Half Moon Bay EOC537 Kelly Ave.Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

Brian Holt, ChairJames Benjamin, Vice ChairSara Polgar, Planning CommissionerSteve Ruddock, Planning CommissionerRick Hernandez, Planning Commissioner

AGENDA

CITY OF HALF MOON BAYPLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2019

7:00 PM

This agenda contains a brief description of each item to be considered. Those wishing to address thePlanning Commission on any matter not listed on the Agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the PlanningCommission to resolve, may come forward to the podium during the Public Forum portion of the Agendaand will have a maximum of three minutes to discuss their item. Those wishing to speak on an agenda itemare asked to fill out a speaker card. Speaker(s) will be called forward at the appropriate time during theagenda item in consideration.

Please Note: Please Provide a Copy of Prepared Presentations to the Clerk

Copies of written documentation relating to each item of business on the Agenda are on file in theOffice of the City Clerk at City Hall and the Half Moon Bay Library where they are available for publicinspection. If requested, the agenda shall be available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with adisability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132.)Information may be obtained by calling 650-726-8271.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, special assistance for participation in thismeeting can be obtained by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at 650-726-8271. A 48-hour notification willenable the City to make reasonable accommodations to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

http://hmbcity.com/

MEETING WILL CONCLUDE BY 10:30 PM UNLESS OTHERWISE EXTENDED BY SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE OF THEPLANNING COMMISSION.

1

PLANNING COMMISSIONER OFF-SITE - TELECONFERENCE

Planning Commissioner Hernandez will be teleconferencing from the lobby at:Miami Marriott Biscayne Bay; 1633 North Bayshore Drive; Miami, FL 33132, US

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Draft Minutes January 8, 2019Draft Minutes January 22, 2019Draft Minutes 01.08.2019

Draft Minutes 01.22.2019

PUBLIC COMMENT

1. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS

1.A CITY FILE #: PDP-2018-004 LOCATION: 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd. PROJECT PLANNER: Scott Phillips, 726-8299, sphillips@hmbcity.com APPLICANT: Equity Builders Group Inc.

DESCRIPTION: Continued Item - Coastal Development and Architectural Review to allowthe construction of a new 3,315 square foot two-story residence andassociated site improvements.

STAFF REPORT

ATTACHMENT 1 - Resolution

ATTACHMENT 2 - PC Staff Report 08.14.18

ATTACHMENT 3 - PC Minutes 8.14.18

ATTACHMENT 4 - PC Staff Report-LUP Amendment 09.25.18

ATTACHMENT 5 - CC Staff Report - LUP Amendment 10.16.18

ATTACHMENT 6 - CCC Staff Report and Attachments

DIRECTOR'S REPORT

PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS

ADJOURNMENT2

January 8, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 4

MINUTES

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY PLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2019

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) / 537 KELLY AVENUE Vice Chair Holt called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM PRESENT: Vice Chair Holt, Commissioners Benjamin, Deman and Evans. ABSENT: Chair Hernandez PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL

Vice Chair Holt led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes: December 19, 2018 Approved: 4-0

PUBLIC COMMENT No Speakers

PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS: 1.A STUDY SESSION ON PILLAR POINT RV PARK PUBLIC RESTROOM PROJECT, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Presentation by staff. Clarifying Questions: Staff provided responses to the Commission’s clarifying questions on a number of topics briefly summarized as follows:

• Q. What is the jurisdiction of the property and who will maintain it? A. Harbor District

• Q. What is the projected lifetime horizon for this project? A. Minimum 20 years

• Q. Will there be an analysis completed for the relocation as it relates to sea level rise? A. Yes, the project’s vulnerability to sea level rise was considered based on most current available data.

3

January 8, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4

• Q. Where are the existing sewer and water lines? A. Proximate, with more detail to follow.

• Q. Will the building be permanent or temporary? A. Both options are possible; however, permanent is preferred.

• Q. Who will be designing the structure? A. The project architect. The first version includes a modular structure.

• Q. To what extent were the sightlines for cyclists/pedestrians considered? A. There will be additional study.

PUBLIC FORUM

John Ullom: Every issue concerning the placement of this building can be solved by using the existing bathroom on site which could be up and running in a couple weeks. The Coastal Conservancy will not fund this.

Dan Haggerty: 30 year El Grenada resident. This segment of the Coastal Trail is very heavily used and cyclists ride too fast in this area. Concerned about anything too close to the trail, especially with potential for groups to congregate near the restroom. Does not favor any of the alternative placements for the proposed bathroom. A bathroom further back would be less obstructive to viewsheds.

Lisa Ketcham: Moss Beach resident. When the RV park was developed, all spots had sewer and water hookups. Feels the proposed sites are too close to potential coastal hazards. Questions why the new location can’t be behind the row of cypress trees. The most ideal location would be within the RV park. Described options for relocating the existing restroom building and reconfiguring the RV parking area.

Ed Larenas: Presented a PowerPoint presentation. Has tried to work for a solution for the restrooms. Proposes removing a few RV spots to make room for day use parking. Believes the restroom should be at the south end of the parking lot.

Tim Pond: Likes the idea of having the restroom further away from the trail. Waves have been coming over the breakwater. A restroom is needed across street at the heavily used lot.

Planning Commission Discussion

• Funding source is not a concern

• The Commission noted that it was difficult to add new restrooms and without compromising RV parking spaces and discussed various configurations: remove the existing restroom, adding new RV spaces and remove spaces at the north west side of the parking area; reconfigure RV spots to avoid congregations blocking the coastal trail.

• Safety and ADA should be a priority; visibility is a concern, regarding the location at the apex of the hill of the trail.

• A structure with amenities, and that can facilitate showers would be preferable.

• Would like to see a broader site plan.

4

January 8, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4

1.B COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, AND SIGN PERMIT FOR HIGHWAY 1/SOUTH MAIN STREET GATEWAY SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING PROJECT Staff presentation along with landscape architect Tom Conroy of Kikuchi and Kanekel Clarifying Questions

• Q. New Zealand Christmas: How tall will they get? What is the anticipated maintenance for the trees? A. The landscape architect noted that the existing trees on Main Street are at the anticipated maximum height for the species.

• Q. Will there be a schedule of vegetation maintenance? A. Yes.

• Q. Street Lights: What will the street lights look like at the intersection? Who makes the decisions about the type of street lights on the highway? A. The City Engineer explained the Caltrans process and limitations of options, but that this would be looked at carefully.

PUBLIC FORUM Johanna Tesauro: HMB resident and local artist. Does not believe the design of the signs

are fitting for HMB. Would like for the signage to reflect what HMB is known for (surfing, fishing, agriculture, pumpkins etc.). Concerned with removal of the Half Moon sculpture and would like it to be repurposed in town if it is to be removed.

Planning Commission Discussion

• Compliments to the design team

• Favors the natural environment of the design

• Lighting improvements are great

• The architecture is understandable and meaningful.

• The project presents an ideal time to relocate and repurpose the sculpture to another park in the City.

M/S: Holt/Deman Motion Carried: 4-0

1.C COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND USE PERMIT, FOR CALVARY CHAPEL CHURCH, 2450 SOUTH CABRILLO HIGHWAY Staff presentation Clarifying Questions

• Q. What’s expected of traffic increase if any; church traffic tends to be very “bursty.” A. Staff described the trip distribution pattern of the church.

PUBLIC FORUM Elaina Cuzick: Coastsider from Montara. Excited about the new location. The church needs

additional space for the increased numbers of their children’s programs.

5

January 8, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4

Brian Heminger: Pastor of Calvary Chapel. Excited to see how the congregation has grown from a small room at the Days Inn, to renting a room at the Ted Adcock Center, to now a great new location south of town.

Planning Commission Discussion

• Concerned with traffic safety making a left turn on to Highway 1 during a busy weekend. M/S: Benjamin/Evans Motion Carried: 4-0

1.D COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, FOR SCHNELL FAMILY TRUST, 400 REDONDO BEACH ROAD Staff Presentation Clarifying Questions

• Q. Is this lot a part of the Carnoustie development? A. Not a part of Carnoustie.

• Q. What are the current boundaries of the property? A. Staff reviewed the boundaries Planning Commission Discussion

• Struggling with the project not offering a lot retirement, however still supportive. M/S: Benjamin/Deman Motion Carried: 4-0 DIRECTOR REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT

M/S: Deman/Evans Motion Carried: unanimously 4-0 Meeting adjourned: 9:36 PM

Respectfully Submitted: Approved: ____________________________ _________________________________ Joe Butcher, Admin. Assistant Brian Holt, Vice Chair `

6

January 22, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 5

MINUTES

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY PLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2019

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) / 537 KELLY AVENUE Chair Hernandez called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM PRESENT: Chair Hernandez, Vice Chair Holt, Commissioners Benjamin, Ruddock and Polgar. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL

Chair Hernandez led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes: December 11, 2018 M/S: Holt/Benjamin Approved: 3-0 (Hernandez, Holt & Benjamin) Abstained: Ruddock and Polgar

ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Vice Chair Holt was nominated for and elected Chair M/S: Benjamin/Polgar Approved: 5-0 Commissioner Benjamin was nominated for and elected Vice Chair M/S: Hernandez/Ruddock Approved: 5-0 PUBLIC COMMENT

No Speakers

7

January 22, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5

PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS: 1.A STUDY SESSION; LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN UPDATE – CH. 2 DEVELOPMENT; CH. 4

AGRICULTURE Presentation by Jill Ekas, Community Development Director and Brittney Cozzolino, Associate Planner. Clarifying Questions

• Q. Are overlays temporary or permanent? If temporary what would it be? A. Overlays as proposed would be permanent; however, there may be other approaches to implementing this concept.

• Q. How is agriculture different in Half Moon Bay then in County? A. A primary difference is proximity to residential development and potential compatibility impacts.

• Q. Planned Development Diagrams – Natural Resources show potential habitat – careful to show ESHA verses potential ESHA. A. Potential ESHA is not included in the PD diagrams.

• Q. Is the priority overlay a precedent? A. As proposed in the draft, the language is unique for this circumstance; however, overlays are common in plans and zoning codes elsewhere and are used to provide more additional control.

• Q. Coastal Act Priority Uses – (30322 development priorities) – where and what type of housing would fall it into this category? A. With the LUP update, the intent per draft policy is for affordable housing to be designated as a priority use.

PUBLIC FORUM

KC Branscomb: A resident with 74 acres, all of it is Urban Reserve; appreciates staff efforts to understand. Applauds having employee living on her farms. Need to live in proximity of work to make the live/work system work. Biggest concern is ESHA, view corridors, where the housing go? 30241.5 – Economic feasibility of agriculture operations – need a flexible point of view about these supplemental options.

Roy Salume: Read both Chapters 2 & 4. Will write down comments and submit to Staff. Chapter 2 – Likes the idea of Dolores PD, transfer of development rights (TDR) from Wavecrest to Dolores is worth exploring. Chapter 4 – Climate change impacts, may be more immediate and farm to table may be a necessity. Consider rapid agricultural production. Be nimble. Visitor serving is good to move to south end of town, more camping south end of town.

Scott McVicker: Average monthly payment for houses is high; how do people find jobs here in town? We are a bedroom community. Traffic and housing are concerns. Try to work with what is already here. Page 2-7 top bullet point is a concern.

