Agenda packet — Pacifica City Council, April 24, 2023 (part 3 of 5)

(Rev. 01/2020)
SACL_SSv6.2
In a continuing effort to offer the best product possible, we reserve the right to change, without notice, specifications or materials that in our opinion will not alter the function of the product. Specification sheets found at www.selux.us are the most recent versions and supercede all other printed or electronic versions.

Selux Corporation © 2020, T 845-834-1400, 800-735-8927, F 845-834-1401, www.selux.us Product Modifications Approvals
Please list modification requirements for review by factory:

LED WARRANTY
5 YEAR IP65
Saturn Cutoff LED
- - - - - - -
Pole Order Code: - - -
Series Height Finish Options
-
HL504,5
Hi-Lo
Switching
Low Output
50%
Project:

Type: Qty:

Date: Customer:

Date:

Series SACL
Saturn Cutoff
LED
SACL
Order Code:

Light Engine 5G450
39W/4442lm
5G700
62W/6644lm
5G105
93W/9241lm
CCT 271
2700K
301
3000K
Optics
Mounting 1
Single
1A
Single Arm
Mount
2 Double
W
Wall Mount
Power Cord
Length
Finish WH
White
BK
Black
BZ
Bronze
SP
Specify Premium Color
Voltage
Options
* For other CCT please consult
factory
SV
Silver
40 4000K
8* 10*
12* 14* 16* 18* XX*
8’ 10’ 12’ 14’ 16’ 18’ XX’
* For 1 mounting use the pole
height. For 1A or 2 mounting use
the pole height +2
1 IDA Approved
BL
Semi-Matte
Black
R1
Type I
R2
Type II
R3
Type III
R5R
Type V
(Round)
R4
Type IV
R5S
Type V
(Square)
R3W
Type III
(Wide)
R5Q
Type V
(Rectangular)
2 Equipped with step-down
transformer
5 120V, 240V or 277V only
4 DM, HLXX, TLR or IMS only. Cannot
be combined.
3 HS3 Type I, II, III, and IV only
House Side
Shield (180°)
DM4
Dimming
(0-10V)
HL304,5
Hi-Lo
Switching
Low Output
30%
DS
No Uplight
Finish
Pole Motion Sensor6
with optional photocell
See page 3 for order code
UNV
120- 277
120
120V
240
240V
277
277V
3472
347V
4802
480V
PCT
Photocell
Tenon
* Based on R1 distribution in
3000K CCT
6 Only available at 120/230/240/277V.

Consult factory for 208/347/480V.

SACL

Page 2 of 11 ends

Selux Corporation © 2020, T 845-834-1400, 800-735-8927, F 845-834-1401, www.selux.us 28 3/8” (720mm)
25”
(636mm)
Saturn Cutoff LED

1. Luminaire Cover - Die cast aluminum cover
made from low copper alloy, designed to ensure
optimal thermal management for extra long life
time of LED light engine.

2. Gasketing - (not shown) Continuous gasket
provides weatherproofing, dust and insect
control at all fixture connections.

3. Luminaire Hood - Aluminum shade with
white painted interior.

4. LED Array - (not shown) High flux LEDs
mounted to PC boards and attached to
aluminum heat sink for maximum LED
performance and life. CCT tolerance 1/4 step
binning for 3000K, and 4000K. CRI minimum

80. Complete light engine can be removed easily
for future upgrade. LED light engine provides a
reported lumen maintenance of 93% at 50,000
hours. L70 calculated greater than 100,000
hours..

5. LED Optics - Technical Optics (R1, R2, R3,
R3W, R4, R5S, R5Q and R5R) use Selux signature
light pattern acrylic lens holder to secure
proprietary silicone optics. Internal micro house
side shield available for distributions types I, II,
III & IV. Clear glass option as well as flat diffuse,
and diffuse bowl.

6. LED Driver - (not shown) LEDs are
driven by RoHS compliant constant current
programmable LED driver. Driver includes 0-10V
dimming to 10%, meets the requirements of
IP66. Driver assembly located inside the head.

7. Hood Supports - Two aluminum arms
support shade and optic assembly and attach
to the die cast aluminum pole fitter (shown
painted matte black for DS option).

8. Pole Fitter - Self-leveling, die-cast lowcopper aluminum alloy, fitter base secured to pole with three, stainless steel, Allen head set
screws. Fitter for 3 1/2” (90mm) O.D. poles.

9. Driver cover - Die cast aluminum cover made
from low copper alloy, removes for tool-less
access to driver. Driver secured to removable
tray for ease of maintenance (shown painted
matte black for DS option).

10. Surge Protector - (not shown) Designed to
protect luminaire from electrical surge (20kA).

11. Power Cord - (not shown) Pre-installed at
factory. Please specify power cord length in
accordance to height of the pole. Add 2 feet
to power cord length if double mounting (2) is
specified.

Exterior Luminaire Finish - Selux utilizes a
high quality Polyester Powder Coating. All Selux
luminaires and poles are finished in our Tiger
Drylac certified facility and undergo a five
stage intensive pretreatment process where
product is thoroughly cleaned, phosphated and
sealed. Selux powder coated products provide
excellent salt and humidity resistance as well
as ultraviolet resistance for color retention. All
products are tested in accordance with test
specifications for coatings from ASTM and PCI.

Standard exterior colors are White (WH), Black
(BK), Semi-Matte Black (BL), Bronze (BZ),
and Silver (SV). Selux premium colors (SP) are
available, please specify from your Selux color
selection guide.
5 Year Limited LED Luminaire Warranty -
Selux offers a 5 Year Limited Warranty to the
original purchaser that the Saturn Cutoff LED
luminaire shall be free from defects in material
and workmanship for up to five (5) years from
date of shipment. This limited warranty covers
the LED driver and LED array when installed and
operated according to Selux instructions. For
details, see “Selux Terms and Condition of Sale.”
Listings and Ratings: Luminaire and LED tested
to IP65 and IESNA LM-79-08 standards. LED
tested to LM-80 standards. Luminaire and LED
tested at 25°C ambient temperature.

Luminaire suitable for ambient temperature
of 45°C. Minimum operating temperature of
luminaire at -40°C (-40°F)
NRTL Listed (i.e. UL, CSA)
Visit selux.us for our LED End of Life
recycling policy.

Specifications
3 1/8" [79mm]
Minimum Pole I.D.
11”
(279mm)
7”
(178mm)
For further details, please see installation instructions. 3 1/8” (79mm) Minimum Pole I.D
SACL-1-XX-DS
1 7
3 8
6 5

Page 1 of 8 ends

(Rev. 01/2020)
IBL_ss_v3.1
In a continuing effort to offer the best product possible, we reserve the right to change, without notice, specifications or materials that in our opinion will not alter the function of the product. Specification sheets found at www.selux.us are the most recent versions and supercede all other printed or electronic versions.

Selux Corporation © 2020, T 845-834-1400, 800-735-8927, F 845-834-1401, www.selux.us Product Modifications Approvals
Please list modification requirements for review by factory:

LED WARRANTY
5 YEAR
Inula Bollard LED
Project:

Type: Qty:

Date: Customer:

Date:

Series IBL
Inula Bollard
LED
Light Engine 1Q1

7.6w/577 lm
2Q90

14.1w/1156lm
2Q180

14.1w/1156 lm
CCT 40
4000K
Height 2.5

2.5 ft
Finish WH
White
BK
Black
BZ
Bronze
SP
Specify Premium Color
Voltage UNV 120 208 240 277 3473,16 4803,16
120-277V 120V 208V 240V 240V 347V 480V
Options REC5,6
GFCI
Receptacle
w/ weatherproof cover
HL304,7,10, 12
Hi-Lo
Switching
100-30%
For other CCT please consult factory
SV
Silver
DM
Dimming
(0-10V)
Order Code: - - - - - - -
3 3 ft

3.5 3.5 ft
3Q

20.5w/1689 lm
302
3000K
*Based on 5000K CCT, 120-277V
1 Not available with EM
4 4 ft
2 IDA Approved
EM8,9,13
Emergency
Battery Pack
T0 - 20C
4 120-277V Only
5 120V Only
6 Not available in 2.5” height
7 Not available at 208V.
8Not available with IQ
9120V or 277V only
10Not available with DM Option
11Not available at 480V
12Not available with EM option
13Not available with PC or LP option
14Not available with HL30 or HP options
15For 1Q, 2Qxx and 3Q please
consult factory
16 Not available with HL30
4QD

27.2w/2246 lm
50 5000K
*50 or 60 Hertz
3 Requires step down transformer, 60
Hertz Only
LP12, 14, 15
Lower Power
Version
Decreases
Light Output by 60%
IBL
IBL
AM2, 15
Amber
HP12
High Power
Version Increases
Light Output by
100%
PC 11
Photocell
4QS

27.2w/2246 lm
REC25,6
GFCI Receptacle
w/ padlockable
in-use cover
REC3
USB & Duplex
Receptacle
w/
weatherproof cover
REC4
USB & Duplex
Receptacle w/
weatherproof
padlockable in-use
cover
BL
Semi-Matte
Black
2 2 ft.
(consult
factory)

1.5 1.5 ft.
(consult
factory)

Page 2 of 8 ends

1. Fixture Housing - Die cast low-copper
and low-iron aluminum fixture body provide
corrosion resistance in marine environments.

2. Gasketing - (not shown) Continuous gaskets
provide weather-proofing, dust, and insect
control between castings.

3. LED Light Engine - (not shown) High
efficiency LED light engine equipped with brandname LEDs, available in 3000K, 4000K, 5000K CCT tolerance within a 3-step MacAdams ellipse,
and Amber CCT. Suitable for max ambient
temperatures up to 45ºC.

4. Optics - (not shown) Proprietary vandal and
UV resistant acrylic optic provides optimal light
blending between quadrants.

5. Surge Protector - (not shown) Designed to
protect luminaire from electrical surge (10kA).

6. Hi-Lo Switching Option - (not shown)
Controlled switching between 100% and 30%
power. See wiring diagrams for additional
details.

7. Low Power Option - (not shown) 60%
decrease in Lumen output in same physical
package.

8. High Power Option - (not shown) 100%
increase in Lumen output in same physical
package.

9. Light Chamber - Castings around Light
Engine are painted with special matte black
light absorbing powder coat paint. Meets
International Dark-Sky Association (IDA)
requirements B0, U0, and G0 BUG ratings at
3000K CCT. Powers 2Q90, 2Q180, 3Q, or 4Q
configurations (refer to lumen matrix on page
3).

10. Low-Temperature Emergency Battery
Pack Option - (not shown) Provide 90 minutes
of constant-power egress lighting when
external power is lost. -20˚C to +55˚C ambient
temperature operation.

Standard exterior colors are White (WH), Black
(BK), Semi-Matte Black (BL), Bronze (BZ),
and Silver (SV). Selux premium colors (SP) are
available, please specify from your Selux color
selection guide.
5 Year Limited LED Luminaire Warranty -
Selux offers a 5 Year Limited Warranty to the
original purchaser that the Inula Bollard LED
luminaire shall be free from defects in material
and workmanship for up to five (5) years from
date of shipment. This limited warranty covers
the LED driver and LED array when installed and
operated according to Selux instructions. For
details, see “Selux Terms and Condition of Sale.”
Listings and Ratings: Tested to INRTL Wet
Location and IESNA LM-79-08 standards.

LED tested to LM-80 standards.

Luminaire tested to IK10 standard, IDA
Approved and Lighting Facts Certified.

Luminaire and LED tested at 25°C (77°F)
ambient temperature.

LED LIFE - LED light engine provides a reported
lumen maintenance of 93% at 36,000 hours. L70
calculated greater than 100,000 hours. NRTL
Listed (i.e. UL, CSA)
Visit selux.us for our LED End of Life
recycling policy.

Specifications
Inula Bollard LED
Net Weight (35lbs)
IBL

7.87in
199.9mm
Ă 7.95in
202.0mm
1 9
7 15/16”
(202mm)
7 7/8”
(200mm)
LED Light Engine Distribution Guide
4QD 3Q 2Q180 2Q90
Handhole
4QS 1Q

POLE LIGHT

DIRECTIONAL FLOODLIGHT

BOLLARD LIGHT

CATALOG NUMBER LOGIC
Material
Blank - Aluminum
B - Brass
S - Stainless Steel
Series
DS - Delta Star™
Finish
Lens Type
Cap Style
Example - DS - LED - e65 - SP - A7 - BZW - 12 - 11 - A - 360SL Optics*
360SL - 360SL™ Rotational Knuckle Mounting System
DS
A - 45° B - 90° D - 45° less Weep Hole E - 90° less Weep Hole (Interior Use Only) (Interior Use Only)
Option
Shielding
11 - Honeycomb Baffle
12 - Soft Focus Lens 13 - Rectilinear Lens
LED
NSP - Narrow Spot (Red Indicator)
SP - Spot (Green Indicator)
MFL - Medium Flood (Yellow Indicator)
WFL - Wide Flood (Blue Indicator)
LED Type
DELTA STAR™
7"
1 5/8"
1"
Dia2 1/4"
4 3/4"
Locking
O-Ring
Compression
Knuckle
Adjust-e-Lume® Output Intensity (Choose factory setting) A9 (Standard), A8, A7, A6, A5, A4, A3, A2, A1
Source LED - ‘e’ Technology with Integral Dimming Driver (See Specifications for Dimming) Designed for use with remote 12VAC BKSSL® transformers. Requires magnetic Low Voltage dimmer

TECHNOLOGY
with
e64 - 7WLED/2.7K
e65 - 7WLED/3K
e66 - 7WLED/4K
e74 - 7WLED/Amber
DRIVER DATA Input Volts InRush Current Operating Current Dimmable Operation Ambient Temperature 12VAC/DC 50/60Hz <250mA (non-dimmed) 700mA Magnetic Low Voltage Dimmer -22°F-194°F (-30°C - 90°C) *OPTICAL DATA
Beam Type Angle
e66
CBCP Visual Indicator
Narrow Spot 13° 6889 Red Dot
Spot 15° 5225 Green Dot
Medium Flood 23° 1984 Yellow Dot
Wide Flood 31° 1300 Blue Dot
LM79 DATA
BK No. CCT (Typ.) Input Watts (Typ.)
CRI
(Typ.)
e64 2700K 7.0 80
e65 3000K 7.0 80
e66 4000K 7.0 80
e74 Amber (590nm) 7.0 ~
L70 DATA
Minimum Rated Life (hrs.)
70% of initial lumens(L70)
50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION OF B-K LIGHTING, INC. AND ITS RECEIPT OR POSSESSION DOES NOT CONVEY ANY RIGHTS TO REPRODUCE, DISCLOSE ITS CONTENTS, OR TO MANUFACTURE, USE OR SELL ANYTHING IT MAY DESCRIBE. REPRODUCTION, DISCLOSURE OR USE WITHOUT SPECIFIC WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF B-K LIGHTING, INC. IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.

B-K LIGHTING 40429 Brickyard Drive • Madera, CA 93636 • USA 559.438.5800 • FAX 559.438.5900
www.bklighting.com • [email protected]

SUBMITTAL DATE
10-24-18

DRAWING NUMBER
SUB000930
PROJECT:

TYPE:

CATALOG
NUMBER:

SOURCE:

NOTES:

Powder Coat Color Satin Wrinkle
Bronze BZP BZW
Black BLP BLW
White (Gloss) WHP WHW
Aluminum SAP —
Verde — VER
Aluminum Finish
Machined MAC
Polished POL
MitiqueTM MIT
Machined MAC
Polished POL
Brushed BRU Interior use only.

Brass Finish
Stainless Finish
Premium Finish
ABP Antique Brass Powder CMG Cascade Mountain Granite RMG Rocky Mountain Granite AMG Aleutian Mountain Granite CRI Cracked Ice SDS Sonoran Desert Sandstone AQW Antique White CRM Cream SMG Sierra Mountain Granite BCM Black Chrome HUG Hunter Green TXF Textured Forest
BGE Beige MDS Mojave Desert Sandstone WCP Weathered Copper BPP Brown Patina Powder NBP Natural Brass Powder WIR Weathered Iron CAP Clear Anodized Powder OCP Old Copper Also available in RAL Finishes See submittal SUB-1439-00
GreenSource Initiative™
Metal and packaging components are made from recycled
materials. Manufactured using renewable solar energy,
produced on site. Returnable to manufacturer at end of life to ensure cradle-to-cradle handling. Packaging contains no chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s). Use of this product may qualify for GreenSource efficacy and recycling rebate(s). Consult www. bklighting.com/greensource for program requirements.

Materials
Furnished in Copper-Free Aluminum (Type 6061-T6), Brass (Type 360) or Stainless Steel (Type 304).

Body
Fully machined from solid billet. Unibody design provides enclosed, water-proof wireway and integral heat sink for maximum component life. Integral knuckle for maximum
mechanical strength. High temperature, silicone ‘O’ Ring provides water-tight seal.

Knuckle
The LOCK™ (Locking ‘O’ Ring Compression Knuckle) is comprised of two components. The first is integral to the body and features an interior, machined taper. The second is machined from solid billet and features a second, reverse angle taper. The resultant mechanical taper-lock allows a full 180° vertical adjustment without the use of serrated teeth, which inherently limit aiming.

High temperature, silicone ‘O’ Ring provides water-tight seal and compressive resistance to maintain fixture position. Design withstands 73 lb. static load prior to movement to ensure decades of optical alignment. ½” pipe thread for mounting.

Optional 360SL™ additionally provides biaxial source control with 360° horizontal rotation in addition to vertical adjustment.

Cap
Fully machined. Accommodates [1] lens or louver media.

Choose from 45° cutoff (‘A’ or ‘D’), or 1” deep bezel with 90° cutoff (‘B’ or ‘E’) cap styles. ‘A’ and ‘B’ caps include weep-hole for water and debris drainage. ‘D’ and ‘E’ caps exclude weephole and are for interior use only.

Lens
Shock resistant, tempered, glass lens is factory adhered to fixture cap and provides hermetically sealed optical compartment. Specify soft focus (#12) or rectilinear (#13) lens.

BKSSL®
Integrated solid state system with ‘e’ technology is scalable for field upgrade. Modular design with electrical quick disconnects permit field maintenance. High power,
forward throw source complies with ANSI C78.377 binning requirements. Exceeds ENERGY STAR® lumen maintenance
requirements. LM-80 certified components.

Integral, constant current driver. 12VAC/VDC input. 50/60Hz.

Proprietary input control scheme achieves power factor
correction and eliminates inrush current. Output, overvoltage, open-circuit, and short circuit protected. Inrush current limited to <250mA (non-dimming). Conforms to
Safety Std. C22.2 No. 250.13-12.

Dimming
Line voltage dimmable via magnetic low voltage dimmer.

For use with low voltage dimmer with dedicated neutral
conductor. For purposes of dimming: Remote magnetic
transformer with BKSSL® Power of ‘e’ technology loads
should be loaded to 25% of the transformer VA (watts)
rated value.

Remote Transformer
For use with 12VAC remote transformer or
magnetic transformers only. B-K Lighting cannot guarantee performance with third party manufacturers’ transformers.

Adjust-e-Lume® (Pat. Pending)
Integral electronics allows dynamic lumen response at
the individual fixture. Indexed (100% to 25% nom.) lumen output. Maintains output at desired level or may be changed as conditions require. Specify factory preset output intensity.

Optics
Interchangeable OPTIKIT™ modules permit field
changes to optical distribution. Color-coded for easy
reference: Narrow Spot (NSP) = Red. Spot (SP) = Green.

Medium Flood (MFL) = Yellow. Wide Flood (WFL) = Blue.

Wiring
XLPE, 18GA,150C, 600V, rated and certified to UL3321.

Hardware
Tamper-resistant, stainless steel hardware. LOCK™ aiming screw is additionally black oxide treated for additional corrosion resistance.

Finish
StarGuard®, our exclusive RoHs compliant, 15 stage
chromate-free process cleans and conversion coats
aluminum components prior to application of Class ‘A’ TGIC polyester powder coating. Brass components are available in powder coat or handcrafted metal finish. Stainless steel components are available in handcrafted metal finish.
(Brushed finish for interior use only).

Warranty
5 year limited warranty.

Certification and Listing
ITL tested to IESNA LM-79. UL Listed. Certified to CAN/CSA/ ANSI Standards. RoHs compliant. Suitable for indoor or
outdoor use. Suitable for use in wet locations. Suitable for installation within 4’ of the ground. IP66 Rated. Made in USA. ®Teflon is a registered trademark of DuPont Corporation. ®Energy Star is a registered trademark of the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(165mm)
6 1/2" (178mm)
7"
1 5/8"
(41mm)
5/8"
(16mm)
(57mm)
2 1/4" Dia.
(16mm)
(57mm)
1 5/8"
(121mm)
(41mm)
4 3/4" 2 1/4" Dia.
5/8"
4 1/4"
(108mm)
Patent Pending
Adjust-e-Lume®
Patent Pending
Adjust-e-Lume®

RELEASED
10-24-18

DRAWING NUMBER
SUB000930
40429 Brickyard Drive • Madera, CA 93636 • USA
559.438.5800 • FAX 559.438.5900
www.bklighting.com • [email protected]
“A/D” CAP
PROJECT:

TYPE:
“B/E” CAP

SPECIFICATIONS
Horizontal Rotation
(Optional 360SL™ Knuckle)
360 SL™
Mounting: Remote Transformers:

Power Pipe™ Power Canopy™ Tree Strap™ Stems Canopies
Mounting
Canopies
UPM™ TR SeriesPower Pipe UPMRM™
Mounting options: Remote options:

Power Pipe™ TR SeriesPower Pipe™
Options:

Horizontal Rotation™
Optional 360SL™ Knuckle
™
UPMRM™
Accessories (Configure separately) All dimensions indicated on this submittal are nominal.

Contact Technical Sales if you require more stringent specifications.

B-K LIGHTING
DELTA STAR™
7"
1 5/8"
1"
Dia2 1/4"
4 3/4"
Locking
O-Ring
Compression
Knuckle

TECHNOLOGY
with
NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL BUILDING-MOUNTED LIGHTING

1.d
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment D - Landscape Plans (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT WORKFORCE HOUSING
05/11/2021
L2.0

DETAILS & PRECEDENT IMAGES

FIRE PIT

OUTDOOR KITCHEN

PERMEABLE PAVING

STORMWATER TREATMENT PLANTING

DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTING

COMMUNITY TABLE

FIRE DEFENSIBLE PLANTING ARBOR

DECORATIVE CMU RETAINING WALL WITH VINES WOOD BOARDWALK - ABOVE GRADE

DINING UNDER ARBOR AL FRESCO

METAL FENCING WITH CMU AND VENEER PILLARS
GAME COURT; CORNHOLE, PING PONG, CHECKERS/CHESS BASKETBALL COURT IN PARKING LOT; CONTRASTING STRIPING

1.d
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment D - Landscape Plans (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.) Know what's
R

1.e
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.e
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment E - Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.) 4080 Cabrilho Drive · Martinez, CA 94553 · Telephone (925) 930-7901 · Fax (925) 723-2442 March 18, 2020
Kenneth R. Klebanoff
Brookwood Advisors
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
415-956-5056 | [email protected]
Re: Arborist Report for 930 Oddstad Blvd, Pacifica
Dear Kenneth,
This arborist report addresses the proposed school district housing project at Oddstad Blvd. The project area encompasses an empty lot south of the Oddstad Blvd & Big Bend Dr intersection down to 930 Oddstad. Per the City of Pacifica’s Municipal Code Chapter 12, Preservation of Heritage Trees, the scope of work includes:
 Tag, identify and measure all trees > 6” diameter within 20’ of proposed improvements, including all trees along the street frontage.
 Note heritage trees, defined as any tree with a trunk circumference of 50” or greater (>16” diameter) measured at 24” above grade. Eucalyptuses are exempt.  Assess individual tree health and structural condition.  Assess proposed improvements for potential encroachment.  Based on proposed encroachment, tree health, structure, and species susceptibility, make recommendations for preservation.
 Note tree #s & locations of protection fencing for JETT Landscape Architecture’s reference.

The data and tree protection recommendations contained within this report will be used by JETT staff for their tree protection plan.

Figure 1. The existing school has closed, but the parking lot and sports field are used by the public. Workforce housing is proposed for the site.

1.f
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 2
Project Summary
The project site is currently developed with a school campus, along with its parking lot to the south and a sports field to the north (Figure 1). Although the school is closed, the field appears to be used recreationally by the public, and the parking lot is used to access the public park to the south. The east and west property lines comprise a steep slope & Oddstad Blvd, respectively.

I assessed twenty-seven (27) trees during my site visit. Twenty-two trees (81%) consist of large mature & aging Monterey cypresses (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa, Figure 2). These trees are primarily located along Oddstad Blvd, where their surface roots are obviously growing into the sports field, lifting the sidewalk, and causing hardscape damage on the property. The remaining five trees consist of four Monterey pines (Pinus radiata) and one Peruvian pepper (Schinus molle).

The proposed project will construct new workforce housing on the school & sports field portions of the property. The existing parking lot will largely remain as parking. Unfortunately, the Monterey cypresses have a multitude of characteristics that render them highly vulnerable to construction impacts: some are declining and/or stressed; the species is intolerant of disturbance; the trees are large and reaching the over-mature phase of their lives.

Figure 2. Twenty Monterey cypresses (#1-5 above) line Oddstad Blvd. Their continuous canopies create screening, while their roots are wrecking damage on hardscape.

1.f
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 3
I provided input to the design team on reducing encroachment on the cypresses, but it is not possible to move the proposed improvements far enough from the trees that survival can be guaranteed. However, a significant effort was made to provide up to 10’-20’ of additional clearance. I consider the trees worthy of all possible efforts of protection throughout and beyond construction. Exceptional caution will be necessary to minimize encroachment to the greatest extent possible.

It is my opinion that a total of seven (7) trees will need to be removed to accommodate the proposed project, including one dying Monterey cypress (Figure 3). The remaining twenty (20) trees can be retained in a structurally stable state given that the protection measures within this report are followed. However, due to the species sensitivity and age of the seventeen (17) Monterey cypresses, they cannot be guaranteed to thrive post-construction.

Assumptions & Limitations
This report is based on my site visit on
2/27/20 and the following plans:
 Proposed site plan, dated 3/17/20 (for
internal coordination).
 Plan package, dated 5/3/19 (in
particular: landscaping, grading &
utility plans).
 Survey by BKF, dated 7/17/08.

It was assumed that the trees and the
proposed improvements were accurately
surveyed. A few trees were not surveyed, so I
approximately located them for the tree
protection plan. I did not review grading and
utility plans that may have been updated after
5/3/19.

The health and structure of the trees were
assessed visually from ground level. No
drilling, root excavation, or aerial inspections
were performed. Internal or non-detectable
defects may exist and could lead to part or
whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature
of trees and their environment, it is not
possible for arborists to guarantee that trees
will not fail in the future.

Figure 3. Tree #15 is in severe decline and is likely to die soon regardless of construction. It should be removed.

1.f
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 4
Tree Inventory & Assessment Table
#s: Each tree was given a square metal tag with numbers ranging from #1-27. Their locations are provided in the tree protection plan.

Size: Trunk diameters in inches were measured at 24” above average grade with a diameter tape. The majority of the Monterey cypresses branched at a low height, which prevented measurement at exactly 24” without disproportionately increasing the trunk sizes. Deviations in the height measurement were performed in accordance with recommended practices and are noted under the “Comments” column.

Health & Structural Condition Rating
Dead: Dead or declining past chance of recovery.

Poor (P): Stunted or declining canopy, poor foliar color, possible disease or insect issues.

Severe structural defects that may or may not be correctable. Usually not a reliable specimen for preservation.

Fair (F): Fair to moderate vigor. Minor structural defects that can be corrected. More susceptible to construction impacts than a tree in good condition.

Good (G): Good vigor and color, with no obvious problems or defects. Generally more resilient to impacts.

Very Good (VG): Exceptional specimen with excellent vigor and structure. Unusually nice.

Dripline: Canopy radius was visually estimated in each cardinal direction.

Age
Young (Y): Within the first 20% of expected life span. High resiliency to encroachment.

Mature (M): Between 20% - 80% of expected life span. Moderate resiliency to encroachment.

Overmature (OM): In >80% of expected life span. Low resiliency to encroachment.

DE: Dripline Encroachment (X indicates encroachment)
CI: Anticipated Construction Impact (L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High) Specific Recommendations: Specific recommendations for each tree, as applicable, in addition to the general recommendations which apply to all trees.

Tree Encroachment Summary
 Trees that will need to be removed: 13-15, 21-24 (7 trees) o Tree #24 appears to be off-site; its removal will require approval by the property owner.
 Trees to be saved that will be subjected to high encroachment: 1-12, 16-20 (17 trees; all Monterey cypresses)
 Trees to be saved that will be subjected to low to moderate encroachment: 25-27 (3 trees)

1.f
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 5
# Species Size Health Structure Dripline

N E S W
Age DE CI Comments Specific
Recommendations
1 Monterey cypress
(Hesperocyparis
macrocarpa)

49.5 G-F G-F 15 18 18 20 MOMX H Large roots to SE visible to 25' from trunk (3"-4" at 10').

Sidewalk replaced (large roots towards sidewalk). Minor 1" deadwood. 21' from proposed patio; 29' from proposed building.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
2 Monterey cypress 39 F F 12 20 15 18 M X H Large roots to SE, 3" diameter at 20' from trunk. Slightly sparse canopy, dead lower branches, moderate small
deadwood. Co-dominant stems at 4'. Sidewalk ground
down with 1 panel replaced. 21' from proposed patio; 26' from proposed building.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
3 Monterey cypress 41 P F 15 25 20 25 OM X H Multiple stems at 1' (diameter measured at 6"). Two low scaffolds leaning/laying on chain-link fence (requires
minimum 7"-8" pruning cut, up to 12"-15" at attachment).

Sparse canopy & stunted growth; lots of deadwood on S
side of trunk; almost half dead; remaining foliage off color and stunted. Sidewalk ground down. 31' & 35' from
proposed buildings.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
4 Monterey cypress 38, 21 P F 8 15 18 10 OM X H Multiple stems at 2'. Small amounts of woody roots visible to 18' from trunk. Lower 3/4 of tree mostly dead with
stunted shoots at ends/top. Some sidewalk grinding.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
5 Monterey cypress 42.5 P F 6 8 20 10 OM X H Woody roots visible to 18' to SE (2" at 10' and 3" at 6' from trunk). Multiple stems at 2' (diameter measured at 1'). Moderate sidewalk grinding. NE side of canopy nearly all dead, SW lower canopy dead with remaining foliage
stunted.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Hand dig
boardwalk footings &
adjust to save large
roots.
6 Monterey cypress 36 F-P F 25 20 20 20 M X H 1"-2" roots visible at 15' to SE. Diameter measured at 6" above grade. Lifting concrete, not yet ground. Sparse
canopy.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Hand dig
boardwalk footings &
adjust to save large
roots.
7 Monterey cypress 31 F/F-P F 25 25 25 25 M X H Multi-stemmed at 3'. Minor/moderate sidewalk grinding.

Moderately dense canopy. South side sparser. Moderate
amount of 2"-3" woody roots visible at 10' to SE.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Hand dig
boardwalk footings &
adjust to save large
roots.

1.f
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project -

5.d
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 6
# Species Size Health Structure Dripline

N E S W
Age DE CI Comments Specific
Recommendations
8 Monterey cypress 38 F F 20 20 20 25 MOMX H Multiple stems at 4'. Slightly sparse canopy. Moderate amount of 3" diameter roots visible at 18' to SE.

Significant sidewalk grinding.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Hand dig
boardwalk footings &
adjust to save large
roots.
9 Monterey cypress 32 F-P F 18 15 15 15 MOMX H Diameter measured at 1'. Moderately sparse canopy; relatively compact (not spreading). Moderate sidewalk
grinding. Minor small diameter surface roots to SE.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Arborist on site
during excavation for
driveway.
10 Monterey cypress 43.5 F-P F 25 20 20 20 MOMX H Co-dominant trunks split at 3.5' above grade. Sparse canopy with slightly yellowed & stunted growth.

Significant hardscape damage. Large woody roots to SE
(2"-3" at 12'; 3" at 10').

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
11 Monterey cypress 40 F-P F 18 15 15 15 MOMX MH/
H
Diameter measured at 6"; multiple stems at 1'. Slightly sparse canopy with yellowing and minor dieback.

Heaving asphalt next to fence (3" root at 6' and 2" root at 15' from trunk). Minor sidewalk lift.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand. Demolish
asphalt by hand starting
around obvious root
damaged areas. Apply
6" deep layer of mulch.
12 Monterey cypress 35 G-F F 18 15 18 18 M X MH/
H
Moderate lifting of sidewalk; previously ground down.

Lower canopy sparse but top good. No asphalt damage.

Carefully remove
existing fence footings
by hand.
13 Monterey cypress 37 G-F F 20 20 18 25 M X H Moderate sidewalk lifting. Multiple stems at 5'; main stem splits into co-dominant stems at 10'. Root-shaped lift in asphalt at 5' from trunk. 25' from proposed driveway;
conflicting with proposed grading.

Remove.
14 Monterey cypress 50 G-F F 20 18 20 20 MOMX H Diameter measured at 6". Large low scaffold to S. Lifting concrete drain; no asphalt damage. Lower canopy
chlorotic and slightly sparse. 6' from proposed driveway.

Remove.
15 Monterey cypress 51.5 VP F 15 12 15 OM X H Very sparse canopy. Minor lifting of sidewalk; previously replaced with 3"-4" cut roots. Only a few green branches on lower NW canopy. 30' from proposed office; 25' from
proposed walkway; 35' from proposed driveway.

Remove due to very
poor health.
16 Monterey cypress 42 G F 15 20 20 20 MOMX MHMinor sidewalk damage. Center stems vertical with little branching. Elongated branches to E. 28' from proposed
seating area; 32' from proposed office.

1.f
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project -

5.d
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 7
# Species Size Health Structure Dripline

N E S W
Age DE CI Comments Specific
Recommendations
17 Monterey cypress 37 F-P F-P 0 20 5 20
W
M X MHCo-dominant stems at 3', narrow canopy with low interior branching due to competition from adjacent trees. Sparse canopy with healthy foliage only at very top of trunks. 27' from proposed seating area.
18 Monterey cypress 54 F F 20 25 20 25 MOMX MH/
H
Chlorotic foliage. Parking lot damaged at 25' to SE and 18' to S (obvious root). Massive surface roots towards
street; no sidewalk damage due to recent replacement.

Proposed walkway 30' to S; proposed seating area 35' to E. Proposed water utility within existing driveway.

Start hardscape
demolition by hand near
obvious root damaged
areas. Minimize fill
under dripline; compact
by hand. Arborist on-site
during utility excavation.
19 Monterey cypress 55 G-F F 20 20 15 20 MOMX H Major concrete lift 18' to SE. Sidewalk ground down; massive roots towards street. 15' from proposed building (in existing asphalt); 5' from proposed boardwalk (may be elevated).

Dig boardwalk footings
by hand.
20 Monterey cypress 45.5 F/F-P F-P 0 0 15
SE
15 MOMX H Declining tree; half of canopy removed (likely from dieback). Co-dominant stems at 3'. Massive woody roots. 17' from proposed building (in existing asphalt); 5' from proposed boardwalk (may be elevated).

Dig boardwalk footings
by hand.
21 Monterey cypress 46 G-F F 15 12 18 18 MOMX H Windswept-appearing canopy to W. Large woody surface root visible on bank. 9' from proposed building; in
proposed walkway.

Remove.
22 Monterey cypress 64.5 F-P G-F 30 20 20 20 MOMX H Well attached branches. Exposed woody woots on bank to S. Roots visible to 30' E (2"-3" diameter). Canopy
chlorotic and sparse. 10' from proposed building; in
proposed walkway.

Remove.
23 Peruvian pepper
(Schinus molle)

10.5,
13 F-P G-F 12 10 6 6 M X H South canopy sparse; canopy dieback. In proposed grading.

Remove.
24 Monterey pine
(Pinus radiata)
26 F-P/P F-P 15 8 0 8 M X H Off site tree? Elongated sparse scaffold branches.

Several dead up to 5" diameter. Moderate hardscape
damage; surface roots. Tree likely to continue decline
regardless of construction. 5' from proposed storm drain.

Remove. Requires
owner approval if offsite.
25 Monterey pine 26 F F 20 15 10 20 M X L Not surveyed. Diameter estimated due to poison oak. 20' from proposed storm drain; 15' from limit of grading.

Install temporary
fencing.
26 Monterey pine 28 G-F F 25 25 25 25 M L Not surveyed, diameter estimated. Within dense brush. 25' from proposed limit of grading.

None.
27 Monterey pine 22 G G 15 15 15 15 M X LMNot surveyed; 15' above canal on slope. 9' from proposed limit of grading & 11' from proposed concrete ditch.

Install temporary
fencing.

1.f
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project -

5.d
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 8
Discussion
Construction impact on trees is generally evaluated based on the following information:
 What is the current health, structure, and age of the trees? Are they likely to live for a long time, during which they will continue to provide benefits to the subject property and the surrounding areas?
 Is the tree species sensitive or tolerant of construction?  What improvements are proposed around the trees, and how much will they impact tree health & stability?
Since the Monterey cypresses are the dominant & most crucial trees, this discussion primarily focuses on them.

Existing tree condition & species variation
The majority of the trees on the property consist of large, aging Monterey cypresses, with a wide range of tree health (good to very poor, Figure 3). Monterey cypresses require moderate amounts of water for optimal health. I suspect that the on-site trees are drought-stressed, especially if they were accustomed to regular irrigation when the school was still in operation.

The structure of the trees is similar, consisting of multiple crowded stems that split at different heights above grade (Figure 4). Crowded stems are considered structural defects – as the diameter of each stem increases, it puts pressure on its neighbors, and eventually the stem with the weakest attachment breaks. This structure is typical of the species and cannot be corrected at this age.

As trees age, their growth rate
slows, and they are less able to
adapt to or recover from
environmental changes. I
consider the majority of the
cypresses to be in the mature to
over-mature age range, which
means they have peaked in their
vitality – the next phase of their
life is senescence & decline.

Additionally, different tree
species have different tolerances
to construction-related impacts
like soil compaction, root loss,
and pruning. The tolerance may
be related to a tree’s ability to
compartmentalize around
damage, regenerate roots or
shoots, etc. Per Trees & Development by Nelda Matheny and Jim Clark, Monterey cypresses have poor tolerance to construction. The ideal “tree protection zone” where no disturbance shall occur is 1.25’ per 1” trunk diameter for over-mature trees with poor tolerance, which comes out to 39’ to 81’ for the on-site cypresses.

Construction’s impact on trees
Construction practices such as grading, excavation and compaction can affect both the structural stability and general health of trees. Structural stability may be compromised when grading or excavation occurs within a tree’s structural root plate (SRP), or the area adjacent to Figure 4. Trees #3-5 (center) are in poor health with dying lower canopies. The deadwood may be maintained as screening. Note multiple crowded stems on every tree.

1.f
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 9
the trunk where the majority of the large-diameter supportive roots are found. This area can be generically estimated as 5 times the trunk diameter, assuming that the root system is perfectly radial. This SRP estimate is best used as a guideline to inform design, since sub-surface conditions and previous development can redirect and alter root growth in unknown ways.

Regardless, excessive removal of roots within the SRP may increase the likelihood that the entire tree will fail.

Construction occurring beyond the structural roots will impact smaller absorption roots. These roots tend to be concentrated in the upper 4”-6” of soil where oxygen and water is readily available. Excavation removes existing roots, while compaction decreases available soil space for air, water and root growth. Additionally, fill – even if un-compacted - affects trees by increasing the depth of soil through which water and air must travel before they reach.

Installation of utilities and foundations typically require excavation or compaction through the entire depth (3’) of a tree’s root system. Hardscape may also have an unexpectedly high impact, especially if >90% compaction is required (Figure 4). Extensive construction disturbance essentially decreases a tree’s ability to obtain enough water or air to survive.

To assist re-design efforts, I provided three “tiers” of clearances to the team. (1) The SRP (5 times, or 0.42 x trunk diameter) was the minimum limit to guarantee that the trees would remain stable after construction.
(2) In my opinion, an acceptable clearance for maintaining tree health would be 1’ per 1” trunk diameter, assuming that appropriate tree protection measures are followed during construction.
(3) The upper limit is the ideal tree protection zone from Matheny & Clark, or 1.25’ per 1” trunk diameter.

In some cases, an additional 10’-20’ of clearance was provided, but even this was not enough to maintain the acceptable or ideal clearances. To do so would eliminate the use of 1/3 of the total width of the property. Regardless, the proposed buildings, walkways, and landscape improvements were moved as far from the trees as possible. Some of the walkways were replaced with boardwalks, which will be supported above grade with footings. Although the footings still affect tree roots, they are limited to a small area and do not require compaction of existing grade.

Typically, I would recommend removing the majority of the cypresses along Oddstad Blvd since their long-term survival cannot be guaranteed. However, the design has been significantly modified to accommodate the trees, and I do consider it worthwhile to continue the preservation efforts into construction - even if the cypresses cannot be guaranteed to thrive in the same condition in the years to come. The recommendations provided in this report are intended to increase the cypresses’ resilience & to reduce construction damage. Still, individual trees may need to be replaced if they decline.

Mitigating construction encroachment
The key to maximizing a tree’s tolerance of disturbance lies in maintaining good health leading up to, during, and after construction. Water stress that occurs from root loss or soil compaction can be partially mitigated with supplemental irrigation. Ideally, this would begin months in advance, and should be applied with soaker hoses. Water drips out slowly from the surface of the soaker hoses, along their entire length. The slow flow rate allows water to infiltrate into soil – especially in clay – without running off the surface. The irrigation should target the roots close to the dripline, since the roots by the trunk are primarily structural. Furthermore, the hoses can also be moved to target other areas of the root system. The only drawback to using soaker

1.f
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 10
hoses is that they require a garden hose
or hosebib, which can be difficult to find
on construction sites. Permanent
irrigation may be installed to the trees as
long as their construction does not
damage tree roots.

Applying a thick layer of wood chips will
conserve soil moisture and reduce soil
compaction from equipment & foot
traffic. Mulch can also be used to
protect roots in areas where temporary
fencing would hinder construction
access. Any type of mulch will reduce
evaporation, but the best type of mulch
can be obtained (for free!) from tree
services. Tree service wood chips
contain a shredded mix of leaves,
needles, branches & wood, which break
down at different rates. As the wood
chips break down, organic matter is
added to improve the existing soil. The
mulch shall be left in place during & after
construction to extend its benefits. If the
mulch does not stay in place on the
slope next to the sidewalk, friction can
be increased by staking down jute
netting over the soil before applying
mulch.

Construction procedures shall aim to minimize excessive root damage, such as demolition by hand where roots are obviously responsible for damage (Figure 5). Hand digging during boardwalk construction will allow the contractor to adjust footings around large roots. Grading in the direction towards the trees, instead of in parallel to Oddstad Blvd, may allow the operator to see roots when they are smaller so that excavation can be performed more carefully as their diameters increase. Roots would not be accidentally fractured; instead they can be pruned with a sharp tool. Canopy pruning should be limited to the minimum required for construction clearance. Other practices may be prudent shall be discussed with the project arborist prior to the start of each phase of construction.

