Agenda — Pacifica City Council, August 12, 2024 (part 2 of 4)

Construction Services Agreement - Amendment
#1 Chesterwerks
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT NO. 1
This AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 is entered into as of the 13th day of June, 2022, by and between the CITY OF PACIFICA, herein called the “City,” and CHESTERWERKS, herein called the “Consultant.”

RECITALS
A. City desired to obtain Project/Construction Management Services in connection with the design and construction of the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, and for that purpose entered into an agreement with Consultant dated February 10, 2022 (“Original Agreement”).

B. Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in this Amendment #1.

C. City desires to authorize Consultant to provide the additional services described in this Amendment #1.

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. The services to be provided are as outlined in the proposed Amendment No.1 provided to City by Consultant, dated June 1, 2022, and attached hereto as Exhibit A “Scope of Amendment #1” and incorporated by reference (“Additional Work”). Consultant shall perform such Additional Work as requested by City through its staff from time to time.

2. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon direction to proceed from City staff and shall be undertaken and completed by September 30, 2022 for the City to comply with requirements imposed upon by the City.

3. Compensation and Method of Payment.

However, in no event shall the amount of Consultant’s compensation for the Additional Work exceed an additional one-hundred twenty thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($120,960). The total combined compensation for the Original Agreement and this Amendment #1 shall not exceed one-hundred thirty-five thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($135,960). Payment by City under the Original Agreement, as amended, shall not be deemed a waiver of defects, even if such defects were known to City at the time of payment. The 5% retention does not apply to Consultant’s compensation. B. Method of Payment. i. Monthly Statements. As a condition precedent to any payment to Consultant under the Original Agreement, as amended, Consultant shall submit monthly to ATTACHMENT "2" 9.b
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment "2"- Agreement Amendment 1 Chesterwerks (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to Chesterworks

9.b
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment "2"- Agreement Amendment 1 Chesterwerks (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to Chesterworks

Page 3 ends

Construction Services Agreement - Amendment #1
Chesterwerks
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3

EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF AMENDMENT #1
SCOPE OF WORK dated June 1,
2022
CHESTERWERKS PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES ($15,000)
Hourly rate is $135 an hour and travel time when necessary. -Provide support for staff design decisions during finalization of PS&E -Conduct value engineering and constructability reviews -Outreach to contractors during pre-qualification process -Review of design consultant schedule and cost estimates -Make recommendations for design delivery
CHESTERWERKS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES ($120,960) Hourly rate is $135 an hour and travel time when necessary. -Provide support for staff design decisions during construction -Conduct in-field value engineering and constructability -Coordinate with contractors during the construction phase -Review of RFI, submittal, substitutions
-Make recommendations for construction delivery
-Up to 896 hours during the construction phase.

9.b
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment "2"- Agreement Amendment 1 Chesterwerks (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to Chesterworks

9.b
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment "2"- Agreement Amendment 1 Chesterwerks (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to Chesterworks ATTACHMENT "3" 9.c
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.c
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment "3"- Agreement Amendment 2 Chesterwerks [Revision 2] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
NO. 3
This AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 is entered into as of the 13th day of August, 2024, by and between the CITY OF PACIFICA, herein called the “City,” and CHESTERWERKS, herein called the “Consultant.”

B. Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in this Amendment #3.

C. City desires to authorize Consultant to provide the additional services described in this Amendment #3.

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. The services to be provided are as outlined in the proposed Amendment No.3 provided to City by Consultant, dated August 1, 2024, and attached hereto as Exhibit A “Scope of Amendment #3” and incorporated by reference (“Additional Work”). Consultant shall perform such Additional Work as requested by City through its staff from time to time.

2. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon direction to proceed from City staff and shall be undertaken and completed by August 30, 2024 for the City to comply with requirements imposed upon by the City.

3. Compensation and Method of Payment.

A. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall be at the rate and schedules set forth in the Original Agreement and this Amendment #3. However, in no event shall the amount of Consultant’s compensation for the Additional Work exceed an additional ten thousand dollars ($10,000). The total combined compensation for the Original Agreement, Amendment #1 & #2 and this Amendment #3 shall not exceed one-hundred eighty-five thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($185,960). Payment by City under the Original Agreement, as amended, or Amendment #1,2 or 3 shall not be deemed a waiver of defects, even if such defects were known to City at the time of payment. The 5% retention does not apply to Consultant’s compensation.

B. Method of Payment.
i. Monthly Statements. As a condition precedent to any payment to Consultant under the Original Agreement, as amended, Consultant shall submit monthly to ATTACHMENT "4" 9.d
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment "4" -Agreement Amendment 3 Chesterwerks [Revision 1] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to the City a statement of account that clearly sets forth the designated items of work for which the billing is submitted. Each statement of account shall also include a detailed record of the month's actual reimbursable expenditures. ii. Timing of Payment. City shall review and approve Consultant's monthly statement and pay Consultant for services rendered hereunder if acceptable to the satisfaction of the City at the rates and in the amounts provided hereunder on a monthly basis in accordance with the approved monthly statements.

C. Changes in Compensation. Consultant shall not undertake any work on the Additional Work that will incur costs in excess of the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or any work under the Original Agreement, as amended by this Amendment #3, or Amendment #1 or #2 in excess of the amount of one- hundred eighty-five thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($185,960) without further written amendment to the Original Agreement.

4. Agreement in Effect. All other provisions of the Original Agreement, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Amendment #3 as of the date first written above.

CITY OF PACIFICA CONSULTANT

CHESTERWERKS
By: ________________________ By: _____________________
Kevin Woodhouse
City Manager
Brett Stollenwerk
President
ATTEST:

By: __________________________
Sarah
Coffey City
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ______________________
Michelle M. Kenyon
City Attorney

9.d
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment "4" -Agreement Amendment 3 Chesterwerks [Revision 1] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF AMENDMENT
#2
Chesterwerks Project Management

PROPOSAL
Provide project Management
Center as follows.

Manage furniture placement in P&E and City Hall and
manage window coverings
Manage Security and excess system placement for City
Hall and P&E building
, including
contractor punch list
work. Not to exceed
$10,000.

Thank you
August 1, 2024

9.d
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment "4" -Agreement Amendment 3 Chesterwerks [Revision 1] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

9.d
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment "4" -Agreement Amendment 3 Chesterwerks [Revision 1] (5718 : Resolution - Approving Third Amendment to

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
8/12/2024
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Annual Agreements for the Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division for FY 2024-2025 for Polydyne, Inc. for $200,000; Trojan Technologies for $100,000, Synagro West, LLC for $180,000, and Centrisys CNP for $175,000
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to adopt the following resolutions to approve Annual Agreements for the Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division for FY 2024-2025:

1. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Purchase Agreement with Polydyne, Inc. In The Amount Of $200,000 For the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Supply of Polymer.

2. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Purchase Agreement with Trojan Technologies Group, ULC in The Amount Of $100,000 For the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Supply of Trojan System UV4000 Original Replacement Parts.

3. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment 1 for Master Agreement for Biosolids Services and Task Order No. 2 with Synagro West, LLC In the Amount Of $180,000 For the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Biosolids Hauling and Disposal.

4. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Master Agreement for Centrifuge Services with Centrisys CNP In the Amount Of $175,000 For the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Centrifuge Services; and Approving Amendment 1 to Extend Term for FY 2023-2024 Master Agreement.

STAFF CONTACT:

Louis Sun, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works (Wastewater) (650) 738-4660
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

During the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the Council approved funding for Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division (WW) Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18). The Council approved funding for the WW chemical expenses for the purchase of the polymer supply, the WW UV supplies and services for the ultra-violet disinfection system 10 Packet Pg. 195
Pacifica City Council 2
August 12, 2024
equipment, and the WW Sludge Hauling expense for biosolids hauling and disposal services.

Each fiscal year, WW estimates the quantity of services, equipment, supplies and materials that will be needed for recurring maintenance, repairs, and operations during the fiscal year. Items that are proprietary and sold only through the manufacturer, have only one authorized distributor in the area, or have proven to be the only product/service acceptable are sole-sourced.

The following are supplies, materials or services that were deemed by staff to be sole source procurement, or the least cost compared to known vendors:

Polymer Chemical Supply:

Polymer is used in gravity belt thickeners and centrifuges at the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant (Plant) to thicken and dewater sludge during wastewater treatment process. It is imperative that the polymer dosed in the centrifuge reacts well with the wet sludge to produce a clear centrate (wastewater liquid and polymer byproduct) that goes back to the Plant’s headworks to be retreated. Having a clear centrate is an indication that the sludge has been dewatered well, thus producing a dryer bio-solid cake. Moreover, the centrate should be clear of solids prior to going back to the headworks for retreatment so as not to clog and/or damage the pumps and other equipment.

Up to the late 2009, the Plant used various types of polymers but ended up clogging the pumps, and the biosolids produced were not the desired dryness. Because of constant equipment breakdown more manpower was needed to keep the Plant in operation. These on-going issues prompted staff to invite polymer manufacturer representatives to run their polymer through our system. Clarifloc WE-2123 (Clarifloc) polymer supplied by Polydyne, Inc. and Zetag 8818 (Zetag) supplied by Kubwater have similar and excellent performance. However, the cost of Zetag is $2.18 per pound or $5,014 per tote while the cost of Clarifloc is $1.75 per pound or $4,025 per tote - a net saving of $991 per tote or $44,595 annually for 45 totes if Clarifloc is used. Based on Clarifloc being the lesser cost per pound, a Purchase Order with Polydyne is recommended.

Approval of the Purchase Agreement with Polydyne, Inc. in the amount of $200,000 is recommended and will cover the polymer chemical expenditure for WW for Fiscal Year 2024- 2025, as projected by staff.

Trojan System UV 4000 Original Replacement Parts:

The Plant uses ultra-violet (UV) to disinfect its effluent prior to discharging to Calera creek. UV disinfection is a physical process that instantaneously neutralizes microorganisms as they pass by ultraviolet lamps submerged in the effluent. The process adds nothing to the water but UV light, and therefore, has no impact on the chemical composition or the dissolved oxygen content of the water. For this process, the Plant utilizes the Trojan System UV4000 manufactured and trademarked by Trojan Technologies Group, ULC (Trojan).

The following are reasons why Trojan System UV4000 Original Replacement Parts from Trojan Technologies have been determined to be Sole Source commodities:
• In the Engineered Submittal Package for the Trojan System UV4000, Trojan provided an equipment performance guarantee stating that the system will meet the required level of disinfection provided that the system is operated and maintained in accordance with recommendations made by Trojan.
10 Packet Pg. 196
Pacifica City Council 3
August 12, 2024
• In order for this equipment guarantee to be maintained, it is imperative that the appropriate components and replacement parts be used in the system. There are key replacement parts and system components that directly influence the performance and reliability of the system. Among these critical replacement parts are the UV lamps, sleeves, electronic ballasts, wiper seals, printed circuitry etc. • Without using lamps, ballasts, and other components that are approved and validated by Trojan, they cannot guarantee that the system will provide the required germicidal output. Subsequently, they cannot guarantee that the required UV dose is being delivered, if lamp output, ballast efficiency and system programming is unknown. • In order to keep the equipment performance guarantee intact, it is recommended that specialized system components be purchased and contracted from Trojan Technologies which has propriety rights to Trojan System UV4000 original replacement parts.

Approval of the Purchase Agreement with Trojan Technologies Group, ULC in the amount of $100,000 is recommended and will cover the UV replacement parts expenditure for WW for Fiscal Year 2024-2025, as projected by staff.

Synagro West LLC Biosolids Hauling and Disposal Services:

Biosolids are nutrient-rich organic materials resulting from the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment facility. When treated and processed, theseresiduals can be recycled and applied as fertilizer to improve and maintain productive soils and stimulate plant growth. The Plant produces mostly Class "A" but a minimum Class "B" biosolids at an average of 100 wet tons (25 dry tons) per month during dry season and an average of 150 wet tons during winter.

The Plant is required to manage the disposal of the biosolids according to EPAStandard 40 CFR Part 503, which says that biosolids that are to be land applied must meet these strict regulations and quality standards. The Part 503 rule governing the use and disposal of biosolids contains numerical limits, for metals in biosolids, pathogen reduction standards, site restriction, crop harvesting restrictions and monitoring, record keeping and reporting requirements for land applied biosolids as well as similar requirements for biosolids that are surface disposed or incinerated. Most recently, standards have been proposed to include requirements in the Part 503 Rule that limit the concentration of dioxin and dioxin like compounds in biosolids to ensure safe land application. Due to the complexities and specialized knowledge needed to manage the program, a third party with this expertise is needed. The third party must also keep up with current regulations and know how to direct biosolids into clean and safe materials for land applications. Synagro West, LLC has such expertise to provide biosolids hauling and management services.

The following are reasons why Synagro West LLC have been determined to be Sole Source services:
• Synagro provides turnkey residuals management services that includes hauling, agronomic management, permitting and monitoring, which other haulers don't provide.

Their proprietary Residuals Management System sets the industry standards for tracking, monitoring and compliance activities.
• Because of Synagro's unique expertise in biosolids disposal, the Plant is able to divert its biosolids to land application, composting and to landfill as a last resort. During 2023, the Plant produced 1,378.23 wet tons (377.39 dry tons) of biosolids which were land applied in farms in Sacramento County.
10 Packet Pg. 197
Pacifica City Council 4
August 12, 2024
• This is proven to be the most cost-effective way to remove this biohazardous material from the City's property and to meet mandated environmental requirements.

Approval of Amendment 1 for Master Agreement for Biosolids Services and Task Order No. 2 in the amount of $180,000 with Synagro West, LLC are recommended and will cover the biosolid disposal expenditure for WW for Fiscal Year 2024-2025, as projected by staff.

Centrisys CNP Centrifuge Services:

Biosolids are nutrient-rich organic materials resulting from the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment facility. When treated and processed, theseresiduals can be recycled and applied as fertilizer to improve and maintain productive soils and stimulate plant growth. The Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant (CCWRP) produces mostly Class "A" but a minimum Class "B" biosolids at an average of 100 wet tons per month during dry season and an average of 150 wet tons during winter.

In order for CCWRP to meet the regulatory disposal requirements for biosolids, the decanter centrifuge is used to dewater or remove the liquid from the digested sludge produced in the treatment process. After the digested sludge goes through the centrifuge process, the dewatered sludge is essentially the biosolids that is easier to handle and costs less to transport.

Currently, CCWRP operates on two centrifuges - both are Centrisys Decanter Centrifuge Model No. CS-18-4. The first one was purchased in July 2011, while the second one was in March 2015. The centrifuge is critical to the solids handling process, and although CCWRP operates on one centrifuge at a time, it is important that both are in running condition to provide redundancy. The Model No. CS-18-4 centrifuge technology is proprietary to Centrisys CNP, and only qualified service technicians from Centrisys are authorized to work. Therefore, all past maintenance was and all current maintenance will be performed by qualified Centrisys service technicians.

The Centrisys Decanter Centrifuge Model No. CS-18-4 should be annually serviced and repaired by Centrisys CNP qualified technicians from Centrisys CNP due to the following reasons:
• The original parts and accessories are proprietary to Centrisys CNP, and the Centrisys Maintenance and Repair in Stockton, California is the only authorized repair facility in northern California.
• Centrisys CNP technicians have the expertise on Centrisys Decanter Centrifuges. ,
• Centrisys repair facility has a proven track record of a quick turn-around time on repairs. Crucial for redundancy at CCWRP.

Approval of Master Agreement for Centrifuge Services in the amount of $175,000 with Centrisys CNP are recommended and will cover the centrifuge services expenditure for WW for Fiscal Year 2024-2025, as projected by staff, and approving Amendment 1 to extend term from December 31, 2025 to December 31, 2026 for FY 2023-2024 Master Agreement.

For the above reasons, the City Manager is recommending the approval of the Purchase Agreement with Polydyne, Inc. in the amount of $200,000; approval of the Purchase Agreement with Trojan Technologies Group, ULC in the amount of $100,000; approval of the Amendment 1 for Master Agreement for Biosolids Services and Task Order No. 2 with Synagro West, LLC in 10 Packet Pg. 198
Pacifica City Council 5
August 12, 2024
the amount of $180,000; and approval of the Master Agreement for Centrifuge Services with Centrisys CNP in the amount of $175,000, for the purchases of equipment, supplies, materials and services in amounts over $75,000 for FY 2024-2025 for routine and recurring maintenance, repairs and operations of Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division from Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18) for a total of $655,000.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The Council may choose not to approve the Annual Agreements; however, doing so would delay the treatment of wastewater and is likely to violate the Plant’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The City Manager does not recommend this alternate action.

RELATION TO CITY GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the Annual Agreements is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure, streets and facilities: this includes repairing/replacing outdated city facilities such as city hall, libraries, fire stations, etc., improving streets, and responding to impacts of sea level rise. The Annual Purchase Agreement for the polymer, biosolids dewatering and disposal, UV supplies, and centrifuge services will ensure continuous treatment of wastewater at the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant and compliance with its NPDES permit.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Source and Use of Funds spreadsheet is shown below:

Vendor/Goods and
Services
Total Use
of Funds
Funds Total
Project
Source
Estimated
Project End
Balance
Polydyne, Inc. $200,000 Enterprise Fund (Fund 18) $309,320 $109,320 Polymer Chemical Account No.

Supply 18.940741.52342.0000.000
Trojan Technologies $100,000 Enterprise Fund (Fund 18) $102,400 $ 2,400 UV4000 Original Account No.

Replacement 18.940741.52341.0000.000
Parts
Synagro West, LLC $180,000 Enterprise Fund (Fund 18) $180,000 $ 0 Biosolids Hauling Account No.

And Disposal 18.940741.52344.0000.000
Centrisys CNP $175,000 Enterprise Fund (Fund 18) $175,000 $ 0 Centrifuge Services Account No.

18.940741.52344.0000.000
Total $655,000 $766,720 $111,720
No additional budget authority is necessary as sufficient funds have been allocated in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund FY 2024-25 budget for these purchases.

ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works - Wastewater Division
10 Packet Pg. 199
Pacifica City Council 6
August 12, 2024
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (PDF)
TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (PDF)
CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Amendment 1_SIGNED_2024-8-1 (PDF) CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 (PDF) Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (PDF) Agreement_Centrisys_20231211_Amendment_1 signed (PDF)
10 Packet Pg. 200
Pacifica City Council 7
August 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH POLYDYNE, INC.

IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 FOR THE CALERA CREEK WATER RECYCLING PLANT’S FY 2024-25 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF POLYMER
WHEREAS, each fiscal year, Wastewater Division estimates the quantity of services, equipment, supplies and materials that will be needed for recurring maintenance, repairs, and operations during the fiscal year. Items that are proprietary and sold only through the manufacturer, have only one authorized distributor in the area, or have proven to be the only product/service acceptable are sole-sourced; and
WHEREAS, during the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the Council approved sufficient funding for Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division (WW) Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18) that includes these purchases; and WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica Administrative Policy #76, Purchasing Policy, section 7.4, authorizes the City Manager to waive bidding requirements for sole source purchases if he/she determines sufficient justification exist; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to approve the Purchase Agreement with Polydyne, Inc. in the amount of $200,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 annual supply of polymer; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to authorize the City Manager to execute the Purchase Agreement with Polydyne, Inc. in the amount of $200,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 annual supply of polymer.
• • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, ULC IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR THE CALERA CREEK WATER RECYCLING PLANT’S FY 2024-25 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF TROJAN SYSTEM UV4000 ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT PARTS
WHEREAS, each fiscal year, Wastewater Division estimates the quantity of services, equipment, supplies and materials that will be needed for recurring maintenance, repairs, and operations during the fiscal year. Items that are proprietary and sold only through the manufacturer, have only one authorized distributor in the area, or have proven to be the only product/service acceptable are sole-sourced; and
WHEREAS, during the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the Council approved sufficient funding for Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division (WW) Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18) that includes these purchases; and WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica Administrative Policy #76, Purchasing Policy, section 7.4, authorizes the City Manager to waive bidding requirements for sole source purchases if he/she determines sufficient justification exist; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to approve the Purchase Agreement with Trojan Technologies Group, ULC in the amount of $100,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 annual supply of Trojan System UV4000 original replacement parts; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to authorize the City Manager to execute the Purchase Agreement with Trojan Technologies Group, ULC in the amount of $100,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024- 25 annual supply of Trojan System UV4000 original replacement parts. • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT 1 FOR MASTER AGREEMENT FOR BIOSOLIDS SERVICES AND TASK ORDER NO. 2 WITH SYNAGRO WEST, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $180,000 FOR THE CALERA CREEK WATER RECYCLING PLANT’S FY 2024-25 ANNUAL BIOSOLIDS HAULING AND DISPOSAL
WHEREAS, each fiscal year, Wastewater Division estimates the quantity of services, equipment, supplies and materials that will be needed for recurring maintenance, repairs, and operations during the fiscal year. Items that are proprietary and sold only through the manufacturer, have only one authorized distributor in the area, or have proven to be the only product/service acceptable are sole-sourced; and
WHEREAS, during the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the Council approved sufficient funding for Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division (WW) Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18) that includes these purchases; and WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica Administrative Policy #76, Purchasing Policy, section 7.4, authorizes the City Manager to waive bidding requirements for sole source purchases if he/she determines sufficient justification exist; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to approve the Amendment 1 for Master Agreement for Biosolids Services and Task Order No. 2 with Synagro West, LLC In the Amount Of $180,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Biosolids Hauling and Disposal; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to authorize the City Manager to execute the Amendment 1 for Master Agreement for Biosolids Services and Task Order No. 2 with Synagro West, LLC In the Amount Of $180,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Biosolids Hauling and Disposal. • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CENTRIFUGE SERVICES WITH CENTRISYS CNP IN THE AMOUNT OF $175,000 FOR THE CALERA CREEK WATER RECYCLING PLANT’S FY 2024-25 ANNUAL CENTRIFUGE SERVICES AND APPROVE AMENDMENT 1 TO EXTEND TERM FOR FY2023-2024 MASTER

AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, each fiscal year, Wastewater Division estimates the quantity of services, equipment, supplies and materials that will be needed for recurring maintenance, repairs, and operations during the fiscal year. Items that are proprietary and sold only through the manufacturer, have only one authorized distributor in the area, or have proven to be the only product/service acceptable are sole-sourced; and
WHEREAS, during the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the Council approved sufficient funding for Department of Public Works - Wastewater Division (WW) Operations and Maintenance Expenditures (Fund 18) that includes these purchases; and WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica Administrative Policy #76, Purchasing Policy, section 7.4, authorizes the City Manager to waive bidding requirements for sole source purchases if he/she determines sufficient justification exist; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to approve the Master Agreement for Centrifuge Services with Centrisys CNP In the Amount Of $175,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2024-25 Annual Centrifuge Services and approve Amendment 1 to extend term for the FY2023-2024 Master Agreement from December 31, 2025 to December 31, 2026; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to authorize the City Manager to execute the Master Agreement for Centrifuge Services with Centrisys CNP In the Amount Of $175,000 for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant’s FY 2023-24 Annual Centrifuge Services and approves Amendment 1 to extend Term. • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

Page 1 ends

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
CITY OF PACIFICA – WASTEWATER DIVISION
PURCHASE ORDER NO.

Seller (Vendor): Buyer:

Name Polydyne, Inc. Name: City of Pacifica
Address 1 Chemical Plant Road Address: 170 Santa Maria Avenue City, State Zip: Riceboro, GA 31323 City, State, ZIP: Pacifica, CA 94044 Attn: Charles Scott Louis Sun
Phone: (916) 202-6191 Fax: Phone: (650)738-4662 Fax: (650) 355-7256 E-mail: [email protected] Fed. Tax I.D.: E-mail: [email protected] Project Information (If Applicable): Ship To:

Charge to Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant
Acct#: 18.940741.52342.0000.000 – WWTP Chemical Expense 700 Pacific Coast Highway Pacifica, CA 94044
Order Date Ship Via Payment Terms
July 5, 2024 - Net 30 days of invoice Upon Receipt of
Equipment Delivery
Buyer and Seller agree as follows:

MATERIAL AND/OR EQUIPMENT TO BE PROVIDED: Vendor shall furnish the materials or equipment described below in strict compliance with the Quotation from Polydyne, Inc. dated 5-26-2022 (Attachment 1) at the price or prices set forth opposite each item and within the times stated below in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Purchase Agreement, including the attached Terms and Conditions, which are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement:

Item
No.

Item Description Budget
Acct No.

Quantity Unit Price Extension Delivery
Date
1 Polymer: Clarifloc WE-2123
(1 tote = 2,300 lbs)

18.940741.52342.0000.000 2,300 lbs $ 1.75 $ 4,025/tote
TOTAL $ 4,025/tote
Sales Tax : $ TBD
Shipping: $ 0
P.O. Total: $ 240,000.00 (Not to exceed)

10.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: POLYDYNE, INC. – SUPPLY OF POLYMER (CLARIFLOC WE-2123) FY 2024-25

Page 2 ends

Special Terms and Conditions
Shipping: Show Purchase Order number on all packages and invoices.

All purchases are F.O.B Pacifica unless otherwise specified on Purchase Order.

Charges: All transportation charges must be prepaid and shown separately on all invoices.

City of Pacifica is exempt from Federal Excise Tax.
 Purchase up to $25,000 (must be approved
by Department Head or authorized signatory)
Approved: _______________________
Name: LISA PETERSEN
Title: Director of Public Works
 Purchase between $25,000.01 and $50,000
(must be approved by the Assistant City
Manager)
Approved: _______________________
Name: YULIA CARTER
Title: Assistant City Manager
 Purchase between $50,000.01 and $75,000
(must be approved by the City Manager)
Approved: _______________________
Name: KEVIN WOODHOUSE
City Manager
 Purchase above $75,000
(must be approved by the City Council)
Date City Council Approved: _______________
Buyer: CITY OF PACIFICA
Authorized Signature: _______________________
Name: KEVIN WOODHOUSE
Title: City Manager
Vendor: POLYDYNE, INC.

Authorized Signature: _______________________
Name:

Title:

If Seller is located in the City of Pacifica, does Seller have a current business license? Yes  No 
Boyd Stanley
Sr. Vice-President

10.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: POLYDYNE, INC. – SUPPLY OF POLYMER (CLARIFLOC WE-2123) FY 2024-25

Page 3 ends

PURCHASE ORDER TERMS AND CONDITIONS
DEFINITIONS: The term "Buyer" as used in this Purchase Order means the City of Pacifica, and the term "Seller" means the person, firm, or corporation from whom the material or equipment described in the purchase order is ordered.

ACCEPTANCE: The attached Acceptance Copy shall be signed and returned by the Seller within ten (10) calendar days after it is received by the Seller. The receipt by the Buyer of the signed Acceptance Copy or the initiation of performance under this Purchase Order by the Seller shall constitute acceptance of the Purchase Order by the Seller, including all of the terms and conditions herein. Acceptance is limited to the terms stated herein. Any additional or different terms and conditions proposed by the Seller are rejected unless expressly agreed to in writing by City Purchasing Agent or authorized agent.

COMPLETE AGREEMENT: This Purchase Order, including all applicable terms, conditions and specifications, shall constitute the sole and exclusive agreement between the parties. This Purchase Order supersedes all other writings and negotiations, written or oral. The City of Pacifica will not be responsible for goods delivered without a Purchase Order properly signed by the City Purchasing Agent or authorized agent. When this Purchase Order covers a purchase rendered over a stated period of time, Seller must obtain a new order upon expiration of the time period to authorize the purchase for an additional period of time.

DEFAULT: The Buyer may terminate the whole or any part of the purchase in any one of the following circumstances: (1) If the Seller fails to make delivery or fails to perform within the time specified herein or any extension thereof; or (2) If Seller delivers nonconforming goods; or (3) If Seller fails to perform in accordance with the material provisions of this agreement, or so fails to make progress as to endanger performance of this Purchase Order in accordance with its terms. In the event of any such failure Buyer will provide Seller with written notice of the default and Buyer's intention to terminate for default if Seller fails to cure the default to Buyer's satisfaction within seven (7) calendar days of Buyer' notice. If Seller fails to cure or correct the default within seven days, the Buyer may, without further notice to Seller, procure upon such terms and in such manner as the Buyer may deem appropriate, items similar to those terminated, and the Seller shall be liable to the Buyer for any excess costs of such similar items; however, the Seller shall continue the performance of this Purchase Order to the extent not terminated.

The rights and remedies of the Buyer provided in this clause shall not be exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Purchase Order.

CHANGES: Buyer may direct in writing changes, including additions to or deletions from the quantities originally ordered, or in the specifications or drawings. If any such change causes a material increase or decrease in the cost of, or the time required for, performance hereunder, an equitable adjustment shall be made in the price or schedule. Any claims for adjustment which Seller believes result from any change directed by Buyer shall be asserted in writing by Seller no later than ten (10) days from the date of Seller's receipt of any such direction. Equitable adjustments for any claims or changes under this agreement, including claims arising from terminations or suspensions directed under DEFAULT above, of this agreement, will be made by

10.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: POLYDYNE, INC. – SUPPLY OF POLYMER (CLARIFLOC WE-2123) FY 2024-25

Page 4 ends

written Change Order. Nothing contained herein shall excuse Seller from proceeding with the change as directed prior to negotiation of any adjustment. Whether made pursuant to this clause or by mutual agreement, changes shall not be binding upon the Buyer, except when confirmed in writing by a member of the Buyer’s Purchasing Department.

INVOICES: Seller shall send Buyer a separate invoice for each shipment. Invoices shall not be issued prior to delivery of items. Payment shall not be made prior to receipt of items and an invoice. Credit and discount periods will be computed from the date of receipt of the invoice to the date the Buyer’s check is mailed. Unless freight and other charges are itemized, the discount will be taken on the full amount of the invoice. Payment will be made within thirty (30) days after approval of the invoice by the Buyer.

TITLE AND RISK OF LOSS: All prices shall be F.O.B. Factory. The Seller shall be responsible for safe and adequate packing of the items, which shall conform to the carriers’ requirements. The Seller shall separately number all cases and packages, showing the corresponding numbers on the invoices. An itemized packing slip bearing this Purchase Order number shall be placed in each container. No extra charge shall be made for packaging or packing materials unless authority therefor is set forth in this Purchase Order. Seller shall assume and pay for any and all loss or damage to the merchandise from any cause whatsoever until delivered to Buyer at the specified destination.

DELIVERY: Timely performance and deliveries are essential to this Purchase Order. The Buyer reserves the right to refuse deliveries made in advance of the delivery schedule.

Overshipment allowances, if authorized, will be applied to the entire order. If the Buyer agrees to accept deliveries after the date of delivery has passed, the Buyer shall have the right to direct the Seller to make shipment to the delivery point set forth in this Purchase Order by the most expeditious means, and the total cost of such expedited shipment and handling shall be borne by the Seller. Acceptance of late deliveries shall not be deemed a waiver of the Buyer’s right to hold the Seller liable for any loss or damage resulting therefrom, nor shall it act as a modification of the Seller’s obligation to make future deliveries in accordance with the delivery schedule.

DELAYS: Seller will not be liable for delays in performing its obligations to the extent the delay is caused by an unforeseeable condition which is beyond Seller’s reasonable control and without Seller's fault or negligence. Acts of God, such as storms or floods, as well as government priorities, acts of civil or military authorities, fires, strikes, epidemics, war or riot are examples of events which will be excusable for being beyond Seller's reasonable control, only upon fulfillment of the following conditions: (a) within seven (7) days of the commencement of any excusable delay, Seller shall provide Buyer with written notice of the cause and extent thereof as well as a request for a schedule extension for the estimated duration thereof, and (b) within seven (7) days of the cessation of the event causing delay Seller shall provide Buyer with written notice of the actual delay incurred, upon receipt of which, the date of promised delivery shall be extended for the time actually lost by reason of an excusable delay.

INSPECTION AND APPROVAL: All items are subject to final inspection and approval after delivery to Buyer. If any items are defective in material or workmanship or otherwise not in conformity with the requirements of this Purchase Order, the Buyer shall have the right to

10.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: POLYDYNE, INC. – SUPPLY OF POLYMER (CLARIFLOC WE-2123) FY 2024-25

Page 5 ends

require Seller to correct or replace them. Final acceptance or rejection shall be made by the Buyer as promptly as practicable after delivery. Final acceptance shall be conclusive except with respect to latent defects, fraud or such gross mistakes as amount to fraud, or with respect to the Buyer’s rights under the “Warranty” clause.

WARRANTIES-GUARANTEES: The Seller warrants that the items, at time of delivery, shall conform to the Buyer’s specifications, the requirements of this Purchase Order, approved sample or samples, if any, and are free from defects in design, material and workmanship. Warranty will be as described in the attached Vendor’s Quotation. At the Buyer’s option, the Seller shall promptly either repair or replace defective items after receipt of the Buyer’s written notice of a defect. Transportation charges for the return and redelivery of defective items shall be borne by the Seller. Seller also warrants that said merchandise is free and clear of all liens and encumbrances whatsoever and the Seller has good and marketable title to same, and Seller agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City of Pacifica, its officers, agents and employees free and harmless against any and all claimants to said merchandise.

SAFETY: All equipment and materials shall comply with all Federal, State and local safety rules and regulations including OSHA. Where applicable, materials must be labeled in accordance with Section 5194, Title 8, of the California Administrative Code. The Seller is required to include a Material Safety Data Sheet prepared in accordance with Section 5194(9) with each shipment of all such materials to the City.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER: It is the policy of the City of Pacifica that in connection with all materials furnished or work performed under this Purchase Order, there be no discrimination against employees because of race, religion, color, sex or national origin, and therefore the Seller agrees to comply with applicable Federal and California laws including, but not limited to, the California Fair Employment Practices Act.

TAXES: Unless prohibited by law, Seller shall pay and has included in the prices of this Purchase Order any federal, state or local tax, transportation tax, or other tax which is required to be imposed upon the items ordered hereunder, or by reason of their sale or delivery.

TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE: Buyer shall have the right to terminate this Purchase Order in whole or in part at any time, and from time to time, by written notice effective upon receipt by Seller of such notice, even though Seller is not in breach of any obligation hereunder.

Upon receipt of notice of termination, Seller shall immediately discontinue performance and shall comply with Buyer’s instructions concerning disposition of completed and partially completed items, work in progress and materials acquired pursuant to this Purchase Order. In the event of such termination, Seller shall be paid an amount in settlement to be mutually agreed upon by the parties which shall cover Seller’s reasonable costs of performance incurred prior to termination in connection with the items for which this Purchase Order is terminated plus a reasonable profit based upon such costs. However, said payment shall not exceed the price specified herein for such items. Seller shall advise the Buyer, in writing, of Seller’s claim, if any, for termination costs within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice of termination.

Termination in accordance with this article shall not affect Buyer’s obligation to pay for items accepted by Buyer prior to such termination.

10.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: POLYDYNE, INC. – SUPPLY OF POLYMER (CLARIFLOC WE-2123) FY 2024-25

Page 6 ends

GOVERNING LAW; VENUE; DEFINITIONS: The definition of terms used, interpretation of this Purchase Order and rights of all parties hereunder shall be construed under and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any litigation with respect to this Purchase Order shall be brought and conducted in San Mateo County, California.

10.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) ATTACHMENT 1

10.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078 May 26, 2022
Emailed to: [email protected]
Maria Aguilar, P.E.

Plant Manager
City of Pacifica
Department of Public Works – Wastewater
(415)336-4750
Subject: Price Adjustment for Emulsion Polymer
Dear Ms. Aguilar,
Polydyne Inc. would like to thank you for the opportunity to propose a price increase for our Emulsion Polymers used by the City of Pacifica. While we are sincerely appreciative for the opportunity to continue to supply our CLARIFLOC WE-2123 we must respectfully request relief in the form of a price adjustment due largely to significant cost increases for raw materials, freight services, Oil, Federal PPI index that effects plastics and materials, along with the ongoing COVID19 pandemic.

Continued high demand for finished polymers, coupled with a tight global supply of raw materials has driven the cost of these same raw materials to record high costs. Two key cost drivers of polymers, propylene and acrylonitrile, have seen substantial increases over the last 12 months. Propylene and acrylonitrile have increased more than 54% over the last 12 months. (Please see attached corresponding price graph) Another key material used in the manufacturing of our Emulsion products is oil. Oil over the last 12 months had increase 77%. Not only does this effect our raw material costs but it also effects the cost of freight which has seen a 40% increase over the last year. Due to the condition of not only the US economy but the World economy, everything is indicating that these trends will continue into the forceable future.

We also see the PPI Federal index’s that effect our industry continue to raise. The attached PPI shows a steady increase over the last year and is currently showing a 36.1% increase.

The cost to do business during the COVID19 pandemic has continued much longer than anyone had expected. Even though things are better the number of cases is again on the rise. There is not a standard metric to measure the cost impact to our business. Suffice it to say that the pandemic has impacted our costs for raw materials, freight, labor, energy, personnel, and administrative.

Polydyne has always made every attempt in the past to shield our customers from the volatility of “normal” market conditions. However, these last 12 months have been unprecedented in terms of escalating costs, have been anything but “normal”.

10.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078 Effective July 1, 2022, we propose to supply CLARIFLOC WE-2123 at an adjusted unit price of $1.75/Lb. Your rate payers can be assured that our proposed price is still at or below current market price. With the uncertainty in the marked and a 1-year price proposal this could significantly benefit the City of Pacifica as key indicators are showing that costs associated with both manufacturing and delivering good will continue to raise through at least the majority of the year this proposal covers.

SNF is the largest producer of water soluble polymers in the US. Our highest priority to the City of Pacifica is to reliably supply your plant with the highest quality polymer you require to meet your operational demands.

Please be assured that we are closely monitoring all aspects of our business, and are working to always remain the low-cost supplier. We greatly appreciate your understanding of our position and the market factors that have necessitated this request. Please respond via email to [email protected] if this offer is acceptable.

We greatly appreciate your business and look forward to continuing our valued partnership. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Charles Scott, Technical Sales Representative, at (360) 931-5566.

Best regards,
Charles Scott
Technical Sales Representative

10.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078 Over the last 12 months oil is up 77%

10.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078 Over the last 12 months key Cationic raw
materials Propylene and Acrylonitrile are
up 54%

10.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078 Over the last 12 months Freight is up 40%
and Diesel is up 64%

10.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) polydyne.snf.com
1 Chemical Plant Road • P.O. Box 279 • Riceboro, GA 31323 USA • Tel 800.848.7659 • Fax 912.880.2078

10.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Purchase Agreement Polydyne FY 2024-25 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

Page 1 ends

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
CITY OF PACIFICA – WASTEWATER DIVISION

PURCHASE ORDER
Seller (Vendor): Buyer:

Name Name: City of Pacifica
Address Address: 170 Santa Maria Avenue
City, State Zip:

Trojan Technologies Group, ULC
3020 Gore Road
London, ON N5V4T7 CANADA City, State, ZIP: Pacifica, CA 94044 Attn: Heather Conine Louis Sun
Phone: (760) 648-3289 Fax: Phone: (650)738-4662 Fax: (650) 355-7256 E-mail: [email protected] Fed. Tax I.D.: E-mail: [email protected] Project Information (If Applicable): Ship To:

Charge to Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant
Acct#: 18.940741.52341.0000.000 – WWTP UV Supplies &
Services
700 Pacific Coast Highway
Pacifica, CA 94044
Order Date Ship Via Payment Terms
FY 2024-25 - Net 30 days of invoice Upon Receipt of
Equipment Delivery
Buyer and Seller agree as follows:

MATERIAL AND/OR EQUIPMENT TO BE PROVIDED: Vendor shall furnish the materials or equipment described below in strict compliance with the Quotation from Trojan Technologies dated 08-08-2022 (Attachment 1) at the price or prices set forth opposite each item and within the times stated below in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Purchase Agreement, including the attached Terms and Conditions, which are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement:

Item
No.