Judy Taylor: Likes the diversity of housing in Chapter 2. Lot retirements and TDR’s are problematic, money goes into new home, will impact affordability. Look at ownership

8

January 22, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5

and rental. Equity shares verses deed restriction. None of downtown will work because of parking. Planned Developments with multiple owners is a nightmare and won’t be developed. Jobs need to be where housing already exists.

David Powell: Lots of discussion of housing but no mention of unsubsidized senior housing. Chapter 2, page 2-4 indicates that commercial is prioritized over residential (also submitted comments in writing at the meeting).

Lennie Roberts: Committee for Green Foothills, will work with staff and submit comments in writing. Look at Priority uses of California Coastal Act: 1) Agriculture, 2) Coastal dependent industry, 3) Visitor Serving. To make this plan work with Coastal Commission approvals need to demonstrate connection of priority housing to Coastal Act priority uses. Supports of Priority overlay concept, recommends focusing on local workforce for the residential development. The unincorporated Midcoast also has more housing than jobs; for their LUP update, San Mateo County has to study comprehensive transportation plan and must mitigate. It is possible that priority local workforce housing could mitigate traffic. Strongly supports maintaining agriculture.

George Muteff: Catching up on the LCP update. Anxious to learn more about affordable housing; traffic is a legitimate concern. The need to reduce traffic but also provide affordable housing needs to be clarified.

Tom Carey: Needs time to digest the document. With respect to the Planned Development –Dolores, not in favor, gives too much power to one developer; likes the existing R1-B2 zoning, could address the planning issues with an assessment district. With respect to down zoning on West Railroad – check city records and what the City promised: if you wait you will get a chance later. Supports building on substandard lots.

Mike Ferreira: Considering how the community will get involved. Workshops are the worst way to involve the community. Housing Element needs to be consistent with LCP, not the other way around. Supports agriculture with workforce housing – putting workers in proximity with where they work. Low vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and CEQA considerations are good. Larger employers would be supportive. Grandview Planned Development not possible because of Bolsa Chica case law: cannot build a road on wetlands for housing.

John Callan: President of San Mateo Land Exchange, owns 300 lots at the end of Redondo Beach road; appreciates work done. Exciting to see Planned Developments discussed. Wavecrest had been approved for residential and there are inconsistencies. Arbitrary limits don’t follow the previous plan approved by the conservancy. No residential west of Park Avenue wipes out 25 acres of developable land at the end of Redondo. Why commercial at Wavecrest? Why residential at Redondo?

Jules Sofer: No mention of boarding houses, they mess up the R-1 neighborhoods resulting in lots of cars. Ox Mountain is causing a lot of the traffic on 92, they should close during the daytime hours. With respect to substandard lots, likes the small houses, just not a fan of using the whole frontage for the driveway.

David Beaumont – In favor of affordable housing. Interested in the Bernardo Station area and recognizes potential benefits for the south end of town. Recommends using the overlay tool in the area.

9

January 22, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5

Planning Commission Discussion

• Public will learn more from interactive dialogue; e.g. the past sub-committee meeting were informal

• With respect to public comment, some comments are too specific for policy level document; would be addressed with zoning.

• Encouraged by public response to the housing overlay. Revise the name/classification to emphasize local workforce housing; the word “priority” needs to remain clear with respect to Coastal Act. With respect to the land use map, the public is looking for something more consistent with the potential buildout.

• Explore ideas that have worked in other places as well as where well-intentioned efforts to provide workforce housing have been less successful.

• Community members are encouraged to reach out reach out the Planning Commissioners.

• Substandard development should be addressed in design guidelines.

• Much of the context of the draft plan is based on practical realties of development

• Traffic remains a primary concern.

• Page 2-4, priority uses are noted, and this section could be emphasized.

• In favor of the overlays, affordable housing, non-conforming lots, and ADUs as creative solutions to address housing affordability.

• Town Center and the three portions of it as defined by former Commissioner Evans show good progress and establish a constructive language.

• Dolores PD – property owners need to provide feedback.

• Consider community comments and promises that were made previously, community members should bring their documentation.

• Inherited a plan that has challenges with neighborhoods, agriculture and open space interspersed. Drainage and habitat are disconnected.

• With respect to specific plans, precise plans, and PDs, consider TDR potential (potential new State assembly bill, Weiner) for TDR from low density communities to other regions or areas that can support density.

• Be flexible with Agriculture – what was described with respect to climate change and food insecurity was kind of a hazard – a slower moving but serious hazard – consider adding to Coastal Hazards.

• Fire Hazards – reminded that needs a more informed hazard/notification system. Seems relevant to PDs that need to be managed with respect to hazards.

• Would like more of an understanding as to where the general PD policies originated.

• This plan is a view of Half Moon Bay past 2040, considers buildout, and adopts a longer mindset.

DIRECTOR REPORT

• Acknowledgment of Emergency Coastal Development Permit (CDPE) (PDP-2018-092) for pipeline removal and replacement of deteriorated drainage pipe at Poplar near

10

January 22, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5

access way to Poplar Beach. Replacement will be temporary fix as a permanent fix will be in the Poplar Gateways plan.

o Planning Commissioner Comments – ▪ Concerned about aesthetics before long term project is in place; address

now if possible. o PUBLIC FORUM

No Comments PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT

M/S: Benjamin/Ruddock Motion to adjourn meeting in memory of Marina Salume. Motion Carried: unanimously Meeting adjourned: 9:56 PM

Respectfully Submitted: Approved: ____________________________ _________________________________ Bridget Jett, Planning Analyst Rick Hernandez, Chair

11

BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: February 12, 2019

TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Jill Ekas, Director – Community Development

Scott Phillips, Associate Planner TITLE: Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review File No. PDP-18-004 for

2801 Champs Elysee Blvd ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution P-19-__ approving PDP-18-004 an application for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review to allow the construction of a new 3,315 square-foot, two story, single-family residence on a 15,160 square-foot site at 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd, based upon the Findings and Evidence contained in Exhibit A of the Draft Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B included in Attachment 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND This project was previously reviewed at the August 14, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, public comment was taken and the Planning Commission evaluated the project as it related to the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan policies applicable to the subject property. The Planning Commission received a presentation, conducted a public hearing, and held a discussion. Public comment and Planning Commission discussion centered around concerns about conflicts with the City’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) policies, especially with respect to the Planned Development (PD) land use designation generally, and the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach planned development in particular. The Commission was supportive of the design of the new residence and site layout but continued the item to a date uncertain and directed staff to research the history of applicable entitlements, conduct a policy analysis, and return to the Planning Commission with a summary report and recommended course of action. A copy of the staff report and minutes from this meeting are included as Attachments 2 and 3. Per the Planning Commission’s direction, revisions to the Surf Beach Dunes Beach PD District to establish a separate PD District for the Stoloski/Gonzalez lands was pursued. At the August 28 meeting, the Commission reviewed a summary report and recommended amending the Local Coastal Program. An amendment to the Local Coastal Program was then presented to the Planning Commission September 25 and a copy of the staff report is included Attachment 4. The

12

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 Page 2 of 3 February 12, 2019

Commission recommended approval of the amendment. The change was then approved by the City Council on October 16, 2018. A copy of the City Council staff report is included as Attachment 5. The amendment was then certified by the California Coastal Commission on December 12, 2018. This amendment established the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD District as a separate PD District from the Surf Beach /Dunes Beach PD District by modifying the PD District boundaries, as well as by modifying policy language in the LCP. The text amendments included modifications to 9.3.3 (Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD) of the Development Chapter and the addition of Policy 9.3.20 a.-c. (Stoloski / Gonzalez PD) to the LUP. By establishing a separate PD District for the Stoloski / Gonzalez subdivision, it is possible for the Planning Commission to make the Coastal Development Permit finding requiring conformance with the Local Coastal Program. Of primary concern at the August 14, 2018 Planning Commission meeting was Policy 9-8 and language within Section 9.3.3 (Surf Beach / Dunes Beach PD) of the LUP. Policy 9-8 requires that for PDs, the entire site be planned as a unit. Section 9.3.3 indicated that the Stoloski / Gonzales subdivision was part of the Surf Beach / Dunes Beach PD. Therefore, the Planning Commission was not able to find that the entire site had been planned as a unit because the PUD plan did not cover the entire Surf Beach / Dunes Beach area. With respect to the new Stoloski / Gonzalez PD policies (9.3.20 a.-c.), the project conforms to its three policies summarized as follows:

a. Final Parcel Map: The project conforms to the map, including building envelop, and infrastructure improvements.

b. Stoloski / Gonzalez Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan: The project conforms to the lot coverage, allowed uses, and other standards established in the previously approved Stoloski / Gonzalez PUD.

c. Settlement Agreement: The settlement agreement stipulated location of a sewer line and tree protection measures. Other requirements of the agreement were not applicable to this portion of the subdivision. The sewer line extension is completed per the agreement. Declining Monterey Pine trees on the property will be maintained until they need to be removed and replaced at a future time. No other requirements of the Settlement Agreement apply to this project.

With the creation of the separate Stoloski / Gonzalez PD District, as well as modification to the language within the LUP for the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD which amended its boundaries so as to not include the Stoloski / Gonzalez subdivision, the project can now be found in conformance with the LCP.

13

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 Page 3 of 3 February 12, 2019

Figure 1. Site Photo with Story Poles facing north, taken August 2018.

Figure 1 shows the site with the story poles reflecting the outer perimeter of the new house. Complete photo documentation of the story poles was also submitted prior to this meeting. CONCLUSION Based on the analysis included in the staff report in Attachment 2 and the establishment of the Stoloski / Gonzalez Planned Development District, staff recommends approval of the project based on the findings and conditions of approval (Exhibit A and B of the attached Draft Resolution). The Planning Commission’s decision may be appealed to the City Council within ten (10) working days of the decision. Furthermore, the subject property is within the appeals jurisdiction boundary for the California Coastal Commission. Therefore the project can also be appealed to the California Coastal Commission.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution with Findings and Evidence, Exhibit A and Conditions of Approval,

Exhibit B. 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 14, 2018 3. Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 14, 2018 4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated September 25, 2018 5. City Council Staff Report, dated October 16, 2018 6. California Coastal Commission Staff Report for the Local Coastal Land Use Change

14

ATTACHMENT 1

PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION P-19-____ RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL

PDP-18-004

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY APPROVING A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 3,315 SQUARE-FOOT TWO-STORY RESIDENCE ON A 15,160 SQUARE-FOOT LOT AT 2801 CHAMPS ELYSEE BLVD IN THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT AND THE RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION (APN 048-133-010)

WHEREAS, an application was submitted requesting approval of Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review to allow the construction of a new 3,315 square-foot two-story, single-family residence on a 15,160 square-foot lot at 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd. in the Planned Unit Development Zoning District and the Planned Development District General Plan designation (APN: 048-133-010) (the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, the procedures for processing the application have been followed as required by law; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings on August 14, 2018, and February 12, 2019 at which time all those desiring to be heard on the matter were given an opportunity to be heard; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all written and oral testimony presented for consideration; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program previously adopted with the approval of the Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map for the property is adequate for the requested Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review for the construction of the new residence; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the required findings for approval of the project, set forth in Exhibit A to this resolution;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission takes the following actions:

1. Finds that, on the basis of the whole record before it, there is no substantial evidence that the Project as proposed and mitigated will have a significant effect on the environment.

