okay good morning everyone we're so happy to be here in Fort Bragg and we
will open this September hearing of the California Coastal Commission and we'll
begin with a roll call please. Commissioner O'Malley. Present. Commissioner
Eckerly. Here. Commissioner Escalante. Here. Commissioner Jackson. Here. Commissioner
Kelly here Commissioner Ketchum here
Commissioner not all here commissioner Turnbull Sanders here
commissioner Wilson
present
chair Harmon
Here you have a corner
Great. Thank you very much. Now. We'll move to the virtual meeting procedures, please
All right. Good morning. This Coastal Commission meeting is occurring both in person and through zoom
This meeting is also being webcast and can be viewed online at CAL-SPAN.ORG.
If you have internet access and wish to watch or listen to the meeting only and not speak
on an item, we recommend you use the CAL-SPAN website.
Those who wish to address the Commission today can do so in person through the Zoom platform
or by phone.
The speaker request forms may be found on the Commission's webpage.
on the commission's agenda webpage, which is a guide on providing comments via Zoom
or by phone. Members of the public speaking during general public comment may be given
up to two minutes to speak at the discretion of the chair. Request to speak during the
general public comment period will not be accepted after 9 a.m. on each day of the
meeting. The first item of the committee is the request to speak at the end of the
during the general public comment period will not be accepted after 9am on each day of the meeting.
In order to provide the opportunity for the broadest range of public participation,
you may speak on a specific topic one time only each month. Those speaking on an agenda item that
is not general public comment are typically allowed two to three minutes to speak at the
discretion of the chair. We will accept the request to speak on a regular agenda item
until the chair opens the hearing on that particular item.
If you have internet access, please go to the Commission's webpage and click on the
link to fill out a speaker request.
If you do not have internet access or prefer to testify by phone, please call the Commission
staff at 562-477-9089.
Again, that number is 562-477-9089.
We'll provide you with a telephone call in number
and instructions for how to participate
and provide testimony by phone.
We will manage speakers coming in and out of the meeting
through a meeting organizer.
When it is your time to address the commission,
the organizer will invite you to turn on your video
and microphone or provide instructions
on how to unmute the phone.
Madam Chair, that concludes the virtual hearing procedures.
Great, thank you very much.
Now we will go to the agenda changes for today, please.
Good morning Chair Harmon and commissioners.
We have three changes to today's agenda.
Item 11A is move to consent.
This is the City of Trinidad LCP amendment
that reformats and makes minor changes
to the city's zoning code.
Item 11B is move to consent.
This is the City of Trinidad LCP amendment
that adds provisions for reasonable accommodations.
And item 13A, the Chevron Products Company application
and Eureka is moved to consent.
I would also note that there will not be
an enforcement report today, which is item nine
on the agenda, and that concludes agenda changes.
Okay, wonderful, thank you.
And now we will open general public comment,
really looking forward to hearing from all of you.
So turn it over to our staff, thanks.
All right, for members of the public,
I'll be announcing the names of the upcoming speakers
and invite you to speak on as your turn.
Each speaker will be allowed two minutes
during general public comment at the discretion
of the chair.
In order to allow for live video testimony on Zoom,
we will be bringing you in as panelists.
As we bring you in, your Zoom will reload.
This may take a moment.
To speed up this process,
we will bring several people in at a time,
but please remain muted and keep your video off
until we ask you to speak.
After your time is up, you'll be moved back to attendee mode.
For members of the public present in the room,
I will call your names in the order
that they appear in our sign up list.
When you hear your name,
please line up behind the podium
and introduce yourself when you approach to speak.
There is a raise your hand function
that will help us find you in the attendee list.
If you are using a phone for audio,
you can raise your hand by dialing star nine.
If you are participating by Zoom,
you should see a button on your Zoom screen.
If you have signed up to speak for this item
and are able to do so, please raise your hand now.
When it is your time to speak,
we will invite you to unmute and turn on your camera.
you can unmute yourself on the phone by dialing star six.
Looks like we have a total of 28 speakers today
for general public comment,
starting with people in the room.
We have Jason Godicke,
followed by Marcia Raffinen and Tristan McHugh.
Hi Jason, go ahead and yeah,
I'd push the mic and then turn the mic on at the base.
There you go.
All right, good morning.
Oh, no, good, that's good.
All right, so, yeah, I'm Jason Godak.
I'm mayor of the city of Fort Bragg.
Marsha Raffan is the vice mayor.
Welcome to Fort Bragg.
And we wanted to just give you a little bit
of cultural context since some of you
are new to the commission.
And this is just a tiny little two-minute glimpse
into one aspect of culture here in our town.
So we have experienced conflict and controversy
around the name of our town.
And that controversy became particularly
acute right before the pandemic. And at that time, we formed a
Citizens Commission to talk through that conflict. And so
there were folks on both sides of the issue who came together
and they talked for 18 months, I think it was over 60 hours of
meeting during the pandemic. So many of those were virtual
meetings. And while they didn't arrive at a conclusion about the
name of our town, they did come up with consensus recommendations
for the city.
And so our City Council formed an ad hoc committee
of culture and education that was given the task
of following through on some of those recommendations.
And so Vice Mayor Raffanin and I, Vice Mayor Raffanin,
who's a member of the Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians
and I have been working on those commitments,
codifying and institutionalizing some of those commitments.
And I'll read what they are that we've come up with.
and our city council has agreed with these.
Consult with the governing body
of the Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians,
as well as other tribal communities
on initiatives, issues, or items of concern.
Raise visibility and public awareness
of the history and contemporary presence
of the native population of our area.
Collaborate with local indigenous people,
local schools, and state and regional partners
to enhance education on the history
and contemporary life ways of local indigenous people.
And so those are actually codified,
and they're with our land acknowledgement
on our website at this point.
And one of the ways that we sought to institutionalize
this commitment was to create a tribal learning center,
which if you look on screen,
there is an image of a little white building,
and that is actually the last architectural vestige
of the Fort Bragg Army Post,
which was part of the Mendocino Indian Reservation here.
And so our goal was to create a,
that's two minutes already.
Only thing I want to say is we're really excited to work with the non-profit tribal organization
Kaipoma, and they are currently using that space as their office, and we'll be collaborating
with them to create exhibits over time that will support our schools and also educate
the general public.
So we'll help you get over there later, the farmer's market is today, and that's exactly
where it is.
So thanks so much for your time.
Sorry to go over.
was fast. Thank you Mayor, thank you Vice Mayor. And then Marcia Raffanin, did you
also wish to speak? Okay, next will be Tristan McHugh, Javier Silva, and then
Brianna Zuber. And Tristan, whenever you're ready. Alright, thank you. Good
morning Commission and everyone here in town. My name is Tristan Anoush McHugh,
I'm the CELP Project Director with the Nature Conservancy and I live and work
here in Fort Bragg. I'm here today to speak to an initiative that we've
launched here in partnership with a ton of folks here in the room with the city
and others but to start to set pace California is one of the most
productive ecosystems on the planet. Rocky reefs and kelp forests are key
contributors to this biodiversity and provide additional benefits including
carbon sequestration, nutrient cycling, and protection from coastal erosion. Yet
a legacy of over exploitation, pollution, and growing threats from climate change
degraded the health of these invaluable ecosystems. In response to these impacts,
the Pacific Coast Ocean Recovery Initiative was established just this
past year as a collaborative statewide partnership aimed at restoring and
recovering marine ecosystems across California through habitat recovery and
endangered species recovery. This is in partnership again with the city of Fort
Bragg as a member, Ocean Protection Council, and many others and we're hoping
to grow that community as well and offer that to the Coastal Commission. Today, what I'd like to
highlight in partnership with Javier here and Brianna, who is on Zoom, is some of the highlights
that we've had here to date. So for KELP, I manage and lead our KELP workstream here and really this
is aimed at creating the largest network of bulk help recovery in the state and this is done in
partnership with the Greater Farallon's National Marine Sanctuary just south of us. Across this
acreage here in Mendocino we're targeting the recovery of over 35 acres
of habitat. Two of our key recovery sites are in Big River here and then Noyo
Harbor. To date at Big River we've been able to increase kelp canopy cover by
over 700% from the lowest in 2023. So incredible outcomes for an incredible
primary producer. With that I will bump it over to Javier to share a little bit
more on some of the tribal capacity building and development.
Two minutes.
I think I'll take some of Marsha's two minutes.
I guess it's two minutes.
Javier Silva, I am a member of the Sherwood Valley Band
of Pomo.
I am of Noyo and Yokayo descent.
I am a descendant of the Mendocino Indian Reservation.
So I do reside on the property that
has been resided by my great-great-grandparents
for over 100 years here south of the mill site.
Lots of things that I could talk to you about,
but I only got two to four minutes here, so.
Really quickly, our connection to the land
for the past 10,000 years has been documented
and is well viewed when you go out on these landscapes.
There was a reason that this was considered a place
to house Native Americans from across the California.
So, and it was primarily because of the resources
that are here, which have been depleted since settlement.
And so one of my goals is to, in working with scientists,
in working with politicians on some of these issues
that we're having to deal with, such as the red abalone,
which is one of our staple foods,
among other marine resources as well.
I have to quote my grandma, who is no longer with us,
but she grew up here, and she, one of her quotes was,
you know, if I lived, when I knew I was on the coast,
I knew I would not starve.
And so that, to me, is really important to me.
The marine resources are out there as for us to enjoy,
but also for us to give back.
And so one of my jobs and roles working
with Nature Conservancy and Reef Check
and others here in the coast and the city
is to be able to revitalize that,
ensure that, you know, future generations
will have the same, or at least get to be able
to experience some of the same things
that my ancestors did here.
So I think I'll be here next year, thank you.
Thank you.
And now on Zoom, Brianna Zuber.
Good morning. Hopefully you can hear me. Thanks for letting me join from Willets.
I am a biology instructor at Mendocino College and Mendocino College is part of the Pacific Coast
Ocean Restoration Initiative that Tristan mentioned earlier. So Mendocino College is part
of the workforce development piece of this initiative. Our goal is to support students
that are interested in going into the field of ocean restoration. So we are creating the
curriculum that will support students that allow them to do that. We are creating a marine science
certificate which will include courses like marine biology, oceanography, marine intertidal ecology,
and we are also creating a dive program that will help students learn the skills that they need to
be able to do the diving which is important for the especially Pacific
Coast ocean restoration. So that's kind of that's kind of our piece of it. I
guess I'm only going to take up one minute here but if anybody has any
questions about it feel free to send me an email. Alright thank you and back to
the people in the room. We have Sarah McCormick followed by Jamie Miller, Sheila
Siemens and then Aubrey Gord. Sarah McCormick. Good morning Commission. Welcome
to Fort Bragg. My name is Sarah McCormick. I work for the city and I just want to
provide you a brief update on the LCP round 8 grant that you gave the city a
couple years ago. So this was an investment of nearly $900,000. I think
it was 895,000 and we've been using it for this past couple years to do a
really comprehensive roadmap for Noyo Harbor. So part of the components is a sea level risk
analysis, an aquaculture feasibility study, which you will hear from next, a special district's
analysis, and lots and lots of public engagement. We have built a website with your investment. I
hope you all check it out. It's noyo, oceancollective.org. And you'll see a lot of the
projects that have occurred because we've been able to leverage your investment. So thank you
you so much for taking a risk a little bit because it wasn't just looking at
the coastal environment and infrastructure we were also looking at
the people it impacted the economy and we really appreciate that holistic
approach that you invested in so that's one big thing I also just want to say
that I drew a blank it's morning welcome to Fort Bragg and I'll pass it off to my
colleagues. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have a joint presentation from Jamie
Miller, Sheila Siemens, and Aubrey Gord. Hi everyone. I'm gonna be speaking on
behalf of Sheila Siemens and Aubrey Gord today and my name is Jamie Miller. I'm
the Coastal Mendocino Extension fellow with California Sea Grant and I'm working
with the City of Fort Bragg on the Noyo Harbor Blue Economy Visioning
Resiliency and Implementation Plan which is what we're calling the LCP grant
update that Sarah just mentioned. And we're calling it the beverage plan for
short. But what I want to focus on today is the aquaculture feasibility aspect of
it. So I'll be providing aquaculture updates from at Noyo Harbor. And that
plan is funded by the California Coastal Commission so thank you all for the
support on this project. And I have a few slides so I'm gonna run through them.
And then next slide please. So we, I have two mentors. Sorry, can we move the clock so we can
see your slides whoever is running the slide presentation sorry. Thank you. I
have two mentors from California Sea Grant who are supporting this project
and we also partnered with the Noyo Center for Marine Science and you can
see that map on the left there this is Noyo Harbor where those stars are where
we put water quality sensors and all of those locations were selected with
aquaculture in mind and on the right side that chart you can see it's real
real-time data that's uploaded to a public portal so our community members can interact
with all of this information.
That green star near the curve is the Noyo Center Field Station and so that's where we
have most of our animals and we have three baskets in the water with Pacific oysters
red abalone and purple sea urchin and so we are monitoring them for health, growth, and
survival.
And the Noyo Center has an on-land facility at that same location so we're able to compare
what in water and on land aquaculture looks like to recommend species location and specific
types of operations for the future.
Next slide, please.
And our most recent development is that we were able to get bulk help in the water, so
we partnered with the Nature Conservancy and through the PCOR initiative and that network
we were able to get bulk help and put it in the water.
Next slide, please.
And so on behalf of the Noyo Center I want to share a little bit about their on land
aquaculture and Sheila Siemens is the executive director of the Noya Center.
Next slide please. You can skip this one. That's the field station where we
work. So they are focusing on a regenerative aquaculture. They have a 40
foot shipping container with raceways for urchin ranching on the inside and
temple culture on the outside. Next slide please. What that looks like is they'll
take empty urchins, zombie urchins from the ocean, put them in an aquaculture
setting, fatten them up and then create high quality uni. Should I wrap up? Okay, thank you.
Thank you and you're also speaking on behalf of Sheila Siemens and Aubrey Korg?
Or are they also speaking? No, I was speaking on behalf of each of them.
Okay, next will be, or thank you, next will be John Smith and Oneka Dragon,
followed by Penny Ilya, Anne Marie Weibel, and Hannah Leibold. John Smith and Onika Drag.
Good morning, commission. I appreciate you all being here as well. My name is John Smith. I'm
the director of public works for the city of Fort Bragg, and I'm here as part of Onika, I suppose,
to introduce them. But we still have a water issue that we need to address, and this is part
part of why Oneka is here, talking about their technology.
We have three surface water sources, all are in decline on a pretty
regular basis over the last few years,
and we're concerned obviously about the environment and losing those sources.
So we're trying to make sure our portfolio adds
different options so we can pull it together and keep
going and health and safety of course is also needed and I believe Dragon and
Ricky are online on Zoom to finish the discussion. What was that name again? The
Onika team, Dragon and Ricky. I have not seen those names on Zoom currently. Would
that be under the name Dragon Tootage? Yes. Okay. We will move them in right
know and then when you're able to please unmute and begin. Hello everyone, I'm not
sure if the presentation is showing up but in any case I'll do it verbally so
I'm Jagann, CEO, founder of Onika Technologies. Thank you John for the
introduction. Indeed, Fort Bragg and other coastal cities in California are
facing water challenges but one of the great opportunities is that they're laying
just in front of the ocean, which is an abundant source of seawater, and the
seawater also has a lot of energy in the form of waves. So what we do is we come
by in the ocean seawater and waves to turn it into fresh water just with the
motion of the waves. So we're working together on a 12-month project
demonstration to demonstrate this technology, which has the promises of
making fresh water with no greenhouse emissions, no land use, with the
well-deluded brine while also protecting the marine life
and we clearly have one unit in Florida, some development in Chile,
but the unit that we're about to deploy in Fort Bragg once we have the permit
will be shipped to Fort Bragg soon and you're invited to come
take a look at it on November 14th where we'll be exposing the unit
during this permitting process before we can deploy it in the ocean.
Thank you, I appreciate it.
And then I believe we have Aubrey Gord again.
Aubrey Gord.
Hi, I'm Aubrey Gord.
I'm here from Wild Blue Aquaculture.
I am working in conjunction with the Noyo Center as well
as the Sea Grant Foundation to help support the LCP program
that you guys have invested in here in Fort Bragg.
I am predominantly holding the commercial aspect of this.
We are very early on in our permitting process.
So you guys have likely not seen my name
or heard of Wild Blue Aquaculture yet,
but we are hoping to support the initiative,
be here for our folks in Fort Bragg
and continue to develop the economy
to support the February and Blue Economy plan.
Thank you.
And then was there an Onika?
I'm not seeing it, okay, so Penny Alea,
followed by Anne-Marie Weible,
Hannah Labelle, Doug Hammerstrom.
I have a PowerPoint, please.
I guess, give us a second to bring it up.
Good morning and thank you for your time.
I have a couple of thank yous this morning.
Next slide.
The first thank you is related
to the 41st Annual Coastal Cleanup Day.
Mendocino Parks and State Parks have participated
in this cleanup for some time, but this year we have 12 sites along the beautiful Mendocino
coast. Next slide. During our recent site captain meeting, we had the honor and pleasure
of a visit from Eben Schwartz. He enlightened us with an update on the marine debris and
plastic pollution as only Eben can. Eben has done this up and down our entire coast
for 26 years. I met him the first day he started working for the commission and was our representative
in Poland in 2019 to celebrate Earth Day.
Quite an amazing person.
A big thank you to Evan.
Next slide.
The next item is related
to the Eel River Rust Creek project you approved last month.
I strongly opposed this permit for many reasons
and felt there were better solutions
and certainly a solution that included tribal consultation.
Next slide.
However, back to the thank you,
my thanks go to the commissioners that spoke out
in support of tribal consultation and specifically Commissioner Presiado.
In March of this year the published opinion was issued interpreting AB 52, the law governing
tribal consultation procedures.
Tribal consultation must not be treated as a box checking exercise but as a substantive
and confidential intergovernmental dialogue.
I trust the commission will keep a watchful eye
on this project as it moves forward and insist
on the required tribal consultation mandated
through AB 52.
Next slide.
Thank you.
Anne-Marie Weibel, Hannah Lay-Bull,
Doug Hammersham, Amy Winn.
Good morning.
Welcome to Fort Bragg.
Anne-Marie Weibel, I'm a member of Albion Bridge Stuarts.
Our group has been opposed to Caltrans's attempt
to tear down the 81-year-old historic Albion River Bridge
and replace it with a concrete bridge almost twice as wide.
We hired three engineers who all said
that with proper maintenance and repair,
this bridge will last another 50 years.
We advocate for repair and maintenance
of the historic Timber Trestle Bridge.
Up until July, 2024, Caltrans considered
rehabilitating the bridge.
Now Caltrans completed the final EIR,
final EIS, and final Section 4F evaluation.
This bridge cost 370,000 in 1944.
The length is 969 feet,
the height 135 feet above the river,
and it is the last timber trestle bridge
on the California highway system.
Golden Gate and Big Sur bridges are maintained
and constantly the Albion River Bridge
is left to fall apart.
Caltrans does not repair or maintain it sufficiently.
the cost based on 2024 estimates is 126 to 135 million for a new bridge and soon this number will
rise tremendously. While you're here, please go to see this last timber trestle bridge
on the California Highway System.
And please keep track of Cal-Trans's webpage
to see what they're proposing.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Hannah Leibul, Doug Hammerstrom, Amy Wynn,
and then Megan Durbin.
Good morning.
My name is Hannah Leibul.
I'm a resident of Fort Bragg,
and I work as a behavioral healthcare provider in this area.
Thank you for being here and everything you do to keep our coast healthy.
You may have read my written comment, which I submitted September 7, I hope it got into
your binders, in which I outline my concerns about the health risks in our areas.