Non-cypress trees
The prior discussion primarily focused on Monterey cypresses, but there are also four Monterey pines and one Peruvian pepper. The pepper (tree #23) is located in proposed grading and will need to be removed. Also, the Monterey pine (tree #24, Figure 6) at the southwest corner of the existing parking lot is only 5’ from the proposed storm drain. It is presently in decline, with several stubs indicating past branch failures. Monterey pines are fairly short-lived and are highly susceptible to pine pitch canker and red turpentine beetles, particularly once they are drought stressed like this tree. I recommend removing it due to high encroachment. The remaining three pines (#25-27) along the east property line can be easily saved with minor impact.

Figure 5. The existing driveway shall be demolished by hand by tree #18, especially where hardscape damage by roots is obvious.

1.f
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 11
Tree Protection Recommendations for Monterey
pines (trees #25-27 along east property line)
 Prior to construction or grading, contractor
shall install 6’ chain-link fencing to construct a
temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around
trees #25 & 27 as indicated on the tree
protection plan. TPZ fencing shall remain in
an upright sturdy manner from the start of
grading until the completion of construction.

Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed
without consulting the project arborist.
 If roots > 2” in diameter are encountered
during the construction of the concrete ditch
by tree #27, they shall be cleanly pruned with
a handsaw or sawzall, immediately covered,
and kept moist till backfilled.
 If needed, pruning shall be performed by
personnel certified by the International Society
of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere
to ISA and American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best
Management Practices.

Tree Protection Recommendations for Monterey
cypresses (trees #1-12, 16-20 along Oddstad Blvd)
Pre-Construction Phase
 Starting at least 3 months before construction, begin monthly supplemental irrigation.

Irrigation shall be provided with soaker hoses, laid as close to the trees’ driplines as possible. Use the lowest water pressure that allows water to bead out of the entire length of the hose, and leave on for a minimum of 8 hours.
 At any time, apply a 4”-6” thick layer of mulch beneath the trees’ driplines within the existing landscape planters, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. The ideal type of mulch can be obtained from tree services, and consists of a mix of shredded leaves, twigs, branches and wood. The mulch shall remain in place throughout and beyond construction.
 If the slope along the sidewalk is too steep to retain mulch, jute netting shall be laid over the soil and staked down to provide friction. The mulch shall be placed on top of the netting as close to 4”-6” depth as possible.

Demolition Phase
 Prior to the start of demolition, the contractor shall discuss recommended tree protection measures with the project arborist.
 Prior to the start of demolition, the contractor shall install 6’ chain-link fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each grove of trees as indicated on the tree protection plan. Fencing shall be securely attached to steel posts driven into the ground. Fencing will need to be extended to encompass a greater TPZ once demolition is completed.
 Remove trees #13-15 & 21-24 (7 trees). Tree #24 appears to be off-site; its removal will require approval by the property owner. Wood chips from tree removals shall be kept onsite for additional tree protection.

Figure 6. Monterey pine #24 is declining with a history of branch failures. It will need to be removed to
construct the proposed storm drain.

1.f
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 12
 Demolition of existing hardscape shall occur by hand within the driplines of trees #11, 12 & 18-20, especially next to areas of obvious root damage. Heavy equipment may be used to remove hardscape fragments & debris only if the roots and soil remains undisturbed.
 Existing fence footings by trees #1-12 shall be carefully removed by hand to minimize injury to tree roots.
 Once demolition is completed, the wood chips from the tree removals shall be spread out over the newly exposed soil within the TPZ, and the TPZ fencing shall be extended as noted on the plan.
 TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist.

Foundation, Grading, and Construction Phase
 Prior to the start of work, each contractor (e.g. grading, utility) shall discuss recommended tree protection measures with the project arborist.  If feasible (i.e. on-site water is still available), maintain monthly supplemental irrigation using soaker hoses. The soaker hoses shall be laid just inside the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing. Use the lowest water pressure that allows water to bead out of the entire length of the hose, and leave on for a minimum of 8 hours.  Minimize grading outside the proposed driveway & building pads to the greatest extent possible.
 Minimize proposed fill within tree driplines, especially by tree #18. Fill shall remain uncompacted or minimally compacted by hand.  If possible, as the contractors approach the trees, grading or excavation should proceed in a perpendicular direction to Oddstad Blvd to minimize fracturing of roots close to the trunk. Caution shall be exercised once roots 2”-3” in diameter are visible.  The project arborist shall be on-site during grading within tree driplines, as well as utility work within the dripline of tree #18. The arborist shall provide monitoring & root pruning services, if appropriate, and the observations shall be used to inform future construction procedure and tree protection measures. If needed, roots shall be cleanly pruned with a handsaw or sawzall, immediately covered, and kept moist till backfilled.  Pruning shall be minimized to maintain as much live foliage as possible on all the trees.

Deadwood may also be left in place to maintain screening, especially in declining trees where the majority of the lower canopy is dead. If needed, pruning shall performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. The size of pruning cuts shall be minimized, and branches shall be reduced back to live foliage wherever possible.
 Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project for approval and recommendations.
 Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees.  Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage.

1.f
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Arborist Report, 930 Oddstad Blvd March 18, 2020
Jennifer Tso, Certified Arborist 13
Landscaping Phase
 The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist.  Footings for the proposed boardwalks by trees #5-8 & 19-20 shall be dug by hand for the upper 3’ of soil. If large roots > 2” diameter are encountered, the footings shall be adjusted to save them. If other large roots are encountered, consult the project arborist for recommendations. If needed, roots shall be cleanly pruned with a handsaw or sawzall, immediately covered, and kept moist till backfilled.  In general, avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand.
 Proposed irrigation lines shall be installed as far from the trunks of the trees as possible.

Trenching shall be performed by hand within tree driplines. Pipes shall be threaded through large roots (> 2” diameter) without damaging them.  The mulch applied for tree protection shall remain in place throughout and beyond landscape construction. If processed mulch is desired for aesthetics, it shall be spread over the wood chip mulch.
 Once water is available via hosebibs, resume monthly supplemental irrigation using soaker hoses. The soaker hoses shall be laid just inside the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing. Use the lowest water pressure that allows water to bead out of the entire length of the hose, and leave on for a minimum of 8 hours.
 Alternatively, permanent irrigation may be installed for the trees as long as it does not require significant trenching or root pruning. The type of irrigation shall match soaker hoses as much as possible (e.g. slow & deep watering across significant area).

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this report, and please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Tso
Certified Arborist #WE-10270A
Tree Risk Assessor Qualified

1.f
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment F - Arborist Report (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Attachment H - Surrounding Compatible Uses
945 -- 953 Oddstad Boulevard
Subject Site
Subject Site
969 -- 973 Oddstad Boulevard

1.h
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment H - Compatible Uses (5305 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.d
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 3 of 24 ends

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

RZ-205-20 File No. 2020-009 – Rezoning RZ-205-20, Development Plan DP-81-20 DP-81-20, Development Agreement DA-3-20, Specific Plan DA-3-20 SP-173-20, Subdivision SUB-248-20, and Heritage Tree SP-173-20 Removal Authorization, to authorize the subdivision of one parcel SUB-248-20 into three separate parcels and construction of seven multi-family Heritage Tree residential buildings with a total of 70 residential housing units Removal (including 11 housing units affordable at below-market rate or Authorization BMR rents), residential amenity buildings, off-street parking and circulation improvements, open space and landscaping, and recreational fields and amenities, at the former Oddstad Elementary School located at 930 Oddstad Boulevard (APN 023-672-600). The proposed Development Agreement would include ongoing use of the existing ballfields as a public recreational facility subject to certain limitations. The Planning Commission will con sider
recommendations to the City Council on the Rezoning, Development Plan and Development Agreement, and con sider action on the Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization. Recommended CEQA Action:

Certification of a final environmental impact report (EIR), including Findings of Fact and a Statement of overriding Considerations, due to significant and unavoidable environmental impacts that would result from approval and construction of the project.

Contract Planner Dacumos presented the staff report.

Planning Director Murdock added that they had the consultants who prepared the Environmental Impact Report, Olivia Ervin and Krystle Rizzi, to answer any technical questions regarding the environmental review. Regarding the development agreement, he asked if the Commission approved the project, he recommended that they allow staff to add a provision to the development agreement before this goes to City Council that was unintentionally omitted, i.e., they have negotiated with the school district to construct all the affordable housing units in phase 1, even though some of them are attributable to the 25 units in phase 2 as that would speed up the process. He also wanted to clarify a point for Commission’s consideration when recommending approval of the project for legislative items and vesting tentative parcel map to give the city approval to vacate any existing public rights-of-way and easements that may remain beneath the project site, i.e., there are four cul-de-sacs when the project was originally subdivided but the city never constructed public streets there and the school subsequently obtained ownership and constructed the school site, but they want to make sure that the Commission will find that consistent with the General Plan and recommends vacation of those public rights-of-way Vice Chair Hauser asked, regarding the last two items he mentioned, if staff has specific language to be put into the motion.

Planning Director Murdock stated that they would prefer not to add specific language in the insertion of the development agreement but provide general language to direct staff to include in the development agreement that all BMR units will be constructed in phase 1.

5.e
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 4 of 24 ends

Vice Chair Hauser referred to vacating the rights-of-way and easements, and asked if the city was confident that all of the new easements being proposed adequately replace them. She mentioned that, in vacating the four rights-of-way, there was a five-foot utility easement that goes along the property and she asked if everything they need is in the new final map.

Planning Director Murdock stated that the tentative subdivision map has undergone review by the city and they are recommending approval of the tentative subdivision map.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if any commissioners had questions before they go to public comment.

Commissioner Wright asked if, at the time of the original transfer of deed to the school district, there were any other deed restrictions besides the right-of-way.

Planning Director Murdock stated that he would need to look at the title report they received for the project as he didn’t think they identified anything that was material to this proposed project.

Commissioner Wright stated that one of his big concerns about stuff like this is what all of Pacifica’s concerns are and that has to do with traffic and our problem at Vallemar. He understood the environmental impact report states that it isn’t necessarily going to have an impact, but he asked if there was something they can do in the future so, when considering projects like this, the analysis has been performed as we all know what the problem is.

Planning Director Murdock stated that this project is consisted with the adopted 2040 General Plan in terms of land use density and intensity and the traffic from this project is also feeding into other future projects contemplated in the General Plan and the impacts have been analyzed in terms of level of service in the General Plan and disclosed to the community. If this were a project to change the General Plan to allow 200 units instead of the 70 units, that would be a separate analysis that would need to be completed to determine consistency with the General Plan.

Commissioner Ferguson needed clarification on the development agreement where it says there is a vested right of the developer to develop under the adopted regulations for the term of 15 years.

He asked if that was opening the door for future development on the same site that is not covered in the scope of this project.

Planning Director Murdock stated that it was not a routine component of most projects that the Planning Commission sees, as most are small projects. He stated that it is common but not always the case that larger projects may include a development agreement and one of the key components of a development agreement from a developer’s perspective is the ability to have assurance that they can undertake the project without changes in zoning or General Plan that would complicate their ability to construct the project. He stated that normally with the city, they would only get assurance of that for possibly two years with their permits only and this development agreement is providing that assurance for a longer period.

Commissioner Ferguson concluded that this is protecting them for 15 years to construct this project specifically.

Planning Director Murdock agreed for this project specifically with a very minor change but not some unforeseen project that is not being proposed at this time.

5.e
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 5 of 24 ends

Vice Chair Hauser stated she would like to understand who, from the applicant’s team, is here, i.e., civil engineer, architect, etc.

Planning Director Murdock asked her to repeat her question.

Vice Chair Hauser wanted to know who, from the applicant’s design team, is present.

Planning Director Murdock wasn’t sure about the entirety of the applicant’s team, but their main representative is present and he can introduce his team members when the opportunity to present the project is given.

Vice Chair Hauser appreciated that, and then stated that they can call the applicant up for the presentation.

Elizabeth Bredall, applicant, asked for the PowerPoint to be set up.

Planning Director Murdock stated he would need a moment to load the school district’s presentation.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if she would like to reserve any of her time for rebuttal.

Ms. Bredall stated that she didn’t think so. She will be turning it partway to Shep Heery. She then stated that she has been a resident of Pacifica for 34 years and was serving her third term as a trustee on the school board. She mentioned that attracting new teachers becomes more difficult every year because of the cost of housing and rent in the Bay Area and is causing great concern for their ability to serve children in the future. When they offer a position to a new recruit, they are excited about moving to Pacifica but have to turn down the position because of the cost of living. She mentioned the community involvement on repurposing Oddstad Elementary for eight years and believe this workforce housing plan will serve, not only the school community, but the Pacifica community. She mentioned the process since the closure of the school in 2005. She then turned the presentation over to Shep Heery from Brookwood Advisors.

Shepherd Heery, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Brookwood Group, stated he has enjoyed working with the city and honored to work with the school district. He stated that some of the team members are present. The design architect is Alex Seidel who he believes is attending by phone or remotely along with Lia Farley of Jett Landscape Architecture. Ian Murphy and Brock Ehlers who are with BDE Architecture, the production architects for the project. He thought BKF Engineers representative is Tim Heffernan. He stated that they also have some people from Hexcel who are transportation consultants. They can answer any questions the Commission might have. He stated that the project consists of two apartment buildings consisting of 1 and 2 bedroom units and five townhome buildings that are located close to the street and are 2 and 3-bedroom units. He stated that at least 64% of the units will be below market rate focusing on workforce housing. They hope they can build all 100% of the units for that purpose but they have to make sure they finalize their financing before they can make that commitment. He stated that, as mentioned, they are preserving the playing fields which is an important public amenity to support and they are also improving the drainage and adding a basketball practice court as a shared use with the upper parking lot that presently exists. He then pointed out the building that is focused on community use of the project, with changing rooms,

5.e
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 6 of 24 ends

restrooms, small snack kiosk for teams having a social event after a game. He stated that it is two stories at most and very consistent with the feeling and scale of the neighborhood and they are working hard to preserve the Monterey Cyprus and Monterey pines that exist on the site. At the vehicular entrance to the project, there will a property management office for receiving mail and serving the residents. There will be a residents common, primarily for use of residents, but will be made available under terms they agreed to with the city for the city and community groups.

They have worked with the city and hope to move into construction document phase in the months ahead and establish a rapport with the building department to make sure they comply with their requirements. They are working on the project financing, but aren’t sure what form it will take. They expect to contract for the abatement/demolition of the existing building and then the construction. He stated that their team is able to answer any questions.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if the Commission had any questions for the applicant before they open the public hearing.

Commissioner Wright stated he would wait until after the hearing.

Vice Chair Hauser opened the Public Hearing.

Gail Benton Shoemaker, Pacifica, stated that she was a strong support of teacher workforce housing on Oddstad, and mentioned her experience when she was the executive director of Pacifica School Volunteers for over a decade, with teacher turnover due to living expenses and finding affordable housing in Pacifica and it was hard on the schools, children and volunteers.

She supported affordable housing to keep teachers in Pacifica, specifically on Oddstad as a member of Tree City Pacifica, and expressed her support for their addition of trees and protection of existing trees while complying with the new tree ordinance on all requirements, including 2-1 replacement ration. She asked them to support this project.

Matthew Levie, Pacifica, stated he was a former PSD board member and on the board when this project was initiated and after leaving the board, joined the district’s workforce housing committee. He lives nearby and this project was important to him. He has attended many meetings and heard all the aspects of the project, and he feels it is a very good project with many benefits, including affordable housing to attract a talented workforce and improve education, etc.

He commended everyone involved who worked hard to understand the community’s desires and integrate them into the project. He thinks it is the right project and he asked them to approve all items before them.

Caroline Frederick, Pacifica, stated she is representing her classified coworkers in the district.

She stated that it has been difficult to work and live here, and she supported this project as it would be great for herself and others as it has been hard to see good coworkers go.

Michelle Gray, Pacifica, stated her family moved here 17 years ago for specific reasons, and this project is going to help to make sure those reasons stay true. She is honored to be the PTO president of IBL Middle School. She expressed her belief in the need to make sure we can attract and retain high quality teachers and shared her positive thoughts on the success of this project.

Catherine Wachtler, Pacifica, stated she is present to urge them to recommend the proposed workforce housing project to City Council. She lives on Yosemite Drive and has been an educator for 30 years in a nearby high school district and is familiar with the difficulty many

5.e
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 7 of 24 ends

teachers in San Mateo County have with affordable housing and shared her thoughts on the need for this project and the awesome job all the team has done for creating this project and informing the community.

Chris Redfield, Pacifica, stated he was encouraged to see this project progress and reusing underutilized , abandoned properties was refreshing. He supports PSD’s workforce housing vision on this site as it will bring much needed local housing for teachers and staff and supports staff’s recommendations and he looks forward to a vibrant housing development and retaining public recreational use.

Kai Martin, Pacifica, echoed his support for this project. He leads the engagement with the school district with the Tree City Pacifica program and they were very supportive of the plans for the trees, adding that it needs some amendment with the latest changes of the ordinances regarding trees, but he supports and accepts these pieces as well as any provisions needed to approve it.

Senior Planner Cervantes stated that there were no raised hands.

Vice Chair Hauser closed the Public Hearing.

Commissioner Wright thought the architect was a good person to direct some of his questions.

He wondered what green infrastructure has been incorporated into the project, such as solar panels, purple pipe for irrigation, a gray water system, a rain water collection system with a big cistern to collect the water. He asked if they can speak to those considerations.

Ian Murphy, BDE Architecture, stated that they are utilizing solar panels and plan to place them on the carports or covered parking along the back so it is hidden and will have solar panels for the entirety of the project. They have a storm water plan that involves a number of bioswales and onsite retention. They are planning to use low to no VOC materials on the project that have minimal to no off gassing. They will be using energy star appliances and low energy use appliances. He referred to the direction of California Code is going with the new cycle initiated this year, it is progressive and, by following that, they have quite a few advancements and sustainability compared to any other recent projects.

Commissioner Wright asked if they will be all electric kitchens, induction ranges, natural gas, on demand out water heaters, solar preheating.

Mr. Murphy stated that they aren’t evaluating solar preheating but they will most likely have all electric kitchens. They are still working on the construction documents and finalizing some of the systems.

Commissioner Wright asked if he can speak to whether they have purple pipe available.

Mr. Murphy didn’t think they were doing any purple pipe or water reuse in that way on that site.

Planning Director Murdock stated that he would like to clarify that the project will be subject to the 2022 California Building Code and it would include local amendments made by Pacifica which would include the requirement for all new buildings to be electric only and the kitchens would not have gas pursuant to that requirement.

5.e
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 8 of 24 ends

Commissioner Wright asked what happens if the project gets upside down on the financing and the bank forecloses on it, and will some other developer come in or are there going to be deed restrictions so they maintain the below market rates and still teacher housing regardless of what happens.

Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that the development agreement will be recorded against the real property and it will act on the deed restriction and in addition there are 11 BMR units that will be required to be constructed and an affordable housing covenant that is recorded against the real property to ensure the construction of those units. She stated that the development agreement allows the ability to assign the agreement which would include the development rights but, in this case, requires the consent of the city for an assignment. She stated that there also within the development agreement mortgage protection language and any lender that forecloses on the property would have the ability to construct the project but would have to comply with all of the conditions in the development agreement in order to do so as the development agreement is recorded as affordable housing covenant for the BMR units and those would remain in effect.

Commissioner Wright asked, if it is a short sale, whether the city have right of first refusal to be able to buy that or could they put that in the agreement or is it asking too much.

Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that is currently not in the agreement. If there is a foreclosure, the city could always pursue purchasing it from the school district but that currently is not a term in the agreement.

Commissioner Wright asked if, during the construction phase, this is going to be built with union labor and with United States goods which you hear a lot of people talking about these days. He asked if management and maintenance will also be done by union labor similar to what happens in the school district now if it is going to be a school district project.

Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated it was not addressed in the development agreement but she thought the applicant could address that.

Mr. Heery stated that it will be prevailing wage, not necessarily union.

Commissioner Wright asked if it was for both phases, build phase and maintenance phase.

Mr. Heery responded affirmatively.

Commissioner Wright stated that there was mention of the fields and what was going to be done to improve them and he asked if they will remain grass fields, any lighting put on there to extend the time of day use as we have such a shortage. He asked if it will be like the San Bruno project where they are actually turfing the field for them. He asked who will pay for the water, cut the grass, and maintain it.

Mr. Heery stated that the project will be responsible for maintaining it.

Commissioner Wright asked who that would be.

5.e
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 9 of 24 ends

Mr. Heery stated that the project entity, whatever it is, will have the responsibility for maintenance and that is basically the school district. He stated that, on the phone, they have the landscape architect and the civil engineer who might speak to the nature of the field improvements.

Commissioner Wright asked if it will be turfed or not turfed.

Mr. Heery stated it will be natural turf.

Commissioner Wright asked if that was so even though it was a perpetual water expense ad infinitum.

Mr. Heery stated that there has been an issue with the field having a drainage issue so maybe Tim Heffernan can speak to that issue.

Commissioner Wright would like to hear a bit more about what some of those improvements are.

Mr. Heery asked how he does that.

Planning Director Murdock stated that, if the civil engineer is on the phone, he should press the button to raise his hand, Star 5.

Commissioner Wright asked if they did an analysis to see if there was any financial advantage to them to lease the land to a developer and not be responsible for the ongoing maintenance, not be responsible for the bill but collect.

Mr. Heery stated that they looked at that early on and also looked at the possibility of having a developer handle the whole process and they got pretty far down the road with an entity that would help to do that, but they withdrew from the negotiations with Bridge Housing.

Commissioner Wright asked, at the time they were pursuing that, if it seemed like it was the best option but it was a close call or out of the question.

Mr. Heery stated, in the case of development management, it turned not to be a viable option and they didn’t have any credible expressions of interest from at risk developers.

Commissioner Wright asked if anyone in their group has any experience with large scale residential development and ongoing management.

Mr. Heery stated that they don’t have as much experience in ongoing management but they have a tremendous amount of experience in development of high rise, mid rise and residential and student housing projects, and have done projects all over the state and the nation.

Ms. Cervantes introduced the caller.

Mr. Heery stated that, if Tim Heffernan was not available to answer the question, maybe Lia Farley could try that.

5.e
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 10 of 24 ends

Tim Heffernan, BKF Civil Engineers, stated that, regarding maintenance of the fields, there as a couple of approaches that are different diagnoses they have heard over the design process. One was an irrigation barriers and they would definitely look at fixing some of the irrigation lines if that is the cause, but one was fixing the drainage concrete ditch at the toe of the existing slope.

They thought that was a lot of the drainage for the hillside to sweep through and get into the field and saturate the field even after rain events. By fixing the drainage ditch which is under disrepair and disjointed and not allowing water to flow out to Yosemite. They thought it would alleviate quite a bit of the soggiest in that corner of the field.

Commissioner Wright asked if that is all the proposed changes and improvements to the field that they are considering.

Mr. Heffernan stated, from the drainage perspective, that is the first but it is one of those that could be an iterative process if that is not the cause of some of the drainage concerns that they would look at and explore other options.

Commissioner Wright stated that the field will be left in a playable condition with a smooth, relatively even surface.

Mr. Heery stated that was the intent.

Commissioner Wright stated that, during the construction process, it seemed that there was going to be a ton of materials that are going to need to be staged and he asked if the contemplation they are going to use the existing parking lots that serve these fields that are going to be continued to be in use or are they considering using that playing space during the construction project. He asked, if they are building in the middle first, where are they going to put all this stuff, i.e., are they going to impact that community use during the construction project. He stated that they have all seen building projects that go out into the street with putting all kinds of things and he asked if they are going to limit themselves to only taking up the parking in front of the project site as opposed to expanding out to even another lane.

Mr. Heery stated that they will consult with the general contractors with whom they take bids.

He did not anticipate a lane closure need. He does anticipate that there will be some use of Lot 1 for staging and storage. He stated that it depends upon whether or not the proceed with phases 1 and 2 at the same time. If they don’t the phase 2 portion of the sight could considerably be used for staging and storage. He didn’t want to make a commitment about the use or non-use of Lot 1 for construction as they haven’t had those detailed conversations yet with general contractors who might build it. He stated that they will certainly work to minimize the disruption to Lot 1.

Commissioner Wright asked if they would consider turfing the field or putting up lights for the field to extend the playing time and putting in a pickle ball court in addition to the basketball court.

Mr. Heery stated that he would have to defer to his client on that question.

Heather Olsen, Pacifica School District Cuperintendent, stated that, in terms of the question of whether they would consider turfing, they are going to do a turf field at Ortega Field which is about .8 mile away and that is about $5 million and they had not considered turfing of that field.

They also thought the natural element of that is very desirable for both the residents as well as the

5.e
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 11 of 24 ends

neighbors. They had not seriously thought about adding lights to that because it is in a residential neighborhood and there was not that much interest. There was a lot of interest during the day but not people asking for lights at night.

Commissioner Wright asked about the pickle ball court.

Ms. Olsen stated that when they started this project, pickle ball was not the rage and now it is.

She stated that they have interest in the basketball court and it seems like pickle ball with a temporary net could be a possibility for the parking lot.

Commissioner Wright asked if they consider talking to Parks & Rec to see if they could work together to turf the field or is that too much to ask.

Ms. Olsen stated that they are working closely with the city and, if that was their interest in doing that, she thinks the piece of keeping it as a natural turf field was around making sure that the rain had a place to go because they are doing the field.

Commissioner Wright asked if that was before the drought.

Ms. Olsen responded affirmatively. She stated that there are certainly some water considerations on that field, but because they are doing the field only .8 mile up as a natural turf field, that was why they didn’t seriously consider that.

Commissioner Wright referred to the gentleman who spoke earlier, and stated that he read in the documents that the infrastructure won’t be overused, and he thought it might be a better question for the architecture. He stated that the city has sufficient wastewater treatment, sufficient water supplies, sufficient PG&E, sufficient emergency medical response, sufficient fire and sufficient police protection without adding additional burdens to those services.

Mr. Heery stated he would defer to Tim Heffernan who is the civil engineer on the project if he can come back online. He stated that they have gone through the due diligence of looking at all those issues and he believes there is adequate capacity but to the extent that it is not, it is their responsibility to work with the city to make sure there is attempt to answer more specifically.

Commissioner Wright stated that the last thing he has is probably for Planning Director Murdock but in the considerations of changing population curves, in the event that things change and we have a lot more young ones and he assume we have more than sufficient capacity with the existing schools we have and more than enough capacity in terms of field space that were are not limiting as they are eliminating one field on the other side of the school for whatever future needs that one could contemplate.

Planning Director Murdock stated that he will try to respond to several of the questions he asked in terms of capacity, sufficiency of services. He stated that the environmental impact report analyzed the variety of public services and did not identify any deficiencies or additional facilities that would need to be constructed to meet the demands of the project. He stated that, specific to school capacity, which he thought was one of his questions, he stated that the state law provides that payment of school fees shall satisfy the requirements to assess for the potential school development and in this case, the project would pay school fees and, therefore, meet the requirement to provide for those potential school impacts in this case. He stated that there is no

5.e
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 12 of 24 ends

identified need for additional infrastructure or public facilities. In addition, our police and fire departments analyzed the project and had not identified any concerns with their ability to service the project.

Commissioner Wright asked if there would be no financial impact since they currently don’t get property tax from the schools and they aren’t going to get it in the future and it is a break even.

Planning Director Murdock thought the potential exists for there to be a positive to the extent that there are market rate units or other units that are not subject to tax exemptions and the potential exists very much for there to be a net positive in terms of property tax collection.

Commissioner Wright asked if the city attorney could talk to the rules around the property tax for the market rate units.

Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that, with respect to the school housing that is set to be constructed, perhaps the school district could respond to that, as she is not sure whether there would be any exemptions dependent on how they are financing and how the project is structures, but if any portion of it does become the standard market rate housing that is not specifically owned by the school district, that would certainly be subject to property taxes.

Commissioner Devine stated that she thought she read in the documents that, if they so choose not to proceed with the second phase of development, it could not happen. She concluded that she was correct. She stated she had a deep curiosity about who was managing the market rate units and the units that are supposed to be designated for Pacifica School District teachers and/or employees, and shed was noticing that a little under 65% of the entirety of the project, phase 1 and 2, are supposed to go those individuals. She was curious who is going to be on top of that.

Ms. Olsen stated that they haven’t gotten that far down the line, but they would use the model that Jefferson Union High School District did where they formed an advisory board and that board sets out some by-laws and makes decisions. She thought the district would work closely in terms of determining what percentage of them were subsidized but, in terms of managing the project, it would be managed by the advisory board with a property manager on site.

Commissioner Devine asked, in the case that phase 2 were not to occur and phase 1 were to proceed with the majority of those units going below market rate, if that is still going to be a feasible financial issue.

Ms. Olsen stated that she identified their biggest challenge. In order to build these, they don’t want to build units that their staff can’t move into as they not affordable and that is one of the reasons why they would think about at market rate units so that they could further subsidize the units that they offer to staff.

Commissioner Godwin stated that his question was for the school district. He stated that getting into the venture of managing rental property is something new for the school district and something that a few other districts have tried recently but not many. He asked, should they lose interest in doing this or decide it is more difficult than they originally projected, and they would like to sell the project or part of the project or radically change the way it is run, is there some time limit before they could make those sort of decisions and what would be the impact on the city if the school district chose to divest themselves of this in the timeframes they discussed.

5.e
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 13 of 24 ends

Ms. Olsen stated that she will answer that question as the superintendent, and she would defer to Mr. Heery in terms of his experience with residential real estate. As the superintendent, she thought this was a great need for the district and she can’t imagine why they would want to divest from this project. She stated that they don’t have any intention of becoming the landlords of our employees as that would be a very difficult situation and why they work with establishing an advisory board that sets out the rules and conditions and becomes the landlord. The property manager would be the day to day interaction but the advisory board would be the landlord and that would be an incredibly difficult situation as an employer to also be someone’s landlord. She stated that is the school district version of that and, for the residential property, she will defer to Mr. Heery.

Mr. Heery knows that the district has no intention of selling, and the education code does limit the extent or prohibits the mortgaging of properties. He stated that there are financing facilities, i.e., certificates of participation which they used with the Jefferson Union High School District to help finance that project. He didn’t think the district would be putting itself at risk of foreclosure.

Regarding radical changes in attitude in the future, they haven’t considered that as he didn’t think the district has any appetite for selling the land.

Planning Director Murdock stated that he heard part of Commissioner Godwin’s question also to be somewhat related to the term of the agreement and what those obligations will be ongoing and as Asst. City Attorney Murphy mentioned earlier, there is an assignment provision in the event that the district were to want to get out of the rental housing business in some fashion and seek to sell the property and be allowed to do so under the law, but there is a process for the city to consider the party to which the district is assigning it and they would continue to be bound by the obligations of the agreement for the term that remained at that point in time. He stated that the benefits the city is receiving as public benefits from the development agreement for approving the project would remain for the remaining term of the agreement as they would if the school district had owned it.

Commissioner Godwin asked if that was the 15-year period of the development agreement.

Planning Director Murdock stated that there are a few operative timelines and it was worth summarizing them for clarity.

Commissioner Godwin stated he wasn’t asking him to read through the whole thing.

Planning Director Murdock stated that the term of the overall agreement is 25 years, the term of guaranteed public access to the playing fields is 20 years and that can be shortened if the school district withdraws the part of the playing field that is excess of the parkland requirements for about a five-school use and there is the term in which they can proceed with the project under the current zoning and General Plan and that is 15 years. He stated that those are the three key timelines and there are other timelines, such as for construction of phase 1 and phase 2 within that initial 15-year term and he wanted to be clear that the total term of the agreement would be 25 years and there are other shorter terms for different particular aspects within that 25 years.

Vice Chair Hauser was personally excited to see this project and have been excited about it for a while. She has some questions that range from the CEQA consultants to the design team to City staff and she will try to cluster them but apologizes if they go out of order. She stated that, with

5.e
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 14 of 24 ends

the MMRP, there are two BIO mitigations, BIO 1 and 2 that seem to conflict with each other.

She qualified that to say that the mitigations themselves don’t seem to conflict but she thinks that they have the city and CDFW as the responsible parties in mitigation 2, but only the city in bio 1 and, for consistency, it maybe was intended to say both, but she would like for them to doublecheck.

Krystle Rizzi, M-Group (CEQA Consultant), thought the intent of that was initially to provide the survey as they have to do the preconstruction survey regardless and she thinks, if they did find something, they would do the relocation plan that CDFW would be a part of but she didn’t see an issue with just modifying it to include CDFW just to be on the safe side to confirm survey protocols.

Vice Chair Hauser thought that would make sense because they are establishing a buffer. She thought it was a well-written EIR. She stated that, in bio 4, she would love for them to define the rainy season. She didn’t know if it was October 15 to April 15 or whatever, but she thought it should be clearer for the applicant so they aren’t confused when starting construction. And in bio 8, it says the total of .063 acres of potential wetlands were identified and bio 9 helps avoid impacts to those wetlands or maybe bio 7, but she wanted to understand how the wetlands plants could be removed if the wetlands are being protected by the other mitigation.

Ms. Rizzi stated that was referring to the modifications that they are going to be doing to the drainage ditch, and given the adjacency, it may be that they damage or potentially remove them.

In the event that those are damaged or removed, they would need to be reestablished with native wetland plants to make sure that the wetland got it.

Vice Chair Hauser thanked her for the clarification and then asked staff if the MMRP called out of Exhibit B, but it wasn’t attached to the resolution. She wanted to make sure that, in the final resolution as things move forward, the MMRP does get into the conditions.

Planning Director Murdock stated that they left placeholder pages for several of the exhibits to avoid confusion and to manage the length of the packet, but however the MMRP is finalized by the Planning Commission would be in the final resolution as that exhibit.

Vice Chair Hauser understood that there were 15% deed restricted below market rate homes and, as there was no technical deed restriction on the workforce housing component, wondered how that would impact our RHNA and which category the units would be counted in.

Planning Director Murdock stated she was correct. The project overall is 70 units and the city’s inclusionary ordinance requires 15% of projects of that size to be deed restricted affordable housing units and equates to 11 units. Our ordinance further specifies that not less than 50% of those shall be affordable to low income individuals and the remainder may be affordable to moderate income individuals. He said six units would be attributable to deed restricted low income housing in our annual progress report for housing element, five of them would be deed restricted moderate income units and the remainder would either be above moderate income units or, if able to obtain information that the district was renting them for some other lower income level, they may be able to assign them to the appropriate income category, but they would not be deed restricted units.

5.e
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 15 of 24 ends

Vice Chair Hauser referred the VMT and the EIR, she appreciated some of the questions asked and the distinction that there is really only one new car per two minutes during peak traffic hours, and would like staff to comment that, with the General Plan finding that they made when they updated the General Plan, it seems like the city, through Planning Commission and Council, has already made the assertion that they understand it is hard to meet VMT requirements in Pacifica and she thought they had already analyzed this and she asked Planning Director Murdock to speak to that.

Planning Director Murdock agreed, stating that perhaps Ms. Ervin or Ms. Rizzi, can speak more about why they packaged a statement of overriding considerations for the project EIR in addition to the one that was done with the programmatic EIR for the General Plan update and the considerations for that and why it is arguably beneficial in this instance.

Olivia Ervin, M-Group (CEQA Consultant), stated that the reason for the timing when they started this, the General Plan had not been certified and updated and they were teeing up in anticipation that the timeline for this project may not align with that, but with the acknowledgment and certification of the EIR for the General Plan, the city had acknowledged that there is a VMT override the land uses.

Vice Chair Hauser thought that made sense. She wasn’t sure if a representative from engineering is present, but she would prefer to ask Pacifica’s engineering team. She wanted to understand if a paper study was done in regard to the sewer or if we are going to do a wet study at the two nearest manholes as she didn’t see that in the conditions of approval, but she knows that, at the back of the valley, that is something typically asked for and she would like staff to weigh in on that and BKF can weigh in as well.

Planning Director Murdock stated that the have Plant Manager Louis Sun from the Wastewater division of Public Works as well as Sr. Civil Engineer Ray Donguines from the engineering and field services division of Public Works. He stated one or both of them can address the question.

WW Plant Manager Sun stated that the city conducted the 2011 sewer master plan and in that plan they identified several CIP projects which would increase the capacity for the collection system, and those projects were completed in 2018 when they upsized the sewer connection trunk line on Terra Nova and Oddstad Blvds. He stated, in terms of plant treatment capacity, that was designed about 20 years when they built a new treatment plant and they have sufficient capacity to treat the whole city even if they built out the entire city to maximum. He hopes that answers her question as they have sufficient capacity both in collections and treatment.

Vice Chair Hauser stated it did. She stated her next questions are for the applicant’s design team.

She referred to discussion of desire to do the project in phases between parcels 2 and 3, and she asked if there was any benefit to the school district as the applicant by reserving the right to file multiple maps and did they think about that or want to do that.

Ms. Olsen asked if the question was specifically whether there was a benefit to filing multiple maps.

Vice Chair Hauser thought it might be a question for her civil engineer.

5.e
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 16 of 24 ends

Mr. Heffernan stated that he didn’t think there was a benefit because these are not for condominium purposes and the district wants to retain property ownership of the property and fees, and they are not going to subdivide for condominium or to sell off the properties.

Vice Chair Hauser stated she noticed on mapping that there was one little leader that called out an emergency vehicle access easement but she can’t tell if the intention is that it is over all of the street and she asked if they can confirm if that is the intention.

Mr. Heffernan stated that it is over a portion of the streets and they worked with the fire department to get an EVAE access to most of the building but it does not encompass the entire parking lot. He stated that they are allowed to drive, whether they need to on the asphalt, but in terms of the EVAE they worked with the fire department to restrict certain locations because of the turnarounds.

Vice Chair Hauser asked, to be clear, the EVAE, where they have the trash enclosure on the left hand side of the plan, they do not need to back out as it is designed now because it looks like they have a 150 foot dead end.

Mr. Heffernan stated that was correct.

Vice Chair Hauser stated she would defer this to engineering, but she thought the city would require an EVAE. She stated that the streets look like they are already designed correctly to accomplish this but she thought they would want to reserve a new emergency vehicle access easement over this portion that loops back around.

Mr. Heffernan stated that it doesn’t exceed the 150 foot limit for a dead end.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if he was saying the dead end does not exceed the 150 feet.

Mr. Murphy asked if they are looking at the turnaround on the trash enclosure to the south side of the plan.

Vice Chair Hauser responded affirmatively.

Mr. Murphy stated that Tim Heffernan was on the line, but maybe he will speak to it. He believed that the hammer head designed there provides the turnaround in lieu as it is not a 150- foot dead end as there is an adequate turnaround space there.

Vice Chair Hauser got it, concluding that there is a hammer head between buildings B1, 2 and 3 and then in the portion that goes further down.

Mr. Murphy stated that there is a hammer head that wraps around the trash enclosure.

Vice Chair Hauser understood it wraps around the trash enclosure. She asked if it was on one of their sheets.

Mr. Murphy stated he thought it was on Civil Sheet C7.1

5.e
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 17 of 24 ends

Vice Chair Hauser stated on looking at that sheet, it struck her that there weren’t public utility easements over the streets and she didn’t know if engineering or the design team could speak to that.

Mr. Heffernan stated the onsite storm will be private, the onsite sewer would be private and the onsite water would be private. The water will be private on the project side of the backflow preventer out at Oddstad. He stated that they will have to provide easements for PG&E when their services are designed, but minor changes and that is not an easement.

Vice Chair Hauser thanked him for the clarification. She stated, for the architects, on the rendering where the trees are taken away, she stated that it was more perceptible than in the elevations but, between buildings C1 and C2, there is one area that lacks articulation and she wondered if the architect could advise if something could be added in this area to rectify that.

Mr. Murphy stated that he thinks that, they can see with the rendering of the trees, the buildings are going to be fairly covered 99% of the time, but they could consider some planter or window box treatments, something to add to buffer articulations if necessary.

Vice Chair Hauser thought that would be nice as she thought people will be walking on the sidewalk and looking at them as well, not just driving by. She thought the wood material looks very nice, and she asked how they plan to weatherize that.

Mr. Murphy asked, to be clear, if it was the wood material for the trellis.

Vice Chair Hauser stated the trellises and there is a post as well.

Mr. Murphy thought they were planning for the trellises are to be a weather wearing wood such as cedar and it will be treated with a stain so it is naturally resistant to most weather.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if the material is noted as composition shingle or asphalt shingle in the staff report and on the drawing they are rendering show standing seam metal roofs and she wonders if that is a material the district is proposing or did it just make it into the rendering.

Mr. Murphy thought they are proposing that for the non-residential amenity buildings to have a higher class roofing that is more public facing and the majority of the roofing would be comp shingle as called out in the plans.

Vice Chair Hauser stated she was excited to hear Tree City Pacifica supporting the project and it sounds like there are 15 new trees that are replacing the one heritage tree that is being removed.

She asked if that is correct.

Mr. Murphy stated that he believes it is correct, and also believes the landscape architect might be on the line and if she can speak to it.

Planning Director Murdock stated that, while waiting for the landscape architect, he wanted to clarify one complaint with respect to the applicable regulations. Some public commenters alluded to the city’s updated tree protection ordinance, and under the applicable law, due to the subdivision map act and the date that this tentative subdivision map was deemed complete, the applicable regulations are those that were in effect at that time, in 2020, and that was prior to the

5.e
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 18 of 24 ends

effected updated tree ordinance and this project was evaluated for compliance with the heritage tree ordinance that preceded the current ordinance.

Vice Chair Hauser thought that made sense.

Lia Farley, Jett Landscape Architect, stated that she concurred with what he just said, providing a significant amount of new trees to mitigate the loss of the few trees they had to take down, including the heritage tree.

Vice Chair Hauser asked if she could clarify what size they are planning to provide for the new trees.

Ms. Farley stated that, for the mitigation trees, they are planning on 24-inch box and 36-inch box trees.

Vice Chair Hauser thanked her and stated that concludes her questions.

Commissioner Wright stated that he lives a similar distance back in the valley and is a bit more familiar with the sun patterns back there, and he noticed in the drawings in some of the representations that they are contemplating black asphalt roofing and he stated that it gets really not back there on a lot of days and they might want to consider using a different color to make more of that hear radiate away.

Mr. Murphy thought that was a good comment and they could consider a more high reflectance color for the shingle roofing and that would be required by the California code and a greener alternative as well.

Commissioner Wright asked if they are considering using heat pumps availing themselves of those, adding that he assumes they don’t need the tax rebate.

Mr. Murphy stated that he has to back check their most recent mechanical plans and plumbing plans.

Commissioner Wright assumes it is just to try to understand what level of efficiency they are trying to achieve with their heating and cooling needs.

Mr. Murphy stated that Mr. Heery confirmed that they have utilized heat pumps in the most recent plan.

Commissioner Wright stated that was good to hear. He asked if they are planning on putting in security cameras at all.

Mr. Murphy thought so, but he doesn’t have that design handy. He believes it is a key part for the near essential development to have security cameras.

Commissioner Wright asked the superintendent that, in reference to a lady who was speaking to 800 kids using that field and he knows in the evening time when he serves on a different youth organization and they have field space time constraints, particularly in the winter months,

5.e
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 19 of 24 ends

whether they would be open to the possibility of allowing people to put temporary, portable lights on those fields up until 9:00 p.m. which is when it is dusk in the summer time.

Superintendent Olsen stated that they have been very receptive to what the community wants and they will be open to that if that is what the community wants if that serves the neighbors needs at the same time.

Commissioner Wright knows it is a current use at Oceana High School during the winter months and he is trying to look to make sure that she knows that he isn’t part of that organization or baseball organization that, if kids want to be playing on fields instead of being at the bonfires on the beach, he is all for it.

