Pacifica City Council
June 26, 2024

Contemporary Native American Resources
As part of the General Plan and Local Coastal Land Use Plan update process, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a record search of the sacred lands file in 20092020. The search failed to indicate the did not indicate the presence of additional Native American cultural resources within the Planning Area. The NAHC response listed six tribes that may have historic ties to the Planning Area, and letters of inquiry were sent to the six tribal representatives; however, no responses were received. 12 California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), 2009

1.e
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE PROTECTION
4-33
Policies
Guiding Policies
ER-G-12 Historic and Cultural Sites. Conserve designated historic and cultural sites and structures that help define Pacifica’s identity and character and increase public awareness and appreciation for them.

ER-G-13 Ensure Mitigation. Require mitigation for any new development that would adversely affect historic, cultural, archaeological or paleontological resources.

Implementing Policies
Resource Impact Mitigation. Ensure that new development analyzes and avoids potential impacts to historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources by:
• Conducting tribal consultations as required by law;
• Requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are considered archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive;
• Requiring pre-construction surveys and monitoring during any ground disturbance for all development in areas of historic or archaeological sensitivity; and • Implementing appropriate measures as a condition of project approval—such as avoidance, preservation in place, and excavation,—to reduce or avoid impacts.

In the event that historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources are accidentally discovered during construction, grading activity in the immediate area shall cease and materials and their surroundings shall not be altered or collected. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist must make an immediate evaluation and avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation should be completed, according to CEQA Guidelines. The State Office of Historic Preservation has issued recommendations for the preparation of Archaeological Resource Management Reports that may be used as guidelines.

Native American Sites. Work with local Native American tribes to protect recorded and unrecorded cultural and sacred sites, and educate developers and the community-at-large about the connections between Native American history and the environmental features that characterize the local landscape.

Development on archaeologically sensitive sites requires on-site monitoring by appropriate Native American consultant(s) and a qualified archaeologist of all grading, excavation, and site preparation activities that involve earth-moving operations.

4.6 SCENIC AND VISUAL QUALITIES
The Coastal Act provides a framework for protecting scenic views and enhancing the visual quality of the “visually degraded areas,” by siting and designing development to protect views, protecting natural landforms, and other means (Section 30251). Section 30253 identifies the need to protect “special communities or neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses.”

1.e
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 4-34
Hillside Preservation
To protect important views from public areas and the sensitive terrain of hillside areas, the City has special development regulations for the Hillside Preservation District (HPD), which requires submission of development plans, grading plans, and other documentation. Hillside development also receives special consideration in the Design Guidelines, which are used to evaluate proposed projects. The key issues for hillside development are slope stability, grading, and visual impact.

Prominent ridgelines are identified based on their visual importance or scenic quality. Owners must focus development on suitable portions of their property off the ridges, to protect the scenic quality of ridgelines, except where ridgelines are the only buildable portions of the property. Prominent ridgelines are shown on Figure 4-4.

Coastal Development
The sensitive natural and visual resources of hillsides also apply to the undeveloped coastal bluffs and promontories, including the Northern Coastal Bluffs, the Quarry site uplands, and Rockaway Headlands.

Developed coastal areas also require special attention, not only because of their natural features but also for their potential as visitor destinations. The City’s Coastal Zone Combining District (CZ) ensures that the goals and policies of the California Coastal Act are followed. These goals include the protection and enhancement of the coastal environment, including its visual resources. Coastal development is also among the special issues treated by Pacifica’s Design Guidelines.

Three promontories dominate Pacifica's Coastal Zone and visually represent the coastal character of Pacifica.

These landforms—Pedro Point Headlands, Rockaway Headlands, and Mori Point (including the Quarry site uplands)—are shown on Figure 4-4. While much of this area has been permanently preserved, development may occur on the Rockaway Headlands or the Quarry site.

Views to the ocean and along the panoramic coastline are an integral part of Pacifica’s character, and a part that must be preserved for the future. Of primary importance are views of the ocean, landforms, and special coastal communities from public roadways, trails, and vista points. Important coastal view corridors are identified on Figure 4-4.

Scenic Routes
The State and County have identified Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road in Pacifica as eligible for scenic highway designation. Local scenic roadway designation requires a corridor study, a program to enhance the scenic qualities, and adoption of the scenic roadway designation and its protection plan. Such a plan may be prepared in the future. For the purpose of this Plan, what is important is that the scenic qualities of these roadways are preserved and enhanced.

Viewsheds
Highway 1 plays an important role in defining the image of Pacifica, creating a visual narrative for the traveler from one end of the City to the other. Sharp Park Road also represents an important visual summary of Pacifica, drawing travelers from the ridgeline at Skyline Boulevard to the coast, with views out to the Ocean and over the Sharp Park neighborhood and Golf Course. Several specific viewsheds coastal view corridors from Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road are shown on Figure 4-4. Other defining views include the view over the West Sharp Park district and Pacifica Pier from Highway 1; views toward Cattle Hill and Fassler Ridge from Highway 1; and the view to the ocean from Grace McCarthy Vista Point on Sharp Park Road.

4.17A

1.e
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE PROTECTION
4-35
Roadway Enhancements
In addition to viewsheds from these roads, the character of the roadways themselves shapes visitors’ and residents’ experience of Pacifica. The appearance of the Coast Highway right-of-way in central Pacifica can be improved as part of roadway beautification projects in partnership with CalransCaltransthe Calera Parkway project. Other future improvements to the visual character of the Highway can include new and improved pedestrian over-crossings, and multi-use trails leading to the Devil’s Slide area. On Sharp Park Road, completion of bicycle improvements will improve the character of this roadway and make its scenic quality available to cyclists.

Development Character in the Highway 1 Corridor
Future development along Highway 1 will also influence the scenic qualities of the corridor.. Development can create a strong presence along the Highway, and harmonious transitions to adjacent neighborhoods. All new commercial development requires site development review, assisted by the Design Guidelines. As part of updating thetThe Guidelines will, the City should provide direction on how buildings should relate to Highway 1., at different segments of the Highway.

Gateways
Pacifica is introduced to southbound travelers with the experience of coming over the hill and seeing the expansive coastal vista. Northbound travelers come through the Devil’s Slide Tunnel, wind around the forested Pedro Point Headlands, and arrive at the active intersection with Linda Mar Boulevard. Skyline Boulevard acts as a coherent eastern boundary for the City, as it travels along the crest of the ridge with mature trees along its edges. From Skyline, Pacifica is entered via Sharp Park Road, Manor Drive, and Hickey Boulevard. While the “gateways” into Pacifica are strong, entry points from the east can be made stronger, and all entries treated with a consistent signage theme. Gateway locations are shown on Figure 4-4.

1.e
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 4-36
Figure 4-4: Visual Resources

1.e
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE PROTECTION
4-37
Policies
Guiding Policies
ER-G-14 Hillsides and Prominent Ridgelines. Maintain development standards that ensure that new development does not detract from the visual qualities (e.g.,shape, form) of Pacifica’s hillsides and visually prominent ridgelines.

ER-G-15 Scenic and Visual Amenities of the Coastal Zone. Protect the City’s irreplaceable scenic and visual amenities in the Coastal Zone by protecting landforms, vegetation, special communities, and important viewsheds.

ER-G-16 Views from Scenic Routes. Ensure that designated viewsheds from Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road are preserved and enhanced. These views are an essential part of Pacifica’s identity.

ER-G-17 Gateways. Create strong entrances and preserve the quality of the viewshedalong viewshed along primary travel routes, in particular along the coast.

Implementing Policies

HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
Minimize Visual Impacts of Hillside Development. Require new development to employ innovative site planning, engineering and design techniques that:
• Seek first to avoid impacts to scenic resources onhillside landforms through site planning and design;
• Minimize grading and conform with natural landforms to the greatest extent possible; • Design structures so that they follow contours and limit their downslope exposure; and
• Use landscaping to screen and integrate buildings with the natural environment.

Protection of Ridgelines. Protect visually prominent ridgelines from residential and commercial development.

Local access roads and trails may be allowed on visually prominent ridgelines provided they follow contours, minimize grading, and are unobtrusive in their design.

Hillside Preservation District Requirements. Continue to implement the requirements of the Hillside Preservation District (HPD), including submission of siting and grading plans.

Update the HPD to ensure that all steep slopes are covered and that sites on other terrain are not included.

Design Review. Continue to use Design Guidelines to evaluate proposed projects in Planned Development, Hillside Development, and Special districts.

1.e
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 4-38

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
Minimize Impacts of Coastal Development on Landforms. Ensure that negative visual impacts resulting from new development in the Coastal Zone are minimized inn areas characterized by bluffs and landforms. Strategies to implement this policy include:
• Prohibiting development on slopes in excess of 35 percent and highly visible tops of prominent landforms;
• Requiring blufftop development to minimize impacts on the view from the ocean and beach below by implementing an appropriate setback from the bluff edge based on existing and projected height and location of the bluff edge from the beach; • Requiring that development be clustered and contoured into the existing slope; and • Requiring that new development be scaled and designed to be subordinate to landforms in the Coastal Zone.

Minimize Impacts of Coastal Development on Vegetation. Continue to require that disturbance to vegetation be minimized in new development and that graded areas be promptly replanted with native vegetation.

Headlands Special Area. In the zoning ordinancecode, update the Headlands Special Area for Aramai Pointthe Rockaway Headlands, to specify low-intensity visitor-serving uses such as hikers' huts and kiosks. A view restaurant may be appropriate if access can be created without harming biological or scenic resources.

Rockaway Quarry Site. Development on the Quarry site should be prioritized in the “flats” and should connect with the adjacent Rockaway Beach district. Development in areas of the Quarry site that would impact the visual qualities of surrounding hillsides or ridgelines should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible.

Trail Design on Coastal Headlands and Bluffs. Develop new trails on Pedro Point Headlands, the Rockaway HeadlandsAramai Point, the Quarry site uplands, and the Northern Coastal Bluffs in such a way that native vegetation is protected by limiting pedestrians to designated trails and preventing access by motorized vehicles.

Underground Utilities. Continue to require underground utilities in all new development.

New developments should include undergrounding For existing developed areas within scenic corridors, prioritize the relocation (e.g., undergrounding) of existing abovegroundoverhead utilities along each project frontage. Within scenic corridors, place lines underground or located there so they do not break the view line of a roadway vista.

This policy applies Citywide so they do not break the viewline of a roadway vista.

1.e
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE PROTECTION
4-39

SCENIC ROUTES
Roadway Enhancements. Coordinate with Caltrans in an effort to ensure that future changes to the Coast Highway will also upgrade the appearance of the right-of-way.

Improvements should include landscaping and roadway design, as well as trails and visually-appealing pedestrian over-crossings.

Scenic Corridor Plans. Seek grant funding to develop local scenic corridor plans for Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road.

Parallel Trails for Non-Motorized Travel. Improve walking, riding, and biking trails along roadways with the State scenic highway designation.

Other Scenic Trails. Improve pedestrian routes along corridors that provide access to locations of significant scenic quality, recreation, historic and cultural importance in Pacifica.

Vehicle Access Points. Maintain and improve existing scenic turnouts, public parking areas, access to regional parks, beaches and other recreation areas.

Roadway Design. Ensure that any proposed new roads or modification to existing roads which traverse scenic areas minimize visual impacts to views from scenic routes.

Where possible, the physical form of structures, grading and alignment should be integrated into the natural setting. Views to and from ridges should be protected.

High-Quality Design at Key Points. Ensure that new development directly adjacent to Highway 1 in West and East Sharp Park helps to create a strong image of Pacifica's cultural and civic core, and that new development in the Rockaway Quarry site has a visual quality that enhances the natural setting and draws travelers in from the highway.

Highway Frontage Design Guidelines. Update the Design Guidelines to provide direction on how new buildings should relate to Highway 1, both in its freeway and highway configuration.

Gateway Signage. Create unified gateway signage, for entrances along Highway 1, Sharp Park Road, Manor Drive, and Hickey Boulevard.

1.e
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 4-40
This page intentionally left blank.

1.e
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 5 NATURAL HAZARDS
Ensuring the safety of community members, through protection from hazards, is an essential service of public agencies and a critical priority for maintaining community health. The purpose of the Natural Hazards chapter is to establish goals and policies to mitigate the potential impacts from natural and man-made hazards that pose a threat to public health, and safety, and coastal resources.

5.1 1.e
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-2

5.1 COASTAL ACT FRAMEWORK
The Coastal Act seeks to ensure that new development minimizes risks to life and property, does not create unstable site conditions, does not create or contribute significantly to erosion, and does not require new protective devices along the shoreline (Section 30253). The same Coastal Act policy also states that new development must not require new protective devices to be built along the shoreline, reinforcing the requirement of Section 30235 that construction that alters the natural shoreline may only be permitted in specific cases, and when designed to mitigate adverse impacts on the local shoreline and sand supply.

Meanwhile, Sections 30212 and 30214 specify that public access to the shoreline is to be consistent with public safety, including with regard to geologic site characteristics. Policies from Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act which are most relevant to the subject matter of this chapter include, but are not limited to, the policies listed below. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, available in Appendix A, is incorporated into this chapter.

Coastal Act Policies
Article 2: Public Access
• Section 30212 New development projects
• Section 30214 Implementation of public access policies; legislative intent Article 4: Marine Environment
• Section 30235 Construction altering natural shoreline • Section 30236 Water supply and flood control
Article 6: Development
• Section 30250 Location; existing developed area
• Section 30253 Minimization of adverse impacts

5.2 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
The Planning Area lies within the geologically complex region of California known as the Coast Range geomorphic province. Much of the Coast Range province is composed of marine sedimentary deposits and volcanic rocks that form northwest trending mountain ridges and valleys, running subparallel to the San Andreas Fault Zone. West of the San Andreas Fault lies the Salinian Block, a granitic core that extends from the southern end of the province to north of the Farallon Islands.

Coastal Bluffs
Pacifica’s Coastal Zone prominently features coastal bluffs. A bluff is a high bank or bold headland with a broad, precipitous, sometimes rounded cliff face overlooking a plain or body of water. A coastal bluff is a bluff overlooking a beach or shoreline or that is subject to marine erosion. Many coastal bluffs consist of a gently sloping upper bluff and a steeper lower bluff or sea cliff. The term “coastal bluff” refers to the entire slope between a marine terrace or upland area and the sea. The term “sea cliff” refers to the lower, near vertical portion of a coastal bluff. For purposes of establishing jurisdictional and permit boundaries coastal bluffs include, (1) those bluffs, the toe of which is now or was historically (generally within the last 200 years) subject to marine erosion; and (2) those bluffs, the toe of which is not now or was not historically subject to marine erosion, but the toe of which lies within an area otherwise identified as an Appealable Area.

5.2 1.e
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-3
The Bluff Edge is the upper termination of a bluff, cliff, or seacliff. In cases where the top edge of the bluff is rounded away from the face of the bluff as a result of erosional processes related to the presence of the steep bluff face, the bluff line or edge is defined as that point nearest the bluff beyond which the downward gradient of the surface increases more or less continuously until it reaches the general gradient of the bluff. In a case where there is a step-like feature at the top of the bluff face, the landward edge of the topmost riser shall be taken to be the bluff edge. Bluff edges typically retreat landward due to coastal erosion, landslides, development of gullies, or by grading (cut). In areas where the bluff top or bluff face has been cut or notched by grading, the bluff edge is the landward most position of either the current or historic bluff edge. In areas where fill has been placed near or over the historic bluff edge, the original natural bluff edge, even if buried beneath fill, shall be taken to be the bluff edge.

Seismic Hazards
Earthquakes can cause surface rupture from faulting or seismically induced effects, such as ground shaking and landslides. The challenge is to minimize earthquake related hazards, liquefaction:
• Mminimize Eearthquake Rrelated Hhazards, lLiquefaction, and landslideslLandslides. The San Andreas Fault, which traverses the northeast corner of Pacifica, is active and capable of causing a large earthquake. Areas located on or immediately adjacent to the mapped fault traces must be investigated prior to any development to ensure that fault rupture hazards be avoided or minimized.

Areas located within the alluvial valleys could have a high potential for liquefaction. Site-specific geotechnical investigations can confirm the presence of liquefiable materials and provide foundation design criteria to mitigate the potentially damaging effects of liquefaction.

The Planning Area also includes slopes that are susceptible to landslides, especially areas with greater than 50 percent inclines. Geotechnical engineering can typically overcome the challenges of development on steep terrain through drainage improvements, anchoring foundations in deeper materials, re-grading slopes, and other methods.
• Minimize Hazards Related to Winter Storms and Coastal Erosion. Much of Pacifica’s coastline is subject to severe coastal erosion. Short term erosion hazards are generally mitigated through best management practices and use of soft stabilization techniques. In areas that are experiencing active coastal erosion, the most effective mitigation is to relocate development. With sea level rise, there is potential for more serious long-term coastal erosion, which could be a critical challenge within the Planning Area.

Modern seismic activity within the Coast Range continues to be associated with movement along the San Andreas system of faults. Regionally, this fault system is the boundary between large sections, or plates, of the earth’s crust known as the North American Plate and Pacific Plate. The Bay Area is considered an area of high seismic activity, with an estimated 63 72 percent probability of an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 or higher occurring in the region over the next 30 years.1
The San Andreas Fault is the principal strike-slip boundary between the Pacific plate to the west and the North American plate to the east. Its main trace trends northwest through the Santa Cruz Mountains and the 1 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WG07). Fact Sheet 2008-30272016-2030, Forecasting California’s EarthquakesEarthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014-2043 s – What Can We Expect in the Next 30 Years?,http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3027/fs2008-3027.pdf. 2008.2008.Accessed at https://pubs.usgs. gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf

1.e
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-4
eastern side of the San Francisco Peninsula. Between Pacifica and San Mateo, Crystal Springs Reservoir and San Andreas Lake clearly mark the rupture zone.

The Hayward Fault trends to the northwest within the East Bay, extending from San Pablo Bay in Richmond, 60 miles south to San Jose. Although large earthquakes on the Hayward Fault have been rare since 1868, there is a 33 percent chance a large earthquake could occur on the Hayward fault by 20432over the planning period.

The Calaveras Fault, located in the eastern San Francisco Bay region, trends along the eastern side of the East Bay Hills, west of San Ramon Valley, down into the western Diablo Range, and eventually joining the San Andreas Fault Zone south of Hollister. The Calaveras Fault has been the source of numerous moderate magnitude earthquakes but the probability of a large earthquake is much lower (26 percent by 2043) than on the San Andreas or Hayward faults3.

Fault Rupture
Fault rupture is the surface displacement of the earth’s surface due to the movement along a fault associated with an earthquake. Ground displacement is generally experienced on or within the immediate vicinity of the mapped fault trace. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 established the requirement to regulate development within Earthquake Fault zones associated with active faults. Development is feasible but requires detailed geologic and seismic evaluations by certified professionals prior to approval of a building permit.

An Alquist-Priolo fault hazard zone associated with the San Andreas Fault grazes the northeast corner of Pacifica’s Coastal Zone, as shown in Figure 5-1., applying to a small amount of housing in the Fairmont West neighborhood. According to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex, there are approximately 952 single-family homes, 399 multiple-family units, 200 acres, and six miles of road within the Alquist-Priolo Study Zone.

Ground Shaking
Ground movement during an earthquake can vary depending on the overall magnitude, distance to the fault, focus of earthquake energy, and type of geologic material. The composition of underlying soils, even those relatively distant from faults, can intensify ground shaking. The strongest ground shaking anticipated to occur in Pacifica would come from the San Andreas Fault, and could cause strong to very violent ground shaking.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a transformation of soil from a solid to a liquefied state during which saturated soil temporarily loses strength resulting from the buildup of excess pore water pressure, especially during earthquakeinduced cyclic loading. Soil susceptible to liquefaction includes loose to medium dense sand and gravel, lowplasticity silt, and some low-plasticity clay deposits. Four kinds of ground failure commonly result from liquefaction: lateral spread, flow failure, ground oscillation, and loss of bearing strength. Liquefaction and associated failures could damage foundations, roads, underground cables and pipelines, and disrupt utility service. The depth to groundwater influences the potential for liquefaction, in that sediments need to be saturated to have a potential for liquefaction.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.

1.e
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-5
In the Coastal Zone, areas surrounding some of the alluvial drainages (i.e., San Pedro Creek Valley and Sanchez Creek Valley) contain some areas of very high liquefaction potential. Medium liquefaction potential exists in many low-lying neighborhoods, including West Edgemar-Pacific Manor, West Sharp Park, Rockaway Beach and Quarry, and parts of Pedro Point.4 The Liquefaction and Fault Lines map (Figure 5-1) shows more detail.
4 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Liquefaction Susceptibility http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/liquefac/liquefac.html. 2003.

1.e
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-6
Figure 5-1: Liquefaction and Fault Lines

1.e
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-7
Other HazardsTsunami and Seiche
A tsunami is a wave generated by abrupt movement of the seabed, which can occur as an earthquake or after a significant landslide. By contrast, seiche is a standing wave in an enclosed body of water. Within Pacifica, only Laguna Salada might be subject to seiche, but the potential for significant risk is low.

Dam Failure
There are no dams within or above Pacifica, and therefore the city is not at risk from a seismically induced dam failure. However, a seismic event may cause water tanks located in the hills above populated areas to burst and inundate areas below.

Slope Failure and Erosion
Slope Failure
Slope failures, commonly referred to as landslides, include many phenomena that involve the downslope displacement and movement of material, and can be triggered by either static (i.e., gravity) or dynamic (i.e., earthquake) forces. The geology, structure, and amount of groundwater in the slope affect slope failure potential, as do external processes (i.e., climate, topography, slope geometry, and human activity). Slope failure may occur on slopes of 15 percent or less; however, the probability is greater on steeper slopes that exhibit old landslide features such as scarps, slanted vegetation, and transverse ridges. Landslide-susceptible areas are characterized by steep slopes and downslope creep of surface materials, and are more common in zones of active faulting.

Figure 5-2 shows three slope failure threat categories: Mostly Landslides, Few Landslides, and Not Landslide Prone.5 Mostly Landslide areas consist of mapped landslides, intervening areas typically narrower than 1,500 feet, and narrow borders around landslides; defined by how groups of mapped landslides are clustered. Areas mapped as Few Landslides contain few, if any, large mapped landslides, but locally contain scattered small landslides and questionably identified larger landslides; defined in most of the region by excluding groups of mapped landslides. Steep slopes on Mori Point, Rockaway Headlands, and San Pedro Mountain are identified as likely sites of slope failures, as are small portions of areas in or near development in the Pedro Point and Fairmont neighborhoods. According to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 45 acres of residential property and 37 acres of infrastructure are located in areas classified as mostly landslide area in the Planning Area. This includes 15 acres of residential property in the Coastal Zone.

SLOPE FAILURE IN THE COASTAL ZONE
The coastline of San Mateo County includes steep upland areas that are susceptible to slope failures. Most notably, the large coastal slide known as Devil’s Slide is located at the southern end of the Planning Area.

Devil’s Slide has a long history of slope failures and rock slides that occasionally caused closures of Highway 1 before the highway was rerouted through the Devils Slide tunnels. 5 United States Geological Survey (USGS), Open File Report 97-745, San Francisco Bay Landslide Folio, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/of97-745/. 1997.

1.e
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-8

SUBSIDENCE
Subsidence—the sinking of a portion of the ground surface—can occur from immediate settlement, consolidation, shrinkage of expansive soil, and liquefaction. Subsidence can also be caused by earthquakes or the excess extraction of groundwater.

Portions of Pacifica are underlain by relatively clean, poorly consolidated granular material, such as sand. In places tThere are perched layers of groundwater in places, potentially creating the conditions for liquefaction.

Also, where materials are poorly consolidated, there may be ground subsidence or other forms of ground failure. Because the conditions at any particular site control the potential for any type of ground failure, only specific geotechnical investigations, including subsurface testing, can provide a basis for assessing such hazards.

Soil Erosion
Erosion is the wearing away of soil and rock by processes such as mechanical or chemical weathering; mass wasting; and the action of waves, wind, and underground water. Excessive soil erosion can eventually lead to damage of building foundations and roadways. The parts of the Planning Area where soils are most susceptible to erosion caused by wind or rainfall include the northern slope of Mori Point; upper Sharp Park; and along San Pedro Creek in San Pedro Valley County Park.

Pacifica’s Coastal Zone includes areas that the USGS has determined to have critical erosion hazards and unstable segments where the sedimentary rocks are susceptible to failure from heavy wave action. A study of the winter storms of 1997–1998 showed that sea cliffs in the Planning Area were particularly impacted and that a number of homes were impacted as a result.6 Bluff erosion is commonplace along much of the Pacifica coastline. In 2009-10, erosion on the northern coast of Pacifica resulted in the evacuation and demolition of three apartment buildings on the 300 block of Esplanade Avenue. Further severe weather in 2015 led to the City-mandated demolition of these buildings in 2016 to prevent their collapse onto the beach below7. The property owner demolished a 12-unit apartment building at 330 Esplanade Avenue and City demolished two 20-unit apartment buildings in common ownership at 310 and 320 Esplanade Avenue. Coastline segments that have experienced significant coastal erosion are shown in Figure 5-2. Short-term erosion hazards are generally mitigated through best management practices and use of soft stabilization techniques. With sea level rise, there is potential for more serious long-term coastal erosion, which could be a critical challenge within the Planning Area. Policies supporting coastal resilience against sea level rise impacts are provided in Chapter 6, Coastal Resilience.

Within the Coastal Zone, the City requires new development to be set back from coastal bluffs enough to accommodate a 100-year event, whether caused by seismic, geotechnical, or storm conditions (unless this limitation makes a property undevelopable). Areas determined by the study to be unsuitable for development shall be set aside for permanent environmental protection as part of any development. 6 United States Geological Survey (USGS). Coastal Erosion Along the U.S. West Coast During the 1997–98 El Niño:Expectations and Observations, http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/lidar/AGU_fall98/, 2005.
7 The property owner demolished a 12-unit apartment building at 330 Esplanade Avenue and City demolished two 20-unit apartment buildings in common ownership at 310 and 320 Esplanade Avenue.

1.e
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-9
Similarly, a site stability survey is required for any new development proposed on or adjacent to coastal bluffs or the coastline. New development that would require the use of seawalls or other shoreline alterations for protection either now or in the future shall not be permitted unless this would make the property undevelopable. New coastline alteration is permitted only where necessary to protect existing development or public resources, and must minimize adverse impacts to natural coastal processes.

1.e
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-10
Figure 5-2: Slope Failure and Shoreline Protection Structures

1.e
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-11

SHORELINE PROTECTION PROGRAMS
In the early 1990s, the City of Pacifica, the California Coastal Conservancy, and the Pacifica Land Trust collaborated to improve steelhead trout habitat and preserve the sandy beach at Pacifica/Linda Mar State Beach, with the removal of vulnerable structures along the shore. The stabilization methods were used to expand and enhance the tidally influenced wetlands at the mouth of San Pedro Creek and restore more than 1900 feet of eroding creek banks. This restoration both enhanced steelhead trout habitat and achieved 100- year flood protection for the nearby community.

To address the remaining flood threat to homes and businesses, the City also removed the most vulnerable structures. In 2002, the City partnered with the Pacifica Land Trust and the California Coastal Conservancy to purchase two homes and their surrounding acreage and delivered 4,000 cubic yards of sand to rebuild dunes and restore four acres of beach and the nearby estuary.

In addition, the City is continuing to maintain and improve the existing seawall and revetment originally constructed in 1962 at Rockaway Beach. Repairs in the past have consisted of retrieval of displaced rip-rap, importation of additional rip-rap, and repair of the revetment. Other revetments are placed along the beaches of the Planning Area and a seawall has been constructed at Beach Boulevard between Clarendon Road and the northern terminus of Beach Boulevard. Existing shoreline protection structures are shown on the Slope Failure and Coastal Erosion map (Figure 5-2). Policies addressing future shoreline protection and sea level rise adaptation are provided in Chapter 6, Coastal Resilience.

In fall 2020, the City of Pacifica initiated the Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project, an infrastructure protection and improvement project that aims to replace the current seawall and outdated infrastructure while building climate resilience into the most vulnerable segment of the City of Pacifica’s shoreline.

The project is considered critical to the public health and safety of the citizens and visitors in and around the historic West Sharp Park neighborhood and serves to create a multi-benefit solution to protect public infrastructure, recreational activities, numerous homes, businesses, and the community at large, from further impacts due to continued coastal erosion.

Increased Coastal Erosion from Potential Sea Level Rise The potential for increased coastal erosion from sea level rise has serious implications for Pacifica. Areas of the Sharp Park Golf Course, the Rockaway Beach district, and the West Linda Mar and West Sharp Park neighborhoods could be inundated. Meanwhile, coastal erosion processes that have caused damage along the high bluffs of Pacifica’s northern neighborhoods would likely increase in magnitude.

Sea level rise resulting from global climate change is projected to cause more extensive erosion of beaches, dunes, bluffs and cliffs. The 2009 Pacific Institute study of the impacts of sea level rise on the California Coast developed erosion models for dune and cliff/ bluff backshore environments. Across the State, mean lateral erosion of dunes is estimated at 115 to 116 meters by 2025, 119 meters to 128 meters by 2050. Bluffs, meanwhile, are projected to have eroded by 8 meters to 9 meters by 2025, with geology, wave exposure, and bluff toe elevation all playing important roles in producing variation8. These models indicate that there could 8 Heberger, M., H. Cooley, P. Herrera, P.H. Gleick, E. Moore of Pacific Institute. The Impacts of Sea Level Rise on the California Coast. A paper from the California Climate Change Center. May 2009.

1.e
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-12
be new risks of erosion along the length of Pacifica’s coastline in areas that are not currently exposed to wave action erosion, which could impact all of the coastal neighborhoods and coastal habitats.

Policy Framework
Enforcement of the State’s latest building code, as required by law, will provide a base level of mitigation from ground shaking. The City also has a Coastal Zoning Combining District and coastal development regulations in its Zoning Ordinance. These regulations should be updated following adoption of the Local Coastal Land Use Plan, to complete the update of the Local Coastal Program and to reflect updates in State law, to better avoid or mitigate seismic and geologic hazards.

Policies
Guiding Policies
NH-G-1 Reduce Risk. Protect coastal resources, and mMinimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic, and seismic, and coastal hazards.

Implementing Policies
NH-I-1 Hillside Preservation. Update the Hillside Preservation District on the zoning map to ensure that all steep and sensitive terrain is subject to these regulations.

NH-I-2NH-I-1The Hillside Preservation map (Figure 4-4 of the 2040 General Plan) should be used as a guide.

NH-I-3NH-I-2Transfer of Development Rights. Amend the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program to reflect the following changes:
• Incorporate use of the TDR as described in Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-7. • Apply receiving status to sites designated for Mixed Use development in addition to the residential land use categories.

The TDR Program provides a mechanism to relocate potential development from areas where environmental or land use impacts could be severe to other areas more appropriate for development.