Just to reiterate the precautions I'd like to see taken for these health concerns, the
toxic contamination at the mill ponds you know about, I've written a couple of times
to you in past years.
It is disturbing because of its influence on endocrine
and immune systems and mental functioning.
Secondly, in my written comment, the health risks noted
in the draft ESA document on sea level rise strategies
for Noyo Harbor, which was published this year in May.
It cites some of the CalEnviroScreen data,
specifically higher incidences of asthma in our area
and higher incidences of lower birth weight,
it's higher than 79% of California Census tracts,
other California Census tracts.
Both asthma and low birth weight
also contribute to higher rates of mental illness later on
with increased incidence of addiction and substance abuse,
domestic violence, suicide, and other societal challenges.
to address these risks i'm i'm hoping that we can take precautions and enforce precautions
for the health of all uh to that end i drafted a resolution submitted to the fort bragg city
council in july which i hope it soon considers which i included in the written comment to to you
all um basically asking that new development new businesses new industrial enterprises follow
their standards of care and building and creating their enterprises.
So I hope you, as you do your talks and tour, I hope you consider helping us enforce these
precautions for the health of all in our area before we move on to other development.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Doug Hammersstrom, Amy Wynn, Megan Derman, Paul Weekland.
Good morning, my name is Doug Hammersstrom.
I'm a resident of Fort Bragg, former mayor of Fort Bragg, and former council member.
I really appreciate the Coastal Commission and, in particular, the help and guidance
that you've given Fort Bragg in stewardship of coastal values.
I rise today to raise a concern about the lawsuit that's currently going on that involves
Fort Bragg, the Coastal Commission and Mendocino Railway.
And the question I raise is why zoning is the subject
of settlement talks rather than the jurisdiction
of the city and the state over railroad development.
What we are seeing is public input on zoning proposals
being ignored or virtually ignored.
And these proposals are going against a consensus
that has been reached by this community
over 20 years of meetings on what to do on the mill site.
And these comments are being ignored and short-cutted
because these proposals serve the desire of the city
to settle the lawsuit.
The consequences that thoughtful land use planning
and stewardship of coastal values
are suffering in the process.
I'm a retired attorney, and for me,
the idea of negotiating in public is anathema,
and particularly for public organizations.
So I would ask you to do what you can
to see that this goes in a different direction,
particularly ask your attorney
what your attorney thinks about negotiating in public.
So, thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Amy Winn, Megan Durbin, Paul Wiecklen, and then Steve Reh.
Hello commissioners.
I'm Amy Winn with Winn Coastal Planning and Biology.
Just, I live in Fort Bragg,
and our office is just a couple blocks up.
I've got a thank you and a please.
And the thank you, it's two part.
Thank you so much for coming.
It's always so great to have you guys here.
I know we're a little town.
It takes a long time to get here.
We're a tiny space,
but this is absolutely important for us.
And so thank you.
Second part of my thank you is thank you for your support
with staff of the Governor's Emergency Proclamation
for Wildfire Resilience.
I think that program from what I can see
has been going well.
I hope that the governor extends that another year
so more people can take advantage of that.
seems to be protective of natural resources while maintaining wildfire resilience.
So thank you to your staff for the support of that program.
The please is, as you've seen, we have a really amazing community.
Just mingle.
That's the please.
Get to know people.
We've got some brilliant folks here, some very passionate, caring people, very empathetic,
really broad thinkers, extremely creative.
the programs that were discussed at the front end,
that's all because of these brilliant people
that are here with the support of the commission
and all the grant systems that exist in the state,
and it's phenomenal.
So while you're here, please mingle,
please get to know people.
Please also ask what they need,
whether it's just on a personal basis,
like we know housing is important for professionals,
for the people that work with me in my office,
and the people that work on these incredible programs.
And then just for these, I mean, just the vision
of this coast is phenomenal and working with the people
that have been here for millennia
and up to you guys here today.
So thank you, please mingle, ask questions
and we'll see you again hopefully
in the next couple of years, thank you.
Thank you, next is Megan Durbin,
Paul Weikland and then Steve Ray.
Hi, my name is Megan Durbin, I'm a senior planner
at Wind Coastal Planning and Biology,
and I wanted to make sure I had my opportunity
to say anything in particular,
but there is nothing more to say
than just thank you for being here today, so thanks.
Thank you.
Paul Wiecklen.
I have a handout here for the Commission.
Commissioner's Paul Wiecklen.
I am really concerned about aquaculture in California.
The first fish farms were first put in
California in 1870. I say again 1870 is when the first aquaculture ventures
were experimented with in California. Unfortunately, the history has been
eliminated. The records have been purged, the files have been cleansed, we don't
know exactly all of the incidentals, the unintended consequences, the degradation
that aquaculture has brought on our state. Some equate it to ecological
sabotage, environmental terrorism, and crimes against nature. Some of these ab
farms and aquaculture facilities and oyster, you don't know what's going on.
The Fish and Game Commission, oh they don't care because they get grant money,
grant money. The grant sucking parasites are sucking up so much money they don't
care what it does to the environment. They don't care the problems that are
being caused. Every business model is exactly the same. They take out a license
it's for five years. They get a lease 25 year leases for a dollar an acre and
then what do they do? They get a small business administration loan. They go for
these grants, grants, grants.
They go for an insurance policy.
They borrow.
They get fundraisers.
They have stock.
And then what is the outcome?
Bankruptcy.
Consistently, routinely, look across.
Since 1870, that is what's been happening.
And it's all because of the grant money.
That's the incentive for these aquaculture facilities.
Unfortunately, we will never know the true history
because they have trashed the files.
It is just not right.
It's a fraud.
It's crimes being committed.
And some of these outplantings and these fish hatcheries,
just look at the California State Fish,
the golden trout on its way to extension
because the introduction of hatchery fish.
I know I'm out of time, thank you very much,
but it is a terrible problem.
It's the grant sucking parasites
who don't care about anything but the dollar.
Thank you.
Steve Ray, I don't see any other
in-person speakers signed up after Steve Ray,
and then we'll move on to our Zoom speakers,
starting with Eileen Boken, Lucia Casalinoovo,
and Rochelle Todi.
Steve Ray, go ahead.
Well, good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners, staff,
and members of the public.
I'm Steve Ray, and I'm here in my unending quest
to keep you informed of recent developments
on proposed developments in the state of California,
specifically today regarding the oral bay old power plant
property on which a large battery plant is proposed.
Well, it seems now that the battery plant
may finally be dead thanks to the citizens of oral bay
who rose up and organized and passed some legislation
in the city that have now made it pretty much impossible.
I mentioned to you last month that the owners
of the property visitor energy, major energy firm,
are planning to do something else with the property.
We thought maybe a different type of battery plant
or a different, some sort of other technology.
Well, we are aware now that it appears
that they are coming in with a very highly
energy intensive, high tech plant proposal
dealing with data and that project is going to be,
as I said, very highly energy intensive.
Now it's right beside an old power plant,
but building this huge facility,
these centers are very, very demanding
in all the energy they consume.
And that's going to require major upgrades
to the power plant, which will be fired by oil
and or gas.
So it's time to pull out the old dusty old
treatises and books and policy statements
regarding climate change and sea level rise again
because this project will certainly affect both.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
I'm seeing six speakers on Zoom that we have signed up.
Eileen Bouken, Lucia Casalaniouovo, Rochelle Toti.
Eileen Bocan, I see that you're on a phone.
You should be able to unmute now.
I did coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods,
speaking on my own behalf.
At yesterday's San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting,
the board unanimously passed a resolution
opposing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
proposal to rescind the 2009
greenhouse gas endangerment finding.
I would urge the Coastal Commission
to propose the US EPA proposal, and submit an opposition
letter by the September 15th deadline.
News subject.
At its August 24th meeting, the State Lands Commission
approved the permit for the pilot project in Fort Bragg
for the offshore desalination project.
I would urge Onika to also come to San Francisco
in November for a presentation on their Fort Bragg Project.
New subject, the Bay Restoration Authority
has begun a project to use LIDAR to create a 3D model
of the bay and estuary in order to monitor
wetlands, shorelines, and restoration progress.
I would urge the Coastal Commission
to initiate a similar project for the coastline,
beginning with the San Francisco coast,
and the Sierra lines, which are within the boundaries
of the city and county of San Francisco.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next, Lucia Casalino, Lucia I see that you
unmuted for a second.
OK.
Thank you.
Good morning, Lucia Casalino, the Oceano Beach Community
Association, and the Defenders of Wildlife,
and concern the citizens for clean air ecologistics,
San Luis Obispo coast keeper, and the Center
for Biological Diversity, and Morro Coast Otherworld Society,
and the San Luis Obispo chapter of Sierra Club.
We respectfully request that you promptly schedule a review
of the ocean doing the state vehicle recreation area,
the odious VRA.
The last one was held in 2021.
It was a long time ago of something
that was supposed to happen every year.
Although the courts have concluded
that you cannot ban driving on the odious VRA
in the manner that you attempted,
you can still recommend the changes
to mitigate the odious VRA's negative impact
on our communities and the environment.
And we respectfully request that your staff
develop a recommendation for submission
to the San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors
so that the LCP, our LCP will conform with the Coastal Act
and your 2021 resolution to ban driving
local beaches and dunes in accord with your 2021 unanimous resolution. Please act as soon as
possible. Do not expect our county to take corrective actions. We believe it never will.
You can and should lead this process. Thank you for listening to Oceano wishes and suffering.
Have a wonderful day.
Thank you.
Next is Rachelle Todi, followed by John Gallo and then
Lydia Ponce.
Rachelle Todi.
Good morning.
Rachelle Todi from the Nipomo Mesa area.
I sent the Coastal Commission and Director Hucklebridge
a letter.
And I'd like to play a video so you
can see what is going on in the riding area
And how birds are treated, vegetation is treated,
please play.
I took this video.
Clearly, the truck could have avoided the birds, but no.
I took this video.
This is the beginning of the parking lot,
I guess you could say, on a summer day.
That gentleman intentionally drove over vegetation.
Please let the video line at 20, maybe a minute more.
Thank you.
Oh, wait, there's one more thing.
There, that's important to see.
That's where the fence line is.
Thank you.
And next will be John Gallo, followed by Lydia Ponce,
Leslie Kashiwata, and then we had one more in-person David
Gurney.
John Gallo, give us a moment to bring up your presentation
as well.
Actually, you can start with the video.
There's only a couple of slides that are needed at the end.
tell me when I should start.
OK.
So hello, everyone.
My name is John Gallo from Fort Bragg Headlands Consortium.
And I'm talking today about the Old Mill Pond out there,
Pond 8.
And I've been asked for the commission and staff
at the end.
So if kept in place, this pond severely
impacts the public access to the beach and the ocean.
It's also a ticking time bomb of contamination.
And currently, our process as a society
figuring out which alternatives we're going to study for what to do about the
mill pond. And so there's many alternatives on the table for keeping
the pond in place, and there's only one on the table for removing the pond, and
it's a flimsy straw man. It's shipping everything in that mill pond all the way
to Kettleman City, which is ridiculous. There's a much better alternative that
needs to be added to the table immediately, and that's for removing what
that exists, but using the latest science and technology
to do it in such a way that we only have to,
we can treat much of the sediment here locally
and only ship a small portion to Kettleman City.
And so we're asking the Coastal Commission
to add this into the plan now
while you're at the MOU stage of this stay.
The city is out of political capital, can't add this.
And next slide, please.
And this is of utmost importance
because you can see in the blue on the right,
that's downtown, that's where we're at right now.
This area that we're talking about is the area in orange
that's currently not accessible by the public
because of all of this.
And we need to open that all up, become a great beach
and just significantly improve the economy of the area
and the benefits that are there.
So again, please help amongst yourselves
or your staff or your lawyer,
please consider adding this on to the table now rather than a year from now when it will be too
late and a lot of the plans will have been made assuming that the pond is going to stay in place.
So thank you very much. Thank you. Lydia Ponce, go ahead.
Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Okay, thank you. Good morning, relatives. With a real heavy
heart, why don't you love us? You only like a few, and maybe there's a few that
you love, but the whole of us. We're more than a combination plate, we're more than
a margarita or a taco too. We are lawyers, doctors, teachers, you hire us to take
care of your precious children. Our precious children are across town.
Essential workers during COVID time because we belong to the culture of me
by any or no fashion.
We must, we have to, we are resilient people.
We were purposely using upcycle before it was a thing,
before it was trending.
We've been innovators before, before, before.
California Coastal Commission doing about the federal law,
the racist cad nappines, the human and sex trafficking.
We are indigenous to this continent
and so many of us are coastal indigenous relatives.
Will this epic crisis of California in humanity
continue to be met with silence?
Are we not part of the EJ policy?
California coastal businesses and homes have much success
because of the employees that today appeared forever.
I'm asking upon you to take into your EJ policies
to see what it is that you can do
within the rights of humanity,
within the rights of us, part of the coastal community
and very much part of California.
And my direct speech that I just said I provided
for Santa Monica yesterday, and it has everything to do
with the task force debacle that they have going on,
simply said the Santa Monica task force for DEI
is merely focusing on Tongva, right, so,
and our black relatives, right.
They have omitted any one of the brown agenda,
any part of the brown agenda.
And we won't stand for it,
and we're asking you to take a look into it,
because it is part of the first part of the program
for environmental justice.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next is Leslie Kashiwata,
and then back to David Gurney in person.
Leslie Kashiwata.
I have a slight thank you.
Good morning commissioners and everyone in attendance and online.
Last month, I shared some photos of the toxic millponds not too far from where you're currently
sitting. Last night, I sent you a letter so you haven't seen it yet. Here's an aerial photo of
Operable Unit E where the millponds are. You'll be touring the site this afternoon,
but I will be showing you some things you will not see. You'll be looking at pondate from the east
instead of by the ocean from the west.
Note the location of pond 7.
Next slide, please.
The next series of images come from a stability assessment done in 2010.
Note the oversteepened wall of the berm holding in pond 8.
The toxins in pond 7 couldn't be removed because it would have destabilized this berm.
Next slide, please.
Show seepage along the same berm.
Next slide, please.
This shows slumping along the same berm.
slide please. Now looking west from the ocean, so just to orient you. Remember that, next
slide please, remember that the containment structures were built over 100 years ago.
This just shows the structure of the cliffs and some of the things holding back pond 8.
Next slide please. This shows the spillway and dam. Note the erosion at the base. Next
slide please. This shows the crib wall just to the south of the dam. Next slide please.
Some reinforcing was done in 2010.
This is a close-up where you can, if you squint, you'll see some concrete at the base of the
dam and you'll see added rip-rap next to the crib wall because of erosion.
Next slide, please.
This shows high tide and low tide of the beach.
My colleague John Gallo mentioned public access, which has been denied because it was behind
Private property and now because of the toxins
So the proposed remediation is for armoring and institutional controls like fences and signs doesn't address
managed retreat to accommodate steal
Providing public access to the beach. Enjoy your tour
Thank you. Thank you. And I'm sorry miss place your speaker slip earlier David Gurney
Good morning and welcome to the commission to Fort Bragg.
It seems like to me that you've sort of entered in the twilight zone and kind of ground zero
of incompetence and soft corruption.
All you have to do is go three blocks up this street and look
at what the Fort Bragg City Council has done to our once jewel of open space,
grassy little park, basically paved the whole thing under.
Right now, in this city of Fort Bragg, you have one guy who's holding down three six-figure positions.
City manager, finance director, and community development director.
And this guy's been in the country less than a dozen years.
It seems they've created sort of a rubber stamp operation for approval of maybe some unwise development projects.
for instance, the park, the park up here, and also this apartment complex, which you'll be coming
to later, but and then you'll be getting a dog and pony show for the development plans of the
whole headlands without proper cleanup. So anyway, I just wanted to welcome you and give you a little
heads up what you're dealing with. Thank you. Thank you. We have no more speakers. Thank you
very much Chris do commissioners have any comments or questions pertaining to
general public comment Commissioner Wilson thanks just a couple things you
know I want to thank whoever was that brought up the coastal cleanup day coming
up yay started in 1979 by the North Coast Environmental Center in Arcata
California and Humboldt County and was brought together statewide effort by the
with the Coastal Commission in 1985,
so a good north coast effort that is now statewide,
so I'm very happy about that.
Also, next time I'm here, I'm gonna look
for my zombie urchins t-shirt.
That is going to be, exactly, and I'm looking forward
to seeing whatever band is put together with that name.
But I do wanna say, for those folks here,
this is a very special place for Bragg
and this part of the Mendocino coast.
And there was some discussions around,
or there was some comment around all the efforts
to bring a more marine-based economy back to this area.
And I think there's a ton of really great opportunity
in that, and I'm proud of the commission's efforts
to support that.
And I think that we're gonna have to work
with our sister agencies to also deal with some of the...
I would say some of the regulatory and policy issues
to help promote that as well as funding.
So I think we're well on our way.
I mean, if you haven't been to Kelpfest, by all means,
please come to Kelpfest, it's wonderful, it's amazing.
I was privileged to attend the Blue Economies event
a few years ago.
It's just really, there's a lot of what I think the woman
from the wind, Coastal Plan, I can't remember her name,
but she's right.
This place, for the small number of people here
in the relatives, there is a lot of inspired, smart,
and energetic and hardworking people
trying to put something together
and really not just revitalize,
but vitalize for the future of this community.
And so we're glad to be here.
And also, if you can, thank the staff of the commission.
I know it's the job of the commission
to try and get to every corner of the coast of California,
but some are a little more difficult than others to get to.
And so I personally wanna thank our staff
for getting us a meeting here in Fort Bragg.
It's amazing, it's a great spot to be.
And if you see or talk to any of our staff likewise,
when we're mingling out there,
please thank our staff for being here.
Commissioners will show up,
but staff's the ones that really got to do all the work
to get us here.
So thank you guys.
Very well said, I agree.
Commissioner Lopez.
Yeah, I just want to thank everybody
for being there today.
My apologies.
I did appreciate the comment that the real magic happened
when you mingle in the community.
And I'm sorry, I'm not going to have that opportunity
this particular year due to a scheduling conflict.
But I also wanted to call out
thank Lydia Ponce for her comments given the reality of that we're living in today. California's
constitution was originally written in two languages, English and Spanish, and yet this
week the Supreme Court allowed for the language itself to be used as a reason to stop and ask
somebody about their status. And so I appreciate you bringing to light the challenges that we're
living with today. And so many of my community were called essential and now we're called
Illegal and it's just it's a shame to to have to deal with that reality today
But given the forum that we have I just want to thank you for calling that out in this space
It matters to me and I want to appreciate you using your voice here today. Thank you, madam chair
Thank you, commissioner Turnbull Sanders
Yes, thank you
chair Harmon, I want to associate myself with the
Comments that Commissioner Lopez made I too was struck by the the public comment in that
thinking about how do we expand and also within our jurisdiction lift up
environmental justice with local jurisdictions and so just also would
like to make a recommendation to staff to consider looking at our
environmental justice policies and looking at outreach to our local
jurisdictions with that regard. Additionally I wanted to thank the
mayor and vice mayor for coming before us today really appreciated the
background around the repurposing of the Fort Bragg original fort for the Pomo
Indian tribe and I think it offers a creative and elegant approach to some of
the challenges that we are experiencing in this country
right now to think about how do we intentionally focus
on communities that have been neglected,
that have been subjected to genocide,
that have been disrespected and not treated like human beings.
And how do we continue, even in these moments,
to reach into our common humanity,
our values around what it means to be an American
and leaning into that.
So I appreciated the public comment today
for those reasons and we'll turn it back over to you, Chair.
Thank you, Commissioner Turnbull-Sanders.
Just have to strongly associate myself with those comments
and the comments of Commissioner Lopez as well.
So thank you.
Commissioner Nada.