2. Approves the Project, based upon the Findings in Exhibit A and subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B.

15

Page 2 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Half Moon Bay Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing held February 12, 2019.

AYES, NOES, ABSENT, ABSTAIN, APPROVED: ______________________________ _____________________________________ Brian Holt, Chair Jill Ekas, Director – Community Development

16

Page 3 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

EXHIBIT A FINDINGS AND EVIDENCE

Planning Commission Resolution P-19-____ PDP-18-004

Coastal Development Permit – Findings for Approval The required Coastal Development Permit for this project may be approved or conditionally approved only after the approving authority has made the following findings per Municipal Code Section 18.20.070: 1. Local Coastal Program – The development as proposed or as modified by conditions, conforms

to the Local Coastal Program.

Evidence: The project consists of construction of a new single-family residence adjacent to an existing neighborhood where public services and infrastructure are provided to the site. The project conforms to all City requirements, will not impact coastal resources and is consistent with the policies of the City’s Land Use Plan (LUP).

Coastal Act 30240(b) and Policy 3-3 (b): Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade such areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of such habitat areas. Compliance: The Pullman Ditch runs along the northern boundary of the subject property. The proposed project has been designed to comply with the Riparian Buffer requirement within the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan/Zoning Ordinance, which requires a 30-foot setback from the centerline of the Pullman Ditch. Additionally, an update to the Biological Resource Assessment was prepared for the site and surrounding area and circulated to the resource agencies for a 45-day comment period. The biologist reviewed a copy of the plans, which included the landscape plan and plant palette. The report concluded that the mitigation measures included in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration are adequate for mitigating any potential effects to biological resources by the residential project. Given the distance of the subject house improvements from the Pullman Ditch and the implementation of the required mitigation measures for biological resources, any significant impacts on environmentally sensitive habitat areas would be avoided.

Coastal Act 30244: Where development would adversely impact archaeological or

paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer,

reasonable mitigation measures shall be required.

Compliance: The proposed single-family residence is not located at or near identified

archaeological or paleontological resources. If cultural resources or paleontological

resources are unexpectedly encountered during subsurface excavation, the permit has been 17

Page 4 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

conditioned to require that construction halt until the find can be evaluated and appropriate

mitigation identified.

Policy 7-1: The City will establish regulations to protect the scenic corridor of Highway 1, including setbacks for new development, screening of commercial parking and landscaping associated with new development. The minimum standards shall include all areas within 200 yards of State Highway 1 which are visible from the road.

Compliance: The subject site is located within 400 feet of State Highway 1. The project has

been designed to conform to the scenic corridor standards identified in the Visual Resource

Protection chapter of the Implementation Plan / Zoning Code.

Policy 7-5: All new development, including additions and remodeling, shall be subject to design review.

Compliance: The proposed residence and site improvements have been subject to design review by the Planning Commission. As shown in the evidence provided for Architectural Site and Design Review findings below, the project is in compliance with the applicable Design Review Criteria.

Policy 7-11: New development along primary access routes from Highway 1 to the beach, as designated on the Land Use Map, shall be designed and sited so as to maintain and enhance the scenic quality of such routes, including building setbacks, maintenance of low height of structures, and landscaping which establishes a scenic gateway and corridor.

Compliance: The proposed single-family residence is not located along a primary access

route from Highway 1 and will not affect coastal access. Public access to Naples Beach currently exists 300 feet to the north of the subject property, along Washington Blvd.

Policy 9-8: The entire site shall be planned as a unit. Preparation of specific plans (Government Code Section 65450) may be required for one or more separate ownerships, individually or collectively, when parcels comprising a site designated PD are in separate ownership.

Compliance: The project is located within the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development (PD) District. The entire PD site has been planned as a unit through prior amendments to the Planned Unit Development Plan that established development standards for the entire Stoloski/Gonzalez PD. With the recent modifications to the Local Coastal Land Use Plan, including language to Section 9.3.3 and addition of Section 9.3.20 (Stoloski/Gonzalez) the new residence and associated improvements conform to the development chapter and related policies of the LCP, including Policy 9-8. The subject property is one of four lots within the recently created Stoloski / Gonzalez Planned Development District. The new residence and

18

Page 5 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

site improvements conform to the development standards that were adopted with the Planned Development District.

2. Growth Management System – The development is consistent with the annual population limitation system established in the Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

Evidence: The proposed site has been granted a valid Measure D Certificate for construction

of one single-family residence; therefore the project conforms to the requirements of the

City’s growth management system.

3. Zoning Provisions – The development is consistent with the use limitations and property

development standards of the base district as well as the other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.

Evidence: The proposed residence conforms to all requirements of the approved PUD Development Standards associated with the Parcel Map approval, including lot coverage, setbacks, height and parking and to the Zoning Code’s riparian buffer zone requirements.

4. Adequate Services – The proposed development will be provided with adequate services and

infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program.

Evidence: The site is located adjacent to an existing developed neighborhood and utilities and services are currently provided to the site. The utilities and roadway were extended from the City of Naples Subdivision shortly after the Final Parcel Map was recorded. As conditioned, a sewer permit through Granada Community Services District is required.

5. California Coastal Act – Any development to be located between the sea and the first public road parallel to the sea conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act.

Evidence: The proposed project is located between the sea and the first public road parallel

to the sea. The proposal is to construct a new single-family home and associated improvements on a vacant lot adjacent to an existing developed neighborhood. Adequate public access to the Coastal Trail, Naples Beach and the coast is available approximately 300 feet away from the subject property, along Washington Boulevard. Therefore, sufficient access to coastal resources from the subject property and surrounding area is available as required by Chapter 18.40 of the Zoning Ordinance and the project would not restrict public access or recreation opportunities.

Architectural Site and Design Review – Findings The required Architectural and/or Site and Design Review for this project may be approved or conditionally approved only after the approving authority has made the findings per Municipal

19

Page 6 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

Code Section 14.37.040. In making these findings, the Planning Commission has considered the design approval criteria set forth in Municipal Code Section 14.37.035. 1. That such buildings, structures, planting, paving and other improvements shall be so designed

and constructed that they will not be of unsightly or obnoxious appearance to the extent that they will hinder the orderly and harmonious development of the city;

Evidence: Zoning Code Section 18.06.010 states that the intent of the residential chapter is to establish residential districts and guide the orderly development within each district. It further states that the residential district regulations are intended to ensure provision of adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling by establishing reasonable development standards for the mass, scale and location on a building site for all new residential construction and to achieve a high standard of site and building design and design compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed improvements have been designed in conformance with the requirements of the adopted PUD Development Standards. The project is also in substantial conformance with the Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines, the objectives of which include ensuring compatible design within existing neighborhood contexts.

2. That such buildings, structures, planting, paving and other improvements will not impair the desirability or opportunity to attain the optimum use and the value of the land and the improvements, or otherwise impair the desirability of living or working conditions in the same or adjacent areas; and Evidence: Zoning Code Section 18.06.010 states that the intent of the residential chapter is to establish residential districts and guide the orderly development within each district. It further states that the residential district regulations are intended to ensure provision of adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling by establishing reasonable development standards for the mass, scale and location on a building site for all new residential construction and to achieve a high standard of site and building design and design compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed project has been designed in conformance with the requirements of the R-1 Single-Family Residential Zoning District and improves the nonconforming condition of the site. The project is also in substantial conformance with the Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines, the objectives of which include maintaining strong property values, compatible neighborhoods, and a healthy environment.

3. The project has been designed in conformance and consistency with the Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines (where applicable). Evidence: The Single Family Residential Design Guidelines (RDG) encourage flexibility in architectural design to reflect the community’s eclectic character and seek to achieve compatible design within existing neighborhoods. The current project proposes a neo-traditional design that is compatible with the existing pattern of development in the

20

Page 7 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

surrounding area in terms of building placement/orientation, massing, and materials and colors. The surrounding neighborhood can be characterized as having an eclectic mixture of architectural styles and features. This project in particular involves the construction of a new two-story Craftsman inspired style home. The materials and colors of the proposed home have been selected to enhance the aesthetics of the Craftsman inspired architectural style. For example, vertical siding along the second story, lap siding for the first story, wood trim, and double hung windows are utilized throughout the exterior of the proposed home. In conclusion, the proposed home is well designed, compatible with the residences within the surrounding area and in compliance with the Single Family Residential Design Guidelines.

Environmental Review – Finding CEQA – The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Based on the whole

record before the Planning Commission (including the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Stoloski subdivision and staff and consultant review of the proposed residence), there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.

Substantial evidence supports the conclusion that no subsequent environmental review is required because there are no substantial changes in the Project or the circumstances under which the Project is to be undertaken that would result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts requiring major revisions to the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, and there is no new information that involves new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified environmental effects that would require preparation of an EIR or a subsequent or supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162.

Evidence: An Initial Study (IS) and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) were prepared and adopted for approval of the Stoloski four-residential lot subdivision and associated Planned Unit Development Plan in conformance with the requirements of CEQA. The proposed residence is located on one of those four lots, conforms to the requirements of the Plan, and is required to comply with the mitigation measures in the MND as a condition of approval. The Final IS/MND is included as Attachment 2. City staff reviewed the proposed project and did not identify any adverse significant effects on the environment. The City considers Pullman Ditch sensitive habitat. The project biologist reevaluated the site and prepared an update the biological resource evaluation. No changed circumstances or new impacts to biological resources were identified through the update process. The biologist concluded that the mitigation measures adopted with the previous MND are appropriate for the new house and site improvements. 21

Page 8 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Planning Commission Resolution P-18-____ PDP-18-004

A. The following Conditions shall apply to the subject site:

1. CONFORMANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS. Development of the site shall conform to the

approved plans entitled New Residence 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd., Half Moon Bay, CA

94019 with a City date stamp of May 7, 2018, except for any revisions required by this

permit. The Community Development Director shall review and may approve any deviation

from the approved plans that is determined minor in nature. Any other change shall

require the submittal of a major modification application and fees and shall be subject to a

public hearing as required by Title 18. (Planning)

2. CONFORMANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. The Community Development Director

shall review and may approve any deviation from the Conditions of Approval that is

determined minor in nature. Any other change shall require the submittal of a major

modification application and fees and shall be subject to a public hearing as required by

Title 18. (Planning)

3. CONFORMANCE WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE. No part of this approval shall be construed to

permit a violation of any part of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code. (Planning)

4. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. This project shall comply with the previous

conditions of approval from PDP-009-10, Resolution C-04-12. (Planning)

5. LIGHTING. All exterior lighting shall be fully shielded so that no light source is visible from

outside the property, except as otherwise expressly approved. (Planning)

6. MAINTANENCE AND LIABILITY. It shall be the duty of the Property Owner(s) whose

property is adjacent to any portion of a public street or place to maintain the project

frontage in a safe and non-dangerous condition. Maintenance shall include removal and

replacement of concrete to eliminate tripping hazards; and pruning and trimming of trees,

shrubs, ground cover and other landscaping within the public right-of-way. The Property

Owner has the primary and exclusive duty to fund and perform such maintenance and

repair, whether or not the City has notified the property owner of the need for such

maintenance or repairs or has performed similar maintenance or repairs in the past,

pursuant to §12.18.020 and §12.18.030 of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code.

