SCHOONMAKER PROJECT 70-76 LIBERTY SHIP WAY DEVELOPMENT

THE ISSUE: The owners of 70-76 Liberty Ship Way, who developed and still own the adjacent Schoonmaker Point Marina, propose construction of 57,075’sq in four buildings, all 32’ high at Schoonmaker Beach. 

The developers have requested that the Planning Commission adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration which contains the conclusion that the project will not result in significant impacts on the environment.

SEA’S POSITION: This project as currently configured should require a full Environmental Impact Report (an “EIR”) The project is not compatible with either the general intent or the specific plan goals of the Marinship Specific Plan.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The Validity of a Mitigated Negative Declaration

There have been three public hearings before the Planning Commission regarding the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”).  A (link) Marin IJ article aptly describes the first hearing, held June 24, 2008, at which the public “slammed” the proposed project.  

Written and oral comments unanimously criticized the MND as both incomplete in its analysis of the impacts of the project and ineffective in the measures proposed to mitigate the impacts it did identify. 

Testimony focused on the areas of Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities, Service Systems and Parking. There are well known, existing parking problems at Schoonmaker Point; it appears that this project will exacerbate the parking issue.

The various impacts on the environment included in the MND and those described at the Planning Commission hearings, cumulatively, are considerable and will have a significant impact on the environment

This development project must be viewed in conjunction with the existing 80 and 85 Liberty Ship Way buildings and the nearby Marina and parking areas, and must be considered in the overall planning for the Marinship. A full EIR should be required.

Project vs General and Specific Plan Goals

The Sausalito General Plan states the objectives (Objective LU-4.0) to “Preserve open water and undeveloped shoreline areas, protect the key marine oriented and water dependent uses, and enhance and improve public access and passive enjoyment of the water by the public.” Policy LU-4.2 calls to “Promote those marine industrial oriented uses that require waterfront locations and ensure the preservation of the existing general industrial uses found in the Marinship waterfront area.”

The Marinship Specific Plan, which applies to this parcel, has as its General Intent regarding Development Objectives “1) To promote the waterfront area and promote diversified water-dependent uses, and 2) To promote the development of other lands in the Marinship with industrial uses and uses compatible with an industrial area.”  The Specific Plan goes on to say:

“To accomplish the General Intent the following shall serve as a list of goals to be considered when evaluating proposed development in the Marinship.

1) Preserve and enhance the maritime history and character of the Marinship.  This shall include giving, to the extent determined reasonable, development preference to marine uses and maritime industries.

2) Preserve and enhance the industrial character and use of the Marinship.

3)  No new commercial office development will be allowed in the Marinship.

5) It is the intent of the plan to discourage the development of non-industrial commercial businesses that are determined by the City to displace industrial and marine businesses or that would disproportionately contribute to the traffic generation…

6) It is the intent of the plan to encourage development that produces low levels of traffic generation.

7) It is the intent of the plan to encourage, to the extent possible, mixed use rather than single use development, especially on larger parcels…

12) Development plans should recognize the aesthetic and social value of small-scale, individual activities as a vital component in the overall composition of the Marinship.

13) Uses and development plans that permit and encourage public access and use of the water and waterfront shall have preference over those that do not.

The parcel currently contains dry boat storage for approximately 85 small vessels, containerized storage, and a storage and launching area for a sea kayaking operation.  These uses are consistent with the intent and the goals of the Marinship Specific Plan.  In contrast, the proposed development would displace these largely water oriented uses with 57,075 square feet of “industrial buildings”, “plaza areas” and “glass canopies”.

SEA takes exception to the characterization of the proposed development as an “Industrial Complex”.  As an examination of the renderings following the Marin IJ article should make clear, the triangular structure on the Point is obviously meant to be an office building, as is the rectangular building behind it.  The circular structure seems more like a typical stand-alone mall fast-food building than an industrial structure.  And the description of the fourth building as a 32’ high “storage” building seems almost certainly to be for the purpose of reducing the parking requirement.

Public slams Sausalito waterfront project

Mark Prado

Article Launched: 06/25/2008 11:59:14 PM PDT

A proposed commercial development near Schoonmaker Point was blasted by Sausalito residents who said the project would ruin open space and bay vistas and change the character of the city's historic waterfront.

At the end of the Wednesday night Planning Commission meeting, it was clear commissioners also had deep reservations about the plan and asked for more information on the project.

International Planning Associates Inc. requested the city's Planning Commission to approve construction of 57,000 square feet of buildings on a 3.9-acre parcel at 70-76 Liberty Ship Way without an environmental impact report. The project proposal includes four buildings 32 feet high - or three stories tall - with 119 parking spaces.

All resident Bob Zadek could see was office space with workers streaming in and out all day long, gawking from their windows at the bay.

"We are not about building office parks for 9-to-5 visitors so they can look out the window and look at heron then go home. That's not why people come to Sausalito," he said. "We are morphing into one big office park."

Consultant Scott Hochstrasser represented the developers at the meeting and said there are no plans to build office space, but rather the intent is to stay within the city guidelines of having light industrial and maritime-related uses.

The consultant also said an environmental impact report was not needed because the site is already has businesses. The space has boat, container and kayak storage, as well as a sea kayaking operation.

"There is traffic there, there is noise there," Hochstrasser told commissioners. "This is not a vacant lot."

Project planners have also met with the Bay Conservation and Development Commission - a regional panel that regulates development along the bay - and have made some design changes based on suggestions the commission made to make the project more appealing to the city.

But Doreen Gounard, who manages nearby Galilee Harbor, said the presence of the building would ruin one of the few areas of town where residents can get into the water.

"We are very concerned about losing a recreation benefit, this is one of the few sandy beach areas in town," she said. "The reality is we would have a bunch of office workers peering down at people in their bikinis. I think that is wrong."

Others groused that the buildings would block views, and resident Heather Wilcoxon was concerned about an impact on a nearby marsh and its wildlife.

"I could see it silting in from development," she said. "This marsh is really the last of its kind in Sausalito."

But developers said the existing marsh area along the southern edge of the site would be preserved, as well as an adjacent existing pedestrian and bike path along the waterfront.

"What we have proposed complies with city zoning," Hochstrasser said.

But Planning Common chairwoman Janelle Kellman criticized the plan, saying biological and cultural impacts had not been looked at closely enough. She also noted that solar panels or other green building techniques weren't incorporated into the plan.

She added that forgoing a detailed environmental impact report for the project "really won't cut it here."

Commissioners Bill Keller and Barry Peterson agreed there needed to be more detailed information on the plan.

"I'm not comfortable with this at all," Keller said.

The commission did not vote on the project and will take up again when it meets July 23.