Yeah, I too appreciated being here today
and I got a sense from a lot of the comments
of the extent of collaboration that's going on here
in terms of building a marine base economy.
I wanted to call out in particular,
I liked the idea of the marine science certificate
at the community college level.
It is something that could be replicated in other places
and seeing that.
And then I did want to just emphasize the value
of being on the ground and seeing projects and settings
that we have to deal with on a policy basis.
Recently, we were down in Pismo Beach
and we did get a chance to go to Oceana Beach
and see what was going on there.
And I wanted to just ask staff to really check in
with the County of San Luis Obispo
and where are we on updating the plans
and seeing what we can do there, given the court rulings.
Because that is a continuing concern
about the impacts there.
So thank you, everyone, for coming
and for working together to make this an even better place,
because it's already pretty great.
Thank you.
Commissioner Kelly.
Thank you.
And I deeply appreciate the comments
of my fellow commissioners.
And I know that the times that we are living in every day,
every headline, every court case,
It is deeply troubling and concerning,
and I think some of the work that we're seeing
and hearing about on the ground here in Mendocino County,
it's really uplifting, it's inspiring
to see the partnerships and collaboration,
and also the dedication to trying to advance
economic support for this community
and looking to ways of engaging
on really progressive problem solving,
whether it's the desal product that will be one of a kind,
truly, on the West Coast and coming to this community
or the work that you're doing in partnership
with tribal communities and advancing aquaculture,
where I'm from in Sonoma County, your neighbor to the South.
We have a lot of great opportunities
to learn from the work that's already happening here
in Fort Bragg and in Mendocino County.
So I look for additional ways that we can collaborate and learn
from the work that you've already started.
And I'm really looking forward to getting
a firsthand view at some of the projects
that we've heard about, especially as it relates
to the Mendocino Railway and projects in this community
and hearing from residents in Fort Bragg.
And I wanna appreciate the comments
of the mayor and vice mayor
and thank you for addressing us today.
And for the folks in the audience
who have taken the time to be here with us
and participate, we truly appreciate it
because we're here working for all of you.
And I think with respect to how we move forward
and the project that Commissioner Nodoff mentioned,
or sorry, the program that's happening
in the state parks down in San Luis Obispo County,
it is concerning the videos that we are seeing,
people that we're hearing from in the community.
It's a public safety issue.
We are seeing really dangerous behavior,
young people in harm's way of vehicles
that are flying above the dunes
and we know that keeping our communities safe
while still being able to have recreational access
is important but also the sensitive environmental areas
that are being utilized in this way, it's concerning
and we all have concerns and we need to figure out
a way to move forward and so it is on our minds,
it hangs heavy because seeing these videos
and knowing that it continues to happen,
we know that there is a situation that is kind of a,
you know, it has the potential to be highly dangerous
and destructive for both the sensitive species there,
but also the humans that are using it for recreation,
and I think we have a duty to do more
than what we're doing now.
So I look to staff and just request
that we continue to prioritize
and advance that conversation
before we have dangerous outcomes
that all of us feel really uncomfortable with.
So, thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner Presiado.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
First and foremost, I too want to associate myself
with all of the comments of the commissioners.
I think we are a wonderful community of stakeholders
that represent the public from all over the state.
And I really appreciate the testimonials
and the feedback we're providing the public
On a personal note, I have new bucket lists
that are being created when I miss meetings like this.
I hope the staff brings us back to Fort Bragg
in the coming years so that I can actually attend in person.
And lastly, I wanted to support and compliment the staff.
I had an opportunity to visit the San Diego office
last week.
I was pleasantly, well, not surprised,
that I was pleasantly excited after I left
because I saw very committed professionals,
very committed and knowledgeable colleagues
that support the work of the commission
in their professional and expert capacities.
And I look forward to our work ahead.
Wonderful, thank you.
Commissioner Jackson, please.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you everybody for being here.
This is my third time at Fort Bragg to Fort Bragg.
And the first time was back in the late 80s
when the mill was operating.
And I fell in love with a little town then.
And I've had two subsequent visits.
Second time was right after the pandemic,
or actually, right after the pandemic,
I was here with my boys and now this third visit.
And every time I come back,
I am struck by the beauty, the charm of this city,
and the palpable passion from you all who were here
championing the right causes.
I got here yesterday morning, and two things really struck out.
Number one was the big brown sign, coastal access,
that always warms my heart every time I see that.
Then I parked, and I walked across the wooden bridge
just north of here.
And what really struck out, there
There was a gentleman at the hotel in his white robe.
It was early in the morning, white robe with his coffee mug.
I think he had some libations in there.
And he was just taking it all in.
And we exchanged some pleasantries.
And I watched all the other folks get out of their cars.
There was a woman in her RV.
And they were waking up to the beauty
of this majestic, really special part of California.
I'm from the South in the LA concrete jungle.
And it was really nice to be here,
to see this part of the state wake up,
to take in its beauty,
to appreciate the potential that is here.
And I just want to thank you all
for fighting the good fight.
Staff does a remarkable job, makes it easy for us.
but it's you all that bring these issues to staff's attention
and our attention that really reminds us
of why we do what we do and why it's all important
that we have this collaborative relationship.
So thank you all for being here.
Thank you for the hospitality.
This is, you know, I was even thinking,
I said, man, you know, I could live up here.
This is a great area, right?
It really, really is.
And I was talking to Commissioner Wilson the other day,
who's from north of this area,
and we were chatting about the beauty,
and it's different if you drive from the south
to the north as it is from the north to the south.
So this is a special part of the state
that is oftentimes overlooked,
particularly when it comes to tourists,
and that's not necessarily a bad thing,
it's the good and the bad,
but it's a special part of the state,
and I appreciate you all fighting to keep, preserve,
and to thoughtfully grow this part of our community.
So thank you all.
Okay, wonderful.
Thank you everyone for your testimony this morning.
With that, we will close public comment
and move to the statewide items
beginning with Director Hucklebridge
and the Executive Director's report.
Thank you, Chair Herman.
Good morning, good morning commissioners,
good morning members of the public.
I published executive director's report,
can be found on the website,
but as usual, I'll spend a few minutes going through it.
First up, just wanted to thank the community of Fort Bragg
for having us for these three days.
We always love coming up here.
It's a little bit hard to get here,
but once we're here, as you see from the commissioner
comments, everybody's happy, and I myself took a walk
on the bluffs this morning and had a similar experience
just really appreciating the beauty of your community.
So thank you again for having us here.
I would also like to welcome Dr. Karl Larson,
who is not in here in person today,
but will be here tomorrow,
who will be joining the commission
as the ex-officio member representing
Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kudilakis.
So he will be here tomorrow.
You'll get a chance to meet him in person,
but just wanted to officially kind of welcome him.
And when you see another person tomorrow up on the dais,
that's who it is.
So next up, this month I approved an LCP grant
for the city of Huntington Beach
for almost $500,000.
The city will build on previous grant-funded work
to develop a coastal resiliency plan update,
an LUP update primarily focused on sea level rise,
and an update to the city's existing
floodplain ordinance.
The project will also include an update
to the city's sea level rise vulnerability assessment
to account for the most recent technical studies
that were developed for the Magnolia Tank Farm site,
and to reflect the most recent
state sea level rise guidance that was adopted in 2024.
Next, we wanted to report out on a staff-to-staff meeting
that we had with the city of San Diego's Parks and Rec
Department to follow up on the various management strategies
to reduce harassment to the sea lions in La Jolla Cove
that were discussed during public comment
at last month's commission hearing.
So the city shared with us that they have recently
increased park ranger staff in La Jolla
during weekends and holidays,
and are in the process of bringing on
a few additional volunteers
to assist the park rangers with education,
and further are planning on coordinating
with tour bus operators to provide educational materials
and different languages so that tourists stay
a safe distance away from marine mammals.
So we'll continue to update you all
as we have additional information on that topic.
On August 19th, South Central Coast District staff member,
Jackie Phelps, participated in a panel
along with staff from the Marytow Foundation,
which is a Whale Tail grant recipient,
to spotlight the ways in which Whale Tail grants
support community driven programs,
including those within the South Central Coast District area
that connect underserved youth to the California coast.
Just wanted to shout out Jackie there
and thanks to our public education staff
for helping out with that presentation.
Next, I have a few exciting public access announcements.
At first we are excited to note the soft opening of the Astero Americano Coast Preserve Trails
Network in Sonoma by the Wildlands Conservancy.
The commission, as you may recall, approved the CDP for this trail network in November
of 2024 and since then the commission's transportation program and North Central staff have worked
closely with the Wildlands Conservancy and Sonoma County staff to facilitate this incredible
new public access opportunity along a stretch of undeveloped and incredibly scenic coast
that has historically been inaccessible to the public.
The trail network is currently open Fridays and weekends
and staff continues to work to support wildlands.
So the trail network can be open seven days a week,
which is anticipated this fall,
as well as to support wildlands and Caltrans
in a partnership to realize habitat restoration
of much of the preserve.
Second, I wanted to highlight the opening
of two newly improved public access stairways
that occurred just last week.
A new and improved Surfers Beach Stairway
in Half Moon Bay, which has been closed
since the winter storms of 2023,
and a new stairway at Deer Creek Beach in Malibu.
Both stairways stem from our partnership with Caltrans
and were recently authorized by this commission this year.
New stairways serve vital and needed public access
in busy urban regions and are significantly strengthened
and improved to provide better and more secure public access.
So next up, a few announcements
from the Public Education Program.
First, as was noted this morning,
Coastal Cleanup Day is almost here.
Hopefully you all have your calendars marked
for Saturday, September 20th.
And as you heard a little bit in public comment this morning,
our Public Education staff,
led by the fabulous Evan Schwartz,
has been attending organizing meetings for the upcoming,
and this is the 41st Annual California Coastal Cleanup Day.
These meetings, which take place in almost every county
of the state, help prepare lead volunteers
for organizing cleanup sites, keeping volunteers safe,
and making sure the cleanup is a success.
Staff has heard an enormous amount of enthusiasm
about this year's Trasher Hunt theme,
and is looking forward to seeing
and hearing about the turnout.
So you're all invited to check out coastalcleanupday.org
to find your local cleanup and join the fun.
And just huge shout out to Eben and the rest of our staff
who've been working tirelessly to pull off this event
this year.
And again, really hope to see you all out on the beaches.
And it's a fabulous event we get to do every year.
And I hope you all can participate.
Next, the dockwalker program is turning 25.
Since 2000, over 1,400 partner dockwalkers
have shared clean boating practices
with over 130,000 boaters across the state.
The Dockwalker Program implemented by California State Parks,
the California Coastal Commission's Boating, Clean,
and Green Program, and the Bay Foundation
is the first of its kind in the nation
and has championed peer-to-peer education and outreach
to inspire environmental stewardship in California.
Please check out our celebratory page
and all the amazing videos from partnered Dockwalkers.
And again, thanks to our staff
for their tireless efforts supporting this program.
Lastly, Public Education just recently announced
the winners and honorable mentions
of the Climate Storytelling Contest.
The contest invited California middle and high schoolers
to answer the following prompt through a narrative essay,
podcast, or photo essay.
What are your feelings towards climate change
and how can those feelings be turned into action?
We got some really fantastic entries
and I would urge you all to check them out
on the contest webpage.
So as I have previously mentioned,
the Coastal Commission has been lucky
to have several summer interns
across our teams and units this summer.
In our tech services unit,
working with the Commission's coastal engineer Jeremy Smith,
we had an intern Rafa Coutin
from Cal State University's Coast Internship Program,
who made amazing progress towards developing
a statewide database of Commission's permit actions,
authorizing sand to be placed on beaches.
Roth represented his preliminary findings
to the San Francisco office on how such a database
could be used to answer key resource management questions,
such as visualizing where sand is coming from
and evaluating how permit requirements
have been effective across the state.
Daniel Pavola from Stanford University
has center a Cardinal Quarter Fellowship program,
excuse me, has also made great progress
on a research project evaluating how the state's
cliffs and dunes erode and are influenced by coastal armoring. So again
another shout out and thank you to all of our summer interns and we look
forward to welcoming more back next year. Lastly as I hope you are all
aware we are planning a field trip to the mill site this afternoon. We'll be
starting at 1 45 or at the close of the hearing whichever happens later. This
This field visit is open to the public and we have posted the itinerary online and we
do have a couple of hard copies in the back of the room for anybody who might want one.
Our first stop is just a couple blocks down the road here so I think the plan for commissioners
will be to walk down there from here, we'll leave at 130 and walk together down to the
first set of stops.
We will need to drive to subsequent stops and staff has vans and have figured that out
for commissioners but just want to make sure the public is aware you will need
vehicle transit if you're going to participate throughout the entirety of
the of the field visit. So with that Madam Chair I will conclude my ED report
and I'm happy to answer any questions. Great thank you very much Director
Hucklebridge. Are there any public comments on the executive directors
report? There are no speakers for this item. Okay any comments or questions from
commissioners? Commissioner Turnbull Sanders. I had a question. Thank you Chair
Harmon and for Dr. Hucklebridge. On the new public access way the
deer was a Deer Creek or Deer River in Malibu. Is that now is that portion of
PCH to access that open to the public or how would the public access that now? So
So it is Deer Creek Beach in Malibu and I do believe Highway 1 is open to the public
at this point.
It's limited and there is some traffic controls I think still in place on Highway 1 but my
understanding is the road is open and I don't know, Linda, can you get down to the public
stairway?
I'm getting a yes so I do believe it's open access to the public at this point.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Seeing no further questions, we will move on
to the legislative report, Mr. Drake.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and good morning, commissioners.
This is the legislative report for September.
The past few weeks have been a mad dash
to the end of the legislative session, which is on Friday.
On August 29th, the appropriations committees
held their second round of suspense hearings
in which they announced which bills
were moving on this year and which were being held.
Any bills that were held have been marked as held
under submission in the written legislative report.
All of the commission's priority bills passed
out of appropriations and are now either on the floor
or already on the governor's desk.
Several priority bills did receive amendments
coming out of appropriations,
and I'd like to draw attention to just a few of those.
First, AB 399 by Assemblymember Bournier,
which would direct the commission to set up a program
for blue carbon demonstration projects,
was amended to specify that the bill
would take effect only if the legislature appropriates
funding for its implementation in a future state budget.
The legislature passed the bill on Monday
and it's currently on the governor's desk.
Next, AB 462 by assembly member Lowenthal
was also amended coming out of appropriations.
That's the bill that would shorten the amount of time
that the commission and local governments have
to process coastal development permits for ADUs
and would eliminate appeals of local ADU CDPs.
The amendment cleared up a point of ambiguity
that staff described in last month's legislative report
stemming from a provision that would direct
local governments to forward complete building
permit applications for ADUs to the Coastal Commission.
The recent amendment clarifies that the commission
must receive a complete coastal development permit
application in order to process a permit for an ADU,
as is the case for all development.
That bill is now on the Senate floor.
AB 1007 by Assemblymember Blanca Rubio was amended twice
in the past two weeks.
That's the bill that would require all state
and local permitting agencies to approve
or disapprove permits for housing projects
within 45 days of receiving a complete application.
The bill was amended coming out
of the Senate Appropriations Committee
to specify that the state's two coastal permitting agencies,
the Coastal Commission and the San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission shall remain subject
the 90-day deadline that was recently enacted earlier this session by AB 130,
the Housing Budget Trailer Bill. This amendment means that the Commission will
continue to perform an expedited review of most housing projects under that
recent legislation while resolving staff's previously identified concerns
about meeting a 45-day deadline given the Commission's meeting schedule and
staffing capacity. AB 1007 was then amended again last week to make the
state and regional water boards similarly subject to a 90-day deadline
for their housing-related approvals. The bill is currently on the Senate floor.
SB 364, the latest bill proposing to exempt billboard fortification projects
from all state and local permitting, was also amended coming out of
approps. The amendments removed the proposed permit exemption, resolving
staff's concerns with the bill. Several other bills that the Commission has been
been tracking have already been enrolled and are on the governor's desk waiting for action.
AB 439 by Assemblymember Chris Rogers, which the Commission took a support position on,
passed out of the Senate last week with bipartisan support, and is now on the governor's desk.
That bill would streamline the implementation of approved, de minimis amendments to local
coastal programs and port master plans.
And it would also standardize the contents and the timetable on which the Commission
and periodically reports to the legislature
about its enforcement activities.
AB 996 by Assembly Member Gail Pellerin
passed out of the Senate last week with unanimous approval
and is now waiting for Governor's action.
The bill would establish a voluntary process
for local governments to consult with the commission
when they're preparing the sea-level rise plans
and associated LCP amendments
that all coastal local governments are required
to develop by 2034.
Also, SB 484 by Senator Laird,
which the commission voted to support,
reached the governor's desk.
That bill would direct the commission
to establish categorical exclusions
for 100% affordable housing projects
in infill areas of three or more
uncertified local jurisdictions.
The legislature passed it earlier this week
with unanimous bipartisan support.
There is one new bill on the ledger port this month
and that's AB and SB 149 by the budget committees.
This is a budget trailer bill
that went into print Monday night.
it would make numerous statutory changes
broadly on the topic of public resources.
Relevant to the Coastal Commission,
the bill would add language to the Coastal Act
stating that all temporary developments undertaken
by the International Olympic and Paralympic Committees
and by the Los Angeles Organizing Committee
as a part of carrying out the 2028 Olympic
and Paralympic Games will be considered temporary events
that are exempt from the requirement
to obtain the Coastal Development Permote.
The bill would require those temporary developments to avoid significant impacts to coastal resources
to the extent feasible and it would also direct LA-28 to coordinate with the Commission on
the planning of all temporary events in the coastal zone associated with the 2028 Olympics
and Paralympics.
This budget trailer bill is a refined version of draft language that the Governor's Administration
publicly released earlier this summer.
The original language would have more broadly made all development associated with the Olympics
exempt from the Coastal Act.
After hearings in the legislative budget committees, the proposed exemption was concentrated to
focus on just the temporary development associated with the Olympics.
Under this approach, the trailer bill would facilitate Olympic events happening in the
coastal zone by making truly temporary development exempt from the CDP process.
This is similar to the temporary event exemption that's already in the Coastal Act.
At the same time, the language also remains protective of coastal resources, both by providing
for ongoing coordination between LA28 and the Commission, and by clarifying the development
projects that may be done in anticipation of the Olympics, but which are permanent,
such as realigning roadways or upgrading public infrastructure, will occur in a way that's
fully consistent with the Coastal Act.
In terms of the process ahead for this bill, AB 149 and SP 149 both contain this language
related to the Olympics, reflecting agreement on it between the two houses.
One of the two bills will move forward as the designated trailer bill sometime this
week.
Lastly, one of the commission's priority bills was already signed by the governor, and that's
SB 856 by the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee.
to the Commission, that bill amends the Coastal Act to clarify that when the Commission waves
the filing fee for an application for a CDP or a CDP amendment for a habitat restoration
or public access project proposed by a nonprofit, the Commission may specify whether that fee
waiver also applies to future amendments to that permit. The Commission took a support
position on the bill earlier this year, and now that it's been signed, it'll take effect
on January 1st. Looking ahead, as I mentioned at the top, this is the last week of the 2025
legislative session. Last night was the last opportunity for bills to be amended and still
move this year. The deadline for the legislature to pass bills is the end of the day on Friday.