NH-I-4NH-I-3Fault Zone. New development shall be sited and designed to minimize risks from seismic events. Buildings for human occupancy shall avoid surface traces of active faults, consistent with the New development shall be sited and designed to minimize risks from seismic events. Continue to review projects located in identified fault zones subject to the AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act and other relevant state laws. (See the Liquefaction and Fault Zones map, Figure 5-1).

5.3 5.3A

1.e
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-13
NH-I-5NH-I-4Development in Hazardous Areas. Prohibit development in areas of Mostly Landslides or High or Very High liquefaction risk as shown on the Slope Failure and Coastal Erosion Map (Figure 5-2), or on slopes steeper than 35 percent, unless detailed site investigations ensure that risks can be reduced to acceptable levels and that the structure will be protected for its design life.

NH-I-6NH-I-5Real Estate Disclosure. Require real estate transactions, development approval processes, and property titles to declare known or suspected seismic or geologic hazards on a property, including Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones and areas suspected of high or very high risk of liquefaction, subsidence, or landslide.

NH-I-7NH-I-6Code Enforcement. Continue to maintain and enforce appropriate building standards to ensure that new development is designed to meet current safety standards associated with seismic activity.

NH-I-8NH-I-7Seismic Rehabilitation Flagging. Identify and catalogue structures that may be subject to serious structural damage in the event of a major earthquake, and provide information to property owners on ways to pay for rehabilitation or retrofit of existing buildings to minimize the potential for damage from an earthquake.

NH-I-9NH-I-8Restrictions on Mitigation Measures. Prohibit development which would require mitigation measures for potential geotechnical hazards if those measures could adversely affect surrounding property, including the use of public rights-of-way or adversely affect public health, safety, and welfare.

NH-I-10NH-I-9 Erosion Prevention. Require erosion prevention of hillside areas by revegetation or other acceptable methods Hillside Erosion Prevention. Encourage erosion prevention of hillside areas to maintain slope stability by revegetation. Other slope stability methods may be acceptable, consistent with this LCP.

NH-I-11NH-I-10 Geotechnical Studies. Within the Coastal Zone and hillside areas, continue to require geotechnical site investigation for proposed development on sites located in any of the following areas, prior to allowing site development:
• On slopes greater than 15 percent.
• In areas showing evidence of landslides or landslide potential. • In areas showing evidence of ground shaking or earth movement. • Within 50 300 feet of a coastal bluff edge in Coastal Vulnerability Zones. • Within sand dune areas.

Geotechnical studies shall identify any geologic hazards affecting the proposed project site, any necessary mitigation measures, and a statement of the site’s suitability for the proposed development and whether or not it will be safe from geologic hazard for its expected anticipated life. The study shall identify net developable areas, if any, based on landslide or

5.4 5.5

5.5 1.e
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-14
ground shaking potential and/or erosion risk. Impacts from the development, such as those resulting from increased water runoff, shall also be determined. Such studies must be signed by a licensed Certified Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer and are subject to review and approval by City staff. As detailed in CR-I-1943, further technical reports may be required for applicable projects.

NH-I-12NH-I-11 Maintain Restrictions on Hazardous Areas. Continue enforcing the existing Coastal Zone Combing District and Hillside Preservation District regulations that restrict development in hazardous areas where access is impractical and areas prone to hillside and coastal erosion, landslides, seismic shaking, tsunami inundation, or flooding.

NH-I-13NH-I-12 Soil Study. Require any geotechnical studies to include study of expansive and creeping soils, as well as analysis of erosion, seismic, tsunami, and other geotechnical hazards, and to make recommendations to mitigate these hazards, as warranted.

NH-I-14NH-I-13 Grading and Drainage Plans. Continue to require a grading and drainage plan for proposed development requiring a coastal development permit and/or a grading permit. The Plan should demonstrate how the project will maintain natural surface drainage and existing vegetation to the greatest extent feasible, by minimizing alteration of natural topography and removal of existing trees and vegetation; stabilizing cut-and-fill surfaces with native vegetation; restricting the movement of heavy equipment and machinery; and other means.

Prohibit development-related grading and vegetation clearance on slopes steeper than 35 percent. Driveways and utilities may be allowed in the case that there is no less environmentally damaging alternative for providing access to the building site.

NH-I-15NH-I-14 Bluff Drainage and Erosion. The City will pursue feasible funding mechanisms to investigate areas that may be significantly contributing to groundwater flows to the bluffs and determine whether improving drainage and/or reducing irrigation could reduce bluff erosion. Measures to improve drainage and reduce over-watering shall be communicated to the public and property owners as part of existing water conservation outreach programs, and included as conditions on new development where applicable.

NH-I-16NH-I-15 Water Tank Rupture. Work with the NCCWD to determine areas potentially affected by flooding from ruptured water tanks in the event of a seismic event and inform property owners.

NH-I-17NH-I-16 Geologic Hazard Abatement District. Amend the Municipal Code to include provisions for formation of a geologic hazards abatement district for coastal bluffs and hillside areas at risk of landslides in Pacifica to enable cooperative efforts among property owners for protection of coastal bluffs from erosion and improvement and maintenance of drainage and protective infrastructure.

The Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) is a potentially useful tool to effectively abate a landslide hazard that crosses property boundaries. It is a mechanism that responds to the physical realities of landslides, and allows property owners to cooperate in solving a common problem. It removes much of the stigma of legal liabilities among adjacent landowners and allows them to cooperate rather than litigate. It also provides for a cost-effective solution, requiring only one geotechnical engineering firm and one plan to solve the

1.e
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-15
problems of several landowners. The City may require the establishment of GHADs as a condition for new development proposed in areas of known bluff erosion or geologic hazard, such as areas identified in Figure 5- 2 as "mostly landslides." The City may consider identifying where GHADs are appropriate or necessary.

The City will undertake the following actions to facilitate formation of GHADs:

Identify where GHADs are appropriate or necessary;
Advance funds for preparation of a Plan of Control for each proposed GHAD by a Certified Engineering Geologist describing the GHAD's boundaries, the geologic hazards affecting the GHAD, and a plan for the prevention, mitigation, abatement, or control of the hazards, with costs to be reimbursed by the GHADs; Establish a public education and outreach program to inform property owners of the benefits and responsibilities of participating in a GHAD; and
• Provide ongoing support of GHADs, with funding provided by the districts.

The establishment of a GHAD would not allow development that is otherwise restricted on the basis of hazard risk, bluff erosion or geologic instability.

NH-I-18NH-I-17 New Development in Coastal Zone. Continue to enforce provisions of the California Coastal Act requiring new development within the Coastal Zone to:
• Minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, or fire hazard; • Assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs;
• Not accelerate the need for a shoreline structure or increase the likelihood of a future seawall beyond the existing development’s expected life; and • Not violate required coastal resource setback provisions.

Small improvement projects are exempt, including improvements that would increase height, bulk or floor area by less than ten percent.

NH-I-19NH-I-18 Accessory Structures in Coastal Zone. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to require new accessory structures within the Coastal Zone to be constructed so they can be easily relocated should they become threatened by erosion.

This policy does not apply to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which are not considered accessory structures as characterized in the City’s Zoning Regulations. ADUs are habitable structures, required to be constructed/installed on permanent foundations, and which are not readily relocated in the same manner as a shed or similar accessory structure.

5.6 5.6

1.e
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-16

POLICIES FOR SPECIFIC SITES
NH-I-20NH-I-19 Esplanade. Establish appropriate zoning for privately-owned, undeveloped land on the west side of Esplanade Avenue to ensure minimal development consistent with the General Plan classification. New development shall preserve the view corridor to the ocean along Bill Drake Way and shall be sited and designed to ensure that any proposed development could withstand erosion resulting from a 100-year seismic or storm event and in accordance with CR-I-2044 and preserve the view corridor to the ocean along Bill Drake Way.

NH-I-21NH-I-20 Pedro Point Upper Slopes. Maintain zoning for the upper slopes of Pedro Point to ensure that any new development is at a density appropriate to the steep slopes.

5.3 FLOODING
Under Section 30236, flood protection devices that alter rivers or streams must use the best mitigation measures, and are limited to necessary water supply projects or flood control projects where no other method is feasible, and where necessary to protect public safety or existing development. New development is expected to minimize risks to life and property in high flood hazard areas, under Section 30253.

Flooding has been an ongoing issue for low-lying areas of Pacifica, and likely will continue to be a challenge in the future, including possible inundation from a tsunami wave. Strategies to minimize flooding impacts will include limiting development in flood-prone areas and incorporating Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines and suggested mitigation activities into the City’s plans and procedures for managing flood hazards.

Flood Zones
Flood hazards mapped by FEMA to support the development of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) generally identify areas of greater flood risk (100 and 500 year events) in the lower reaches of the main stream channels, and the risk of coastal flooding along the shoreline, although they do not account for climate change or sea level rise, and thus should be reviewed in conjunction with Appendix B (“Coastal Zone Vulnerability Maps”). Flood zones based on the FIRMs are shown in Figure 5-3. The FIRMs represent the best available maps of flood hazard areas in Pacifica. Additional maps of flood hazard areas prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Water Resources are not available for the city. The City’s annex to the Multi-jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJ-LHMP) includes additional information on past flooding events and actions to mitigate flooding risk in Pacifica.

Areas of flood risk include:
• Broad flood inundation in several parts of Sharp Park Golf Course and the Rockaway Beach district. • More narrowly confined flood hazards along the creeks; limiting potential flooding in these areas. For example, along Milagra Creek mapped flood hazards are typically within the active channel.

5.7 1.e
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-17
Coastal Flooding
Pacifica can also experience flooding from coastal sources, which occurs as some combination of high tides, large wind-driven waves, storm surge, and/or tsunami waves. Areas with the potential for coastal flooding are the low-lying areas along the coast, including the Sharp Park Golf Course/Laguna Salada area and Pacifica State Beach.

The only section of coastline protected by levees is the Sharp Park Golf Course area. However, drainage from Sanchez Creek and Laguna Salada to the ocean can be insufficient to prevent lowland flooding during high tide/high flow events. A seawall/revetment structure protects the area north of the Sharp Park Golf Course, generally along Beach Boulevard, including the Pacifica Pier. This structure has required maintenance to repair areas where beach erosion has undermined it. Policies addressing increased coastal flooding from potential sea level rise are provided in Chapter 6, Coastal Resilience.

1.e
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-18
Figure 5-3: Flood Zones

1.e
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-19

TSUNAMI
A tsunami can occur after a significant earthquake beneath the ocean. Coastal flooding, potentially severe damage, and threats to human health and safety can result from a tsunami. Recorded tsunami run-up magnitude is generally lower at Pacifica than other locations from San Francisco to Monterey, likely due to offshore bathymetry and shoreline alterations along the city. Tsunami hazards are generally coincident with the coastal flooding zones: at the Sharp Park Golf Course/Laguna Salada area, Lower Calera Creek, portions of Rockaway Beach, and the residential and commercial area at Linda Mar near the mouth of San Pedro Creek.

Tsunamis can reach Pacifica from several sources, including ‘far-field’ sources throughout the Pacific Ocean, a substantial earthquake along the Cascadia Subduction Zone in northern California north to Vancouver Island, movement along local fault lines such as the Seal Cove Fault or San Gregorio Fault, and local coastal landslides. Travel times, the degree of warning, and the magnitude of the wave will vary depending on the source and initial strength of the tsunami-generating event. Earthquakes along the Cascadia Subduction Zone are likely the most hazardous to Pacifica because of the potential for very large wave generation, and a relatively short travel time (on the order of one to three hours). However, smaller events along local faults could result in a wave that reaches Pacifica with essentially no warning time, potentially limiting the effectiveness of the existing tsunami warning system.

According to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, there are approximately 900 existing dwelling units within Pacifica’s tsunami run-up area.

San Mateo County has an established emergency proposal for tsunamis. As part of this program, the City has installed a tsunami warning system, consisting of three solar powered alarm towers. One is located in the Sharp Park neighborhood, the second is located in the Rockaway Beach neighborhood, and the third tower stands at Pacifica State Beach. This system links into a San Mateo County alert system that can reach email and cell phones.

Policies
Guiding Policies
NH-G-2 Development in Hazardous Areas. Site and design Protect development in 100-year floodplains and tsunami hazard zones to minimize hazard risk without the need for armoring (e.g. flood damage prevention programs).

Implementing Policies
NH-I-22NH-I-21 Floodplain Management. Continue to manage floodplains through zoning, development requirements, and ordinances, and take other actions as required by FEMA, in order to remain a participant of the National Flood Insurance Program.

NH-I-23NH-I-22 Flood Map Review. Periodically review maps prepared by FEMA and the State Department of Water Resources to identify changes in mapping of areas subject to flooding and amend the General Plan, Municipal Code, or LCP as warranted.

5.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-20
NH-I-24NH-I-23 NDPES Enforcement. Enforce NPDES permits, as well as the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program, to mitigate potential flooding risks by slowing the release of stormwater from development sites into drainage channels.

NH-I-25NH-I-24 Flood Hazard Reduction. Continue to comply with the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in the Municipal Code.

NH-I-26NH-I-25 Flood Insurance. Inform households and businesses located in flood-prone areas about opportunities to purchase federal flood insurance.

NH-I-27NH-I-26 Flood Control Maintenance. Regularly maintain flood control structures, including, but not limited to drainage channels, pipes, and culverts, and stream beds. Routine maintenance of streambeds shall conform to the Coastal Act, including but not limited to Section 30236.

NH-I-28NH-I-27 Flood Control Structures. Require flood control devices that alter rivers and streams to incorporate the best mitigation measures whenever feasible, and only permit them where no other method for protecting existing structures in the flood plain is feasible, and where such protection is both necessary for public safety, including for water supply, and or to protect existing development, or where the primary function is the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat.

NH-I-29NH-I-28 Storm Drainage Impact Assessment. Require developers to provide an assessment of a project’s potential impacts on the local storm drainage system as part of the development review process.

If development is found to have a negative impact on storm drainage, require applicable and effective mitigation measures, such as the creation of permanent or temporary detention or retention basins, provision of additional landscaped areas and green roofs, installation of pump stations, and the use of permeable paving in driveways, walkways and parking areas.

NH-I-30NH-I-29 No Adverse Impact Approach. Update the Flood Hazard Reduction regulations to establish a “No Adverse Impact” standard to floodplain and coastal development.

In essence, NAI floodplain management takes place when the actions of one property owner are not allowed to adversely affect the rights of other property owners. No building permits should be issued for projects that increase the potential for flooding or erosion on and off site, degrade water quality, or increase potential public service costs for things such as emergency personnel and stormwater management, unless such projects are designed and completed in such a way that they will not:
• pose a threat to public safety; and
• substantially increase flood or storm damage risk to public or private property.

NH-I-31NH-I-30 Tsunami Evacuation Zone. For new development in the tsunami evacuation zone, require use of low impact engineering techniques, such as elevating structures above projected water levels, to mitigate impacts to people and structures.

NH-I-32NH-I-31 Critical Facilities Location. Site critical public facilities including hospital and healthcare facilities, emergency shelters, police and fire stations, and emergency

5.9 5.11

5.10 1.e
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-21
communications facilities outside of the tsunami evacuation zone, and 100-year flood plains, and other portions of the Coastal Vulnerability Zone over the anticipated life of the development.

5.4 FIRE HAZARDS
New development is expected to minimize risks to life and property in high fire hazard areas (Section 30253).

Fire hazards in Pacifica include both urban and wildland fires. Urban fires involve the uncontrolled burning of built structures due to human-made causes; wildland fires affect grassland, forest, and brush (and the structures on them), and can result from either human or natural causes. Pacifica has a substantial risk of wildland fires, with many areas of high and very high threat within the Planning Area. The City’s main challenges regarding these hazards are:
• Actively Managing the Urban-Wildland Interface. Pacifica’s residents enjoy close contact with open ridges and woodlands. This brings with it the risk of proximity to wildland fires. Preparedness is essential, and the North County Fire Authority’s fire prevention activities, especially its Vegetation Management Program, are important.
• Maintaining and Enhancing Evacuation Routes. It is critical that road capacity exists for local residents, workers, and visitors to evacuate in case of an environmental disaster, including fire.

Urban Fires
Urban fires are fires that begin in a building in urban centers. They are typically localized but have the potential to spread to an adjoining building. The risk of urban fires is highest where single-family homes, multi-family residences, and business facilities are clustered close together, increasing the possibility of rapid spread to an adjoining building. The risk to life and property can be reduced by adopting and funding adequate levels of fire protection and ensuring new buildings are built to include fire resistive features which conform to modern fire and building codes.

Wildland Fires
Wildland fires are fires that start in a wooded or undeveloped area. Their potential for damage is dependent on the extent and type of vegetation, known as surface fuels, as well as weather and wind conditions.

Wildland fires occur infrequently but typically cause more damage than urban fires.

About two-thirds of Pacifica is undeveloped, and nearly half is protected open space. This undeveloped land is mainly on the rugged ridges that form the City’s western edge and descend down to the ocean between Pacifica’s valley communities. Coastal scrub is the predominant vegetation type, interspersed with annual grassland. Significant areas of eucalyptus forest and mixed woodland are present in eastern Sharp Park and on Cattle Hill and San Pedro Mountain. In California, most wildfire damage occurs in wildland urban interface areas, where homes and woodland vegetation are directly adjacent. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZs) throughout the state based on factors such as fuel, slope, and weather to indicate varying degrees of fire hazard (i.e., moderate,

5.12 1.e
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-22
high, and very high). FHSZ maps evaluate physical conditions that create a likelihood that an area will burn over a 30- to 50-year period. CAL FIRE also has developed maps of fire threat, or a measure of fuel conditions and fire potential in the ecosystem that represent the relative likelihood of “damaging” or difficult to control wildfire occurring for a given area, available at their website9.

CAL FIRE also designates land as either a Federal, State, or Local Responsibility Area (FRA, SRA, and LRA, respectively), based on population density, land use, and land ownership. Portions of the Planning Area within the SOI are designated State Responsibility Areas (SRA), where the State of California is financially responsible for the prevention and suppression of wildfires, while the NCFA has primary responsibility for Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) within the City limit.

Lands in Pacifica owned by the federal government and the County, including GGNRA lands are designated as a State Responsibility Area (SRAFRA) within the Pacifica LRA.

Some areas shown on Figure 5-4 along the southwestern perimeter within the Sphere of Influence are designated as Very High FHSZs. Most of this land in the Very High FHSZ is an urban reserve or park or other designations where extremely low densities of residential development may be permitted. Land adjacent to these areas that is within city limits is low- and very-low density residential development. To address this risk, the City cooperates with CAL FIRE and the North County Fire Authority (NCFA) through cooperative fire protection agreements.

CAL FIRE tracks the deadliest, largest, and most destructive wildfires that have occurred in the state, with the lists last updated in late March 2021. San Mateo County is not included in any of these lists. However, according to the San Mateo County Multijurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJ-LHMP), it is likely that the risk of wildfires will continue to occur in San Mateo County. Wildfires are influenced by both weather and human activities. Based on its history of past events, San Mateo County has a high chance of a wildfire in any given year.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) maps areas of significant fire hazards in the state. These areas are identified based on weather, terrain, fuels (e.g., type of ground vegetation), and other factors. According to the CDF:
• A Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone is designated for much of Pedro Point Headlands, directly adjacent to the Pedro Point neighborhood.
• Pedro Point Headlands has large areas considered to have “high” or “very high” threat of fire. • Mori Point is classified with a mix of “high” and “moderate” risk areas. • Nearly all of the urbanized parts of the Planning Area are classified as having a “moderate threat” level for fire.

Figure 5-4, Fire Hazards and Public Safety Services, shows these locations. 9 https://frap.fire.ca.gov/media/10315/firethreat_19_ada. pdf

1.e
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-23
The CDF also designates land as either a State or Local Responsibility Area (SRA and LRA), based on population density, land use, and land ownership. The City of Pacifica is an LRA while the small areas of the Planning Area outside City limits are in an SRA. Lands in Pacifica owned by the federal government and the County are designated as a Federal Responsibility Area (FRA) within the Pacifica LRA.

Fire and Emergency Services
The cities of Brisbane, Daly City, and Pacifica are contributing members of the North County Fire Authority (NCFA), a Joint Powers Authority established in 2003. The Fire Authority provides both emergency response and non-emergency public safety services to the three cities and their 185,000 residents in its service area.

Two of the Authority’s 10 stations are in Pacifica. Fire Station 71, at 616 Edgemar Avenue, serves the north end of Pacifica, while Fire Station 72, at 1100 Linda Mar Boulevard, serves the south end. Neither is located in the Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-24
Figure 5-4: Fire Hazards

1.e
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-25
Fire and Emergency Response
NCFA has established the following service ratio and response time standards:
• Service ratio standard: one responder per 1,500 population. • Response time standards for fire service: Four-minute travel time to 90 percent of calls for fire service, and eight-minute travel time for all apparatus on-scene for fire calls for service. • Response time standard for Emergency Medical Services (EMS): Under seven-minute travel time (6:59) for first response to 90 percent of calls.

Pacifica’s long and narrow geography and its reliance on Highway 1 as the single north-south access route makes the City a challenge for fire response. A 2008 study determined that the Vallemar, West and East Fairway Park, Rockaway Beach, and Rockaway neighborhoods in central Pacifica are beyond four-minute travel distance from northern San Mateo County fire stations, corresponding with the standard response time for first-due fire apparatus. The full assignment response time standard cannot be met in Pacifica from Vallemar south.10
NCFA’s EMS standard is for 90 percent of calls to be reached in less than seven minutes. This standard is met for 97 percent of calls in the North Zone, including approximately 93 percent of calls in Pacifica.

The NCFA Fire Authority needs additional facilities to meet its fire response standards for Vallemar and areas to the south. A third, mid-point station in Pacifica with a truck and engine company has been discussed for some time. The area that currently does not meet first-response time standards has a low density of development, and so it has fewer persons and structures threatened by fire. A new station would be needed if the central part of Pacifica were to experience significant new development, for example at the Quarry site.

Pacifica has an ISO rating of 4. The City’s rating is unlikely to be affected by population growth, but population growth will increase existing deficiencies in service delivery.

Fire Prevention
The NCFA’s Fire Services Prevention Bureau manages code enforcement, plan review and construction inspection, fire investigations, and public education. A key part of the Bureau’s code enforcement activities is the annual safety inspection of every commercial business and multi-family residential property in its service area. The Fire Authority also conducts a Vegetation Management Program, promoting compliance with vegetation standards to reduce the threat of fire in the urban/wildland interface.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The regional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies two several mitigation strategies for wildland fires in Pacifica, including update of its Emergency Operations Plan; pursuing opportunities to preserve and protect critical transportation infrastructure; and developing and delivering business programs and public outreach programs to promote resiliency and community preparedness. : review development proposals to ensure that they incorporate appropriate fire-mitigation measures, including adequate provisions for evacuation and 10 Emergency Services Consulting, 2008.

1.e
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-26
access by emergency responders, and develop a clear legislative and regulatory framework to manage the wildland-urban interface consistent with best practices.

State Requirements
In 2005, the California Building Code was amended to require that all new buildings located in any Fire Hazard Severity Zone in SRAs, or any Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone in LRAs, must use building materials approved for use in wildland/urban interface areas. The code now specifies certain roof coverings, fire resistive wall and ceiling-floor assemblies, wall finish materials, hardware, insulation, and other building materials for use in high fire hazard areas. Also in 2005, Public Resources Code (PRC) 4291 was amended to expand the defensible space clearance requirement around buildings from 30 feet to 100 feet, in any SRA.

Building owners must minimize potential fuel around structures, to minimize the risk of loss, and to improve firefighter safety.

Policies
Guiding Policy
NH-G-3 Fire Prevention. Protect Pacifica residents and businesses from potential wildland fire hazards.

Implementing Policies
NH-I-33NH-I-32 Response Time. Support efforts by North County Fire Authority to meet its response time standards throughout the City.

This effort may include construction of a third fire station in the central part of Pacifica, near the police station or the Quarry site. The City could provide land or shared facilities.

NH-I-34NH-I-33 Adequate Peak Load Water Supply. Work with the North Coast County Water District to maintain adequate water supply for firefighting, including capacity for peak load under a reasonable worst case wildland fire scenario, to be determined by the North County Fire Authority.

NH-I-35NH-I-34 Water Storage Locations. In evaluating sites for new water storage facilities, place a priority on locations least subject to impacts from seismic activity and landslides.

NH-I-36NH-I-35 Development Review. Review development proposals to ensure that they incorporate appropriate fire-mitigation measures, including adequate provisions for evacuation, access by emergency responders, and vegetation clearances that don’t impact ESHAs or wetlands or their associated buffers, unless undertaken consistent with the City’s ESHA and wetlands policies.

NH-I-37NH-I-36 Plan Review in Fire-Prone Areas. Continue to request North County Fire Authority participation in plan review of new buildings in potentially fire-prone areas.

5.13 1.e
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) CHAPTER 5: NATURAL HAZARDS
5-27
NH-I-38NH-I-37 Fire Prevention Inspections. Continue to require a fire prevention inspection of every permitted business and multi-family development covered by the North County Fire Authority.

NH-I-39NH-I-38 Fire Prevention Education. Continue educating the public about local fire hazard prevention programs. Work cooperatively with the North County Fire Authority to promote public awareness of fire safety and emergency life support.

NH-I-40NH-I-39 Vegetation Management. Promote and support the North County Fire Authority’s Vegetation Management Program to reduce urban/wildland interface fire hazards, if consistent with the LCP.

All vegetation management efforts should include coordination with applicable City Departments and State and Federal agencies.

NH-I-41NH-I-40 Multi-Jurisdictional Approach. Participate in State or regional efforts to develop a clear legislative and regulatory frame-work to manage the wildland-urban interface, including implementation of the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

NH-I-42NH-I-41 Rockaway Quarry Service. Ensure that any new development at the Rockaway Quarry site is adequately served by public infrastructure, including fire and police services.

5.14 1.e
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 5-28
This page intentionally left blank.

1.e
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6 COASTAL RESILIENCE
The purpose of this chapter is to provide policies which protect existing development from the hazard of sea level rise and which guide the design of new development to respond to sea level rise during the economic anticipated life of the project. Topics covered in this element include sea level rise projections, transfer of development rights (TDR), repair and replacement of existing shoreline protection structures (e.g., sea walls), and establishment of appropriate site design measures for new development.

Protection of property rights is an important theme in this chapter. Balancing appropriate protection of property and coastal resources along the dynamic coastline is an important theme in this chapter.

6.1 1.e
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-2

6.1 COASTAL ACT FRAMEWORK
Sea level rise increases the risk of flooding, coastal erosion, and saltwater intrusion into freshwater supplies, which, if left unmanaged, have the potential to threaten many of the resources that are integral to the California coast, including coastal development, coastal access and recreation, habitats (e.g., wetlands, coastal bluffs, dunes, and beaches), coastal agricultural lands, water quality and supply, cultural resources, community character, and scenic quality. Policies from Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act which are most relevant to Pacifica’s plan to manage coastal resiliency through the increasing risks posed by sea level rise include, but are not limited to, the policies listed below. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, available in Appendix A, is incorporated into this chapter.

Coastal Act Policies
Article 2: Public Access
• Section 30211 Development not to interfere with access • Section 30212 New development projects
• Section 30214 Implementation of public access policies; legislative intent Article 4: Marine Environment
• Section 30235 Construction altering natural shoreline • Section 30236 Water supply and flood control
Article 6: Development
• Section 30250 Location; existing developed area
• Section 30253 Minimization of adverse impacts
Additionally, for all purposes with this LCLUP, no activity undertaken pursuant to Section 30610(g) of the Coastal Act shall be construed to be a Substantial Structural Modification as defined in this LCLUP.

This chapter will expand upon the relevant Coastal Act policies with additional legal considerations. In 2015, Governor Brown put into effect two regulatory requirements regarding climate change adaptation planning. The first, Senate Bill 379, requires local agencies to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in long range planning documents. The second, Governor’s Executive Order No. B-30-15, directed state agencies to factor climate change into planning decisions. This order has been promulgated by the California Coastal Commission to include climate adaptation in Local Coastal Programs (LCP).

The purpose of this chapter is to address the above-mentioned regulatory requirements regarding climate change and to provide policy guidance to minimize the risk to persons and property posed by potential sea level rise. These policies recognize that sea level rise projections are continually evolving and the effectiveness of hybrid adaptation strategies is not well known. Therefore, the policies focus on protecting beaches and the natural shoreline while also allowing for protection and armoring of the shoreline for specific limited circumstances as provided for within the Coastal Act and reassessment of the adaptation plan in the future. The policies do not include managed retreat as an adaptation strategy unless and until

6.2A

6.2 1.e
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-3
a future Local Coastal Land Use Plan amendment and public input process culminates in supporting the strategy.

6.2 SEA LEVEL RISE KEY FINDINGS
Climate change is happening now. The accumulation of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere is causing and will continue to cause global warming and resultant climate change. For the coastal setting, the primary exposure will be an increase in sea level rise1 due to thermal expansion of the ocean’s waters and melting of ice sheets. Based on state level studies regarding sea level rise, seven key findings have been determined (CalNRA/OPC 2018):
• Scientific understanding of sea level rise is advancing at a rapid pace. Projections of future sea level rise have been adjusted to address improved understanding of sea level rise contributors and will continue to adjust as scientific understanding increases. • The direction of sea level change is clear. Coastal California is already experiencing the early impacts of a rising sea level.
• The rate of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets is increasing. These ice sheets will soon become the primary contributor to global sea level rise, overtaking the contributions from ocean thermal expansion and melting mountain glaciers and ice caps. • New scientific evidence has highlighted the potential for extreme sea level rise. If greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, key glaciological processes could cross thresholds that lead to rapidly accelerating and effectively irreversible ice loss. • Probabilities of specific sea level increases can inform decisions. A probabilistic approach to sea level rise projections, combined with a clear articulation of the implications of uncertainty and the decision support needs of affected stakeholders, is the most appropriate approach for use in a policy setting.
• Current policy decisions are shaping our coastal future. Before 2050, differences in sea level rise projections under different emissions scenarios are minor but they diverge significantly past that point. After 2050, sea level rise projections increasingly depend on the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions.
• Waiting for scientific certainty is neither a safe nor prudent option. High confidence in projections of sea level rise over the next three decades can inform preparedness efforts, adaptation actions and hazard mitigation undertaken today, and prevent much greater losses than will occur if action is not taken.

As further discussed below, impacts of sea level rise along Pacifica’s coastline would be significant. High tides and larger storms will challenge and change Pacifica’s existing shoreline, including portions of the 1 Sea level rise is the worldwide average rise in mean sea level.

1.e
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-4
shoreline with shoreline protection structures. Impacts to Pacifica’s shoreline could affect existing coastal developments, coastal habitats, coastal access and recreation. The policies in this chapter will guide Pacifica in how to prepare for the challenges associated with sea level rise and to reduce risks to people and property.

