PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AGENDA · 2018-12-14 · Attachment 1 December 19, 2018 Planning Commission LCLUP Study Session ERRATA SHEET Staff recommends the following

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

Rick Hernandez, ChairBrian Holt, Vice ChairJohn Evans, Planning CommissionerJames Benjamin, Planning CommissionerLes Deman, Planning Commissioner

AGENDA

CITY OF HALF MOON BAYPLANNING COMMISSION

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2018

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

http://hmbcity.com/

COMMISSIONER TELECONFERENCING - CHAIR HERNANDEZ - RESIDENCE INN, 6000 US HWY 290WEST,AUSTIN TX 78735

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Draft Minutes 11.27.18Draft Minutes 11.27.18

PUBLIC COMMENT

STUDY SESSION

LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN UPDATE - STUDY SESSION ON COASTAL ACCESS ANDRECREATION, COASTAL HAZARDS, CULTURAL RESOURCES, AND SCENIC AND VISUALRESOURCESStaff Report

Attachment 1 - Errata Sheet

Attachment 2 - Coastal Access and Recreation Policy Comparison Table

Attachment 3 - Coastal Hazards Policy Comparison Table

Attachment 4 - Cultural Resources Policy Comparison Table

Attachment 5 - Scenic and Visual Resources Policy Comparison Table

DIRECTOR'S REPORT

PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS

ADJOURNMENT

2

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284351/Draft_Minutes_PC_11.27.18.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284134/12.19.18_PC_Staff_Report.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284135/Attachment_1_Errata_Sheet.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284136/Attachment_2_Access_and_Rec_Policy_Comparison.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284137/Attachment_3_Coastal_Hazards_Policy_Comparison.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284138/Attachment_4_Cultural_Resources_Policy_Comparison.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/284139/Attachment_5_Scenic_and_Visual_Resources_Policy_Comparison.pdf

November 27, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 3

MINUTES

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY PLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2018

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

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

Minutes: November 13, 2018 Approved: 5-0

PUBLIC COMMENT No Speakers

PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS: 1.A STUDY SESSION ITEM; LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN UPDATE – CH. 6 NATURAL RESOURCES Presentation by staff and Gary Deghi from Huffman Broadway Clarifying Questions The Commissioners asked about future components of the document, including a table of contents, glossary, etc. They further inquired about where additional topics will be addressed:

• Need definition of heritage tree, where will the heritage tree ordinance be covered?

• Is there language for dealing with buffer zones with flexibility?

3


PUBLIC FORUM Dana Riggs: A biologist, concerned about man-made impoundments and dispersal habitats

and dispersal habitats now designated as habitats but were not before. Why designate an impoundment as ESHA if in an active use? Values wildlife corridors, but there is potential for CRLF dispersal habitat to be anywhere. Concerns with Branscomb Farms—no refugia on property, only “occupied” for part of the year.

Mike Ferreira: Would like to see different colors for active and abandoned ponds. The buffer language invites reduced buffer zones. For Policy 6-20 ‘public accessways’ is more expansive than trails, and the language needs to be more specific. 6-22 b. ‘qualified biologists’ language is opening the door to interpretation.

KC Branscomb: Table 9-1 made promises to Urban Reserve and family farmers, need to find a common ground to help ag farmers. Wants the City to understand the realities of her business and wants her property ground-truthed. The proposed plan conflicts with the Fire Department regulations.

Chris Rogers: A biologist, confused why the golf course is shown as Ag. Coastal Terrace Prairie should be shown as a habitat type on Figure 6-1. Policy 6-15 is a professional obligation. Policy 6-18, a biologist is not the best person to do a SLR assessment. 6-78 conflicts with allowing ag in buffers, need to refine types of invasive species prohibited.

Kerry Burke: Colors on the map are hard to read. Suggests an online GIS program to access specific parcels. Has some concern for City and private individuals requiring amendments to change an ESHA map. Amendments to the maps are costly and time consuming. Unclear on Pullman setback, 35 feet vs. former 20. Would like some more information on lot retirement program.

Bruce Russell: The draft LCP has come a very long way from where it was in 1993. What applies to the buffers for ESHA vs riparian/wetlands? Would like some clarity regarding buffer issues and policies, LCP exemptions for pre-approved development. Clarity on existing development uses/restrictions. ESHA, wetlands, riparian buffer seems to have increased in many locations, will be creating non-conformities. Need consistent language for minimum buffer requirements. Looking forward to clarification of buffers.

Terry Andreotti: Farmers need every bit of soil they can use instead of additional restrictions.

Planning Commission Discussion

• Would like clarity on section 6-24, what’s grandfathered in and what is not.

• Challenges with Pullman and the potential for erosion, meandering, and up cutting.

• Map colors are difficult to see and differentiate. Perhaps use a pantone coloring system that includes a type of numbering system for colors.

• GIS map system can be costly but could create a KML/KMZ file to use in Google Earth. Regarding natural shorelines:

4


• Bluff erosion and questions about breakwater in the harbor, are we coordinating our efforts with bluff erosion studies?

PUBLIC FORUM Sara Polgar: Groundwater Management Act can really affect our ability to access our

groundwater, will there be any local say? Would like more discussion on water storage, especial for Ag. Fully protected status does apply for San Francisco garter snake and affects permitting restoration work.

Lennie Roberts: Pilarcitos quarry permit for deep excavation, will establish a large area for a reservoir and will release into Pilarcitos Creek in the summer months for groundwater recharge. A long-term process, but could be included in the narrative to address long-term health of basin.

Kerry Burke: Regarding policy 6-125, we need to understand implications and impacts from Groundwater Act. Need to be open to other water source strategies.

Planning Commission Discussion

• One water- Integrated thinking about water, referring to water storage under the high school football field.

• Policy development, questions of recycled water and general water concerns. Why don’t we use recycled water for agriculture and golf course?

DIRECTOR REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT

M/S: Benjamin/Deman Motion Carried: unanimously 5-0 Meeting adjourned: 9:07 PM

Respectfully Submitted: Approved: ____________________________ _________________________________ Joe Butcher, Admin. Assistant Rick Hernandez, Chair

5

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

AGENDA REPORT

For meeting of: December 19, 2018

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

Brittney Cozzolino, Associate Planner TITLE: Local Coastal Land Use Plan Update – Study Session on Coastal Access and

Recreation, Coastal Hazards, Cultural Resources, and Scenic and Visual Resources ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION Receive a presentation overview of Chapter 5: Coastal Access and Recreation, Chapter 7: Coastal Hazards, Chapter 8: Cultural Resources, and Chapter 9: Scenic and Visual Resources of the Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update; hold a public comment forum; conduct a discussion and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND This study session is one in a series of meetings with the Planning Commission for the purpose of receiving and providing input on public draft chapters of the LUP. The general content of these four chapters was first released in the 2016 first public draft of the Land Use Plan Update. In August 2017, staff went back to the Planning Commission for a study session on updated versions of Coastal Hazards, Cultural Resources, and Scenic and Visual Resources. The current drafts reflect Planning Commission and public input received on the 2016 and 2017 versions of these chapters, as well as updated Coastal Commission guidance on sea level rise adaptation planning, tribal consultation, and environmental justice. DISCUSSION The purpose of this session is to review and discuss the draft Coastal Access and Recreation, Coastal Hazards, Cultural Resources, and Scenic and Visual Resources chapters of the LUP Update. A presentation will provide an overview of the draft chapters and their updated content and figures. Policy Comparison Tables for each of these chapters are attached to this staff report to support review of the updated chapters as compared to the existing LUP policies. The purpose of this session is also to introduce Chapter 2: Development to the Planning Commission and public. Staff will provide a brief overview of this new draft chapter. The next LUP Update Study Session, scheduled for January 22, 2019, will cover the Development and Agriculture Chapters.

6

Planning Commission – LCLUP Natural Resources Draft Chapter Page 2 of 2 December 19, 2018

ATTACHMENTS 1. Errata Sheet 2. Coastal Access and Recreation Policy Comparison Table 3. Coastal Hazards Policy Comparison Table 4. Cultural Resources Policy Comparison Table 5. Scenic and Visual Resources Policy Comparison Table

7

Attachment 1 December 19, 2018

Planning Commission LCLUP Study Session

ERRATA SHEET

Staff recommends the following corrections and improvements be made to the October 30th, 2018 draft

chapters of the Land Use Plan Update:

1. Add the western terminus of Mirada Road as a Coastal Access Improvement Area

a. Add to narrative on Page 5-7

b. Add to Figure 5-1

2. Figure 5-3: Add Railroad Right-of-Way trail as a proposed Class I multi-use trail as described in

narrative on Page 5-25.

3. Coastal Hazards Chapter: move Sea Level Rise section up to follow the Climate Change section,

provide additional background on coastal squeeze and shoreline protection strategies and

effects.

4. Revise Policy 7-8 to clarify “areas of known geologic hazards,” clarify purpose and content of

required geological report, and clarify examples of preferred mitigation measures.

5. Revise Figure 7-2 as follows:

a. Clarify areas with steep slopes with respect to landslide risk potential

b. Remove beach layer and adjust color scheme to better clarify areas with very high

liquefaction potential

c. Map locations of existing critical facilities as defined in the chapter narrative

6. Figure 8-1: Reconcile mapped historic resources with the City’s local historic resources

inventory.

8



Coastal Access and Recreation Policy Comparison Table

Public Coastal Access Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin General Policies 5-1. Maximum Coastal Access. Provide maximum coastal access and recreational opportunities for all people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights of property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse.

2016 First Public Draft Policy

5-2. Public Shoreline Access Rights. Continue to ensure that the public retains right of access to the shoreline and sea as provided by the public trust doctrine, where acquired through historic use or legislative authorization, and where environmentally appropriate.


5-3. Environmental Justice. Minimize barriers to public coastal access to the extent feasible, accounting for the social, physical, and economic needs of all people.

New 2018 Planning Commission Public Draft Policy

5-4. Distribution of Public Facilities. Continue to distribute public facilities, including parking areas, on both sides of Highway 1 so as to mitigate against the impacts of overcrowding or overuse by the public of any single area.


5-5. New Development and Coastal Access. Require that new development along the coastline provide public access from the first public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast, and be designed to minimize impacts to public coastal access and recreation. Ensure that impacts are mitigated through the dedication of access or trail easements in perpetuity or the provision of improvements to other public access points. Exceptions to this requirement shall be granted only where public access would pose a safety risk or threat to fragile resources, or where adequate access exists nearby.


5-6. Public Beach Parking Inventory. Maintain and enhance the existing public beach parking inventory by maximizing retention of on-street public parking spaces, providing opportunities for alternative modes of transportation and beach shuttles, and, where feasible, providing new beach parking areas where there are no conflicts with adjacent land uses or environmentally sensitive habitat areas.


9



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-7. Enhance Beaches and Open Spaces. Work with California State Parks and other agencies and organizations to enhance the quality of the city’s beaches, watercourses, and open spaces by reducing the amount of litter and pollution present in these areas and providing appropriate amenities.

a. Increase public awareness of the sources of pollution in the city’s waterways;

b. Increase public awareness of litter and its impacts on the landscape;

c. Provide trash receptacles in strategic locations with associated signage along the city’s open space network;

d. Encourage volunteer events and activities to pick up litter in public open spaces; and

e. Provide more amenities to support high quality coastal access where appropriate, including public restrooms, benches, and bicycle facilities.


Coastal Access Points 5-8. Coastal Access Improvements. Improve safety, accessibility, environmental sustainability, and aesthetics of coastal access points at the Coastal Access Improvement Areas identified on Figure 5-1.


5-9. Siting and Design of Parking for Coastal Access Points. Work with the State Department of Parks and Recreation and others to ensure that coastal visitor parking is created, modified, and/or managed with the following goals and characteristics:

a. Provide distributed public parking along the coast and throughout the City to ensure access to all coastal access points, as permitted by environmental and safety constraints (e.g. avoiding public safety hazards, adverse impacts to ESHA, visitor-residential conflicts).

b. Emphasize new beach parking areas on the east side of Highway 1, including the downtown area, where the public can connect to coastal access points via alternative modes of transportation such as shuttles and bicycles.

c. Locate parking lots on property accessible directly from primary and secondary access routes and appropriately separated from adjacent residential areas by distance, landscaping, or lowered elevation.

Original LUP Policy 2-17: Provide improved State parking facilities for at least 1,000 automobiles generally in accordance with the allocation provided on the Access Improvements Map with most parking located at the end of the primary Beach Access Routes.

(a) No parking facility designed for more than 200 vehicles.

(b) No parking facility south of Kelly designed for more than 50 cars, located at least 50 feet back from the bluff edge.

(c) Parking lots to be located on public property accessible directly from primary and secondary access routes, located at least 100 feet from lots zoned for residences and suitably

10



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin d. Include green infrastructure features such as vegetated swales, permeable pavement, or

bioretention areas to ensure that water runoff does not exceed that which exists prior to installation of new parking areas, and to ensure that stormwater runoff impacts are minimized to the extent feasible for improvements to existing parking areas.

e. Incorporate site-appropriate setbacks and reserve suitable surrounding land for expansion or retreat for existing or redeveloped public parking areas near the beach, as permitted by environmental constraints.

f. Locate parking facilities so that beach access does not compromise sensitive habitat areas such as dunes, sea cliffs, bluffs, wetlands, and riparian areas. Where no other accessway is feasible, use site and design measures such as boardwalks, fencing, and signage to ensure habitat protection.

g. Incorporate educational and interpretive signage; and accommodate temporary uses including beach clean-ups, farm and sea-to-table events, and wildlife and habitat classes within beach parking areas as a compliment to the coastal setting and subordinate to visual resource qualities.

screened by berms, landscaping, or lowered elevation.

Parking surfaces to be designed to ensure that water runoff does not exceed that which exists prior to the improvement. Original LUP Policy 2-20: Locate parking facilities so that beach access is not across dunes, where possible, and use wooden walkways where access across the dunes is required from new parking facilities; post signs to discourage random passage to the beach.

5-10. Beach Fees and Time Restrictions. Maintain lower-cost user fees and parking fees, and minimize parking lot and beach curfews to the extent feasible in order to maximize public access and recreation opportunities. Imposing new time restrictions or fees at public parking lots where none previously existed shall require a coastal development permit.


5-11. Structures on Public Beaches. Limit structural development on public beaches to that which is necessary for public access or safety, such as lifeguard towers, waste receptacles, accessways (including ADA accessways), and informational signage. Such development will be sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts on public access, recreation, and coastal resources. Prohibit the encroachment of private development onto public beaches.


5-12. Signage for Coastal Access Points along Highway 1. Work with Caltrans to provide a coordinated signage program along Highway 1, identifying the coastal access routes shown on Figures 5-1 and 5-2. Signage shall be clear, legible, and consistent, and shall indicate what amenities are available at each access point. The program shall include signage designed for visitors in vehicles as well as for pedestrians/cyclists, and shall remove or replace any existing signage that is inconsistent or unnecessary under the

Original LUP Policy 2-11: Encourage Caltrans to improve signs along Highway 1 designating specific access routes as provided for in the Plan. Signs shall also be posted at entrances to the City, informing the public about the recreational

11



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin coordinated sign program. Signage shall also be provided where beach access is not available at western neighborhood entrances and the entrance the SAM Plant to discourage visitors from needlessly entering and parking in these areas.

resources available in Half Moon Bay, and routes to reach these areas.

