1 From: Peter Loeb < >
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 11:06 AM
To: Public Comment
Subject: Comments re: Housing Element joint study session Attachments: PH4A Housing Element policies.pdf; HCD revisions.pdf [CAUTION: External Email]
Attached 2 pdf’s and same text pasted in below summarize 1) Pacifica Housing 4 All (PH4A) recommended policies for preserving, protecting, and producing housing for tenants and low income and affordable housing, and 2) summary of HCD’s required revisions to address special needs populations, persons with disabilities, emergency shelter and supportive and transitional housing, housing for all income levels, farmworkers, and preserving coastal housing for lower-income households.
Pacifica Housing 4 All
Recommended Policies for Housing Element Consideration
Policies for tenant protection and preservation of affordable housing • Rental registry. Example: Concord, cost $5-15 per unit. Advantages: data source, track complaints, track displacement indicators referenced in Sharp Park Specific Plan, AirB&B tax compliance.
• Anti-harassment ordinance, City of Richmond, January 2022. • Red Tag Ordinance, City of San Mateo, requires property owners to provide relocation payments to tenants displaced because of code violations. • Short term rental regulations linked to vacancy rate, below 5% vacancy. • Substantial renovation ordinance: pulled permits required before tenant eviction, tenant first right of return, tenant 3 month relocation benefits. • Just cause eviction protection from 1st day of rental. • Developer buyout allowing tenants first opportunity of purchase.
Policies to incentivize low-income housing
• Increase inclusionary rate to 20% to produce more low-income housing. In-lieu fees should be based on market values ($750K/unit) • Create dedicated housing fund supported by:
1. Vacancy fee: all residential properties, NOT just rental properties – see Sand Francisco, Oakland, Vancouver BC 2017 – 1% non-primary residence unoccupied for more than 6 months annually including short term rentals.
2. In lieu fees, developer impact fees (to benefit low income housing), sale of city land. • Pathway for preservation of existing affordable housing – HIP housing and HEART: to leverage funds from dedicated housing fund. Redwood City has an established system to be ready in the event an opportunity for affordable housing presents.
Dept. of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
comments on Pacifica’s Housing Element
HCD sent a cover letter and 12-page appendix listing required revisions to the Housing Element. HCD was critical of Pacifica’s plans for special needs populations and the need for transitional and supportive housing, and that zoning doesn’t address emergency shelter, and programs to achieve moderate to extremely low income housing. These comments are summarized below. There were many other required revisions in other areas.
Special needs populations. “The element must be revised to include an analysis of the existing needs and resources for each special need group including seniors, farmworkers, large households, and persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities and extremely low-income (ELI) households.”
2 Emergency Shelters. “Zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action was required as part of the 4th cycle housing element and prior to the 5th cycle housing element.” “HCD cannot find the element in compliance until the appropriate zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action is demonstrated or completed.” Transitional and Supportive Housing. “Transitional housing and supportive housing must be permitted as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.” Housing for all income levels. “An analysis of … governmental constraints … upon development of housing for all income levels … and for persons with disabilities.” “Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing.” Programs for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income housing. “The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income households.” Farmworker housing. “Given the importance of farmworkers and the local and regional needs, the element must include specific actions to addressing this population. Examples of actions could include proactive outreach with developers and the community, identifying potential sites, provide incentives (e.g., expedited permitting, flexible development standards, gap funding, fee waivers), and applying for state and federal funding.” Preserve coastal housing units for lower- and moderate-income households. “The element should include a program committing to actions that preserve coastal housing units for lower- and moderate-income households.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
Pacifica Housing 4 All
Recommended Policies for Housing Element Consideration
Policies for tenant protection and preservation of affordable housing • Rental registry. Example: Concord, cost $5-15 per unit. Advantages: data source, track complaints, track displacement indicators referenced in Sharp Park Specific Plan, AirB&B tax compliance.