6.3 PREPARATION OF POLICIES
The City of Pacifica received a Local Assistance Grant from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) and California Coastal Conservancy. The grant provided funding to the City of Pacifica to hire a consultant to conduct technical analyses for the CCC-recommended multi-step process to develop sea level rise and adaptation policies this LCLUP. The CCC-recommended steps included:

Step 1. Determine a range of sea level rise projections relevant to the LCP Planning Area/segment.

Step 2. Identify potential physical sea level rise impacts in the LCP Planning Area/segment.

Step 3. Assess potential risks from sea level rise to coastal resources and development in the LCP Planning Area/segment.

Step 4. Identify adaptation measures and LCP policy options.

Step 5. Draft an updated or new LCP for certification with the CCC.

Step 6. Implement the LCP and monitor and re-evaluate strategies as needed.

Steps 1 through 3 were completed through the preparation of the Vulnerability Assessment. Step 4 was completed through the preparation of the Adaptation Plan. Steps 1 through 4 are further discussed below.

Step 5 was completed by CCC certification of this LCLUP. Step 6 will be ongoing throughout the implementation of this LCLUP.

Council Goals
In March 2018, the City Council unanimously adopted the following goals to help guide the direction of the planning effort for development of the Coastal Resiliency Policies. The goals included:

1. Bolster efficacy of public safety efforts. Evacuations of bluff top homes have been necessary to protect the health, safety, and wellness of residents. The Adaptation Plan will assist the City to protect human life, property, and critical infrastructure in response to a catastrophic event.

2. Respond to climate change. The Adaptation Plan will allow Pacifica to prepare for sea level rise and climate change impacts by identifying policies that enhance the Coastal Zone’s adaptive capacity.

3. Preserve Existing Neighborhoods and Promote Environmental Justice and Local Economic Vitality. Pacifica’s Coastal Zone includes:

1.e
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-5
• 12% of the City’s population.
• The majority of older, and therefore more affordable, housing stock. • Five of six hotels (80% of the rooms) that generate transient occupancy tax revenues for City operations and bring visitors who patronize businesses. • More than half of commercial businesses, which provide vitality to the community and tax revenue for City operations.
• Public facilities that include City Hall, North Coast County Water District, Ingrid B. Lacy Middle School, the Pacifica Pier, drainage outfalls, waste water pumping stations, sewer force mains, and the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant. • Significant historical and public recreational assets including beaches, coastal trails, the Beach Boulevard promenade, parks and Sharp Park Golf Course.

The loss or disruption of these assets could have far reaching impacts and affect everyone in Pacifica, not just those living or doing business in the Coastal Zone. The Adaptation Plan will allow the City to create policies that will protect these areas from the impacts of sea level rise, erosion, and coastal flooding. Consistent with the Coastal Act, the Adaptation Plan shall protect existing homes, businesses, and infrastructure in Pacifica.

4. Preserve and enhance coastal access. Beach and bluff access to the coastline is a crucial element of Pacifica’s coastal character and is valued by the community. The Adaptation Plan will allow the city to identify where bluff erosion, sedimentation, and sea level rise may threaten coastal access.

Vulnerability Assessment
In 2018, the City prepared a Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment2 which focused on determining the potential exposure of assets to flooding and erosion hazard under six sea level rise scenarios selected for study. Because future projections of sea level rise along California’s coastline are uncertain (due to uncertainty associated with modeling and the trajectory of global emissions), it was recommended to consider a range of projections to understand the consequences of various decisions, determine the tolerance for risk associated with those decisions, and to inform adaptation strategies necessary to prepare for change in the face of uncertainty. The sea level rise scenarios include no sea level rise (existing conditions) as well as state-recommended scenarios listed in Table 6-1.

TABLE 6-1. PROPOSED FUTURE SEA LEVEL RISE (SLR) AMOUNTS FOR VARIOUS SCENARIOS WITH ASSOCIATED PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE (CALNRA & OPC 2017) Year Low (17% chance) Med-High (0.5% chance) Extreme (n/a) 2050 1 ft. 2 ft. -
2100 3 ft. 6 ft. 10 ft. *
* SLR of 6 ft. at 2075 was considered in place of 10 ft. at 2100 to assess potential impacts under the Extreme scenario. This was recommended by ESA because of the lack of erosion and flooding data for 10 ft. of SLR.

The current best available science was identified in the Vulnerability Assessment. Consistent with the San Mateo County Vulnerability Assessment3, existing and future coastal flooding was evaluated using 2 Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment, prepared by ESA. June 2018. Website:
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=67369.96&BlobID=14459. 3 County of San Mateo Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment, prepared by County of San Mateo et. al. Final Report, March 2018.

1.e
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-6
the Our Coast, Our Future (OCOF; produced by US Geological Survey) mapping products, while future coastal erosion was evaluated using the Pacific Institute (PI) erosion maps.

Our Coast, Our Future
Our Coast Our Future (Ballard et al. 2016) is a collaborative project that provides online maps and tools to help users understand, visualize and anticipate vulnerabilities to sea level rise and storms. The project maps 40 different sea level rise and storm scenarios that were developed by the US Geological Survey (USGS) using their Coastal Storm Modeling System1 (CoSMoS 2.0, North-central California (outer coast)).

Various OCOF mapping products were used to evaluate existing and future coastal flooding hazards due to sea level rise (for regular tidal inundation) and storm flooding (considering a 100-year coastal event).

The OCOF/CoSMoS modeling used for the Vulnerability Assessment does not incorporate the long-term erosion of shorelines and bluffs and thus the flood layers may underestimate flood exposure. The modeling does however use recent (2013) topography that includes existing features such as the elevation of the Beach Boulevard seawall and the Sharp Park Golf Course levee. While potential erosion is not included in the OCOF maps, flooding shown beyond these built features essentially represents conditions for the ongoing maintenance of these elements at their current location and elevation. 4 Pacific Institute Study
In 2009, Philip William and Associates, Ltd. (PWA, now ESA) was funded by the Ocean Protection Council to provide the technical hazards analysis supporting the Pacific Institute report on the “Impacts of Sea Level Rise to the California Coast” (PWA 2009; Pacific Institute 2009). In the course of this work, PWA projected future coastal flooding hazards for the entire state based on a review of existing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hazard maps and projected future coastal erosion hazard areas for the northern and central California coastline, ending at Santa Barbara. These hazard areas were used in the Pacific Institute study, which evaluated potential socio-economic impacts of sea level rise. In order to maintain consistency with the Sea Change SMC study, ESA used the coastal erosion hazard maps in this Vulnerability Assessment to identify potential impacts to Pacifica. The erosion hazard zones produced for this study do not consider the effects of coastal armoring structures, but rather depict the potential extent of erosion in the case that armoring fails or is not maintained. It is important to understand the potential risk that coastal erosion poses to assets without assuming any given adaptation strategy, and the Pacific Institute erosion maps are the best available resource to do so in Pacifica.

The Vulnerability Assessment tabulated asset exposures within seven coastal sub-areas5to facilitate more focused development of adaptation strategies and policies. The subareas used in this assessment, and carried forward throughout this chapter are consistent with the seven subareas used in the other chapters of this LCLUP. The one exception is the West Sharp Park neighborhood. It was decided that the analysis should combine the portion of the West Sharp Park neighborhood along the public sea wall and retaining wall with the Sharp Park Golf Course, West Fairway Park and Mori Point subarea. This decision was made because this entire stretch of shoreline is publicly owned and fully government owned shoreline may have different policy or funding considerations. An additional subarea identified in this planning effort is the West Linda Mar neighborhood, which is not in the Coastal Zone, but will be affected by sea level rise coastal hazards. Figure 6-1 shows the subareas referenced in this Chapter. 4 Erosion modeling was not included in the OCOF mapping data for the Pacifica area at the time of preparation of the Vulnerability Assessment. 5 Eight subareas were analyzed under the Vulnerability Assessment. However, one of those subareas is a portion of West Linda Mar and is outside of the Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6 -7
<<INSERT FIGURE 6-1>>>

1.e
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-8
Based on the best available hazard data from OCOF and PI, the potential hazards for land within the City were identified and evaluated in the Vulnerability Assessment (ESA 2018a). Dominant coastal hazards in Pacifica include the following:
• long-term shoreline erosion
• storm-event coastal erosion of bluffs and beaches
• coastal flooding associated with major wave events
• rising groundwater levels in Linda Mar
• flooding from Laguna Salada and San Pedro Creek
Maps were developed for each subarea depicting the anticipated areas needing protection under the most extreme sea level rise projections. These Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps are included as Appendix B to the LCP and relate to administration of Coastal Resilience Policies CR-I-1, CR-I-2, CR-I-7, CR-I-43, and other policies in this chapter.

The following public and private assets were determined to experience some form of existing or future risk and related vulnerability to sea level rise (e.g., coastal erosion and/or flooding):
• Property (public land and structures, private land and structures including homes, hotels, businesses, etc.)
• Public roads (local and regional)
• Drinking water system
• Wastewater pipes, mains and pump stations
• Stormwater pipes and pump stations
• Parks, trails, and coastal public access
• Beach and wetland habitats
• Other utilities (e.g. communications, electricity, gas) During preparation of the Vulnerability Assessment, the City heard concerns from the public that the PI data used to project coastal erosion did not consider the effects of existing shoreline protection (i.e., coastal armoring) structures. As a result, commenters expressed that the projected area for erosion shown in the Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps (Appendix B of the LCP) was more extreme than practical due to the protections provided by the existing shoreline protection structures and, therefore, the Maps were inappropriate for purposes of assessing actual vulnerability. However, because the Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps show significant erosion for areas that are protected by existing shoreline protection structures, the Maps highlight the protection provided by the structures. importance of the existing structures and the vital need for them to be maintained to protect those vulnerable areas. The City acknowledges that the Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps would not be appropriate for the use of site-specific erosion analyses, but the Maps do show important information necessary to make general planning-level decisions about the vulnerability of portions of the Coastal Zone. Revising the Maps to show the anticipated erosion associated with sea level rise with existing shoreline protection structures in place would result in a smaller projected area of vulnerability, but would not fully show what areas are in fact being protected by the shoreline protection structures and the value of the assets they protect would not be accurately captured.

6.3 1.e
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-9
The findings of the Vulnerability Assessment were used to inform which adaptation strategies may be appropriate to consider in each subarea and provide the background information for the subsequent study, the Adaptation Plan, which is discussed below. The Coastal Vulnerability Zone maps utilized the best available data at the time of preparation. The erosion scenario does not account for existing shoreline protection structures. This information is continually evolving and the maps reflect a long planning horizon recognizing typical design life of structures. Updated models and site-specific analysis could identify that the respective Coastal Vulnerability Zones may have shifted to include more or less area. Coastal Vulnerability Zone maps are not detailed to the parcel-scale and should not be used for real estate, financing, or insurance transactions, or other uses such as navigation, permitting, or regulatory uses. To confirm vulnerability potential, further studies should be performed for Coastal Vulnerability Zones. Coastal Vulnerability projections were sourced from publicly available data and existing models not created by the City of Pacifica.

Adaptation Plan
Following the above-mentioned Vulnerability Assessment, but also in 2018, the City prepared a Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan6. The Adaptation Plan was prepared using information identified in the Vulnerability Assessment. The purpose of the Adaptation Plan was to be a background document that analyzed various adaptation strategies for each subarea, including the costs and benefits of each adaptation strategy, to inform future decisions on adaptation policies. The cost-benefit analysis section of the Adaptation Plan was not adopted or approved by the City of Pacifica. The purpose of the costbenefit analysis was to provide information regarding various sea level rise scenarios and adaptation options and was not intended to prescribe specific adaptation policies. The cost-benefit analysis was perceived to require additional work to adequately analyze the value of public recreational amenities.

The cost-benefit analysis shall not be used for any future purpose by the City of Pacifica or its planning processes, including implementation of the Local Coastal Program, public infrastructure investment, permitting or other regulatory purposes.

The Adaptation Plan modeled selected feasible adaptation strategies for each subarea. The plan identified environmental triggers for when an adaptation strategy would need to be implemented and the cost-benefit analysis of implementation. The cost-benefit analysis considered costs related to • Engineering
• Flooding and erosion
• Transient occupancy, sales, and property tax receipts • Property transactions
The estimated costs were then compared to the estimated benefits of the increased recreational value of expanded beach areas. The comparison was made using an economic methodology that detailed its assumptions as well as the limitations of the analysis and gaps in available data. The cost-benefit analysis was conducted using engineering unit cost estimates for adaptation measures and asset replacement, scheduling (and costing) of adaptation measures through time using a shoreline evolution model and flooding thresholds, and conducting a geographic information system (GIS) exposure analysis 6 Final Draft Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan, prepared by ESA. September 2018. Website:
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=58348.79&BlobID=14632. This footnote is for informational purposes only and does not constitute incorporation of the Final Draft Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan into this LCLUP.

6.4 6.4

1.e
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-10
for the alternative adaptation strategies considered in each sub-area. The Table 6-2 7 below provides a
summary of the methods and data sources used for the cost-benefit analysis.

TABLE 6-2. SUMMARY OF METHODS AND DATA SOURCES FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Estimate Valuation Method Source
Residential Land Market Update County Parcel Data
San Mateo County,
Zillow
Commercial Land Market Update County Parcel Data
San Mateo County,
Zillow
Publicly Owned Land,
Land Trusts Acquisition Cost Apply acreage metric Various Publicly Owned Buildings Appraisals City of Pacifica
Demolition Costs Removal Costs Apply sq. ft. metric ESA Linda Mar Beach Non-Market Valuation
Day Use Value X
Attendance City of Pacifica
Other Beaches Non-Market Valuation
Day Use Value X
Attendance Pacifica CRSMP
Trails None
Estimate Length of Trails
Lost City of Pacifica
Golf Course Market and Non-Market
See Appendix B of
Adaptation Plan Various
Water Pipes Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric NCCWD Communication Conduits Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric Comcast Wastewater Pipes Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric ESA/City Wastewater Mains/Pumps Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric ESA/City Roads Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric ESA/City Stormwater Pipes/Pumps Replacement Costs Apply linear ft. metric ESA/City Source: ESA 2018b; Table 15, Page 69
During preparation of the Adaptation Plan, the City heard concerns from the public that the cost-benefit analysis did not include consideration of some assets, which undervalued the assets needing protection.

Examples provided by the public included the recreational values of Sharp Park Golf Course and coastal trails. The Adaptation Plan provides a detailed description of what assets were considered in the costbenefit analysis and which items were either not included or discussed only at a qualitative value and the reasoning for such actions. An analysis of the recreational value of the Sharp Park Golf Course in the Adaptation Plan concludes that the recreational value of the Golf Course is approximately even with the operation costs for the golf course. For this reason and other factors provided in the Adaptation Plan, and with the recommendation from a qualified economic consultant, the loss of the Sharp Park Golf Course was only evaluated as a loss of public property.

Other public comments related to the valuation assigned to trails. Pacifica has a number of coastal hiking trails which are popular with various user types. However, no reliable source to quantify trail use could be found for inclusion in the Adaptation Plan. The Adaptation Plan recognizes that a recreational value for the trails was not provided, but also assumed that trails are an asset that can naturally be relocated. The cost-benefit analysis does qualitatively value the estimated loss of trails by acknowledging the loss of trails in linear feet for each alternative. 7 Table 6-2 is a replication of Table 15 (page 69) from the ESA 2018b.

1.e
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-11
Additionally, the City also heard concerns from the public regarding the recreational beach value used in the cost-benefit analysis. Commenters were concerned that the $40/day per person-visit value was an unsupported value and the analysis overestimated beach attendance. Concerns were that an overestimated value would set a standard for future mitigation costs for maintaining current shoreline protection structures and would create an imbalance on the analysis in favor of managed retreat. The cost-benefit analysis in the Adaptation Plan was prepared to support and inform the comparison of various adaptation strategies. The cost-benefit analysis is not intended to establish a standardized statewide beach recreation value. As fully discussed in the Adaptation Plan, the City did address concerns that the $40/day per person-visit value was too high for Pacifica’s beaches and that the number of people using the beach was very small, lower than the estimates used in the Adaptation Plan.

In response, a sensitivity analysis was applied using a lower day-use value ($10/day per person-visit)8. In summary, significantly lowering the value of a beach day, or significantly lowering attendance, did not change the rank ordering of the alternatives in economic terms, except at Rockaway Beach, where a higher attendance estimate would justify beach nourishment, which would also help protect the hotels, restaurants and other businesses there.

The findings of the Adaptation Plan are just one of the considerations that were used to develop the Coastal Resilience policies below and, as discussed, the Coastal Resilience policies focus on protection and armoring of the shoreline for specific limited circumstances as provided for within the Coastal Act and reassessment of the Adaptation Plan in the future. Therefore, changes to the cost-benefit analysis are not necessary to inform the Coastal Resiliency policies. in a manner to discourage managed retreat as suggested by some public commenters detailed below would be unnecessary since the Coastal Resilience policies do not include managed retreat as an adaptation strategy. As noted earlier in this section, the cost-benefit analysis prepared for the Adaptation Plan shall not be used for any future purpose by the City of Pacifica or its planning processes.

The Adaptation Plan was prepared to inform City decision making about a variety of sea level rise adaptation policies, but does not include or dictate the ultimate policies selected by the City. Although managed retreat alternatives are analyzed in the Adaptation Plan in accordance with the City’s grant agreement with the CCC, these analyses do not, in themselves, equate to a managed retreat policy. The City uses other sea level rise adaptation policy in this LCP and any future changes to policy will require an amendment to this LCP. To the contrary, the City has rejected managed retreat as a sea level rise adaptation policy in this LCP and managed retreat could only become the policy of the City subsequent to a future amendment to the LCP.

As mentioned above, there are many unknowns associated with sea level rise. The science and modeling of sea level rise projections are inherently uncertain. The rate of sea level rise is highly dependent on whether global greenhouse gas emissions will continue to increase or whether global emissions will be reduced. The rate of sea level rise could be higher, or lower, than current projections. The Vulnerability Assessment and the Adaptation Plan are the background documents that were prepared to inform the development of the Coastal Resilience policies contained in the LCP. The background documents were prepared based on the best available science and available data at the time of preparation. As discussed 8 Note that the effect of lowering the beach value by 75% yields the same result as lowering attendance by 75% or reducing both attendance and unit value by 50%.

6.4 6.4

6.4 6.4

1.e
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-12
in the policies, updates to these background documents may be appropriate as future best available science progresses, which may warrant the consideration of new or revised Coastal Resilience policies.

6.4 GENERAL POLICIES
Based on the results of the Adaptation Plan, consideration given to the Coastal Act, stakeholder input9, and Council goals, the below Coastal Resilience policies were developed and selected for inclusion in the LCP.

Guiding Policies
CR-G-1 Key Coastal Act Policies. The City of Pacifica adopts the following key policies derived from the Coastal Act to address coastal resilience:

PRC 30235. Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels, seawalls, cliff retaining walls, and other such construction that alters natural shoreline processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal-dependent uses or to protect existing structures or public beaches in danger from erosion, and when designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply.

PRC 30253. New development shall: (1) minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard; and (2) assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs; and,
The Coastal Resilience policies adopted herein are intended to achieve and are consistent with these key policies, subject to periodic updates as resource and development monitoring and program implementation may dictate.

CR-G-2 Sea Level Rise and Best Available Science. Planning and development reviews shall use, as applicable, the best available science about projected sea level rise and other climate change-related environmental changes when addressing coastal erosion, bluff failure, flooding, and other coastal hazards.
9 Public comments were received throughout the process of preparing the Coastal Resilience policies. Comments and responses to those comments were published after public review of each of the deliverables. Please see https://CityofPacifica.org/sealevelrise for more information.

1.e
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-13
Implementing Policies
CR-I-1 Vulnerability Identification and Mapping. The City’s Coastal Vulnerability zones shall be mapped based on the best available science about projected sea level rise, erosion, flooding, and other coastal hazards. Mapping shall be updated as necessary to guide implementation of the LCP’s Coastal Resilience policies. Notwithstanding the Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps, site-specific hazard mapping and assessment may be required as part of the individual development review process for properties within the City’s Coastal Vulnerability zones.

6.5 COASTAL RESILIENCE POLICIES
Implementing Policies
CR-I-1 Coastal Vulnerability Zones. Those areas of the City that are predicted to be vulnerable to coastal hazards have been mapped as Coastal Vulnerability Zones in Appendix B, where such mapping is based on the best available science about projected sea level rise, erosion, flooding, and other coastal hazards at the time of LUP adoption. It is likely that such areas will change over time, and Appendix B shall be regularly updated to guide implementation of the LCP’s coastal resiliency provisions. In any case, however, if best available science at the time an application is reviewed shows that proposed development located outside of such mapped area is also vulnerable to coastal hazards, then such application shall be reviewed as though such development was located in the Coastal Vulnerability Zones.

CR-I-2 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan. Development in Coastal Vulnerability Zones. The City shall implement its Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan10 as expressed in the general and subarea Coastal Resilience policies. Adaptation alternatives evaluated in the Adaptation Plan that are not specifically expressed in these Coastal Resilience policies shall not be implemented without an amendment to the LCP, public notice, and opportunity for public input. The City shall monitor implementation and, consistent with Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-4, update the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan to strengthen public safety, preserve existing neighborhoods, assure local economic vitality, respond to climate change, promote environmental justice, implement the Coastal Act, and protect the public trust.
10 Final Draft Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan, prepared by ESA. September 2018. Website:
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=58348.79&BlobID=14632. This footnote is for informational purposes only and does not constitute incorporation of the Final Draft Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan into this LCLUP.

6.5B

6.5 6.5A

6.6 6.6A

1.e
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-14
Development located in Coastal Vulnerability Zones may only be approved consistent with the sub-area policies in Section 6.6 if such development, as measured over its full anticipated life, is sited, designed, and conditioned: the following findings can be made:
a. The proposed development is sited and designed to avoid, and where unavoidable, to minimize risks from coastal hazards and impacts to coastal resources to the maximum extent feasible, consistent with the Adaptation Plan; b. All project impacts on coastal resources are To avoided, and where unavoidable ,to minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent feasible through the City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-5) or consistent with Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-59.
c. The project will not pose unacceptable risks to life or property for the anticipated life of the development or otherwise To avoid createing a nuisance; and d. The project will not To avoid encroachment onto public trust lands for the anticipated life of the development; and
e. The project is designed to assure stability and structural integrity absent the need for without reliance on shoreline protection ve devices for the anticipated life of the development.

CR-I-3 Monitoring Shoreline Change. The City shall implement a monitoring program for sea level rise, beach width, bluff offset, flooding and storm damage, and other potential measures or triggers for guiding implementation of the Coastal Resilience policies. The monitoring program shall include yearly biannual (minimum following winter and summer) shoreline and bluff edge surveys and also establish thresholds for reassessing the City’s Adaptation Plan.

The City, in coordination with Coastal Commission staff, shall create an alternating schedule to do half of the applicable area each year.

CR-I-4 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan Update. Assessing Coastal Resiliency Provisions Implementation. The City shall reassess implementation of the LCP’s coastal resiliency provisions its Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan as expressed in the general and sub-area Coastal Resilience policies at least every five years, where such or sooner as required by the shoreline monitoring program (Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-3). The reassessment assessment shall at minimum consider the following:
• The efficacy of such provisions at protecting and enhancing the City’s beach and shoreline area resources, critical infrastructure, and other built and natural environment features. Efficacy of Adaptation Plan and implemented measures. • Updated sea level rise projections and risks.
• The potential need to revise adaptation coastal resiliency measures and/or implement new measures, including review of emerging engineering, science, and technologies.
• Funding needs and potential funding sources.

6.6B

6.6 6.6C

6.6 6.6

6.6 6.7

6.7A

6.7A

1.e
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-15
• The results of the City’s shoreline monitoring program (CR-I-3), shoreline adaption program (CR-I-5), adaptation funding efforts (CR-I-6), consideration of an LCP transfer of development rights program (CR-I-7), critical transportation infrastructure efforts (CR-I-8), hazard prone infrastructure efforts (CR-I-9), business outreach efforts (CR-I-10), high water mark efforts (CR-I-11), flood ordinance and LHMP consistency efforts (CR-I-11 and CR-I-12), sediment management and beach nourishment programs (CR-I-14 and CR-I-15), additional flood protection efforts (CR-I-16), groundwater monitoring efforts (CR-I-17), and Caltrans coordination efforts (CR-I-18).

The draft findings of the City’s City shall use such assessment shall be disseminated to the public for review and comment prior to being finalized. efforts to form the basis for LCP updates and changes to better address coastal hazards in a way that can protect and enhance bluff, shoreline, offshore, and sandy beach recreational areas for public use and enjoyment while ensuring all development (including private structures and public infrastructure) are safe from coastal hazards as much as possible both now and in the future.

CR-I-5 Shoreline Mitigation Adaptation Program. Within 10 years of the certification of this LUP update, the City shall develop a Shoreline Adaptation Program for the City’s shoreline and obtain Coastal Commission certification of an LCP amendment informed by the Program. The Program is encouraged to be made up of sub-area plans for smaller sections of the coastline that share similar attributes, shall build on past adaptation planning work, and identify adaptation approaches that will be implemented to address vulnerabilities and protect coastal resources throughout the City.

The Program shall be consistent with and help to support and implement the Coastal Access and Resilience Program developed per CR-I-44 and at a minimum address the following topics:
a) Existing and Future Conditions. Leveraging any existing relevant data or studies, describe the relevant shoreline area in terms of its resources and constraints. Identify baseline conditions in terms of existing public and private development; shoreline, sandy beach, and offshore public access and recreational areas; and environmental resources. Include an assessment of beach widths throughout tidal and seasonal ranges. Additionally, analyze how conditions are expected to change as coastal hazards (including short- and long-term erosion and flooding) are exacerbated by sea level rise. Describe how the presence or absence of development and shoreline protection structures has impacted and is projected to impact conditions over

6.7A

6.7A

6.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-16
time, particularly how such development would or would not allow for natural migration of beaches over time and impact public use and availability of the sandy beach/shoreline. Identify areas where beaches would likely be able to persist if able to migrate as sea levels rise versus those areas where the geology/conditions are such that the continued presence of beaches in such areas is unlikely. b) Goals and Actions. Describe the overall vision for Pacifica’s coastline (and each sub-area) over the short-, medium-, and long-term horizon.

This vision shall relate to the opportunities and constraints identified above and shall include specific goals and actions for protection of public access and coastal resources and minimization of coastal hazard risks. The Program shall provide requirements for adapting existing and future development, including public and private structures, community infrastructure, coastal accessways, and other shoreline area development to meet specific goals in line with the overall vision of the City’s shoreline (and each sub-area), including as such objectives may differ by sub-areas. Strategies to consider shall include but are not limited to sediment management, beach nourishment, green infrastructure, shoreline protection structures, elevation of development, structural modifications, and removal of development as part of a Transfer of Development Rights Program (Policy CR-I-7) or other voluntary process for property owners. Additionally, the Program shall identify the timeline over which different options may be applied, including how different strategies would be phased over time, and shall explicitly define triggers for when different adaptation options would need to be implemented. The Program shall also describe the policy options (e.g., land use and zoning requirements, development approval conditions, deed restrictions, design guidelines, etc.), specific projects, and funding mechanisms necessary to ensure adaptation actions are carried out.
c) Special Shoreline Resilience Areas. Considering the existing and future shoreline conditions and the City’s goals and actions described in parts (a) and (b) above, evaluate phased adaptation approaches for the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas. Consider the extent to which shoreline protection structures may continue to be the preferred adaptation approach or whether alternatives may better achieve City goals and result in preferred coastal resource outcomes. Furthermore, analyze the ability of the shoreline protection structures to withstand

6.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-17
coastal hazard conditions over time as sea levels rise, the feasibility and costs of anticipated maintenance activities, any anticipated augmentations or replacement that may be necessary over time as sea levels rise, and any threshold hazard conditions beyond which the shoreline protection structures may not be able to function and the associated adaptation measures that would be necessitated for the development that relies on the shoreline protection structures. d) Sandy Beach Areas. The City shall identify all sandy beach areas that provide for associated recreational opportunities, including but not limited to Sharp Park south of the Pacifica pier, southern Rockaway Beach, and Pacifica State Beach. For areas where public beach access has already been or is likely to be limited and eventually lost due to the presence of development that prevents natural beach formation/migration, the Program shall focus on strategies that will result in the removal of development to allow for natural beach migration processes. The Program for these sandy beach areas (broken down by each sub-area as well as overall) shall also include the following:
i. Minimum Sandy Beach Widths. An analysis of the minimum width of sandy beach necessary to maintain optimum public recreational access and habitat function. This analysis shall include considerations of daily tidal range, seasonal erosion, and short-term, storm-driven erosion when determining
optimum beach widths. Additionally, the analysis shall assess the types of adaptation strategies, including but not limited to sediment management, beach nourishment, and removal of
development (subject to voluntary mechanisms available to property owners, as described above), along with appropriate triggers for when different adaptation strategies should be implemented to ensure that minimum sandy beach widths are maintained over time as sea levels rise.
ii. Sandy Beach Monitoring. The Program shall include monitoring protocols for the width of the beach as well as recreational access, sandy beach use, and habitat values throughout the year and over time. Such monitoring protocols shall identify and track locations, times, and durations throughout the year when the sandy beach is too narrow to be adequate for public recreation and/or lateral access. Such monitoring will ensure

6.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-18
that the minimum beach width established through the
analysis above is adequate for maintaining public access and coastal resource values and will provide the necessary
information for when adaptation triggers are met, as described below.
iii. Sandy Beach Adaptation. The Program shall identify the suite of actions and programs that will be implemented over time to maintain sandy beach utility. The Program shall also include explicit triggers for sediment management, beach
nourishment, voluntary development removal, and/or
alternative strategies that are designed to ensure that the identified minimum sandy beach width is maintained. The Program shall identify “maintenance” triggers for when beach nourishment or related strategies to protect sandy beach areas should occur as well as “adaptation” triggers for when new adaptation strategies will have to be implemented in order to preserve beach recreational access as sea levels rise and erosion worsens.
iv. Mitigation. The Program shall include provisions designed to offset loss of sandy beach area, including application of complementary provisions for offsetting such losses through enhancements in other beach/shoreline areas in the City if applicable.
e) Alternative Access. Where geologic conditions or land use patterns and shoreline armoring approaches will limit the ability of sandy beaches to persist (even without the presence of development and shoreline protection structures), the Program shall identify options to allow for alternative types of shoreline access. Such options may include, but are not limited to, vertical access to rocky shorelines or to the ocean, lateral access along blufftops or as part of shared vertical seawalls, viewing platforms, and parks. The Program shall identify preferred locations for such features and tools for ensuring such features are constructed and maintained (e.g. conditions of approval, shoreline protection structure design requirements, acquisition of easements or other areas, voluntary removal of development, etc.).

Additionally, the Program shall identify and describe how such features should be adapted and modified over time as sea levels rise to ensure access is maintained over time.

