Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

And one we are live.

Good evening the 05/14/2026 meeting of the Brisbane Planning Commission will now come to order We have a roll call please.

Yes, Commissioner Flunker.

Here.

Commissioner Gooding.

Here.

Commissioner Saison. Here. Commissioner Wodziak.

Here.

Let the record reflect Commissioner Lau is absent.

Now, regarding the adoption of the agenda, I would ask for a motion to adopt the the agenda with one, addition, which is that the agenda be, modified to reflect that the next scheduled meeting on May 28 will have an early start time of 06:30PM instead of the usual 07:30. May I ask such a motion?

I'll make such a motion.

I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? The motion passes with four ayes. At this time, we would move on to the consent calendar, and we will ask the public if there are any members of the public who would like to pull any item from the consent calendar, and staff will post a Zoom call number on the screen and start a time clock for thirty seconds to allow time for anyone to chime in. Meanwhile, are there any items that any commissioner would like to remove from the consent calendar? Seeing none.

No hands are raised.

Thank you. In that case, may I have a motion to adopt the consent calendar?

I'll make a motion.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes with four ayes. Moving on to oral communications. Is there anyone in the audience or at home who would like to address the commission on any items not on tonight's agenda? And again, we'll start a time clock for one minute to allow folks to raise their hand by pressing the raise hand button or pressing 9 on their phones.

And while that's running, we can move on to written communications. We would acknowledge written communication dated April 30 from Dana Dilworth, and that is in the record. Are there any other written communications besides that? Thank you.

A minute has passed.

Thank you. Moving on to, full business, there is none. Moving on to new business. First item is the public hearing regarding 128 Alvarado Street 2026 Dash UP Dash 01 Dash PE. Staff, may we have presentation please?

Excuse me, chair. I have to recuse myself from this matter.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you chair. As introduced, this agenda item is for a use permit author authorizing a modification to the parking regulations of the Brisbane Municipal Code to eliminate a covered parking space and replace it with an uncovered parking space at the same location at an existing single family dwelling at 128 Alvarado Street. The Planning Commission has the authority to allow for any modifications of the parking regulations within Chapter 17.34 of the Brisbane Municipal Code via a use permit, which is why it is here before you this evening. To provide you with some context on the site, this is a approximately 2,200 square foot lot located in the R1 District of Central Brisbane and is developed with a nine ten square foot single story single family dwelling with a single carport accommodating one parking space. Pursuant to chapter 17.34.020 of the BMC, a single family residence of 900 square feet in floor area or more than one bedroom requires two parking spaces, one of which shall be in a garage or a carport.

Due to the home being over 900 square feet, I'm sorry, over being 900 square feet, it is considered legal nonconforming by providing only one covered off street space on the property. If the use permit were to be approved, one parking space would remain on the property, albeit uncovered instead of covered. In order to approve the use permit, the Planning Commission must make the findings contained within the Brisbane Municipal Code Section 17.40.060 and 17.34.50. Of them, there are five findings that are abbreviated on the screen. Detailed findings are included in Exhibit A of the draft resolution, although in summary, the request complies with all of the findings.

The subject property is located within the R1 Zoning District and developed with a single family dwelling and adjacent uses on Alvarado Street are similarly low density residential uses. The proposed project does not increase the footprint of the home nor change the intensity of the use. In fact, the proposed carport demolition will actually make the property more conforming to the code by bringing the total lot coverage down from a little over 49% to a little over 40%. Furthermore, the proposed project will not change the present traffic and circulation conditions at the site, and therefore strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not considered to be required. Any project would not create or intensify a shortage of on street parking spaces as no net reduction in parking would occur.

Lastly, due to the location and the size of the home, there is not sufficient room to add another covered parking space within the required minimum setbacks and lot coverage maximums for the zoning district. This concludes the staff presentation with the recommendation of approval of use permit twenty twenty six dash UP dash one dash PE via the adoption of the attached resolution. This application was reviewed by the city's public works building and fire department teams and any applicable conditions of approval have been incorporated in that resolution. With that staff is available to answer any questions the commission may have at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. Do any other other commissioners have any questions for staff?

No question.

Not really about the the merits of the whole thing. I'm wondering.

Through the chair rule is your mic on? Sorry.

Oh, thank you.