• Anti-harassment ordinance, City of Richmond, January 2022. • Red Tag Ordinance, City of San Mateo, requires property owners to provide relocation payments to tenants displaced because of code violations. • Short term rental regulations linked to vacancy rate, below 5% vacancy. • Substantial renovation ordinance: pulled permits required before tenant eviction, tenant first right of return, tenant 3 month relocation benefits.
• Just cause eviction protection from 1st day of rental. • Developer buyout allowing tenants first opportunity of purchase.
Policies to incentivize low-income housing
• Increase inclusionary rate to 20% to produce more low-income housing. In-lieu fees should be based on market values ($750K/unit)
• Create dedicated housing fund supported by:
1. Vacancy fee: all residential properties, NOT just rental properties – see Sand Francisco, Oakland, Vancouver BC 2017 – 1% non-primary residence unoccupied for more than 6 months annually including short term rentals.
2. In lieu fees, developer impact fees (to benefit low income housing), sale of city land. • Pathway for preservation of existing affordable housing – HIP housing and HEART: to leverage funds from dedicated housing fund. Redwood City has an established system to be ready in the event an opportunity for affordable housing presents.
Dept. of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
comments on Pacifica’s Housing Element
HCD sent a cover letter and 12-page appendix listing required revisions to the Housing Element.
HCD was critical of Pacifica’s plans for special needs populations and the need for transitional and supportive housing, and that zoning doesn’t address emergency shelter, and programs to achieve moderate to extremely low income housing. These comments are summarized below.
There were many other required revisions in other areas.
Special needs populations. “The element must be revised to include an analysis of the existing needs and resources for each special need group including seniors, farmworkers, large households, and persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities and extremely low-income (ELI) households.”
Emergency Shelters. “Zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action was required as part of the 4th cycle housing element and prior to the 5th cycle housing element.” “HCD cannot find the element in compliance until the appropriate zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action is demonstrated or completed.” Transitional and Supportive Housing. “Transitional housing and supportive housing must be permitted as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.” Housing for all income levels. “An analysis of … governmental constraints … upon development of housing for all income levels … and for persons with disabilities.” “Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing.”
Programs for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income housing. “The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income households.” Farmworker housing. “Given the importance of farmworkers and the local and regional needs, the element must include specific actions to addressing this population. Examples of actions could include proactive outreach with developers and the community, identifying potential sites, provide incentives (e.g., expedited permitting, flexible development standards, gap funding, fee waivers), and applying for state and federal funding.”
Preserve coastal housing units for lower- and moderate-income households. “The element should include a program committing to actions that preserve coastal housing units for lowerand moderate-income households. 1 From: Sue Digre < >
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 11:48 AM
To: Public Comment
Subject: Fwd: HOUSING ELEMENT. for Developmental Disabilities 9 25 2023 [CAUTION: External Email]
Regarding :
Disposition of City owned land; award of financing; density bonus concessions,land use exceptions or waivers for any affordable project:
City: require that the housing developer implement an affirmative marketing plan that provides disabilityserving organizations adequate prior notice of availability; and a process for supporting people with qualifying disabilities to apply.
Note persons who have a developmental disability are included and do have some additional core agencies of assistance that must be approptiately notified.
The City too should have responsibility to do thourough,timely outreach to the Golden Gate Regional Center and the Vendorized Agencies that provide appropriate wrap around services. Including Brilliant Corners Housing & Housing Choices.
... regarding persons who have a developmental disability:
In addition to implementing the Calif density bonus statute ,the City shall provide an additional LOCAL density bonus , incentives and/or concessions for housing projects that include at least 5% of the units for people at the Extremely lowincome Affordability level.
Or.
Commit to make a percentage of the units subject to a preference for people with special needs, persons who have a developmental disability. (Persons who have a developmental disability will benefit from COORDINATED ON SITE SERVICES , such as services from the State GoldenGate Regional Center, which vendorizes assisting services).
