| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:00:00.72 | Director Phipps | Yep, and good evening to you once again, Chair, Vice Chair Saad, Planning Commissioner, staff, and members of the public. This evening's meeting is being held at City of Sausalito Council Chambers at 420 Litho Street and is open to members of the public. Members of the public may also access this meeting and provide public comment through Zoom. And with that, I will call roll Commissioner Merlot. Present. Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:00:10.16 | Unknown Staff | I understand. |
| 00:00:21.14 | Director Phipps | Present. Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:00:22.78 | Kristina Feller | here. |
| 00:00:23.32 | Director Phipps | Vice Chair Hassan. |
| 00:00:24.23 | Kristina Feller | Here. |
| 00:00:24.75 | Director Phipps | Chair Luxenberg. Here. We have quorum. All are in attendance. Back to you, Chair. |
| 00:00:29.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And second item is approval of the agenda. I look for a motion, please. |
| 00:00:34.17 | Kristina Feller | So moved. |
| 00:00:34.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.96 | Director Phipps | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:00:35.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | IN THE CITY. Any discussion? Seeing none, Director Phipps, please call the roll. |
| 00:00:39.60 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Saad. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. |
| 00:00:40.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:00:44.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:00:45.48 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 00:00:45.51 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:00:47.16 | Director Phipps | Yes. |
| 00:00:48.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Pass. |
| 00:00:48.43 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:00:48.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Item three is public comments for items not on the agenda. Director Phipps, if you could please give instructions, please. |
| 00:00:56.09 | Director Phipps | Happy to. Thank you. This is the time for the commission to hear from citizens regarding matters not on the agenda, except in very limited situations. State law precludes the commission from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the commission may refer matters not on the agenda to staff or direct that the subject be agendized at a future meeting. 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. And to raise your hand from a phone on the Zoom application, press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. and chair. I have not received any speaker cards in connection with this agenda item. |
| 00:01:50.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you. Somebody's raising their hand in the audience, Judge Fipps. |
| 00:02:00.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | if you could come up to the podium. Did you fill out a speaker card? for the other item but you want to speak about an item not on the agenda yes feel free right now if you give your name and address for the record that'd be appreciated |
| 00:02:10.15 | John Diamant | Thank you. |
| 00:02:13.38 | John Diamant | John Diamant, Post Office Box 2353-94966. Good evening. |
| 00:02:18.46 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 00:02:18.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Good evening. |
| 00:02:20.01 | John Diamant | I've addressed this in the conclusion of my remarks and comment to 7A, but I just wanted to make it verbal. I think we should engage this in future. There's a real deficiency of circulation of information right down to a printed agenda. available at meetings. I go way back consistently to In the 50s, as her second or third job as a working mother, my mother was secretary to the planning commission. So from age 10 or 11, once a month or so, the dinner table would be entirely consumed by the minutes of that meeting. From that age, I've been pretty familiar with planning, commission, and other procedures. I'm in particular concerned that there is no hard copy of important, indeed any items, any longer furnished to the Sauceneta Library. So the digital world that we're in, some would say trapped in, is all well and good. But there really is no substitute for ease of observation, understanding, quick reference, or study to a printed copy. And it would be great if those were once again furnished as they used to be in a binder to the Southlater Library. Thanks so much. |
| 00:03:40.59 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:03:40.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Other comments from the audience? You see anything else on Zoom? |
| 00:03:48.26 | Director Phipps | Chair seeing none in the chamber, looking to the Zoom application for any raised hands. And seeing none, back to you. |
| 00:03:56.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Next item on the agenda, item 4, approval of the Planning Commission minutes for November 13, 2024. I look for a motion to approve. So moved. |
| 00:04:08.40 | Kristina Feller | SECOND. |
| 00:04:09.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | any discussion. Seeing none, Director Phipps, if you could call roll. |
| 00:04:14.72 | Director Phipps | Commissioner Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Saad. Yes. Chair Luxembourg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:04:18.45 | Unknown Staff | Yes. Yes. |
| 00:04:23.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | next item is item five communications director phipps |
| 00:04:27.75 | Director Phipps | No communication items this evening from staff. Thank you, Chair, and back to you. |
| 00:04:31.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Any items from commissions? Seeing none, move on to item six. First item, business items. Adoption of the Sausalito Planning Commission meeting schedule for 2025. I will move to get the item on the floor that the regular Planning Commission meetings in 2025 are set for the second and fourth Wednesdays of the month at 6.30, with the following exceptions. Meeting in January will occur on january 15th uh 2025 and january 29 2025 there will be no meetings in august there will only be one meeting the second week of november november 12th and there'll be only one meeting in the second week of december december 10. uh and these are all described in the attached resolution attached to the agenda i'll look for a second to that motion before we get public comment |
| 00:05:25.18 | Andrew Junius | Second. Thank you. |
| 00:05:26.19 | Jeffery Luxenberg | At this point, we'll have public comment on this item, both here and possibly on Zoom. Director Phillips. |
| 00:05:34.54 | Director Phipps | No submitted speaker cards in connection with this item. Looking to the Zoom application for raised hands. I'll give folks a moment to raise their hand as needed. Going once, going twice. |
| 00:05:39.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | hands. |
| 00:05:39.39 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 00:05:46.64 | Director Phipps | Seeing none, Chair. Back to you. |
| 00:05:47.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Any discussion about the calendar? Yes, Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:05:53.36 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair. Just a couple things. I mean, just based on tradition, we usually allow the City Council to approve their calendar before we approve ours as they take priority on some of these dates. So I'm just putting that out there as a comment. The other thing I'd like to mention is, you know, we've gone a couple years now without joint meetings between City Council and Planning Commission, and typically we've always had one per year. We do have a couple pressing matters that take place, I'll say, in the first quarter of 2025. So I'm just curious if we need to take into consideration or hold any additional dates that might be joint hearings. And then my third comment, and I'll look to Director Phipps to maybe opine on that a little bit. Then I also note between, like, April and June, May. I know you mentioned it's what the second and fourth Wednesday, but We always are very, very busy, like in that timeframe, sort of that spring into summer. Karen Hollweg, And I noticed that we go like two full weeks without meetings at all and so i'm wondering or curious if we could switch made like the seventh and the 21st. Karen Hollweg, Before the holiday and that would keep in the regular every other week just again something to put out there for consideration. Karen Hollweg, So those are those are my thoughts and comments and and perhaps share, you might want to comment on it and director phipps i'd love to hear. from you about some of these other pressing matters in Q1. And any joint. potential hearings we might need to consider as we're adopting a calendar. |
| 00:07:43.94 | Director Phipps | you |
| 00:07:43.96 | Unknown Staff | Thank you, Commissioner. |
| 00:07:44.03 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:07:44.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you go ahead the comment on may if i could so traditionally uh although we don't know and uh we don't have but we do need to set our calendar and we can always amend it uh in may typically the council has may met the first and third uh tuesdays so ours are typically in the opposite weeks and that was the intent here, and hence why the May calendar stays the way it is. And unlike January, the first Tuesday and the first Wednesday are in the same week, and January they're not. So that was why we did what we did. |
| 00:07:45.26 | Unknown Staff | Go ahead. |
| 00:07:45.97 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:08:20.53 | Kristina Feller | I figured. I just wanted to put that out there, but thank you. |
| 00:08:25.54 | Director Phipps | And if I may add a couple more cents to that, we may always create and approve special meetings of the commission as needed to accommodate, you know, a higher level of applications, a greater intensity of work that requires more capacities by staff in both the commission. So we're very much able and happy to do that as needed. As related to the Q1 hot items that you will be hearing, appreciate the question and the sensitivity to that, as this is important. The schedule before you this evening is sensitive to those hot items, and I have already provided counsel with what I'll call a reversed engineer calendar for Q1 and Q2 2025, which, again, is complementary of the meeting schedule that you see here, particularly for the month of January. As I'll note that that is occurring, our meetings are occurring on the third and the fifth Wednesday of that month. And I will also agree with Chair that this calendar is being proposed with the assumption and I would say say the good assumption, that council will continue their first and third Tuesday meeting schedule. So for everybody's edification, that calendar will be going before the council on the 17th of this month. And based on any changes that I will call unsuspected at this time, we'll come back to the commission. But I think calendar as proposed this evening is sensitive to the items that Commissioner Pella brought up and is sensitive to some of the hot items that we will be addressing in January and February next year. |
| 00:08:28.69 | Kristina Feller | We, |
| 00:09:12.89 | Unknown Staff | that you're doing. you |
| 00:09:15.42 | Kent Ibsen | Sorry. |
| 00:09:15.67 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 00:10:05.24 | Kristina Feller | Appreciate that. Thank you. |
| 00:10:06.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And to the comment about joint meetings, those would be special meetings. So we have the ability to schedule those joint meetings with the city council as we may need in the next couple months or so. With that, is there further discussion on the calendar? Seeing none, Director Phipps, please call the roll. |
| 00:10:25.96 | Director Phipps | Happy to. Commissioner Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Vice Chair Assad. Yes. Chair Luxembourg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:10:31.53 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:10:33.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 00:10:33.11 | Nastassya Saad | Yes. |
| 00:10:34.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 00:10:36.40 | David Marlatt | Next item on the agenda. Excuse me, Chair. I'm sorry to take things out of order. It's my mistake. In the communications item, I did have a disclosure that I intended to make regarding Item 7A. |
| 00:10:40.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:10:45.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I was going to, under public hearing, we always do ex parte. So that would be the appropriate time, and I was about to get there, but thank you. I thought I missed. No, no, you did not. So under public hearing this evening, item 7A, we're going to get to 7A, but before we do that, any commissioners have any ex parte communications or any other communications? |
| 00:10:50.44 | David Marlatt | But that would be... Most of all, THE DEMOCRATS. That's what I did. Thank you. |
| 00:11:12.53 | David Marlatt | Commissioner Marla. Yeah, I do. Well, I visited the site, but did not meet or interact with anyone. That's one. But number two, I just wanted to inform you that about 10 years ago or more, a little bit 10 years ago, the applicant, Kent Ibsen Schipollini, is a former client. We did a remodel in Clayton, California. It's been 10 years. I've not had any interaction. So I don't feel like there's any conflict or reason not to participate, but I wanted to make that disclosure. |
| 00:11:40.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:11:40.78 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:11:41.59 | Andrew Junius | Bye. |
| 00:11:41.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, |
| 00:11:41.96 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:11:42.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Juniors. |
| 00:11:42.37 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:11:44.95 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:11:45.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:11:45.05 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 00:11:45.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 00:11:45.25 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:11:45.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:11:46.71 | Kristina Feller | Nothing to declare. |
| 00:11:48.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Vice Chair side. |
| 00:11:49.30 | Nastassya Saad | Nothing to declare. |
| 00:11:50.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And I also have nothing to declare. First item on the public hearing portion of our agenda, item 7A is 715 Bridgeway Boulevard. The applicant and owner, Kent Ipsen, is requesting a design review permit, a variance, two conditional use permits, a minor use permit, a signed permit, and a certificate of appropriateness to convert a vacant historic bank building, formerly Wells Fargo Bank, into a fine dining restaurant in a three-room boutique hotel in the pocket at 715 Bridgeway. And Mr. Mandich, welcome back. And the floor is yours. |
| 00:12:32.37 | Matthew Mandich | Hello, Commissioners. Good evening. Thank you very much chair for introducing the project. As mentioned, this is for the refurbishment and conversion of the existing bank building at 715 bridgeway from a bank formerly Wells Fargo into two new uses a restaurant and boutique hotel. Next slide please. So just to orient us in town here, here's the parcel and questions in 1-5 Bridgeway, centrally located on our commercial corridor in the Central Commercial Zoning District. It's across from Vineyard El Mar Park, which you can see here and here, parking lot one, the ferry landing, as well as two other hotel uses and several restaurant uses along the Bridgeway corridor there. It is also adjacent to the r3 residential zoning district back here which is our densest multi-family residential zoning district next slide please Background on the building is built in 1924, designed by H.H. Winter for the Bank of Sausalito. It was designed to mimic the grand banking temples of major cities at that time, however, on a smaller scale that fits more with the Sausalito landscape. It is a contributor to the Downhound Historic District. It's on the local and state register, and it's eligible for the national register with a listing code of 2D2 the building itself remains largely unaltered especially the facades on the east and south on bridgeway and excelsior lane which are very well preserved now for 100 years so it remains in great shape and one of our prized historic buildings in the city it became the american trust and savings bank before becoming wells fargo and and it was a Wells Fargo bank until July 12th of 2023. The building was purchased by its current owner, Kent Ipsen, in early 2024. Next slide, please. So just a little bit of a project proposal right here. Here's just a rendering from the plan set showing how the front facade on Bridgeway, east facade, would look. Just the rendering there. As you can see, all the character-defining features being well-preserved, signage remaining largely the same, and just some small embellishments and refurbishments and painting to the exterior. Next slide, please. So moving into the project proposal in earnest, the ground floor will be a fine dining restaurant and full bar. It's meant to accommodate 105 guests inside as well as 20 for outdoor dining. Construction of a second floor inside the building is part of the project, and a design review permit is being sought for that. That second floor in the interior building will be for three boutique high-end hotel rooms. the western rear facade is to be removed to create space for a new patio fire pit hot tub and lounge area which interior building will be for three boutique high-end hotel rooms. The western rear facade is to be removed to create space for a new patio, fire pit, hot tub, and lounge area, which will be guest amenities reserved solely for the guests at the hotel. This will all be within the existing perimeter of the existing retaining walls on site, which coincide with the property lines. The exterior will feature new signage, new lighting, some removable flower boxes, as well as a repainting and refurbishment of any features that require it. All defining characteristics are to be preserved and rehabilitated as part of this project. Next slide, please. So it's going to require a number of planning permits, as was announced in the introduction, as well as put on the agenda. It will require a design review permit for the addition of 1,049 square feet of floor area of variance to demolish and remodel existing legal nonconforming structures that are located in the rear setback pursuant to our nonconforming section. It will require a conditional use permit for hotel transient lodging use in the Central Commercial Zoning District. It will also require a conditional use permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on site in the Central Commercial Zoning District. In addition, it will require a minor use permit, which is required for outdoor sidewalk dining. That is typically a permit that's heard by the zoning administrator. However, because it's bundled in with these other discretionary permits, it will also be decided upon and heard by the Planning Commission today. Also a sign permit for new business signage on both the south and east facades and a certificate of appropriateness, which requires a final determination by the Planning Commission. The Historic Preservation Commission already approved an advisory certificate of appropriateness on October 17th so 2024 so the planning commission must render a final determination on that advisory certificate of appropriateness for the changes to the historic building next slide please. So I'm going to kind of walk you through the project from the outside and then move on in. So first we'll look at the front or the eastern facade, which is the one that faces Bridgeway, 715 Bridgeway right here. As you can see, the existing elevation, proposed elevation, very much the same. All the character-defining features, including the frieze, medallions, Romanesque windows, bronze sashes, all those will be preserved and restored. Next slide, please. moving to the, uh, Southern facade right here. You can see again, everything's staying the same, all the character defining features. Um, being again, restored, refurbished and preserved. Um, new paint. New signage, but the science will very much mimic the existing signage of the Wells Fargo. Next slide, please. So just looking a little bit at these exterior details and the pallets chosen here, you can see the freeze up top here. Pallets running from kind of an off-white to a gray graphite and charcoal. Here as well around the window treatments and for the exterior walls. And then some new lighting. Currently there's two LED lights that exist there right now. These will be replaced by two new lighting fixtures that were approved by the HPC as well. Next slide, please. So a little bit of exterior restoration is going to occur as well. As this was an old bank building, there was a hole carved out for a safe deposit box on the left front facade of the building. That will be patched. The gray marble below will be replaced in line with HPC recommendations. The window here will be restored, and there will be a removable flower box hung to kind of cover that restored area. On the other side, on the right side of the facade, of the front, eastern facade, this is where the ATM used to be for those familiar with the building. This space will be converted into a new doorway, glass door right here. A projecting sign, which has in the pocket on it, will be above that. This will be the exclusive entrance for the hotel. So hotel guests will enter through here, which avoids going through the restaurant. There's a specific entrance for the hotel on the side of the building. Next slide, please. So walking ourselves inside the building now, here's the floor plan for the first floor. Here's the sidewalk, bridgeway, main entrance to the restaurant, which there's a little reception desk here. Seating all on the side throughout the interior, kitchen area back here, and a full bar right here. We go over to the side, that door that we saw on the last slide where the ATM used to be will be right here. Provides a separate entrance to the hotel, leads back to a newly installed elevator, which will be right here, and a stair set that leads up to the bathrooms for the restaurant, which are up here on the second floor. Stair set right here, following along. Once you get up to the second floor, as you enter in up the stairs and into the platform that leads you into the restrooms, there is kind of a glass storefront right here, which will allow restaurant patrons to have a look into the amenity area that's proposed for the guests. This is the area that includes a fire pit and a hot tub. I'm sure people enjoying the restaurant will like to make a trip to the bathroom to have a little look in there and get a peek into what amenities are proposed to be offered there. As you can see too as well, this little courtyard patio area opens up onto three rooms. You have the largest suite on the left side here, which extends this area right there, complete with two queen beds, two bathrooms, kitchen, lounge area, and a fireplace in the corner there. In the middle, slightly smaller suite right here with one queen bed, bedroom, or one queen bedroom, excuse me, bathroom, and small kitchenette, as well as a lounge area and another little fireplace right there. And then the other third suite on the far right-hand side of the building, queen bed, bathroom, kitchen, lounge area, and another fireplace on the corner right there. These will then take advantage of the upper floor bed bathroom kitchen lounge area and another fireplace on the corner right there these will then take advantage of the upper floor of those big arched windows and have views out to richardson bay and the harbor and vineyard del mar park below next slide please So. continuing to move up through the back of this area here. This is the lounge area right here. Stair set leading up to a small deck right here with the fire pit. And this will also serve as an emergency access and fire escape access here onto the Excelsior steps right away. There will also be above the... So this was the entranceway into the bathrooms up here to the rear and where I mentioned that storefront. Above that, there'll be another floor housing all the utility equipment, electrical equipment. There'll also be another floor above the kitchen area housing electrical equipment. This is kind of the brains and the guts of the building on this little area on the side here and on this side there, which is why we have another level above that covering all this important equipment. This will be accessed via stair set from Excelsior Lane. This is the upper patio or viewing deck. As you can see in this image, I hope you can see well, there's a little white void here. This is a bit different than what was presented at HPC. After meeting with some of the neighbors after the HPC hearing hearing the applicant decided to restrict and prohibit guest access to the space closest to the excelsior stairs and closest to the lower portion of the retaining wall this will be made a landscaped area and effectively makes the deck much smaller next slide please and we will talk about this in a little more detail as we work our way through the building um Just wanted to present the additional floor area and the floor totals for the new spaces, the restaurant below second floor above with the with the guest rooms and the amenity area. All in all, combined, this will come out to a floor ratio of 1.29, which is below the 1.3 threshold for the commercial zoning district next slide please. Here is also, Images in a section drawing here of the new second floor that will be installed inside the building. As you can see, here's the second floor, one, two, three rooms, so section kind of cutting right through. This is the door that you would use to enter the guest rooms, and here's the main entrance to the restaurant. This is a close-up of how that floor will interact with the windows. It's designed to cross right at one of the cross sections of the window where the mouillons are. So it will be kind of indistinguishable. There's a system here in place to restrict light and things like that, moving up. So create like a clear separation between the rooms above the restaurant below. It's definitely been well thought out and designed. And our historic architect also had some let's say details and some fine touch on this evaluation to get where we are here. And I'm sure the architect can speak a little bit more detail about that. If you have any questions, uh, next slide, please. So moving to this western rear facade, which I know has been the topic of much of the public comment that we've received on this item. Here's a rendering right here. As you can see, this was originally part of the plan, but this space will no longer be used by any hotel guests, effectively making the proposed viewing deck, the rear patio, smaller, restricted access. It would be landscaped as well. This will be a green area. There will be additional trees up there. this is the current situation that exists on the property today this is a existing structures legal non-conforming structures that abut the rear property line which is demarcated by this retaining wall here so you can see the site as it exists today is currently totally built out all the way up to the rear property line while a 15 foot rear setback is required for commercial spaces that abut residential buildings this building has existing legal non-conformities because it built in 1924 so A REAR PROPERTY LINE. WHILE A 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK IS REQUIRED FOR COMMERCIAL SPACES THAT ABUT RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. THIS BUILDING HAS EXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMITIES BECAUSE IT BUILT IN 1924. SO THE LOT IS BUILT ALL THE WAY OUT TO ALL OF ITS PROPERTY LINES ON ALL SIDES. |
| 00:24:52.96 | Matthew Mandich | Um, And then just looking at the rendering again, these are the little storefront doors. You come up through here. Bathrooms would be under this area. This is the utility zone. This ladder provides access to this utility area. There's also a kitchen utility zone here. And then here's the spa and this secondary deck with fire pit. Next slide, please. So again, looking at this a little more detail, this is the existing situation as it is today, built all the way up to the rear lot line. Here is the site plan as the current existing bank. Here's the ground floor with all the tellers right here, safe back here. And then the stairs up to the bathrooms, which will remain in the same location. Bathrooms right here, bathrooms right there, and a storage room and a lunch break room that are currently under these roofing mechanisms. And I know it's a bit difficult to see, but there is a line above here where the applicant has put out the story poles to show where the bottom of that rear deck will be. But I have a different photo. We can see it a little bit better. Next slide, please. So just to address some of these issues that were mentioned concerning privacy and looking into the deck, this is the Del Monte apartments, which are located directly across from the building, across the Excelsior Lane. Here are the Excelsior steps right here, and here's the retaining wall. This shot right here is from looking out what these apartments would see right here, looking directly across. There'd be no privacy impact, no view impact whatsoever. You wouldn't see any of the new structures created down way below this level of retaining wall would be all you would see here. And from this corner of the structure right here, looking back, you would see, and I know it's hard to see in these images, but about two pink flags are visible over there, which on their far north side. So you would see a little bit of the far north of the handrail. And that's about it for any kind of visualization of any of the amenities provided from the public right away. Next slide, please. All right, so here we can see it in a little bit better detail. This is again, can you go back one slide please actually? In order to get that perspective, you have to stand on this handrail, which is quite rickety. I don't recommend it and fully kind of get your chest on this retaining wall and lean over. So that's how I was able to get that image. So next slide. Here's that image of me leaning over the retaining wall. Again, all built out currently in this area all the way back to the rear lot line. This is the yellow line. I know it's kind of faint in this image, but you can see it right here. So it's about three, four feet up from the existing roof to where the deck would be. And then here's the ribbons right here tied onto the line showing the extent of the deck coming out. This deck is 11 feet below the top of this retaining wall. Next slide, please. So just a little bit more on the deck in the back here. These are some section drawings. So this is kind of looking from the north to the south through. Here's the retaining wall right there on the Excelsior stairs. Here's a section of the deck, proposed gate, retaining wall right here, landscaping on the deck, drop down, restrooms, patio, courtyard area, secondary deck there. And then here's an image looking basically through the building from the front. So looking from east to west, you could see start up top. Here's the retaining wall. deck with grass glass railing stair set here area that would be prohibited for guests the secondary deck all the utility equipment housed up in here the electrical room right here with a door leading over to that and then the spa fire pit located very deep down and deeply recessed back up against the wall underneath these overhangs there so next slide please So as discussed at the beginning, this project will require several use permits. The first will be a conditional use permit for a hotel use in the Central Commercial Zoning District pursuant to SMC Table 1024-1. In our code, a hotel is defined as a transient lodging land use. And transient occupancy or lodging in our code is defined to mean occupancy of residential structures, hotel rooms, or dwelling units on a temporary period of less than 30 days. Hotel means any structure or any portions of any structure which is occupied or intended or designed for occupancy by transients for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes, and includes any condominium, inn, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, tourist home or house, rooming house, apartment house, dormitory, public or privateging house tourist home or house rooming house apartment house dormitory public or private club mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location or other similar structures or portions thereof so very wide definition of a hotel which this uh hotel and in very much fits within um and again i know i've seen some concerns in the public comment about noise. The city of Sausalito does have a noise ordinance longstanding violations will be issued. The noise ordinance governs every part of the city, including ambient noise levels in the central commercial and the R three zoning districts. Next slide, please. Conditional use permit is also required for the sale of alcohol. This is all alcohol, beer, wine, and spirits for on-site consumption in the Central Commercial Zoning District. And a minor use permit is also required for outdoor dining on sidewalks pursuant to our special uses code 1044-22-OC. Sidewalk dining encroachment agreement is also required once the minor use permit, if and when the minor use permit is approved. that's an administrative action done by the director in the the community development department outdoor dining uses are subject to a number of conditions in our code as well as any other conditions listed in the draft resolution outdoor dining right now is proposed for 20 people it is on a 12 foot wide sidewalk one of the largest and widest sidewalks in the city and is nearby other multiple outdoor dining areas in the central commercial zoning district next slide please So just wanted to highlight here that these are the stars that you see on the map here, here, and here are all approved outdoor dining locations in the vicinity. These all have minor use permits that were issued to them. Here is the subject property kind of right in the middle. You've got Copita, soon to be Cultivar, Lapperts, and Napa Burger Co. all on this corridor here. So adding another star out there. Also, again again you've got the proposed hotel use here with another hotel here another hotel here ferry landing park lot parking lot one very centrally located a lot of economic synergy between hotels and restaurants and bars in this area next slide please Also, a sign permit is requested by the applicant to install the signage on this historic building. As you can see here, the sign program proposed mimics the Wells Fargo program very similarly. It's proposing 42.75 square feet of signage. The Wells Fargo program was 42.25 square feet of signage, so very similar. Replacing a projecting sign with a wall sign here, replacing a wall sign with a wall sign here replacing a wall sign with a projecting sign here and very similar on the eastern facade or this is the eastern facade excuse me very similar sign program identical on the south facade next slide please. A little bit more detail on these signs. These will be internally illuminated signs through translucent letters, black signage with clear translucent letters for the wall signs and the projecting sign here. While lighted signage is typically discouraged in the historic district, it is not prohibited, and the HPC did approve this signage as proposed. There is also a small LED light strip, which you can see here, which will be exterior lighting for the sign, the wall sign up on top of the freeze right here, be recessed into the eaves of the building and the actual lights themselves will not be visible from any public right away. Next slide, please. So finally, we get to the certificate of appropriateness, which was approved previously by the Historic Preservation Commission. Again, just going over some of the character defining features of this building that will be preserved. You have the frieze over here, the medallions, Corinthian column capitals, bronze sashes, and Romanesque arched windows, all of which will be preserved and restored and maintained as part of this project. Next slide, please. We also had a historic evaluation of the project for the for the certificate of appropriateness carried out by our city's historic consultant, historic architect, Jerry Hollon. She determined that the proposed project is in conformance with the secretary of interior standards for the treatment for historic properties. She also determined that the proposed project is in conformance with Sausalito historic design guidelines. And she recommended approval of the certificate of appropriateness because all the required findings in our municipal code can be made. The Historic Preservation Commission provide an advisory certificate of appropriateness approved on October 17th, 2024. Next slide, please. So. That brings us to the recommendation staff recommend the planning commission approve application 2024 00147 for 715 bridgeway and adopt the attached draft resolution approving the design review permit variance to conditional use permits minor use permit sign permit and the certificate of appropriateness staff finds that the proposed project is designed appropriately and will not result in a substantial adverse impact on the historic resource or the historic district. It is in conformance with the Secretary of Interior standards 1 through 10. The proposed uses fill a difficult... not result in a substantial adverse impact on the historic resource or the historic district it is in conformance with the secretary of interior standards one through ten the proposed uses fill a difficult vacant space in the heart of the downtown central commercial corridor and the proposed uses would be a boon for economic development with sales tax being collected from the restaurant as well as tlt tax or transient occupancy tax for the hotel which is sits at 14%, which is certainly a high number for most municipalities. Staff finds that the proposed project is also in conformance with all the required findings in the Sassal City Municipal Code for the permits described above, as was detailed in the staff report, as well as in the draft resolution. And of course, approval is subject to the conditions of approval provided in the draft resolution resolution as well as any conditions that might be put on the project this evening. So with that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to take any questions from commissioners. Thank you. |