I'm wondering if there are conditions. So, it's non conforming right now and I completely understand that that won't really be changed significantly by tearing down the port. Is there something that a property owner could do to a property like this that would require them to become conforming? Like if they were to add surface area, add another story, something would then be like, yeah, now you must have two parking spaces, two off street parking spaces, one covered. Just curious if under what conditions that would be triggered.

There are certain conditions within the Brisbane Municipal Code that would require conformity with the property. So for instance, there is a provision in the code where if you are having a change of greater than 50% of the the layout of the property, or if there's a substantial demolition

of

more than 75% of the walls, the entire property would need to be brought into conformance. There's also individual standards that apply for certain expansions beyond a certain size. So depending on an applicant's proposed scope, there could be additional requirements that come into play.

Okay. Thank you.

I don't have any questions. Thank you. Alright. In that case, we can open the public hearing and ask the applicant if he or she would like to speak to the commission. I I take it the applicant. Is the applicant here?

Yeah, that's me.

Oh. Really? Yeah. Okay. Come on up.

Didn't realize that.

Good evening, commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here to request approval to remove an existing carport on our property. This property is very straightforward. We're removing, this project is very straightforward.

We're moving a deteriorated nonconforming accessory structure that was built decades ago, and no longer functions as intended. The surrounding neighborhood is composed of single family homes and our project maintains that character by removing the carport where, reducing lot coverage and improving the overall condition and appearance of the property. The structure is in poor shape and eliminating it removes non a non conforming element while allowing us to park our truck on the property. Right now the truck doesn't fit, under the carport and being able to park it on our driveway instead of on the street helps reduce competition in a very limited on street parking situation on our block. The entire side of one half of our block is lined with driveways, so there's really only on street parking on one side of the block.

So being able to park our largest vehicle on our property makes it easier on our neighbors. We also store work tools in the vehicle so being able to store that, on our property behind, a locked gate if we need to, is just just is better security for us and for the neighborhood. So this proposal is not interest or detrimental to the surrounding properties and in fact reducing the degree of non conforming on a very small lot. So the project helps bring the property closer into alignment with the current lot coverage standards. Removing the carport brings our lot coverage down from 49% to 40.7% so nearly right at the 40% maximum and with regard to the parking requirements our lot is, 2,200 square feet roughly so less than half the size of, a standard residential lot.

Removing the carport doesn't change the amount of parking spaces the property can support. In fact, it ensures that the driveway remains available for parking instead of becoming a convenient storage area, which can be tempting when you have covered parking. And while the code requires one covered and one uncovered parking space, our lot is physically incapable of accommodating two spaces. So we're simply asking to exchange the covered space for the uncovered space in order to maintain functional off street parking. In summary, this project improves our property, reduces nonconformity, preserves practical off street parking, and has no negative impact on our neighbors or the city. We respectfully request your approval and are happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Any questions? No. Thank you, Madison. You actually answered the only question I had, which was why you want to tear it down in the first place. Think you addressed that. We can open it up to anyone in the public to raise their hand or press 9 and we will set a timer for how long? A minute?

I should turn my mic on. There are no online attendees. So at this time, commenters would be in the room. We can display the phone number, on the screen if folks are are watching on cable at home, and and want to call in.

Anybody in the audience wanna speak? No? We are running a timer correct?

We'll run a timer for thirty seconds.

It's been thirty seconds.

Thank you. May I a motion to close the public hearing?

I'll make a motion.

Second.

All in favor. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes with three eyes. Alright. We're in deliberations on this one then. Does any either commissioner in my left or right have any comments or appreciate?

I mean, I think it's pretty straightforward. I mean, the modification that's being requested is minor. You know, they're keeping the same one parking space and I think the changes they want to make is actually will increase the aesthetics. So, think it's an overall improvement. So, I'm inclined to approve it.

Me too. Yeah. No questions. No issues.

Yeah. Mean, my my 2¢ is that I think this I I agree with Commissioner Saison that that removing this carport is probably a net plus for the property. And otherwise, on a more technical level, it does appear to satisfy the criteria required, the five criteria laid out by staff of impact on the neighborhood and No change in the availability of off street parking and so forth. Any other comments? Alright. That case. We have a motion, please.

Yes, I'll make a motion to approve the applicant's request.

And we will also adopt the findings.

Yes, yes.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none.

I should read the appeal.

You could read the appeal procedure.

