4)       ED05-015            Request for:

a) a Rezoning from Planned Development (PD1764) District to a revised PD District with adopted zoning regulations that permit a new indoor and outdoor recreational facility;

2) an amendment to the Master Use Permit for the property to allow the addition of recreational uses; and

c) Environmental and Design Review Permit for the construction of new, 35 ½-foot tall, 85,700-square-foot recreational building, two outdoor fields, and associated site improvements, landscaping and parking.

                       397-400 Smith Ranch Road (San Rafael Airport)  (Raffi Boloyan)

Chair Dickens brought the discussion back to the Board:

Laird-Blanton commented that the project would need to be continued because there are certainly a lot of issues that would need to be addressed before any definitive decisions could be made by the Board particularly some of the transportation issues around the bridge and access to the property, also the issues relating to the wetlands and the flood zone.  The points raised in the letter from the Department of Parks are very valid and need to be addressed and responded to. 

 It is interesting to listen to everyone’s comments about the sound and how it travels across the water.  Some sound studies would also certainly need to be done to see what the implications of that are. 

She happens to live a half a block away from Pickleweed Park and they have all kinds of outdoor sports fields and she never hears a thing.  Traffic is never a problem even though people park along the road in terms of people using those facilities.  The soccer facilities are highly used and many people she knows that play soccer complain that there are not enough places for them to play.  She also has a brother who has played soccer for over 30 years and he loves playing indoor soccer.  She watched him on occasion and thought that as a recreational use that facility actually has a good purpose.  She thought that Paul has done a pretty good job with what could be a bad industrial building and articulating it giving it much more character than most of the buildings out at the airport at the moment. 

She also agreed with the parks and open space letter that it would be advantageous to see more story poles and linking so that a much better idea could be given of the massing of the building.  It is hard to see what it would really be like from those residences across the creek and marsh.  As part of the sound studies, she was not sure about how noisy the swamp coolers are or whether there is a technology that is not.  She certainly hoped that with all of the operable windows that much would be done with natural ventilation as opposed to artificial and she did not think that people were necessarily taking that into account in terms of some of their criticisms. 

Again, the landscaping drawings are pretty skimpy at this point so more would have to be shown.  They do not even go as far as to include the baseball fields so it is not known what is happening over there.  She stated that it was not discussed what kind of glass would be used in the windows, so whether it is tinted or not to reduce the impact of night lights might certainly be an issue.  Certainly criteria would have to be the hours of operation and making sure they were all worked out to take into account as of issues and concerns of people, particularly around noise.  She also thought that the comments about bike access were very valuable.  There should be bike and walking access and it should be encouraged.

Huntsberry commented that there were a lot of items and if some kind of enclosed recreational facility went forward it would need to be addressed.  When he first went out to the site and looked at the story poles he realized that it is very big but does not obscure the ridgeline. 

He would like to see a study done from the residents across the way, mostly on Vendola Way and see if in fact how much of it they could see.  Usually people do not like any change in their backyard and the right of the developers to develop their property to the maximum use they can has to be respected to some degree.  If they did go forward with that, he thought that much checks and balances would be needed along the way.  There was a comment that the building has to be a clear span because the soccer field needs that.  He looked at the plan and the western half of the building is already divided in half permanently with a wall.  On the eastern half, there are two indoor soccer fields which he really did not see why the entire structure 200 feet wide would have to be a clear span.  There is obviously a row down the middle where special columns could be placed and it would be an opportunity to raise the roof up or back down in the middle and the height of the building lowered.  The spans could go across the two halves that would help in the overall height.  When the overall height is looked at, the edge of the fascia is about 32 feet and the top of the roof is about 40 feet so the main part of the roof only increases 8 feet on the entire half width of the building.  He was not sure if that exercise would be worth it but it would certainly be something to look at.  Also on the clear span, if it were only spanning half a distance, perhaps the cost of the building would be less and might help the developer.  The parking lot next to the baseball diamond is labeled overflow parking.  It is well known that anyone who uses the baseball diamond would go right to the gravel parking path. 

He thought that all of the parking spaces should be paved to eliminate noise and dust.  He was concerned about the sound transfer that several people brought up.  If the building was totally air conditioned, there would be no sound coming out of the building, but certainly on warm nights when windows were opened just the roar of someone yelling because a goal scored and the whistles blaring at the fouls during the game would travel right out those windows and across the way. 

 There was a comment from the applicant that only the players were coming with one or two people and he wondered why the whole design of the elevated viewing platform with a café just how many people would be there to watch these games.  If there are that many people there watching games it would be nice to watch the games in an air conditioned space, but from the applicant’s own words he did not think there would be that many people coming so he questioned the need for that.  He applauded the applicant for going with the artificial turf fields which really work fine.  What if the soccer does not work, or the baseball or gymnastics do not work? 