Item Description Budget
Acct No.

Quantity
(Approximate)
Unit Price Extension Delivery
Date
1 Lamp Assembly 441169-024 18.940741.52341.0000.000 50 $ 580.65 $ 31,899.46 2 Ballast 490291 18.940741.52341.0000.000 20 $1,380.57 $ 30,338.03 3 Acticlean Gel 901507 18.940741.52341.0000.000 4 $ 224.65 $ 987.34 4 Wiper Seal Kit 445039 18.940741.52341.0000.000 40 $ 258.83 $ 11,375.58 5 Sleeve 441143-024 18,940741.52341.0000.000 18 $ 443.64 $ 8,774.09 6 Cylinder Kit 442645 18,940741.52341.0000.000 1 $1,627.25 $ 1,787.94 5 UV4 MCB Board Kit 18,940741.52341.0000.000 2 $6,490.58 $14,263.05 TOTAL
(Approx.)
$99,425.49
Sales Tax (9.375%): $ $8,935.86
Shipping: $ TBD
P.O. Total: $ 100,000.00 (Not to Exceed)

10.b
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES – Trojan UV4000 Parts Supplies FY 2024-25

Page 2 ends

Special Terms and Conditions
Shipping: Show Purchase Order number on all packages and invoices.

All purchases are F.O.B Pacifica unless otherwise specified on Purchase Order.

Charges: All transportation charges must be prepaid and shown separately on all invoices.

City of Pacifica is exempt from Federal Excise Tax.
 Purchase up to $25,000 (must be approved
by Department Head or authorized signator)
Approved: _______________________
Name: LISA PETERSEN
Title: Director of Public Works
 Purchase between $25,000.01 and $50,000
(must be approved by the Assistant City
Manager)
Approved: _______________________
Name: YULIA CARTER
Title: Assistant City Manager
 Purchase between $50,000.01 and $75,000
(must be approved by the City Manager)
Approved: _______________________
Name: KEVIN WOODHOUSE
City Manager
 Purchase above $75,000
(must be approved by the City Council)
Date City Council Approved: _______________
Buyer: CITY OF PACIFICA
Authorized Signature: _______________________
Name: KEVIN WOODHOUSE
Title: City Manager
Vendor: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, ULC
Authorized Signature: _______________________
Name:

Title:

If Seller is located in the City of Pacifica, does Seller have a current business license? Yes  No 
In acknowledgment and agreement
with contract terms and conditions as
modified by the Contract Addendum
attached hereto and incorporated by
reference.

Ross O'Rourke
District Sales Manager

10.b
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES – Trojan UV4000 Parts Supplies FY 2024-25

Page 3 ends

The rights and remedies of the Buyer provided in this clause shall not be exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Purchase Order.

10.b
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES – Trojan UV4000 Parts Supplies FY 2024-25

Page 4 ends

change as directed prior to negotiation of any adjustment. Whether made pursuant to this clause or by mutual agreement, changes shall not be binding upon the Buyer, except when confirmed in writing by a member of the Buyer’s Purchasing Department.

DELIVERY: Timely performance and deliveries are essential to this Purchase Order. The Buyer reserves the right to refuse deliveries made in advance of the delivery schedule.

10.b
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES – Trojan UV4000 Parts Supplies FY 2024-25

Page 5 ends

Buyer as promptly as practicable after delivery. Final acceptance shall be conclusive except with respect to latent defects, fraud or such gross mistakes as amount to fraud, or with respect to the Buyer’s rights under the “Warranty” clause.

Seller not liable for any consequential, incidental or liquidated damages. Total cumulative value of damages capped at the value of this order.

10.b
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Project Title: TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES – Trojan UV4000 Parts Supplies FY 2024-25

Page 6 ends

Termination in accordance with this article shall not affect Buyer’s obligation to pay for items accepted by Buyer prior to such termination.

10.b
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) Contract Addendum Rev. –2023 - MAK Page 1
Confidential - Company Proprietary
Contract Addendum to Purchase Agreement
Calera Creek WWTP – UV Disinfection System
Parties: City of Pacifica (“Customer”)
Trojan Technologies Group, ULC (“Supplier”)
Date: July 16, 2024
Recitals: Customer and Supplier are entering into a contract for the Project and, for convenience, are using Customer’s standard contract forms (“Customer’s Base Contract”) for the purchase of Supplier’s goods and/or services (“Goods” and/or “Services”). This Addendum is intended to provide reasonable revisions to Customer’s Base Contract to enable the parties to enter a contract for the Project without prolonged or complex negotiations over terms and conditions. Accordingly, the parties incorporate this Addendum into the Customer’s Base Contract and make it an integral part thereof, taking precedence over any contrary or related terms or conditions that may be contained therein, in any purchase orders, or in any other writings, addenda or exhibits constituting part of the agreement between the parties (collectively, the “Agreement”).

Revisions: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Agreement, the following provisions and rules of construction apply:

1. Services. The Services shall be limited to those services specifically described herein. For the avoidance of doubt, and without limitation, Supplier has no responsibility for the supervision or actions of Customer’s employees or contractors or for non-Supplier items (e.g., chemicals or equipment) and disclaims all liability and responsibility for any loss or damage that may be suffered as a result of such actions or items, or any other actions or items not under Supplier’s control.

2. Indemnification. Any and all indemnification obligations imposed upon Supplier are limited to the extent of those damages proportionately caused by Supplier’s breach of the Agreement, negligence, wrongful conduct, or violations of law. In no case is Supplier liable for any damages caused by negligence, misuse or misapplication of goods by others. For non-government customers, Supplier’s indemnification obligations are provided on the condition that Customer defends, indemnifies and holds harmless Supplier against those damages to the extent proportionately caused by misuse or misapplication of goods, negligence, wrongful conduct, or violations of law by the Customer, its affiliates, or those in privity with them.

3. Limitation on Liability. The total liability of Supplier and its subsidiaries, affiliates, employees, directors, officers, and agents arising out of performance, nonperformance, or obligations in connection with the design, manufacture, sale, delivery, and/or use of Goods and/or Services in no circumstance includes any liquidated, penalty, incidental or consequential damages of any kind, nor exceed the total amount of compensation actually paid to Supplier under the Agreement, except only in the case of damages arising due to Supplier’s willful misconduct.

4. Warranty. Supplier warrants the Goods in accordance with Supplier’s Quote #QO0013568, covering the specific Goods ordered, generally under which Supplier warrants to the Customer that during the period ending 18 months after the delivery date or 12 months after the start-up date, whichever occurs first, Goods which are manufactured by Supplier will be free from defects in material and workmanship and will function in accordance with the specifications specified in any quotation. If Supplier breaches this warranty and the Customer notifies Supplier of such breach within 30 days of the end of the applicable warranty period, Supplier will, at its option, either replace or repair the nonconforming Goods, or re-perform any nonconforming Services, or refund the amounts paid by Customer to Supplier for the nonconforming Goods and/or Services. Supplier’s warranty contains the exclusive remedies for any breach of warranty.

Supplier expressly disclaims any remedies of “cover” and any warranties implied by law, including but not limited to any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

5. Intellectual Property; Information Technology; Privacy. Supplier retains all rights in and to any intellectual property and confidential information created or procured by it or its representatives at any time, and Customer receives licenses to use such intellectual property and information only to the extent provided by implied license under applicable law. No Customer information technology requirements apply, except the extent such requirements specifically apply to equipment being sold to Customer. To help ensure mutual compliance with applicable privacy laws, Customer will not provide to or share with Company any personal data or personally identifiable information.

6. Performance Guarantees. All product warranties and performance guarantees shall only be enforceable if (a) all equipment is properly installed, inspected regularly and is in good working order, (b) all operations are consistent with Supplier recommendations, (c) operating conditions at the Customer site have not materially changed and remain within anticipated specifications, and (d) no reasonably unforeseeable circumstances exist or arise.

7. Acceptance and Set-off. Subject to a 10-day inspection period, all Goods and Services are deemed accepted upon delivery. The foregoing statements shall not negate Supplier’s responsibilities under the testing and acceptance criteria of the applicable specifications, nor Customer’s right to claim under the applicable warranties. All payments are due Net 30 days from Supplier’s invoice and pay-when10.b Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) Contract Addendum Rev. –2023 - MAK Page 2
Confidential - Company Proprietary
paid clauses shall not apply. Any set-off rights in the Agreement notwithstanding, Customer bears the customary burden of proof with respect to any amounts invoiced by Supplier but not paid by the invoice due date. Customer shall pay Supplier interest on the outstanding balance at a rate of 1.5% per month or the maximum rate permitted by law, if lower, for each month or part thereof that there is an outstanding balance.

8. Funds Transfers (Payments). The parties both recognize that there is a risk of banking fraud when individuals impersonating a business demand payment under new banking or mailing instructions. To avoid this risk, Buyer must verbally confirm any new bank or mailing instructions by calling Supplier and speaking with Supplier’s accounts receivable contact before mailing or transferring any monies using the new instructions. Both parties agree that they will not institute mailing or bank transfer instruction changes and require immediate payment under the new instructions but will instead provide a ten (10) day grace period to verify any payment instruction changes before any new or outstanding payments are due using the new instructions.

9. Force Majeure. Supplier is excused from performance of its obligations under this Agreement to the extent caused by acts or omissions that are beyond its control, including but not limited to Government embargoes, blockages, seizures or freezing of assets, delays, or refusals to grant an export or import license, or the suspension or revocation thereof, or any other acts of any Government; fires, floods, severe weather conditions, or any other acts of God; quarantines; epidemics and pandemics; labor strikes or lockouts; riots; strife; insurrections; civil disobedience or acts of criminals or terrorists; war; material shortages or delays in deliveries to Supplier by third parties. In the event of the existence of any force majeure circumstances, the period of time for delivery, payment terms, and payments under any letters of credit will be extended for a period of time equal to the period of delay. If the force majeure circumstances extend for six months, Supplier may, at its option, terminate this Agreement without penalty and without being deemed in default or in breach thereof.

10. Miscellaneous. Except to the extent signed by a duly authorized representative of an affiliate of Supplier, the Agreement does not bind any affiliates of Supplier. Supplier is not subject to any audit rights in favor of the Customer, except for audit rights (under reasonable conditions) directly related to Supplier’s compliance with laws and regulations (e.g., safety) which are directly applicable to Supplier’s Goods and/or Services purchased under this Agreement. Supplier is not obligated to purchase or carry Professional Liability or E&O Insurance coverage, provide copies of Supplier’s policies, or provide waivers of subrogation. Supplier may include Customer and their Affiliates as an Additional Insured party. Nothing in the Agreement supersedes or nullifies this Addendum. Upon thirty (30) days prior written notice, Supplier may, in its sole discretion, elect to terminate any order for the sale of Goods and provide a pro-rated refund for any pre-payment of undelivered Goods. Supplier’s obligations under the Agreement will only be modified by written agreement of Supplier through the same duly authorized representative who signed this Addendum, or such person’s duly authorized successor. Except as provided herein, neither party agrees to any contractual clause or provision, that waives such party’s ordinary and standard rights, including, but not limited to, the right to retain party’s own counsel and each party’s right to determine facts and circumstances in the event of a dispute.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Addendum to be executed by their duly authorized representatives, intending thereby to be legally bound.

City of Pacifica Trojan Technologies Group, ULC
By: By:

Name: Name:

Title: Title:

Date: _ Date:

District Sales Manager
July 17th 2024
Ross O'Rourke

10.b
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25) ATTACHMENT 1

10.b
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

QUOTATION
QO0013568

TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES
3020 GORE ROAD
LONDON, ON N5V 4T7
CANADA
T. 519-457-3400
www.trojantechnologies.com
Sold to Ship to
CITY OF PACIFICA Calera Creek WWTP
170 SANTA MARIA AVENUE Water Recycling
Pacifica CA 94044-2506 700 Pacific Coast Hwy
UNITED STATES Pacifica CA 94044-0099

UNITED STATES
Customer Service Contact : [email protected] Payment Terms : 0% / 00 / 30 net Internal Sales Rep : Heather Conine Delivery Terms : DELIVERED DUTY PAID Customer No. : 100003393 Carrier/LSP : Reference :

Quote Date : 07-10-2024
Quote Expiry Date : 12-31-2024
Freight ID 8089
Project Quantity Price Unit Net Price Tax Rate
Line Item Discount % Net Amount Tax Amount Amount
Description
10 441169-024 50.00 580.65/ EA 580.65 9.87% 31,899.46
LAMP P, ASSY PKG 24" UV4000 G2 29,032.50 2866.96
20 490291 20.00 1,380.57/ EA 1,380.57 9.87% 30,338.03
BALLAST, REPLACEMENT KIT UV4G2 27,611.40 2726.63
30 441143-024 18.00 443.64/ EA 443.64 9.87% 8,774.09
SLEEVE, PACKAGED UV4000 24 7,985.52 788.57
40 445039 40.00 258.83/ EA 258.83 9.87% 11,375.58
SEAL KIT, WIPER W/TFE BEARING 10,353.20 1022.38
50 901507 4.00 224.65/ CS 224.65 9.87% 987.34
CLEANER, ACTICLEAN GEL 4X4L 898.60 88.74
60 442645 1.00 1,627.25/ EA 1,627.25 9.87% 1,787.94
CYLINDER REPLACEMENT KIT, 316S 1,627.25 160.69

Page 1 ends

10.b
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

QUOTATION
QO0013568

TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES
3020 GORE ROAD
LONDON, ON N5V 4T7
CANADA
T. 519-457-3400
www.trojantechnologies.com
Project Quantity Price Unit Net Price Tax Rate
Line Item Discount % Net Amount Tax Amount Amount
Description
70 917538 2.00 6,490.58/ EA 6,490.58 9.87% 14,263.05
BOARD KIT, UV4 MCB 12,981.16 1281.89
80 FREIGHT AT COST 1.00 / EA 0.00 0.00% 0.00
FREIGHT AT COST 0.00 0.00
Goods 90,489.63 Discount 0.00 Tax Amount Total USD
Costs 0.00 Subtotal 90,489.63 8,935.86 99,425.49

Page 2 ends

10.b
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

QUOTATION
QO0013568

TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES
3020 GORE ROAD
LONDON, ON N5V 4T7
CANADA
T. 519-457-3400
www.trojantechnologies.com
Terms and Conditions
All purchases of Trojan products and/or services are expressly and without limitation subject to Trojan's Terms and Conditions of Sale ("Trojan" or "SELLER"), incorporated herein by reference and published on Trojan's website https: www.trojantechnologies.com/sales-terms-conditions/ Trojan TCS are incorporated by reference into each of Trojan's offers or quotations, order acknowledgments, and invoice and shipping documents. The first of the following acts shall constitute an acceptance of Trojan's offer and not a counteroffer and shall create a contract of sale ("Contract") in accordance with the Trojan TCS, subject to Trojan's final credit approval: (i) Buyer's issuance of a purchase order document against Trojan's offer or quotation; (ii) Trojan's acknowledgement of Buyer's order; or (iii) commencement of any performance by Trojan in response to Buyer's order. Provisions contained in Buyer's purchase documents that materially alter, add to or subtract from the provisions of the Trojan’s TCS shall be null and void and not considered part of the Contract.
www.trojantechnologies.com/sales-terms-conditions
Page3/3

10.b
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: TrojanPartsFY2024-25PurchaseAgreement_1 (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-25)

MASTER AGREEMENT FOR BIOSOLIDS SERVICES
AMENDMENT NO. 1
This AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 is entered into as of the 12th day of August 2024 (“Amendment No. 1”), by and between the CITY OF PACIFICA, herein called the “City,” and SYNAGRO WEST LLC. hereinafter called the “Consultant.” City and Consultant may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as “Parties”.

RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, City and Consultant entered into a Master Agreement for Biosolids Services on August 14th, 2023 for providing Biosolids Services; and B. WHEREAS the Master Agreement identified an end of term date in Section 3.1 as December 31, 2024; and
C. WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend that date to December 31, 2026.

AGREEMENT
A. Amendment. The Parties agree that the Master Agreement shall be amended as set forth below.

1. Section 3.1 “Effective Date”. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2026 (the “Term”).

2. Agreement in Effect. All other provisions of the original Master Agreement, except as amended herein, shall remain in full force and effect. [Signatures on Next Page]
Biosolids Services Agreement

SYNAGRO WEST LLC
Amendment No.1 Page 1
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3

10.c
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Amendment 1_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Amendment No.1 as of the date first written above.

CITY OF PACIFICA
By:
______________________________ Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Attest:

By:
______________________________ Date
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
Approved As To Form:

By: ______________________________ Date
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
CONSULTANT: SYNAGRO WEST LLC.

By: ______________________________ Date
Rhylee Callan, Contract Administration Manager
Biosolids Services Agreement

SYNAGRO WEST LLC
Amendment No.1 Page 2
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3
8-1-2024

10.c
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Amendment 1_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual TASK ORDER NO. ___2____

CITY OF PACIFICA
AND

SYNAGRO WEST, LLC
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct ECOLOGICAL CONCERNS INC. to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Biosolids Services between the City of Pacifica (“CITY”) and SYNAGRO WEST, LLC (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated August 15, 2023(“MASTER AGREEMENT”)
SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed One Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($180,000) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by December 31, 2026 or as extended in writing by the City Manager.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this ___15__ day of August, 2023.
[Signatures on Next Page]

10.d
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT

SYNAGRO WEST, LLC
By: Date 8-1-2024

10.d
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.d
Packet Pg. 234
Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.d
Packet Pg. 235
Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.d
Packet Pg. 236
Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.d
Packet Pg. 237
Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.d
Packet Pg. 238
Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual July 25, 2024

CITY OF PACIFICA
Attn: Mario Xuereb
170 Santa Maria Ave.

Pacifica, California 94044
RE: City of Pacifica, CA - Biosolids Services
CPI Cost Adjustment
Per our contract, Synagro is entitled to an adjustment of our contract price(s) effective at the anniversary of the contract.

Such price(s) shall be adjusted annually consistent with the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the West Urban area, Not Seasonally Adjusted with the base being June 2023. We hereby inform to you that an adjustment has been calculated as follows:

Item
Description
CPI
Percentage
Multiplier
Base
Price
Price
Adjustment
Percentage
New
Price
Unit
MONTHLY TRAILER RENTAL 100.00% $1,325.00 3.24% $1,367.93 M o n t h l y Fee
STANDBY 100.00% $130.00 3.24% $134.21 Hour
TRANSPORT AND LAND APPLY BIOSOLIDS AT SOLANO (22 TON MINIMUM PER LOAD)
100.00% $84.50 3.24% $87.24 Wet Ton
TRANSPORT AND LAND APPLY BIOSOLIDS AT SILVA (22 TON MINIMUM PER LOAD)
100.00% $84.50 3.24% $87.24 Wet Ton
TRANSPORT AND LAND APPLY BIOSOLIDS AT MERCED (22 TON MINIMUM PER LOAD)
100.00% $84.50 3.24% $87.24 Wet Ton
MONTHLY BIOSOLIDS TESTING 100.00% $445.00 3.24% $459.42 Each MINIMUM LOAD CHARGE (TONS UNDER 22 TONS PER LOAD) 100.00% $1,804.00 3.24% $1,862.45 Each LANDFILL DISPOSAL OF NON-CLASS B, NOT SUITABLE FOR COMPOSTING 100.00% $117.00 3.24% $120.79 Wet Ton TRANSPORT AND LAND APPLY BIOSOLIDS AT SAN BENITO (22 TON MINIMUM

PER LOAD)
100.00% $84.50 3.24% $87.24 Wet Ton
We shall prepare our invoices effective July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025 with the adjusted unit prices, as stated above.