Anyone may appeal the action of the Planning Commission to the City Council except where specified otherwise, appeals shall be filed with the city clerk not later than fifteen calendar days following the Planning Commission's decision. Exceptions to the fifteen day filing period include the following. Appeals shall be filed with the city clerk within six calendar days of the planning commission's action for use permits and variances and ten calendar days for tentative maps and advertising sign applications. An application form and fee is required to make a formal appeal. For additional information, please contact the city clerk at (415) 508-2110.

Alright. In fact, concludes this item. Moving on to the next item. Public hearing on 10 Industrial 10 Industrial Way 2026. U P 01.

Regarding an automobile repair facility and a use permit for that. Staff, may we have a presentation?

Yes, thank you. The applicant is also the owner in this case. He requests an approval of a use permit to allow for auto repair facility for City Dent. That's a paintless dent removal company. The proposed use would occupy approximately 4,100 square feet of the eastern portion of the building at 10 Industrial Way.

That building size is about a little over 9,000 square feet. The site is located at the north end of the Mone Manufacturing District. The municipal code allows for auto repair shops in the Mone District subject to the granting of a use permit. Historically, auto repair facilities were permitted by Wright in the Mone District as a type of light manufacturing and assembling use. However, in 2015, the uses were updated for this district and auto repair was made a conditional use at that time.

In doing so, existing vehicle repair facilities became legal, non conforming, and so there are a number of existing businesses out there for auto repair. But any new facilities were required to apply for a conditional use permit. In early March of this year, the applicant submitted for a business license and occupied the warehouse space unaware that the permit, the use permit was prerequisite. The applicant was denied the business license application pending the granting of use permit. Also, at approximately the same time, an allied but separate business entity that shares the same space as Peninsula in detail was granted a business license.

That business license supplies protective film or decals to to automobiles without conducting any kind of bodywork or other type of vehicle repair. And so that business license was granted. The site was developed in nineteen seventies and as I mentioned, it's about 9,000 square feet of single story warehouse building, metal warehouse. And it's divided into two. The western side is location of Gray Line Bus, San Francisco for their, office there and warehouse, and that has a separate fenced parking area on the site for for that use.

The proposed, city dent along with Peninsula would share the east side of the building. City Dent is a owner operator business. They do not have any employees. The business performs minor paintless dent repair as I've mentioned. That's using hand tools.

A detailed description was provided in your agenda report. Average repair time is approximately two hours per vehicle according to their description. The business owner would work on customers' vehicles on the floor of the warehouse space and has also provide proposed to provide long term storage for a small number of cars on two vehicle stackers inside the building. That would be his ancillary warehouse use which wouldn't require a use permit. The applicant has indicated that no hazardous materials would be stored on-site.

Business hours are proposed from 7AM to 06:30PM, Monday through Friday, Saturdays eight to five. Parking for the use would be located on the east side of the building. That's in at the front of the site adjacent to Industrial Wear Way. And parking would meet the city standards per the conditions of approval. The sites bordering or near the subject site are industrial in nature or they're vacant lands.

Uses to the south include contractor's office, storage yard, and Bayshore Sanitary District pump station. Industrial Way borders the eastern edge of the site with the closest uses across the street being roofing and flooring contractors and other a full auto body shop. To the north and northwest are contractors yards, Bayshore Boulevard borders the South on its the site on its western side and across Bayshore are vacant lands of Guadalupe Hills sub area, the Marsh, and PG And E Smarton substation. The nearest residential uses are nearly a quarter mile away to the west in Daly City. The use permit findings are provided in the municipal code and the use would meet those findings as was detailed in your agenda report.

The use is of similar nature to the other nearby uses and would not be detrimental or injurious in any way. Finally, this application was provided to North County Fire, Department of Public Works, Police Department, Building Department for review and comment, and none of the departments had objections to the proposed use. So in closing, staff recommends approval of the use permit application 2026 UPA1 via adoption of the resolution containing the findings and conditions. If you have any questions, I'm happy to take those.

Any questions?

No. No questions.

I have one question. It was about the the car storage. I think you said that the intent the intended method of car storage will be the to use the stackers that are inside the premises? Correct. And we'll check with the applicant about that as well but and I don't recall and I can't pull it up right now. It would be I think valuable might be valuable for that to be a condition of the permit that the storage of cars take place inside the premises and not interfere with the parking spaces that are otherwise provided on the lot for customers and and and other public. That's one suggestion I have. How old other other commissioners feel about that?

