. late spring. of next year. If you want to compare what you approved in plan view to what's now proposed, you could look at sheet A 2.1, which is what you approved, and sheet A 2.2. But I'm going to focus on the questions that I just heard. First of all, the flu. If you there's two sheets and you could pull them up here. You saw a 2.3. Can you go back to that one, Matthew? That's what you approved. And if there's the exhaust. Is this? No, one more back. To make it really confusing, there's two sheets with the same number. Sorry about that. I'll talk to my staff about that, all right? But the good news is they put a title down here. This is what you approved. So forget the sheet numbers. That's what you approved, and there's the flu. What we found out when we brought in a mechanical engineer is won't work in that location. Okay. We didn't have a mechanical engineer during design review. So if you go to the next sheet, A2.3, it kind of moved here more to the center. And we actually thought that was an improvement because then it's more fair to both property owners. And the property owners were noticed on this change and they didn't object. So it seems if they had concerns, they would have raised it because they certainly participated in. significantly at your previous hearing. So that's the change. We think it's fairly minor. This is going to make the mechanical system function properly. It also moved it back right up against that wall. So it's further away from the street, which we think is a benefit also to the public. The other question is transom windows. If you could go back to that rendering 11.1. |
| 01:40:12.71 | Michael Rex | The center bay here and the bay to the north are recessed. And then the bay at the south end is not. I pointed out, we haven't really determined whether those are operable transoms or not. It's a good question. is a question I'd like to ask. Michael and Isaac Lappert, They if it's hot in there, it might be nice in a summer day to open them up. If it's a cold night, they certainly would close them. And it's the nighttime where the... the noise might be most impacted to the hotel next door. So I'd like to keep the option open to make them operable. That center one in the very center, it's a little hard to see in this rendering, it's way too big to be operable. So we're talking about some pretty small windows. We didn't have a transom windows before in the previous approval. Now we do because when the floor level we have more height, and it's kind of cool because the existing building has transom windows, so it kind of replicates more of what's there, and I think enhances the appearance. We also added shutters up at the top that are fixed, wooden shutters, that we thought adds a little more character. So in terms of transom windows, we haven't decided whether they're up or not. I'd like to leave that up to the property owners to decide on that, if you're okay with that. In terms of Parklet programs, when we designed this parklet, the first thing we did was pull out that draft program and we followed it in every possible way I'm not aware of any deviation, even though it hasn't been adopted. we certainly respected all the work that went into it, and staff concurred with us as far as Neil pointed out, that everything we can tell, it conforms to those guidelines. Um, I'm surprised, however, to hear that if the city, if and when they adopt an official parklet standard, that we'd be subject to some retroactive action by the city that we'd have to change our parklet after you approved it My understanding of how the law works is that If it's approved, it's fine. And if the law changes, we can stay with what was approved. It's kind of what we call grandfathered. question that statement that we should be aware that the city may decide to change that standard. And then suddenly, what, we're obligated to change the parklet. We do have an encroachment permit, however. We're asking you to recommend to the council an encroachment permit for the parklet and the canopies and the signage, the balcony that overhangs the public right away. like many businesses downtown. We'd like you to do that tonight because one of our next steps is go to the planning commission. And, um, If the Planning Commission, if you approve, you've already approved the parklet, We're not changing it. And if the console approves the encroachment permit, then we should be able to build it and keep it that way, even if the parklet program gets adopted in some different fashion. Just a point I wanted to make. I think that responds to the questions I heard. And I'm open to any other questions. Um, we're asking that, uh, You approve this application for changes to an approved project. It's a better project, and we ask that you make a recommendation to the city council to grant an encroachment agreement. Thank you. |
| 01:43:56.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | At this point, we'll have questions of the applicant. Are there any questions for the applicant? |
| 01:44:00.51 | Michael Rex | Yeah. |
| 01:44:02.11 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The ends. I don't see any, now she has the hand. There's like a two-second delay, Christina. Go ahead, Commissioner Fowler. |
| 01:44:14.21 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair. Sorry for the delay. First and foremost, again, I really want to thank the applicant for a superior submission and project here. Um, Of course, we would have loved to have seen this the first time. But here we are today. I appreciate the effort and work that's gone into this. I did just want to clarify for the for the applicants. architect Mr. Rex, but the whole point of my mentioning The issue about the Parklet program is that part of that program did discuss at the time, and of course, It's up to the city council. It is not up to us that if there are any parklets that do not comply with the parklet program, whatever that will be, if and when they approve it, there will be a grace period for people to bring it up into compliance. That language has been in there for, Since the beginning of the program or the draft program, I should say it is not an approved program. So the city council, it's up to them to do whatever there is, whatever they're going to do. I just wanted you as the applicant to be eyes wide open. about that. So it was really a comment made just for your benefit in terms of that. So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear on the record and certainly to to the applicant. I certainly don't have any questions at this time and am very pleased with this submission. Thank you, Chair. |
| 01:46:02.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Feller. Other questions? No, and just a follow-on. The encroachment agreement that will be signed allows the city, if there's a problem with your utility or something like that, to ask you to make some change in the future. It's just part of the agreement. It's not that they're looking to redesign the parklet or anything like that. But that encroachment agreement allows for that. So with that, thank you very much. You've got five minutes left if there's any public comment and you want to have any rebuttal at that time. At this point, Director Phipps, if you could give instructions for public comment. |