 He really felt a need for recreational fields, and especially with our long winters months with much rain he was sure it would be well used.  He could think of a couple of indoor tennis courts that were built in the San Rafael area that were used all of the time except that they were put in without a permit and had to be closed down.  He was sure they would love to take out an application out here and build some indoor tennis courts.  That especially does not work very well in the rain.  He took exception that they are always looking at parking on all of the projects to see if there is the right back up space and if there is the right number of cars and circulation which is very much a design issue. 

Given that it is a one-lane bridge, at a minimum it needs to be rebuilt to two lanes.  It needs to be considered what would be done when it is an emergency access and all of the people have just exited a game and the bridge is being tied up for minutes on end if not longer.  It definitely needs two-way traffic in and out to such a large facility. 

 The landscaping needs to be expanded and the area on the south along the runway is minimal at best.  It is nice at best that there are some islands for planting and a nice planting plan for the actual parking lot but when 2 or 3 feet of planter is shown on the south side of the parking lot, that should be a mounded area that would have some space for good sized landscaping and trees to be planted.  The mounded area could also serve as a noise break and could serve as a noise barrier so that noise coming from this could bounce up and over and away from the residents across the way.  There is a lot of work that needs to be done.  He was not too impressed with the exterior elevation but when he saw the colored rendering of it in the muted shades of greens and ochre he thought it looked quite nice and the building does have good articulation for such a large building.  The architect said that they might not be able to get the exact colors that are on the rendering and looking at the actual samples he would have some concerns with four or five different types of colors.  The rendering is almost a camouflaged type of building and would tend to hide it as much as possible.  Dickens stated that if large quantities of that sheet metal were used that they would be able to get any color desired and Huntsberry agreed.

Chair Dickens commented that generally he was in favor of the project.  He always likes to encourage private enterprise to do something of a public recreational need.  Obviously he has some obstacles to overcome and maybe everyone can be helpful in solving them.  The photomontage from multiple views would certainly help the neighbors both short and long range.  With computer technology as it is, Dickens was sure the client could afford it.  He questioned the 35-foot height limit and could not believe it is high enough for baseball and kicking a soccer ball but something higher would scare the neighbors even more. 

The mechanical systems need to be studied more.  Swamp coolers are not very effective.  They are very inexpensive but with the humidity in Marin, he did not think that swamp coolers would give the desired cooling factor. 

 He supported the need for soccer especially with the long winter rains causing the McInnis fields to be closed.  An indoor facility is a great idea and it obviously has a ways to go.  His big concern in going out to the airport is that it is not very well maintained and he was a little disappointed because the tenants out there are not policed out there very well, and there are piles of rubber tires, debris, trash, and cuttings that have been there maybe 20 years.  He would like to see an effort on the part of the developer to present a stronger and a more respectable public image, especially next to a piece of the property, the lagoon and the swamp. 

As this project advances, he would certainly encourage some type of maintenance controls on the property so that the debris would not accumulate around this building as the other airport property has accumulated.  It seems to take a long time to get anything built and finished there and asked why.  He noted that one of the speakers complained about the construction activity and he felt that could be rightly so since it does not appear to be rightly expedient.  Dickens felt that the project is probably moving toward a continuance but thought that enough input was given.

===============================================================================================

Boloyan gave a presentation of the project.

Laird-Blanton asked for clarification that the Board would not be addressing the bridge and all the related concerns expressed in correspondence.  Boloyan indicated that the majority of the comments and concerns that the City has heard to this point are not design-related issues.  The Board’s review would only give advice on design issues.

Andrew Rowley, applicant, gave a background of the project.  They have been looking for 15 years in Marin for a facility like this.  The facility is needed in Marin due to a lack of playing fields.  There is also a lack of quality fields which is are dangerous.  He mentioned a quote from the City’s General Plan that amount of parks and recreation facilities in San Rafael are limited and in deteriorated conditions.  One major concern about expanding recreation facilities is the cost of maintenance.  The surfaces of many playing fields in San Rafael have been overused for years without proper maintenance and it would be a benefit for all that the use of the fields in San Rafael be rebuilt with proper turf combinations and drainage systems to create year-round surfaces.  Policy recommendations is an amateur private multi-sport athletic campus in the City of San Rafael limits striving for the development of a privately owned, publicly used large multi-sport campus to address the needs of the community.  This is what the goal is to provide with this project.  Indoor soccer basically needs more ceiling height than a normal warehouse building at around 35 feet because the balls are kicked indoors.  There will be two indoor soccer fields that are like an indoor hockey rink but with synthetic grass turf.  Many of the campuses in the area have the same type of surface and have been proven to reduce injuries even against natural grass which provides a consistent playing surface.  The field turf that would be used has just had a five-year injury study that has been published in the American Journal of Medicine that shows it is safer than natural grass which is a huge benefit to the community and nice consistent year-round surface for the children to play on.  Basically the interior of the facility design is that the players would enter on the ground floor and the spectators for family and friends then go upstairs overlooking the playing fields below, with a concession area and viewing area that overlooks both the outdoor playing field and the indoor fields.  There is a huge demand for this.  After the games, players can shower in the shower facilities, there will be an area to socialize in and a concession area.  It has been great from the perspective of Santa Rosa where there are hundreds of children and adults playing where it has been a year-round environment to play in but also a social environment for many families.  There are high school co-ed leagues and it helps for parents to know where their kids are instead of wondering if they are out getting into trouble.  Countless parents have thanked him personally for the weekend high school co-ed league for those reasons.  It has been a positive thing for the community and there have been no problems in the 10 years they have been doing that.  They have a zero-tolerance policy and do not allow any bad things to happen, running a top of the line, quality business up there.  There will be scholarships for kids in the area who cannot afford to play.  It is generally cost-effective for them to play.