(Engineering)

7. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. The applicant/owner shall ensure that all landscaped areas

and/or fences are continuously maintained, and all plant material is maintained free of

refuse and weeds and in a healthy growing condition. (Planning) 22

Page 9 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

B. The following Conditions shall be fulfilled prior to the issuance of building

permits:

1. SIGNED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. The applicant/owner shall submit a signed copy of the

conditions of approval to the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit.

(Planning)

2. REQUIRED PLAN REVISIONS. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit

revised plans providing the following:

a) Split rail fencing shall be shown and constructed along the 30-foot riparian buffer,

along the south bank of Pullman Ditch. (Planning)

3. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. The previous conditions of approval for PDP-009-10,

Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development, Use Permit and Tentative Parcel

Map (Resolution C-04-12) for the subdivision creating the subject property shall apply to

this project. (Planning)

4. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. The applicant shall obtain any necessary approvals that

may be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It is the applicant’s responsibility to

make sure the project is in compliance with all of the Corps’ requirements.

5. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. The following impact fees shall be paid to the City prior to

issuance of building permits in conformance with the City’s adopted Master Fee Schedule:

a) Sewer Connection Fee

b) Storm Drainage Fee

c) Capital Outlay Facilities Fee

d) Traffic Mitigation Fee

e) Park Facilities Fee

6. SCHOOL IMPACT FEES. The applicant shall provide proof of payment of required school

Impact fees to Cabrillo Unified School District prior to issuance of building permits.

7. VALID MEASURE D CERTIFICATE. No building permit shall be issued unless the Measure D

Certificate issued for the property has not expired and remains valid to the satisfaction of

the Community Development Director. (Planning)

8. PROJECT BIOLOGIST. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the

Director the name, company affiliation, and contact information of the project biologist who

will oversee the construction. The project biologist shall be selected from the City’s List of

Pre-approved Biological Consultants to the satisfaction of the Community Development

Director. The applicant shall notify the Community Development Director in writing within

24 hours of any change in the project biologist. (Planning)

23

Page 10 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

9. CONSTRUCTION PLANS. File Number PDP-18-004 and the Conditions of Approval for this

project shall be provided on the cover page of the building permit application plan

submittal. All plans, specifications, engineering calculations, diagrams, reports, and other

data for construction of the building and required improvements shall be submitted with

the appropriate permit application to the City’s Building and Engineering Divisions for

review and approval. Computations and back-up data will be considered a part of the

required plans. Structural calculations and engineering calculations shall be prepared, wet-

stamped and signed by an engineer or architect licensed by the State of California. The plans

must show the location of the sewer connection and property line sewer cleanout.

Construction plans shall indicate that there shall be no staging / storage of materials or any

other use of the Pullman Ditch buffer area for construction purposes. (Planning)

10. WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPING. The permittee shall submit a detailed landscape

plan to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If the project includes 500

square feet or more of irrigated landscaping (new or rehabilitated) the permittee shall

submit landscape and irrigation plans and an Outdoor Water Efficiency Checklist that

demonstrate compliance with the City’s Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance

(Chapter 13.04 of the Municipal Code) prior to issuance of building permits to the

satisfaction of the Community Development Director. (Planning)

11. SURVEY REQUIRED. Submit a detailed topographic/site boundary survey certified by a

licensed surveyor with building application plans. The survey shall include a baseline

elevation datum point on, or close to the construction site, indicating existing grade of the

datum. This datum point shall be permanent, marked, shall remain fixed in the field, and

shall not be disturbed throughout the building process. Examples of datum points include:

fire hydrants, manhole covers, survey markers, and street curbs. This datum point shall be

shown on all site plans including revised/resubmitted plans. The survey must show the

footprint and roof plan of the proposed residence and identify the existing grade elevations

at the corners and roof ridgeline of the residence. (Building)

12. EVIDENCE OF WATER CONNECTION CAPACITY. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the

permittee shall submit a letter from Coastside County Water District certifying that the

subject site has an adequately-sized water connection for this approved project. (Building)

13. EVIDENCE OF SEWER CONNECTION CAPACITY. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the

permittee shall demonstrate issuance of a sewer permit from Granada Community Services

District. (Building)

14. ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. The proposed project, including street improvements, shall

comply with State of California and federal (ADA) accessibility standards and with the line of

sight requirements of Half Moon Bay Zoning Code Section 18.06.040(B).

24

Page 11 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

15. LOT GRADING, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE STORAGE. No lot site grading,

preparation, storage, or placement of construction materials, equipment, or vehicles shall

take place prior to issuance of a building permit. Any earth movement on or off the site in

excess of 50 cubic yards shall require the submittal of a grading plan for review by the City

Engineer and issuance of a grading permit. Lot Grading includes, but is not limited to, any

leveling, scraping, clearing, or removal of lot surface area. Materials, Equipment, and

Vehicles include, but are not limited to:

1. All masonry, wood, and steel construction materials;

2. All construction-related equipment and storage containers; and

3. All construction-related vehicles, including temporary trailers. (Engineering)

16. COPPER BUILDING ELEMENTS. The building plans shall specify that all copper building

elements will be pre-patinated at the factory, or if patination will occur on the site, the

plans shall identify best management practices in conformance with the San Mateo

Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program Requirements for Architectural Copper, to

the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)

17. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL. An erosion and sediment control plan shall be

submitted that shows effective Best Management Practices (BMP) and erosion and

sediment control measures for the site. Construction plans shall also include the

“construction best management practices” plan sheet. (Engineering)

18. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES/SERVICES. Electric, telecommunication, and cable and utility

service to the property shall be through underground service connections only. No

overhead utilities are allowed. Show locations of all utility service connections: sanitary

sewer, storm drain (if applicable), water (domestic and fire), cable television, telephone,

electrical, and gas. (Engineering)

19. FIRE CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS. The permittee shall comply with all applicable fire and

building codes and standards relating to fire and panic safety as identified by the Coastside

Fire Protection District during the building permit process. (Fire)

20. HARD-WIRED SMOKE DETECTORS/ALARMS. Pursuant to the 2016 California Building and

Residential Code, State Fire Marshal regulations and current Coastside Fire District

Ordinance, the permittee shall install smoke detectors which are hard-wired,

interconnected and have battery backup in each new or reconditioned sleeping room and

at a point centrally located in the corridor or area giving access to each separate sleeping

area. A minimum of one detector per floor is required. For alterations: If there is an attic,

basement, crawl space or removal of a wall or ceiling that provides access, then all smoke

alarms shall be hardwired and interconnected. Building plan submittals shall demonstrate

25

Page 12 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

conformance with these requirements to the satisfaction of the Building Official prior to

issuance of building permits. (Fire)

21. COASTSIDE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT - REGULATIONS. The project shall comply with all

applicable regulations and requirements of the Coastside County Water District. Water

service shall not be in the same trench as other utilities. (Water District)

C. The following conditions shall be implemented prior to and during

construction:

1. ARCHAEOLOGY-DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the

Health and Safety Code, and Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code of the State of

California, in the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall

be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected

to overlie adjacent remains. The County Coroner shall be notified and shall make a

determination as to whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines

that the remains are not subject to his authority, he shall notify the California Native

American Heritage Commission who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased

Native American(s). If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the

remains pursuant to this State law, then the permittee shall re-inter the human remains and

items associated with Native American burials on the property in a location not subject to

further subsurface disturbance. (Planning)

2. ARCHAEOLOGY-DISCOVERY OF RESOURCES. If subsurface historic or archaeological

resources are uncovered during construction, all work shall stop, the applicant shall

notify the Community Development Director and retain a qualified archaeologist to

perform an archaeological reconnaissance and identify any mitigation measures

required to protect archaeological resources. Subsurface excavation shall not resume

until expressly authorized by the Director. (Building)

3. TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS. The following tree protection measures shall be

implemented during construction:

a) Prior to commencement of construction, construction fencing shall be placed

around the drip line of all trees proposed for preservation.

b) No grading or other construction shall occur within the drip line of any tree

proposed for preservation except in conformance with a Tree Protection Plan

approved by the Community Development Director.

c) No vehicle, equipment or materials shall be parked or stored within the drip line of

any tree proposed for preservation. (Planning/Building)

4. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS. Temporary construction trailers are permitted as accessory uses

in conjunction with the development of this site, subject to the following conditions: 26

Page 13 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

a. The construction trailer shall be used as a temporary construction office only.

b. Neither sanitation facilities nor plumbed water is permitted within the trailer.

c. No overnight inhabitance of the construction trailer is permitted.

d. No construction trailers are permitted on site prior to building permit issuance.

e. The construction trailer shall be removed prior to issuance of a certificate of

occupancy. (Planning)

5. AIR QUALITY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. The project shall implement the following

standard BAAQMD dust control measures during all phases of construction on the project

site:

• All active construction areas shall be watered twice daily or more often if necessary. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles-per-hour.

• Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads and parking and staging areas at construction sites.

• Cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand, and any other materials that can be windblown. Trucks transporting these materials shall be covered.

• All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day or as often as necessary to keep them free of dust and debris associated with site construction. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

• Subsequent to clearing, grading, or excavating, exposed portions of the site shall be watered, landscaped, treated with soil stabilizers, or covered as soon as possible. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas and previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more.

• Installation of sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.

• Replanting of vegetation in disturbed areas as soon as possible after completion of construction.

• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes. Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.

• Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Half Moon Bay regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

6. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Any materials deemed hazardous by the San Mateo County

Department of Health that are uncovered or discovered during the course of work under

27

Page 14 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

this permit shall be disposed in accordance with regulations of the San Mateo County of

Health. (Building)

7. COMPLIANCE WITH CBC. All structures shall be constructed in compliance with the

standards of the 2016 California Codes of Regulations Title 24, including Building Code,

Residential Code, Administrative Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, Electrical Code,

Energy Code, Fire Code and Green Building Code to the satisfaction of the Building Official.

(Building)

8. FIRST FLOOR HEIGHT VERIFICATION. Prior to below floor framing or concrete slab steel

reinforcement inspection, a stamped and signed building height verification letter shall be

submitted to the City from a licensed land survey certifying that the first-floor height as

constructed is equal to (or less than) the elevation specified for the first floor height in the

approved plans.

9. BUILDING PAD ELEVATION. The building pad shall be at least one-foot above the centerline

crown of the roadway or the top of the curb. (Engineering)

10. OVERALL PROJECT HEIGHT. Maximum overall height of the project, including any grading,

foundation, pad, and building elevations shall be calculated using the elevation points

indicated on the topographic survey map submitted at the time of application. The

approved height of all projects developed in the City will be measured from existing grade

as indicated on the submitted topographical survey. (Building)

11. COMPLETION OF UTILITIES. Any public utilities requiring relocation as a result of the

construction of the building(s) or improvements under this permit shall be relocated at the

owner’s expense. (Building)

12. CONSTRUCTION HOURS. Construction work shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to

6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturdays; and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00

p.m. Sundays and holidays, except as expressly authorized by the City Engineer in

conformance with Section 14.40.020 of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code. (Engineering)

13. NOTICE OF DISRUPTION. The permittee shall provide written notice to affected property

and business owners and a copy of such notice to the City Engineer a minimum of two

business days prior to any planned disruption of pedestrian or vehicular traffic, parking, or

public service facilities. (Engineering)

14. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL STORAGE. Construction material shall not be stored in the

street right-of-way without issuance of a Temporary Encroachment Permit. (Engineering)

15. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. The permittee shall obtain an Encroachment Permit prior to

starting any construction activity within the City right-of-way or affecting City

28

Page 15 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

improvements. All improvements constructed within the City right-of-way shall conform to

City standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)

D. The following conditions shall be implemented prior to issuance of an

occupancy permit:

1. EXTERIOR COLORS AND MATERIALS. Exterior building colors and materials shall be in

substantial conformance with those shown on the approved color and materials board

date-stamped 5/7/18 to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.