| 01:46:38.36 | Director Phipps | Certainly, if you'd like to make public comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application or in the chamber. I am seeing one hand raised. Yes, please step to the dais. |
| 01:46:51.45 | Director Phipps | Mr. Monsef, you will have three minutes to speak. |
| 01:46:54.64 | Mike Monsef | Mike Monsef, I have been actually, I want to thank you for, I didn't come here for a last project. But that was nice. That end of Caledonia needs some action. And I'm one of the person who was in Caledonia and steer a lot of things in city. That's when they were trying to take Caledonia Street off a map. So it would be just for the... a neighborhood which I brought international news here. So. By saying that, thank you for approving that. Now going back to this project. As you know, I'm very active downtown and I Two of you, at least, you know me very well. And a lot of people keep asking me, what's going to happen to this monster? of fish and chips. When is he going to be approved? He's been there for, what, three years, four years? I mean, enough is enough. I hope you approve this one. As an architect, I'd like to thank... It's a beautiful design. And thank you. And, uh, I'd like to see something like that more. happening downtown and much better presentation. As far as the parklet goes, I'm the one who started the parklet in this town. and I can see the back and forth, everything complied to what I started. If they're going to have some kind of new regulation, then if we have to comply to it, We'll see. will comply to it. But at this point, I don't think that should be obstacle. for any You know, on decision about this project. Let's approve that. Let's, let's see it October 1st. Let's start that. I really, really want to see as somebody who walked downtown a lot. And I have my business downtown. I'd like to see something happen. And please with the same scrutiny you accept the other one please accept this one too so i can get up before i leave i thank you again for approving this project Thank you. Thanks. |
| 01:49:15.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Mr. Phipps, are there any other, Director Phipps, are there any other comments on Zoom or I don't see anything in the audience. |
| 01:49:24.27 | Director Phipps | If there are no additional public commenters in the chamber... I will just look to the zoom application and I am seeing none sure so I'll give it back to you |
| 01:49:33.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | All right, we'll close public hearing. At this point, I'm going to have Mr. Rex, if you want. You've got five minutes to respond to if you want anything. And Mr. Taffer, you have another comment? you |
| 01:49:47.81 | Neal Toft | Yeah, I just wanted to respond because there was a question that Commissioner Feller had put out and regarding the the windows. The there is a condition number for the condition for actually requires all windows and doors be closed by 1030 p.m. Therefore, I would suggest that whether or not they put in transom windows as part of the building permit, that's something that could be theoretically controlled and forced through that condition. I think. So I just wanted to provide a level of comfort on that issue. |
| 01:50:23.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So I just wanted to. Thank you. you Thank you for that clarification. With that, I'm gonna bring this up to the dais and in order to move this along in some way, I'm gonna make a motion to approve pursuant to the staff recommendation and the resolution that's in the staff recommendation. |
| 01:50:44.83 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:50:44.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Okay, with that, is there any further discussion? |
| 01:50:48.06 | Andrew Junius | I'd make a few comments. |
| 01:50:49.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 01:50:50.42 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:50:50.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:50:50.60 | Andrew Junius | Bye. First comment is, Commissioner Marlott, welcome to the Fish and Chips Project. We've been, we were hoping we could spare you this, but it's back again, so. |
| 01:50:56.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:50:56.53 | David Marlatt | It's a great thing. |
| 01:50:56.59 | Nastassya Saad | it. |
| 01:50:56.68 | David Marlatt | Thank you. Thank you, yeah. My comment was to thank you all, actually. This is clearly an improved project, and I'm so happy that I was not part of the |
| 01:51:06.16 | Andrew Junius | carried this forward waiting for you to come and put your final touch and vote on this project. |
| 01:51:10.47 | David Marlatt | You don't have to thank me. |
| 01:51:12.95 | Andrew Junius | The only other comment I'd have was the back and forth with respect to the parklet rules. I haven't followed those rules, and I'm sure everything's fine. I have nothing specific except for a process comment. I think the way the rules work is if you pull a permit, And the rules change. And you're not specifically grandfathered in some way or another by the ordinance that adopted the new rules. You are subject to the new rules. So in that respect, the grandfathering is kind of up to, I think the future drafting of the ordinance for the parklet rules. if you actually pull the permit, start construction, and then the rules change, well, then you're vested, and that's not going to be an issue. So just to clarify for the record, that's the way I see things, and I'm certainly happy to support the motion. |
| 01:52:02.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Any other comments? Seeing none, Director Phipps, please call the roll. |
| 01:52:07.30 | Director Phipps | Happy to chair Mr. Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Saad. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Congratulations. |
| 01:52:13.22 | Kristina Feller | Yes. Yes. |
| 01:52:20.23 | Mike Monsef | Yeah. I promise you I thank you for it. |
| 01:52:23.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Next item is adjournment. A motion to adjourn? So moved. |
| 01:52:28.04 | Mike Monsef | Oh. |
| 01:52:29.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, all in favor. |
| 01:52:31.01 | Nastassya Saad | Bye. |
| 01:52:31.03 | Nastassya Saad | Bye. |
| 01:52:31.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:52:31.35 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:52:31.45 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, staff. Thank you, members of the public. We'll see you next time. Probably to you. |
| 01:52:31.48 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, staff. Thank you, members of the public. |
| 01:52:35.16 | Director Phipps | THE END OF THE END OF THE |