Superintendent Olsen stated that they currently don’t have lights on any of their fields and they have some other fields that are maybe not as residentially based that would also be acceptable uses for light if that was the interest of the community.

Commissioner Wright stated, for the record, he is married to a school teacher and totally in support of this project and thinks it’s a great thing. He isn’t a teacher in the district and doesn’t want them to get the wrong idea that he is not thankful for what they are trying to do for the community. He thinks it is important and thinks they are horribly underpaid for what they do for our community and he thanks them for recognizing the need and trying to fill it.

Planning Director Murdock clarified that installation of light, whether permanent or portable, are not a part of this project and the impacts of the lighting at night have not been evaluated in the environmental impact report and to the extent they may be utilized at the site, that would require further review by the city at some point in time.

Vice Chair Hauser understood and thought they can agree to defer that analysis. She stated that she reviewed Sheet C7.0 and she assumed it was okay that the applicant would be willing to add the center leg of the hammer head to the EVAE as it is not currently in there. She sees the hammer head and it does look like it meets the fire code and she wanted to make sure that the appropriate easement is over the hammer head.

Mr. Murphy stated that he thought that was appropriate and asked if Mr. Heffernan could speak to that.

Mr. Heffernan stated that they will look at that and provide the additional area that is required.

Vice Chair Hauser referred to a staff request on vacating the existing right-of-way and easement, and asked Planning Director Murdock if he can confirm that there are not existing utilities that are on the property that are currently in use and should be in use and if we are vacating them with the mapping rather than at the time they are stopping usage, she thought they will need to make sure they add a timing consideration to the way they word that.

Planning Director Murdock stated that it may be best for Senior Civil Engineer Donguines to speak about any utilities he is aware of operating on the site and what that coordination piece may be as it is not an issue he is familiar with.

5.e
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 20 of 24 ends

Sr. Civil Engineer Donguines stated that the existing subdivision maps which included the courts that was never build and therefore for the utility easements that was proposed there were no utilities built in them so they are confident that, if they are extinguished, there are no utilities in them.

Vice Chair Hauser asked, for avoidance of doubt, if he can confirm that also applies to the fivefoot easement that fronts Yosemite Drive and Oddstad Blvd.

Sr. Civil Engineer Donguines stated that those utility easements will be retained as part of the new map for the final map and, if there are any easements there, the easements will be retained with the new final map.

Vice Chair Hauser stated, as this is a timing question and they are not recommending vacating those things at this time but recommending them vacating those at the time of the final parcel map, she asked Planning Director Murdock if that is correct.

Planning Director Murdock agreed, adding that the vacation would not occur upon whatever action the Commission takes at this meeting, if that was an action to approve the project, and that vacation would be, as she said, at the time of the final map approval and recordation.

Vice Chair Hauser assumed they would extinguish and replace in kind simultaneously.

Planning Director Murdock agreed that there would not be a period of time where they didn’t have any appropriate utility easements but they would need them for the project to be built.

Vice Chair Hauser thanked him for that clarification, then asked if there was any deliberation.

Commissioner Wright asked the designers, in terms of the exterior lighting and lamping on that, he hoped they are going to go with a relatively high Kelvin lighting so it is more of a softer white, not that bright, white, intense, light bloating light.

Mr. Murphy stated that he didn’t think there was anything that would prohibit them from picking a lamp of a softer white as long as it met the foot candle lighting requirements on site and they would be happy to look at pictures of that description.

Commissioner Wright stated that he personally would appreciate it, but it was not for him to decide but he knows that is one of the things that he finds very distasteful.

Mr. Murphy stated that it was his aesthetic preference as well.

Commissioner Ferguson noted that it was remarkable that this is the largest project he has seen in the three years he has been here and has gotten not one single vitriolic mail or negative comment.

He thought it was a true achievement and he hasn’t heard any recommendations for additional conditions of approval and, unless they have anything else to discuss, he was happy to make a motion now or he will hear other opinions.

Vice Chair Hauser suggested that they hear from others and come back to him for a motion.

5.e
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 21 of 24 ends

Planning Director Murdock stated that he would like an opportunity, when they are ready, to read back what he has heard from the Commission in terms of what that final motion might include as a change to the proposed motion in the staff packet.

Vice Chair Hauser agreed as she has six things, including the two he has, if he wants to take it away.

Planning Director Murdock agreed and asked that they let him know if he didn’t capture anything correctly or if they have anything to add. He stated that some are minor clarification changes he didn’t announce earlier. He heard the Commission discuss changes to add California Department of Fish and Wildlife to the responsible parties and mitigation monitoring and reporting program, mitigation measure bio 1 and to define the period of the rainy season, presuming consistent with the grading moratorium rainy season in the Municipal Code, MMRP mitigation measure bio 4, recommendation to vacate any existing city rights of way and easements in the project area, including a revision to the development agreement to clarify that all BMR units would be constructed in phase 1 of the project. The applicant, prior to the hearing, did ask, regarding condition No. 20, to add accept where a centralized system or systems may be approved by the building official. That condition pertains to photovoltaic systems. The condition of approval was more so standard condition applicable to single family residences where each unit would have its own PVC system. In this case, the applicant proposed a centralized system on top of the carports and staff is supportive of that change if the Commission is. Modifying condition of approval No. 38, to clarify a typo, it indicates Crespi Drive and it should Indicate Oddstad Blvd., with respect to sewer lines. He heard potentially a new condition of approval that the applicant shall add articulation to the façade of building C2, such as a trellis feature, window planter box or other articulation acceptable to the Planning Director and on sheet C7.0, ensuring that the applicant shall ensure that the emergency vehicle access easement includes the entirety of the fire access turnaround to the satisfaction of the city engineer and fire chief. He stated that is all he captured.

Vice Chair Hauser wanted to clarify the last one to say that the vesting tentative map reflects the EVAE consistent with the hammer head shown on C7.0. The easement should be shown on the vesting tentative map. She also would like to clarify the metal roofs which were not part of the drawing package but were part of the renderings and add those to sheet A4.0.

Planning Director Murdock confirmed she referred to A4.0.

Vice Chair Hauser responded affirmatively.

Planning Director Murdock stated applicant shall revise the project plans to include standing seam metal roofs on the community amenity buildings.

Vice Chair Hauser responded affirmatively.

Commissioner Leal stated that he is happy to see this project fully supported as he thinks it will be a great community benefit. He also sees it as a great economic benefit, and given the location of the project, it is going to have, by an estimate, over 100 new residents to help support the Park Mall in the back of the valley as well as other businesses within Pacifica whereas if these tenants lived elsewhere, they would be spending their money elsewhere, whether northern Pacifica or elsewhere in the Bay Area so he sees the economic benefits. He agrees with the community

5.e
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Planning Commission Minutes
March 20, 2023

Page 22 of 24 ends

comments as well as fellow Commissioners’ sentiments on the project. He saw one minor typo in the report on packet page 29, where it says basketball hope installation and he thought it meant basketball hoop installation.

Commissioner Wright added that, with all the turnover they have had in planning staff, he thought it was amazing how they were able to pull it together just to be here at this time to make this decision and he gave kudos especially to the gentleman sitting over there (Planning Director Murdock).

Vice Chair Hauser added that she thought this is super cool as she rarely looks at the project and the architecture and think it looks great and not want to change a whole bunch of stuff and she commends the design team and the school district for all the additional open space and she thought it is very cool and they did an excellent job. She is happy to support this.

Commissioner Devine stated that she grew up in Shenandoah Court, a couple of blocks from the project site, and this has been something that her family has talked about years and it is so exciting to see this area revitalized and she completely agrees with Vice Chair Hauser that it is a beautiful looking project and is so excited that we will still have access to the fields, frontage trees, the back they are trying to keep and it is important that this is an otherwise very sleepy neighborhood and it is important to keep a level of privacy, not only for the neighbors but for the new residents. She noticed that the new designation and rezoning, they could have built up to 299 units and keeping it at 70 is incredibly commendable and she appreciates it. She thanked them for the forethought, years of work, volunteerism, enthusiasm and she was happy to be here to support this project.

Vice Chair Hauser called on Commissioner Ferguson for the motion.

Commissioner Ferguson stated that it was her conditions and he stated she can take it away.

Vice Chair Hauser moved that the Planning Commission ADOPT the resolution included as Attachment A to the staff report to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, make the required findings and approve the Statement of Overriding Considerations, APPROVE Specific Plan SP-173-20, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map SUB-248-20 and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization, subject to conditions of approval as amended in Exhibit A and Exhibit B of the resolution to RECOMMEND City Council approval of ordinances to approve Development Agreement DA-3-20, Rezoning RZ205-20 and Development Plan DP-81-20 and to INCORPORATE all maps, written records and reports and testimony into the record by reference; Commissioner Ferguson seconded the motion.

The motion carried 6-0.

Ayes: Commissioners Devine, Ferguson, Godwin, Leal,
Wright and Vice Chair Hauser
Noes: None

5.e
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - March 20, 2023 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-006

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA CERTIFYING A FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DA-3-20, REZONING RZ-205-20, AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN DP-81-20; APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN SP-173-20, VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP SUB-248-20, AND HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL AUTHORIZATION, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT CONSISTING OF 70 RESIDENTIAL RENTAL UNITS AT 930 ODDSTAD BOULEVARD (APN 023-672-600) FOR THE PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 930 ODDSTAD BOULEVARD (APN 023- 672-600) (FILE NO. 2020-009)
________________________________________________________________ Initiated by: Pacifica School District (“Applicant”)
WHEREAS, an application has been submitted for construction of a 70-unit residential development including a property management office, residents’ commons building, and public restroom/changing facilities located at 930 Oddstad Boulevard (APN 023-672-600); removal of three heritage trees; a division of land into three individual lots; a development agreement with certain public and developer benefits, including use of playing fields; a rezoning to change the zoning classification to the P-D Planned Development District; and a Development Plan and a Specific Plan to insure the proper orientation, design character and compatibility of the construction of 70 residential units across seven buildings, a property management office, residents’ commons, and public restroom and changing facility (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the proposed Rezoning would change the zoning classification of the Project site from R-1 (Single-Family Residential) to P-D (Planned Development) zoning district to allow site specific development standards; and
WHEREAS, upon approval of the proposed Rezoning to the P-D (Planned Development) zoning district, approval of a Development Plan is necessary pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC) Section 9-4.2203 to establish permissible uses and development standards for the Project site; and WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement would provide for public and developer benefits resulting from negotiations between the City of Pacifica (“City”) and Applicant; and WHEREAS, upon approval of the proposed Rezoning to the P-D (Planned Development) zoning district, approval of a Specific Plan is necessary pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2210 prior to issuance of a grading or building permit to demonstrate proper orientation, desirable design character, and compatible land uses; and
WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map because it would divide a parcel into four or less parcels pursuant to PMC Section 10-1.303; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a Heritage Tree Removal Authorization because the Project proposes removal of one or more heritage trees; and

5.f
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 2 WHEREAS, the City determined that the Project required the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR), pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 2100 et seq.; (“CEQA”), and the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Title 14, Sections 1500 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations; “CEQA Guidelines”); and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft EIR (“DEIR”) dated November 2022 to consider, identify and analyze all potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2021100457), which concluded that the Project could result in potentially significant impacts to Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation and Traffic, and that all the potentially significant impacts of the Project, with the exception of Transportation and Traffic, can be avoided or reduced to insignificance with implementation of mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the City provided notice of the availability of the DEIR and the City made the DEIR available for a 45-day review and comment period that ran from November 23, 2022, to January 9, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City received one written public comment and no agency comment letters during the DEIR public review period; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comment received during the comment period, which together with revisions to the DEIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) constitutes the Final EIR (“FEIR”); and
WHEREAS, no significant new information has been added to the EIR after public notice of the availability of the DEIR or added or modified in the FEIR, under CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5. The additional information and modifications that have been provided do not show (1) a new significant environmental impact, (2) a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, (3) that a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure would clearly lessen the significant impacts of the Project, but that the developer declines to adopt it, or (4) that the DEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comments are precluded. The EIR mitigation measures are incorporated in the FEIR for the Project to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. Therefore, no further analysis is required and there is no need to recirculate a revised EIR for further review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the DEIR found that the project would result in significant and unavoidable environmental impacts related to vehicle miles traveled generated by the project and, therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations describing public benefits from the project that would outweigh the potential significant environmental impacts of the project has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the City provided notice of the Planning Commission’s intent to hold a public hearing to consider the EIR, Findings, Statement of Overriding Consideration, and MMRP and approval of the Project, as required by law by publishing a Notice of Public Hearing in the Pacifica Tribune on March 8, 2023, and by mailing the Notice of Public Hearing to 348 surrounding property owners, occupants and interested parties on March 9, 2023; and

5.f
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the FEIR and MMRP prior to making its decision to approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission (“Commission”) held a duly noticed public hearing on March 20, 2022, at which time it considered all oral and documentary evidence presented, and incorporated all testimony and documents into the record by reference.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica that the Planning Commission finds as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and material to this Resolution.

2. In making its findings herein, the Planning Commission relied upon and hereby incorporates by reference all correspondence, staff reports, and other related materials.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby take the following actions with respect to the FEIR:

1. The Planning Commission finds that the FEIR for the Project was presented to the Planning Commission, that the FEIR was prepared, published, circulated, reviewed and completed in full compliance with State law and CEQA Guidelines, that there was adequate public review of the DEIR, that it has considered all comments on the DEIR and responses to comments, that the FEIR adequately discusses all significant environmental issues , and that the FEIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission further certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information in the FEIR.

2. The Planning Commission finds that the information added in the FEIR does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation, but rather that additional information clarifies or amplifies an adequate EIR.

3. The Planning Commission hereby certifies the FEIR for the Project.

4. Pursuant to CEQA section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, and in support of its recommendation of approval of the Project, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project, attached hereto as Exhibit A incorporated herein by reference, finds that such Findings of Fact are supported by substantial evidence and adopts the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

5. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091 and in support of its approval of the Project, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that requires all mitigation measures described in the FEIR be implemented by means of Project conditions, agreements or other measures, as set forth in the MMRP, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the MMRP.

5.f
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 4 6. The record of proceedings is available for review by responsible agencies and interested members of the public during normal business hours at the Planning Department, 540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA 94044. The custodian of these documents is the Planning Department of the City of Pacifica.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby intend to initiate rezoning of the Project site located at 930 Oddstad Boulevard from the R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoning district to the P-D (Planned Development) zoning district.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby recommend City Council approval of Rezoning RZ-205-20, as set forth above, based on the following:
• General Plan Consistency
The proposed Rezoning would be consistent with the following General Plan policies:

1. Promote a Positive Image. Promote a positive image of Pacifica as a desirable place to work, live and visit (ES-G-3);

2. Appropriate Site Design. Ensure that development projects adjacent to protected natural areas are designed to minimize impacts on those areas by employing low impact development techniques for stormwater management, using native/non-invasive landscaping, and minimizing nighttime lighting and glare (ES-I-36);

3. Concentrated Development. Focus new development in or directly adjacent to alreadydeveloped areas, where it can be served by existing public services and where it will not have significant impacts on coastal or other resources (LU-G-2);

4. Future Residential Development. Limit development to sites that are not critical for open space connections or habitat preservation, and which will be in harmony with the surrounding natural setting (LU-G-3);

5. Private Parking. Ensure adequate off-street parking in all new development (CI-G-20);

6. Development of City Parks. Create and enhance neighborhood and pocket parks and plazas to provide access to local recreational space to all Pacifica residents (OC-G-1);

7. School Playfields. Continue to cooperate with the school districts to make school play fields available for public use after school hours (OC-G-4);

8. Park Land Dedication or In-Lieu Fees. For new development, continue to require the dedication of land or payment of in-lieu fees to provide park land at a ratio of five acres per 1,000 residents (OC-I-1);

9. Optimize Public Facilities. Ensure that public facilities are adequate to meet needs, and plan for opportunities that help to meet goals of school districts and the City (OC-G-11);

10. School Site Reuse and Redevelopment. Identify appropriate future land uses for unused school sites that are compatible with existing neighborhoods (OC-I-55);

11. Prioritize in-fill residential development (Housing Element #4.D.i);

12. Provide housing opportunities for all income groups (Housing Element 8.A. page 114); and

13. Provide a choice of housing types and densities (Housing Element 8.A. page 114).

5.f
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 5 • Existing Lot
The site can be adequately accessed from Oddstad Boulevard and can obtain all utilities from existing sources within the Oddstad Boulevard public right-of-way. The site’s location, layout, in-fill nature of development on the site, make it suitable for the density, intensity, and type of development as part of a rezoning to the P-D zoning district concurrently with the proposed Development Plan and Specific Plan, and approval of these items would not threaten public health, safety, or welfare. • Surrounding Neighborhood
The surrounding neighborhood is predominantly single-family residential and commercial recreation land uses. The area zoned as commercial recreation is the Frontierland Park, owned and operated by the City of Pacifica. To the southeast of the project site is the Yosemite Drive Club of the Boys & Girls Club of North San Mateo County. The project area is characterized by two-story single-family homes to the west, south, north, and northeast. To the southeast is a hillside which slopes up towards Frontierland Park. The proposed project consists of one- and two-story buildings. The seven residential buildings are all two-stories and the property management office, Residents Commons, and public restrooms/changing rooms are all one story.

For additional context, Attachment H of the staff report shows the neighboring compatible uses. These properties have been developed in a manner compatible with the proposed project in terms of height, design, and use. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project can be developed without adverse impacts to public health, safety, and welfare to these developments. Therefore, the proposed project can safely develop without causing adverse neighborhood impacts.

In the case of the subject project, rezoning the site to the P-D zoning district would support the applicant’s objectives to provide workforce housing for Pacifica School District and potentially other public agency employees. The clustering of multi-family housing towards the middle and northwest corner of the site helps to preserve the hillside and maintains the existing fields. Without the Rezoning, residential density would be less, but would not support the School District’s goals to provide housing and would not help the City’s Housing Element goals and policies to provide housing.
• Maximum Development Potential
The proposed Rezoning would change the maximum development potential of the project site. The parcel size is 544,064 sf or 12.4 acres. Under the proposed Planned Development (P-D) district, the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) district development standards would apply. The existing Single-Family Residential district has a minimum lot area of 5,000 sf resulting in a maximum development potential of 108 units. The change to P-D results in a minimum lot area of 2,075 sf and a maximum development potential of 262 units. The project proposes only 70 residential dwelling units, and does not seek to accomplish the maximum development potential of the site. The project proposes a minimum lot dwelling area of 4,668 sf.

5.f
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 6 The applicant proposes to develop the project as three lots. Lot 1, which is 4.9 acres, would be maintained as fields, recreation, and public parking. Lots 2 and 3, which amount to 7.5 acres, would be developed for residential and associated uses. In addition to the 20 percent landscaped area of Lots 2 and 3, 26 percent of the project site would remain undeveloped in a natural state.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby recommend City Council approval of an Ordinance approving Development Plan DP-81-20, based on the following discussion and findings required by PMC Section 9-4.2206:

1. The proposed P-D District can be substantially completed within the time schedule submitted by the applicant.

The applicant has anticipated certain economic conditions and proposes to construct the project in phases. Demolition and construction activities are anticipated to occur concurrently beginning in December after entitlement. A Development Agreement between the City and the Pacifica School District was prepared to further outline project phasing and requires commencement of construction for Phase 1 and the parkland improvements within seven years of the execution of the agreement. The Development Agreement would also provide flexibility to the applicant to complete the project.

Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to make this finding.

2. Each unit of the development, as well as the total development, can exist as an independent development capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability or adequate assurance that such objective will be attained.

The proposed project, a workforce housing development with 70 units, is compatible with the larger Park Pacifica residential neighborhood. Specifically, the project would be constructed consistent with the Low Density Residential density (three to nine dwelling units per acre) that exists in the surrounding neighborhood. The main distinction would be the multi-family residential building form factor of the proposed project.

Similar to existing residences, the project benefits from its location on Oddstad Boulevard, a collector street and each building would have access to existing water, sewer, and storm utilities. The craftsman building design, two story heights, landscaping and new trees proposed by the Development Plan would support the desirability and stability of the neighborhood. Individually, each building is designed to provide a unified palette with style, materials and color selection, but is differentiated in terms of articulation and massing to show uniqueness. Additionally, as designed, each unit can provide all the requirements of a single housekeeping unit including, but not limited to restrooms and a place to store, cook, and wash food. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to make this finding.

5.f
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 7 3. The land uses proposed will not be detrimental to the present or potential surrounding uses but will have a beneficial effect which would not be achieved through other districts.

The proposed Planned Development district for Lot 2 and Lot 3, with a multi-family housing use and utilizing the Multi-family Residential District (R-3) development standards, would help to activate an underutilized former school site by providing quality design and building elevations compatible with surrounding uses. The buildings in the surrounding neighborhood are primarily two-story single-family houses. The development would not exceed two stories and would comply with the maximum 35’-0” height limit. The craftsman design compliments the neighboring houses. The proposed development provides landscaping on 20 percent of the project site and to the rear of the property, maintains 33 percent of the project area in its natural state. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to make this finding.

The proposed Planned Development district for Lot 1 would authorize a public park use, which is consistent with its current use, and would not introduce any new or expanded uses that would be detrimental to the present or potential surrounding uses. The presents of a public park at this location would be beneficial to the multi-family residential uses proposed with the project as well as the surrounding residential and commercial uses in the vicinity of the project site.

4. The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic, and in-creased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the street network outside the P-D District.

The project is served by Oddstad Boulevard. The General Plan identifies Oddstad Boulevard as a collector street, which has slower permitted speeds than arterials, serve short, local trips, and accommodate travel between residential neighborhoods and arterials. Collectors have moderate volumes of traffic, and accommodate equally automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians within the right-of-way. The project’s Transportation Analysis studied the magnitude of traffic produced by the proposed development. The analysis concluded that “the project is estimated to generate approximately 484 daily trips with 30 trips during the morning peak commute hour and 37 trips during the evening peak commute hour. This equates to one new trip on Oddstad Boulevard every 2 minutes. It is unlikely that such a small number of added trips would be noticeable to existing residents.”
The Transportation Analysis also evaluated intersections along Oddstad Boulevard and estimated that there would be no noticeable change in the level of service or traffic conditions due to the project, which is consistent with the General Plan’s Circulation Element Policy CI-I-18 which indicates the city should strive to maintain a certain threshold. The project would not exceed the threshold. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to make this finding.

5.f
Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 8 5. Any proposed commercial development can be justified economically at the location proposed and will provide adequate commercial facilities for the area.

The proposed project is a residential development, therefore, the need to make this finding is not applicable.

6. The area surrounding the development can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with the proposed development, and the P-D District uses proposed are in conformance with the General Plan and, where applicable, the Local Coastal Plan, or that changes in the General Plan or Local Coastal Plan are justified.

The surrounding developments include single-family residences to the north, northeast, west, and south, an approximately 63-acre City of Pacifica-owned and operated park (Frontierland Park) to the east, and the Boys and Girls Club to the south. The design of the surrounding residences includes gabled roofs, wood framing, support columns, exposed rafters and covered porches which are characteristic of craftsman styles. The proposed project design is congruent with the adjacent neighborhood and employs the same craftsman style. Twenty percent of the project is landscaped and incorporates drought tolerant and native vegetation. Additionally, the rear of the property will be maintained in a natural state and visually transitions well with the abutting Frontierland Park.

The proposed Development Plan would be consistent with the City’s General Plan.

General Plan consistency includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Land Use Element
Public and Semi-Public. The Public and Semi-Public (PSP) designation indicates public or private schools, libraries, police, and fire stations and other civic and community uses. In the case that public facilities are converted or sold for new uses, Plan land use designations shall be updated. If a public school is discontinued, any proposed new use should be compatible with the adjacent neighborhood.

One of the applicant’s main objectives for the proposed project is to repurpose an underutilized Pacifica School District property as workforce housing to help reduce the cost of housing for School District employees. The School District would make residential units available for rent to employees. The residential nature of the proposed use, building design, and maximum heights are compatible with the adjacent neighborhood.

Low Density Residential (LDR). The Low Density Residential designation provides for development of three to nine dwelling units per gross acre. Single-family residential is the primary use intended for LDR areas. Residential care facilities, schools, and community uses are permitted. Clusters of small-lot development as well as standard subdivisions may be allowed.

5.f
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 9 The proposed residential density (70 units over 7.47 acres) is approximately nine dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the density established for the LDR land use designation, which allows for three to nine units per acre.

2. General Plan Policies
Economic Sustainability Element, Policy ES-G-3. Promote a Positive Image.

Promote a positive image of Pacifica as a desirable place to work, live and visit.

Open Space and Community Facilities Element, Policy OC-G-11. Ensure that public facilities are adequate to meet needs, and plan for opportunities that help to meet goals of school districts and the City.

Open Space and Community Facilities Element, Policy OC-I-55. School Site Reuse and Redevelopment. Identify appropriate future land uses for unused school sites that are compatible with existing neighborhoods.

Housing Element, Policy 4.D.i. Prioritize in-fill residential development.

Housing Element, Policy 8.A. page 114. Provide housing opportunities for all income groups.

Housing Element, Policy 8.A. page 114. Provide a choice of housing types and densities.

The proposed project supports the General Plan policies listed above while also furthering the Pacifica School District’s objectives to attract school employees by reducing the cost of housing and taking advantage of a property no longer needed as a school site. The project would provide 70 residential units which contribute toward meeting the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation across a variety of income levels, including 11 below market rate (BMR) units.

7. The project is consistent with the City's adopted Design Guidelines.

As conditioned, the proposed improvements at the site are consistent with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines. Major areas of project consistency with the Design Guidelines are discussed below:

SITE PLANNING

a. Site Improvements. Locate site improvements such as buildings, parking areas, and walkways to take advantage of desirable site features. For example, existing healthy trees and distinctive berms or rock outcroppings should be incorporated into site design. Buildings should be oriented to capitalize on views of hills and ocean.

Site improvements should be designed to work with site features, not against them. Lot grading should be minimized and disruption of natural features such as trees, ground forms, rocks, and water courses should be avoided.

5.f
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 10 The parcel is oriented in a west to east direction adjacent to Oddstad Boulevard with the property frontage facing the west. The City’s General Plan identifies the land use designation of the site as Low Density Residential (LDR), which allows three to nine dwelling units per acre.

The project site is 12.46 acres and would be developed as three lots: Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3.

There is no plan to divide the parcel. Lot 1, consisting of 4.99 acres, would be developed as playing fields and a parking lot which would include basketball hoops and striping for parking spaces. Lot 2 (4.69 acres) and Lot 3 (2.78 acres) total 7.47 acres and would include a total of 70 units at a density of approximately 9 units per acre, consistent with the LDR land use designation.

The project proposes to construct five residential buildings, a property management office, residents commons, and public restroom / changing room on Lot 2 and three residential buildings on Lot 3. The project also includes four accessory structures, two each for trash collection and bike storage.

There are 27 trees within the Project Area, 20 of which would be maintained. The existing trees are predominantly Monterey Cypresses, but also include Monterey Pine and Peruvian Pepper. The project proposes at least 96 trees, including seven replacement trees. Twenty percent of Lot 2 and Lot 3 would be landscaped and would also include two courtyards.

To the east of the project site is the Park Pacifica Hillside, which also includes the Frontierland Park owned and operated by the City of Pacifica. b. Lighting. Exterior lighting should be subdued, and should enhance building design as well as provide for safety and security. Lighting which creates glare for occupants or neighbors should not be used. In general, large areas should be illuminated with a few low shielded fixtures. Tall fixtures which illuminate large areas should be avoided.

The proposed lighting fixtures are downlights, as shown on Sheet L1.5-L1.6 of the Project Plans. The project includes site and building lighting including 10 to 12 foot pole lights, three-foot bollard lights, indirect lighting to identify wayfinding and project identification signage, integrated under canopy lighting at proposed carports, and wall scones at the proposed buildings.
c. Parking. The visual impact of parking areas should be minimized when appropriate to the site by locating parking areas to the rear or side of the property, rather than along street frontages. Ample landscaping should be used to help screen parking areas from both exterior and interior views.

Many of the covered spaces would be provided through garages designed as craftsman and are integrated with the residential buildings. Other covered parking is provided by carports with corrugated metal roofing that will be under a structure that is capable of supporting solar panels. The parking areas are located within the Project Area and the majority of

5.f
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 11 parking areas would not be wholly visible from the street. Additionally, the project will add new trees to provide visual breaks and screen parking areas.

BUILDING DESIGN
d. Design. The style and design of new buildings should be in character with that of the surrounding neighborhood. This does not mean that new buildings should be identical to existing buildings on neighboring lots, but that new buildings should complement, enhance, and reinforce the positive characteristics of surrounding development. This can be accomplished by incorporating the dominant architectural features of an area into the design of new development. Such features may include bay windows, chimneys, balconies, porches, roof shapes, and other architectural details and materials.

The project building design is styled after the surrounding single-family residences to the north, northeast, west, and south. Like the single-family residences, the project design utilizes gabled roofs, wood framing, support columns, exposed rafters and covered porches which are characteristic of craftsman styles and achieves consistency with the neighborhood.
e. Scale. An important aspect of design compatibility is scale. Scale is the measure of the relationship of the relative overall size of one structure with one or more other structures.

Scale is also used to refer to a group of buildings, a neighborhood, or an entire city. A development can be “out of scale” with its surroundings due to its relative height, bulk, mass, or density.

A structure which is out of scale with its site and neighborhood threatens the integrity of the overall streetscape, and residential projects, particularly single-family dwellings, which are much larger than neighboring structures are therefore discouraged. The City’s height limitation is a maximum only, and the maximum height may often be inappropriate when considered in the context of surrounding development and topography. The “carrying capacity” of a given site is also an important factor in determining appropriate scale and lot coverage. As with the height limitation, the City’s lot coverage limitation is a maximum only.

The proposed development is in a neighborhood that includes two-story single-family residential structures. None of the proposed buildings exceed two stories, and all are under the 30’-0” height maximum. Additionally, the majority of the buildings are oriented so that the narrowest side faces Oddstad Boulevard which assists in reducing the visual scale of the buildings. In instances where the widest face of the building faces Oddstad Boulevard, trees are proposed to be planted to provide a visual break in building mass. • Details. Use architectural features and details to help create a sense of human scale. Wall insets, balconies, window projections, etc., are examples of building elements which may help reduce the scale of larger buildings.

The proposed building includes several architectural features and details that further help create a sense of human scale. These features and details include a distinct base,

5.f
Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 12 balconies, and various sized windows to break up the massing, and different colors, materials, and textures providing articulation.

• Materials. Compatibility of materials is an essential ingredient in design quality. In areas with either historic or architecturally significant structures, the use of similar exterior construction materials should be used in new construction in order to maintain neighborhood character. Consistency and congruity of materials and design elements on individual structures is also important.

The proposed material palette draws upon the surrounding neighborhood and includes asphalt shingle roofs, horizontal lap siding, fiber cement trim, wood trellises, divided-lite vinyl windows and wall sconces.
• Color. Building color should be compatible with the neighborhood and should reinforce and complement the visual character of the building’s environment. Multiple colors applied to a single building should relate to changes of material or form.

As shown on Sheets A4.0 of the Project Plans, the proposed color palette consists of three blue colors, white, and shades of grey and brown. For the multi-family residential buildings, colors, roof orientation, and material textures are utilized to differentiate units to give the appearance that the units are individual buildings and not connected. • Privacy. Consideration should be given to the impact of development on the privacy of surrounding properties. Use judicious windows placement and appropriate landscaping to help minimize the potential for loss of privacy.

The minimum approximate setback from Oddstad Boulevard is 70’-5” providing space between the proposed development and existing properties. Additionally, the project maintains many of the existing mature trees along its frontage on Oddstad Boulevard and would plant an additional 96 trees, including seven replacement trees, along the perimeter of the property and between buildings.
• Consistency. There should be architectural consistency among all building elevations. All elevations need not be identical, but a sense of overall design continuity must occur.

Window treatment and trim, for example, should be carried out around the entire building, not just on the most visible sides.

The proposed buildings do not exceed two stories. The seven residential buildings are all two stories, and the property management office, residents commons, and public restroom / changing rooms are one story. The number of openings and size of windows on the different façades of the buildings vary, but are consistent across the buildings.

Additionally, the applicant has carried the same materials, trim, architectural detailing, and similar shapes of window openings on all sides of the proposed buildings.

5.f
Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 13 LANDSCAPING
• Purpose. Landscaping should not be used to screen or hide an otherwise unacceptable building. Building architecture should stand on its own, with landscaping incorporated as an integral element of overall project design.

The landscaping and plant selection complements the architecture and material colors and provides visual spacing between buildings. The project also provides two landscaped courtyards as tenant amenities and is an integral part of the site design. • Amount and variety. Applicants are encouraged to exceed the minimum amount of landscaping required by the zoning ordinance and landscaping plans should incorporate a variety of plant species. The amount, scale, and nature of landscape materials should be appropriate to the site and/or structure. Large-scale buildings should be complemented by large-scale landscaping. Development along major streets should also include large scale trees.

The project proposes approximately 66,574 square feet of landscaped area which amounts to 20 percent of the Project Area. The proposed planting palette includes 46 different perennial, shrub, grass, groundcover, tree and vine species, including, but not limited to native species and drought tolerant species such as manzanitas, blue-eyed grass, yarrow, Mexican sage, and Australian fuchsia. As noted previously, the project would maintain many of the mature Monterrey Cypresses along Oddstad Boulevard which range in height and circumference.

8. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan and, if applicable, Local Coastal Plan.

Based on the preceding discussion including but not limited to the analysis contained above for the Rezoning, the proposed Development Plan would be consistent with the General Plan. General Plan consistency would include, but not be limited to, making a discontinued school compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby recommend City Council approval of an Ordinance approving Development Agreement DA-3-20, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D with non-substantive revisions as may be agreed upon by the Applicant and City staff, and with an insertion to clarify the mutual agreement between City and Applicant that the 11 below-market rate (BMR) housing units required by the City’s Below Market Rate (Inclusionary) Program (PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 47) shall be constructed in Phase 1 of the Project, based on the following factors provided in PMC section 9-4.5007:

1. Other pending applications and approved projects.

The project site is located at 930 Oddstad Boulevard. There are no other pending applications or projects recently approved in the immediate vicinity.

5.f
Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 14 2. The traffic, parking, public service, visual, and other impacts of the proposed development project upon abutting properties and the community.

As analyzed in the discussion of the proposed Rezoning application, the project site consists of an in-fill development with direct access to a public street and utilities within Oddstad Boulevard. The proposed development would not result in any adverse impacts to public health, safety, or welfare as conditioned.

In particular, the project is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation in the General Plan, providing 70 residential units on 7.5 acres, which is approximately nine dwelling units per gross acre. Building mass would be broken up into seven residential buildings and three buildings with accessory uses, as opposed to a single building as would be required under current General Plan and zoning standards.

The Transportation Analysis evaluated intersections along Oddstad Boulevard and estimated that there would be no noticeable change in the level of service or traffic conditions due to the project, which is consistent with the General Plan’s Circulation Element Policy CI-I-18 which indicates the city should strive to maintain a certain threshold. The project would not exceed the threshold. Additionally, the project is anticipated to result in two additional trips per minute during peak hours which is not expected to be noticeable to the surrounding community.

3. Ability of the applicant to address public facility needs and financing obligations.

The project is seeking approval of a development agreement to establish certain developer benefits and public benefits (Attachment G). These include, but are not limited to, developer benefits including vested rights to proceed with development under the City’s current land use regulations for the term of the development agreement (typically, vesting occurs only after issuance of a building permit and commencement of construction), and term of up to 25 years.

Public benefits include, but are not limited to, public use of the 4.9 acre fields located at 930 Oddstad for at least a 20 year term, field improvements (drainage improvements, parking lot sealing and striping, basketball hoop installation), a public building with restrooms and changing rooms, ongoing maintenance of the fields and facilities by the School District for at least a 20-year term, and a potential 1.4 acre dedication of a portion of the 4.9 acre field site after 20 years. These public improvements and community benefits would increase park and recreation availability and the School District’s agreement to operate and provide maintenance of the fields and amenities enhances City operations while minimizing Costs to the . Maintenance of the fields, in 2022 dollars, is anticipated to be $234,704 annually and would be a community benefit. However, the costs that are incurred by the school district for drainage improvements, striping, construction of the public restroom, and basketball hoops, would be credited to the School District for its obligation to pay $961,984 for the Parkland Improvement Fee.

4. The relationship of the project to the City's growth management program.

Pursuant to Government Code section 66300(b)(1)(D), the City is currently unable to require issuance of a growth management allocation for housing projects as required by PMC section 9-5.03 through January 1, 2025. Therefore, consideration of this factor for approval of a development agreement is inappropriate at this time.

5.f
Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 15 5. The provisions included, if any, for reservation, dedication, or improvement of land for public purposes or accessibility to the public.

As noted above, the proposed public benefits in the development agreement would include improvements to the playing fields at Oddstad Boulevard. These improvements would include construction of additional off-street parking facilities, striping, and drainage improvements. These improvements and the availability of the playing fields would park and recreation opportunities to the public.

6. The type and magnitude of the project's economic effects to the City of Pacifica, and of its contribution, if any, toward meeting the City's housing needs, including affordable housing.

The project provides a total of 70 residential units across various income levels including below market rate at low- and moderate- income levels, subsidized housing for School District employees, and market rate housing. The project seeks to support the School District in their goals of attracting and retaining quality employees, which benefits Pacifica residents.

As stated before, playing fields would be accessible to the Pacifica community and would be operated and maintained by the School District at no cost to the City for a minimum of 20 years. The savings of not having to perform operations or maintenance on the fields results in an annual savings of $243,704 in 2022 dollars.

The project, if approved with 19 residential units, would be among the largest residential projects approved by the City of Pacifica in recent years. Extrapolated over the 20 year term of this provision, this amounts to a total of $4,874,080 in savings.

7. Any other comparable, relevant factor or factors.

As discussed in the staff report analyzing the development permits for the project, it would result in an appropriate development of the site given its in-fill nature and access to existing City infrastructure. The project would be compatible with existing residential uses, and Pacifica residents will be able to utilize the project’s playing fields. Given the project location’s proximity to Frontierland Park, the addition of playing fields to the City’s parkland inventory helps to make the area a local destination for recreation. The project, in whole, inclusive of the provisions of the proposed development agreement, would be positive for the City of Pacifica and would not adversely affect public health, safety, or welfare.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby make the following finding required by PMC 10-1.407(c) and approves Vesting Tentative Parcel Map SUB-248- 20:

1. That the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan, any Specific Plan, the Local Coastal Program, and the zoning provisions.

The discussion of General Plan consistency and zoning provisions compliance contained in the discussion for recommendation of a Rezoning, above, are hereby incorporated by reference. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the following General Plan policies: Promote a Positive Image (ES-G-3),

5.f
Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 16 Appropriate Site Design (ES-I-36), Concentrated Development (LU-G-2), Future Residential Development (LU-G-3), Private Parking (CI-G-20), Development of City Parks (OC-G-1), School Playfields (OC-G-4), Park Land Dedication or In-Lieu Fees (OC-I-1), Optimize Public Facilities (OC-G-11), School Site Reuse and Redevelopment (OC-I-55), Prioritize in-fill residential development (Housing Element #4.D.i), Provide housing opportunities for all income groups (Housing Element 8.A. page 114), and Provide a choice of housing types and densities (Housing Element 8.A. page 114); the Below Market Rate inclusionary zoning requirements in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 47; and, P-D (Planned Development) / R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) Zoning Standards in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 6.

Because the project is a for-rent multi-family development, the subdivision standards in PMC Title 10, Chapter 1 that are designed for subdivisions of land are not applicable to the proposed project. However, the proposed subdivision would meet the lot design standards required by Table 4 of PMC section 10-

1.912(c); and, PMC section 10-1.909 related to the preservation of existing vegetation by preserving the southern half of the project site. The proposed subdivision would also comply with the specific requirements applicable to a vesting tentative map in PMC section 10-1.706. These include, but are not limited to a conspicuous printing on its face the words “vesting tentative map”; and, a concurrent application for all other required discretionary project approvals which include Rezoning, a Development Plan, a Specific Plan and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby recommend that the City Council vacate all public rights-of-way and public easements underlying the Project site in its current condition as indicated in Vesting Tentative Parcel Map SUB-248-20, reserving only those new easements offered for dedication in same, and finds that such vacations would be consistent with the General Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica does hereby make the following findings required by PMC 9-4.2209 and approves Specific Plan SP-173-20:

1. That the specific plan is consistent with the approved development plan.

The project applicant has submitted an application for a Specific Plan concurrent with the Development Plan for a 70 unit multi-family residential building. The Specific Plan, showing circulation, open space, public buildings, land uses, topography, landscaping, irrigation, parking, buildings, and utilities is substantially consistent with the Development Plan under review by the Planning Commission.

2. That the use or building applied for is consistent with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines.

As previously discussed under the findings for approval of the Development Plan, there is sufficient evidence to make this finding.

The City has adopted Design Guidelines which are intended to accomplish the following purposes:
• Ensure at least a minimum standard of design through the application of consistent policies.
• Encourage new construction which exceeds minimum standards and discourage construction which falls short of those standards.

5.f
Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 17 • Provide a framework for review and evaluation of design proposals. • Implement applicable General Plan and Local Coastal Plan goals and policies. • Expedite and facilitate the planning permit process.
• Provide direction for design and redesign of projects.

The Design Guidelines are advisory in nature and, unlike zoning, do not contain explicit standards for determining strict compliance. Rather, they address significant elements of project design that, when balanced overall, result in the best possible site layout and building architecture for a project. An applicant may propose a project which complies with some of, but not all guidelines, and the Planning Commission may still find the project consistent with the Design Guidelines. It is up to the Commission’s discretion to determine the appropriate balance and relative priority of the guidelines for a particular project when considering whether a project has achieved Design Guidelines consistency.

The proposed improvements at the site are consistent with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines. Major areas of project consistency with the Design Guidelines are set forth below:

SITE PLANNING

The site is approximately 1225’-4” wide and 638’-10” long at its maximum depth. The parcel is oriented in a west to east direction adjacent to Oddstad Boulevard. The City’s General Plan identifies the land use designation of the site as Low Density Residential (LDR), which allows three to nine dwelling units per acre.

The project site is 12.4 acres and will be developed as three lots: Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3.

There is no plan to divide the parcel. Lot 1, consisting of 4.9 acres, would be developed as playing fields and a parking lot which would include basketball hoops and striping. Lot 2 (4.7 acres) and Lot 3 (2.8 acres) total 7.5 acres (Project Area) and would include 70 units at an approximate proportion of 9 units per acre, consistent with the LDR land use designation.

The proposed project concentrates development on Lots 2 and 3 with ten occupiable buildings, including seven residential buildings, a property management office, residents’ commons, and public restroom / changing room. The project also includes four accessory structures, two each for trash collection and bike storage.

There are 27 seven trees within the Project Area, 20 of which would be maintained. The existing trees are predominantly Monterey Cypresses but also include Monterey Pine and Peruvian Pepper trees. The project proposes at least 96 trees, including seven replacement trees. Twenty percent of Lot 2 and Lot 3 would be landscaped and would also include two courtyards.