6.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-19
f) Funding Opportunities. Identification of potential funding opportunities to support short-, medium-, and long-term adaptation options. This shall include funding for implementation of specific adaptation projects (e.g. sediment management, beach nourishment, green infrastructure, habitat restoration, development removal, etc.); construction of public access features; purchase of deed restrictions, easements, or similar interests; and structural buyouts and related opportunities for acquisition and removal of structures encroaching within the established sandy beach areas. Potential funding opportunities may include in-lieu fees (including those generated from mitigation for shoreline protection structures per Policy CR-I-34), grants, state/federal funds, and GHADs/CSAs. Opportunities to integrate adaptation strategies with other planning processes (e.g., Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, Capital Improvement Plans, Climate Action Plans, etc.), including in order to leverage funding options, shall also be explored.
g) GHADs/CSAs. Identification of measures necessary to support creation of Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts, City Service Areas, or other similar entities involving one or more sections of the coastline, as a preferred mechanism for implementation of Shoreline Adaptation Program (and related LCP amendment) requirements.

CR-I-6 Adaptation Funding. The City will pursue feasible grant funding sources or new funding mechanisms, such as the formation of Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts (GHADs) as supported by NH-I-16, or securing FEMA and other federal or state adaptation and hazard mitigation funds, to finance adaptation strategies for public infrastructure.

CR-I-7 Transfer of Development Rights Program. Use The City shall explore the ways in which the City’s transfer of development rights (TDR) ordinance could be applied within the LCP to relocate development rights from Coastal Vulnerability Zones (sending sites) to receiving sites outside of Coastal Vulnerability Zones, including to identify areas where densities and heights may be increased using TDR credits, including to facilitate affordable housing.

CR-I-8 Critical Transportation Infrastructure. The City will pursue opportunities to preserve, protect, or relocate critical local transportation infrastructure, or provide alternative access, to mitigate against isolation and economic loss, and to ensure public safety, while avoiding (and where unavoidable minimizing and mitigating) impacts to coastal resources, including public access and recreation, to the maximum extent feasible, and being consistent with prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act.

6.8 6.9

6.8A

1.e
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-20
CR-I-9 Hazard Prone Infrastructure. The City will preserve, protect, or relocate hazard prone infrastructure to maintain critical services and protect coastal resources, including if required by prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act. Preservation/protection in situ with shoreline armoring shall be required to meet the requirements of Policies CR-I-31 and CR-I-32.

CR-I-10 Business Outreach. The City’s Economic Development Division shall provide nonfinancial assistance to businesses in evaluating options to promote business resiliency.

CR-I-11 High Water Program. The City will research and evaluate feasible new funding mechanisms to implement a program to record high water marks where feasible following high-water events.

CR-I-12 Flood Ordinance Consistency. The City will review and amend as necessary the flood damage prevention ordinance to assure consistency with the updated policies and ordinances of the LCP.

CR-I-13 LHMP Alignment. The City will coordinate its departments and programs to align the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) with the LCP to ensure proactive, coordinated and streamlined adaptation efforts and response to future coastal hazards. The City shall leverage FEMA funding opportunities for hazard mitigation and other related funding mechanisms to implement the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan as expressed in the general and sub-area Coastal Resilience policies. LCP’s coastal resiliency provisions.

CR-I-14 Regional Sediment Management. Participate in regional approaches to protecting, enhancing and restoring coastal beaches and watersheds through the California Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup, with a goal of minimizing coastal erosion.

CR-I-15 Shoreline Protection Structures. Shoreline protection structures shall be avoided except that existing shoreline protection structures may be maintained or new shoreline protection structures constructed to protect existing structures in danger from erosion if found to be the least environmentally-damaging alternative, impacts to beach, public access and recreation, and other coastal resources are fully mitigated consistent with CR-I-5 and CR-I-59, and compliant with any prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act . Allow shoreline protection structures for the public road and sewer line existing structures if necessary and consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57, other LCP policies, and the Coastal Act. New development on blufftops shall comply will all LCP setback policies, including CR-I-44.

CR-I-15 Beach Nourishment. Evaluate the feasibility of using beach nourishment In coordination with the California Coastal Commission and other permitting agencies (e.g. State Lands Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) the City shall evaluate a beach nourishment program, in conjunction with sand retention structures (see artificial headlands concept

6.10 6.10A

6.11 6.12

1.e
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-21
in the Adaptation Plan) as described in CR-I-55, to reduce shoreline protection structure maintenance requirements and maintain beaches of at least 100 feet in width on average, consistent with other LCP policies and the Coastal Act. If feasible and approved through a coastal development permit, secure funding and implement as soon as possible. Repeat as necessary. Mitigate all adverse impacts and monitor effectiveness over time. The beach nourishment program will need to be evaluated to be the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative and will include measures to protect water quality and to avoid (and where unavoidable to minimize and mitigate) potential adverse coastal resource impacts, including biological resource impacts, from deposition of material, including measures such as sand compatibility specifications, restrictions on volume of deposition, timing or seasonal restrictions, and identification of environmentally preferred locations for deposits.

CR-I-16 Additional Flood Protection Measures. The City shall evaluate the need for additional flood protection measures, which may include:
• Clarendon Road and/or West Fairway Park stormwater basin, pump station, and/or interior Sharp Park Golf Course levee to help protect homes and businesses; • A San Pedro Creek floodwall along commercial property to help manage flooding; • Floodproofing at the Anza (stormwater) and/or Linda Mar (sewer and stormwater) pump stations to help protect against coastal storm flooding vulnerabilities; and • Elevate and floodproof development structures if consistent with any permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act as necessary to mitigate flood damage, consistent with height limitations.

CR-I-17 Groundwater Monitoring. The City shall begin groundwater monitoring to help determine needs for dewatering wells in the lowest portions of the coastal neighborhoods.

CR-I-18 Caltrans Coordination. The City shall coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate options for protecting Highway 1, if necessary.

6.6 SUB-AREA POLICIES AND PROGRAMS DECRIPTIONS
The following policies and programs section discusses implementation the near-term sea level rise adaptation priorities for each sub-area in Pacifica, and identifies y mid- and long-term adaptation measures, subject to feasibility and monitoring concerns. These priorities were developed based on existing conditions and existing/near term vulnerabilities for each sub-area, as well as the City’s adopted goals for sea level rise adaptation.

As required in Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-3, the City shall monitor erosion, flooding, and sea level rise amount into the future to identify triggers for future adaptation measures beyond initial actions

6.12A

6.12B

6.12C

6.13A

6.13A

1.e
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-22
required due to existing conditions. Where applicable, the titles of the policies in this subsection detail when the policy should be implemented. For example, CR-I-15 Shoreline Protection Structures (0-1 foot SLR or 260-foot offset from bluff toe to infrastructure) should be implemented when 0 to 1 foot of sea level rise or a 260-foot bluff offset is experienced. The bluff offset is measured distance between the edge of the bluffs and the asset (e.g., infrastructure, development). These triggers do not account for regulatory permitting, approvals, or financing; therefore planning should be done in advance of the triggers.

Generally, for all lands within the Coastal Vulnerability 2050 Pacific Institute erosion hazard Zones 11 ,
utilities, roadways and other public infrastructure should be floodproofed unless other adaptation alternatives are implemented and performing well, and only if consistent with LCP and Coastal Act policies. The City should incentivize risk reduction (e.g, floodproofing, etc.) that property owners can invest in, with grant funding or code updates. In addition, the City should, when appropriate, evaluate and pursue floodproofing infrastructure that may be currently exposed to coastal erosion and flooding to reduce the consequences of under-performance of protection measures, only if such floodproofing infrastructure is designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply, is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative and consistent with LCP and Coastal Act policies, consistent with LCP and Coastal Act policies (CR-I-1661).

The City’s overall approach to address for new development is to minimize or avoid current and projected future coastal hazards is through siting and design of new development to be out of harm’s way and to limit shoreline armoring as much as possible, including to help preserve and protect the City’s shoreline and beaches. At the same time, managed retreat is not included in any of the nearterm policies. Managed retreat would be reconsidered if feasibility and monitoring warranted, as detailed in Coastal Resilience Policies CR-I-3 and CR-I-4.

SPECIAL RESILIENCY AREAS
The Special Resiliency Areas (SRA) include the existing shoreline protection structures in the Rockaway and West Sharp Park sub-areas. The existing shoreline protection structures protect a mix of unified coastal access, including coastal access points and trails; public infrastructure, including sidewalks, roads, water, and sewer; electrical utilities; and public parking, both on- and off-street. The unique circumstances in Rockaway Beach and West Sharp Park warrant a unique policy approach. The purpose of modifying policies applicable to this area is to allow ongoing reliance on the existing shoreline protection structures and allow ongoing provision of public services, and protection of robust coastal access for all persons including persons with disabilities within a Special Resiliency Area (SRA). The two SRA locations are identified in Figure 6-2 and 6-3
Implementing Policies
CR-I-17 Shoreline Management Plan. The City will establish a funding source for a shoreline management plan implementation. Funding sources may include, but not be limited to, 11 Maps available at http://esanw.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=5163d0c3a03043baba59eb273cce3139

6.13 6.13

6.13 6.13

6.14 6.15

1.e
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-23
grants, fees, assessments, taxes, and any other lawful public or private funding source.

The City will create a funding and implementation plan with specific projects to improve the coastline Citywide. Improvements may include the 400 Esplanade Multi-Purpose Trail, Beach Boulevard Promenade Park Improvements, and the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle Lane Project. Creation of this plan will include community outreach and input.

The plan will identify specific short-, medium-, and long-term projects to mitigate coastal resource impacts from ongoing reliance on shoreline protection within Special Resiliency Areas. In general, the implementation plan will fund a variety of projects identifying and carrying out shoreline protection removal opportunities, implementing nature-based solutions to adapt existing shoreline protection devices, maintenance or alteration of existing shoreline protection devices to expand public coastal access including but not limited to trails and beach access, acquiring and conserving undeveloped coastal properties, and enhancing visitor amenities. Specific improvements and shoreline protection device removal may occur anywhere within the City of Pacifica.

The plan must be submitted to California Coastal Commission for certification within three (3) years of LCLUP certification. Failure to submit will void Special Resiliency Area allowances provided in other LCLUP policies until such time as the CCC certifies the plan.

FAIRMONT WEST
The Fairmont West sub-area includes 0.6 miles of shoreline at the northern most portion of the City of Pacifica that includes open space west of and residential development east of Palmetto Ave and Westline Drive. The most seaward assets in this sub-area are the north end of Palmetto Avenue and Westline Drive which are beyond 300 feet from the current bluff edge, and the Dollaradio station (100 Palmetto Avenue), both of which were constructed prior to the Coastal Act. A rock revetment was constructed along the bluff toe in front of Dollaradio in 2010.

The roadway and utilities in Fairmont West are at risk after one to two feet of sea level rise. Some beach width may exist for access and other coastal resources, but given the high bluffs here, there is not adequate vertical access to the beach. Due to the undeveloped conditions of the bluffs in this sub-area, adaptation efforts are not required immediately. Beach nourishment, while a lower priority for this subarea compared to other more developed sub-areas in the City, could take place at a later date with a larger volume of sand. CR-I-1655 would direct the City to evaluate a citywide sand replenishment program in conjunction with sand retention structures to determine the City’s preferred sand replenishment design.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-15 Shoreline Protection Structures (0-1 foot SLR or 260-foot offset from bluff toe to infrastructure). Shoreline protection structures shall be avoided except that the existing shoreline protection structures may be maintained or new shoreline protection structures constructed to protect existing structures in danger from erosion if found to be the least environmentally-damaging alternative, impacts are fully mitigated consistent with CR-I-5, and compliant with any prior permit conditions and/or legal

6.15 6.16

1.e
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-24
obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act. Allow shoreline protection structures for the public road and sewer line existing structures if necessary and consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57, other LCP policies, and the Coastal Act. New development on blufftops shall comply will all LCP setback policies, including CR-I-44.

CR-I-16 Beach Nourishment (2 feet SLR or 260-foot offset from bluff toe to infrastructure).

Evaluate the feasibility of using beach nourishment, in conjunction with sand retention structures (see artificial headlands concept in the Adaptation Plan) as described in CR-I55, to reduce shoreline protection structure maintenance requirements and maintain beaches of at least 100 feet in width on average. If feasible and approved through a coastal development permit, secure funding and implement as soon as possible. Repeat as necessary. Mitigate all adverse impacts and monitor effectiveness over time.

CR-I-17 Transfer of Development Rights (ongoing). Provide an option to private landowners to voluntarily transfer development potential as supported by CR-I-7.

WEST EDGEMAR AND PACIFIC MANOR
The West Edgemar and Pacific Manor sub-area includes all land west of Highway 1, south of Dollaradio Station to and including the San Francisco RV Resort. The sub-area includes 0.8 miles of coastline that consists of rip rap and a few short (100-400 feet) stretches of sandy beach. The backshore is characterized by tall bluffs (60-120 feet) with development on or near the edge of bluff. Approximately 80 percent of the backshore is currently armored in this sub-area, which highlights the erosion hazards posed to bluff top property and infrastructure.

Built assets and property are at risk from bluff erosion where unarmored now. Much of the armored areas may be overwhelmed by waves with as little as one foot of sea level rise, due to scour and structure sloughing, increased wave loads and overtopping of the structure. Beaches tend to exist in pockets, with armoring impeding lateral access from the degraded vertical access ways. Beach access is limited in West Edgemar and Pacific Manor.

6.17A

6.17 1.e
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-25
Implementing Policies
CR-I-18 Shoreline Protection Structures (0-1 foot SLR or 220-foot offset from bluff toe to infrastructure or development). Maintain existing or construct new shoreline protection structures to protect existing public infrastructure structures, including between Bill Drake Way and Manor Drive. Allow private property owners to maintain existing or construct new shoreline protection structures if allowed pursuant to Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57, and if consistent with prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act, and require mitigation of beach, public access and recreation and other coastal resource impacts, consistent with CR-I-5 or CR-I-59, as necessary.

CR-I-19 Beach Nourishment (0-1 foot SLR or 220-foot offset from bluff toe to infrastructure or development). Evaluate the feasibility of using beach nourishment, in conjunction with sand retention structures (artificial headlands concept) as described in CR-I-55, to reduce shoreline protection structure maintenance requirements and maintain beaches of at least 100 feet in width on average. If feasible and approved through a coastal development permit, secure funding and implement as soon as possible. Mitigate all adverse impacts and monitor effectiveness over time.

NORTHWEST SHARP PARK
The Northwest Sharp Park sub-area includes land west of Highway 1 and between the SF RV Resort and Bella Vista Ave. This sub-area is the northern portion of the West Sharp Park sub-area for the remaining chapters of the LCP. For this chapter, the West Sharp Park sub-area from the LCP was divided along the parcel boundaries between Shoreview Avenue and Paloma Avenue for two reasons. First, the backshore armoring infrastructure changes at this location from private to public. North of the divide, private homes are armored by rock revetments and gunnite covering the bluff face. South of the divide, a public walkway and Beach Boulevard runs along the bluff top which is protected by a seawall and fronting rock revetment. Secondly, flooding at the Sharp Park Golf Course (SPGC) affects residences surrounding the course. Any shoreline management strategies taken for SPGC will have implications for the neighborhood north of and adjacent to the golf course. Thus, the southern portion of West Sharp Park sub-area was combined with the Sharp Park sub-area in order to more clearly discuss existing conditions, evaluate vulnerability and develop adaptation strategies that account for this flooding linkage.

Northwest Sharp Park sub-area includes approximately 2,800 feet of shoreline from the south end of the San Francisco RV Resort to the north end of the Beach Boulevard seawall. The shoreline is almost entirely covered with rock or rubble; the beach is currently very narrow at the north end and disappears in front of the armored homes along Shoreview Avenue. The backshore is about 90 percent armored in this sub-area, owing to gaps in rubble along the northern bluffs.

6.18 6.19

1.e
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-26
The backshore of Northwest Sharp Park is armored but may be overwhelmed by waves with as little as one foot of sea level rise, due to existing scour and shoreline protection structure sloughing, increased wave loads and overtopping of the shoreline protection structure. Beaches tend to exist ephemerally in pockets, with armoring impeding lateral access from the degraded vertical access ways. Existing property and infrastructure are at risk from coastal erosion so actions should be taken soon. As directed by CR-I-5, the City will prepare a public access improvement plan as part of the Shoreline Mitigation Program . Due to the potential lead time of establishing a sand source, beach nourishment planning should begin immediately. CR-I-1655 would direct the City to evaluate a citywide sand replenishment program in conjunction with sand retention structures to determine the City’s preferred sand replenishment design.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-20 Shoreline Protection Structures (0-1 feet SLR or 70-foot offset from bluff toe to development or infrastructure). Private land owners may maintain, expand, or construct new shoreline protection structures to protect existing structures in danger from erosion, consistent with CR-I-2 and any prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act.

CR-I-21 Beach Nourishment (0-2 feet SLR or 70-foot offset from bluff toe to development or infrastructure). Evaluate the feasibility of using beach nourishment, in conjunction with sand retention structures (artificial headlands concept), to reduce shoreline protection structure maintenance requirements and maintain beaches of at least 100 feet in width on average. If feasible and approved through a coastal development permit, secure funding and implement as soon as possible. Repeat as necessary. Mitigate all adverse impacts and monitor effectiveness over time.

CR-I-22 Flood Protection (1 feet SLR). Enable property owners to modify development structures (e.g., elevate a residence) to manage impacts of wave run-up and overtopping of bluff face provided such modifications are consistent with the LCP and any prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act.

SHARP PARK, WEST FAIRWAY PARK AND MORI POINT
The Sharp Park, West Fairway Park and Mori Point sub-area (Figure 14 and Figure 15, Appendix B-4) includes land west of Highway 1 and contains the Palmetto Ave business district, Beach Boulevard Promenade, Fishing Pier, multiple City-owned parcels and landmarks, the Sharp Park Golf Course (SPGC), West Sharp Park and West Fairway Park neighborhoods and Mori Point. In order to represent the

6.20 6.22

6.21 1.e
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-27
flooding connectivity of the lower Sharp Park neighborhood with the SPGC, the “West Sharp Park” subarea was split in two (as described for Northwest Sharp Park above).

The shoreline in this sub-area is comprised of rip rap at the north end along the Beach Boulevard seawall, coarse grained sand from the pier to Mori Point, and exposed wave-cut platforms in bedrock around Mori Point. At the north end of this sub-area, the backshore consists of the Beach Boulevard seawall and fronting rock revetment that extend south of the Pacifica Pier and terminates north of Clarendon Avenue. The seawall protects the pedestrian walkway, road and residential properties from its northern terminus to Montecito Avenue. South of Montecito Avenue there is open space and parking between the seawall/walkway and development that includes City owned and private parcels. The beach is mostly absent along northern Beach Boulevard (north of the pier), and emerges south of the Pacifica Fishing Pier and widens with distance south. Beyond the south end of the seawall, the City currently manages a sand berm to limit wave run-up and overtopping at the end of Clarendon Ave.

South of Clarendon, the backshore consists of an earthen berm levee that spans south to the headlands of Mori Point. The levee was built in the 1980s to protect the Sharp Park Golf Course. The fronting beach is approximately 200 feet wide with sparse vegetation along the back of beach. Approximately 1,150 feet of the northern portion of the levee are covered with rock, while the southern approximately 250 feet are armored by a revetment where the drainage outfall is located.

Most of this area is armored. The northern section between the Pier and Paloma Avenue is subject to frequent wave overtopping and damage to homes has occurred. Beaches are narrow and ephemeral, with armoring impeding lateral access from the degraded vertical access ways. South of the Pier, the beach tends to be more persistent and wider, and there is usually an accessible beach in the vicinity of the end of Clarendon Road, with reliable vertical and lateral beach access. South of Clarendon Road to Mori Point, the beach persists although wave run-up can reach the levee and there is some armoring.

This sub-area is exposed to flooding due to rainfall runoff which cannot flow directly to the ocean. The Clarendon Road area is exposed to flooding now, and certain parts of the West Fairway neighborhood may be exposed to flooding if sea level and ground water levels rise over 3 feet. Due to the potential lead time of establishing a sand source, beach nourishment planning should begin immediately. Policy CR-I-1655 would direct the City to evaluate a citywide sand replenishment program in conjunction with sand retention structures to determine the City’s preferred sand replenishment design.

Flood protection is already needed for homes and businesses along Clarendon Road during rain events and will need to be improved around Sharp Park Golf Course to manage flooding of Laguna Salada regardless of the condition of the Sharp Park Golf Course berm. The City and County of San Francisco is expected to maintain the Sharp Park Golf Course berm which protects the Sharp Park and West Fairway Park neighborhoods from the coastal flooding source, but existing pumping facilities in Sharp Park Golf Course are not designed to mitigate flooding in and around the course during significant rainfall events (i.e., a portable pump station is currently used to manage rainfall runoff flooding along Clarendon Road).

The priority recommendations for flood protection surrounding Sharp Park Golf Course are therefore based on the rainfall (fluvial) flood source, but would also be effective during a major coastal storm if the Sharp Park Golf Course berm is overtopped or breached. Flooding due to wave run-up landward of Beach Boulevard seawalls is already an issue. Monitoring of the existing seawalls against the higher sea

1.e
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-28
levels expected in the future will be necessary (Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-3). Results of the monitoring will be considered during the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan Update to determine if additional flood protection adaptation measures are necessary.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-23 Sharp Park Golf Course. Strongly support the City and County of San Francisco’s ability to provide public access along the coast, protect Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area, and provide flood protection. maintenance of the Sharp Park Golf Course berm and armoring, consistent with the Coastal Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission, including adaptation planning for the course, and protecting public access.

The City of Pacifica shall strongly support the City and County of San Francisco’s ongoing maintenance of the berm even if Coastal Commission termination of authorization is trigged by the conditions of approval, or require construction of flood protection improvements by the City and County of San Francisco.

CR-I-24 Shoreline Protection Structures (0 feet SLR). Maintain existing or construct shoreline protection structures to protect existing public infrastructure structures if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57. Extend the Beach Boulevard seawall to the Sharp Park Golf Course berm if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57.

CR-I-25 Structure Elevation (0-2 feet SLR). Maintain existing or construct shoreline protection structures if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57, and with any prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act to limit wave overtopping unless beach nourishment strategies are effective in reducing wave run-up on the backshore. Elevate development structures if consistent with Policy CR-I-61, and with any prior permit conditions and/or legal obligations pursuant to the California Coastal Act as necessary to mitigate flood damage, consistent with height limitations,.

Elevations of wave run-up and associated development thresholds shall be determined via a site-specific study.

CR-I-26 Beach Nourishment (0-1 feet SLR). Pursue beach nourishment and sand retention structures to reduce shoreline protection structure maintenance requirements and provide beach resources. Encourage the City and County of San Francisco to nourish the beach fronting the Sharp Park Golf Course berm to maintain beach widths.

CR-I-27 Flood Protection (0 foot SLR). Evaluate and construct appropriate flood protection measures, which may include a Clarendon Road stormwater basin, pump station, and/or interior Sharp Park Golf Course levee, to protect homes and businesses from existing fluvial storm flood hazard zone.

6.23 6.24

6.25 6.26

6.27 6.27A

1.e
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-29
CR-I-28 Flood Protection (3 feet SLR). Evaluate the future need to construct a West Fairway Park stormwater basin, pump station, and interior Sharp Park Golf Course levee to protect western homes from future coastal/fluvial flood hazard zone.

ROCKAWAY BEACH, QUARRY AND HEADLANDS
This sub-area includes the vacant quarry site, Rockaway Beach, and Rockaway Headlands. Of the 1,800 feet of shoreline at Rockaway Beach, 1,000 feet are backed by armoring structures. South of the armored development, a small creek daylights from under the highway and flows onto the wider public beach. There are two beach access points in this sub-area: one at the parking lot just south of Calera Creek mouth, and the other at Rockaway Beach.

The armoring near the end of Rockaway Beach Avenue is overtopped by waves under present conditions, with occasional damages caused to nearby structures. Hence, this area has very little capacity and will have a noticeably degraded condition with as little as one foot of sea level rise. There is no beach in this area, with waves crashing directly into the shoreline protection structures. The shore becomes more accessible with distance northward but will also be more limited with as little as 1 foot of sea level rise. The south end of Rockaway Beach is unarmored, has a persistent beach and the backshore is estimated to be impacted with about 2 feet of sea level rise.

Due to the cove configuration of Rockaway Beach, it is a great candidate for beach nourishment. Policies recommend that Rockaway Beach be used as a pilot project for beach nourishment in Pacifica. In the pilot project, the City will go through the overall process for beach nourishment and identify available sources in the region and corresponding sediment characteristics and costs, evaluate the performance of the nourishment and enable the City to reevaluate nourishment along northern Pacifica and perform a more thorough assessment for a larger-scale nourishment project.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-29 Shoreline Protection Structure Shoreline Protection Structures (0 feet SLR). Maintain existing or construct new shoreline protection structures along the north cove for public safety and hazard reduction if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57.

CR-I-30 Shoreline Protection (2-3 feet SLR, or when backshore toe is 100 feet from Highway 1).

Coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate the need for a revetment or other appropriate shoreline protection for the Highway 1 embankment.

CR-I-31 Public Access (0 feet SLR). Plan and provide for enhanced public access, consistent with the City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (CR-I-5).

CR-I-32 Beach Nourishment/Public Access (0 feet SLR). Plan and implement beach nourishment for Rockaway Beach. Monitor and measure performance and any reduction of shoreline protection structure maintenance needs. Establish mechanisms through the City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (CR-I-5) to receive and use beach impact mitigation funds from other sub-areas of the City.

6.28 6.28

6.29 6.30

6.30A

6.31 6.31A

6.32 6.32A

1.e
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-30
CR-I-33 Development Setbacks (ongoing). Implement new development shoreline setbacks consistent with CR-I-44.

CR-I-34 Transfer of Development Rights (ongoing). Provide an option to the private landowners of the Rockaway Headlands to voluntarily transfer development potential as supported by CR-I-7.

PACIFICA STATE BEACH & WEST LINDA MAR
This sub-area spans from the northeast end of Pacifica State Beach to the mouth of San Pedro Creek and includes land west of Highway 1 North. The beach is currently 100 to 250 feet wide. The backshore is mostly comprised of low vegetated dunes habitat in the middle and north portions, while a low seawall fronts the northern pump station and parking lot at the southwest end of the sub-area. The backshore in this sub-area is approximately 15 percent armored.

Adaptation policies for Pacifica State Beach and West Linda Mar are presented together because actions taken at Pacifica State Beach influence coastal hazard exposure to West Linda Mar. Much of the Pacifica State Beach sub-area has a persistent, relatively wide beach with bulkheads in the south transitioning to dune fields in the north. Hence, this shore and roadway can likely withstand at least 2 feet of sea level rise. However, the West Linda Mar sub-area east of Highway 1 has a low elevation and is subject to flooding from high creek flows and rising groundwater associated with sea level rise. Due to the existing beach widths at Pacifica State Beach and existing coastal armoring, armoring actions are not a near - term priority. However, conditions of existing armoring at the Anza stormwater pump station should be monitored to ensure protection in the near term. Nourishment of Pacifica State Beach should be initiated using the shoreline-backshore offset for the main parking lot. Beach nourishment projects should include dune restoration to maintain ecology, protect the sewer force main that is buried in the existing dune field north of the main parking lot/Anza pump station as well as provide flooding protection of Highway 1 and West Linda Mar. Pump stations at Pacifica State Beach are vulnerable to wave run-up and require floodproofing in place. The West Linda Mar neighborhood is also vulnerable to flooding from San Pedro Creek based on existing FEMA hazard maps and will become more vulnerable as sea level rise increases the flood levels in the creek via its ocean boundary condition. The West Linda Mar neighborhood was constructed in a former lagoon and experiences high groundwater issues in the lowest areas, which is evident by existing wetlands around the skate park and homes furthest west.

Groundwater in low areas near the ocean are directly influenced by the sea level, and thus groundwater issues will increase with sea level rise.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-35 Shoreline Protection (2 ft SLR or 100 foot offset from shoreline to infrastructure).

Evaluate beach conditions and consider future shoreline protection to protect existing

6.32A

6.32B

6.33 1.e
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-31
parking structures and the existing Linda Mar stormwater and wastewater pump station structures as necessary.

CR-I-36 Highway One Protection. Coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate options for protecting Highway 1, if necessary.

CR-I-37 Beach Nourishment (2 ft SLR or 100 foot offset from shoreline to infrastructure).

Evaluate beach conditions and implement beach nourishment as necessary to maintain a 100-foot buffer seaward of the sewer force main and/or Highway 1. Repeat nourishments as needed.

CR-I-38 Flood Protection (0 feet SLR). Analyze need for floodwall along commercial property to manage flooding from San Pedro Creek under existing conditions with sea level rise allowance. Future flood studies that include climate-driven changes in precipitation should inform any floodwall design. Floodproof Anza pump station (stormwater) to mitigate existing coastal storm flooding vulnerabilities to wave run-up.

CR-I-39 Flood Protection (2 feet SLR or 100-foot offset from shoreline to infrastructure).

Floodproof the Linda Mar pump stations (sewer and stormwater) to mitigate future coastal storm flooding vulnerabilities to wave run-up as necessary.

CR-I-40 Groundwater Management (0-2 feet SLR). Begin groundwater monitoring to determine needs for dewatering wells in the lowest portions of the West Linda Mar neighborhood.

PEDRO POINT AND SHELTER COVE
The Pedro Point and Shelter Cove sub-area is the southernmost in Pacifica. The backshore is low adjacent to the creek with a few homes built seaward of the former Ocean Shore Railroad berm, two of which have boat ramps into the ocean. Most of these homes have been fortified with timber sea walls West of the beach homes, the previous railway berm and road to Shelter Cove rises to a bluff. A wooden seawall is built in front of the northernmost homes in the Shelter Cove community.

Potential bluff erosion may reach the most seaward bluff top homes at Pedro Point by about 2050 with 1 to 2 feet of sea level rise. Private property is mostly armored along the water (boat docks/homes) but requires upgrades by property owners, while bluff top properties have limited ability to prevent bluff toe erosion due to parcel limits. Private property is vulnerable to bluff erosion, but implementing bluff toe armoring would be complicated due to land ownership.

Implementing Policies
CR-I-41 Shoreline Protection Structure Upgrades. Allow maintenance of existing or new shoreline protection structures to reduce hazards and resource impacts if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57. Mitigate impacts consistent with the City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (CR-I-5), or CR-I-59, as necessary.

6.34A

6.35 6.34

6.35A

6.36 6.36A

6.37 6.37A

6.38 1.e
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-32
CR-I-42 Flood Protection (0-1 feet SLR). Allow private property owners to raise homes and other development structures above wave run-up hazards if consistent with Policy CR-I-61, consistent with height limitations.