I'll double check that. Either that condition exists or we'll add it.

Right. Maybe

in the. Yes. Yeah.

Yeah. Any other questions at all?

No, I mean, I I agree with you. I just assumed, I don't know if I read it or I assumed it would be in inside the building would be where the storage of the vehicles were, but we can clarify.

Yeah, I think they can. The easiest way to assure that is to make it a condition of the permits.

Right. We can add that.

Yeah, I get, you know, now that we're talking about the parking thing, reading of the of the description was actually that the turnaround of the vehicles that are brought in for repair is actually really short or supposed to be really short. So is the storage vehicle like a separate use? Presumably it's not for right so it's like a certain an extra service you provide or something like

That that is staff's understanding from the applicant and and he's here and he could he could speak to that as well.

Yeah. Don't really have have an issue with it but it just for my understanding that that that they're clearly separate services or something. Yeah.

Also, he's indicated that this is more of a long term type of thing so you don't have vehicles coming in and out frequently. So, it's like people's surplus cars that they have no place to put and want to keep off the street.

Okay. I know there's a lot of cars in industrial way anyway like from the repair storage shops, right? I mean, it's pretty packed.

That's the nature of my concern is that. Yeah. Exactly. The store, the storage cars stay inside and not further let the street. Yeah. Okay. Time to open the public hearing I think. Would the applicant like to speak?

No, but if

I'm opening questions anybody.

Right. Can you come for? Just so you can get near a mic.

Yeah. Well, yeah, might have to. Hello. My name is John Zaro. I'm the owner and operator of Peninsula in detail. So just to clarify the whole storage situation, obviously, the storage of the long term cars would obviously be inside and not on the street. Another thing I wanna clarify is that there will be no cars parked outside overnight at all, Like, zero. You know, we we have like 4,000 square feet for that exact reason. So, we don't have to park cars overnight outside. And obviously, during the day, you know, I have my own car.

Anthony has his car and then maybe a customer car will be out there for a little bit before we can actually bring it in. But you know, compared to pretty much every other auto body shop, not that Anthony is an auto body shop because he's not, but we can get into that later. There will be no traffic at all parked on the street. Obviously, besides my car and Anthony's car, well, know, during the day. I think I'm rambling so I'm going stop and It's good. We'll get there.

Okay. Yeah, that that was the only question I had was about about the the car storage issues.

Perfect. Okay.

Moving on. Is anybody here in the audience that would like to comment publicly? Well, while we're doing that, can we start a timer for anybody else to raise their hand? Perhaps, save some time.

I just have a concern that I've raised before of noise at 6AM and like backup beepers. I don't know how noisy your business would be but it is a concern because a quarter mile away there is housing, even though it's not Brisbane housing. And I know how I wake up at like 05:30 when somebody has a backup beeper down or there's noise in Downtown Brisbane, so I'm just concerned for that. So I don't know how noisy this business is at six in the morning,

but I think that the terms of the permit are that operations are not beginning until 7AM.

Oh, no, you said 6AM Didn't you? 7AM. Sorry,

Okay, because we're recording. Just go up to the mic. Yeah, I just want make sure

that it's

not that it doesn't wake people up at 6AM that live a quarter mile away.

Just just to address that on on the record here. So, the operational conditions are six a, excuse me, 7AM to 06:30PM and then Saturdays, 8AM to 5PM.

And are are those the same working hour conditions as the other automotive facilities on that street?

The other automotive facilities do not have restrictions like there is a Tigers Automotive across the street and they do they do not have restrictions on their hours because they're they were permitted by rice the right about twenty years ago.

Sure. Coming up. So,

I'm I'm I'm Anthony. I'm the owner of CityDent. And just to be clear, so I'm I'm just one guy. I don't make noise. The hour first, let's start with the hours. The hours that are stated, I put those hours because my hour I'm just like I said, I'm one guy, so I schedule things at the convenience of my customers. Sometimes I'll be there early. Sometimes I'll be there later. So it kinda fluctuates within within that time frame. But as far as noise, I don't use any machinery.

I don't use grinders or do anything that makes any loud noises. It's literally my hands and and I take rods and I apply pressure and I I I push. So it's it's you wouldn't even hear anything. In addition, it's inside the building. So, I I don't see how it can be a a concern. I mean, if you don't know but Yeah. Now that I'm explaining it's it's not it shouldn't be a concern whatsoever.

Any questions about that?