5-13. Siting and Design of Public Accessways. Public accessways shall be sited and designed to account for likely uses of the facility, topographic and site constraints; the fragility of natural resources; and the privacy of adjacent residential uses. Where trails are permitted uses within sensitive habitat areas and their buffers, new trail segments and improvements shall be sited and designed to minimize and mitigate impacts to the habitat and buffer areas.


5-14. Review of Accessway Plans. Allow any public agency holding beach lands to review all accessway plans on adjacent property to ensure they are consistent with the Local Coastal Land Use Plan or the adopted State Park General Plan.

Original LUP Policy 2-4: Any public agency holding beach lands may review all accessway plans on property abutting the State Beach and County Acquisition area to ensure they are consistent with the adopted State Park General Plan or Land Use Plan in other areas.

5-15. Setbacks from Accessways. No structure shall be built within 15 feet of an accessway or the boundary of shoreline areas under public ownership. A greater distance may be required to minimize adverse visual impacts, to protect residential privacy, or to protect public access.

Original LUP Policy 2-5: No structure shall be built within 15 feet of an accessway or the boundary of public shoreline recreation area ownership. A greater distance may be required to minimize adverse visual impacts, to protect residential privacy, or to protect public access.

5-16. Signage for Accessways. All vertical and lateral public accessways shall have clearly posted and maintained signs specifying the public's right to use these areas; signs shall also contain any limitations on the public’s right of access and specific uses.

Original LUP Policy 2-6: All vertical and lateral public accessways shall have clearly posted signs specifying the public's right to use these areas; signs shall also contain any limitations on the public’s right of access and specific uses.

5-17. Maintenance of Accessways. Require a public or private entity to be responsible for public accessways and adjacent ESHA if present, when required for new development projects. Until such an entity agrees to be responsible for the maintenance and liability of such access ways, they are not required to be open for public use.


12



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-18. Restrictions on Parking. Prohibit restrictions on public parking that would adversely affect public access to beaches, trails, or other recreational lands along the coast except where necessary to protect public safety and preserve neighborhoods for primarily residential use. Such restrictions include the installation of “private beach” and “private parking” signs, landscaping, and painting red curbs in the public right-of-way.


5-19. Private Roads and Gates. Prohibit gates and other barriers designed to regulate or restrict access on private roads where such barriers have the potential to impede access to public trails and recreational areas.


5-20. Abandonment of Public Rights-of-Way. Require a coastal development permit for any proposed abandonment of a public right-of-way that may affect public access, and allow abandonment only if it is demonstrated that adequate public access to the coast will be preserved.


Sea Level Rise Adaptation Policies

5-21. Public Access. Provide for the preservation of public access and recreation areas by planning for and conditioning approved development on the eventual loss and replacement of access and recreation areas vulnerable to coastal bluff erosion or sea level rise.

2016 First Public Draft Policy, Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment

5-22. Safe Access. Identify areas where accelerated erosion due to sea level rise may affect the stability of formal and informal coastal accessways, and address hazardous accessways including establishing alternative formal accessways in less hazardous areas. Provide informative signage restricting public access or warning of bluff instability where appropriate. Where public access becomes restricted due to hazards, restore the trail area with stabilizing vegetation.


13



Vehicular Coastal Access Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin General Policies 5-23. Cohesive Transportation System. Establish a cohesive transportation system to improve circulation and support existing and planned land uses, with improved linkages between neighborhoods and destinations such as schools, commercial centers, and the ocean beaches.

2016 First Public Draft Policy, 2013 Circulation Element

5-24. Safe and Functional Vehicle Access. Maintain safe and functional access for local and recreational traffic to and from downtown and for regional, recreational, and commuter traffic to and from outside the city.


Roadway Network and Vehicle Access Policies 5-25. Roadway System to Meet Needs. The transportation network shall be planned and designed to accommodate traffic due to the build out of the LUP’s envisioned uses and densities, and to the extent practical and in scale with community character, growth beyond the city limits including within the sphere of influence, and recreational, and regional through traffic.

Original LUP Policy 10-24: The City shall support expansion of highways connecting Half Moon Bay with the remainder of San Mateo County to capacities which do not exceed that needed to accommodate commuter or recreational traffic required at Plan build-out, while maintaining accepted standards of traffic safety.

5-26. Town Boulevard. Study coordinated improvements for Highway 1 to implement a Town Boulevard. Without reducing capacity, the design shall include lower speed limits; multi-modal improvements with safe crossings; as well as landscaping and other amenities intended to enhance the image and scenic quality of the city. Round-abouts, grade-separations and other approaches are potential options in addition to other types of traffic control systems. The objective is a slower, safer, and contextually appropriate roadway that better serves residents and provides improved coastal access for visitors.


5-27. Connective Network. Promote a transportation network and information system that improves connectivity and access to all transportation modes and to local and regional destinations.


5-28. San Mateo County CMP. Coordinate transportation network improvements with the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program.


14



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-29. Complete Streets. Coordinate with Caltrans and other local public works and transportation agencies to implement complete street improvements that emphasize safety, context-sensitive design, and continued community input.


5-30. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). VMT is the City’s performance standard for purposes of CEQA impact assessment. Establish appropriate measurement methodology, thresholds of significance, and mitigation approaches pursuant to CEQA Guidelines.


5-31. Level of Service (LOS). Utilize LOS analysis to evaluate roadway and intersection performance and determine the impacts to coastal access associated with proposed development and identify potential transportation system improvements.


5-32. Alternate Performance Standards. Evaluate and consider adopting alternate performance standards to assess additional components of the circulation system. Such standards may include pedestrian, bicycle, or transit quality indexes and delay indexes.


5-33. Emergency Vehicle Access. Ensure adequate emergency vehicle access to all parts of the city, including during times of peak congestion and in popular destinations, such as the beaches or downtown, as well as each California Coastal Trail segment between pedestrian bridges.


5-34. Implement Planned Intersection Improvements. Consolidate the intersection of Highway 1 at Terrace and Grand Avenues, including a southward extension of Frontage Road. Signalize the reconfigured Terrace intersection and the Main Street (south) intersection of Highway 1. These improvements shall incorporate the Eastside Parallel Trail along the east side of Highway 1, and highway widening shall be limited to the minimum needed for implementing the intersection improvements.


5-35. Peak Period Traffic Control. Coordinate with local law enforcement to provide traffic control personnel at the intersection of Highways 1 and 92 or other congested locations during peak weekend use times to facilitate safety, reduce gridlock, and maintain emergency vehicle access.


15



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-36. Evacuation Routes. Maintain evacuation routes for hazards such as tsunami, earthquake, and fire. Routes shall be clearly marked with signage at regular intervals, widely publicized, and specific to each type of hazard.


Sea Level Rise Adaptation Policies 5-37. Transportation Priorities. Carry out and maintain sea level rise vulnerability analyses to identify chronic problem areas that are highly subject to erosion, wave impacts, flooding, or other coastal hazards or that may become so in the near future. Coordinate with Caltrans and local public works/transportation agencies to address high priority areas and increase monitoring efforts of chronic problem areas.


5-38. Transportation Adaptation. Coordinate with Caltrans and local public works/transportation agencies to establish new alternative transportation routes or a plan to provide and maintain alternative transportation and parking that allows for continued access to beaches and other recreation areas as sea levels rise (e.g. shuttles, parking areas east of Highway 1).


5-39. Harbor Linkages. Coordinate with relevant stakeholders (such as the San Mateo County Harbor District) to support linkages between nearby harbor infrastructure and overland transportation networks to promote resilience against future sea level rise impacts.


5-40. Transportation Planning and Design. Transportation networks shall be designed and upgraded to function even if the highest projected sea level rise amounts occur. Efforts to realign, retrofit, and/or protect infrastructure should be coordinated with Caltrans, local public works/transportation agencies, and LCP planning efforts. Individual projects shall require coastal development permits.


16



Bicycle and Pedestrian Coastal Access Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin General Policies

5-41. Trail System. Develop a safe, cohesive network of pedestrian and bicycle trails, integrated with the regional trail system. The trail network shall include and complement the California Coastal Trail, the Naomi Patridge Trail, and the Eastside Parallel Trail.


5-42. Support for Walking and Biking. Promote walking and biking as healthy, environmentally sound methods to reduce vehicle trips, promote active lifestyles, and improve access to the coast.


5-43. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee. Maintain an advisory committee of citizen experts to provide input on bicycle and pedestrian facilities planning and the incorporation of complete streets.


5-44. Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implement and update a strategic master plan that identifies needs and prioritizes improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs.


California Coastal Trail and Other Multi-use Trails Policies 5-45. Complete Trail System. Complete the trail system within the city to allow safe and environmentally compatible access to parks, beaches, and recreational open space areas, integrating with the regional trail system and minimizing adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas or their buffers. The complete trail system should include: a. Continuous pedestrian and bicycle trails along the coastline;

b. Trails along Pilarcitos and Frenchmans Creeks aligned outside the riparian meander belt, connecting neighborhoods to the beaches and coastline, parks, and foothills;

c. Completion of pedestrian and bicycle trails west of Highway 1, and the new Eastside Parallel Trail east of and adjacent to Highway 1 along its entire length; and

d. Connectivity between off-road trails and major on-road pedestrian and bicycle routes, such that future improvements in the trail system also contribute to linkages between important sites (such as beaches, schools, and commercial centers).


17



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-46. Trails Accessible for All User Groups. Trails designed and designated as multi-use shall be accessible for all user groups, including walkers, bicyclists, and equestrians (as land use policy allows). Ensure that the network provides an appropriate amount of resources for each trail type or user group such as lighting, benches, and signage, as appropriate with respect to sensitive habitat area and visual resource protection. Encourage improvements that will reduce conflicts between all types of users, such as speed-graded trails.


5-47. Resource-Dependent and Coastal-Dependent Uses. Public trails and beach accessways are considered resource-dependent uses, unless there is a habitat specific limitation that precludes development or aggravates hazards. The California Coastal Trail is considered a coastal-dependent use and its implementation, maintenance, and improvement along the coastline shall be a priority.


5-48. Minimize Potential Impacts of Trails. Multi-use trails, associated amenities, and passive recreational features shall be located to minimize impacts to sensitive habitats and other sensitive surrounding land uses, such as residences and agriculture.


5-49. Improve Existing Trails. Improve existing formal trails, trail amenities, and safety. Consider options to retrofit or relocated existing formal trails and amenities to reduce impacts from sea level rise.


5-50. Trail Design and Maintenance. Trails shall be designed and maintained for good drainage, using natural grades and surrounding vegetation; lasting ADA compliance; and sustainable implementation and maintenance with respect to ESHA and City resources (e.g. staffing, budget, capacity).


5-51. California Coastal Trail Improvements. Work with the Coastside Land Trust and others to develop a formal segment of the California Coastal Trail between the Wavecrest open space and Redondo Beach Road. The trail should generally parallel the bluff edge, be designed to minimize erosion and potential adverse impacts to biological resources, and be aligned adequately inland to accommodate future sea level rise and bluff erosion projections. Connect the lateral trail with one or more vertical trails connecting to the beach, located and designed to minimize negative impacts. Restore any areas damaged by existing formal or informal trails that will not be part of this formalized alignment.

Original LUP Policy 2-22: Provide an improved bluff edge trail designed to improve coastal access and avoid increase in bluff edge runoff from Kelly to Miramontes Point Road as shown on the Access Improvement Map or as determined by the Wavecrest Conservancy Project for the area between Seymour and Redondo Beach Road. Connect the lateral trail to the beach with vertical trails at the end of Kelly, midway between Kelly and Seymour, at the end of Seymour, midway between Seymour and

18



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Redondo Beach Road as determined by the Wavecrest Conservancy Project, near the end of Redondo Beach Road, and at the end of Miramontes Point Road.

5-52. Trail Improvements at Surfers Beach. Work with Caltrans and others on a long-term solution to reduce erosion, enhance coastal access and recreation, and protect Highway 1 from future instabilities at Surfers Beach. This solution shall include enhancements of the segment of the California Coastal Trail between Coronado Street and the Pillar Point RV Park.


5-53. Long-term California Coastal Trail Alignment. Study, identify and implement future alignments of the California Coastal Trail that would be sufficiently protected from the highest projection of erosion and sea level rise scenarios and would preserve or establish native vegetation between the trail and the bluff edge.


5-54. Equestrian Trails. Separate trails shall be maintained for equestrian use along the California Coastal Trail corridor. Use landscaping and signs to separate horse and pedestrian trails and to reduce erosion or other adverse impacts along bluff tops and watercourses. Trail crossings of watercourses shall be sustainable and minimize impacts to ESHA.

Original LUP Policy 2-24: Use landscaping and signs to separate horse and pedestrian trails. Restrict horseback riding to trails and areas as shown on the Access Improvements Map.

5-55. Naomi Patridge Trail Extension. Extend the multi-use trail along the west side of Highway 1, connecting to a continuous parallel trail planned for the unincorporated Midcoast.


5-56. Downtown Multi-Use Trail. Study opportunities for a Town Center trail that can link to other downtown bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Site and design trails and trail connections to protect priority uses such as sensitive habitat areas and agriculture.


5-57. Creekside Trails. Use Half Moon Bay’s creek system as part of a network of pedestrian and bicycle trails linking the City’s parks and open space recreation areas and providing coastal access. Ensure that all new development along creeks is set back to accommodate planned trails. Site trails to avoid adverse environmental impacts to riparian corridors and other environmentally sensitive habitat areas; to prevent erosion, sedimentation, and flooding along the creek beds and banks upstream and downstream from trails; and to protect other priority uses including agriculture.


19



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-58. Trail Easements. As part of the development approval process, obtain an irrevocable offer to dedicate or a permanent easement for multi-use trails on privately owned property where trails are proposed as part of the Half Moon Bay trail system. At a minimum, the dedicated easement shall have a width sufficient to allow an adequate multi-use trail, to protect the privacy of any residential structures built near the accessway, and to accommodate landward realignment needed for erosion and sea level rise impacts. For all new private development along the California Coastal Trail alignment, granting of lateral easements to allow for continuous public access along the shoreline shall be mandatory unless publicly owned blufftop land suitable for trail development and long-term maintenance intervenes between the development and the bluff edge.

Original LUP Policy 2-2: For all new development along the Shoreline Trail alignment shown on the Access Improvements Map, granting of lateral easements to allow for continuous public access along the shoreline shall be mandatory unless publicly owned blufftop land suitable for trail development intervenes between the development and the bluff edge. All beach seaward of the base of the bluff shall be dedicated. At a minimum, the dedicated easement shall have a width sufficient to allow an adequate trail and to protect the privacy of any residential structures built near the accessway. Lateral trails along the bluff edge shall be set back at least 10 feet and native vegetation shall be established between the trail and the edge to stabilize the bluff top.

5-59. Trail Setbacks. Lateral trails along the bluff edge shall be set back a sufficient distance from the bluff edge to avoid impacts from erosion and sea level rise, at least 50 feet, and native vegetation shall be established and maintained between the trail and the edge to stabilize the blufftop. Outlooks and other trail amenities shall be incorporated to discourage damage from informal trails.