After that, the governor will have until October 12th to sign or veto bills. With that, Chair
Harmon, that concludes the legislative report and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Great. Thank you very much. Are there any public comments on the legislative report? There are no speakers for this item
Okay, thank you Chris sending comments or questions from the Commission Commissioner Wilson
yes, thank you for
staff and all those that helped to
Push back the language that was being promoted by the outdoor advertising association through legislation that would make
Really it's not the redefinition of maintenance of billboards not just on the coastal, California, but all through the state that would allow
the complete rebuild of those structures even when they are in
non-conforming
zones and and even when local jurisdictions have said that
They're you know not to be rebuilt through their local ordinances would have exempted all that would have exempted all the all the state
legislation in the past to the state agencies and even
And even worker protections in those spaces. So thank you for that
I just want to I know that
462 has now has an exemption for
basically
Appeals to the Commission for ADUs in the coastal zone
I have a couple of concerns that maybe we can for you know, maybe for future reference, which is one is
Coastal access is something that is always challenged
and especially we have to remember that these structures
in the coastal zone in some places,
like where up here in the North Coast,
typically more often than not,
an ADU is not something that is in a high value area.
And what I mean by that,
the property is probably not worth four or $5 million.
In some areas, it's a little different than that.
And sort of the exemptions around ADUs
can be really exploited and manipulated.
And so, I'm concerned about that,
especially just mostly around coastal access.
And it takes away the ability of the commission
to review that for that.
And we have a litany of things that we review in appeals,
but that's really, I think, the key one
in the sea level rise is probably next in line.
I will note that coming from local government,
We're often advocating for the, you know,
that local government should have that control,
that we make that, you know, that we make that choice,
and we're reticent to have another agency review that.
In this case, I'd say cautionary note to local governments,
oftentimes those appeals come through the commission,
will save that local government being drawn into a lawsuit.
Because the local government then is interpreting
the Coastal Act, or they're interpreting their local LCP,
and without the adjudication of this body as a filter
for which to go through,
local governments can, you know, have now,
they're now the front end of that adjudication
between neighbors and the community,
and even outside third party groups.
So I full heartedly support more housing in the coast,
especially housing that people actually live in,
and which, as we know,
sometimes that doesn't happen necessarily,
since a lot of things that we call housing on the coast
are second homes or short-term rentals
or whatever they may be,
and we really wanna do the job of creating more housing.
We have to actually create housing that people live in.
But in this case, removing that appeal,
I think it may not produce the amount of housing
we might want to imagine it to produce,
even though that's what we want it to do.
And I'm looking forward to getting data on that
as we move forward.
Again, we should definitely have ADUs be easier to build,
cheaper to build, more of them
all over the state of California.
But on that thin line that is the coast,
We have some special needs related to public access,
and again, there's just a high level of litigation
that I think we should, you know,
that local governments should be, you know,
think about as we move forward in this process.
Thank you to staff for all your hard work on this.
We'll always be working more to, again,
bring more housing opportunities to the coast
and also protect public access, thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I believe we did have one person that wished to speak.
Mr. Ray?
Take them.
Yeah, Steve Ray.
Come on up.
First of all, thank you, Chris.
Madam Chair, commissioners, staff, and members
of the public, I'm Steve Ray again.
I haven't changed my name yet.
I wanted to address the legislative process
that the commission goes through.
legislation is often compared to making sausage you don't want to see either.
You can wind up with some really sweet tasting stuff but some of it can be
putrid so and that's the way it is with legislation. I actually years ago used to
work in the world's probably the world's largest sausage factory. It's also called
the US Congress and and I've been up in the state capital many times over the
years lobbying or talking to legislators and staff members up there about
legislation they're going through and I know this last week is going to be a
huge huge effort to make sure you don't wind up with a lot of sausage that's
putrid in the process and if Commission is very fortunate and that you have such
an excellent staff doing this work for you and backed up by not only
Sacramento but staff in San Francisco who works on all of this too and under
the leadership of Sarah Christie and Sean Drake you guys are so lucky because
I have dealt with a lot of these people over the years and sometimes you wonder
how they ever got in the profession but the Commission is very lucky to have the
these experts here and doing this job it's very difficult this last week you
you wind up with all kinds of things in the sausage.
And so I just wanted to congratulate them.
I know they're busy this last week,
but they'll finally get about a break of two days
and then they start on the next period.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Ray.
Okay, now Commissioner Nada.
Yeah, I too wanted to just say that it's good to see
the outcome on several of these bills that we were watching.
particular preserving the Commission's ability to do its job in terms of
reviewing applications and with enough time but still moving expeditiously. I,
you know, I'm prone to point out often at these Commission hearings that there's a
lot of housing proposals that go through on consent or administrative permits so
things are moving and the Commission is doing our part in getting housing,
affordable housing in the coastal zone within urban service area boundaries so
I was glad to see the outcome on that. I do want to make sure that to associate
myself with my concern that I think there are times when the appeal process
is very valuable and just to remind folks that the vast majority of appeals
that come to the Commission. The Commission finds that the local government
has actually taken the appropriate considerations into account and we let
those stand. But in the rare instances where there's a statewide interest that
needs to be looked at, I think having that authority is an important part of
the Commission's responsibility. So I did just thank you for the good work. It's
It's been a rough year, it's not over yet.
And next year will probably be rough too,
but I'm glad we are in good hands, thanks.
Thank you, Commissioner Eckerly.
Thank you so much, Chair.
I just wanted to draw the Commission and the public's
attention to the, there was budget language
that was included, it's SB 105 that came out late last night
that has all of the proposed appropriations
for that climate bond.
So this is significant funding for climate resilience projects
and habitat restoration, including funding
for the Coastal Conservancy, the Ocean Protection Council,
the Department of Fish and Wildlife,
and others to do this good work.
So I'm still trying to get my arms around the details,
but that language is in print
and I think is moving towards the governor's desk.
Okay, thank you very much.
So I'm gonna suggest we do item 6D
and then take a quick break.
So this is to you, I think, Director Hucklebridge.
Yes, the next item 6D is the revised 2026 meeting schedule.
There's just one proposed change
to the previously approved meeting schedule
for the month of February.
We need to move the February meeting dates back a week
to February four through six to accommodate PSA deadlines
given that we don't have a January meeting.
So unless there's any questions,
I'll turn it back to you, Madam Chair, for a motion and a vote.
Thank you.
Are there any public comments on this change?
There are no speakers.
Great.
Thank you, Chris.
Any discussion or a motion from commissioners?
I'll move approval of the revised schedule.
Second.
2026.
OK.
That is a motion from Commissioner Notoff
and a second by Commissioner Wilson.
And because we have two commissioners online today,
I'd like to ask for a roll call vote, please.
Commissioner O'Malley.
yes o'mally yes commissioner eskallante yes eskallante yes commissioner
Jackson Jackson yes commissioner Kelly hi Kelly yes commissioner Lopez Lopez
hi Lopez yes commissioner not off I not off yes commissioner presidio yes
presidio yes commissioner Turnbull Sanders yes Turnbull Sanders yes
Commissioner Wilson yes Wilson yes chair Harmon yes Harmon yes the vote is
unanimous great thank you okay we'll take a quick bio break and if everyone
could be back at five minutes after 11 thank you
Commissioner Wilson thank you okay we will be we're returning to session now
So that brings us to item seven the consent calendar please. Yep this item
is for applications to be moved from regular to the consent calendar as
mentioned during the agenda changes earlier this morning there are three
items that we are recommending be moved to consent and those are item 11a the
City of Trinidad LCP amendment to reorganize reformat and make minor
changes to the certified zoning code. Item 11B, the City of Trinidad LCP amendment that
adds zoning code requirements to process reasonable accommodation requests consistent with federal
and state housing laws. And item 13C, the Chevron Products Company application for
dock repairs in Eureka. We are not aware of any opposition to these items. The applicants
are in agreement with the recommendations and staff is recommending that the commission
and vote and approve this item.
Great, thank you.
Are there any ex partes to report on any of these items?
Okay, seeing none, I'll ask if there are any members
of the public who wish to speak
on any of these items, move to consent?
For all three items, move to consent.
We only have one person for each item
available for questions and no speakers.
Great, thank you.
Okay, I will return to the commission.
Does anyone wish to remove any of these items?
Okay, I'll entertain questions comments or a motion on the consent calendar move consent
Second, thank you. That's a motion by Commissioner Wilson and a second by Commissioner Kelly and
We will ask for a roll call vote, please just pause for one second
Okay, Commissioner Escalante
Yes, Escalante. Yes, Commissioner Jackson. Aye. Jackson. Yes, Commissioner Kelly. Aye.
Kelly. Yes, Commissioner Lopez.
Aye. Lopez. Yes.
Commissioner Notoff. Aye. Notoff. Yes, Commissioner Preciado.
Yes. Preciado. Yes, Commissioner term. No, Commissioner Wilson. Yes, Wilson. Yes, Commissioner Jackson.
I Jackson yes commissioner O'Malley yes O'Malley yes chair Herman yes Herman yes
the vote is nine zero great thank you the consent calendar is adopted so
there's no enforcement report today so we will move to item 10 the deputy
directors report for the North Coast District thank you I'd like to start by
reporting the executive director certification review review for the city
Fort Bragg LCP amendment that was approved by the Commission in April of this year
This is LCP amendment f t b 24 dash 47 dash 1
Which added a third planning sub area known as area C to the mill site planning
This amendment rezoned areas for public access recreation and visitor serving uses and rezoned an existing housing area into medium
density residential
the City Council acknowledged and accepted the Commission suggested modifications and the ED is to determine that the city's action meets the requirements for
certification and
In addition to this item the deputy director's report includes one waiver one immaterial amendment and two permit extensions
Staff is not aware of any opposition to these items and we are asking whether three or more commissioners object to any item in this
Report we're available for questions. Thank you. Ms. Gray. Are there any ex partes to report?
Okay, seeing none, are there any public speakers on the deputy director's report? We have no speakers just one available for questions
Thank you. Do three or more commissioners object to any item in the deputy director's report
Seeing no objection the Commission concurs. Thank you. Now we'll go to item 12, please
Yes, items 12a and 12b are two related appeals in the city of Fort Bragg
Melissa Cramer the coastal program manager in our North Coast district will be giving the presentation
Good morning chair Herman and commissioners. There is a PowerPoint presentation, please
Okay
This is a combined presentation and hearing on the city of Fort Bragg's approval of a coastal development permit and CDP amendment for a
multi-family residential and mixed-use development project located at 1151 South Main Street.
Next slide, please. The subject property is a vacant 2.6 acre lot west of Highway 1 and
south of the Noyo River. The lot is between the sea and the first public road and is near
a few different coastal access points, including Todd Point, Pomo Bluffs Park and Hare Creek
Beach. Next slide. Here's a closer look at the site vicinity. The property is marked
with a blue star. The property is bordered by three local streets, Harbor Avenue to the
west, shown here with a green dashed line, Ocean View Drive to the south, shown with
a blue dashed line, and an unnamed frontage road to the east that runs parallel to Main
Street, which is Highway 1 to the east. The city boundary is indicated with red lines
and the property borders the city boundary to the west. The lands immediately west of
Harbor Avenue are rural residential properties in unincorporated Mendocino County. Next slide.
This slide shows the relationship and timelines of the two permit actions. The city approved
a CDP in March of this year authorizing the construction of an 86 unit multi-family housing
project that included studio, one bedroom and two bedroom units and seven apartment
buildings ranging in height from 32 to 38 feet.
Eight of the residential units were designated affordable
to households of very low income.
The CDP also authorized a 1,000 square foot commercial retail
space, a parking lot, landscaping, playgrounds,
stormwater management infrastructure,
and street improvements.
In April, the commission received two appeals
raising a number of issues.
In May, the applicant submitted a waiver of the 49 Working Day
deadline for the opening of the appeal by the Commission. The applicant
subsequently submitted a revised project description to the city requesting to
amend the CDP to address issues raised in the appeals. The city approved the
amended project in July with additional visitor serving uses in the form of four
hotel units, one of which will be rented to visitors at a low-cost rate and all
All of which will be managed out of the adjacent Emerald Dolphin Inn which is also under the
applicant's ownership.
To integrate these hotel units into the design, the project as revised includes 83 housing
units, eight of which will continue to be designated for very low income households.
The revised number of housing units is consistent with the project's maximum density bonus allocation.
revised project also adds a public access path across the parcel from the
frontage road to Harbor Avenue and proposes signage to be installed along
the path directing access to Pomo Bluffs Park north of the site. Five separate
appeals were filed on the city's CDP amendment raising a number of issues a
few of which I'll get into in a moment. Next slide. Slide five shows the approved
site plan showing seven apartment buildings two of which directly front
Main Street. There's an L-shaped parking lot west and north of the site. The visitor
serving hotel units and retail store would be located on the ground floors in the front
portions of the two buildings that front Main Street. Next slide. Here are visual renderings
of the development. The upper rendering shows the view from Main Street looking west. The
lower image shows the view from Harbor Avenue looking east. Next slide. The various appeals
filed raise a wide array of issues, a few of which I'll touch on. Next slide.
Several of the appeals allege that the approved project does not conform to the LCP requirements
for the highway visitor's commercial zoning district, including but not limited to requirements
that residential uses be restricted to the upper floors or if allowed on the ground floor
than only to the rear of the buildings. This map shows the land use designations in the
project vicinity. The property again is marked with a blue star and is located in a sort
of pale orange area indicating the CH designation along the highway. Next slide. As described
in the LCP, the CH lands typically are applied to lands along Highway 1 and typical uses
include motels and other lodging, restaurants and retail outlets. Residential uses are permitted
with a conditional use permit above the ground floor or on the ground floor in the rear of
buildings at a maximum density of up to 24 units per acre. The City approved both a conditional
use permit as well as the CDP for the project and the residential and visitor serving uses
are all allowed on CH lands under the LCP. The City's approval was supported by findings
demonstrating the project complies with all the land use standards except height limit,
floor area ratio, and density. However, the LCP allows for density bonus and inclusionary
incentives as part of an affordable housing project provided that the density increase
will have no adverse effect on coastal resources. As mentioned, the approved project includes
eight affordable units. Next slide. The density bonus and inclusionary incentives approved
by the city are allowed under state density bonus law in the city's LCP. In brief at 24
units per acre allowed in the CH zone, the 2.6 acre lot could support 64 units. The applicant
initially requested a 55 unit project and proposed 15% of the units or 8 units as affordable
to households of very low income. As a result, the project qualifies for a density bonus
totaling 83 units. Projects are eligible for three incentives for projects that include
at least 15% of units reserved for very low-income households. For this project, the applicant
requested and the city granted the three incentives listed here. As mentioned, the LCP and Density
Bonus Law allow granting of incentives so long as it can be found that the requested
incentives would not have an adverse effect on coastal resources. Next slide.
The appeals contend that the approved project prioritizes private residential uses over
visitor serving uses and that there are feasible alternatives that would provide more visitor
serving uses than the approved project such as additional hotel units or other visitor
serving uses on the ground floors of the buildings. Rather than proposing visitor serving uses
on the ground floors of all seven buildings, which across all buildings total over 24,000
square feet. The approved development includes about 3400 square feet of visitor serving
space on the ground floors of two of the buildings closest to the highway. The applicant requested
this incentive to not require visitor serving uses on the ground floors of all seven buildings
to maintain the project's financial feasibility, as explained in the city's findings that include
market and feasibility analysis. Special conditions of the project require the
applicant to maintain the project's visitor-serving elements consistent
with the intent of the CH land use and zoning designation and with LCP policies
that prioritize visitor-serving uses. Given the high degree of legal and
factual support for the City's decision and the standards for granting density
bonuses and inclusionary incentives under the certified LCP that have been
met the city's decision will not set an adverse precedent for future interpretations of its LCP next slide
Though this is a relatively large housing project for the city's coastal zone
The project is limited to a single residential property
Earth's sorry to a single property adjacent to the southern end of the city that will have no significant effect on coastal resources
As discussed in the findings. There are no significant visual resources affected by the city's decision
There are no environmentally sensitive habitat areas wetlands or natural drainages on or adjacent to the site
The site is not within a hazardous area and the city's findings demonstrate that the approved project as conditioned will be served by adequate
services including improved local roadways on
Site drainage infrastructure and connections with municipal water and sewer services
The city's findings also demonstrate that the project as designed and conditioned with significant open space and permeable areas
Will infiltrate and treat a significant volume of stormwater on site
Thereby minimizing any effect on groundwater and domestic wells west of the site
the city's approval also includes appropriate traffic mitigation including but not limited to a
requirement that the applicant work with the Mendocino Transit Authority in the school district to install a bus stop if warranted
next slide
Therefore given the high degree of factual legal support for the city's decision the numerous conditions of approval imposed to protect coastal
resources and the lack of precedent setting potential this project will have on future CDP decisions for projects in the CH zoning district
staff recommends that the city's approval of the CDP amendment does not raise a substantial issue of LCP conformance a
No substantial issue decision by the Commission on the CDP amendment would render the CDB at the CDP amendment
Final and effective which in turn would render the original CDP approval as having no legal effect
Thus with the appeal of the original permit effectively moot the condition the contentions are raised under the original permit approval
Also would not present a substantial issue
So the motions to adopt the staff recommendation of no substantial issue are found on pages 11 and 12 and this concludes our presentation
I would just quickly note that at the substantial issue phase of
of an appeal the only people who are qualified to testify at the hearing are the
Appellants the local government the applicant and those who oppose the application at the local level
It's my understanding that there are a few people
who have signed up to speak who don't qualify.
So I just wanted to clarify that those are the regulations
but that any person may submit a comment
to the commission in writing.
Okay, thank you very much.
Are there any ex partes to report?
Seeing none, we'll open the public hearing
and begin with the appellant.
We have a number of appellants.
I believe that they have requested three minutes a piece
then we're granted that by staff.
So we have Colin Morrow, Hamid Zarabi, Guy Burnett,
Teresa Scar, and Truthful Kindness.
And you may speak in the order that you wish.
Can you hear me now?
Good morning, Madam Commissioner,
good morning, honorable commissioners.
My name is Colin Morrow.
I'm speaking on behalf of appellant Paul Clark.
Welcome to Fort Bragg.
As you may have noticed,
we're a bit of a town in transition here,
moving from a lumber and fishing economy
to a tourist and vacationer economy.
And also, most of you likely passed through by this site
as you were coming into town.
It's located a very focused arterial entryway
for anyone coming from the east or coming from the south.
I mention these things because it's a sensitive time
and it's a sensitive location,
and your decision on this project
will have far-reaching impacts on how Fort Bragg develops.
This is probably the biggest housing development
in Fort Bragg in a hundred years.
It's not an isolated single development,
but it's something that's gonna have very long-term impacts
on this community.
At least twice in the last 25 years,
this commission has recognized that the area
where this site's located is a very sensitive site.
A quarter century ago when the Noyo River Bridge,
passing over Noyo River, was approved,
This commission required Caltrans to spend millions of dollars developing
Pomo Bluffs Park, which is located on the same peninsula as this development.
You can see the view from Pomo Bluffs Park in the bottom three of the pictures
on the slide in front of you.
Right now, there's visual notice of that park.
You look from the street and you see that there's this peninsula here,
these headlands here. When you put up a barrier of bedrooms, visitors are no
longer going to be aware that that park is there. Additionally, access to that
park will be obstructed by significant traffic in a large parking lot in
access of 100 spaces. Similarly, when this Commission approved Fort Bragg's
local coastal plan, it made very clear that this area was supposed to be a
be a visitor serving commercial parcel. It was meant for visitor serving commercial
facilities. Those facilities just aren't here. There's one 1,000 foot retail space and four
unmarked overflow hotel rooms for a neighboring hotel. This isn't a development that's going
to be inviting visitors into the community. It's going to be a barrier of private residences
that hinder the ability of Californians
to make coastal access or make use of coastal access.
So for those reasons, in accord with the coastal access
values of California, I respectfully pray that you find
that there is a significant issue here
and take a good, careful look at this project.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The next up, Alan.
Good morning, and thank you for giving me the time
to speak in regards to this project.
We were told that this project will have an adequate onsite
and street parking, which is incorrect.