Of course.

Thank you sir. Have there been any hands raised? I

see nobody.

Thank you. There's no written communication on this. So, may I have a motion to close the public hearing?

I'll make that motion.

I'll second it.

All in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes with four eyes. We're in deliberations any- any comments or opinions anybody wants to state.

No it also seems very straightforward to me

yeah and I and I think the- owner clarified any concerns but yeah but from reading the staff's report it seems like you know noise shouldn't be an issue. They're going to store all the cars in side. So parking or whatnot is not going to be an issue I think and yeah I think I don't was were the hours of operation in the conditions? Okay.

They are. Yes.

So, yeah. So, I don't have any other concerns.

Nobody else? Okay. In that case, may I have a motion to approve or deny the this permit application?

I move to approve this permit application.

I'll second.

I think if I could just add if we can make it part of the motion that's conditioned on staff modifying the conditions regarding interior storage of the cars that's clarified for the public. With that, I'm in an amended motion. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? The motion passes with four ayes. And the use permit is approved with the additional condition that I just stated. I should read the appeal procedure.

Anyone may appeal the action of the Planning Commission to the City Council except where specified otherwise. Appeals shall be filed with the city clerk not later than fifteen calendar days following the planning commission's decision. Exceptions to the fifteen day filing period include the following. Appeals will be filed with the city clerk within six calendar days of the planning commission's action for use permits and variances and ten calendar days for tentative maps and advertising sign applications. An application form and fee is required to make a formal appeal.

For additional information, please contact the city clerk at (415) 508-2110. And that concludes this item. Thank you, folks. You're welcome to stay, but you're free to go. Alright. Our next next item on the agenda. Is a public hearing on the general plan amendment twenty twenty six dash G P A dash zero one. Regarding general plan amendments to the open space element. Staff, can we have a presentation please?

Yes, thank you. The proposed general plan amendment would update the open space element in order to comply with state law. For tonight's presentation, I'll provide a brief background and then talk a bit on the structure of the draft element and highlight just a couple of the programs, but I I don't plan to go into detail on all the programs. Of course, if if the commission wants to to bring any forward for discussion, we can do that. And those are provided in the element of course and also in the table that's included in your gender report that compares the existing and proposed goals, policies, and programs of the element.

This is a public hearing and so after my presentation, if there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer those and then the commission can open the public hearing and then commission may then provide a recommendation to city council after public hearing. So, first, by way of background, the open space element is one of the seven state mandated elements of the city's general plan. This image shows the seven mandated elements plus other elements that the city has voluntarily adopted with the 1994 general plan. Recent state law requires that jurisdictions update their open space elements to address open space access for its residents, climate resilience, and other co benefits of open space, as well as rewilding. The deadline for the update was January, and so we passed that, and that was to allow time for review of the element by outside parties.

The process of updating Brisbane's open space element began in the 2025 with a series of workshops with the commissions and committees listed here. These workshops provided an opportunity for review of preliminary proposed updates to the element as part of those reviews, a comparison table between the existing and proposed draft goals, policies, and programs was provided. Input from those workshops was used to prepare the draft element that's before the commission this evening. The draft element is provided as an attachment to the proposed resolution in your packet. Staff also reviewed the other elements of the general plan to ensure consistency between the elements.

No amendments are proposed other than elements no other amendments are proposed to the other elements of this plan. So the last update of the city's open space element was in 1994 with the general plan. Well, most of the 1994 elements goals, policies, and programs remain relevant today. The update provided an opportunity for restructuring to more clearly address state law requirements. With that in mind, the element was restructured and the existing policies and programs were reorganized while keeping much of the existing content.

The table of contents is provided with this slide and with the exceptions of the introduction and military chapters. We don't have a military base in Brisbane. Each chapter has at least one overarching city goal and following that one or more policies and under the policies would be implementing programs. As a reminder for the general plan, a goal is a general direction setter. Policy is a commitment to a particular course of action and a program is a specific implementation measure.

This example shows that hierarchy, a specific example addresses state law requirement that the city maintain an inventory of vacant land essentially with an eye toward creation of new open space. So, mapping, we have started that and come along way with that but essentially that would be an implementation measure to allow that to be more of a living document without updating the open space element every time there's a change to that. The element does call for an update of the 2,001 open split space plan, also referred to as implementation plan here. Some of the contents of that plan has been integrated into the draft element, such as the criteria for considering open space plans for acquisition or not acquisition. The update to the implementation plan would include assignment of timelines and responsible parties.