5.f
Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 18 To the east of the project site is the Park Pacifica Hillside, which also includes the Frontierland Park owned and operated by the City of Pacifica. b. Lighting. Exterior lighting should be subdued, and should enhance building design as well as provide for safety and security. Lighting which creates glare for occupants or neighbors should not be used. In general, large areas should be illuminated with a few low shielded fixtures. Tall fixtures which illuminate large areas should be avoided.

The lighting fixtures proposed downlights, as shown on Sheet L1.5-L1.6 of the Project Plans. The project includes site and building lighting including 10 to 12 foot pole lights, three-foot bollard lights, flood lights directed toward proposed wayfinding and project identification signage, integrated under canopy lighting at proposed carports, and wall scones at the proposed buildings.
c. Parking. The visual impact of parking areas should be minimized when appropriate to the site by locating parking areas to the rear or side of the property, rather than along street frontages. Ample landscaping should be used to help screen parking areas from both exterior and interior views.

The project would provide on-site parking for the townhouse units in grade level garages and additional covered and uncovered parking for townhouses and flats. The parking areas are located within the Project Area and the majority of parking areas would not be wholly visible from the street. Additionally, the project will add new trees to provide visual breaks and screen parking areas.

5.f
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 19 A structure which is out of scale with its site and neighborhood threatens the integrity of the overall streetscape, and residential projects, particularly single-family dwellings, which are much larger than neighboring structures are therefore discouraged. The City’s height limitation is a maximum only, and the maximum height may often be inappropriate when considered in the context of surrounding development and topography. The “carrying capacity” of a given site is also an important factor in determining appropriate scale and lot coverage. As with the height limitation, the City’s lot coverage limitation is a maximum only.

The proposed development is in a neighborhood that includes two-story single-family residence structures. None of the proposed buildings exceed two stories, and are all under the 30’-0” height maximum. Additionally, the majority of the buildings are oriented so that the most narrow side faces Oddstad Boulevard which assists in reducing the visual scale of the buildings. In instances where the widest face of the building faces Oddstad Boulevard, trees are proposed to be planted to provide a visual break in building mass. • Details. Use architectural features and details to help create a sense of human scale. Wall insets, balconies, window projections, etc., are examples of building elements which may help reduce the scale of larger buildings.

The proposed building includes several architectural features and details that further help create a sense of human scale. These features and details include a distinct base, balconies, and various sized windows to break up the massing, and different colors, materials, and textures providing articulation.

The proposed material palette draws upon the surrounding neighborhood and includes asphalt shingle roofs, horizontal lap siding, fiber cement trim, wood trellises, lite vinyl windows and wall sconces.
• Color. Building color should be compatible with the neighborhood and should reinforce and complement the visual character of the building’s environment. Multiple colors applied to a single building should relate to changes of material or form.

As shown on Sheets A4.0 of the Project Plans, the proposed color palette consists of three blue, white, and shades of grey and brown. For the multi-family residential buildings, colors, roof orientation, and material textures are utilized to differentiate units to give the appearance that the units are individual buildings and not connected.

5.f
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 20 • Privacy. Consideration should be given to the impact of development on the privacy of surrounding properties. Use judicious windows placement and appropriate landscaping to help minimize the potential for loss of privacy.

Window treatment and trim, for example, should be carried out around the entire building, not just on the most visible sides.

The proposed buildings are do not exceed two stories. The seven residential buildings are all two stories, and the property management office, residents’ commons, and public restroom / changing rooms are one story. The number of openings and size of windows on the different façades of the buildings vary but are consistent across the buildings.

Additionally, the applicant has carried the same materials, trim, architectural detailing, and similar shapes of window openings on all sides of the proposed buildings.

LANDSCAPING
• Purpose. Landscaping should not be used to screen or hide an otherwise unacceptable building. Building architecture should stand on its own, with landscaping incorporated as an integral element of overall project design.

The project proposes approximately 66,574 square feet of landscaped area which amounts to 20 percent of the Project Area. The proposed planting palette includes 46 different perennial, shrub, grass, groundcover, tree and vine species, including, but not limited to native species and drought tolerant species including manzanitas, blue-eyed grass, yarrow, Mexican sage, and Australian fuchsia. As noted previously, the project would maintain many of the mature Monterrey Cypresses along Oddstad Boulevard which range in height and circumference.

5.f
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 21 Based on the foregoing, the project would not be inconsistent with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica hereby authorizes removal of three heritage trees based on the following criteria as required by PMC Section 4- 12.05(c):

1. The condition of the tree with respect to disease, general health, damage, public nuisance, danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures, interference with utility services, and its ability to host a plant which is parasitic to another tree which is in danger of being infested by the parasite;

2. Whether the requested action is necessary for the economically viable use of the property;

3. The topography of the land and effect of the requested action on it;

4. The number, species, size, and location of existing trees in the area and the effect of the requested action upon shade, noise buffers, protection from wind damage, air pollution, historic value, scenic beauty and upon the health, safety, historic value, and general welfare of the area and the City as a whole; and

5. The number of healthy trees the parcel is able to support.

The applicant has submitted an arborist report that assess the condition of all trees in the project vicinity including four heritage Monterey pine trees on the project site. The arborist report determined one of the Monterey pine trees (Tree #24) to be in fair to poor condition which is expected to decline regardless of construction activities and recommended removal of the tree.

Therefore, the proposed heritage tree removal is justified based on the criteria in PMC section 4-12.05(c).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the approvals of Specific Plan-173-20, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map SUB-248-20, and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization (“Development Permits”), are subject to conditions of approval included as Exhibit C to this resolution and the mitigation measures set forth in Exhibit B to this resolution. As set forth in the conditions, the Development Permits shall have no force or effect until, and their terms of approval shall begin on, latest effective date of any ordinance(s) to approve Rezoning RZ-205-20, Development Plan DP 81-20, or Development Agreement DA-3-20 (collectively the “Legislative Approvals”).
* * * * *

5.f
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 22 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 20th day of March 2023.

AYES, Commissioners: DEVINE, FERGUSON, GODWIN, HAUSER, LEAL, WRIGHT

NOES, Commissioners: None
ABSENT, Commissioners: None
ABSTAIN, Commissioners: None
_____________________________
Samantha Hauser, Vice Chair
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _____________________________ Christian Murdock, Planning Director Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney

5.f
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

EXHIBIT A
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations

5.f
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

5.f
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Role of CEQA Findings........................................................................................................ 1

2.0 FINDINGS UNDER CEQA............................................................................................... 2

2.1 Impacts Determined not to be Significant........................................................................ 3

2.2 Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant............................................................. 3

2.2.1 Aesthetics:.........................................................................................................................3

2.2.2 Air Quality: ........................................................................................................................3

2.2.3 Biological Resources:.......................................................................................................3

2.2.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources .........................................................................4

2.2.5 Geology and Soils.............................................................................................................4

2.2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................................4

2.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................4

2.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality.........................................................................................5

2.2.9 Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................................5

2.2.10 Noise..................................................................................................................................5

2.2.11 Population and Housing .................................................................................................6

2.2.12 Public Services..................................................................................................................6

2.2.13 Transportation and Traffic..............................................................................................6

2.2.14 Utilities and Service Systems..........................................................................................6

2.2.15 Wildfire ..............................................................................................................................7

2.3 Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant with Mitigation................................... 7

2.3.1 Aesthetics..........................................................................................................................7

2.3.2 Air Quality .........................................................................................................................8

2.3.3 Biological Resources......................................................................................................11

2.3.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources .......................................................................16

2.3.5 Geology and Soils...........................................................................................................19

2.3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions..........................................................................................22

2.3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................23

2.3.8 Noise................................................................................................................................25

2.3.9 Transportation and Traffic............................................................................................26

2.4 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts.............................................................................. 27

2.5 Findings Regarding Feasible Alternatives ....................................................................... 29

2.5.1 Alternative 1: No Project/No Development................................................................29

2.5.2 Alternative 2: Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences ..29

2.5.3 Alternative 3: Variation of Site Layout and Unit Mix .................................................30

2.5.4 Findings Regarding Alternatives ..................................................................................31

3.0 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CONCLUSIONS ..................................................... 32

3.1 Project Benefits................................................................................................................. 33

3.2 Statement of Overriding Considerations........................................................................ 34

3.3 General Findings............................................................................................................... 35

5.f
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 1 CEQA requires the Pacifica City Council to balance the benefits of the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project (project) against its significant and unavoidable environmental effects in determining whether to approve the project. Since the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies significant impacts of the project that cannot feasibly be mitigated to below a level of significance, the City must state in writing its specific reasons for approving the project in a “statement of overriding considerations” pursuant to Sections 15043 and 15093 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This Statement of Overriding Considerations sets forth the specific reasons supporting the City’s action in approving the project, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR or FEIR, which incorporates the Draft EIR or DEIR by reference) and other information in the administrative record.

In making the statement of overriding considerations, CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable’. (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, subd. (a).)
The following sections provide findings and statements of facts supporting the findings, describe the general project benefits considered by decision makers in determining to adopt the proposed project despite its potentially significant adverse environmental effects, and provide conclusions.

The following findings are hereby adopted by the City Council of Pacifica pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. (CEQA), and the Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act, Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines).

These Findings and Facts in Support of Findings relate to the approval of the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project for which the City Council of Pacifica is the Lead Agency.

5.f
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 2 The Findings state the City Council’s conclusions regarding the significance of the potential environmental impacts of the project after all feasible mitigation measures have been adopted. These findings have been prepared to comply with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and are based on information in the Draft and Final EIR for the project and on all other relevant information contained in the administrative record.

CEQA requires agencies to identify mitigation measures that would avoid or substantially lessen a project’s significant impacts or potentially significant impacts if such measures are feasible. The mitigating measures identified in the Final EIR mitigate the potentially significant impacts of the project, to the extent feasible, as described in the Final EIR. All mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR (as listed in Table 1-1 of the Draft EIR) that are within the City Council’s authority to impose are hereby adopted by the Council.

Public Resources Code Section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” Section 21002 further provides that “in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.” (Pub. Resources Code, Section 21002.) The mandate and principles set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Resources Code, Section 21081, subd. (a); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091, subd. (a).)
The EIR examined the environmental impacts of the project in the areas of Aesthetics; Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources; Geology and Soils; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Hydrology and Water Quality; Land Use and Planning; Noise; Population and Housing; Public Services; Transportation and Traffic; Utilities and Service Systems; Wildfire; Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes; Growth-Inducing Impacts; and Cumulative Impacts.

5.f
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 3 State CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 requires that an EIR contain a brief statement disclosing the reasons why various possible significant effects of a project were found not to be significant, and therefore would not be discussed in detail in the EIR. Chapter 4, Environmental Evaluation, of the DEIR identified the following issue areas that would not be impacted by the proposed project, and thus, does not include a detailed discussion of:
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Energy
• Mineral Resources
• Recreation
Under Public Resources Code section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091(a)(1) and 15092(b), the City determines that the following potential impacts would not occur as a result of the project or would be less than significant, as identified in the EIR:

Impact AES-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Impact AES-2: Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.

Impact AES-4: The project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime.

Impact AQ-1: Implementation of the proposed Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan.

Impact AQ-4: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Impact BIO-2 (no impact): The project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,

5.f
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 4 policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Impact BIO-4: The project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Impact BIO-6 (no impact): The project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Impact C/TCUL-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section15064.5.

Impact GEO-5 (no impact): The proposed project will not be located on soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water.

Impact GHG-2: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Impact HAZ-1: The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Impact HAZ-3: The proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Impact HAZ-4 (no impact): The proposed project would not be located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

Impact HAZ-5: The proposed project would be located within an airport land use plan, but would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the

5.f
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 5 project area.

Impact HAZ-6: The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Impact HYDRO-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.

Impact HYDRO-2: Implementation of the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project would impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

Impact HYDRO-3: Implementation of the proposed would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows.

Impact HYDRO-4: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation as a result of being located in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone.

Impact HYDRO-5: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Impact LUP-1: The project would not physically divide an established community.

Impact LUP-2: The project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact.

Impact NOI-2: The proposed project would not result in generation of excessive

5.f
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 6 groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Impact NOI-3 (no impact): The proposed project, would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels as a result of being located in an airport land use plan.

Impact POP-1: The project would not induce direct substantial population growth in the area as a result of construction of the proposed units, nor would the project result in indirect population growth in the area as a result of expansion of public facilities, such as roads or other infrastructure.

Impact POP-2: The project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Impact PS-1: The project would not require expansion or construction of new governmental facilities which could result in substantial adverse physical impacts as a result of increased demand for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities.

Impact TRA-1: The project will not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Impact TRA-4: Implementation of the project will not result in inadequate emergency access.

Impact UTIL-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Impact UTIL-2: Implementation of project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

Impact UTIL-3: Implementation of the project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have

5.f
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 7 adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Impact UTIL-4: Implementation of the project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Impact UTIL-5: Implementation of the project would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Impact FIRE-1: The project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Impact FIRE-2: The project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, and thereby would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.

Impact FIRE-3: The project would not require installation or maintenance of infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.

Impact FIRE-4: The project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Under Public Resources Code section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 (a)(1) and 15092(b), and to the extent reflected in the EIR, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate to a less than significant level or avoid the following potentially significant effects on the environment:

Impact AES-3: Implementation of the proposed project could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings and could result in a conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality in urbanized areas (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)

5.f
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 8 AES-1: All applicable Tree Protection Recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report prepared by Traverso Tree Service on March 18, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to protection of Monterey pines (trees 25-27) and Monterey cypress (trees 1-12, 16-20) during the pre-construction, demolition, foundation, grading, construction, and landscaping phases of the project shall be implemented, except that the tree replacement ratio for removal of heritage and protected trees shall be 2:1. Final grading plans, construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report have been incorporated into the final design of the project. Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with the planting size, species, and ratio recommendations set forth in the Tree Replacement Recommendation Memorandum prepared by Traverso Tree Services on June 17, 2020.

Protection measures and replacement trees shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Pacifica Planning Department, Planning Commission, and City Council, as applicable.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Implementation of the project will result in removal of seven mature heritage and nonheritage trees that contribute to the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings.

However, measure AES-1 requires planting of replacement trees at a 2:1 ratio, as well as protection of trees to be retained onsite which reduces the project’s potential impacts to less than significant.

Impact AQ-2: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
AQ-1: Latest BAAQMD recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control for fugitive dust and exhaust during all construction activities shall be incorporated into all demolition and construction plans to require implementation of the following:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and

5.f
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 9 unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]).

Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

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

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Implementation of measure AQ-1 will reduce fugitive dust emissions during construction activities as recommended by BAAQMD. Exhaust emissions from operation of construction equipment and trucks for criteria pollutants will also be reduced through implementation of measures during construction activities. Therefore, after applying this measure, the impact will be less than significant.

Impact AQ-3: Implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
AQ-1: (see above under Impact AQ-2)

5.f
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 10 AQ-2: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, a plan to reduce diesel particulate matter emissions by at least 60 percent shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following strategies:

1. All construction equipment larger than 50 horsepower used at the site for more than two continuous days or 20 hours total shall meet U.S. EPA Tier 4 emission standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), if feasible. Alternatively, the plan may include:
a. Equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards for Tier 2 or 3 engines and include particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether achieve a 60 percent or greater reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment.
b. Alternatively fueled or electric equipment.

2. Alternatively, the applicant may develop a construction operations plan demonstrating that the construction equipment used on-site would achieve a reduction in construction diesel particulate matter emissions by 60 percent or greater. The construction operations plan shall be subject to review by an air quality expert and approved by the City prior to construction. Elements of the plan could include a combination of the following measures:
a. Use Tier 4 or alternatively fueled equipment;
b. Installation of electric power lines during early construction phases to avoid use of diesel generators and compressors;
c. Use of electric-powered equipment;
d. Use of electric or propane/natural gas-powered forklifts and aerial lifts; e. Change in construction build-out plans to lengthen phases; f. Implementation of different building techniques that result in less diesel equipment usage.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
The Construction Community Risk Assessment, prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin for the project used the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) to compute construction

5.f
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 11 period emissions with implementation of mitigation measures. The model inputs assumed all construction equipment met U.S. EPA Tier 4 interim engines standards and all BAAQMD best management practices for construction were included. With these mitigation measures AQ-1 and AQ-2, the project’s construction cancer risk impact, assuming infant exposure, would be reduced by 90 percent to 2.48 per million and the project’s annual PM2.5 concentrations would be reduced by 65 percent to 0.12 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).

A plan that reduces DPM emissions by 60 percent would reduce cancer risk to approximately

9.7 chances per million and a plan that reduces total PM2.5 emissions by 15 percent would reduce PM2.5 concentrations to 0.29 μg/m3. Based on these calculations, the project’s construction cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations would be reduced below the BAAQMD single-source thresholds and as such project impacts would be less than significant.

Impact BIO-1: The project could result in a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
BIO-1: Prior to the start of grading, construction, or any other ground-disturbing activity, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify occupied San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat middens onsite. Where feasible, occupied middens shall be avoided and a minimum five (5) foot non-disturbance buffer, or greater buffer as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established, maintained, and monitored throughout project construction. Additionally, a minimum five (5) foot non-disturbance buffer, or greater buffer as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established between the eastern limit of proposed development activities and the densely vegetated, impenetrable hazelnut scrub habitat.

BIO-2: To address potential impacts to San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats, a Relocation Plan prepared by a qualified biologist, shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Pacifica and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and approval. At a minimum, the Relocation Plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
• Nests requiring relocation shall be dismantled by construction crews by hand and under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist.
• Each member of the construction crew shall receive an environmental awareness

5.f
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 12 training regarding San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat ecology and specifics of the Relocation Plan.
• All material removed during nest dismantling shall be moved into the Relocation Area, as determined by the qualified biologist, and constructed into piles suitable for habitation or use as refugia.
• If an active nest requires removal, the following phased dismantling protocol shall be implemented:
 Remove at least 50-100% of the existing canopy cover and begin dismantling.  After partially dismantling the nest, leave nest alone for two to four days to allow woodrats to disperse on their own. After two to four days, continue to disassemble nest by hand. Plan to completely dismantle in two to three sessions.  If young are present, the construction crew and qualified biologist shall cease dismantling of the nest for 48 hours to allow the adult to move the young. If the young have been moved and the nest is vacant, nest removal may resume. • If an inactive nest (as determined by a qualified biologist) needs to be removed, it may be removed completely in one day. If woodrats are observed within or fleeing from the nest, the nest will be considered active and relocated using a phased approach.

BIO-3: To offset the loss or disturbance of foraging habitat (native forbs and shrubs) for the special-status obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus), plant species that are known nectar sources of the obscure bumble bee shall be replaced at a 2:1 ratio, or as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist and CDFW and shall be included in a revised landscaping plan. Plant species shall be sited in concentrated locations selected in consultation with a qualified biologist and CDFW as necessary to ensure the long-term survival of such plants and to limit disturbance throughout project operation. Plant species known to benefit the obscure bumble bee include but are not limited to Ceanothus, Cirsium, Clarkia, Lathyrus, Lotus, Lupinus, Rhododendron, Rubus, Trifolium, and Vaccinium. As part of the update to the landscaping plans, selected bee-friendly species and planting locations shall be confirmed by a qualified biologist in consultation with the City of Pacifica.

BIO-4: If construction commences during the rainy season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for California red-legged frog no more than five days prior to commencement of ground disturbing activities. In the event that California red-legged frogs are found onsite, the qualified biologist in consultation with CDFW shall provide recommendations for relocation of individuals and installation of exclusion fencing. At the recommendation of CDFW and the qualified biologist and based on factors including the migration window for red-legged frog, rainfall, and inundation, exclusion fencing shall be installed. Exclusion fencing shall be inspected and maintained under the supervision of a qualified biologist. Results of the survey and recommendations for relocation and exclusion

5.f
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 13 fencing shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

BIO-5: To avoid potential impacts to special-status bats, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of all structures and trees that would be impacted by the project, no more than 15 days prior to demolition, tree removal, or commencement of ground disturbing activities. Results of the preconstruction survey shall be documented by a qualified biologist and provided to the City of Pacifica. If special-status bat species are found roosting in building or trees proposed to be removed, the biologist shall determine if there are young present (i.e., the biologist should determine if there are maternal roosts). If young are found roosting in any tree or building proposed for removal, such impacts shall be avoided until the young are flying and feeding on their own. A 100 foot non-disturbance buffer, or as otherwise specified by a qualified biologist, installed with orange construction fencing shall be established around maternity site. If adults are found roosting in a tree or building on the project site but no maternal sites are found, then the adult bats can be flushed, or a one-way eviction door can be placed over the tree cavity for a 48-hour period prior to the tree removal or building demolition. If bats or evidence of bats are detected during the pre-construction surveys, the applicant shall notify the City of Pacifica and the CDFW regarding bat eviction protocol and submit a plan for review and acceptance by the City of Pacifica and the CDFW.

BIO-6: Should construction activities commence during the bird nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction activities. Areas within 500 feet of construction shall be surveyed for active nests. Should active nests be identified, a 100 foot buffer for passerines and 300 foot buffer for raptors shall be established, or as otherwise specified by a qualified biologist based on the needs of the species as set forth by CDFW and shall be maintained until a qualified biologist verifies that the nestlings have fledged, or the nest has failed. Should construction activities cease for 14 consecutive days or more within the nesting season, an additional nesting bird survey shall be required prior to resuming construction. Results of the pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding

5.f
Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 14 The required surveys and protection measures for the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, California red-legged frog, special status bats, and nesting birds would prevent harm to these species as a result of construction activities. Therefore, after applying the mitigation measures listed above, impacts to special status species would be less than significant.

Additionally, though foraging habitat for the obscure bumblebee will be removed as part of the project, the provision for planting of replacement habitat would result in less than significant impacts to this species.

Impact BIO-3: The project could have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other mean (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
BIO-7: Indirect impacts to the seasonal wetlands and jurisdictional drainage feature shall be avoided through implementation of best management practices (BMPs) prior to earthwork.

Construction exclusion zones shall be established by installing appropriate construction fencing, silt fencing, wildlife friendly hay wattles (no monofilament netting), gravel wattles, and other protective measures between project activities and the seasonal wetlands and drainage feature.

All non-native, invasive vegetation removed shall be discarded offsite and away from wetland areas to prevent reseeding.

Prior to implementation of the construction project, a biological monitor shall inspect installation of BMPs to ensure proper protection of the seasonal wetlands and jurisdictional drainage feature areas are in place. BMPs shall thereafter be routinely inspected by the construction manager to ensure BMPs remain in place for the duration of construction activities. Upon completion of project construction all exclusion fencing shall be removed along with any temporary BMPs.

BIO-8: A total of 0.063 acres of potential wetlands were identified in the project area. In the event that wetland plants are removed, altered, or destroyed along the edges of the concrete drainage ditch during repair/replacement of the concrete drainage ditch, the applicant shall replant these areas with native wetland plants at a 1:1 ratio to ensure continued viability of the wetlands.

BIO-9: To avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands throughout project operation, plans submitted for building permit shall be revised to include a split rail fence with minimum

5.f
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 15 three foot and maximum 6 foot height along the boundary between the recreational field and seasonal wetlands and concrete drainage ditch located at the southeast portion of the project site to preclude access and limit foot traffic within the drainage and wetland features.

The design of the fence shall be submit to review and approval by the Planning Director.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
The project includes construction within 100 feet of an existing wetland which could result in impacts associated with construction activities. However, the project is required to implement best management practices such as establishment of construction exclusion zones installation of silt fencing, wildlife friendly hay wattles, gravel wattles, and other measures that would ensure the protection of wetlands onsite during construction. In addition, the project proposes repair of an existing drainage ditch, which is subject to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Nationwide Permit 41. The project does not propose removal, fill, or hydrological interruption of existing wetlands adjacent to the drainage ditch, however, it is possible that construction activities could result in damage or removal of wetland plants. The project has been provisioned to replace wetland plants at a ratio of 1:1 in the event that such plants are removed, altered, or destroyed during construction. With implementation of best management practices and the provision for wetland plants to be replaced, impacts of the project on wetlands during construction would be less than significant.

As the wetlands onsite are located in an area that will be used for recreation purposes, operation of the project could result in impacts to wetlands onsite. However, the requirement to include split rail fencing to exclude foot traffic from the wetland area will reduce impacts during project operation to less than significant.

Impact BIO-5: The project could conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
AES-1: (see above under Impact AES-3)
Finding

5.f
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 16 Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Impact C/TCUL-2: Implementation of the project could potentially cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
C/TCUL-1: Prior to commencement of ground-disturbing activities, project supervisors, equipment operators, and other members of the construction team overseeing or conducting ground-disturbing activities shall receive one or more preconstruction Cultural Awareness Trainings by a Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist. The Training(s) shall educate and familiarize supervisors, contractors, and equipment operators with the potential to encounter archaeological resources, the types of archaeological material that could be encountered, and procedures to follow if archaeological deposits and/or artifacts are encountered during construction.

C/TCUL-2: In the event that an archaeological deposit is encountered during grounddisturbing activities, all work within 50-feet of the discovery shall be redirected until a Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist is retained to inspect the material and provide recommendations for appropriate treatment of the resource pursuant to regulations and guidelines set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act, including the involvement of Native American monitors if a prehistoric archaeological resource is identified. If avoidance of the archaeological resource is not feasible, the archaeological resource shall be evaluated for its eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are identified as eligible for listing on the CRHR, recommendations for proper treatment and handling shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist including, but not be limited to, avoidance or excavation in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation, which may include

5.f
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 17 data recovery using standard archaeological field methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered archaeological materials; preparation of a report detailing the methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and associated materials; and accessioning of archaeological materials and a technical data recovery report at a curation facility. Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of the assessment. The report shall be submitted to the project applicant and the Northwest Information Center.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Due to past disturbance of the project site and surrounding area, including removal of native soils, placement of artificial fill, and undergrounding of the North Fork San Pedro Creek, there is a possibility that disturbed or redeposited archaeological resources could be encountered during excavation and grading of the site. Without proper care during the grading and excavation phases of the proposed project, unknown and potentially significant historic and prehistoric archaeological resources could be damaged or destroyed, if present. With implementation of Mitigation Measures C/TCUL-1 through C/TCUL-2, the proposed project impacts to archeological resources would be less than significant.

Impact C/TCUL-3: Implementation of the project could potentially cause a significant impact due to disturbance of human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
C/TCUL-3: In the event that human remains are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, all work must stop within 100-feet of the discovery area, the area shall be secured to prevent further disturbance, and the San Mateo County Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner will determine if the remains are precontact period Native American remains or of modern origin, and if any further investigation by the coroner is warranted. If the remains are believed to be precontact period Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission by telephone within 24-hours. The NAHC will immediately notify the person believed to be the most likely descendant (MLD) of the remains. The MLD has 48-hours to make recommendations to the landowner for treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MLD does not make recommendations

5.f
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 18 within 48-hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does not accept the descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendant may request mediation by NAHC. An archaeologist should also be retained to evaluate the historical significance of the discovery, the potential for additional remains, and to provide further recommendations for treatment of the site in coordination with the MLD.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
No known human burials have been identified on the project site or within recorded resources located in the vicinity. However, it is possible that unknown human remains could occur on the project site, and if proper care is not taken during grading and excavation, damage to or destruction of these unknown remains could occur, if present. Implementation of Mitigation Measure C/TCUL-3 would ensure that impacts to buried human remains, if present onsite, would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Impact C/TCUL-4: Implementation of the project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, including resources that are listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources, or that are determined by the City of Pacifica to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in Section 5024.1(c) of Public Resources Code (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
C/TCUL-1: (see above under Impact C/TCUL-1)
C/TCUL-2: (see above under Impact C/TCUL-1)
C/TCUL-3: (see above under Impact C/TCUL-3)
Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
There are no known Native American Sacred Sites on or within the immediate vicinity of the site nor are there any known tribal cultural resources on the project site. However, as stated

5.f
Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 19 above under Impact C/TCUL-2, there is a possibility to encounter buried resources onsite.

The project is subject to Mitigation Measures T/TCUL-1 through T/TCUL-3 which require avoiding inadvertent impacts to prehistoric resources and human remains, should they be encountered during excavation and grading, the proposed project would not affect any known or unknown tribal cultural resources in the area. Therefore, with mitigation the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.

Impact GEO-1: The proposed project could potentially directly or indirectly result in substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction and landslides (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
GEO-1: All applicable recommendations set forth in the Design Level Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical on August 20, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to grading, drainage, excavation, foundations systems, and compaction specifications shall be implemented. Final grading plan, construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the geotechnical reports have been incorporated into the final design of the project and to the satisfaction of the City of Pacifica City Engineer.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Due to the site’s location in a region of high seismicity the project would likely experience moderate to severe ground shaking during a seismic event, which could affect the proposed residences and other buildings onsite. The proposed project would comply with building requirements set forth by the State, which have been designed to reduce the likelihood of damage as a result of ground shaking. In addition, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 requires implementation of recommendations set forth in the design-level geotechnical report related to grading, drainage, excavation, foundation systems, and compaction specifications.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 the potential for seismically induced impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant.

5.f
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 20 Impact GEO-2: The proposed project could result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
GEO-2: Upon submittal of grading and drainage plans, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements of Title 6, Chapter 12 (Stormwater Management and Discharge Control) of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code. Plans shall include identification of appropriate best management practices (BMPs) to prevent the discharge of construction wastes or contaminants from construction materials, tools, equipment, stockpiles, or exposed soil from entering the City storm water system or watercourses. Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with stormwater treatment requirements set forth in NPDES Permit No. CAS612008.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Construction of the project involves ground disturbing activities that have the potential to result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. However, the project is subject to the erosion and sediment control requirements set forth in the City’s Municipal Code which requires incorporation of erosion, sediment, and pollution prevention BMPs during to prevent sediment from reaching the streets or entering the stormdrain system. Mitigation Measure GEO-2 requires that the project demonstrate compliance with the City’s requirements, which would result in less than significant impacts related to erosion during construction.

Impact GEO-3: The proposed project would be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
GEO-1: (see above under Impact GEO-1)
Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding

5.f
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 21 The project is proposed on a relatively flat portion of the site and would not result in on- or off-site landslides. Though the eastern portion of the project site includes steep slopes, the project proposes a 10-foot retaining wall which is designed to resist lateral pressure from the adjacent hillside. Though existing soil conditions have the potential for geologic and soil instability, the project would not be affected by lateral spreading or liquefaction. To address existing soil instability, the project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure GEO1, which incorporates recommendations set forth in the design level geotechnical report.

Through incorporation of geotechnical recommendations, impacts resulting from construction on an unstable geologic unit or soils would be less than significant.

Impact GEO-4: The proposed project would be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property (potentially significant impact).

Facts in Support of Finding
Based on the findings of the geotechnical analysis prepared for the project, the site contains 35 feet of artificial fill comprised of loose to very dense gravels and sands with varying amounts of clay, underlain by alluvium and sandstone bedrock. To address the presence of expansive soils onsite, the Geotechnical Investigation provides recommendations related to site preparation, treatment of fill, and foundation design which are required to be implemented into the final design through Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Compliance with measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts related to the site’s location on expansive soils to less than significant.

Impact GEO-6: The proposed project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
GEO-3: In the event that paleontological resources, including individual fossils or assemblages of fossils, are encountered during construction activities, all ground disturbing

5.f
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 22 activities shall halt, and a qualified paleontologist shall be procured to evaluate the discovery and make treatment recommendations.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Though there are no known paleontological resources on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site, there remains a potential for inadvertent discovery of unique paleontological or geological resources during ground disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure GEO-3 identifies procedures to be followed in the event of a paleontological discovery. With implementation of measure GEO-3, impacts resulting from direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature would be less than significant.

Impact GHG-1: Implementation of the proposed Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would result in a significant impact on the environment (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, a GHG reduction plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall, at a minimum demonstrate that at least 10% of the total building materials used for the project will be local building materials sourced from the San Francisco Bay Area Region and will reuse/recycle at least 50 percent construction waste and demolition material. In the event that these measures are not feasible, the plan shall identify suitable replacement to achieve equivalent or greater GHG emissions reductions.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Construction of the project would result in greenhouse gas emissions associated with mobile sources including operation of construction equipment, worker, and vendor trips. To reduce

5.f
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 23 GHG emissions during construction, the project is required to implement Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which requires preparation of a GHG reduction plan. With implementation of measure GHG-1, impacts of the project would be less than significant.

Impact HAZ-2: The proposed project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
HAZ-1: Prior to demolition of the existing structures, an asbestos survey shall be performed by a licensed asbestos inspector to identify all asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint. The survey shall adhere to sampling protocols outlined by the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) and shall incorporate the findings of the survey into a report to be submitted to the city. In the event that such substances are found, the report shall include appropriate removal and disposal protocols subject to requirements set forth by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration AHERA requirements, lead standard contained in 29 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62, and any other local, state, or federal regulations.

Treatment, handling, and disposal of these materials shall be performed by qualified professionals in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations, and shall be completed prior to demolition of the existing structures.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
Based on observations made during site surveys as well as the age of the school building and shed to be demolished as part of the project, asbestos containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP) are presumed to be present in existing structures onsite. Disturbance to ACMs and LBP during demolition activities has the potential to result in impacts to construction workers or the environment if not properly treated and removed. However, consistent with Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, a full survey of the building would be performed to identify all ACMs and LBP and appropriate removal and disposal protocols would be established prior to demolition. With implementation of measure HAZ-1, impacts would be less than significant.

5.f
Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 24 Impact HAZ-7: The proposed project could expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

Mitigation Measure(s)
HAZ-2: Upon submittal of a building permit the applicant shall submit a site-specific Vegetation Management Plan for review and approval by the City of Pacifica and the North County Fire Authority. The Plan shall:

1. Remove all vegetation within the site listed on the San Mateo County list of “Fire Prone (Pyrophytic) Plants” except for isolated specimen plants. a. Existing isolated or newly planted specimens shall meet the vertical and horizontal spacing guidelines.

2. Maintain and plant all trees and shrubs to the specifications identified in ‘Plant and Tree Spacing’, ‘Vertical Spacing’, and ‘Horizontal Spacing’ as outlined in the Plan “Fire Safe Landscaping” guide.
a. An evaluation of slope implications shall be reflected when determining the landscape.
b. All plantings shall be from the Plan “Firescaping with Native Plants” or otherwise fire resistive plantings.

3. Maintain an ember zone of 5 feet around all buildings pursuant to California Government Code (CGC) 51182 (5)(1), (2) within the Project.
a. The ember zone shall be maintained to remove weeds and other combustible materials on a minimum monthly basis.

4. Maintain all landscaping and vegetation on the Project site on a regular basis as part of a regular landscape maintenance program.
a. All vegetation shall be irrigated as needed to maintain the vegetation in a healthful condition.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
The project site is located within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and is adjacent to an

5.f
Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 25 area designated as a moderate fire hazard severity zone which could expose people or structures to hazards associated with wildland fires. Based on the site’s vulnerability to wildland fires, compliance with California Building Code for construction within the WUI would be required. Furthermore, the project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, which requires preparation of a site-specific Vegetation Management Plan that complies with the Vegetation Management Plan Memo prepared for the project as well as the Fire Safe San Mateo County Defensible Guidelines. Through compliance with the California Building Code as well as implementation of measure HAZ-2, impacts related to hazardous conditions caused by wildland fires would be less than significant.

Impact NOI-1: The proposed project could involve generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
NOI-1: Construction activities shall comply with the following best management practices to minimize noise levels from the proposed development:
• Construction will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays.
• The contractor shall use “new technology” power construction equipment with state-ofthe-art noise shielding and muffling devices. All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poorly maintained engines or other components.
• Staging areas and stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as possible from noise-sensitive receptors, such as residential uses (a minimum of 200 feet). • Ensure that generators, compressors, and pumps are housed in acoustical enclosures. • Locate cranes as far from adjoining noise-sensitive receptors as possible. • During final grading, substitute graders for bulldozers, where feasible. Wheeled heavy equipment are quieter than track equipment and should be used where feasible. • Substitute nail guns for manual hammering and electrically powered tools for noisier pneumatic tools, where feasible.
• The adjacent residences within 200 feet of the project site shall be notified not less than 96 hours prior to the start of each phase of the project, including but not limited to demolition, grading, and construction. Notifications shall indicate the hours of operation and planned timeline for the respective phase.
• A “noise disturbance coordinator” shall be designated to respond to any local complaints

5.f
Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 26 about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., beginning work too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
The temporary or periodic increases in noise that would result from activities such as demolition, site preparation, grading, excavation, material hauling, deliveries, and foundation work would be significant. To minimize noise levels during construction, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires implementation of noise abatement measures including limiting construction hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekends (consistent with standard Pacifica construction hours); staging equipment as far as possible from sensitive uses; using acoustical enclosures; substituting certain equipment for quieter alternatives where possible; notifying residents of construction; and designating a noise disturbance coordinator. With implementation of measure NOI-1 project impacts associated with construction activities would be reduced to less than significant.

Impact TRA-3: The project will not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design or incompatible uses (potentially significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
TRA-3: To maintain adequate sight lines at the project driveways, signage and landscaping introduced onsite within close proximity of the driveways shall be maintained such that lowlying shrubs remain at a height lower than three feet from ground level and that tree branches be no less than seven feet in height from ground level. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining adequate sight lines from the project driveways.

TRA-4: Parking shall be prohibited south of the project driveway along Oddstad Boulevard for a distance of at least 30 feet. To ensure parking does not occur in this area, curbs shall be painted red subject to review and approval by the North County Fire Authority.

Finding
Changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which avoid

5.f
Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 27 or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact identified in the EIR.

Facts in Support of Finding
The project could result in significant transportation hazards if not designed properly.

Mitigation Measures TRA-3 and TRA-4 require that the project be designed to provide adequate site lines for vehicles exiting the site onto Oddstad Boulevard. Compliance with measures TRA-3 and TRA-4 would reduce potential impacts resulting from a geometric design hazard to less than significant.

Impact TRA-2: The project will conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (B) (significant impact).

Mitigation Measure(s)
TRA-1: Upon submittal of plans for building permit, the applicant shall submit a list of Transportation Demand Management strategies to be implemented district-wide. TDM strategies shall be clearly defined in terms of location, extent, timing, and responsibility for implementation. Strategies may include, but are not limited to the following:
• Safe Routes to School. Pursue grants to fund pedestrian and bicycle improvements around Pacifica School District schools to increase safety for students and staff walking and bicycling.
• Install Bike Racks. Identify Pacifica School District schools where more bicycle racks are needed. Once identified, install as needed.
• Install e-bike Charging Stations. Install e-bike charging systems in secure bike parking facilities at Pacifica School District schools.
• Samtrans Flex Services. Continue to partner with Samtrans to establish fixed-route services to Pacifica School District schools. Coordinate with Samtrans on possible flex services (such as dial-a-ride) to serve schools with lower demand. • Shuttle Services. Partner with the Jefferson Union High School District to fund shuttle services to Pacifica schools.

TRA-2: To promote electric vehicle ownership and reduce GHG emissions associated with vehicles traveling to and from the site, install electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure and equipment as required by the 2022 California Building Standards Code and any City of Pacifica local amendments thereto.

Finding
Under Public Resources Code section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091(a)(1) and 15092(b), the City determines that impacts related to the project’s vehicle miles traveled

5.f
Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 28 (VMT) generation remain significant and unavoidable despite incorporation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2, set forth above. Further, the City finds that the significant and unavoidable impact is acceptable due to the overriding considerations described below. The City also finds that further mitigation measures and Alternatives that may reduce the significance of any of these impacts are rejected as infeasible for the reasons provided below.

Facts in Support of Finding
There are no feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce project-level VMT impacts to less than significant. Other potentially effective on-site VMT measures, such as increasing the density would not result in a quantifiable reduction of project-generated VMT given the project site’s location within the regional context and at the edge of City limits, the project site’s land use designation, and zoning provisions.

The project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure TRA-1, which sets forth transportation demand management (TDM) strategies implemented throughout the Pacifica School District. Given that there is limited evidence to support VMT reductions from such TDM strategies, it is not feasible to quantify VMT reductions of the alternative mode programs. Programs identified as potential mitigations are intended to encourage staff and students to walk, bike, or use transit, however, given the conceptual nature of these programs and the level of staff and student participation, the resulting VMT reduction could not be known at the time of preparation of the EIR. Furthermore, many of the strategies identified in measure TRA-1 are complementary to one another such as Safe Routes to School and installation of more bike racks and e-bike charging stations, which makes isolating their effectiveness difficult. Nonetheless, measures that encourage alternative transportation can help reduce VMT, and as such the project would be required to incorporate such measures. Programs that are intended to increase bus or shuttle service to the schools would also help to reduce VMT, however, these services are not in place at the time and therefore the level of reduction is not known. Based on the lack of quantitative data available, project VMT cannot be reduced below the VMT threshold of 15% and there are no additional feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce project-level VMT impacts to less than significant.

Though the project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to project VMT, as noted in the DEIR, the General Plan Update and Sharp Park Specific Plan EIR (SCH No. 2012022046), certified by the City Council on July 11, 2022, also concludes that implementation of the General Plan will result in significant and unavoidable impacts related

5.f
Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 29 to VMT and the City Council adopted a statement of overriding considerations for the General Plan (Resolution 45-2022). The project is consistent with the General Plan as residential development at the project site has already been anticipated and significant and unavoidable VMT impacts have already been considered.

The above Findings are made in conjunction with a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is simultaneously being adopted for the project (see Section 3).

The Final EIR analyzed three alternatives to the project, examining the environmental impacts and feasibility of each alternative, as well as the ability of the alternatives to meet project objectives. The project objectives are listed in Chapter 3 (Project Description) of the Draft EIR; the potentially significant environmental effects of the project, including feasible mitigation measures identified to avoid these impacts, are analyzed in Chapter 4 (Environmental Evaluation) of the Draft EIR; and the alternatives are described in detail in Chapter 6 (Alternatives) of the Draft EIR. Brief summaries of the alternatives analyzed are provided below. All analysis in Final EIR Chapter 6 is incorporated by reference.

The No Project alternative is the continuation of existing conditions on the project site, which is developed with the former Oddstad School complex, closed by the Pacifica School District in 2005, and used for storage since 2019. The site includes a single-story school complex, circulation improvements such as driveways, parking areas, and pedestrian pathways, recreational fields and courts, landscaping, fencing, and an undeveloped hillside area along the eastern portion of the site. The existing recreational fields are publicly accessible and are used for both organized sports and individual recreation activities. Under the No Project alternative, no physical alterations would be made, and the site would continue to be used as storage and publicly accessible recreation.

The Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences alternative represents an alternative that could occur based on the existing Low Density Residential General Plan Land Use designation, R-1 zoning designation, and underlying single family residential subdivision, originally recorded in 1965 with the County of San Mateo. The subdivision includes 56 single family lots, two remainder lots adjacent to the city-owned Frontierland Park, and four dedicated public rights-of-way. Since recordation of the subdivision in 1965,

5.f
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 30 Lots 54 and 55, along Big Bend Drive to the north of the project site, have been developed.

As such, lots 54 and 55 are presumed to no longer be part of the subdivision and are therefore not considered in this alternative.

Under this alternative, the existing lots on the project site would be used for development rather than a re-subdivision of the land as proposed with the project. The entire 12.49-acre site, with the exception of the approximately 2.02-acre hillside area to the east (referred to as Lot D on the subdivision map), would be developed with single-family residences, including the existing recreational field at the southern portion of the site. Of the 54 single family residences, this alternative assumes construction of 16 accessory dwelling units (ADUs) for a total of 70 units on 54 lots. Development of the single-family residences and ADUs would be subject to regulations contained in Section 9-4.402 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, which permits a maximum of 40% lot coverage, and maximum building height of 35- feet. In addition, development of 54 single family residences and 16 ADUs would be subject to the minimum setbacks, landscaping, and parking requirements of the Municipal Code.