| 00:35:03.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Mr. Mandich. And again, as always, very thorough in your presentation. So we thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Questions? |
| 00:35:12.05 | David Marlatt | Commissioner Merlock. Yeah, thank you, Chair, and thank you also, Mr. Mandich, for a great presentation. I had maybe three questions relating all to process, because I know we're going to hear from the applicant and the architect soon. And part of it is just for my own information. On the architect's drawing A3.1, which we don't have here, there is a rectangle shown in the um staircase for an underground transformer uh future transformer i believe which would be required um question is does that's going to be subject to some sort of encroachment permit would that encroachment permit come back to the commission |
| 00:35:50.48 | Matthew Mandich | No, I don't believe so. That would be issued by DPW. Thank you. |
| 00:35:53.77 | David Marlatt | Okay, so that's not subject to Part of my questions are, is anything coming back to us once we get through tonight? My second question relates to the Historic Preservation Commission's review and Jerry Hallinan's letter. So her review is based on the drawings of October 9. The drawings that we were provided were dated November 19 with an update of November 21. And I don't know if you can answer this, or maybe the architect. I'm not asking for detailed differences, but were there any substantial differences that we should be aware of that we might be approving tonight that Historic Planning Commission has not approved? Just irrelevant to them. |
| 00:36:34.54 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah. Yes. So the main difference is that piece of deck that has been removed or not removed, but prohibited access, which will now be a green area, landscaped area. That wasn't the original planning set from the Historic Preservation Commission. The light fixtures originally proposed were of a gas lamp, kind of a faux gas lamp light. They didn't like those and they wanted a more period appropriate piece. So we got different light fixtures on the front by the entrance. Um, and then, uh, they wanted to make sure that the, um, safe deposit box was restored with the same gray marble or something as close to it as possible. Um, so that was kind of the only recommendations that came out of that hearing and the plan set that you see today. Um, A few little things change it. There's a roof put over the kitchen area to house the electrical area above that. And then I think just, and the architect can speak onto this more, but very minor changes with that deck. uh upper deck thing i told you about already with the the greenscaping and I think that's pretty much it. The addition of the fireplaces, I don't think the two fireplaces on the corners were in the original HPC set. But other than that, that's all. |
| 00:37:48.44 | David Marlatt | So at any case, I think it's normal that the staff reviews the final permit it's set for compliance with the approved. So when this comes through as a final building permit, you're reviewing the drawings to make sure that nothing is snuck in that was not previously approved or understood to be approved. Yeah. My third question, and I'm happy to see the floor, regarding the variance in the rear yard. And just to help me understand, unfortunately, the drawings that we have don't really show, I couldn't find a drawing that shows what would be kind of fictitious original or so-called natural grade. We see the steps, but of course, it's been altered heavily. And we don't see the neighbor's property above and below and the sidewalk below. And so there's a section in your slides. But maybe if you can walk us through exactly what it is that we're being asked to approve under a variance. Because most of the deck, and I'm not sure, because I don't have adequate drawings, but most of the deck seems to me that it would be below, less than 24 inches above the so-called natural grade. But then there are parts that are not. So is the entire deck subject to a variance? Because if we were to draw a diagonal and follow the Sausalito code, much of it is in fact below the ground, understanding that's |
| 00:38:02.34 | Matthew Mandich | Correct. Yeah. |
| 00:38:05.58 | Tim Kahn | Thank you. |
| 00:38:05.60 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:39:04.17 | David Marlatt | you know. |
| 00:39:05.00 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, no, for sure. That's a good point. Interesting one. The reason that we decided and landed on the variance, there was actually a number of ways we could have approached this from a permitting process. I mean, a nonconformity permit was certainly discussed because you have existing nonconforming structures that abut that rear property line that, you know, could be remodeled potentially subject to a nonconforming permit, potentially subject to no additional discretionary permit and just a building permit, depending on how you read it. If you want to take a very, um, you know, very wooden reading of the 51% demolition. The building's not actually demolishing more than 51%. However, because those structures in the back there are being pretty much completely demolished and a new system and structure is being constructed within that rear setback. And because in the non-conformity section, we have a portion of that section that says when a structure is completely demolished, it can't be rebuilt unless it's in code compliance or a variance is obtained so we thought that the variance was actually the the proper permitting route it's a higher bar to get past it's higher higher bar than non-conformity permit and certainly than just going to a building permit so we thought for the construction within that rear setback which is required between a residential zone and commercial zone however you could read it as if you wanted to if you wanted to take a very liberal reading and say that that retaining wall is essentially the wall of the structure and everything you're doing within that is like just interior redesign so if you wanted to think of like a house that's on a zero lot line and someone does the redoes their kitchen they don't need any permit for that they don't need a non-conformity permit unless they were to change the windows around but they would just need a building permit so if you wanted to read it very liberally you wouldn't even need any kind of discretionary permit to redo that however we know this was a sensitive area of the project something that we had already received comment from the rear neighbors on something that other neighbors were concerned about so we went for a higher bar and a higher level on the variance there. So that was kind of the reasoning that led us to choose the permitting path of the variance, if that makes sense. I know it's a little bit convoluted, |
| 00:41:06.87 | David Marlatt | Yeah, no, definitely. |
| 00:41:07.17 | Matthew Mandich | The code is is very when it comes to nonconforming structures, our code, as some of the commissioners know, certainly as council knows very, very difficult to interpret and kind of contradicts and conflicts itself throughout that whole section. So trying to err on the side of caution and setting a higher bar for approval by going with the variance throughout. |
| 00:41:27.05 | David Marlatt | Okay, so the variant, and I really appreciate the thoughtfulness of this, so I'm really glad to hear. But just to conclude then, so the variants, the elements that are subject to variants are pretty much all the constructed elements within the rear 15 feet. Correct. And then call it a day. That's what we're talking about. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, thank you very much. |
| 00:41:44.20 | Andrew Junius | That's right. |
| 00:41:46.27 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:41:47.37 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:41:47.47 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 00:41:47.49 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Commissioner Marlott. Commissioner Junius, any questions? No. Commissioner Feller. |
| 00:41:54.83 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Senior Planner Mandich. That was a great presentation, and the staff reports really very comprehensive as well. So thank you for that. I've got a series of questions here. Um, that I just want to go through, and these are in no particular order, but I want you to just clarify for the record if you could. the noticing that you went through for this particular project, so it was on the agenda tonight. Can you expound on that a little bit? |
| 00:42:28.80 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, sure. Notices were sent out on the Tuesday before Thanksgiving. I think that was the 26th. So well in line with the 10 day noticing period well before the site was also physically posted that day as well with the flyer advertising the meeting. And so it was a duly noticed public hearing by the letter of the law. |
| 00:42:49.67 | Kristina Feller | Great, perfect, thank you. Sounds like standard procedure. Excuse me, sir. I'm sorry. Sorry. Excuse me, sir. This is not the time for the for the public. We'll get to you. So not not to worry. The other questions I had are, |
| 00:43:07.09 | Matthew Mandich | Oh, and sorry, just to add that was sent to neighbors in a 300 foot radius. That's what I'm noticing just to clarify. |
| 00:43:10.99 | Kristina Feller | it. |
| 00:43:11.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:11.32 | Kristina Feller | of. |
| 00:43:11.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:13.40 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. can you talk to me a little bit or explain a little bit to all of us about Um, the how, what the thought is behind any kind of valet or drop off, because this is a very precarious area on Bridgeway. just before or in between two crosswalks. And of course it's a small little downtown |
| 00:43:38.30 | Unknown Staff | Yep. |
| 00:43:38.36 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Anyway, was there thought or discussion that you had with the owner on that? |
| 00:43:44.13 | Matthew Mandich | Well, it is red curbed all the way in front of the building, and there is a small green space a little bit further north, kind of getting towards Copita, which was used prior for people using the ATM. So a lot of people would stop and park. So we haven't talked specifically about valet, but I'm sure the applicant and architect could offer some insight into that. There is the parking lot directly across the street, parking lot one. And we have had some conversations about potentially renting out some spaces for specific hotel use where guests can park and be dropped off and things like that. So trying to avoid a lot of people pulling into the red, obviously, and keeping that clear. And the bus also stops right by the Excelsior stairs frequently. So we don't want to, you know, get in the way of any bus traffic. Yeah. |
| 00:44:24.61 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 00:44:24.66 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:44:30.38 | Kristina Feller | Well, thank you for... I'm not sure. discussing that with the applicant, working through that. Moving on to the exterior dining. I note, and I'm looking on my computer here, that there are three, maybe four tops outside. |
| 00:44:48.05 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:44:48.72 | Kristina Feller | So, you know, 12 seats. |
| 00:44:52.15 | Unknown Staff | Yeah. |
| 00:44:52.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I would be very curious to understand how 20 seats would really fit there. You know, noting as you did that this is a more generous depth of a sidewalk there. We want to be very mindful as the proposed sidewalk dining and parklet program that is still in draft form. would require generally that that exterior seating be up against the building. So, Have you seen a different drawing or rendering that had 20 seats outside? |
| 00:45:31.60 | Matthew Mandich | No, I've only seen the rendering that you're referring to with, I believe, three, four tops in the rendering. Yeah, I believe there is space for a couple more on the other side of the doors. So you might be able to add another two potentially, which would get you to 20. I'd have to look at the specs of the length of the linear frontage of the building. But is a generous sidewalk it is 12 feet wide you could easily have a path of travel of five feet and still have those tables there within the seven foot area without impacting any pedestrians the applicant has requested 20 seats but if that doesn't seem feasible to the commission i'm sure they'd be willing to discuss |
| 00:46:13.72 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And you know I know also note like on the drawings, it talks about the name of the project being the pocket sauce Lido but we're talking about. in the pocket as signage and all of that. So Is in the pocket just the hotel element and the pocket is the restaurant? |
| 00:46:32.14 | Matthew Mandich | Correct, yeah. So kind of two uses both being represented there, different signage, pocket, in the pocket, in the pocket, rejecting sign by the door, pocket by the restaurant. |
| 00:46:42.53 | Kristina Feller | And then, you know, I think you had a slide at the very beginning of your presentation that, mentioned 105 seats for dining. |
| 00:46:51.95 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:46:52.60 | Kristina Feller | So. When that was anticipated, what are the paths of travel for egress? |
| 00:47:00.84 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, so all of the ingress and egress have been approved by the fire department. The rendering actually shows, I think, about 84 seats inside. The request for 105 is in case there's other people at the bar, things like that. And that's the occupancy of the building. And I think Clay or the architect can clarify a little bit on that when it's their turn to present. But the request is obviously for what the building can support and nothing more than that. And, again, the rendering has, again, somewhere in the 80s on the seats. And ingress, egress, all looked over by fire department, all approved or conditionally approved. And I did provide letters to the commissioners on that as well after Commissioner Marlott requested some information on that. So I wanted to send those around to everyone as well. |
| 00:47:45.36 | Kristina Feller | Perfect. And I'm and some of these questions I'm asking just for clarification. Yeah, absolutely. On the record. So I want to make sure that those letters are also available to the public or attached to the to the agenda. Yeah, sure. As we go forward for the avoidance of any doubt on on particular matters. |
| 00:47:49.89 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, absolutely. Okay. |
| 00:47:57.72 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, sure. |
| 00:48:01.82 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah, no, I can certainly attach those typically, just also for clarity for the public that's here. I mean, anytime we're taking a project forward to a planning commission meeting, it's we've already gone through the process of departmental review and SMFD and DPW and things like that. So, but yes, for sure. I believe those letters should have been attached. So I'll make sure to do that. |
| 00:48:22.87 | Kristina Feller | You had a excellent slide that had the stars on it. It was an aerial that with all the other either hotel and or outdoor dining or restaurant activities. And I'm not going to try to throw you a curveball right now, but I think we want to um, be clear about what some of the, the, uh, hours of operation are for the exterior, the seating in particular. Um, certainly, uh, the, uh, what's happening in kind of catty corner to this at, at what will be cultivar, um, they have quite a lot more outdoor dining and outdoor activity, uh, on that spot. And so I just want to be clear. |
| 00:48:47.42 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:49:08.87 | Kristina Feller | in this particular hearing what those benchmarked times are for operation. So I don't know if you have those on your – we need to come back to that. We can put that to the side if we come back to that. |
| 00:49:21.17 | Matthew Mandich | So I did list the hours that were requested by the applicant in the staff report for the operation of the restaurant. I did not differentiate between indoor and outdoor at the time. And, you know, I feel like oftentimes when we've taken businesses forward, especially restaurants to the commission, this is kind of the place we hammer out those hours. And, you know, you can... |
| 00:49:21.19 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:49:37.42 | Unknown Staff | Yeah. |
| 00:49:39.06 | Matthew Mandich | Ask, you know, applicant has a request and then we have a discussion and we get to where we need to be on, on a decision. So, um, yeah, I'm, you know, I'm sure that can be discussed further, but the hours that I put in the staff report were those that were requested and, uh, I did not differentiate between indoor and outdoor. I do also point out that obviously the outdoor wouldn't be probably an operation year round considering, you know, some of our tougher weather in the winter months, things like that. So we'll see, you know, what the applicant has to say about all that when that becomes their time to present. |
| 00:50:10.94 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, you know, I would like to refer back to those that are maybe a little closer to this particular property because I want to recognize that there have been some concerns expressed about noise. And so... You know, the fact of the matter is there are other establishments that are larger. that have actually more outdoor areas than this particular property. And those hours are actually longer than what this particular applicant has expressed as their interest for operations. So that's why I'm asking for that, because we live on the water. Water reverberates sound quite a bit. And this is a commercial district. So these are functions to be expected in a commercial district. But I would like, you know, at some point this evening, maybe we can reference back to the closer properties to this particular one in terms of their operating hours and exterior operating hours as well. |
| 00:51:19.08 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, absolutely. We can certainly look into some of the approvals that were given for the other outdoor dining areas in the vicinity and on that Bridgeway corridor there. Yeah, it's a very, it's a busy part of the city. It's loud and a lot of tourists walking through there all the time. Bus picks up there. It's a very highly trafficked area. You've got a big line of people out front of the Lapperts all the time, which is just right down the street. A much tighter area too for the outdoor dining that occurs there. And yeah, I mean, it's very much a reasonable expectation. I think that when you live in a commercial zone, there will be commercial activity around |
| 00:51:57.01 | Kristina Feller | So sort of the last question I have, and then I'll yield back to the rest of my colleagues, are regarding the second floor that is proposed for this particular property. And I know that I spent some time looking back at HPC and what they were talking about. they had expressed, you know, some, I won't call them concerns because I don't think that's fair, but they were interested in sort of what that second floor would look like from the exterior since these are such large and grand windows. And so I want to know if you've had further conversations with the applicant or any modifications that had been made per Commissioner Marlott's question here regarding that. |
| 00:52:46.02 | Matthew Mandich | Yeah, thank you for that. That actually was another addition that was made to this plan set. There's a much more fleshed out image of that section right there showing how the second floor interacts with and connects to the window. It will not be supported in any way by the window frame or anything like that. It's just how that connection works. So they'd ask for a little bit more clarity on that, and that has been provided in the image that you see there and that. Um, Yeah, that's... I'm sure the architect can offer a little bit more on that. It's not my specialty about how all those elements interact with each other when it |
| 00:53:23.02 | Unknown | comes to the floor. |
| 00:53:23.70 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:53:23.72 | Unknown | you. |
| 00:53:23.87 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:53:24.07 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:53:24.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:24.22 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. |
| 00:53:24.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:24.81 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you, Matthew. |
| 00:53:27.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Feller. Vice Chair, questions? |
| 00:53:31.11 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thank you to my colleagues. You asked many of the questions I was thinking of. I just wanted to ask one general question in terms of noise complaints, because we, of course, have the noise ordinance, which we all know falls on Saucelato PD in the after hours. Who would be responsible, and I'm noting this particularly to the in aspect, if you have guests, because there's no front desk as far as I can understand from everything I've read. So it must be, and I'll ask these questions for the applicant, maybe a self check-in type experience. If there are Sausalito PD complaints and a noise violation is issued, is that for the person occupying the room or is that to the? owner of the inn. |
| 00:54:19.44 | Matthew Mandich | So there will be a staff person on site and there will be someone that that meets the guests there at the hotel and gets them checked in and goes over ground rules and things like that. And I'll leave it to the applicant to explain a little bit more how that process works and how it's worked with his other boutique hotel in Carmel. But, yes, there's also going to be security cameras, of course, in the back area. and if there are any noise complaints, I imagine that will be addressed to the staff person running the inn and those will be relayed to any guests in the room and of course noise complaints and violations if they occur come with fines and things like that so um and you know we we do have some hours built into the conditions of approval for that amenity space you know we don't expect people splashing around the hot tub at 11 p.m. You know, I mean, that's just kind of standard practice for any hotel that public spaces will have a certain end time. And in this and for the commercial zone, the noise ordinance restricts noise after 10 p.m. And so that's what we've put into the conditions of approval. |
| 00:55:19.56 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. I think the rest are for the applicant. Thank you, Chair. |
| 00:55:23.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Vice Chair Saad. Let's see. I have some questions on stairways. I'm going to leave those to the architect and the applicants. And I also had questions about the hours of operation. And as part of this discussion, if we could go back and look at, even if we do it this evening, the resolution for cultivar, because we were specific about outside and inside and Lappert's fish and chips. So if we could have that information available when we bring this back up to the dais, that would be helpful. With that, I'll take my other questions for the applicant. Is there any other questions of staff, Commissioner Fallon? |
| 00:56:03.25 | Kristina Feller | Could we include Capita in that list that you just provided, since that's closer to this as well? |
| 00:56:09.39 | Matthew Mandich | Sure, we can look into that. |
| 00:56:11.47 | David Marlatt | Commissioner Marlow. Thanks. Just two very quick follow-up questions. One regarding noise, because there's obviously been a lot of concerns raised. And I noticed that the kitchen exhaust hood and the condensers for the restaurant are relatively close to the property line on a roof. At what point does staff, or maybe it's the building department, evaluate the decibel ratings for the actual equipment? I know that we have the ordinances, but at what point, just to reassure the public, is that verified or controlled? |
| 00:56:43.08 | Matthew Mandich | That would probably be during the building permit phase. That's not something that we would, I mean, it's not there. So we can't really control that at the planning permit phase. Of course, if there's any, I mean, we have very specific codes in our municipal code and very specific ordinances about mechanical equipment, sounds, odors, things like that. Those all have to be followed, of course. So, you know, if there's any issues with that, that would be become a code enforcement issue that, you know, of course, if, but as part of the program. |
| 00:57:02.91 | Unknown Staff | Of course. You know, if there's any issues |
| 00:57:10.97 | David Marlatt | process, it's the building department that will request those specifications, not the planning department. Correct. Thank you. |
| 00:57:14.21 | Matthew Mandich | Okay. |
| 00:57:16.95 | David Marlatt | And then the other one, just to follow up on Commissioner Feller's question very quickly, the detailed drawing of the connection, because I intend to ask the applicant more about this, of the floor to the window wall, that detail itself has not been seen by the HBC. I know it's responsive to a concern, but that detail has not been reviewed by the HBC. |
| 00:57:36.23 | Matthew Mandich | Um, that's a great question. I'm trying to remember. I think I did run that. Did we, we did get that back to the HPC for review and for, to Jerry actually to our historic architect and they approved of that redesign. Yeah. Thank you. |
| 00:57:47.81 | David Marlatt | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:57:50.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you and to Commissioner fellows comment about posting the fire department comments as well as the Other comments that we received in that regard if you could also post these new drawings to the agenda just for the record I which is... |
| 00:58:07.93 | Matthew Mandich | you |
| 00:58:07.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The drawings with the window, how the floor works in conduction. |
| 00:58:13.04 | Matthew Mandich | That's in the current plan set. That's what we have. That's in the current plan. |
| 00:58:15.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I missed that one. Okay. Thank you. With that, we'll now have the presentation by the applicant. You will have 15 minutes to do a presentation. If you want to save some time for any rebuttal, please keep a crack of the clock. The clock will be up there for you. And I look forward to the presentation. Thank you. |
| 00:58:36.98 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you, commissioners. |