A strong collaboration with these core agencies should be involved for appropriate & effective partnership. ..The same type of language should be in the competitive proposals for City owned land dedicated to affordable housing under the Inclusionary Ordinances .
Offer Developers a menu of options for achieving truly affordability.
Adjust the percentage of units required to be affordable for persons who have a developmental disability who will benefit from coordinated on-site services provided by the local State Regional Center & its Vendorized Agencies for supportive services.
These collaboration, partnership like relationships can enable the City to reach some significant priority housing gaps. ..Grant additional points to proposals that address the housing needs those who are most difficult to house .( those who haveva developmental disability)
2 ...City include plans to Further Fair Housing particularly those with disabilities ,including developmental disabilities, that include policies designed to increase the production extremely low income units . ( Vendorized GGRC Agencies provide assistance services). ...Include adequate staff capacity to implement and monitor the impact of these policies.
A strong collaboration with the local Golden Gate Regional Center and their Vendorized Service Agencies is imperative.
The State Department on Developmental Disabilities can be a supportive Govt.Agency .They oversee the Regional Centers.
..A goal of 30 new extremely low-income housing units for Pacifica residents with a developmental disability over the HE period would represent meaningful progress .
(Persons who have a developmental disability are eager to be positive , contributing members of their Community.) .....consider similar " set asides", preference, incentives, points for extremely low-income Accessory Dwelling Units ., esp for persons who a developmental disability & wrap around services . ..CIty establish on on-going funding source for financing Extremely-low income units for persons who have a developmental disability.
...Transportation. Most persons who have a developmental disability can not drive. Public transportation can be essential.
The City collaboration with GGRC the State Regional Center and the County &,Regional Transportation Agencies can worked together to improve Public Transportation for everyone. Ridership important for sustainability. These core agencies planning together can have a better probability of creating a sustainable shared transportation endeavor for everyone. The Regional Center does have a Transportation Vendor. All public transportation services need such collaborative type partnership to make significant changes in our City & area cities.
City should have a staff member dedicated to following through on these new comprehensive "partnership". It will take diligence & leadership. The goods are available.
Kalisha of Housing Choices submitted an excellent report. Please refer to it CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
From: Harkousha, Brianne
To: Harkousha, Brianne
Subject: FW: HOUSING ELEMENT for Developmental Disabilities Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:23:04 AM
From: Sue Digre
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 11:52 AM
To: Housing <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: HOUSING ELEMENT for Developmental Disabilities [CAUTION: External Email]
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sue Digre
Date: Mon, Sep 25, 2023, 11:46 AM
Subject: HOUSING ELEMENT for Developmental Disabilities To: Sue Digre
Regarding :
Disposition of City owned land; award of financing; density bonus concessions,land use exceptions or waivers for any affordable project:
City: require that the housing developer implement an affirmative marketing plan that provides disability-serving organizations adequate prior notice of availability; and a process for supporting people with qualifying disabilities to apply.
Note persons who have a developmental disability are included and do have some additional core agencies of assistance that must be approptiately notified.
The City too should have responsibility to do thourough,timely outreach to the Golden Gate Regional Center and the Vendorized Agencies that provide appropriate wrap around services. ... regarding persons who have a developmental disability:
In addition to implementing the Calif density bonus statute ,the City shall provide an additional LOCAL density bonus , incentives and/or concessions for housing projects that include at least 5% of the units for people at the Extremely low-income Affordability level.
Or.
Commit to make a percentage of the units subject to a preference for people with special needs, persons who have a developmental disability. (Persons who have a developmental disability will benefit from COORDINATED ON SITE SERVICES , such as services from the State GoldenGate Regional Center, which vendorizes assisting services).
A strong collaboration with these core agencies should be involved for appropriate & effective partnership.
..The same type of language should be in the competitive proposals for City owned land dedicated to affordable housing under the Inclusionary Ordinances .
Offer Developers a menu of options for achieving truly affordability.
Adjust the percentage of units required to be affordable for persons who have a developmental disability who will benefit from coordinated on-site services provided by the local State Regional Center & its Vendorized Agencies for supportive services.