Related to that as a program to provide annual reporting to the city council that would be especially related to monitoring inventory and planning for acquisitions. This represents a consolidation of a few different programs from the 1994 element. For other updates to individual goals, policies, and programs, please go ahead and refer to the table or the element itself in your staff report. Finally, we reached out to a number of departments, agencies, and organizations regarding this update and and they're outlined on on this slide. Staff has provided public outreach to the Brisbane community through Star Articles.

The lady latest being this month's edition and also on social media platforms that the city has. We did a booth at the day in the park where we were there to answer questions on a variety of topics but open space included there. At the time of this writing, no comments have been received on the contents of the draft element that that staff feels we have not already addressed into the element. OSEC had a number of comments that were provided back to staff for OSEC, and otherwise, there have not been comments since the workshops essentially. In closing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to city council of adoption of the proposed general plan amendment, the resolution twenty twenty six GPA o one.

And if you have any questions, I'm happy to take that those or we can open it up for public hearing.

Any questions at start?

I I guess my only one just out of interest, you mentioned that there's with regard to open space resources, there will be like a living document and an annual report that's made to the city council. I assume the first annual report hasn't come out yet. Is that right? Or?

That's that's correct. Not. Okay. Not with this. Although we we do a overall general plan annual report as well but I I think this will be a little bit more focused on acquisition and and open space issues as as a separate matters as how staff envisions that.

Any more any more questions?

And then just a question on the priority conservation areas. Is that listed in that document as well? Are those outlined there somewhere else?

The priority conservation areas of PCAs, yeah, under

OS two B two. I'm just curious on

that point. Right. So, those would be part of the mapping and they're also described in the glossary.

No,

that's all I'm just I would be very curious to see that report when the time comes I'll either have to go to the City Council meeting or hopefully it'll be posted, I assume, for the public to see.

All right, anyway, thank you. Why don't we open the public hearing then? Is there anyone in the audience who would like to address the Commission?

Michelle Salmon, Brisbane resident and member Osik.

While we're hearing Michelle, let me go ahead and start a timer for anybody else to raise their hand, please.

So the open space element is really a very important document and the 1994 general plan was really an amazing general plan that really laid out a lot of things about open space and open area. And so I would urge the I don't know if you've all read through the document and the staff report, but I would really urge you to do that. I know you have a lot of things on your plate that are coming up where you'll be reading a lot. But your opinion and your, assurance of this before you recommend it to the council is really one of the ways that you can actually, you know, make a difference and, make sure that everything is the way that you want it to be going forward, that, you know, open space in Brisbane, especially wildland open space, is extremely important. We we have this incredible mountain.

We have this incredible bay. We are The jewel of the peninsula, especially the North Peninsula. And as the Planning Commission, it's it's your responsibility to make a really solid, excellent recommendation to the council about the open space element, making sure that it really encompasses everything that we envision Brisbane to be, especially with the amount of pressure that we're feeling now for build, build, build, develop, develop, develop, you know, cover every inch of every lot and pave over everything. And that's not going to help us get to a better future at all. It may be a short term solution for a few people, but really what that does is we live in a very special place.

San Bruno Mountain is one of the 18 biodiversity hotspots in the world that Doctor E. O. Wilson considered worthy of saving. But when we over pave and over build and get rid of open space and call it open area or develop open space to where it becomes paved open space. Like the Crocker Trail.

It diminishes the natural habitat, the flow of the water, the flow of the of the dirt, you know how everything works. And so I would just really, as the Planning Commission, where you're really thinking about planning, the open space element is one of the few areas where we can kind of push back against overdevelopment. So I hope that you have all taken the time to really read through the document, make sure that it makes your heart sing the way that the 1984, I mean 1994 general plan did for so many of us for so long before approving it. And if it takes another week to do that or another two weeks to do that, that's time well spent because once it's or maybe staff, can anymore if we don't preserve our open space.

So I

have a question. Did OSEC provide any comments and opinions to the planning staff?

Actually can can told you that just now that we did provide comments. I can honestly say I haven't read the final draft. I've just been up to here with reading all of the other things that Are coming down the pike and trying to, know, each thing as it comes that dealing with the sea level rise reports and then this report and that report and you know OSEC has been shorthanded all year. So I did not read the final draft. Definitely make we definitely made comments.