Again, we greatly appreciate your business and thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Philip Morsberger
Philip Morsberger
Accounting Manager
435 Williams Court, Suite 100
Baltimore, MD 21220
www.synagro.com

10.d
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual ~ U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATJSTJCS
Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject
Change Output Options: ,~r,,, I .. EJ ID
D include graphs D include annual averages
More Formatting Options-+
Data extracted on: July 25, 2024 (11:10:36 AM)
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)
Series Id: CUURS49BSA0,CUUSS49BSA0
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series Title: All items in San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA, all urban consumers, not seasonally adjusted Area: San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA
Item: All items
Base Period: 1982-84=100
Download: .xlsx
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual HALFl HALF2 2014 248.615 251.495 253.317 253.354 254.503 252.273 251.985 250.507 253.463 2015 254.910 257.622 259.117 259.917 261.019 260.289 258.572 256.723 260.421 2016 262.600 264.565 266.041 267.853 270.306 269.483 266.344 263.911 268.777 2017 271.626 274.589 275.304 275.893 277.570 277.414 274.924 273.306 276.542 2018 281.308 283.422 286.062 287.664 289.673 289.896 285.550 282.666 288.435 2019 291.227 294.801 295.259 295.490 298.443 297.007 295.004 293.150 296.859 2020 299.690 298.074 300.032 300.182 301.736 302.948 300.084 299.109 301.059 2021 304.387 309.419 309.497 311.167 313.265 315.805 309.721 306.724 312.718 2022 320.195 324.878 330.539 328.871 332.062 331.222 327.060 323.408 330.711 2023 337.173 338.496 340.056 340.094 341.219 339.915 339.050 337.689 340.411 2024 345.151 351.247 351.064 347.857
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Postal Square Building 2 Massachusetts Avenue NE Washington, DC 20212-0001 Telephone:1-202-691-5200_ Telecommunications Relay Service:7-1-1_ www.bls.gQY Contact Us O~pecial Notices 4/25/2024

10.d
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: CCON_Pacifica, CA_Biosolids Services_Task Order 2_SIGNED_2024-8-1 [Revision 1] (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual

10.e
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.e
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Master Agreement for Centrifuge Repair Services Centrisys_2024 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for

10.f
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Agreement_Centrisys_20231211_Amendment_1 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-

10.f
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Agreement_Centrisys_20231211_Amendment_1 signed (5711 : Resolution to Approve Annual Agreements for DPW-WW FY 2024-

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
8/12/2024
1 SUBJECT:

Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 with Websoft Developers Inc for the Fund 18 Sewer Collection Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS).

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Adopt a Resolution:

A. Approving a sole source Master Agreement and Task Order No.1 with Websoft Developers Inc. for the Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) in the amount of $127,500; and
B. Authorizing a budget authority in the amount of $146,625.00, which include contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Contract amount; and
C. Authorizing staff to execute future change orders not to exceed the contingency amount; and
D. Authorizing the City Manager and Designated Personnel to execute all documents related to the maintenance of CMMS.

STAFF CONTACT:

Eddie Pastrano, Collection System Manager
(650) 738-4660
[email protected]
Louis Sun, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works (Wastewater) (650) 738-4662
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

During the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the City Council approved funding for the Fund 18 Sewer Collection Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS). Currently, the Public Works Department Wastewater Division uses ICOM for asset management and creating work orders. Staff utilize the computerized work order system or CMMS, which allows them to keep accurate, archived records and makes it easier for staff to search past maintenance history through a database. The CMMS is more efficient and in addition to record keeping, the work order system assists with the operational efficiency of both the Sewer Collection and Plant Operation crew by improving the coordination, implementation, and tracking of tasks.

The current ICOM system was implemented over ten years ago, and today the ICOM system is obsolete, and it is no longer being supported by the software designer. Without a current functional CMMS system for maintenance, this condition will cause our collection system to be 11 Packet Pg. 263
Pacifica City Council 2
August 12, 2024
vulnerable and will increase the risk of blockages in our sewer collection system leading to sanitary sewer spill. State Water Board can and will enforce penalty fees if sanitary sewer spills occur.

Staff conducted a thorough research, evaluation, and selection process to find the next CMMS system. Staff initially looked into other CMMS software such as Lucity and others, but did not find a suitable system that allows more customization to fit the City’s needs. Later staff reached out to other agencies that also use ICOM to find out what was their replacement, and staff found many of these agencies are using Websoft Developers Inc. Agencies such as Montecito Sanitary District, Carmel Area Wastewater District, City of Lodi, Pebble Beach Community Services District, and Ojai Sanitary District were once ICOM users but have since updated to Websoft Developers’ proprietary system called Mobile MMS. Staff received positive reviews of Mobile MMS as it is customizable, easy to transfer data from ICOM, and user-friendly. Websoft Developers was also able to customize a demo version of Mobile MMS for the Collection group to try out and test the functions.

Therefore, the City Manager recommends adoption of a Resolution approving a sole source Master Agreement (Attachment 1) and Task Order No. 1 (Attachment 2) between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers Inc. for CMMS for the Public Works Department Wastewater Division in the total amount of $127,500 for three years; authorizing a budget authority in the amount of $146,625.00, which include contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the contract amount; and authorizing the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The Council may choose not to approve the agreement with Websoft Developers Inc, however, doing so will result in continuing the use of unsupported CMMS software. The City Manager does not recommend this alternate action.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the construction contract is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Improve and Steward City Infrastructure, streets and facilities: The new CMMS system will improve infrastructure by keeping accurate computerized records.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Source and Use of Funds spreadsheet is shown below:

Use of Funds
Master Agreement with Websoft Developers Inc $127,500.00 Contingency (15%) $19,125.00
Total Use of Funds $146,625.00
Project Fund Source
Enterprise Fund (Fund 18)
Account No 18.940742.52485.0000.000 $150,000.00
Total Project Fund Source $150,000.00
Estimated Project Fund End Balance $3,375.00
11 Packet Pg. 264
Pacifica City Council 3
August 12, 2024
No additional budget authority is necessary as sufficient funds have been approved in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for FY 2024-25 to pay for this project.

The project budget was approved in Sewer Enterprise Fund for Fiscal Year 2024-2025.

18.940742.52485.0000.000 Maintenance contract SVCS-CMMS.

ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works - Wastewater Division
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (PDF) Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (PDF)
11 Packet Pg. 265
Pacifica City Council 4
August 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. _______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING A SOLE SOURCE MASTER AGREEMENT AND TASK ORDER NO. 1 BETWEEN THE CITY OF

PACIFICA AND WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS INC FOR THE COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR $127,500 FOR THE DURATION OF THREE YEARS; AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AUTHORITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $146,625.00, WHICH INCLUDE CONTINGENCIES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FIFTEEN PERCENT (15%) OF THE CONTRACT AMOUNT; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND

DESIGNATED PERSONNEL TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO

COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND NOT TO EXCEED THE

BUDGET AMOUNT
______________________________________________________
WHEREAS, during the FY 2024-25 budget approval process, the City Council approved funding for the Fund 18 Sewer Collection Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS); and
WHEREAS, the current CMMS for Public Works Department Wastewater Division Collection group is no longer being supported and is now obsolete.

WHEREAS, the staff conducted a thorough research, evaluation, and selection process to select Websoft Developers Inc ; and
WHEREAS, the project will improve asset management and sewer collection operations and help protecting public health and our environment.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to approve a sole source Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers Inc in the total amount of $127,500 for Computerized Maintenance Management System for the duration of three years; authorize a budget authority in the amount of $146,625.00, which include contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the contract amount; and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers
ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
________________________________
Sue Vaterlaus, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ 11 Packet Pg. 266
Pacifica City Council 5
August 12, 2024
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 11 Packet Pg. 267
OAK #4818-2196-0582 v1

MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Master Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this ____8th___ day of ____July______, _2024_, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS, INC. [a corporation] (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires a new asset management software for the Public Works Department Wastewater Division Collection Group and to replace the current existing obsolete software;
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform such services; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide CITY with such services on the terms and conditions set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES

1.1. Scope of Services. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish services pursuant to a Task Order in the form set forth in Exhibit A, Task Order, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

1.2. Compliance with Law. The Services shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.

1.3. Time is of the Essence. CONSULTANT agrees to diligently prosecute the Services. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence.

1.4. Professional Competence. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional skills necessary to perform the Services and that it will perform the Services in a skillful and professional manner. CONSULTANT represents that it has all the necessary licenses to perform the Services and shall maintain them throughout the term of this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees that the Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged, in the same or similar geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices its profession, and will prepare all work products required by this Agreement in accordance with such standards. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is in responsible charge of the Services. Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.

11.a
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master

1.5. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT expressly warrants that it will not represent that it is an employee of CITY. Persons employed or utilized by CONSULTANT in the performance of the Services will not be employees or agents of CITY. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

1.6. Confidentiality. CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in confidence and not disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation, without CITY's prior written consent, any trade secret or confidential information, knowledge or data relating to the products, process, or operation of CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain in confidence and not to disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation any data, information, technology, or material developed or obtained by CONSULTANT during the performance of the Services. The covenants contained in this Section 1.6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause.

1.7. Ownership of Material. Any reports and other material prepared by or on behalf of CONSULTANT under this Agreement (collectively, the "Documents") shall be and remain the property of CITY. All Documents not already provided to CITY shall be delivered to CITY on the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason. The Documents may be used by CITY and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes CITY may deem appropriate without further employment of or payment of any compensation to CONSULTANT.

1.8. Documentation. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain full and complete documentation and accounting records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the performance of the Services, and CONSULTANT shall make such documents available for review and/or audit by CITY and CITY's representatives at all reasonable times for at least four years after the termination of this Agreement or completion of the Services.

1.9. Testimony. CONSULTANT agrees to testify at CITY's request if litigation is brought against CITY in connection with the Services. Unless the action is brought by CONSULTANT or is based upon CONSULTANT's negligence, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the preparation and the testimony at CONSULTANT's standard hourly rates.

ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION

2.1. Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with the rate and schedules specified in a Task Order. However, in no event shall the amount the CITY pays to CONSULTANT for work done under a Task Order exceed the total compensation specified in the Task Order (“Cost Ceiling”) .

2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form satisfactory to CITY on or before the tenth day of each month for Services provided during the preceding month. CONSULTANT shall submit time and cost records as necessary to substantiate

11.a
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master performance of the Services. Within 35 days after receipt of each such invoice, CITY shall verify the accuracy of the invoice, correct the charges where appropriate and as discussed and mutually agreed with CONSULTANT, and make payment to CONSULTANT in an amount equal to the amount of such invoice, as verified or corrected by CITY. No payment hereunder shall be construed as evidence of acceptance of any of CONSULTANT's work. CITY reserves the right to withhold payment from CONSULTANT on account of Services not performed satisfactorily, delays in CONSULTANT's performance of Services, or other defaults hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not stop or delay performance of the Services under this Agreement on account of payment disputes with CITY.

2.3. Status Reports. Together with each monthly invoice, CONSULTANT shall submit a status report detailing the amount expended on the Services to that date and the remaining amount to be expended before the Cost Ceiling is reached. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY in writing when payments have reached 90 percent of the Cost Ceiling.

2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment under a Task Order until the Services provided under that Task Order are complete and CITY has received all Documents. CONSULTANT shall diligently continue and complete performance of the Services if the Services are not complete at the time CONSULTANT has performed services up to the Cost Ceiling.

ARTICLE 3 - TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2027 (the "Term").

Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be extended for successive one-year term(s) upon mutual, written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee and CONSULTANT. Work authorized by a Task Order shall be performed in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Task Order.

3.2. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by CITY upon written notice to CONSULTANT.

3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for the Services rendered under this Agreement.

3.4. Other Remedies. Nothing in this Article 3 shall be deemed to limit the respective rights of the parties to terminate this Agreement for cause or otherwise to exercise any rights or pursue any remedies which may accrue to them.

ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Eddie Pastrano, its Collection System Manager, as its contact who shall be responsible for administering and interpreting the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for matters relating to CONSULTANT's performance under this Agreement, and for liaison and coordination between CITY and

11.a
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master CONSULTANT. In the event CITY wishes to make a change in CITY 's representative, CITY will notify CONSULTANT of the change in writing.

4.2. CONSULTANT Contact. CONSULTANT designates Manoj Desai, President as its contact, who shall have immediate responsibility for the performance of the Services and for all matters relating to performance under this Agreement. Any change in CONSULTANT's designated contact shall be subject to written approval by CITY.

ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

5.1. Indemnification. CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest extent allowed by law, with respect to claims, liability, loss, damage, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's and expert witness fees, awards, fines, penalties, or judgments, arising out of or relating to the Services (collectively "Claims") that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its Officials, officers, employees and agents (the "CITY Parties"), except to the extent the Claims are attributable to CITY Parties' gross negligence or willful misconduct. CONSULTANT shall defend the CITY Parties as required by California Civil Code Section 2778, and with counsel reasonably acceptable to those parties. CONSULTANT shall have no right to seek reimbursement from the CITY Parties for the costs of defense.

If CONSULTANT is a “design professional,” as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(c), CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnitees harmless against Liability only to the extent such Liability arises out of, pertains to, or relates to CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. In such an event, the cost to defend charged to CONSULTANT shall not exceed CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault.

The obligations contained in this Section 5.1 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause for the full period of time allowed by law and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance requirements of this Agreement.

5.2. Health and Safety. CONSULTANT may perform part of the Services at sites which contain unknown working conditions and contaminated materials. CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible for the health and safety of CONSULTANT's employees during the performance of the Services.

5.3. Insurance. CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency shall procure, provide and maintain at all times during the performance of this Agreement, and for such additional periods as described herein, the insurance listed below with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.

A. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance providing bodily injury liability and property damage, to protect against all liability arising out of the use of any owned, leased, passenger or commercial

11.a
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master automobile at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit and $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.

B. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Commercial General Liability Insurance, with limits providing a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage for each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate and $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate. The insurance shall cover all operations including but not limited to the following: (1) premises, operations and mobile equipment liability; (2) completed operations and products liability; (3) contractual liability insuring the obligations assumed by CONSULTANT in this Agreement; (4) broad form property damage liability; (5) personal injury liability endorsement, including death; and (6) automobile bodily injury and property damage insurance, including all owned, hired and non-owned equipment.

C. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional Liability Insurance protecting against liabilities arising out of or in connection with negligent acts, errors, or omissions of CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency in connection with this Agreement, at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage and $1,000,000 aggregate, on a "claims made basis" with a continuation of coverage extension for liabilities for two years from the date the Services are substantially complete. Such professional liability policies shall include coverage for liability assumed by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement.

D. Workers Compensation Insurance. Workers Compensation insurance, occupational disease insurance and employer’s liability insurance shall be required with minimum limits as required by law, covering all workplaces involved in this Agreement.

E. Policy Terms. Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that CONSULTANT has obtained or maintains the insurance required by this Section

5.3. The Certificates shall be on forms acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall also furnish CITY with original endorsements with the following documentation:
• Precluding cancellation or reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after CITY shall have received written notification thereof from CONSULTANT by United States mail;
• Providing that CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, and include a “separation of insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (cross-liability endorsement);
• Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds (“Additional Insureds”); and

11.a
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master • Providing that for any claims relating to CONSULTANT's services hereunder, CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not be contributory with it.
• It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverages requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured, including but not limited to any umbrella or excess insurance.

Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of:
(a) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (b) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured.

F. Material Breach. If CONSULTANT fails to maintain insurance coverage or provided insurance documentation which is required pursuant to this Agreement, it shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. CITY, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, CITY may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by CITY for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY.

ARTICLE 6 - NOTICES
All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by facsimile or reputable overnight courier and shall be deemed received upon the earlier of: (1) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice; (2) if delivered by Federal Express or other overnight courier for next business day delivery, the next business day; (3) if sent by facsimile, with the original sent on the same day by overnight courier, the date on which the facsimile is received, provided it is before 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time; or (4) if sent electronically, the date of delivery on the confirmed read receipt. Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner described in this Article 6. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of a change in address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice or communication sent. Unless changed in accordance herewith, the addresses for notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:

If to CITY: City Manager
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 738-7409
Facsimile: (650) 359-6038
Email: [email protected]

11.a
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master If to CONSULTANT:Manoj Desai
Websoft Developers, Inc
P.O. Box 4008
Davis, CA 95617
Phone: (530) 759-8754 x210
Email: [email protected]
ARTICLE 7 - MISCELLANEOUS

7.1. Conflict of Interest Prohibition. CITY and CONSULTANT will comply with the requirements of the CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code adopted pursuant to California Government Code §87300 et seq., the Political Reform Act (California Government Code §81000 et seq.), the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission (Title 2, §18110 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations), California Government Code §1090 et seq., and any other ethics laws applicable to the performance of the Services and/or this Agreement. CONSULTANT may be required to file with the CITY Clerk a completed Form 700 before commencing performance of the Services unless the CITY Clerk determines that completion of a Form 700 is not required, pursuant to CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code. Form 700 forms are available from the CITY Clerk.

CONSULTANT may not perform Services for any other person or entity that, pursuant to any applicable law or regulation, would result in a conflict of interest or would otherwise be prohibited with respect to CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with CITY and to provide any necessary and appropriate information requested by CITY or any authorized representative concerning potential conflicts of interest or prohibitions concerning CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT may not employ any CITY official, officer or employee in the performance of the Services, nor may any official, officer or employee of CITY have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code §1090 et seq. CONSULTANT hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of CITY. If CONSULTANT was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of CITY in the previous twelve months, CONSULTANT warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. CONSULTANT understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et seq., the entire Agreement is void and CONSULTANT will not be entitled to any compensation for CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services, including reimbursement of expenses, and CONSULTANT will be required to reimburse CITY for any sums paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement. CONSULTANT understands that, in addition to the foregoing, penalties for violating Government Code §1090 may include criminal prosecution and disqualification from holding public office in the State of California.

Any violation by CONSULTANT of the requirements of this provision will constitute a

11.a
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master material breach of this Agreement, and the CITY reserves all its rights and remedies at law and equity concerning any such violations.

7.2. Subcontracting. CONSULTANT may subcontract portions of the Services upon the prior written approval of CITY. CONSULTANT will be solely responsible for payment of such subcontract Services. No contractual relationship will exist between any such subcontractors of CONSULTANT and CITY. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Agreement. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this Agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, with any subsubcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the sub-subcontractor’s work. A copy of the CITY indemnity and insurance provisions will be furnished to CONSULTANT’s subcontractors upon request.

7.3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of CITY and CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may only be modified by an amendment in writing signed by each party.

7.4. No Assignment. The Services are deemed unique and neither party shall assign, transfer, subcontract or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. As limited by this Section

7.2, this Agreement is to be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

7.5. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is determined to be unconstitutional, invalid or beyond the authority of either party, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties.

7.6. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document.

7.7. Choice of Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without reference to its choice of laws principles and venue shall be in the appropriate court in San Mateo County, California.

7.8. Waiver. No failure on the part of either Party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder. A waiver by either CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of this Agreement shall not be binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other further breach.

7.9. Mediation. In the event the parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement through good faith negotiations, the parties agree to submit the matter to

11.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator. Prior to the mediation, the parties shall exchange any documents reasonably necessary to resolve the matter to be mediated.

7.10. Attorney’s Fees. If any action at law or in equity, including an action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled.

7.11. Interpretation. In the event this Agreement is ever construed in any dispute between the parties, it and each of its provisions shall be construed without regard to the party or parties responsible for its preparation and shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly by the parties. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement.

7.12. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.