According to the California Department of Fair employment
and housing, two plus one formula standards,
a one bedroom apartment could be occupied by three people,
a three bedroom apartment could be occupied by five people.
This could bring in up to 339 people and over 300 vehicles.
and this is going to be all in one area
that is one of the most common
and important visiting areas in Fort Bragg,
which would be the Noyo Headlands,
the beach, Hare Creek Beach.
This project is located between two dead-end roads
which would become parking lots
because there's not enough parking.
The no-name road, as everybody calls it,
already being utilized by local businesses because they don't have enough parking spaces.
So this would leave Harbor Avenue, which on the slide, as you can see, and the original
slide that was showed by you, it shows that Harbor Avenue is going to be the main entrance
to the parking lot also.
This road is a poorly maintained 20 feet wide gravel road, and according to the city, this
road will stay exactly the same.
So it's a dead end, 20 feet wide gravel, and poorly maintained.
There's no ... This road is already being used by visitors to the park, and there's
parking spots at the end of it, which are no longer going to be available to the visitors
because of lack of parking.
And there are also no turnarounds on either one of these roads.
So everybody that parks on these roads are going to have to be trying to make a u-turn
on this 20 feet wide gravel road, which is going to be hazardous.
These roads are going to be especially hazardous for the local residents in that area.
Visitors walk into the park and mainly emergency response vehicle, God forbid, if something
happens.
There's no way they can go down that road and be able to do their job.
One other thing that I'm going to add to this, beside the road, the city, you heard from
the City Public Works that Fort Bragg is still having water issues.
Well, according to the Fort Bragg City report, they say, no, we have plenty of water.
Thank you.
Yes.
Could we have the next slide, please?
Could I have my time start once it gets up there?
And the next one?
Yes.
Thank you very much.
My name is Guy Burnett.
I'm a resident on Harbor Avenue.
The Fort Bragg local coastal plan policy OS dash 2.2.2 requires all new developments
on Todd's point to perform a project specific study regarding groundwater recharge.
If the project specific study finds a net decrease in groundwater recharge, a supplemental
study is required to determine the impact on the Todd Point wells. The
current project has done no such study as required. The current study that they
are using is from 1995 that is what 30 years ago. It was deemed inadequate 22
years ago. There is nothing that gives any reliable, credible, bankable guidance
to the hydrology characteristics of Fort Bragg that affects our wells, that
affects the entire structure of the hydrology. Hydrology issues on Todd's
point at this point need to take or have a guideline that is reasonable,
rational, and has legal teeth to it when they make the decisions. There is none.
This is all basically hearsay from a 35 year old report. We've maintained from
the outset of this project that the water supply is threatened on Todd's
point. Contaminated surface water migrating through the fractured
Franciscan bedrock would taint the confirmed aquifer, the confined aquifer
below. The soil, sand and gravel, and bedrock have poor filtration
characteristics. Is this working? Okay, probably as good as I am. Let me see,
Okay, out of 24 boreholes in 1994-95, 23 came up dry.
Only one had water in it.
The water bleeds through this layer.
Anything that's in that confined above the Franciscan ends up in our well water.
The impact of a well failure on local residents would be catastrophic.
catastrophic. Local Airbnbs would be required to post boil water notices and mandatory
well testing. Who would expose their family, children, and friends to experience this special
seaside attraction? It was mentioned a little. The project is not compliant with the Fort
EIGLCP please find the appeals race substantial issues.
Thank you there is a little bit of an echo not sure if we can just just wait
one second there's some ringing and echo we've been trying to work on it yeah
thank you. Hi everyone I'm Teresa Scar I'm also an
appellant your staff's report for this project acknowledges that the city of
Fort Bragg approved more bonus incentives than required by state
housing law. In fact, the city of Fort Bragg approved a project that is more than twice
the size of that allowed by their zoning regulations. If they had required compliance with zoning
regulations, the project would have been less than half the size and they still would be
in compliance with state housing law. Your staff claims that you don't have jurisdiction
to reject the city's decision to grant extra bonus incentives to developers. However, the
decision to allow this huge project breaks many local coastal policies and
doesn't comply with the Coastal Act, both of which are within your jurisdiction.
The city inappropriately exempted this project from environmental review
through invalid CEQA exemptions. However, the LCP includes many requirements for
evaluation of resource impacts. There are resource impacts. The city determined
that six studies were required for this project, but only one of those, the
biological survey was a report specifically prepared for this
development. The other reports like the hydrology evaluation covered by Mr.
Burnett were done for other projects some very long ago even when local
regulations require project specific studies and even when the studies had
already been determined by the city to be inadequate. One of the most important
parts of our appeals was that the city planner made inaccurate statements to
the City Council about the circumstances under which they could deny or require changes to
this housing project. The planner grossly mischaracterized those circumstances, raising
serious questions about the validity of the City Council's decision. Our appeals raise
substantial issues. Please reject the recommendation of your staff to dismiss our concerns. Please
find that our appeals raise substantial issues and schedule a de nova hearing to fully vet them.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker uh last appellant is truthful kindness
and they've requested and been granted six minutes to speak due to ADA compliance.
I couldn't understand you but that doesn't matter. Yes, I think.
My full legal name is truthful loving kindness, and I'm a resident on Todd's Point.
As a resident of Fort Bragg itself, I feel really strongly that each building on the west side of
Highway 1 should be something to bring visitors to Fort Bragg. As shown by our first power,
anyway upon the top there. Currently even the lack of buildings in this space serves
visitors. The top photo shows a bit of coastline and ocean to beckon visitors
to partake of Pomo Bluffs Park. Eventually the ocean painting on the
Welcome to Fort Bragg sign on Highway 1 from the Highway 20 intersection may be
be simply a memorial for ocean views from Fort Bragg partially depending on
what happens with that big big one Georgia Pacific something like that
anyway yes drivers need to be watching the road but can you hear the squeals
from the children with their first view of the ocean?
Or was that simply their excitement
at seeing a two-dimensional painting on the billboard?
Welcome to Fort Bragg.
Even living here 25 years, I myself
watch for each glimpse of ocean view
when he drives me somewhere.
If that current view beckoning folks
to Pomo Bluffs Park is to be sacrificed
then it needs to be sacrificed to functions
that fully serve visitors making them fully aware
of reasons to return to our beautiful coastline.
Thank you.
There are no more repellents, sign up to speak.
Okay, thank you very much.
Now we'll move to the applicant.
There's a representative.
Yes, we have one person representing the applicant,
I believe, Josh Gruul, and they are on Zoom.
All right, Kosh Gruul.
Mr. Gruul, you'll have three minutes.
Can you guys hear me now?
Yes, we can hear you.
Okay, perfect.
Good morning, or sorry, good afternoon, commissioners.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today.
My name is Kosh Grewell.
owner and applicant of this project and I'm here to express strong support for our proposed
housing development in the city of Fort Bragg, a project that we believe will bring significant
and much needed benefits to the local community and help address the broader housing crisis facing
California. As you know, California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing shortage across the
state, working families, young professionals, and even essential workers are being priced out of their
communities that they serve. This crisis is not abstract. It is felt every day in places like
Fort Bragg where the availability of quality affordable housing is extremely limited. Governor
Newsom and the Governor's office have made it clear California must build more housing especially in
communities that are experiencing both population pressure and economic need. Our project aligns
with these statewide goals and priorities. It represents smart sustainable growth with an
existing urban footprint and it is tailored to meet the real housing needs of the city.
What makes this project especially important is its affordable housing component. We're
not just building market rate units, we're reserving a meaningful portion of the development
or affordable housing that will be accessible to working class individuals and families
in Fort Bragg. These are the people who power the local economy, teachers, healthcare workers,
grocery clerks, service providers, and they deserve to live in the community where they
work. Housing is a fundamental right and housing for all Californians regardless of income must be
a shared priority. Our project reflects this commitment by expanding access to housing in
Fort Bragg we are helping ensure that the city remains inclusive economically diverse and livable
for generations to come. We also recognize and deeply respect the Coastal Commission's mission
to protect California's coast and ensure equitable public access. We have worked carefully to design
this project with environmental responsibility and community benefit at the forefront.
We believe this project will serve as a model of how responsible development can work with
the Coastal Act, not against it. In closing, we believe this project is a win-win for the city,
a Fort Bragg for the region, and for California. It supports housing equity, aligns with state
policy, and provides real opportunities for people who simply want a chance to live and thrive in the
communities that they live. Thank you for your time and your continued dedication to the California
and coast and to the people who call it home.
And I'm also available for questions at the end
if any of the commissioners would like that.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you, Mr. Greywall.
Are there any representatives
from the local government who wishes to speak?
I guess we have the mayor of Fort Bragg.
Thank you, Chair Harmon, commissioners, commission staff.
My name is Isaac Wippe.
I'm the city manager for the city of Fort Bragg.
Welcome to the city.
It's nice to see you all and thank you
for having your September meeting here on the north coast
and we certainly appreciate all the work you do
on protecting the California coast.
I have a statement to read on behalf of Mayor Godecki
and our Vice Mayor Raffanin in support of this project.
Fort Bragg hasn't seen a major market rate housing proposal
in a very long time.
This project would serve families, couples,
and single people.
It is housing with modestly scaled rental units
which will support our workforce.
Currently, our workers struggle to find housing.
We're talking about nurses, teachers, first responders,
contractors, professionals, and service workers,
among many others.
Employers aren't able to attract needed talent to our area
due to the high cost of housing
and a lack of available units for rent or for sale.
Workers are forced to leave their jobs in this community
because of viscosity of housing that is affordable
for people who do not qualify for subsidies.
This story isn't just anecdotal.
The city recently did a comprehensive study
of our residents in 2024.
We asked them to assess the community's
most difficult challenges and 85% of those respondents
consider the cost of housing as extremely serious
or a serious problem.
By far the highest challenge we face here in Fort Bragg.
Our SEIU, or Service Employer International Union
of Manicino County surveyed its members on housing,
23% of their members reported pain
between 40 and 50% of their income on housing,
and 32% were paying 50% or more.
We also have data from the employer side,
Three years ago, the North Coast Housing Action Team
surveyed employees on the question of housing.
This survey received 72 responses
from locally owned business, nonprofit, government,
public entities, and healthcare,
with 66% of respondents weren't able to hire
or keep employees because of housing.
Through a collaborative process, city staff,
our planning consultant, have worked closely
with your commission staff to improve and refine the project,
ensuring it balances responsible coastal stewardship
with the urgent housing needs of our community.
We certainly appreciate this collaborative approach
and the coastal commission staff's recommendation.
Our city planning commission and city council
each approved this project twice.
And just to close, this is certainly rare opportunity
to bring a much needed housing
to a small coastal city like Fort Bragg
that has waited far too long.
We respectfully urge you to support this project
and allow Fort Bragg to move forward.
Thank you again for the update.
Thank you.
And then I'll note that we do have one person
from the consulting team on Zoom
and available for questions.
Okay, now any qualified speakers?
On our list, we have three people sign up to speak,
John Hughes, Michelle Blackwell, and Curtis Hebel.
But we don't see their names on the list
of qualified speakers.
And there are no other speakers signed up.
Okay, and they're not in the room with us today, are they?
Did you hear your name?
Curtis Hebel indicated that they were in the room,
but I'm not sure.
Okay, well not seeing any of those three,
we will close the public hearing,
and I will bring it back to staff for your response.
Yeah, I just wanna mention that all issues that were raised,
we believe these have been addressed in the staff report
and this project really raises
no significant coastal resource issues.
And we think that the approved project as conditioned
under the CDP amendment strikes an appropriate balance
between providing new housing in the coastal zone,
including affordable housing for persons of low
and moderate income and protecting priority visitor
serving uses, including lower cost overnight accommodations
and coastal access amenities.
And we believe this project is consistent with the LCP,
which is the standard of review.
And I just want to make one correction as well.
One of the appellants mentioned that there was a miscalculator
that this project authorizes a slightly larger number of units
than what would be allowed
under the density bonus calculations,
but there is a miscalculation
that's in the staff report on page 29.
So I just wanna correct this on the record.
The staff report states that the 83 units
is slightly larger than what would be allowed,
but that's incorrect.
The revised number of housing units
as approved under the permit amendment
is consistent with the project's maximum density
bonus allocation as allowed under state density bonus law
the city's LCP and the calculation error had to do with not counting the
accessory dwelling units as part of the base count so I think that's it thank
you okay thank you very much so I will bring it back to the Commission for
comments questions or a motion Commissioner Wilson I always jump first
today, it seems like. These aren't last, but here we go. Just a couple of things. There
was some comments around the view shed, but that particular property is already zoned
for potential multi-story commercial development. It doesn't have necessarily an inherent protection
of that resource and its current state construct.
Is that right?
Yes, that's correct.
I think the height limit is 28 feet,
and then there's also buildings or lots west of this site
in the county that I think the height limit there
may also be 28 feet.
And there's just limited blue water views currently,
a few in between the existing vegetation on the property
in some of the other buildings behind this property to the west.
And there was mention of the potential for a bus stop
if warranted.
Now, in my world, kind of chicken and egg there, right?
Generally speaking, bus stops are warranted.
You don't know until you have it,
and then people are using it.
And so I'm just wondering, has there
been more discussion with the local transit agency about that and and what
is the trigger? So Special Condition 20 requires the applicant to work with the
Mendocino Transit Authority in the school district to determine if the
addition of a transit and or school bus stop at the property is
warranted slash feasible. If a transit slash school bus stop is feasible and
desirable the applicant shall install a bus stop in the sidewalk at the location
per the request of the MTA school district prior to final of the building
permit. Sometimes it doesn't happen to be at the very location of the property
under the control of the applicant and so I'm just wondering if there's a
willingness to consider some area around this as the potential for their
application of this of being supportive in in the building of a new bus stop
whether it's building it or actually funding that new bus stop as part of
this development do you see I'm getting at because sometimes just limiting it to
that one location it doesn't really work but you still need it and so I'm just
I'm hoping there's some flexibility in that I might recommend directing that
question to the city I think there's willingness from our standpoint but
really would be the city I think that would be working through any changes or
thinking through bus lines. So maybe we could... And probably the applicant as
well. Sure, so I can address that directly. So there is already a bus stop
essentially across Highway 1 from here at Harvest Market. So it's less than a
maybe three-minute walk from this location. That's why we didn't directly
require a bus stop. And I think the applicant has been very open to
responding to concerns. So I'll let him speak to that if he wants to as well.
In other words, we can put it someplace else if we need to.
Thank you, Ms. Jones.
Mr. Greywall, see your hand up.
Yeah, just to elaborate on that.
Our goal from the beginning was to definitely speak to the local transit authority and the
school district as well.
As we've said before, this apartment complex is for all people of all walks of life, whether
they're single, married, with kids, without kids.
So we feel like it would be important to have the local transit authority along with the
school agency so that if there are children in the area that are going to
take the bus that it would be located as close to possible to the parcel itself.
Great, thanks. On another note, we just moments ago approved an extension for
Caltrans's work to do ped pedestrian improvements along the
highway here. I can't remember where that begins and
ends necessarily, but does that get close to this project or where does that
beginning and end. I think that's north of the Noya River so it doesn't come
this far south in the city is what we call it. So continuing my overall concern
about pedestrian and bike access and safety in the city of Fort Bragg, again
it's like so weird that you have this two-lane highway that goes all the way
up and down the coast but then suddenly becomes four lanes where all the people
are. And then it becomes, as you know, there's no really good safe crossing between the location
of this project, right, which has a lit intersection to just to the south of it, I guess. And then
you go all, I mean, it's probably a half mile, almost a mile into before you get to the next
sort of safe crossing across the highway.
And so, and also there's not much in the,
it's just a very complicated and not very safe access.
And I'm just hoping that unfortunately
our Caltrans representative is not here today.
Oh, there, Jeremy, sorry, there you are.
How did I miss you?
Sorry, Jeremy.
Got confused.
So Jeremy, can you update us on that project
And is Caltrans still looking at doing these updates
in terms of making pedestrian crossings more safe
here in the city of Fort Bragg?
Yeah, I don't have specifics on the project here
in Fort Bragg, but we definitely are looking at that
throughout the state, increasing access and ADA compliance.
So that is definitely a goal of ours throughout the state.
And yeah, I don't have any specifics
the one here in Fort Bragg.
OK, so I'm just saying, so where
we have in this town multifamily housing on the south side
is where it's the most difficult and most dangerous
to cross the road to both access coastal resources.
But likewise now that we're seeing multifamily housing
on the coastal side, accessing those facilities
like stores and other things that people need to get to
and getting into town.
I'm just hoping that we're thinking about those things
as we move forward, especially if we're talking
about these sort of developments.
So right now, in that zoning, it requires
a conditional use permit to have housing
on the second floor.
Is that the way I understand that?
Yes.
Okay.
I would be amenable to future LCP updates
where second floor housing is principally permitted
as opposed to conditional.
Just for the future of thinking about development
and how we support housing development,
and we're doing it in our community and many other places,
that's just, why would that be conditional,
like in a place like this?
Why would we be slowing housing down
if it's on the second floor of already a commercial space?
I think that's something we should be thinking about.
It's also, I think it can be on the ground floor
in the rear of buildings, yeah, as well.
I hear that, but again,
that layer of that conditional use versus principally
permitted is something we need to be thinking about
if we're trying to encourage housing
in these commercial areas and mixed use,
I think it's important.
There's some concern around the water quality
and the wells that exist in that space.
There's a reason probably those lots are at,
are they an acre each?
Is that what they are or something like that?
Yeah, on a coastal prairie.
I mean, that's tenuous as far as development goes, for sure.
Probably was not a great idea without actually
having services having been delivered in that space,
and that would require annexation
and all those other things.
Not going down that rabbit hole too far,
but you still have commercial activities
that could be much more impactful in that zone
from a water quality perspective currently.
And this is not, and so this is really a conversion
to residential which tends to have a less
of a water quality impact,
especially when it's on services,
than maybe like a, you know,
like a garage of some kind, or repair space,
or those sorts of facilities.
So I'm just kind of wondering,
is that part of the analysis that?
There's a lot of conditions on the permit
related to hydrology considerations
and especially capturing stormwater on-site
and allowing it to slowly infiltrate on-site
and for any that leaves the site,
having it go through bioswales
and there's also requirements for drainage improvements
in the city streets.
So I think the city was attempting to just have
as much stormwater management as possible
to reduce the potential for any water quality impacts
to properties to the west.
And this development will be connected
to the city's municipal services.
And there's analysis that the city did showing
that there's more than enough water
to supply this development.
Okay, and just for lastly,
and I appreciate you letting me kind of go down this path,
We at the commission don't have a direct nexus
in terms of what we consider housing as a coastal resource.
And it has been a quandary.
And we get criticized from multiple directions
because of that.
And so we take interpretations often around that.
And I would say, and I've been clearly stating
for a long time, that workforce housing
is part of the infrastructure
that supports coastal resources,
that supports coastal communities.
If we are gonna have a community that receives visitors
and all its values, there is a workforce
required to work in the restaurants,
maintain first responder services, rebuild the streets,
do all of the things that are required to do that.
Part of that infrastructure is the housing
that maintains our workforce to be able to service that.
And from my perspective, I think that's relevant.
Also, we see as pressure on housing on the coast goes up,
we see sometimes, and there was a mention
of Airbnb's, right, and someone was concerned
about the threat to Airbnb's.
Well, quite frankly, that's part of that infrastructure
that gets lost when we convert housing
into visitors or into hotels, essentially.
We lose that housing, we're losing that infrastructure,
and we need to rebuild it wherever we can,
it seems to me, and I think that this is supportive of that.
So I'm supportive of this project, but going forward,
I really want to make sure that we're really still putting pressure on Caltrans and sort
of the access issues that we see along, because we may see, someone said that we may see more
development like this, and if that's the case, then we need to be cognizant of that
and moving forward.