(Planning)

2. TREE INSTALLATION. 1 minimum 24-inch box size tree shall be installed in the front setback

of the property, adjacent to the street right-of-way. The tree shall be planted in

conformance with the site distance requirements of Section 18.06.040(B) (4) of the Zoning

Code and shall not interfere with utility lines. (Planning/Engineering)

3. CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS. If a deferred street agreement is not

executed prior to issuance of building permits, all street improvements shall be constructed

in conformance with approved plans and permits prior to issuance of a certificate of

occupancy to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)

4. DISPLAY OF SINGLE-FAMILY STREET ADDRESS. Prior to issuance of an Certificate of

Occupancy, the residential dwelling shall display an internally-illuminated street address

number in a prominent location on the dwelling, visible from the street (a minimum of 6

feet above the surface of the driveway), and with contrasting background and

letters/numbers that are 4 inches in height with a minimum 3/4–inch stroke. Where a

building is set back from the street or otherwise obscured, a street address with 3-inch

reflective numbers/letters shall also be provided near the driveway entrance leading to the

dwelling. (Fire/Building)

5. TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS. The following tree protection measures shall be

implemented during construction:

a) Prior to commencement of construction, construction fencing shall be placed around

the drip line of all trees proposed for preservation.

b) No grading or other construction shall occur within the drip line of any tree

proposed for preservation except in conformance with a Tree Protection Plan

approved by the Community Development Director.

c) No vehicle, equipment or materials shall be parked or stored within the drip line of

any tree proposed for preservation. (Planning/Building)

29

Page 16 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

E. Validity and Expiration of Permits

1. EFFECTIVE DATE. This site is located within the Coastal Appeal Zone. This permit shall take

effect after expiration of the Coastal Commission appeal period, or if the permit is appealed

to the Coastal Commission during the appeal period, it shall take effect after final Coastal

Commission action. (Planning)

2. ACCURACY OF APPLICATION MATERIALS. The permittee shall be responsible for the

completeness and accuracy of all forms and material submitted for this application. Any

errors or discrepancies found therein may be grounds for the revocation or modification of

this permit and/or any other City approvals. (Planning)

3. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and Architectural Review shall

expire one year from its date of final approval if the use/development has not commenced

in conformance with this permit or the applicant has not obtained an extension of the

permit.

4. PERMIT EXTENSION. The Community Development Director may, at the Director’s

discretion, approve a Minor Amendment for a single one-year extension of this permit

based on a written request and fee submitted to the Director prior to expiration of the

permit. Submittal of a Building Permit application with development plans prior to

expiration of the permit shall constitute an extension of this permit until the building permit

is issued or until the Building Official determines the applicant is no longer diligently

pursuing the required building permit. Any other extension shall require approval of a

Major Permit Amendment prior to expiration of the permit. Any Major Permit Amendment

Application to extend the permit shall be filed a minimum of ninety (90) days prior to permit

expiration to ensure adequate processing time. (Planning)

5. PERMIT RUNS WITH THE LAND. The approval runs with the land and the rights and

obligations thereunder, including the responsibility to comply with conditions of approval,

shall be binding upon successors in interest in the real property unless or until such permits

are expressly abandoned or revoked. (Planning)

6. HOLD HARMLESS. To the fullest extent allowed by law, the permittee agrees as a condition

of approval of this application to indemnify, protect, defend with counsel selected by the

City, and hold harmless, the City, and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and its elected

and appointed officials, officers, employees and agents, from and against an and all

liabilities, claims, actions, causes of action, proceedings, suits, damages, judgments, liens,

levies, costs and expenses of whatever nature, including reasonable attorney’s fees and

disbursements (collectively, “Claims”) arising out of or in any way relating to the approval

of this application, any actions taken by the City related to this entitlement, any review by

the California Coastal Commission conducted under the California Coastal Act Public 30

Page 17 of 17

Resolution P-19-__

Resources Code Section 30000 et seq., or any environmental review conducted under the

California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 210000 et seq., for this

entitlement and related actions. The indemnification shall include any Claims that may be

asserted by any person or entity, including the permittee, arising out of or in connection

with the approval of this application, whether or not there is concurrent, passive or active

negligence on the part of the City, and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and its

elected and appointed officials, officers, employees and agents. The permittee’s duty to

defend the City shall not apply in those instances when the permittee has asserted the

Claims, although the permittee shall still have a duty to indemnify, protect and hold

harmless the City. (City Attorney).

OWNER’S/PERMITTEE’S CERTIFICATION:

I have read and understand and hereby accept and agree to implement the foregoing conditions

of approval of the Coastal Development Permit.

APPLICANT:

___________________________________ ________________________

(Signature) (Date)

31

BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: August 14, 2018

TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners

FROM: Jill Ekas, Director – Community Development

Scott Phillips, Associate Planner

TITLE: Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review File No. PDP-18-004 for

2801 Champs Elysee Blvd

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt Resolution P-18- approving PDP-18-004 an application for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review to allow the construction of a new 3,315 square-foot, two story, single-family residence on a 15,160 square-foot site at 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd, based upon the Findings and Evidence contained in Exhibit A of the Draft Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B.

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Summary of Project File Number PDP-18-004 Requested Permits/Approvals Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Site Location 2801 Champs Elysee Blvd, APN: 048-133-010 Applicant/Property Owner Equity Builders Group Inc. / Mark Stoloski Project Planner Scott Phillips; (650) 726-8299 Phone;

sphillips@hmbcity.com Zoning District Planned Unit Development LCP Land Use Plan Designation Planned Development District Water Service 1, 3/4” Non-priority water service is assigned to the property

Sewer Service (Granada Community Services District)

Sewer connection permit required through Granada Community Services District

Street Improvements Frontage improvements constructed through subdivision Improvements

Environmental Determination Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted with Tentative Parcel Map approval

32

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 2 of 9

Heritage Trees

Tree Protection Measure Required

Story Poles

Not Required

Yes Yes if PUD, or those cited in code No Variance or Exception required? No Located in a largely undeveloped area?

Right of Appeal Any aggrieved person may appeal the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Council within ten (10) working days of the decision.

The project is located within the Coastal Commission Appeals Jurisdiction; therefore final City action can be appealed to the Coastal Commission.

Site

Figure 1. Site Location

33

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 3 of 9

Figure 1. Site Photo, facing west, taken 6/21/18

Site and Surrounding Properties The project site is located along the eastern side of the new cul-de-sac, which was recently constructed on the south side of Champs Elysee Blvd. The site is currently vacant; limited vegetation includes ruderal ground cover and several mature conifer trees along the northern side property line. The site is zoned Planned Unit Development. The Planned Development Plan adopted with the parcel map allows for single-family residential uses. Land use and zoning for properties surrounding the subject site are as follows:

Table 1. Land Use and Zoning of Surrounding Properties

Direction Property Land Use and Zoning

North Existing Single-Family Residence (2805 Champs Elysee Blvd)

R-1, Single Family Residential District

South Undeveloped Planned Unit Development

PUD, Planned Unit Development (Surf Beach/Dunes Beach)

East Undeveloped Planned Unit Development

PUD, Planned Unit Development (Surf Beach/Dunes Beach)

West Proposed single-family residence (2800 Champs Elysee Blvd)

PUD, Planned Unit Development (Surf Beach/Dunes Beach)

The site was created in 2012 when the City Council approved the tentative parcel map, which subdivided a triangular shaped lot at the north end of the Surf Beach / Dunes Beach Planned Unit Development into four lots and was known as the Stoloski Development. The Final Parcel Map for this subdivision was approved on May 1, 2015.

34

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 4 of 9

The City Council’s decision on the tentative parcel map was appealed to the California Coastal Commission. Appellants contended that the subdivision (1) would impact environmentally sensitive habitat areas associated with Pullman Ditch and did not provide adequate setbacks, (2) was inconsistent with LCP requirements because it allowed development of the site before a specific plan was prepared for the Surf Beach / Dunes Beach PUD, and (3) created flooding hazards. During the Coastal Commission review of the appeal, the applicant removed the previously proposed culvert in Pullman Ditch from the project scope. On May 15, 2014, the California Coastal Commission determined that no substantial issue existed with respect to the grounds on which the appeal was filed. Under the Coastal Act, the City is bound by that decision for future actions regarding this particular Stoloski subdivision. Pub. Res. Code § 30625(c).

The City approved the final map for this subdivision on May 1, 2015 after the landowner satisfied the tentative map’s conditions of approval. The subject property includes the eastern side of the cul-de-sac on Champs Elysee Blvd.

Project Description The project consists of a new two-story residence with a floor area of 3,315 square feet. The proposed residence includes a detached two car garage and a large wrap-around front porch. The new home would include 4 bedrooms and three bathrooms. The front façade of the proposed house is characterized by a series of front-facing gable roof elements. A decorative trellis would be installed above the garage. Proposed materials include Eldorado Stone, stucco siding, and composition shingles; proposed colors are muted earth tones.

Figure 2. West Elevation of Proposed Residence facing Champs Elysee Blvd. cul-de-sac.

35

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 5 of 9

Development Standards Zoning Requirements Proposed

Min. Site Area 15,160 sq. ft. (as subdivided)

15,160 sq. ft. (existing)

Min. Front Setback

Per Approved Building Envelope on Final Map

20 ft., 4 inches

Min. Side Setback 30 ft. (left side) 44 ft. 6

inches (right side)

Min. Rear Setback 11 ft. 6 inches

Max. Height 28 ft. 27 ft. 3 inches

Max. Lot Coverage 6,000 sq. ft. 4,138 sq. ft.

Min. Parking Spaces 2 garage spaces, 2 additional uncovered spaces

2 garage spaces, 2 additional uncovered spaces

ANALYSIS

The key issues for this project are conformance with the General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan, conformance with the Zoning Code/LCP Implementation Plan,1 and design compatibility with surrounding development.

Conformance with the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan As the City Council found in approving the tentative subdivision map, a proposed single- family residence on this 15,160 square-foot lot is consistent with the General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan’s Planned Development designation for the site.

Conformance with the Zoning Code Consistency with the approved Planned Unit Development Plan and associated Use Permit is required per Section 18.15.045. The proposed single-family residential use is an allowed use identified within the adopted development standards for this Planned Unit Development. As indicated in Table 2 below, the proposed project conforms to all of the other development standards of the PUD Development Standards for the Stoloski / Gonzalez Parcel Map (Attachment #3). The project also conforms to the residential uses associated with the previously approved use permit. Additionally, Chapter 18.38 of zoning code contains buffer requirements applicable to riparian corridors. Due to the absence of riparian vegetation, a 30 foot buffer from the centerline of Pullman Ditch applies to this property. The project was designed to comply with this 30-foot riparian buffer.

Table 2. Project Conformance with PUD Development Standards – PDP-18-004

1 The Zoning Code is the LCP Implementation Plan. 36

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 6 of 9

Issue Applicability/Explanation

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Yes Pullman Ditch

Visual Resource Area

Yes Properties zoned Planned Unit Development are identified as Visual Resource Areas

Obstruct Public Access No House will have no effect on coastal access.