7.13. Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the CITY or CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s Services hereunder are being performed solely for the benefit of CITY. CITY shall be an express third-party beneficiary of all contracts between CONSULTANT and any subcontractors or subconsultants in connection with any services performed in connection with, or in furtherance of, this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS, INC.

By: Date
Attest:

By: ___________________________
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Manoj Desai
June 10, 2024

11.a
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master

EXHIBIT A

TASK ORDER

11.a
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master TASK ORDER NO. ________

CITY OF PACIFICA
AND
__________________________
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct _______________ to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica (“CITY”) and _______________ (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated ________________ (“MASTER AGREEMENT”)
SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed ____________________ ($____________) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by _________________ or as extended in writing by the City Manager.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this _______ day of _____, _______.
[Signatures on Next Page]

11.a
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT
_______________________________
By: Date
By: Date

11.a
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master ATTACHMENT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES

11.a
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master ATTACHMENT “B”

COMPENSATION

11.a
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and Websoft Developers (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master TASK ORDER NO. ___1____

CITY OF PACIFICA
AND
WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS INC.

SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS INC to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica (“CITY”) and WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS INC (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated JULY 8, 2024 (“MASTER AGREEMENT”)
SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed One Hundred Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($127,500.00) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by December 31, 2027 or as extended in writing by the City Manager.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this ___8th__ day of _July_, __2024_.
[Signatures on Next Page]

11.b
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc)

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT
WEBSOFT DEVELOPERS INC.

By: Date

11.b
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc) ATTACHMENT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES

11.b
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc)

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Full implementation for all agency collection system tasks. We will convert all existing data sources
and publish the agency's GIS on our ArcGIS server platform. We will meet on site every month with
additional interim monthly web-based meetings. The attached feature list show a sample of the work that will be included in this implementation. We plan on implementing all collection system tasks. Plant-related activities will be addressed at a future date. * GIS integration and display of all relevant data sources on a web-based system * Conversion of any existing data sources. This specifically includes all activities, workflows, and historical data included within the ICOM database
* Line cleaning/root cutting/foaming and CCTV inspection including implementation of routes * CCTV inspection integration and tracking from the existing WinCan system * Sewer Lateral (PSL) inspections
* Compliance inspections (FOG) and permitting
* Import assets and historical vertical asset work orders from Fiix system * Work Order management system for all lift station and treatment plants assets including automated routing, workflows, scheduling, and escalation * Plant rounds including reproduction of key reports
* Lift station and other asset inspections (manholes, recycled water, pressure main) * Full asset lift station, fleet, equipment maintenance including PM scheduling * GPS surveying for GIS asset improvement
* USA ticketing with Positive Response
* Activities to be defined
* Reporting
- Use of ad-hoc reporting tools
- Development of 10 customized reports or Excel datasets for management analysis * Training for system use and administrative management

11.b
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc) ATTACHMENT “B”

COMPENSATION

11.b
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc) 1 Billing inquiries should be made to: Manoj Desai at (530) 759-8754 ext. 210or [email protected] Quote # Q-100129
Quote Date 04/29/2024
Expiry Date 06/29/2024
QUOTE Websoft Developers, Inc.
2020 RESEARCH PARK DR STE 140
DAVIS, California 95618-6150
TOTAL $65,500.00
City of Pacifica
Attn: Louis Sun
Subject :

Pacifica: MobileMMS Quotation for wastewater
We have a new mailing address:

PO Box 4008
Davis, CA 95617
# ITEM & DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
MobileMMS Licensing
1 Includes yearly hosted software license for MobileMMS software with unlimited access for all agency-related wastewater tasks. Pricing is based on a service population of approximately 40,000. $31,000.00
x 1.00 31,000.00
MobileMMS Implementation
2 Full implementation for all agency collection system tasks. We will convert all existing data sources and publish the agency's GIS on our ArcGIS server platform. We will meet on site every month with additional interim monthly web-based meetings. The attached feature list show a sample of the work that will be included in this implementation. We plan on implementing all collection system tasks. Plant-related activities will be addressed at a future date. * GIS integration and display of all relevant data sources on a web-based system * Conversion of any existing data sources. This specifically includes all activities, workflows, and historical data included within the ICOM database
* Line cleaning/root cutting/foaming and CCTV inspection including implementation of routes * CCTV inspection integration and tracking from the existing WinCan system * Sewer Lateral (PSL) inspections
* Compliance inspections (FOG) and permitting
* Import assets and historical vertical asset work orders from Fiix system * Work Order management system for all lift station and treatment plants assets including automated routing, workflows, scheduling, and escalation * Plant rounds including reproduction of key reports
* Lift station and other asset inspections (manholes, recycled water, pressure main) * Full asset lift station, fleet, equipment maintenance including PM scheduling * GPS surveying for GIS asset improvement
* USA ticketing with Positive Response
$34,500.00
x 1.00 34,500.00

11.b
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc) 2 Billing inquiries should be made to: Manoj Desai at (530) 759-8754 ext. 210or [email protected] Sub Total 65,500.00
Total $65,500.00
# ITEM & DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
* Activities to be defined
* Reporting
- Use of ad-hoc reporting tools
- Development of 10 customized reports or Excel datasets for management analysis * Training for system use and administrative management This implementation cost includes any future modifications for included activities.

Terms & Conditions
Recurring yearly fees will be billed annually with 1 initial payment. Initially implementation fee will be billed upon project initiation. Annual renewal will be billed automatically unless customer cancels services 30 days prior to renewal date. Renewal rates will include an annual increase equal of 5%. This increase will be waived with a 3 year or longer contract.

11.b
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order No. 1 (5686 : Resolution to Approve Master Agreement and Task Order 1 with Websoft Developers Inc)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
8/12/2024
1 SUBJECT:

A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Authorizing the Acceptance of $95,042.68 from the State of California’s Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for the Education, Prevention, and Enforcement of Impaired Driving Laws
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica authorizing the acceptance of $95,042.68 from the state of California’s Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws.

STAFF CONTACT:

Maria Sarasua, Police Chief
(650) 738-7314
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:

With the passage of Proposition 64 in 2016, The Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use Marijuana Act (AUMA), California voters mandated the state to set aside funding for the CHP to provide grants to local governments and Qualified Nonprofit Organizations for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws pursuant to Section 34019 (f)(3)(B) Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC).

The Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program funding for fiscal year 2024/25 is $13,000,000.00 statewide for the education, prevention, and the enforcement of laws related to driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs, including cannabis and cannabis products.

The intent of the program is to educate the public regarding the dangers of impaired driving, enforce impaired driving laws on the roadway, and improve the Pacifica Police Department’s effectiveness through training and development of new strategies.

DISCUSSION:

Over the last several years, 75 injury collisions occurred in Pacifica. The total number of collisions in 2023 was 168. When the data for all reported collisions was evaluated, almost 40% were caused by impaired driving. Nearly 50% of all the reported collisions resulted in persons being injured, with many of them due to impaired/DUI drivers.

In the last three years, the Pacifica Police Department has made approximately 260 arrests for people driving while impaired. This is notable as there was a 12.5% increase in DUI arrests from 2022 to 2023.

Due to low staffing levels and budgetary constraints, the police department does not have the capacity to staff a specialized traffic unit. Any special enforcement operation or public education 12 Packet Pg. 289
Pacifica City Council 2
August 12, 2024
presentation requires personnel to work overtime which is both costly and unsustainable. This grant award will enable the police department to fund saturation patrols, DUI checkpoints, and purchase a motorcycle necessary to conduct these effective interventions. The funds will also pay for educational presentations at our two local high schools.

Staff submitted a grant application requesting a total of $95,042.68 and received an award for the entire amount. The request included personnel costs for special enforcement/saturation patrols, educational presentations, and the cost of a new Harley Davidson police motorcycle.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Council may choose not to adopt the resolution. However, not doing so will make the City ineligible to receive Cannabis Tax grant funding for the purposes of impaired driving education and enforcement.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC GOAL 1:
• Enhance organizational and fiscal stability: Adopting the resolution will support the strategic initiative to pursue grant funding.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adopting the resolution authorizing the acceptance of $95,042.68 from the state of California’s Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program will bring this additional revenue to the City to be used for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws.

ORIGINATED BY:

Police Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Grant Application
12 Packet Pg. 290
Pacifica City Council 3
August 12, 2024
ORIGINATED BY:

Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Cannabis Tax Grant Application (PDF)
12 Packet Pg. 291
Pacifica City Council 4
August 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING THE

FILING OF APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF CANNABIS TAX FUND GRANT

PROGRAM FUNDS
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol has been delegated the responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program, setting up necessary procedures governing the application; and

WHEREAS, said procedures established by the California Highway Patrol require the Applicant to certify by resolution the approval of the application to the State; and WHEREAS, successful Applicants will enter into an agreement with the California Highway Patrol to complete the Grant Scope.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica approves the filing of an application for the Cannabis Tax Fund and Awarded Amount of $95,042.68; and

1. Certifies that said Applicant has or will have available, prior to commencement of any work on the project included in this application, the sufficient funds to complete the project if the grant is awarded; and

2. Certifies that if the project is awarded, the Applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the project, and

3. Certifies that the Applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the program regulations; and

4. Delegates the authority to the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion of the Grant Scope; and

5. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Vaterlaus, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 12 Packet Pg. 292
Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Prepared by Pacifica Police Department
for California Highway Patrol (CHP) Law Enforcement: Small and Mid-Size Organizations/Agencies FY2024/2025 Primary Contact: Steven Mansker

12.a
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Opportunity Details
Opportunity Information
Title
Law Enforcement: Small and Mid-Size Organizations/Agencies FY2024/2025 Description
Law Enforcement grants provide financial assistance to allied agencies for the education, prevention, and the enforcement of laws related to driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs, including cannabis and cannabis products.

The intent of the program is to educate the public regarding the dangers of impaired driving, enforce impaired driving laws on the roadway, and improve the Organization/Agency’s effectiveness through training and development of new strategies.

Awarding Agency Name
California Highway Patrol
Agency Contact Name
Cannabis Grants Unit (CGU)
Agency Contact Phone
916-843-4360
Agency Contact Email
[email protected]
Fund Activity Categories
Education, Law, Justice and Legal Services
Opportunity Manager
Cannabis Grants Unit (CGU)
Opportunity Posted Date
1/9/2024
Public Link
https://www.gotomygrants.com/Public/Opportunities/Details/468aa0b8-b253-4f24-b655-b0bf6cf72569 Is Published
Yes
Funding Information
Funding Sources
State
Funding Source Description
With the passage of Proposition 64 in 2016, The Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use Marijuana Act (AUMA), California voters mandated the state to set aside funding for the CHP to provide grants to local governments and Qualified Nonprofit Organizations for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws pursuant to Section 34019 (f)(3)(B) Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC).

Funding Restrictions
State Agencies/Departments, please refer to Section 34019 (f)(3)(B) RTC and California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13, for additional information.

Page 2 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Award Information
Award Range
$500,000.00 Ceiling
Award Period
07/01/2024 - 06/30/2025
Award Type
Competitive
Indirect Costs Allowed
No
Matching Requirement
No
Submission Information
Submission Timeline Type
One Time
Submission Timeline Additional Information
GRANT APPLICATIONS ARE DUE FEBRUARY23, 2024, BY5:00 PM PST Grant Applicants are advised to ask submittal questions well before the deadline. The Cannabis Grants Unit (CGU) cannot guarantee an immediate response and the Grant Management System (GMS) will automatically close at 5:00 PM PST. Once a Grant Application is submitted through the GMS, Grant Applicants may not add, edit, or delete any Grant Application information.

Question Submission Information
Question Submission Email Address
[email protected]
Eligibility Information
Eligibility Type
Public
Additional Eligibility Information
Small and Mid-Size Law Enforcement Organizations/Agencies, with the primary function of enforcing traffic laws, which includes responding to calls, making arrests, and issuing citations, pursuant to the California Penal Code, California Vehicle Code, and California Health and Safety Code
Small-Size Law Enforcement Organizations/Agencies: 100 employees or less Mid-Size Law Enforcement Organizations/Agencies: 500 employees or less Additional Information
Additional Information URL
https://www.chp.ca.gov/programs-services/programs/cannabis-tax-fund-grant-program Award Administration Information
State Award Notices
Awards will be announced in May and June 2024.

Page 3 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Administrative and National Policy Requirements
The California Highway Patrol (CHP) adopted regulations within Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 2, by adding Chapter 13, which govern the CHP, Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program.

These regulations outline:
* Grant Provisions
* Grant Project Types
* Specific Grant Application Requirements
* Grant Evaluation Criteria
* Necessary Administrative Procedures for the Program
Regulations can be found at:
https://www.chp.ca.gov/programs-services/programs/cannabis-tax-fund-grant-program/program-regulations Reporting
Quarterly Reporting is required and due within 14 calendar days after the close of each quarter.

Quarter One (Q1): July 1 - September 30
Quarter Two (Q2): October 1 - December 31
Quarter Three (Q3): January 1 - March 31
Quarter Four (Q4): April 1 - June 30
Other Information
Please ensure your Organization/Agency has the capability to electronically sign required documents (ex: Grant Agreement).

Page 4 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Project Information
Application Information
Application Name
Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Award Requested
$95,042.68
Total Award Budget
$95,042.68
Primary Contact Information
Name
Steven Mansker
Email Address
[email protected]
Address
2075 Coast Hwy
Pacifica, ca 94044
Phone Number
(650) 738-7419

Page 5 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Project Description

1. Organization/Agency Representatives
Organization/Agency Section/Unit (subdivision) to administer the Grant Agreement Pacifica Police Department
Organization/Agency Representative
Please complete the following fields with appropriate Organization/Agency representatives, as applicable.

The Authorized Official is authorized to enter into a Grant Agreement with signing authority.

The Authorized Financial Contact maintains financial records, documentation, and recipient of warrant.

The Administrative Contact is responsible for day-to-day administration.

Authorized Official Name (first and last)
Maria Sarasua
Authorized Official Title
Chief of Police
Authorized Official Address (street, city, state, zip code) 2075 Coast Highway, Pacifica CA 94044
Official Address to Receive Reimbursement Payment - MUST MATCH FI$CAL FORM (street, city, state, zip code) 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica, CA, 94044-3422
Authorized Official Phone Number (with area code)
650-738-7314
Authorized Official Email Address
[email protected]
Authorized Financial Contact Name (first and last)
Lucy Xie
Authorized Financial Contact Title
Deputy Director of Finance
Authorized Financial Contact Phone Number (with area code) 650-738-7395
Authorized Financial Contact Email Address
[email protected]
Administrative Contact Name (first and last)
Steven Mansker
Administrative Contact Title
Police Sergeant
Administrative Contact Phone Number (with area code)
650-738-7419
Administrative Contact Email Address

Page 6 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) [email protected]

Page 7 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

2. Senate/Assembly/Congressional/County Information
To determine the State Senate District(s), State Assembly District(s), and California Congressional District(s), copy and paste the below URL in your browser and search:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/CDEGIS::legislative-districts-in-california-2/about Select one or more State Senate District(s) where the proposed Project activities will occur. To make multiple selections, hold down the Ctrl key and click each one.

State Senate 13
Select one or more State Assembly District(s) where the proposed Project activities will occur. To make multiple selections, hold down the Ctrl key and click each one.

State Assembly 23
Select one or more California Congressional District(s) where the proposed Project activities will occur. To make multiple selections, hold down the Ctrl key and click each one.

California Congressional District 16
Select one or more California counties where the proposed Project activities will occur. To make multiple selections, hold down the Ctrl key and click each one.

San Mateo
Number of residents (population) that your Organization/Agency serves. 36517

Page 8 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

3. Statistical Data
Ensure the responses below are accurate and align with the statistical data provided within the Grant Application. If a question is not applicable, please input "0" or "N/A".

How many schools are in your jurisdiction?
Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools Colleges/Universities Number of Schools 7 2 3 0
How many law enforcement personnel are within your Organization/Agency? 33 Does your Organization/Agency have specifically designated traffic enforcement personnel who conduct driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement operations?
Yes
No
How often does your Organization/Agency conduct DUI enforcement activities (ex: DUISaturation Patrols, DUI Checkpoints)?
Weekly Average Monthly Average Yearly Average
Enforcement Activities 0 1 11
How many law enforcement personnel have attended Standard Field Sobriety Test (SFST), Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE), and/or Drug Recognition Evaluator (DRE) training?

SFST ARIDE DRE
Number of Trained Law Enforcement Personnel 28 14 6
How many certified DREs does your Organization/Agency currently have? 6 How many law enforcement personnel are certified SFST and/or DRE Instructors?

SFST DRE
Number of Certified Instructors 0 0
What in-service training does your Organization/Agency offer related to DUI/DUID? During the in-house/initial training at hire, we conduct 4-6 hours of DUI/SFST Training. Once an officer completes Field Training, We send them to SFST Training, ARIDE Training, and sometimes, Drug Recognition Training depending on the officers assignment or specific training need/request.

Is training conducted at your Organization/Agency or at an alternate facility? WithinOrganization/Agency
Alternate Facility
Do law enforcement personnel participate in training with local city attorneys and/or district attorneys? Yes
No
Grant Funded Equipment
Have Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program Grant Funds been utilized to purchase equipment (an acquisition cost of at

Page 9 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) least $5,000)?
Yes
No
If yes, list EACH equipment item and fiscal year of the Grant Agreement.

EXAMPLE ONLY
FY21-22 = Two Message Boards
FY22-23 =One DUI Vehicle

Page 10 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

4. Project Description
Project Types: Please select project type(s) applicable to your Project.

Law Enforcement Training
Public Education and/or Prevention
Enforcement Efforts
Provide a brief overview/synopsis (a paragraph) of the proposed Project. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

Having only .79 officers per 1000 residents versus the national average of 1.7 officers per 1000 residents, the Pacifica Police Department does not have the resources to deploy officers for the sole purpose of DUIEnforcement during their regular shifts. However, when officers are assigned to overtime details for the specific purpose of DUIEnforcement, Officers are typically very productive and complete the assignment with anywhere between 20-30 enforcement stops, multiple citations, and usually one-to-three arrests. While our officers are successful during these details, it is currently not feasible to have DUISaturation Patrols on a regular basis as the budgetary impact of this on the department is not financially feasible.

The Pacifica Police Department is seeking grant funding increase the frequency with which we can deploy officers on these details and to support the purchase of one Police Motorcycle in order to conduct the saturation patrols. Given that we currently have one motorcycle, this proposal would allow for two motor officers to be paired together during enforcement operations. This is not only more effective, but also provides for increased officer safety. The combined impact of a second dedicated motor unit and increased DUISaturation patrols would provide for a substantial increase in our DUI enforcement efforts.

Page 11 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

5. Problem Statement & Proposed Solution
Clearly identify the problem/need (Problem Statement) in your local community that will be addressed by the Project. Then, clearly identify the Proposed Solution to address the problem/need. If applicable, provide recent and high-level statistical data that directly supports the problem/need in your local community. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - EITHER TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD OR ATTACH DOCUMENT.

The City of Pacifica is a city of approximately 39,000 residents covering approximately 12 square miles along the coast of Northern California in the San Francisco Bay area. State Route 1 is the major highway that traverses the entire length of the city and is a major commuting route for residents of the City of Pacifica as well as other coastal communities to the north and south. State Route 35 also travels through a portion of Pacifica jurisdiction for a distance of 1.7 miles. In addition to commuters traveling through Pacifica, there is a substantial amount of tourist and visitor traffic, particularly during the summer months. Over time, traffic in and through the City of Pacifica has increased as the coastal communities have grown in population. At one time, it was rare to have traffic congestion through the City of Pacifica but this is now a regular occurrence, especially during morning and evening commutes. In recent years, there have been several instances where commute traffic was brought to a near standstill where it took in excess of 40 minutes to travel a distance of four miles on State Route 1. These traffic issues have stemmed from poorly timed road repairs and unfortunate crashes which blocked portions of the roadway. There have also been recent instances of road closures in other coastal communities which left State Route 1 as the only road open to access the coastal areas of our county.