Huntsberry was glad to hear that the artificial turf would be used for the indoor facilities and was pleased that it would also be used in the outdoor facility.

Huntsberry asked about the north/south section through the project where it mentioned an ascending clear zone which is perpendicular to the runway.  He also asked about the fenestration at the upper levels around the walls of the perimeter of the building for natural light and asked if any of them were operable and openable for ventilation.  Rowley explained that there is ventilation but was not sure if the windows actually open.  The facility would not be air conditioned but would have fans and would use swamp coolers or other means.  Certain areas would be air conditioned such as the meeting room and the areas where the spectators would be which are enclosed.  Huntsberry asked if they had a concern about the one-lane bridge serving the site.  Rowley explained that they have tracked in the last 3 years every single car by the hour that has come into the parking lot for studies.  Their experience is that there is very minimal flow of traffic coming through there.  It does not create a traffic hazard or a parking situation.  The games are every 50 minutes so there is a quick flow of the games.  The adults that play don’t really bring anyone except for maybe one other person.  On the weekends, the kids bring more and the smaller the kids bring more too since the parents come.  It does balance out to where the traffic flow is not bad at all.  It has one control point in and out of the parking lot on the main road.

Larry Paul brought a colored elevation and passed it around to the Board to look at while he spoke.  Paul explained that the various shades of green were chosen partly because of the scale of the building and at the site they wanted to try to blend in with the landscape as much as possible.  It is a large building but relatively as far as scale goes, 350 feet long and 35 feet wide is a 10-1 ratio.  If looked at from most vantage points around the area, it would blend into the landscape quite nicely.  There is the existing natural landscape with the Eucalyptus trees and the plan is to augment that with new landscaping as well to marry the building with the site.  It is a relatively simple building and the goal is to keep the water off of the participants and to bring light into a natural building, and the windows would be openable allowing natural ventilation.  There would also be mechanical ventilation, since ventilation would also be needed in the cold weather and that sometimes when it is windy it may not be conducive to have opened windows.  There would be air conditioning in the occupied parts of the gallery spaces.  The idea was to try to treat the building as a simple, straightforward, functional building, yet articulated so that it does not become a big blob.  Because they are metal building panels, care was taken about using the different colors that are readily available.  Many of the issues brought up by the neighbors will have to be dealt with one at a time.  The airport property has very restrictive covenants that only allow certain uses and the recreational use is just one of them.  Paul remembered from the community meetings for St. Vincent’s/Silveira the recreational enthusiasts were always looking for opportunities for more recreation in the county.  This is an opportunity where something can be done for the good of the community.  It fits well because McInnis Park is a big recreational opportunity right at the end of Smith Ranch Road.

Huntsberry reminded Paul that he had asked earlier about the ascending clear zone that runs perpendicular to the runway.  Paul stated that the FAA wants it clear on both sides and no obstructions for private planes coming in.  The cone is very restrictive, going up from the runway itself.  Everything close from the parking lot and entry drive is coming up with very low lights limited to 5-foot bollards and 5-foot fencing.  The plan is to provide a low level of lighting throughout the complex because it is a sensitive site.

Huntsberry asked what Paul’s take was on the one-way bridge.  Paul stated that he had not really finished analyzing what the need is and thought that it was something the traffic engineer would need to take a good look at.  The possibility for that may be necessary and much of it depends on the overall usage of the site and how successful it really could be.

Bob Herbst, airport manager, finished up the presentation.  He gave a brief project history.  The design was started about a year ago involving the architect, landscape architect, traffic engineers, wetlands consultants, cultural consultants, geotechnical and lighting consultants.  He stressed that there is nothing haphazard about this project design.  Two different locations were considered on the airport property.  Three different building and field configurations and sizes were drawn up.  They looked at multiple users including baseball and gymnastics, a climbing gym, basketball, a fitness center, tennis, and martial arts.  Each of those users has specific site plan requirements that were considered to fit into the project to have the least possible impact on the property and the surrounding neighborhood.  Two big issues that have driven this project are economics and the recreational use.  The difficulty has been that recreation is not a big money maker which is why it is provided in public parks and funded by taxpayers.  Unfortunately the taxpayers have not been able to keep up with the demand.  A lot of flat land is needed for these types of fields and the property and buildings in Marin County is very expensive.  An indoor sports facility is a big building needing tall, clear heights as explained by the architects.  He showed pictures to the Board showing examples of clear span metal buildings which are not very attractive.  Herbst noted that Paul did a very good job of taking a building product that has many limitations and adding through the use of colors, materials and fenestrations making it an attractive building and something that really blends in well with the natural colors in the area.  Fortunately, the airport property is 120 acres and is large enough that there are built in setbacks.  The closest residence to this facility is actually about one quarter mile away in Santa Venetia which is a large distance.