| 00:58:39.84 | Kent Ibsen | It's great to be here and be able to present this to this body today. I am, I'm the owner of the pocket and I'm the off and the owner of the, in the pocket. So. I also happen to be the owner of the building, but the way we do things in our business is, I make significant investments into the properties that I own and because I'm very comfortable with the tenant who is me. And so it's very difficult to ever take the kind of investment that what we are putting into this building into someone else's building. And so most of our properties, we, we improve and we are also the tenant. I offer that up because I'm not a developer that I'm a, I'm a businessman and, We own restaurants and some small hospitality places. And then we find unique, interesting, outrageously cool spaces to house these businesses. And this one is surely at the pinnacle of that list, at least for the projects that I've pursued. So I think there's a little bit of a difference between a developer and business owners. And so these two things dovetail together, but I'm not someone that's buying a building and giving it out for whoever pays me the most lease, where it's an all-inclusive project to build something that just works in this community and ultimately becomes an asset. My role as the CEO of The Pocket and in The Pocket, to build something that just works in this community and ultimately becomes an asset. My role as the CEO of The Pocket and In The Pocket is to create and craft a five-star project dining and lodging experience. And we've had great success with that in Carmel and received tremendous reviews on on boats. As the owner of the building, and to me more importantly because I laid awake nights when I was in Eastern Europe and I couldn't think of anything other than this building. And I kept telling my wife that I had jet lag. She's like, geez, it's been a week. But I would go to sleep. I'd just stare at this building all night long. So more importantly, as the owner of the building, I'm the steward. I feel like I'm a steward of the historic building that has been a landmark in this community forever. And so it's my job to safeguard and protect that landmark and also energize it and allow more people in the community, both locals and tourists to come in. and experience it in its full glory. The Pocket, the Pocket Restaurant is a vibey restaurant. energized, upbeat restaurant that caters to uh, It could be a guy coming in off the ferry and just having an appetizer and a cocktail. It also could be a 50-year anniversary and someone wants Chateau de Fee Rothschild and Bone and Ribeye. It can, it caters to all. It is not an anniversary or a date place. It is. a place for everyone and there's something for everyone at the pocket restaurant in the pocket. is exclusive and it is They're small, just like the place in Carmel. They're small, they're unique. They're heavily amenitized. It is not a place that you walk by and accidentally bounce into and say, oh, let's get a room tonight. It is a curated experience that starts right when you make your reservation. You make your reservation, you'll have a welcome ambassador that reaches out to you. They coordinate your arrival time. We ask that 15 minutes before you tell us what your arrival time will be exactly and what your beverage of choice is. Once they take their luggage across the street, they're ours. And that welcome ambassador is in charge of them for their entire stay. We take their luggage. We give them their beverage of choice. We take them upstairs. We either sit around the fireplace or in their actual suites that they have rented for the evening that is where we teach them about the rules of the of the property what quiet hours are what could be used when they can be used how the drapes work how the fireplace works how the sono system works how the tv works so these people that are coming in and spending a quite a handsome sum, they don't spend their two days on property trying to establish a learning curve on how to get the drapes open. So we walk them all through that. The welcome ambassador also curates the entire experience. So if you're staying in the pocket, you always have a table at the pocket. You also can be served in your suite from the restaurant. When the restaurant is open, it will cater into those suites, just like room service. If they need transportation, if they need other restaurant recommendations, if they need where the local grocery store is, that is all curated through the welcome ambassador. And the welcome ambassador happens to work for me in Sausalito. And she wanted to come to this property. She's completely enamored with this property. And so she's moving here. And so it is a tried tested product that we put in front of the Carmel by the Sea community, and the actual person that oversees that will be moving up here and taking that role. So it's a very bespoke. elevated experience to stay in these three suites. just to walk you through the property, the hot tub and that TV, those are Very, very low below that retaining wall, maybe 26, 27 feet. And it's under a covered patio. There is no bar there. there is a counter that is a service counter. if the restaurant brings things up, That's to put things there and stage it for the guests of the inn. You cannot be on that property unless you have a key card. That's the only way you can get out there. It's the only way you can get in the emergency access, and it's the only way that you can get to the roof deck. The roof deck is quite simply not a party deck. What we try to do is create spaces for these three suites. One could be next to this fireplace. One could be here. One could be in the hot fireplace one could be here one could be in the hot tub where no one's on top of each other and they're not in this space all crammed in it's this where everyone has their own little space If they're with their partner or they're having coffee in the morning or whatever's going on, They have little spaces that are very special to move around to. So that is how the inn works. Now there is another fireplace on a midway elevator. You can't see that rooftop. It looks across at another rooftop garden, but that's all behind the retaining wall. And, um, That has a fireplace there as well. That's on the way going out to the stairwell, and that's part of our emergency egress. The roof deck has no amenities. |
| 01:05:49.95 | Unknown Staff | Wow. |
| 01:06:00.44 | Kent Ibsen | There's no bars, no sinks, no toilets, no nothing. It's a garden and a place to sit and enjoy the exact same view that everyone else gets to enjoy all over this community. And it's all behind protected walls. Just for a little. I'm a little bit height challenged. I'm 5'9", and I would say that this is very close to the top of the wall. So I'm standing on the deck just to provide some perspective. And then it goes up the hill from back there. So it's a very protected space. I have tried to work with the neighbors. We did send out originally at the request of the city, so they would be kind to send out a 600-foot radius of what the plan is, what are you thinking? I did that. We didn't really hear much back from that, but then when they sent out the cards for the HPC, we started to hear some things. And then after the HPC meeting, Patrick Kahn, he had mentioned that he wanted to see on the Excelsior side, he'd like to see a green or a garden space on that side. And we said that's fine. So that was the genesis of making the deck smaller. And then we met with him and his attorney. And we tried to work through different things. We even offered up to, to put up a green wall on his side of the, the retaining wall at our expense because it would just add as an additional buffer. And I think the quote was, you're not creating a solution for your problem on my property. What I do want to convey, and I don't want this to be Mr. Poopypants thing, and I want this to be a very positive experience between the neighbors and the community and myself, But when we bought that property, That property had massive trees all along that wall. They were at least 20 feet high, and it was solid. You could not see the property, which is the vacated, undeveloped property that the cons owned. It's a sliver of land that's in between their home. Couldn't see any of it. They were all cut down. since I bought the building. Thank you. Thank you. So I just want to be clear that some of these problems arose from things that this was just completely unnecessary. It was probably two decades of vegetation that was glorious. And that home up there saw over the top of it and captured the entire view. All of the trees were destroyed. I did not mention that to Patrick because I didn't want to be that guy. So I just said, I, Hey, We'll build a green fence here. And That was not an option. But the simple fact of the matter, and there's pictures, you can just go on Google Earth, and you'll see massive trees all along that wall. This was a non-issue. Everything was moot. You could not see into anything. And they would have helped. They don't. trees and stuff don't stop noise, but they help. That was all there. And I can't glue them back on. They're gone forever. And so we're in a little bit of a kerfuffle here. But, you know, we're open to revisiting the solution of putting that wall in. So... I want to save some time, and so I'll wait for any questions that you have of me, and I'll get back to my seat. |
| 01:09:40.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That sounds good. Well, I would stay at the podium. We'll stop the clock, and we'll have questions of the commissioners of you at this time. Thank you. |
| 01:09:48.12 | Andrew Junius | Okay. So with that, Commissioner Marlott. I just know, will the architect also be presented? |
| 01:09:54.97 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:09:56.93 | Kent Ibsen | I can answer one question about the seating on the outside. Was it your question on the patio in the front? At the front of the restaurant. |
| 01:10:07.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | There's a question about the number of seats. There's 12 shown in the drawing. Correct. So we... |
| 01:10:10.78 | Kent Ibsen | correct so we we don't have we haven't completely bird dogged that um it is it is i mean maybe from sausalito standards um it seems like a robust patio it it's not um so we are going to be limited and we're not going to over stuff it i did see a really great vision of what it could be and that's at the barrel house. The way they've utilized their patio where they have that railing system and people sit right on it, that allows a little bit of free space and then you could put bistro tables against the wall. I have no problems conditioning at 20 I think that you. That would probably be what you could get there if it was properly laid out. We put those tables in there just to basically express to the commission that We intend to have dining out out front, but it has to be further revised. But it's about seven and a half to eight feet that we have to deal with. So you need some sort of counter system and then some sort of bistro table against the wall. |
| 01:11:11.33 | Kristina Feller | Just for clarification, are you talking about the sidewalk dining? Yes. Okay. Okay. |
| 01:11:14.48 | Kent Ibsen | Yes. |
| 01:11:15.63 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:11:15.72 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah, I was I went to the after the HBC meeting, I I went to the barrel house and I looked outside and I'm like, This is brilliant. And the way they did it, the way they took very little space and utilized it really nicely. |
| 01:11:30.41 | Kristina Feller | Chair, can I ask a follow-up? |
| 01:11:31.87 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 01:11:34.55 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Marlott, |
| 01:11:34.58 | Andrew Junius | Commissioner Marlott will have a feedback. |
| 01:11:37.82 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I love that question. This is just a following question to the topic that you've brought up, and thank you for |
| 01:11:41.81 | Andrew Junius | to. |
| 01:11:46.53 | Kristina Feller | being here and discussing your project with us. Um, You're talking about the sort of the all-glass railing at the barrel house. |
| 01:11:56.17 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:11:56.57 | Kristina Feller | The difference is that is actually on their property. It is not where you are looking on the sidewalk. You'd be talking about a very different encroachment agreement into the sidewalk for a structure of sorts, and that is not what is in front of us here tonight. Is that something that you have anticipated. |
| 01:12:15.96 | Kent Ibsen | No, I just thought it was brilliant. Whatever the rules are, we'll fully comply with it. And if it means we limit the seats just to the four tops, the purpose of that is not so much this big economic boondoggle of tables that come in because actually the weather is somewhat inclement for everybody. for outside dining here. It's to energize the space. That is a massive building and just something to create some energy, put candles on, if there's a little heater out there, something that's cute and welcoming and pulling people in. That's actually why I originally put the gas lamps on the building. I thought that they were really cool, but I was informed that I was 20 years too late. Okay. Yeah, that it was electricity then. But it was really just to kind of add that warmth and kind of suck you in when you come off the ferry building and be like, Oh, that looks like a place I want to be. So we're open. |
| 01:13:13.52 | Unknown Staff | I'm not sure. |
| 01:13:13.57 | Unknown Staff | Okay. |
| 01:13:13.98 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:13:15.50 | Kent Ibsen | amenable to, we're not going to overstuff it. It needs to look very nice. And when people do sit out there, it needs to be an intimate, wonderful experience. So it was just an idea that I thought was really good. |
| 01:13:25.25 | Kristina Feller | THE FAMILY. Appreciate the clarification and thank you, Commissioner Marlott. Thank you. |
| 01:13:30.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just if I could, I want to add on to that. The plan is before shows the tables outside a maximum of 20 seats. If you were to do anything other than that, you would need to come back for an actual plan. |
| 01:13:43.63 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah, we wouldn't put any more than 20 seats. It's just how it's configured because we so the reason I thought the railing was a really good idea for obviously for them, it's so you don't fall and plummet into the ocean. But for us, we all are also obligated to if they're drinking, we have to. have them. you know, they have to be confined. So I thought it was a brilliant way to utilize a table and a system and energize it with human beings all in the same space. Because if you start taking the 14-inch planter box and then you put a table next to it, you just run out of space with only seven or eight feet. So that's why I thought. But we have no problems conditioning it to no more than 20 seats. |
| 01:14:24.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, but in addition to that, if you'll see across the street for cultivar, they're not done yet. But the specific plan of any outside structure that allows that and planters, all that has to come back for a different plan other than what you've got. You obviously will need some cordon off for if you're serving alcohol. Right. Right. Commissioner, Vice Chair, you have an additional thing. |
| 01:14:49.29 | Nastassya Saad | We are all piggybacking on this topic. Just to stay on it, may I? Will you permit me a? |
| 01:14:53.05 | David Marlatt | Will you permit me a... Okay. |
| 01:14:54.70 | Nastassya Saad | Commissioner Marlott, steal your time. |
| 01:14:57.10 | David Marlatt | not one of my topics. |
| 01:14:59.48 | Nastassya Saad | So. In your professional expertise in this space, I'm sure you already heard, and of course you've bought this building, you must be aware that that bus stop is right at that front part of Wells Fargo. So currently, a lot of residents, and we have a community that spans all ages, but a lot of our residents take advantage of those two benches that are in the front for the bus stop. I'm gonna put that off to the side. I'm just gonna throw that out to you at the moment. But in your expertise for this restaurant ownership, do you not have concerns to have an outdoor space with the exhaust and fumes of this bus that is kind of a constant revolving situation? Less than ideal. |
| 01:15:23.00 | Unknown Staff | it. |
| 01:15:30.23 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:15:47.93 | Kent Ibsen | Less than ideal. Situation. Yeah, less than ideal. |
| 01:15:50.61 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. I just want to call it out just from an awareness standpoint because it is one of the main bus stops in thoroughfare and it's noisy and blows up dust and it's just a constant revolving situation. |
| 01:15:59.59 | Kent Ibsen | Yes. |
| 01:16:04.65 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah, it's less than ideal for sure. OK. It's really, again, it's |
| 01:16:06.86 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 01:16:08.94 | Kent Ibsen | To add some it's a lot of hardscape there. The building's got I mean, just beautiful facade, but it's hard. And then the the all the concrete, everything. So we're just trying to add some warmth and and make it a little bit more inviting. And with regard to the benches, we donated those to a lady on the HPC. She donated them to them and. She asked for him back and I said, I don't have a use for him and I truly can't carry them. They're all marble. So those are being somehow recycled back into some other place in Sausalito. |
| 01:16:40.36 | Nastassya Saad | I see. Okay. We can... I'll give my time back to Commissioner Marlott. Thank you. |
| 01:16:46.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Marlon. |
| 01:16:53.94 | David Marlatt | I'm sorry. Let me start with the upper roof, the observatory, the observation deck, I guess it is. I read in your email up November 19th regarding accessibility. |
| 01:17:03.06 | Unknown Staff | I'm not sure. |
| 01:17:09.01 | David Marlatt | CBC chapter 11b, very familiar with it. The gist of your email is that the upper deck should qualify for a hardship. And I know you're working with the CASPS uh, consultant on that and the hardship you laid out based on redundant facilitation and topography. and I don't want to judge that. My question is simply, is there a plan B? So if you get through the, because the building department was clear, they're going to look at this when the application comes to them, which is normal. When the application comes to them and the building department does not grant a hardship, or if they do not grant a hardship, Is there a plan B that does not require you cycling back to the commission? And I'm thinking, obviously, of a case earlier this year where we re-saw something that had to come back to us. And... I'm supportive of the project. Let me just say that. I'm very supportive of the project. What I want to make sure is that whatever we pass tonight is as rock solid as it can be, not subject to any issues that may come back to us. |
| 01:18:14.35 | Clay Haberman | So Mr. Mandich could confirm this. This has been sent to the building department along with our explanation of the code sections involved there. As a building that's less than three stories, It's not required to have an elevator to every story, as long as we have similar uses on an accessible level. |
| 01:18:41.81 | Kristina Feller | Sir, sorry for interrupting. Could you talk into the microphone because there are folks at home trying to listen to. Thank you. |
| 01:18:45.03 | Clay Haberman | Oh, sorry. |
| 01:18:49.40 | Clay Haberman | Sorry about that. So basically, this has been re reviewed that the building department brought this up in the beginning is what generated that email and that has been sent back to them And there haven't been any further comments from them. And it's based on It is a hardship is part of the argument, but also the code section allows a three-story or less. This is a two-story building to not have elevator access to every level. |
| 01:19:30.22 | David Marlatt | Okay, thank you. Yeah, and I certainly don't wanna take up time here litigating the hardship or not. My question is simply, I know how important it is to Mr. Ibsen, the owner. Is there a contingency in place? And I appreciate very much the research you've done, but I've also had to go through hardship requests myself and other contexts. Is there a contingency? |
| 01:19:45.51 | Clay Haberman | I think. |
| 01:19:50.94 | Clay Haberman | We did look into putting some kind of access up to there, and really it doesn't fit. Any kind of elevator has an overrun on it that would stand up. higher than than the the patio. So we really don't want to go that route. Obviously, if we did something like that, I'm assuming we'd have to come back here. |
| 01:20:17.76 | David Marlatt | or eliminate the deck. one or the other. I'm not suggesting you do. |
| 01:20:23.19 | Kent Ibsen | in. Well... Yeah. Thank you. I prefer to not do that. Of course. Yeah, I definitely would prefer to not do that. So we did bird dog this a little bit with the building department and with our cast specialist or expert. And |
| 01:20:28.52 | David Marlatt | Yeah, of course. Definitely would prefer to not. |
| 01:20:40.91 | Kent Ibsen | I guess we had comfort to the level that we felt okay submitting this as is. It definitely isn't pie in the sky. We retained experts to go through exactly, whether we can do what we're doing and He said yes. And so that's why we've moved forward. So I guess if the question is, there is a plan B, there's not. |
| 01:21:05.84 | David Marlatt | Okay. That is a question. Okay, thank you. So I'll maybe move on. Like I said, I know these questions sound like they're related to building code, and we're not about the building code, but I'm trying to restrict them to purely building code-related questions, which may impact the planning code. So also, a number of the rooms, of the bedrooms and the living rooms, will not have natural ventilation, which, you know, is normally required by the code. You can have mechanical ventilation. Is there no plan for skylights to provide natural ventilation? I mean, you're intentionally not providing skylights for natural ventilation. No, I shouldn't. |
| 01:21:43.40 | Clay Haberman | Yeah, we're not providing skylights. There's a spectacular ceiling that's in this space that we are trying to preserve. Additionally, the roof level... I mean, it's hard to fathom when you look up at this building because the ceiling is so far above the floor, but the roof is even farther up. you can you can see. Yeah. There's a substantial attic. Yeah. So, you know, skylights would be. |
| 01:22:05.83 | Unknown Staff | You can see. |
| 01:22:07.02 | David Marlatt | He's got a substantial attitude. |
| 01:22:09.02 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:22:09.03 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:22:09.32 | Unknown Staff | Okay. |
| 01:22:14.20 | Clay Haberman | Huge shafts, basically. |
| 01:22:17.05 | David Marlatt | So, okay, and that's fine. So the intention is to provide mechanical ventilation when required for code compliance. That's right. Okay. Another, this may be a small item, but just to verify the fireplaces would be electric, I assume? |
| 01:22:18.84 | Clay Haberman | Yes, but we are an idea. Yes. |
| 01:22:31.88 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. They can be electric. I don't know if that is that a well, if they were |
| 01:22:38.97 | David Marlatt | gas, then we would see somewhere in the drawings the termination for the flues. There's a termination for a gas fireplace. And that would have some impact. I mean, you obviously wouldn't put them on the facade. |
| 01:22:51.14 | Clay Haberman | No. That would be, yeah. That would, yeah. |
| 01:22:51.19 | David Marlatt | No. That way. |
| 01:22:53.47 | Clay Haberman | I mean, we haven't gotten to that level of detail, but that would be on the roof and they wouldn't be visible. OK. |
| 01:23:00.97 | David Marlatt | I just didn't know if that was the intention. It would be. |
| 01:23:03.39 | Clay Haberman | It would be, we're not touching any of the tile roof. So behind the tile roof is a flat roof and it would be up there. Okay. right? |
| 01:23:12.62 | David Marlatt | uh... and in the last thing i wanted to touch on is this uh... enlarged detail that you provided the n a five point three i don't know if we can put it up on the |
| 01:23:18.17 | Clay Haberman | YES. |
| 01:23:18.52 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:23:21.49 | David Marlatt | screen it might be helpful. I had a few questions about that. Of course, one-hour fire rating is required between two occupancies, between the commercial and the residential occupancy, as well as a sound transmission coefficient of 50 or greater. And my question as it's coming up is you're proposing a kind of a steel plate to meet the glass, and maybe you can walk us through how that will be code compliant. And the reason that's also, once again, important to us is that whatever is done there is going to be very visible from the street. We're seeing through the glass to this assembly. And your detail also shows an LED light, which maybe you can help me out with what? Why is there an LED light strip? Is it? |
| 01:24:08.03 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. |
| 01:24:08.15 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:08.19 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. |
| 01:24:08.22 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:08.54 | Clay Haberman | below the |
| 01:24:08.59 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:11.93 | Clay Haberman | Below that steel plate, there's a soffit shown that comes into the that does hit the mullion of the window. That is where the, that is where the fire rating would occur. And it's actually, we will be sprinkling this building, by the way. So we'll have fire sprinklers and. So it's actually a 30 minute rating. It's pretty easy to accomplish. And then we will also have an acoustical engineer on board when we do the permit drawings. |
| 01:24:48.01 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:48.05 | Peter Van Meter | Okay. |
| 01:24:48.65 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:50.65 | Clay Haberman | because |
| 01:24:51.40 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:51.94 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. |
| 01:24:51.96 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 01:24:51.98 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. |
| 01:24:51.99 | David Marlatt | But looking at this detail, there's a steel plate that's meeting the glass itself, and that will have some sort of sealant or fire caulk or something. |
| 01:25:01.61 | Clay Haberman | Yes, it's just a closure. |
| 01:25:04.28 | David Marlatt | Thank you. at closure and then there's the glass. |
| 01:25:06.71 | Clay Haberman | Yes. |
| 01:25:07.10 | David Marlatt | you And then, of course, then there's the mullion for the arch window and two layers of sheetrock. And then there's an LED tape. So is this whole enclosure illuminated? |
| 01:25:20.24 | Clay Haberman | So the historic review... They were concerned that this would be kind of a dark spot. They asked us to add. the the gypsum board enclosure, the sheet rock there. And so I added the, the tape to try to, I believe we can mimic the lighting that's in the restaurant in this area. So it, it's not just a dark spot on, on the storefront. Otherwise, you know, the space between the million that vertical space between the Mayan and the closure would be dark. |
| 01:26:01.39 | David Marlatt | I see. OK, so the LED tape is meant to sort of balance |
| 01:26:03.97 | Clay Haberman | The light. Right. It's not meant to like blast anything or it's not a sign or anything like that. It's just to try to make it look. basically have a similar light level to the, to the restaurant. |
| 01:26:17.40 | David Marlatt | Okay. Well, there again, it's not about the building code. It's about making sure that HPC and the fellow commissioners are aware of this roughly 18-inch |
| 01:26:28.03 | Clay Haberman | And they were. And that's, you know, the we had only shown the steel beam in there. in that spot and they asked us to make it an enclosure that was, was just, uh, |
| 01:26:42.76 | David Marlatt | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:26:43.99 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:44.01 | David Marlatt | Just drywall. If it doesn't meet, it's a one-hour fire separation between dwellings and a different occupancy. So if it doesn't meet that, do you have also a contingency for how to meet that? Because I think you need one hour. We will meet. |
| 01:26:57.90 | Clay Haberman | We will meet whatever |
| 01:27:00.36 | David Marlatt | No, I'm sure you will. |
| 01:27:05.12 | Kristina Feller | I think that's when they work with staff on those findings. |
| 01:27:07.84 | David Marlatt | Right. Well, it just may have a big impact on visuals. |
| 01:27:12.34 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 01:27:12.63 | David Marlatt | Thank you. Okay, thank you. |
| 01:27:15.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner O'Malley. Just as an add-on to that, we're trying to get projects, when you come in, so that if you make changes, we don't want you to have to come back to us. So just so you're aware, one of the findings we have to make is that exterior lighting, mechanical equipment, and chimneys are appropriately designed and located to minimize visual noise and air quality impacts to adjacent properties in the general public. So if you, we don't know whether you have protrusions for these fireplaces or mechanical equipment, then we have trouble making this finding. And if you make some change and then you have to come back to us, we've had projects who have come back two and three times. We're trying to avoid that. So we're trying to help you here so that you're not having to come back to us in the future. |
| 01:27:26.52 | Unknown Staff | You have to. Yeah. |
| 01:27:53.92 | Unknown Staff | And. |
| 01:28:08.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I appreciate that. Further questions, Commissioner Junius? |
| 01:28:08.99 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:28:09.03 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:28:09.04 | Andrew Junius | I'm sure they're going to be and I can't |
| 01:28:12.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:28:12.49 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Mr. Ibsen, I really appreciate your introduction. It's not often we get a story like yours. So welcome to Sausalito and thank you for that. It was a great way to start. Can you spend a minute or two, since a lot of what's before The Commission tonight and a lot of the findings we're going to be making have to do with the operation and the use of the hotel and that it's the right use. And I don't think there's any question that that's the case. It is the right use. |
| 01:28:33.94 | Unknown Staff | No. Yeah. |
| 01:28:35.42 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 01:28:35.57 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:28:38.78 | Andrew Junius | We'll be talking a lot about that up here when the public hearing moves on. But your experience in Carmel, it sounds like it's been fantastic. You've got a letter from the mayor of Carmel supporting you, which is pretty stunning. Not to drag this out much, but how long you've been operating and what's been your experience in Carmel? Can you describe a little bit about that operation compared to what you're going to have here in Sausalito? |
| 01:28:47.74 | Unknown Staff | Yeah. |
| 01:28:51.16 | Unknown Staff | I mean, |
| 01:29:05.15 | Kent Ibsen | Sure. I mean, it's very similar. I mean, we have the restaurant component there. The restaurant fully caters into those spaces. We have the welcome ambassador. A big reason that we do have a welcome ambassador, too, is that we just want to make sure, you know, if you say that you're coming with... two people from Napa, we want to make sure it's not 20 people from Sonoma State. And so we physically walk them into the space. Also, I forgot to, I didn't mention, both in Carmel and at all of our operations, we have about 25 to 30 cameras in the public space. So, and also the welcome ambassador has access to those, our COO does our vice president of operations and myself. And then we also have those posted on a screen that other people can't see, but are down at the restaurant that we can maintain it. That is not to say that wealthy people don't make stupid decisions. I mean, they you know, it that doesn't avoid that. But they are monitored and in the public areas. And we have I don't want to toot my own horn, but I guess I will. The penthouse in Carmel is over 250 reviews, and we are five-star. So no one has ever marked it less than five stars, which I'm pretty proud of. The fairway view, that one has a golf simulator in it and a movie theater. That's 4.9. We're trying to amenitize this. We're not going to have a golf simulator here. But we're trying to amenitize this space in a similar gonna have a golf simulator here. But, but we're trying to amenitize the space in a similar fashion, when people come in, they're like, wow, And, um, and those are the people that we cater to. And that's why we have the level of this. I don't like to say Butler because Butler kind of infers something we call them a welcome ambassador, because they're really there just to facilitate an extraordinary experience while they're spending their time in Sausalito or Carmel West City. And again, how long have you been operating in Carmel? Well, okay. We, we bought that building in 2017 and, um, And then. I had the dubious honor of opening the restaurant. I thought it was gonna be a great idea. I was opening it on March 18th because it was the anniversary of my father's passing. And I'm like, I'm gonna turn March 18th into a great day. And then they closed us for COVID. And so we did not open. So I just basically think that March 18th is a horrible day. But we didn't get we didn't wind up opening until June 1st of |
| 01:31:31.49 | Clay Haberman | you |
| 01:31:39.04 | Andrew Junius | 2020. And your neighborhood experience, complaints, any issues with the neighbors since the hotel opened? |
| 01:31:47.32 | Kent Ibsen | no and and uh one of our customers of the restaurant i read that i read anthony lombardo uh we don't have any legal counts or anyone representing us but the um he happens to be a land use attorney he happens to live in the house across the street and he uh he wrote us a very nice letter of recommendation and he is very close to us we also have a church right across the street and uh We work together incredibly well. residential on the right side, mixed use on the left side, and then the Carmel Arts Association behind us. So we have a really mixed bag of guests. We have had one complaint for noise, and it was from the resident in the residence below. And the people in the penthouse just had their, they just got married. So yeah. That's, |
| 01:32:43.40 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:32:43.48 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you very much. I appreciate that. |
| 01:32:44.87 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:32:47.14 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:32:47.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:32:50.20 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, and thank you, Commissioner Junius, for the question. It definitely helps understand your business better. So thank you for that. You had made a couple comments. I'm looking down at my notes. when you were originally presenting to us here at the podium, about the wall behind that, I guess, is abutting also the your neighbors, property. And the first question I had is, you've talked about these trees being cut down. Can you tell me when did you buy, when did you purchase the building again? It was this year, wasn't it? |
| 01:33:29.48 | Kent Ibsen | I believe it was May 2024. |
| 01:33:33.18 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, and the trees were there when- |
| 01:33:36.10 | Kent Ibsen | I always take pictures of everything I bought. It's not that someone's going to pick up the building and take it. I just, yeah, I like to see... |
| 01:33:38.49 | Kristina Feller | that. Right. |
| 01:33:44.13 | Kent Ibsen | every, everything. So yeah, well I was confused because you know there was kind of an accusation that we embellish the renderings and the person that does all that for me has worked for me for a long time and I would never give that directive. And so I was like, gosh, and then I went home and it's like, no, there's, just a tremendous amount of vegetation here and and and it's not there anymore so now we We can see the con house, but we could never see it before. |