Archaeologically Resource Area No Not in area of mapped or known resources.

Historic Resources No No historic resources exist on the site.

Table 2 identifies key Zoning Code/LCP Implementation Plan topics and their applicability to the subject site. See additional discussion under Design Compatibility below.

Table 3. Key Zoning Code/LCP Implementation Plan Topics

Environmental Review and Biological Reports In December of 2011, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Tentative Parcel Map, Partial Planned Unit Development Plan, Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to subdivide the original triangular shaped parcel into four smaller parcels, creating the subject property. An Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and circulated for comments. The Planning Commission considered the IS/MND when they made the determination to recommend the project to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council approved the project and adopted the IS/MND. A copy of the IS/MND is included as Attachment #4. The resolution approving the Tentative Parcel Map and adopting the IS/MND is included as Attachment #5. The final parcel map was recorded at the County Recorder’s Office on May 4, 2015.

More recently, an update to the biological report associated with the adopted IS/MND was prepared in order to evaluate this residential project. The original and updated biological report is included as Attachment #6. The biological consultant concluded in the updated report that the mitigation measures associated with the adopted IS/MND were appropriate for the current project, and that the site conditions had not substantially changed since the 2011 analysis. Pullman Ditch is a man-made seasonal drainage, that predominately drains runoff from the lands east of Highway 1. The status of the ditch as sensitive habitat has been the subject of much study. The updated report concludes Pullman Ditch may be considered a sensitive habitat as a man-made intermittent stream. Section 18.38.020 of the Zoning Code identifies riparian areas as sensitive habitat and buffers are imposed.

The original and updated biological report were then circulated for 45 days to the resource agencies for comments. The United State Army Corps of Engineers submitted a letter, requiring a permit through the Army Corps for any changes between the top of banks for the Pullman Ditch. A Condition of Approval was added identifying this requirement; however, the project scope does not include any changes to the ditch area. The proposed home will be

37

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 7 of 9

setback 30 feet from the centerline of the Pullman Ditch as allowed for by Zoning Code Section 18.38.075 (D)(2), and as specified in the building envelope on the approved parcel map. No other comments on the updated biological report were received from the resource agencies.

Visual Resource Area Since the site is within a Planned Unit Development, the site is considered a Visual Resource Area. Section 18.37.020 (C) states that the new development shall be subject to development conditions as stated in the LCP Land Use Plan for each planned development. The project complies with the base permitted residential density for parcels located within the Planned Development District, and is not inconsistent with maximum density for the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach area. It also complies with the development standards to preserve visual resources in the LUP and the Planned Unit Development Plan approved with the Tentative Parcel Map, including by maintaining low building heights and reserving 20% of the parcel as open space. (A copy of the PUD Development Standards are included as Attachment #3). Finally, the project does not implicate view corridors along Young Avenue.

Specific landscape requirements are also included in the Zoning Code’s Visual Resource Protection Standards, Section 18.37.050, requiring low lying landscaping that is designed to be compatible with the environment. A landscape plan was included in the plan set. The landscaping proposed on the plan includes plants that are native to Half Moon Bay and respect the intermittent stream corridor. Split rail fencing has also been sited along the property lines. A condition of approval requiring split rail fencing along the 30-foot buffer line from the centerline of Pullman Ditch has been included as Condition #B2a. The split rail fence requirement is a standard landscape practice to delineate the edge of required sensitive habitat buffer.

Broad ocean views across the site from Highway 1 are currently blocked by the existing mature trees along the property lines. Visual Resource Protection Standards require that new plants be low lying and not interfere with public views of the ocean. Due to their dwarf nature, the selected plant palette will not further block views from public lands or interfere with views that may open up over time. The new trees on the landscape plan are limited between the roadway and new house.

Drainage and Grading The project has been designed to minimize the cuts and fills that would take place during construction of the project. The amount of fill would exceed the soil grading required. In total approximately 20 cubic yards would be imported for the project.

One large detention basin has been sited along the south sides of the proposed residence. The detention basins has been sized to accommodate the stormwater runoff from the additional impervious surface generated from the new house and other impervious surfaces. The preliminary grading and drainage plans show drainage contained on the site and avoiding the Pullman Ditch. Engineering staff have reviewed both the preliminary grading

38

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 8 of 9

and drainage details and found the preliminary plans acceptable. Detailed plans will be considered with the Building Permit.

Subdivision Improvements Construction of two cul-de-sacs, road extensions of Champs Elysee Blvd and Pullman Avenue and utility extension were required through the approval of the Final Parcel Map for the Stoloski Subdivision. Since the recording of the Final Parcel Map in 2015, the street extension, cul-de-sac and utilities have been constructed for Champs Elysee Blvd. Engineering staff has verified that the other cul-de-sac on the south end of Pullman Avenue has yet to be completed, but progress is being made Access to this proposed residence does not depend upon completion of the Pullman Avenue cul-de-sac.

Design Compatibility The Single Family Residential Design Guidelines (RDG) encourage flexibility in architectural design to reflect the community’s eclectic character and seek to achieve compatible design within existing neighborhoods. The current project proposes a neo-traditional design that is appropriate for the size of the site and compatible with the existing pattern of development in the surrounding area in terms of building placement/orientation, massing, and materials and colors. The proposed building is well-articulated on all sides and building materials and colors are consistent with the proposed architectural style, compatible with the surrounding area, and suitable to the coastal setting. Similar to the home proposed across the cul-de-sac, the garage has been deemphasized by setting it back from the rest of the front façade. As recommended in Design Guideline 3-44, a trellis has been included above the garage to provide additional articulation to the front of the new residence.

As recommended in Chapter 3 of the Residential Design Guidelines, the exterior colors and materials of the new home have been appropriately broken up. Per Design Guideline 3-31, Stone veneer has been included along the base of the new home and has been consistently wrapped to all sides.

39

Planning Commission PDP-18-004 August 14, 2018

Page 9 of 9

Figure 3. Guideline 3-31.

Conclusion Based on the above analysis, staff concludes that the proposed residence is consistent with the General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan, the Zoning Code/LCP Implementation Plan, and the Residential Design Guidelines; is compatible with surrounding development; and conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff recommends approval of the project based on the findings and conditions of approval (Exhibits A and B of the attached Draft Resolution).

ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution with Findings and Evidence, Exhibit A and Conditions of Approval,

Exhibit B. 2. Project Plans 3. PUD Development Standards, dated February 16, 2010 4. Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted with Tentative Parcel Map 5. City Council Resolution C-04-12 and Final Notice from the Coastal Commission 6. Original and Updated Biological Resource Evaluation

40

41

42

43

44

BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: September 25, 2018

TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commissioners FROM: Jill Ekas, Community Development Director TITLE: Recommendation to City Council to Amend the Land Use Plan and Establish the

Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District, PDP 18-068 ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION By resolution, recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to the Half Moon Bay Local Coastal Land Use Plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development district (Attachment 1 and Exhibit A). BACKGROUND On August 14, 2018, the Planning Commission considered applications for Coastal Development Permits and Architectural Review for two homes under separate applications at 2800 and 2801 Champs Elysee Boulevard within the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision. The Planning Commission discussion centered around concerns about conflicts with the City’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) policies, especially with respect to the Planned Development (PD) land use designation generally, and the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach planned development in particular. The Commission continued both items to a date uncertain and directed staff to research the history of applicable entitlements, conduct a policy analysis, and return to the Planning Commission with a summary report and recommended course of action.

On August 28, 2018, the Planning Commission received a detailed report covering the history of this matter. Highlights include:

• January 2012: The City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approved a Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development Plan, Use Permit, and Tentative Parcel Map to create four residential parcels on a 2.1-acre site located in the 2700 block of North Cabrillo Highway (PDP-009-10).

• February 2012: The site is located within the California Coastal Commission’s appeals jurisdiction and following City approval, an appeal of the City’s actions was made to the Coastal Commission.

• May 2014: The Coastal Commission made a finding of no substantial issue.

45

Planning Commission Recommendation of LUP Amendment for Stoloski/Gonzalez PD Page 2 of 5 September 25, 2018

• December 2014: Following a lawsuit lodged by a neighboring property owner, the developer, neighboring property owner, and the City of Half Moon Bay entered into a settlement agreement (“Stoloski-Gradstein-City Settlement Agreement”) which prescribed additional conditions restricting development in the westernmost portion of the subject site.

• May 2015: The City approved the Final Parcel Map. As of now, construction of utility and road infrastructure provided for on the Final Parcel Map is nearly complete.

• December 2017 and January 2018: Separate applications were submitted to the City for Coastal Development Permits and Architectural Review for two new homes proposed for the two westernmost parcels in the subdivision.

The August 28, 2018 report also included an analysis and a recommended course of action. Specifically, the analysis concluded that approving development in the Surf Beach/Dunes PD district, before a Specific Plan has been prepared for the entire district, does not conform to applicable Land Use Plan policies. At the same time, the entitlement process for Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision demonstrates that the City and the Coastal Commission considered this property to be a unique area that could be planned separately from the rest of the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD. The Land Use Plan was never amended to conform to this approach, however. Thus, staff recommended that the Planning Commission initiate an LUP amendment to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision area as a separate Planned Development (PD) District, distinct from the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD.

For reference, the August 28, 2018 staff report to the Planning Commission is provided in Attachment 5 as a link through the City’s on-line agenda.

The Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an LUP amendment for their future consideration, which is the subject of this report.

DISCUSSION The purpose of the proposed Land Use Plan amendment is to establish a new Stoloski/Gonzalez PD District that incorporates the approved development conditions for this 2-acre site. The proposed LUP amendment is provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution in Attachment 1. The Stoloski/Gonzalez PD encompasses the area of the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision previously approved by the City Council and is noted on the following reference map and outlined in green.

46

Planning Commission Recommendation of LUP Amendment for Stoloski/Gonzalez PD Page 3 of 5 September 25, 2018

Reference Map

City of Naples Subdivision

Surf Beach Subdivision

Surf Beach / Dunes Beach PD

Stoloski/Gonzalez Subdivision and PD District Area

47

Planning Commission Recommendation of LUP Amendment for Stoloski/Gonzalez PD Page 4 of 5 September 25, 2018

The LUP amendment includes the following:

• Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD: Because the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision was originally located within the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach Planned Development District, the boundaries for the Surf-Dunes PD need to be revised and the build-out summary needs to be clarified.

• Stoloski/Gonzalez PD: The new PD language includes a description of its location and policies applicable to review of future development. The policies specifically incorporate the approved Final Parcel Map (Attachment 2), the approved Planned Unit Development Development Standards (Attachment 3), and the Stoloski-Gradstein-City Settlement Agreement (Attachment 4).

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use Plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzales Planned Development district. This amendment recognizes that the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision area has already been planned, with an approved Final Parcel Map and Planned Unit Development Plan, and that additional development conditions were agreed to. It also continues to require a Specific Plan before any development may occur within the amended Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD. This approach is also consistent with the City’s past consideration of the 2-acre Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel as distinct from the remaining 48 acres of the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD, which still must be planned as an entire unit. Under the amendment, proposed development within the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD will be evaluated for consistency with the Land Use Plan’s Development Conditions for the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD as well as for consistency with other existing Land Use Plan policies that are generally applicable to development within any PD district. CEQA Review: Statutory exemption for local government approvals of local coastal programs. 14 C.C.R. § 15265(a). Conclusion: Following Planning Commission action on the proposed LUP amendment, the item will be brought to the City Council. If the City Council approves an amendment to the LUP, the item and public comments received by the City will be conveyed to the California Coastal Commission for proposed certification.