This resulted in an exponential increase in traffic and traffic related issues in our community.

Over the last several years, we have been fortunate to maintain a low number of fatal crashes, however, we continue to see a high number of injury collisions (75) given our relatively small geographic footprint. The number of total collisions in 2023 was significantly higher than that with 168 being reported. When the data for all reported collisions was evaluated, almost two-fifths were caused by DUI’s. While these numbers may not be significant in comparison to a large city, they are significant in this case as the data shows nearly half of all the reported collisions resulted in persons being injured, with many of them due to DUI drivers.

In the last three years, the Pacifica Police Department has made approximately 260 arrests for people driving while impaired. This is notable as our most recent years data indicates a 12.5% increase in DUI arrests from 2022 to 2023.

The City of Pacifica is considered a "bedroom community" so there is very little industry or commercial activity to increase revenue. Due to a variety of financial issues over the years, the Pacifica Police Department has faced consistent budget cuts that have resulted in decreased staffing. Currently, the Pacifica Police Department has 33 authorized sworn officers compared to the 42 authorized positions it had previously. At this staffing level, the Pacifica Police Department has .79 sworn officers per 1000 residents. Over the last few years, the Pacifica Police Department has had several officers out at one time due to work related injuries and illnesses making our actual available staffing less than what is shown on paper. According to a 2017 report by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the national average for similarly sized police departments in the United States was 1.7 officers per 1000 residents. This equates to Pacifica having less the half the national average of officers than similarly sized cities. As a result, the only way the department can have dedicated DUIPatrols is on an overtime basis.

This funding request will enable the Pacifica Police Department to fund saturation patrols and purchase a motorcycle necessary to conduct the operations in order to address the issue of increased impaired driving in Pacifica. It will resolve the financial constraints that prevent the PD from currently conducting the saturation patrols.

Statistical Data/Report(s)

Page 12 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

6. Performance Measures/Scope of Work
Detail EACH Project activity/item below, which will serve as your goals and objectives for the Project. For EACH goal/objective, include estimated timelines (ex: monthly, quarterly), quantitative measurements (ex: reduction of DUI/DUID by %), and justification detailing how it will enhance/support the Project. NOTE: These goals and objectives must be consistent with the Budget. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD. 24 DUISaturation Patrols (Q1 = 6, Q2 = 6, Q3 = 6, Q4 = 6): Conduct 2 saturation patrols per month to reduce Pacifica PD's DUI Injury Collision rate by 20%, which will improve traffic safety for the commuting public. 1 Police Motorcycle (Q1 = Purchase, Q2 = Take Delivery, Q2-Q4 = Use for deployments/enforcement operations):

Purchase 1 motorcycle for a department total of 2, with the goal of utilizing it for enforcement efforts in order to reduce collisions, increase traffic safety, and provide a visible deterrence to potential impaired drivers. Pacifica PD aims to reduce DUI’s by at least last year's increase of 18%.

EXAMPLE ONLY
16 DUI Saturation Patrols (Q1 = 4, Q2 = 4, Q3 = 4, Q4 = 4): Aimto reduce DUI/DUID deaths by 10%, which will improve roadway safety in the community.
2 DUI Checkpoints (Q2 = 1, Q4 = 1): Aimto reduce DUI/DUID by 15%, which will reduce the number of impaired drivers in the community.
4 Message Boards for DUI Checkpoints and Educational Messaging (Q1 = Purchase, Q2 = Receive, Q2-Q4 = Use to complete DUI Checkpoints and education): We will utilize the Message Boards to notify the public of an approaching DUI Checkpoint. In between DUI Checkpoints, we will display educational messaging against driving under the influence.
4 Educational Presentations at local high schools (Q1 = 1, Q2 = 1, Q3 = 1, Q4 = 1): Aimto contact at least 100 students each quarter to increase awareness of driving under the influence. The presentations will educate students on the implications of driving impaired.

Page 13 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

7. Project Performance Evaluation
Provide the method of evaluation to show Project effectiveness and positive impact(s) on the community. These strategies shall include captured quantitative/qualitative data and a communication plan to share Project results with both internal and external stakeholders. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

In order to prove the effectiveness of this enforcement program, the department will maintain records/statistics for all enforcement details throughout the grant performance period. This data will be compared to the previous two years’ worth of data for the same time period (i.e. July 2022 to July 2023, July 2023 to July 2024). Data from the year with grant funding can then be compared to previous years without grant funding which will show how impactful the enforcement efforts have been. The departments current Record Management System allows for this data to be easily captured and shown through tables, charts, or graphs. Likewise, the department is currently implementing a new community facing web portal that will allow the community to access these types of records and search them, making the data readily available 24 hours a day.

Page 14 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

8. Program Sustainability
Describe the plan for reducing reliance on future grant funding. Include a summary and timeframe to continue efforts when grant funds are either not available or significantly reduced. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

Studies have shown that when enforcement efforts are increased during a specified time period, there is a correlating decrease in the issues being targeted. Several studies have shown that when enforcement efforts are increased or decreased by a measurable amount, 10 or 20% for example, the number of collisions during that time period and immediately following either increased or decreased nearly the exact same amount. This shows that an increase in efforts has a positive effect in reducing collisions whereas a decrease in enforcement efforts results in an increase in collisions. This effect carries over to various aspects of law enforcement, but specifically with DUI’s. The department would make full use of this grant funding to substantially increase our DUIEnforcement Efforts while simultaneously promoting the efforts and associated results on multiple social media platforms, through press releases, and through the use of our existing electronic sign boards. Once a measurable impact has been established, the department could slowly decrease the frequency with which we conduct Saturation patrols to the point where the details are being conducted during dates/times that are driven purely by measurable, statistical data. By that point, a targeted, measured response would allow us to continue having a high impact with less resources.

In addition, the purchase of a motorcycle will enable the PD to safely continue enforcement efforts in the future when funding is available to do so, without a recurring cost of vehicular equipment.

Page 15 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

9. Administrative Support
Describe the administrative support, including the Organization/Agency’s grant experience, personnel, and physical resources needed to successfully implement the Project. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

Sergeant Steven Mansker will be managing the grant. Sergeant Mansker has 18 years of law enforcement experience and has managed the Pacifica Police Departments OTS STEP Grant since 2015. He has been a member of the Pacifica Police Department's collision investigation team (CRASH) for nearly 15 years, and was the department's first DRE Officer. Under Sergeant Mansker's management, the Pacifica Police Department successfully met all of its grant requirements each year, with the exception of some objectives which could not be completed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sergeant Mansker has experience with actively managing officers assigned to grant funded details and operations, and ensuring that only those officers who are the most proactive and productive in regards to traffic and DUI enforcement are selected for grant funded enforcement activities. By taking this approach with thoughtful selection of officers, choosing statistic based dates and times for saturation patrols, PD has been able to maintain very productive enforcement campaigns in years past.

Our fiscal staff for the City of Pacifica will oversee the financial aspects of this grant, as well as any other grants the city may receive. Through their oversight and experience, they ensure we comply with all state and federal regulations.

Page 16 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

10. Other Grant Programs
Impaired Driving Enforcement Funding
Has your Organization/Agency previously received grant funding for impaired driving enforcement? Yes
No
If yes, detail the outcome. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

The Pacifica Police Department annually submits requests for traffic safety funding to the Office of Traffic Safety.

While the department is typically successful in obtaining some grant funding, the details within that grant are targeted more towards traffic enforcement efforts, with a lesser focus on the DUI aspect, and zero dollars towards vehicles. Our OTS grant funds two DUICheckpoints per year; one during the winter and one during the summer, which do receive a significant positive response from the community.

Other Grant Programs
Has or will your Organization/Agency submit a proposal to another grant program for this Project (ex: funds for the same components as this Project, or for similar/related components that will be completed during the same time period as this Project)?
Yes
No
If yes, detail the granting Organization/Agency. In addition, clearly distinguish which tasks would be funded by the CTFGP and which tasks would be funded by another Organization/Agency. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

Pacifica PD submitted a grant request for 2024 OTS funding for a limited number of DUISaturation Patrols. While the funding is similar, the OTS grant directs enforcement efforts to be during specific times, whereas with additional funding from CTFGP, our efforts could be more broadly applied and utilized during time periods that we deem as the most appropriate and beneficial. In addition, the motorcycle has been requested only from the CTFGP.

Are any personnel dedicated to this Project funded by other sources/grants? Yes
No
If yes, detail which source/grant. PLEASE DO NOT COPYAND PASTE TABLES IN FIELD - TYPE INFORMATION IN FIELD.

Page 17 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

11. Terms and Conditions
By submitting your Grant Application, you agree to the following Terms and Conditions:

I certify, under penalty of perjury, that the information I entered in this Grant Application is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I further understand that any false, incomplete, or incorrect statements may result in my disqualification from the grant process or dismissal from receiving grants funded by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program. I authorize the California Highway Patrol, Cannabis Grants Unit (CGU), to investigate referenced documents or other documents submitted to the program to check the accuracy of the information provided.

I agree with the Request for Application, the above Terms and Conditions, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13, Sections 1890.00 through 1890.27.

IAgree
When using the GMS (AmpliFund), I authorize the state to take my requested action by an electronic means and authorize the state to accept the combination of my User ID and password in lieu of my written signature.

IAgree
My password is unique to me and is to remain confidential. Iwill not allow other individuals to use my User ID and password to access the GMS (AmpliFund).

IAgree
It is my responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of GMS (AmpliFund) information.

IAgree
Once I submit the Grant Application, I am unable to add, edit, or delete anyGrant Application information.

IAgree
Confidentiality Notice: All documents submitted as a part of the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program Grant Application are public documents and may be subject to a request pursuant to the California Public Records Act. The CHP, CGU, cannot ensure the confidentiality of any information submitted in or with this Grant Application (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.).

IAgree
Generated Income Disclaimer: There will be no program income generated from this grant. Nothing in this Grant Application shall be interpreted as a requirement, formal or informal, that a particular law enforcement officer issue a specified or predetermined number of citations, in pursuance of the goals and objectives. Although special emphasis will be placed upon violations specific to this Grant Application, appropriate enforcement action will be taken for all observed violations.

IAgree
Financial Information Systemfor California Government Agency Taxpayer ID (FI$Cal Form) A FI$Cal Form is required for reimbursement. If the Grant Applicant does not have a completed FI$Cal Form at final Grant Application submission time, the Grant Applicant may submit the completed FI$Cal Form via email to CGU prior to execution of the Grant Agreement. NOTE: The “Remit-To Address" on the FI$Cal Form MUST match the “Official Address to Receive Reimbursement Payment” you entered in Form #1. Organization/Agency Representative. This address shall be the official address on file with FI$Cal and the State Controller’s Office (SCO) to receive warrants (Reimbursement Request Payments). Forms are located on the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program's website at https://www.chp.ca.gov/programs-services/programs/cannabis-tax-fund-grant-program.

IAgree
FI$Cal Form
Fi$cal_TaxPayor_ID_Form city of pacifica.pdf
City Council or County Resolution
A county, city, district, or other public body shall provide a copy of a resolution, order, motion, or ordinance of local governing body, which by law has the authority to enter into an agreement authorizing execution of a Grant Agreement. If the Grant Applicant does not have a signed resolution at final Grant Application submission time, the Grant Applicant may submit a signed resolution via email to CGU prior to execution of the Grant Agreement. NOTE: The resolution MUST explicitly state the Organization/Agency has delegated authority to enter into a Grant Agreement for the requested amount.

Page 18 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) IAgree

Page 19 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) Budget
Proposed Budget Summary
Expense Budget
Grant Funded Total Budgeted
Personnel
Saturation Patrols Officer Compensation $58,056.00 $58,056.00 Subtotal $58,056.00 $58,056.00
Equipment
Police Motorcycle $36,986.68 $36,986.68
Subtotal $36,986.68 $36,986.68
Total Proposed Cost $95,042.68 $95,042.68
Revenue Budget
Grant Funded Total Budgeted
Grant Funding
Award Requested $95,042.68 $95,042.68
Subtotal $95,042.68 $95,042.68
Total Proposed Revenue $95,042.68 $95,042.68
Proposed Budget Detail
See attached spreadsheet.

Proposed Budget Narrative
Personnel
Costs may include compensation for wages, such as overtime, and benefits (annual leave and sick leave) for work directly related to, and consistent with, the Project. Personnel hours will be awarded based on the number of grantfunded Project activities approved by CGU. To be eligible for reimbursement, personnel services must occur within the Project Performance Period. Please note, full salary positions are not allowed. Itemize separate Budget line items by Project activity (ex: one Budget line item for DUISaturation Patrol; one Budget line item for DUI Checkpoint). Combine wages and benefits in the same Budget line item for each Project activity. For EACH Budget line item, the narrative shall include the below: * Number of times Project activity will occur * Classification(s) working Project activity * Rate of pay for each classification working Project activity (notate regular or overtime pay) * Number of hours for each classification working Project activity EXAMPLE 16 DUISaturation Patrols = $9,600 2 Officers per patrol / Officer = OT $60 per hour 5 hours per patrol / 80 hours per Officer / 160 hours Saturation Patrols Officer Compensation
OT Rate = $120.95 per hour Detail Length = 10 hours # of Officers per Detail = 2 # of Details = 24 (2 per month over

Page 20 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval) grant performance period) $120.95 x 10 hrs x 2 officers = $2419.00 per detail x 24 details = $58,056.00 Equipment
Costs may include non-expendable, tangible, personal property having a normal useful life of more than one year, and an acquisition cost of at least $5,000 (ex: four identical assets, which cost $1,250 each, for a total of $5,000, are not considered an equipment purchase). Equipment shall be directly related and necessary to complete grantfunded activities included in the Project. Equipment should be purchased at the beginning of the Project Performance Period to ensure it is utilized when completing corresponding Project activities. If requesting equipment, the Project shall contain a correlating grant-funded Project activity (ex: Message Board for DUI Checkpoints). DUISaturation Patrol equipment approved by CGU may utilize eligible outfitting expenses, which only include emergency lights, sirens, radio, and transport partition (cage). To be eligible for reimbursement, equipment must be purchased and received within the Project Performance Period. Itemize separate Budget line items for each Equipment item. For EACH Budget line item, the narrative shall include the below: * Description of equipment item * Quantity * Unit cost and total cost
Police Motorcycle
Harley Davidson Electra-Glide Police Motorcycle

Page 21 of 21 ends

Pacifica Police Department 2024-2025 DUI Impact Grant
Pacifica Police Department

12.a
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Cannabis Tax Grant Application (5726 : Resolution - Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Approval)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
8/12/2024
1 SUBJECT:

Consultant Services Agreements for Mapping Update Services Between the City of Pacifica and Environmental Science Associates (ESA)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to adopt the attached resolution to approve the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and Environmental Science Associates (ESA) with a total amount of $102,200 for mapping update services associated with the City’s draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP); authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement and a budget amendment; and finding the action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).

STAFF CONTACT:

Stefanie Cervantes, AICP, Acting Deputy Director
(650) 738-7341
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The process to update the Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) has been ongoing since 2009. Since the fall of 2023, City Council has held several community meetings to discuss updates and changes needed to the LCLUP and has requested staff to update the Coastal Vulnerability Zone (CVZ) maps and create a Tsunami Inundation Zone (TIZ) map.

Staff has determined that updates to the CVZ maps and creation of the TIZ map would most efficiently be achieved by working with ESA, who originally created the CVZ maps in the LCLUP. While the City’s Purchasing Policy requires a solicitation of three bids, the City’s Purchasing Officer (City Manager) has approved the use of ESA because of the cost savings that will result from using a company that is already familiar with the project and services that the City requires and the City is familiar with ESA’s work. The Agreement for Consultant Services (“Agreement”) would provide a cost ceiling of $102,200 (Attachment 1). The term of the Agreement is proposed to be twelve (12) weeks. The proposed Agreement will provide a comprehensive update to the CVZ maps and create a TIZ map. Based on this timeline, it is likely the final maps will be available prior to California Coastal Commission action on the City’s updated LCLUP. However, the City Manager recommends delaying execution of the agreement until if/when the City Council approves the modified LCLUP for submission to the Coastal Commission since expedited map update work is not necessary if the LCLUP is not updated.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Do not authorize the Agreement. An action to not authorize the Agreement will result in the City using outdated maps when implementing the LCLUP.

Do not authorize the Agreement and require solicitation of three bids. An action to not authorize 13 Packet Pg. 314
Pacifica City Council 2
August 12, 2024
the Agreement and solicit three bids will result in a longer timeline to update the maps. The City will need to go through a time-consuming Request for Proposal process.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

The tasks being performed by ESA are directly associated with the following item(s) in the Council-adopted Strategic Plan and Priority Work Plan for FY 2023-24:
• Goal 4: Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. o Strategy C: Update Pacifica’s Local Coastal Plan and improve communications and collaboration with the California Coastal Commission.

CEQA:

The approval of the agreement with ESA to provide mapping update services associated with the draft LCLUP is exempt from review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the services that will be provided by ESA to update the maps will have a significant effect on the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The FY 2024-25 Budget included $50,000 for the cost of a mapping update. The FY 2024-25 Budget will need to be amended to appropriate additional funds of $52,000 from the unappropriated General Fund balance to fund this project. If approved, staff will incorporate this budget amendment during the mid-year budget adjustment.

ORIGINATED BY:

Planning Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (PDF) 13 Packet Pg. 315
Pacifica City Council 3
August 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING AN

AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES (ESA) FOR AN AMOUNT OF $102,200 FOR MAPPING UPDATE SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY’S DRAFT LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN (LCLUP); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND FINDING. THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Purchasing Policy (Administrative Policy No. 76), the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to enter into an agreement with Environmental Science Associates (“ESA”) for mapping update services associated with the City’s draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP); and
WHEREAS, updating maps in the City’s draft LCLUP is critical for the implementation of the document.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby resolves as follows:
1) This action is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.) because it is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the services that will be provided by ESA to update the maps will have a significant effect on the environment.
2) The agreement is hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute the agreement with ESA in the amount of $102,000.
3) The FY 2024-25 Budget for this project includes $50,000 and is hereby amended to appropriate the additional funds in the amount of remaining $52,000 from the undesignated General Fund balance to fund the project.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 12th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

Sue Vaterlaus, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
13 Packet Pg. 316
Pacifica City Council 4
August 12, 2024
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 13 Packet Pg. 317
July 29, 2024 City of Pacifica 1
environmental science associates
Proposal
City of Pacifica Coastal Hazard Mapping Updates
Per the City of Pacifica’s (City) request, ESA
developed this scope and fee to update the City’s
coastal hazard maps as part of its current Local
Coastal/Land Use Plan (LCLUP) update process.

Project Understanding
As part of the City’s current efforts in the LCLUP
process, we understand that the City wants to
update the coastal flood, erosion, and tsunami
hazard maps for existing and future conditions with
sea level rise using the best available science and
information. ESA developed coastal hazards maps
as part of the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP)
update in 2018. ESA developed the maps in
compliance with the Ocean Protection Council’s
(OPC) 2018 State of California Sea Level Rise
Guidance, which was the best available science at
the time that the work was completed, as well as
the best available existing modeling and mapping,
including USGS CoSMoS flooding and wave hazards
maps, Pacific Institute erosion hazards, and
additional refined calculations of erosion hazards.

Since publication of the 2018 hazard maps, the
State updated the sea level rise guidance, and the
CoSMoS hazard maps were updated by the USGS to
include coastal erosion hazards and refined coastal
flood hazards. In general, the current CoSMoS flood
hazard maps show less flooding than the maps that
were available at the time of the 2018 mapping
effort. ESA has also refined the methods and
equations of our in-house erosion hazard model to
estimate bluff erosion hazards, which generally
show less erosion than earlier generations of the
ESA model used in the 2018 mapping. Based on our
review of the CoSMoS erosion hazards maps along
the City’s shore, additional refinement of the
erosion hazard mapping is warranted to inform
planning decisions.