Herbst noted that the photos show that a lot of care was taken to site and design the building and put the colors and materials together so that it really blends in with the natural environment out there so that it has a minimal impact.  The residences are far away but if people have to look at anything at all, it is a concern.  They have tried their best to really make it fit in.  He showed some final pictures from McInnis Park.  The county expressed some concerns about view from their hiking path and from their future picnic areas.  The pictures also show the story poles.  One in particular from the hiking path does a good job of addressing the ridgeline views.  The General Plan talks about protecting bay, wetlands and ridgeline views from public streets and obviously the hiking path is not a public street.  The project is pretty much invisible from the public streets but even from the hiking trail, which it is the most visible, it is seen that the ridgeline views are still prevalent above the height of the building.

Regarding the landscaping, Herbst stated that there is a row of existing Eucalyptus trees that are now in the neighborhood of 15 – 25 feet and some are already as tall as the story poles.  The building fits inside of those two rows so from Santa Venetia, one would have to look through the trees to see the building and the same thing for McInnis Park.  There is actually a second row of screening trees at McInnis Park that they planted when they built their park.  So there is really very good screening of the building from the surrounding area.

Chair Dickens asked how many people were present at the meeting due to the application which turned out to be almost everyone. 

He took another poll and found that almost the same amount had questions about traffic and environmental and endangered species.  Dickens acknowledged on the record that all of the objections of the two items would be listed in the minutes and would not need to be repeated.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chair Dickens opened the discussion to the public.

Robert Dogrin, 215 Vendola Drive, encouraged the Board members to go and look at the story poles.  He stated that the developers have talked a lot about how the existing trees will shield the views from both the Santa Venetia side and from the McInnis Park side.  From what he could see, there are no trees shielding it from the Santa Venetia side and those that are on the McInnis side, the story poles are almost directly parallel with the trunks so he did not know how it would be possible to put up buildings with a wall and not take down these trees.  He would like to see additional landscaping in the proposal to shield the views of this building from Santa Venetia as well as from the McInnis side because there are a lot of people that use that creek for kayaking and canoeing that would be going right by it and looking at it all the time.  The lighting on the proposed outdoor fields is a very big concern to me.  They are proposing that the indoor facility be operated from 8:30 a.m. until close to midnight.  The plan is not to light the outdoor fields.  However the outdoor fields will see some use no matter what and there are also noise considerations.  They can already hear the soccer fields in McInnis Park and this is even closer.

Alan Scotch, Vendola Drive, asked

What it would look like when the park sinks and the pilings aren’t deep enough to hold the building up. 

What would it look like when people jump over the 5-foot fence?  The fence stops well before the creek and the hangars so he suggested that the fence be 6 foot high at least and go all the way to the creek. 

He was curious about how wildlife would cope when they walked around the levy, whether the fence is there or not. 

What would it look like when the legislation doesn't stop lighting up at all hours in the future. 

What would it look like when people go there to enjoy the party rooms, only, when it becomes even more populated with people for that reason only? 

He also asked what it would look like when people do not go to McInnis Park because they are going to have batting cages there along with a baseball park, competing with cages and 2 ballparks already in the park. 

He noted that there is more of a demand for outdoor soccer fields in Marin than indoor.  That soccer league players would be better served with 2 outdoor fields instead of only one. No league games could be played in the indoor facility.

He went on to say that the history of this property was allowed for regulation of dense development of the marshlands in exchange for development of the Embassy Suites and surrounding developments.  The intent was for the land to be open for outdoor recreational uses and he suggested that it stay that way. 

He was glad to see people from Marin Conservation League and the County commissioners but would like to see opinions from the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society.

Jonathan Hale, Vendola Drive, stated that he looks out over the property.  They get a lot of noise from the playing fields already.  He presented them with photographs because they are getting a lot more reflective sound off the airport than ever before because of this unbroken line of buildings that borders the creek.  The airplanes are warming up in a place that is inappropriate and are not using the runway all the time.  There is a lot of noise coming off of the airport.  This is just another big building to reflect the sound.  The building can be dealt with and his major concern is the outdoor playing fields.  One of the project spokesman said that they are a quarter of a mile away, which is true, but there is nothing between the neighbors and the project site.  With the wind blowing in that direction, people can be heard calling to each other on the field.  Two more playing fields at the hours planned would make a tremendous amount of noise, when that is combined with the reflective buildings.  Another item in the photographs is the hangars.  They were previously promised to get vegetation to break the sound and to make them look pretty.  He pointed out that there is no vegetation except for a couple of lollipop trees.  He is distrustful of this project and is wondering if it is appropriate to this site.  In driving around the site, there are endless flat-sided buildings with four residence houses.  There are brand new buildings for the four different companies that are there.  He wondered if this is really recreational use and if it is appropriate for that site.