6.7 NEW SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD POLICIES
Implementing Policies
CR-I-1943 Technical Reports. Development proposed on the shoreline in Coastal Vulnerability Zones shall include coastal engineering, geomorphology and other relevant technical reports unless on-site hazards already identified in a recent Coastal Vulnerability Zone Map or assessment approved within the last five years are adequate for evaluating and ensuring compliance with the LCP, including through use of permit conditions to address any uncertainty. Reports shall
• be prepared by a licensed civil engineer or other suitably qualified professional; • use the best available science;
• consider the impacts from the med-high intermediate-high projection (CalNRA & OPC 20242018; or similar precautionary projections as reflected in future updated statewide guidance) of sea-level rise for the anticipated duration life of the proposed development;
• demonstrate that the development will avoid (or if unavoidable, minimize) impacts from coastal hazards for the anticipated life of the proposed development without reliance on any existing or future shoreline protection devices, except that development behind Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas shall consider CR-I-38, CR-I-39, and CR-I-41to the maximum extent feasible; and ▪ demonstrate that the factor of safety for blufftop development will be greater than or equal to 1.5 for static conditions and greater than or equal to 1.1 for seismic conditions; and for blufftop and/or shoreline development, be set back a sufficient distance from the blufftop edge or highest predicted water line, accounting for wave runup, highest astronomical tide, storm surge, and other relevant factors (not less than 25 feet, or as determined by site-specific conditions) to avoid coastal hazard risks to the maximum degree possible while ensuring stability and structural integrity in light of potential erosion and other coastal hazards, where such minimum required setback shall be the distance necessary for all structural development (including any decks, fences, patios, arbors, and other ancillary development, and generally not including native landscaping, minor grading for landscaping/restoration purposes, and other similar non-structural development) to stay inland of a line that identifies the future predicted location of the blufftop edge or highest predicted water line, accounting for wave runup, highest astronomical tide, storm surge, and other relevant factors, accounting for expected erosion and a bluff stability factor of safety of at least 1.5 for static conditions and at least 1.1 for seismic conditions (where K=0.15) or sea level rise and other climate change impacts as applicable; and

6.39 6.40

6.39A

6.41 6.43

6.42 1.e
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-33
• evaluate the foreseeable effects that the development will have on coastal resources over time and mitigate the impacts where they are unavoidable.

Reports may be waived for temporary events, temporary development structures or other minor, short-term development where it is clear there will be no significant hazard risks over the project’s life.

CR-I-2044 Siting and Design. New development on vacant shoreline property in Coastal Vulnerability Zones shall be sited, and designed, and setback from the blufftop and/or shoreline to be safe from erosion, bluff failure, wave run-up, flooding and other coastal hazards for at least 100 years the anticipated life of the development or in accordance with CR-I-19, without shoreline protection, considering projected sea level rise and other climate change effects to be determined from best available science and current guidance at the time of approval of the proposed development, as demonstrated by site-specific analyses and/or technical reports. Permit approvals shall prohibit shoreline protection structures for the authorized development, require the property owner to record an acknowledgement that the development does not qualify as an existing structure entitled to construction of a shoreline protection structure under Coastal Act Section 30235, and any other laws, that and a waiver of any rights to such protection structures that might exist, and that, where necessary, requires a removal and restoration plan, including bonding for large projects, to avoid future shoreline protection structures or project failure. However, behind Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas development may consider CR-I-38, CR-I-39, and CR-I-41.

CR-I-2145 Assumption of Risk by Private Landowners. Coastal Hazards Risk Disclosure.

Coastal development permit approvals of development on the shoreline in Coastal Vulnerability Zones and or Tsunami Evacuation Inundation Zones shall require the property owners of all affected properties to record deed restrictions against all such properties prior to issuance of coastal development permits for the development wherein the property owners acknowledge and agree, on behalf of themselves and all successors and assigns that they:
applicant to: record a deed restriction requiring the owner to assume liability and indemnify and hold the City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless, including any injury and/or damage from coastal hazards in connection with the permitted development; unconditionally waive any claim of damage from coastal hazards against the City; waive rights to future shoreline armoring; acknowledge the development may need to be removed and the site restored in response to future hazard conditions; and to assume all responsibility for any adverse effects to property caused by the permitted project and/or need for removal or relocation make other acknowledgments relating to the risks of development on the property.
• acknowledge the site is subject to coastal hazards, including but not limited to episodic and long- term shoreline retreat and coastal erosion,

6.44 6.45

1.e
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-34
high seas, ocean waves, storms, tsunami, tidal scour, coastal flooding, landslides, bluff and geologic instability, and the interaction of same, and all as impacted by sea level rise;
• assume and accept the risks to themselves and their properties of injury and damage from such coastal hazards in connection with the permitted development;
• unconditionally waive any claim of damage or liability against the City and its officers, agents, and employees, for injury and/or damage in connection with the permitted development;
• indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees with respect to the City’s approval of the development against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, and amounts paid in settlement arising from any injury and/or damage in connection with the permitted development, including in terms of the approval or issuance of the coastal permit, the interpretation and/or enforcement of coastal permit terms and conditions, or any other matter related to the coastal permit;
• acknowledge public funds may not be available in the future to repair, maintain, and/or continue to provide infrastructure and related services to the property (e.g., roads and utilities), and that the occupancy of structures may be prohibited if such services are no longer available to serve the development, including where sewage disposal and/or water systems are rendered inoperable;
• waive any rights that might exist under applicable law for shoreline protection structures for the duration the permitted development is present on the property;
• acknowledge the development may need to be removed and the site restored in response to future hazard conditions and/or certain defined triggers identified in the LCLUP and implementing Programs and/or as identified by the terms and conditions of the CDP, including when deemed unsafe, if land comes to be impressed with a public trust interest, when within 10 feet of the blufftop edge, when within 10 feet of the mean high tide line, when no longer served by necessary utilities/infrastructure, when coastal hazards would necessitate construction of a shoreline protection structure to ensure safe occupancy of the development, and/or as part of shoreline protection structure repair/maintenance if the development is not permitted to obtain shoreline protection;

6.45 1.e
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-35
• acknowledge any adverse effects to property caused by the approved development shall be fully the responsibility of the property owner, including any cost associated with abatement and/or future relocation/removal of structures due to coastal hazards; and acknowledge approval of coastal development permits shall not constitute a waiver of any public rights that may exist on the affected properties (including but not limited to the public’s right of access onto or across the property), and such property owner shall not use any such approval as evidence of a waiver of any public rights that may exist on the affected properties now or in the future.

Except that an applicant shall not be required to record a deed restriction as described in this policy if a site-specific geotechnical hazard analysis prepared by a qualified professional licensed by the State of California determines that the project site would not be subject to the hazard(s) identified in the Coastal Vulnerability Zones and/or Tsunami Inundation Zone for the Anticipated Life of the project.

CR-I-2246 MHTL and Avoidance of Public Trust Lands. Applications for low-lying development adjacent to coastal waters shall include a Mean High Tide Line (MHTL) survey of the development site prepared by a licensed professional land surveyor based on field data collected within 12 months of the application submittal (may be based on City monitoring survey data if collected by a licensed professional land surveyor). The survey shall be conducted in consultation with and approved by the California State Lands Commission (CSLC) staff. Development shall be sited to avoid public trust lands for the approved duration of the project, unless otherwise authorized by the California State Lands Commission and California Coastal Commission. The City shall conduct new MHTL surveys every ten years or within one year of a new tidal datum epoch (an epoch is a 19- year tidal cycle used to calculate datums), seismic event in the project area greater than

5.5 magnitude, or significant relative rise in annual local mean sea level records.

CR-I-2347 Bluff Face Development. Shoreline protection structures, grading, and landform alteration Development on bluff faces is are prohibited, except for the following:
• Native bluff landscaping; public recreational access structures improvements (e.g. stairways, paths, overlooks, ramps, etc.) and critical public infrastructure (e.g. public roads, public utility infrastructure, etc.) where no feasible alternative means of public access providing such improvements/infrastructure exists; and • Shoreline protection structures if otherwise allowed by the LCP and the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act. Such shoreline protection

6.45 6.45A

1.e
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-36
structures shall be designed and constructed to be visually compatible with the surrounding area to the maximum extent feasible, to minimize effects on erosion of the bluff face, and to avoid (and where unavoidable to minimize and to mitigate) coastal resource impacts to the maximum extent feasible.

CR-I-2448 Minor Development in Shoreline Areas. Minor and/or ancillary development, including public trails, benches, gazebos, patios, etc., may be located seaward of a bluff or shoreline setback line provided that development is otherwise consistent with the LCP, does not create a hazard, does not use a foundation that can serve as a bluff retaining device, such as caissons, or that requires landform alteration, and that the development is removed or relocated by the landowner when threatened or in the event that portions of the development fall to the bluffs, beach or ocean.

CR-I-2549 Substantial Structural Modifications to Existing Structures. When a proposed physical improvement modifications to an existing a structure would constitute a Substantial Exterior Structural Modification (SESM), as defined, the portion of the project constituting a SESM such proposed development shall correct any existing legal nonconformities related to costal resources, ESHA, and/or coastal hazards and shall be undertaken consistent with the LCP and, if applicable, the Coastal Act, including but not limited to Policies CR-I-1943 and CR-I-2044. Any portion of the existing structure that remains and which is determined to be legally nonconforming with an LCP standard, including bluff setbacks or other hazard criteria, shall not be modified to increase the degree of nonconformity. Except that behind Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas, development shall only be required to correct existing nonconformities related to applicable coastal hazards on the site. Nonconformities related to non-coastal resource issues may be maintained at the discretion of the decision-making body so long as they do not lead to significant impacts to coastal resources.

CR-I-2650 Protection of Private Property in Hazardous Areas. Where full adherence with all LCP policies, including for setbacks and other Coastal Resilience and Natural Hazard avoidance measures, would preclude a reasonable economic use of the property as a whole, the City may allow the minimum economic use and/or development of the property necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation. There is no taking that needs to be avoided if the proposed development constitutes a nuisance or is otherwise prohibited pursuant to other background principles of property law (e.g., public trust doctrine). If development is allowed pursuant to this policy, it must be consistent with all LCP policies to the maximum extent feasible.

CR-I-2751 Habitat Sea Level Rise Migration Buffers. A sea level rise buffer area shall be added to required new development habitat buffers if necessary to allow for the migration of wetlands and other coastal habitats caused by sea level rise over the anticipated duration (i.e., economic life) of the development. Habitats include all wetlands, riparian,

6.46 6.47

1.e
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-37
intertidal/shoreline and terrestrial environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHAs) as defined by the Coastal Act. The sea level rise projection considered shall be determined for the type of development from CalNRA and OPC (2018) guidance or the latest update based on the type of development and current State guidance. Except for temporary uses, as described below, uses and development within sea level rise buffer areas shall be limited to minor passive recreational uses, with fencing, de-siltation or erosion control facilities, or other improvements deemed necessary to protect the habitat, to be located in the upper (upland) half of the buffer area. Water quality features such as drainage swales required to support new development shall not be constructed in wetland buffers. Temporary uses may also be placed in the sea level rise buffer area until such time as sea level rise causes the wetlands or other coastal habitat to migrate to within 100 feet of the temporary uses, at which time, they shall be removed. All habitat and buffers identified shall be permanently conserved or protected through a deed restriction, open space easement, or other suitable device.

CR-I-2852 Stormwater and Dry Weather Flows. New development shall provide adequate drainage and erosion control facilities that convey site drainage in a non-erosive manner to minimize hazards resulting from increased runoff and erosion. Runoff shall be directed inland to the storm drain system or to an existing outfall, when feasible. If no storm drain system or existing outfall is present, blufftop runoff shall not be channelized or directed over bluffs and/or to the beach or the ocean.

CR-I-2953 Subdivision Limitations. Update the Zoning Ordinance to Prohibit the division of shoreline property that creates hazardous or unbuildable parcels due to erosion, bluff failure, wave run-up, flooding and other coastal hazards for at least 100 years without shoreline protection, considering projected sea level rise and other climate change effects to be determined from best available science and current guidance at the time of approval of the proposed development. Only allow new lots to be created if they can be developed without ever requiring shoreline protection for the development.

6.8 SHORELINE PROTECTION STRUCTURE STANDARD POLICIES
Implementing Policies
CR-I-3054 Soft Shoreline Protection. Encourage the use of soft or natural shoreline protection methods, such as dune restoration and beach/sand nourishment as alternatives to hard shoreline protection structures, such as revetments or sea walls. Soft shoreline protection devices shall be fully evaluated for coastal resource impacts, and, if proposed in conjunction with a shoreline protection structure, shall only be approved if found consistent with the LCP and Coastal Act policies related to shoreline protection.

Consider combining beach replenishment with groin construction to maintain beaches and protect development. (see subarea policies).

6.47A

6.47B

1.e
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-38
CR-I-55 Beach Nourishment. In coordination with the California Coastal Commission and other permitting agencies (e.g., State Lands Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), the City shall evaluate a beach nourishment program in conjunction with sand retention structures to assist in maintaining beach width and elevations, consistent with sub-area policies and the Coastal Act. The beach nourishment program will need to be evaluated to be the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative and will include measures to protect water quality and to avoid (and where unavoidable to minimize and mitigate) potential adverse coastal resource impacts, including biological resource impacts, from deposition of material, including measures such as sand compatibility specifications, restrictions on volume of deposition, timing or seasonal restrictions, and identification of environmentally preferred locations for deposits. The City will also consider developing an opportunistic sand program and evaluate how replenishment options may need to change over time with sea level rise.

CR-I-3156 Existing Shoreline Protection Structures. Except as may be otherwise provided in the LCP sub-area policies, Legally permitted shoreline protection structures may be repaired and maintained, as supported by Section 30235 of the Coastal Act, subject to all coastal development permit requirements (including those associated with the construction of the structure and/or prior repair and maintenance episodes) until the development they are protecting is removed or redeveloped pursuant to the definition of a Substantial Structural Modification (SSM) or no longer requires shoreline protection structures, at which time the shoreline protection structure shall be reevaluated for consistency with the LCP, and removed if no longer necessary and/or allowed, if found to be inconsistent with the LCP by the reevaluation, and the area restored. Activities considered “repair and maintenance” shall not result in any enlargement or extension of modification to the shoreline protection structure, or any replacement of materials in excess of 50%, or any seaward encroachment or impairment of public trust resources, and shall provide mitigation for any new coastal resource impacts not previously or otherwise mitigated, including through the City’s Shoreline Adaptation Mitigation Program (CR-I-5), Coastal Access and Resilience Program (CR-I-44), and/or Policy CR-I-3459, shall minimize impacts, and must be found to be the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative. Other modifications to existing shoreline protection structures which fall within the limitations of an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Exterior Structural Modification shall be considered to be an existing shoreline protection structure. This policy shall not be applied to justify the removal of a shoreline protection structure which protects any structure authorized to be constructed pursuant to an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Exterior Structural Modification. Modifications to existing shoreline protection structures which fall within the limitations of an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Structural Modification shall be considered to be allowed without the above-mentioned considerations.

6.48 6.49

6.50 1.e
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-39
CR-I-3257 New Shoreline Protection Structures. Shoreline protection structures, including revetments, breakwaters, groins, seawalls, cliff retaining walls, deep piers and caissons, and other such construction that alters natural shoreline processes shall only be permitted if consistent Section 30235 of the Coastal Act and with the LCP’s sub-area policies, and only when required to serve coastal-dependent uses or protect existing structures (including existing public roads and sewer lines if necessary) or public beaches in danger from erosion coastal hazards, when there is no less environmentally damaging feasible alternative and when designed to avoid, and where unavoidable, minimize eliminate or mitigate to the maximum extent feasible adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply and other coastal resources, where unavoidable coastal resource impacts are required to be commensurately mitigated.

CR-I-3358 Authorization Limits of Shoreline Protection Structures. Shoreline protection structures shall only be authorized until the time when the existing structure protected by such shoreline protection structure: 1) is/are no longer present, or2or 2) no longer require(s) armoring, or 3) is redeveloped pursuant to the definition of a Substantial Structural Modification (SSM). This policy shall not be applied to justify the removal of a shoreline protection structure which protects any structure authorized to be constructed pursuant to an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Exterior Structural Modification.

CR-I-3459 Mitigating Impacts of New Shoreline Protection Structures. New or reconstructed shoreline protection structures shall be sited and designed to avoid sensitive resources to the maximum extent feasible. Adverse coastal resource impacts shall be avoided, and where unavoidable shall be minimized and fully mitigated, including impacts on sand supply, beach area, public access (vertical access to the shore and horizontal access along the shore and blufftop) and recreational use (surfing, fishing, hiking, etc.), public trust lands and values, ecological function, water quality, shoreline aesthetics, and cultural resources. At a minimum, new shoreline protection structures shall:
• blend with the natural environment;
• avoid significant habitat areas;
• minimize encroachment/footprint;
• protect, and where feasible, provide public access; and • control erosion from surface and groundwater flows.

Mitigation options shall include consideration of providing equivalent new public access, recreation, habitat or other coastal resources in the vicinity of the project, or if such options are not feasible, proportional in-lieu fees that consider and reflect, to the maximum extent practicable, the full value of impacted and/or lost resources for the authorization period of the project. Any fees shall be deposited in an interest-bearing account held by the City of Pacifica for use within the City Limits for mitigation of the specific impact identified in the project approval. This policy may be met through

6.51 6.52

6.53 1.e
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-40
compliance with the City’s Shoreline Adaptation Mitigation Program (CR-I-5) or Coastal Access and Resilience Program (CR-I-44).

CR-I-3560 Monitoring Plan for New Shoreline Protection Structures. Proposals for new, redeveloped/augmented or repaired shoreline protection structures shall include a monitoring plan that evaluates the condition of the shoreline protection structure, conditions at the site and surrounding area, and whether the shoreline protection structure is still needed for protection. The plan shall require an inspection at least every five years to identify:
• Any structural damage and need for repair;
• Environmental impacts, including excessive scour, impacts to shoreline processes and beach width (at the project site and the broader area and/or littoral cell as feasible), and impacts to public access and the availability of public trust lands for public use; and
• The status of the existing structure being protected. • The monitoring plan shall also be updated to at a minimum include any specific requirements associated with coastal permit approval.

At least every 15 years the landowner shall submit a new Mean High Tide Line (MHTL) survey of the subject property based on field data collected within 12 months of the date submitted. Surveys shall comply with Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-2246.

CR-I-36 Emergency Shoreline Protection Structures. In cases of emergency, an emergency shoreline protection structure may only be approved on a temporary basis, and only under the condition that the structure is required to be removed unless a regular CDP is approved for retention of the structure. In such cases, a complete CDP application shall be required to be submitted within 60 days following construction of the temporary emergency shoreline protective structure, unless an alternate deadline is authorized by the Planning Director for good cause, including continued good faith efforts toward submittal of such application. Any such temporary emergency shoreline protective structure shall be sited and designed to be the minimum necessary to abate the identified emergency, and to be as consistent as possible with all LCP shoreline protective structure standards, including in terms of avoiding coastal resource impacts to the maximum possible extent. Mitigation for impacts will be required through the regular CDP process, including mitigation commensurate with the duration of impacts caused by the emergency temporary structure. The City shall notify the Executive Director upon receipt of a request for an emergency shoreline protective structure within the City’s CDP jurisdiction.

6.54 1.e
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-41
CR-I-37 Sharp Park Golf Course. Strongly support the City and County of San Francisco’s ability to provide public access along the coast, protect Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area, and provide flood protection.

6.9 COASTAL FLOODING AND OTHER HAZARD STANDARD POLICIES Implementing Policies
CR-I-61 Flood Risk Reduction. The City should, when appropriate, evaluate and pursue, floodproofing of infrastructure and other development in danger from projected flooding by 2050. Allow and facilitate (if feasible) private owners to floodproof development structures, consistent with other LCP policies.

SPECIAL SHORELINE RESILIENCY AREAS
The Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas (SSRA) include the existing shoreline protection structures in the Rockaway and West Sharp Park sub-areas. The existing shoreline protection structures protect a mix of unified coastal access, including coastal access points and trails; public infrastructure, including sidewalks, roads, water, and sewer; electrical utilities; and public parking, both on- and off-street. The unique circumstances in Rockaway Beach and West Sharp Park warrant a unique policy approach. The purpose of modifying policies applicable to this area is to allow ongoing reliance on the existing shoreline protection structures and allow ongoing provision of public services, and protection of robust coastal access for all persons including persons with disabilities within a Special Shoreline Resiliency Area (SSRA). The two SRA locations are identified in Figure 6-2 and 6-3.

CR-I-38 Public Infrastructure along the shoreline in Special Shoreline Resilience Areas. Public infrastructure (e.g., public roads, sidewalks, parking areas, accessways, water and sewer infrastructure) on the immediate oceanfront of the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-2 and 6-3 shall be consistent with all LCP provisions except that, to establish the safety and stability of the proposed development, such development may rely on a shoreline protection structure that is existing at the time of the application and/or that is proposed in the same permit application as the infrastructure itself.

CR-I-39 Development directly inland of public infrastructure in Special Shoreline Resilience Areas. Notwithstanding Policy CR-I-2, development located directly inland of the public infrastructure on the immediate oceanfront of the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-2 and 6-3 may rely on a shoreline protection structure in that area that is existing at the time of the permit application to help demonstrate that its setbacks meet the requirements of Policies CR-I-19 and CR-I-20. In addition to meeting the requirements of Policy CR-I-21, such development shall be conditioned to require the applicant to acknowledge that the development’s long-term safety may be based in part on shoreline protection structures located seaward of the development, which may or may not be effective, and/or be maintained, and/or be present in the future.

6.55 6.56

6.57 6.61

1.e
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-42
CR-I-40 Armoring in Special Shoreline Resilience Areas. In the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-2 and 6-3, repair and maintenance, enhancement, realignment, and redevelopment/replacement of a shoreline protection structure that is existing at the time of the permit application, including minor extensions in order to fill gaps or otherwise ensure the overall shoreline protection structure is effective may be approved when required to protect public infrastructure (e.g., public roads, sidewalks, parking areas, accessways, water and sewer infrastructure) on the immediate oceanfront of the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-2 and 6-3. Such shoreline protection structure must comply with all relevant LCP policies except that it may be approved regardless of whether such shoreline protection structure is required to protect a coastal dependent use, a public beach in danger of erosion, or a structure that qualifies as an "existing structure" within the meaning of Coastal Act Section 30235. Any such shoreline protection structure shall incorporate public access elements into its design, be the least environmentally damaging feasible design, and improve coastal resource conditions relative to conditions that exist at the time of permit approval (examples of improved conditions could include restoring intertidal habitat, enhancing public access, having a smaller footprint than a shoreline protection structure that already lawfully exists, enhancing scenic and visual qualities of the area).

CR-I-41 Effective date of Policies CR-I-38, 39, and 40. Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-39, and CR-I-40 shall only be of force and effect when and if, as determined by the Coastal Commission’s Executive Director:
• In accordance with Policy CR-I-43, the initial Coastal Access and Resilience Program is developed and submitted for Commission review, and • In accordance with Policy CR-I-5, the development of the Shoreline Adaptation Program has been initiated, including, at a minimum, that the City has developed a public engagement plan, workplan, timeline, and identified funding for completion of the technical studies and planning work.

CR-I-42 Suspension of Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-39, CR-I-40. Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-39, and CR-I-40 shall be suspended, and shall have no further force and effect during the period of suspension, upon the occurrence of any of the following conditions, as determined by the Coastal Commission’s Executive Director:
• In accordance with Policy CR-I-43, if:
o the Coastal Access and Resilience Program is not certified by the Commission within 15months of acceptance ofthe LCP amendmentfor filing as identified in Policy CR-I-41, or
o any of the CDP applications that are required every 5 years to implement projects are not submitted in complete form, or o any of the projects required in the Coastal Access and Resilience

6.58 6.58

6.59 1.e
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-43
Program are not developed/implemented.
• In accordance with Policy CR-I-5, if:
o The City has not completed the technical studies to accomplish part (a) of the Shoreline Adaptation Program within 6 years of effective certification of the Land Use Plan Amendment that created the requirement for the Shoreline Adaptation Program (i.e., created Policy CR-I-5), or
o The City has not prepared a Draft Shoreline Adaptation Program within 8 years of effective certification of the LUPA that created the requirement for the Shoreline Adaptation Program, or o The Coastal Commission has not certified a Final Shoreline Adaptation Program within 10 years of effective certification of the LUPA that created the requirement for the Shoreline Adaptation Program (i.e., created Policy CR-I-5).

In the event that the Coastal Commission’s Executive Director determines that the City has not met one or more of the above conditions, the Executive Director shall provide a preliminary written determination to the City explaining that one or more conditions set forth above have not been met and that suspension of Policies CR-I38, CR-I-39 and CR-I-40 shall occur after fifteen working days, unless the City submits written objections to the preliminary determination and the Executive Director concurs with the objections. The City may submit to the Executive Director a written notice of objection within seven working days of the date of the preliminary determination. The Executive Director will promptly review and either concur or disagree, in writing, with any objection submitted by the City prior to the fifteenth working day from the date of the preliminary determination. The period of suspension will end, and Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-38 and CR-I-40 will once again become effective, at the beginning of the fifth working day after the Executive Director provides a written determination to the City that all necessary conditions have been satisfied.

CR-I-43 Additionally, as of January 1, 2045, no new development may rely on Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-39, or CR-I-40 , unless the Commission has certified an LCP amendment extending that deadline. As of January 1, 2045 (or such later date as specified in an LCP amendment), development approved based on Policies CR-I-38 and CR-I-39 that relied on a shoreline protection structure to demonstrate safety, stability, and adequate setbacks (including in relation to the requirements of Policies CR-I-19 and CR-I-20) shall become legal nonconforming and, moving forward, a Substantial Structural Modification to such development shall, in accordance with Policy CR-I-25,

6.59 6.60

1.e
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 6-44
be required to be consistent with all LCP provisions, including but not limited to Policies CR-I-2, CR-I-19, and CR-I-20 related to setbacks and safety without relying on shoreline protection to establish safety, and Policy CR-I-32 regarding approvable shoreline protection.

CR-I-44 Coastal Access and Resilience Program. The City shall develop a Coastal Access and Resilience Program to ensure continued and increased access to the coast, including as sea levels rise. The Program shall include, but is not limited to, methods to maximize public access to and along the coast despite sea level rise and address the coastal resource impacts associated with shoreline protection structures along the City’s shoreline, including as required per Policy CR-I-34, and impacts associated with the perpetuation of shoreline protection structures within Special Shoreline Resilience Areas allowed by Policies CR-I-38, CR-I-39, and CR-I-40. The priority for such access benefits and mitigation shall be efforts/projects designed to maintain and enhance sandy beaches and public access to and along the City’s shoreline in a manner that is most protective of coastal resources and general public access utility. The Program shall include, at a minimum, all of the following:
• A prioritized list of public access projects within the City’s Coastal Zone that can help maximize access to the coast and serve as required mitigation. Projects shall be organized in terms of expected implementation dates within 5-year increments and shall be developed with full community input. Some opportunities may include enhancement of public recreational access facilities (e.g., pathways, overlooks), removal of existing armoring, nature-based adaptation, beach nourishment, and acquisition/conservation of properties subject to coastal hazards. Potential projects include but are not limited to:
o Enhanced public pathway system seaward of private
development in the Rockaway Beach area.
o Coordinated vertical accessways, landscaping, benches, picnic tables, bicycle racks, garbage and recycling receptacles, doggiemitt stations, and enhanced signage in the Sharp Park area.
o The following projects listed in the program: Rockaway to Pacifica State Beach Trail Rehabilitation, Rockaway Beach Parking Structure, Rockaway Parking Area, Beach Boulevard Promenade Park
Improvements, Sharp Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Access Pedestrian Improvement project
• A timeline and benchmarks for implementation of identified projects, including measures by which progress and success can be measured over time, as well as necessary monitoring and tracking. At a minimum,

6.61 1.e
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 6-45
projects shall be designed to be implemented in at most 5-year increments.
• Identification and development of a funding mechanism (or mechanisms)sufficient to cover all identified projects. Such mechanisms may include, but are not limited to:
o Development of a protocol for requiring mitigation for development within Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas that is allowed to rely on existing shoreline protection structures pursuant to CR-I-38 and CR-I-39, thus resulting in continued impacts from that armoring.
o Formation of a GHAD, CSA, or similar
o State or Federal grant funding
o Other funding mechanisms identified for adaptation planning and projects as discussed in Policy CR-I-5
An initial program shall be developed and should be submitted as an amendment to the LCP by 3 years from the date of LUP Update certification. By 5 years from the date of Coastal Commission approval of the initial Coastal Access and Resilience Program (and every subsequent 5 years) the City shall submit a complete CDP application to the Coastal Commission, or where applicable the City itself shall approve projects via City CDPs, to implement projects identified in the Program. The Program shall be monitored, evaluated, updated, and resubmitted as an amendment to the LCP at least every 10 years thereafter.

1.e
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APOLICIES IN CHAPTER 3 OF

THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
ACT
This appendix provides each policy of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, as amended. These policies form the parameters for planning in the Coastal Zone, and are binding in Pacifica’s Coastal Zone. In some cases, policies are not relevant to the specific setting of Pacifica’s Coastal Zone. This is noted in italics following the policy in question.

The six chapters of this LCLUP each begin with a section called “Coastal Act Framework,” where Coastal Act policies that are most applicable to the subject of the chapter are summarized. However, additional policies from this appendix may also apply.

1.e
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-2
ARTICLE 1: GENERAL
Section 30200 Policies as standards; resolution of policy conflicts (a)Consistent with the coastal zone values cited in Section 30001 and the basic goals set forth in Section 30001.5, and except as may be otherwise specifically provided in this division, the policies of this chapter shall constitute the standards by which the adequacy of local coastal programs, as provided in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 30500), and, the permissibility of proposed developments subject to the provisions of this division are determined. All public agencies carrying out or supporting activities outside the coastal zone that could have a direct impact on resources within the coastal zone shall consider the effect of such actions on coastal zone resources in order to assure that these policies are achieved. (b) Where the commission or any local government in implementing the provisions of this division identifies a conflict between the policies of this chapter, Section 30007.5 shall be utilized to resolve the conflict and the resolution of such conflicts shall be supported by appropriate findings setting forth the basis for the resolution of identified policy conflicts.

ARTICLE 2: PUBLIC ACCESS
Section 30210 Access; recreational opportunities; posting In carrying out the requirement of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution, maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall be provided for all the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights of private property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse.

Section 30211 Development not to interfere with access
Development shall not interfere with the public's right of access to the sea where acquired through use or legislative authorization, including, but not limited to, the use of dry sand and rocky coastal beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation.

Section 30212 New development projects
(a) Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast shall be provided in new development projects except where: (1) it is inconsistent with public safety, military security needs, or the protection of fragile coastal resources, (2) adequate access exists nearby, or, (3) agriculture would be adversely affected. Dedicated accessway shall not be required to be opened to public use until a public agency or private association agrees to accept responsibility for maintenance and liability of the accessway. (b) For purposes of this section, "new development" does not include:
(1) Replacement of any structure pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (g) of Section 30610. (2) The demolition and reconstruction of a single-family residence; provided, that the reconstructed residence shall not exceed either the floor area, height or bulk of the former structure by more than 10 percent, and that the reconstructed residence shall be sited in the same location on the affected property as the former structure.