Under this alternative, new water, sewer, and storm drain facilities would be installed to accommodate the residential units and the four dedicated rights-of-way shown on the subdivision map would be paved, and curb, gutter, and sidewalks would be installed.

The Variation of Site Layout and Unit Types Alternative assumes that Lot 1, at the southern portion of the project site, would be retained as a recreational field for use by the public, and Lots 2 and 3, totaling 7.47 acres would be developed in a varied layout and with a different unit mix as compared to the proposed project. Under this alternative, Building A, located at the eastern portion of Lot 2 would be relocated to the area of Buildings B1 and B2 and would include an additional floor with 14 units. The height of Building A would increase from 30- feet to approximately 40-feet. Under this alternative, the site would be rezoned from R-1 to Planned Development (P-D), which provides for flexibility in building height if the findings in Section 9-4.2211(a) of the PMC can be made. In addition to modification of the location of Building A, under this alternative, Building B3 would be modified to eliminate two units for a total of four units. Under this alternative, the unit count and mix would be as follows:
• Building A (41 units)

2.0 32 one-bedroom

3.0 9 two-bedroom
 Building B3

4.0 2 two-bedroom

5.0 2 three-bedroom

5.f
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 31  Buildings C1 and C2 (no change)

6.0 2 two-bedroom

7.0 2 three-bedroom
 Building D (no change)

8.0 11 one-bedroom

9.0 6 two-bedroom

1. The City Council finds that changes or alterations to the project as evaluated in the Draft EIR have been required of, or incorporated into the project that avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects.

2. The EIR evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives to the project. The City Council adopts the EIR's analysis and conclusions eliminating alternatives for an adaptive reuse of the existing school complex, increased density, and alternative site location from further consideration.

3. The potentially feasible alternatives analyzed in the EIR, including the No Project/No Development alternative required by CEQA, represent a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that reduce one or more significant impacts of the proposed project.

These alternatives include: (1) Alternative 1: No Project/No Development; (2) Alternative 2: Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences; and (3) Alternative 3:

Variation of Site Layout and Unit Mix. As presented in the EIR, the alternatives were described and compared with each other and with the proposed Project.

4. The City Council certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered the information on alternatives provided in the EIR and in the record. The EIR reflects the City Council's independent judgment as to alternatives. The City Council finds that the project provides the best balance between the project sponsor's objectives, the City's goals and objectives, the project's benefits, and mitigation of environmental impacts. The three CEQA alternatives evaluated in the EIR are rejected for the following reasons. Each individual reason presented below constitutes a separate and independent basis to reject the alternatives.

5. No Project/No Development Alternative: The No Project/No Development Alternative would not achieve the property’s, highest and best use or realize residential development as provided by the Low Density Residential land use designation and as planned for in the City of Pacifica 2040 General Plan. Furthermore, the No Project/No Development Alternative would fail to meet all stated project objectives, would be inconsistent with the General Plan objectives and land use designations, and would not provide housing

5.f
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 32 needed to meet the city’s RHNA obligation.

6. Alternative 2: Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences: The Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences Alternative would result in new or increased impacts to biological resources, hydrology and water quality, recreation, and utilities and service systems relative to the proposed Project.

Furthermore, the Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences Alternative would fail to meet some of the stated project objectives as it would not provide workforce housing for current and future staff members of the Pacifica School District, would not provide rental rates and lease terms that enable and improve the District’s ability to retain and attract qualified faculty and staff, and would not maintain and expand recreational opportunities on site for use by the surrounding neighborhood, future residents, and organized recreational groups.

7. Alternative 3: Variation of Site Layout and Unit Mix Alternative: The Variation of Site Layout and Unit Mix Alternative would be incompatible with the surrounding singlefamily residential neighborhood as it would introduce an approximately 40-foot (3 story) building to an area predominantly consisting of one and two story single family homes.

Additionally, VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable and other environmental impacts identified would not be substantially reduced.

CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable. CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record.

In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), when implemented, avoid or substantially lessen virtually all of the significant effects identified in the Draft and Final EIR. Nonetheless, one significant impact of the project is unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. The significant unavoidable impact is identified and discussed in Section 2.4 of

5.f
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 33 these Findings. The City further specifically finds that notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant unavoidable impacts, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons for approving the project. Each of the following reasons in Section 3.1 provides an independent basis to support the override of the following significant and unavoidable impact:

Impact TRA-2: The project will conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (B) (significant impact).

1. The project will redevelop a previously developed and underutilized 12.4-acre property in an established residential neighborhood.

2. The project would enhance the property by removing aging facilities, upgrading utilities, and improving landscaping, including providing stormwater management facilities onsite.

3. The project will maintain the eastern portion of the lot in a natural state providing a visual and biological transition to the Frontierland Park which is owned and operated by the City.

4. Through a Development Agreement (DA), which would vest the right to develop the property for 15 years, the School District would dedicate 1.4 acres onsite as parkland and would preserve an additional 3.5 acres for public use for at least 20 years.

5. The DA also seeks to make the 3.5 acres available for public use beyond 20 years. As provided therein, the Pacifica School District would provide notice to the City on how the

3.5 acres may be used to further the School District’s mission. Should removal of the 3.5 acres from public use be proposed, such removal and any new use would be subject to review and approval by the City; and if the School District intends to sell the 3.5 acres, the City has the right of first offer to purchase the 3.5 acres.

6. Other public benefits provided by the project include a bathroom/changing room, field drainage improvements, parking lot striping, and periodic use of residents’ commons building.

7. The Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project would benefit Pacifica residents by attracting quality teachers and school employees to work and live in the city.

8. The project would contribute 70 new residential units to the city inclusive of 11 below market rate (BMR) units, affordable to low- and moderate-income households consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Below Market Rate Program, 34 subsidized units for teachers

5.f
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 34 and School District employees, and up to 25 market rate units to assist in subsidizing the other units.

9. By providing subsidized and below market rate housing, the project would help to address challenges experienced by the Pacifica School District in competing for and retaining qualified teachers and other School District employees due to the high cost of living in the San Francisco Bay Area. The proposed project will help to attract and retain teachers by lowering the cost of living associated with housing.

10. The project would contribute to the City’s existing housing inventory and assist in meeting the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation across a variety of income levels.

11. Though the EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact associated with VMT, providing affordable housing options proximate to jobs is consistent with state and local goals as it would help to reduce vehicle miles traveled associated with living and working in a different city, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Council finds that the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project has been carefully reviewed and that mitigation measures have been included in the Final EIR to be certified by the Council. Nonetheless, the proposed project, as was previously concluded by the EIR prepared for the 2040 General Plan, will result in environmental effects due to VMT that cannot be avoided or substantially lessened. As to these significant environmental effects that are not avoided or substantially lessened to a point less than significant, the Council finds that specific fiscal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make additional mitigation of those impacts infeasible, in that all feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project.

The Council has carefully considered all environmental impacts that have not been mitigated to a less than significant level, as listed above. The Council has also carefully considered the fiscal, economic, social, and environmental benefits of the proposed project, as listed above, and compared these with the benefits and impacts of the alternatives. The Council has balanced the fiscal, economic, social, and environmental benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable and unmitigated adverse environmental impacts and, based upon substantial evidence in the record, has determined that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh, and therefore override, the remaining adverse environmental effects. Such benefits provide the substantive and legal basis for this Statement of Overriding Considerations.

5.f
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 35 In approving the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project, the Council makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 in support of its findings on the Final EIR:

1. The Council has considered the information contained in the Final EIR and has fully reviewed and considered all public testimony, documentation, exhibits, reports, and presentations included in the record of these proceedings. The Council specifically finds and determines that this Statement of Overriding Considerations is based upon and supported by substantial evidence in the record.

2. The Council has carefully weighed the benefits of the proposed project against any adverse impacts identified in the Final EIR that could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance, which are listed below. While the Council has required all feasible mitigation measures, such impacts remain significant for purposes of adopting this Statement of Overriding Considerations:
a. Impact TRA-2: The project will conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (B) (significant impact).

1. The City, acting through the Planning Division, is the “Lead Agency” for the project evaluated in the EIR. The City finds that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The City finds that it has independently reviewed and analyzed the EIR for the project, that the Draft EIR which was circulated for public review reflected its independent judgment and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3).

2. The DEIR evaluated the following potential project and cumulative environmental impacts: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic, utilities and service systems, and wildfire. Additionally, the EIR considered, in separate sections, Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes and Growth Inducing Impacts.

The significant environmental impacts of the project, as well as other alternatives were identified in the DEIR.

3. The City finds that the DEIR provides objective information to assist the decision makers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the

5.f
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 36 project. The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Draft EIR. The Final EIR was prepared after the review period and responds to comments made during the public review period.

4. The Planning Division evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the Planning Division prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Final EIR provides adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The Planning Division reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the Draft EIR. The Lead Agency has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the FEIR.

5. Having reviewed the information contained in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, and the administrative record, as well as the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines regarding recirculation of Draft EIRs, the City finds that there is no new significant impact, substantial increase in the severity of a previously disclosed impact, significant new information in the record of proceedings or other criteria under CEQA that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR, or that would require preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR. Specifically, the City finds that:
a. The Responses to Comments contained in the Final EIR fully considered and responded to comments claiming that the project would have significant impacts or more severe impacts not disclosed in the Draft EIR and include substantial evidence that none of these comments provided substantial evidence that the project would result in changed circumstances, significant new information, considerably different or feasible mitigation measures, or new or more severe significant impacts than were discussed in the Draft EIR.
b. The City has thoroughly reviewed the public comments received regarding the Project and the Final EIR as it relates to the project to determine whether under the requirements of CEQA, any of the public comments provide substantial evidence that would require recirculation of the EIR prior to its adoption and has determined that recirculation of the EIR is not required.
c. None of the information submitted after publication of the Final EIR, including testimony at the public hearings on the project, constitutes significant new

5.f
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 37 information or otherwise requires preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR.

The City does not find this information and testimony to be credible evidence of a significant impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an impact disclosed in the Final EIR, or a feasible mitigation measure or alternative not included in the Final EIR. d. The mitigation measures identified for the project were included in the Draft and Final EIR. The final mitigation measures for the Project are described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Each of the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP is incorporated into the project. The City finds that the impacts of the project have been mitigated to the extent feasible by the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP.

6. CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project to adopt a MMRP or the changes to the project which it has adopted, or made a condition of project approval, in order to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The mitigation measures included in the EIR as certified by the City and in the MMRP as adopted by the City serve that function. The MMRP includes all mitigation measures adopted by the City in connection with approval of the project and has been designed to ensure compliance with such measures during implementation of the project. In accordance with CEQA, the MMRP provides the means to ensure that the mitigation measures are fully enforceable. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts the MMRP.

7. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code § 21081.6, the City hereby adopts each of the mitigation measures expressly set forth herein as conditions of approval for the Project.

8. The custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City decision is based its decision making is the City of Pacifica, Planning Division.

9. The City finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every finding made herein is contained in the EIR, which is incorporated herein by this reference, or is in the record of proceedings in the matter.

10. The City is certifying an EIR for, and is approving and adopting Findings for, the entirety of the actions described in these Findings and in the EIR as comprising the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project.

11. The EIR is a project EIR for purposes of environmental analysis of the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project. A project EIR examines the environmental effects of

5.f
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 38 a specific project. The EIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for entitlement decisions regarding the project by the City and the other regulatory jurisdictions.

5.f
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

EXHIBIT B
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

5.f
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 FEIR
9 3.0Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)

AESTHETICS
AES-1: All applicable Tree Protection Recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report prepared by Traverso Tree Service on March 18, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to protection of Monterey pines (trees 25-27) and Monterey cypress (trees 1-12, 16-20) during the pre-construction, demolition, foundation, grading, construction, and landscaping phases of the project shall be implemented. Final grading plans, construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report have been incorporated into the final design of the project.

Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with the planting size, species, and ratio recommendations set forth in the Tree Replacement Recommendation Memorandum prepared by Traverso Tree Services on June 17, 2020. Protection measures and replacement trees shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Pacifica Planning Department.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Demolition,
Grading, or
Building Permit.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: Latest BAAQMD recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control for fugitive dust and exhaust during all construction activities shall be incorporated into all demolition and construction plans to require implementation of the following:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per Review and
Approval by
Planning and
Building
Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Demolition,
Grading, or
Building Permit.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
10 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

AQ-2: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, a plan to reduce diesel particulate matter emissions by at least 60 percent shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following strategies:

1. All construction equipment larger than 50 horsepower used at the site for more than two continuous days or 20 hours total shall meet U.S.

EPA Tier 4 emission standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), if feasible. Alternatively, the plan may include:
a. Equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards for Tier 2 or 3 engines and include particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control Review and
Approval by
Planning and
Building
Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Demolition or
Grading Permit.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
11 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
devices that altogether achieve a 60 percent or greater reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment.
b. Alternatively fueled or electric equipment.

2. Alternatively, the applicant may develop a construction operations plan demonstrating that the construction equipment used on-site would achieve a reduction in construction diesel particulate matter emissions by 60 percent or greater. The construction operations plan shall be subject to review by an air quality expert and approved by the City prior to construction. Elements of the plan could include a combination of the following measures:
a. Use Tier 4 or alternatively fueled equipment;
b. Installation of electric power lines during early construction phases to avoid use of diesel generators and compressors;
c. Use of electric-powered equipment;
d. Use of electric or propane/natural gas-powered forklifts and aerial lifts;
e. Change in construction build-out plans to lengthen phases; f. Implementation of different building techniques that result in less diesel equipment usage.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1: Prior to the start of construction, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify occupied San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat middens onsite. Where feasible, occupied middens shall be avoided and a minimum five (5) foot non-disturbance buffer, or as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established, maintained, and monitored throughout project construction. Additionally, a minimum five (5) foot non-disturbance buffer, or as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established between the eastern limit of proposed development activities and the densely vegetated, impenetrable hazelnut scrub habitat.

Survey by
Biologist,
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to
Commencement
of Construction
Activities.

Applicant,
California
Department
of Fish and
Wildlife
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
12 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
BIO-2: To address potential impacts to San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats, a Relocation Plan prepared by a qualified biologist, shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Pacifica and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and approval. At a minimum, the Relocation Plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
• Nests requiring relocation shall be dismantled by construction crews by hand and under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. • Each member of the construction crew shall receive an environmental awareness training regarding San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat ecology and specifics of the Relocation Plan.
• All material removed during nest dismantling shall be moved into the Relocation Area, as determined by the qualified biologist, and constructed into piles suitable for habitation or use as refugia. • If an active nest requires removal, the following phased dismantling protocol shall be implemented:
o Remove at least 50-100% of the existing canopy cover and begin dismantling.
o After partially dismantling the nest, leave nest alone for two to four days to allow woodrats to disperse on their own. After two to four days, continue to disassemble nest by hand. Plan to completely dismantle in two to three sessions.
o If young are present, the construction crew and qualified biologist shall cease dismantling of the nest for 48 hours to allow the adult to move the young. If the young have been moved and the nest is vacant, nest removal may resume.
• If an inactive nest (as determined by a qualified biologist) needs to be removed, it may be removed completely in one day. If woodrats are observed within or fleeing from the nest, the nest will be considered active and relocated using a phased approach.

Plan by
Biologist,
Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department
and CDFW.

Prior to
Issuance of
Demolition or
Grading Permit.

Applicant,
California
Department
of Fish and
Wildlife,
Planning
Department.

BIO-3: To offset the loss or disturbance of foraging habitat (native forbs and shrubs) for the special-status obscure bumble bee (Bombus Review and
Approval by
Prior to
Issuance of
Applicant,
Planning

5.f
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
13 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
caliginosus), native shrubs and herbaceous (forb) species known to benefit native bees shall be identified in a revised landscaping plan and introduced onsite. Plants known to benefit native bees shall be selected and may include but are not limited to coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), sage (Salvia spp.), lupines (Lupinus spp.), various species of Lotus and Acmispon, gumplant (Grindelia spp.), and Phacelia spp. As part of the update to the landscaping plans, selected bee-friendly species and planting locations shall be confirmed by a qualified biologist in consultation with the City of Pacifica.

Planning
Department.

CDFW
Building Permit. Department.

BIO-4: In the event the construction commences during the rainy season (between October 1 and May 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for California red-legged frog no more than five days prior to commencement of ground disturbing activities and provide recommendations for installation of exclusion fencing, as warranted.

Results of the survey and recommendations for exclusion fencing shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

At the recommendation of a qualified biologists and based on factors including the migration window for red-legged frog, rainfall, and inundation, exclusion fencing shall be installed. Exclusion fencing shall be inspected and maintained under the supervision of a qualified biologist.

Survey by
Biologist,
Approval by
Planning
Department.

No More than 5
Days Prior to
Commencement
of Ground
Disturbing
Activities.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

No More than
15 Days Prior to
Demolition, Tree
Removal, or
Commencement
of Ground
Disturbing
Activities.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
14 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
avoided until the young are flying and feeding on their own. A nondisturbance buffer installed with orange construction fencing shall be established around maternity site. The size of the buffer zone will be determined by a qualified bat biologist at the time of detection. If adults are found roosting in a tree or building on the project site but no maternal sites are found, then the adult bats can be flushed, or a one-way eviction door can be placed over the tree cavity for a 48-hour period prior to the tree removal or building demolition. If bats or evidence of bats are detected during the pre-construction surveys, the applicant shall notify the City of Pacifica and the CDFW regarding bat eviction protocol and submit a plan for review and acceptance by the City of Pacifica and the CDFW.

BIO-6: Should construction activities commence during the bird nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction activities. Areas within 300 to 500 feet of construction shall be surveyed for active nests. Should active nests be identified, a disturbance-free buffer shall be established based on the needs of the species as set forth by CDFW and shall be maintained until a qualified biologist verifies that the nestlings have fledged, or the nest has failed. Should construction activities cease for 14 consecutive days or more within the nesting season, an additional nesting bird survey shall be required prior to resuming construction. Results of the pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

Survey by
Biologist,
Approval by
Planning
Department.

No More than
14 Days Prior to
Ground
Disturbing
Activities.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

BIO-7: Indirect impacts to the seasonal wetlands and jurisdictional drainage feature shall be avoided through implementation of best management practices (BMPs) prior to earthwork. Construction exclusion zones shall be established by installing appropriate construction fencing, silt fencing, wildlife friendly hay wattles (no monofilament netting), gravel wattles, and other protective measures between project activities and the seasonal wetlands and drainage feature.

Inspection by
Biological
Monitor,
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Demolition or
Grading Permit.

Applicant,
Construction
Manager,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
15 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
All non-native, invasive vegetation removed shall be discarded offsite and away from wetland areas to prevent reseeding.

BMPs shall thereafter be routinely inspected by the construction manager to ensure BMPs remain in place for the duration of construction activities.

Upon completion of project construction all exclusion fencing shall be removed along with any temporary BMPs.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to Final
Inspection.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

BIO-9: To avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands throughout project operation, plans submitted for building permit shall be revised to include a split rail fence along the boundary between the recreational field and seasonal wetlands and concrete drainage ditch located at the southeast portion of the project site to preclude access and limit foot traffic within the drainage and wetland features.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building Permit.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
C/TCUL-1: Prior to commencement of ground-disturbing activities, project supervisors, equipment operators, and other members of the construction team overseeing or conducting ground-disturbing activities shall receive one or more preconstruction Cultural Awareness Trainings by a Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist. The Training shall educate and familiarize supervisors, contractors, and equipment operators with the potential to encounter archaeological resources, the types of archaeological material that could be encountered, and Training
Conducted by
Archaeologist.

Prior to
Commencement
of Ground
Disturbing
Activities.

Applicant,
Construction
Team,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
16 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
procedures to follow if archaeological deposits and/or artifacts are encountered during construction.

C/TCUL-2: In the event that an archaeological deposit is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, all work within 50-feet of the discovery shall be redirected until a Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist is retained to inspect the material and provide recommendations for appropriate treatment of the resource pursuant to regulations and guidelines set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act, including the involvement of Native American monitors if a prehistoric archaeological resource is identified. If avoidance of the archaeological resource is not feasible, the archaeological resource shall be evaluated for its eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are identified as eligible for listing on the CRHR, recommendations for proper treatment and handling shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist including, but not be limited to, avoidance or excavation in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation, which may include data recovery using standard archaeological field methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered archaeological materials; preparation of a report detailing the methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and associated materials; and accessioning of archaeological materials and a technical data recovery report at a curation facility. Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of the assessment. The report shall be submitted to the project applicant and the Northwest Information Center.

Construction
Team with
Cultural
Awareness
Training.

Observation
by Native
American
Monitor.

Evaluation by
Archaeologist.

Planning
Department
Required to
be Notified of
Any
Discovery.

During Ground
Disturbing
Activities.

Applicant,
Construction
Team,
Planning
Department.

Applicant,
Construction
Team,
Planning

5.f
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
17 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
Coroner will determine if the remains are precontact period Native American remains or of modern origin, and if any further investigation by the coroner is warranted. If the remains are believed to be precontact period Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by telephone within 24-hours. The NAHC will immediately notify the person believed to be the most likely descendant (MLD) of the remains. The MLD has 48-hours to make recommendations to the landowner for treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MLD does not make recommendations within 48-hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does not accept the descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendant may request mediation by NAHC. An archaeologist should also be retained to evaluate the historical significance of the discovery, the potential for additional remains, and to provide further recommendations for treatment of the site in coordination with the MLD.

Training.

Archaeologist
evaluation.

Planning
Department
Required to
be Notified of
Any
Discovery.

Department.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1: All applicable recommendations set forth in the Design Level Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical on August 20, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to grading, drainage, excavation, foundations systems, and compaction specifications shall be implemented. Final grading plan, construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the geotechnical reports have been incorporated into the final design of the project and to the satisfaction of the City of Pacifica City Engineer.

Review and
Approval by
Public Works
and Building
Department.

Prior to Grading
and Building
Permit Issuance.

Applicant,
Public
Works
Department,
Planning
Department.

GEO-2: Upon submittal of grading and drainage plans, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements of Title 6, Chapter 12 (Stormwater Management and Discharge Control) of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code. Plans shall include identification of appropriate best Review and
Approval by
Public Works
Department.

Prior to
Demolition,
Grading, and
Building Permit
Applicant,
Public
Works
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
18 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
management practices (BMPs) to prevent the discharge of construction wastes or contaminants from construction materials, tools, equipment, stockpiles, or exposed soil from entering the City storm water system or watercourses. Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with stormwater treatment requirements set forth in NPDES Permit No. CAS612008.

Issuance.

GEO-3: In the event that paleontological resources, including individual fossils or assemblages of fossils, are encountered during construction activities, all ground disturbing activities shall halt, and a qualified paleontologist shall be procured to evaluate the discovery and make treatment recommendations.

Review and
Coordination
between
Applicant and
Planning
Department.

During Ground
Disturbing
Activities
Applicant,
Construction
Team,
Planning
Department.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, a GHG reduction plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall, at a minimum demonstrate that the project will use at least 10 percent local building materials and will reuse/recycle at least 50 percent construction waste and demolition material. In the event that these measures are not feasible, the plan shall identify suitable replacement measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions reductions.

Review and
Approval by
Planning and
Building
Departments.

Prior to
Demolition or
Grading Permit
Issuance.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZ-1: Prior to demolition of the existing structures an asbestos survey shall be performed by a licensed asbestos inspector to identify all asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paint (LBP). The survey shall adhere to sampling protocols outlined by the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) and shall incorporate the findings of the survey into a report to be submitted to the City. In the event that such substances are found, the report shall include appropriate removal and disposal protocols subject to requirements set forth by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) AHERA requirements, lead standard contained in 29 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62, and any other local, Survey by
Asbestos
Inspector.

Review by
Building
Department.

Prior to
Demolition
Permit Issuance
Applicant,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
19 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
state, or federal regulations. Treatment, handling, and disposal of these materials shall be performed by qualified professionals in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations.

HAZ-2: Upon submittal of a building permit the applicant shall submit a site-specific Vegetation Management Plan for review and approval by the City of Pacifica and the North County Fire Authority. The Plan shall:

1. Remove all vegetation within the site listed on the San Mateo County list of “Fire Prone (Pyrophytic) Plants” except for isolated specimen plants.
a. Existing isolated or newly planted specimens shall meet the vertical and horizontal spacing guidelines.

3. Maintain an ember zone of 5 feet around all buildings pursuant to CGC 51182 (5)(1), (2) within the Project.
a. The ember zone be maintained on a minimum monthly basis.

4. Maintain all landscaping and vegetation on the Project site on a regular basis as part of a regular landscape maintenance program. a. All vegetation shall be irrigated as needed to maintain the vegetation.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department
and North
County Fire
Authority.

Prior to Building
Permit Issuance.

Applicant,
Planning
Department,
North
County Fire
Authority.

NOISE
NOI-1: Construction activities shall comply with the following best management practices to minimize noise levels from the proposed development:
• Construction will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

During
Construction.

Applicant,
Construction
Team,
Planning

5.f
Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
20 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Any work outside of these hours by the construction contractors should require a special permit from the City Engineer.

There should be compelling reasons for permitting construction outside of these designated hours.
• The contractor shall use “new technology” power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices.

All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poorly maintained engines or other components.
• Staging areas and stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as possible from noise-sensitive receptors, such as residential uses (a minimum of 200 feet).
• Ensure that generators, compressors, and pumps are housed in acoustical enclosures.
• Locate cranes as far from adjoining noise-sensitive receptors as possible.
• During final grading, substitute graders for bulldozers, where feasible.

Wheeled heavy equipment are quieter than track equipment and should be used where feasible.
• Substitute nail guns for manual hammering and electrically powered tools for noisier pneumatic tools, where feasible.
• The adjacent residences shall be notified early and frequently of the construction activities.
• A “noise disturbance coordinator” shall be designated to respond to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., beginning work too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator would be conspicuously posted at the Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
21 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
construction site.

TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TRA-1: Upon submittal of plans for building permit, the applicant shall submit a list of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to be implemented district-wide. TDM strategies shall be clearly defined in terms of location, extent, timing, and responsibility for implementation.

Strategies may include, but are not limited to the following:
• Safe Routes to School. Pursue grants to fund pedestrian and bicycle improvements around Pacifica School District schools to increase safety for students and staff walking and bicycling.
• Install Bike Racks. Identify Pacifica School District schools where more bicycle racks are needed. Once identified, install as needed. • Install e-bike Charging Stations. Install e-bike charging systems in secure bike parking facilities at Pacifica School District schools. • Samtrans Flex Services. Continue to partner with Samtrans to establish fixed-route services to Pacifica School District schools. Coordinate with Samtrans on possible flex services (such as dial-a-ride) to serve schools with lower demand.
• Shuttle Services. Partner with the Jefferson Union School District to fund shuttle services to Pacifica schools.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to Building
Permit Issuance.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to Building
Permit Issuance.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School FEIR
22 MITIGATION MEASURES

METHOD OF

VERIFICATION

TIMING OF

VERIFICATION

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

COMPLETION
(DATE/INITIAL)
TRA-3: To maintain adequate sight lines at the project driveways, signage and landscaping introduced onsite within close proximity of the driveways shall be maintained such that low-lying shrubs remain at a height lower than three feet from ground level and that tree branches be no less than seven feet in height from ground level. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining adequate sight lines from the project driveways.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department.

Prior to Final
Inspection.

Applicant,
Planning
Department.

Review and
Approval by
Planning
Department
and Fire
Department.

Prior to Building
Permit Issuance,
and Prior to
Final Inspection.

Applicant,
Planning
Department,
Fire
Department.

5.f
Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School

EXHIBIT
C
Conditions of Approval

5.f
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Conditions of Approval: File No. 2020-009 – Development Agreement DA-3- 20, Rezoning RZ-205-20, Development Plan DP-81-20, Specific Plan SP-173-20, Tentative Subdivision Map SUB-248-20, and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization for construction of a residential development consisting of 70 Multi-Family Residential Dwelling units at 930 Oddstad Boulevard (APN 023-672-600)
Planning Commission Meeting of March 20, 2023
Planning Division of the Planning Department

1. Development shall be substantially in accord with the plans entitled “Pacifica School District Workforce Housing” dated November 2, 2022, except as modified by the following conditions.

2. The Applicant shall incorporate all mitigation measures as detailed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

3. The effective date of the Specific Plan SP-173-20, Tentative Subdivision Map SUB-248-20 and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization (the “Development Permits”) shall be the latest effective date of approval of the ordinances adopted by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to approve Rezoning RZ-205-20, Development Plan DP 81-20, and Development Agreement DA-3-20 (collectively the “Legislative Approvals”). The Development Permits shall have no force or effect until, and their terms of approval shall begin on, the latest effective date of any of the Legislative Approvals.

4. Except as otherwise provided in Development Agreement DA-3-20, consistent with section 65863.9 of the Government Code regulating expiration dates of local agency permits issued in conjunction with a vesting tentative parcel map, and consistent with section 10-1.606 which refers to section 10-1.411 of the Pacifica Municipal Code governing expiration of vesting tentative subdivision maps for five or more parcels, the vesting tentative subdivision map and related development permits are valid for a period of 24 months from the date of final determination. If the final subdivision map is not recorded within such period of time, the approvals shall expire unless Applicant submits a written request for an extension and applicable fee not less than 30 days prior to the expiration date of the vesting tentative map in the manner required by section 10-1.412 of the Pacifica Municipal Code. Any extension of the term of the vesting tentative map shall be deemed also to extend the term of the related development permits.

5. Except as otherwise provided in Development Agreement DA-3-20, the development permits approved in conjunction with the vesting tentative subdivision map shall be valid for a period of two years from the date of recordation of the final subdivision map. If the use or uses approved is/are not established within such period of time, the approval(s) shall expire unless Applicant submits a written request for an extension and applicable fee prior to the expiration date, and the Planning Director or Planning Commission approves the extension request as provided below. The Planning Director may administratively grant a single, one year extension provided, in the Planning Director’s sole discretion, the circumstances considered during the initial Project approval have not materially changed. Otherwise, the Planning Commission shall consider a request for a single, one year extension.

5.f
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 In the event of litigation filed to overturn the City’s determination on the vesting tentative subdivision map or development permits, the expiration of the vesting tentative subdivision map and related development permits may be tolled during the pendency of such litigation as provided in state law, including but not limited to section 66452.6(c) of the Government Code.

6. The Applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its Council, Planning Commission, advisory boards, officers, employees, consultants and agents (hereinafter “City”) from any claim, action or proceeding (hereinafter “Proceeding”) brought against the City to attack, set aside, void or annul the City‘s actions regarding any development or land use permit, application, license, denial, approval or authorization, including, but not limited to, a development agreement, variances, use permits, developments plans, specific plans, general plan amendments, zoning amendments, approvals and certifications pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and/or any mitigation monitoring program, or brought against the City due to actions or omissions in any way connected to the Applicant’s Project (“Challenge”).

City may, but is not obligated to, defend such Challenge as City, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at Applicant’s sole cost and expense. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and costs of suit, attorney’s fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the Applicant, City, and/or parties initiating or bringing such Proceeding. If the Applicant is required to defend the City as set forth above, the City shall retain the right to select the counsel who shall defend the City. Per Government Code Section 66474.9, the City shall promptly notify Applicant of any Proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.

7. The approval letter issued by the City, all conditions of approval attached thereto, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) shall be included as plan sheets within all plan sets submitted to the City as part of any building permit or grading permit application.

8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall clearly indicate compliance with all conditions of approval on the plans and/or provide written explanations to the Planning Director’s satisfaction.

9. Exterior lighting shall include buffering techniques to reduce light and glare impacts to adjacent properties to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.

10. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall ensure the Project complies with all requirements of Development Plan DP-81-20 and Specific Plan SP-173-20.

11. All trash and recycling materials, if stored outdoors, shall be fully contained, and screened from public view within an approved enclosure. The enclosure design shall be consistent with the adjacent and/or surrounding building materials, and shall be sufficient in size to contain all trash and recycling materials, as may be recommended by Recology of the Coast. Trash enclosure and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage.

Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall provide construction details for the enclosure for review and approval by the Planning Director.

12. All transformers, HVAC units, backflow preventers and other ground-mounted utility

5.f
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall be located out of public view and/or adequately screened through the use or combination of walls or fencing, berming, painting, and/or landscaping, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.

13. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall demonstrate that the lot on the Project site was subdivided into three lots to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.

14. All vents, gutters, downspouts, flashing, and conduits shall be painted to match the colors of adjacent building surfaces. In addition, any mechanical or other equipment such as HVAC attached to or protruding from the building shall be appropriately housed and/or screened to the Planning Director’s satisfaction.

15. Applicant shall maintain its site in a fashion that does not constitute a public nuisance and that does not violate any provision of the Pacifica Municipal Code.

16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall submit a final landscape plan for approval by the Planning Director. The landscape plan shall show each type, size, and location of plant materials, as well as the irrigation system. Landscaping materials included on the plan shall be coastal compatible, drought tolerant and shall be predominantly native, and shall include an appropriate mix of plantings including. All landscaping shall be completed consistent with the final landscape plans prior to occupancy. In addition, the landscaping shall be maintained as shown on the landscape plan and shall be designed to incorporate efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote surface filtration, and minimize the use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. Landscaping on the site shall be adequately maintained in a healthful condition and replaced when necessary as determined by the Planning Director.

17. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Applicant shall enter into a Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Unit Affordability Agreement (“Affordability Agreement”) with City, in a form approved by the Planning Director and City Attorney. The Affordability Agreement shall provide, among other things that: (1) Applicant will develop and rent 11 its units as BMR units at an affordable rent; (2) the BMR units shall meet the size and design requirements set forth in Pacifica Municipal Code Section 9-4.4705; (3) rental BMR units shall remain available at an affordable rent to an eligible household for a minimum of 55 years; (4) the development and rent of the BMR units otherwise meets the requirements of Article 47 of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code (“City of Pacifica Below Market Rate (Inclusionary) Program”) and the terms of the Development Agreement; and (5) Applicant will be responsible for the City’s administrative costs associated with compliance with the Affordability Agreement. The Affordability Agreement must be recorded against the property prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map.

18. All outstanding and applicable fees associated with the processing of this Project shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit.

Building Division of the Planning Department

19. The Project shall require review and approval of a grading permit and a building permit prior to commencement of any construction activities.

5.f
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

20. Each unit shall be required to provide separate energy calculations and independent solar systems, except where a centralized system(s) may be approved by the Building Official.

Engineering Division of Public Works Department

21. The City Council of the City of Pacifica will need to accept offer of easements for Emergency Vehicle Access and Public Use Access prior to the filing of a final subdivision map.

22. Should the Applicant desire to record the final map prior to completion and acceptance of improvements, Applicant may enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City of Pacifica to construct all on-site and off-site improvements, as depicted on the approved Tentative Map and any conditions and mitigations imposed on this Project, prior to approval of the final map and all necessary fees and bonds associated with this agreement, including applicable Park Land Dedication fees as determined by the Planning Director, shall be paid by the applicant.

23. Should the Applicant desire to record the final map prior to completion and acceptance of improvements, a bond in an amount determined by the City Engineer must be provided. The bondmaybe in the formof cash, instrument of credit orsurety bond. In addition, an improvement agreement shall be executed to guarantee that the work will be done in accordance with the approved plans.

24. Prior to the execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement, Applicant shall submit to Engineering Division the construction plans and necessary reports and engineering calculations for all on-site and off-site improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Such plans and reports shall include but not limited to:

A. All plans and reports must be signed and stamped by a California licensed professional.

B. Plan, profile and cross sections of the proposed driveways. The proposed driveway shall not exceed the maximum grade of 18 percent.

C. Curb ramps on both sides of the driveways.

D. Design Geotechnical Report analyzing the proposed on-site and off-site improvements including but not limited to the driveways and retaining wall.

E. All site improvements including utilities and connections to existing mains must be designed according to the City Standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

25. Priorto approval ofthe finalmap,the Applicantshall verify that all public and private utilities have been provided to serve the subdivision. Approvals and/or agreements shall be obtained from all utilities.

26. The form, contents,submittal, approval, and filling of a final subdivision map (or final parcel map) shall conform to the following:

A. Surveys required. An accurate and complete survey of the land to be subdivided shall be made by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. All monuments, property lines, and centerlines ofstreets, alleys, and easements adjoining or within the subdivision shall be tied into the survey. The allowable error of closure on any portion of the parcel map shall not exceed 1/10,000 for field closures and 1/20,000 for calculated closures.

B. Forms and contents. The form and contents of the parcel map shall conform to the final

5.f
Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 map form and contents requirements of Pacifica Municipal Code Section 10-1.504 and Pacifica Municipal Code Section 10-1.505 of, except for subsection (6) of subsection (c).

C. Preliminary submittal. The subdivider shall submit prints of the parcel map to the City Engineer for checking. The preliminary printsshall be accompanied by copies of the data, plans,reports, and documentsrequired forfinalmaps by Pacifica Municipal Code Section 10-1.506.

D. Review and approval by the City Engineer. The City Engineershall review the parcel map, and the subdivider's engineer shall make corrections and/or additions until the map is acceptable to the City Engineer. The subdivider's engineershallsubmitthe originaltracing of the map, corrected to its final form and signed by all parties required to execute the certificates on the map, to the City Engineer. The City Clerk or his or her authorized agent shall transmit the approved parcel map directly to the County Clerk fortransmittal to the County Recorder.

27. City Council approvalshall be required prior to recording a final map.

28. The improvements shall be consistent with the plans approved by, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Conditions of Approval. All construction shall meet the latest California Building Code, California Fire Code, City of Pacifica Municipal Code and the City Standard Specifications and Drawings. Securities for all required improvements, and applicable fees and charges, shall be submitted prior to permit issuance. The applicant shall obtain all required permits before commencing work. All required improvements shall be constructed at no cost to the City except where specifically agreed to by the City under the provisions of a written agreement. Grading and improvement plan review and approval by the City Engineer are required before any City Permit is issued. The improvement plans shall include details for on‐site and off‐site improvements for vehicular and pedestrian access, parking, traffic signs and markings, utility service connections, modifications and extension of the City’s sewer, storm drain, safety lighting, landscaping, and other public service and common facilities. All utility services shall be underground unless otherwise approved. Said improvements shall conform to City of Pacifica and affected Agency’s standards.

29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall provide runoff calculations for review and approval by the City Engineer verifying that post-development stormwater runoff from the site does not exceed the pre-development stormwater runoff. Additional stormwater runoff generated from the design storm as a result of this development shall be retained on-site.

30. All stormwater retention, stormwater treatment, or other stormwater best management practice (BMP) improvements shall be located outside of the public right-of-way and maintained by the property owner. All privately owned and maintained improvements shall be located outside of the public right-of-way except as permitted by the City Engineer pursuant to an approved encroachment permit.

31. The Project’s electrical transformer shall not be installed within the public right-of-way.

32. The Applicant shall repair and/or replace additional areas of street pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter, street lights, manhole, catch basins, or any other public infrastructure within the right-of-way damaged by construction activities associated with the project (utility installation, etc.) as required by the City Inspector during construction.

5.f
Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

33. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall provide verification, in writing, that the joint trench design has been reviewed and approved by each utility company if required.

34. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall provide “will serve letters” from North Coast County Water District for water service and from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for electric service.

35. Concurrent with each demolition, grading and drainage permit submittal or as a part of the Site Improvement Plan package, the Applicant shall prepare a dust control plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plan shall conform to the City Standards and comply with the requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Best Management Practices for dust control. The Applicant shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. The identified person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.

Wastewater Division of Public Works Department

36. Irrigation and sprinkler systems shall not drain into sanitary sewer system.

37. Trash enclosure shall be shown on plans to have a roof and berm around enclosure to prevent rainwater from entering the sanitary sewer system.

38. All sanitary sewer system connections shall be shown on the building permit plans to connect to the main line sewer on Oddstad Boulevard.

39. All proposed sewer lines up to the connection to the existing mainline shall be privately maintained.

North County Fire Authority (NCFA)

40. Fire sprinkler system is required. Submit plans to NCFA under separate fire permit.

41. Approval of Alternative Methods and Materials shall be required for the Project. Applicant shall submit a request form and fee for NCFA review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.

42. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall provide fire flow information per California Fire Code (CFC), Appendix B.

43. Fire extinguishing/hood system is required. Submit plans to NCFA under separate fire permit.

44. Fire alarm system is required. Submit plans to NCFA under separate fire permit.

45. Fire alarm system shall be monitored, per CFC.

46. Key Box is required. Apply for approved hardware at NCFA Administration.

5.f
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

47. Portable fire extinguishers(s) are required. Mount fire extinguishers 3-5 feet above floor.

48. Illuminated address identification is required.

49. Utility identification is required.

50. Doors shall be easily openable in one motion without special knowledge, key or effort per California Building Code (CBC). Use of thumb operated deadbolts prohibited unless integrated with latch.

51. Illuminated exit signs and emergency egress illumination is required.

52. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief that Emergency Responder Radio Coverage is provided as required by CFC Section 510.

Conditions of Approval added by the Planning Commission on March 20, 2023

53. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall add articulation to the façade of Building C2 such as a trellis feature, window planter box, or other articulation acceptable to the Planning Director.

54. Prior to final map approval, Applicant shall revise Sheet C7.0 and any other sheet of the vesting tentative parcel map to ensure that the emergency vehicle access easement (EVAE) includes the entirety of the fire access turnaround to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Fire Chief.

55. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall revise Sheet A4.0 of the Project plans to incorporate standing seam metal roofs on the community amenity buildings. ***END***

5.f
Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

EXHIBIT D
Development Agreement DA-3-20 as Recommended for Approval by the Planning Commission on March 20, 2023

5.f
Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:

City of Pacifica
City Clerk’s Office
540 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Attn: City Clerk
Record Without Fee
Pursuant to Government Code
Section 27383
Space Above Reserved for Recorder’s Use Only

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(DA-3-20, File No. 2020-009)

BY AND BETWEEN

CITY OF PACIFICA
AND

PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT
Effective Date:

5.f
Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
-iARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS.......................................................................................................... 3

1.1 Definitions.............................................................................................................. 3 ARTICLE 2 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM............................................................................ 6

2.1 Effective Date ........................................................................................................ 6

2.2 Term of Agreement................................................................................................ 6

2.3 City Representations and Warranties..................................................................... 7

2.4 District Representations and Warranties................................................................ 7 ARTICLE 3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY................................................................. 7

3.1 Vested Rights......................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Applicable Law...................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Development Timing ............................................................................................. 8

3.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies.................................................................... 9

3.5 Life of Project Approvals..................................................................................... 10

3.6 District’s Right to Rebuild................................................................................... 10

3.7 State and Federal Law.......................................................................................... 10 ARTICLE 4 FEES ....................................................................................................................... 10

4.1 Impact Fees.......................................................................................................... 10

4.2 Processing Fees.................................................................................................... 11

4.3 Other Agency Fees............................................................................................... 11

4.4 Connection Fees................................................................................................... 11 ARTICLE 5 PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PUBLIC BENEFITS..................................... 11

5.1 Parkland Dedication and Recreation Site.. .......................................................... 11

5.2 Residents’ Commons Building / Occasional Use by City ................................... 13

5.3 Sales Tax Point of Sale Designation.................................................................... 13 ARTICLE 6 ANNUAL REVIEW ............................................................................................... 14

6.1 Annual Review..................................................................................................... 14 ARTICLE 7 COOPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION...................................................... 15

7.1 Subsequent Approvals ......................................................................................... 15 ARTICLE 8 AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVALS................... 15

5.f
Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-ii8.1 Amendment by Written Consent ......................................................................... 15

8.2 Major Amendments to Agreement....................................................................... 15

8.3 Minor Amendment............................................................................................... 16

8.4 Requirement for Writing...................................................................................... 16

8.5 Subsequent CEQA Review.................................................................................. 16 ARTICLE 9 INSURANCE, INDEMNITY AND COOPERATION IN THE EVENT OF LEGAL CHALLENGE ....................................................................................... 16

9.1 Insurance Requirements....................................................................................... 16

9.2 Indemnity and Hold Harmless............................................................................. 17

9.3 Defense and Cooperation in the Event of a Litigation Challenge ....................... 17 ARTICLE 10 ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE..................................................... 17

10.1 Assignment .......................................................................................................... 17

10.2 Successive Assignment........................................................................................ 18 ARTICLE 11 MORTGAGEE PROTECTION............................................................................ 18

11.1 Mortgagee Protection........................................................................................... 18

11.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated .................................................................................... 18

11.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee ........................................................................... 19

11.4 No Supersedure.................................................................................................... 19 ARTICLE 12 DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION ........................................................ 19

12.1 Breach and Default .............................................................................................. 19

12.2 Withholding of Permits........................................................................................ 19

12.3 Termination.......................................................................................................... 19

12.4 Specific Performance for Violation of a Condition ............................................. 20

12.5 Legal Actions....................................................................................................... 20

12.6 Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative................................................................. 20

12.7 No Damages......................................................................................................... 20

12.8 Resolution of Disputes......................................................................................... 21

12.9 Surviving Provisions............................................................................................ 21 ARTICLE 13 GENERAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................... 21

5.f
Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-iii13.1 Covenants Binding on Successors and Assigns and Run with Land................... 21

13.2 Notice................................................................................................................... 21

13.3 Permitted Delays.................................................................................................. 22

13.4 Counterparts......................................................................................................... 22

13.5 Waivers................................................................................................................ 22

13.6 Construction of Agreement.................................................................................. 23

13.7 Headings .............................................................................................................. 23

13.8 Severability .......................................................................................................... 23

13.9 Time is of the Essence ......................................................................................... 23

13.10 Extension of Time Limits .................................................................................... 23

13.11 Signatures............................................................................................................. 23

13.12 Entire Agreement................................................................................................. 23

13.13 Estoppel Certificate.............................................................................................. 23

13.14 Recordation of Termination................................................................................. 24

13.15 City Approvals and Actions................................................................................. 24

13.16 Negation of Partnership ....................................................................................... 24

13.17 No Third Party Beneficiaries............................................................................... 24

13.18 Governing State Law ........................................................................................... 24

5.f
Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA- )
This Development Agreement (“Agreement”), dated as of the Effective Date, is entered into by and between the City of Pacifica, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and Pacific School District, a California school district (“District”). District and City may be referred to individually in this Agreement as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

R E C I T A L S
A. In order to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs and risks of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code (“Development Agreement Statute”) which authorizes a city and a school district having a legal or equitable interest in real property to enter into a binding, long-term development agreement establishing certain development rights in the property.

B. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, the City Council of the City of Pacifica enacted Pacifica Municipal Code (“PMC”) section 9-4.5001 et seq. (“Development Agreement Regulations”), which authorize the execution of development agreements and set forth the required contents and form of those agreements. The provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and the City’s Development Agreement Regulations are collectively referred to herein as the “Development Agreement Law.” C. District is the owner of that certain real property located at 930 Oddstad Boulevard, in the City of Pacifica, also known as Assessor’s Parcel Number 023-672-600, and described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”).

D. District has submitted applications to the City for a Rezoning (RZ-205-20), Development Agreement (DA-3-20), Development Plan (DP-81-20), Specific Plan (SP-173-20), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUB-248-20), and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization for the development of seventy (70) residential housing units, residential amenity buildings and improvements, circulation improvements, open space and landscaping, and recreational fields and amenities, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the “Project”).

E. The Project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase 1 generally consists of four (4) residential buildings consisting of forty-five (45) units, three (3) amenity buildings, circulation and other improvements, and retention of and improvements to existing recreational fields, (“Phase 1”). Phase 2 generally consists of three (3) residential buildings consisting of twenty-five (25) units, and circulation and other residential amenities (“Phase 2”). The improvements to the existing recreational fields in Phase 1 consist of drainage improvements, natural turf repairs, parking lot sealing/striping, and basketball hoop installation (all located on Lot 1), as described in more detail in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Parkland Improvements”). The following two buildings are also in Phase 1, and more particularly described in Exhibit B: (1) the residents’ common amenity building to be constructed on a portion of Lot 2 (that is immediately adjacent to Lot 1), which includes a snack window/kiosk and covered picnic area that will serve the public and community groups under

5.f
Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 2 terms and conditions described herein (”Residents’ Commons Building”); and (2) a restroom structure on Lot 2 (that is immediately adjacent to Lot 1), which includes new restrooms/changing rooms that will be used in conjunction with the Parkland Improvements (“Recreation Restroom”).

F. In order to satisfy the parkland dedication requirements of the Project, District shall maintain and operate that 4.99-acre portion (“Lot 1”) of the Property depicted in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and the Parkland Improvements to be constructed thereon, for public use for a period of at least twenty (20) years (“Recreation Site”).

The Recreation Site consists of 1.4-acres that would have been required to be dedicated (“Dedication Acreage”) and an additional 3.59 acres of parkland and recreational property (“Additional Parkland”). After the initial 20-year public use period of the Recreation Site, the Parties have agreed that District may withdraw the Additional Parkland from public use on the terms set forth herein.

G. City and District have reached mutual agreement on the terms of this Agreement and desire to voluntarily enter into this Agreement to facilitate development of the Project subject to the conditions and requirements set forth herein.

H. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.), an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) has been prepared and adopted for the Project. As required by CEQA, the City has certified the EIR, and adopted written findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) on , pursuant to Resolution No. .

I. Prior to or concurrently with approval of this Agreement, the City will take numerous actions in connection with the approval of the Project on the Property. The approvals and development actions described herein are collectively referred to as the “Existing Approvals”: (1) Rezoning; (2) Development Plan; (3) Specific Plan, (4) Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and (5) Heritage Tree Removal Authorization.

J. City has given the required notice of its intention to adopt this Agreement and has conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to Government Code section 65867 and PMC section 9-4.5006. The City has reviewed and evaluated this Agreement in accordance with the Development Agreement Law and found that the provisions of this Agreement and its purposes are consistent with the Development Agreement Law and the goals, policies, standards and land use designations specified in the General Plan.

K. On the City Council introduced Ordinance No.
(“Enacting Ordinance”) approving this Agreement and authorizing its execution, and adopted that Ordinance on .

A G R E E M E N T
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein and other valuable consideration, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

5.f
Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 3 ARTICLE 1

DEFINITIONS

1.1 Definitions.
“Additional Parkland” is defined in Recital F.
“Additional Parkland Site” is defined in Section 5.1.3.1. “Agreement” shall mean this Development Agreement between City and District, including all Exhibits hereto.
“Applicable Law” is defined in Section 3.2.
“Assignee” is defined in Section 10.1.
“Assignment” is defined in Section 10.1.
“Board of Trustees” means the Board of Trustees of the Pacifica School District. “Bona Fide District Use” is defined in Section 5.1.3.
“CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq., as amended from time to time. “CEQA Guidelines” means the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000, et seq.), as amended from time to time. “Changes in the Law” is defined in Section 3.7.
“City” means the City of Pacifica, a municipal corporation. “City Council” means the City Council of the City of Pacifica. “City Manager” means City’s City Manager or his or her designee. “City Parties” means and includes City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, attorneys, contractors and representatives.
“Claims” means liabilities, obligations, orders, claims, damages, fines, penalties and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and costs.
“Commence Construction” shall be deemed to have occurred when the District has begun vertical construction as evidenced by an approved foundation City inspection. “Connection Fees” means those fees charged by City on a citywide basis or by a utility provider to utility users as a cost for connecting water, sanitary sewer, and other applicable utilities, except for any such fee or portion thereof that constitutes an Impact Fee, as defined below.

5.f
Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 4 “Dedication Acreage” is defined in Recital F.
“Dedication Site” is defined in Section 5.1.3.1.
“Default” is defined in Section 12.1.
“Development Agreement Law” is defined in Recital B.
“Development Agreement Regulations” is defined in Recital B. “Development Agreement Statute” is defined in Recital A. “District” means the Pacifica School District, and its permitted successors and assigns. “District CBO” means the individual who serves as the Chief Business Officer for the District or his or her designee.
“District Superintendent” means the individual who serves as the Superintendent of Schools for the entire District or his or her designee. “District’s Development Manager” means the individual or company that District appoints to serve as its development phase authorized representative, collaborating with the District in planning and managing the overall development of the Project, overseeing its design and construction, and assisting with marketing and start-up operations. As of the Effective Date, the District’s Development Manager is Brookwood Group, Inc., a California corporation. “District’s Property Manager” means the individual or company that District appoints to serve as its property manager and authorized representative for the leasing and on-site management for the operations of the Project or any portion thereof. “Effective Date” means the date that this Agreement becomes effective as determined under Section 2.1.
“EIR” is defined in Recital H.
“Enacting Ordinance” refers to the Ordinance identified in Recital K. “Exactions” means exactions that may be imposed by the City as a condition of developing the Project, including requirements for acquisition, dedication or reservation of land; and obligations to construct on-site or off-site public and private infrastructure improvements such as roadways, utilities or other improvements necessary to support the Project, whether such exactions constitute subdivision improvements, mitigation measures in connection with environmental review of the Project, or impositions made under Applicable City Regulations.

For purposes of this Agreement, Exactions do not include Impact Fees. “Existing Approvals” means and includes those permits and approvals for the Project granted by City to District as of the Effective Date as set forth in Recital I. “General Plan” means the City of Pacifica’s General Plan, as amended from time to

5.f
Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 5 time.
“Impact Fees” means the monetary amount charged by City in connection with a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of mitigating the impacts of the development project or development of the public facilities related to the development project, including, any “fee” as that term is defined by Government Code section 66000(b). For purposes of this Agreement, a fee that meets both the definitions of an Impact Fee and an Exaction will be considered to be an Impact Fee. “Litigation Challenge” is defined in Section 9.3.
“Lot 1” (the legal description for which is in Exhibit A) comprises the western portion of the Property and is that portion of the Project site for Phase 1 that is defined herein as the Recreation Site.
“Lot 2” (the legal description for which is in Exhibit A) comprises the central portion of the Property and is that portion of the Project site upon which all three amenity buildings and the four residential buildings of Phase 1 will be constructed. “Lot 3” (the legal description for which is in Exhibit A) comprises the eastern portion of the Property and is the Project site for Phase 2 of the Project. “Major Amendment” is defined in Section 8.2.
“Minor Amendment” is defined in Section 8.2.
“Mortgage” means any mortgage, deed of trust, security agreement, and other like security instrument encumbering all or any portion of the Property or any of the District’s rights under this Agreement.
“Mortgagee” means the holder of any Mortgage, and any successor, assignee or transferee of any such Mortgage holder.
“Municipal Code” means and refers to the City of Pacifica’s Municipal Code, as amended from time to time.
“New City Laws” means and includes any ordinances, resolutions, orders, rules, official policies, standards, specifications, guidelines or other regulations, which are promulgated or adopted by the City (including but not limited to any City agency, body, department, officer or employee) or its electorate (through their power of initiative or otherwise) after the Effective Date.
“Notice of Breach” is defined in Section 12.1.
“Other Agency Fees” is defined in Section 4.3.
“Other Agency Subsequent Approvals” means Subsequent Project Approvals to be obtained from entities other than the City.

5.f
Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 6 “Parkland Improvements” is defined in Recital E.
“Permitted Delay” is defined in Section 13.3.
“Phase 1” is defined in Recital E.
“Phase 2” is defined in Recital E.
“Planning Commission” means the City of Pacifica Planning Commission. “Processing Fees” means all fees for processing development project applications, including any required supplemental or other further environmental review, plan checking and inspection and monitoring for land use approvals, design review, grading and building permits, General Plan maintenance fees, and other permits and entitlements required to implement the Project, which are in effect at the time those permits, approvals or entitlements are applied for, and which are intended to cover the actual costs of processing the foregoing. “Project Approvals” means the Existing Approvals and all Subsequent Approvals. “Project” is defined in Recital D.
“Property” is defined in Recital C.
“Recreation Restroom” is defined in Recital E.
“Recreation Site” is defined in Recital F.
“Residents’ Commons Building” is defined in Recital E.
“Subdivision Map Act” means California Government Code sections 66410 through 66499.58, as it may be amended from time to time.
“Subsequent Approvals” is defined in Section 7.1.
“Term” is defined in Section 2.2.
“Withdrawal Notice” is defined in Section 5.1.3.

ARTICLE 2

EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM

2.1 Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Agreement shall be the later of (1) the date that is 30 days after the date that the Enacting Ordinance is adopted, or (2) the date this Agreement is fully executed by the Parties. The Effective Date is inserted at the beginning of this Agreement.

2.2 Term of Agreement. Unless earlier terminated, the “Term” of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall expire on the earlier of: (1) 25 years after the Effective Date, or (2) District’s satisfaction of all obligations contained herein.

5.f
Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 7 2.3 City Representations and Warranties. City represents and warrants to District that, as of the Effective Date:

2.3.1 City is a municipal corporation, and has all necessary powers under the laws of the State of California to enter into and perform the undertakings and obligations of City under this Agreement.

2.3.2 The execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations of the City hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary City Council action and all necessary approvals have been obtained.

2.3.3 This Agreement is a valid obligation of City and is enforceable in accordance with its terms.

During the Term of this Agreement, City shall, upon learning of any fact or condition which would cause any of the warranties and representations in this Section 2.3 not to be true, immediately give written notice of such fact or condition to District.

2.4 District Representations and Warranties. District represents and warrants to City that, as of the Effective Date:

2.4.1 District is a California District formed under the laws of the State of California, and has all necessary powers under the laws of the State of California to own property interests and in all other respects enter into and perform the undertakings and obligations of District under this Agreement.

2.4.2 The execution and delivery of this Agreement and the necessary performance of the obligations of District hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary action and all necessary shareholder approvals have been obtained.

2.4.3 This Agreement is a valid obligation of District and is enforceable in accordance with its terms.

During the Term of this Agreement, District shall, upon learning of any fact or condition which would cause any of the warranties and representations in this Section 2.4 not to be true, immediately give written notice of such fact or condition to City.

ARTICLE 3

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY

3.1 Vested Rights. District shall have the vested right to develop the Property and the Project in accordance with and subject to the Existing Project Approvals, the Subsequent Project Approvals, Applicable Law and this Agreement, which shall control the permitted uses, density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height and size of buildings on the Property.

3.2 Applicable Law. City and District acknowledge and agree that City is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the limitations, reservations and

5.f
Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 8 exceptions contained in this Agreement are intended to reserve to City all of its police power that cannot be so limited. Notwithstanding the foregoing reservation of City, it is the intent of City and District that this Agreement be construed to provide District with rights afforded by law, including but not limited to, the Development Agreement Statute. Therefore, the laws, rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications of City applicable to the development of the Property and/or the Project shall be (collectively, “Applicable Law”):

3.2.1 Those rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications of the City set forth in the Project Approvals and this Agreement, including without limitation Section 3.1 above;

3.2.2 With respect to matters not addressed by and not otherwise inconsistent with the Project Approvals and this Agreement, those laws, rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications (including City ordinances and resolutions) governing permitted uses, building locations, timing and manner of construction, densities, intensities of uses, heights and sizes, requirements for on- and off-site infrastructure and public improvements, in force and effect on the Effective Date, except as set forth in section 3.1 above;

3.2.3 New City Laws that relate to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedure imposed at any time, provided such New City Laws are uniformly applied on a City-wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and properties;

3.2.4 New City Laws that revise City’s uniform construction codes, including City’s building code, plumbing code, mechanical code, electrical code, fire code, grading code and other uniform construction codes, as of the date of permit application, provided, that such New City Laws are uniformly applied on a City-wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and properties;

3.2.5 New City Laws that are necessary to protect physical health and safety of the public; provided, that such New City Laws are uniformly applied on a City-wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and properties;

3.2.6 New City Laws that do not conflict with this Agreement or the Project Approvals, provided such new City Laws are uniformly applied on a City-wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and properties; and

3.2.7 New City Laws that do not apply to the Property and/or the Project due to the limitations set forth above, but only to the extent that such New City Laws are accepted in writing by District in its sole discretion.

3.3 Development Timing. District shall phase and construct the Project within the timeframes set forth below:

3.3.1 District shall obtain a building permit to construct Phase 1, including the Parkland Improvements prior to, or concurrently with, issuance of a building permit for Phase 2. In no event shall City issue a building permit for any portion of the Project prior to the issuance of a

5.f
Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 9 building permit for Phase 1, except that the City may issue a building permit for construction of the Parkland Improvements prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.

3.3.1.1 3.3.2 District shall commence construction of Phase 1 and the Parkland Improvements prior to, or concurrently with, commencement of construction of any other portion of the Project, but no later than seven (7) years from the Effective Date, subject to extension for a Permitted Delay.

3.3.3 District shall complete construction of and obtain a certificate of occupancy for Phase 1, including the Parkland Improvements, prior to the date that is thirty (30) months from the issuance of the first building permit for Phase 1 and the Parkland Improvements subject to extension for a Permitted Delay. City may extend such 30-month time period for up to six months if City reasonably determines that District has made substantial progress toward completion of construction of Phase 1 and/or the Parkland Improvements prior to the expiration of such initial 30-month period.

3.3.4 District has no obligation to construct Phase 2. However, in the event District desires to construct Phase 2, District shall commence construction of Phase 2, no later than twelve (12) years from the Effective Date, subject to extension for a Permitted Delay.

3.3.5 In the event District commences construction of Phase 2, District shall complete construction of and obtain a certificate of occupancy for Phase 2 prior to the date that is thirty (30) months from the date of issuance of a building permit for Phase 2, subject to extension for a Permitted Delay. City may extend such 30-month time period for up to six (6) months upon the written request of District if City reasonably determines that District has made substantial progress toward completion of construction of Phase 2 prior to the expiration of the initial 30- month period.

3.3.6 Except as set forth above, since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. The City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to consider and expressly provide for the timing of development resulted in a lateradopted initiative restricting the timing of development prevailing over such parties’ agreement, it is the desire to avoid that result by acknowledging that, unless otherwise provided for in this Agreement, District’s vested rights under this Agreement include the right to develop the Property and the Project in such order and at such rate and at such times as District deems appropriate in the exercise of its discretion, subject to the terms, requirements and conditions of the Project Approvals and this Agreement.

3.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. City and District acknowledge and agree that other governmental or quasi-governmental entities not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property and the Project and that this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. City shall reasonably cooperate with District in District’s effort to obtain such permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental entities in connection with the development of, or the provision of services to, the Property and/or the Project; provided,

5.f
Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 10 however, City shall have no obligation to incur any costs, without compensation or reimbursement, or to amend any City policy, regulation or ordinance in connection therewith.

3.5 Life of Project Approvals. The term of any and all Project Approvals shall automatically be extended for the longer of the Term or the term otherwise applicable to such Project Approval. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, any vesting or tentative maps heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Project or the Property shall be extended for the Term (and may be subject to other extensions provided under the Subdivision Map Act).

3.6 District’s Right to Rebuild. City agrees that District may renovate or rebuild portions of the Project at any time within the Term should it become necessary due to any casualty, including natural disaster or changes in seismic requirements. Such renovations or reconstruction shall be processed as a Subsequent Project Approval consistent with all prior Project Approvals and Applicable City Law. Any such renovation or rebuilding shall be subject to all design, density and other limitations and requirements imposed by this Agreement, and shall comply with the Project Approvals, Applicable City Law, and the requirements of CEQA.

3.7 State and Federal Law. As provided in Section 65869.5 of the Development Agreement Statute, this Agreement shall not preclude the applicability to the Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in State or Federal laws or by changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies of special districts or other governmental entities, other than City, created or operating pursuant to the laws of the State of California (“Changes in the Law”). In the event Changes in the Law prevent or preclude, or render substantially more expensive or time consuming, compliance with one (1) or more provisions of this Agreement, the City and District shall meet and confer in good faith in order to determine whether such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended, or performance thereof delayed, as may be necessary to comply with Changes in the Law. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City or District from contesting by any available means (including administrative or judicial proceedings) the applicability to the Project any such Changes in the Law. If Changes in the Law preclude or substantially prevent or preclude, or render substantially more expensive or time consuming, performance of this Agreement in a manner that makes the Project economically infeasible, District, in its sole and absolute discretion, may terminate this Agreement by providing written notice thereof to City.

ARTICLE 4
FEES

4.1 Impact Fees. District shall pay any and all Impact Fees imposed by City that are in place as of the Effective Date, at the rate in effect at the time of building permit issuance, except as provided in Section 4.1.1 below. In addition, City may impose and District shall comply with those Exactions required by this Agreement and the Project Approvals.

4.1.1 Park Facilities Improvement Fee. District’s construction of the Parkland Improvements shall satisfy District’s obligation to pay the Park Facilities Improvement Fee.

Therefore, no Park Facilities Improvement Fee shall be required in connection with the Project, provided that the Parkland Improvements are constructed.

5.f
Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 11 4.2 Processing Fees. Subject to District’s right to protest and/or pursue a challenge in law or equity to any new or increased Processing Fee, City may charge and District agrees to pay any and all Processing Fees which are in effect on a City-wide basis at the time those permits, approvals or entitlements are applied for, and which are intended to cover the actual costs of processing the foregoing.

4.3 Other Agency Fees. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City from collecting fees from District that are lawfully imposed on the Project by another agency having jurisdiction over the Project, which the City is required to collect pursuant to Applicable Law (“Other Agency Fees”).

4.4 Connection Fees. Subject to District’s right to protest and/or pursue a challenge in law or equity to any new or increased connection Fee, City may charge and District shall pay any Connection Fee that is lawfully adopted.

ARTICLE 5

PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PUBLIC BENEFITS

5.1 Parkland Dedication and Recreation Site. District shall satisfy its parkland dedication requirements as set forth below.

5.1.1 Initial 20-Year Public Use of Recreation Site. District shall maintain and operate the entire Recreation Site, including the Dedication Acreage and Additional Parkland Area, and Parkland Improvements constructed thereon and the Recreation Restroom (on Lot 2) for use by the general public for a period of twenty (20) years from the Effective Date (“20-Year Public Use Period”).

5.1.1.1 Rental Payments. District’s operation will include, among other things, rental to sports leagues and for other community events. For the 20-Year Public Use Period, District shall have the right to receive all rents for the entire Recreation Site (Lot 1), including the Dedication Site, and also including rents relating to the Residents’ Commons Building to be located on a portion of Lot 2 that is immediately adjacent to Lot 1). During the 20-Year Public Use Period, District shall retain all records of payments for use of Dedication Site and associated use of the Residents’ Common Building and, within thirty (30) days of any written request from City, provide City with access to or copies of such records.

5.1.1.2 Maintenance Obligations. District, at its sole expense, shall maintain, safely operate, periodically inspect, repair, resurface and replace the Parkland Improvements (on Lot 1) and the Recreation Restroom and Residents’ Common Building (on Lot 2) if deemed necessary by District or City, as well as perform all necessary service on maintenance equipment, in order to ensure the attractive and healthy appearance of the landscaping, the attractive appearance, condition and safety of any and all structures, and the efficient operation of all of the Parkland Improvements, including paying the electrical expense of operating any light and irrigation controllers.

5.1.1.3 Insurance Obligations. In addition to the insurance obligations of Section 9.1 below, District shall ensure the Recreation Site and Parkland Improvements and the Residents’ Commons Building and Recreation Restroom are covered by its general liability and

5.f
Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 12 property insurance policies and that the City is named as an additional insured, in a form approved by City, on all insurance policies regarding the Recreation Site and Parkland Improvements.

5.1.1.4 Exclusion of Public. District may have exclusive use of the Recreation Site (on Lot 1) and the Recreation Restroom (on Lot 2) for special events, including but not limited to, soccer leagues, flea markets, and farmers markets, up to ten (10) calendar days per month for not more than eight hours each day. District shall provide notice to City at least one month prior to the start of each month of the days in which the Recreation Site and Recreation Restroom will not be open to the public that month. District shall have exclusive use of the Residents’ Commons Building, except as provided in Section 5.2 below.

5.1.2 Ongoing Public Use. Following the 20-Year Public Use Period, District shall continue to allow public use of the Recreation Site and the Recreation Restroom on Lot 2 and may continue to collect rents upon the terms set forth in Section 5.1.1 above, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, except that maintenance of the Recreation Site and the Recreation Restroom on Lot 2 pursuant to Section 5.1.1.2 shall become the obligation of the City.

5.1.3 Withdrawal of Additional Parkland from Public Use. Following the 20-Year Public Use Period, District may provide written notice to City of its intent to withdraw the Additional Parkland from public use (“Withdrawal Notice”). The Withdrawal Notice shall describe whether or not the District requires the Additional Parkland for a bona fide use directly related to the District’s educational mission, as follows: a pre-school or school; District offices or support or maintenance facilities; workforce housing for District employees or employees of another government entity; or market rate rental housing that generates cash flow to directly support District operations (“Bona Fide District Use”). District may also request City’s approval of a Bona Fide District Use not described above, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

5.1.3.1 Dedication Acreage. Upon City receipt of the Withdrawal Notice, the City and the District shall meet in good faith to identify the 1.4-acre portion of the Recreation Site that shall remain in continued public use and shall be dedicated to the City in fee simple to satisfy the PSD’s obligation to dedicate the Dedication Acreage (the “Dedication Site”). The remaining portion of the Recreation Site other than the Dedication Site shall be referred to as the “Additional Parkland Site.” In identifying the Dedication Site, City and District shall consider the existing park improvements and the ability of the site to meet the recreational needs of the public. In the event City and District cannot agree on the Dedication Site, the Parties shall equally share the costs of mediation to resolve the dispute. District shall convey title to the Dedication Site to the City through a Grant Deed, subject only to liens for unpaid taxes, and easements and other exceptions approved by City, prior to withdrawal of the Additional Parkland from public use. The District shall provide an easement and right-of-entry to the City for continued use of the Recreation Restroom, together with dedication of the Dedication Site. (i) As an alternative to dedication of the required Dedication Acreage, District may satisfy its obligation through one of the following alternatives, upon the written approval of City. In the event that City approves one of the following alternatives, the City and public have no further right of use and access to the Recreation Restroom.

5.f
Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 13 (1) District may dedicate another comparable site to City as parkland.
(2) District may pay a parkland dedication in-lieu fee.

In the event City approves payment of the in-lieu fee, District shall pay the fee amount in effect on the date of the Withdrawal Notice. Payment of the fee shall occur prior to withdrawal of the Additional Parkland from public use. The fee shall be calculated on the value of the Dedication Area and shall not include any portion of the Additional Parkland.

5.1.3.2 Requirements for Additional Parkland. In the event District withdraws the Additional Parkland for a Bona Fide Public Use, District’s obligations as to the Additional Parkland Site terminate upon the grant of the Dedication Site to City. In the event that the District is not withdrawing the Additional Parkland for a Bona Fide Public Use, City shall have a right of first offer to purchase the Additional Parkland Site, which right shall remain in effect for one year from the Withdrawal Notice. During such one-year time period, City may exercise its right to purchase the Additional Parkland Site, at which time the Parties shall commence good faith efforts to complete the property transfer. If the City desires to exercise its right of first offer, it must do so with respect to the entire 3.59 acres of Additional Parkland, unless District consents, in its sole discretion, to an acquisition of less than the entire 3.59 acres. In the event that the City exercises its right of first offer, the purchase price for the Additional Parkland shall be the per-acre value assigned to the parkland based on the City’s park in-lieu fee in effect at the time of the Withdrawal Notice, unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties. If the City does not exercise its right to submit an offer within the one-year time period or if City notifies District that it does not desire to purchase the Additional Parkland Site, District may withdraw the Additional Parkland Site from public use after City approval of any required land use or other approvals for an alternative use for the site. Until such approval, District shall continue to make the Additional Parkland available for public use pursuant to Section 5.1.2 above.

5.1.4 Agreement to be Recorded Affecting Real Property. The Parties shall enter into and record an agreement against the Recreation Site setting forth the terms and obligations of this Section 5.1, within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit D, which agreement shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.

5.2 Residents’ Commons Building / Occasional Use by City. District shall make the Residents’ Commons Building available for use by the City not more than two (2) days per month for City-hosted or sponsored activities, not to exceed eight (8) hours per day. City shall be responsible for reserving the Residents’ Commons Building through the District’s standard facility reservation system, or other process mutually agreed by City and District, and City’s use shall be subject to periods of availability based on reservations by other facility users. Use of the Residents’ Commons Building will be subject to City payment of any standard facility use fee adopted by District. This Section 5.2 shall survive the termination or earlier expiration of this Agreement. Further, this obligation shall be documented in the Agreement to be Recorded Affecting Real Property described in Section 5.1.4.

5.3 Sales Tax Point of Sale Designation. District shall require, to the extent allowed by law, all persons and entities providing bulk lumber, concrete, structural steel and pre-fabricated building components, such as roof trusses, to be used in connection with the construction and

5.f
Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 14 development of, or incorporated into, the Project, to (a) obtain a use tax direct payment permit; (b) elect to obtain a subcontractor permit for the job site of a contract valued at Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) or more; or (c) otherwise designate the Property as the place of use of material used in the construction of the Project in order to have the local portion of the sales and use tax distributed directly to City instead of through the county-wide pool. District shall instruct its general contractor(s) for the Project to, and cause such general contractor(s) to instruct its/their subcontractors to, cooperate with City to ensure the local sales/use tax derived from construction of the Project is allocated to City to the fullest extent possible. To assist City in its efforts to ensure that such local sales/use tax is so allocated to City, District shall on an annual basis provide City with such information as shall be reasonably requested by City regarding subcontractors working on the Project with contracts in excess of the amount set forth above, including a description of all applicable work and the dollar value of such subcontracts. City may use such information to contact each subcontractor who may qualify for local allocation of use taxes to City.

ARTICLE 6

ANNUAL REVIEW

6.1 Annual Review.

6.1.1 Purpose. As required by California Government Code section 65865.1 and PMC section 9-4.5009, City and District shall review this Agreement and all actions taken pursuant to the terms of this Agreement with respect to the development of the Project every twelve (12) months to determine good faith compliance with this Agreement. Specifically, City’s annual review shall be conducted for the purposes of determining compliance by District with its obligations under this Agreement. Each annual review shall also document: (a) the status of the Project development, and (b) the status of ongoing public use of the Recreation Site and/or compliance with parkland dedication requirements.

6.1.2 Conduct of Annual Review. The annual review shall be conducted as provided in this Section 6.1.2. By December 1st of each year, District shall provide documentation of its good faith compliance with this Agreement during the calendar year, and such other information as may reasonably be requested by the Planning Director. If the Planning Director finds good faith compliance by District with the terms of this Agreement, District shall be notified in writing and the review for that period shall be concluded. If the Planning Director is not satisfied that District is performing in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Planning Director shall prepare a written report specifying why the District may not be in good faith compliance with this Agreement, refer the matter to the City Council, and notify District in writing at least 15 business days in advance of the time at which the matter will be considered by the City Council. This notice shall include the time and place of the City Council’s public hearing to evaluate good faith compliance with this Agreement, a copy of the Planning Director’s report and recommendations, if any, and any other information reasonably necessary to inform District of the nature of the proceeding. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing at which District must submit evidence that it has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. District shall be given an opportunity to be heard at the hearing. The findings of the City Council on whether District has complied with this Agreement for the period under review shall be based upon substantial evidence in the record. If the City

5.f
Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 15 Council determines, based upon substantial evidence, that District has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the review for that period shall be concluded. If the City Council determines, based upon substantial evidence in the record, that District has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, or there are significant questions as to whether District has complied with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City Council, at its option, may continue the hearing and may notify District of the City’s intent to meet and confer with District within 30 days of such determination, prior to taking further action. Following such meeting, the City Council shall resume the hearing in order to further consider the matter and to make a determination regarding District’s good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. In the event City determines District is not in good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, City may give the District a written Notice of Breach, in which case the provisions of Section 12.1, below, shall apply.

6.1.3 Failure to Conduct Annual Review. Failure of City to conduct an annual review shall not constitute a waiver by the City of its rights to otherwise enforce the provisions of this Agreement nor shall District have or assert any defense to such enforcement by reason of any such failure to conduct an annual review.

ARTICLE 7

COOPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

7.1 Subsequent Approvals. Certain subsequent land use approvals, entitlements, and permits other than the Existing Approvals, will be necessary or desirable for implementation of the Project (“Subsequent Approvals”). The Subsequent Approvals may include, without limitation, the following: amendments of the Existing Approvals, grading permits, building permits, design review permits, sewer and water connection permits, certificates of occupancy, lot line adjustments, site plans, development plans, land use plans, building plans and specifications, parcel maps and/or subdivision maps, and any amendments to, or repealing of, any of the foregoing. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the City shall not impose requirements or conditions upon the development and construction of the Project that are inconsistent with the Existing Approvals and the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

ARTICLE 8

AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVALS

8.1 Amendment by Written Consent. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein (including Section 6.1 relating to City’s annual review and Section 12.1 relating to termination in the event of a breach), this Agreement may be terminated, modified or amended only by mutual written consent of the Parties hereto or their successors in interest or assignees and in accordance with the provisions of Government Code sections 65967, 65867.5 and 65868.

8.2 Major Amendments to Agreement. Any amendment to this Agreement which affects or relates to (a) the Term; (b) permitted uses of the Property; (c) provisions for the reservation or dedication of land; (d) conditions, terms restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of the use of the Property or the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (f) parkland requirements of District, shall be deemed a “Major

5.f
Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 16 Amendment” and shall require giving of notice and a public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council and also shall require the approval of the District’s Board of Trustees. Any amendment which is not a Major Amendment shall be deemed a “Minor Amendment” and shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by Applicable Law, require notice of public hearing before the Parties may execute an amendment hereto. Either the City Manager or the District Superintendent (acting alone or together) shall have the authority to determine if an amendment is a Major Amendment.

8.3 Minor Amendment. The City Manager and the District Superintendent or their respective designees shall have the authority to review and approve amendments to this Agreement provided that such amendments are not Major Amendments.

8.4 Requirement for Writing. No modification, amendment or other change to this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective for any purpose unless specifically set forth in a writing which refers expressly to this Agreement and is signed by duly authorized representatives of the Parties or their successors in interest.

8.5 Subsequent CEQA Review. In the event that any additional CEQA documentation is legally required for any discretionary Subsequent Approval, then the scope of such documentation shall be focused, to the extent possible consistent with CEQA, on the specific subject matter of the Subsequent Approval, and the City, at District’s expense, shall conduct such additional CEQA review as expeditiously as possible.

ARTICLE 9

INSURANCE, INDEMNITY AND COOPERATION IN THE EVENT OF

LEGAL CHALLENGE

9.1 Insurance Requirements. District shall procure and maintain, or cause its contractor(s) to procure and maintain, until the expiration of this Agreement, a commercial general liability policy in an amount not less than two million ($2,000,000) combined single limit, including contractual liability together with a comprehensive automobile liability policy in the amount of one million ($1,000,000), combined single limit. Such policy or policies shall be written on an occurrence form, so long as such form of policy is then commonly available in the commercial insurance marketplace. District’s insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M.

Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII or a rating otherwise approved by the City in its sole discretion. District shall furnish at City’s request appropriate certificate(s) of insurance evidencing the insurance coverage required hereunder, and City Parties shall be named as additional insured parties in such policies. The certificate of insurance shall contain a statement of obligation on the part of the carrier to notify City of any material change, cancellation or termination of the coverage at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of any such material change, cancellation or termination (ten (10) days advance notice in the case of cancellation for nonpayment of premiums) where the insurance carrier provides such notice to the District. Coverage provided hereunder by District shall be primary insurance and shall not be contributing with any insurance, self-insurance or joint self-insurance maintained by City, and the policy shall contain such an endorsement. The insurance policy or the endorsement shall contain a waiver of subrogation for the benefit of City.

5.f
Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 17 9.2 Indemnity and Hold Harmless. District shall indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to City) and hold harmless City Parties from and against any and all Claims, including Claims for any bodily injury, death, or property damage, resulting directly or indirectly from the development or construction of the Project by or on behalf of District, maintenance and operation of the Recreation Site and Parkland Improvements (on Lot 1) and the Residents’ Common Building and Recreation Restroom (on Lot 2), and/or from any other acts or omissions of District under this Agreement, whether such acts or omissions are by District or any of District’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees, except to the extent such Claims arise from the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of City or City Parties.

9.3 Defense and Cooperation in the Event of a Litigation Challenge. City and District shall cooperate in the defense of any court action or proceeding instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, or the Project Approvals (“Litigation Challenge”), and the Parties shall keep each other informed of all developments relating to such defense, subject only to confidentiality requirements that may prevent the communication of such information. To the extent District desires to contest or defend such Litigation Challenge, (a) District shall take the lead role defending such Litigation Challenge and may, in its sole discretion, elect to be represented by the legal counsel of its choice; (b) City may, in its sole discretion, elect to be separately represented by the legal counsel of its choice in any such action or proceeding with the reasonable costs of such representation to be paid by District; (c) District shall reimburse City, within ten (10) business days following City’s written demand therefor, which may be made from time to time during the course of such litigation, all reasonable costs incurred by City in connection with the Litigation Challenge, including City’s administrative, legal, and court costs and City Attorney oversight expenses; and (d) District shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City Parties from and against any damages, attorneys’ fees or cost awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, assessed or awarded against City by way of judgment, settlement, or stipulation. Any proposed settlement of a Litigation Challenge shall be subject to City’s approval not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. If the terms of the proposed settlement would constitute an amendment or modification of this Agreement or any Project Approvals, the settlement shall not become effective unless such amendment or modification is approved by City in accordance with Applicable Law, and City reserves its full legislative discretion with respect thereto. If District opts not to contest or defend such Litigation Challenge, City shall have no obligation to do so.

ARTICLE 10

ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE

10.1 Assignment. Because of the necessity to coordinate development of the entirety of the Property pursuant to plans for the Project and ongoing parkland obligations, certain restrictions on the right of District to assign or transfer its interest under this Agreement with respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, are necessary in order to assure the achievement of the goals, objectives and public benefits of the Project and this Agreement. District agrees to and accepts the restrictions set forth in this Section 10.1 as reasonable and as a material inducement to City to enter into this Agreement. District shall have the right to sell or transfer its fee interest, or ground lease its interests in the Property, in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act) to any person, partnership, joint

5.f
Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 18 venture, firm, company, corporation or other entity (any of the foregoing, an “Assignee”) subject to the prior written consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. District shall provide the City with written notice of any proposed transfer or assignment of District’s rights or obligations hereunder (each, an “Assignment”) at least thirty (30) days prior to such Assignment. Each such notice of proposed Assignment shall be accompanied by evidence of Assignee’s agreement to assume District’s obligations hereunder. District shall pay the actual costs borne by City in connection with its review of the proposed Assignment, including the costs incurred by the City Attorney’s Office. If City consents to such Assignment, a written assignment and assumption agreement, in a form approved by City, shall be recorded in the Official Records of San Mateo County. Assignee shall succeed to the rights, duties and obligations of District only with respect to the parcel or parcels, or portion of the Property so purchased, transferred, ground leased or assigned, and District shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement with respect to any remaining portions of the Property retained by District and not assigned.

10.2 Successive Assignment. In the event there is more than one Assignment under the provisions of this Article 10, the provisions of this Article 10 shall apply to each successive Assignment and Assignee. This Article 10 does not apply to or rental of the residential units.

ARTICLE 11

MORTGAGEE PROTECTION

11.1 Mortgagee Protection. Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent or limit District, at its sole discretion and to the extent authorized by law, from granting one or more Mortgages encumbering all or a portion of District’s interest in the Property or portion thereof or improvement thereon as security for one or more loans or other financing, but all of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against and shall run to the benefit of Mortgagee who acquires title or possession to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise. District shall provide the City with a copy of the deed of trust or mortgage within ten (10) days after its recording in the official records of San Mateo County; provided, however, that District’s failure to provide such document shall not affect any Mortgage, including without limitation, the validity, priority or enforceability of such Mortgage.

11.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. No Mortgagee (including one who acquires title or possession to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise) shall have any obligation to construct or complete construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any use except in full compliance with this Agreement and the other Project Approvals nor to construct any improvements thereon or institute any uses other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by this Agreement, or otherwise under the Project Approvals. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 11.2, all of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement and the other Project Approvals shall be binding upon and effective against and shall run to the benefit of any person or entity, including any Mortgagee, who acquires title or possession to the Property, or any portion thereof.

5.f
Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 19 11.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If City receives a notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any Notice of Default given District hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City agrees to use its diligent, good faith efforts to deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to District, any Notice of Default given to District. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to District to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of Default claimed or the areas of noncompliance set forth in City’s Notice of Default. If a Mortgagee is required to obtain possession in order to cure any Default, the time to cure shall be tolled so long as the Mortgagee is attempting to obtain possession, including by appointment of a receiver or foreclosure, but in no event may this period exceed 120 days from the date the City delivers the Notice of Default to District.

11.4 No Supersedure. Nothing in this Article 11 shall be deemed to supersede or release a Mortgagee or modify a Mortgagee’s obligations under any subdivision or public improvement agreement or other obligation incurred with respect to the Project outside this Agreement, nor shall any provision of this Article 11 constitute an obligation of City to such Mortgagee, except as to the notice requirements of Section 11.3.

ARTICLE 12
DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION

12.1 Breach and Default. Subject to Permitted Delays or by mutual consent in writing, and except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, breach of, failure, or delay by either Party to perform any term or condition of this Agreement shall constitute a “Default.” In the event of any alleged Default of any term, condition, or obligation of this Agreement, the Party alleging such Default shall give the defaulting Party notice in writing specifying the nature of the alleged Default and the manner in which the Default may be satisfactorily cured (“Notice of Breach”).

The defaulting Party shall cure the Default within thirty (30) days following receipt of the Notice of Breach, provided, however, if the nature of the alleged Default is non-monetary and such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, then the commencement of the cure within such time period, and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure thereafter, shall be deemed to be a cure, provided that if the cure is not diligently prosecuted to completion, then no additional cure period shall be provided. If the alleged failure is cured within the time provided above, then no Default shall exist and the noticing Party shall take no further action to exercise any remedies available hereunder. If the alleged failure is not cured, then a Default shall exist under this Agreement and the non-defaulting Party may exercise any of the remedies available under this Agreement.

12.2 Withholding of Permits. In the event of a Default by District, or following notice of breach to District pursuant to Section 12.1 above and during the cure period provided therein, upon a finding by the Planning Director that District is in breach, City shall have the right to refuse to issue any permit or other Subsequent Approvals to which District would otherwise have been entitled pursuant to this Agreement until such Default or breach is cured. This provision is in addition to and shall not limit any actions that City may take to enforce the conditions of the Project Approvals.