48

Planning Commission Recommendation of LUP Amendment for Stoloski/Gonzalez PD Page 5 of 5 September 25, 2018

ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution and Exhibit A: Draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment establishing the

Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District 2. Stoloski/Gonzalez Final Parcel Map 3. Stoloski/Gonzalez Property PUD Development Standards/Planned Unit Development Plan 4. Settlement Agreement 5. Planning Commission Agendas – August 28, 2018, Item 1.C:

https://granicus_production_attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/halfmoonbay/258d351a2d1e5affdd1728016b4b08eb.pdf

1039675.2

49

Page 1 of 5 Agenda Item # X.X.

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: October 16, 2018

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: David Boesch, Interim City Manager FROM: Jill Ekas, Community Development Director TITLE: LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISH THE

STOLOSKI/GONZALEZ PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, PDP 18-068 ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: By resolution, approve an amendment to the Half Moon Bay Local Coastal Land Use Plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development district (Attachment 1 and Exhibit A). FISCAL IMPACT: The City is sponsoring this amendment and thus the fiscal impact has been staff time and City Attorney support. STRATEGIC ELEMENT: This recommendation supports the Inclusive Governance Element of the Strategic Plan. BACKGROUND: On August 14, 2018, the Planning Commission considered applications for Coastal Development Permits and Architectural Review for two homes under separate applications at 2800 and 2801 Champs Elysee Boulevard within the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision. The Planning Commission discussion centered around concerns about conflicts with the City’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) policies, especially with respect to the Planned Development (PD) land use designation generally, and the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach planned development in particular. The Commission continued both items to a date uncertain and directed staff to research the history of applicable entitlements, conduct a policy analysis, and return to the Planning Commission with a summary report and recommended course of action.

On August 28, 2018, the Planning Commission received a detailed report covering the history of this matter. Highlights include:

• January 2012: The City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approved a Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development Plan, Use Permit, and Tentative Parcel

50

Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to Establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District, PDP 18-068 October 16, 2018 Page 1 of 3

Map to create four residential parcels on a 2.1-acre site located in the 2700 block of North Cabrillo Highway (PDP-009-10).

• February 2012: The site is located within the California Coastal Commission’s appeals jurisdiction and following City approval, an appeal of the City’s actions was made to the Coastal Commission.

• May 2014: The Coastal Commission made a finding of no substantial issue.

• December 2014: Following a lawsuit lodged by a neighboring property owner, the developer, neighboring property owner, and the City of Half Moon Bay entered into a settlement agreement (“Stoloski-Gradstein-City Settlement Agreement”) which prescribed additional conditions restricting development in the westernmost portion of the subject site.

• May 2015: The City approved the Final Parcel Map. As of now, construction of utility and road infrastructure provided for on the Final Parcel Map is nearly complete.

• December 2017 and January 2018: Separate applications were submitted to the City for Coastal Development Permits and Architectural Review for two new homes proposed for the two westernmost parcels in the subdivision.

The August 28, 2018 report also included a policy analysis and a recommended course of action. Specifically, the analysis concluded that approving development in the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD district, before a Specific Plan has been prepared for the entire district, does not conform to applicable Land Use Plan policies. At the same time, the entitlement process for Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision demonstrates that the City and the Coastal Commission considered this property to be a unique area that could be planned separately from the rest of the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD. The Land Use Plan was never amended to conform to this approach, however. Thus, staff recommended that the Planning Commission initiate an LUP amendment to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision area as a separate Planned Development (PD) District, distinct from the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD. The Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an LUP amendment.

On September 25, 2018, the Planning Commission recommended approval of an amendment to the LUP to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD District to the City Council. The subject of this report is Council consideration of the Planning Commission’s recommended LUP amendment.

DISCUSSION The purpose of the proposed LUP amendment is to establish a new Stoloski/Gonzalez PD District that incorporates the approved development conditions for this 2-acre site. The proposed LUP amendment is provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution in Attachment 1. The Stoloski/Gonzalez PD encompasses the area of the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision previously approved by the City Council and is noted on the following reference map and outlined in green.

51

Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to Establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District, PDP 18-068 October 16, 2018 Page 1 of 3

City of Naples

Subdivision

Surf Beach

Subdivision

Surf Beach / Dunes

Beach PD (current

boundaries)

Stoloski/Gonzalez

Subdivision and

Proposed PD

District Area

52

Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to Establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District, PDP 18-068 October 16, 2018 Page 1 of 3

The LUP amendment includes the following:

• Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD: Because the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision was originally located within the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach Planned Development District, the boundaries for the Surf-Dunes PD need to be revised and the build-out summary needs to be clarified.

• Stoloski/Gonzalez PD: The new PD language includes a description of its location and policies applicable to review of future development. The policies specifically incorporate the approved Final Parcel Map (Attachment 2), the approved Planned Unit Development Plan (Attachment 3), and the Stoloski-Gradstein-City Settlement Agreement (Attachment 4).

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approves the attached resolution to approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use Plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzales Planned Development district. This amendment recognizes that the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision area has already been planned, with an approved Final Parcel Map and Planned Unit Development Plan, and that additional development conditions were agreed to. It also continues to require a Specific Plan before any development may occur within the amended Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD. This approach is also consistent with the City’s past consideration of the 2-acre Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel as distinct from the remaining 48 acres of the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PD, which still must be planned as an entire unit. Under the amendment, proposed development within the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD will be evaluated for consistency with the Land Use Plan’s Development Conditions for the Stoloski/Gonzalez PD as well as for consistency with other existing Land Use Plan policies that are generally applicable to development within any PD district. CEQA Review: Statutory exemption for local government approvals of local coastal programs. 14 C.C.R. § 15265(a). Conclusion: If the City Council approves the amendment to the LUP, the item and public comments received by the City will be conveyed to the California Coastal Commission for proposed certification. Staff believes that this amendment qualifies for expedited processing as a de minimis amendment to the Local Coastal Program and the attached Resolution requests that the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission make that determination and process it accordingly. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution and Exhibit A: Draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment establishing the

Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District 2. Stoloski/Gonzalez Final Parcel Map 3. Stoloski/Gonzalez Property PUD Development Standards/Planned Unit Development Plan

53

Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to Establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District, PDP 18-068 October 16, 2018 Page 1 of 3

4. Settlement Agreement 5. Minutes for the September 25, 2018 Planning Commission meeting, including public

comments on the draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan amendment to establish the Stoloski / Gonzalez Planned Development District

6. Link to August 28, 2018 Planning Commission Agenda Report regarding Overview of Stoloski/Gonzales Subdivision and Applications to Develop Homes within the Subdivision; Initiation of Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment for Establishment of the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development Designation

1048928.1

54

STATE OF CALIFORNIA—NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., GOVERNOR

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION NORTH CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE

45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

PHONE: (415) 904-5260

FAX: (415) 904-5400

WEB: WWW.COASTAL.CA.GOV

W13c Prepared November 21, 2018 for December 12, 2018 Hearing

To: Commissioners and Interested Persons

From: Jeannine Manna, North Central Coast District Manager

Sophia Kirschenman, Coastal Planner

Subject: De Minimis Amendment Determination for City of Half Moon Bay LCP

Amendment Number LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2 (Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned

Development District)

City of Half Moon Bay’s Proposed Amendment

The City of Half Moon Bay is proposing to modify the Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use

Plan (LUP) to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District (PDD),

incorporating specific development standards to carry out the City-approved Parcel Map and

Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for this specific parcel.1 The Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel

comprises approximately 2.1 acres and is considered a remnant parcel located between two

existing subdivisions. The parcel is directly south of the partially developed Naples subdivision

and is currently part of, and forms the northern boundary to, the larger Surf Beach/Dunes Beach

PDD. Under the certified LCP, no development can be approved within a PDD until a Specific

Plan is established for the entire area. Recognizing that there is a City-approved Plan for the

subject parcel, separate and distinct from the larger Surf Beach/Dunes Beach PDD that has not

yet been planned, the proposed amendment would establish a new Stoloski/Gonzalez PDD to

regulate development within the parcel boundaries. The Stoloski/Gonzales PDD incorporates the

approved development conditions pursuant to the City approved PUD Plan, Parcel Map, and

Settlement Agreement, and assures consistency with LCP provisions that dictate development

approvals in PDD areas. In addition, development potential within the Surf Beach/Dunes Beach

PDD has been reduced accordingly to reflect the removal of this parcel. See Exhibit A for the

text of proposed amendments to LUP Chapter 9.

1 In January of 2012, the City of Half Moon Bay approved a Coastal Development Permit, PUD Plan, Use Permit,

and Tentative Parcel Map for the Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel. A subsequent Settlement Agreement was reached in

December of 2014, which prescribed additional conditions restricting development in the westernmost portion of

the parcel. In May of 2015, a Final Parcel Map for the Stoloski/Golzalez parcel was approved.

55

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2 (Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District)

2

De Minimis LCP Amendment Determination

Pursuant to Coastal Act Section 30514(d), the Executive Director may determine that a proposed

LCP amendment is “de minimis”. In order to qualify as a de minimis amendment, the

amendment must meet the following three criteria:

1. The Executive Director determines that the proposed amendment would have no impact,

either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources, and that it is consistent with the

policies of Chapter 3;

2. The local government provides public notice of the proposed amendment at least 21 days

prior to submitting the amendment to the Commission, by one of the following methods:

posting on-site and off-site in the affected area, newspaper publication, or direct mailing to

owners and occupants of contiguous property; and

3. The amendment does not propose any change in use of land or water or allowable use of

property.

If the Executive Director determines that an amendment is de minimis, that determination must

be reported to the Commission. If three or more commissioners object to the de minimis LCP

amendment determination, then the amendment shall be set for a future public hearing; if three or

more commissioners do not object to the de minimis determination, then the amendment is

deemed approved, and it becomes a certified part of the LCP 10 days after the date of the

Commission meeting (in this case, on December 22, 2018).

The purpose of this notice is to advise interested parties of the Executive Director’s

determination that the proposed LCP amendment is de minimis. Each of the de minimis

criteria is discussed briefly below:

1. No impact to coastal resources and consistency with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act: The

City of Half Moon Bay Local Coastal Program, including the proposed amendment, is

intended to be carried out in full conformity with the California Coastal Act. The proposed

amendment will create the Stoloski/Gonzalez PDD, but does not change the base zoning,

land use designation, or allowable uses for the parcel. This designation is applied to

undeveloped areas of land within the City, so that the areas are planned in a way that protects

resource values, ensures coastal access, eliminates poorly planned subdivisions, and clusters

development to provide open space and recreation opportunities. The PUD development

standards that will be implemented in this PDD through the approved PUD Plan, Parcel Map

and Settlement Agreement include appropriate setbacks, permitted uses, lot size, lot

coverage, parking, and open space requirements, so as to avoid siting structures in hazardous

areas and protect onsite resources, especially sensitive coastal resources, such as

environmentally sensitive habitat areas, riparian corridors, wetlands, and existing coastal

access.