Original LUP Policy 2-2: For all new development along the Shoreline Trail alignment shown on the Access Improvements Map, granting of lateral easements to allow for continuous public access along the shoreline shall be mandatory unless publicly owned blufftop land suitable for trail development intervenes between the development and the bluff edge. All beach seaward of the base of the bluff shall be dedicated. At a minimum, the dedicated easement shall have a width sufficient to allow an adequate trail and to protect the privacy of any residential structures built near the accessway. Lateral trails along the bluff edge shall be set back at least 10 feet and native vegetation shall be established between the trail and the edge to stabilize the bluff top.

20



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Policies 5-60. Safe Pedestrian and Bike Connections. Designate safe routes between residential neighborhoods, schools, public parks, downtown, commercial areas, regional trail connections, and the coast, including safe crossings across Highway 1 and Highway 92. Focus pathways (sidewalks and trails) and bicycle improvements along these routes. Seek grant funding and support implementation of Safe Routes to School improvements in coordination with the Cabrillo Unified School District.


5-61. San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Coordinate with and expand upon the bicycle network in the San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (CBPP) by providing end‐of‐trip facilities, improving bicycle/transit integration, encouraging bicycle use, and making bicycling safer.


5-62. Multi-Modal Highway 1 Improvements. Implement safety and improvements for all modes using Highway 1 as an on-going effort supported by community engagement and analysis.


5-63. Work with Other Agencies. Promote cooperation with the County of San Mateo, Caltrans, California State Parks and private land trusts to implement and maintain bicycle and pedestrian connections across jurisdictional lines.


5-64. Highway Crossings. Crossings of Highway 1 and Highway 92 shall provide safe access for bicycles and pedestrians from all neighborhoods to the beach, downtown, and schools.


5-65. Downtown-Beach Pedestrian Connections. Develop strong pedestrian east-west connections between downtown and the Francis State Park Beach and Poplar Beach. Kelly Avenue and Poplar Street should be high priorities for walkway enhancements suitable to the adjacent neighborhood environment, and pedestrian amenities as well as directional signage.


5-66. Bicycle Parking Priorities. Work with the State Department of Parks and Recreation, Cabrillo Unified School District, and downtown associations to identify funding sources for and implement safe and convenient bicycle parking at all beach access parking lots; schools; and Downtown Half Moon Bay.


21



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-67. Funding Sources. Pursue national, state, and local grants to improve bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian infrastructure, encouragement, enforcement, and education efforts. Improvements to infrastructure include bridges along multi‐use trails within the city.


Parking, Transit and Alternate Modes Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Parking and Signage Policies

5-68. Peak Period Parking Provisions. In the downtown area and for beaches and other attractions, encourage improvements to parking systems such that they are sufficient to accommodate visitor surges during peak periods, including special events and weekends.


5-69. Parking Management. Parking management strategies shall continue to be developed and implemented during peak periods and may include encouraging non-motorized transportation and providing spillover parking lots, online parking capacity information, shuttle services, or establishing a demand-based parking program.


5-70. On-Street Public Parking. Protect and enhance the on-street public parking supply by requiring new development to provide sufficient off-street parking and frontage improvements.


5-71. Comprehensive Signage Program. Implement a comprehensive program to provide wayfinding and informational signage to direct visitors to destinations such as the beaches and downtown, as well as public parking areas, and provide other necessary public information, ensuring that any signage is visually consistent and appropriate in the coastal setting.


5-72. Directional Signage. Design signage to be visible from Highway 1 and Highway 92, and maintain visual harmony with the coastal setting.


22



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Transit Access and Shuttle Policies

5-73. Effective Transit Services. Support efforts to maintain and operate local and regional transit services that meet the needs of Half Moon Bay residents, workers and visitors.


5-74. Local and Regional Transit. Work with SamTrans to increase bus frequencies and ensure that routes connect to regional transit options for coastal access and expanded commute options. Encourage SamTrans to provide frequent, especially peak weekend transit service to Half Moon Bay State Beach.

Original LUP Policy 2-15: Designate, sign, and improve, as primary Beach Access Routes to the State Beach the following streets as shown on the Land Use Plan Map: Young, Venice, and Kelly. (a) Provide for left-turn lanes at each primary

access route, with signs on Highway 1 indicating beach access.

(b) Encourage Samtrans to provide peak weekend transit service to the beach on Kelly and Venice and reserve the possibility of eventual connections with remote parking sites.

5-75. Bus Shelters. Work with SamTrans to provide safe, comfortable, and weather-protective bus shelters throughout Half Moon Bay, including amenities such as benches and pedestrian-scale lighting, set back a safe distance from the roadway. Ensure that shelters are easily accessible for all users of the pedestrian and bicycle network.


5-76. Community Shuttle Service. Establish a shuttle service to meet a variety of local needs. Options include a local circulator for seniors and youth throughout the week, as well as weekend and event shuttles that can transport visitors between downtown, the beaches, and parking.


5-77. Visitor-Serving Transit Hub. Collaborate with SamTrans to model potential ridership and identify potential locations for a Half Moon Bay and bay-side linked transit hubs.


23



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Alternate Modes and Emerging Technologies Policies

5-78. Promote Alternate Modes. Explore the integration of alternative modes of transportation to enhance access to Half Moon Bay’s destinations while reducing vehicle trips, greenhouse gas emissions, and parking impacts. Support efforts to manage travel demand during periods of congestion through the distribution of information (e.g. through signage, online) about in-advance and real-time travel options and parking capacities, pricing of City‐owned parking facilities, subsidy of transit options and the provision of facilities for walking and bicycling.


5-79. EV Vehicle Facilities. Support installation of EV charging stations in all public parking areas and require EV charging stations in new commercial and multi-family development.


5-80. Emerging Modes. Allow smaller, slower moving and context-appropriate motorized vehicles to utilize streets and trails that can be easily shared to enable nonautomotive transportation. Study the use of emerging technologies including autonomous vehicles to ensure future implementation improves coastal access and does not contribute to congestion or other unintended consequences.


5-81. Transportation Demand Management. Explore and support TDM programs that reduce the reliance of Half Moon Bay residents and, especially, visitors on use of the private automobile.


5-82. Scenic and Unique Facilities. Support special transportation and recreation facilities in Half Moon Bay and surrounding areas, including the airport, marina, and equestrian facilities.


24



Coastal Recreation Policies


5-83. Comprehensive Public Recreation System. Coordinate with Cabrillo Unified School District, Boys and Girls Club, State Parks, County of San Mateo, and other organizations to maintain a diversified, comprehensive system of open space for outdoor recreation, including, but not limited to: parks; beaches; areas for organized sports; and opportunities for the study, education, and appreciation of nature.


5-84. Parkland Provisions. Parkland provision and accessibility standards shall ensure that new parkland keeps pace with population increase.

Original LUP Policy 2-35 (in part): Continue the existing policy of requiring land dedications or inlieu fee contributions to assure adequacy of recreation and park facilities to meet the demand generated by new developments. Modify the existing Dedication Ordinance to assure that contributed fees are equivalent in value to lands which would otherwise be required by basing the fees on the equivalent fair market value of the land which would otherwise be dedicated.

5-85. Parks Master Plan. Develop a strategic parks master plan that identifies needs and prioritizes improvements to park facilities and programs.


5-86. Sustainable Public Access. Provide sustainable public access to parks and recreational open space areas, which shall include adequate parking, alternative transportation, and trails, while protecting and enhancing the natural resources, ecosystem functions, and habitat values of such areas.


5-87. Interagency Cooperation for Beach Management. Work with the State, County, and other agencies to implement consistent beach management practices that balance protecting the natural beach habitat and marine resources, including beach wrack and snowy plover habitat, with maintaining the recreational value of sandy beach areas for residents and visitors.


25



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-88. Interagency Cooperation for Open Space Acquisition. Coordinate with agencies and organizations and leverage regional resources to ensure strategic and efficient progress in the acquisition of public open space as well as its long-term maintenance.


5-89. Water-Oriented Recreation. Continue to protect coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational activities. Protective measures shall not include hard shoreline armoring unless permitted by Chapter 7, Coastal Hazards policies.


Open Space Policies 5-90. Open Space Dedications. The State Department of Parks and Recreation, other State agencies, the County of San Mateo, or any private agency organized for the purpose of accepting dedications for public use, shall be designated to accept offers of dedication in perpetuity required by this Plan to increase opportunities for public access and recreational use of the Regional Public Recreation Area designated on the Land Use Plan Map. Any offers of dedication or easement required by this Plan shall be reserved until accepted by one of the above listed entities. Such reservation shall be held by the City until accepted by one of the above listed agencies.

Original LUP Policy 2-1: The State Department of Parks and Recreation, other State agencies, the County of San Mateo, or any private agency organized for the purpose of accepting dedications for public use, shall be designated to accept offers of dedication required by this Plan to increase opportunities for public access and recreational use of the Regional Public Recreation Area designated on the Land Use Plan Map. Any offers of dedication or easement required by this Plan shall be reserved until accepted by one of the above listed entities. Such reservation shall be held by the City until accepted by one of the above listed agencies.

5-91. Restorative Access. Identify public coastal access points, whether formal or informal, where public access is causing erosion or other impacts to sensitive habitat due to maintenance challenges or poor design. Provide alternate access, either in the same or a nearby location, designed to protect the surrounding habitat and allow for eventual restoration of the originally impacted access area. Options include raised boardwalks or seasonal bridges. Prioritize locations identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan including Wave Avenue and other streets in the Casa del Mar and Miramar neighborhoods that link directly to the California Coastal Trail.


26



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-92. Vista Trail. Prepare a feasibility study of potential trail alignments east of the city’s northwest neighborhoods for pedestrian use. To facilitate inland and upland relocation of equestrian use over time, the feasibility assessment shall consider alignment and design requirements to potentially accommodate equestrian use. The presence of environmentally sensitive habitat will dictate trail alignment, design, and management. Future implementation shall include a funded plan for active oversight by a resource management agency to ensure protection of sensitive habitat areas and compliance with open space deed restricted areas.


Coastal Recreation Policies

5-93. Coastal-dependent and Recreational Uses. Define coastal-dependent development and uses to mean any development or use which requires a site on or adjacent to the sea to be able to function at all. Upland areas necessary to support coastal-dependent and recreational uses shall be reserved for such uses, where feasible. In a zone extending approximately 300 feet inland from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to coastal-dependent and related recreational activities and support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set back at least 100 feet from the beach and bluffs and near-shore areas reserved for day use activities.

Original LUP Policy 2-7: In a zone extending approximately 200 feet inland from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to coastal-dependent and related recreational activities and support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set back 100 feet from the beach and bluffs and near-shore areas reserved for day use activities. In no case shall recreational improvements, other than accessways, lifeguard facilities, trash containers, and informational signs be located directly on the dry, sandy beach.

5-94. Acquisition for Coastal Access and Recreation. Coordinate with the State of California, the County of San Mateo, and any private entity organized for acquisition of public dedication and private land donations that are expected to make all purchases for expanding opportunities for coastal access and recreation. The City's role shall be to require dedications as provided in this Plan in order to reduce required purchases, and to retain any offers of dedication or easements required by this Plan as open for acceptance by the above listed entities.

Original LUP Policy 2-10: In implementing all proposals made in this Plan for expanding opportunities for coastal access and recreation, the State of California, the County of San Mateo, or any private entity organized for acquisition of public dedication are expected to make all purchases. The City's role shall be to require dedications as provided in this Plan in order to reduce required purchases, and to retain any offers of dedication or easements required by this Plan as open for acceptance by the above listed entities.

27



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-95. Parkland Standard. Provide 5 acres of City parkland including neighborhood and community park area for each 1,000 Planning Area residents, with additional parkland for specialized and low use park acreage. The parkland standard shall ensure that new development accommodates the recreational needs of future residents.


5-96. Temporary Events. Ensure that temporary events minimize impacts to public access, recreation, and coastal resources through the special events permitting process. Require a coastal development permit for temporary events to be held between Memorial Day weekend and Labor Day; that occupy all or part of a public sandy beach area; that involve a charge for general public admission where no fee is currently charged for use of the same area; or that have the potential to result in significant adverse impacts to public access and/or coastal resources.


5-97. Recreational Uses on Oceanfront Land. Recreational uses on ocean front lands that do not require extensive alteration of natural environment shall have priority over recreational uses requiring substantial alterations. This shall apply to both public and private development. Off-road vehicle use shall be prohibited in regional recreation areas, as designated on the Land Use Plan Map.

Original LUP Policy 2-8: Recreational uses on ocean front lands that do not require extensive alteration of natural environment shall have priority over recreational uses requiring substantial alterations. This shall apply to both public and private development. Off-road vehicle use shall be prohibited in regional recreation areas, as designated on the Land Use Plan Map.

5-98. Recreational Uses in Public Park Lands. Development unrelated to on-site recreational activities shall not be permitted in publicly owned recreational areas, with the exception of habitat restoration and the State Park administrative and maintenance operations located at Half Moon Bay State Beach, including limited housing for State Parks staff.

Original LUP Policy 2-9: Development unrelated to on-site recreational activities shall not be permitted in publicly owned recreational areas, with the exception of the State Park administrative and maintenance operations located at Half Moon Bay State Beach.

Sea Level Rise Adaptation Policies

5-99. Access Sites and Facilities. Require new public access locations, segments of the California Coastal Trail, and recreation and visitor-serving facilities to be sited and designed to avoid impacts from sea level rise, while maximizing public access and recreation opportunities. Where facilities can be safely sited for


28



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin the near term but future impacts are likely, require an adaptive management plan detailing steps for maintenance, retrofitting, and/or relocation. 5-100. Sea Level Rise Mitigation. For unavoidable impacts to public access or recreation from shoreline armoring or other development, require mitigation of impacts through the addition of new public access, recreation opportunities, visitor-serving accommodations, or California Coastal Trail segments, or payment of fees to fund such improvements. Mitigation measures should be planned for long-term resiliency with sufficient setbacks in such a way that, if possible, sea level rise will not impair their efficacy over time.


5-101. Sea Level Rise Impacts Research. Support research on impacts to recreation and public access, including impacts to recreational activities like surfing or other coastal recreational uses.


5-102. Loss of Access and Recreation Areas. Identify opportunities to replace recreation areas and accessways that will be lost due to inundation or damage associated with sea level rise. Establish a program to address and minimize loss of beach areas, including loss of lateral access, or changes in beach management due to sea level rise through sand replenishment, removal or maintenance to shoreline protective devices, or other actions as may be appropriate.


5-103. Open Space Protection for Recreation. Protect open space to ensure adequate land is available to replace parkland that is lost to sea level rise. Protect open space adjacent to beaches, coastal habitats, and other environmentally sensitive habitat areas to allow for inland migration.


Commercial Recreation and Visitor-Serving Commercial Uses Policies

5-104. No-Cost and Lower-Cost Visitor and Recreational Facilities. Protect no and lower-cost visitor-serving and recreational facilities including overnight accommodations from removal, redevelopment, and/or coastal hazards including erosion. These include major, free recreational attractions such as the California Coastal Trail and numerous beaches; and low-cost facilities such as Half Moon Bay State Park and other camping and RV facilities.