| 01:34:13.07 | Kristina Feller | So when you bought the property, the trees were there? Yes. |
| 01:34:15.48 | Kent Ibsen | Yes. |
| 01:34:15.81 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Probably in a minute I'm going to defer back to staff and ask about those trees and if they knew about them being cut. Okay. And then you would, at the very end, well, I guess you were talking about there were other discussions that you had. with the cons and I appreciate that you've already modified your project to accommodate some of their thoughts or concerns. But then that you might be willing to put a wall back at their request. |
| 01:34:50.82 | Kent Ibsen | We were thinking it was like a green fence. So we don't, you know, I understand his position that he doesn't want to encroach a lot into his property line. But it would basically, it's not going to restore 20-foot trees. But, yeah. that's really not the level that... there's really, it's not a problem anyway, but a problem. |
| 01:35:10.55 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:35:11.09 | Kent Ibsen | but a five foot green fence or a six foot green fence. And we were we continue to be happy to install that as per their design at our cost. |
| 01:35:21.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Well, that's incredibly generous. Had you designed something already or shown them something or maybe staffed? |
| 01:35:31.49 | Kent Ibsen | No, it was just a conversation that we had with them, with Robert and his attorney. |
| 01:35:36.59 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Well, I will say at least as of about 4.15 this evening, we had 37 different public comments on record. I'm not sure if you had the chance to look through this, |
| 01:35:49.72 | Kent Ibsen | I've read a lot of them, yeah. Yeah. Well, not... |
| 01:35:50.85 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 01:35:52.23 | Kent Ibsen | until I got in my car in Clayton and drove here. |
| 01:35:55.06 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, exactly. Um, So I just mentioned that I didn't know if you had a chance to look at those. There's varying ideas about the project, but overall I think the community is excited about it. And then can you talk a little bit about, again, I'm sorry, I'm looking down, but I'm looking at my papers here. you had expressed interest in certain hours of operation. Can you just talk to us a little bit about that and what your thoughts are about that? |
| 01:36:28.63 | Kent Ibsen | We see a lot of activity in Sausalito on Saturday and Sunday, so we thought it would be an attractive place for brunch. Um, we have, I think we left hours of operation, left our ability for the same reason as a couple of you alluded to, that we really didn't want to come back and change our hours of operation. I'm not entirely certain about lunch every day. Lunch is a hard animal. It's, you have a one hour window of time and then you sit there dormant for, so, but I wanted to ask for the hours of operation to open for lunch so we could, we could kind of put our fingers on the pulse of that and see whether that's a good economic decision. |
| 01:37:13.60 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I don't see that to be a problem, at least. I speak for myself only. I wanted to know a little bit more maybe about your evening hours or your night hours. Sure. You wanted to go, I'm looking down again, sorry about that, but... |
| 01:37:25.43 | Unknown Staff | Sure. |
| 01:37:29.36 | Kristina Feller | to 12 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. um, |
| 01:37:36.57 | Kent Ibsen | Same reasoning, not entirely certain about that. We are a place that likes to do our business, clean up, do the good business, the clean business, not really interested in staying open late for someone that's got his head in his soup. And and so. I just don't know. Like Carmel, I know exactly. Those sidewalks roll up at like 930, and it's just done. Even on Friday, maybe other than Concourse de la Gonson, the AT&T. And then I actually don't think I really want to serve those people after 10 o'clock either. So I asked for it, but I don't know if that's going to be. |
| 01:38:13.44 | Unknown Staff | Right. |
| 01:38:16.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:38:16.17 | Unknown Staff | Okay. stuff. |
| 01:38:18.16 | Kent Ibsen | And I feel incredibly comfortable that we would not come back to this body to ask to be open later. |
| 01:38:24.09 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, no, I really appreciate that. And I'm not sure that Sausalito is that much different. I know. |
| 01:38:29.18 | Kent Ibsen | I know. |
| 01:38:29.49 | Unknown Staff | Wow. |
| 01:38:29.82 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:38:29.84 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 01:38:29.91 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:38:29.96 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:38:29.98 | Unknown Staff | I know. |
| 01:38:31.38 | Kristina Feller | But, you know, in you might have heard us references with with other properties in downtown where we actually differentiate the hours of operation of the outdoor dining versus the interior. I'm comfortable with that. |
| 01:38:45.87 | Kent Ibsen | I'm comfortable with that as well. |
| 01:38:46.82 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right. Thank you. |
| 01:38:48.96 | Kent Ibsen | with the one, one caveat, um, the conditions it also says you know bring all your furniture inside let's just say you want the patio to close at 10 in the evening, the front. I'll close it and I'll say closed, but I can't bring the furniture in until all the inside guests are gone. |
| 01:39:09.18 | Kristina Feller | That is not inconsistent with other properties. But I appreciate you mentioning that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. |
| 01:39:11.59 | Kent Ibsen | Okay. |
| 01:39:17.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fellows, Vice Chair Sade. |
| 01:39:21.97 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair, and thank you to my fellow commissioners. Let me just review. Chair, you might have some of the same questions about the staircase, so feel free to ping pong here with me if you'd like. Thank you. |
| 01:39:36.38 | Nastassya Saad | and so forth. |
| 01:39:37.48 | Nastassya Saad | Can you explain the reasoning why the staircase on Excelsior, why the residents or the guests, they have to go outside and go up? Can we pull up the drawings, please, for the staircase? Yeah, and Clay can. And can we get into all of that logic? |
| 01:39:51.03 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah. |
| 01:39:51.11 | Clay Haberman | And clay cans. Sure. By the way, I didn't introduce myself. I'm Clay Haberman from Johnson Lyman Architects. So, We first of all, the lower staircase, which is at the the kind of intermediate landing on the Excelsior staircase. We need that one as a secondary exit out of the. out of the the units out of the residential area Um, and that's just. based on not so much how many people are there, but the distance. to get out of the building. So we have that staircase and that deck, that staircase. hits the excelsior staircase at the intermediate level. And then the upper upper level, um, is quite a bit higher. And so, you know, we're taking advantage of the Excelsior Stare to access that as well. A staircase to get up to that from our property would... take up most of our space. It's, this is a very, it's... It's very tall. Um, the roof level that you saw in the photos, that that roof level is is 10 feet. or nine and a half feet above where our patio level is. So if you can imagine how long that staircase |
| 01:41:25.04 | Kent Ibsen | how long that staircase. Or the electric. Because we put it inside, it's going to go through the electric well. |
| 01:41:31.64 | Clay Haberman | Right. So basically, we don't have room to put a staircase up there on our property. |
| 01:41:36.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I add on to that question? So you have this fire pit on the second floor above the residential unit, and you have a landing there. Yes. So if you started there and used and went up there, yes, it would be long, but it would be no longer than the distance on the outside stairway. And it's going to go over the top of things. But let me just ask, let me explain the reason for the question. So you have an area that is sort of like someone's backyard, except for the only place into it is off the public stairway. So the question is, wouldn't it make more sense for the people that come and stay in the inn to be able to not have to go out to the public stairway and come back to the deck and just come in from the inside, I guess is the question. |
| 01:41:46.57 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 01:42:01.30 | Clay Haberman | Yeah. Well, |
| 01:42:29.75 | Clay Haberman | side. |
| 01:42:31.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and from that landing, because you're already up part of the way. |
| 01:42:35.10 | Clay Haberman | So again, that upper deck is 15 feet above that landing. So, you know, our new stairs would have to meet, you know, current standards for stairs for width heights of risers and everything, and would have to have an intermediate landing based on current codes. It just takes up a ton of space. |
| 01:42:58.42 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You have a little bit of room where you have that X on there now. There's a little room there that maybe could be the final landing pointers. It just seems strange, I guess, to me. I think this is a great project, by the way. But it does seem strange to go outside if I'm staying there, that I have to go out onto a public stairway, come around, and then you use a key code to get back in. If you could just keep it within the property, it would seem, and then you still need the, I understand you need the fire exit. That I'm not questioning. But the upper level would seem like maybe a lot of problems go away if you could make that stairway work. |
| 01:43:42.55 | Clay Haberman | I guess is the question. Well, the area that you're talking about is where all of our electrical equipment is, and we have to have the electrical equipment in that. general area because we have to be close to the Transformer. Um, |
| 01:43:55.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, but you have some space in between there and where the landing is, I believe. Some space. And you just start to come up. Yes, you're going to have to switch back. I mean, it would be complicated. But is it physically impossible, I guess, is my question. |
| 01:44:11.32 | Clay Haberman | It's it's pretty hard. It's difficult. Also below that area. is a horizontal concrete beam that's part of the the retaining wall. Um, that actually protrudes about four and a half feet into our project. It's invisible because it's underneath the existing roofs and it's underneath our roof. So I can't put anything there. that moves everything away from the back wall. And I mean, we've, you know, we, we looked at it, Kent definitely would rather have had it that way. But, you know, we're trying to leave the thing as open as possible, you know, that our patio is down in a hole that's pretty deep. And so we are trying not to cover over it with staircases and whatever other roofs. |
| 01:45:04.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, further questions on that in a little bit, but I'll turn it back over to Vice Chair Saad. |
| 01:45:10.32 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, I'll actually defer to you, Chair. No more questions. |
| 01:45:15.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I do have some questions. Just first about this welcome ambassador. What would the hours of that person be and where would they be inside the restaurant? Because there doesn't seem to be another place |
| 01:45:29.51 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah, so they are inside the restaurant. That's where they start the process. They meet them at the entrance to the kind of the discreet entrance to go in. That's where they greet them. Jane also serves as a capacity, like she oversees a part of the restaurant as well. And then it's not just Jane. We also have two other people. Sometimes Jane goes on vacation, but they were typically... they are typically also working inside the pocket and the part. We have had, on rare circumstances, someone's plane was delayed, blah, blah, blah. They need to get in at 1 o'clock in the morning. We agreed in there. |
| 01:46:14.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, but beyond the extenuating circumstances, so to speak, there will be somebody in the, as long as the restaurant is open, somebody's managing the hotel from the restaurant. Somebody in the restaurant, if it isn't Jane, it's somebody, the manager at that time would take, if there was a noise complaint, for example. So as long as the restaurant's open, there's somebody to handle. |
| 01:46:27.52 | Unknown Staff | Correct. |
| 01:46:37.41 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 01:46:42.24 | Kent Ibsen | I know. They're overseeing the N as well. And then check-in for the N is 3, and check-out is 11. |
| 01:46:50.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so from three to 11, there will always be somebody if there's a problem or something. |
| 01:46:54.77 | Kent Ibsen | Even even beyond. I mean, we'll have, yeah, we'll have the restaurant. Towers are far more significant than the check in window. Sometimes people want to come in later, and if we can get them in earlier, we accommodate that as well. |
| 01:47:06.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, that's very helpful, and I think that addresses a number of questions. My other question relates to going back to ladders. So I think in my view, the ship's ladder is an attractive nuisance. I'm worried that somebody's going to go over the railing and try to use it. Is there a way to put a door or a gate or something up in that deck so that somebody can't get to that ship's ladder who doesn't have a specific key that means they're a maintenance person? |
| 01:47:36.31 | Clay Haberman | Thank you. Sure. Yeah, yeah, we can definitely, yeah, we could put something there to, uh, restrooms to keep, yeah, we could make it a, well, it seems to be off of a deck. I'm sure something. |
| 01:47:46.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, it seems to be off of the deck. I'm sure. So my misunderstanding this, it seems the picture shows that it's attached to the glass railing on the deck. |
| 01:47:56.49 | Clay Haberman | Yeah, well, it's our way to get to the mechanical equipment for maintenance, right? |
| 01:48:02.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So you would go up to the deck and then you would climb over and down the ship's ladder. Which for a maintenance person I don't have a problem with. But some way to make sure that one of your guests isn't deciding that. |
| 01:48:12.06 | Clay Haberman | Yeah, we can make it. Yeah, sure. We can make that secure. There's a number of ways to do it. |
| 01:48:16.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Um, let's see. |
| 01:48:26.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Oh, the last question is about Excelsior Lane, which is very narrow and on the driving part of it, not the stairway part of it. For construction, you're not planning to use that for, you'll not allow your construction vehicles to use that road, correct? |
| 01:48:46.15 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 01:48:46.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:48:46.32 | Kent Ibsen | And you're more than welcome to condition that. And also we talked to the cons about they had asked to not have that used for any service, whether it's housekeeping or guest arrival or whatever. |
| 01:48:46.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to get the information. |
| 01:49:01.94 | Kent Ibsen | you know, Yeah. meat delivery. No one wants to go down that that's a white knuckle drive to go down there and you surely don't want to carry 80 pounds of rib eyes down those stairs, so you would park out front and and bring this stuff in so I have no problem conditioning. that we will not Use that. that that for no use of the restaurant and the end will use that upper Excelsior stairwell driveway. |
| 01:49:31.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, that's great. That's great. you're just |
| 01:49:33.84 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 01:49:33.89 | Kristina Feller | Just a side note. Commissioner Feller. |
| 01:49:34.28 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:49:34.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | which is a side note. Thank you. |
| 01:49:35.93 | Kristina Feller | if you don't mind you can't park out front that that is what we talked about before the there is no parking out out front so that i want to make sure that that your |
| 01:49:37.01 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:49:37.03 | Unknown Staff | No. |
| 01:49:37.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You can. |
| 01:49:37.57 | Unknown Staff | I can't. |
| 01:49:37.65 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:49:47.37 | Kristina Feller | Your operation, your enterprise is functional, but it can't include parking out front. We're going to be in. |
| 01:49:54.38 | Kent Ibsen | Right, I understand that. And I would also take some marching orders from the city about how these other places take delivery, because pretty much all of Bridgeway is Redcurb. Um, so how they take delivery and it might be just on the other side of the park where they have that bicycle, uh, thing. Um, we will find a safe place where that, you know, and they'll just have to, um, they'll wheel it around in Carmel. They do park in front, but then they take everything up, uh, uh, an elevator lift and then they take it from there to another place and another place. Um, so. |
| 01:50:33.20 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I think there are a couple areas of green area loading zones, so to speak, not right in front of where you are, but not that far away. And I think that's what others do as well as, you know, they'll have, you know, dollies and whatever to move food and stuff. Other questions, other commissioners? Vice Chair, stop. |
| 01:50:52.44 | Nastassya Saad | This is very specific, and I understand that this is not your responsibility, but I'm going to ask. Those benches are a little bit of a sticking point for me, only because you do have, we have an elderly community, and it is a place to wait. We don't have a proper bus stop there like we do at some other locations in town. There's no coverage in the rain. There's no place to wait. Is there any part in your space in the world that there would be some form of availability for people for the use that has existed there for people to wait for the bus, because I worry anyway. |
| 01:51:31.02 | Kent Ibsen | And people upset. You're asking me to be an Indian giver? |
| 01:51:34.16 | Nastassya Saad | I'm not trying to take you to take those benches back, but I'm just wondering in that 20 space that you're looking at right now, if there's even just a nook. I mean, and this could be a question even for the city. I mean, I don't understand, you know, where the responsibility lies here, but it was such a significant bus stop and everybody sits and waits there. And so to lose those already, I'm just not even sure where there's |
| 01:51:35.03 | Kent Ibsen | No, I'm not trying to take you to take you. |
| 01:51:58.54 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:51:58.68 | Kristina Feller | city |
| 01:51:58.88 | Nastassya Saad | It's a city thing. I know it's not your responsibility. I'm sort of throwing it out. |
| 01:51:59.82 | Kristina Feller | I know it's not your responsibility. City or Caltrans, yeah. |
| 01:52:04.16 | Nastassya Saad | I'm, |
| 01:52:04.18 | Kent Ibsen | And definitely not being unsympathetic to the plight. I get it. It's just we're working with such a confined space. I totally understand. I wish I could put them on the front of that rail. But now we're approaching too far into the city right of way. Yes. |
| 01:52:04.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:52:04.41 | Nastassya Saad | I'm sorry. |
| 01:52:04.48 | Kristina Feller | . |
| 01:52:04.52 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:52:10.56 | Nastassya Saad | I totally understand. |
| 01:52:17.73 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 01:52:18.12 | Kent Ibsen | Um, |
| 01:52:18.74 | Nastassya Saad | maybe it's something just to discuss with the city. If you hear me, um, director Phipps, um, it's just, it's a, it's a public loss for a private gain. And, and with all due respect, you have the right to do that outdoor dining. So I don't want to be misinterpreted, but, If I may, Vice Chair, |
| 01:52:36.81 | Director Phipps | If I may, Vice Chair, I appreciate the comments and the sensitivity to public transportation and access and an area for folks who are waiting for that transportation to rest and to take a seat as needed. So I'm happy to discuss that further with you offline. Sure. I'm also happy to collaborate with our Public Works Director, Kevin McGowan, around how we might tackle that issue because I think that that is, well, it's sensitive, and I appreciate it. Yeah, again, I appreciate you bringing it up. |
| 01:53:03.71 | Nastassya Saad | I appreciate you bringing it up. Thank you, Director Phipps. Thank you for entertaining me. Thank you. No further questions. |
| 01:53:10.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I will follow up with that also. I mean, the steps are often used as seating areas. So a good solution, you don't want to restrict people going up and down the stairs, too, and people do use the steps that way. So some solution that works with this. And you might be able to, you know, I mean, you might not get 20 seats. You get 16. Maybe there's an area off to the left side for a bench or something. I don't know if you can look at the plan in that regard or something. Okay. Okay. 20 seats, you get 16, and maybe there's an area off to the left side for a bench or something. I don't know if you can look at the plan in that regard or something. With that, other questions? So we will close this part. You still have four minutes in a little bit after we have public comment for any rebuttal that you want at that time. At this time, thank you. At this time, we're gonna open it up for public comment. Director Phipps, if you can give instructions for speaker cards and Zoom raised hands, et cetera. |
| 01:53:37.56 | Nastassya Saad | Amen. |
| 01:54:05.19 | Director Phipps | Certainly. 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. If you'd like to make a comment in the Zoom application, please raise your hand, and you'll be called upon when it's your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press star 9, and each speaker will be notified when time has elapsed. I'm going to start with the speaker cards that I have received. and the first speaker card I have and part of the screen Each speaker will be notified when time has elapsed. I'm gonna start with the speaker cards that I have received. And the first speaker card I have, and pardon me for any name errors, Branka Pabaric. There was not an item number listed, but I assume it's in connection with this item. Very good. |
| 01:54:46.95 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. I feel totally out of my element here. after a very and presentation is sharp and all that. And I came here. And I find this an irony because I am exactly the closest neighbor directly across this project In fact, just before I got here, I measured And I am 25.7 feet from my front door on the second level of Excelsior, seven Excelsior, Del Monte Apartments. to the building at the Wells Fargo. I have lived there for 13 years happily. I have welcomed, in fact, I think I sent you Mr. Manvich. email the other day. I have, I love, love the building. I also. in keeping with the new owner. I lived in, and I'm from Eastern Europe. I've lived in Europe for four years. I appreciate and am thrilled with the fact that we have this amazing, beautiful building next door. The fact that I heard it was going to be reused recently when I got... what everything was sent, was thrilling and yet, Even though I did, you know, address a few issues, the last two hours now has been absolutely earth shattering. I'm going to address the few quick things. I only have three minutes after two hours of their presentations. So... The first thing is the first floor in the restaurant, which I think is wonderful. And I've said for years to my neighbors and others, this would make a fabulous, beautiful, fine dining place. But when we're comparing it to the likes of Barrel House and Capitas and the hamburger, Sausalito Hamburger, and Cultivars, which hasn't opened and it's been trying to open for three, four years, yada, yada, yada, they are not adjacent to personal and private residences. My neighbors, I've had people that have been sick that have lived and died in that building. We would hear that downstairs the restaurant is not an issue because we hear it anyway. The bus stop, I look right down at the bus stop. And I see it till 1230 at night and 530 in the morning when it starts. Mr. Mandich, I believe you're 30. |
| 01:57:07.88 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:57:07.90 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. |
| 01:57:08.03 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. |
| 01:57:08.05 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:57:08.10 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. |
| 01:57:08.18 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 01:57:08.25 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. slide showed my apartment windows that look right down on the Wells Fargo, which I love because I see the motifs and all the beautiful work on that. I have no trouble with what goes on downstairs. I hear them at no name. And that's all well and good. That's part and parcel to why I love living where I live. The second floor with the hotels, we're talking about three hotels, inns, Airbnbs. I don't even know what we're going to classify it as. You call it one thing, you call it a welcoming ambassador, yada, yada, yada. I can hear people, and I do, just based on the staircases, |
| 01:57:49.90 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much for your comments. Apologies, you're out of time. |
| 01:57:53.42 | Branka Pabaric | Sorry, is that it? |
| 01:57:54.98 | Director Phipps | You're allotted three minutes per speaker. Apologize. We have to be equitable with how we treat public comment. Thank you very much for your comments. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your comments. Thank you very much for your comments. |
| 01:57:59.68 | Branka Pabaric | I'm a pretty- |
| 01:58:03.50 | Branka Pabaric | for the space we have. Thank you very much. for three possible |
| 01:58:11.09 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. |
| 01:58:11.14 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you, Madam. |
| 01:58:13.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just for everyone's edification, we try to give equal time to everybody on the public. But I also want to make clear for everybody here and also people at home, we have gotten a lot of written comments. We all get those comments. We read all those comments. So if you've submitted written comments, we do have them, and we have read them, or at least I've read them I'm presuming others have as well so I just want you to be aware that those those are also part of the record and we do get those so I just want you to be aware of that next |
| 01:58:51.57 | Director Phipps | Next speaker is Tim Kahn. Tim, you'll have three minutes to speak. Please approach the dice. |
| 01:59:04.52 | Tim Kahn | Yes, good evening. A few comments about this project. I think central commercial zoning requires upstairs uses to be residential. The planning commission may approve a waiver for small commercial uses, but only up to 1,000 square feet. And here it appears they're seeking a waiver for more than 1,000 square feet. So I don't know or believe that the planning commission may have authority to approve a waiver of that size. A few technical comments. To avoid a nuisance to the neighbors, i would ask that any kitchen exhaust flues be directed towards bridgeway and for any odors that may be coming out that they would add a scrubber to that second comment is that for any sound levels there will be equipment on the roof and we would just like to have sound levels be checked and verified to be as low level as possible add to that but if there's any future electric generators that might be added that they would be put in some kind of like soundproof enclosure exhaust. CHECKED AND VERIFIED TO BE AS LOW LEVEL AS POSSIBLE. ADD TO THAT, IF THERE'S ANY FUTURE ELECTRIC GENERATORS THAT MIGHT BE ADDED, THEY WOULD BE PUT IN SOME KIND OF SOUND PROOF ENCLOSURE, EXHAUST DIRECTED TO THE BRIDGEWAY ONCE AGAIN. THE THIRD POINT, I THINK, IS THAT THERE'S PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS BEING MADE TO A RETAINING WALL. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY GET A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THAT THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THAT RETAINING WALL IS INTACT. IT'S NOT BEING REDUCED. |
| 02:00:02.82 | Unknown Staff | and i think |
| 02:00:13.39 | Tim Kahn | You know, a couple of the voices that have weighed in on the comments, they're really presenting kind of a false dichotomy. And they're basically saying that our choice is we either have to rubber stamp this project immediately right now or it will kill the project. And in reality, none of the neighbors are trying to kill the project. We're just asking for some very reasonable modifications. My family has lived and owned those properties since 1934. It's very residential. It's a sleepy, quiet neighborhood. There's kind of been a steamroller approach with this, and we've gotten really limited communications. And so we don't have that faith that we would like to have that once this is open and operating, we will have a responsive, to our concerns and our noise issues and so forth. So our ask, my ask is that the Planning Commission would hear our concerns and put in place some of the changes to the design into the conditions of approval. to protect the neighborhood and the many, many residences that are specific to this parcel, far in excess of what the other commercial uses around there have. We have so many more residences around this particular parcel than the other residences have. A lot of issues to respond to in three minutes. Can't get to them all. But the trees is kind of a funny one. These were junk acacias. There's roughly four or five of them. We were trimming them at great expense every single year and maintaining them. And it was a lot of effort and time and expense. PG&E approached us and said they would like to take two of them out. We said take three or four of them out. And we replanted with other uses that are happier for PG&E. So it won't be as much maintenance for either of us going forward. Thank you. |
| 02:01:45.25 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is Robert Kahn. Robert, come on down. Thank you for being here. |
| 02:01:56.96 | Unknown Staff | Robert B. Hi i'm Robert i'm my mother Sharon lives next door to this project, which is just a rebranding of an airbnb with no dedicated staff. Robert B. That party space upstairs is supposedly going to be monitored on camera by restaurant workers but that's not credible because cameras can't see noise and restaurant workers don't have a second to spare away from their primary job. And then just when everyone's a few drinks in and start to get a little rowdy, that's exactly when the restaurant closes and all the staff go home. Sausalito bans Airbnbs and strictly enforces that ban because they're destructive to the peace and welfare of residential neighborhoods. And if you let them make an end run around that ban, you'll be granting them an Airbnb monopoly, concentrating all that demand into one location so that we'll have a 24-7 bachelor party. The zoning code requires that any new space upstairs in the commercial downtown be residential to promote affordable housing, resident focused retail, and also to provide a sound buffer for the adjoining residents. And the general plan is incredibly clear on that last point stating quote uses which result in noise levels unacceptable to residents surrounding the downtown will not be allowed period. So let's look at what they're building against that standard. It's a massive open air party area with a hot tub bar TV and a giant party deck. And they're lifting that party deck one full story above street level. So the sound is going to travel all throughout our neighborhood. Um, And instead of a buffer use is called for in the general plan as a use that the city has outright banned. So this needs to be mitigated with design changes and project conditions. And there's several reasonable options. They could just enclose and soundproof the amenity area, which would retain all the same amenities, or they could be required to follow the same 30 day rental minimum that all other unmonitored short term stays are subject to in Sausalito. And absent that, I'd ask for the following changes and conditions. That elevated party deck right on our property line and that second raised fire pit are problematic and they should just be removed. It would be a very nice project without those. And if you're not going to remove that upper party deck, then its width and its length should be greatly reduced. And the height should be lowered as much as possible, which can be done if you make the part over the mechanical room unoccupied. And there also shouldn't be any furniture up there. I think there should be a hard limit on the number of guests at any one time. They originally represented that there would be eight guests and now it's suddenly 14. 14 is way too many. There should be an earlier cutoff time, especially for that upper deck and raised fire pit. And they shouldn't have any amplified speakers up there. Their first pocket location in Carmel has a very small outdoor space, basically just a fire pit and some chairs, which is why they haven't had a lot of noise issues. And they say it's a smashing success. So we know that they do not need this gargantuan space in order to have a successful project. And with no staff, this project will place a tremendous burden on neighbors to be the ones to constantly police it. And so the best thing to do is to limit it so that it's not an attractive nuisance to the groups who are going to use it in a, in a negative way. And this is not about a few junk acacia trees. This is about noise. |