Specifically, the public’s ability to access the Half Moon Bay portion of the existing

California Coastal Trail, located west of the parcel, and Roosevelt Beach and existing

parking area, located northwest of the parcel, will not be impaired by future development in

56

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2 (Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District)

3

the Stoloski/Gonzalez PDD, consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Furthermore, any

future development projects proposed within the boundaries of the proposed PDD would be

required to adhere to the proposed development standards for the PDD, and by extension, the

Settlement Agreement, assuring consistency with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Any new

development proposals for the area would be analyzed and approved only if found to be

consistent with the proposed standards.

Thus, the proposed amendment will not adversely affect coastal resources, and it is consistent

with the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

2. Provision of public notice: The City provided public notice in advance of the Planning

Commission hearings (held on August 14, 2018, August 28, 2018, and September 25, 2018)

and the City Council hearing (held on October 16, 2018) where the proposed amendment was

considered. Prior to each of these hearings, noticing was completed through NextDoor

postings, eNews announcements, and mailings to the Planning Commission and City Council

email lists. Additionally, for the Planning Commission hearing on September 25, 2018,

notices were mailed on September 12, 2018, a newspaper advertisement notice was printed

for at least one week, commencing on September 12, 2018, and additional notices were

printed and posted in six locations around the Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel prior to the hearing.

For the City Council hearing on October 16, 2018, notices were mailed on October 2, 2018, a

newspaper advertisement notice was printed for at least one week, commencing on October

3, 2018, and additional notices were printed and posted in six locations around the

Stoloski/Gonzalez parcel prior to the hearing. The application materials were also made

available at City Hall in advance of the City’s hearings. The amendment submittal was

subsequently received by the Coastal Commission on November 1, 2018 (and filed as

complete on November 21, 2018), and therefore, the 21-day noticing requirement has been

satisfied.

3. No change in use of land or allowable use of property: No change in use is proposed by

this amendment.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

The Coastal Commission’s review and development process for LCPs and LCP amendments has

been certified by the Secretary of Resources as being the functional equivalent of the

environmental review required by CEQA. The City found the proposed amendment is exempted

from environmental review under CEQA. (Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14,§ 15265(a)). This report

has discussed the relevant coastal resource issues with the proposal, and has concluded that the

proposed LCP amendment is not expected to result in any significant adverse impact on the

environment.

Coastal Commission Concurrence

The Executive Director will report this de minimis LCP amendment determination, and any

comments received on it, to the Coastal Commission at its December 12, 2018 meeting in

Newport Beach. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding the proposed

amendment or the method under which it is being processed, please contact Sophia Kirschenman

at the North Central Coast District Office in San Francisco. If you wish to comment on and/or 57

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2 (Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development District)

4

object to the proposed de minimis LCP amendment determination, please do so by December, 7

2018.

Procedural Note - LCP Amendment Action Deadline

This proposed LCP amendment was filed as complete on November 21, 2018. It amends the

LUP only and the 90-day action deadline is February 19, 2019. Thus, unless the Commission

extends the action deadline (it may be extended by up to one year), the Commission has until

February 19, 2019 to take a final action on this LCP amendment.

Exhibits

Exhibit A: Proposed Amendments to Chapter 9 in the LUP

Exhibit B: City Council Resolution No. C-2018-117

58

1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA—NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., GOVERNOR

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION NORTH CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE 45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 PHONE: (415) 904-5260 FAX: (415) 904-5400 WEB: WWW.COASTAL.CA.GOV

W13c

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2 (STOLOSKI/GONZALEZ PDD)

DECEMBER 12, 2018

EXHIBITS

Table of Contents

Exhibit A: Proposed Amendments to Chapter 9 in the LUP

Exhibit B: City Council Resolution No. C-2018-117

59

EXHIBIT A

9.3.3 Surf Beach/Dunes Beach

The Surf Beach/thmes Beach area is a partially undeveloped area totaling about 4! :1l acres,

bisected by Young Avenue and bounded by Half Moon Bay State Beach on the west and south,

Highway I on the east, and the Stoloskri Gonzalcz PD and partially developed City of Naples

subdivision on the north.

1.. .l

Prooosed Develooment Conditions

t...1

(b) A maximum of 150 residential units may be developed on the site.l

l gecause the stoloski/Gonzalez PD area was orisinallv a oart of the Surf Eeach/Dunes Beach PD area. when

I

h

units maximum. deoendinq on coastal resource constraints and allowed develooment densiw and intensitv), the

i;u; residential units in the Stoloski/Gonzatez P D shall be included. These fou r units shall be considered part of the

100 units allocated to the Surf Beach Subdivision in Table 9.1.

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit A

Page 1 of 2

60

EXHIBIT A

Policv 9.3.20 Stoloski/Gonzalez

The Stoloski/Gonzalez PD Distriot is bounded by Half Moon Bav State Beach on the west. the

Surf Beact/Dunes Beach PD on the south, Hiehwav 1 on the east. and Citv of Naples

zubdivision (the Miramar neiehborhood) on the north as described in PDP-009-10 aoproved bythe Citv Council.

Development Conditions

Future develooment ofthe Stoloski/Gonzalez PD district shall.

a) Conform to the aooroved Final Parcel Map recorded in the oflicial records ofSan MateoCountv on Mav 4th, I 5. Book 8l Parcel Maos at Pases 85-86. No.20l 5-900059.

b) Comnlv rvith the "Stoloski/Gonzalez PUD enl Slandards." which sovem the entireth Planned tJnit the Sto

PD District arca.

c) Comply with condition s on develoomcnt in the "Further Restriction rea ' as defined in and

tin -ci Settlemenl A on December I2014.

1031387.r0

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit A

Page 2 of 2

61

EGEIVEATTACHMENT 1

Nov 01 2018

Resolution No. C-2018-1U CALIFORNIACOASTA. COMMISSION

A RESOTUT]ON OF THE CITY COUNCIT OT THE CITY OF HAIF MOON BAYTO AMEtrlD THE tOCAt COASTAL I-AND USE PI-AN TO ESTABLISH THE STOLOSKI/GONZAIEZ

PI.ANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, PDP 18.058

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay Planning Commission considered PDP 009-10including Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development Plan, Use Permit andTentative Parcel Map for the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision at a duly noticed public hearing onDecember 73,2OLl at which time the Commission considered all written and oral testimony,and reviewed an initial study/mitigated negative declaration prepared in accordance with theCalifornia Environment Quality Act; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of PDP 009-10 for theStoloski/Gonzalez subdivision including all of the aforementioned entitlements to City Council;and

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay City Council considered PDP 009-10 for theStoloski/Gonzalez subdivision at a duly noticed public hearing on January 77,2012 at whichtime the Council considered all written and oral testimony, and reviewed an initialstudy/mitigated negative declaration prepared in accordance with the California EnvironmentQuality Act; and

WHEREAS, the City Council approved PDP 009-10 for the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision;and

WHEREAS, the City Council approval reflects that the City considered theStoloski/Gonzalez subdivision to be distinct from the remainder ofthe Surf Beach/Dunes EeachPlanned Development district; and

WHEREAS, in February 2012, an appeal of the city council's approval of PDP 009-10 was

made to the California Coastal Commission citing concerns regarding the approval of theStoloski/Gonzalez subdivision due to impacts to biological resources, policy conflicts with theLocal Coastal Land Use Plan, and flood risk; and

WHEREAS, the California Coastal Commission found no substantial issue on May 15,2014 and thereby made the City's approval of the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision final; and

WHEREAT in December 2014 the developer, a neighboring property owner, and theCity of Half Moon Bay entered into a settlement a8reement ("Stoloski-Gradstein-CitySettlement Agreement") which prescribed additional conditions restricting development in thewesternmost portion of the subiect site; and

WHEREAS, the City of Half Moon Bay approved the Final Parcel Map for theStoloski/6onzalez subdivision on May 1, 2015; and

D

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit B

Page 1 of 4

62

ATTACHMENT ,I

WHEREAS, infrastructure including roadway and utilities consistent with the Final ParcelMap have been installed by the subdivider for development of the Stoloski/Gonzalezsubdivision; and

WHEREAS, the City is in receipt of two separate applications for Coastal DevelopmentPermits and Architectural Review for new homes on two of the lots at 2800 and 2801 Champs

Elysee Boulevard within the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision; and

WHEREAT the Planning Commission at duly noticed public hearings on August L4,zOfEfor consideration of Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review for the two homesidentified policy conflicts with the Local coastal Land Use Plan and continued both items todates uncertain; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission directed City staff to research the matter andprepare a report summarizing the history of the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision entitlementprocess relative to Land Use Plan policy and present the report, findings, and recommendationsto the Planning Commission; and

WHEREAS, on August 28, ?OLB the Planning Commission reviewed this research and

initiated an amendment io the Local Coastal Land Use Plan to establish a separate Planned

Development district for the Stoloski/Gonzalez subdivision consistent with the approved Finalparcel Map, Planned unit Development Plan, and Stoloski-Gradstein-city settlementagreement; and

wHEREAt pursuant to Public Resources code sestion 30514(d), the city provided public

notice in in a newspaper of general circulation specifying that comments would be accepted on

a draft amendment'to the Local Coastal Land Use Plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalezplanned Development by the Planning commission at a september 25 hearing and

subsequently by the City Council; and

WHEREAS, the Planning commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on

september 25,2078, made findings, and recommended that the city council amend the_Local

Coastal Land Use plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development district

encompassing the area of the Stoloski/Gonza lez subdivision; and

wHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the

amendment on October 16, 2018; and

WHEREAS, the City,s approval of amendments to its Local coastal Program are exempt

from the California Environmental Quality Act under california code of Regulations, Title 14,

Section 15265(a); and

WHEREAS, the city Council recognizes that the stoloski / Gonzalez subdivision area has

already been planned wit'h "n

approred- Final Parcel Map and Planned Unit Development Plan

and that this ii a unique situation and shall not be construed as precedence for future projects.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOTVED THAT:

1. the city council of the city of Half Moon Bay hereby approves an amendment to the

Local Coastal Land Use plan to establish the Stoloski/Gonzalez Planned Development district as

distinct from the surf Beach/Dunes Beach Planned Development district, and incorporate

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit B

Page 2 of 4

63

ATTACHIVENT ,I

established development conditions for this Stoloski/Gonzales PD area, as set forth in Exhibit A;

and

2. theCityCouncil certifies that the City of Half Moon Bay Local Coastal Program,

including this amendment to the Land Use Plan, is intended to be carried out in a manner fully

in conformity with the California CoastalAct; and

3. the City Council directs staff to take all actions necessary to submit this amendment

to the Executive Director of the California Coastal commission for determination and

certification as a de minimis amendment, or, if a de minimis determination is not made, for

designation and certification as a minor amendment, or a regular amendment, as the Executive

Director or Commission determines is warranted.

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit B

Page 3 of 4

64

ATTACHMENT 1

,tt ****!.{.*i.t***rt***S** *l * t,r+ttt*t * + * *,r:r * * I * rtt,},t tl,t + * * + ** t *ltf +****1.*

l, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted

on the 16th day of October, 2018 by the City Council of Half Moon Bay by the followint vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

1

,'lair, Citv Clerk Deborah Penrose, Mayor

1048361.1

LCP-2-HMB-18-0081-2

Exhibit B

Page 4 of 4

65