5-105. Development Priority for Visitor-Serving and Recreational Uses. Prioritize visitor-oriented and recreational uses in all areas designated for Commercial Visitor-Serving on the Land Use Diagram. Encourage the addition of visitor-serving uses and overnight accommodations in these areas, particularly those that are lower-cost.


29



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-106. New Overnight Accommodations. Consider the carrying capacity of the coast, visitor demand over a range of affordability levels for various accommodation types, and consistency with all applicable LCP and General Plan policies before approving any new overnight accommodation development proposals. Prioritize lower-cost visitor-serving accommodations over higher-cost lodging.


5-107. Inclusion of Lower-Cost Accommodations. Require new development of higher-cost accommodations to provide for a component of lower-cost accommodations (e.g. a lower-cost bank of rooms in a hotel, a hostel, campground, RV park, etc.). The lower-cost accommodations may be provided on-site, off-site, or through payment of an in-lieu fee fund to support establishment of new lower-cost accommodations. The provision of lower-cost accommodations shall be at least 15 percent of the number of approved high-cost accommodations.


5-108. Location of Visitor-Serving Commercial Development. Generally locate new visitor-serving commercial development including facilities that provide lodging, food and automobile services within the Town Center area, within and near Ocean Colony/Half Moon Bay Golf Links, near Pillar Point Harbor, near Dunes Beach, and in locations along Highway 1 as designated for Commercial Visitor-Serving on the Land Use Diagram.

Original LUP Policy 2-29: Generally locate new visitor-serving commercial development facilities that provide lodging, food, and automobile services within the downtown commercial core, within and near Ocean Colony/Half Moon Bay Golf Links, at Pillar Point Harbor (near Dunes Beach), and in the Wavecrest area as designated in the Wavecrest Conservancy Project.

5-109. Marine-Oriented Visitor-Serving Uses. Promote coastal related land uses including an interpretive center, education, and low-cost water-oriented recreation.


5-110. Marina Improvements. Consult with the Harbor District and marina operators on marina related improvements and operations, and support marina improvements and operation that will bolster local industry and tourism.


5-111. Ecotourism and Agritourism. Promote agricultural and open space land uses by encouraging sustainable and economically viable visitor-serving ecotourism and agritourism activities as consistent with the policies of the City’s Local Coastal Program.


30



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 5-112. Location of Commercial Recreation. Locate new or expanded commercial recreation facilities in areas already established for such uses, with priority to locations in the Town Center area of the City, except where use characteristics are incompatible with densely developed commercial areas (e.g. stables and golf courses). Commercial facilities which are strongly connected with and support recreational uses shall be encouraged to locate in close proximity to the recreational activity.

Original LUP Policy 2-31: Locate new or expanded commercial recreation facilities in areas already established for such uses, with priority to locations in the commercial core of the City, except where use characteristics are incompatible with densely developed commercial areas (e.g. stables and golf courses). Commercial facilities which are strongly connected with and support recreational uses (such as a fishing supply store at Pillar Point Harbor) shall be encouraged to locate in close proximity to the recreational activity.

5-113. Equestrian Facilities. Limit equestrian use and facilities west of Highway 1 to the level generally available as of the time of the LUP update and require that existing equestrian facilities and activities improve practices to prevent and remediate adverse environmental impacts to creeks and other ESHAs. Encourage relocation of equestrian facilities inland and/or upland. Facilities east of Highway 1 are preferred, where future City trails could link to the San Mateo County trail system. New facilities shall not be established on the coastal terrace unless such use will not conflict with other public recreation uses and has no adverse environmental impacts.

Original LUP Policy 2-32: Locate new equestrian facilities near proposed County trail systems in upland areas east of Highway 1 or on sites where the coastal terrace is broad enough to accommodate such use without conflicts with public recreation. Limit equestrian use and facilities west of Highway 1 to the level now generally available and encourage relocation to upland areas.

5-114. Commercial Recreation Water Quality Impacts. Evaluate the potential water quality impacts of commercial recreation uses, including equestrian facilities and golf courses, to inform future decisions regarding the types of commercial recreations uses that can be accommodated in the city.


31



Coastal Hazards Policy Comparison Table

Climate Change Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-1. Hazard Avoidance. All new development shall be sited, sized, and designed to minimize risks to life and property and protect coastal resources both on and off-site from geologic, flood, and fire hazard, including for conditions anticipated to be compounded by climate change.


7-2. Climate Change Agency Coordination. Coordinate with San Mateo County and other local, regional, and State agencies on efforts to study and implement climate change adaptation measures and resiliency planning including, but not limited to, green infrastructure, managed retreat, water conservation and reuse, and wildland fire prevention.

2017 Planning Commission Public Draft Policy

7-3. Climate Change Research. Consider, support and contribute to climate change research efforts including USGS coastal erosion modeling, as well as on-going analysis by the California Coastal Commission, Coastal Conservancy, Ocean Protection Council and other agencies working to further the understanding of climate change impacts on coastal communities


7-4. Climate Change Education. Provide and support climate change education throughout the community, including through the community college and local school district, the library, and City Parks and Recreation programming.


7-5. Climate Action Planning. Prepare a climate action plan with performance measures to document and track the city’s greenhouse gas inventory and efforts to meet State greenhouse gas reduction targets over time.


32



Geologic and Seismic Hazards Policies


7-6. Minimize Geologic Hazard Consequences. New development and redevelopment shall minimize risk to life and property and neither create nor contribute to geologic hazards.


7-7. Seismic and Geologic Hazard Mapping. Maintain updated maps of seismic and geologic hazard areas based on new and best available science.


7-8. Geological Reports. Review applications for new development, including grading and building permits and subdivisions, for adjacency to, threats from, and impacts on geologic hazards arising from seismic events, bluff or watercourse erosion, landslides, flooding, or other coastal and geologic hazards such as expansive soils and subsidence areas. In areas of known geologic hazards, as indicated on the Seismic Hazards and Liquefaction Potential map (Figure 7-2), a site-specific geological report shall be required. Reports shall identify mitigation measures where necessary to minimize potential impacts to life and property.

Original LUP Policy 4-6: Applications for grading and building permits and applications for subdivisions shall be reviewed for adjacency to, threats from, and impacts on geologic hazards arising from seismic events, tsunami run-up, landslides, flooding, or other geologic hazards such as expansive soils and subsidence areas. In areas of known geologic hazards, as indicated on the Geologic Hazards Map, a geologic report shall be required. Mitigation measures shall be required where necessary.

7-9. Siting of New Critical, High-Occupancy, and Public Facilities. Prohibit the siting of new critical facilities, structures involving high occupancies, and public facilities in areas of high geologic hazard unless such location is deemed essential to the public welfare. Where permitted, these structures will be sited, designed, and constructed to minimize and mitigate potential for damage due to ground deformation, seismically triggered subsidence, and landslide, or other coastal hazards.

2016 First Public Draft Policy, Safety Element

7-10. Hillside Construction Slope Limitation. Require soils and geologic reports for all new development on slopes 20 percent or greater to be reviewed by appropriate City engineering staff or consultants selected by the City at the applicant’s expense. Limit development in areas exceeding 20 percent slope to critical facilities and public infrastructure that cannot be located elsewhere, and beach accessways to the extent feasible.

Original LUP Policy 4-7: In areas of flooding due to tsunamis or dam failure, no new development shall be permitted unless the applicant or subsequent study demonstrates that the hazard no longer exists or has been or will be reduced or eliminated by improvements which are consistent with the policies of this Plan and that the development

33



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin will not contribute to flood hazards or require the expenditure of public funds for flood control works. Where not otherwise indicated, the flood hazard zone shall be considered to be a zone defined by the measured distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the creek to both sides of the creek. Non-structural agricultural uses, trails, roads, and parking lots shall be permitted, provided that such uses shall not be permitted within the area of stream corridor.

7-11. Landslide Remediation and Stabilization. Permit the remediation or stabilization of landslides that affect existing structures (pre-Coastal Act) or that threaten public health or safety except along coastal bluff or other eroding edges, such as streambanks. Permit remediation or stabilization to the extent necessary where an existing landslide prevents development of private property and remediation does not shift risk to other property, and the remediation project includes mitigation monitoring and reporting. Alternative remediation or stabilization techniques shall be analyzed to determine the least environmentally damaging alternative. Maximum feasible mitigation shall be incorporated into the project in order to minimize adverse impacts to resources.


7-12. Geologic Event Analysis. Require a detailed study to be conducted in the event that a substantial landslide or seismic event may have caused significant damage to a foundation or structure to document the geologic materials, foundations, or structures involved.


7-13. Risk of Upset near Coastal Resource Areas. Monitor and support remediation of hazardous materials sites exposed to erosion or other geologic hazards along the coastal bluffs and along beds and banks of watercourses.


Development near Beachfront and Blufftops Policies 7-14. Development near Blufftops. Permit development near blufftops only if design and setback provisions are adequate to assure stability and structural integrity for the expected economic life span of the development (at least 100 years) without reliance on shoreline protective devices, and if the development (including storm runoff, foot traffic, grading, irrigation, and septic tanks) will neither create nor contribute to erosion, geologic instability of the site or surrounding area, or otherwise harm coastal resources. Lateral trails near blufftops shall be set back a sufficient distance from

Original LUP Policy 4-3(B): Permit bluff and cliff top development only if design and setback provisions are adequate to assure stability and structural integrity for the expected economic life span of the development (at least 50 years) and if the development (including storm runoff, foot traffic, grading, irrigation, and septic tanks) will neither

34



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin the bluff edge to avoid impacts from erosion and sea level rise, at least 50 feet. Prohibit development on bluff faces except for stairways for public access to the beach. Development near blufftops is defined as development within 300 feet landward of a bluff line or edge, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 13577(h); however, for this policy, the setback shall be established utilizing best available science, such as that developed by USGS, the National Academy of Science, the National Academy of Engineering, the California Geological Survey, or the California Coastal Commission. Setbacks may also be needed based on the presence of ESHA and in such a case, the most conservative setback (greater) requirement applies. Setbacks shall also include room for buffers from hazards and/or ESHAs as applicable. Economic life is defined as the period over which a development is expected to be usable, with normal repairs and maintenance, for the purpose for which it was designed, and may range from a minimum of 100 years to perhaps 150 years for critical infrastructure.

create nor contribute significantly to erosion problems or geologic instability of the site or surrounding area. Prohibit development on bluff faces except for stairways for public access to the beach.

7-15. Bluff Face Development Prohibited. Prohibit development on bluff faces, except for engineered accessways to provide public beach access and shoreline protective devices legally authorized to protect existing structures (pre Coastal Act) and critical facilities as consistent with the policies of this LCP and the Coastal Act. Drainage pipes shall be allowed only where no other less environmentally damaging drain system is feasible, and the drain pipes are sited and designed to minimize impacts to the bluff face, toe, and beach, be visually unobtrusive, and are removed overtime if exposed. Drainage devices extending over the bluff face shall not be permitted. Permitted development shall be constructed and designed to not contribute to further erosion of the bluff face and to be visually subordinate with the surrounding area.

Original LUP Policy 4-5: No development shall be permitted on the bluff face, except for engineered accessways to provide public beach access. Drainage pipes shall be allowed only where no other less environmentally damaging drain system is feasible and the drain pipes are designed and placed to minimize impacts to the bluff face, toe, and beach. Drainage devices extending over the bluff face shall not be permitted if water can be directed away from the bluff face.

7-16. Beach and Bluff Setbacks. Ensure that structures are set back far enough inland from the beach or bluff edge such that they will not be endangered by erosion (including sea level rise induced erosion) over the economic life of the structure plus an added geologic stability factors of safety of 1.5 for the static condition and 1.1 for the seismic condition, without the use of a shoreline protective device. Require geological reports to include a detailed, site-specific stability evaluation to determine the size of the setback, taking into consideration the highest projection of sea level rise and potential bluff and shoreline retreat based on best available science, over the economic life of the structure (at least 100 years).


35



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-17. Site Stability Evaluation near Beachfront or Blufftops. Require, for development near the beachfront or blufftops, the submittal of a site stability evaluation report using a 100-year storm performance standard to establish the expected economic life of the structure (at least 100 years for residential or commercial, 150 years for critical facilities) and the appropriate setback from the beach or bluff edge. The analysis shall demonstrate a factor of safety greater than or equal to 1.5 for static conditions and greater than or equal to 1.1 for seismic conditions. The report shall be prepared by a soils engineer or a certified engineering geologist based on an on-site evaluation, and shall consider:

a. Historic and projected rates of erosion, including potential erosion taking into account future sea level rise, and possible changes in shore configuration and sand transport. Sources to be investigated include recorded land surveys and tax assessment records in addition to the use of historic maps and photographs where available, and possible changes in shore configuration and transport;

b. Cliff geometry and site topography, extending the surveying work beyond the site as needed to depict unusual geomorphic conditions that might affect the site and the proposed development;

c. Geologic conditions, including soil, sediment and rock types and characteristics in addition to structural features such as bedding, joints, and faults;

d. Evidence of past or potential landslide conditions, the implications of such conditions for the proposed development, and the potential effects of the development on landslide activity;

e. Wave and tidal action, including effects of marine erosion on bluffs;

f. Ground and surface water conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes caused by the development (e.g., introduction of irrigation water to the ground water system; alterations in surface drainage);

g. Potential effects of seismic forces resulting from a maximum credible earthquake;

h. Effects of the proposed development including siting and design of structures, landscaping, drainage, grading, and impacts of construction activity on the stability of the site and adjacent area;

Original LUP Policy 4-3(D): Require the submittal of a site stability evaluation report for an area of stability demonstration prepared by a soils engineer or a certified engineering geologist, as appropriate, acting within their areas of expertise, based on an on-site evaluation. The report shall consider:

1. Historic, current and foreseeable cliff erosion, including investigation of recorded land surveys and tax assessment records in addition to the use of historic maps and photographs where available, and possible changes in shore configuration and transport.

2. Cliff geometry and site topography, extending the surveying work beyond the site as needed to depict unusual geomorphic conditions that might affect the site and the proposed development.

3. Geologic conditions, including soil, sediment and rock types and characteristics in addition to structural features such as bedding, joints, and faults.

4. Evidence of past or potential landslide conditions, the implications of such conditions for the proposed development, and the potential effects of the development on landslide activity.

5. Wave and tidal action, including effects of marine erosion on seacliffs.

6. Ground and surface water conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes caused by the development (e.g., introduction of irrigation water to the ground water system; alterations in surface drainage).

36



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin i. Any other factors that may affect slope stability; and

j. Potential erodibility of site and mitigating measures to be used to ensure minimized erosion problems during and after construction (i.e., landscaping and drainage design).

7. Potential effects of seismic forces resulting from a maximum credible earthquake.

8. Effects of the proposed development including siting and design of structures, landscaping, drainage, grading, and impacts of construction activity on the stability of the site and adjacent area.

9. Any other factors that may affect slope stability. 10. Potential erodibility of site and mitigating

measures to be used to ensure minimized erosion problems during and after construction (i.e., landscaping and drainage design).

