1 ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING REZONING RZ-205-20 AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN DP-81-20 TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT (P-D) ZONING DISTRICT WITH DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT 70 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT 930 ODDSTAD BOULEVARD (APN 023-672-600) (FILE NO. 2020- 009)
WHEREAS, the Pacifica School District (“Applicant”) has submitted an application 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 Planning Commission of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 2023-006 recommending City Council approval of the Rezoning, Development Plan and Development Agreement on March 20, 2023, and separately certified a final environmental impact report (“EIR”) including a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), findings of fact, and statement of overriding considerations and approved certain development permits including Specific Plan-173-20, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map SUB-248-20, and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization to authorize construction and operation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. __________ on April 24, 2023, to certify a final environmental impact report (“EIR”) including a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), findings of fact, and statement of overriding considerations for the Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2021100457); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica held a duly noticed public hearing on April 24, 2023, and introduced this Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pacifica does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find that the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. __________ on April 24, 2023, to certify a final environmental impact report (“EIR”) including a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), findings of fact, and statement of overriding considerations for the Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2021100457).
Section 3. Findings. Specific findings of fact for approval of Rezoning RZ-205-20 and Development Plan DP-81-20 are as follows:
2 Rezoning RZ-205-20
• 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). • 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 3 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 Planning Commission 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 City Council 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.
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.
Development Plan DP-81-20
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.
4 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.
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 5 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 CII-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. 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:
• 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, 6 schools, and community uses are permitted. Clusters of small-lot development as well as standard subdivisions may be allowed.
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. • 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.
7 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, threefoot 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 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.
8 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, 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.
9 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.
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. 10 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.
Section 4. Reclassification. Section Map 36 of the Zoning Map of the City of Pacifica, as described in Section 9-4.302 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, is hereby amended as depicted in Exhibit 1 to this Ordinance. The specific area affected by this reclassification is more particularly described in the legal description included as Exhibit 2 to this Ordinance.
Section 5. Development Plan. The approved Development Plan DP-81-20 for the Project site, which shall be implemented through the development more particularly set forth in a specific plan approved in accordance with Article 22 of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, shall be as set forth in the following Table 1 and Table 2:
11 TABLE 1
Standard Approved
Use Lot 1 of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
• Active and passive recreation including
improved parkland and sports fields,
but not including nighttime
illumination of sports fields.
• Accessory buildings and structures
incidental to authorized recreational
uses, including but not limited to trash
enclosures, uncovered off-street
parking facilities, bicycle
parking/storage,
vehicular/pedestrian/bicycle circulation
improvements, restroom/changing
room facilities, and snack kiosk for the
vending of food to recreational facility
users during periods of active
recreation such as organized sporting
events.
Lot 1 of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
Standard Approved
Lot Size No minimum/maximum
Lot Width No minimum/maximum
Lot Coverage (max.) Buildings: 10%
Landscaping (Planting
area+Undisturbed Natural
Vegetation) (min.)
20%
Setbacks No minimum/maximum
Height (max.) 35’-0”
Off-street Parking (min.) 40 uncovered spaces
12 TABLE 2
Standard Approved
Use Lots 2 and 3 of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
• Multiple-family dwellings not to
exceed 70 dwelling units.
• Accessory buildings and structures
appurtenant to multiple-family
residential development, including but
not limited to trash enclosures, offstreet parking facilities including garages/carports and bicycle
parking/storage,
vehicular/pedestrian/bicycle circulation
improvements.
• The following accessory buildings and
structures incidental to recreational
uses authorized on Lot 1 of the Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map:
restroom/changing room facilities, and
snack kiosk for the vending of food to
recreational facility users during
periods of active recreation such as
organized sporting events.
Lots 2 and 3 of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
Standard Approved
Lot Size (min.) 5,000 square feet
Lot Area Per Dwelling
Unit (min.)
2,075 square feet
Lot Width (min.) 50 feet
Lot Coverage (max.) 60%
Landscaping (Planting
area+Undisturbed Natural
Vegetation) (min.)
20%
Setbacks (min.)
Front 15’-0”
Side
Street-side
5’-0”
10’-0”
Rear 20’-0”
13 Height (max.) 35’-0”
Off-street Parking (min.) 53 covered parking (garage or carport) and 43 uncovered spaces
Usable Open Space (min.) 400 square feet per dwelling unit Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following its passage and adoption.
Section 8. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, and cause the same to be published once in The Pacifica Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Pacifica, California.
* * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2023, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney 4894-1736-5854 v1
EXHIBIT 1
Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project
File No. 2020-009: 930 Oddstad Blvd. (APN 023-672-600)
4894-1736-5854 v1
EXHIBIT 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
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;
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;
Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project
File No. 2020-009: 930 Oddstad Blvd. (APN 023-672-600)
4894-1736-5854 v1
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.
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
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 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;
Pacifica School District Workforce Housing Project
File No. 2020-009: 930 Oddstad Blvd. (APN 023-672-600)
4894-1736-5854 v1
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.
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 right-of-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.
Containing 121,203 square feet or 2.78 acres, more or less.