We also understand that the City would like to show
maps depicting tsunami hazards for a range of risk
levels. Recent advances in tsunami modeling were
used by the State to develop the California Tsunami
Hazard Maps, which are intended for emergency
and evacuation planning. This scenario uses a very
extreme tsunami event with a very low likelihood.

However, additional data sets from the State’s
study are available that show inundation associated
with more likely events that align with expectations
for community planning (i.e., lower return period).

The proposed scope of work below is limited to
updating the City’s sea level rise and tsunami
hazard exposure maps and does not include an
updated vulnerability assessment.

Scope of Services
We have presented a scope of work to update
hazard maps and support the City with a series of
base and optional tasks. We aligned the base scope
of work to target the available budget of $50,000
PREPARED FOR:

CITY OF PACIFICA
JULY 29, 2024
ESA CONTACT: LOUIS WHITE, PE, (415) 262-2351, [email protected]

13.a
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) City of Pacifica Coastal Hazard Mapping Updates
2 esassoc.com
and identified optional tasks that could be funded
subsequently when additional resources are
available. ESA welcomes discussion of the scope to
refine the work to best meet the needs of the City.

Task 1 Project Initiation
ESA will meet with the City to initiate the project
and conduct review of background materials to
inform the following analyses/tasks. Outcomes of
this task will be documented in Task 3 Reporting.

This task includes the following:
• Review of background material (City
vulnerability assessment, LCP update, etc.)
• Project kickoff meeting
• Establishing project goals and objectives
• Review and summarize updated sea level rise
guidance and implications for Pacifica
Task 2 Coastal Hazards
ESA will collect and summarize existing data
regarding sea level rise and coastal hazards in order
to update the City’s coastal hazard maps.
• Coastal Hazard Mapping – latest available
coastal flooding and erosion maps from USGS
CoSMoS for existing conditions and two future
sea level rise scenarios (e.g. 2050 and 2100).
• Groundwater mapping – New state guidance
recommends consideration of groundwater
levels with sea level rise, especially for low lying
areas. USGS CoSMoS groundwater maps are
available for the same sea level rise scenarios
listed above.
• Wave Hazards – We will develop a general
description of wave hazards through the
project site that can be quantified under
Optional Task 6.
• Tsunami Mapping – The California Tsunami
Hazard Maps prepared for emergency planning
include less extreme scenarios of tsunami
hazards, which may be better suited for
informing coastal planning.

ESA will develop new coastal hazard maps for the
City that incorporate the newly compiled hazard
maps listed above. Following the LCP Update map
format, each map set will consist of a series of five
individual maps that depict the various sub-areas in
the City. ESA will also compile tsunami mapping
data for a range of tsunami likelihood/intensity. We
will provide a summary in Task 3 Reporting that
describes the data and provides background
information on tsunami preparedness guidance.

Hazard maps will be developed to show the
following coastal hazards:
• Coastal Flooding and Erosion – one set for
existing conditions and each future sea level
rise amount (three sets total)
• Groundwater – one set for existing conditions,
one set for 2100 (there are limited changes
shown in the intermediate SLR scenarios)
• Tsunami – one set for existing conditions.

Task 2 Deliverables
• Draft and final coastal hazard maps based on
one set of consolidated City comments.

Task 3 Reporting
ESA will document the technical tasks and hazard
mapping updates in a brief technical report. The
technical report will include summary of sea level
rise guidance update, hazard data sources, the
updated sea level rise hazard maps, and describe
technical methods for tsunami analysis.

Task 3 Deliverables
• Draft and final report based on one set of
consolidated City comments.

Task 4 Project Management
ESA will provide project coordination to support the
technical tasks and overall progress of work,
including project meetings. This task includes the
following:
• Project management (budget and schedule
tracking, invoicing, staffing etc.)
• Regular check-ins with City staff

13.a
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) City of Pacifica Coastal Hazard Mapping Updates
July 29, 2024 City of Pacifica 3
environmental science associates
Optional Tasks
Optional Task 5 Agency and
City Meetings
With additional budget, ESA can support the City by
preparing for and attending the following meetings
as needed/requested:
• CA Coastal Commission meetings
• City Council meetings
Optional Task 6 Update Wave
Run-up Hazard Zones
As part of the hazard mapping updates, we
recommend computing wave hazard zones for
existing and future conditions with sea level rise
(e.g., FEMA high velocity flood zones). Wave run-up
hazard data are needed to supplement the available
USGS CoSMoS coastal flood mapping. ESA will
apply total water level data from USGS and
methods ESA developed for the Technical Methods
Manual to model and map future wave hazards.

Optional Task 7 Update Erosion
Hazard Zones
ESA recommends developing updated erosion
hazard zones and maps to support City planning.

We will apply its updated methodology for
projecting coastal bluff erosion that utilizes recent
total water level data and improves upon the
methods used to develop Pacific Institute mapping
used for the City’s LCP Update.

Optional Task 8 Update
Webmaps
If desired, ESA will update the City’s existing sea
level rise hazard map web viewers with new hazard
maps developed for this study. ESA can add/replace
the updated hazard mapping to each of the two
web viewers we prepared for the City LCP Update:
• Asset Data and Hazard Zone GIS-webviewer
• Multi-Scenario Hazard GIS-webviewer
Budget
Table 1 provides estimated budget for each of the
base and optional tasks described above. As it is
difficult to estimate the level of effort required for
this scope, we recommend compensation on a time
and materials basis, not to exceed the total
estimated budget of $50,000 without prior
authorization. Please note that actual distribution
of charges may differ from Table 1. ESA will invoice
monthly for actual time and materials according to
our standard rate schedule in effect at the time the
work is performed. We have attached a provisional
rate schedule for work that we anticipate will be
performed in 2024 (Exhibit B).

TABLE 1. ESTIMATED BUDGET BY TASK
Task Description Estimated
Budget
1 Project Initiation $8,000
2 Coastal Hazards $27,000
3 Reporting $10,000
4 Project Management $5,000
Total Base Tasks $50,000
OPT 6 Agency & City Meetings $8,000
OPT 7 Update Wave Run-up $20,000
OPT 8 Update Erosion $20,000
OPT 9 Update Webmaps $4,000
Total Base+Optional Tasks $102,000
Schedule
A preliminary schedule is presented in the attached
Table 2. Please note that significant delays in the
project schedule could affect our ability to perform
the work within the budget presented herein.

TABLE 2. PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE
Task Description Duration,
weeks
Completion,
weeks from
Start
1 Project Initiation 2 2
2 Coastal Hazards 8 10
3 Reporting 4 12
4 Project Mgt. 12 12

13.a
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) 1 EXHIBIT B
Environmental Science Associates &
Subsidiaries: 2024 Schedule of Fees
I. Personnel Category Rates
Charges will be made at the Category hourly rates set forth below for time spent on project management, consultation or meetings related to the project, field work, report preparation and review, travel time, etc. Time spent on projects in litigation, in depositions and providing expert testimony will be charged at the Category rate times 1.5.

LABOR CATEGORY BILLING
STEP I

BILLING

STEP II

BILLING

STEP III

BILLING

STEP IV

BILLING
STEP V

BILLING

STEP VI
Senior Principal
Consultant
$255 $282 $311 $341 $371 $401
Principal Consultant $210 $238 $265 $293 $321 $349
Managing Consultant $189 $211 $234 $256 $278 $300
Senior Consultant $155 $171 $192 $212 $233 $253
Associate Consultant $137 $151 $164 $177 $190 $203
Consultant $104 $117 $129 $143 $156 $169
Project Technician $75 $97 $119 $142 $164 $186
(a) The range of rates shown for each staff category reflects ESA staff qualifications, expertise and experience levels. These rate ranges allow our project managers to assemble the best project teams to meet the unique project requirements and client expectations for each opportunity.
(b) From time to time, ESA retains outside professional and technical labor on a temporary basis to meet peak workload demands. Such contract labor may be charged at regular Employee Category rates.
(c) ESA reserves the right to revise the Personnel Category Rates periodically to reflect changes in its operating costs.

II. ESA Expenses
A. Travel Expenses

1. Transportation
a. Company vehicle – fixed rate + fee for mileage in excess of 100 miles. b. Common carrier or car rental – actual expense multiplied by 1.15 c. If company vehicle is to be used in off-road conditions, a daily $15 use fee will be added to the standard daily vehicle rate.

2. Lodging, meals and related travel expenses – direct expenses multiplied by 1.15

13.a
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) ESA 2024 Schedule of Fees
2 B. Technology and Data Management Fee
Non-travel expenses incurred for the duration of the agreement for project support but not itemized below. Project labor charges multiplied by 3%. Fee encompasses the following:

1. Ongoing long-term retention and retrieval, management, and security of project-related data.

2. Proprietary tools, cloud data services, data science and AI capabilities as required for project delivery.

C. Cloud-based Services

ITEM RATE/HOUR RATE/DAY RATE/WEEK RATE/MONTH
Cloud-based Services
Nearmap High Resolution Images $55/image
ArcGIS Online Hosting (Web Maps/Apps) $225
Website Hosting $200
Custom Application & Services Hosting* $300*
Modeling (GeoHECRAS, TUFLOW, Delft3D) + Drone
Processing
$7 $160 $950 $3,900
Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT)
Processing
$13 $190 $1,120 $4,600
*includes support for database, SSL, IT support – costs vary by project. Contact software development services for firm pricing.

D. Printing/Reproduction Rates
If a weekly or monthly rate is not provided, equipment usage is billed at a daily rate.

ITEM RATE/PAGE SAMPLE PRICING
Black & White – 8.5 x 11 $0.15
Black & White – 11 x 17 $0.30
Color – 8.5 x 11 $0.50
Color – 11 x 17 $0.80
B&W – Plotter (Toner – ECO Quality) $0.50/sf 24x36 B/W CAD drawing would cost $3 per sheet
B&W – Plotter (Toner – Presentation
Quality)
$1.25/sf 24x36 B/W CAD drawing would
cost $7.50 per sheet
Color – Plotter (Inkjet – ECO Quality) $2.50/sf 24x36 Color Drawing would cost $15 per sheet
Color – Plotter (Inkjet – Presentation
Quality)
$5.00/sf 24x36 Color Drawing would cost
$30 per sheet
CD $10.00
Digital Photography $20.00 (up to 50 images)
All Other Items
(including bindings and covers)
At cost plus 10%

13.a
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) ESA 2024 Schedule of Fees
3 E. Equipment Rates

ITEM RATE/DAY RATE/WEEK RATE/MONTH
Project Specific Equipment:

Vehicles – Standard size (no off-road usage) $ 100a $ 500a Vehicles – 4x4 /Truck (light duty) 150a
Vehicles – 4x4 /Truck (heavy duty) 175a
Vehicles – ATV 150
Noise Meter 115
Hydroacoustic Noise Monitoring Equipment 175
Satellite Phone 15 70 250
Electrofisher 350 1,750
Field Traps 50
Digital Hypsometer (Nikon) 25
Backpack Sprayer 30
360-Degree 4k Camera 35 175
High Resolution Time-Lapse Camera 20 100 350
Beach Seine 60
Otter Trawl 115
Wildlife Acoustics Bat Detector 125 400
Wildlife Trail Camera 30 100
Fiber Optic Endoscope 150 750
Spotting Scope 50 200
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 25
Topographic/Bathymetric Survey Equipment:

Total Station 300
UAV/Drone 300 1,500
RTK-GPS 300
RTK-GPS Smartnet Subscription 75
Hypack Survey Software 150
Laser/Auto Level 50
Single-Beam Echoshounder 150 600
Sidescan Sonar 200
1m GNSS Data Collection System 85 425 1,700
Sub-meter GNSS Data Collection System 115
Sub-foot Data Collection System 230
Garmin GPS or equivalent 30
Hydrologic Data Collection, Water Current, Level and Wave Measurement Equipment:

ISCO 2150 Area Velocity Flow Logger $ 50 $ 300 $ 800
SonTek IQ-Plus Area Velocity Flow Logger 100 500 1,500
Logging Rain Gage 10 50 200
Hand-Held Current Meter 50
Surface Velocity Radar 50
Wave Pressure Sensor 115 460
Wave Buoy 175 700
Sonic Wave Sensor 35 175 500
Logging Water Level - Pressure Transducer 125
Logging Barometric Pressure Logger 60
Well Probe / Water Level Meter 25
Bottom-Mounted Tripod / Mooring 30 150 400
Stormwater Crest Sampler 20
Radar Wave Sensor with Logger Box 150 300 1000
Water Quality Equipment:

Logging Turbidimeter/Water Level Recorder $ $ $ 400
Logging Conductivity/Water Level Recorder 250
Recording Conductivity Meter w/Datalogger 20 60 200
Hand-Held Turbidimeter 50 200
Hand-Held Salinity Meter or pH meter 35
Logging Salinity Gauge 150
Logging DO/Temp Probe 150

13.a
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report) ESA 2024 Schedule of Fees
4 ITEM RATE/DAY RATE/WEEK RATE/MONTH
Logging Water Quality Sonde 1 Sensor 50 200 700
Logging Water Quality Sonde 2 Sensor 65 250 800
Logging Water Quality Sonde 3 Sensor 75 300 900
Logging Water Quality Sonde 4 Sensor 90 350 1,000
Telemetry System Hardware 125
Water Quality Multi-Probe Depth Profiler 200
Niskin Water Sampler 50
ISCO 6712 Portable Sampler w/ISCO 2105 Module 60 350 900 Sedimentation / Geotechnical Equipment:

Peat Corer $ 85
60lb Helly-Smith Bedload Sampler 200
Mini-Ponar Grab Sampler 50
DH-76 Suspended Sediment Sampler 100
D-96 Suspended Sediment Sampler 200
Bridge Crane 150
RSET 50
AMS Soil Sampling Kit 50
Hand-Held Helley-Smith Bedload Sampler 30
Guelph Permeameter 60
Sludge Sampler 60
Shear Strength Vane 60
Handheld DH-48 Suspended Sediment Sampler 30
Boats:

Small Watercraft $ 50 $ 200
15’-17’ Boat 350 1,200
20’-21’ Boat 400 1,800
22’-25’ Boat 500 2,000
Houseboat Floating Laboratory 4,500
a Actual project charges will include the daily rate plus $0.75 per beyond 100 miles III. Subcontracts
Subcontract services will be invoiced at cost multiplied by 1.15.

IV. Other
The fees above do not include sales tax. Any applicable or potential sales tax will be charged when appropriate.

V. Payment Terms
Unless otherwise agreed in writing, ESA will submit invoices on a monthly basis. Any unpaid balances shall draw interest at one and one half percent (1.5%) per month or the highest rate allowed by law, whichever is lower, commencing thirty (30) days after date of invoice. All invoices not contested in writing within fifteen (15) business days of receipt are deemed accepted by Client as true and accurate and Client thereafter waives any objection to Clients invoices, which are payable in full.

13.a
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment 1 - ESA Proposal - Pacifica Coastal Hazards Update - 2024-07-29 (5728 : ESA contract Staff Report)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
8/12/2024
1 SUBJECT:

Modifications to the City of Pacifica’s Revised Certification Draft Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP), including the Special Resiliency Area policies, and direction to staff regarding alternative modifications.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive a presentation from staff and discuss and confirm list of alternative modifications to the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP.

STAFF CONTACT:

Stefanie Cervantes, AICP, Acting Deputy Director
(650) 738-7341
[email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City has been updating its Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) since 2009. In February 2020 the City Council approved and submitted its Certification Draft LCLUP to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification. In March of 2023, the CCC submitted modifications to the City’s Certification Draft LCLUP. Most recently in 2023 and 2024, the City has undertaken a community engagement strategy to inform the community and City Council about the LCLUP Update process and steps that could be considered to respond to California Coastal Commission (CCC) staff suggested modifications. Completion of the LCLUP Update would advance Goal 4, Strategy C of the City Council’s 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan: Update Pacifica’s Local Coastal Plan and improve communications and collaboration with the California Coastal Commission.

The City Council has held Special Meetings in April, May and June of 2024 to complete a detailed discussion of alternative modifications that City staff has proposed in response to the CCC staff’s suggested modifications released in March 2023. During the special meetings, City Council was able to discuss the alternative modifications in all chapters, including the first half of Chapter 6, and the glossary.

Although this meeting was noticed as a public hearing to adopt the resolution for the LCLUP, due to a late transmission from the CCC staff, this meeting will instead be held to continue to discuss the alternative modifications in Chapter 6 and the glossary and confirm the list of alternative modifications supported by the City Council. Once confirmed by Council, staff will schedule adoption of the resolution in Attachment A at a subsequent City Council meeting.

INTRODUCTION:

Pacifica Needs an Updated LCLUP
The California Coastal Act requires every city along the coast to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP), which consists of two parts: a Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) and an 14 Packet Pg. 325
Pacifica City Council 2
August 12, 2024
Implementation Plan (IP). The LCLUP must be consistent with the Coastal Act. The LCLUP must specify the intended uses of land within the Coastal Zone, and serves as a policy framework for future actions, such as development review and City infrastructure projects. The LCLUP must balance statewide interests for the Coastal Zone as expressed in the Coastal Act with local land use priorities. The LCLUP also guides the contents of the IP, which consists of the zoning ordinance, zoning map, and other policies and programs to implement the LCLUP.

The City’s LCLUP currently in effect was last comprehensively updated in 1980 (“1980 LCLUP”). While the LCLUP is separate from the General Plan, much of the descriptive text and policies overlap between both documents due to their similar purposes of specifying land uses, establishing goals and policies, and providing a policy framework for future actions.

There are many benefits to having an updated LCLUP. These include, but are not limited to, accurate maps, modernized policies to guide development, enhanced environmental protections, strengthened economic development and housing policies, and consistency with the City’s 2040 General Plan. Achieving consistency with the City’s General Plan, which the City Council comprehensively updated in July 2022, will become increasingly challenging over time if a corresponding LCLUP Update is not completed. Also, whenever a conflict between the 2040 General Plan and the 1980 LCLUP occurs, the 1980 LCLUP’s policies will prevail.

Staff’s assessment is that the 1980 LCLUP is not adequate to continue guiding the City’s actions in the Coastal Zone on a long-term basis. Many objectives of the 1980 LCLUP have been accomplished, such as protection of key beach and open space areas and formalization of public coastal access in many locations, while its assessments of some coastal neighborhoods are no longer reflective of the challenges and needs of those areas. Moreover, the 1980 LCLUP does not do enough to help Pacifica plan for the future. The plan is over 40 years old, and importantly, the 1980 LCLUP does not effectively identify climate change and sea level rise (SLR) as major issues that need to be addressed.

The City Council has recognized since at least 2009 that an update was needed, and started the process at that time. Yet, despite 15 years with various starts and stops in the process, the update is not yet completed. As more time passes, the need for an update continues to grow, and the problems the LCLUP seeks to address will only become more complex. The City Council has demonstrated the capacity to tackle difficult challenges in recent years, and has used lessons learned during community planning processes to inform subsequent planning and implementation activities, as exhibited in the following:
• The General Plan Update, which identified a community desire for in-fill, mixed-use development, preservation of open spaces, enhancement of parks and other community facilities, and improved planning to address hazard mitigation and evacuation from wildfires and other events, among other priorities.
• The Sharp Park Specific Plan (SPSP), which creates a plan for the historic Sharp Park neighborhood to enhance it as a regional destination and active neighborhood center. • The Housing Element Update, which demonstrated the need to plan for more than 2,000 housing units, while undertaking other supporting actions to accelerate housing approvals and provide services for the neediest members of our community. • The Economic Opportunities Study, which identified ways for the City to strengthen its fiscal position so it can continue to provide high-quality services, infrastructure, and facilities to meet community needs.