| 02:04:58.52 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is Wright Bass. Mr. Bass, come on down. |
| 02:05:07.90 | Wright Bass | Okay, I live on Excelsior across from the Conn, so I can see where the deck would be and the walls and everything. Lived there for a long time. Lived on that block on and off since 1965, 66, something like that. And I've seen, and I agree with Rob Conn. I like what he said. I'm totally agree with what he said. So I'm not going to go into that. But I'm going to go into something that these guys didn't even think about. Those stairs are filthy. In the middle of the night, there's drug-crazed homeless people that walk up there. And that noise is going to attract them. They're going to look inside. So you're not giving your high-end guests any privacy. If you could make the neighbors happy and make your guests happy, you're going to have incidents there. |
| 02:05:54.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can you just address the commission? Oh, yeah. They're going to have... |
| 02:05:57.13 | Wright Bass | Oh yeah, they're going to have it. |
| 02:05:58.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:05:58.78 | Wright Bass | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:05:58.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 02:05:59.20 | Wright Bass | Yeah, they're going to have incidents there, and they need to give their guests more privacy. You can go and look down that retaining wall, and I've seen people quite often use just below the fire hydrant on that retaining wall on just the outside, use it as a urinal. Okay, so some funny things happened there. People smoke dope on the stairs. Rowdy people come up the stairs. So they're not going to have what they want for their guests all the time. And I don't know how. That's poorly thought out just as the parking was poorly thought out. And I just don't think they really thought about this very much. I mean, the restaurant, the rest of it's great. I'm all for that. It's beautiful. I think that's great. And the rooms, yeah. So anyway, I just don't have very much confidence in these people doing the right thing. That's all I have to say. |
| 02:06:57.81 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is John Diamante. John, welcome. Come on down. |
| 02:07:07.97 | John Diamant | I do have two questions, but I don't want to cut into the three minutes, if I may. And one is to, I guess, the secretary. I asked for a printout of recipients of the notice for this meeting. And after some tussle, I was sent that. And I think it had about 16, 18 names on it. It's... great disparity with what you're representing the notification has been. Half of those names are commercial and not residents. So this goes back to my earlier comment about the deficiency of the whole notification process. And tonight, when we have this ridiculous three-minute limit where people and the other second question is, can you tell me how many people are online Zoom at this meeting tonight? Do we know? |
| 02:08:00.99 | Kristina Feller | We don't. |
| 02:08:03.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | During, this is, can we stop the clock for a minute? Please. We allow public comment, so we don't have a conversation back and forth with people giving comments. I'm looking for conversation. I understand that, but generally we don't have a dialogue answering questions is what I'm saying to you. This is a general philosophy. But the whole process. |
| 02:08:16.15 | Andrew Junius | I'm looking for conversation. |
| 02:08:27.97 | John Diamant | is so deficient in terms of information that it would be helpful to know if there's nobody on Zoom or if there are 50 people on Zoom. Because the notification has been so late, So hurried. You have a handful of people where if you act tonight prematurely, you're going to have packed houses, because the citizens will do the notification that you haven't. So those are the two points I wanted to make. How many people are on Zoom? |
| 02:08:52.04 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can we stop the clock again, please? So again, the number of people on Zoom, you have access, if you have a phone, you have access to Zoom and you can see what we have. |
| 02:09:01.07 | John Diamant | Some people do not have these phones, is the point. |
| 02:09:03.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm just making the public aware that you can sign on to Zoom and find out who's on Zoom. That's just a point of view. |
| 02:09:12.24 | John Diamant | That's not my responsibility, Mr. Gare. I understand that. |
| 02:09:13.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand. Thank you. you can continue with your company. |
| 02:09:16.39 | John Diamant | If there were a sign-in sheet for a meeting online or otherwise, we would have some idea of how much that public, the virtual public, is involved. That's the point. Now I'm not going to, by the way, you have a four page written comment from me. There are two or three flaws in those comments and that goes to the difficulty of navigating and reading things on screen instead of hard copy, especially drawings, illustrations that used to be furnished the library, et cetera. So I'm not going to address the comments you have in written form, there'll be many more. I do want to address through the chair, the owner of the property. And I would say to him, When you go to bed at night, Just you're of an age, you've done the successful restaurant. You've proven that. Just dump that. Look at this space that you're going to bifurcate, this singular noble space in town, and think of the imaginative uses this space could be put to as a civic asset. No, it would not be a bar and restaurant and inn earner, but there are other ways to earn. There are other roles this space could play. This is an amazing space. Forget the outside architectural frills and details and so forth, which the Historical Preservation Committee was apparently seduced by, but altering this space, this noble space, by installing a floor just is a destruction of the whole thing, but using this space, trying to think of... the spaces, uses of the space which the public, the visitors, the tourists, the citizens would all be part of. I've mentioned two or three examples in the written comment. There are many more. If the Planning Commission or the Preservation Commission had thrown this whole subject open since May, date of purchase, am I right? Then you might have some ideas. Thank you, sir. |
| 02:11:02.57 | Director Phipps | Thank you, sir, for your comments. Much appreciated. I apologize. The three minutes are up. |
| 02:11:03.90 | John Diamant | Much appreciated. I apologize. |
| 02:11:10.78 | Director Phipps | next speaker is Fred Moore. Fred, welcome. Come on down. You'll have three minutes. |
| 02:11:18.97 | Fred Moore | Good evening. I want to appreciate your very detailed review of the plans and so forth. And I was at the historic commission meeting. I'm wholeheartedly supporting this project. I think it's an amazing project. I think the landowner proponent has done an amazing job of reacting to many items, which he didn't have to do. But he made many concessions to try to appease as many people as possible. I know that many of my neighbors are all excited about this, the opportunity for the restaurant, the opportunity for the hotel. It's a great space for downtown. I understand the concerns of the residents, which are typical. I represent developers for 40 years. All we do is infill projects. So we meet resistance from neighbors all the time, every day. There's codes for those issues that they bring up, especially the noise issue, which I've heard mentioned many times. There's city codes to ensure that this particular use meets those noise elements. And if there are issues and violations, they'll be addressed, just like they're addressed in every other part of the city. I probably have more noise from the basketball courts below my house and Dumpy Park than they're going to have from this residence. And if there's noise issues, they can be addressed with the police. So I think that I hope that you continue forward and move this project to the city council so they can be opened up. Maybe I can have my 40th anniversary at the restaurant, send my rich brother to the hotel. But I'm looking forward to seeing this in town. I think it's going to be a big benefit to the town. I had one other thing, but I totally forgot what it was. But I think I look forward to you guys moving this forward and approving it. Thank you. |
| 02:13:02.26 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is Ron Albert. Mr. Albert, come on down. You'll have three minutes. |
| 02:13:10.43 | Ron Albert | Yes, good evening, Commissioners. Ron Albert, 35-year resident, former Planning Commissioner, former Councilmember, former Mayor. I learned about this project a while ago and was incredibly excited. I think it's a godsend for Sausalito, turning this vacant building into a very high-quality restaurant and a boutique hotel. I thought, holy cow, what could be better? And we've got an applicant with a proven track record. Fantastic. I read every one of the letters submitted and then I submitted my own and I then I read a few that came after it It seems to me a lot of the people who are opposing this project are saying, what would happen if they don't comply with the conditions of approval? What would happen if they violate the law? What would happen if there's noise after 10 o'clock that isn't remedied? Are we going to be a type of city where a handful of angry neighbors raise these fears that what will happen if the applicant doesn't comply, doesn't say they're going to do what they say they're going to do? What will happen if the police don't come to shut down noisy parties? Therefore, let's not let this happen. Please do not be that type of city. We've been that type of city too many times in the past. This is a godsend for Sausalito. It's going to be a tremendous asset. Please approve it. |
| 02:14:53.16 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments, Mr. Albert. That does it for speaker cards submitted to me in house. I will now look to the Zoom application for raised hands and I will call them in the order that I see them. The first raised hand is that of Adrian. Adrian, welcome. Feel free to unmute yourself and you will have three minutes. |
| 02:15:15.66 | Adrian | I thank you for my comment. I just wanted to express my support for this project. a person who's putting the project on speaking and kind of project we need downtown, when I hear the neighbors talking about concerns. for sound or noise. Um, The noise level downtown is artificially young. And there is no activity downtown, need activity downtown. I think that our noise ordinances can definitely uh, handle any excess noise, but the fact is we need this and, you know, getting a hotel and restaurant downtown that will fill our empty storefronts is a great thing. And I hope you'll, uh, approve this project. Thank you. |
| 02:16:09.25 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments. Next speaker on the Zoom application is Joel Carr. Joel, welcome. You'll have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:16:17.59 | Joel Carr | Uh-oh. Thank you. Sorry, I would appear on the video, but I can't seem to get it to function. So thank you for this. Here we are, Commissioners. I appreciate the the application and the project. I think, as has been said before, that this is a fantastic project for this city. I have owned an architecture firm, commercial architecture firm in San Francisco for 25 years, and I've dealt with myriad versions of projects like this. And not only do we have a very thoughtful and very sensitive and clearly very responsive owner, whom I have not met or seen until this evening, but clearly the kind of a client I would want to have. very engaged with the community and I think doing a fantastic job. I've done quite a bit of historic preservation work in my career as well. And I think that what's being proposed for this project is absolutely appropriate and brilliant and the kind of tax revenues that we'll have. in Sausalito, which we need badly as a result of this project. I think is a major benefit, and I would love to see this project go ahead. I wish I had known in advance, longer in advance about the hearing because I would have sent a letter as well. Thanks for considering, and I appreciate the project. Thanks so much. |
| 02:17:59.24 | Director Phipps | Joel, thank you for your comments. Next speaker with their hand raised in the Zoom application is the one and only iPhone 492. Please unmute yourself. You'll have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:18:18.70 | Rebecca | Hi, my name is Rebecca and I am writing in support of Ken Ibsen and the Bridgeway project. I highly recommend you welcome Kent Ibsen and his small business to your Sausalito community. Ken Ibsen has a huge presence in every community he is a part of. His Schipollini's restaurants are a popular spot for families and friends to gather and create a sense of community and bond. I grew up in the East Bay where I ate at Scipolini's every Friday night with my family while growing up. I currently live in Rockland, California, where Ken Ibsen has another Schipelini's restaurant. In Rockland, I am on the board of directors for the Rockland FC Soccer Club, one of the many clubs and communities groups that Kent and his restaurant generously support through donations and hosting events. This past Friday, I was fortunate enough to be able to attend a fundraising event Kent Ibsen hosted at the Pocket in Carmel, in Carmel benefiting the Monterey County Food Bank. The event was a very sophisticated, classy, upscale event. It raised over $120,000 for the Monterey County Food Bank. Ken is a special and rare business owner. He cares about all people. He cares about his employees and his customers alike. He believes in integrating into the community and being involved. I strongly believe Ken Ibsen and his vision will only benefit Sal Salido. You will not regret the decision to make him and his business a part of your community. Thank you so much for your time. |
| 02:19:52.49 | Director Phipps | Thank you very much for your comments. Next raised hand in the Zoom application is that of Carolyn Revell. Carolyn, welcome. You'll have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:20:10.85 | Carolyn Revell | Can you hear me? There we go. I'd like to quickly add my support to this imaginative project, this excellent adaptive reuse project. |
| 02:20:12.15 | Unknown Staff | Yeah. |
| 02:20:18.48 | Carolyn Revell | project, which will complement the historic district. The restaurant will help revitalize the downtown, and the hotel will contribute revenue to the city coffers through the TOT tax. So I do urge you to support this project. Thank you so much. |
| 02:20:33.99 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Carolyn, for your comments. Next raised hand in the Zoom app is Peter Van Meter. Peter, welcome. You will have three minutes to speak. |
| 02:20:45.55 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. I'm very supportive of this project. I think it's a fabulous adaptive reuse of a historic building. and the revenues to the city has been emphasized earlier comment. In the general plan that we adopted in 2021, One of the key objectives is they have Low environmental impact high revenue uses in our downtown district. A hotel use is a prime example of that. People come, they stay, they spend money. And as I look at this, the restaurant and the three high end rooms as described in the discussion here tonight. I would guess that that could produce $150,000 to $200,000 in tax revenue to the city of Sausalito from just this one small building. because I gather that the room rates are going to be pretty darn high in that hotel from what I heard described. So this is going to be a win-win deal for the city of Sausalito. And I really hope that you go ahead and approve it. Thank you. |
| 02:21:53.32 | Director Phipps | Thank you for your comments, Peter. Looking for additional raised hands in the Zoom application. Going once, going twice. Seeing none, Chair, back to you. |
| 02:22:03.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:22:03.63 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:22:04.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We'll close the public hearing portion of this hearing item, bring it back up to the dais. I'm sorry, I take that back. Thank you very much. It's been a long night so far. At this point, the applicant, you have four minutes to respond to any questions, comments that you heard, and we will put the clock back up for those four minutes. |
| 02:22:36.15 | Kent Ibsen | I don't have a lot to add to what we've already discussed, but Clay took some notes about some of the items that were of concern to the other speakers, and I think he'll address them. |
| 02:22:49.04 | Clay Haberman | you Well, certainly, you know... Items like, you know, mechanical noise, of course. We... you know we will have a uh an acoustical engineer on our project uh because we want you know, these to be luxury apartments. You know, they don't we don't want noise. in the apartments or anywhere, you know, bothering people on site as well as offsite. And structural for the wall, you know, analyzing the wall, of course, any, any hole we put in the retaining wall, we will have structural engineer who will be reviewing the whole thing and I'm sure we will have to. do some some structural work to make sure that all of that is fine. And I think really that's that's about all I have. Do you have any other questions? Thank you. |
| 02:23:44.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | This is not time. We'll do it when we commit those dice. Okay. We don't have any questions at this point. We're going to bring it back up to the dais, but any commissioner might, through the chair, ask you folks to come back to answer our questions. So at this point, if you don't have any further comments or rebuttal, we'll close that part of the hearing. OK, so we're back up at the dais. If comments, questions, thoughts, You sure felt. |
| 02:24:13.73 | Kristina Feller | Could I just start by asking if staff has had time to look at what those operating hours are of the other enterprises in downtown? We had asked them to do that just so we have that in the beginning of our deliberations. |
| 02:24:30.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, that would be helpful. Do we do we have that Mr. Manage? |
| 02:24:36.83 | Matthew Mandich | Yes, we do. We have some of the hours, the businesses in the vicinity. So for Copita, run during the week until 9 p.m., Friday and Saturday, 10 p.m. And then we were looking for the hours for the cultivar proposal, but fortunately not able to find those in the resolution of the staff report. However, I did get some correspondence from Commissioner Saad that they were till 1030. PM. |
| 02:25:10.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:11.01 | Nastassya Saad | That was the outdoor dining. |
| 02:25:12.56 | Unknown | For the outdoor dining? And then for the restaurant itself? Do you have a recollection of that? We look for minutes too, but. |
| 02:25:12.61 | Matthew Mandich | Thank you. . |
| 02:25:12.97 | Nastassya Saad | We're done. I agree. try to look as well. I know we negotiated at 10.30pm for outdoor dining and I believe they had asked |
| 02:25:22.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:22.97 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:25:23.00 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:25:23.06 | Unknown Staff | you |
| 02:25:23.09 | Unknown | you |
| 02:25:27.11 | Nastassya Saad | for midnight, but I remember we pushed it back to 11. I want it, yeah. |
| 02:25:29.25 | Kristina Feller | THEY WERE IN THEIR Thank you. |
| 02:25:32.49 | Unknown | 10.30 outside, 11 inside. |
| 02:25:34.04 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, but it was definitely 1030 outside. Yes. And |
| 02:25:37.58 | Director Phipps | And if I may, we were also asked to look into the fish and chips approval. There is a general condition in the conditions of approval as written on July 10, 2024, which reads, alcohol may be sold for indoor on-site consumption during the operating hours of the restaurant from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Sunday. Alcohol shall not be sold for on-site consumption outside of restaurant hours. |
| 02:26:05.26 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:26:06.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So let me just make sure I heard that. So 10 o'clock to 9 p.m. for both outside and inside, hours of operation, no. For Lapperts? |
| 02:26:16.97 | Unknown | KOPIDA. |
| 02:26:17.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Per Copito. What was Lappert's director for? |
| 02:26:21.88 | Director Phipps | The item that I just read is from the general conditions of the conditions of approval dated July 10, 2024 for fish and chips. And it reads, alcohol may be sold for indoor on-site consumption during the operating hours of the restaurant from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Sunday. |
| 02:26:37.29 | Unknown | I believe that is for the restaurant on the ground level, though. I believe that's also the case. It's at 11 p.m. for the upstairs. |
| 02:26:42.45 | Director Phipps | I believe that's also the case. It's an 11 p.m. for the upstairs. I agree. So that's what we were able to find in the limited time that we had. However, I do recall... |
| 02:26:48.36 | Unknown | Perfect. |
| 02:26:48.75 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:26:53.54 | Director Phipps | I believe that there were later operating hours for the upstairs restaurant. |
| 02:26:58.16 | Nastassya Saad | There were. |
| 02:26:58.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | There were and they needed to close the windows after a certain... |
| 02:26:59.01 | Nastassya Saad | I want to. |
| 02:26:59.28 | Director Phipps | I'm not sure. |
| 02:27:02.65 | Director Phipps | Yep, I recall that as well. |
| 02:27:04.05 | Nastassya Saad | I think this helps with the gist of what we're trying to achieve. |
| 02:27:06.20 | Kristina Feller | Okay, yeah, that's helpful for benchmarks. Thank you. |
| 02:27:12.69 | Nastassya Saad | May I ask a question for the attorney? May I kick it off with a question to the attorney? Sure. Can we please comment on the, it came from public comment and just from the municipal code around all uses located above the first street, or sorry, thank you, first street, first floor level of all existing and new structures shall be residential, which is municipal code 10.44190B1A. Thank you. about residential occupancy in the moment to look that in. Would you like me to repeat that? |
| 02:27:48.06 | Mary Wagner | I mean, |
| 02:27:52.15 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, could you repeat the number for me real quick? Thank you. |
| 02:27:53.93 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. 10.44. one nine zero B1A in regards to residential occupancy on a second floor. And if you need some time, we can come back to it. But I do want to, I would like our city attorney to weigh in, please, on that. |
| 02:28:16.51 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, let me take a look at it. And if we can come back to me, that would be lovely. |
| 02:28:20.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That would be fine. Thank you. |
| 02:28:21.81 | Kristina Feller | THANK YOU. |
| 02:28:22.05 | Branka Pabaric | Thank you. |
| 02:28:23.30 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Other questions before we get into conversations, I guess, if people have clarifications. |
| 02:28:30.69 | Kristina Feller | I think we should kick off the discussion about this. And while others are looking for additional information, just for clarification. |
| 02:28:41.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:28:41.12 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 02:28:41.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Before you do that, Commissioner Mollett, did you have a question? I had a question. |
| 02:28:44.78 | David Marlatt | Well, I had a couple of questions for Mr. Hipson, the applicant. I think we're past that. |
| 02:28:51.67 | Jeffery Luxenberg | If we were past that, but if we have a specific question that relates to how we would condition something, we can ask that. |
| 02:29:00.93 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 02:29:01.03 | Kristina Feller | These are deliberations. |
| 02:29:02.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure, no, I understand. Right. |
| 02:29:05.82 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:29:05.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Commissioner Fowler. |
| 02:29:07.54 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, I can get us started. I mean, I... First of all, I want to thank the public for commenting on this, whether you're on Zoom, whether you've written. a letter or an email or you're here in the chambers. This is a very critical part to this commission. The different and varying perspectives are very important, and I certainly value that when we're considering what we need to deliberate up here. And we have quite a bit. We have a design review permit, a variance to conditional use permits, a minor use permit, an assigned permit. We already have the Certificate of Appropriateness from HPC, which is the Historic Preservation Commission. I think that the theme here is noise. I guess, you know, amongst us up here, I also want to be really clear that this applicant and property owner has every right to develop this property. I mean, not... within the confines, obviously, of our ordinances and municipal codes, etc., But this is a commercial district. This is actually a very light use compared to many of the other hearings we've recently seen, and certainly in this calendar year. and in the last 12 to 18 months of other projects in the downtown area, Um, that does not mean I negate or diminish any comments that anyone's made for or against this. But when it relates to noise, this is that commercial district. We have other projects and properties being developed now that will generate probably more foot traffic than this that are within noise. you know. less than a block, you know, within 100 feet of this, and we did not get the same amount of issues regarding noise. Again, I don't think that negates the issue, but I think we do need to address this in some way. And I am very happy to hear that the applicant does have an acoustical engineer and will retain that acoustical engineer through completion and a structural engineer, which I believe also addresses some of the comments and concerns of the public. Thank you. I am actually less concerned about the, what I'll call the sort of sunken outdoor area. I think you'll have some natural acoustics because of the fact of the surrounding areas and use of material I think is very important there. It's where you have outdoor outdoor sidewalk in public areas that tend to generate a little bit more noise than other areas. So I am very supportive of this project. I will also note, just as a side note for to make sure we have guardrails here for the benefit of the public. This commission doesn't comment on economics. you know, we don't, we're not here to talk about TOT taxes and all that kind of stuff. That might be a residual benefit, but we're really here to make certain findings and appreciate the comments we've had about that, but that is not part of the findings that we make this evening. So as it relates to the design review permit, I can make the findings on the design review permit. I have, I still have a little bit of a hang up on the minor use permit so i want to hear what the the rest of of my fellow commissioners think about that as it relates to actually fitting 20 seats reasonably outside on on that sidewalk based on the renderings that we have seen. I actually like the sign. I like how I think it's a beautiful, all of the signage. And so I can make the rest of the findings, but the minor use permit, I'm still a little bit hung up on. |
| 02:33:19.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. Other comments? Commissioner Marillott. |
| 02:33:24.55 | David Marlatt | Yeah, well, thank you. And my concerns are more focused, I guess, on the observation deck and the variants. I think as far as the design review, I think for me I can very easily make the findings. It's a great project, would be great for Sausalito as so many of us have discussed. My concern with the observation deck is really twofold, or maybe three. One is I wanted to understand better from staff or be very clear from staff if The variance in that rear 15 feet is for all construction because effectively they're showing like the three-story building in that cut. There's the bathroom and kitchen level, then there's the equipment level, and then there's the observation deck. if we do not Thank you. grant the variance that they're being asked for, do they have to construct nothing all the way down to that second story, or is it just the observation deck? And that would be something maybe we can get clarification from staff on. The other concern, again, about the observation deck, in addition to the awkwardness of leaving the property and coming back in, is the risk, and we can each decide whether the risk is reasonable or not, that it will have to be on what the building code calls an accessible route. That's not our business to decide, but the risk that this project will be back to us, which none of us, we would all like to avoid if possible. So that's my other concern. And what I haven't really heard from the applicant is the business case for this. And I'll be in a strict sense of talking just about money. But obviously, if the observation deck wasn't there, there would still be hotel rooms, there would still be a restaurant, there would still be a jacuzzi, etc, etc. So is there a business case that compels us to make the finding that this is not in fact a kind of a privilege? That's where I'm struggling, and I'm certainly open to hearing everyone else's comments and concerns. But I struggle with the finding that this is not, in fact, a privilege and something that's not inherently necessary due to the topography of the site. |
| 02:35:27.84 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:35:27.94 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm not sure. |
| 02:35:32.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Merlot. Commissioner Juniors. |