7-18. Development near Blufftops. All new development near beachfront and blufftops shall be sized, sited and designed to minimize risk from wave run-up, flooding in the event of a 100-year storm, and beach and bluff erosion hazards in consideration of sea level rise without requiring a shoreline protection structure at any time during the life of the development.


7-19. Land Divisions near Beachfront and Blufftops. Land divisions, including subdivisions, lot splits, lot line adjustments, and certificates of compliance which create new lots adjacent to beachfront or blufftops, shall not be permitted unless the subdivision can be shown to create lots which can be developed without requiring a current or future bluff or shoreline protection structure. No new lots shall be created that could require shoreline protection or bluff stabilization structures.

Original LUP Policy 4-3(C): Prohibit land divisions or new structures identified in areas described in A and B above that would require the need for bluff protection work.

7-20. Grading near Beachfront or Blufftop. Require that any grading necessary to establish proper drainage, install minor improvement (e.g. trails), to restore eroded areas, or to provide permitted accessways directs water runoff away from the edge of the bluff or requires runoff to be handled so as to prevent damage to the bluff from surface and percolating water.

Original LUP Policy 4-4 (in part): In the absence of a determination supported by a site-specific survey by a qualified geologist and biologist to the contrary, within 100 feet from the bluff or foredune edge, drought-tolerant coastal vegetation capable of enhancing bluff and dune stability shall be installed and maintained as a part of any new development. Grading as may be required to establish proper drainage, to install minor improvement (e.g. trails) and to restore eroded areas and to provide permitted

37



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin accessways shall direct water runoff away from the edge of the bluff or be handled in a manner so as to prevent damage to the bluff by surface and percolating water.

7-21. Beachfront or Blufftop Vegetation. Require the installation and maintenance of drought-tolerant native coastal vegetation capable of enhancing bluff and dune stability within 100 feet from the bluff or foredune edge as part of any new development near the beachfront or blufftops.

Original LUP Policy 4-4 (in part): In the absence of a determination supported by a site-specific survey by a qualified geologist and biologist to the contrary, within 100 feet from the bluff or foredune edge, drought-tolerant coastal vegetation capable of enhancing bluff and dune stability shall be installed and maintained as a part of any new development. Grading as may be required to establish proper drainage, to install minor improvement (e.g. trails) and to restore eroded areas and to provide permitted accessways shall direct water runoff away from the edge of the bluff or be handled in a manner so as to prevent damage to the bluff by surface and percolating water.

7-22. Blufftop Development Relocation Program. Develop a relocation program, in conjunction with state and federal agencies, to provide incentives to relocate development out of hazardous areas and to acquire oceanfront properties that have been or will be damaged by coastal hazards in situations where relocation of development to a safer location on the site, or additional protection measures, are not feasible.


Shoreline and Bluff Protection Policies

38



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-23. Shoreline Management Plans. Develop shoreline management plans for shoreline areas subject to wave hazards and erosion, such as for Surfers Beach and Mirada Road, in coordination with San Mateo County and the Harbor District. Any plans should include:

a. An examination of local and regional annual erosion rates in order to reflect current shoreline changes;

b. Standard engineering plans and analyses defining the specific types of armoring that would be acceptable or preferable for specific areas if otherwise allowed, and where appropriate, identification of the types of armoring that should not be considered for certain areas or beaches, in order to minimize risks and impacts from armoring to public access and scenic resources along the shoreline and beach recreation areas;

c. Standard alternatives feasibility analysis that would be a required element of all hazard response projects and that would require applicants to go through a series of steps to assure that hard protective devices were only used as a last resort;

d. Standard conditions and monitoring requirements that should include mechanisms to ensure shoreline protection effectiveness and public safety with provisions for the removal or ineffective or hazardous protective structures as well as programs to address beach replenishment and sand supply; and

e. Procedures to address emergency armoring, such as: coordination with property owners and for field inspections before and after storm seasons; guidance for types of temporary protective structures preferred; mitigation requirements; and a provision for removal of temporary structures if no follow up permit is filed.

f. The alternatives feasibility analysis should require, but not be limited to, the use of technical evaluations of the site (geotechnical reports, engineering geology reports, wave uprush reports etc.), an examination of all other options (removal, relocation, sand replenishment, no action etc.), and a conclusion that a shoreline protective device would be the “best option” (most protective of the public trust, best long-term solution etc.) for the subject site.


7-24. Shoreline Protective Devices. Do not permit new development or redevelopment that would require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter landforms along bluffs and cliffs over the economic life of the development or redevelopment (at least 100 years).


39



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-25. Protection for Critical Facilities. Allow shoreline protective devices for critical facilities, including the SAM Wastewater Treatment Plant, that may require shoreline protective devices or other coastal hazard adaptation measures in order to continue providing needed services to the community. Mitigation programs shall consider, at a minimum, impacts to shoreline sand supply, impacts to public access and recreation, and impacts from reflected wave energy over the life of the shoreline protective device. Shoreline protective devices shall be designed to preserve the maximum amount of existing beach, ensure lateral access along the shoreline, and visually blend with the surrounding shoreline; and shall be designed so as to not encompass an area larger than that necessary to protect critical facilities.


7-26. Protection for Existing Structures. Permit shoreline protective devices for existing structures (pre-Coastal Act) in danger from erosion only if no feasible alternative exists. Permitted shoreline protective devices must minimize impacts to coastal resources and provide mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring. Mitigation programs shall consider, at a minimum, impacts to shoreline sand supply, impacts to public access and recreation, and impacts from reflected wave energy over the life of the shoreline protective device. Shoreline protective devices shall be designed to preserve the maximum amount of existing beach, ensure lateral access along the shoreline, and visually blend with the surrounding shoreline; and shall be designed so as to not encompass an area larger than that necessary to protect existing structures. Existing structures relying on shoreline protective devices shall not be substantially altered or redeveloped without removal of the shoreline protective devices.

Original LUP Policy 4-1: Seawalls and cliff-retaining structures shall not be permitted unless the City determines they are necessary for preservation of existing structures, and has determined that there are no other less environmentally damaging alternatives for protection of existing development. If such structures are permitted, they shall be designed to preserve the maximum amount of existing beach, to ensure lateral access along the shoreline, and to assure that all existing endangered development within the area of the improvement is protected as a part of the project; such structures shall not be designed so as to encompass an area larger than that necessary to protect existing structures. An applicant for such a structure shall include a geologic report indicating that the structure will succeed in stabilizing that portion of the shoreline which is subject to severe erosion and will not aggravate erosion in other shoreline areas.

7-27. Accessory Structure Protection Prohibited. Do not permit shoreline protection structures for the sole purpose of protecting an ancillary or accessory structure. Such accessory structures shall be removed if it is determined that the structure is in danger from erosion, flooding or wave uprush or if the bluff edge encroaches to


40



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin within 10 feet of the structure as a result of erosion, landslide or other form of bluff collapse. Accessory structures shall be constructed and designed to be removed or relocated in the event of threat from erosion, bluff failure or wave hazards.

7-28. Shoreline Protection Waiver. Applicants for new development and redevelopment shall agree to waive rights to future shoreline protection. In the event that development is threatened by erosion or other hazards and it needs to be removed or relocated, the owner bears full responsibility for all costs and must work with the City to implement the mitigation in a timely manner.


7-29. Geological Reports for Shoreline Protection. Require applicants for hard shoreline protection to provide a geologic report indicating that the structure will succeed in stabilizing that portion of the shoreline which is subject to severe erosion and will not aggravate erosion in other shoreline areas.

Original LUP Policy 4-1: Seawalls and cliff-retaining structures shall not be permitted unless the City determines they are necessary for preservation of existing structures, and has determined that there are no other less environmentally damaging alternatives for protection of existing development. If such structures are permitted, they shall be designed to preserve the maximum amount of existing beach, to ensure lateral access along the shoreline, and to assure that all existing endangered development within the area of the improvement is protected as a part of the project; such structures shall not be designed so as to encompass an area larger than that necessary to protect existing structures. An applicant for such a structure shall include a geologic report indicating that the structure will succeed in stabilizing that portion of the shoreline which is subject to severe erosion and will not aggravate erosion in other shoreline areas.

7-30. Soft Protection. Require development to use “soft” or “natural” solutions or “living shorelines” where appropriate as a preferred alternative to the placement of hard shoreline protection in order to protect development or other resources and to enhance natural resource areas. Examples of soft solutions include vegetative planting, dune restoration, and sand nourishment. Soft


41



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin protection devices shall be fully evaluated for coastal resource impacts and shall require mitigation for any unavoidable impacts.

7-31. Removal of Shoreline Protection. Require removal of existing shoreline protective devices when the structure requiring protection is redeveloped, removed, or no longer requires a protective device, whichever occurs first. If removal is not possible, require a waiver of any rights to retain the protective device to protect any structure other than the one that existed at the time the protective device was constructed or permitted. Require restoration of beach area to public use when removal of protective devices is feasible.


7-32. Shoreline Protection Removal Priorities. Identify priority areas where shoreline protection structures should be removed if they are no longer needed or if in a state of great disrepair, including areas where structures threaten the survival of wetlands and other habitats, beaches, trails, and other recreational areas.


7-33. Maintaining Existing Protection. Allow properly designed shoreline armoring to remain for the foreseeable future if the removal of the armoring would put existing development at risk and would not otherwise result in the significant protection or enhancement of coastal resources. Allow non-exempt repair and maintenance of existing, legally permitted shoreline protective devices only if such activities do not result in an enlargement or extension of armoring, and if mitigation measures are included as necessary. Replacement of 50% or more of the protective device shall constitute a replacement structure subject to provisions applicable to new shoreline protective devices. Establish conditions that provide for potential future removal of the armoring in coordination with surrounding development.


7-34. Protection Permit Expiration. Permits for bluff and shoreline protective devices shall be tied to the life of the structure it has been authorized to protect and shall expire when the structure requiring protection is redeveloped, is no longer present, or no longer requires a protective device, whichever occurs first.


7-35. Shoreline Protection Monitoring. Require as a condition of approval a monitoring program for new shoreline protective devices and their impacts on the surrounding area at the applicant’s expense. The monitoring program should include a plan for the periodic monitoring of permitted shoreline protective devices to


42



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin examine for structural damage, excessive scour, or other impacts from coastal hazards and sea level rise, as well as of impacts to shoreline processes and beach width both at the project site and the broader area and/or littoral cell as feasible, and analysis of the need for additional mitigation. Require periodic assessment of changed site conditions (e.g. period Mean High Tide Line surveys) and provide for such actions as removal or modification of armoring in the future if it is no longer needed for protection or if warranted by changed site conditions. 7-36. Exceptions for Retention of Shoreline Protective Devices. Require, on lots with existing pre-Coastal Act or permitted armoring, a waiver of rights to retain such protection for any structures other than the structure that existed at the time the armoring was constructed or permitted.


7-37. Permit Tracking. Develop a permit tracking and monitoring system to identify and prevent illegal and unpermitted construction of shoreline protective devices (e.g. protection is no longer warranted by changed site conditions, the economic life of the structure being protected has expired, the structure being protected has redeveloped or is no longer present).


7-38. Shoreline Protective Device Inventory. Develop an inventory to track and map all shoreline protective devices in coordination with permit tracking and monitoring efforts.


Flood Hazards Policies


7-39. Floodway Development Prohibition. Prohibit development in a designated floodway where such development would endanger life or contribute to flood hazards by decreasing floodway capacity or directing water flows outside of the floodway.


7-40. Drainage Capacity. Maintain and improve the City’s stormwater management system to prevent or mitigate impacts during flood events.


43



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-41. Interagency Coordination. Coordinate with federal, state and local jurisdictions, and agencies involved in the mitigation of flood hazards from dam inundation, tsunamis, sea level rise, and major flood events (e.g. SFWD, NOAA, Cal OES, FEMA).


7-42. Emergency Warning System. Update, maintain, and improve the City’s emergency warning system as consistent with local, state, and federal standards.


7-43. Flood Hazard Mapping. Maintain updated flood hazard mapping (flooding, tsunami, and dam or impoundment inundation) based on new and best available information, including the most current official FEMA FIRM to determine the general location of flooding hazard areas. Support and pursue study and mapping of inland watercourses, prioritizing Pilarcitos Creek, as well as updated dam inundation and local impoundment mapping.


7-44. New Development in Flood Zones. Prohibit new development within the 100-year flood hazard zone unless no alternative building site exists, proper mitigation measures are provided to minimize or eliminate risks to life and property from flood hazard, and the development would not constitute a public nuisance.


7-45. New Development Adjacent to Flood Zones. Require new development in areas proximate to identified 100-year flood hazard zones to identify opportunities to improve site drainage, address biological resource and water quality issues, and reduce contributions to flood hazards.


7-46. Flood Hazard Avoidance for New Development. Ensure that no new permitted development causes or contributes to flood hazards.

Original LUP Policy 4-8: No new permitted development shall cause or contribute to flood hazards.

7-47. Flood Protection. Prohibit habitable space at elevations subject to wave/flood risk. New development that must be located in areas subject to current or future flood/wave action shall be sited and designed to be capable of withstanding such impacts in compliance with FEMA, NFIP, and Coastal Act requirements. This shall include elevating all finished floor elevations at least 2 feet above the 100-year flood event, taking into account future sea level rise and projected storm events. Allow retrofitting for existing development in areas subject to current or future flood/wave action, including through elevation of habitable areas, use of break-away walls, etc. Consider


44



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin the visual and other coastal resource protection policies of this LCP in the siting and design of raised development and other adaptation measures.

7-48. Real Estate Disclosure. Require disclosure of the presence of flooding hazards during transactions of property located within areas of special flood hazard.


7-49. Flood Hazard Abatement. Support measures for the abatement of flooding hazards, including but not limited to:

a. Removal or relocation of development from flood hazard areas;

b. Prioritizing green infrastructure approaches;

c. Restoration of flood plains and meander belts of drainages that were channelized;

d. Construction of impoundments or channel diversions when necessary, provided that adequate mitigation of environmental impacts can be demonstrated; and

e. Debris clearance and silt removal programs conducted in a manner so as not to disrupt existing riparian communities.


7-50. Critical Facilities. Avoid locating critical facilities in areas susceptible to tsunami inundation. If no feasible alternative exists and a critical facility must be located in the tsunami inundation zone, require the development incorporate mitigation measures to resist tsunami damage and facilitate evacuation on short notice.


7-51. Flood Protection Evaluation. Evaluate impacts from flood protection measures by requiring new development to evaluate potential impacts to adjacent or downstream properties from all proposed structural flood protection measures to ensure that development will not create adverse direct and/or cumulative impacts either on-site or off-site.


Localized Flood Policies

7-52. Citywide Drainage Master Plan. Update the Citywide Drainage Master Plan and undertake steps to increase system capacity, prioritizing nature-based green infrastructure approaches (e.g. retaining runoff at site, restoring flood plain and meander belts of drainages that were channelized, maintaining and increasing permeable surfaces and native plants in watersheds, requiring sheet flow in


45



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin subdivisions adjacent to flood-prone channelized watercourse) over engineering solutions (e.g. upsizing existing storm drain pipes, adding storm drain lines parallel to existing ditches, reconstructing ditches to increase capacity).