Tom Davis, 22 Yosemite Road, commented on Community Design Standard #5.  Recently he heard that the story poles for this project were up so he took a walk along Gallinas Creek past the golf course and out onto the marsh to look for the poles.  His experience with poles is that they are generally raw 2 x 4’s and that they define corners and rooflines.  He was surprised that these story poles for this project were so hard to see.  That is possibly because they had been painted a dull green/grey to blend in with the background so there is more to this project than meets the eye.  When he finally located the poles by the ribbons on the top, he began to realize how huge this building would be.  From the path he was on which was public access, which he hoped that it be considered a public right-of-way as much as a street that is paved since it is used by the public and that the views be considered from that public vantage point as being important to preserve, ¾ of the sides of the China Camp hills are used and there are places where the top of Mt. Tamalpais cannot be seen.  This was known as an open valley but would not be that anymore.  It would be something very different and he wondered if it was worth the change.  It would never be again what it is now and the experience that people have now would never be repeated.  This is regardless of the use of the 36-foot high building.  It may well be that indoor soccer at midnight with a beer and wine bar would be popular.  He did not wish the applicants ill in their desire to make money but he thought it was more likely that it would be popular and they would be stuck with a huge building without a use.  He is afraid that this project will be a Trojan horse, that whether or not the intention right now is to change the use.  In the future, they would be faced with the fact of an enormous building.  Later, subsequent owners might ask to change an application because they have the building in place.  He agreed with Huntsberry that the one-way bridge is a major lynch pin to this project and he would hope that any discussion of it was put aside until that issue was resolved, for public safety if nothing else.  In conclusion, he added that the Gallinas Park Marsh is not a place to put a building that is larger than the Sears store at Northgate.  It is a huge volume and he recommended that they walk the route as well and see whether it is worth giving up the feeling that is there now.

Jerry Frate, 193 Isle Royale Court, would like the size of the proposed building to be limited as designed since it is two and a half times the size of the local multi-screen theater, The Regency, on Smith Ranch Road.  Based on the fact that this is a speculation building, it should go slowly before creating this large facility.  He suggested building the complex in two phases.  Phase I would be a building housing an indoor soccer field and an indoor baseball instruction area.  Phase II would be dependent upon market demand and a good track record free of problems with the community.  Besides limiting the size, also limit the mass of the building.  One of the reasons the building is so high is that all of the functions are condensed into one large mass.  The functions of the building could be spread out over more area thereby lowering the height and creating a smaller profile.  With respect to the architecture, he would like to change the look of the building from an industrial airplane hangar to a comfortable old lodge with heavy timber and wide covered porches, using materials such as wood, stucco, tile or stone.  The building sits next to a creek in a unique natural setting.  Make the building look like it belongs there.  Porches would allow kids to wait for their rides and to talk with other players while having to wait in a windless interior lobby.  He suggested a different access over the creek to the sports complex and suggested using an access from McInnis Park.  It makes sense considering the park and sports complex for recreational and other uses which could share parking, fields and facility.  The airport owner could help the park with expanding and paving the existing parking area at the access point in exchange for the right to park there and walk across the new bridge to the new sports building.  The children are too exposed to the airport runway by using the outdoor field proposed by this complex.  If there were an access from McInnis Park to the complex, the children could then use the function of McInnis Park instead of being right next to the airport.

Frances Nunez, 209 Vendola Drive, reiterated that the building is much too massive for the site.  These are historical wetlands of which there are not very many left.  There was some confusion since at the meeting in June, there was a total of 70,000 square feet but on another page it states that it is 85,000 square feet.  It seems to have grown in only one month.  She also reiterated the comment regarding the landscaping of the trees.  Eucalyptus trees are not natural to wetlands but a lot were planted there along the south edge at one time between the building and the Santa Venetia property.  Those are crucial and there are spots where the trees are there and huge, empty spaces where there are no trees.  Although she has been told that they are trees that are feisty and will grow to be 20 feet later.  As far as she knows, they were all planted at the same time and if they are not any bigger than 5 feet now they will not get any larger than that.  She asked that the Board look at the property from some residences on Vendola Drive.  There are no trees between the parking lot and the runway where there is talk about putting in a fence and there should be some vegetation even if squeezed in there somehow because the headlights of cars coming in there at night is going to be very obvious.  This is totally flat land and not like a normal landscape which is also why the sound will travel.  She did not see any kind of buffer wall between the outdoor playing fields.  Something like that was done at McInnis Park where the batting cages were put in, but it seems as though it was a landscape design that was left out.  Otherwise, it will be a huge impact and the building is too massive.