1.e
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-3
(3) Improvements to any structure which do not change the intensity of its use, which do not increase either the floor area, height, or bulk of the structure by more than 10 percent, which do not block or impede public access, and which do not result in a seaward encroachment by the structure. (4) The reconstruction or repair of any seawall; provided, however, that the reconstructed or repaired seawall is not a seaward of the location of the former structure. (5) Any repair or maintenance activity for which the commission has determined, pursuant to Section 30610, that a coastal development permit will be required unless the commission determines that the activity will have an adverse impact on lateral public access along the beach.

As used in this subdivision "bulk" means total interior cubic volume as measured from the exterior surface of the structure.
(c) Nothing in this division shall restrict public access nor shall it excuse the performance of duties and responsibilities of public agencies which are required by Sections 66478.1 to 66478.14, inclusive, of the Government Code and by Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution.

Section 30212.5 Public facilities; distribution
Wherever appropriate and feasible, public facilities, including parking areas or facilities, shall be distributed throughout an area so as to mitigate against the impacts, social and otherwise, of overcrowding or overuse by the public of any single area.

Section 30213 Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities; encouragement and provision; overnight room rentals
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.

Developments providing public recreational opportunities are preferred.

The commission shall not: (1) require that overnight room rentals be fixed at an amount certain for any privately owned and operated hotel, motel, or other similar visitor-serving facility located on either public or private lands; or (2) establish or approve any method for the identification of low or moderate income persons for the purpose of determining eligibility for overnight room rentals in any such facilities.

Section 30214 Implementation of public access policies; legislative intent (a) The public access policies of this article shall be implemented in a manner that takes into account the need to regulate the time, place, and manner of public access depending on the facts and circumstances in each case including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) Topographic and geologic site characteristics.
(2) The capacity of the site to sustain use and at what level of intensity. (3) The appropriateness of limiting public access to the right to pass and repass depending on such factors as the fragility of the natural resources in the area and the proximity of the access area to adjacent residential uses.

1.e
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-4
(4) The need to provide for the management of access areas so as to protect the privacy of adjacent property owners and to protect the aesthetic values of the area by providing for the collection of litter. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the public access policies of this article be carried out in a reasonable manner that considers the equities and that balances the rights of the individual property owner with the public's constitutional right of access pursuant to Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution.

Nothing in this section or any amendment thereto shall be construed as a limitation on the rights guaranteed to the public under Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution. (c) In carrying out the public access policies of this article, the commission and any other responsible public agency shall consider and encourage the utilization of innovative access management techniques, including, but not limited to, agreements with private organizations which would minimize management costs and encourage the use of volunteer programs.

ARTICLE 3: RECREATION
Section 30220 Protection of certain water-oriented activities Coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational activities that cannot readily be provided at inland water areas shall be protected for such uses.

Section 30221 Oceanfront land; protection for recreational use and development Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use and development unless present and foreseeable future demand for public or commercial recreational activities that could be accommodated on the property is already adequately provided for in the area.

Section 30222 Private lands; priority of development purposes The use of private lands suitable for visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation shall have priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry.

Section 30222.5 Oceanfront lands; aquaculture facilities; priority Oceanfront land that is suitable for coastal dependent aquaculture shall be protected for that use, and proposals for aquaculture facilities located on those sites shall be given priority, except over other coastal dependent developments or uses.

No oceanfront land has been identified as suitable for aquaculture in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

Section 30223 Upland areas
Upland areas necessary to support coastal recreational uses shall be reserved for such uses, where feasible.

Section 30224 Recreational boating use; encouragement; facilities Increased recreational boating use of coastal waters shall be encouraged, in accordance with this division, by developing dry storage areas, increasing public launching facilities, providing additional berthing space in existing harbors, limiting non-water-dependent land uses that congest access corridors and preclude boating

1.e
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-5
support facilities, providing harbors of refuge, and by providing for new boating facilities in natural harbors, new protected water areas, and in areas dredged from dry land.

ARTICLE 4: MARINE ENVIRONMENT
Section 30230 Marine resources; maintenance
Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and where feasible, restored. Special protection shall be given to areas and species of special biological or economic significance. Uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in a manner that will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and that will maintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes.

Section 30231 Biological productivity; water quality
The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marine organisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, where feasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of waste water discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface waterflow, encouraging waste water reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.

Section 30232 Oil and hazardous substance spills
Protection against the spillage of crude oil, gas, petroleum products, or hazardous substances shall be provided in relation to any development or transportation of such materials. Effective containment and cleanup facilities and procedures shall be provided for accidental spills that do occur.

Section 30233 Diking, filling or dredging; continued movement of sediment and nutrients (a) The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes shall be permitted in accordance with other applicable provisions of this division, where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative, and where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following:
(l) New or expanded port, energy, and coastal-dependent industrial facilities, including commercial fishing facilities.
(2) Maintaining existing, or restoring previously dredged, depths in existing navigational channels, turning basins, vessel berthing and mooring areas, and boat launching ramps. (3) In open coastal waters, other than wetlands, including streams, estuaries, and lakes, new or expanded boating facilities and the placement of structural pilings for public recreational piers that provide public access and recreational opportunities.
(4) Incidental public service purposes, including but not limited to, burying cables and pipes or inspection of piers and maintenance of existing intake and outfall lines. (5) Mineral extraction, including sand for restoring beaches, except in environmentally sensitive areas.

1.e
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-6
(6) Restoration purposes.
(7) Nature study, aquaculture, or similar resource dependent activities. (b) Dredging and spoils disposal shall be planned and carried out to avoid significant disruption to marine and wildlife habitats and water circulation. Dredge spoils suitable for beach replenishment should be transported for these purposes to appropriate beaches or into suitable longshore current systems. (c) In addition to the other provisions of this section, diking, filling, or dredging in existing estuaries and wetlands shall maintain or enhance the functional capacity of the wetland or estuary. Any alteration of coastal wetlands identified by the Department of Fish and Game, including, but not limited to, the 19 coastal wetlands identified in its report entitled, "Acquisition Priorities for the Coastal Wetlands of California", shall be limited to very minor incidental public facilities, restorative measures, nature study, commercial fishing facilities in Bodega Bay, and development in already developed parts of south San Diego Bay, if otherwise in accordance with this division.

For the purposes of this section, "commercial fishing facilities in Bodega Bay" means that not less than 80 percent of all boating facilities proposed to be developed or improved, where the improvement would create additional berths in Bodega Bay, shall be designed and used for commercial fishing activities. (d) Erosion control and flood control facilities constructed on watercourses can impede the movement of sediment and nutrients that would otherwise be carried by storm runoff into coastal waters. To facilitate the continued delivery of these sediments to the littoral zone, whenever feasible, the material removed from these facilities may be placed at appropriate points on the shoreline in accordance with other applicable provisions of this division, where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects. Aspects that shall be considered before issuing a coastal development permit for these purposes are the method of placement, time of year of placement, and sensitivity of the placement area.

Section 30234 Commercial fishing and recreational boating facilities Facilities serving the commercial fishing and recreational boating industries shall be protected and, where feasible, upgraded. Existing commercial fishing and recreational boating harbor space shall not be reduced unless the demand for those facilities no longer exists or adequate substitute space has been provided.

Proposed recreational boating facilities shall, where feasible, be designed and located in such a fashion as not to interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry.

No commercial fishing or recreational boating facilities exist in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

Section 30234.5 Economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing The economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing activities shall be recognized and protected.

Section 30235 Construction altering natural shoreline
Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels, seawalls, cliff retaining walls, and other such construction that alters natural shoreline processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal-dependent uses or to protect existing structures or public beaches in danger from erosion, and when designed to eliminate or

1.e
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-7
mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply. Existing marine structures causing water stagnation contributing to pollution problems and fishkills should be phased out or upgraded where feasible.

Section 30236 Water supply and flood control
Channelizations, dams, or other substantial alterations of rivers and streams shall incorporate the best mitigation measures feasible, and be limited to (l) necessary water supply projects, (2) flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing structures in the flood plain is feasible and where such protection is necessary for public safety or to protect existing development, or (3) developments where the primary function is the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat.

ARTICLE 5: LAND RESOURCES
Section 30240 Environmentally sensitive habitat areas; adjacent developments (a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources shall be allowed within those areas. (b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and parks and recreation areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of those habitat and recreation areas.

Section 30241 Prime agricultural land; maintenance in agricultural production The maximum amount of prime agricultural land shall be maintained in agricultural production to assure the protection of the areas’ agricultural economy, and conflicts shall be minimized between agricultural and urban land uses through all of the following:
(a) By establishing stable boundaries separating urban and rural areas, including, where necessary, clearly defined buffer areas to minimize conflicts between agricultural and urban land uses. (b) By limiting conversions of agricultural lands around the periphery of urban areas to the lands where the viability of existing agricultural use is already severely limited by conflicts with urban uses or where the conversion of the lands would complete a logical and viable neighborhood and contribute to the establishment of a stable limit to urban development.
(c) By permitting the conversion of agricultural land surrounded by urban uses where the conversion of the land would be consistent with Section 30250.
(d) By developing available lands not suited for agriculture prior to the conversion of agricultural lands. (e) By assuring that public service and facility expansions and nonagricultural development do not impair agricultural viability, either through increased assessment costs or degraded air and water quality. (f) By assuring that all divisions of prime agricultural lands, except those conversions approved pursuant to subdivision (b), and all development adjacent to prime agricultural lands shall not diminish the productivity of such prime agricultural lands.

No prime agricultural land exists in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-8
Section 30241.5 Agricultural land; determination of viability of uses; economic feasibility evaluation (a) If the viability of existing agricultural uses is an issue pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 30241 as to any local coastal program or amendment to any certified local coastal program submitted for review and approval under this division, the determination of "viability" shall include, but not be limited to, consideration of an economic feasibility evaluation containing at least both of the following elements:
(1) An analysis of the gross revenue from the agricultural products grown in the area for the five years immediately preceding the date of the filing of a proposed local coastal program or an amendment to any local coastal program.
(2) An analysis of the operational expenses, excluding the cost of land, associated with the production of the agricultural products grown in the area for the five years immediately preceding the date of the filing of a proposed local coastal program or an amendment to any local coastal program.

For purposes of this subdivision, "area" means a geographic area of sufficient size to provide an accurate evaluation of the economic feasibility of agricultural uses for those lands included in the local coastal program or in the proposed amendment to a certified local coastal program. (b) The economic feasibility evaluation required by subdivision (a) shall be submitted to the commission, by the local government, as part of its submittal of a local coastal program or an amendment to any local coastal program. If the local government determines that it does not have the staff with the necessary expertise to conduct the economic feasibility evaluation, the evaluation may be conducted under agreement with the local government by a consultant selected jointly by local government and the executive director of the commission.

No prime agricultural land exists in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

Section 30242 Lands suitable for agricultural use; conversion All other lands suitable for agricultural use shall not be converted to nonagricultural uses unless (l) continued or renewed agricultural use is not feasible, or (2) such conversion would preserve prime agricultural land or concentrate development consistent with Section 30250. Any such permitted conversion shall be compatible with continued agricultural use on surrounding lands.

Section 30243 Productivity of soils and timberlands; conversions The long-term productivity of soils and timberlands shall be protected, and conversions of coastal commercial timberlands in units of commercial size to other uses or their division into units of noncommercial size shall be limited to providing for necessary timber processing and related facilities.

No timberlands exist in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

Section 30244 Archaeological or paleontological resources Where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required.

1.e
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-9
ARTICLE 6: DEVELOPMENT
Section 30250 Location; existing developed area
(a) New residential, commercial, or industrial development, except as otherwise provided in this division, shall be located within, contiguous with, or in close proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where such areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate public services and where it will not have significant adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources. In addition, land divisions, other than leases for agricultural uses, outside existing developed areas shall be permitted only where 50 percent of the usable parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels would be no smaller than the average size of surrounding parcels.
(b) Where feasible, new hazardous industrial development shall be located away from existing developed areas.
(c) Visitor-serving facilities that cannot feasibly be located in existing developed areas shall be located in existing isolated developments or at selected points of attraction for visitors.

Section 30251 Scenic and visual qualities
The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas. New development in highly scenic areas such as those designated in the California Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan prepared by the Department of Parks and Recreation and by local government shall be subordinate to the character of its setting.

Section 30252 Maintenance and enhancement of public access The location and amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the coast by (1) facilitating the provision or extension of transit service, (2) providing commercial facilities within or adjoining residential development or in other areas that will minimize the use of coastal access roads, (3) providing nonautomobile circulation within the development, (4) providing adequate parking facilities or providing substitute means of serving the development with public transportation, (5) assuring the potential for public transit for high intensity uses such as high-rise office buildings, and by (6) assuring that the recreational needs of new residents will not overload nearby coastal recreation areas by correlating the amount of development with local park acquisition and development plans with the provision of onsite recreational facilities to serve the new development.

Section 30253 Minimization of adverse impacts
New development shall do all of the following:
(a) Minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard. (b) Assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs.

1.e
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-10
(c) Be consistent with requirements imposed by an air pollution control district or the State Air Resources Board as to each particular development.
(d) Minimize energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled. (e) Where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses.

Section 30254 Public works facilities
New or expanded public works facilities shall be designed and limited to accommodate needs generated by development or uses permitted consistent with the provisions of this division; provided, however, that it is the intent of the Legislature that State Highway Route 1 in rural areas of the coastal zone remain a scenic twolane road. Special districts shall not be formed or expanded except where assessment for, and provision of, the service would not induce new development inconsistent with this division. Where existing or planned public works facilities can accommodate only a limited amount of new development, services to coastal dependent land use, essential public services and basic industries vital to the economic health of the region, state, or nation, public recreation, commercial recreation, and visitor-serving land uses shall not be precluded by other development.

Section 30254.5 Terms or conditions on sewage treatment plant development; prohibition Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the commission may not impose any term or condition on the development of any sewage treatment plant which is applicable to any future development that the commission finds can be accommodated by that plant consistent with this division. Nothing in this section modifies the provisions and requirements of Sections 30254 and 30412.

Section 30255 Priority of coastal-dependent developments Coastal-dependent developments shall have priority over other developments on or near the shoreline.

Except as provided elsewhere in this division, coastal-dependent developments shall not be sited in a wetland.

When appropriate, coastal-related developments should be accommodated within reasonable proximity to the coastal-dependent uses they support.

ARTICLE 7: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
Section 30260 Location or expansion
Coastal-dependent industrial facilities shall be encouraged to locate or expand within existing sites and shall be permitted reasonable long-term growth where consistent with this division. However, where new or expanded coastal-dependent industrial facilities cannot feasibly be accommodated consistent with other policies of this division, they may nonetheless be permitted in accordance with this section and Sections 30261 and 30262 if (1) alternative locations are infeasible or more environmentally damaging; (2) to do otherwise would adversely affect the public welfare; and (3) adverse environmental effects are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible.

No coastal-dependent industry exists in the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-11
Section 30261 Tanker facilities; use and design
Multicompany use of existing and new tanker facilities shall be encouraged to the maximum extent feasible and legally permissible, except where to do so would result in increased tanker operations and associated onshore development incompatible with the land use and environmental goals for the area. New tanker terminals outside of existing terminal areas shall be situated as to avoid risk to environmentally sensitive areas and shall use a monobuoy system, unless an alternative type of system can be shown to be environmentally preferable for a specific site. Tanker facilities shall be designed to (1) minimize the total volume of oil spilled, (2) minimize the risk of collision from movement of other vessels, (3) have ready access to the most effective feasible containment and recovery equipment for oil spills, and (4) have onshore deballasting facilities to receive any fouled ballast water from tankers where operationally or legally required.

No tanker facilities exist in the Pacifica Coastal Zone. Tanker facility development would be incompatible with land use and environmental goals for the area.

Section 30262 Oil and gas development
a) Oil and gas development shall be permitted in accordance with Section 30260, if the following conditions are met:
(1) The development is performed safely and consistent with the geologic conditions of the well site. (2) New or expanded facilities related to that development are consolidated, to the maximum extent feasible and legally permissible, unless consolidation will have adverse environmental consequences and will not significantly reduce the number of producing wells, support facilities, or sites required to produce the reservoir economically and with minimal environmental impacts. (3) Environmentally safe and feasible subsea completions are used when drilling platforms or islands would substantially degrade coastal visual qualities unless use of those structures will result in substantially less environmental risks.
(4) Platforms or islands will not be sited where a substantial hazard to vessel traffic might result from the facility or related operations, as determined in consultation with the United States Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers.
(5) The development will not cause or contribute to subsidence hazards unless it is determined that adequate measures will be undertaken to prevent damage from such subsidence. (6) With respect to new facilities, all oilfield brines are reinjected into oil-producing zones unless the Division of Oil and Gas, Geothermal Resources of the Department of Conservation determines to do so would adversely affect production of the reservoirs and unless injection into other subsurface zones will reduce environmental risks. Exceptions to reinjections will be granted consistent with the Ocean Waters Discharge Plan of the State Water Resources Control Board and where adequate provision is made for the elimination of petroleum odors and water quality problems. (7)(A) All oil produced offshore California shall be transported onshore by pipeline only. The pipelines used to transport this oil shall utilize the best achievable technology to ensure maximum protection of public health and safety and of the integrity and productivity of terrestrial and marine ecosystems.

1.e
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-12
(B) Once oil produced offshore California is onshore, it shall be transported to processing and refining facilities by pipeline.
(C) The following guidelines shall be used when applying subparagraphs (A) and (B):
(i) "Best achievable technology," means the technology that provides the greatest degree of protection taking into consideration both of the following:
(I) Processes that are being developed, or could feasibly be developed, anywhere in the world, given overall reasonable expenditures on research and development.
(II) Processes that are currently in use anywhere in the world. This clause is not intended to create any conflicting or duplicative regulation of pipelines, including those governing the transportation of oil produced from onshore reserves.
(ii) "Oil" refers to crude oil before it is refined into products, including gasoline, bunker fuel, lubricants, and asphalt. Crude oil that is upgraded in quality through residue reduction or other means shall be transported as provided in subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(iii) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall apply only to new or expanded oil extraction operations. "New extraction operations" means production of offshore oil from leases that did not exist or had never produced oil, as of January 1, 2003, or from platforms, drilling island, subsea completions, or onshore drilling sites, that did not exist as of January 1, 2003. "Expanded oil extraction" means an increase in the geographic extent of existing leases or units, including lease boundary adjustments, or an increase in the number of well heads, on or after January 1, 2003.
(iv) For new or expanded oil extraction operations subject to clause (iii), if the crude oil is so highly viscous that pipelining is determined to be an infeasible mode of transportation, or where there is no feasible access to a pipeline, shipment of crude oil may be permitted over land by other modes of transportation, including trains or trucks, which meet all applicable rules and regulations, excluding any waterborne mode of transport. (8) If a state of emergency is declared by the Governor for an emergency that disrupts the transportation of oil by pipeline, oil may be transported by a waterborne vessel, if authorized by permit, in the same manner as required by emergency permits that are issued pursuant to Section 30624. (9) In addition to all other measures that will maximize the protection of marine habitat and environmental quality, when an offshore well is abandoned, the best achievable technology shall be used. b) Where appropriate, monitoring programs to record land surface and near-shore ocean floor movements shall be initiated in locations of new large-scale fluid extraction on land or near shore before operations begin and shall continue until surface conditions have stabilized. Costs of monitoring and mitigation programs shall be borne by liquid and gas extraction operators.
c) Nothing in this section shall affect the activities of any state agency that is responsible for regulating the extraction, production, or transport of oil and gas.

No known oil or gas fields exist in or adjacent to the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-13
Section 30263 Refineries or petrochemical facilities
(a) New or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities not otherwise consistent with the provisions of this division shall be permitted if (1) alternative locations are not feasible or are more environmentally damaging; (2) adverse environmental effects are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible; (3) it is found that not permitting such development would adversely affect the public welfare; (4) the facility is not located in a highly scenic or seismically hazardous area, on any of the Channel Islands, or within or contiguous to environmentally sensitive areas; and (5) the facility is sited so as to provide a sufficient buffer area to minimize adverse impacts on surrounding property.
(b) New or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities shall minimize the need for once-through cooling by using air cooling to the maximum extent feasible and by using treated waste waters from inplant processes where feasible.

Section 30264 Thermal electric generating plants
Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, except subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 30413, new or expanded thermal electric generating plants may be constructed in the coastal zone if the proposed coastal site has been determined by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to have greater relative merit pursuant to the provisions of Section 25516.1 than available alternative sites and related facilities for an applicant's service area which have been determined to be acceptable pursuant to the provisions of Section 25516.

Section 30265 Legislative findings and declarations; offshore oil transportation The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Transportation studies have concluded that pipeline transport of oil is generally both economically feasible and environmentally preferable to other forms of crude oil transport. (b) Oil companies have proposed to build a pipeline to transport offshore crude oil from central California to southern California refineries, and to transport offshore oil to out-of-state refiners. (c) California refineries would need to be retrofitted if California offshore crude oil were to be used directly as a major feedstock. Refinery modifications may delay achievement of air quality goals in the southern California air basin and other regions of the state.
(d) The County of Santa Barbara has issued an Oil Transportation Plan which assesses the environmental and economic differences among various methods for transporting crude oil from offshore California to refineries.
(e) The Governor should help coordinate decisions concerning the transport and refining of offshore oil in a manner that considers state and local studies undertaken to date, that fully addresses the concerns of all affected regions, and that promotes the greatest benefits to the people of the state.

No known offshore oil or gas fields exist in or adjacent to the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-14
Section 30265.5 Governor or designee; coordination of activities concerning offshore oil transport and refining; duties
(a) The Governor, or the Governor's designee, shall coordinate activities concerning the transport and refining of offshore oil. Coordination efforts shall consider public health risks, the ability to achieve shortand long-term air emission reduction goals, the potential for reducing California's vulnerability and dependence on oil imports, economic development and jobs, and other factors deemed important by the Governor, or the Governor's designees.
(b) The Governor, or the Governor's designee, shall work with state and local agencies, and the public, to facilitate the transport and refining of offshore oil in a manner which will promote the greatest public health and environmental and economic benefits to the people of the State. (c) The Governor, or the Governor's designee, shall consult with any individual or organization having knowledge in this area, including, but not limited to, representatives from the following:
(1) State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (2) State Air Resources Board
(3) California Coastal Commission
(4) Department of Fish and Game
(5) State Lands Commission
(6) Public Utilities Commission
(7) Santa Barbara County
(8) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (9) Southern California Association of Governments
(10) South Coast Air Quality Management Districts
(11) Oil industry
(12) Public interest groups
(13) United States Department of the Interior
(14) United States Department of Energy
(15) United States Environmental Protection Agency
(16) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(17) United States Coast Guard

1.e
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) APPENDIX A: CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT POLICIES
A-15
(d) This act is not intended, and shall not be construed, to decrease, duplicate, or supersede the jurisdiction, authority, or responsibilities of any local government, or any state agency or commission, to discharge its responsibilities concerning the transportation and refining of oil. (Added by Ch. 1398, Stats. 1984.) No known offshore oil or gas fields exist in or adjacent to the Pacifica Coastal Zone.

1.e
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 A-16
This page intentionally left blank.

1.e
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

B COASTAL VULNERABILITY

ZONE MAPS
This chapter provides maps which define areas identified in the Vulnerability Assessment as having the potential for erosion and/or coastal flooding under the PHGLXPhigh sea level rise scenario for year 2100.

1.e
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B)LJVB&RPPXQLW\P[GMUM  6285&(
6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\,PDJHU\
&LW\RI3DFLILFDQG60&$VVHWV


3DFLILF,QVWLWXWH(URVLRQ


2&2)&RDVWDO)ORRGLQJ


/HJHQG
3DFLILFDB&LW\/LPLWVB&$63
6XEDUHD%RXQGDULHV
&RPPXQLW\$VVHWV
$+ 6HQLRU&HQWHU
k 0RELOH+RPH3DUN
^_ $IIRUGDEOH5HQWDO
#* &RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHU
&RPFDVW8WLOLWLHV
/RFDO6WUHHWV
&LW\2ZQHG3DUFHO
/DQGPDUN
$W5LVNFRPPXQLW\
([LVWLQJ/DQG8VH
$JULFXOWXUH
6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO
0XOWL)DPLO\
0RELOH+RPHV
&RPPHUFLDO
$XWR6HUYLFHV
+RWHOV
2IILFH
0L[HG8VH
8WLOLWLHV
,QGXVWULDO
6FKRROV
&KXUFK
2WKHU3XEOLFRU&RPPXQLW\8VHV
2WKHU2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNV $FFHVVLEOH2SHQ6SDFH
%HDFK
9DFDQW8QGHYHORSHG
&RDVWDOVulnerability
:DYH5XQXS
IW6/5

6WRUP)ORRG$UHD
IW6/5

)ORRG3URQH$UHD
IW6/5

&RDVWDO(URVLRQ
 
)HHW
$SSHQGL[B-
Coastal Vulnerability =RQH Map
)DLUPRQW:HVW
1 




Disclaimer: 7KH&RDVWDO9XOQHUDELOLW\=RQH
&9=
PDSVXWLOL]HGWKHEHVWDYDLODEOHGDWDDWWKHWLPHRISUHSDUDWLRQ7KH HURVLRQVFHQDULRGRHVQRWDFFRXQWIRUH[LVWLQJVKRUHOLQHSURWHFWLRQVWUXFWXUHV7KLVLQIRUPDWLRQLVFRQWLQXDOO\HYROYLQJ DQGWKHPDSV UHIOHFWDORQJSODQQLQJKRUL]RQ UHFRJQL]LQJW\SLFDOGHVLJQOLIHRI VWUXFWXUHV8SGDWHGPRGHOVDQG VLWH VSHFLILFDQDO\VLVPD\LGHQWLI\WKDWWKHUHVSHFWLYH&9=VPD\KDYHVKLIWHGWRLQFOXGHPRUHRUOHVVDUHD&9=PDSVDUH QRWGHWDLOHGWRWKHSDUFHOVFDOHDQG VKRXOGQRWEHXVHGIRU UHDOHVWDWHILQDQFLQJRULQVXUDQFHWUDQVDFWLRQVRURWKHU XVHV VXFK DV QDYLJDWLRQ SHUPLWWLQJ RU UHJXODWRU\ XVHV  7R FRQILUP YXOQHUDELOLW\ SRWHQWLDO IXUWKHU VWXGLHV VKRXOG EH SHUIRUPHG IRU &9=V&9=SURMHFWLRQVZHUHVRXUFHGIURPSXEOLFO\DYDLODEOHGDWDDQGH[LVWLQJPRGHOVQRWFUHDWHG E\WKH&LW\RI3DFLILFD

1.e
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B)LJVB&RPPXQLW\P[GMUM  6285&(
6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\,PDJHU\
&LW\RI3DFLILFDQG60&$VVHWV


3DFLILF,QVWLWXWH(URVLRQ


2&2)&RDVWDO)ORRGLQJ


/HJHQG
3DFLILFDB&LW\/LPLWVB&$63
6XEDUHD%RXQGDULHV
&RPPXQLW\$VVHWV
$+ 6HQLRU&HQWHU
k 0RELOH+RPH3DUN
^_ $IIRUGDEOH5HQWDO
#* &RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHU
&RPFDVW8WLOLWLHV
/RFDO6WUHHWV
&LW\2ZQHG3DUFHO
/DQGPDUN
$W5LVNFRPPXQLW\
([LVWLQJ/DQG8VH
$JULFXOWXUH
6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO
0XOWL)DPLO\
0RELOH+RPHV
&RPPHUFLDO
$XWR6HUYLFHV
+RWHOV
2IILFH
0L[HG8VH
8WLOLWLHV
,QGXVWULDO
6FKRROV
&KXUFK
2WKHU3XEOLFRU&RPPXQLW\8VHV
2WKHU2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNV $FFHVVLEOH2SHQ6SDFH
%HDFK
9DFDQW8QGHYHORSHG
&RDVWDOVulnerability
:DYH5XQXS
IW6/5

6WRUP)ORRG$UHD
IW6/5

&RDVWDO(URVLRQ
 
)HHW
Appendix B-2
Coastal Vulnerability =RQH Map
:HVW(GJHPDUDQG3DFLILF0DQRU

1RUWKZHVW6KDUS3DUN
1 




'LVFODLPHU
7KH&RDVWDO9XOQHUDELOLW\=RQH
&9=
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

1.e
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B)LJVB&RPPXQLW\P[GMUM  6285&(
6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\,PDJHU\
&LW\RI3DFLILFDQG60&$VVHWV


3DFLILF,QVWLWXWH(URVLRQ


2&2)&RDVWDO)ORRGLQJ


/HJHQG
3DFLILFDB&LW\/LPLWVB&$63
6XEDUHD%RXQGDULHV
^_ $IIRUGDEOH5HQWDO
#* &RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHU
&RPFDVW8WLOLWLHV
/RFDO6WUHHWV
&LW\2ZQHG3DUFHO
/DQGPDUN
([LVWLQJ/DQG8VH
6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO
0XOWL)DPLO\
&RPPHUFLDO
$XWR6HUYLFHV
2IILFH
0L[HG8VH
,QGXVWULDO
6FKRROV
&KXUFK
2WKHU3XEOLFRU&RPPXQLW\8VHV
2WKHU2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNV $FFHVVLEOH2SHQ6SDFH
%HDFK
9DFDQW8QGHYHORSHG
&RDVWDOVulnerability
:DYH5XQXS
IW6/5

6WRUP)ORRG$UHD
IW6/5

)ORRG3URQH$UHD
IW6/5

&RDVWDO(URVLRQ
 
)HHW
Appendix B-3
Coastal Vulnerability =RQH Map
6KDUS3DUN:HVW)DLUZD\3DUN
DQG0RUL3RLQW
1 




'LVFODLPHU
7KH&RDVWDO9XOQHUDELOLW\=RQH
&9=
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

1.e
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B)LJVB&RPPXQLW\P[GMUM  6285&(
6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\,PDJHU\
&LW\RI3DFLILFDQG60&$VVHWV


3DFLILF,QVWLWXWH(URVLRQ


2&2)&RDVWDO)ORRGLQJ


/HJHQG
3DFLILFDB&LW\/LPLWVB&$63
6XEDUHD%RXQGDULHV
&RPPXQLW\$VVHWV
$+ 6HQLRU&HQWHU
k 0RELOH+RPH3DUN
^_ $IIRUGDEOH5HQWDO
#* &RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHU
&RPFDVW8WLOLWLHV
/RFDO6WUHHWV
&LW\2ZQHG3DUFHO
/DQGPDUN
$W5LVNFRPPXQLW\
([LVWLQJ/DQG8VH
$JULFXOWXUH
6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO
0XOWL)DPLO\
0RELOH+RPHV
&RPPHUFLDO
$XWR6HUYLFHV
+RWHOV
2IILFH
0L[HG8VH
8WLOLWLHV
,QGXVWULDO
6FKRROV
&KXUFK
2WKHU3XEOLFRU&RPPXQLW\8VHV
2WKHU2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNV $FFHVVLEOH2SHQ6SDFH
%HDFK
9DFDQW8QGHYHORSHG
&RDVWDOVulnerability
:DYH5XQXS
IW6/5

6WRUP)ORRG$UHD
IW6/5

)ORRG3URQH$UHD
IW6/5

&RDVWDO(URVLRQ
 
)HHW
$SSHQGL[%
Coastal Vulnerability =RQH Map
5RFNDZD\%HDFK4XDUU\DQG+HDGODQGV
1 




'LVFODLPHU
7KH&RDVWDO9XOQHUDELOLW\=RQH
&9=
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

1.e
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B)LJVB&RPPXQLW\P[GMUM  6285&(
6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\,PDJHU\
&LW\RI3DFLILFDQG60&$VVHWV


3DFLILF,QVWLWXWH(URVLRQ


2&2)&RDVWDO)ORRGLQJ


/HJHQG
3DFLILFDB&LW\/LPLWVB&$63
6XEDUHD%RXQGDULHV
&RPPXQLW\$VVHWV
$+ 6HQLRU&HQWHU
^_ $IIRUGDEOH5HQWDO
#* &RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHU
&RPFDVW8WLOLWLHV
/RFDO6WUHHWV
&LW\2ZQHG3DUFHO
/DQGPDUN
$W5LVNFRPPXQLW\
([LVWLQJ/DQG8VH
$JULFXOWXUH
6LQJOH)DPLO\5HVLGHQWLDO
0XOWL)DPLO\
&RPPHUFLDO
$XWR6HUYLFHV
+RWHOV
2IILFH
0L[HG8VH
8WLOLWLHV
,QGXVWULDO
6FKRROV
2WKHU3XEOLFRU&RPPXQLW\8VHV
2WKHU2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNV $FFHVVLEOH2SHQ6SDFH
%HDFK
9DFDQW8QGHYHORSHG
&RDVWDOVulnerability
:DYH5XQXS
IW6/5

6WRUP)ORRG$UHD
IW6/5

)ORRG3URQH$UHD
IW6/5

&RDVWDO(URVLRQ
 
)HHW
$SSHQGL[%
Coastal Vulnerability =RQH Map
3DFLILFD6WDWH%HDFK
:HVW/LQGD0DU

3HGUR3RLQWDQG6KHOWHU&RYH
1 




'LVFODLPHU
7KH&RDVWDO9XOQHUDELOLW\=RQH
&9=
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

1.e
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

REFERENCES

LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Respective hotels; City of Pacifica; hotels.com; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2008.

Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2010.

ABAG Projections, 2010.

Plan Bay Area Jobs-Housing Connection Strategy, 2012.

San Mateo County Assessor’s Office, 2008.

Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA). BAWSCA Annual Survey-FY 2007-08.

January 2009. Accessed at http://www.bawsca.org,2009.

North Coast County Water District (NCCWD). CIP and Bond Projects Status Report February 20, 2008.

Accessed at http://www.nccwd.com, February 2008
NCCWD. Website http://www.nccwd.com, accessed May 2009.

RWQCB, 2006.

PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION
Pacifica General Plan, 1980
California Coastal Commission, “Some Facts About Public Prescriptive Rights,” accessed July 2013 at http://www.coastal.ca.gov/access/pr-access-facts.pdf.

San Mateo County Assessor's Office, 2008.

National Park Service, http://www.nps.gov/goga/parkmgmt/statistics.htm, accessed 2009.

California Park & Recreation Society. Market Research to Support CRPS Building the Brand Initiative. March 2009.

1.e
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 R-2
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. “Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets” Report 616. Washington, DC: 2008.

Dowling Associates, 2010.

City of Pacifica Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, 2009.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCENIC RESOURCES
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,National Wetlands Inventory, 2011; FEMA, 2008; ESA, 2009; City of Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009.

Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2004.

San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program. Annual Report, 2007-08. August 29, 2008.

John Northmore Roberts & Associates et al., 1992; State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, 1990.

State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, 1990; ESA surveys, 2008.

John Northmore Roberts & Associates et al., 1992.

San Pedro Creek Watershed Coalition, 2002.

San Pedro Creek Watershed Coalition, 2005.

California Dept of Fish & Game, 1988, 2003; California Dept of Forestry, 2005; U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 2011; FEMA, 2008; ESA, 2009; City of Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009.

San Pedro Creek Watershed Coalition, 2005.

BLM, 1981; State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, 1990.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2008; National Marine Fisheries Service, 2005; National Park Service, 2005; California Dept of Forestry, 2005; California Natural Diversity Database, 2009; California Native Plant Society, 2008; California Dept of Fish & Game, 2008; FEMA, 2008; ESA, 2009; City of Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009.

California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), 202009.

US Geological Survey, 2009; City of Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009.

1.e
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

REFERENCES
R-3

NATURAL HAZARDS
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WG07).

Fact Sheet 2016-20302008-3027. Forecasting California’s Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Regions 2014-2043s – What Can We Expect in the Next 30 Years?, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3027/fs2008-3027.pdf. 2008. Accessed at https://pubs.usgs. gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Liquefaction Susceptibility http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/liquefac/liquefac.html. 2003.

Association of Bay Area Governments, 2003; US Geological Survey, 2008; ESA.2009; City of Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009.

United States Geological Survey (USGS), Open File Report 97-745, San Francisco Bay Landslide Folio, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/of97-745/. 1997.

United States Geological Survey (USGS). Coastal Erosion Along the U.S. West Coast During the 1997–98 El Niño: Expectations and Observations, http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/lidar/AGU_fall98/, 2005.

Heberger. M.H. Cooley, P. H. Gleick, E. Moore of Pacifica Institute. The impacts of Sea Level Rise on the California Coast. A paper from the California Climate Change Center. May 2009.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire). https://frap.fire.ca.gov/media/10315/firethreat_19_ada. Pdf Emergency Services Consulting, 2008.

COASTAL RESILIENCE
California Coastal Commission (CCC) 2015. Sea-level Rise Policy Guidance Interpretive Guidelines for Addressing Sea-level Rise in Local Coastal Programs and Coastal Development Permits.

Unanimously Adopted August 12, 2015.

California Coastal Commission (CCC) 2018. Residential Adaptation Policy Guidance: Interpretive Guidelines for Addressing Sea-level Rise in Local Coastal Programs. March 2018, Revised.

California Natural Resources Agency (CalNRA) and California Ocean Protection Council (OPC), 2018. State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance: 2018 Update. Adopted March 2018.

City of Pacifica. 1994. City of Pacifica Implementation Plan codified in Articles 43 and 44, Chapter 4, Title 9 Planning and Zoning. Amended November 8, 2017. Available at:
https://library.municode.com/ca/pacifica/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=16544. Accessed on January 11, 2018.

1.e
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 R-4
Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 2018a. Sea-Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment. Prepared for the City of Pacifica January 2018, Revised June 2018.

Environmental Science Associates (ESA) 2018b. Final Draft Sea-level Rise Adaptation Plan. Prepared for the City of Pacifica. September 2018.

1.e
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

REFERENCES
R-5
This page intentionally left blank.

1.e
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
Acronyms
ABAG: Association of Bay Area Governments
BART: Bay Area Rapid Transit
BAWSCA: Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency
BMP: Best Management Practices
CCWRP: Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant
CDF: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CDFG: California Department of Fish and Game
CNDDB: California Natural Diversity Database
CRLF: California Red-Legged Frog
CRSMP: Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan
CSA: City Services Area
EMS: Emergency Medical Services
ESHA: Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area
FESA: Federal Endangered Species Act
GGNRA: Golden Gate National Recreation Area
HPD: Hillside Preservation District
LHMP: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
LID: Low Impact Development
NCCWD: North Coast County Water District

7.1A

1.e
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-2
NCFA: North County Fire Authority
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
RWQCB: State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board PG&E: Pacific Gas & Electric
SamTrans: San Mateo County Transit District
SCS: Sustainable Communities Strategy
SESM: Substantial Exterior Structural Modification
SFGS: San Francisco Garter Snake
SFPUC: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SMCWPPP: San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program TDR: Transfer of Development Rights
USGS: United States Geological Survey
USFWS: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Definitions
Anticipated Life: The period over which a development is expected to be usable, with normal repairs and maintenance, for the purpose for which it was designed, typically a minimum of 75-100 years for residential and commercial development and a minimum of 100-150 years for critical infrastructure.

Aquaculture: A form of agriculture as defined in Section 17 of the Fish and Game Code. Aquaculture products are agricultural products, and aquaculture facilities and land uses shall be treated as agricultural facilities and land uses in all planning and permit-issuing decisions governed by this division.

Beach: The expanse of sand, gravel, cobble or other loose material that extends landward from the mean low water line to the place where there is distinguishable change in physiographic form, or to the line of permanent vegetation. The seaward limit of a beach (unless specified otherwise) is the mean low water line. The inland extent of the beach shall be determined as follows:
1) From a distinct linear feature (e.g., a seawall, road, or bluff,etc.); 2) From the inland edge of the further inland beach berm as determined from historical surveys, aerial photographs, and other records or geological evidence; or 3) Where a beach berm does not exist, from the further point separating the dynamic portion of the beach from the inland area as distinguished by vegetation, debris or other geological or historical evidence.

7.1B

7.2 7.1

1.e
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
G-3
Best Available Science: The most recent peer-reviewed and locally-relevant science reasonably validated by qualified experts in the scientific community, and as may be recommended by the State of California or other authoritative coastal management entity (e.g. NOAA).

Best Management Practices (BMPs): Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, operation and maintenance procedures, structural treatment devices, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the conveyance of pollution in stormwater and urban runoff.

Biodiversity: A term used to quantitatively or qualitatively describe the species richness and abundance of plants and animals within an ecosystem.

Bluff: A high bank or bold headland with a broad, precipitous, sometimes rounded cliff face overlooking a plain or body of water.

Bluff/Cliff Edge: The upper termination of a bluff, cliff, or seacliff. In cases where the top edge of the cliff is rounded away from the face of the cliff as a result of erosional processes related to the presence of the steep cliff face, the bluff line or edge shall be defined as that point nearest the cliff beyond which the downward gradient of the surface increases more or less continuously until it reaches the general gradient of the cliff. In a case where there is a steplike feature at the top of the cliff face, the landward edge of the topmost riser shall be taken to be the cliff edge.

Bluff Face: The portion of a bluff between the bluff edge and the toe of the bluff.

Buffer: A buffer is a development setback designed to minimize the disturbance that development may cause in sensitive environments, or to protect development from nuisances or hazards.

Building Footprint: The full horizontal extent of a structure and all attached structures, above or below grade.

Cliff: A high, very steep, perpendicular, or overhanging face of rock.

Coastal Access: The ability of the public to reach, use or view the shoreline of coastal waters or in land coastal recreation areas and trails.

Coastal Bluff: A bluff, the toe of which is now or was historically (generally within the last 200 years) subject to marine erosion or the toe of which lies within an area otherwise identified in Public Resources Code Section 30603(a)(1) or (a)(2)..

Coastal Development Permit (CDP): A permit for any development within the coastal zone that is required pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 30600 of the California Coastal Act.

Coastal-Dependent Development or Use: Any development or use which requires a site on, or adjacent to, the sea in order to function.

7.3 1.e
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-4
Coastal Hazards: Include but are not limited to episodic and long-term shoreline retreat and coastal erosion, high seas, ocean waves, storms, tsunami, tidal scour, wave overtopping, coastal flooding, and their interaction, all of which may be exacerbated by sea level rise.

Coastal-Related Development: Any use that is dependent on a coastal-dependent development or use.

Coastal Vulnerability Zone: The areas shown on the City’s maps prepared for the Pacifica SLR Vulnerability Assessment (1/12/2018), incorporated herein, and as may be amended from time-to-time based on updated best available science about projected sea-level rise, erosion, flooding, and other coastal hazards.

Critical Habitat Areas: Areas containing features essential for the conservation of species listed under the FESA, and which may require special management and protection outside that which is already provided by FESA. Critical Habitat Areas are designated by the USFWS.

Cumulative Effects: The incremental effects of an individual project shall be reviewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.

Design Life. The design life of a structure is the period of time during which it can still safely meet the demand of its users.

Development: On land, in or under water, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure; discharge or disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials; change in the density or intensity of use of land, including, but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (commencing with Section 66410 of the Government Code), and any other division of land, including lot splits, except where the land division is brought about in connection with the purchase of such land by a public agency for public recreational use; change in the intensity of use of water, or of access thereto; construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility; and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes, kelp harvesting, and timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commencing with Section 4511).

As used in this section, "structure" includes, but is not limited to, any building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, siphon, aqueduct, telephone line, and electrical power transmission and distribution line. In this LCP, ‘development’ is synonymous with ‘new development.’ Dune: Ridges or mounds of loose, wind-blown material usually sand. A dune structure often has a back and foredune area. Stable dunes are often colonized by vegetation.

Easement: A right given by the owner of land to another party for specific limited use of the land. An easement may be acquired by a government through dedication when the purchase of an entire interest in the property may be too expensive or unnecessary; usually needed for utilities or shared parking.grant of one or more of the property rights by the property owner to and/or for the use by the public, a corporation or another person or entity.

Economic Life (also called “design life” and “expected life”): Period over which a development is expected to be usable, with normal repairs and maintenance, for the purpose for which it was designed.

7.4 7.5

1.e
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
G-5
Energy Facility: Any public or private processing, producing, generating, storing, transmitting, or recovering facility for electricity, natural gas, petroleum, coal, or other source of energy.

Erosion: The wearing away of soil and rock by processes such as mechanical or chemical weathering; mass wasting; and the actions of waves, wind, and underground water.The process by which material is removed from the earth’s surface (including weathering, dissolution, abrasion, and transportation), most commonly by wind or water.

Environmental Justice: The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA): Any area in which plant or animal life or their habitat are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and development (California Public Resources Code Section 30107.5).

Estuary: A coastal water body, usually semi-enclosed by land, having open, partially obstructed, or intermittent exchange with the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater from the land.

Existing Structure: A structure that has any of the following characteristics:
i) lawfully constructed prior to the certification date of the LCLUP; or ii) permitted for construction prior to the certification date of the LCLUP, and all permits remained in full force and effect prior to the date of construction; or iii) authorized to be constructed pursuant to an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Exterior Structural Modification.”
..

Fault Rupture: The displacement of the earth’s surface due to the movement along a fault associated with an earthquake.

Feasible: Capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.

Fluvial: Produced by the action of a stream.

Fill: Earth or any other substance or material, including pilings placed for the purposes of erecting structures thereon, placed in a submerged area.

Fuel Modification: A fire control strategy that thins vegetative cover within a buffer area surrounding development in order to interrupt continuous paths of fuel and provide defensible space to allow for firefighting operations in case of wildland fire.

7.7 7.6

1.e
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-6
Groundwater: Subsurface water occupying the zone of saturation usually found in porous rock strata and soils.

Habitat: The natural environment of a locality, including the physical and biological environment, in which a plant or animal lives.

Headland: A high, steep-faced projection extending into the sea, usually marking an area of fairly stable and rigid landform.

Hillside Preservation District (HPD): A district that overlays Pacifica’s base zoning and covers most of the city’s ridges and open spaces. The HPD is intended to ensure that development of highly sensitive slopes does not endanger the public or harm the environmental or scenic values of the site, and to encourage highquality site planning and design that enhances the beauty of the landscape. The District creates more stringent lot coverage limits, based on the average natural slope of the site, and requires submission of development plans, grading plans, and other documentation.

Hydric Soil: A type of soil with characteristics resulting from prolonged saturation and chemically reducing conditions such as occurs under anaerobic conditions.

Hydrology: The dynamic processes of the water within an environment including the sources, timing, amount, and direction of water movement.

Hydrophytic Vegetation: Plants that have adapted to living in aquatic environments. These plants are also called hydrophytes. In wetlands, hydrophytic species occur where at least the root zone of the plant is seasonally or continually found in saturated or submerged soil.

Landslide: Also known as slope failure, a landslide involves the downslope displacement and movement of material, and can be triggered by either static (gravity) or dynamic (seismic) forces.

Land Divisions: Land divisions include subdivisions (through parcel map, tract map, grant deed, or any other method), lot line adjustments, redivisions, mergers, and certificates of compliance.

Littoral Cell: A region that encompasses most features affecting sediment transport. The boundaries of the cell are usually delineated by river drainage areas, promontory headlands, or submarine canyons on the periphery, the continental shelf-continental slope boundary on the seaward side and by inland ridges and river inlets on the landward side. Sediment within these cells generally travel seaward by river drainage, southward (downcoast) by longshore currents, and are eventually lost to the continental slope area or submarine canyon.

Liquefaction: The transformation of soil from a solid to a liquefied state, in which saturated soil temporary loses strength due to the buildup of excess pore water pressure, especially during earthquake-induced cyclic loading.

Low Impact Development (LID): An approach to development that seeks to manage stormwater as close to its source as possible, employing principles such as preserving and recreating natural landscape features, minimizing imperviousness, and creating functional and appealing site drainage that treats stormwater as a resource rather than as a waste product.Site planning and development features that reduce impermeable sur1.e Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
G-7
face areas and increase infiltration, such as use of permeable paving, vegetated swales, and water retention facilities.

Marine System: Open ocean overlying the continental shelf and coastline exposed to waves and currents of the open ocean shoreward to (1) extreme high water of spring tides; (2) seaward limit of wetland emergent vegetation, trees, or shrubs; or (3) the seaward limit of the Estuarine System, other than vegetation. Salinities exceed 30parts per thousand.

Mean-High Tide: The intersection of the tidal plane of the mean high water with the shore. Determined by survey prepared by a licensed professional land surveyor based on field data collected within 12 months. The survey must be conducted in consultation with and approved by the California State Lands Commission.

Mitigation: A specific action taken to reduce environmental impacts. Mitigation measures are required as a component of an environmental impact report (EIR) if significant measures are identified.

As defined in Section 15370 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, mitigation includes:

1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.

2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.

3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment.

4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.

5. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

Mitigation Measures:Mitigation Measures: Action taken to avoid, minimize, or eliminate environmental impacts. Mitigation includes: avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance during the life of the action; and compensating for the impact by repairing or providing substitute resources or environments. Measures imposed on a project consistent with Section 15370 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act to avoid, minimize, eliminate, or compensate for adverse impacts to the environment or for purposes of consistency with Coastal Act requirements.

Monitoring: The systematic collection of physical, biological, or economic data or a combination of these data in order to make decisions regarding project operation or to evaluate project performance. Monitoring is typically required for beach nourishment projects and habitat restoration projects.

Net Developable Area. The total area of land available for development, not necessarily the total area of a property itself. It does not include open space, drainage land, regional roads and land used for other public facilities.

7.7A

1.e
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-8
New Development: Development, as defined in Section 30106 of the California Coastal Act, where no existing development occurs. New Development does not include the remodeling or improvement of an existing structure, as defined, and also does not include any structure authorized to be constructed pursuant to an exclusion contained in the definition of Substantial Exterior Structural Modification.”.

Non-conforming Use: A use of a structure or land that was lawfully established and maintained, but which does not conform with the use regulations or required conditions for the district in which it is located by reason of adoption or amendment of this code or by reason of annexation of territory to the City.

Non-conforming Structure: An existing structure that is legally nonconforming with an LCP standard.

Permit: Any license, certificate, approval, or other entitlement for use granted or denied by any public agency.

Prescriptive Rights: Prescriptive rights refer to public rights that are acquired over private lands through continuous use over the length of a “prescriptive period” of at least five years. This right of access is considered an “implied dedication” of a public easement, and can occur with or without the explicit consent of the property owner.

Public Trust Lands: All lands subject to the Common Law Public Trust for commerce, navigation, fisheries, recreation, and other public purposes. Public Trust lands include tidelands, submerged lands, the beds of navigable lakes and rivers, and historic tidelands and submerged lands that are presently filled or reclaimed, and which were subject to the Public Trust at any time.

Public works: The following developments are considered public works:

1. All production, storage, transmission, and recovery facilities for water, sewerage, telephone, and other similar utilities owned or operated by any public agency or by any utility subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission, except for energy facilities.

2. All public transportation facilities, including streets, roads, highways, public parking lots and structures, ports, harbors, airports, railroads, and mass transit facilities and stations, bridges, trolley wires, and other related facilities.

3. All publicly financed recreational facilities, all projects of the State Coastal Conservancy, and any development by a special district.

4. All community college facilities.

Qualified Biologist: A person who has earned a minimum of a Bachelor of Science degree in biology or a related field from an accredited college or university and has demonstrated field experience evaluating land use impacts on marine or wildlife species and their habitats. Biologists who conduct wetland delineations shall have completed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' "Reg IV" wetland delineation training, or the equivalent, and shall have the demonstrated ability to independently conduct wetland delineations.

Riparian: Consists of trees, shrubs, or herbs that occur along watercourses or water bodies. The vegetation is adapted to flooding and soil saturation during at least a portion of its growing season.

7.8 1.e
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
G-9
Riprap: A protective layer or facing of rock, concrete blocks or quarry stone, placed to prevent erosion, scour, or sloughing of an embankment or bluff.

Sea: The Pacific Ocean and all harbors, bays, channels, estuaries, salt marshes, sloughs, and other areas subject to tidal action through any connection with the Pacific Ocean, excluding non-estuarine rivers, streams, tributaries, creeks, and flood control and drainage channels. “Sea” does not include the area of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, established pursuant to Title 7.2 (commencing with Section 66600) of the Government Code, including any river, stream, tributary, creek, or flood control or drainage channel flowing directly or indirectly into such area.

Sea Cliff: A vertical or very steep cliff or slope produced by wave action, situated at the seaward edge of the coast or the landward side of the wave-cut platform, and marking the inner limit of beach erosion.

Seawall: A structure separating land and water areas, primarily designed to prevent erosion and other damage due to wave action. It is usually a vertical wood or concrete wall as opposed to a sloped revetment.

Sediment: Grains of soil, sand, or rock that have been transported from one location and deposited at another.

Sensitive Coastal Resource Areas: Those identifiable and geographically bounded land and water areas within the coastal zone of vital interest and sensitivity. "Sensitive coastal resource areas" include the following: (a) Special marine and land habitat areas, wetlands, lagoons, and estuaries as mapped and designated in Part 4 of the coastal plan;(b) Areas possessing significant recreational value; (c) Highly scenic areas; (d) Archaeological sites referenced in the California Coastline and Recreation Plan or as designated by the State Historic Preservation Officer; (e) Special communities or neighborhoods which are significant visitor destination areas; (f) Areas that provide existing coastal housing or recreational opportunities for low- and moderate income persons; and(g) Areas where divisions of land could substantially impair or restrict coastal access.

Seiche: A standing wave in an enclosed body of water that may be caused by tidal action or a seismic event.

Shore: Narrow strip of land in immediate contact with the sea, including the zone between high and low water. A shore of unconsolidated material is usually called a beach.

Shore Protection: Structures or sand placed at or on the shore to reduce or eliminate upland damage from wave action or flooding during storms.

Shoreline: Intersection of the ocean or sea with land; the line delineating the shoreline on National Ocean Service nautical charts and surveys approximates the mean low water line from the time the chart was prepared. Seaward of the base of coastal bluffs and/or at or near the sandy beach/ocean elevation, including as depicted in Appendix B (“Coastal Zone Vulnerability Maps”) and denoted as “wave run-up,” “storm flood area,” and “flood prone area.”
Shoreline Armoring: Protective structures such as vertical seawalls, revetments, riprap, revetments, and bulkheads built parallel to the shoreline for the purposes of protecting a structure or other upland property.

Special Status Species: Plant and animal species designated as rare, threatened, or endangered under the Federal or State Endangered Species Acts; species that are candidates for listing under federal or state law;

7.9 1.e
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-10
species designated as USFWS species of concern or species of local concern; species designated by CDFG as species of special concern; species protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Bald Eagle Protection Act; and species that may be considered rare or endangered pursuant to Section 15380(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. Any species which is listed, or proposed for listing, as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. It also includes any species designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a “candidate” or “species of concern” or species identified on California Native Plant Society’s Lists 1A, 1B, or 2, implying potential danger of extinction.

Storm Surge: A rise above normal water level on the open coast due to the action of wind stress on the water surface. Storm surge resulting from a hurricane also includes the rise in level due to atmospheric pressure reduction as well as that due to wind stress.

Stream: A topographic feature that at least periodically conveys water through a bed or channel having banks. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation. A creek is a subset of a stream that tends to have low water flow.

Structure: Anything construed or erected which requires a fixed location on the ground, or is attached to a building or other structure having a fixed location on the ground.

Submerged Lands: Submerged lands shall be defined as lands which lie below the line of mean low tide.

Subsidence: The sinking of a portion of the ground surface that may occur from immediate settlement, shrinkage of expansive soil, liquefaction, earthquakes, or excess extraction of groundwater.

Substantial Exterior Structural Modification (SESM): Any physical improvement which modifies an existing structure, as defined, to achieve in any of the following ways:
i) a seaward encroachment of the structure; or
ii) alteration, removal or replacement of 50 percent or more of the linear length of the exterior walls or other major structural components (including but not limited to floor, roof, and foundation structures), whether or not the floor area or building footprint is expanded; or iii) an addition that includes new floor area at or below the first story equal to 50 percent or more of the structure’s total existing floor area; or
ivii) an increase of the existing building footprint equal to 50 percent or more; but however excluding, but not limited to any of the following:
i) removal, replacement, or maintenance of nonstructural exterior components, of exterior walls such as: decorative
i) plywood roof sheathing;
ii) underlayment;

7.10 1.e
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GLOSSARY
G-11
iii) siding;
iv) shingles;
v) other roofing materials;
vi) windows and doors (including garage doors);
vii) exterior waterproofing/weatherproofing materials
viii) appliance installations and replacements, such as water heaters, generators, and solar panels, that do not involve structural modifications;
x) remedial actions to address termite infestation and dry rot; and xi) other modifications required to comply with State and/or Federal laws and regulations, such as disabled accessibility improvements and seismic retrofits/upgrades. ii) development on any site which is protected from coastal erosion by an existing, permitted shoreline protection structure; iii) replacement of any structure pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (g) of Section 30610 of the Public Resources Code;
iv) the demolition and reconstruction of a single-family residence; provided, that the reconstructed residence shall not exceed either the floor area, height or bulk of the former structure by more than 10 percent, and that the reconstructed residence shall be sited in the same location on the affected property as the former structure; or
v) the reconstruction, repair, or maintenance of any shoreline protection structure; provided, however, that the reconstructed, repaired, or maintained shoreline protection structure is not seaward of the location of the former structure, and that such modifications do not increase the height or length of the former shoreline protection structure by more than 10 percent.

Changes to exterior walls, floor area, height, length, or building footprint shall be measured cumulatively from those existing at the site on the date of certification of the LCLUP. The cost of improvements shall not be used as a basis in application of this definition or any policy relying thereupon unless expressly stated in the policy. Incremental structural changes that cumulatively amount to replacement of 50 percent or more over time shall also be considered a SSM.

Temporary Event: An activity or use that constitutes development as defined in Section 30106 of the California Coastal Act, but which is or will be of limited duration and involves the placement of non-permanent structures; and/or involves the use of sandy beach, parkland, filled tidelands, water, streets, or parking areas which are otherwise open and available for general public use.

Tidelands: Lands which are located between the lines of mean high tide and mean low tide.

7.10 1.e
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, JUNE 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 G-12
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): The maximum amount of a pollutant that can be discharged into a water body from all sources (point and non-point) and still maintain water quality standards. Under Clean Water Act section 303(d), TMDLs must be developed for all water bodies that do not meet water quality standards after application of technology-based controls. TMDL also refers to the written, quantitative analysis and plan for attaining and maintaining water quality standards in all seasons for a specific water body and pollutant.

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR): A mechanism to relocate potential residential development from areas where environmental or land use impacts could be severe to other areas more appropriate for development, in order to preserve significant open space resources. Owners of environmentally sensitive sites may transfer residential development rights to other sites where higher-density development can be supported, or from one part of a site to another.

Tsunami: A wave generated by abrupt movement of the seabed, which can result from an earthquake or a significant landslide.

Tsunami Inundation Zone: An area of likely tsunami inundation under a tsunami scenario. The applicable tsunami scenario should balance a reasonable probability of event occurrence with a reasonable potential of the tsunami event causing substantial loss of life and/or damage to property. Such a tsunami scenario could include, but is not necessarily limited to, 475-year Average Return Period (ARP) event described in the publication Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Maps for the State of California (Phase 2), California Department of Conservation (2023).

Watershed: The geographical area drained by a river and its connecting tributaries into a common source. A watershed may, and often does, cover a very large geographical region.The total area above a given point on a watercourse which contributes water to the flow of the watercourse; the entire region drained by a watercourse.

Wave Run-up: The distance or extent that water from a breaking wave will extend up a beach or structure.

Wetland: The Coastal Act defines wetland as land which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and includes saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, mudflats, and fens. The California Code of Regulations further defines wetland as land where the water table is at, near, or above the land surface long enough to promote the formation of hydric soils or to support the growth of hydrophytes, and shall also include those types of wetlands where vegetation is lacking and soil is poorly developed or absent as a result of frequent and drastic fluctuations of surface water levels, wave action, water flow, turbidity or high concentrations of salts or other substances in the substrate.

Wildlife Movement Corridor: Wildlife movement corridors link areas of suitable habitat that are otherwise separated by barriers such as rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or areas of human disturbance or development, allowing wildlife to access additional areas with food, water, and other resources.

7.11 1.e
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GAT EWAY DR

FIRECREST AVE

INVERNESS DR

MONTEREY RD

PALMETTO AVE

MANOR DR

SKYLINE BLVD

GLENCOURT

MONTEREY RD

VEA OTTEMLAP

EDGEMAR DR

MILLER AVE

AVALON DR

OCEANA BLVD

PALOMA AVE

TALBOT AVE

BRADFORD WAY

SHARP PARK RD

MOANA WAY

LUNDY WAY

FAIRWAY DR RIDGEWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

REINA DEL MAR AVE

ROCKA WAY BEACH AVE

TERRANOVA BLVD

EVERGLADES DR

ODDSTAD BLVD

CRESPI DR

LERIDA WAY

CRESPI DR

SEVILLE DR

MANZANITA D
A
R

LICANTE
LIN
DR

DA MAR BLVD

ROSITA RD

ROSITA RD

ADOBE RD

PERALTA RD

DE SOLO

LINDA MAR BLVD

FASSLER AVE

PARK LINCOLN GRAND AVE

WESTBOROUGH

KING DR

SKYLINE BLVD

MILAGRA DR

HICKEY BLVD

ESPLANADE AVE

MANOR DR

ROBERTS RD

SHARP PA RK RD

SEASIDE DR

CLARENDON RD
P a c c
O c e a n
D e vi l ’ s S l i d e T u n n e l
Figure 2-3:

Land Use Diagram
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Source: City of Pacica, 2019; San Mateo
County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Planning Area
City Limits
Low Intensity VisitorServing Commercial
Public and Semi-Public
Beach/Commuter Parking
Utilities
Park
Conservation
Urban Reserve (Unincorporated)
Transportation Corridor
Coastal Zone

ESPLANADE AVE VEA OTTEMLAP

DVLB HCAEB

MANOR DR

AVALON DR

MONTEREY RD

PALMETTO AVE

SHOREVIEW AVE

SALADA AVE
LINDA

SANTA ROSA AVE

MONTECITO AVE

CLARENDON RD

VEA OTTEMLAP

CARMEL AVE

PALOMA AVE

PACIFIC AVE

FRANCISCO BLVD

SAN JOSE AVE

SANTA MARIA AVE

GRAND AVE

DANMANN

HALLING WAY

SHELTER COVE

STANLEY AVE

KENT RD

OLYMPIAN WAY

STERLING AVE

LIVINGSTON AVE
* Sites 0.5 acres or more may be developed at up
to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.
developed up to 1.5 times the maximum with the
Density Bonus program.