So I just, you know, I just, again, I want to make sure, the other part about this, I
I guess I was getting at it as we see working people pushed
away from the coast, we remove a certain character
of that coast, which is people who live in that space,
who go fishing, who walk around town,
who are the fun people that make a place authentic,
is what I'm getting at.
I'm being, I could use more colorful terms,
But really, it's just meaning that there's authenticity
in that space and we need that to remain.
And I think that this type of housing helps us maintain
that and keep that and move it forward.
So unless I, and then I want to get to,
I just didn't, I support the staff's analysis
is what I want to really get to.
And so I think there isn't anything in the staff's analysis
that I don't agree with, and so thanks.
Thank you, Commissioner Lopez.
Yeah, Madam Chair, I do wanna make sure
that the cool people stay on the coast
as Commissioner Wilson was talking about there.
I'll use that analogy, and I think that's a big part of
one of the, the big part of the reason I'm here
is to make sure that our folks have an opportunity
to live where they work.
And so for that reason, at the appropriate time today,
Madam Chair, I'd be honored to make the motion
to support staff's recommendation
when you feel that time's appropriate, please let me know.
Will do, thank you.
Commissioner Kelly.
I wanna align myself with the comments of Commissioner Wilson
and just mention a couple quick items.
One is that coming from Healdsburg,
a community that is deeply focused
on visitors serving uses,
although not in the coastal zone,
I think creating access to affordable housing
and the city's acknowledgement
that when you have an investment
and visitor serving uses, that that does create
a strong need for affordable housing.
And without that adequate housing
to support those visitor serving uses,
and I'm talking about for people that work in our hotels,
who work in our restaurants,
who are helping to build the infrastructure,
construction jobs within the community,
healthcare workers, et cetera.
The environmental issues that are associated
with not building that housing
and the environmental justice issues associated
with not building that housing,
it means that we are asking people
to commute very long hours.
If we're not building transit to support that,
then they're commuting by car
and the greenhouse gas emissions associated with that.
We're putting people on roads,
doing commutes for many hours.
I don't know for the folks who drove here today,
but imagine driving that drive back to say,
Ukiah or wherever you're living,
if you're unable to live in housing along the coast
and in doing it after your shift or at a time
that puts you at a disadvantage to participating
in the community in which you live.
You can't go to soccer practice after school.
You can't participate in those parent-teacher conferences
because you're commuting hours to get to that job
because your housing isn't located in the city
with which you're working.
So I do think that this is part and parcel
to supporting visitor serving uses
to have housing, both that's dense,
that allows for multi-generational housing
for families and individuals, as well as seniors,
who want to stay in this community,
but maybe downsize out of the units
that they're currently living in
and have a more accessible place to age and place.
So in addition, I just wanna talk about
the pedestrian and transit improvements
that Commissioner Wilson mentioned.
So because this property does have
that special condition 44,
as well as 42.
So we are looking at increasing public access
along that path and providing public access
to the Pomo Bluffs Park,
which is a visitor supporting access component.
I think if we aren't looking at the,
we're just looking at the site in isolation
and saying we're gonna increase public access here
and getting people to that Pomo Bluffs Park,
but we're not talking about what happens
when they reach the edge of the parcel.
it is a really poorly induced design
in terms of thinking about we're gonna have people
somehow show up on this parcel and then access this park.
And so what I'd like to think us to consider is that yes,
in this moment we are talking about this particular parcel,
but thinking about how people will get to this point,
visitors specifically in this context,
we're building a bench for them,
but are we building a pathway to get them
from point A to this parcel?
And if not, we're kind of putting them in harm's way,
saying when you arrive here there'll be a path for you to get to the park but
before you get here you have to be in your car or you might have to play
Frogger which is a video game where a frog you know gets hit by a bus to get
to this site which of course we don't want to see happen as people are
traversing this four-lane highway with no crosswalk no pedestrian improvements
and no transit directly associated so I just want us to consider that as we're
creating density on this site and creating public access there have to be
these additional kind of zoom out from this bird's eye view
to think about how will people access this site on foot
and by transit and what are the best ways
to get them out of their car
and experiencing the public realm here in Fort Bragg
because that is the goal for I think all of us
is to experience those public access trails in these parks
and not having to drive your car to get there ideally
or if you don't have the privilege of owning a car
to do that that is accessible for everyone.
So thank you.
Commissioner Nada.
Thank you.
I want to thank the Appellants for bringing this to us
and the city for their conditions
that they applied to the project.
Housing in the coastal zone is of utmost importance
to all of us and for workforce housing.
I did want to reference the state density bonus law which actually affects the calculation
of density at the state level that allows local jurisdictions to apply that, which I
just want to highlight that in the staff report that that's not something that we're running
the numbers on.
I will note that, I'm glad to see that there's about 10%
of the units for very low income.
Always like to see that number higher,
but I think that with rental units, one and two bedrooms,
many of those will be affordable by design.
And I hope that those will be affordable to the folks
who live here and work here.
So while these housing and development on the west side
of Highway 1 is always, you know, it's difficult to, you know, see those changes.
I think that this one has been designed and conditioned so that its benefits are
duered down to the community. Great, thank you. Commissioner Jackson. Thank you Madam
Chair, thank you all of our speakers today. Just one question about the
Affordability a component to this proposed project are those is that deed restricted in perpetuity? I
Believe so the city could probably answer that better
They are required under a condition to enter into an occlusionary housing agreement
And I think that the intent is it'll be consistent with state law for the time period which I don't know if that's 55 years
or
longer than that. Marie can answer. Yeah, I can answer that real quick. So yeah, they will have to enter into an agreement with this city
prior to a final building permit because you know it involves lawyers.
That the units would be permanently affordable for 55 years as required by state density bonus law.
And I also just wanted to answer Commissioner Williams concern and we did reach out to Caltrans. They are recommending the city
for a grant to design sidewalk improvements along the southwest side of Highway 1 between Oceanview Drive and the Noyo River.
Those sidewalks are currently deficient. It becomes a challenge to require an applicant to make sidewalk improvements that are not a consequence of their project.
This project does include sidewalk improvements along both frontages of the property itself
as well as pretty significant roadway improvements and parking area improvements.
I appreciate that clarification and understand that the applicant may not be required to,
but it's always a nice gesture by those that are willing and able.
Just a couple of last quick things.
My colleague earlier mentioned local control, and in these days of mandates, unfunded mandates
coming from Sacramento, I think this is an example of the local government retaining
the authority to shape its housing solutions that reflect their unique needs and infrastructure.
And I think this is an example of that coming together
to address an issue that is paramount
to not only this city, but the state.
So I appreciate that.
And the commissioner Wilson talked about
the non-vehicle infrastructure that, you know,
I think, you know, just to reiterate,
has to be a part of any development
because you don't want the cool people
to be able to get to the cool stuff outside of vehicles.
So to the extent that micromobility options
are sort of always factored into future developments,
I think that's an important consideration.
Particularly in light of my colleague,
Commissioner Kelly mentioning Frogger.
And like most things in life,
it relates to a Seinfeld episode
and there's the scene for those Seinfeld aficionados
of George trying to salvage his Frogger legacy
while crossing a road in New York.
And I just had visions of people who live
in this great planned new community
trying to cross the highway,
trying to get to the cool stuff.
So again, that infrastructure,
micro-mobility is important,
be it e-bikes, be it pedestrian, but whatever.
So I'm glad that that is being discussed.
And I think more folks, more communities
as well as obviously Caltrans plays an important part
in that, so thank you.
Okay, thank you.
So really important discussion.
And with that, I don't see any other commissioners.
So I'll turn it back to Commissioner Lopez for a motion.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
With that, I would move that the commission
determine the result that appeal number A1FTB 250024 does not present a substantial issue
with the respect to the grounds on which the appeal is been filed under Section 3603 of
the Coastal Act regarding consistency with a certified local coastal plan and or the
public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act.
Second.
Okay, that was a motion by Commissioner Lopez, a second by Commissioner Wilson.
And may we please have a roll call vote.
Commissioner Jackson aye Jackson yes Commissioner Kelly yes Kelly yes
Commissioner Lopez yes Lopez yes Commissioner not off aye not off yes
Commissioner presiano yes presiano yes Commissioner Turnbull Sanders
Commissioner Wilson yes Wilson yes Commissioner O'Malley yes O'Malley yes
Commissioner Escalante yes Escalante yes Chair Harmon yes Harmon yes the vote is
unanimous thank you and with that no substantial issue has been found
there's a second motion now on the second motion be if you're ready madam
chair yes thank you all right so then I would also move that the Commission
determine and resolve that appeal number A1FTB 2500,
I'm sorry.
Yeah, that was all right.
0013 does not present a substantial issue
because the appeal is moot upon finding that appeal number
A1FTB 25-0024 raises no substantial issue
with respect to the grounds on which that appeal
has been filed under section 3603 of the Coastal Act
regarding consistency with the certified local coastal plan
and or the public access and recreation policies
of the Coastal Act.
second that's a motion by Commissioner Lopez a second by Commissioner Wilson
and may we have another roll call vote please Commissioner Kelly yes Kelly yes
Commissioner Lopez yes Lopez yes Commissioner not off I not off yes
Commissioner Presiado yes yes Commissioner Wilson yes Wilson
Yes commissioner O'Malley yes O'Malley yes commissioner Escalante yes Escalante
yes commissioner Jackson Jackson yes chair Herman yes Herman yes the vote
is unanimous and now no substantial issue has been found
okay we're gonna take a five-minute bio break to maintain quorum thank you be
back at 1225 thank you. Okay thanks everybody we will return to our calendar
and that brings us to item 12c I think. Looking to staff to see if I'm right
about that. Yes item 12c that's a new appeal in the city of Trinidad. I'm gonna
hand it over to Rebecca Jacobson a coastal program analyst in our North
Coast District to provide the staff recommendation good afternoon
commissioners item 12c is an appeal of a City of Trinidad coastal development
permit amendment for repairs to the Axel Lindgren Memorial Trail including
vegetation trimming and replacement of the cable steps at the base of the trail
we have received three comment letters and one email on this item which can all
be viewed in the correspondence tab on the website for this item none of the
Comments received raise any new issues not already addressed in the staff report
The try ancestral society appealed the city's approved trail
Improvements on the grounds that the city did not undertake consultation or obtain approval of the project by the try ancestral society
As required by land use plan policy 69 of the certified Trinidad local coastal program the LCP
Specifically policy 69 requires approval by the trie ancestral society for any ground disturbance
within the trie study area
due to ground disturbance associated with the city approved project and the requirements of policy 69 as it relates to cultural resource protection as
Further described in the staff report staff is recommending that the appeal raises substantial LCP issues
And that the Commission take jurisdiction over the CDP application for the proposed project
So, at this point, the question is whether three or more commissioners would like to
debate the substantial issue question through a full hearing.
If not, then substantial issue will be found, and the de novo portion of the hearing will
proceed at a future date.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Are there any ex partes on this?
Okay.
I'm seeing none.
Do, I don't see, I'm assuming none from our commissioners online also.
Okay.
Thank you.
Couldn't see you for a second.
Do, are there any, oh, I just asked.
Do three or more commissioners wish to have a hearing
on substantial issue?
Okay.
Seeing none, none, then substantial issue has been found.
And we will have the de novo hearing at a later date.
Thank you very much.
And now we just have some minutes to approve, I believe.
Any comments, motion?
I'll make a motion to approve the minutes.
Second.
Moved by Commissioner O'Malley, seconded by Commissioner
Wilson.
May we have a roll call vote, please, Ms. Miller?
Commissioner Jackson?
Aye.
Jackson, yes.
Commissioner Kelly?
Yes.
Kelly, yes.
Commissioner Lopez?
Aye.
Lopez, yes.
Commissioner Notoff?
Aye.
Notoff, yes.
Commissioner Presiado?
Aye.
Presiado, yes.
Commissioner Turnbull Sanders.
Yes.
Turnbull Sanders.
Yes.
Commissioner Wilson.
Yes.
Wilson.
Yes.
Commissioner O'Malley.
Yes.
O'Malley.
Yes.
Commissioner Escalante.
Yes.
Escalante.
Yes.
Chair Harmon.
Harmon.
Yes.
The vote is unanimous.
Great.
Thank you, and the minutes have been approved.
So now I'll ask if there are any reports, commission reports,
of Conservancy Reports or a report from our Deputy AG?
Yes, thank you commissioners.
I just wanted to highlight one decision
that recently came down that was a successful win
is the Benedetti versus County Marin case
and the California Court of Appeal
issued a published decision
where they upheld Marin County's LCP amendment
that requires CDPs for residential buildings
agricultural properties but requires that there's a restrictive covenant
recorded that the owners are engaged in agriculture so or Lisa to yeah someone
engaged in agriculture so it was a big win because it was it upheld the the
trial courts ruling and that LCP amendment thank you great thank you and
now I'll turn it over to miss Warren who I think is gonna thank you just before
Before we adjourn the meeting, I wanted to let the public know that on the field trip
there will not be any public comment taken during the field trip.
And commissioners will not be discussing what they see on the field trip together on the
trip.
But if members of the public wish to make comment about what's seen, if they participate
in the field trip and want to make comments about it, they can do so during general public
comment tomorrow morning or Friday morning.
Thank you.
Great.
Thank you.
We'll close the hearing for today and I believe we'll all be meeting here at 1 45 to begin
the field trip.
Director Hucklebridge.
We're just we're going to leave from here at 1 30 to walk down.
Yeah.
Just the commissioners.
1 30.
Great.
Thank you.
We are adjourned for the day.
The city and medicinal railway.
So I am just going to work with the itinerary explains the stock to stop.
The itinerary explains the stop to stop, the different stops that we'll be making, some of that's walking.
We're going to try to stay together as a group for each stop and then there'll be some driving as well.
But there's going to be a safety briefing given in just a moment, but first I'm going to introduce again Isaac,
would be the City Manager, to come up and start off talking about today's tour.
Thanks very much Melissa. Welcome to the commissioners again, staff, and community. Thanks for being here.
I just wanted to kick it off and say that the land here which we stand on has defined so much of the history of Fort Brett from an economic standpoint
be the former mayor owned by Georgia Pacific and is at the heart of the conversation with the
next chapter of this community in terms of housing, jobs, environmental restoration,
expanded open space and coastal access. So it's super important for the community
and I know many of you have been following this for the longest time and others that have joined
here recently, including myself. We've, the City Council, have embraced a plan, a more
cooperative planning strategy in the view of the litigation for various reasons and
we've embarked on the master developer agreement approach with the LCP amendment
coming up and we've undertaken three public workshops with the community to
gather feedback. Mendocino Rail has presented their last
which have been refined based on community feedback at HODD and that has evolved and
it's continually evolved which is fantastic. So my boss Ms. Marie Jones who is our former
community development director has been doing this a long time. We asked by the Commission
staff to compare the 2019 administrative plan and just kind of a full context, provide
some of the changes and you know just for those wondering 2019 was the last
time we undertook the LCP amendment over 30 plus public workshops of the
community so this is an information gathering I encourage you all to you know
look at the the challenges understand the challenges of the site very
complicated but also the events opportunities that it holds and I'd like
I'd like to thank Madam City Rail as well for facilitating the tour. And with that, I'll ask about Bernie Johnson, please.
Thank you, Isaac. So I've been asked to start by just giving a little history line, if you don't mind.
So for those of you who don't know, the mill site did close down in 2002.
And in 2003, George Pacific started and initiated a planning process that engaged the city until 2009.
and actually Linda Roofing and I headed that up,
it was quite a big effort.
During that time we had countless community meetings
and charrettes and city council meetings
and planning commission meetings,
but at the end of the day it a little bit all came for naught
because, well, there was a lawsuit about remediation.
And so Georgia Pacific walked away
from the planning process at that time.
And then it basically just, nothing really happened
until 2017 and at that time the city went ahead on its own
and got a grant from the California Coastal Commission
to start an LCK amendment process to rezone the mill site.
That process went until 2019.
And again, during that process,
we had multiple community meetings
and council meetings planning commission meetings.
The plans changed over time,
and I'm gonna talk a little bit about
what that looked like on the ground.
But I just want to start off by saying
that all of that work has informed
some of what you're gonna see today.
There are differences though, and so I'm going to go through what's similar and also what's different.
And then I also wanted to mention that in 2004, we had another LCK amendment,
which actually re-zoned over 110 acres of the Fort Bragg Mill site.
I bet you didn't know that.
And that is the entire coastal trail, the property that's owned by the Sherwood Valley Band of Comos,
and the property that's owned by the NIO Center.
So that was a new planning area, and that was completed this year, and the Coastal Commission
certified that amendment.
So essentially, a quarter of the site has already been rezoned, primarily for visitor
serving uses and recreational uses.
So I'm going to start with a little bit of overview of what's happening with our process
now.
I only have five minutes, so I'm going to talk soon for the past two or maybe anyone
who always has any questions later.
So we are engaged in a consultation process with other agencies which is required by state
law.
So we're talking about the Sherwood Valley Land of Homa, Caltrans, the Coastal Commission,
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
So we started consultation with all of those agencies and there are other agencies that
we will also likely have to consult with as well.
All of those agencies will be weighing in on the entirety of the plan and I do want to
emphasize that the plan is a language map but it's also much more of a map.
That's all the policies and zoning regulations that go with the lens map that describes how
to film an almost kind of bullet burn where it will burn and what it will look like.
So with that created, I just want to talk through both the similarities of this plan
and also the differences with the 2019 plan and it's not to point out the ones that are
all working with the number, no, of course not.
It's just to bring everybody back to speed so that you understand kind of where Senate
Council on the Planning Commission were in 2019 and how that compares to today. I
do want to emphasize that 2019 plan never even made it to the Coastal
Commission so we didn't really get feedback from them other than from staff
about it. So bottom line is there's a lot of cooks in the kitchen this and the
dinner is not done. So that's like your take home quote message. So I'm going to
start on the North Mill site, which we basically think of as kind of here in
Orange. And both Minnesota Railway and Georgia Pacific initiated their plan with
development all the way to the Coastal Trail. And in both cases they recognize
that they need to pull back the kinds of coastal resources that are located on those
areas. What's different about the plan is both emphasize multi-family
development here, rather than single-family residential, so that is similar. The old
have more high density so this is a little less density. Obviously in a new
skunk train station, that's different. In 2019 we actually had our rail line that
went all the way out here. The skunk train has pulled that back to go here
instead and that's really to respond I think a lot to concerns from City Council.
So in the middle section what's different? The Central Business District has been
extended further out of the mill site. In the past the City Council expressed
concerns about creating another location of visitors serving that were
tall about our downtown. So that's different. We really only have this in the
business district, just a little block extension. There's arguments to go into
play. Both have an open space area here. This is new, this trail track. In the
2019-10, this was light industrial. Now it's obviously all train related
activities, the high-density residential here is the same. Moving south, highway
commercial, that is the same. This area is all the same, as if these are all coastal
resources so development cannot occur here or in here or in here. So these open
space frameworks are largely the same because development isn't basically allowed in those
areas. In the 2019 plan we had heavy industrial here that's been replaced
with white industrial has been extended further up to the North. The big difference is in,
as you were saying, I'm a lot. I must be nervous. So in 2019, the City Council had this concept of a
urban reserve. And the idea of the urban reserve was to save most of the southern portion for a
future City Council to do a different Helsinki Amendment and zoning around because if anybody's
long time. You know the corporate change is very slow. Right? And so the idea is
that even though everybody thinks it's a great place to live here, not many people
actually live here because guess what? It's very far from anywhere. And so the
idea was that this park would get designed in a future period. We submitted that to
the Coastal Commission staff. They said basically you can't do that at this point. You need
need to rezone the entire rehearsal. You can't have a separate location. So the other big
difference on the South side is the City Council really envisioned this as a jobs area with
little to no housing. And the new plan includes quite a bit more housing. Basically, housing
would be a permissible use at 24 units per acre throughout these areas that are on the
And part of that was just since we can zone it urban reserve for future process,
the idea was just to get the most flexibility it could have.