7-53. Dam Inundation Impact Avoidance. Update the Pilarcitos dam inundation evaluation periodically to account for changes in localized flood risk. Establish setbacks and minimum building pad elevations for new development to avoid and mitigate flooding impacts in the event of dam failure, in coordination with SFWD dam management.


7-54. Impoundment Impact Avoidance. Study the condition and function of the impoundments located within and on the hills above the city limits, and assess the cumulative impacts of anticipated development within watersheds. Establish avoidance measures and require on-going maintenance to minimize risk of flood and water quality impacts and protect ESHAs associated with impoundments.


7-55. Tsunami and Dam Failure. Except within established neighborhoods as identified in Chapter 2. Development, do not permit new development in areas at risk of flooding due to tsunamis or dam or impoundment failure, unless a technical study completed at the applicant’s expense demonstrates all of the following:

a. The hazard no longer exists or has been or will be reduced or eliminated by improvements which are consistent with the policies of this Plan; and

b. The development will not contribute to flood hazards; and c. The development will not require the expenditure of public funds for flood control works.

Original LUP Policy 4-7: In areas of flooding due to tsunamis or dam failure, no new development shall be permitted unless the applicant or subsequent study demonstrates that the hazard no longer exists or has been or will be reduced or eliminated by improvements which are consistent with the policies of this Plan and that the development will not contribute to flood hazards or require the expenditure of public funds for flood control works. Where not otherwise indicated, the flood hazard zone shall be considered to be a zone defined by the measured distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the creek to both sides of the creek. Non-structural agricultural uses, trails, roads, and parking lots shall be permitted, provided that such uses shall not be permitted within the area of stream corridor.

46



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin Watercourse Protection Policies

7-56. Erosion Protection for Watercourses. Protect watercourses from erosion impacts. Examples include but are not limited to maintaining riparian vegetation where present to slow water flow; avoiding hardening banks and channels which exacerbates erosion up or downstream; restoring the floodplain and meander belt; and providing green infrastructure drainage facilities to reduce run-off into the City’s various watercourses.


7-57. Watercourse Monitoring. Monitor and assess the condition of watercourses with respect to changes in erosion and sedimentation. In cases where undesirable changes are identified (e.g. the beginning of incising or head cutting conditions, bank retreat, or subsidence), implement restoration measures prior to such conditions becoming irreparable through low impact green infrastructure intervention measures.


7-58. Water Quality of Watercourses. Monitor water quality of watercourses to ensure that potential upstream contaminants are identified and abated.


7-59. Development near Watercourses. Require that any new development or redevelopment be located outside the riparian buffer as determined in the Natural Resources chapter of the LUP, incorporate low impact development (LID) design features including green infrastructure, limited impervious surface areas, and use of nontoxic building materials.


7-60. Impervious Surface Limitations in Development. Minimize the installation of new impervious surfaces, especially directly-connected impervious area, and particularly in areas west of Highway 1 and within flood zones, such that there will be no increase in surface runoff. Where feasible, increase the area of pervious surfaces in redevelopment to reduce runoff and minimize additional contributions to waterways.


47



Fire Hazards Policies

LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-61. Minimize Fire Hazards. Minimize fire hazards in the city by appropriately siting development and managing fuels and ensuring adequate firebreaks and buffers around high-risk areas. Coordinate with the Coastside Fire Protection District (CFPD) and the City’s Public Works Department to maintain long-term fire hazard reduction projects, such as ongoing vegetation clearance on public and private roads.


7-62. Fire District Coordination. Work with the CFPD to provide fire prevention services and programming and ensure adequate emergency response services. Request updates from the District regarding training and fire prevention programs to ensure that the City is supported adequately through best practices.


7-63. Impact Fees. Continue to require new development to pay a fee and/or participate in an Assessment District for CFPD equipment, facility expansions, additional man power, and other capital improvements when the need arises to accommodate the increased service demand of new development and/or provide for needed capital improvements through future Capital Improvement Programs.


7-64. Fire Prevention Programs. Coordinate with the CFPD to ensure the continuation of fire prevention programs such as weed abatement and enforcement of Uniform Fire Code Requirements, and ensure consistency with and implementation of applicable fire protection plans such as the City and County’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, Cal Fire’s CZU Unit Plan, and the Cal Office of Emergency Services Plan. Support the District in their efforts to provide community education about fire prevention and fire safety.


7-65. Fire Hazard Avoidance for Development. Require that both new development and redevelopment, including remodeling and additions, adhere to most current Wildland-Urban Interface fire code and minimize risks to life and property from fire hazard through:

a. Assessing site-specific characteristics such as topography, slope, vegetation type, wind patterns etc.;


48



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin b. Siting and designing development to avoid hazardous locations, including siting to avoid

the need for fuel modification within sensitive coastal resources and their buffer zones;

c. Providing adequate ingress and egress for fire equipment access;

d. Incorporation of fuel modification and brush clearance techniques for the development site and adjacent private or public roads in accordance with applicable fire safety requirements and carried out in a manner which avoids impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat and their buffer areas unless necessary to abate a public health and safety concern;

e. Use of appropriate building materials and design features to ensure the minimum amount of required fuel modification;

f. Use of fire-retardant, native plant species in landscaping, and removal of fire-prone, non-native and invasive species such as Cape ivy and Blue gum eucalyptus to reduce fuel load where appropriate, avoiding adverse impacts to sensitive species that use such habitats.

7-66. Fire Marshal Review. All discretionary permit applications for new habitable structures shall be reviewed by the City Fire Marshal to determine if any thinning or clearing of native vegetation is required for fuel modification. Fuel modification requirements may be reduced under certain circumstances, such as when equivalent methods of wildlife risk abatement are included in the project design.


7-67. Fuel Modification Zones. For new habitable structures requiring fuel modification, establish two fuel modification zones as follows: Zone 1 shall extend 30 feet from the exterior walls and requires thinning, pruning, or removal and replacement of vegetation; Zone 2 shall extend the required distance beyond 30 feet and requires thinning of non-native vegetation and removal of dead vegetation.


7-68. Fuel Modification Performance Standards. The City Fire Marshal retains the discretion to reduce or expand the fuel modification zones and requirements on a case-by-case basis, with specific findings due to factors that may include but are not limited to building material, topography, vegetation type, and fuel load. Required fuel modification shall adhere to the following performance standards:

a. Vegetation shall be thinned to a height of 18 inches.


49



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin

b. Root systems and stumps shall be left in place to minimize soil disturbance and soil

erosion.

c. All fuel modification work shall be done by hand crews only.

7-69. Redevelopment Following Disaster. Allow the replacement or redevelopment following natural disasters provided that the replacement or redevelopment conforms to all current development standards and Wildland-Urban Interface Code, is the same use and general size of the destroyed structure, and avoids or sufficiently mitigates any coastal resource impacts.


7-70. Fire Risk Avoidance. Avoid, where feasible, approving new development in areas subject to high wildfire risk. If avoidance is not feasible, condition such new development on implementation of measures to reduce risks associated with that development.


7-71. Fire Risk Avoidance for New Subdivisions. Implement the Subdivision Map Act to ensure that new subdivisions are established with adequate emergency vehicle access, evacuation standards for residential development, and can be maintained without requiring fuel modification within ESHAs and their buffer areas. Prohibit the creation of new developable lots within high fire hazard zones.


7-72. Fire Plan Check Review of New Development. Coordinate with the CFPD to allow the District to review all applications for new development. The District’s review should ensure compliance with fire safety regulations and assess potential impacts to existing fire protection services and the need for additional and expanded services.


7-73. Emergency Vehicle Accessibility of New Development. Require new development to assure that it can be adequately served by the CFPD, provide adequate access for fire protection vehicles, and guarantee sufficient water supply and fire flow. Development in rural or high fire hazard areas should be clustered near major roads to ensure access.


7-74. Street Identification and Visibility. Ensure that all roads, streets, and major public buildings are identified in a manner that is clearly visible to fire protection and other emergency vehicles.


50



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-75. Fire Hazard Avoidance of Critical Facilities. Locate, where feasible, new critical public facilities outside of high fire risk areas, including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities. If no feasible alternative exists, identify construction methods or other methods to minimize risk.


7-76. Fire Flow Upgrades. Work with the CFPD and Coastside County Water District to establish and maintain a priority list for upgrading fire flow capabilities in neighborhoods that may have inadequate fire flows. Fire flow upgrades may require upsizing water mains solely for the purpose of establishing and maintaining adequate fire flow to protect existing development; and not for accommodating future growth. This distinction shall be acknowledged and documented for each such upgrade and restrictions limiting future use of expanded capacity to fire protection shall be implemented.


7-77. Fire and ESHA Protection Policy Consistency. Cooperate with the CFPD to ensure consistency between the District’s fuel management and fire protection policies and those of the Half Moon Bay LCP, particularly those relating to the protection of ESHA, agreeing on measures to balance the need for fire protection for existing structures with the need to protect environmental resources. Examples of such measures include sprinkler system retrofits, smart landscaping, restoring ESHAs for better biological function and defensible fire-fighting space, surrounding ESHAs with fire breaks, and limiting activities in areas adjacent to ESHAs.


7-78. Fire-prone Vegetation Removal. To the maximum extent feasible, require applicants to remove on-site fire-prone plant species and replace with native species of higher habitat value. Where fuel modification within ESHAs is unavoidable, due to a public health and safety concern, or there is potential to impact habitat for protected species, use environmentally responsible and nature-based approaches to remove fire-prone vegetation (e.g. grazing sheep or goats penned away from the highest value habitat area). Fuel modification plans within ESHA shall require review and approval by the City and shall include monitoring and mitigation.


7-79. Future Risk. Plan for future fire risk as a result of climate change or other factors and alert public and private landowners in future risk areas, using best available science. Coordinate with CFPD to periodically reassess for the need for additional emergency services in the future.


51



Sea Level Rise Policies


7-80. Sea Level Rise Adaptation. Consider long-term climate change and sea-level rise for hazard mitigation and incorporate adaptive strategies in planning for future public facilities and infrastructure.


7-81. Interagency Cooperation. Continue to work with other state and local jurisdictions to address sea level rise issues.


7-82. Coastal Flood Hazard Mapping. Maintain and update coastal hazard maps, including areas subject to wave action and flooding due to sea level rise.


7-83. Dynamic Sea Level Rise Adaptation Strategy. Continue to review and use current and best available sea level rise science and projections and periodically identify coastal resources, development, infrastructure, and communities that are vulnerable to sea level rise impacts. Use this information to continue to develop or adjust adaptation strategies.


7-84. Outreach and Education. Encourage public outreach and education addressing climate change and sea level rise impacts on the City’s coastal resources, development, and infrastructure. Provide public information and guidance through workshops, signage, and other outreach tools.


Sea Level Rise Development Policies 7-85. New Development. Ensure that new development is sited and designed to be safe with consideration for sea level rise impacts such as flooding, wave run up, and erosion that may occur over the economic life of the structure (at least 100 years).


7-86. Site-Specific Hazard Evaluation. Require, as part of geological report requirements in areas vulnerable to sea level rise impacts, site-specific evaluation of coastal hazards due to the high projection of sea level rise over the full projected life of any proposed development. Analyses should be conducted by a certified Civil Engineer or Engineering Geologist with expertise in coastal processes and shall be based on best available science.


52



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-87. Building Codes and Standards. Establish and implement building codes and standards for development siting and construction that avoid or minimize risks from flooding and erosion and increase resilience to extreme events within sea level rise hazard zones. Provide additional development controls in areas that are identified in the LCP as hazard areas.


7-88. Subdivisions. Limit subdivisions in areas vulnerable to coastal hazards, including hazards exacerbated by sea level rise, by prohibiting any new land divisions, including subdivisions, lot splits, lot line adjustments, and/or certificates of compliance that create new beachfront or blufftop lots unless the lots can meet specific criteria that ensure that when the lots are developed, the development will not be exposed to hazards or pose any risks to protection of coastal resources.


7-89. Assumption of Risk. Require development permit conditions and deed restrictions that ensure that property owners understand and assume the risks, and mitigate the coastal resource impacts, of new development and redevelopment in a hazardous area. Include conditions of approval for such development and redevelopment that require recorded assumptions of risk, waiver of claim of damage or liability against the City of Half Moon Bay, waiver of rights to future shoreline armoring, and any other acknowledgements and mitigation measures necessary to internalize risk decisions. Where necessary, require property owners to set aside money, such as in the form of a bond, as a contingency if it becomes necessary to modify, relocate, or remove development that becomes threatened in the future.


7-90. Real Estate Disclosure. Require sellers of real estate to disclose permit conditions related to coastal hazards, or property defects or vulnerabilities, including information about known current and potential future vulnerabilities to sea level rise, to prospective buyers prior to closing escrow.


7-91. Non-conforming Structures. Consider a structure non-conforming when the seaward edge of the structure no longer meets the standards or setback that would be required for new development at the location. Allow non-exempt repair and maintenance and modifications only if they do not increase the size or degree of non-conformity of the existing structure (pre-Coastal Act), including through increased intensity of development with a non-conforming setback. Acknowledge that additions to existing structures should be considered new development that must conform to


53



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin the standards for new development including but not limited to avoiding future protective devices. Consider limitations on the size of additions unless non-conforming portions of the structure are removed.

Sea Level Rise Redevelopment, Repair, and Retrofit Policies

7-92. Redevelopment in At-Risk Locations. Prohibit expansions, additions, or substantial renovations of existing structures in danger from erosion hazards, including as may be exacerbated by sea level rise. Require removal of non-conforming portions of the existing structure unless such removal would be detrimental to site stability or natural resources, when a remodel or renovation meeting the threshold for redevelopment is proposed.


7-93. New or Replacement Foundations. Limit new or replacement foundations or substantial improvements, other than repair and maintenance, to the existing foundation when located seaward of the appropriate bluff setback for assuring site stability for at least 100 years. Approve significant new foundation work only when it is located inland of the setback line for new development and when it will not interfere with coastal processes in the future.


7-94. Redevelopment Standards. Require that renovations meeting the threshold for redevelopment should not be approved unless the entire structure meets the standards for new development, including but not limited to a waiver of right to shoreline protection and current setback requirements. Specify that if any existing non-conforming elements are permitted to remain when a renovation is under the threshold for redevelopment, those non-conforming elements are not subject to rights to protection pursuant to Coastal Act Section 30235.


7-95. Repair and Retrofit of Existing Structures. In instances where relocation is not an option, repair damage and/or retrofit existing structures to better withstand sea level rise impacts through measures such as using stronger materials, elevating bridges or sections of roadways, and building larger or additional drainage systems to address flooding and erosion sedimentation concerns.


Managed Retreat, Relocation, and Removal Policies

7-96. Managed Retreat. Require new development that is subject to wave action, erosion, or other hazards to be removed or relocated if it becomes threatened in the future by coastal hazards, including as may be exacerbated by sea level rise.


54



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-97. Options for Removal. For new development in high hazard areas or resource-constrained areas where managed retreat might be an appropriate option at some time in the future, ensure that foundation designs or other aspects of the development will not preclude future incremental relocation or managed retreat. Alternative design options should be considered and employed if site conditions allow.