Huntsberry asked Nunez if the story poles could be seen from her house.  Nunez stated that she could not, but someone corrected her and said that they can be seen.  She suggested that maybe just she was not able to recognize them.  Huntsberry suggested that they look even through binoculars to see them because once the building is up it would be too late.  Huntsberry was very interested to know how visible they are from the area of Vendola Drive.

Penelope Dunham, 88 Yosemite Road, stated that she is opposed to this project both for sound, for taking away the pastoral landscape, for essentially having 500 cars and 1000 visits in and out every day, impacting sound, the light when the kids finish their games, and the yelling and screaming all affecting their quality of life.  The other thing is endangered species and an EIR is needed.  Two species, the clapper rail and the salt marsh harvest mouse, need to be checked on before this is developed.  Her main comment was that this was proposed to them as a giant green monstrosity of 85,000 square feet with three tenants that would have soccer, baseball and gymnastics.  One third of the tenants are gone, so make 14,000 square feet of this go away because those tenants are not there any more.  If a blank check is being written for someone to come in, it is not known what is being written for in terms of carswho can come, how many visits a day back and forth on the road would be there.  Essentially if something is being proposed and the Board is being asked to design it and to write them a blank check for usage for this giant green building, it is going to be hot in summer, but mostly it is an eyesore and a lifesore for the people who live out there.  It really could be reduced in size.  If it has two tenants right now, make it the size for two tenants.

Rich Leahy, 21 Sailmaker Court, agreed with everything said.  He read from something that was sent out to City of San Rafael residents approximately two to three months ago by the City Manager.  He noted that it stated that it has taken 15 years for the City to get to this point and he started to see why the City is looking into this.  He was happy to hear that Andrew Rowley wanted to make the size of the ceiling at 35 to 36 feet so that it would not break the game up.  There is an area for socializing afterwards and he wondered if the 12:30 a.m. time as mentioned was at all realistic.  He was glad also that there have been no complaints in all the 10 years he operated in the industrial parks of Cotati and Santa Rosa.  Certainly there has to be a correlation as to why they are not having complaints there and why complaints are already being made here with only poles put up.  The first time he heard of a dirt parking lot, he thought of how windy it is up there and that it might endanger the field.  He would be curious if this would be a successful venture and how the bridge would end up being bigger.  He quoted from notes from a planning meeting in review of plans, “noise study by a developer says – okay, no noise”.  The City engineer stated that there would be no significant traffic and he asked Boloyan about it at a neighborhood meeting and was told that the traffic studies are done only during peak hours.  Once again, he felt that more than what was being presented to them was being looked at.  The four-hour increments mentioned really do not bear out the severity.

Kathy Lowry, Marin Conservation League, stated that they have some great concerns about such a massive building being built so near wetlands and in a flood zone. 

They are aware that the covenant from 20 years ago recognized that this area could be used for recreation but the intent needs to be returned to.  The intent was not development but was for recreation.  This is a site near one of the major parks and even though every effort is being made to make it least obtrusive by painting it green and adding landscaping, it is a huge building and will impact the views from all over especially from the park.  The hills would be not completely obliterated but there would be a big building in front of the hills and in front of the creeks. 

This is clapper rail habitat and critters are used to nighttime being quiet and dark. 

The main parking lot calls for 182 spaces plus an overflow parking lot.  That indicates that a lot of activity is planned there at once.  She mentioned that in the background, it is mentioned that access to the site would be on a two-lane road.  At the very least, it needs to be acknowledged that it is a one-way bridge which is not in the background report. 

It will be a major concern for everybody.  The noise, lighting, and the massiveness of this building create some serious concerns.

Ron Beasley, Contempo Marin, 117 Bryce Canyon, which is on the east side of the park adjacent to the airport, had many concerns.  He had been out to see the story poles several times.  He felt that the building is far too massive and that the use is not appropriate.  However, he wondered what kind of footings would be used there in that questionably filled soil and how well compacted it is.  He was concerned that the bridge is entirely inadequate with only one lane but particularly if there is any kind of an emergency out there, it is inadequate in terms of width and very questionable structurally although it has been worked on the last 3 to 4 years.  At the end of September, construction began of a large hangar that is located directly in back of him.  He happened to be home at the time and watched it being built with the main beam structure going up over a three-day period on a weekend, some of the times being inappropriate for construction.  He made some calls and complained and Boloyan stated that his plans showed two buildings but it was now one building, 130 feet x 60 feet.  He then called the chief building inspector who stated that it had been totally inspected.  Beasley did not feel that it had been inspected and all except for the sliding door it was fully constructed and so he questioned the integrity of the whole thing.  An old construction trailer that is behind the hanger was going to be moved but is still there and is supposedly still in use.  There is no wire hooked to the power head but there is now an RV there that someone is living in with an extension cord.  The promises to improve the side of the building with the trellis and planting were promised in early 2004 and nothing has been done yet.