Beyond that, so initially more of this would have been undeveloped for a longer period of time,
but that said, even though you zone it doesn't mean necessarily we will come,
and realistically this is probably at least a 30-year build-out projection,
and I have to say to Linda that in 2006 when we were doing this, I said it was a 30 year build out projection
and now we're coming years later, a lot of years later and nothing's happened.
So it's a bold heart to project that stuff.
So I'm just going to put my notes and make sure that I've done that.
With that, I will pass it off to the next persona.
Hi, good afternoon everybody. I'm Robert from Lane, the President and CEO of Mendocino Railway.
And before I go too much further, I want to ask one of our associates to do a safety briefing on the route we're going to take today and some of the things to be accomplished.
Thank you Robert. Good afternoon. My name is Mike Buck. I'm the Environmental Project Manager from the New Zealand Railway.
And just, we don't want to get out there and check out the property.
Real quick, this is a former industrial site as everyone probably knows.
But most of the features of that former industrial use have not been changed and just been cleared off.
So there are open pits, there are holes to trip in.
Mostly trip and fall happens out there.
So please stay together as we go out and look at the various features of the site.
And other than that, just to let us know if you have any issues,
meaning all the consistence along the way,
but that's the safety of the group.
Thank you, Mike.
Again, good afternoon and welcome.
I'd like to welcome the members
of the California Coastal Commission.
Thank you for visiting Fort Dragon.
It's been a couple of years,
and thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule
to come out and do this tour.
I also want to welcome and recognize two members
of the governing board, the Sherwood Band,
So, thank you very much for being here, and we appreciate the continued working relationship
that we have.
Many of you may not know, but the second call that we made when we purchased the property
in alongside Thorne was to the Sherwood van, and so we greatly appreciate it working with
that.
A little bit about Mendocino Railway, we are a Class III common carrier.
We have railroads throughout the state of California.
Our sister company, Sierra Northern, is also a part of our larger organization, and Sierra
Railroad Company is the overarching parent organization.
We are spread out from Mendocino County in the far north to Ventura County in the far
south with operations in and around the Sacramento and greater Central Valley.
I collectively, we carry about 20,000 carloads of freight per year across all of our systems
and about 150,000 passengers.
The spent train this year is in its 140th year of continuous operation and our plan
is to really develop this site consistent with what the community has been asking for
through the various stages of a less than a drawing
that you see here, and how things have changed over time.
So I'm going to yield some of my time
and happy to answer any questions that you all have,
may have specifically as we're walking about
or driving about today.
And I'll turn it over to Chris Hart.
Thank you, Robert.
We're just going to do some quick introductions
so you know a little bit about those.
So I'm Vice President of Business Development
for Sierra Railroad Company.
for me 26 years with the company and before that the previous year was fixing up downtown.
So for me this has been a dream job of trying to do this incredible project here.
Also on our project team Lemie, let's go to Mike Clark and let you do a quick introduction.
And while he's making his way over I also wanted to say my brother Mike Hart,
who's president of the company, wanted to be here but a long term vacation with his wife on her birthday.
So, he couldn't make it, but a quick background on him, he's been doing railroad in for 30
years.
Besides his leadership on the railroad side, he is also the head of our Sierra Energy,
which we're very involved in the environmental issues.
Last year we were awarded these environmental railroad for the year.
We have the lowest emission fleet in California and currently in the whole of the United States.
And just last week we had a major event in West Sacramento where we had the nation's
first time to power a switcher local movement.
It's a huge, huge issue and if you don't know about the event, please look it up.
It's a great thing.
Mike.
Thank you, Chris.
I got that.
And so as I said, I'm the environmental project manager.
I'm using a railway.
And my background is that sites that are like this, and I think she was talking about this,
Once like this, and I did write the environmental chapter for the most popular tree development book California.
And that's about it.
I'd like to introduce Jeremy Meyer.
Hi, I'm Jeremy Meyer. I work with Woodard and Kern, and I'm an environmental engineer.
I've been working with a project since about 2009.
I've collected samples out here, so now I just have staff helping with that but we'll be talking later on in the tour, we'll get down into some of the areas where there's ongoing environmental work and we'll be able to explain and answer questions about those activities.
And I think I'll pass this on to Burton.
Thank you, I'm Burton Miller, I'm an architect,
I work in Flversdale, based in San Francisco.
I've been working with this team since 2019.
I think this is my fifth community meeting before the break.
Just going to recognize some faces, it's going to be here.
Just a very brief overview of my background.
I mentioned I'm an architect and planner, I've executed a number of buildings and a wide range of building types.
Domestically, their design and planning experience ranges from San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, San Jose, San Francisco, Sacramento and Fort Brown.
and many small communities and municipalities throughout the state.
I've worked in about, I know, a dozen of 15 states, completed master plans, urban designs,
and buildings in 15 countries internationally, primarily Asia Pacific and Eastern Europe.
I'm quite happy to be back in Tellers morning in Northern California.
Chris was wondering, is it launching to…
Better.
Okay.
So I did build a bid I won't read, set an issue.
I like to acknowledge the projects heritage and history and let everyone know that we
thoroughly researched, investigated, looked into all prior planning work and planning
and spoke to many folks that were involved from the beginning.
So all of that work, the work that Marie referenced in 2019
provided an invaluable foundation for our work.
And I think you'll find that there's
a great deal of DNA from those prior efforts
in the current illustrious plan.
Should also say that this plan has evolved, is evolving,
and will continue to evolve, evolve.
So it's a snapshot in time.
It's where we are.
Lots of issues to continue to explore and hit
in the greater detail.
So we have three exhibits, well, let me say one other thing.
In addition to that foundation, I think Chris alluded to,
we entered a collaborative team effort about a year ago
with the city, the coastal commission, the community.
The railroad has been noted in several very informative, very
well attended community meetings and workshops, ad hoc committees, zoom team calls.
So we've gotten a great deal of useful commentary and information from the community of which
Linda Ruffin was here, dutifully noted, organized, and published.
So, you know, it's written record.
I won't go into too much detail here
because there's so much to talk about,
but I will point out some changes we made
in response to what we heard from the community,
city council, and by way of Isaac and the council
the coast of the mission. These are some updates that we presented in our last public workshop.
So the first which Marie mentioned was for quite a while, as we'll recall from earlier
planning arrangements, that there was an exhibition of the rail along the coastal trail, set back
200 feet to Glass Beach, and had been, I guess there was some concern about its impact on the coastal trail in the open space.
So the railroad was a little rethought back, and came up with an alternative approach instead of extending the rail to Glass Beach.
would employ electric trolley, just a single car, low impact, zero energy.
And originally we had it aligned in a similar fashion.
What we have done and have presented to all parties was to shift the trolley alignment
to the far east of the site, so it can better serve all those neighborhoods.
It's, again, it's a single car electrical frequency, and completely remove it from the open space
in the coastal trail. However we are, I'm routing it so that it's at the glass beach, which is a great
The other thing the city asked us to do was to provide a little more insight and detail
into the proposed last beach station and the proposed new scum station.
So we developed a preliminary program of space skis, i.e. what might go into each building,
how we can develop the footprints that are reflective of those programs.
So instead of having, as in this land use plan, a large area designated as railroad related
and not characterizing the road, now if you look at that same parcel,
parcel and some darker purple is the footprint of the station.
So it's pretty de minimis in the context of the overall parcel.
The other thing we did in the request of the council member was shifting back about
a hundred feet from the boundary of the current parking.
So it creates a kind of gathering point
before visitors head out on the coastal trail
or visit the station with darling.
And the facilities of vision there
are pretty modest, kind of captivating with an outdoor
terrace, a small ticketing, a history room,
last-beach history room which could certainly be expanded
through coastal travel history room.
So as you know right now there are a lot of placards and exhibits out there
so this might be an opportunity to gather them
and make it more sort of focused and form an experience.
Similarly for the proposed SCUN station,
Again, the land use plan, you see that as rail related.
That doesn't mean it's building rail related.
So here's an illustrative illustration
of that, that little rectangle, which
is about a 9,000 square foot print,
is the proposed station on a plaza with parking
along the Redwood extension with supporting CPE uses on the north side.
And the thought for this is it's a little bit like Main Street and Desiigneau where
the buildings are on the north side and the south side has an uncharted view south over the weapons.
And this is all open space.
It's important to note that within that parcel,
even though it's designated land use, ground related,
there's also a substantial divide for open space.
The other thing we did, which is a little hard to read,
where you all are, is I took it close and carefully
with the topography, and it's surprising how much great change there is.
You wouldn't realize it, but east to west is not a 20-changing equation.
So, exploring how to respect the nature of the land,
how to work with it so that the rail is sort of even greater than the topography
in and into the landscape.
So its presence is kind of different.
And when it comes around to the south,
the rail can actually be used to extend over,
just to point out these two.
We've got a little bar, so the ramp itself, just to provide a question.
And that's something we can address a bit later.
But in order to keep this moving with the complete permission, very tight schedule.
We now invite everybody. We're going to leave the dry shed and we're going to follow and walk out of the building and go over to the north ramp area.
it's going to take us a little bit of time to get there, and when we condition there, we'll circle back, and for those that drove their cars in,
we'll go ahead and move up to the north end of the hillside of the s-factor, and those who may have looked at the cars outside the fence,
are certainly welcome to grab their cars, come in and drive them around as well, so we're going to exit right here, and we're going to move over to the north ramp. Thank you.
Hi guys. So this is a fairly quick stop, but we thought it was important to change from showing
you what's on a map to showing you in person where things are. So on your maps, which a lot of you
have, there's the distinctive dry shed, the very large building in the middle that we were just in.
So that's right across the way. There is the proposed skunk train station. If you see the
four cones that's roughly where the station would be. That's approximately 90 by 100 foot
station, three stories, basically the ticketing on the ground floor, offices second floor
and third story would be a restaurant. Redwood Avenue would be extended about halfway between
the dry shed and if you look over there there's the orange cones, there's a small tower of
cones I put out there, that is approximately where the hotel and event center would be.
So as you get a little bit of orientation of where it is, that is a place that we did
some meetings several years ago with the Millside Ad Hoc Committee on the setbacks.
So there was some thought put into that.
The train loop, the one in purple looping around there that are trains that would go
out into the countryside, they would come on the south side of this orange square, come
in and then curve and go on the outside of the station, right outside of the hotel.
Other notable landmarks, where we parked our cars today, that's where about a third of
the way towards us, that would be the Redwood Avenue.
What we have is a planned railroad square, which is a, we were still working on the details,
but that'd be a place where large events could take place.
Not much development in that gap between our engine house and dry shed.
Let's turn to the south.
To the extreme right, we have Soldier Bay.
We have the coastal trail right below us.
pond 8 that we'll be talking about a little later. And then one of the things
that we've envisioned is a 60-acre discovery nature area that would
craft from where the trees are curling around to the bay. A lot of details we
worked out on that but that's something that we think we should tie it all
together into one nature area with trails. If you look across the way, we are going to go down there
in a bit. We'll talk more about that, but just kind of orienting you. What you're seeing there,
that's where the crews who are doing the undergrounding or the firemen.
Oh, that's a great plug because it is so many people rely on good internet up here
and it will be fantastic.
That's also just, that's where they make unique stages
in their home, household, emergencies, et cetera.
So that is the, when we were talking earlier
about the industrial area,
you'll see that some of the most heavily planned
on the site and that's where we're planning
to do the light industrial.
Other than that, I think,
unless there's any other quick questions about orientation,
I'd say let's move on to the next thing.
Any questions where things go?
yes why are we not able to see pond eight nine that was originally on our
proposed tour and I had it on our tour sorry so actually this is a really good
place to see pond 8 because when you get down there we're gonna have a harder
time so I'll spend just a minute orienting a little bit so on the to the
east to our left as we face south you can see a set of kind of cattail like
vegetation I'm not a biologist of an engineer so please don't judge so you've
got that area down there that is the beginning of the pond a dam the dam
itself is about a quarter of a mile long it extends all the way over towards the
ocean side and is an earthen berm for most of that the mill itself was down in
the lowland and the spillway for the dam is all the way out to the west just
about where you see the end of the power lines that see the wastewater treatment plant.
And so down in that area is the spillway and a timber crib wall that was constructed to
block part of the drainages that formed the pond. So the pond is actually three drainages
that in 1885 were blocked with the earthen berm and the crib wall. And so that gives
you some orientation. We'll talk later about the environmental stuff, but this is a really
good place for you to get that sense because you get too close to it and you won't be able
to see the whole thing and when we get down in there, we're not as high of an elevation,
right? So this is a really good place to get a sense of what the size of the pond is and
what that area is. So that's ponding.
Jeremy, any other orientation questions about where things are? Okay, so the next thing we're
going to do is we're going to walk back this way and curl back to get to cars. I'm hoping
the people can all have vehicle transportation, one story, and people who don't like us, we
can pilot, we can share cars, because the next step, once we get our cars, there is
a cone path, you can see if they're curling around behind the dry shed all the way up
to the glass beach area, and we'd like to do a whole rendezvous over there where we'll
be talking about the glass beach area.
I'm sure it would be happy to hear it.
Alright.
Good deal.
So I got a question, what does the planning process actually look like?
Because, you know, the city's been in this planning process forever, and when do we actually
get to the end of it?
That was kind of the question.
So it's a very structured process, and it has to follow the law, because the law is
what mandates or regulates zoning change.
It's not like somebody's whim. It's the law and so that law includes
Both the Planning Commission and the City Council would have to approve what's called a local coastal program amendment
Which changes three things for the city it changes the general plan the zoning code
And the land use map everybody focuses on land use map, but honestly in my opinion, it's the least important
So the general plan has all the policies that regulate how development would occur on the mill site and the zoning regulations
regulate what and what what does wear what densities height limits setbacks all of that stuff
None of that has even been prepared yet
So we are still in very early stages in so far as what we have is a draft land use plan
That still hasn't even gone to planning commission or City Council locally for consideration and input
So so as part of this process also the city has to complete an environmental document
Because of the scale of this project site that environmental document will be what's called an environmental impact report
EIR you might have you've heard that term before within the EIR
They will look at impacts to all different aspects of this project. So we'll look at impacts to traffic traffic safety
wetlands rare plants rare animals
ecological resources, etc etc. So all of that will need to get looked at as well.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval and goes to City Council and City Council recommends approval, and remember because this is a legislative
action, the City Council has the purview to make changes as it goes through this process.
So they can change wording, they can change the land use plan, etc, etc, until they're happy with it. Then it's an
The Coastal Commission is the body that has the final authority to regulate land use in
Fort Bragg because it's in the coastal zone.
And once it goes to the Coastal Commission, they have a year to look at and think about,
make whatever changes they want, and then their commission will consider it as well.
Often, what happens at that point is they have something called friendly modifications
where they tell the city, well, you got it 80% right, but we don't like these 20% of
you got to fix them and this is how we want you to fix them. And then the City
Council has an opportunity to say okay I'm gonna make those changes or we don't
agree with you we're gonna volley back and so there's sometimes a little bit of
volleying back and forth. So that's the process. So when people ask me is it gonna
take you know a year, the answer is no. It's gonna take much longer than that.
It depends on the area. There's not a set direction. The
entire mill site is in the coastal zone but you know in the county it can go
one to two miles inland in Fort Bragg it's generally on the west side of
highway one. All right so the road that we took up to get here is approximately
where the trolley line would be so it would be on the inland side with the
inside the housing residential area. Out here, Glass Beach, the proposed train
station would be this footprint right here, roughly from Robert, 100 feet out that way.
And this is about the right distance from the parking lot. But in this general area here,
what we're proposing is a two-story station, train operations on the first floor, restaurant
on the second floor. And there's not a whole lot specifically to this site we wanted to talk about,
besides just imagining the residential, all back here in the first about one block of residential
going the whole length of this. All this area would remain as open space and I think in just
as terms of perspective for some of you, and I know this is off camera, but if you look down
south you'll see barely see the dry shed where we were in. That's the north end of the dry shed way
down there and in terms of to get you a sense of magnitude the dry shed land up
where we're standing is roughly 77 acres so the entire mill site project is 300
so everything you've seen so far is only 77 out of 300 acres so after this stop
we're going to drive and I you we have some great walkers here and some you
may want to catch a ride because we're gonna go to the extreme other end of the
site and that is a fair hike. So we can very briefly, if there's any key
questions, I'll take that real quick but otherwise we're going to then jump back
in cars bikes and loop all the way down to Cyprus. For those of you outside the
area it is where you see Safeway take a right towards the ocean. Yes please.
you said railway operations would be on the ground floor. Yes. What does that entail?
Okay, so railway operations meaning this would be a train station but it would be servicing the
trolley. One thing to clarify, one thing as a compromise there would be no full-on trains like
we're accustomed to sending up into the hills. This would be an electric trolley only. What we
do see is part of a trolley system and I'll be talking about that a little bit more at the next
stop the trolley concept that we have but the idea is that people could step
on to a trolley ride all the way out here get off at the station and walk on
down to glass beach ticketing gift shop offices yes how far exactly is it from
this parking lot to say the cypher street parking lot how far is that
I think it's two miles.
Two miles?
Two miles?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Where would you, where do you envision embarking the rail, the rail cars from in the new setup?
Oh, um, that's actually, I'm glad you mentioned that.
So for the Skunk train, full-on train set, um, when we were talking about the Orange rectangular
new station, there's a very important, uh, uh, detail about that.
With our current station, number one, it's too small.
we've outgrown it. We've been in the business for many many decades and it's too big.
We are too big. Second thing is the railroad cars board north-south. So when we have our train in
the station, we want to be connected with the new and the existing downtown. But our trains block
all the way from Redwood to Laurel up to Pine. We essentially create a two block in the core
area of the downtown, we separate it with our own trains. So one of the key features,
I'm so glad you mentioned this, one of the key features of why we want to be at the new location
is our trains will board on an east-west orientation, and there would then be no
impediment connecting us with the downtown. One of the key things for me is, it's very important
that our success and the downtown succeeds together, and there's a lot of, I could talk a
a lot about economic development. I won't do it now. But the key is a bit more visitors
and staying longer so they'll have enough time to do both. Rather than people coming
in for a few hours, I'd like to have them have enough reason to be here for a few days.
The last question. Yes, please. So can local residents, say on West Street, jump on this
electric train and go downtown? Yes. Now, it would not be a free trolley and we have
not got to the point what the prices would be. For me, I do envision charging a bigger
price for visitors and a much, much lower price for locals because I would love for
this to be something very easy and convenient. For the residences here, I would love for
them to step out of their front door, jump on a trolley, ride downtown, never have to
use their car. Okay, there may be more questions, but we should keep things moving.
Okay, so we're now going to stop five. Now, a key thing is where we all parked,
We have a gentleman here who's going to open the gate so we can drive right out here and
take a right and we're going to go up to Highway 1, drive south on Highway 1 until you see
Safeway which is Cypress and we'll take a right there and there's a gate at the gate.
Don't continue all the way to the beach area.
You'll see a gate and you want to go in there.
You don't go in the public gate.
Yeah, we'll make it obvious where to turn.
We all get friendly and come on in, because it will be a much easier for everybody to
hear that.
Andrew is already losing his voice.
I've always been soft-spoken, unfortunately, I can't hear worth a dart.
So I think, Marie, did you want to start off with something?