These collaboration, partnership like relationships can enable the City to reach some significant priority housing gaps.
..Grant additional points to proposals that address the housing needs those who are most difficult to house .( those who haveva developmental disability)
...City include plans to Further Fair Housing particularly those with disabilities ,including developmental disabilities, that include policies designed to increase the production extremely low income units .
( Vendorized GGRC Agencies provide assistance services). ...Include adequate staff capacity to implement and monitor the impact of these policies.
A strong collaboration with the local Golden Gate Regional Center and their Vendorized Service Agencies is imperative.
The State Department on Developmental Disabilities can be a supportive Govt.Agency .They oversee the Regional Centers.
..A goal of 30 new extremely low-income housing units for Pacifica residents with a developmental disability over the HE period would represent meaningful progress . (Persons who have a developmental disability are eager to be positive , contributing members of their Community.)
.....consider similar " set asides", preference, incentives, points for extremely low-income Accessory Dwelling Units ., esp for persons who a developmental disability & wrap around services . ..CIty establish on on-going funding source for financing Extremely-low income units for persons who have a developmental disability.
...Transportation. Most persons who have a developmental disability can not drive. Public transportation can be essential.
The City collaboration with GGRC the State Regional Center and the County &,Regional Transportation Agencies can worked together to improve Public Transportation for everyone.
Ridership important for sustainability. These core agencies planning together can have a better probability of creating a sustainable shared transportation endeavor for everyone. The Regional Center does have a Transportation Vendor. All public transportation services need such collaborative type partnership to make significant changes in our City & area cities.
City should have a staff member dedicated to following through on these new comprehensive "partnership". It will take diligence & leadership. The goods are available.
Kalisha of Housing Choices submitted an excellent report. Please refer to it CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
1 From: Pat Kremer < >
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 11:57 AM
To: Public Comment; _City Council
Cc: Pat Kremer
Subject: Comments for Study Session Sept. 25
Attachments: PatriciaKremerComments.pdf
[CAUTION: External Email]
I have attached a memo fort distribution to the members of the Pacifica City Council, Planning Commission and staff of the Planning Department.
Regards,
Patricia Kremer
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
To: City of Pacifica City Council, Planning Commission, Planning Department
From: Patricia Kremer (5 Eastlake Avenue, Sharp Park)
Date: September 25, 2023
Subject: Housing Element Study Session
Since the first version of the Draft Housing Element, I have been particularly interested in the Tables that have included lists of potential RHNA Sites with information about zoning status and proposed income distribution of the proposed housing units (Lower –> Above-Moderate). My comments and questions pertain to the RHNA Tables included in the packet for tonight’s Joint Study Session.
What is the status of each of these sites, both “CORE” and “BUFFER”, with respect to how realistic the specific site is to be developed with residential housing during the next several years? How close is the property to being “shovel ready”? It is surprising to me that the Draft Housing Element from May 2023 included very detailed information about each of the sites in Appendix F, while stating: “The analysis does not include the economic feasibility of specific sites, nor does it take into consideration the owner’s intended use of the land now or in the future. It does not dictate where residential development will actually occur, and the decision whether to develop any particular site always remains with the owner of the property, not the City.”
During the Scoping Meeting on Aug. 1, 2023, I was surprised to learn that not all the owners of the “Opportunity Sites” listed in the revised Housing Element Draft from May 2023 had been consulted about being included as part of the City’s RHNA list.
This seems to me to be irresponsible on the part of the City that specific information about numbers of units in a range of income levels is included in the Tables of CORE and BUFFER RHNA Sites without input from the owners of the properties.
In looking at the Tables included for tonight’s meeting, many of the numbers were changed from earlier Tables in Appendix F in the May 2023 Draft. That is not surprising, and most of the changes were relatively minor. The change for the Sea Bowl (Site #36) was dramatic however. The May HE Draft included 219 units of “Lower Income Capacity” while the current Table shows 186 “Above Moderate-Income Capacity” with only 17 units as “Lower-Income”. I hope someone at tonight’s meeting inquires about the justification for the original data and for the change.