| 02:35:39.11 | Andrew Junius | Well, I'm going to start on a much more positive note. I think some of the speakers... we're, were very supportive and very clear and i want to be very supportive and very clear that this really is an enormously special and unique opportunity for Sausalito and we can't we can't screw this up. Thank you. um Let me let me first start. with the historic angle here. Historic buildings are really difficult to deal with if you wanna save them. Thank you. and do something good with them. San Francisco is littered with historic buildings, historic properties that have been caught in processes like this and not redeveloped and they fall apart and the city loses them because for a variety of reasons, and I don't want to get into all the different back and forths that happen, preservation is oftentimes used as a way to slow things down and stop things. And I don't think that's going to happen here tonight, but I do want to make sure that, The record shows and the public is aware just how extraordinarily lucky Sausalito is that this applicant is here right now to do this project. This is just, I mean, it just adds up so perfectly. And the fact that he even started out by making us very aware that he's an owner-operator, so we're not dealing with half a deal here. In 10 years, this could go away. This sounds even more extraordinary of an opportunity. It all just adds up. I mean, I'm gonna respond to some of the noise issues and the variance question that Commissioner Marlott raised in a second. I don't think there's going to be any complaint here about the actual use. This is where hotels belong. The city council has recently been talking about we need more hotels. This town needs more hotels, needs more hotel rooms. Generates revenue, good for business across the board. It's just, and for this, again, incredibly special building in the heart of San Francisco to have this kind of proposal made. and somebody to bring as you know, these are enormously expensive projects too. I mean, this is not, you know, something where there's a pro forma that we could start, you know, nickel and diamond and talking about what piece is this, you know, what happens if you take this away and this away? I mean, that's, I'm completely, we just shouldn't be going there. This is the project in front of us. The project fits literally almost within the envelope of the existing building. I mean, it's like, I can't see anything with respect to the proposal itself, the massing, the number of rooms, the way it's laid out, the preservation of the facade, it's just extraordinary. So I am going to make a motion to approve this, but before I do that, I don't really understand. I think, first off, I also want to congratulate the staff. The staff report and the analysis here is really top-notch. It really, it shouldn't have to be this much. Do we really need seven discretionary permits to do something like this? I mean, it's like over the top. So I'll just make yet another pitch for we need more simplified code. We need some of these things to be at the discretion of the staff. There's a lot of stuff here that really, the issue before us, the key issue, and the issue that every city deals with in terms of hotels, is an appropriate late location for a hotel and there's nobody in this room that says no this is not I mean well there's there are people that are nearby that are worried about noise but there's no question this is a good place for a hotel that's the big issue everything else kind of falls into place. There's a lot of talk about details. We can get into the details. I hope the details don't start to drag this down and start to, you know, jeopardize what is an incredible opportunity here. But with respect to the variance, I think the staff really kind of nailed it here. There was three or four different ways to go, easier ways, kind of just, you know, kind of mail it in. But no, we decided or the staff decided to look at the site as if you are literally building in the rear yard. And when you build in the rear yard, you... to mail it in but no we we decided or the staff decided to look at the site as if you are literally building in the rear yard and when you build in the rear yard you but you need a variance for me it's that simple I don't talk about I don't worry about the grade I don't worry about a lot of other stuff the site has been fully occupied by a structure since its inception and This is And and and as the code evolves, the rear yard. requirement comes into place I mean that the bottom line is when the building was built there wasn't a rearguard requirement that's why it is the way it is and so now you know, to put it back the way the new project needs to be, We need a variance. I mean, it's just that simple. And the variance is clearly justified by the fact that it's a historic building. The general plan wants us to preserve historic buildings. Hotels are an encouraged use in Sausalito. Plenty of justification here for that. Um, So I'm not actually sure how I want to respond. I don't have any response to Commissioner Marlott, your question about the deck. I mean, it's a great amenity. You want this hotel to be the best hotel Salsa Luta can possibly produce? He needs the deck, full stop. It's just the way, I mean, it's just, you know, I just sometimes get frustrated with commissions that try to, you know, make it more perfect more perfect you know or do things to it that you know don't really advance any real goal and take away from the project we see this oftentimes in residential projects make it a little bit smaller make the back you know do this and it's like all you do is make the house worse and nobody really benefits now in this case I certainly certainly going to acknowledge the fact that there are a handful of people that live very close by and have some concerns about noise We have rules about that. The noise ordinance is in place. I think Mr. Albert, who's left the room, made the exact case that we need to make every time where there are these issues. There's nothing extraordinary about a hotel moving into a commercial district, and the commercial district happens to be next to a residential area. And the rules and regulations deal with that as best they can. I'm confident that the type of product that Mr. Ibsen is proposing here is not going to create some of these hypothetical worst case scenarios. It's just not going to happen. I'm particularly kind of. struck by the idea that this is somehow you know, a subversive short-term rental Airbnb thing. That's kind of interesting. It's small. There's no question it's really small, but these kind of boutique-y hotels are really becoming a thing. I've actually been at one. There's a fascinating one up in Dunsmuir called, I think, the Moss Prayer or something, a really interesting, interesting redevelopment of a little historic building. This is the future of the – this is how you save these buildings. And I just think, you know, the idea that it's going to turn into, you know, party rooms or I don't know, it's certainly not a short-term rental. Short-term rentals are illegal in Sausalito. This is a hotel. That's why it's here for conditional use authorization. That's the question, the main question, in my opinion, before the commission. And anyway, I will leave it at that. I appreciate your patience. Thank you. |
| 02:42:47.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:42:47.23 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Thank you. to make |
| 02:42:47.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, let's hold, let's hold. |
| 02:42:49.76 | Andrew Junius | I am making a motion to approve without |
| 02:42:52.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | without you hold off and let everybody speak can I just make my motion and then we can |
| 02:42:55.06 | Andrew Junius | Can I just make my motion and then we can move on? |
| 02:42:58.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | because I would rather everybody have a chance to speak and then make the motion if we could. |
| 02:43:02.82 | Andrew Junius | I already made the motion. So move to approve without changes, and we can start talking about. I will second that motion. Thank you. |
| 02:43:07.24 | Kristina Feller | I will second that motion. |
| 02:43:09.84 | Nastassya Saad | He made it a little earlier. I would like to see if the attorney has had a chance to come back for comment, please. |
| 02:43:21.79 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. I did look at the code section you asked me to, which does say that uses on the first floor |
| 02:43:26.43 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 02:43:26.74 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:43:31.70 | Mary Wagner | COB, Elaine McLaughlin, Above the first floor apologize for existing a new structure shall be residential. It does also say further down that there's an exception to that. that does say to allow for an exception to the section we were just talking about, Um, that does allow you this planning commission in special circumstances. to make an exception to the residential uses only being above the ground floor. It does talk about the allowance of small commercial spaces up to a maximum of 1,000 square feet per parcel. In talking with staff, I believe that the hotel rooms themselves are about a thousand square feet. So it's just the open space that would be above that. So it'd be up to the commission to decide whether this is a special circumstance. It appears to be up to the commission to decide if it'd be a special circumstance that would be one of these exceptions to that requirement. It's also my understanding that this hasn't really been utilized by the city of Sausalito, so just As an FYI, you may want to address that with staff to see what has been done in the past for this area, this zone and the second floor issue. |
| 02:44:51.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Vice Chair Saad, do you have comments before we... |
| 02:44:55.67 | Nastassya Saad | That is interesting. That opens it back up, which I was hoping that it wouldn't. I think we can get there. I don't think I am at the stage to completely move to approve. I just want to talk about that variance because I'm actually, to Commissioner Marlott's point, the variance, the deck, which seems to be a point of contention for noise and privacy and other aspects of it, is I think the only thing that's up for debate. I don't actually have a problem with a minor use permit for outdoor dining, although I'd be more than happy to discuss with Commissioner Feller and her thoughts around the total seats. I don't have any issue with the signed permit. I think the certificate of appropriateness makes sense. I think a CUP is a no-brainer. I think the design review permit makes sense overall. I think we all know on the commission outright that I love lighter colors, so I wish it would stay the same, but there is an elegance to the colors that were chosen, even though I'm not as fond of them as the current building, but I'm just putting that on record that I do prefer some lighter colors, but we'll move on from that. So I think it's just about understanding. I'd be curious. You were very clear, Commissioner Junius. I appreciate that. There's no nuance there. And if I can just toss that back to the rest of the commission, because I'm a little here on the fence with the deck against the variance. |
| 02:46:23.84 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:46:28.16 | Andrew Junius | OK. Thank you. |
| 02:46:29.41 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:46:30.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But... |
| 02:46:31.48 | Andrew Junius | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:46:31.84 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:46:31.85 | Kristina Feller | Isn't this deliberation? |
| 02:46:31.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | It's a good thing. I know, but I haven't had a chance to make any comments. I thought everybody could make some comments and then we could get to that. |
| 02:46:38.64 | David Marlatt | Can I make a quick observation regarding the residential use? Sorry. Just very quickly before we leave it, because |
| 02:46:45.27 | Nastassya Saad | Is your mic on? |
| 02:46:46.75 | David Marlatt | Yeah, sorry. Just a very quick observation. And my understanding is that this hotel is of residential use. It's zoned. The building code in Sausalito or anywhere were treated as what's called an R1 occupancy. Technically speaking, we say hotel, but technically it's transient lodging. That's the code definition. And in our planning code, we have transient lodging, which includes bed and breakfast in hotels. So we can all interpret this as we like, but in my understanding of the code, this is in fact a residential occupancy. |
| 02:47:18.48 | Kristina Feller | I agree with that. That was the comment I was going to make. And I was also going to, that's all right, it's not your fault, also mention that the applicant did on that deck area make that landscape area as a concession also to one of the neighboring properties. And so I think it's a very low use in occupancy there. |
| 02:47:21.06 | Unknown Staff | And I was also going to. |
| 02:47:47.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Commissioner Fowler. I'll make some comments and then we can discuss the motion as it is. |
| 02:47:52.43 | Unknown Staff | motion. |
| 02:47:54.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I also think, concurring with Commissioner Junius, that this is an excellent use for this property. I commend the applicant on reusing a historic building that could have become a white elephant that is hard to reuse and came up with a very creative use that goes with what Sausalito is. I think people will come to this. I think it's a benefit for the city. I think it's a central location. There are challenges with regard to noise and those types of things in this location, but we have that challenge for every other commercial use we've approved recently from Lerts to Cultivar or whatever. So I think that what we really need to talk about is some of the conditions that we have here, and the staff has added some with regard to restricting the deck space for hotel guests only. I think some critical ones, which we have not refined yet, would be what are the hours. There was a proposal for the maximum possible. I think we need to make sure it's consistent with what we just heard for other properties in the area. And I think there should be a different knowing for the outside spaces and for the inside spaces. I think that the idea that you can't pull the chairs until after you close the inside is not a problem at all. That is the way it's done elsewhere, but we would want those just cordoned off after a certain hour so there isn't noise. I was very heartened by this welcome ambassador, and I think we should have some sort of condition here the cordoned off after a certain hour so there isn't noise. I was very heartened by this welcome ambassador, and I think we should have some sort of condition here. It doesn't have to be welcome ambassador, but it has to be a condition that as long as the restaurant's open, there's some way that somebody can make sure if there's noise or any other problems or a guest has a problem that it gets addressed some way because unlike a hotel with 50 units, there are only three, but still there has to be that person that gets contacted in that. So I feel really good about that. The fact that the applicant is the owner and not a developer and has done this in other communities I think is excellent. As far as I think we need some provision to restrict this ship's ladder because it looks like a problem to me. So I don't know what the design solution is, but a condition that a guest would not be able to access it, unlike a maintenance person, that there would be a difference in some way, I think could be a condition here. I think we might want a condition on the number of outside seats less than 20, but the 12 that are on the plan seems fine to me. And then I'm still struggling with, it would really be great if we could have a ladder to this deck on the inside because it really changes my opinion of this because going out and going back in to this segregated area just seems like a problem. But I defer to more Commissioner Marlott as an architect to tell me that it really isn't possible to build in any reasonable way. But anyway, so those are my thoughts for additional conditions, but I strongly believe we should approve this project. With that, I'll open it up to others. |
| 02:51:40.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | The ones that I've added are the ones that are already in there. Um, |
| 02:51:46.74 | Kristina Feller | It was a number of seats outside. |
| 02:51:48.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | number of seats outside, hours of operation. I added this welcome ambassador or whatever we wanna call it, that there has to be a requirement that somebody is responsible on site. And the restriction regarding the ship ladder. |
| 02:52:07.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, during all operating hours, somebody on site that's responsible for the hotel. |
| 02:52:15.04 | Andrew Junius | while the property is operating. |
| 02:52:17.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:52:17.49 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:52:17.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And an after-hours contact person that somebody can call. The ship ladder needs to be protected. And I don't know if we want a requirement to put an internal letter in, but I'd like everybody's thoughts on that. Well, we're not designing it, but we're allowing public use of a space and putting a private sign on a public stairway. And so, which, you know, there are a lot of places in Sausalito that have private access off of a stairway. But in this case, usually in those cases, it's somebody's backyard where they can get to it another way. This is the only way to get to the space. So that's concerning me. I don't know if it's concerning anybody else. So. |
| 02:53:07.42 | Nastassya Saad | May I ask, are we open to discussing, because I know we're talking about the hours of operation, I think for the front, excuse me, for the outdoor dining versus indoor dining, but are we also putting anything on the table about that observation deck we seem to be calling it now as well? |
| 02:53:25.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | My suggestion was when I say outside spaces, I see the deck as an outside space. |
| 02:53:30.45 | Nastassya Saad | So I just want to be clear for everybody that we're talking. |
| 02:53:32.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We're searching on the hours for that deck. |
| 02:53:34.01 | Andrew Junius | Okay, so there's already condition number two says use of the hotel common area amenity area, including elevated decks, will be prohibited from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. And use of these spaces must comply with the noise ordinance. That fully satisfies me, and I think answers all the questions. |
| 02:53:34.49 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:53:48.46 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. I couldn't find that. I knew I read it. Thank you for calling that out. |
| 02:53:53.14 | Andrew Junius | So that takes care of the noise issue with respect to the and hours on the deck in the minute area. So hours on the restaurant? I mean, is that where we going? |
| 02:53:56.73 | Nastassya Saad | Overnight. I agree. |
| 02:54:02.28 | Kristina Feller | I'm not concerned about the restaurant because the hours are consistent with everybody else. Downtown as well. Yeah. |
| 02:54:08.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Everybody else. Downtown as well. What are the hours? |
| 02:54:14.23 | Kristina Feller | Let me just pull it up. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:54:16.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Is that what Commissioner Juresh just read, or that was just the outcome? No. That was just the amenities. |
| 02:54:19.86 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:54:21.15 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:54:21.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, it's not. |
| 02:54:21.28 | Andrew Junius | That's good. |
| 02:54:21.37 | Nastassya Saad | That was the amenity space. That was the outdoor space, yes. |
| 02:54:24.30 | Andrew Junius | There is no condition regarding hours at this time, and I'm comfortable that that's okay with me because there's no downtown regulation about this. |
| 02:54:28.59 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 02:54:28.98 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:54:28.99 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 02:54:29.06 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:54:31.25 | Andrew Junius | And as we all know, the sidewalks roll up pretty early, so the restaurant kind of self-closes at that point. |
| 02:54:34.80 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. So Yeah, and the restaurant would be indoors, so it's 12 a.m. on Friday and Saturday and 11 p.m. on Sunday. |
| 02:54:46.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I much would rather prefer that since we've done it elsewhere that we include a condition with the hours rather than Say all of a sudden they decide to open the one o'clock or something and they're not going to do that But if they were I just rather be consistent also because there might be someplace else since I can support that |
| 02:54:46.24 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:55:04.21 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:55:04.25 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:55:04.28 | Andrew Junius | I can. |
| 02:55:04.52 | Kristina Feller | So, we're going to have a that that's fine that's fine okay so that takes care of two um the number of seats outside i mean we have 12 that are shown in the drawing which looks reasonable and of course what we will ask the applicant to come up and confirm all this but 20 seems like a stretch to me um i don't know anyone else's thoughts about that. I don't want to spend too much time thinking about this because ultimately they need to run a business. But I would say three to four tables out there makes the most sense to me. It's pretty packed otherwise. |
| 02:55:43.89 | Nastassya Saad | I would agree. Uh. |
| 02:55:45.24 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, if we're throwing out a number, I think 16 might work. Okay. |
| 02:55:49.50 | Kristina Feller | I'm happy with that. Okay, 16. Okay. And then the condition of a, um, manager on site that can handle the hotel. and then restricting access to the ship ladder. Okay, anything else everybody? |
| 02:56:06.65 | David Marlatt | And I would just offer it may not be the title manager because Mr. Ibsen said it was a concierge or staffer. |
| 02:56:10.87 | Kristina Feller | concierge or staff. |
| 02:56:12.71 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:56:12.84 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:56:12.91 | Andrew Junius | A hotel representative. |
| 02:56:13.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We got hotel representative, welcome ambassador, concierge, whatever you call it. |
| 02:56:13.92 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:56:13.97 | David Marlatt | Not necessarily. |
| 02:56:15.24 | Andrew Junius | THE FAMILY. Thank you. |
| 02:56:17.58 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:56:17.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:56:17.69 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:56:17.72 | Andrew Junius | We're going to go. |
| 02:56:18.07 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:56:18.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. All right. All right. So the maker of the motion, do you accept these? |
| 02:56:23.95 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, all those conditions are acceptable. |
| 02:56:26.17 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and as the second, I accept those as well. |
| 02:56:29.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I clarify that CDD fully understands those conditions? It's... |
| 02:56:34.71 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:56:34.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:56:34.93 | Director Phipps | I do. |
| 02:56:35.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:56:35.25 | Director Phipps | Thank you, Chair. |
| 02:56:36.38 | Kristina Feller | We should ask the applicant to come up and confirm that these are acceptable to him. |
| 02:56:40.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | if the applicant can come up and are these conditions you'll be able to meet? Thank you. |
| 02:56:49.34 | Kent Ibsen | Yeah, all the conditions sound fine. I would say that outside, If you're going to condition something, you don't want to condition tables because the table is going to be real big, right? So you condition seats. I think we can, I think we can safely get 20 in there, but if that's a big bone of contention for y'all, then it'll be 16. So, um. I think that you guys have been fantastic and I'm not here to split air. So, um, if that, if that's what you're comfortable with, it'll be 16. But it should be conditioned to seats, not tables. Seats. Because then people put big tables in and you'll have 40. Excellent point. |
| 02:57:24.11 | Kristina Feller | See you. |
| 02:57:24.36 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 02:57:24.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:57:24.43 | Unknown Staff | because then people see big tables in and you'll have 40. |
| 02:57:26.96 | Kristina Feller | Excellent point. But before you leave, sir? Just want to make sure that you you're amenable to the other two conditions that we mentioned as well. |
| 02:57:38.62 | Kent Ibsen | I am and that the, the, Yeah. I am. |
| 02:57:42.28 | Kristina Feller | A hotel representative on site for the. |
| 02:57:45.81 | Kent Ibsen | During all hours of the restaurant operation, correct? During all hours. I mean, because they won't, I mean, they're not gonna be there at four in the morning. |
| 02:57:48.59 | Kristina Feller | Correct. |
| 02:57:54.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Plus plus a phone number to call and they were all there |
| 02:57:57.50 | Kent Ibsen | That is just baked into our process. Yeah. |
| 02:58:01.96 | Kristina Feller | and restricted access to the ship ladder. |
| 02:58:05.25 | Kent Ibsen | We're going to get rid of it. |
| 02:58:07.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:58:07.88 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. That's the best solution. |
| 02:58:08.17 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:58:08.64 | David Marlatt | THE BEST. |
| 02:58:09.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 02:58:09.85 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 02:58:10.21 | Kristina Feller | That's at your discretion. |
| 02:58:10.95 | Kent Ibsen | It was really unattractive. |
| 02:58:11.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I concur that's a good idea, but how are you, are you gonna just access it from the lower or lower? |
| 02:58:17.92 | Kent Ibsen | Or it will create some sort of either a vault that we can get in or another access point. Okay. |
| 02:58:23.66 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, that would be good. |
| 02:58:25.09 | Kent Ibsen | I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 02:58:25.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 02:58:25.78 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 02:58:26.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. We'll just, okay, removal of the ship ladder would be there. |
| 02:58:32.26 | Kristina Feller | Should that be the congestion or, I mean, should we leave it up to the applicant to work with staff? I don't wanna be too, |
| 02:58:39.71 | Kent Ibsen | We do have to get access to that space. And also there's a gardener that does the rooftop garden. |
| 02:58:40.92 | Kristina Feller | that space. |
| 02:58:45.80 | Kent Ibsen | Thank you. |
| 02:58:45.85 | Kristina Feller | Right. |
| 02:58:46.19 | Kent Ibsen | is that's accessed through the, so we do have to get access to it, but we do not have to get access through a ladder that's looped over the roof. |
| 02:58:46.20 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:58:46.25 | Unknown Staff | It's a great thing. |
| 02:58:53.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So since they are saying they can do that, I would like to say as a condition, the removal, because it's in the drawings of that ship ladder, they will obviously come up with another solution to that. But that ladder is in the drawing, so it should come out. Along the lines of that idea, the drawings that are referred to in the conditions do not show this new green landscape area, because those came in later. So somehow we have to modify that condition to reflect that. |
| 02:59:27.90 | Kristina Feller | That is discussed in the... attachment 5, which is the amendment of the historic design That was issued to them as well. |
| 02:59:46.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But the condition in the thing refers to a set of drawings and that drawing came later. With a specific date. That's all I'm... I just want to... So are you... |
| 02:59:53.65 | Kristina Feller | Mississippi. Okay. So are you adding another condition of approval? |
| 03:00:00.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm suggesting we modify that the existing condition there and add in plus the drawing dated whatever it is |
| 03:00:04.33 | Kristina Feller | Okay. or whatever it is. Okay. Staff, is that clear to you? Okay. Clear to you. And then I, I'm pretty comfortable that staff can work with the applicant regarding alternate to ship ladder. We don't, we don't, we don't need to see that again. |
| 03:00:24.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I'm not suggesting we, I just want to get the, I just want to note that the chip ladder is removed because it's on drawings and it looks like an unsafe thing. |
| 03:00:27.17 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:00:32.68 | Kristina Feller | And any alternative access will be worked out with staff. Yeah. Okay. Okay. I think we have all four. |
| 03:00:32.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and, you know, the Any. |
| 03:00:40.51 | Andrew Junius | In agreement? |
| 03:00:41.41 | Kristina Feller | I'm in agreement. |
| 03:00:43.53 | Andrew Junius | All the questions. |
| 03:00:44.02 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:00:44.04 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 03:00:44.09 | Andrew Junius | Uh, uh, Koro. |
| 03:00:47.97 | Director Phipps | Mr. Merlot. I vote yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Filler. Yes. |
| 03:00:54.54 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:00:55.08 | Director Phipps | Vice Chair Assad. |
| 03:00:56.02 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 03:00:56.58 | Director Phipps | Chair Luxenberg. Yes. |
| 03:00:57.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, and thank you very much. I'll look forward to the project. Thank you. Congratulations. |
| 03:01:02.64 | Director Phipps | Congratulations. difference. |
| 03:01:03.31 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:01:07.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, back to me. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing. Um... Item 7B, it's amendments to the ADU and JADU ordinances. Ordinance amending chapters 1044.080 and 1044.085 of the Sausalito Municipal Code with regard to accessory dwelling unit regulations and junior accessory dwelling unit regulations. Kristen Taiki, welcome again. And we also have some additional questions that were handed out this evening. |
| 03:01:32.73 | Unknown Staff | and I'm not sure if you're not. |
| 03:01:49.09 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you for that nice introduction. Just so you know, I did work quite extensively on this particular ordinance with our city attorney who is online, so we can also tap her for questions that I may not be able to answer. Or if I want to double check my answer. Can you go to the next slide? Thank you. So the request tonight is to conduct a public hearing on the amendments of 10 44080 and 10 44085, which address ADUs and JADUs, and adopt a draft resolution making a recommendation to the City Council. Next slide, please. So the regulations were last adopted under Ordinance 05-2003, which obviously is in 2023. At that time, it brought our code, which was not in compliance with state law, into much greater conformity with the current housing laws that were in effect at that particular year. In 2024, the governor signed two additional bills into law. further amending ADU and JADU regulations. And I listed the. Bill's there for you. These laws go into effect as of January 1st, and the cities are required to update their current regulations to incorporate these new laws into their codes. And if they are not adopted by January 1st, 2025, then the state law supersedes our law. We do have some urgency in trying to move forward on this. Next slide. can comply with the state. HCD preferences. HCD did give us some direction on how they'd like these things to be written, and they don't want to. Um, They don't want it too personalized, I think, is a good way to put it. And so we did follow the state law quite extensively in the new organization. THE FAMILY. And I said there that it does include reorganization of both in merging the JADU laws into ADU because that's how the state law is written. The new ordinance will make it easier to incorporate future state mandated amendments and in generally. It doesn't really change a whole lot for the R1 districts. The number of units permitted, their general size, height limits and onsite parking. are all pretty much the same. Can we have the next slide? So the major amendments that are required under AB 2533, one of the new laws, is really just addressing that we have to legalize non-permitted ADUs and JADUs that were established prior to January 1st, 2020. It used to be 2018. And they also really narrowed the conditions in which the city can't can deny it. They're really pushing us to approve these units if they can be done safely. Next slide, please. The requirements for SB 1211, first the city already Uh, pretty much. does not allow or the state does not allow us to require replacement parking when parking structures are removed in order to replace them with an ADU. The new law expands it even further and doesn't allow you to require uncovered parking spaces to be replaced. So if somebody expanded into a driveway, for instance, and, lost their parking in their single family home. We can't require its replacement. We also added a definition of livable space because it wasn't defined in the current state law. And under multifamily structures, you're allowed to add new ADUs into areas that are not livable space. So they tried to correct that. It has expanded the number of detached ADUs that a multifamily property can install from two to up to eight. Now, that isn't a guarantee they will always get eight. but they can add up to eight or an equivalent number of the number of units on the property already. Next slide, please. So additional amendments that we incorporated from state law or to just kind of make things work better. where state law is silent include Um, Adding zoning tables, identifying permitted and required FAR lock coverage in impervious surfaces adding a front yard setback of 10 feet. The only place in town that really requires a setback is along Main Street and Alexander Avenue. There is a special 10-foot setback. And And in order to accommodate that, we just put a blanket 10 foot set back in. And that is something the commission can consider or not. And keeping. We added an architectural requirement section, which is fairly basic. And not too extensive because we have to be careful about not doing anything that isn't objective. Next slide, please. And lastly, in addition to existing size limitations, new attached ADUs are further limited to 50% of the size of the primary dwelling unit. That was in state law, but not in our code, and we have incorporated that in as well. Next slide, please. So what's the city's authority here in terms of changing what you have before you tonight? The ordinance largely mirrors state law. The city may impose less restrictive and more generous rules than the state, but cannot be more restrictive. So... We're in areas where the state law is silent. This, you can see, is already reflected by our inclusion of FAR, lot coverage, impervious surface tables, and a required front yard setback. Next slide. Examples where you can change things. The city, these are just examples. The city may allow an ADU to be larger than the maximum 1,000 square feet that we're proposing in the ordinance. State law allows up to 1,200 square feet. You can increase the square footage of the permitted by right ADU above 800 square feet. You can remove or modify the front setback requirement. Next slide. You can change the FAR, lock coverage limits, and impervious surface restrictions in order to be more lenient. You can waive any on-site parking requirement. It's very limited where we actually can require an on-site parking space, and you can just waive them entirely if you choose. You can modify the proposed architectural requirements, and you can require an ADU permit from planning for units that are subject to building permit only. The ADU permit would just give planning a look at the proposal before it goes to a building permit stage. Next slide. So our recommendation is that you consider the resolution before you with the attachment A and the proposed modified ADU and JADU regulations and make a motion to the City Council to approve the changes, either as rafted or subject to any additional modifications you may decide on tonight. |