Well I was asked to provide some perspective on the south side here about what's different
with the new plan versus the plan from 2019.
just to give people perspective. You'll see that this is a big huge area. So the main
difference was the city council basically said whoa, all this area, we don't know, let's
wait for 30 years and let a different city council decide what to do about it. So that's
the main difference. Both plans look for highway commercial basically between the trees and
Cypress Street, so this parcel right here, which is about seven acres. This parcel, um, the new plan
is going all highway commercial. The old plan basically split that parcel in half and did half
highway commercial and half urban reserves. Um, looking to the north, which we will go to in a
minute, you'll see a big ramp there. That ramp used to go into the Sawmill. Um, and over there,
it is truly a concrete wasteland.
I mean there is just concrete that's like two feet thick as far as your eyes can see.
And so we thought that that made a lot of sense for an industrial use but then also
to have like a 200 foot set back from the coastal trail so that there's a little bit
of separation there.
And their plan is similar, all industrial use there without the separation, that's
really the only difference.
Both plans preserve this woodland area and Ponds 1-4 and with a wildlife core or to the
coastal trail through the Ponds 1-4, and Babarit, Babarit, that's all.
Thank you.
One of the challenges for us is that when we entered this legal stay, it wasn't like
we had finished plans.
So as Marie was talking about, there was less details on the South Mill site.
However, as part of an understandable interest from I think the city,
the community and the Coastal Commission was, well, what are you guys planning to do?
Well, we've been really working to try to have some specificity so
that you guys would have things to react to.
And so that's one of the reasons why we've been moving very quickly trying to put
together the plans and not just simply have a section where we'll figure it out
later. In this area a lot of details I could talk for an hour I'm not going to
I did just want to point out first off a landmark if you look way over there you
see the yellow wall well that's the dry shed as you can see you're starting to
get a sense for just how big this property is so that's where we started
the day the tour and as you also see there is an awful lot of asphalt so it
is something that was worth trying to figure out what to do with it's a
challenge now heading to looking to the south at the very end of this property
is land owned by the Pomo and then if over here is the coastal trail now some
of the things I talked about earlier was the the trolley concept because of
concerns as we're trying to work through our issues and concerns we have told the
city that we will not bring our tracks south of the middle of the mill site
unless they give us the the approval that way we thought that was the ultimate
way to make sure that they were happy with whatever plans we come up with the
vision if they like it would be to come down we proposed coming down on
basically where this road is ending potentially here at the this commercial
area there are a couple options one which I love I just recently came up
with would be to continue down because then I think it would be within a
couple hundred feet of the Noyo Harbor you'd be above but there's a pedestrian
under crossing that's being discussed and I think it could be a fantastic way
to tie in with the harbor. Another option would be to go west to where the
south entrance to the coastal trail is. There have been concerns about our
trolley being too close to the coastal trail, so that's why I'm just suggesting
that as an option. Other things in this area? I think that's the key stuff is
are there any questions about where we are? Yes, please. So as you're talking about the
tracking and trolley and train, and I'm trying to discern between the difference. Yes. You had
mentioned earlier one of your team members had talked about some really progressive environmental
awards that you received around hydrogen fuel for rail or for locomotives. Is that something
you're planning on implementing for this project? At this point, no. The trolley concept only came
about in October but some people have said well why don't you do hydrogen
power and I'm like I'm open to it I think it'd be awesome what that was is
that we have cutting edge technology on locomotives with hydrogen power but the
trolley because of size and magnitude I think that's bigger than what we've
ought we've said we would operate we might do something with our full-on
trains but our trains we're only proposing to do basically a loop you
You would come into that station, the orange squares we lit, then we'd do a loop and then
head back out into the hills.
But for the going north to Glass Beach or south to here would only be trolleys.
But I'm open to alternative things with energy for that too.
Does trolley mean electric?
What does that mean?
Yeah, most likely.
Electric.
Yeah, there's so much technology out there.
But the idea is quiet and something like electric or some other smart thing.
So what entity gave you this award that you made?
Oh the award? That was the railroad. The American Shoreline Association chose us as the 2024
environmental railroad of the year.
That's the name of the time of the year.
The alternate residential? Who would determine whether it's residential or the other designation?
So behind that, one of the things which I personally would love to see would be live work lofts.
And so you would have a, I'm not sure the size, but let's just say 100 things that would be a shot below residents above.
Make it into a really cool makerspace community.
That's something I would love to see because it would be something unique.
Part of the thing there and along with probably the other next 20 questions we could get into
is that we'd be entering a memorandum of understanding where it would be non-binding, scoping out
what we would do.
That would then lead to a master development agreement which would be more binding.
Let me just ask answer Doug's question because that's not really answered by that answer.
So all private projects that are not railroad related would have to go through a normal
city planning approval process.
So we need to go to planning commission and city council, get a coastal development permit
use permit design review.
So at the end of the day, it's going to be the city council and the planning commission
that decides whether a project gets approved or not approved.
But if the residential is a permitted use, the fact that it's residential can't be a
reason to deny it.
So in all mixed use districts, and I will say that the city and
MR have a disagreement about allowing residential.
When I say city, I don't mean city council because city council, as I said in the past,
has not weighed in this.
I mean the city's consultants disagree with the idea of including residential in
the industrial zone area.
So that just is an area of contention that hasn't been worked out yet
before bringing it to city council, and it may not be.
City council may need to decide that.
but the rest of the project, mixed use,
generally consists of two different alternatives.
So commercial on the bottom floor and residential above,
or within the same parcel, a component of residential
and a component of commercial.
Right now in the...
Yeah, so you're moving beyond answering my questions.
I think we need to move on.
We kind of wear a little behind schedule,
so it'd be great if we could go up to the project.
Can I just ask a quick question?
So the award for clean railroads was not for this railroad, the Mendocino Railroad.
That was won by Sierra Northern Railway, which is our two main railway operations.
Right, but that's another.
Yes, but then the hydrogen locomotive was for Sierra Railroad Company and Mendocino and Sierra Energy.
But these engines are not hydrogen or clean.
No, but let me answer the question.
far as, but Mendocino Railway is, Mendocino Railway does have for tier
four emission locomotives that are coming online right now specifically for
all only operation in this county and those are the lowest emission locomotives
are currently available anywhere so that is coming here we have the lowest
emission locomotives here the hydrogen we only have one built three more are
being built. Well, the impression was here. I'm covering a lot of ground very quickly.
We're gonna get up to top 6 and 7 where we're gonna talk about remediation and that'll kind of wind down and are we riding?
Folks? No, sorry, we're driving right? Yeah, so we're just gonna go drive straight down and park.
So, jump in your cars and then wind up driving.
I pardon my speed. Again, Jeremy Mayer, I'm an environmental engineer. I've been working out here
on the cleanup of the mill site for over a decade. Brought a couple of exhibits. This is going to be
a little bit quick. This is the state of soil and sediment at the mill site. Everything that you see
is green has been approved by DTSC for no further action. That means it can be used for any unrestricted
use. Residential, hospitals, schools, day cares, anything. Everything that is in yellow has a
restriction. That's generally because there's some soil in the ground below the pavement that maybe
is deeper or has a relatively lower concentration but is not meeting unrestricted use but could
easily be you know commercial, industrial, or even recreational. So those are the the current state
and this goes back to the date on here is 2019. Everything that's on here is the same as it is
today. On the back, I have the state of groundwater. So groundwater at the site is also largely
unrestricted use. There are three large yellow areas that you see on here. The two of the three
of these, the groundwater meets drinking water standards. So I'll say that again. The groundwater
meets drinking water standards in two of these restricted areas, it is just above a human
health goal that the state of California likes to use as a remedial goal because it is more
conservative, but you could still put a well in those areas and drink that water under
the state of California rules.
So some of them, there are some slightly higher concentrations in the center area and at the
very corner here that are not approved for drinking but we all use city water
in the City of Fort Bragg so there is not a lot of risk to people from
groundwater. So soil and groundwater are nearly complete at the site. We do still
do some monitoring periodically and you see those reports they go into DTSC. The
larger activity that remains at the mill site that is yet to be done and a lot of
folks have interest in this is the Mill Pond Dam. So pond 8, as it's called, has
sediment in it. It has 105, give or take, thousand cubic yards of sediment in that
pond. Some of that sediment has some dioxin in it that is at concentrations
just above the unrestricted use goals. And so that dioxin, the ponds, are not
going to harm you by walking by them. In fact, you can go in the pond 50 days a
year for 24 hours a day. Please don't. You'll get hypothermia. But if you were in
the pond 50 days a year, 24 hours a day, you would be at the residential standard
for dioxin exposure. Concentrations are very low. That said, they are not
unrestricted. So something has to be done in order to address that. The current
proposal that the DTSC is working with us on is a containment proposal. The dam,
as some of you may have known, was built in 1885. So I don't have the record
drawings and I'm not, I didn't, I didn't draw them. So, but in 1885 the dam was
built to, as I said earlier, there were three drainages that went across the
site. Two of them were stopped by the earthen berm, the long earthen berm that
goes along the north side of the pond.
The other was at the crib wall, which is right up against the ocean down here.
This is the concrete spillway.
The dam is this entire quarter of a mile long structure at the northern end of the pond.
In order to better contain the sediment and in response to DSOD, so the Department of
Safety of dams under the Division of Water Resources of California has deemed that the
dam has some deficiencies.
It is thin in this area, so under an earthquake load this area could be subject to some deformation.
A soil buttress, basically a large pile of dirt for the technical terms, has been proposed
to be built in that area.
The pond is large enough to be a jurisdictional pond, which would mean that we would need
to have a low-level outlet, a larger spillway and a bunch of other features, that if we
were to simply disconnect it in the center, those elements would not need to be constructed.
So we have a small divider that would divide the pond into two smaller areas.
And then there's the crib wall section.
The crib wall is made out of timber, redwood timber.
As I said, they're some of the biggest timber logs I've ever seen.
You stand down next to them, they're about six foot in diameter.
They were placed in the 1880s and infilled with soil.
That is the subject of some additional interest by the Department of Dam Safety.
They would like a buttress or some other feature.
They've actually, their first proposal to us was dig it out and pour a concrete dam.
And we said, you know, we could do something that's easier, more natural, more consistent
with the environment that's out there.
We could do just a rock slope protection using rock that looks a lot like the cliffs that
are out there, the bluffs. So that is the current plan. That is the most recent
proposal that went to DTSC that is currently in their consideration and it
is also the subject of the Coastal Development Permit that was submitted to
the city a couple of years ago. And so we've been in the midst of those
discussions and ongoing conversation with both DSOD, DTSC, the Regional Board, a
host of other California and federal agencies to get to a point where we can
understand what that what that plan should be. In all of that, I wanted to
mention that we have a stormwater system. The city of Fort Bragg drains to Pond 8.
About 50% of the land area in the city discharges to Pond 8. That discharge is
not something that you or I should be drinking. That water has contamination in
it and it settles out in pond 8. Pond 8 offers anywhere between about 65% and 99% treatment
of the storm water that comes off of the city. That contamination accumulates in the sediment
in the pond as it does just about anywhere else in the world. Right? So things get into
slow moving channels and they're going to settle out. And so this is a map that shows
Because the drainage areas shows 124 acres, 103 acres of the city drained directly into
pond 8 through culverts.
Folks have talked about daylighting creeks.
There's definitely some interest in accommodating that as part of the future development if
that's something that the community wants to support.
And so there's the possibility to daylight creeks into the pond.
But that pond provides a vital stormwater treatment function for city stormwater before
gets to the ocean. And so we've got to figure out a plan that addresses the
sediment that's currently in the pond plus all of the sediment and
contamination that comes off of the city and ends up either in the pond or in the
ocean at some point in the future and we need a plan that's going to work all of
that in together. So, I had five minutes I probably went over.
No, no, that was great. I don't know if...
I have just one quick item.
especially for the commissioners. There's a lot of activity all happening between the fence there and the coastal trail there.
There's no official plan yet how to address this, but we have pond 8, pond 5, there's talk about the trolley, there's talk about a road,
there's all the possible daylighting of creeks, there's a lot of issues.
So, Jess, you may want to take a mental picture or an actual picture because this in the future is going to be a tricky spot how to navigate.
That's all I wanted to take care of.
Okay, and I just was going to invite the city, if there was anything Marie, anyone wanted to talk about related to the CDP for the, in the CEQA process that you have pending or any of this remediation stuff.
There's something I want to talk about an application was submitted to the city.
I believe in 2019 and then the lawsuit intervened and
there hasn't been much progress on it since then.
Essentially this project will require coastal development permit because
part of the area is within the coastal commission's purview.
Basically everything above the mean high tide down on the beach,
it's within their purview.
The Coastal Development Permit that gets processed for this could either be
processed by the city or we could work with the Coastal Commission to have them
process it instead.
Regardless, it will also require a secret document.
All of that will be forthcoming at some point.
I mean, this has been getting worked on forever and I don't know,
I don't have much more on what I have than that.
I think it is actually all above the high tide line.
So the what's proposed currently is in the city's jurisdiction.
And it was described some of what's proposed,
some improvements to the dam
to meet the seismic safety requirements.
But DTSC, as I understand it,
is still looking at various alternatives
for remediation for pondate through an addendum
that was requested to be prepared
for the remedial action plan for pondate.
So that's currently with DTSC.
I don't think they have a final remediation plan yet.
And so that might be part of what's holding up
this CDP and the alternatives that will be contemplated in the CEQA document.
Yeah, and the CEQA document would be an EIR for this project, and it would have to include
alternatives per DTSC's requirements.
Yeah.
So, there's just one more stop.
It's a quick one.
And it's just to go see Ponce 1 through 4, and I think you can walk, or you can drive.
Yeah, you already walked.
If you walked, you walked twice as far as we're going.
So, it's just kind of better.
I'd suggest let's do that at the next one because that would be the last stop
and if people want to then leave while we're talking we could. I have a question
still about one day. I understand it was all only checked down to a certain level.
When will it be checked to a lower level to see about additional toxins like
Dioxins and others
I think that's the question for Jeremy. So I'm sorry
How far did the sediment get sampled the sediment has been sampled throughout the entire depth some of the pond is six feet thick in
Sediment some of the pond is actually about 20 to 25 feet thick in sediment
But it has been sampled through that full range
Some of you who've been tracking it very closely may remember in about 2019. We did additional sediment sampling
That was at DTSC's request because maybe there was a gap in a particular layer in a particular spot
And so we did additional sampling. That's the last time I actually collected an environmental sample in my career
I was out there in the pond myself and my waiters. So
But that that work was done. Yes
On the map the water map you had several areas that were large and blue
So I'm sorry, so large and blue the
The site was divided into OU ABCD and E at the very beginning.
OU E is the part that has the ponds and some of the aquatic related features that are adjacent
to them.
The blue areas are still part of OU E. There's not a final remedial action plan for OU E.
That's what DTSC is working on now.
So anything that was not yet fully signed off by DTSC in there were in those blue areas
for the groundwater I think that was.
Yeah and maybe even some of the soil. So mediation is not complete for the hillside.
Remediation? Yes. Well the sediment still is in the pond, we're working on that remedy,
and the current proposed remedy is a containment remedy. There is one spot up near the skunk train
that there was a tank that still has a planned remediation on it, but otherwise the soil,
all that soil that's in green is complete and the groundwater is in a
monitoring program. Does that answer your question? So yes, there's work to
be done. Yeah, there's work yet to be done.
All right, so again, we're going to talk a little bit about the remediation parts of the
the mill site that remain. Ponds one through four, also sometimes referred to in some of
the reports as the South Ponds. These were a part of the wastewater treatment system for the facility.
So when we were down towards the very beginning, looking at a pond eight, you could see that low
land where the powerhouse and some of the other mill equipment was, the
powerhouse would discharge into a pond in that lowland called pond seven. Then
that water was pumped up here to pond four and it settled in pond four which
is a really narrow little trench. They would scoop that out and put it in
something they called the ash pile and then the ash pile was hauled off site
and disposed. The pond one went from four, this is really good engineer set this up,
it went from seven to four to one to two to three, so again I didn't do that. So
but this was the final area of wastewater treatment for water that was
coming out of the power plant at the mill. Yeah so I know and I heard some
folks mentioning ash from the mill did get used in soil amendments in the
community at the school. DTSC has sampled a lot of those locations. A lot of it
went to McGuire Ranch and those locations were sampled. The areas that
were found to contain dioxin were from a very limited window. So who remembers in
In 2001, the lights went out, rolling blackouts, so they had a power plant on the site and
they were using it to generate electricity and they could push that electricity back
out to the grid.
And so there was a very limited window of about two years where they accepted municipal
waste from the city and burned it in the boiler.
That limited window of time did generate ash that had higher concentrations of dioxin in
it. Most of that ended up in pond seven, first place. We've removed all of the
sediment from pond seven. It is now in a landfill. So that pond is in the lower
area of the site. The second pond, as I said, was pond four. That's that narrow
little ditch where they would regularly scoop it out and put it in a pile. That
pile did not get distributed in the community. That pile got hauled away when
the mill got closed. So that ash came out upon four, and then it settled into
ponds one, two, and three. So ponds one and two had some limited
remediation where we removed the highest concentrations back in 2017, and so that
material then was removed, taken to a landfill. These do not meet your
unrestricted use, right? You don't want to build the daycare in the pond, but you
can still be in there, like I said, 50 days a year, 24 hours a day, and still
have a exposure that is considered safe by DTSC. So what we did is we removed
those concentrations that were above that, and then these are also slated to
be contained and remain as a water feature, you know, as an environmental
feature as habitat but not for unrestricted use. So that is the state
of ponds one through four. And Melissa is asking me to wrap us up. So I'm the wrap
up. So I wanted to just give a really quick overview of what's next. So one of
the things that the city and the Coastal Commission is considering is something
called a categorical exclusion order which would help settle the lawsuit with
this gunk train by defining specific areas of the mill site and specific
train related uses only that would be exempt from requiring a CDP. And then
also she's telling me I'm getting all kinds of hints. The previous planning
efforts as well. So this is the area that I was talking about that's
super industrial. You can look over there and see it's all paved and there's a lot
old foundations for buildings. So the new plan also calls for that to be industrial but they're also
calling for live work whereas the old plan was just purely industrial. Why does the city need
industrial? Because actually as it turns out this whole site was in industrial and it was the major
employer for Port Bragg for many years and the rest of the town has very little industrial and so
things like contractors, different types of businesses that are industrial uses have a very
hard time finding a location, and so there's actually a fair amount of market
demand for an industrial use, and that seems like a very good location to have
it. Again, just a reminder, most of this was thought of as as urban reserve in
the previous plan, and now is thinking more general commercial, some more higher
density housing, 24 units per acre, and then the wide array of commercial uses
that would be permissible there. And with that hallelujah, we're finished, you can
and all walk home and thank you for coming.
Just wanted to say thanks,
I don't know if you want to wrap up with anything,
but yeah, I just wanted to thank Mendocino Railway
very much for allowing us to come out here
and tour in the city for their efforts as well
and challenging our efforts.
Thank you, thanks to everybody who made the trek out
and all of the walking and jostling back and forth.
We'll be happy to stay around
if anybody has any specific questions,
but otherwise, really appreciate the participation
from the coastal commission, the city of Fort Bragg,
the Sherwood Band of Pomo Indians.
Really do appreciate everybody coming out
and going on this walk with us.
So thank you again, everybody.
Thank you.
I have a question.
I have a question.
Sure.
What is that?
Is that a wildland?
Is that a...
It was our cable.
So is that like the beach?
Yeah, that's gonna be preserved as well.
It was, I believe, wasn't it?
There was a demonstration for us planted by Georgia Pacific.
That's north of there was a demonstration and it also has always been kind of a wet
land kind of a willing and willing to clean water as well.
But this will remain.
So that fills up with water and you're gonna win it?
There is a creek or a ditch that runs through the middle of it that is wet, yeah.