7-98. Foundations and Basements. Limit the use of foundations, caissons or basements that can interfere with shoreline erosion or become exposed over time. In locations where foundation or building elements, such as deepened perimeter foundations, caissons or basements may be exposed to wave action through rising sea level or erosion, require analysis of less extensive foundation or building options. If no less damaging foundation alternatives are possible, require that the foundation, caisson or basement design allows for, and require future incremental or complete removal as the foundation elements become exposed to avoid future impacts to coastal bluffs and beaches.


7-99. Incremental Removal. When a lot is not large enough to accommodate development that avoids coastal hazards for the expected life of the development, develop a project option that minimizes hazards from the identified sea level rise scenarios for as long as possible, and then requires incremental retreat once certain triggers are met. Triggers for relocation or removal of the structure would be determined by changing site conditions such as when erosion is within a certain distance of the foundation; when monthly high tides are within a certain distance of the finished floor elevation; when building officials prohibit occupancy; when essential services to the site can no longer feasibly be maintained (e.g. utilities, roads); or when the wetland buffer area decreases to a certain width. It will be the property owner’s responsibility to remove the structure(s) and restore the site such that the public trust and coastal resources are protected.


7-100. Foundation and Structure Removal. If no less damaging foundation alternatives are possible, ensure that foundation design allows for incremental removal as foundation elements become exposed, and develop pre-established triggers for incremental or complete removal that will avoid future resource impacts.


7-101. Rolling Easements. Establish a program of rolling easements to allow coastal lands and habitats, including beaches and wetlands, to migrate landward over time as the mean high tide line and public trust boundary moves inland with sea level rise.


55



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-102. Relocation Incentives. Provide incentives to relocate development out of hazardous areas. Consider creating a relocation fund through increased development fees, in lieu fees, or other funding mechanisms.


7-103. Acquisition and Buyout Programs. Establish an acquisition plan or buyout program to acquire property at risk from flooding or other hazards. Acquisition includes the acquiring of land from the individual landowner(s). Structures may be demolished or relocated, the property is restored, and future development on the land is restricted.


Public Facilities and Infrastructure Policies 7-104. Infrastructure and Public Facilities. Site and design infrastructure and public facilities, including roads, trails, and parks, with consideration for sea level rise impacts that may occur over the economic life of the structure (at least 100 years). Ensure that the connectivity of infrastructure is preserved in the event of ongoing erosion or wave run-up, and ensure adequate egress/evacuation is preserved during storm events. Consider sea level rise in the siting and design of any new Coastal Trail improvements and consider planned retreat or other adaptive measures for new and existing Coastal Trail areas at risk of erosion, flooding or wave run-up. In cases where facilities cannot be sustainably maintained, removal or abandonment of infrastructure should be evaluated, and the least environmentally damaging approach shall be implemented.


7-105. Critical Facilities. Identify critical facilities that are vulnerable to sea level rise hazards, such as the Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside Wastewater Treatment Plant, and establish measures that ensure continued function of critical infrastructure, or the basic facilities, service, networks, and systems needed for the functioning of a community, including:

a. Developing strategies for the managed retreat (retiring, moving, or replacing) of infrastructure and public facilities at risk of damage from sea level rise impacts that may occur over the economic life of the structure (at least 150 years for critical facilities);

b. Ensuring functional continuity of the critical services provided by infrastructure at risk from sea level rise and extreme storms; and

c. Providing for the use of protective devices if necessary to ensure the continuation of needed services.


56



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 7-106. Planning for Extreme Conditions. Ensure that critical facilities are designed to function even if the highest projected amounts of sea level rise occur and that sites with hazardous materials are protected from extreme sea level rise impacts. Require proposals and/or expansion plans to address sea level rise for coastal dependent infrastructure that must necessarily be sited in potentially hazardous areas, such as industrial, energy, and port facilities. Such facilities should be designed to withstand future extreme impacts while minimizing risks to other coastal resources through initial siting, design, and/or inclusion of features that will allow for future adaptation, including protective devices if necessary.


57



Cultural Resources Policy Comparison Table

Cultural Resources Policies


8-1. Cultural Resources Protection. Half Moon Bay’s paleontological, archaeological, and historic resources shall be protected and preserved through identification, education and awareness, and standards for avoidance and mitigation of impacts from the siting and design of new development. Implement reasonable mitigation measures and adopt a threshold of significance standard for impact to cultural resources, consistent with CEQA standards.


8-2. Cultural Resources Reporting. Report all known and newly discovered cultural resources to the appropriate agency or organization. These may include but are not limited to the California Native American Heritage Commission, the State Historical Resources Commission, or the California Office of Historic Preservation.


8-3. Cultural Resources Awareness. Promote community education and awareness of the region’s culture, history, and historical resources through a variety of means, including the provision of arts and cultural offerings and exhibits accessible to all members of the community. Inform the public that any potential archaeological finds should be reported to the City immediately.


8-4. Cultural Resources Inventory Updates. Update the Planning Commission on the status of and any changes to the City’s cultural resources inventory, districts and designations every 2-5 years, or as otherwise appropriate.


8-5. Cultural Resources Archive. Establish a comprehensive archive of archaeological surveys, archaeological and historical resources mapping, and other relevant studies, inventories, and information for sites throughout the city to support cultural resource protection.

Original LUP Policy 6-1: The City will actively solicit technical and financial assistance from the State and Federal governments for purposes of undertaking a survey of potential archaeological resources in Half Moon Bay.

58



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 8-6. Development Impacts on Cultural Resources. Any impacts, disturbance, or substantial adverse changes caused by development on archaeological, Native American, or historic resources shall be mitigated through avoidance, preservation in place, or site sampling and salvage. The preferred and required alternatives for mitigating impacts to archaeological and Native American resources, if feasible, are avoidance or preservation in place. Consult with Native American representatives on appropriate alternatives.

Original LUP Policy 6-5: In the case of any development within an area designated on the Map of Potential Archaeological Resources, the City shall encourage, and require where feasible, such designs and methods of construction as will offer protection for any potential archaeological site.

8-7. Discovery of Human Remains. When human remains are uncovered during development, no further disturbance of the site shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition of the remains. If the Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the California Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified and no further disturbance of the site shall occur until the Commission provides direction on handling procedures.


8-8. Impacts of Coastal Hazards on Cultural Resources. Ensure that cultural resources are protected from the impacts of coastal hazards, including sea level rise. Work with the State Historic Preservation Officer to identify actions such as mitigation and monitoring programs to protect paleontological, archaeological, and historic resources including Native American artifacts at risk from hazards such as erosion, inundation, and sea level rise in a manner consistent with the policies of the LCP and other applicable provisions of the Coastal Act.


Native American Cultural Resources Policies 8-9. Native American Cultural Sites. Work with local Native American tribes to protect sacred and culturally significant sites, as well as discovered Native American artifacts and remains.


59



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 8-10. Native American Consultation. Notify Native American organizations of proposed developments or land use actions that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources early in the development review process, providing an opportunity for concerned Native American parties to comment on or participate in any treatment plan for sites with cultural or religious significance to the Native American community. Development on sensitive sites requires on-site monitoring by appropriate Native American consultant(s) and a qualified archaeologist for all grading, excavation, and site preparation activities that involve earth-moving operations.


Archeological Resources Policies 8-11. Archaeological Resources Mapping. Maintain an updated generalized archaeological resource map for public use that designates archaeologically sensitive areas and identifies where archaeological reports may be required for future development. Develop and maintain a detailed archaeological resources map, which due to the sensitive and fragile nature of archaeological resources, is intended for use by City staff and authorized persons only.


8-12. Archaeological Survey with Development Applications. Require the submission of a report by a qualified archaeologist as part of applications for new development within any archaeologically sensitive area as designated on the archaeological resources map. In areas vulnerable to sea level rise impacts, require a site-specific evaluation of potential sea level rise impacts to any archaeological resources on the development site. A report shall include findings on actual and potential resources on the site, impacts of the development proposed, and recommended mitigation measures. All feasible mitigation measures shall be incorporated in the specific plan or development plan prior to the issuance of a permit for development.

Original LUP Policy 6-2: Prior to the issuance of a permit for any development within 100 feet of any recorded archaeological site identified in Figure 6.1, the City will require the submission of a report by a qualified archaeologist regarding the resources which may be affected and mitigation measures necessary to protect the site or to undertake salvage of archaeological materials before development. Any permit shall be conditioned upon reasonable measures taken to mitigate the impact of development on archaeological resources. These may include (1) designating construction to avoid important resources, (2) covering the site with fill, and (3) site sampling and salvage. Original LUP Policy 6-3: In that portion of any development of 1 acre or more, as indicated on the Land Use Plan Map, which is also

60



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin within an area designated on the Map of Potential Archaeological Resources, an archaeological survey shall be undertaken as a part of the preparation of a specific plan for development. The survey shall include findings on actual and potential resources on the site, impacts of the development proposed, and recommended mitigation measures. All feasible mitigation measures shall be incorporated in the specific plan or development plan prior to the issuance of a permit for development.

8-13. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Monitoring. Require, where there is a potential to affect known or newly discovered archaeological, Native American, or paleontological resources, the submittal of a monitoring plan that identifies monitoring and reporting methods and describes the procedures for selecting archeological and Native American monitors and procedures that will be followed if additional or unexpected resources are encountered during development of the site. Procedures may include, but are not limited to, provisions for cessation of all grading and construction activities in the area of the discovery that has any potential to uncover or otherwise disturb cultural deposits in the area of the discovery and all construction that may foreclose mitigation options to allow for significance testing, additional investigation and mitigation.

Original LUP Policy 6-4: As a part of any project to construct new roads, trails, sewer or water lines, or other public projects involving substantial excavation which could destroy archaeological resources within the areas designated on the Map of Potential Archaeological resources, provision shall be made for an archaeological survey and the opportunity to sample and salvage the site by a qualified archaeologist as a part of the construction project.

Historic Resources Policies

8-14. Historic Resources Inventory. Prepare, maintain, and update no less than every five years a comprehensive inventory of buildings, structure, objects, and areas of historic, architectural, and engineering significance in Half Moon Bay.


8-15. Historic Resource Designation. Assess potential historic resources; and if eligible, resources shall be brought forth for resource designation to the highest level to which they are eligible. Consider establishing a district of local importance in the heritage downtown area.


8-16. Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance. Review and update the Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance periodically, at a minimum ensuring continued compliance with CEQA and the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for


61



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, repair and maintenance, and reconstruction of historic resources.

8-17. Historic Resource Protection. Continue to protect, preserve, and/or restore identified historic resources through the Historic Resources Preservation chapter of the City’s Zoning Ordinance (part of the City’s Local Coastal Implementation Plan).


8-18. Historic Resource Evaluation. Require historic resource evaluations for all development applications associated with potential historic resources on or adjacent to the proposed project site. Historic resources identified through this process shall be included in the historic resources inventory.


8-19. Historic Resource Training. The City shall provide periodic training to the Planning Commission and City staff regarding the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Secretary of Interior’s Standards.


8-20. Adaptive Reuse of Historic Resources. Encourage adaptive reuse of historic structures compatible with surrounding development and preserving the historical integrity of the structures. Establish guidelines for adaptive reuse in the Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance.


8-21. City-Owned Historic Resources. Maintain historic City-owned properties such as the Johnston House, Historic Train Depot, Half Moon Bay Historic Jail, Johnston Barn and others and make them available to the public.


8-22. Mills Act Contracts Program. Establish a Mills Act Contracts Program to incentivize private property owners to ensure the restoration and preservation of qualified historic buildings through agreed-upon scheduled maintenance repairs and restoration.


8-23. Restoration Grant Program. Study the feasibility of establishing a grant program for funding historic resource restoration projects, and pursue other related state and federal grant funding opportunities.


62



Scenic and Visual Resources Policy Comparison Table

Scenic and Visual Resources Policies


9-1. Scenic Resource Prioritization. New development in highly scenic areas shall be subordinate to the character of its setting.


9-2. Visual Quality. Preserve and enhance the unique visual quality that contributes to Half Moon Bay’s coastal and small-town character, including its open, expansive views from the coastal terrace to the beaches, bluffs, ocean, picturesque landscapes, and foothills.


9-3. Scenic Resources. Ensure the long-term enjoyment of publicly accessible scenic view corridors, viewsheds, vista points, and unique or characteristic visual resources.


9-4. Visual Compatibility of New Development. Require all new development to be sited and designed to ensure visual compatibility with the character of surrounding areas.


9-5. Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Scenic Resources. Ensure that scenic and visual resources are able to adapt to the impacts of sea level rise and are not negatively affected by adaptation strategies employed to protect development from sea level rise.


Scenic and Visual Resource Identification Policies 9-6. Highly Scenic Coastal Areas. Designate the beach and ocean, coastline, foothills, ESHA, open spaces, and other largely undeveloped areas as highly scenic coastal areas.


9-7. Viewing Areas and Vista Points. Designate public places including the California Coastal Trail, other trails, beaches, parks, other areas with public access that offer broad views of highly scenic coastal areas as public viewing areas and vista points.


63



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 9-8. Scenic View Corridors. Designate spans of Highway 1, Highway 92 and other public roads that offer broad views of highly scenic coastal areas as scenic view corridors.

Original LUP Policy 7-13: The City will establish regulations to protect scenic corridors along all designated primary shoreline access routes where existing permits or development does not exist.

9-9. Special Communities and Neighborhoods. Identify Heritage Downtown as a special community and protect the scenic quality of this area and its surrounding historic buildings and properties as contributing visual resources.


Natural Resource Policies

9-10. Alteration of Landforms. Require that all new development be sited and designed to minimize alteration of natural landforms through the following measures:

a. Conform to the natural topography of the site;

b. Minimize substantial grading or reconfiguration of the project site;

c. Prohibit flat building pads on slopes and requiring building pads on sloping sites to utilize split-level or stepped-pad designs;

d. Require that man-made contours mimic the natural contours of the site;

e. Ensure that graded slopes blend with the existing terrain of the site and surrounding area;

f. Minimize grading permitted outside of the building footprint;

g. Cluster structures to minimize site disturbance and development area;

h. Avoid landscaping that blocks public ocean views;

i. Minimize the height and length of cut and fill slopes;

j. Minimize the height and length of retaining walls; and

k. Allow the balancing of cut and fill operations on site only where the grading does not substantially alter the existing topography, where it blends with the surrounding area when viewed from public locations, and where it conforms to all applicable LCP policies for hazard avoidance and habitat protection. Export of cut material may be required to preserve natural topography.

Original LUP Policy 7-10: New development on upland slopes visible from Highway 1 and Highway 92 as indicated on the Visual Resources Overlay Map, shall not involve grading or building siting which results in a significant modification of the hillscape; where trees must be removed for building purposes, reforestation shall be provided as a part of any new development to maintain the forested appearance of the hillside. Structures shall be subordinate in appearance to the natural landform, shall be designed to follow the natural contours of the landscape, and shall be sited so as not to intrude into the skyline as seen from public viewing places.

64



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 9-11. Bluff Setback. Require development near blufftops to incorporate a setback from the edge of the bluff that avoids visual impacts from scenic public areas including trails and lookouts on the blufftops, and from the beach and ocean below. The blufftop setback necessary to protect visual resources may be in excess of the setback necessary to ensure that risk from geologic hazards are minimized for the life of the structure, as detailed in the Coastal Hazards chapter of the LUP.