2 Special needs populations. “The element must be revised to include an analysis of the existing needs and resources for each special need group including seniors, farmworkers, large households, and persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities and extremely low-income (ELI) households.”
Emergency Shelters. “Zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action was required as part of the 4th cycle housing element and prior to the 5th cycle housing element.” “HCD cannot find the element in compliance until the appropriate zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action is demonstrated or completed.” Transitional and Supportive Housing. “Transitional housing and supportive housing must be permitted as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.” Housing for all income levels. “An analysis of … governmental constraints … upon development of housing for all income levels … and for persons with disabilities.” “Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing.” Programs for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income housing. “The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income households.” Farmworker housing. “Given the importance of farmworkers and the local and regional needs, the element must include specific actions to addressing this population. Examples of actions could include proactive outreach with developers and the community, identifying potential sites, provide incentives (e.g., expedited permitting, flexible development standards, gap funding, fee waivers), and applying for state and federal funding.”
Preserve coastal housing units for lower- and moderate-income households. “The element should include a program committing to actions that preserve coastal housing units for lower- and moderate-income households. --
Suzanne Moore
Home
Cell
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
From: Harkousha, Brianne
To: Harkousha, Brianne
Subject: FW: Pacifica CA input 2nd draft Housing Element Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:22:50 AM
From: Suzanne Moore
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:49 PM
To: Housing <[email protected]>; [email protected]; _Planning Commission Group <[email protected]>; _City Council <[email protected]> Subject: Pacifica CA input 2nd draft Housing Element
[CAUTION: External Email]
Suzanne Moore from the Manor, and member of Pacifica Housing 4 All.
It’s been several years since the Association of Bay Area Governments promoted the 3 Ps to address our regional housing crisis: production of housing at all levels of affordability, preservation of existing low-income, affordable housing, and protection from displacement.
Those recommendations are visibly present in California’s Fair Housing Law, and the HCD looks for evidence of this as they evaluate Housing Elements.
Pacifica’s Housing Element needs assessment was clear: Pacifica 1) has not built low-income housing in decades,
2) Pacifica’s homeless numbers are 3rd in the county: Pacifica is 5% of the County’s population but has 15% of the homeless - of which nearly 75% have strong ties to Pacifica and many of whom were previously housed here.
3) Pacifica’s tenants face difficult challenges:
- rents increased and wages stagnated: median contract rent increased 62% since 2009 - rental market in Pacifica is constrained partially due to vacation rentals - Some populations are disproportionately impacted by housing costs: female headed households, seniors, disabled, farmworkers, low-wage earners, homeless, Hispanics The HCD response letter made several important suggestions:
1)Pacifica’s Housing Element must provide a cumulative evaluation of the effectiveness of past goals, policies, and related actions in meeting the housing needs of special needs populations (e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, female-headed households, farmworkers, and persons experiencing homelessness). 2) Emergency Shelters: Zoning to permit emergency shelters without discretionary action was required as part of the 4th cycle housing element and prior to the 5th cycle housing element. The element states that the City’s zoning regulations do not address emergency shelters (p. G-16) and the City will include a program committing to comply with Government Code section 65583, subdivision
3) Transitional and Supportive Housing: Transitional housing and supportive housing must be permitted as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.
4) The element includes general commitments to addressing various special needs populations. However, given the importance of farmworkers and the local and regional needs, the element must include specific actions to address this population.
Here is input from the Housing Leadership Council:
All of the elaborate research that makes up Housing Elements are supposed to lead to policy outcomes that respond to what the city learns. The analyses alone cannot make a housing element comply with state law, only appropriate policy change can.
Taking all these recommendations together, I feel it is necessary for our Housing Element to promote what we have failed to achieve and what our community lacks:
protection, preservation and production with the priority goal of assisting those most vulnerable.