| 03:09:13.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Ms. Taiki. Questions from commissioners? Commissioner Marlowe. |
| 03:09:20.97 | David Marlatt | Thank you. And thank you for the presentation. It's very thorough and understandable. doing this in a number of communities, with ADUs around the Bay Area and California. I have some familiarity with what goes on in other places. And certainly we all share that we want to provide some clarification, simplification to what we do. So I do have some comments and questions, really. On C4, which is the definition for kitchen, this is more of just a recommendation for us to the council. I understand that it's basically copy- for us to the council. I understand that it's basically copy-pasted from the state, the definition as appropriate, but it's very vague. And my recommendation, if you can even look at examples in Mill Valley or Tiburon or San Francisco, is that for better or worse, they define what a kitchen is. What we don't know, but it doesn't tell us. And Sausalito currently doesn't tell us. Is there a hot plate? Is it a fixed cooktop? Is it an oven? I know this sounds incredibly trivial, but even the building department doesn't know what a kitchen is legally. And it's very easy. So that would be a suggestion. On C7. Thank you. It seems to say that the ADU area is measured from the interior of the walls as opposed to the exterior, which is fine, but I just wanted to clarify that. So an 800 square foot is 800 as measured interior or exterior? |
| 03:10:48.33 | Kristin Teiche | That's how our code measures floor area. as well. |
| 03:10:51.54 | David Marlatt | ADU purposes. |
| 03:10:52.60 | Kristin Teiche | No, for everything. |
| 03:10:54.07 | David Marlatt | OK, including ADU purposes. |
| 03:10:55.73 | Kristin Teiche | MAKING A LITTLE BIT. |
| 03:10:56.27 | David Marlatt | Okay. On D, just a suggestion, changing the word approvals to conditions. I have to get to D, sorry. So it says the following approvals apply to ADUs and JDUs. I think it's maybe better if the following conditions apply. That's very small. But then the next one, D1, says building permit only. If an ADU and JDU complies, then only it is allowed with only a building permit. And I understand the intention, but I'm afraid that it could be a misunderstanding because an applicant actually needs possibly a sprinkler permit photovoltaic permit demolition permit treatment removal permit and Christmas permit so my suggestion is to just say a. A to you permit is not required for as opposed to saying only a building permit. |
| 03:11:50.18 | Kristin Teiche | Okay. We can check with Kylie on the language because I know a lot of this is directly out of state law and, uh, |
| 03:11:50.84 | David Marlatt | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:11:57.27 | Kristin Teiche | the HCD has been pretty... Pretty opinionated on how many changes we make or how reworded it is. |
| 03:12:06.25 | David Marlatt | OK, well, there may be constraints in this that I don't know about. But as somebody who's. permits this stuff. Thank you. |
| 03:12:11.66 | Kristin Teiche | And I think, |
| 03:12:11.92 | David Marlatt | And I see codes where I go, what does that mean? And I have to explain to clients what that really means. |
| 03:12:17.42 | Kristin Teiche | Right. Well, state law, I think the legislature isn't really... versed in necessarily drafting language for our zoning ordinances. It is difficult. |
| 03:12:28.34 | Carolyn Revell | Thank you. |
| 03:12:28.45 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:12:28.56 | Kristina Feller | Can we get the city attorney to weigh in on that clarification in real time so we know what we're approving tonight? |
| 03:12:35.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, if we could, Kylie, that would be helpful. |
| 03:12:39.74 | Mary Wagner | Absolutely. Do you want me to start back at the beginning or just pick up from that one item? |
| 03:12:43.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Start with that one and then go back to the beginning so we just can knock them off as we can. |
| 03:12:49.48 | Mary Wagner | As to the building only permit, there are other applications and things out there. This is just meant to deal with the ADU. If someone needed a tree permit, for example, you wouldn't be looking in the ADU ordinance to deal with that. That's a separate and a part. So as the word approvals, it's meant to be that here's how we're going to approve it. So I think that it's not. My concern is putting the word conditions because that carries with it more of a discretionary versus approvals seems more, it's meant to be more ministerial. That's why the choice of that word was there. to try and make sure that the HCD doesn't trigger that they think we're putting conditions on these projects because especially for the first D1, those are all ministerial in nature. They're not discretionary at all. Those are just supposed to be the, these are, there's even less conditions or less standards on these than there are as you go into D2, for example. So that was the rationale. If you'd like us to consider a different word, |
| 03:13:55.61 | Unknown Staff | different work. Thank you. |
| 03:13:56.12 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:13:56.14 | Unknown Staff | So... |
| 03:13:56.52 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:13:56.58 | Unknown Staff | that you know |
| 03:13:57.23 | Mary Wagner | else conditions bothers me to be honest. |
| 03:14:00.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | While we're there, because we might as well do these things sort of in order, can you explain, I asked this to Ms. Taiki earlier this evening, when the... The ADU permit will come into place, like if you wanted over 800 square feet, but are the requirements basically the same? And the only difference is having the CDD department review it first and then it goes for building? What is the really conceptual difference between an ADU permit and a building-only permit? |
| 03:14:33.19 | Mary Wagner | Well, first I'd like to say that if you wanted to, for section D1, if we wanted to, if the commission wanted to make the change, you could also require a, ADU permit for that. The main difference between D1 and D2 is the standards that can be applied. For D1, only subsection E, those are the standards that we apply. For D2, it also puts into play subsection F, so E and F, And F is where As Kristin was talking about, it's the FAR the lot coverage, the impervious surfaces, those apply to the D2 permits or the D2 ADUs. And the D1, it only is the limited sections in E. So that's the main difference. And those are based off state law. |
| 03:15:28.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I'm seeing it now. Okay. |
| 03:15:31.21 | Kristin Teiche | Yeah. Includes quite a range of things, including height limits. Correct. |
| 03:15:36.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So for the building only height limits apply, but for FAR does not apply. |
| 03:15:36.36 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:15:36.37 | Andrew Junius | So for |
| 03:15:43.33 | Mary Wagner | Correct. |
| 03:15:44.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's right. |
| 03:15:44.37 | Andrew Junius | Amen. |
| 03:15:44.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:15:44.83 | Andrew Junius | Amen. |
| 03:15:45.17 | Mary Wagner | Both of those would apply, for example. |
| 03:15:45.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you |
| 03:15:45.23 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 03:15:45.35 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:15:45.39 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:15:45.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:15:45.52 | Andrew Junius | of the |
| 03:15:48.98 | David Marlatt | OK, thank you. And my suggestion about not titling D1, not stating that it is allowed with only a building permit. I understand that your intention is that somebody shouldn't be looking in our zoning code for a tree permit process. But they do. And it's just a communication question, not a legal question about not having that. Yeah. |
| 03:16:16.92 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 03:16:17.53 | David Marlatt | So I'll move on. |
| 03:16:18.88 | Mary Wagner | But might I suggest that if you're concerned about that, we could always have staff could create a, Here's all. |
| 03:16:25.82 | David Marlatt | The ADU permit is not required. It is required and it's not required, but |
| 03:16:30.17 | Mary Wagner | they could provide my own informational sheet you know, |
| 03:16:33.93 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:16:33.95 | David Marlatt | Yeah. |
| 03:16:34.04 | Unknown Staff | Yeah. |
| 03:16:34.09 | Mary Wagner | Other places you might want to look, but they aren't really related to the ADU section. So we want to keep those separate and apart, especially since |
| 03:16:34.10 | David Marlatt | I'm not sure. |
| 03:16:34.29 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:16:34.31 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:16:42.07 | Mary Wagner | It then would look like we're trying to stop ADUs and that would raise red flags for HCV. |
| 03:16:48.28 | David Marlatt | Oh no, certainly that's not the intention. |
| 03:16:50.12 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, absolutely. |
| 03:16:51.33 | David Marlatt | Yeah. So let me skip down a little more substantive. And I know this is coming from our current code, which is not clear on the subject either. Down into E1C. This was regarding JADUs. Our code and our current code and the new code picks it up says a JADU may only be created on a lot zone for single family residences. So we have a lot of single family residences on R2 and some on R3 lots. So a single family residence, if it's on an R2.2.5 lot could not have a JADU. |
| 03:17:32.46 | Mary Wagner | Sorry, what section were you referencing? I was trying to find the section as you were saying. |
| 03:17:35.87 | David Marlatt | This is E1C. |
| 03:17:44.64 | Kristin Teiche | . Page seven. |
| 03:17:46.87 | Mary Wagner | Got it. Thank you. |
| 03:17:48.15 | David Marlatt | Oh, good. Bye. |
| 03:17:53.58 | David Marlatt | And then somewhere in here it also says that they are limited to single family residential zones only. |
| 03:18:00.59 | Mary Wagner | That is that code section that's referenced is the JADU section. So that's coming directly from straight law. So saying that it's may only be created in lots that are single family residences that are zoned for that. That's straight from straight law. |
| 03:18:15.54 | David Marlatt | So does the state prohibit us because we can go beyond state law. And if you have a single family house that's in an art 2 dash 2.5 district, which I think there are many and in Sausalito, those people are prohibited from having J to use. |
| 03:18:33.12 | Mary Wagner | currently, and you are correct that this city can decide to do more, more generous than the state law. The state law is the minimum parameters. |
| 03:18:42.64 | David Marlatt | Thank you. Right. And a strong recommendation, because in theory, if we're for more housing and we're concerned that more housing is going to impact views and all of these negative things. Seems to me as a city, we should be encouraging JADUs. |
| 03:18:56.07 | Mary Wagner | So while that could be the commission's decision. I would just like to offer that typically when you have a, the zones that are higher in nature like that. And it's gone from a single family residential zone to a higher density residential zone. that the city's goal is for that area to change and transform into that zone. building and infrastructure you put in there makes it more difficult for it to transition. Not arguing one way or the other. I just wanted to offer that as a rationale as to sometimes why you may not want to consider that. But of course, that would be at the, um, |
| 03:19:34.97 | David Marlatt | But also in Section 3, Government Code 66, 323, it says that in a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for building permit within a residential or mixed use zone to create any one of the following. And then one accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit. So aren't we in fact out of sync with state law? |
| 03:19:59.05 | Mary Wagner | All of this is in line with state law. The state law itself has some interesting ways in which you have to read it to make it all make sense. |
| 03:20:08.85 | David Marlatt | So notwithstanding that, my recommendation to you and then to the council is that we allow JADUs in any single family home, wherever that may occur in the city. I don't see why we wouldn't. |
| 03:20:21.12 | Kristina Feller | I think that the point that the city attorney is making, though, is that you do have single-family homes in... zones that could be higher density multifamily. And so we don't want to discourage the higher density multifamily. |
| 03:20:34.39 | David Marlatt | But... |
| 03:20:37.76 | David Marlatt | But you don't because you can have an accessory dwelling unit in addition to a JADU in every case. |
| 03:20:41.68 | Kristina Feller | the case. Possibly, but you don't want to restrict it, and what you don't want to really do is create a |
| 03:20:43.92 | David Marlatt | But you have the right. |
| 03:20:50.15 | Kristina Feller | you know, the pathway where you're going to I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE build a JADU potentially. But then you, which is, which conveys with the deed of your property. And then you have to get rid of it because you're actually, you know, a new owner comes in and they want to. max out what they can build in an R2 or an R3. I think that's the argument. which I... |
| 03:21:13.77 | David Marlatt | the argument. |
| 03:21:14.62 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Yeah. |
| 03:21:14.97 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:21:15.46 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, but I... |
| 03:21:15.63 | Kristina Feller | I think so. |
| 03:21:16.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But isn't it a case that there are a lot of 2,500-square-foot lots in the R2 zone in Sausalito? And if somebody has a single-family home, rather than they could make a duplex, but they don't have the square footage, but they should be allowed to do a JADU in an R2 zone. And I don't think that long-term they're going to really rebuild buildings. that that, you know, |
| 03:21:41.16 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:21:41.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:21:41.25 | David Marlatt | I think we should be encouraging ADUs of all flavors any way we can. I mean, there's different situations where the market will decide. JADU is cheaper to build than a detached or an attached. So if somebody comes in, they want to do a JADU and say, I'm sorry, you've got to spend more money five years from now when you save up or qualify for a loan to build a detached unit. |
| 03:22:00.89 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let me ask the city attorney, if, Kylie, if somebody puts a deed on for this and then wants to redevelop the property, They can do that right? They just have to |
| 03:22:15.00 | Mary Wagner | So you're asking if they with JADUs and actually in our ordinance, all ADUs have a deed restriction. If someone wanted to remove the deed restriction, they need to come to the city and get authorization for the deed restriction to be lifted. And then that would allow them to make the change to their building. So they'd have to come to the city. Once the deed restrictions in place, the city has to basically be a participant to the lifting of that deed restriction. |
| 03:22:41.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | if they had a single family house with a JADU in an R2, in an R3 zone, and then they wanted to build three or four units instead, they would have to come to the city anyways. And so I don't think allowing JADUs, which will allow us to increase our unit count throughout the city with these small units would be a bad thing. What Commissioner Marlott is suggesting, I think is a good thing. Wouldn't that be a good thing? |
| 03:23:08.61 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. Can I, um, point something out in 2023, we amended the permitted use tables and took |
| 03:23:11.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | 20. |
| 03:23:16.34 | Kristin Teiche | JADUs out of the R3 district. And I can't recall if we did R2 as well. We'd have to look. Yeah. So they're not permitted currently in our permitted use tables for the R2 and R3 zoning districts. Because we were doing that to comply with state law, which said they want them in single family districts. Or that's the presumption. It was for single family districts. |
| 03:23:39.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So we're not allowed by HCD to allow JDA to use in other zones? Is that what you're saying? |
| 03:23:39.40 | Kristin Teiche | We're, we're, |
| 03:23:45.16 | Kristin Teiche | I'm saying we have to amend more of the code. if you want to go this route. |
| 03:23:49.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, we're amending the co-remending. But I'm more interested in if the ACD wouldn't allow us to do that because they're worried that that will discourage us from making more units in multi-family zones. |
| 03:23:51.07 | Kristin Teiche | Well, Thank you. |
| 03:24:03.00 | Kristin Teiche | They might consider that. I don't know. |
| 03:24:05.16 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:24:05.27 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:24:05.65 | David Marlatt | Peace. Thank you. |
| 03:24:06.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:24:06.52 | David Marlatt | Certainly I defer to the attorney, but I'm quoting from the state law here that says, you know, approve an application for building permit within a residential or mixed use zone, and it says J-E-D-U. |
| 03:24:07.01 | Kristin Teiche | But- |
| 03:24:18.20 | Kristin Teiche | A mixed-use zone is commercial and residential, and it is permitted in those zones. |
| 03:24:23.80 | David Marlatt | but not an R2, but a CN. |
| 03:24:25.84 | Kristin Teiche | Not an R2 or R3. And then how do you, |
| 03:24:30.05 | David Marlatt | but that's also not what we say because we say, |
| 03:24:30.77 | Kristin Teiche | If we're only trying to approve this for single family homes in those districts, we'd have to consider how we word that carefully so that's achieved because we're not supposed to allow JA to use in a multifamily building. |
| 03:24:43.61 | Director Phipps | And if I may, just to be clear, if we were to move forward with that direction from the commission this evening and it were to be put, that language were to be put into this ordinance, we would have an inconsistency with our land use tables. So, I would recommend we don't take that action tonight |
| 03:25:03.85 | David Marlatt | Well, I guess we're just making recommendations to council anyway. I just don't understand. I understand we have to maybe update tables. I just don't understand if our goal is to increase our housing count and we're sensitive to, you know, through the odds of the process and so forth, we're sensitive to what might happen with unrestricted development and so forth, why we wouldn't just do this. It just seems very easy. But I understand. |
| 03:25:30.17 | Kristin Teiche | Just if it makes you feel any better, the state law does require we ministerially approve conversion of interior space to an ADU. And ADUs do not have to be 800 square feet. They can be 350 square feet. |
| 03:25:30.39 | David Marlatt | It's just. |
| 03:25:43.76 | Kristin Teiche | or 400. They just have to provide a more robust kitchen, and it's a private bathroom. So, You can get there these small units in these houses if they truly want to without even providing an addition |
| 03:25:57.27 | Kristina Feller | You're referring to a JADU. An ADU. |
| 03:25:59.84 | David Marlatt | A converted ADO. Yeah, converting spaces to an ADO. |
| 03:26:02.83 | Kristin Teiche | Yeah, converting spaces to an ADU within an existing single-family home. |
| 03:26:10.17 | David Marlatt | In our two district, okay. Okay, well, my next questions are just more informational. So in, just so I understand, in F1C, which is page 10, applications for additions are elsewhere limited to 50% of the primary dwelling. But then it also states that unless it's, but up to 800 square feet is also allowed. So if I have a 1,200 square foot primary dwelling, Thank you. But then it also states that unless it's, unless, but up to 800 square feet is also allowed. So if I have a 1200 square foot primary dwelling, can I do an 800 square foot attached ADU? |
| 03:26:45.67 | Kristin Teiche | Potentially, yes. If you can meet the height limits, the setback requirements, and don't exceed 800 square feet. Okay. Even if it didn't meet zoning, we would have to authorize it. |
| 03:26:46.97 | David Marlatt | Okay. |
| 03:26:52.32 | David Marlatt | Okay, so it's... |
| 03:26:56.42 | David Marlatt | So it's limited to the lesser of, basically. Okay. Then the 10-foot setbacks you had already mentioned. So if an 800-square-foot detached ADU, there's no setback. It's in the front yard, sorry. in the future. |
| 03:27:13.08 | Kristin Teiche | There's no front yard setback in any of our residential districts except along Alexander and parts of Maine. There's a 10 foot special disc setback. Um, so we put that in to accommodate that requirement. Um, |
| 03:27:26.81 | David Marlatt | So in all districts, though, if I have an ADU greater than 800 square feet, I'd have a 10-foot setback? Even in districts that don't otherwise have that? |
| 03:27:34.79 | Kristin Teiche | Mm-hmm. Right. That's something you can have some discretion over here tonight if you want to. |
| 03:27:41.22 | David Marlatt | All right. We leave that for discussion. So my next question is regarding the, in D2, units that are over 800 square feet, then they're subject to FAR, lot coverage, et cetera. Is that from the first square foot or from the square footage of exceeding 800 square feet? In other words, if I 200 square feet of available FAR on my property. Can I make a 1,000 square foot ADU, or do I have to wait and How is that? |
| 03:28:11.50 | Kristin Teiche | The exemption is for units 800 square feet or less. We have to allow it regardless of whether it goes over floor area. It will count as floor area if you come back for future improvements to your home. But we have to allow it, even if it went over. |
| 03:28:28.98 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:28:29.03 | David Marlatt | Right. |
| 03:28:29.06 | Kristin Teiche | If you want a 1,000 square foot unit, now you have to comply with zoning, period. Okay. |
| 03:28:33.67 | David Marlatt | Okay, so if you have 1,000 square foot, you have to have 1,000 square feet of available FAR. That's correct. |
| 03:28:38.04 | Kristin Teiche | That's correct. |
| 03:28:39.98 | David Marlatt | First square foot counting. |
| 03:28:41.53 | Kristin Teiche | Right. And part of the reason we did that originally in the current regulations was to encourage smaller units because the perception is smaller units will be more affordable. |
| 03:28:51.44 | David Marlatt | Okay. Um... Yeah, I've never seen that in any of the other communities that I'm working in, so that was one of my questions. Then on G1's waiver of fees, just for information, are school fees also waived? Because normally there's school fees at 500 square feet and above, and I'm just curious, because it says all fees are waived. |
| 03:29:15.91 | Kristin Teiche | If it's a two-bedroom ADU, Kylie, would we... be allowed to waive school fees? Because potentially that could happen. |
| 03:29:22.25 | David Marlatt | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:29:22.30 | Director Phipps | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:29:22.39 | David Marlatt | it's a school |
| 03:29:23.03 | Director Phipps | district that I don't even know if you have jurisdiction. Yeah, those aren't fees imposed by the city. So I think to be clear, all city fees. |
| 03:29:27.77 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:29:27.79 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 03:29:29.97 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:29:30.18 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 03:29:30.22 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, it's only one. |
| 03:29:30.25 | Director Phipps | Yeah. |
| 03:29:30.84 | David Marlatt | So again, that might be just a small suggestion, all city fees. |
| 03:29:36.24 | Mary Wagner | Well, they're all the fees under the Mitigation Fee Act, and those are the ones that apply to the cities. So that's where, again, it's coming from state law. We're not dealing with, those are not fees that we charge or handle. |
| 03:29:49.46 | David Marlatt | Again, this may be more of a communication issue, just people aren't aware of that. and rebuild the rest, I guess, of other people. |
| 03:30:02.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Merlock. Other questions? |
| 03:30:07.90 | Kristina Feller | I just had a quick question on architectural requirements. You talk about the materials are required to be the same as the primary dwelling. Um, I'd like to suggest that they should be consistent with the primary dwelling, but for instance you've got a lot of old homes here that are cedar shingle and so on and so forth. |
| 03:30:30.70 | Unknown Staff | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:30:31.10 | Kristina Feller | They're better materials like hardy board or something that look the same, but they are a different material. I would like to suggest that perhaps we modify that language to say consistent with, you know, not the same as, but, you know, consistent with what. I see her. |
| 03:30:48.60 | Kristin Teiche | Yeah. |
| 03:30:52.32 | Kristin Teiche | I see her brain working there. Thank you. |
| 03:30:55.76 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:30:55.77 | Kristin Teiche | Bye. |
| 03:30:56.03 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:30:56.09 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:30:56.11 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:30:56.13 | Kristin Teiche | I |
| 03:30:56.15 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:30:56.25 | Unknown Staff | my |
| 03:30:56.53 | Kristina Feller | I have to articulate that better than I can. |
| 03:30:57.11 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:30:57.78 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:31:00.97 | David Marlatt | Or other cities say similar to is another way that other cities say similar to. |
| 03:31:03.52 | Kristina Feller | Yes, salute. |
| 03:31:04.09 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. So the problem with, and I hear what you're saying, I don't disagree. from a practical perspective. The problem is we need to have this be an objective standard So, perhaps what we could, if it was the commission's desire and if it's roof materials, that is because I can hear where that would be. and understand why that would be a concern. perhaps saying that the roof, if roof materials can be made of tile if it's a shake roof or something along that lines. saying of the same color, but so that they can change the material, but the color stays the same. It has to be objective and saying similar to, is probably it's not going to pass. an objective standard that's subjective, whether My tile is similar to a shake roof. that's not gonna be an objective standard. come to a consensus of that's just the issue. I think that internally we can figure out how to draft that So that it's a pleasure. |
| 03:32:08.88 | Kristina Feller | Aesthetically consistent. |
| 03:32:12.56 | Mary Wagner | that subject objective either they're tying our hands with these and unfortunately Yeah, but I was in my life. |
| 03:32:18.77 | David Marlatt | Yeah. |
| 03:32:18.83 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:32:19.20 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:32:19.31 | Andrew Junius | you're going to be |
| 03:32:19.36 | Mary Wagner | I know. So we could say that you could go to tile and the tile has to, you can't have a wood roof or, you know, shake roof and you have to have tile and the tile needs to be the same color. That would be objective. |
| 03:32:19.37 | David Marlatt | I'm sorry. |
| 03:32:30.19 | Mary Wagner | But it would need to be in that, vein to say, you know, something very specific. It can't be generic, which is what we used to be able to |
| 03:32:38.39 | Kristina Feller | like, I don't want to get hung up on this in particular. I've just, I appreciate the feedback on that. |
| 03:32:47.37 | David Marlatt | So... I think it's a good thing. Commissioner Merlin. Sorry, yeah. No, I think I would like to get hung up on that a little bit because a lot of times Sausalito, when a lot of the homes in Sausalito were built, was, of course, not in the wooey. It didn't exist. Today it exists. So it's literally illegal to match some of the materials, as well as some materials not being on the market anymore. And then some of it is old plywood T111, which is not even available and it's a very deficient material. So I think we have to, first of all, at a higher level, I'd question why we do this at all. I really would question why we have these so-called architectural standards. But if that's the political will that we must have it, we must find a way. Because if I come and I can't match a product because the building department won't let me, the fire department won't let me, or it simply doesn't exist. What do you do? |
| 03:33:36.64 | Kristin Teiche | Well, these are a component you can decide not to include if you want to give the applicants greater latitude. |
| 03:33:44.54 | David Marlatt | And that may be a bridge too far, I don't know. I would definitely be supportive of that. |
| 03:33:47.16 | Kristin Teiche | I would. |
| 03:33:47.63 | Kristin Teiche | THE END OF THE |
| 03:33:47.71 | Kristina Feller | of that. And be in support of that. |
| 03:33:49.50 | David Marlatt | Oh good, that's not a bridge too far. Because for me that's the solution. I would get rid of it. |
| 03:33:49.98 | Kristina Feller | So, Because for me, that's the solution. I would get rid of it altogether. |
| 03:33:56.00 | David Marlatt | Oh. I didn't know. |
| 03:34:01.58 | Kristina Feller | Thank you for the clarification. Sure. |
| 03:34:04.42 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Commissioner, am I all at other questions? No, no, thank you. Okay, I just have a couple which I gave you in advance, but I want to clarify a little bit. So on page 13, top of the page, it says, no impact fee is required for an ADU that is less than 750 square feet in size. So before I get to my specific question, what is an impact fee and who do we charge them to? |
| 03:34:31.83 | Kristin Teiche | I ask the same question. |
| 03:34:36.26 | Kristin Teiche | It is. |
| 03:34:36.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I agree. do we have impact fees are these different than permit fees |
| 03:34:40.30 | Director Phipps | We did. We do, if I may. An impact fee is generally a fee, not a tax, adopted by a city such that development can pay for its kind of future impact to the city. And there's a nexus that must be defined and created in order to back into what that impact fee looks like. As, you know, is written in that section, impact fee means a fee under the Mitigation Fee Act, and that's what Attorney Otto was referencing earlier on. In City of Sausalito, the impact fee that I know we have is a construction-based impact fee. So the impact that the construction of the structure will have on city infrastructure, like roads. |
| 03:35:20.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | What is that? |
| 03:35:27.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And how much does that feed? |
| 03:35:30.33 | Director Phipps | I'll have to look at the fee schedule, but it's a set fee. It's a set fee. Is it? I believe it's a percentage of the valuation of the project. |
| 03:35:38.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so what we're saying in this section is that by law, we have to let somebody build an 800 square feet ADU. But if they build one, if they reduce it from 800, which they're allowed to ministerially, to 750, they can avoid this fee, which we don't know exactly how much it is. But so there's a big, so are we encouraging people to build 750 square feet units to avoid a fee? And if so, we could increase this section to 800 to not have that issue, because that's less restrictive, right? I mean, or does the city want the money for, I mean, if somebody is gonna have to pay, we don't know if it's a large number or a small number, but if it's a large number, they're gonna purposely take the 50 square feet out. |
| 03:36:38.49 | Director Phipps | If I may, Chair? Yeah. The construction impact fee is equal to 0.85% of the valuation plus a $5 surcharge per CY. |
| 03:36:39.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 03:36:52.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You'll be good. Wait, zero points. Put that in English. |
| 03:36:57.78 | Kristin Teiche | 8%. 8.5%. |
| 03:36:59.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | They didn't have percent. |
| 03:37:01.76 | Director Phipps | No, 0.85% of the valuation. |
| 03:37:04.75 | David Marlatt | of the 0.85%. |
| 03:37:06.67 | Kristin Teiche | . |
| 03:37:06.82 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:37:07.31 | Director Phipps | 5% of the valuation. |
| 03:37:08.73 | David Marlatt | of the valuation. For a cubic yard of excavation, which is not a lot of dirt. |
| 03:37:14.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So is this a small amount? Small amount. Small amount, yeah. But it does seem weird to me that we talk all about 800 square feet, and then on this one thing, we're putting in 750. |