12.3 Termination. In the event of a Default by a Party, the non-defaulting Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon giving notice of intent to terminate pursuant to

5.f
Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 20 Government Code section 65868 and regulations of City implementing such section. Following notice of intent to terminate, the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review in the manner set forth in Government Code section 65867 and City regulations implementing said section. Following consideration of the evidence presented in said review before the City Council, a Party alleging Default by the other Party may give written notice of termination of this Agreement to the other Party. Termination of this Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of Section 12.9.

12.4 Specific Performance for Violation of a Condition. If City issues a Project Approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by District in the future, and if District then fails to satisfy such condition, City shall be entitled to specific performance for the purpose of causing District to satisfy such condition.

12.5 Legal Actions.

12.5.1 Institution of Legal Actions. In addition to any other rights or remedies and subject to the limitation of damages in Section 12.7, a Party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any Default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation thereof, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Any such legal action shall be brought in the Superior Court for San Mateo County, California, except for actions that include claims in which the Federal District Court for the Northern District of the State of California has original jurisdiction, in which case the Northern District of the State of California shall be the proper venue.

12.5.2 Acceptance of Service of Process. In the event that any legal action is commenced by District against City, service of process on City shall be made by personal service upon the City Clerk of City or in such other manner as may be provided by law. In the event that any legal action is commenced by City against District, service of process on District shall be made by personal service upon District’s registered agent for service of process, or in such other manner as may be provided by law.

12.6 Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative. The rights and remedies of the Parties are cumulative, and the exercise by a Party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same Default or any other Default by the other Party, except as otherwise expressly provided herein.

12.7 No Damages. In no event shall a Party, or its boards, commissions, officers, agents or employees, be liable in damages, including without limitation, actual, consequential or punitive damages, for any Default under this Agreement. It is expressly understood and agreed that the sole legal remedy available to a Party for a breach or violation of this Agreement by the other Party shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance or other injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party, or to terminate this Agreement. This limitation on damages shall not preclude actions by a Party to enforce payments of monies or the performance of obligations requiring an obligation of money from the other Party under the terms of this Agreement including, but not limited to, obligations to pay attorneys’ fees and obligations to advance monies or reimburse monies. In connection with the

5.f
Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 21 foregoing provisions, each Party acknowledges, warrants and represents that it has been fully informed with respect to, and represented by counsel of such Party’s choice in connection with, the rights and remedies of such Party hereunder and the waivers herein contained, and after such advice and consultation has presently and actually intended, with full knowledge of such Party’s rights and remedies otherwise available at law or in equity, to waive and relinquish such rights and remedies to the extent specified herein, and to rely to the extent herein specified solely on the remedies provided for herein with respect to any breach of this Agreement by the other Party.

12.8 Resolution of Disputes. With regard to any dispute involving the Project, the resolution of which is not provided for by this Agreement or Applicable Law, a Party shall, at the request of another Party, meet with designated representatives of the requesting Party promptly following its request. The parties to any such meetings shall attempt in good faith to resolve any such disputes. Nothing in this Section 12.8 shall in any way be interpreted as requiring that District, City and/or City’s designee reach agreement with regard to those matters being addressed, nor shall the outcome of these meetings be binding in any way on City or District unless expressly agreed to in writing by the parties to such meetings.

12.9 Surviving Provisions. In the event this Agreement is terminated, neither Party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder, except for those obligations of District set forth in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 and Article 9.

ARTICLE 13

GENERAL PROVISIONS

13.1 Covenants Binding on Successors and Assigns and Run with Land. Except as otherwise more specifically provided in this Agreement and subject to the limitations on assignment set forth herein, this Agreement and all of its provisions, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations, shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective successors (by merger, consolidation, or otherwise) and assigns, and all other persons or entities acquiring the Property, or any interest therein, and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns, as provided in Government Code section 65868.5.

13.2 Notice. Any notice, demand or request which may be permitted, required or desired to be given in connection herewith shall be given in writing and directed to the City and District as follows:

If to the City: City Clerk
City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94044
Telephone: 650-738-7300
with a copy to: City Attorney
City of Pacifica
1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: 510-273-8780

5.f
Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 22 If to District: Pacifica School District
Attn:

Telephone:
with a copy to: County Attorney
400 County Center, 6th Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063
Telephone: 650-363-4750
And with a copy to: District’s Development Manager
Notices are deemed effective if delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, or commercial courier, with delivery to be effective upon verification of receipt. Any Party may change its respective address for notices by providing written notice of such change to the other Parties.

13.3 Permitted Delays. Performance by either of the Parties of an obligation hereunder shall be excused during any period of “Permitted Delay.” Permitted Delay shall mean delay beyond the reasonable control of a Party caused by (a) calamities, including without limitation earthquakes, floods, and fire; (b) civil commotion; (c) riots or terrorist acts; (d) strikes or other forms of material labor disputes; (e) shortages of materials or supplies; or (f) vandalism. A Party’s financial inability to perform or obtain financing or adverse economic conditions generally shall not be grounds for claiming a Permitted Delay. The Party claiming a Permitted Delay shall notify the other Party of its intent to claim a Permitted Delay, the specific grounds of the same and the anticipated period of the Permitted Delay within thirty (30) business days after the occurrence of the conditions which establish the grounds for the claim. If notice by the Party claiming such extension is sent to the other Party more than thirty (30) days after the commencement of the cause, the period shall commence to run only thirty (30) days prior to the giving of such notice. The period of Permitted Delay shall last no longer than the conditions preventing performance. In no event shall any Permitted Delay extend the Term of this Agreement.

13.4 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

13.5 Waivers. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, any failures or delays by any Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies under this Agreement shall not operate as a waiver of any such rights or remedies, or deprive any such Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. A Party may specifically and expressly waive in writing any condition or breach of this Agreement by the other Party, but no such waiver shall constitute a further or continuing waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of the same or any other

5.f
Packet Pg. 466 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 23 provision. Consent by one Party to any act by the other Party shall not be deemed to imply consent or waiver of the necessity of obtaining such consent for the same or similar acts in the future.

13.6 Construction of Agreement. All Parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be construed according to the fair meaning of its language. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement.

Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, (a) the plural and singular numbers shall each be deemed to include the other; (b) the masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each be deemed to include the others; (c) “shall,” “will,” or “agrees” are mandatory, and “may” is permissive; (d) “or” is not exclusive; (e) “includes” and “including” are not limiting; and (f) “days” means calendar days unless specifically provided otherwise.

13.7 Headings. Section headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement.

13.8 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a specific situation, is found to be invalid, or unenforceable, in whole or in part for any reason, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect unless an essential purpose of this Agreement would be defeated by loss of the invalid or unenforceable provisions, in which case any Party may terminate this Agreement by providing written notice thereof to the other Party.

13.9 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. All references to time in this Agreement shall refer to the time in effect in the State of California.

13.10 Extension of Time Limits. The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by mutual consent in writing of the Parties in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.

13.11 Signatures. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement on behalf of the respective legal entities of District and the City. Each District Party shall be jointly and severally liable for the obligations of the other District Party.

13.12 Entire Agreement. This Agreement (including all exhibits attached hereto, each of which is fully incorporated herein by reference), integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto, and constitutes the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and all prior or contemporaneous oral agreements, understandings, representations and statements, and all prior written agreements, understandings, representations, and statements are terminated and superseded by this Agreement.

13.13 Estoppel Certificate. District or its lender may, at any time, and from time to time, deliver written notice to the City requesting the City to certify in writing that: (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect; (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified or, if so amended or modified, identifying the amendments or modifications; and (c) District is not in Default of the performance of its obligations, or if in Default, to describe therein the nature and

5.f
Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 24 extent of any such Defaults. District shall pay, within thirty (30) days following receipt of City’s invoice, the actual costs borne by City in connection with its review of the proposed estoppel certificate, including the costs expended by the City Attorney’s Office in connection therewith.

The Planning Director shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by District hereunder. The form of estoppel certificate shall be in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney. The Planning Director shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following District’s request therefor. District and City acknowledge that a certificate hereunder may be relied upon by tenants, transferees, investors, partners, bond counsel, underwriters, bond holders and Mortgagees. The request shall clearly indicate that failure of the City to respond within the thirty-day period will lead to a second and final request. Failure to respond to the second and final request within fifteen (15) days of receipt thereof shall be deemed approval of the estoppel certificate.

13.14 Recordation of Termination. Upon completion of performance of the Parties or termination of this Agreement, a written statement acknowledging such completion or termination shall be recorded by City in the Official Records of San Mateo County.

13.15 City Approvals and Actions. Whenever a reference is made herein to an action or approval to be undertaken by City, the City Manager or his or her designee is authorized to act on behalf of City, unless specifically provided otherwise or the context requires otherwise.

13.16 Negation of Partnership. The Parties specifically acknowledge that the Project is a private development, that no Party to this Agreement is acting as the agent of any other in any respect hereunder, and that each Party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. None of the terms or provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between or among the Parties in the businesses of District, the affairs of the City, or otherwise, or cause them to be considered joint venturers or members of any joint enterprise.

13.17 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the signatory Parties and their successors and assigns, including Mortgagees. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision in this Agreement.

13.18 Governing State Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to its choice of law provisions.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and District have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CITY:

CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation
By: ________________________________

5.f
Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 25 Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager [Signature must be notarized] ATTEST:

By: ________________________
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: __________________________________
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
DISTRICT:

Pacifica School District,
a California School District
By: ________________________________
Name: ______________________________
Its: Superintendent [Signature must be notarized]
By: ________________________________
Name: ______________________________
Its: Chief Business Officer [Signature must be notarized]

5.f
Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Legal Description of the Property (consisting of three Lots) LOT 1
All that certain real property situate in the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, State of California, being all of Lots 1-21 inclusive, Lot C, and Everglades Court, Block 6, and being a portion of Lots 22-30, Block 6, as said lots are shown on that certain map entitled “PARK PACIFICA HIGHLANDS NO. 1”, filed for record on October 5, 1965, in Volume 63 of Maps at Pages 13, 14 and 15, Records of San Mateo County, and also being a portion of that certain parcel of land described in that certain City of Pacifica Resolution No. 960, passed and adopted on March 22, 1967 in Book 5535 at Page 226, Official Records of said County, being more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at the most southerly corner of said parcel described in said Resolution No. 960, said corner also being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of Yosemite Drive; Thence northwesterly along said northeasterly right-of-way line, said northeasterly right-of-way line being common to said Lots 1-7 inclusive, and said Lot C as shown on said map, the following four (4) courses:
1) North 78°22’00” West, 299.73 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; 2) Along said curve, having a radius of 320.00 feet, through a central angle of 33°10’00”, for an arc length of 185.24 feet;
3) North 45°12’00” West, 168.40 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; 4) Along said curve, having a radius of 20.00 feet; through a central angle of 77°50’42”, for an arc length of 27.17 feet to a point on the southeasterly right-of-way line of Oddstad Boulevard, also being a point on the northwesterly line of said Lot 7 as shown on said map, said point also being the beginning of a tangent curve to the right;
Thence northeasterly along said southeasterly right-of-way line, said southeasterly right-of-way line being common to said Lot 7, 8, and 22, the following two (2) courses:
1) Along said curve, having a radius of 968.00 feet, through a central angle of 12°21’18”, for an arc length of 208.74 feet;
2) North 45°00’00” East, 113.66 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left, whose radius point bears North 86°35’57” East;
Thence leaving said southeasterly right-of-way line and along said curve, having a radius of 24.00 feet, through a central angle of 131°35’57”, for an arc length of 55.12 feet; Thence North 45°00’00” East, 65.58 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 10.00 feet, through a central angle of 90°00’00”, for an arc length of 15.71 feet;
Thence South 45°00’00” East, 204.53 feet;
Thence South 45°00’00” West, 7.50 feet;

5.f
Packet Pg. 470 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit A
Thence South 45°00’00” East, 233.44 feet;
Thence South 69°30’43” East, 49.64 feet to a point on the southeasterly line of said parcel described in said Resolution No. 960;
Thence southwesterly along said southeasterly line, South 20°29’17” West, 247.22 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.

Containing 218,586 square feet or 5.02 acres, more or less.

This legal description is not to be used in violation of the Subdivision Map Act or for the transfer, lease, or sale of the real property described within.

Lot 1 is intended to describe a proposed future lot subject to a future Parcel Map to be recorded with the County of San Mateo.

This legal description was prepared by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act.

LOT 2
All that certain real property situate in the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, State of California, being all of Lots 31-42, inclusive, Shenandoah Court, Carlsbad Court, Block 6, and being a portion of Lots 22-30, Lots 43-45, Lots 48 and 49 and Lot D, block 6, as said lots are shown on that certain map entitled “PARK PACIFICA HIGHLANDS NO. 1”, filed for record on October 5, 1965, in Volume 63 of Maps at Pages 13, 14 and 15, Records of San Mateo County, and also being a portion of that certain parcel of land described in that certain City of Pacifica Resolution No. 960, passed and adopted on March 22, 1967 in Book 5535 at Page 226, Official Records of said County, being more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at the northerly corner of said parcel described in said Resolution No. 960; Thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said parcel, South 20°29’17” West, 281.03 feet;
Thence leaving said southeasterly line, North 69°30’43” West, 49.64 feet; Thence North 45°00’00” West, 233.44 feet;
Thence North 45°00’00” East, 7.50 feet;
Thence North 45°00’00” West, 204.53 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 10.00 feet, through a central angle of 90°00’00”, for an arc length of 15.71 feet;
Thence South 45°00’00” West, 65.58 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 24.00 feet, through a central angle of 131°35’57”, for an arc length of 55.12 feet to a point on the southeasterly right-of-way line of Oddstad Boulevard, said point

5.f
Packet Pg. 471 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit A
also being on the northwesterly line of said Lot 22, as shown on said map; Thence northwesterly along said southeasterly right-of-way line, said southeasterly right-of-way line being common to said Lots 22, 23, 37, 38, & 45, the following three (3) courses:
1) North 45°00’00” East, 232.34 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; 2) Along said curve, having a radius of 638.00 feet, through a central angle of 11°49’00”, for an arc length of 131.58 feet to the beginning of a reverse curve to the left; 3) Along said curve, having a radius of 1632.00 feet, through a central angle of 03°31’08”, for an arc length of 100.23 feet;
Thence leaving said line, South 36°42’08” East, 14.84 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left;
Thence along said curve, having a radius of 60.00 feet, through a central angle of 36°01’54”, for an arc length of 37.73 feet;
Thence South 72°44’01” East, 39.36 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 60.00 feet, through a central angle of 27°41’10”, for an arc length of 28.99 feet;
Thence South 45°02’52” East, 109.32 feet;
Thence North 44°57’08” East, 145.00 feet;
Thence South 46°45’00” East, 153.84 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot D; Thence along said southeasterly line, South 43°15’00” West, 278.59 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.

Containing 204,273 square feet or 4.69 acres, more or less.

This legal description is not to be used in violation of the Subdivision map Act or for the transfer, lease, or sale of the real property described within.

Lot 2 is intended to describe a proposed future lot subject to a future Parcel Map to be recorded with the County of San Mateo.

This legal description was prepared by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act.

5.f
Packet Pg. 472 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit A
LOT 3
All that certain real property situate in the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, State of California, being all of Lots 46 and 47, inclusive, Lots 50-53, inclusive, Lot 56 and Big Bend Court, Block 6, and being a portion of Lots 43-45, Lots 48 and 49 and Lot D, block 6, as said lots are shown on that certain map entitled “PARK PACIFICA HIGHLANDS NO. 1”, filed for record on October 5, 1965, in Volume 63 of Maps at Pages 13, 14 and 15, Records of San Mateo County, being more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at the easterly corner of said Lot D, as shown on said map; Thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot D, South 43°15’00” West, 245.53 feet;
Thence leaving said line, North 46°45’00” West, 153.84 feet; Thence South 44°57’08” West, 145.00 feet;
Thence North 45°02’52” West, 109.32 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 60.00 feet, through a central angle of 27°41’10”, for an arc length of 28.99 feet;
Thence North 72°44’01” West, 39.36 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence along said curve, having a radius of 60.00 feet, through a central angle of 36°01’54”, for an arc length of 37.73 feet;
Thence North 36°42’08” West, 14.84 feet to a point on the southeasterly right-of-way line of Oddstad Boulevard, said point also being on the northwesterly line of said Lot 45, as shown on said map, said point also being the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left, whose radius point bears North 36°42’08” West;
Thence northwesterly along said southeasterly right-of-way line, said southeasterly rightof-way line being common to said Lots 45, 46, 51-53, and along said curve, having a radius of 1632.00 feet, through a central angle of 14°27’00”, for an arc length of 411.59 feet to the northerly corner of said Lot 53;
Thence leaving said southeasterly right-of-way line, and along the northeasterly line of said Lots 53, 56 and D, the following three (3) courses:
1) South 51°09’07” East, 144.95 feet;
2) South 41°19’17” East, 57.78 feet;
3) South 45°49’00” East, 160.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.

5.f
Packet Pg. 473 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit A
Containing 121,203 square feet or 2.78 acres, more or less.

This legal description is not to be used in violation of the Subdivision map Act or for the transfer, lease, or sale of the real property described within.

Lot 3 is intended to describe a proposed future lot subject to a future Parcel Map to be recorded with the County of San Mateo.

This legal description was prepared by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act.

5.f
Packet Pg. 474 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit B
Exhibit B
Description of the Parkland Improvements,
Residents’ Common Building and Recreation Restroom
Parkland Improvements - Improvements to existing recreational fields consisting of natural turf repairs such as but not limited to reseeding, aeration, soil leveling, weed removal, and drainage improvements. Other improvements to facilities supporting the recreational fields, comprised of repair and/or replacement of a concrete surface drain adjacent to the recreational fields, slurry seal or overlay and striping of the parking lot for off-street parking purposes, striping of the offstreet parking area for alternate use as a basketball court (striping color to contrast with parking striping), and installation of two basketball hoops and backboards with adjustable heights and a maximum rim height of ten (10) feet.

Residents’ Common Building - Construction of one (1) approximately 860-square foot amenity building, substantially consistent in height, materials, and architectural design with that shown on Sheet A3.15 of the plan set presented to the Planning Commission on March 20, 2023, comprised of an open floor area, snack window/kiosk, kitchen countertop and sink, a 61-square foot restroom, and exterior covered picnic area and installation of at least four (4) picnic tables.

Recreation Restroom - Construction of one (1) approximately 716-square foot amenity building, substantially consistent in height, materials, and architectural design with that shown on Sheet A3.15 of the plan set presented to the Planning Commission on March 20, 2023, comprised of two gender separated restrooms with toilets, urinals, handwashing sinks, and other restroom improvements as required by the California Building Code.

5.f
Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit C
Exhibit C
Depiction of Recreation Site
[to be inserted]

5.f
Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Exhibit D
Exhibit D
Form of Agreement to be Recorded
[to be inserted]

5.f
Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: Attachment F - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-006 (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 PREPARED BY M-GROUP FOR:

THE CITY OF PACIFICA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
540 CRESPI DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
IN ASSOCIATION WITH:

COAST RIDGE ECOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANT

EVANS & DE SHAZO, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT

ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, AIR QUALITY AND ACOUSTICAL CONSULTANT

5.g
Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.g
Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
i

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................1-1

1.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Project Summary .............................................................................................................1-1

1.3 Areas of Known Controversy/Issues to be Resolved....................................................1-2

1.4 Summary of Project Alternatives....................................................................................1-2

1.5 Impact Summary .............................................................................................................1-3

2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................2-1 Purpose of the EIR...........................................................................................................2-1 Draft EIR Review Process ................................................................................................2-1

2.2.1 Notice of Preparation................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2.2 Public Scoping............................................................................................................................ 2-2

2.2.3 Draft Environmental Impact Report........................................................................................ 2-2

2.2.4 Public Review of DEIR................................................................................................................ 2-3

2.2.5 Final Environmental Impact Report ........................................................................................ 2-3

2.2.6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ..................................................................................... 2-4 EIR Scope..........................................................................................................................2-4 EIR Organization ..............................................................................................................2-4 Appendices.......................................................................................................................2-5

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................3-1 Regional Location ............................................................................................................3-1 Existing Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses ..................................................3-1

3.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designation ....................................................................................... 3-2

3.2.2 Zoning Designation ................................................................................................................... 3-2 Project Components........................................................................................................3-7

3.3.1 Overview..................................................................................................................................... 3-7

3.3.2 Site Plan and Coverage ............................................................................................................. 3-7

3.3.3 Architectural Design and Building Floor Plans ...................................................................... 3-8

3.3.4 Recreational Amenities........................................................................................................... 3-10

3.3.5 Access, Circulation, and Parking............................................................................................ 3-10

3.3.6 Landscaping, Lighting, Signage, and Fencing ...................................................................... 3-12

3.3.7 Stormwater Management ...................................................................................................... 3-13

3.3.8 Utilities3-15

3.3.9 Fuel Management and Wildland Urban Interface Requirements ..................................... 3-15

3.3.10 Demolition and Project Construction ................................................................................... 3-15 Project Objectives..........................................................................................................3-17 Project Entitlements ......................................................................................................3-17

5.g
Packet Pg. 480 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii

3.5.1 Development Agreement....................................................................................................... 3-17

3.5.2 Rezoning ................................................................................................................................... 3-18

3.5.3 Vesting Tentative Parcel Map................................................................................................. 3-20 Intended Use of the EIR ................................................................................................3-21 Appendices.....................................................................................................................3-21 References......................................................................................................................3-21

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ..................................................................4-1 Background......................................................................................................................4-1 Levels of Significance ......................................................................................................4-1 Format of Resource Topic Sections................................................................................4-2 Topics Not Discussed Further.........................................................................................4-2

4.4.1 Agricultural and Forestry Resource......................................................................................... 4-3

4.4.2 Energy 4-4

4.4.3 Mineral Resources..................................................................................................................... 4-5

4.4.4 Recreation .................................................................................................................................. 4-5 References........................................................................................................................4-6

4.1 Aesthetics ......................................................................................................................4.1-1

4.1.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.1-1

4.1.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.1-6

4.1.3 Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................................... 4.1-7

4.1.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures....................................................................... 4.1-8

4.1.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.1-11

4.1.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.1-12 Air Quality......................................................................................................................4.2-1

4.2.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.2-1

4.2.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.2-5

4.2.3 Thresholds of significance..................................................................................................... 4.2-7

4.2.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures....................................................................... 4.2-8

4.2.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.2-16

4.2.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.2-16 Biological Resources.....................................................................................................4.3-1

4.3.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.3-1

4.3.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.3-6

4.3.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.3-21

4.3.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.3-21

4.3.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.3-31

4.3.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.3-32 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources.......................................................................4.4-1

4.4.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.4-1

4.4.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.4-5

4.4.3 Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................................... 4.4-9

4.4.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.4-10

5.g
Packet Pg. 481 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iii

4.4.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.4-14

4.4.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.4-14 Geology And Soils .........................................................................................................4.5-1

4.5.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.5-1

4.5.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.5-3

4.5.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.5-10

4.5.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.5-10

4.5.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.5-18

4.5.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.5-18 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .........................................................................................4.6-1

4.6.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.6-1

4.6.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.6-6

4.6.3 Thresholds of significance..................................................................................................... 4.6-7

4.6.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures....................................................................... 4.6-7

4.6.5 References............................................................................................................................... 4.6-9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials..............................................................................4.7-1

4.7.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.7-1

4.7.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.7-6

4.7.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.7-10

4.7.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.7-10

4.7.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.7-16

4.7.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.7-16 Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................4.8-1

4.8.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.8-1

4.8.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.8-4

4.8.3 Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................................... 4.8-5

4.8.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures....................................................................... 4.8-6

4.8.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.8-11

4.8.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.8-11 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................4.9-1

4.9.1 Regulatory Context................................................................................................................. 4.9-1

4.9.2 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 4.9-3

4.9.3 Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................................... 4.9-4

4.9.4 Analysis, Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................................................................ 4.9-4

4.9.5 References............................................................................................................................... 4.9-7 Noise............................................................................................................................4.10-1

4.10.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.10-1

4.10.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.10-5

4.10.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.10-9

4.10.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.10-9

4.10.5 Appendices..........................................................................................................................4.10-12

4.10.6 References...........................................................................................................................4.10-12 Population and Housing ............................................................................................4.11-1

4.11.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.11-1

4.11.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.11-3

5.g
Packet Pg. 482 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv

4.11.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.11-5

4.11.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.11-5

4.11.5 References.............................................................................................................................4.11-7 Public Services ............................................................................................................4.12-1

4.12.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.12-1

4.12.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.12-5

4.12.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.12-9

4.12.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.12-9

4.12.5 References...........................................................................................................................4.12-12 Transportation and Traffic.........................................................................................4.13-1

4.13.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.13-1

4.13.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.13-4

4.13.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.13-8

4.13.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.13-8

4.13.5 Appendices..........................................................................................................................4.13-14

4.13.6 References...........................................................................................................................4.13-14 Utilities and Service Systems .....................................................................................4.14-1

4.14.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.14-1

4.14.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.14-5

4.14.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.14-7

4.14.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.14-8

4.14.5 References...........................................................................................................................4.14-13 Wildfire ........................................................................................................................4.15-1

4.15.1 Regulatory Context...............................................................................................................4.15-1

4.15.2 Environmental Setting .........................................................................................................4.15-4

4.15.3 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................................4.15-4

4.15.4 Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.....................................................................4.15-5

4.15.5 Appendices............................................................................................................................4.15-8

4.15.6 References.............................................................................................................................4.15-8

5.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................5-1 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts.............................................................................5-1 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ...........................................................5-2

5.2.1 Commit Future Generations to Similar Uses ......................................................................... 5-2

5.2.2 Consumption of Natural Resources, including Non-renewable Resources ...................... 5-2

5.2.3 Irreversible Damage from Environmental Accidents ........................................................... 5-3 Growth Inducing Impacts................................................................................................5-3

5.3.1 Removal of an Impediment to Growth................................................................................... 5-4

5.3.2 Population and Economic Growth .......................................................................................... 5-4

5.3.3 Urbanization of Land in Isolated Localities (Leap-Frog Development) .............................. 5-5 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...............................................................................5-5

5.4.1 Quality of the Environment...................................................................................................... 5-5

5.4.2 Cumulative Impacts................................................................................................................... 5-6

5.4.3 Adverse Effects on Human Beings ........................................................................................ 5-11

5.g
Packet Pg. 483 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
v

6.0 ALTERNATIVES ..............................................................................................6-1 CEQA Requirements........................................................................................................6-1

6.1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................ 6-1

6.1.2 Project Objectives...................................................................................................................... 6-2 Impacts of the Proposed Project....................................................................................6-2

6.2.1 Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................... 6-3

6.2.2 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 6-3

6.2.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................. 6-3

6.2.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources................................................................................... 6-4

6.2.5 Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................................... 6-4

6.2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................................................................................... 6-4

6.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.......................................................................................... 6-4

6.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................................................. 6-5

6.2.9 Land Use and Planning............................................................................................................. 6-5

6.2.10 Noise 6-5

6.2.11 Population and Housing........................................................................................................... 6-5

6.2.12 Public Services ........................................................................................................................... 6-6

6.2.13 Transportation........................................................................................................................... 6-6

6.2.14 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................................... 6-6

6.2.15 Wildfire........................................................................................................................................ 6-6

6.2.16 Other Resource Topics.............................................................................................................. 6-6 Alternatives Considered but Not Further Studied ........................................................6-7

6.3.1 Adaptive Reuse of Existing School Complex.......................................................................... 6-7

6.3.2 Increased Density Development ............................................................................................. 6-7

6.3.3 Alternative Site Location........................................................................................................... 6-8 Alternatives Evaluated.....................................................................................................6-8

6.4.1 Alternative 1: No Project/No Development ........................................................................... 6-9

6.4.2 Alternative 2: Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences ............ 6-14

6.4.3 Alternative 3: Variation of Site Layout and Unit Types ....................................................... 6-24 Environmentally Superior Alternative..........................................................................6-30

7.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................7-1 Sources .............................................................................................................................7-1 Persons Consulted...........................................................................................................7-4 Report Preparers .............................................................................................................7-5

5.g
Packet Pg. 484 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
vi
Figure 3-1: Regional Location ....................................................................................................3-3 Figure 3-2: Project Vicinity .........................................................................................................3-4 Figure 3-3: General Plan Land Use Designations.....................................................................3-5 Figure 3-4: Zoning Designations................................................................................................3-6 Figure 3-5: Proposed Site Plan...................................................................................................3-8 Figure 3-6: Project Identification Sign .....................................................................................3-13 Figure 3-7: Project Wayfinding Signage ..................................................................................3-13 Figure 4.1-1: Coastal Zone and Planning Boundary .............................................................4.1-2 Figure 4.3-1: Plant Community Map ....................................................................................4.3-10 Figure 4.3-2: San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat Observances....................................4.3-17 Figure 4.3-3: Mapped Wetlands and Waters .......................................................................4.3-18 Figure 4.3-4: Special-Status Animal Species CNDDB Occurrences ....................................4.3-19 Figure 4.3-5: Special-Status Plant Species CNDDB Occurrences .......................................4.3-20 Figure 4.5-1: Faults ..................................................................................................................4.5-8 Figure 4.5-2: Earthquake Fault Zones and Seismic Hazard Zones ......................................4.5-9 Figure 4.5-3: Slopes A and B .................................................................................................4.5-13 Figure 6-1: Alternative 2 - Additional Impacts to Special-Status Species and Habitats ......6-17 Figure 6-2: Alternative 2 - Additional Impacts to Wetlands...................................................6-18 Table 1-1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures .....................................................1-4 Table 2-1: Environmental Topics to Be Evaluated in the DEIR................................................2-4 Table 3-1: Site Development Totals ..........................................................................................3-8 Table 3-2: Residential Building Detail .......................................................................................3-9 Table 3-3: Parking Summary....................................................................................................3-11 Table 4.2-1: Non-Attainment Air Quality Pollutants .............................................................4.2-6 Table 4.2-2: Air Quality Screening Criteria.............................................................................4.2-9 Table 4.2-3. Impacts from Combined Sources at Project MEI ...........................................4.2-12 Table 4.6-1: City of Pacifica GHG Reduction Targets (With 2005 Baseline).........................4.6-5 Table 4.9-1: Development Regulations Comparison: R-3 and P-D ......................................4.9-6 Table 4.10-1: Land Use Compatibility Matrix (dBA CNEL) ..................................................4.10-3 Table 4.10-2: Definitions of Acoustical Terms .....................................................................4.10-5 Table 4.11-1: Pacifica Population Rate of Change, 1980-2010...........................................4.11-4

5.g
Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
vii
Table 4.11-2: Regional Housing Needs Allocation and Progress 2014-2022 ....................4.11-4 Table 4.13-1: Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Estimates....................................................4.13-10 Table 4.14-1: Normal Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison..............................4.14-10 Table 4.14-2: Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison .........................4.14-11 Table 4.14-3: Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison .........................4.14-11 Table 6-1: Comparison of Project Alternatives.......................................................................6-32 • Appendix 2-A: Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project • Appendix 2-B: Notice of Preparation Comment Letters
• Appendix 3-A: Project Drawings, prepared by BDE Architecture, May 11, 2021 • Appendix 3-B: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, prepared by BKF Engineers, February 1, 2021
• Appendix 3-C: Arborist Report, prepared Traverso Tree Service, March 18, 2020 • Appendix 4.1-A: Arborist Report, prepared Traverso Tree Service, March 18, 2020 • Appendix 4.1-B: Tree Replacement Recommendation Memorandum, Traverso Tree Service, June 17, 2020
• Appendix 4.2-A: Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Construction Community Risk Assessment, prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, November 17, 2021. • Appendix 4.3-A: Biological Resources Assessment, prepared by Coast Ridge Ecology, November 2021
• Appendix 4.3-B: Wetland Delineation, prepared by Coast Ridge Ecology, November 2021
• Appendix 4.3-C: Arborist Report, prepared by Traverso Tree Service, March 18, 2020 • Appendix 4.3-D: Rare Plant Survey, prepared by Coast Ridge Ecology, May 31, 2022 • Appendix 4.4-A: Historic Resource Evaluation for the Proposed Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project, prepared by Evans & De Shazo, December 30, 2021. • Appendix 4.4-B: Cultural Resources Evaluation for the Proposed Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project, prepared by Evans & De Shazo, December 30, 2021 (CONFIDENTIAL).
• Appendix 4.5-A: Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Pacifica Workforce Housing, 930 Oddstad Boulevard, Pacifica, California, prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical, August 20, 2020.
• Appendix 4.5-B: Summary of Existing Geotechnical and Geologic Information – Letter

5.g
Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
viii
Report, Oddstad Site Planned Development, Pacifica, California, prepared by Slate Geotechnical Consultants, February 21, 2020.
• Appendix 4.7-A: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Strata Environmental Services, Inc., May 2018
• Appendix 4.7-B: Vegetation Management Plan Memo, prepared by Richard Johnson, February 28, 2022
• Appendix 4.8-A: Hydrology and Hydraulics Technical Memorandum, prepared by BKF, September 14, 2020
• Appendix 4.8-B: Oddstad Boulevard Drainage Study, prepared by BKF, May 18, 2021 • Appendix 4.8-C: 930 Oddstad Boulevard Planning Request for Information, prepared by BKF, April 26, 2022
• Appendix 4.10-A: Construction Noise and Vibration Assessment, prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin Inc, November 17, 2021.
• Appendix 4.13-A: Traffic Analysis for the Oddstad Workforce Housing in Pacifica, CA, prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., July 27, 2022 • Appendix 4.15-A: Vegetation Management Plan Memorandum, prepared by Richard Johnson, Retired Fire Marshal North County Fire Authority, February 28, 2022

5.g
Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF ACRONYMS
ix
The following provides a list of acronyms in alphabetical order that are used throughout this document. Acronyms are reintroduced in each chapter/section upon their first appearance.

AAI All Appropriate Inquiries
AAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
AB Assembly Bill
AB 1358 Assembly Bill 1358
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
AC asphalt concrete
ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
ACM asbestos-containing materials
ADU accessory dwelling unit
AHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act
AIA Airport Influence Area
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials
AWSP Alternative Water Supply Planning Program
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BACT Best Available Control Technology
bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practices
BMR below market rate
BRA Biological Resources Assessment
C/CAG City/County Association of Governments
CAA Clean Air Act
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEnviroScreen California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool Caltrans California Department of Transportation
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Clean Air Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CARE Community Air Risk Evaluation
CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery CBC California Building Code
CBC California Building Code
CCA Community Choice Aggregation
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CCWRP Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFC California Fire Code

5.g
Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.) LIST OF ACRONYMSx
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs cubic feet per second
CGS California Geological Survey
CH4 Methane
CMP Congestion Management Program
CMU concrete masonry unit
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CPT cone penetration tests
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission C-R Commercial Recreation CREC controlled recognized environmental conditions
CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CRS Cultural Resources Study
CSFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CWA Clean Water Act
CWP Global Warming Potential
cy cubic yards
dB decibel
dBAA-weighted decibel
DBH diameter at breast height
DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report
DEM Department of Emergency Management
DOT Department of Transportation
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DWR Department of Water Resources
EDA Endangered Species Act
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FCAA Federal Clean Air Act
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHA Federal Highway Administration
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
FRA Federal Responsibility Area
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GCASWP General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit GGNRA Golden Gate National Recreational Area
GHG greenhouse gas
GIS geographic information systems

5.g
Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF ACRONYMS
xi
GOV Government Code
GPCD gallons per capita per day
HI hazard index
HMTA Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
HRE Historic Resource Evaluation
HREC historical recognized environmental conditions
HTWTP Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant
HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development
Hz Hertz
ICC International Code Council
IRF Intermediate Regional Flood
ISG Individual Supply Guarantee
IWMP integrated waste management plan
JUHSD Jefferson Union High School District
LBP lead-based paint
Ldn Day-Night average
LDR Low Density Residential
Leq equivalent noise level
LHMP local hazard mitigation plan
LOS Level of service
LRA Local Responsibility Area
LSUSD Laguna Salada Union School District
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MEI maximally exposed individuals
MGD million gallons per day
MLD most likely descendant
MMI Modified Mercalli Intensity
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
mph miles per hour
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organizations
MRP Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Mw moment magnitude scale
MWELO Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
N2O Nitrous oxide
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCWD North Coast County Water District
NCFA North County Fire Authority
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOP Notice of Preparation
Nox nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPPA Native Plant Protection Act
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWIC Northwest Information Center

5.g
Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF ACRONYMS
xii
O3 ozone
OES Office of Emergency Service
OHWM ordinary high water mark
OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PCAP Pacifica Climate Action Plan
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
P-D Planned Development
PDA Priority Development Areas
PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric
PM particulate matter
PMC Pacifica Municipal Code
PPD Pacifica Police Department
ppd pounds per day
PRC Public Resources Code
PSD Pacifica School District
R-1 Single-Family Residential
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
REC recognized environmental conditions
REL reference exposure level
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
ROGs reactive organic gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Boards
RWS Regional Water System
SamTrans San Mateo County Transit District
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SB Senate Bill
SB 375 Senate Bill 375
SB50 Senate Bill 50
SCH State Clearinghouse
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas
SFO San Francisco International Airport
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SFRWQCB San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board SHPO State Historic Preservation Offices
SMCL San Mateo County Libraries
SMCWPPP San Mateo Countywide Pollution Prevention Program SO2 sulfur dioxide
SR1 State Route 1
SRA State Responsibility Area
SSC Species of Special Concern
SSMP Sewer System Management Plan
SSO sanitary sewer overflows
STOPPP San Mateo Countywide Pollution Prevention Program (former) SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan

5.g
Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

LIST OF ACRONYMS
xiii
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TACs toxic air contaminants
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Loads
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
USPS United States Postal Service
UST Underground Storage Tanks
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VMT vehicle miles traveled
WUI wildland urban interface

5.g
Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.g
Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.) 1-1

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 Introduction
The City of Pacifica, as the Lead Agency, has prepared this Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project (herein after referred to as the proposed project or project) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. As specified in Section 15123 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR is required to include a summary of the proposed action and its consequences. The following summary includes a brief description of the project, areas of known controversy, issues to be resolved, and a summary of significant impacts and proposed mitigation to reduce or avoid such impacts.

1.2 Project Summa ry
In response to the declining school-age population in the area, the Pacifica School District closed the former Oddstad elementary school in 2005. Since then, the need for affordable housing options for the School District’s current and future workforce has increased. The project proposes to demolish the existing, non-operational elementary school in order to construct 70 residential units, 11 of which will be below market rate affordable housing units pursuant to the City of Pacifica Municipal Code, as well as community amenities, and other site improvements such as landscaping and parking. To accommodate the proposed development, the project will amend the existing zoning designation from Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Planned Development District (P-D). Entitlements requested from the applicant include the following, and are collectively referenced as File No. 2020-009:
• Rezoning
• Development Agreement
• Development Plan
• Specific Plan
• Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
The project includes a three-lot subdivision including Lot 1 (5.02-acres), Lot 2 (4.69-acres), and Lot 3 (2.78-acres), totaling 12.49-acres. The project will preserve approximately 2.13- acres of the site as undeveloped hillside along the eastern property line for defensible space to support fire prevention site design.

Lot 1, approximately 5.02-acres of the southern portion of the site, will include the existing

5.g
Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-2
recreational field, parking lots, and basketball courts, allowing for continued recreational use by the community and fulfillment of the project’s parkland dedication requirement. The offstreet parking for this portion of the site will be accessed via the existing driveway on Oddstad Boulevard, approximately 300 feet north of its intersection with Yosemite Drive.

Development of Lot 2 will include construction of four residential buildings containing 45 units. In addition, Lot 2 will contain three residential amenity buildings including an approximately 1,015 square foot community building, 800 square foot restroom, and 900 square foot office. Other improvements include bike storage accommodating parking for up to 18 bicycles, a refuse enclosure, surface parking area, usable open space, and landscaping.

Development of Lot 3 will include construction of three residential buildings containing 25 units as well as bike storage accommodating parking for up to 18 bicycles, refuse enclosure, surface parking area, useable open space, and landscaping.

Vehicular access to Lots 2 and 3 will be provided via a new two-way driveway located along Oddstad Boulevard, north of the site’s existing driveway.

1.3 Areas of Know n Controv ersy/Issues to be Resolv ed A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published and circulated on October 22, 2021 to solicit comments regarding the final scope and content of the EIR. Scoping comments received on the project’s NOP included oral comments received at the scoping meeting on November 4, 2021 and two written comments received during the 30-day scoping comment period. Issues raised at the scoping meeting and in the comment letters were related to biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, transportation and traffic, and public services and utilities, as further detailed in Section 2.0, Introduction.

1.4 Summary of Project Alterna tiv es
The range of alternatives considered include changes to the project design that would reduce the project’s environmental impacts and reasonably foreseeable alternatives that could be constructed if the project were disapproved. Alternate land uses were not considered as the site is designated in the City’s General Plan for residential use. Alternate site locations were also not considered as the applicant does not control access to other properties and would not meet the stated objective of redeveloping the underutilized school site.

Chapter 6.0 includes a detailed discussion of the three project alternatives including the No Project Alternative, Park Pacifica Highland Subdivision: 54 Single Family Residences Alternative, and Variation of Site Layout and Unit Types Alternative. As discussed therein, the

5.g
Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-3
Variation of Site Layout and Unit Types Alternative is environmentally superior after the No Project Alternative.

1.5 Impact Summa ry
A detailed discussion regarding potential environmental impacts of the proposed project is provided in Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis. A summary of the significant impacts of the proposed project is provided in Table 1-1. Also provided in Table 1-1 are mitigation measures, which are proposed to avoid or reduce significant project and cumulative impacts.

The table indicates whether implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

5.g
Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-4
TABLE 1-1: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
Aesthetics
Impact AES-3: Implementation of the
proposed project would not
substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings
nor would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality
in urbanized areas. Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure AES-1:

AES-1: All applicable Tree Protection Recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report prepared by Traverso Tree
Service on March 18, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to protection of Monterey pines (trees 25-27) and Monterey cypress (trees 1- 12, 16-20) during the pre-construction, demolition,
foundation, grading, construction, and landscaping phases of the project shall be implemented. Final grading plans,
construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the Arborist Report have been incorporated into the final design of the project. Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with the planting size, species, and ratio recommendations set forth in the Tree
Replacement Recommendation Memorandum prepared by
Traverso Tree Services on June 17, 2020. Protection measures and replacement trees shall be subject to review and
approval by the City of Pacifica Planning Department.

Less than
Significant
Air Quality
Impact AQ-2: Implementation of the
proposed project would not result in
a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure AQ-1:

AQ-1: Latest BAAQMD recommended Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to control for fugitive dust and exhaust during all construction activities shall be incorporated into all demolition and construction plans to require implementation of the following:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-5

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street
sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting
equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum
idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

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

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

5.g
Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-6

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
Impact AQ-3: Implementation of the
proposed project would not expose
sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and AQ-2:

AQ-1: (see impact AQ-2 above)
AQ-2: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading
permit, a plan to reduce diesel particulate matter emissions by at least 60 percent shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following strategies:

Alternatively, the plan may include:
a. Equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards
for Tier 2 or 3 engines and include particulate matter
emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether
achieve a 60 percent or greater reduction in
particulate matter exhaust in comparison to
uncontrolled equipment.
b. Alternatively fueled or electric equipment.