Original LUP Policy 7-2: Blufftop structures shall be set-back from the bluff edge sufficiently far to ensure that the structure does not infringe on views from the beach and along the blufftop parallel to the bluff edge except in areas where existing structures on both sides of the proposed structure already impact public views from the beach or along the blufftop. In such case, new structures shall be located no closer to the bluff edge than adjacent structures.

9-12. Bluff Dedication. Require Planned Developments on the west side of Highway 1 to dedicate, or preserve as open space, the coastal bluff face and an area inland from the edge of the bluff adequate to minimize visual impacts while also providing safe public access, avoiding hazards, and accommodating bluff erosion.


9-13. Dark Night Skies. Protect dark night skies as part of Half Moon Bay’s scenic and visual character by preventing light pollution from development. Avoid impacts from exterior lighting on the city’s visual character and sensitive habitats.


9-14. Lighting. Protect scenic natural resources including dark night skies and ESHA by:

a. Limiting exterior lighting to low-intensity fixtures, shielded, and concealed so that the

light source is not directly visible from public viewing areas, with the exception of traffic

lights, navigational lights, and other similar safety lighting;

b. Limiting installation and use of high-intensity perimeter lighting and lighting for sports

courts or other private recreational facilities in scenic areas; and c. Reducing light pollution from greenhouses as a condition of approval for new

development through shielding and other practices that minimize light spillover.


Coastal Access Policies 9-15. Highway Viewsheds. Ensure that viewsheds from Highways 1 and 92 are preserved and enhanced. Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure that future improvements and changes to the highways, including


65



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin implementation of the Town Boulevard concept, will preserve or enhance the visual experience of traveling through a coastal community with small town character.

9-16. California Coastal Trail Viewsheds. Ensure that views of the ocean, bluffs, hillsides, and ridgelines from the California Coastal Trail are protected, particularly in areas adjacent to Planned Developments including Surf/Dunes Beach, Venice Beach, West of Railroad, and North Wavecrest. Provide sufficient setbacks and height limits for any development permitted near the trail to avoid impacts to visual resource. Ensure visual resource protection is maintained in any sea level rise adaptation strategies for the trail, including planned retreat.

Original LUP Policy 7-6: Parking facilities and recreational structures, including campers, located in public regional recreational areas, private recreational areas, visitor-serving commercial areas and other developments shall be designated to minimize visibility from the beach.

9-17. Scenic Corridor Study. Study the scenic corridors of Highway 1 and 92 as part of the Town Boulevard approach to assess the viewshed from the perspective of existing and potential development along these corridors. Identify scenic segments along Highway 1 and 92, including views of the ridgelines and other visual resources. From the study, establish standards to address, at a minimum, appropriate building heights and setbacks, longest wall lines, minimum space between buildings, and streetscape design.

Original LUP 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 in new developments. The City will establish and map scenic corridors for Highway 1 to guide application of the policies of this chapter. Minimum standards shall include all areas within 200 yards of State Highway 1 which are visible from the road.

9-18. Gateways Enhancement. Enhance the eight gateways along Highway 92 and Highway 1 identified on Figure 9-1 to improve community identity and provide wayfinding.


9-19. Roadway Design. Work with Caltrans and private developers to ensure that proposed new roads or modifications to existing roads which traverse scenic areas minimize visual impacts to views from scenic routes.


9-20. Vehicle, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Viewing Points. Maintain and improve existing turnouts, parking areas, lookouts, and beach and park access areas that provide scenic viewpoints.


Picturesque Landscape Policies 9-21. Streetscapes. Streetscape improvements, whether they are required as a condition of new development or implemented as a City project, shall be designed and maintained with street trees, vegetation,


66



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin and landscaping to enhance the visual experience of the corridor without obstructing scenic views upon maturity.

9-22. Town Forest. Plan for long term maintenance and diversification of a resilient town forest by preparing a preemptive tree replacement plan for significant stands of trees.


9-23. Vegetation Removal. Require that new development be sited and designed to minimize removal of natural vegetation, including the preservation of existing on-site native trees and plants. Encourage removal of non-native invasive species to maintain visual and biological quality.

Original LUP Policy 7-9: New development shall be sited and designed so as to avoid or minimize destruction or significant alteration of significant existing plant communities identified in the General Plan (which include riparian vegetation along stream banks, and notable tree stands).

9-24. Fuel Modification and Visual Resources. Recommend that new development on sites requiring fuel modification incorporate alternative fuel modification measures (e.g. exterior sprinklers, fire resistant building materials, and fire-resistant construction methods) in order to minimize impacts to visual resources due to site disturbance, removal, and thinning of natural vegetation.


Built Environment Policies 9-25. Land Divisions. Require land divisions, including lot line adjustments, to be designed in a manner that minimizes impacts to visual resources. Measures for minimizing visual impacts include the following:

a. Clustering the building sites to minimize site disturbance and maximize open space; b. Prohibiting land divisions and adjustments that would create lots with insufficient space

for development, including to avoid the need for fuel modification, without impacting visual resources;

c. Requiring new land divisions to provide sufficient park and open space areas; d. Prohibiting building sites on ridgelines within City limits; e. Minimizing the length and impermeability of access roads and driveways; f. Using shared driveways to access development on adjacent lots, where feasible; g. Reducing the maximum allowable density in steeply sloping and visually sensitive areas;

and


67



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin h. Incorporating interim seeding of graded building pad areas, if any, with native plants

unless construction of approved structures commences within 30 days of the completion of grading.

9-26. Site Planning and Design for New Development. Require new development to be sited and designed to minimize adverse impacts on scenic areas visible from public roadways, public trails and accessways, or other public viewing areas and to be visually compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Measures to reduce visual impacts include, but are not limited to the following:

a. Siting development in the least visible portion of the site;

b. Breaking up the mass of new structures;

c. Designing structures to blend into the surrounding natural landscape;

d. Restricting building maximum size and height;

e. Clustering development; and

f. Incorporating landscape elements, and screening.

Original LUP Policy 7-11: New development along primary access routes from Highway 1 to the beach, as designated on the Land Use Plan 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. Original LUP Policy 7-12: In areas affording broad views of the ocean from Highway 1 as indicated on the Visual Resources Overlay Map, all new development shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission to ensure conformance with the following criteria: (a) Structures shall be sited and designed to preserve

unobstructed broad views of the ocean and shall be clustered to the maximum extent feasible.

(b) A landscaping plan shall be included in the development plans for approval and shall provide for landscaping which, when mature, will not impede public views of the ocean.

(c) Building height shall not exceed one story or 15 feet, unless an increase in height would not obstruct public views to the ocean from the Highway or would facilitate clustering of development so as to result in greater view protection.

68



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 9-27. Design Review. Utilize design review to ensure that proposed developments do not interfere with or degrade the visual features of the site or adjacent sites which contribute to its visual character as viewed from public viewing areas. Incorporate review criteria into design guidelines.

Original LUP Policy 7-5: All new development, including additions and remodeling, shall be subject to design review and approval by the City Architectural Review Committee.

9-28. Visual Impact Evaluation. Where any development is proposed within a highly scenic coastal area, view corridor, or viewshed, a visual impact evaluation shall be required and may include visual simulations and/or story poles.


9-29. Hillsides and Ridgelines. Protect broad views of hillsides, prominent ridgelines and other intervening ridgelines that are visible from a public road, view corridor, a beach, public viewing areas and vistas points, or public hiking trails through the following means:

a. Prohibiting new development above the 160-foot contour line;

b. Ensuring new development below the 160-foot contour line is sited and designed to avoid

significant intrusions into the skyline through the application of appropriate height and

setback restrictions; and c. Establishing standards for the Town Forest and streetscapes to highlight and frame, but

not block important views.

Original LUP Policy 7-10: New development on upland slopes visible from Highway 1 and Highway 92 as indicated on the Visual Resources Overlay Map, shall not involve grading or building siting which results in a significant modification of the hillscape; where trees must be removed for building purposes, reforestation shall be provided as a part of any new development to maintain the forested appearance of the hillside. Structures shall be subordinate in appearance to the natural landform, shall be designed to follow the natural contours of the landscape, and shall be sited so as not to intrude into the skyline as seen from public viewing places.

9-30. New Development on Hillsides. On hillside building sites below the 160-foot contour line, locate building pads and new development on flatter portions of the project site as consistent with the grading restrictions and hazard avoidance policies of this LCP, except where there is an alternative location that would be more protective of scenic resources or ESHA.


9-31. Planned Developments and Viewsheds. Require Planned Development areas that provide viewsheds over largely undeveloped areas, towards the ocean (e.g. Surf Beach/Dunes Beach, Venice Beach, and North Wavecrest), or the hillsides (e.g. L. C. Smith Estate and Podesta), to assess visual resources and provide a visual impact evaluation with any master plan for developing the Planned Development. Planned Developments shall be planned to minimize adverse impacts on viewsheds, and shall utilize the siting and design standards of Policies 9-24 and 9-25.


69



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 9-32. Heritage Downtown. Ensure through implementation of land use regulations and design review that Heritage Downtown is protected as a special community and that the architecture, landscape, scale and ambience of this area is maintained.

Original LUP Policy 7-8: New development, alterations to existing structures, and proposed demolitions in the downtown area, as designated on the Visual Resource Overlay Map, shall be subject to design approval in accordance with the following criteria: (a) Scale and style similar to that of the predominant

older structures. (b) Continuity in building lines maintained along

Main Street. (c) Existing older buildings which contribute

significantly to the character of the area not demolished or altered in a manner which eliminates key architectural features.

9-33. Historic Buildings. Support the maintenance and restoration of historic buildings and properties to preserve their scenic and visual qualities.


9-34. Historic Jail and San Mateo County Garage. Maintain views of the historic Jail and San Mateo County Garage from Main Street by keeping a view corridor open between Main Street and Johnston Street immediately south of City Hall.


9-35. Fences, Walls, and Landscaping. Ensure that fences, walls, and landscaping shall not block views of scenic areas from scenic roads, parks, beaches, and other public viewing areas through height restrictions and required landscape maintenance.


9-36. Landscape Screening. Prioritize avoidance of impacts to visual resources through site planning and design alternatives as the preferred method of mitigating the scenic impacts of development over landscape screening. Landscape screening as mitigation of visual impacts shall not substitute for project alternatives including re-siting or reducing the height or bulk of structures, but may be used where appropriate to soften any unavoidable visual impacts of new development. Where permitted, landscape screening shall be comprised of native and drought tolerant species and shall be maintained such that scenic views are not blocked at maturity.

Original LUP Policy 7-7: Recreational vehicle parks shall be sited and landscaped within five years of development to assure full screening from public roads, vista points, public recreation areas, and residential areas.

70



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin 9-37. Lighting Standards. Establish citywide lighting standards that take into account the following:

a. Lighting levels appropriate for the land use;

b. Minimum and maximum lighting levels for various conditions;

c. Evenness of lighting levels (e.g. parking lots);

d. Cut-off requirements and spillover restrictions;

e. Maximum height of light fixtures;

f. Lighting for signage and landscaping;

g. Prohibited lighting (e.g. that will cause glare or be intrusive); and

h. Allowances for differing light levels for security lighting responsive to neighborhood

preferences related to safety and comfort.


9-38. Lighting Plan Review. Require lighting plans with applications for development. For subdivisions and new commercial and multi-family residential development a photometric lighting plan is required; for single-family and other small development proposals, lighting cutsheets with photometric specifications are sufficient.


9-39. Street Lighting. Street lighting design and fixtures shall abide by the following criteria:

a. Provide enough lighting to meet safety standards;

b. Utilize lower light poles as feasible;

c. Ensure that fixtures direct light down with no spillover beyond the roadway area they

intend to illuminate; and d. Retrofit existing street lights that do not meet these standards.


9-40. Lighting Inspection. Where new lighting associated with residential or commercial developments will face the public right-of-way, ESHA, or ESHA buffer areas, require design review during the construction phase to ensure compliance with the required lighting criteria.


9-41. Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Visual Resource Protection. Ensure that sea level rise adaptation measures protect visual resources while minimizing hazards. Emphasize the use of adaptation strategies that will not impact visual resources, such as shorter-term retrofitting with plans for longer-term relocation or removal, and update


71



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin design standards accordingly. Adaptation strategies such as shoreline protective devices or elevation techniques should be designed such that the development is subordinate to, and in character with, the surrounding visual resources of an area.

9-42. Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Height Limits. Avoid modifications to height limits in scenic areas and provide for options to modify roof-lines or elevate the lowest flood elevation for flood protection in a manner that is consistent with scenic character. In some cases, it may be appropriate to update height limitations to allow for elevation in response to sea level rise and flood hazards.


Signs and Utilities Policies 9-43. Signs. Ensure that signs are designed and located to minimize impacts to visual resources. Signs approved as part of commercial development shall be incorporated into the design of the project and shall be subject to height, width, and lighting limitations and design standards to ensure that signs are visually compatible with surrounding areas and protect scenic views. Prohibit placement of signs, excluding traffic or public safety signs, which obstruct views to the ocean or beaches from public viewing areas or scenic roads.


9-44. Billboards. Prohibit the construction of new off-site commercial signs, including billboards.

Original LUP Policy 7-3: Off-premise advertising structures shall be prohibited.

9-45. Right-of-Way Signage. Minimize the use of parking and directional signage and locate it so as to not encroach into any pedestrian path or sidewalk. Establish a program for creating consistent highway, directional, and parking signage, and remove or consolidate excess signage where feasible.


9-46. Underground Utilities Program. Establish a citywide program to relocate existing overhead utilities underground as they are replaced or when funding for undergrounding becomes available. Prioritize areas where elimination of overhead utilities will most improve scenic and visual resources.

Original LUP Policy 7-4: Utilities shall continue to be placed underground in all new developments.

9-47. Utility Boxes. Locate utilities including traffic control boxes, transformers, meters, backflow prevention devices, and others underground in vaults; or if above finish grade, in discrete locations outside of any pedestrian path or sidewalk.


9-48. Utilities in New Development. Require applications for new development to include preliminary utilities plans to ensure that undergrounding and minimizing the negative visual impacts of utilities are considered during


72



LUP Update – 2018 Public Draft Origin the earliest phases of project design. For commercial, multi-family development and new subdivisions, utilities shall be underground unless infeasible, such as in locations subject to erosion or with high water tables. For such cases, require utilities to be designed and sited in a manner to minimize impacts to coastal resources, and require the development to contribute in-lieu fees to support undergrounding utilities in other locations. 9-49. Telecommunications Facilities. Require all telecommunications facilities to place support facilities underground where feasible. New communication transmission lines shall be sited and designed to be located underground, except where doing so would result in a hazardous condition. Existing communication transmission lines should be relocated underground when they are replaced or when funding for undergrounding is available. Where undergrounding is not feasible, require facilities to be sited and designed in a manner that minimizes impacts to visual resources by co-locating facilities, utilizing a constructed disguise, or ensuring compatibility with surrounding development or natural character.


73

PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AGENDA · 2018-12-14 · Attachment 1 December 19, 2018 Planning Commission LCLUP Study Session ERRATA SHEET Staff recommends the following

Documents