SAN PEDRO AVE
Note: Senior or a
ordable housing may be
Open Space/Agriculture/Residential
(up to 0.2 units/acre)
Very Low Density Residential
(0.2 -2.0 units/acre)
Low Density Residential
(3 -9 units/acre)
Medium Density Residential
(10 -15 units/acre)
High Density Residential
(16 -21 units/acre)*
Coastal Residential Mixed Use
Mixed Use Neighborhood
(16 -26 units/acre)*
Mixed Use Center
(30 to 50 units/acre)
Retail Commercial
Office Commercial
Service Commercial
Visitor-Serving Commercial

1.e
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) West Edgemar,
Pacic Manor
Fairmont
West
West
Sharp
Park
Sharp Park GC,
West Fairway Park,
and Mori Point
Pedro Point
and
Shelter Cove
Rockaway Beach,
Quarry, and
Headlands
Pacica
State
Beach
F
Northern
Coastal
Blus
Bowl Site
Paci
c
Manor
Industrial
Northern
Palmetto
Promenade and Beach
Boulevard Property
Palmetto Ave
Eureka Square and
Mixed Use Center
Sharp Park
Golf Course
Rockaway
Quarry Site
Rockaway
Beach
Rockaway
Headlands
Undeveloped
San Pedro
Avenue Site
Pedro Point
Shopping Center
Shamrock
Ranch
Pac i c
O cea n
Dev i l’s S l ide
Tunne l
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Source: City of Pacifica, 2019; San Mateo
County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Figure 2-4:

Sub-Areas &
Specic Sites
Subarea
Specic Sites
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area

OLD COAST HWY

P A OTTEMLA VE

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

DVLB HCAEB

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR
Figure 2-7
Figure 2-5
Figure 2-6
Key to Area Maps

1.e
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Northern
Coastal
(GGNRA)
Bowl
Manor
Shopping
Center
Industrial
Northern
Palmetto
Beach
Boulevard
Property
Palmetto
Ave
Eureka Square
and Mixed
Use Center
Fish
Undercrossing
Fairmont
West Park
Ingrid B.

Lacy
Middle
School
City
Hall
Promenade
Sharp
Park
Golf
Course
Overcrossing
Overcrossing
San
Francisco
RV Park
Pier Talbot Rd Trail
Coastal Trail
West Edgemar,
West
Sharp
Park
Fairmont
West
Lands End
Apts.
12 10
11 9
4 5
2 1
7 VEA OTTEMLAP

BEACH BLVD

PALMETTO AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

FRANCISCO BLVD
7 8
Note: ordable housing may be
developed up to 1.5 times the maximum with the
Density Bonus program.
0 1/4 1/2
MILES
1 Open Space/Agriculture/Residential
(up to 0.2 units/acre)
Low Density Residential
(3 -9 units/acre)
Medium Density Residential
(10 -15 units/acre)
High Density Residential
(16 -21 units/acre)*
Mixed Use Neighborhood
(16 -26 units/acre)*
Mixed Use Center
(30 to 50 units/acre)
Retail Commercial
Service Commercial
Low Intensity VisitorServing Commercial
Public and Semi-Public
Park
Conservation
Transportation Corridor
Coastal Access Points
(Beach)
Coastal Access Points
top/View)
Park Opportunity Site
View Corridor
Existing Trail
Proposed Trail
On-street trail
Subareas
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Coastal Access Points are
keyed to Table 3-1
Figure 2-5:
* Sites 0.5 acres or more may be developed at up
to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.
3 6
8 1.e
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Sharp Park
Golf Course,
West Fairway Park
& Mori Point
Rockaway Beach,
Quarry, &
Headlands
State
Beach
Rockaway
Quarry Site
Rockaway
Beach Rockaway
Headlands
Water Recycling
Plant
Flats
Pad
Proposed
Overcrossing
Undercrossing
Coastal Trail
Coastal Trail

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

SEASIDE DR
Mor i Po i n t
( G GNR A )
Sh a r p Pa r k
& Golf Cour s e
Sharp
Park
Beach
12 14
13 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 7
8 0 1/4 1/2
MILES
1 Open Space/Agriculture/Residential
(up to 0.2 units/acre)
Low Density Residential
(3 -9 units/acre)
Medium Density Residential
(10 -15 units/acre)
High Density Residential
(16 -21 units/acre)*
Mixed Use Neighborhood
(16 -26 units/acre)*
Mixed Use Center
(30 to 50 units/acre)
Retail Commercial
Service Commercial
Low Intensity VisitorServing Commercial
Public and Semi-Public
Park
Conservation
Transportation Corridor
Coastal Access Points
(Beach)
Coastal Access Points
top/View)
Park Opportunity Site
View Corridor
Existing Trail Proposed
Trail
On-street trail
Existing Trailhead
Subareas
Specic Sites
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Coastal Access Points are
keyed to Table 3-1
Figure 2-6:

Note: ordable housing may be
developed up to 1.5 times the maximum with the
Density Bonus program.
* Sites 0.5 acres or more may be developed at up
to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.
15 16

1.e
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) State Beach
Pedro
Point
& Shelter
Cove
Pedro Point Trail
Coastal Trail
Undeveloped
San Pedro Ave Site
Pedro Point
Shopping
Center
Shamrock
Ranch

GRAND AVE

SAN PEDRO AVE
Devil’s Slide Trail
DEVIL’S SLIDE TUNNEL
Pedro Point
Headlands
(GGNRA)
State Beach
25 21
22 23
24 26
27 Open Space/Agriculture/ Residential
(up to 0.2 units/acre)
Very Low Density Residential
(0.2 -2.0 units/acre)
Low Density Residential
(3 -9 units/acre)
Mixed Use Neighborhood
(16 -26 units/acre)*
Retail Commercial
Low Intensity VisitorServing Commercial
Beach/Commuter Parking
Utilities
Park
Conservation
Urban Reserve
Transportation Corridor
0 1/4 1/2
MILES
1 Existing Trail
Proposed Trail
On-street trail
Existing Trailhead
Proposed Trailhead
Coastal Access Points
(Beach)
Coastal Access Points
View Corridor
20 Subareas
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Coastal Access Points are
keyed to Table 3-1
Figure 2-7:
outh
* Sites 0.5 acres or more may be developed at up
to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.

Note: ordable housing may be
developed up to 1.5 times the maximum with the
Density Bonus program.

Coastal Residential Mixed Use
Visitor-Serving Commercial
16 1.e
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

GAT EWAY DR

FIRECREST AVE

INVERNESS DR

MONTEREY RD MANOR DR

SKYLINE BLVD

GLENCOURT

MONTEREY RD

EDGEMAR DR

MILLER AVE

AVALON DR

OCEANA BLVD

PALOMA AVE

TALBOT AVE

BRADFORD WAY

SHARP PARK RD

MOANA WAY

LUNDY WAY RIDGEWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

REINA DEL MAR AVE

ROCKA WAY BEACH AVE

TERRANOVA BLVD

EVERGLADES DR

ODDSTAD BLVD

CRESPI DR

LERIDA WAY

CRESPI DR

SEVILLE DR

MANZANITA D
A
R

LICANTE
LIN
DR

DA MAR BLVD

ROSITA RD
ROSI

ADOBE RD
TA RD

PERALTA RD

DE SOLO

LINDA MAR BLVD

FASSLER AVE

PARK LINCOLN

WESTBOROUGH

KING DR

SKYLINE BLVD

MILAGRA DR

HICKEY BLVD

MANOR DR

ROBERTS RD

SHARP PA RK RD

CLARENDON RD
Pa c
O c e a n
De v i l ’ s S l i de T u nn e l
Pier
Sh a r p Pa r k
G o l f C o u r s e
Mo r i P o in t
( G G N R A )
Pedro Point
Headlands
(GGNRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
State Beach
Northern
Coastal
(GGNRA)
23 25 24 26
27 22
21 20
19 18
17 13
14 7
5 2
1 1
3 Figure 3-1:

Coastal Access
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Coastal Access Points
Coastal Access Points
(Beach)
Regional Open Space
Neighborhood &
District Parks
Golf Course
Beach
Conservation
Partial Conservation
with Development
School
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: City of Pacica, 2019; San Mateo
County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.
on GGNRA land
Pursue small public park and trail
Improve public access and
Maintain public parking as part
of redevelopment of City-owned
Beach Boulevard property
Ensure public access
Provide public trail to overlook
point as part of development
or land conservation
Provide additional signage and amenities
at Crespi Drive parking lot in relation to
proposed extension of Baquiano Trail
Improve new segment of Coastal Trail
along former railroad berm
Trail and access improvements expected under
land steward management; new trails should
provide coastal views from Pedro Peak

PALMETTO AVE

ALMETTO A P VE FAIRWAY DR

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR
3 4
9 8
7 6
12 11
10 14 15
16 Ensure public access to beach
in 400-block of Esplanade Avenue
if feasible
and restore blu conditions
Playelds

1.e
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) P
acc
Ocean
D e vi l ’ s S l i d e T u n n e l
Figure 3-2:

Parks and Open Space
System
0 1/4 1/21
MILES
2 Park Opportunity Site
RegionalOpenSpace
District, Neighborhood,
& Pocket Parks
Special Facilities
Schoolelds
Priorities for Conservation
Golf Course
Beach
OtherProtected OpenSpace
PartialConservation
with Development
Urban Reserve
Visitor Serving Commercial
LowIntensity Visitor-
Serving Commercial
Visitor Parking Lot
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

P

PALMETTO AVE

VE A OTTE MLAP
FAIR
WAY DR

GRAND AVE

SEASIDE
DR
Pier
Sharp Park
Go lfC ourse
MoriPoint (GG N R A )
Pedro Point
Headlands
(GGNRA)
Sharp Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
State Beach
Northern Coastal
Ingrid B. Lacy
Middle School
Rockaway
Quarry
Site
Fairmont
West Park
Sharp Park Beach Promenade

FRANCISCO BLVD

SAN PEDRO AVE

BEACH BLVD
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Source: City of Pacica, 2019: San Mateo

1.e
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 400
300
200
100
100
500
600
700
400
500 300
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
600
400
300
200
100 500
600
700
200
300
400
500
600
700 800
900 1000
1100
1200
100
100
200
200
300
100
300
100
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
400500
600
700
800
900 1000
1100
1200
300
800
200
900
800
700
600 500
700
600
500
300
400 300
400
500
400
500
400
400
300
200
100
400 300
200
100
500
600
700
200
100
800 900
1000
1100
1100
1000
900
800
600
700
500
1100
1000
700600
800
700
600 500
400
300
400 300 500 600
700
800
300
200
300
400
500
600
200
400
300
200
100
400
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
300
200
300
200
300
400 500 600
700
800
900
100
200
300
400
300
400
400 300 200
100
500
100
200
300
400
500
100 200300
400
500
900
1220
MilagraRidge Trail
PiertoRidge Trail
SharpPark Trail
Mori RidgeTrail
BaquianoTrail Trail
San Pedro Valley Trail
PedroPo ni t Trail
Coastal Trail
Coastal Trail
De v il’s Slide T rail
HarryDean Trail
Pac i  c
O cea n
Dev i l’s S l ide
Tunne l
Figure 3-3:

Trail System
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Existing Trails
Existing On-Street
Trail Routes
Proposed Trails or
Trail Improvements
Proposed On-Street
Trail Routes
Coastal Trail
Existing Trailheads
Trailheads to be
Improved
Visitor Parking Lot
Existing SR 1 Crossing
Proposed SR 1 Crossing
Regional Open Space
Neighborhood, District
and Pocket Parks
Golf Course
Beach
Other Protected Open Space
Partial Conservation
with Development
School Playelds
100
Contour
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: City of Pacica, 2008; San Mateo
County, 2009; Dyett & Bhatia, 2013.

OLD COAST HWY

P A OTTE MLA EV

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR
BEACH

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR
SAN JOSE AVE Pacica
Pier
Sha rp Pa r k G ol f C ou r s e
Mor i Poi n t (G GN R A )
Pedro Point
Headlands
(GGNRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State Beach
Northern
Coastal
Blu
s
(GGNRA)
BLVD
Fa r allon View

1.e
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Manor Dri
v
e
O
v
e
r
c
rossing
(planned)
Manor Dri
v
e
O
v
e
r
c
rossing
(planned)
Pacic
O cean
Dev i l’s S l ide Tunne l
Figure 3-4:

BicycleNetwork
0 1/4 1/21
MILES
2 Existing Class I
Proposed Class I
Existing ClassII
Proposed Class II
Existing Class III
Proposed Class III
Class III to be upgraded
to Class II
Class I to be upgraded
Bicycle Lockers
Bicycle Parking
Changing Room w/Water
Changing Room w/oWater
Pedestrian/Bicycle Overpass
Pedestrian/Bicycle Underpass
Existing Link
PotentialLinkto UnpavedTrail
Coastal Zone
Parks/Open Space
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: City of Pacica, 2019; DKS, 2009;
SanMateoCounty, 2009;Dyett&Bhatia, 2019.

Pacica
Pier
Sharp Park
Golf Course
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Ped ro Point
Headlands
(GG NRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
Blu
s
(GGNRA)
Water
Recycling
Plant

OLD COASTHWY

P A OTTE MLA EV

FRANCISCO

BRADFORD
FAIR

WAY DR SEASIDE DR

BEACH BLVD

SAN PEDRO

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

1.e
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Pac
ic
Ocean

GATEWAY
DR

PALMETTO AVE

MONTEREY RD

EVA OTTE MLAP

OCEANA BLVD
PA
L
O
MA
AVE
TA
L
B
OT
AVE

DVLB OCSI CNARF

CLARENDON RD BRADFORD WAY SHARPPA RK
R
D
M
O
A
N
A
WAY

LUNDY WAY
FAIR

WAY DR RIDG
E
WAY DR

SEASIDE DR

BEACH BLVD ROCKAWAY BEACH
AVE

FASSLER AVE

SAN PEDRO AVE GRAND AVE
MILAG
RA
D
R

ESPLANADE AVE
MANOR
DR

ROBERTS RD
Manor Dri
ve
O
v
e
r
c
rossing
(planned imp
r
o
vements)
R
E
I
N
A
D
E
L
MA
R
AVE
CRESPI
DR

LINDA MAR
BLVD
Dev i l’s S l ide Tunne l
Figure 3-5:

RoadwayNetwork
and Planned
Improvements
0 1/4 1/21
MILES
2 Freeway
MultiLane Highway
TwoLane Highway
Arterial
Collector
Local Street
Unimproved RightofWay
Planned Improvement
PotentialFuture Street
Pedestrian Priority Zone
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: City of Pacica, 2019; DKS, 2019;
San Mateo County,2019;Dyett& Bhatia,
2019.

Pacica
Pier
Sharp Park
Golf Course
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Ped ro Point
Headlands
(GG NRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
Blu
s
(GGNRA)
Water
Recycling
Plant

1.e
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Manor Dri
v
e
O
v
e
r
c
rossing
(planned)
112
110
14 16
16 16
14 294
110
112
19 16
140
140
112
16 14
14 110
294
118 112
P
P
16 110
49 49
19 49
19 19
Manor Dri
v
e
O
v
e
r
c
rossing
(planned)
Pac
O cean
D e vi l’ s S l i d e T u nne l
Figure 3-6:

Transit Routes
and Facilities
0 1/4 1/21
MILES
2 SamTrans to BART
SamTrans to Caltrain
Local Service
Park and Ride Lot
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: City of Pacica, 2019; DKS, 2019; San
Mateo County, 2019; Dyett& Bhatia,2019.
118

GATEWAY
DR

OLD COASTHWY

MONTEREY RD

E AV TO TE LM PA

OCSI CNARF

BRADFORD SHARPPARK
R
D
FAIR

WAY DR SEASIDE DR

BEACH BLVD

LINDA MAR BLVD

FASSLER
AVE

SAN PEDROGRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE
Sharp Park Golf Cour s e
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Ped ro Point
Headlands
(GG NRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
(GGNRA) CRESPI DR
SamTrans OnDemand
Service Area

1.e
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) NORTH
GLOBE
BIG
INCH

MILAGR A
CREEK

UNNAMED

SANCHEZ
CREEK

CALER A
CREEK
QUARRY

SAN PEDRO
CREEK
Milagra Creek
S anchez Cr eek
Cal e r a Creek
Roc kaway Creek
San P edro Cree k
Pac i  c
O cea n
D e vil’s
Sl i d e T u n n e l
Figure 4-1:

Hydrology
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Creeks
Water Treatment Facility
Stream Restoration Projects
Coastal Zone Protected Open Space
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: FEMA, 2017; ESA, 2009;
City of Pacifica, 2019; San Mateo
County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Watersheds
Sharp Par k Golf Cours e
Pacica
Pier
Mori Poin t
(GGNRA )
Pedro Poin t
Headland s
(GGNRA )
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
Blu
s
(GGNRA)
Water
Treatment
Facility
Laguna
Salada
Horse
Stable
Pond

OLD COAST HWY

AP ML ET OT VA E

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR FRANCISCO BLVD

1.e
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 0 1/4 1/2
1 MILES
2 Pac i  c
O c e a n
Dev i l’s S l ide Tunne l
Figure 4-2: Vegetation
Grassland
Coastal Bluff Scrub
Eucalyptus
Northern Coastal Scrub
Monterey Cypress
Riparian Mixed Hardwood
Beach/Intertidal
Urban
Creeks
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Source: California Dept of Fish & Game,
1988, 2003; California Dept of Forestry,
2009; USDA Forest Service, 2017;
FEMA, 2017; ESA, 2009; City of
Pacifica, 2019; San Mateo County, 2019;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Pacica
Pier
Sharp Park
Golf Course
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Ped ro Point
Headlan d s
(GG NRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal Blu
s
(GGNRA)
Water
Recycling
Plant
N o r ther
n C oastal Scru b
Norther
n Coastal Scru b
Ann u a l Grassl a n d
A nn ua
l Grass la n d
Riparian Mixed
Hardwood
Beach/Intertidal
Eucalyptus
Monterey
Cyprus
Coastal
Blu Scrub
Beach/
Intertidal
Beach/Intertidal
Urban
Urban
Urban
Ann u a l
Grassl a n d
Riparian Mixed
Hardwood
Norther
n Coastal Scru b
Beach/Intertidal
Coastal
Blu Scrub

P A OTTEMLA EV

DVLB OCSICNARF

CLARENDON RD

FAIRWAY DR

SAN PEDRO

ESPLANADE AVE

1.e
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Pa
c
O ce a n D e vil’ s S l i d e T u nne l
Figure 4-3:

Potential
Environmentally
Sensitive Habitat
Areas
0 1/4 1/21
MILES
2 Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
SOURCE: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2019;
National Marine Fisheries Service, 2019;
National Park Service, 2009; USDA Forest
Service, 2017; California Natural Diversity
Database, 2019; California Native Plant
Society, 2019; California Dept of Fish &
Game, 2019
; FEMA, 2017; ESA, 2008;
City of Pacifica, 2019; San Mateo County,
2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Critical Habitat
Steelhead
California Red-Legged Frog
Pier
Sharp Pa r k
Golf Cour s e
Mori Poi n t
(GGNR A )
Ped ro Poi n t
Headlan d s
(GG NR A )
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
(GGNRA)

OLD COAST HWY

E AVTOTELMPA

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE
DR
San Pedro Creek
Potential ESHA
Note: The preliminary delineation of ESHA boundaries does not include an exhaustive compilation of the habitat areas that meet the ESHA definition. Site-specific biological evaluations and field observations shall be required to identify ESHAs and other special status resources that may not have been included in the literature and database review.

1.e
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 400
300
200
100
100
500
600
700
400
500 300
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
600
400
300
200
100 500
600
700
200
300
400
500
600
700 800
900 1000
1100
1200
100
100
200
200
300
100
300
100
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
400500
600
700
800
900 1000
1100
1200
300
800
200
900
800
700
600 500
700
600
500
300
400 300
400
500
400
500
400
400
300
200
100
400 300
200
100
500
600
700
200
100
800 900
1000
1100
1100
1000
900
800
600
700
500
1100
1000
700600
800
700
600 500
400
300
400 300 500 600
700
800
300
200
300
400
500
600
200
400
300
200
100
400
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
300
200
300
200
300
400 500 600
700
800
900
100
200
300
400
300
400
400 300 200
100
500
100
200
300
400
500
100 200300
400
500
900
1220
200
300
400
100
Mori Point
Rockaway
Headlands
Pedro Point
Headlands
Pacific
Ocean
D evil’s Slid e T u n n el
Figure 4-4:

Visual Resources
0 1/2 1 1/4
MILES
2 Source: US Geological Survey, 2009; City of
Pacifica, 2008; San Mateo County, 2009;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2013.

Gateways
Prominent Landforms
Coastal View Corridors
Scenic Routes
Prominent Ridges
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Pacifica
Pier
Sharp Park
Golf Course
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Pedro Point
Headlands
(GGNRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Pacifica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal Bluffs
(GGNRA)
Rockaway
State Beach

PALMETTO AVE

PALMETTO AVE

FAIRWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR
Manor Dr
Palmetto Ave
Paloma Ave
Salada Ave
Clarendon Rd
Coast Highway
Coast Highway
Coast Highway
Coast Highway
Shelter Cove/Shoreside Dr
Rockaway Beach

1.e
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 400
300
200
100
100
500
600
700
400
500 300
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
600
400
300
200
100 500
600
700
200
300
400
500
600
700 800
900 1000
1100
1200
100
100
200
200
300
100
300
100
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
400500
600
700
800
900 1000
1100
1200
300
800
200
900
800
700
600 500
700
600
500
300
400 300
400
500
400
500
400
400
300
200
100
400 300
200
100
500
600
700
200
100
800 900
1000
1100
1100
1000
900
800
600
700
500
1100
1000
700600
800
700
600 500
400
300
400 300 500 600
700
800
300
200
300
400
500
600
200
400
300
200
100
400
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
300
200
300
200
300
400 500 600
700
800
900
100
200
300
400
300
400
400 300 200
100
500
100
200
300
400
500
100 200300
400
500
900
1220
300
200
100
100
Pac i  c
O c e a n
Dev i l’s S l ide
Tunne l
Figure 5-1:

Liquefaction and
Fault Lines
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Very Low
Low
Medium
High
Very High
San Andreas Fault
Alquist-Priolo Zone
100 foot contour interval
400 foot contour interval
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
Liquifaction Potential
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments,
2003; US Geological Survey, 2019; ESA. 2009; City of Pacica, 2019; San Mateo County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019. 100
400
Pacica
Pier
Sharp Par k
Golf Cours e
Mori Poin t
(GGNRA )
Pe d ro Poi n t
Headland s
(G G NRA )
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
Pacica
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
Blu
s
(GGNRA)

OLD COAST HWY

EVA OTTE MLAP

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR

FRANCISCO BLVD

1.e
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 400
300
200
100
100
500
600
700
400
500 300
100
200
300
400 500
600
700
600
400
300
200
100 500
600
700
200
300
400
500600
700 800
900 1000
1100
1200
100
100
200
200
300
100
300
100
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
400500
600
700
800
900 1000
1100
1200
300
800
200
900
800
700
600
500
700
600
500
300
400 300
400
500
400
500
400
400
300
200
100
400 300
200
100
500600
700
200
100
800 900
1000
1100
1100
1000 900
800
500 600
700
1100
1000
700600
800
700
600 500 400
300
400 300 500 600
700
800
300
200
300
400
500
600
200
400
300
200
100
400
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000 1100
300
200
300
200
300
400
600 500
700
800
900
100
200
300
400
300
400
400 300 200
100
500
100
200
300
400
500
100 200300
400
900
1220
200
300
300
400
Pa c c
O ce a n
De v i l ’ s S l i de T u nn e l
Figure 5-2:

Slope Failure and Shoreline
Protection Structures
0 1/4 1/2 1
MILES
2 Mostly Landslides
Few Landslides
Not Landslide Prone
Seawall
Riprap, Other Revetments
500 foot Contours
100 foot Contours
Coastal Zone
City Limits
Planning Area
DFIRM, 2017; US Geological Survey, 1997; ESA, 2009; City of Pacica, 2019; San Mateo County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia,
2019.

Shoreline Protective Structures
Note:

Pier
Sharp Pa r k
Golf Cour s e
Mori Poi n t
(GGNR A )
P e d ro Po i n t
Headlan d s
( G G N R A )
Sharp
Park
Beach
Rockaway
Beach
State
Beach
Northern
Coastal
(GGNRA)

OLD COAST HWY

EV ALMETTO A P

BRADFORD WAY

FAIRWAY DR

BEACH BLVD

GRAND AVE

ESPLANADE AVE

SEASIDE DR

FRANCISCO BLVD

SAN PEDRO AVE

1.e
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) 8-16
Milagra Ridge
(GGNRA)
Pacifica
State
Beach
Pacifica
Pier
Sharp Park
G ol f Course
San Pedro Valley County Park
Sharp Park
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Sweeney Ridge (GGNRA)

FASSLER AV E TERRA NOVA BLVD

LINDA MAR BLVD

ODDSTAD BLVD

GRAND AVE

ROCKAWAY BE ACH AVE

REINA DEL MAR AVE

CRESPI DR

CRESPI DR

FAIRWAY DR RIDGEWAY DR

PALOMA AVE

CLARENDON RD

PALMETTO AVE

MANOR DR

AVALON DR

MI LAGR ADR

MONTEREY RD

IVERNESS DR

NELSON AVE

PA ML ETTO AVE

ADOBE DR

BEACH BLVD

HICKEY B LV D
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
Northern
Coastal
Bluffs
(GGNRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
P e n i n s u l a Watershed
(SFPUC)
Rockaway
Beach
Pedro Point
Headlands
Devil' s Slide Tunnel

PERALTA RD

ROSITA RD

EVE RGLAD ES DR

M ANZA NI T A DR

LERI D A WAY

R OBERTSRD

SHAR P P A RK R D

BRADFORD WAY

ESPLANADE AV E

E DGEMAR A VE

GAT EWAYDR

FIRECREST AVE

OCEANA BLVD

SHARP PARK RD TALBO T AVE

MOANAW AY
Water
Recycling
Plant
·|}þ35
·|}þ1
MILES
0 1/4 1/2 1 2
Source: National Flood Hazard Layer for San Mateo
County, FEMA, 2019; Tsunami Hazard Area for
San Mateo County, Department of
Conservation, State of California, 2021; City
of Pacifica, 2020; San Mateo County, 2020;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2021.

Flood Zones
Planning Area
City Limits

0.2% Annual Chance
Flood Zone
1% Annual Chance
Flood Zone
1% Annual Chance
Coastal Flood Zone
Tsunami Evacuation Area
Historic
Figure 5-3: Flood Zones
& Clubhouse

1.e
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) Milagra Ridge
(GGNRA)
Pacifica
State
Beach
Pacifica
Pier
Sharp Park
G ol f Course
San Pedro Valley
County Park
Sharp Park
Mori Point
(GGNRA)
Sweeney Ridge (GGNRA)

FASSLER AV E TERRA NOVA BLVD

GRAND AVE

ROCKAWAY BE ACH AVE

CRESPI DR

FAIRWAY DR RIDGEWAY DR

PALOMA AVE

CLARENDON RD

PALMETTO AVE

MANOR DR

AVALON DR

MI LAGR ADR

MONTEREY RD

IVERNESS DR

NELSON AVE

PALMETTO AVE

ADOBE DR

BEACH BLVD

HICKEY B LV D
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
Northern
Coastal
Bluffs
(GGNRA)
Sharp
Park
Beach
Peninsula
Watershed
(SFPUC)
Rockaway
Beach
Pedro Point
Headlands
Devil' s Slide Tunnel

PERALTA RD

ROSITA RD

EVE RGLAD ES DR

M ANZA NI T A DR

LERI D A WAY

R OBERTSRD

SHAR P P A RK R
BR
D

ADFORD WAY

ESPLANADE AV E

E DGEMAR A VE

GAT EWAYDR

FIRECREST AVE

OCEANA BLVD

SHARP PARK RD TALBO T AVE

MOANA WAY
·|}þ35
·|}þ1

LINDA M AR BLVD

ODDSTAD BLVD

LINDA MAR BLVD

C R E SPIDR

REINA DEL MAR AVE
Police
Station
Fire
Station
#72
Fire Station # 71
LRA
FRA
SRA
FRA
FRA
LRA
FRA
LRA
LRA
SRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
LRA
MILES
0 1/4 1/2 1 2
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
in State Responsibility Area
Very High
High
Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection, 2020; City of Pacifica, 2019; San
Mateo County, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Public Safety Facilities
Fire Protection
Responsibility Area
City Limits
Planning Area
Local (LRA)
State (SRA)
Federal (FRA)
LRA
SRA
FRA
The City will update this
figure as new recommended
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
maps are adopted by the City.

Historic
Figure 5-4:

Fire Hazards and
Emergency Services
& Clubhouse

1.e
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5) :HVW/LQGD0DU
3HGUR3RLQWDQG
6KHOWHU&RYH
6KDUS3DUN:HVW)DLUZD\3DUNDQG0RUL3RLQW
)DLUPRQW:HVW
5RFNDZD\%HDFK4XDUU\DQG+HDGODQGV
1RUWKZHVW6KDUS3DUN
:HVW(GJHPDU3DFLILF0DQRU
3DFLILFD6WDWH%HDFK
3DWK
8
?*,6?*,6?3URMHFWV?[[[[?'B3DFLILFD/&3?B0;'VB3URMHFWV?7B9XOQHUDELOLW\?9$B3URMHFW$UHDP[GMUM 
6285&(
&LW\RI3DFLILFD
/HJHQG
3DFLILFD&LW\/LPLWV6XEDUHDV

0LOHV
)LJXUH6-
Coastal Resilience6XEDUHDV
1 /RFDWLRQ0DS

1.e
Packet Pg. 348
Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

1.e
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)

1.e
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment E Redlined LCP (5698 : LCLUP Meeting #5)