And I know that Ken incorporated a lot of those comments. But I just want to make sure that it that you're not just relying on OSEC's comments or I don't know if the other groups made comments, but that you yourselves can stand behind what it says. That's, I think, a really important thing, and it's good practice for what's coming down the pike with even more areas of extreme seriousness with, you know, the amount of toxins and dangers that we're going to be dealing with. So I really appreciate the work that you do. I really do. Thank you. Thank you.

Ken, can you can you address the issue of of of the comments that that were made by Osak and were not incorporated? Yes.

Staff went in detail through each of their comments and addressed them either directly in the element or if there was a reason that a number of the comments related to timing and who has responsibility which was an earlier version of the table which made sense to us to put that into the implementation plan instead of directly in the element. So, that's not in the element but we're the intent is to address those through the implementation plan. So, then those comments were essentially my responses were in the red line and and then provided back through through OSX staff.

Any any other public hands raised?

None on Zoom. Thank you.

Alright. We have a motion to close the public hearing.

I'll make a motion.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes with four ayes. So deliberation. Any any comments, opinions?

I mean, I've I've read through this, and, I mean, I think with as with any, I think, legal documents or statutes or whatnot, I you know, there's probably things that you could do to make it better if you kept on working at it and working at it and drafting it. Right? But overall in reading this, you know, I thought it was pretty strong. I think it's a good document. And, you know, I think this is something that I think we could stand by.

Reading it, like this document would help protect Brisbane, what we stand for, what we believe, the environment and whatnot. I mean, I don't I don't know what much more, you know, could be added to this.

Yeah. I I read the document as well and I I was gratified to see that it didn't it an updated since the 1994 version with with comments of sort of conforming more to the current realities and the current pressures. I echo Commissioner Saison's comments that I don't we could probably keep tweaking it ad infinitum and not come up with an open space element that's in conformity with state requirements to have one, which I think we need to get going on. Any other comments?

I just said I agree and I think by its nature it's a plan so it's very general. I'm not sure that it was is the purpose of a document like this to sort of proactively block certain things that may or may not happen is my feeling. I think those uses when they are proposed will be subject to public comment and debate but I think that the general plan itself has I think it's mainly meant to outline the principles that we're supposed to follow and I think it does that.

There were no written communications about this were there? No. I don't believe the only written communication we had, I don't believe directly addressed the plan itself.

Unrelated. That was unrelated to the side.

Yeah. Yeah.

That that was my impression as well. Thank you. Okay. I have a motion.

Yes, I'll make a motion to recommend recommend this for the city council to move forward with this.

I'll second that.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you. Does the appeal procedure play to this? It does not.

The the city council will be hearing this item. Yeah. Based on your recommendation.

That's what I figured. Thank you. Believe. Are there any items initiated by staff?

Yes. Thank you. Good evening commissioners. Couple items tonight. First, I am so excited to introduce Jake Whitney, the city's new associate planner. Long time coming. We've been needing some staff. Jake comes to us from Southern California. He has four years of experience in planning, and, he's been with us since early April and is doing a great job fitting in. So I'm very, very happy to, introduce him to the commission.

Also, wanted to announce for those who may not have known that I was permanently appointed the community development director position as of last week. So I'm happy to continue serving you and the community. And then the last item I wanted to share, which some may already be aware of, city today published the final EIR for the Baylands specific plan as well as a draft staff recommended version of the specific plan. So those documents are on the city's website. There are hard copies available at city hall and at the library for folks to read.

There's many volumes of them. And as you may also have heard, we will be commencing with workshops on the specific plan before any public hearings. So the first workshop will be at your next regular meeting of May 28 with a special start time of 06:30. The following meeting of June 11 will be the second workshop. So those workshops are intended to be educational, explaining, you know, how we got to where we are today in terms of process and then an overall orientation to the plan and the final EIR.

The first planning commission public hearing is has been confirmed and noticed for June 25. That would be a 07:30 p. M. Start time. So that process is starting relatively quickly. And those are all the items I had tonight. Stephanie? Oh, thank you. Based on your recommendation on the previous public hearing item for the open space element, we are looking at the June 18 meeting at council, for that item to be heard. The open space element.

And that's it.

Any items initiated by any commissioner? No. Alright. In that case, we will adjourn to our next regular meeting of 05/28/2026 at the earlier starting time of 06:30PM. Thank you.