| 03:37:26.18 | Kristin Teiche | That's directly out of state law. |
| 03:37:28.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand that, but I'm just like, there's no lie. The people in the state law that do these things don't really understand the details. They just make these things up. Or is there some reason for this? Do we have any idea why they would use a different number and all of a sudden in this one section? No. |
| 03:37:28.86 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:37:48.47 | Kristin Teiche | Somebody decided that it had an impact once you hit a certain threshold. |
| 03:37:54.09 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I see. Okay. My second question relates to parking restrictions. On page seven, we have one parking restriction and on page 11, we have another one. And that's because state law has different wording in different parts of the law. |
| 03:38:06.17 | Kristin Teiche | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:38:10.44 | Kristin Teiche | Bye. Thank you. |
| 03:38:10.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:38:10.66 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. They have set the threshold different. depending on what you're trying to achieve. If you want a two foot addition to height, You have to be within a half mile of a high-quality transit district. just want to put an ADU on your single family home. You don't have to provide a parking space if you're within a half mile of a of a transit stop. you know, just a regular bus stop. So they just set the thresholds differently. |
| 03:38:38.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand they're trying to provide less parking requirements or whatever. So I understand the one about a single-family home. I don't understand what the nexus is between height and whether or not you have a transit stop. Why is it? That makes no sense to me. state law. |
| 03:38:59.46 | Nastassya Saad | We can't speak for state. We don't know. We don't know. And quite frankly, I don't know how much we can care to argue with the state law, but I completely understand your point. It's not logical, but that is where we are. |
| 03:39:13.22 | Kristina Feller | Let's move on with what we can do. |
| 03:39:14.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, I mean, we can control these things. We can make them less restrictive and make them the same. We can do that. That's why I'm raising the issue. Because we could make the thing 7. Instead of 7.50, we can make it 8. |
| 03:39:26.12 | Kristina Feller | That's different than wondering why they do that. |
| 03:39:28.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, we don't. Well, I mean, we have to understand why. If it solves some problem, then we leave it alone. If it doesn't solve some problem, we want it to be consistent. We do that, or we just say forget it and have inconsistencies like we do in other parts of our code. I don't know. I just raised the issue. My last question, I just want to confirm in reading the red lines, it's clear you have all these height. The language from the height has just gotten relocated. It's not been changed in any way whatsoever. Not really. |
| 03:39:35.15 | Andrew Junius | It does. |
| 03:39:57.70 | Kristin Teiche | Not really. |
| 03:39:58.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 03:40:00.04 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.06 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.15 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.43 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.48 | Kristin Teiche | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.50 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:40:00.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes, Commissioner Feltz. |
| 03:40:02.07 | Kristina Feller | I just want, maybe you can just clarify or articulate so it's clear here, clear to anybody listening to this hearing tonight or later on, what the process is in terms of you've brought this to the Planning Commission today. We make comments. Eventually, or even this evening, we take a vote or ask for modifications, take a vote, and then this goes to the City Council to ratify. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Thank you. |
| 03:40:32.50 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. So going back, I was hearing some discussion about architectural requirements, about whether we leave that in or take that out. Is that what I was hearing? |
| 03:40:41.78 | Andrew Junius | Take it out. |
| 03:40:42.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. So the one that I see If I'm |
| 03:40:45.84 | Mary Wagner | If I might have not had public comment yet. So to the extent that you're starting to deliberate, this is still the question time. So if we could just stay in the questions and after the public has a comment, we would love to get your input on what should be the recommendations of the commission. |
| 03:40:59.21 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Okay, I just want a clarification on one of these. Where is it? |
| 03:41:13.08 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So 8B, I guess maybe we'll do this later after public comment, but 8B says the roof slope must match that dominant roof slope of the primary dwelling. The dominant roof slope of the slope is shared by the largest portion of the roof. So over in Newtown, there was a prefab ADU just plopped in the front yard of something without with a flat roof on, you know, and that one might have been below the right size. But if somebody is going over 800 square feet, if we wanted to not have that happen, we need to keep this provision in. Is that the idea? Thank you. |
| 03:41:58.74 | David Marlatt | Well, but it cuts both ways, right? I mean, because the primary dwelling could have a very ugly roof, and now they have no choice but to do it. You're presuming. You're presuming that the existing primary dwelling is architectural merit that needs to be copied. And that's not always the case. |
| 03:42:16.11 | Nastassya Saad | That's not good. Well, I understand that. But we're dealing with ministerial approval here, so we need objective standards. |
| 03:42:24.48 | David Marlatt | I think our objective standards is cut it out. |
| 03:42:27.95 | Nastassya Saad | I have two objective standards to cut it out, but that means we have no standards. Okay, at this point, any other questions? |
| 03:42:34.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 03:42:35.46 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:42:35.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 03:42:36.41 | David Marlatt | Sorry, one just last clarification, because you'd mentioned about in a multifamily zone, you can convert an ADU as opposed to a JADU to accomplish the same result. And so I was able to find, if I understand right, but I found this section, and it says that the converted ADU can be up to 25% of a multifamily dwelling. So the converted ADU doesn't apply to a single family dwelling in an R2 zone. |
| 03:42:36.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Yes, Claire. |
| 03:43:02.04 | Kristin Teiche | A single family dwelling can propose to convert interior space to an ADU. Correct. |
| 03:43:08.45 | David Marlatt | OK, because well, then what it says is it says multifamily building. in the converted ADU. I have to get back up to it. |
| 03:43:18.80 | Mary Wagner | The section that Kristen's referring to is A1 I'm sorry, D1A, set it backwards, The section that you're referring to, I believe, D1C. Both have a version. One is on a multifamily lot. and one is on a single family lot. |
| 03:43:38.39 | David Marlatt | But a single family home on a multi-family lot can have a JADU? No, it has to go with a converted ADU. But it can't do a converted because it's not a multifamily building. |
| 03:43:48.82 | Kristin Teiche | They can have a detached ADU as well. |
| 03:43:51.23 | David Marlatt | Well, that requires... |
| 03:43:52.01 | Kristin Teiche | Yeah. |
| 03:43:52.58 | David Marlatt | construction in the yard that may not exist. |
| 03:43:54.39 | Kristin Teiche | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:43:54.69 | David Marlatt | Thank you. It just comes to my other point of why do we discourage this? But that's maybe something that we can deliberate. |
| 03:44:01.20 | Kristin Teiche | Well, since it is a multifamily district as well, don't forget that dividing the house into two units would probably be permitted if If it's considered an ADU, then you don't have to provide the parking for it. |
| 03:44:12.95 | David Marlatt | Yeah, there's advantages to it. So I just think we should be promoting it. But that can be part of the deliberation. So I have no more questions. |
| 03:44:14.25 | Kristin Teiche | So I, |
| 03:44:20.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No more questions. OK, at this point, we're going to open it up for public comment. There's nobody in the audience, but can we look on Zoom to see if there's anybody that wants to raise their, if you're on Zoom and you want to raise your hand to provide comment on this item? Please do so at this time. |
| 03:44:36.62 | Director Phipps | And to do that, press star nine if you're joining from a phone. |
| 03:44:43.46 | Director Phipps | seeing none sure |
| 03:44:44.59 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you director so bring it up to the backup to the dias here. Uh, |
| 03:44:50.09 | Andrew Junius | I wanted to start the conversation by saying that one of the very first things that commissioner marlott said is i think one of the most important things the definition of a kitchen should be pretty straightforward let's just give them a definition of a kitchen and see if we can get that in there and |
| 03:45:03.86 | David Marlatt | many examples. |
| 03:45:04.37 | Andrew Junius | examples. Yeah, and we can just, come on, go for it. Give us an example. |
| 03:45:05.23 | David Marlatt | We can miss that. Well, Kebron. |
| 03:45:09.38 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:45:09.41 | David Marlatt | Bye. |
| 03:45:09.45 | Andrew Junius | . |
| 03:45:09.53 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:45:09.55 | Andrew Junius | No, no, I mean, what would be, is it a removable cooktop that can be plugged in? Or, I mean, we should be recommending the definition. |
| 03:45:10.58 | David Marlatt | What? |
| 03:45:16.08 | David Marlatt | It varies per jurisdiction, per town. But some of them require an oven with four burners. San Francisco, ironically, is one of the strictest. |
| 03:45:24.60 | Kristina Feller | Director Fitz, do you have a recommendation? |
| 03:45:26.96 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:45:26.98 | Director Phipps | If I may, and I'll also defer to the attorney on this, but I believe that HCD has specific requirements for kitchens and ADUs. |
| 03:45:38.08 | David Marlatt | I've worked with HCDB. Mr. Merlant disagrees. Well, I would have to go back and be sure of that. I can certainly find that out. And I can certainly volunteer to send some examples. |
| 03:45:46.03 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 03:45:48.97 | David Marlatt | Because different communities just handle it differently. We just need one. Yeah. And I'm happy to share that. I honestly don't care what it says. Some example. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. |
| 03:45:52.66 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, and I'm happy to share that. |
| 03:45:57.34 | Mary Wagner | So, and I would just like to add that While I would agree that it is not the most clearly explained reason of what a kitchen is that is exactly verbatim from state law. So we know that works with HCD because it mirrors state law. To the extent that we start modifying it and |
| 03:46:08.83 | Unknown Staff | So we know that |
| 03:46:17.72 | Mary Wagner | we get pushback from HCD and they actually bring to say that our ordinance is not valid. It, it fails. It, it, it's, if they consider it, Inconsistent with state law, it's null and void. So I just wanna caution about getting too detailed to where each city would think that we are trying to avoid what an efficiency kitchen is because that has been That has been what is an efficiency kitchen, I think, as long as I've been Amy is the lawyer, unfortunately. |
| 03:46:45.89 | Andrew Junius | All right, then I withdraw the comment. I thought I was trying to help here. I do not want to hurt you. |
| 03:46:50.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let me ask this. Isn't Section 3 severability such that in the event that they don't like the definition of the kitchen, it doesn't void the entire board? |
| 03:47:02.69 | Mary Wagner | If it's declared inconsistent with the state law, there's a provision within the statute that says the ordinance itself is found null and void. We have that as an argument, but it likely we could have problems with it being in direct conflict with the state law. If AHCB comes after us for us, |
| 03:47:20.72 | Unknown Staff | for us. |
| 03:47:23.17 | Mary Wagner | the statute is likely going to prevail, but we always have that in our ordinances just as matter of |
| 03:47:30.35 | David Marlatt | Can we leave the wording as it currently is and can the planning department adopt internal policy that's published and available? This is how we interpret this. |
| 03:47:37.39 | Director Phipps | I was going to suggest that. Thank you. I, |
| 03:47:39.91 | David Marlatt | We have... |
| 03:47:39.92 | Director Phipps | The same thing, Commissioner. We have that ability to render interpretations and to make public those interpretations. I'm happy to consider that. Sure. |
| 03:47:46.32 | Mary Wagner | RECORDING TO THEM. |
| 03:47:46.35 | Unknown Staff | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:47:46.40 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:47:46.52 | Unknown Staff | Educations. |
| 03:47:46.96 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:47:47.01 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:47:47.03 | Mary Wagner | We can. |
| 03:47:47.21 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:47:49.59 | Mary Wagner | And we've already made the recommendation with staff and they're already gonna be in the process to deal with the reasonable size because that one is, I think even more egregious because what's reasonable is completely So internally staff was already gonna do that. Appliances at least has, |
| 03:48:05.05 | David Marlatt | I'm just trying to be more consumer friendly. Thank you. |
| 03:48:07.14 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:48:07.39 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:48:09.15 | Kristina Feller | So I think that would be the recommendation, is that we stick with the language. |
| 03:48:13.76 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:48:13.79 | David Marlatt | Absolutely. |
| 03:48:14.01 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:48:15.73 | Kristina Feller | that we have and that CDD actually develop a policy that they can publish. |
| 03:48:27.37 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And just to follow on with that, if the HCD sees that policy and doesn't like it, you just change the policy? Is that the idea? |
| 03:48:34.83 | Director Phipps | Well, the approach that I would take is once we draft that interpretation, I would forward that to HCD staff and request technical assistance and see if they have any issues with the position that the city has taken. So it'll be a collaborative process with HCD with the goal of ensuring compliance. |
| 03:48:45.51 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:48:45.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. has taken. Yeah. I think that would be better. I like that approach. Thank you. Okay. So what's the commission's pleasure here? |
| 03:49:01.34 | Kristina Feller | I would like to make a motion to approve this for recommendation to the city council with the recommendation to remove the architectural requirements, as we had already discussed, that we leave the description per state law of kitchen and that CDD develop a sort of policy of sorts that they will collaboratively work with HCD on moving forward. |
| 03:49:33.93 | Carolyn Revell | Second. |
| 03:49:35.18 | David Marlatt | And I'd like to pose an amendment to that, which I Thank you. not feeling has a lot of positive feedback here, is that we also permit JA to use in any single family home, not simply in a single family or multi-use district. And I know there's examples of other cities that do that. So I would suggest that. |
| 03:49:56.02 | Andrew Junius | Do we have any problem with that, with respect to that starts to ripple through the whole code and requests, yeah, I think that's a good question. |
| 03:50:00.54 | David Marlatt | Well, that's going to change some tables. |
| 03:50:03.06 | Andrew Junius | I don't know. I'm a little concerned about that. |
| 03:50:04.93 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I don't know. I don't want to poke the bear on that and I appreciate the comment but I don't want to poke the bear Um, I want to stay, I want... I want to get these changes approved per HCD and per the state law. Okay. So at this time, I – |
| 03:50:19.15 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:50:19.25 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:50:19.29 | Unknown Staff | change. |
| 03:50:27.44 | Kristina Feller | formerly would not |
| 03:50:28.99 | David Marlatt | Okay, then. |
| 03:50:29.33 | Kristina Feller | Except the recommendation, although I appreciate it very, very much. |
| 03:50:30.63 | David Marlatt | I appreciate it very, very much. So final idea and then I promise I'll give up. Thank you. |
| 03:50:35.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:50:35.24 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:50:35.25 | David Marlatt | Thank you. Can we modify, I'm sorry I can't find the section right now, on converted ADUs in multifamily lots to simply say, it says right now one or more ADUs within portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures, can we simply say in portions of existing structures or dwelling structures, which would then open up the possibility that if you've got a single family home on a multifamily lot, You can convert. It's not a JEDU. It's a conversion. |
| 03:51:05.02 | Kristina Feller | I appreciate where you're going with that. I would defer to city attorney to weigh in on that. I know we're sort of walking a tightrope a little bit. So I just want to make sure that we're not inadvertently doing something. |
| 03:51:18.47 | David Marlatt | in person. Theoretically on the same side, trying to make more housing. One hundred percent. |
| 03:51:21.79 | Kristina Feller | 100%, but we don't want to upset the apple cart with this. Sure. |
| 03:51:26.74 | David Marlatt | Sure, okay. I promise I'll give up after this. |
| 03:51:27.50 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So I promise I'll give up after this. No, no. |
| 03:51:31.01 | David Marlatt | But that's D1E. |
| 03:51:31.65 | Kristina Feller | We have the same goal. Just, |
| 03:51:34.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let's get the city attorneys coming on this, please. |
| 03:51:37.84 | Mary Wagner | That language comes directly from state law as well. It's in 66323A3. So that is how the state has worded that. Exactly. So. They call it existing multifamily. dwelling. Let me double check. Well, it specifically says multiple accessory dwelling in has been portions of existing multifamily multi-family dwelling structures, that are not used as livable space, including but not limited to storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garage. |
| 03:52:08.56 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:52:08.64 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:52:08.66 | Unknown Staff | things. |
| 03:52:13.38 | Mary Wagner | if each unit complies with the state building standards for dwellings. So that comes directly. state law. Up to that sentence comes directly from straight law. And then the next one, the next portion of that, is subsection B, 3B. So. That's a mirror image of state law. just for, |
| 03:52:35.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But if we're making it less restrictive, I thought we could make stuff less restrictive. |
| 03:52:39.98 | Mary Wagner | You can make it less restricted. I just wanted to let you know where it's coming from. It's directly coming from state law. This wasn't drafted. as this is just mirror imaging of state law. Thank you. |
| 03:52:49.07 | Jeffery Luxenberg | See you. |
| 03:52:49.38 | Kristina Feller | Can you maybe comment on Commissioner Marlott's recommendations? |
| 03:52:55.67 | Mary Wagner | At this point, If my recommendation would be if there's changes that you would like make, you make the recommendation that this is approved as is. And then for future amendments, asking the city council to basically opine and direct staff. for the reason that if we don't have an ordinance put in place, we're, Sarah Silver, Basically, have no regulations on it. We're simply relying on state law. There's nothing that says that you can't adopt this and then two months later doing another change to it. We don't have to wait for state law to change to make a change to the ADU ordinance. But... I do have a concern with delaying this because if additional changes are made in huge amounts now at city council it's going to take we're going to have to come back. We can't do a significant change at city council, they won't be able to make a bunch of changes to the code, for example. |
| 03:53:46.53 | Rebecca | example. |
| 03:53:47.63 | Mary Wagner | um, on the dais, we'd have to, they can make minor modifications for the first reading. But if you're talking about a wholehearted change of a lot of things, I would say, make a list and just recommend for future changes, here's what you'd like. And so this one, if you want to make the change recommendation, I don't have It is less restricted. It's more generous to ADUs so that it wouldn't violate state law. So it definitely could be Karen Hollweg, Something that you could recommend and the Council could adopt if they desired. |
| 03:54:16.52 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So is, by the way, is this hearing considered a first reading? Or is the city council that has to have a first reading? A second reading. |
| 03:54:25.53 | Mary Wagner | you're recommending this to the city council. City Council will have a first reading and a second reading. So city council is the only one that can adopt an ordinance because they make the laws. You guys make the recommendations to them for that. |
| 03:54:37.51 | Kristina Feller | So have they had a first reading or they're waiting for our recommendation? Correct. We only have one meeting left next month and this takes effect January 1st? |
| 03:54:45.49 | Mary Wagner | No, we will be lagging by a little bit. So we will have that period of time where we have nothing no ADU ordinance in place. beyond state law. Unless I don't know if we're doing an urgency ordinance. I don't recall if We've had that conversation with staff. I don't know if we're doing one or not. |
| 03:55:07.82 | Nastassya Saad | So regardless if we move forward, which we intend to, but just for clarification, we are not going to meet the deadline given councils. |
| 03:55:18.09 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:55:18.20 | Nastassya Saad | Schedule. |
| 03:55:19.09 | Mary Wagner | Unless council has an urgency ordinance, you are correct. |
| 03:55:22.90 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Let me understand what you just said. So if we, in January, somebody wants to get an ADU, we're adopting an ordinance that meets all the state standards for anything under 800 square feet, correct? So therefore, if somebody comes in, state law will rule. But our ordinance matches state law, what we're proposing. So why is there any practical difference? |
| 03:55:48.64 | Mary Wagner | Basically all of what is contained in section F, I believe. everything within section F would not apply. |
| 03:56:01.11 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No, I understand that, but for ADUs, 800 square feet or less, all come under E if I understood what... |
| 03:56:09.33 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 03:56:09.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. So. |
| 03:56:10.96 | Mary Wagner | And that are compliant with state law and we've made no changes. You're absolutely correct. It's only the ones where we have the discretion. that that window of not having your ordinance in place becomes a problem. The city could likewise take a position. They don't want to regulate ADUs and just want state law to control and you would only have the regulation that state law permits. |
| 03:56:33.51 | Andrew Junius | Um. |
| 03:56:34.52 | Mary Wagner | That's not what the city has done in the past. We've had an ordinance that allows for the discretion where we have the windows that the state has allowed us, the areas of which the state has allowed control, the city has historically taken control of those areas, which is what's contained in the ordinance before you. |
| 03:56:53.14 | Kristina Feller | So we can go over why this did not come to us earlier to meet the deadline, but there is a motion on the floor here. So |
| 03:57:01.71 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:57:02.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I'm just want just not to beat this thing, but I just want to further understand this. So the if somebody wants an ADU bigger than 800 square feet, they're not there. The state law doesn't let them necessarily have that because that doesn't let them have that. Right. |
| 03:57:22.53 | David Marlatt | It does. It does. |
| 03:57:23.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | It does. Thank you. |
| 03:57:23.51 | David Marlatt | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:57:23.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | actually a |
| 03:57:24.37 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:57:24.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:57:24.42 | David Marlatt | it. |
| 03:57:24.71 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you |
| 03:57:24.98 | David Marlatt | you |
| 03:57:25.03 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:57:25.05 | David Marlatt | Exactly, it was up to 12. |
| 03:57:26.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | In state law allows them to go up to 1200 square feet. If there's no local, I'm sorry. |
| 03:57:32.27 | David Marlatt | Thank you. |
| 03:57:32.89 | Kristin Teiche | Yes, state law allows an ADU. Is it specifically detached, Kylie? Or I can't recall if it's attached as well. But again, the state law also includes that limitation of 50% of the size of the primary unit if it's attached. Right. So. |
| 03:57:48.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So for ones less than 800, what we're about to submit to the city council is exactly pretty much what state law is. From 800 to 1,200, we have some additional restrictions that would not apply. So the risk from January 1st till mid-February is that. I'm just trying to define the risk, really. |
| 03:57:59.13 | Unknown Staff | from age to age. |
| 03:58:10.27 | Kristin Teiche | it specifies the application of our zoning in terms of floor area lock coverage impervious surfaces Things like that. So you can control some of the extent of development on the lot. |
| 03:58:22.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | from 800 to 1,200. Those are the only ones at risk. The other ones aren't at risk, even though the state law is the same. I just want to make sure I get that and understand what the risk is here. |
| 03:58:36.46 | Kristin Teiche | I kind of agree with him. I think that that's a true statement. |
| 03:58:40.12 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, thank you. All right, we have a motion on the floor. Is there any additional conversation? Okay, Director Fips, can you take the roll? |
| 03:58:47.97 | David Marlatt | What were the conditions? I'm sorry. Did we decide on the conditions? |
| 03:58:50.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Bye. |
| 03:58:50.58 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 03:58:50.60 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you Mr. Fowler can you restate the motion for Commissioner Merlin? |
| 03:58:54.65 | Kristina Feller | The conditions were, number one, we were removing architectural requirements. |
| 03:58:59.21 | David Marlatt | 8A and 8B. Right. |
| 03:59:00.47 | Kristina Feller | Right. And |
| 03:59:02.16 | David Marlatt | And then we're going to, CDD is going to adopt a policy. |
| 03:59:04.29 | Kristina Feller | Adopt the policy on the kitchen. So we're going to leave that the state definition and that CDD would develop that in cooperation with and collaboration with HCD. |
| 03:59:05.74 | David Marlatt | Thank you. So. Okay. |
| 03:59:08.73 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:59:15.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:59:15.20 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Just those two. Just those two. Architect, you said A. |
| 03:59:15.64 | Kristina Feller | Just those two. Remove architectural requirements. Which is A and B. |
| 03:59:20.81 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Which is A and B. A, B, C, D, and E. |
| 03:59:24.11 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 03:59:24.15 | Jeffery Luxenberg | you |
| 03:59:24.17 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:59:24.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Well, because I just heard. |
| 03:59:24.79 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:59:24.82 | David Marlatt | Well. |
| 03:59:26.11 | Kristina Feller | Well, I'd have to... I didn't say hate. |
| 03:59:28.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, okay. |
| 03:59:29.67 | Kristina Feller | I didn't say AMB. |
| 03:59:30.83 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:59:30.97 | Kristina Feller | I said, remove architectural |
| 03:59:31.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I said, Thank you. |
| 03:59:32.98 | Nastassya Saad | requirements. This section right here is what you're talking about. |
| 03:59:35.27 | Nastassya Saad | She's referring to the entire section. |
| 03:59:37.08 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:59:37.31 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:59:37.33 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:59:37.77 | Kristina Feller | The section. Okay. Yeah. And then the second is that CDD will develop a kitchen policy that will provide greater definition. They will do that in coordination with and collaboration with HCD. |
| 03:59:42.63 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:59:42.66 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:59:42.78 | Nastassya Saad | It's a |
| 03:59:43.32 | Unknown Staff | Thank you. |
| 03:59:43.35 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:59:55.30 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 03:59:55.64 | Kristina Feller | That was the motion. |
| 03:59:57.34 | Andrew Junius | Uh, |
| 03:59:57.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:59:57.98 | Kristina Feller | I had a second for it. I seconded. And so we're ready to vote. |
| 03:59:58.22 | Andrew Junius | that. |
| 03:59:59.23 | Nastassya Saad | I second it. |
| 03:59:59.84 | Director Phipps | as well. |
| 04:00:01.63 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And CD, Director Phipps, clear on the motion, the wording of the motion. |
| 04:00:06.44 | Director Phipps | I am, thank you. |
| 04:00:06.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I am. Thank you. Can we take a vote? Can you call roll? |
| 04:00:10.59 | Director Phipps | Yes, thank you. Commissioner Merlot. Yes. Commissioner Junius. Yes. Commissioner Feller. Yes. Vice Chair Saad. Yes. Chair Luxenberg. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 04:00:15.38 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 04:00:16.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:00:18.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 04:00:20.50 | Director Phipps | Thank you. |
| 04:00:21.47 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Next item is adjournment. Happy holidays, everybody. |
| 04:00:27.23 | Director Phipps | Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, attorney Otto. Thank you, staff. Happy holidays to everybody, and happy new year if we don't cross paths before then. Thank you. |
| 04:00:38.21 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:00:49.15 | Unknown Staff | . |
Tim Kahn — Against: Neighbor requesting modifications to address noise, kitchen exhaust odors, structural integrity; feels there has been a 'steamroller approach' to the project. ▶ 📄
Robert Kahn — Against: Neighbor opposing project as de facto Airbnb; requests design changes, guest limits, earlier cutoff times for amenity areas, and no amplified speakers. ▶ 📄
Wright Bass — Against: Resident concerned about noise, privacy, drug activity on Excelsior stairs, and lack of confidence in management; supports restaurant but skeptical. ▶ 📄
John Diamant — Against: Criticized notification process as deficient; suggested alternative civic uses for the historic space instead of the proposed hotel/restaurant. ▶ 📄
Fred Moore — In Favor: Supports project as a benefit to downtown; believes noise issues can be managed through existing city codes and enforcement. ▶ 📄
Ron Albert — In Favor: Former mayor and planning commissioner strongly supports project as a 'godsend' and urges approval, not letting fear of non-compliance stop progress. ▶ 📄
Adrian — In Favor: Supports project as needed activity for downtown; believes noise ordinance will handle any excess noise. ▶ 📄
Joel Carr — In Favor: Architect expressing support, commending applicant as responsive and project as tax revenue generator for Sausalito. ▶ 📄
Rebecca — In Favor: Supports based on applicant's community involvement and successful track record in Carmel; believes project will benefit Sausalito. ▶ 📄
Carolyn Revell — In Favor: Supports adaptive reuse project as complement to historic district and beneficial for downtown revitalization. ▶ 📄
Peter Van Meter — In Favor: Supports project for its high revenue, low environmental impact as per General Plan; estimates significant tax revenue. ▶ 📄