5.g
Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-7

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
construction phases to avoid use of diesel generators
and compressors;
c. Use of electric-powered equipment;
d. Use of electric or propane/natural gas-powered
forklifts and aerial lifts;
e. Change in construction build-out plans to lengthen
phases;
f. Implementation of different building techniques that result in less diesel equipment usage.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The project could
result in a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on species identified
as candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6:

BIO-1: Prior to the start of construction, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify occupied San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat middens
onsite. Where feasible, occupied middens shall be avoided and a minimum five (5) foot non-disturbance buffer, or as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established, maintained, and monitored throughout project construction. Additionally, a minimum five (5) foot nondisturbance buffer, or as otherwise recommended by a qualified biologist, shall be established between the eastern limit of proposed development activities and the densely vegetated, impenetrable hazelnut scrub habitat.

BIO-2: To address potential impacts to San Francisco duskyfooted woodrats, a Relocation Plan prepared by a qualified biologist, shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Pacifica and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and approval. At a minimum, the Relocation Plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
• Nests requiring relocation shall be dismantled by
Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-8

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
construction crews by hand and under the direct
supervision of a qualified biologist.
• Each member of the construction crew shall receive an environmental awareness training regarding San
Francisco dusky-footed woodrat ecology and specifics of the Relocation Plan.
• All material removed during nest dismantling shall be moved into the Relocation Area, as determined by the
qualified biologist, and constructed into piles suitable for habitation or use as refugia.
• If an active nest requires removal, the following phased dismantling protocol shall be implemented:
o Remove at least 50-100% of the existing canopy
cover and begin dismantling.
o After partially dismantling the nest, leave nest
alone for two to four days to allow woodrats to
disperse on their own. After two to four days,
continue to disassemble nest by hand. Plan to
completely dismantle in two to three sessions.
o If young are present, the construction crew and
qualified biologist shall cease dismantling of the
nest for 48 hours to allow the adult to move the
young. If the young have been moved and the nest
is vacant, nest removal may resume.
• If an inactive nest (as determined by a qualified biologist) needs to be removed, it may be removed completely in
one day. If woodrats are observed within or fleeing from the nest, the nest will be considered active and relocated using a phased approach.

BIO-3: To offset the loss or disturbance of foraging habitat

5.g
Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-9

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
(native forbs and shrubs) for the special-status obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus), native shrubs and
herbaceous (forb) species known to benefit native bees shall be identified in a revised landscaping plan and introduced onsite. Plants known to benefit native bees shall be selected and may include but are not limited to coyote brush
(Baccharis pilularis), sage (Salvia spp.), lupines (Lupinus spp.), various species of Lotus and Acmispon, gumplant (Grindelia spp.), and Phacelia spp. As part of the update to the
landscaping plans, selected bee-friendly species and planting locations shall be confirmed by a qualified biologist in consultation with the City of Pacifica.

BIO-4: In the event the construction commences during the rainy season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for California red-legged frog no more than five days prior to commencement of ground disturbing activities and provide recommendations for installation of exclusion fencing, as warranted. Results of the survey and recommendations for exclusion fencing shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

At the recommendation of a qualified biologists and based on factors including the migration window for red-legged frog, rainfall, and inundation, exclusion fencing shall be installed.

Exclusion fencing shall be inspected and maintained under the supervision of a qualified biologist.

5.g
Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-10

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
removal, or commencement of ground disturbing activities.

Results of the preconstruction survey shall be documented by a qualified biologist and provided to the City of Pacifica. If special-status bat species are found roosting in building or trees proposed to be removed, the biologist shall determine if there are young present (i.e., the biologist should determine if there are maternal roosts). If young are found roosting in any tree or building proposed for removal, such impacts shall be avoided until the young are flying and feeding on their own. A non-disturbance buffer installed with orange
construction fencing shall be established around maternity site. The size of the buffer zone will be determined by a qualified bat biologist at the time of detection. If adults are found roosting in a tree or building on the project site but no maternal sites are found, then the adult bats can be flushed, or a one-way eviction door can be placed over the tree cavity for a 48-hour period prior to the tree removal or building demolition. If bats or evidence of bats are detected during the pre-construction surveys, the applicant shall notify the City of Pacifica and the CDFW regarding bat eviction protocol and submit a plan for review and acceptance by the City of Pacifica and the CDFW.

BIO-6: Should construction activities commence during the bird nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a preconstruction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction activities. Areas within 300 to 500 feet of construction shall be surveyed for active nests. Should active nests be identified, a disturbance-free buffer shall be established based on the needs of the species as set forth by

5.g
Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-11

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
CDFW and shall be maintained until a qualified biologist verifies that the nestlings have fledged, or the nest has failed.

Should construction activities cease for 14 consecutive days or more within the nesting season, an additional nesting bird survey shall be required prior to resuming construction.

Results of the pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be submitted to the City of Pacifica.

Impact BIO-3: The project could have
a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measures BIO-7 through BIO-9:

BIO-7: Indirect impacts to the seasonal wetlands and
jurisdictional drainage feature shall be avoided through implementation of best management practices (BMPs) prior to earthwork. Construction exclusion zones shall be
established by installing appropriate construction fencing, silt fencing, wildlife friendly hay wattles (no monofilament netting), gravel wattles, and other protective measures between project activities and the seasonal wetlands and drainage feature.

All non-native, invasive vegetation removed shall be
discarded offsite and away from wetland areas to prevent reseeding.

Prior to implementation of the construction project, a
biological monitor shall inspect installation of BMPs to ensure proper protection of the seasonal wetlands and jurisdictional drainage feature areas are in place. BMPs shall thereafter be routinely inspected by the construction manager to ensure BMPs remain in place for the duration of construction
activities. Upon completion of project construction all exclusion fencing shall be removed along with any temporary BMPs.

BIO-8: A total of 0.063 acres of potential wetlands were Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-12

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
identified in the project area. In the event that wetland plants are removed, altered, or destroyed along the edges of the concrete drainage ditch during repair/replacement of the concrete drainage ditch, the applicant shall replant these areas with native wetland plants at a 1:1 ratio to ensure continued viability of the wetlands.

BIO-9: To avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands throughout project operation, plans submitted for building permit shall be revised to include a split rail fence along the boundary between the recreational field and seasonal
wetlands and concrete drainage ditch located at the
southeast portion of the project site to preclude access and limit foot traffic within the drainage and wetland features.

Impact BIO-5: The project could
conflict with local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure AES-1 (see impact AES-3) Less than
Significant
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact C/TCUL-2: Implementation of
the project could potentially cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5. Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measures C/TCUL-1 and C/TCUL-2:

C/TCUL-1: Prior to commencement of ground-disturbing
activities, project supervisors, equipment operators, and other members of the construction team overseeing or
conducting ground-disturbing activities shall receive one or more preconstruction Cultural Awareness Trainings by a
Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist. The Training shall educate and familiarize supervisors, contractors, and equipment operators with the potential to encounter
archaeological resources, the types of archaeological
material that could be encountered, and procedures to follow Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-13

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
if archaeological deposits and/or artifacts are encountered during construction.

C/TCUL-2: In the event that an archaeological deposit is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, all work within 50-feet of the discovery shall be redirected until a Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist is retained to inspect the material and provide recommendations for
appropriate treatment of the resource pursuant to
regulations and guidelines set forth in the California
Environmental Quality Act, including the involvement of Native American monitors if a prehistoric archaeological resource is identified. If avoidance of the archaeological resource is not feasible, the archaeological resource shall be evaluated for its eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are identified as eligible for listing on the CRHR, recommendations for proper treatment and handling shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist including, but not be limited to, avoidance or excavation in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for
Archaeological Documentation, which may include data
recovery using standard archaeological field methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered archaeological materials; preparation of a report detailing the methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and associated materials; and accessioning of archaeological materials and a technical data recovery report at a curation facility. Upon completion of the assessment, the
archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the
methods and results of the assessment. The report shall be

5.g
Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-14

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
submitted to the project applicant and the Northwest
Information Center.

Impact C/TCUL-3: Implementation of
the project could potentially cause a
significant impact due to disturbance
of human remains, including those
interred outside of formal
cemeteries.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure T/TCUL-3:

C/TCUL-3: In the event that human remains are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, all work must stop within 100-feet of the discovery area, the area shall be secured to prevent further disturbance, and the San Mateo County
Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner will determine if the remains are precontact period Native
American remains or of modern origin, and if any further investigation by the coroner is warranted. If the remains are believed to be precontact period Native American, the
Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) by telephone within 24-hours. The NAHC will immediately notify the person believed to be the most likely descendant (MLD) of the remains. The MLD has 48- hours to make recommendations to the landowner for
treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MLD does not make recommendations within 48-hours, the
landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does not accept the descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendant may request mediation by NAHC. An
archaeologist should also be retained to evaluate the
historical significance of the discovery, the potential for additional remains, and to provide further recommendations for treatment of the site in coordination with the MLD.

Less than
Significant
Impact C/TCUL-4: Implementation of
the project could cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measures C/TCUL-1 and C/TCUL-2
(see impact T/TCUL-2 above)
Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-15

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
a tribal cultural resource, including
resources that are listed or eligible for
listing in the CRHR, or in a local
register of historical resources, or
that are determined by the City of
Pacifica to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in Section 5024.1(c)
of Public Resources Code.

Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1: The proposed project
could potentially directly or indirectly
result in substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving fault rupture, strong
seismic ground shaking, or seismicrelated ground failure including liquefaction and landslides.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure GEO-1:

GEO-1: All applicable recommendations set forth in the
Design Level Geotechnical Investigation prepared by
Rockridge Geotechnical on August 20, 2020, for the subject property, including, but not limited to recommendations related to grading, drainage, excavation, foundations
systems, and compaction specifications shall be
implemented. Final grading plan, construction plans, and building plans shall demonstrate that recommendations set forth in the geotechnical reports have been incorporated into the final design of the project and to the satisfaction of the City of Pacifica City Engineer.

Less than
Significant
Impact GEO-2: The proposed project
could result in substantial soil erosion
or the loss of topsoil.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure GEO-2:

GEO-2: Upon submittal of grading and drainage plans, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable
requirements of Title 6, Chapter 12 (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Control) of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code. Plans shall include identification of
appropriate best management practices (BMPs) to prevent the discharge of construction wastes or contaminants from construction materials, tools, equipment, stockpiles, or Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-16

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
exposed soil from entering the City storm water system or watercourses. Plans shall also demonstrate compliance with stormwater treatment requirements set forth in NPDES
Permit No. CAS612008.

Impact GEO-3: The proposed project
would be located on a geologic unit or
soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.

Potentially
Significant Mitigation Measure GEO-1: (see impact GEO-1 above) Less than Significant Impact GEO-4: The proposed project
would be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property.

Potentially
Significant Mitigation Measure GEO-1: (see impact GEO-1 above) Less than Significant Impact GEO-6: The proposed project
could directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure GEO-3:

Less than
Significant
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: Implementation of
the proposed Pacifica School District
Workforce Housing project would not
generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure GHG-1:

GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, a GHG reduction plan shall be prepared and
submitted to the City for review and acceptance. The plan shall, at a minimum demonstrate that the project will use at Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-17

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
would result in a significant impact on
the environment.
least 10 percent local building materials and will
reuse/recycle at least 50 percent construction waste and demolition material. In the event that these measures are not feasible, the plan shall identify suitable replacement
measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-2: The proposed project
could create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1:

HAZ-1: Prior to demolition of the existing structures an asbestos survey shall be performed by a licensed asbestos inspector to identify all asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paint (LBP). The survey shall adhere to
sampling protocols outlined by the Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act (AHERA) and shall incorporate the findings of the survey into a report to be submitted to the City. In the event that such substances are found, the report shall include appropriate removal and disposal protocols subject to requirements set forth by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) AHERA requirements, lead standard contained in 29 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62, and any other local, state, or federal regulations. Treatment, handling, and disposal of these materials shall be performed by qualified professionals in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations.

Less than
Significant
Impact HAZ-7: The proposed project
could expose people or structures,
either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2:

1. Remove all vegetation within the site listed on the San Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-18

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
Mateo County list of “Fire Prone (Pyrophytic) Plants”
except for isolated specimen plants.
a. Existing isolated or newly planted specimens shall
meet the vertical and horizontal spacing guidelines.

2. Maintain and plant all trees and shrubs to the
specifications identified in ‘Plant and Tree Spacing’,
‘Vertical Spacing’, and ‘Horizontal Spacing’ as outlined in the Plan “Fire Safe Landscaping” guide.
a. An evaluation of slope implications shall be reflected when determining the landscape.
b. All plantings shall be from the Plan “Firescaping with Native Plants” or otherwise fire resistive plantings.

3. Maintain an ember zone of 5 feet around all buildings pursuant to CGC 51182 (5)(1), (2) within the Project.
a. The ember zone be maintained on a minimum
monthly basis.

4. Maintain all landscaping and vegetation on the Project site on a regular basis as part of a regular landscape
maintenance program.
a. All vegetation shall be irrigated as needed to maintain the vegetation.

Noise
Impact NOI-1: The proposed project
could involve generation of a
substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure NOI-1:

NOI-1: Construction activities shall comply with the following best management practices to minimize noise levels from the proposed development:
• Construction will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Any work outside of
these hours by the construction contractors should
Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-19

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
agencies. require a special permit from the City Engineer. There should be compelling reasons for permitting construction outside of these designated hours.
• The contractor shall use “new technology” power
construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise
shielding and muffling devices. All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical
condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poorly maintained engines or other components.
• Staging areas and stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as possible from noise-sensitive receptors, such as residential uses (a minimum of 200
feet).
• Ensure that generators, compressors, and pumps are
housed in acoustical enclosures.
• Locate cranes as far from adjoining noise-sensitive
receptors as possible.
• During final grading, substitute graders for bulldozers, where feasible. Wheeled heavy equipment are quieter
than track equipment and should be used where feasible. • Substitute nail guns for manual hammering and
electrically powered tools for noisier pneumatic tools, where feasible.
• The adjacent residences shall be notified early and
frequently of the construction activities.
• A “noise disturbance coordinator” shall be designated to respond to any local complaints about construction noise.

The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause
of the noise complaints (e.g., beginning work too early,

5.g
Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-20

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures
warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number
for the disturbance coordinator would be conspicuously
posted at the construction site.

Transportation and Traffic
Impact TRA-2: The project will
conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (B).

Significant
Mitigation Measure TRA-1 and TRA-2:

TRA-1: Upon submittal of plans for building permit, the applicant shall submit a list of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies to be implemented districtwide. TDM strategies shall be clearly defined in terms of location, extent, timing, and responsibility for
implementation. Strategies may include, but are not limited to the following:
• Safe Routes to School. Pursue grants to fund pedestrian and bicycle improvements around Pacifica School District schools to increase safety for students and staff walking and bicycling.
• Install Bike Racks. Identify Pacifica School District schools where more bicycle racjs are needed. Once identified,
install as needed.
• Install e-bike Charging Stations. Install e-bike charging systems in secure bike parking facilities at Pacifica School District schools.
• Samtrans Flex Services. Continue to partner with
Samtrans to establish fixed-route services to Pacifica
School District schools. Coordinate with Samtrans on
possible flex services (such as dial-a-ride) to serve schools with lower demand.
• Shuttle Services. Partner with the Jefferson Union School District to fund shuttle services to Pacifica schools.

Significant and
Unavoidable

5.g
Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1-21

POTENTIAL IMPACTS

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE WITH

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE

AFTER MITIGATION
TRA-2: To promote electric vehicle ownership and reduce GHG emissions associated with vehicles traveling to and from the site, install electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure and equipment as required by the 2022 California Building
Standards Code and any City of Pacifica local amendments thereto.

Impact TRA-3: The project will not
substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design or incompatible
uses.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measures TRA-3 and TRA-4:

TRA-3: To maintain adequate sight lines at the project
driveways, signage and landscaping introduced onsite within close proximity of the driveways shall be maintained such that low-lying shrubs remain at a height lower than three feet from ground level and that tree branches be no less than seven feet in height from ground level. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining adequate sight lines from the project driveways.

Less than
Significant

5.g
Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930

5.g
Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 2-1

2.0 Introduction
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) has been prepared in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3).

Purpose of the EIR
As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a), an EIR is a public disclosure document that provides decision-makers and the public with information that enables consideration of the environmental consequences of the proposed project. CEQA requires that an EIR be prepared by the agency with primary responsibility over approval of a project (lead agency).

The lead agency is charged with considering and, where feasible, minimizing environmental impacts of proposed development and is committed to balancing economic, environmental, and social factors.

On April 15, 2020, the Pacifica School District (School District) applied to the City of Pacifica for permits to construct and operate the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project (herein after referred to as the proposed project or project). The City of Pacifica, as the lead agency under CEQA, has determined that demolition of the existing school complex and construction and operation of the proposed project is a "project" under CEQA, which defines a project as the whole of an action that has the potential to result in a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment CEQA Guidelines Section 15378[a]). CEQA requires the preparation of an EIR prior to approving any project that may have a significant impact on the environment.

This summary is provided in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15123. As provided therein, an EIR is required to include a brief summary of the proposed actions and its consequences as well as a brief description of the proposed project, a summary of the significant effects and associated mitigation measures, areas of known controversy, identification of alternatives evaluated, and of the environmentally superior alternative.

Draft EIR Rev iew Process

2.2.1 Notice of Preparation
In accordance with Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Pacifica, as the lead agency, published the Notice of Preparation of an EIR, included herein as Appendix 2-A.

5.g
Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

2.0 INTRODUCTION
2-2
The NOP was circulated to the State Clearinghouse (SCH) for distribution to federal, state, and local agencies, and was noticed pursuant to local noticing procedures set forth by the City of Pacifica on October 22, 2021. The 30-day NOP review period extended from October 22, 2021 to November 22, 2021. In accordance with Section 15063(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, when the lead agency can determine that an EIR will clearly be required, an initial study is not required and as such an Initial Study has not been prepared for the proposed project.

2.2.2 Public Scoping
The City of Pacifica posted the NOP with the California Office of Planning and Research, the County of San Mateo Clerk-Recorder, and distributed the NOP in accordance with local noticing requirements. The Pacifica School District and the City of Pacifica held a joint informational/scoping meeting on November 4, 2021. In addition to comments received at the November 4th meeting, the City received two written comments on the NOP. A copy of all written comments received during the 30-day scoping comment period are included in Appendix 2-B, the contents of which are summarized below. • Biological Resources
 Potential drainage feature along the south side of the property near Yosemite Drive and the City’s Frontierland Park
• Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
 The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) submitted a letter encouraging the City to conduct AB 52 notification, SB 18 (as appropriate) and to consult with Native American Tribes.
• Transportation and Traffic
 Adequacy of parking onsite and concern regarding parking spill over into the neighborhood
 Traffic generation by the project and effects on neighborhood roadways • Public Services/Utilities and Service Systems
 Concern that existing City infrastructure cannot support the added demand of the proposed project

2.2.3 Draft Environmental Impact Report
This document constitutes the DEIR prepared for the proposed demolition of the unoccupied Oddstad School and construction of the 70-unit, Pacifica School District Workforce Housing project and associated recreational facility improvements in Pacifica, California. It contains a description of the project, description of the environmental setting, identification of project

5.g
Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

2.0 INTRODUCTION
2-3
impacts and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, and an analysis of project alternatives. The DEIR addresses environmental issues that could result in potentially significant environmental effects from project implementation. Significance criteria are further described in Chapter 4.0 Environmental Evaluation.

CEQA requires that a lead agency shall neither approve nor carry out a project as proposed unless the significant environmental effects have been reduced to an acceptable level, where possible (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and Section 15092). An acceptable level is defined as eliminating, avoiding, or substantially lessening the significant effects. If such a reduction is not possible, a lead agency must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 as a balance of the benefits of a project against its unavoidable consequences.

2.2.4 Public Review of DEIR
This DEIR is being circulated to state and local agencies, all adjacent landowners, and to other interested parties. Publication of this DEIR marks the beginning of the public review period, during which written comments may be submitted to the following address:

Christopher Dacumos, Consulting Senior Planner
City of Pacifica, Planning Department
540 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Comments may also be submitted via email to: [email protected]

2.2.5 Final Env ironmental Impact Report
A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) will be prepared after the public review period on the DEIR has ended. The FEIR will consist of the following, consistent with Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines:
• The DEIR or a revised version of the DEIR
• Comments and recommendations received on the DEIR either verbatim or in summary • A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR • Responses to significant environmental points raised in the DEIR process • Any other information added by the lead agency
Upon completion of the FEIR and scheduling of a public hearing, the City of Pacifica City Council will consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090. Once the EIR has been certified, the City’s decision-making body

5.g
Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

2.0 INTRODUCTION
2-4
may take action on the project entitlements, which may occur concurrently or at a separate hearing. Prior to approving the project, the City must make written findings with respect to each significant environmental effect identified in the EIR in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines.

2.2.6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, the lead agency is required to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR are implemented to avoid significant effects on the environment as identified in the EIR. The specific reporting or monitoring program is not required to be included in the EIR. As such, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the proposed project will be prepared concurrent with the FEIR.

EIR Scope
Consistent with Section 15060 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Pacifica completed review of the application materials for the proposed project and determined that an EIR was the appropriate level of environmental review. Based on the anticipated environmental impacts and comments received during the NOP comment period, the City identified the environmental topics listed in Table 2-1 to be evaluated in detail in the DEIR. In addition to the topics listed below, the DEIR also includes a statement indicating the reasons why impacts to Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Energy, Mineral Resources, and Recreation resulting from the project were determined not to be significant and are therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR, consistent with Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines.

TABLE 2-1: ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICS TO BE EVALUATED IN THE DEIR • Aesthetics • Land Use and Planning
• Air Quality • Noise
• Biological Resources • Population and Housing
• Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources • Public Services • Geology and Soils • Transportation and Circulation
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Utilities and Service Systems • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Wildfire
• Hydrology and Water Quality
EIR Orga niza tion
The DEIR is organized into the following Chapters:

Chapter 1.0 - Executive Summary, presents a brief description of the proposed project,

5.g
Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

2.0 INTRODUCTION
2-5
summarizes environmental consequences that would result from implementation of the proposed project, provides a summary table identifying anticipated significant environmental impacts, describes identified mitigation measures, and indicates the level of significance of impacts before and after mitigation. This section also presents a brief description of alternatives to the proposed project and provides a table comparing each of the identified alternatives to the proposed project.

Chapter 2.0 - Introduction, provides an introduction and overview describing the purpose and scope of topics addressed in this DEIR and the environmental review process.

Chapter 3.0 - Project Description, describes the proposed project, including the project location, existing site conditions, existing and proposed land uses, project components and objectives, and a discussion of the intended uses of the EIR.

Chapter 4.0 - Environmental Impact Analysis, describes the regulatory context and environmental setting, including applicable plans and policies for each environmental topic identified above, provides an analysis of the significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and identifies mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the severity of significant impacts.

Chapter 5.0 - Other CEQA Considerations, provides a discussion of the project’s cumulative impacts, the potential for growth inducement due to project implementation, significant and unavoidable impacts, and significant irreversible environmental changes that are anticipated to result from implementation of the proposed project.

Chapter 6.0 - Alternatives, summarizes alternatives to the proposed project, including the No Project Alternative as required by CEQA, and the comparative environmental consequences of each alternative.

Chapter 7.0 - References, provides a list of source materials and persons consulted to support analyses contained in the DEIR and provides a list of individuals and organizations involved in preparation of the DEIR.

Appendices
• Appendix 2-A: Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project • Appendix 2-B: Notice of Preparation Comment Letters

5.g
Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

5.g
Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.) 3-1

3.0 Project Description
Consistent with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15124 (Project Description), this Chapter of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) includes a description of the proposed project’s location, objectives, characteristics, and the intended uses of this DEIR including, where applicable, a list of agencies expected to use the DEIR in their decision making, a description of City and outside agency approvals needed to implement the project, and a list of federal, state, and local environmental review and consultation requirements.

Regional Location
The project is in the southeastern portion of the City of Pacifica at 930 Oddstad Boulevard (APN 023-672-600), within the Park Pacifica neighborhood, on an approximately 12.49-acre site. The site is bounded by Big Bend Drive to the north, Yosemite Drive to the south, Oddstad Boulevard to the west, and the City’s Frontierland Park to the east (Figure 3-1: Regional Location)
Ex isting Site Conditions a nd Surrounding La nd Uses
The site contains a single-story school complex, including circulation improvements, recreational fields and courts, parking areas, landscaping, and fencing along the Oddstad Boulevard frontage and along the northern and southern property lines. The eastern most hillside areas of the site are undeveloped. Surrounding land uses include single-family residences across Oddstad Boulevard to the west, the approximately 63-acre City-owned and operated Frontierland Park and undeveloped hillside to the east, single-family residences and the Pacifica Boys and Girls Club to the south, and single-family residences to the north.

Other uses proximate to the project site include the Park Mall commercial shopping center, 76 gas station, Pacifica Sanchez Library, multi-family residences, and Pacifica Oaks Senior Apartments, located approximately one-half mile south of the project site near the intersection of Oddstad Boulevard and Terra Nova Boulevard (Figure 3-2: Project Vicinity).

The project site was part of the Park Pacifica Highlands subdivision, recorded with the County of San Mateo in 1965. The subdivision consisted of 54 single-family residential lots, two remainder lots adjacent to the City-owned Frontierland Park, and four dedicated public rights-of-way intended to provide access to future residential units, referenced on the

5.g
Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-2
recorded map as Everglades Court, Shenandoah Court, Carlsbad Court, and Big Bend Court.1 The site was acquired by the Pacifica School District (“PSD” or “School District”) in 1966 and was developed as the Oddstad Elementary School, originally constructed in 1967-1968 and began operation in 1968. In response to the declining school-age population in the area, the PSD closed the former public elementary school in 2005 and as such no longer operates it as an elementary school. The site was utilized by third party commercial tenants and various education and non-industrial uses from 2006 to 2019. Since 2019, the School District has utilized the building exclusively as storage. The site contains three recreational fields, all of which continue to be publicly accessible and are utilized by a variety of organized sport groups as well as individuals.

3.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designation
The project site is designated Low Density Residential in the City’s General Plan. The Low Density Residential land use designation allows residential development at a range of 3 to 9 dwelling units per acre. As shown in Figure 3-3: General Plan Land Use Designations, the project site is predominately surrounded by land also designated as Low Density Residential.

In addition, the Pacifica Boys and Girls Club, located south of the site is designated Public and Semi Public, and the City’s Frontierland Park, located east of the site is designated as Park.

3.2.2 Zoning Designation
The project site has a Zoning Designation of Single-Family Residential (R-1), which permits by-right single-family dwellings, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), junior ADUs, child day care homes, small special care facilities, and accessory buildings and uses. The R-1 Zoning District also conditionally permits churches, schools, parks, playgrounds, crop and tree farming, mobile home parks, large special care facilities, landscaped public or private parking lots when adjacent to any C district, and small bed and breakfast facilities. As shown in Figure 3-4: Zoning Designations, the site is surrounded by areas also designated as R-1 as well as the City’s Frontierland Park to the east, which is designated as Commercial Recreation (C-R). 1 San Mateo County Recorder, Park Pacifica Highlands No. 1, Volume 63, pages 13, 14, and 15

5.g
Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-3
FIGURE 3-1: REGIONAL LOCATION

5.g
Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION3-4
FIGURE 3-2:PROJECT VICINITY

5.g
Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-5
FIGURE 3-3: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS

5.g
Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-6
FIGURE 3-4: ZONING DESIGNATIONS

5.g
Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-7
Project Components
This section of the DEIR provides a description of the proposed project as presented in the application materials submitted to the City of Pacifica by the project sponsor including architectural, civil, and landscape plans dated May 11, 2021 (Appendix 3-A), the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map dated February 1, 2021 (Appendix 3-B), and other supporting documentation.

3.3.1 Overv iew
The project proposes to demolish the existing, non-operational elementary school located on the 12.49-acre site at 930 Oddstad Boulevard, and to construct 70 residential units, 11 of which will be below market rate (BMR), affordable to low- and moderate-income households, consistent with Article 47 (Below Market Rate Program) of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code. In addition to BMR units, the project will allocate an additional 34 units, for teachers and staff of PSD which will be subsidized by the School District. Up to 25 units will be rented at market-rate to occupants other than teachers and staff of PSD. The project will also provide community amenities including a recreation building, restroom and changing room, office, site improvements such as landscaping and parking, and off-site improvements along the Oddstad Boulevard right-of-way, as further discussed in Section 3.3.4, below. The site’s zoning classification will be amended from Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Planned Development District (P-D), details of which are included in Section 3.5.2.

The project sponsor is requesting the option to construct and implement the project in two phases to provide flexibility given the changing economic conditions in the area. Though there is a possibility that the project will be constructed in two phases, the entirety of the development is being analyzed in the EIR.

3.3.2 Site Plan and Coverage
The project includes a three-lot subdivision totaling 12.49-acres, comprised of Lot 1 (5.02- acres), located at the southern portion of the project site; Lot 2 (4.69-acres), located in the central portion of the site; and Lot 3 (2.78-acres), located at the northern portion of the site as shown in Figure 3-5 below. The project will preserve approximately 2.13-acres of the site as undeveloped hillside along the eastern property line, with the proposed residential development and recreational field occupying the remaining 10.36 acres. Table 3-1 summarizes the project’s site coverage using broad development categories to capture coverage of the site by buildings (residential, accessory, and amenity), circulation improvements (parking, drive aisles, driveways, etc.), landscaping (ornamental and

5.g
Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-8
stormwater treatment), and open space and undeveloped hillside areas.

FIGURE 3-5: PROPOSED SITE PLAN2
TABLE 3-1: SITE DEVELOPMENT TOTALS
Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3
Buildings - 31,879 s.f. 17,326 s.f
Circulation Improvements 31,182 s.f. 55,942 s.f. 33,567 s.f.

Landscaping 1,480 s.f. 51,083 s.f. 27,913 s.f.

Open Space & Undeveloped Hillside 185,926 s.f. 65,372 s.f. 42,398 s.f.

TOTALS 218,588 s.f. 204,276 s.f. 121,204 s.f.

Calculations in Table 3-1 are based on Sheet A1.1, and L1.3, of Appendix 3-A, dated May 11, 2021

3.3.3 Architectural Design and Building Floor Plans
Residential Buildings
The project proposes construction of seven craftsman-style residential buildings in four varying layouts, identified as Buildings A (1 building), B (3 buildings), C (2 buildings), and D (1 building). All residential structures are two-stories, ranging in height from 25-feet 3 ¾-inches to 30-feet, as measured from finished grade to the highest point of the gable roof, consistent 2 Sheet A0.2, Project Drawings, prepared by BDE Architecture, May 11, 2021

5.g
Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-9
with the City of Pacifica Municipal Code.
3 Buildings feature roof forms of varying height,
slope, and orientation. Colors and materials include asphalt shingle roofs in black and grey, horizontal lap siding in blue and grey, fiber cement shingle siding in two shades of brown, fiber cement trim in white, sectional garage doors in blue, wood trellises, divided light vinyl windows, and cylindrical wall sconces. Residential buildings are summarized in Table 3-2 below including the type of units (e.g., flats vs. townhomes) where flats are apartments that include a single level of livable space per unit, and townhomes include two floors of livable space per unit.
4 In addition to the type of units, the table also includes a summary of the overall square-footage, total number of units, and unit mix of each building.

TABLE 3-2: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING DETAIL
Lot 2 Buildings
Building A (Flats):
• 26,385 square feet
• 27 units
 21 one-bedroom
 6 two-bedroom
Lot 3 Buildings
Building C1, C2 (Townhomes):
• 5,142 square feet each (10,284 square
feet total)
• 4 units each (8 units total)
 2 two-bedroom
 2 three-bedroom
Building B1, B2, B3 (Townhomes):
• 7,370 square feet each (22,110 square
feet total)
• 6 units each (18 units total)
 4 two-bedroom
 2 three-bedroom
Building D (Flats):
• 19,392 square feet
• 17 units
 11 one-bedroom
 6 two-bedroom
Accessory and Amenity Buildings
The project proposes construction of accessory and amenity buildings, including bike storage and refuse enclosures, one of each type on Lots 2 and 3, and three amenity buildings on Lot 2, including an approximately 1,015 square-foot recreation building, 800 square-foot restroom and changing room, and 900 square-foot office. Amenity buildings range in height from 16-feet 5 ¾-inches to 23-feet 11 ¾-inches and feature simple architecture that is complementary to that of the residential buildings including asphalt shingle roofs, horizontal 3 City of Pacifica Municipal Code, Title 9 – Planning and Zoning, Chapter 4 – Zoning, Article 2 – Definitions, Section 9-4.243 – Height of Buildings
4 As used here, “townhomes” refer to a type of building and not to a form of ownership housing (i.e., condominiums). All residential units proposed with the project are rental units.

5.g
Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-10
lap siding, fiber cement trim, wood trellises, divided lite vinyl windows, and cylindrical wall sconces. As proposed, the recreation building and office will be used exclusively by residents of the project, however, the restroom and changing facilities will be available for use by the public and in particular are intended to support the publicly accessible recreational portion of the project, further described in Section 3.3.4. The School District may also make the recreation building available for rental by community groups or private parties on a case-bycase basis.

3.3.4 Recreational Amenities
The project includes several recreational amenities onsite. Publicly accessible amenities include two play fields, measuring approximately 127,825 square feet, located at the southern portion of the site and one informal basketball practice court in the parking area of Lot 1. As proposed, the existing, approximately 53,167 square foot recreational field located at the northern portion of the site and the existing basketball court located adjacent to the school complex will be removed to accommodate the proposed residences and associated improvements on Lots 2 and 3. In addition to the recreational amenities on Lot 1, the public will also have access to the proposed changing rooms and restroom building proposed on Lot 2.

Resident recreation amenities are located on Lot 2 and include the recreation building, and three common outdoor patios including a lower patio with game courts located south of the recreation building, an upper patio with outdoor seating located north of the recreation building, and a patio with outdoor seating located between Oddstad Boulevard to the west and Building B3 to the east. See the Conceptual Landscape Plan provided at Sheet L1.0 of Appendix 3-A for a detailed site plan showing locations of onsite recreational amenities.

3.3.5 Access, Circulation, and Parking
Vehicular Access and Circulation
Vehicular access to and from the residential portion of the project site (Lot 2 and Lot 3) will be provided via a new, approximately 25-foot-wide driveway with additional 8 ½ feet of width for parallel parking along the south (inbound) side located 340 feet south of the Oddstad Boulevard/Big Bend Drive intersection. The existing driveway used to access the former school is located approximately 70 feet south of the proposed driveway and will be replaced with standard curb, gutter, and sidewalks. The project proposes to introduce internal roadways and drive aisles including Ciervo Lane, which is oriented east-west and provides access to the site from Oddstad Boulevard; Pueblo Court, which is oriented north-south and

5.g
Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-11
provides access to Building A, Building B3, the community recreation building, and the recreation restroom on Lot 2 as well as Buildings C1, C2, and Building D on Lot 3; and Conejo Lane which is oriented east-west and provides access to Buildings B1 and B2 on Lot 2.

Internal roadways and drive aisles are shown in Figure 3-5 above.

Vehicular access to and from the recreational portion of the project site (Lot 1) will be provided by way of an existing, approximately 25-foot-wide driveway located approximately 225 feet north of the Oddstad Boulevard/Yosemite Drive intersection. Improvements to the existing driveway are limited to installation of curb ramps.

Table 3-3 includes a summary of the total vehicular parking spaces provided by the project including the 54 existing parking spaces on Lot 1 which will be restriped and retained as part of the project, 86 parking spaces on Lot 2, and 56 parking spaces on Lot 3, for a total of 196 parking spaces, inclusive of covered and uncovered spaces where “S” indicates standard parking spaces, “C” indicates compact spaces, and “A” indicates ADA spaces.

TABLE 3-3: PARKING SUMMARY
Lot
Uncovered
(S)
Uncovered
(C)
Uncovered
(A)
Covered
(S)
Covered
(C)
Covered
(A) Total
1 49 2 3 - - - 54
2 8 12 2 61 1 2 86
3 7 2 2 45 - - 56
Sum 64 16 7 106 1 2 196
Covered parking spaces are provided in the form of private garages in Buildings B1, B2, B3, C1, and C2 as well as detached, approximately 8-foot tall, covered carports with corrugated metal roofs and galvanized steel columns in the parking lot areas of Lots 2 and 3 (see Sheet A6.0 of Appendix 3-A).

Bicycle and Pedestrian Access and Circulation
Bicycle and Pedestrian access to the site is provided by way of existing facilities along Oddstad Boulevard including Class II bicycle lanes extending from south of the site at Terra Nova Boulevard to north of the site beyond at the terminus of Oddstad Boulevard, as well as existing sidewalks on both sides of Oddstad Boulevard for the extent of the public rightof-way. Upon entering the project site, bicyclists may utilize the proposed project roadways to access secure bicycle parking areas at the southeast portion of Lot 2 and the northwest portion of Lot 3. Sidewalks are proposed throughout the site including on either side of the entry roadway (Ciervo Lane), throughout the proposed parking areas, and adjacent to all

5.g
Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-12
proposed buildings. In addition to the main project entry, pedestrians may access the site via the proposed stairs along Oddstad Boulevard adjacent to Buildings B1 and B2, connecting to the remainder of the site via Conejo Lane.

Bicycle Parking
The project includes two common-use, enclosed bicycle parking areas each accommodating up to 18 bicycles, as well as a two bike racks each accommodating two bicycles located on the lower community patio adjacent to Lot 1, and one located adjacent to Ciervo Lane near the proposed office. In total, the project provides 40 bicycle parking spaces.

3.3.6 Landscaping, Lighting, Signage, and Fencing
Landscaping
An arborist report was prepared for the project by Jennifer Tso of Traverso Tree Service, dated March 18, 2020 documenting and evaluating all trees onsite, including those within 20-feet of the proposed development and along the Oddstad Boulevard street frontage. As noted in the arborist report, of the 27 trees surveyed, 22 are Monterey cypress, four are Monterey pine, and one is a Peruvian pepper. As proposed, the project will remove seven trees, including five Monterey cypress, one Monterey pine, and the Peruvian pepper.

In addition to removal and replacement of trees, the project proposes landscaping throughout the site including along the Oddstad Boulevard frontage, along the northern property boundary, between Lot 1 and Lot 2, in the parking area of Lot 1, and throughout the proposed parking and residential areas on Lots 2 and 3. The total landscaped area across the three proposed lots is 66,574 square feet, which accounts for approximately 12% of the

12.49-acre site and is inclusive of trees, shrubs, groundcovers, vines, and bioretention areas, all of which require low to moderate water use. Stormwater management is further discussed in Section 3.3.7, below.

Lighting
The project includes site and building lighting including 10- to 12-foot pole lights, three-foot bollard lights, flood lights directed toward proposed wayfinding and project identification signage, integrated under canopy lighting at proposed carports, and cylindrical wall sconces at the proposed buildings.

Signage
The project proposes an approximately 8.5-foot tall by 8-foot-wide project identification sign

5.g
Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-13
at the entrance to the residential portion of the site as well as an approximately 6-foot wayfinding sign located at the terminus of Ciervo Lane. See Figure 3-6 and Figure 3-7 for details on proposed signage.

FIGURE 3-6: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGN FIGURE 3-7: PROJECT WAYFINDING SIGNAGE Fencing
The project proposes to remove the existing chain link fencing located around the northern recreational field and will replace fencing in this area with a new fence consistent with the proposed residential use. Existing wood fencing located between residences to the north along Big Bend Drive and the project site will remain. Existing chain link fencing around the southern recreational field will be repaired and replaced as needed but will remain in its current design and location consistent with the existing and proposed recreational use. In addition, the project will install a four-foot decorative concrete masonry unit (CMU) retaining wall between Lot 1 and Building B1, a six-foot ornamental metal fence and gates with CMU and veneer pillars at the upper community patio located directly east of Building B1, and a CMU retaining wall ranging in height from 4- to 10-feet between the undeveloped eastern portions of Lots 2 and 3 and the proposed residential areas.

3.3.7 Stormwater Management
Stormwater management is required both during and after construction, throughout the life of a development project. Stormwater regulations are further discussed in 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality. The project’s proposed stormwater management during construction and at operation are discussed in detail below.

Construction
Consistent with the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP)

5.g
Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-14
and the State Water Board’s Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by Order 2010-0014-DWQ, the project will implement best management practices (BMPs) throughout construction of the project. BMPs to be implemented are detailed on Sheet C8.0 of Appendix 3-A and include several measures including installation of fiber rollers between the proposed development and the undeveloped area along the eastern portion of Lots 2 and 3 to prevent erosion of the sloped area, as well as installation of storm drain inlet protections to eliminate runoff of sediment, construction debris, and other materials into the storm drain system.

Operation
In addition to implementation of BMPs during construction, the SMCWPPP also requires stormwater management throughout operation of the project and can be satisfied through the use of self-retaining, self-treating, and bioretention areas. The project includes selfretaining areas (5,586 square feet), self-treating areas (299,861 square feet), and bioretention areas (6,949 square feet) across the three proposed lots.

Self-retaining areas are defined as portions of the development site that retain the first inch of rainfall without producing stormwater runoff and may also receive runoff from adjacent impervious areas of the site.5 The project contains one self-retaining area south of Ciervo Drive near the proposed office building.

Self-treating areas include portions of the development site where natural processes remove pollutants from stormwater.
6 The project includes five self-treating areas which comprise the majority of Lot 1, excluding the parking area, the undeveloped portions of Lots 2 and 3 along the eastern boundary of the site, and the northeast portion of Lot 3 adjacent to Building D.

Bioretention areas are a type of biotreatment measure designed to evapotranspirate or infiltrate stormwater with the remainder of runoff being filtered and released back into the storm drain system.7 The project includes five bioretention areas located throughout the site including a 221 square foot area between Building D and the northern property line, a 2,770 and 2,710 square foot areas between the parking area of Lot 1 and Building B1, and a 646 and 602 square foot areas located within the parking area of Lot 1. 5 C.3 Regulated Projects Guide, San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program, Version 1.0, January 2020, Glossary of Terms, page x.
6 Ibid., page x.
7 Ibid., page ii.

5.g
Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: Attachment G - Draft EIR (5327 : Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project - 930 Oddstad Blvd.)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-15

3.3.8 Utilities
The project will connect proposed onsite utility lines to existing water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain utilities located within the Oddstad Boulevard public right-of-way. To accommodate the proposed development, the project will install two new sewer laterals with manholes, four fire hydrants and water lines, three domestic water laterals (two eight-inch and one 2.5-inch), and one storm drain lateral within the Oddstad Boulevard public right-ofway. Proposed sewer laterals will connect from Conejo Lane (project roadway between Buildings B1 and B2) to Oddstad Boulevard, and from Ciervo Lane (residential project entry roadway) to Oddstad Boulevard. Fire hydrants and associated water lines will be evenly spaced within the right-of-way between Lots 2 and 3. Water laterals will extend from Ciervo Lane to Oddstad Boulevard, northwest of Building B2 to Oddstad Boulevard, and north of the bike storage area on Lot 3 to Oddstad Boulevard. The project proposes to connect to an existing storm drain outfall near the entry drive along Oddstad Boulevard, and existing storm drain outfall near the existing parking lot adjacent to the southern recreational field. A new storm drain lateral will be constructed adjacent to the northern project boundary and will extend to the existing storm drain located within the Oddstad Boulevard right-of-way.

Pacifica City CouncilApril 24, 2023

Pacifica City Council
April 24, 2023