Sharon Bale, 37 Sailmaker Court, commented that for a period of time there was supposed to be restricted use on traffic and when it could start in the mornings but no one has ever paid any attention to that.  She has filled in complaint forms and delivered them to the City Planning Department but has not heard anything from anyone although she has called in to ask if they had been received but her calls were never returned.  She talked to the drivers as they came across the bridge asking if they knew there were time restrictions and none of them said that they knew anything about it.  Dickens questioned the restriction hours and Boloyan explained that there are some hours of operation that are allowed for maintenance and construction type uses.  The project is in a protected wetland area that also has a lot of residential area surrounding it.  It is entirely too large, too invasive and too noisy and to put something that operates until midnight in there where people have to drive back and forth past the resident’s bedroom windows is insane.  Also, the use of vegetation and the planting of Eucalyptus trees when most people are taking out those types of trees – she was not sure that due to fire dangers that it was a wise choice to be putting back there.  Everyone has talked about recreational use which is usually thought of as park recreational use but this is not and is commercial recreational use which is a big difference that needs to be kept in mind.

Robert Zingale, representative of Smith Ranch Homeowners’ Association, lives at 14 Smith Ranch Court, was concerned about comments on the intended use.  The use is zoned as recreational and they would love to see more recreation in the area, in fact outdoor recreation seems to be the intent here – not to convert this into an industrial park as is being proposed by this building.  The building being at 85,000 square feet, 15,000 of it in a mezzanine area, is huge and very imposing in the area, and will be seen from public areas, the environment hiking path and the public outdoor seating area as well as the golf course.  It will be seen prominently from the first hole, third hole, fourth hole, eighth hole and the ninth hole.  One would be looking straight down onto the property which is 56 percent of the holes in that golf facility right now.  It would also be seen from the access road up to the skate park in the area.  This building would have to be of a different material and could not be an industrial warehouse facility.  If this size, it would have to be screened in a way so that it would look more in keeping with some of the surrounding buildings similar to McInnis.  If something like that was there, the community may be in support of it.  The building was described as a big, green building which is one of the things the HOA is concerned about.  It is a big green metal shed and they are very opposed to that.  Another thing mentioned is that it would not be conditioned and would be operable and would have swamp coolers on the roof.  One of the concerns is that it would generate noise.  When the windows are opened, people will be playing soccer, whistles will be blowing and it will be disturbing.  It goes until 12:30 at night and no one is going to get sleep.  It will carry for at least one half of a mile.  These are very serious concerns as well as the single lane access bridge coming into the facility.  One of the nice things about it is that two bike racks would be shown in front of the parking area but he wondered how the bikes would get there.  Over a single-lane bridge?  And what kind of impact would that have on traffic and how dangerous would that be for bikers in the area?  People access the bike path and go all the way out to Point Reyes by way of Lucas Valley Trail.  There will be a significant amount of bikers that would be accessing this facility.  He asked if anyone had really considered any other alternatives.  One of the things he would like to see somebody pursue is possibly a public private joint venture where someone would go in.  He realizes that the fields are not in good shape and are torn up and have had a lot of use.  He asked if anyone has thought about going in there with a public/private development or redevelopment effort to replace the fields with turf fields and possibly operate those.  McInnis Park operates now until the sun sets when the noise stops and then the traffic goes away as well.  If the area could be limited, they would be in better shape than they are right now.

Lissa Herschleb, 121 Yellowstone Court, thought that this is an unbelievable proposition and concurred with everyone that spoke.  She stated that she lives in a metal box and the metal box that is being built out there is going to be extremely hot in the summer.  If swamp coolers are proposed to cool that massive building, it will be terribly noisy.  It would be an unbelievable sound pollution problem.

Joanna Arakaki, 47 Wharf Circle, had a lot of concerns that had already been expressed.  She was very concerned about the hours of operation and asked that if there is a change in the master use permit could it be implemented into that.  Dickens said that it could.  She was also concerned about the definition of recreational use.  The concern would be what types of recreation would be there.  She would like the definition to be built into any type of change in the master permit.  She clarified that she is against the development but also has to be real.  She was also concerned about landscaping which some other people reiterated.  The non-native landscaping and more attention paid to fire resistant type of trees is needed and Eucalyptus would not be one of them.  She also did usenot know what type of authority the Planning Commission has to ask the developer to impose in his plan some sort of compensation for Captain’s Cove residents that are directly affected where bordering that airport road.  For every car that goes down that road, the headlight would shine into Bale’s living room.  She would never have a moment’s peace again, either coming or going.  Arakaki wondered what type of authority the Board had to ask for those kinds of concessions from the developer.