Protection: Anti-displacement measures successfully demonstrated in other communities:
just cause for eviction, anti-harassment language,
Preservation. Utilize existing housing to create:
- interim housing and programs as transitions from homelessness, - supportive housing for those in need of additional help to maintain independence, - short-term rental regulations.
Production:
- create a clear pathway to incentivize below-market rate housing priorities. - streamline what is most desperately needed,
- create a specialized team: HCD recommends examples of actions like proactive outreach with developers and the community, identify potential sites, provide incentives (e.g., expedite permitting, flexible development standards, gap funding, fee waivers), and apply for state and federal funding.
Housing is necessary for the life and health of the individual, families, and the community as a whole. Our Housing Element must address past failures and prioritize what Pacifica needs most: stable housing especially at below-market rate levels of affordability. --
Suzanne Moore
Home
Cell
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
1 From: Samuel Casillas
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 7:40 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: Item 1.) 9/25/23 Joint study session of City Council and Planning Commission for 2023-2031 Housing Element
Attachments: Housing Element comments for joint meeting 9 25 2023.docx [CAUTION: External Email]
Hello,
Please enter my public comment for the joint session to discuss the Housing Element.
Thank you,
Sam Casillas
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.
Housing Element comments for Pacifica
The current housing element is not acceptable due to the fact that there is actually no approved general plan as the LCLUP has not been approved by the California Coastal Commission, the proposed EIR format will be inadequate as it is not properly outlining how hazards, traffic mitigation and water issues will not be properly addressed and therefore violate CEQA. We also need to consider economic sustainability for the city itself.
On the economic sustainability question the SeaBowl site #36 is particularly problematic. In order to accommodate 200+ housing units here it is being discussed that the SeaBowl venue would have to be demolished and thus eliminating Pacifica’s only family friendly tax revenue generating venue. Does it make sense to eliminate tax revenue generating businesses? Remember that this site would need to be rezoned in order to allow housing so the city can dictate to a developer that housing needs to be built around the SeaBowl so that we can preserve some of our sales tax revenue base.
We need to honestly discuss what the impact of taking this venue out of our tax base to put up more nonrevenue generating housing that will only cost us more economic hardship as any well executed Cost of Service Study (COS) will point out.
This committee should be studying and recommending how to keep venues that generate tax revenue for the city and not eliminating them. The SeaBowl site is a prime example of whether we have thoughtful city leadership that is serious about building a sustainable economy or just acquiescing to real estate lobbying interests.
I realize that economic sustainability is not a legal challenge to this housing element but the fact that we will need a well vetting EIR that considers traffic mitigation, wastewater treatment plant expansion, hazard areas including fire, landslides ESHA flooding and drinking water availability are issues that will take this plan down.
Thank you,
Sam Casillas
1 From: Mickey Mouse
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 9:49 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: Fwd: For September 25th 2023 meeting.
[CAUTION: External Email]
To:
Begin
To: [email protected]
Subject: For September 25th 2023 meeting.
For todays meeting:
SPECIAL MEETING for
JOINT STUDY SESSION CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION It would be reckless to assume building housing at the Oceana High School. Many if not all residence in the Oceana High School area see this area as neighborhood courtyard. People from other surrounding neighborhoods come as well to use the field Site#21 as recreation on a daily basis. Please look elsewhere for land to develop.
One such piece of property that I can recommend is just south of WestPort Dr. and North of Mori RidgeTrail off Hwy 1 (North Bound)on the east side (of HWY 1), this property is just as big as the Oceana High School. Why not try and obtain that property? Furthermore, we are unfairly represented (us people near Oceana High School) because we are a few. Do any city council people or planners live in the valley where Oceana High is located? I doubt it. If they did, they wouldn’t want this neighborhood to be destroyed by senseless overdevelopment of this neighborhood.
Pacifican Resident
Rocky Rome
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Pacifica. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, do not click links, open attachments or reply.