At last week’s standing room only meeting, the Tam Valley Design Review Board declined to approve a developer’s plan for a controversial affordable housing project, instead unanimously ruling it incomplete.
Two representatives working on the project for The Pacific Companies, an Idaho-based developer, made a brief presentation to the board on March 5, focused on the architectural design of a five-story, 32-unit building proposed at 150 Shoreline Highway in the Tam Junction/Manzanita area.
However, Lauren Alexander, entitlements manager, and Nickolos Gomez, director of modular construction for Architects Orange, were unable to answer several significant questions about the “Marin Shoreline Apartments.”
Board members, as well as Tam Valley residents who spoke during public comment, were particularly interested in whether the planned project meets regulations for building in a FEMA designated special flood hazard area.
Michael Wara, a Tam Valley Design Review Board member who did not attend the meeting, summed up the board’s position on developing 150 Shoreline in a written statement. For many in the community, Wara’s words carry weight. He is the director of Stanford’s Climate and Energy Policy Program and a senior research scholar at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment.
Citing a recent NASA study, Wara said that more than sea level rise, subsidence is a “major issue in this part of Tam Junction,” because the area is constructed on fill. Heavier buildings create more problems over time.
“In other words, this building will sink into the mud and cause adjacent land to sink more than smaller buildings on the site,” Wara wrote. “It’s not just that the site floods.”
“This project would have my support were it not for its location on land we know to be subsiding and without any apparent mitigation for flood risks,” he continued. “I am opposed to putting low income Marinites in harm’s way.”
Tam Valley residents also expressed concerns about the size of the development, lack of parking, traffic and building aesthetics. Some noted that the .6-acre parcel can only accommodate 32 units by constructing a five-story building, the tallest in the area.
With only eight designated parking spaces, they questioned where the building residents will park and how they will get to their vehicles during the regularly occurring flooding.
It’s already difficult to make a left turn from this property to get to the freeway, and increased traffic will compound the problem, neighbors said. Some inquired about installing a traffic light.
Yet, most of those issues won’t derail the project. With 100% of the units designated for low-income residents, state laws promoting affordable housing development give The Pacific Companies certain entitlements that override local government codes.
Under California’s Bonus Density Law, the developer may increase the number of units by 80% over Marin County’s limit for the parcel size. That equates to 33 units, although the current design has 32 units, including 24 one-bedrooms and eight two-bedrooms.
“The developer can request waivers for anything that makes that density feasible,” Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency, told the Pacific Sun. “And the only basis for us to deny a waiver is health and safety.”
Thus far, The Pacific Companies has applied for three waivers, including increasing the building height limit from 25 feet to 58 feet, five inches.
As for parking, eight spaces is more than state law requires. Assembly Bill 2097 removes mandatory minimum parking requirements for projects within a half mile of a major transit stop. The Manzanita transit hub is across the street from the proposed development.
According to Jones, California’s push to build more multi-unit housing and the resulting legislation has limited the county’s discretion to approve or deny projects.
Amy Kalish, Tam Valley Design Review Board’s chair, provided the Pacific Sun with the specific issues that led to their incomplete ruling on the developer’s application. Of utmost importance, the building design does not address current and future flooding risks and the subsidence issue.
The building is raised 12 inches, not the 36 inches required by FEMA and county code, according to Kalish. When that issue is corrected, with the additional 24 inches, most of the roof height and the elevator shaft will exceed the height waiver requested by the developer.
The ruling also addressed that the five-story building will block “iconic views of the Mill Valley hills.” The board suggested the developer could compensate for the lost vista by adding an art component to the building, such as a mural.
Although the review board’s role is advisory only, Jones agrees that The Pacific Company’s application is not complete.
“We don’t have necessary information or resolution of issues to be able to make a decision about the project,” Jones said. We will address the issues raised to the extent feasible under the law. Regarding flood and subsidence, those are the subjects of the county’s review—the building will need to meet all codes applicable for its location.”
Caleb Roope, CEO of The Pacific Companies, did not respond to requests for comment.
Despite objections raised by the Tam Valley Design Review Board and those who spoke during public comment, almost everyone stated that the county needs more affordable housing. Just where it should be built is up for debate.
Indeed, Roope purchased the Shoreline property to shift 32 units from an affordable housing project at 825 Drake Ave. in Marin City, currently approved for 74 units. The decision to reduce the Drake development to 42 units was in response to the Marin City community’s strong opposition to the project.
The Marin City site is in a state-designated high-fire hazard zone, there is only one road into and out of Marin City and the five-story building will block the sun from the adjacent two-story, low-income senior housing. Traffic, parking and children’s safety are also concerns, as the community’s only public park is across the street from 825 Drake.
However, Jones has repeatedly said that if the 150 Shoreline project does not move forward, Roope is entitled to build all 74 units in Marin City.
“This is so unfortunate,” said Tam Valley Design Review Board member Doug Wallace. “I feel the way they set this up, by imposing a cost on Marin City residents, is so unconscionable. To force this on us, it’s just a terrible idea.”
Save Our City, a local group, has been battling the county and developer for more than two years, even filing a lawsuit to stop the Marin City project entirely In October, a Marin County Superior Court judge ruled in favor of Save Our City, reversing approvals for $40 million in tax-exempt bond financing the developer secured for construction. Still, Roope is moving forward.
Marilyn Mackel, a Save Our City leader, said the group is working to enforce the judgment against The Pacific Companies.
At the Tam Valley Design Review Board meeting last week, Susan Kirsch, a political organizer and Mill Valley resident, suggested a lawsuit could be the only way to prevent the 150 Shoreline development. It remains to be seen whether the idea will garner support.
Roope’s two-site solution, intended to appease those against the Marin City project, has stirred up controversy in two communities.
Next up, the Marin County Planning Commission will hold a hearing on the 150 Shoreline proposal. No date has been announced.