Kathleen Phelps, 327 North San Pedro Road, supported the project.  She paid attention to a lot of development projects in Santa Venetia and had concerns about how a project of this size would impact her enjoyment of hiking along the levies and also at McInnis Park.  She would like to see more landscaping around the outdoor fields if possible but was not sure how that would work with the creek banks there.  She would like to see native landscaping and wondered if on the Santa Venetia side of the proposed outdoor field if it might be possible to look at incorporating into the architecture some kind of a sound wall or a planted sound wall that might lessen the sound and take care of some of the visual impact.  She wondered if it was possible to pull back some of the parking a little bit from the runway so that some higher landscape elements could be placed along that side.  She was not as familiar with the interaction to the Contempo Marin side and wondered if that is something that could be looked at.  Lastly, she appreciated the costs, and is very aware of the need for this facility since she drives on a regular basis both to Vallejo and Oakland to play indoor soccer herself.  It is unfortunate that in Marin there is not a lot of space for this but the need to mitigate this use with the neighbors is being looked at.  The developer/applicant has made some great strides in this direction.  The cost with regards to a building of this size to make it work are difficult.  She was impressed with what they have been able to achieve and would like to some more human scale elements in the landscape.  If some of the examples from McInnis would be looked at such as the large entry arbor and the bathroom buildings, there might be some exterior elements that could be added to the design which could help to create more of a human scale to the exterior of the building.

Misty Eberhart, 122 Yellowstone Court, stated that her house is parallel to the access road to the airport.  For the last two years, her life has been completely miserable with the building construction of the hangars and the new home.  She is currently disabled and at home and could not tell of the damage done to her home.  The owner of the airport had sent someone to her house to redo the foundation where it had actually cracked and fallen.  Things in her house have actually cracked.  In the meantime, they supposedly put up a soundwall between the access road that goes past Captain’s Cove clear out to the airport.  It is not a soundwall, the height is nothing and the noise is horrendous, the workers start coming at 5:30 a.m. with their screaming radios as they are driving into work, they are screaming getting ready for work, and the headlights shine right into her bedroom so she hardly even uses that part of her house anymore.  The thought is the massive thing being built.  With 35,000 square feet on landfill she cannot imagine what it will do to shake the earth and would probably destroy her house.  The view is completely gone with what they have built already and it is miserable.  It is not safe and no one stops at the stop sign.  She has no cats or dogs but hopes that a child does not get hit by a car there.  Everytime one cannot see up over the horizon, they honk at all hours of the night.  It is inhumane and no one should have to live like this.  For this, an operation until 12:30 is ridiculous and will not allow people around there to have some peace.

Nancy Peake, park planner with Marin County Parks, stated that they sent a letter expressing their concerns.  She asked that the Board address the items being reviewed tonight, the main item of concern is Community Design Policies CD-5 & CD-6.  The story poles from McInnis Park definitely have an impact on the view from McInnis Park.  She is a designer by trade and the drawings look fine, but when she went out to the site she was amazed at how much of the pastoral view and ridgeline would be obstructed by the view of this building.  They realize there is a lack of fields in the county and the county is looking for locations to provide more soccer fields.  Someone brought up the fact of improving the fields at McInnis and they are looking into putting in artificial turf in the fields at McInnis.  Of course, being a county agency, they are also looking for funding to do that.  They just feel that this structure is not really what this site is for.  It is for recreational uses but they do not feel that a huge structure is a recreation use but that restrictions are called for.

Evan Marks, 803 Vendola Drive, was rather shocked.  He is a contractor and has seen the story poles.  Before he came to the meeting he was quite agreeable to the mass of the building.  What he saw was a big green shed and the architect described it as such.  It is screened by recently planted Eucalyptus trees which were only put there in recent years for exactly that purpose.  The question has to be asked if we are better served by the wonderful asset to the community or the status quo and the status quo was his feeling.  They look directly downwind of the fields over at McInnis and he enjoys the occasional soccer game.  They also live across the water from the golf course which has a license to operate until midnight.  When he gets up at 3 a.m. and the lights are going along with the ball cages, that is not part of their license.  He asked if the maintenance agreements had been considered since the soccer games finish around 12:30 a.m. and the maintenance crew arrives to clean up.  The cars are going in and out all night.

Chair Dickens closed the public hearing.  He listed the consensus items brought up by the public: traffic, noise, more landscaping, bridge safety and/or inadequacy, maintenance, hours of operation, and lighting.

======================================================================================================

after the board discussion:

Boloyan stated that every Board member made different points and comments and suggested that the applicant be given the list of issues that the Board raised as well as looking at what the public raised as well to try to address those.  The additional information that the Board would like to see is:

1)      Different photomontages from various points on Vendola as well as the McInnis Park side.

2)      A better connection between the story poles and possibly brightening up the actual poles.

Dickens stated that the Board greatly respected the public coming out and voicing their concerns and encouraged them to continue to do that.  For some who thought they could support the project, he asked that they contact the architect and the developer and to be specific about their concerns and to think about the benefit it might have to their families to have a facility like that in their neighborhood.  It could be pretty great if they could somehow overcome the obstacles.  He added that we are all resistant to change.

      3)   The comments made by the Board and the public would be transmitted to the applicants to incorporate and consider in their design.

Laird-Blanton moved and Huntsberry seconded that the project be continued.

AYES:             MEMBERS:                Chair Dickens, Huntsberry, Laird-Blanton

NOES:             MEMBERS:                None

ABSTAIN:            MEMBERS:                None

ABSENT:            MEMBERS:                Crew, Kent