The priorities identified in the above-referenced planning documents cannot meaningfully move forward in the Coastal Zone while limited by the 1980 LCLUP. An updated LCLUP is needed to address these emerging community priorities while also addressing issues that are all the more 14 Packet Pg. 326
Pacifica City Council 3
August 12, 2024
pressing in the Coastal Zone such as climate change and SLR adaptation. While significant City staff resources continue to be absorbed by the LCLUP Update process, work on those other community priorities cannot proceed effectively. Housing Element implementation, pursuing economic development initiatives, planning for City infrastructure and facilities, etc., can all advance much more efficiently once an updated LCLUP is in place. Completion of the LCLUP Update is also needed before staff can focus on pursuing CCC certification of the Sharp Park Specific Plan (SPSP), which combined with redevelopment of 2212 Beach Boulevard (a major economic opportunity site for the City) will provide a major boost to the Palmetto Avenue commercial corridor and enhance the City as a visitor destination. Implementation SPSP is on hold until the LCLUP and, subsequently, SPSP are certified by the CCC.

Lastly, an update to Pacifica’s LCLUP to account for SLR is inevitable. State law, as enacted in late 2023 with Senate Bill (SB) 272, now requires LCLUPs throughout California to be updated to include a plan to address SLR.

Based on this information, staff’s assessment is that completion of the LCLUP Update as expeditiously as possible and consistent with the 2040 General Plan is in the City’s best interest.

DISCUSSION:

1. Community Engagement
Community engagement has been a significant component of the LCLUP Update process, particularly the latest phase occurring in 2023 and 2024. The City Council has expanded the community engagement plan it initially approved with three meetings into a four-meeting plan, with potential for a fifth meeting. This August 12 meeting is the second iteration of “Meeting #5,” effectively resulting in an eight-meeting community engagement plan, and continues the discussion of alternative modifications proposed by City staff that started on April 15. Additional information on the City’s work to update the LCLUP and the community engagement plan is available in the City Council agenda reports for the City Council meetings on October 9, 2023 (Agenda Item No. 10), November 13, 2023 (Agenda Item No. 1), December 5, 2023 (Agenda Item No. 1), March 2, 2024 (Agenda Item No. 1), April 15, 2024 (Agenda Item No. 1), April 22, 2024 (Agenda Item No. 6), May 23, 2024 (Agenda Item No. 1), and June 26, 2024 (Agenda Item 1). The March 2, 2024 report includes detailed case studies that describe specific scenarios that could result from application of different potential LCLUP policies in the Coastal Zone and responses to almost 150 questions submitted by the public. Additionally, the May 23, 2024 report includes responses to over 100 questions received by the public and City Council.

This community engagement process is intended to conclude the comprehensive LCLUP update process that started nearly 15 years ago. It involves concluding the LCLUP update process based on the structure and policy emphasis approved by the City Council in the 2020 LCLUP, with consideration of alternative modifications to certain policies as an alternative to the CCC staff’s suggested modifications from March 2023 (i.e., the “alternative modifications”). This process is not a reconsideration of policy emphasis or direction that was approved in the 2020 LCLUP (and continued in the Revised LCLUP) and instead is focused on specific changes to LCP policies that will ensure CCC certification.

The purpose of the LCLUP Update process and community engagement process is to bring the Council and community to a point of understanding the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications so an informed decision can be made on whether to approve the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications. This is a necessary step to conclude the comprehensive LCLUP update process that was started in 2009 and most recently included incorporation of conforming General Plan amendments in October 2023. Consideration 14 Packet Pg. 327
Pacifica City Council 4
August 12, 2024
of a resolution to propose alternative modifications that may be acceptable to the CCC is the best and most expedient way for the City to seek CCC certification of the LCLUP in a form that is acceptable to the CCC and the City Council.

The need for transmittal of alternative modifications by resolution arose during a City-CCC staff coordination meeting after LCLUP Meeting #3 on March 2, 2024. At the coordination meeting, CCC staff relayed that further internal discussions at the CCC concluded that transmittal by resolution was required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 30510 which states, in part, that “a proposed local coastal program may be submitted to the [CCC]” only if it is submitted “pursuant to a resolution adopted by the local government...” Staff has prepared the draft resolution included as Attachment A which will serve as the mechanism for transmittal of the alternative modifications to the CCC once they are finalized by the City Council. Adoption of the resolution would be considered at a subsequent City Council meeting.

2. Follow-up Items from June Meeting
Staff noted several points in City Council’s discussion at the June meeting that required followup. Items that were identified in the April and May meetings were discussed in the June 26 report. At the June 26 meeting, there were some additional points identified, which are discussed below.

A. Changes to 2040 General Plan Consistent Text
During the June 2024 CCC review of the entire Revised LCLUP document, CCC suggested several revisions to 2040 General Plan (GP) consistent text. 2040 GP consistent text was incorporated in October of 2023. As stated in the June 26, 2024 report, staff reviewed the CCC staff requests to amend the GP language and determine the following: (1) updates to introductory or background text should be done to both the 2040 GP and LCLUP documents at a later date, (2) some requested edits to GP consistent text should be made to be consistent with the Coastal Act, (3) some requested edits to GP consistent text should be made to address internal inconsistency, etc.; and (4) some requested edits to GP consistent text should not be made. During the June 26 meeting, City Council expressed interested in obtaining more details regarding the last two determinations. CCC staff requested edits to GP consistent text to address internal inconsistencies in the LCLUP document, these edits have now been added to the Attachment B Summary Table and are shown with modification numbers GP1, GP2, etc.

The Summary Table provides a brief explanation as to why staff agrees with removal and/or modifications of the text.

B. Exemptions of Minor Projects
As previously discussed, the California Coastal Act requires to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP), which consists of two parts: a Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) and an Implementation Plan (IP). The LCLUP guides the contents of the IP, which consists of the zoning ordinance, zoning map, and other policies and programs to implement the LCLUP. The policies within the LCLUP are generally applied to the City’s process, City projects, and Coastal Development Permits. While the LCLUP contains a definition for Development, it is important to highlight that not all development requires a Coastal Development Permit. As outlined in PMC section 9-4.4303, there are exemptions and categories of excluded development, which allow minor development that will not impact coastal resources to be approved without a Coastal Development Permit. Once the City’s obtains certification of the LCLUP, staff will be able to further update and refine the IP, including sections related to exemptions and categories of excluded development. It is also important to note that these exemptions and categories of excluded development are only applicable to the areas within the City’s permit jurisdiction. 14 Packet Pg. 328
Pacifica City Council 5
August 12, 2024
C. Follow-up Items from April and June Meeting
During several of the last meetings, there were follow-up items that the Council wanted to discuss further. The June 26 report further detailed those items; however, due to lack of time some of those items were not discussed during the meeting and Council was not able to confirm the proposed staff recommended alternative modification. Those items include several policies in Chapter 6, starting at CR-I-20 (previously CR-I-44) Siting and Design and including the Special Shoreline Resiliency Area (SSRA). The items also include further Coastal Act compliance Modifications to LD-I-5 Lower Cost Visitor and Recreational Facilities; LD-I- 9 Coastal- Dependent Industry; and NH-I-3 Fault Zone.

As previously stated, staff has reviewed these modifications and believes they are necessary to ensure Coastal Act compliance and certification of the LCP document. These alternative modifications have been added to the attached Summary Table with a brief explanation and staff recommends that the City Council accept the changes. Both City and Coastal staff have worked closely to ensure that the additional modifications are consistent with the Coastal Act and with the goals of both agencies. Staff is prepared to discuss the remaining of Chapter 6, including the SSRA policies, and other policies changes as highlighted above during the August 12 meeting.

1. Additional Follow-up on Maps
At several of the previous meetings, the Council had directed staff to complete map updates to Figure 3-1 and provide a draft Tsunami Inundation Zone (TIZ) Map. Staff has been able to dedicate resources to both of these efforts and these maps are included within Attachment C.

Figure 3-1 has been replaced and the draft Tsunami Inundation Zone Map has been added to Chapter 6. The draft TIZ map was created using limited staff resources. There is an item on the August 12, 2024 agenda to execute a contract for updating mapping services, which includes the creation of a final TIZ map.

D. Additional Alternative Modifications
Prior to June 26, 2024 meeting, CCC staff suggested additional alternative modifications to the document. In general, staff is in support of the modifications to address redundancies, typos, and formatting issues and provide further policy clarity and they were incorporated into Summary Table with a brief explanation and staff recommends that the City Council accept the changes. However, staff had noted remaining items. Since the June 26 meeting, City and CCC staff were able to meet to discuss the last remaining items and CCC staff provided written comments on August 6, 2024, see Attachment D. The August 6 letter provides more reasoning for certain requested General Plan consistent text changes and recommended alternative language for the items below.
• LD-I-20 Undeveloped San Pedro Avenue Site: CCC staff recommends keeping their original suggested modification from March 2023 that states “some low density” instead of the staff drafted alternative modification that proposed a specific density range. Staff strongly believes that a specified density is necessary to address community concerns regarding potential future development of the site and to assure that the City’s internal land use documents, e.g. General Plan, and LUP are consistent with regard to density designations. The August 6 letter provided more alternative language that would further reduce the density to account for coastal resources protections; however, staff does not recommend that language. If there are coastal resources on the site, it would reduce the gross developable area that density is based on.
14 Packet Pg. 329
Pacifica City Council 6
August 12, 2024
• ER-I-1 Creek Protection and Restoration and ER-I-24 Management of ESHA: CCC staff recommends keeping their original suggested modification from March 2023 which clarified exceptions to buffer instead of the staff drafted alternative modification that removes “no less than 50 feet in any case.” As staff has previously explained, requiring a minimum buffer with no exception is too prescriptive and does not consider the quality of habitat or design alternative. While the CCC acknowledges that language should be included in LCLUP which protects against potential taking challenges, their modification conflicts with the general exception contained in the policy which allows for reductions in buffers to avoid a takings claim. Staff believes that buffers should be determined on a case-by-case basis and as necessary to avoid takings claims. In the August 6 letter, CCC staff had further alternative language for ER-I-24 that would add “wetlands” in several areas. City staff does not believe this is necessary as the introductory language for Section 4.3 Biological Resources “identified potential ESHA’s in the Planning Area in three general categories: wetlands, stream/riparian, and other terrestrial ESHAs.” • In the Glossary, definition of Substantial Structural Modification: CCC staff recommends additional clarification on what qualifies as a major structural component and a shorter exclusion list. While staff appreciates the effort to clarify and streamline the definition, City Council and the community have put extensive efforts into the current alternative modification of SSM and does not support substantial changes. Instead, staff recommends a minor revision to a portion of the definition to read “however excludes, but not limited to:” to clarify that the list of example exclusions is not exhaustive. Staff believes this change meets the intent of CCC staff. Staff is not recommending any additional modification based on the August 6 letter.

The August 6 letter contains additional reasoning and specific Coastal Act sections that is recommending that GP consistent text be reverted back to the 2020 version in order to comply with the Coastal Act. Due to the timing of when the letter was received, staff is unable to provide a recommendation on specific changes to these policies. Staff will need to do an analysis of the proposed revisions and continue coordination with Coastal staff, and will bring recommendations to Council at a future date.

3. Meeting #5.1: Completing Review of All Alternative Modifications Meeting #4 in the community engagement plan was designed to allow City Council to receive a presentation from staff on all of the proposed alternative modifications, including the SSRA policies, and to allow City Council to ask questions on any of the alternative modifications. The City Council previously completed its review of alternative modifications except Chapter 6 and a few select policy changes made after the CCC staff June 2024 review. During Meeting #5, City Council reviewed about half of Chapter 6. Staff recommends the focus of this meeting #5.1 be on review of the remainder of Chapter 6, including the SSRA policies, and a few select changes as outlined above.

Attachment B contains the alternative modifications prepared by City staff in response to CCC staff’s suggested modifications from the CCC’s report from March 8, 2023. The table also contains a brief summary and/or explanation as to why staff is or is not proposing an alternative modification. Attachment B redlines contain new changes since June 26 staff report, as well as the redline items that the Council was not able to confirm at the June 26 meeting.

4. Next Steps
14 Packet Pg. 330
Pacifica City Council 7
August 12, 2024
The key outcome of this meeting is to confirm the list of alternative modifications supported by the City Council. Once confirmed by Council, staff will schedule adoption of the resolution in Attachment A at a subsequent City Council meeting. Once the resolution is adopted and the LCLUP is transmitted to the CCC, CCC staff has indicated that they will need approximately 2-3 months to review and schedule a hearing on the City’s LCLUP once they receive the City Council resolution. The CCC may then certify the City’s LCLUP as submitted, deny the LCLUP submittal, or certify subject to City Council acceptance of additional suggested modifications.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Staff has received five public comments since the June 26, 2024 City Council Meeting and before the release date of this report those. Those comments and responses are attached to this report, see Attachment E and F.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):

Adoption of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications would be exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15266 of the CEQA Guidelines (“Adoption of Coastal Plans and Programs”) which provides that “CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals pursuant to the California Coastal Act…by (1) Any local government, as defined by Section 30109 of the Public Resources Code, necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program…” Section 15265 further provides that “CEQA shall apply to the certification of a local coastal program… by the California Coastal Commission.” ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

No alternative action has been identified.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

The Local Coastal Land Use Plan Update is consistent with the following item(s) in the Counciladopted Strategic Plan and Priority Work Plan for FY 2023-24:
• Goal 4: Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. o Strategy C: Update Pacifica’s Local Coastal Plan and improve communications and collaboration with the California Coastal Commission.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no direct fiscal impact from this item.

ORIGINATED BY:

Planning Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (DOCX) Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (PDF) Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (PDF)
Attachment D CCC comment letter to City of Pacifica 8-6-24 (PDF) Attachment E Public Comments (PDF)
Attachment F Responses to Council and Public Questions (PDF) 14 Packet Pg. 331
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA CERTIFYING AND

ADOPTING THE REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN (LCLUP) WITH ALTERNATIVE MODIFICATIONS IS INTENDED TO BE CARRIED OUT IN A MANNER FULLY IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT; AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TRANSMIT THE REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT

LCLUP WITH ALTERNATIVE MODIFICATIONS TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR CERTIFICATION; AND FINDING THAT APPROVAL OF THE REVISED

CERTIFICATION DRAFT LCLUP WITH ALTERNATIVE MODIFICATIONS IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).

WHEREAS, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (“Coastal Act”) (Public Resources Code section 30000 et seq.) provides that each local government lying, in whole or part, within the coastal zone shall prepare a local coastal program (LCP) for that portion of the coastal zone within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, an LCP consists of a Local Coastal Land Use Plan (“LCLUP”) and Implementation Plan (“IP”); and
WHEREAS, an LCP takes effect only after the California Coastal Commission (“CCC”) certifies conformity of the LCLUP and IP with the policies of the Coastal Act; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica approved its current LCLUP on September 24, 1979, the CCC certified the LCLUP with suggested modifications on March 4, 1980, and the City Council accepted the suggested modifications on March 24, 1980; and WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica desires to update the 1980 LCLUP by adopting a new LCLUP pursuant to the Coastal Act due to the current LCLUP’s age and, more importantly, the changed conditions within Pacifica’s coastal zone over the last 40 years; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the LCP will be submitted in two phases with the LCLUP being processed first pursuant to Public Resources Code section 30512 and the zoning ordinances, zoning district maps and if required, other implementing actions being processed thereafter as the Implementation Plan pursuant to Public Resources Code section 30513; and
WHEREAS, the LCLUP describes the planning area’s land use and environmental conditions, identifies issues, and contains land use policies and maps that compliment adopted City policies including but not limited to the General Plan, and satisfies the intent of the Coastal Act; and
WHEREAS, upon certification, the LCLUP policies will form the standard of review for issuance of coastal development permits (CDPs) within the coastal zone; and WHEREAS, upon certification of the LCLUP, the authority to issue CDPs for areas previously identified as deferred certified areas (i.e., Shelldance Nursery, Rockaway Quarry) would be transferred from the CCC to the City as set forth in the Coastal Act; and

14.a
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) WHEREAS, on February 24, 2020, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 15-2020 certifying that the LCLUP (“Certification Draft LCLUP”) is intended to be carried out in a manner fully in conformity with the Coastal Act and directing the City Manager to transmit the Certification Draft LCLUP (File No. 2020-001) to the CCC for certification and finding that approval of the LCLUP is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and
WHEREAS, on August 12, 2022, the CCC accepted the City’s Certification Draft LCLUP for filing (CCC File No. LCP-2-PAC-20-0036-1); and
WHEREAS, on December 16, 2022, the CCC approved a one-year extension, as authorized by Public Resource Code section 30517, to act on the City’s Certification Draft LCLUP; and
WHEREAS, on October 9, 2023, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 121-2023 certifying that the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP is intended to be carried out in a manner fully in conformity with the California Coastal Act; directing the City Manager to incorporate 2040 General Plan consistency revisions into the existing Certification Draft LCLUP to form the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP and adopting the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP; approving transmittal of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP to the CCC for certification; and finding that approval of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on October 9, 2023, the City Council of the City of Pacifica provided direction on a community engagement plant to update the public on the status of Pacifica’s effort to obtain CCC certification of the LCLUP; and
WHEREAS, between November 2023 and May 2024 the City of Pacifica hosted six community engagement meetings, including a community roundtable discussion and question and answer session; and
WHEREAS, on TBD, the City Council of the City of Pacifica found that revising the Certification Draft LCLUP approved in February 2020 to incorporate alternative modifications, as identified in the document attached hereto and hereinafter incorporated by reference as Exhibit A (“Alternative Modifications”) is appropriate and necessary and that a revised LCLUP should be submitted to the CCC for certification.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find as follows:

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

2. In making its findings, the City Council relied upon and hereby incorporates by reference all correspondence, staff reports, and other related materials, including but not limited to, all oral and documentary evidence presented at the public hearing for the Certification Draft LCLUP and relies upon those proceedings and evidence for the adoption of this Resolution.

3. Adoption of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15266 of the CEQA Guidelines (“Adoption of Coastal Plans and Programs”) which provides that “CEQA does not apply to

14.a
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) activities and approvals pursuant to the California Coastal Act…by (1) Any local government, as defined by Section 30109 of the Public Resources Code, necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program…” Section 15265 further provides that “CEQA shall apply to the certification of a local coastal program… by the California Coastal Commission.”

4. The public health, safety, and general welfare are best served by adoption of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council has reviewed, considered, and hereby directs incorporation of Alternative Modifications into the Certification Draft LCLUP to form the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications and adopts the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications attached hereto in Exhibit A to this Resolution. The City Council further authorizes the City Manager with approval by the City Attorney to make non-substantive text revisions to the Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications that may be requested by California Coastal Commission to achieve certification that are consistent with Council action and direction.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council certifies that the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications is intended to be carried out in a manner fully in conformity with the Coastal Act (Public Resources Code 30000 et seq.).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications contains, in accordance with guidelines established by the CCC, materials sufficient for a thorough and complete review by the CCC and the City Council directs the City Manager to take all steps necessary to effectuate submittal of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications to the CCC for certification in accordance with the Coastal Act, including but not limited to, withdrawal or modification of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP application currently pending with the CCC as authorized by City Council Resolution No. 121-2023.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications shall take effect immediately upon certification by the CCC if approved by the CCC as submitted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, if the CCC certifies a Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications with further substantive modifications, final approval by the City Council shall be required prior to the LCLUP taking effect. The Planning Commission shall provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding any substantive modifications proposed by the CCC prior to final City Council consideration and approval.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the 1980 LCLUP shall be repealed and replaced by the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications upon the CCC certification of the Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications, after which the 1980 LCLUP shall have no further force or effect and any such certified. Revised Certification Draft LCLUP with Alternative Modifications, shall thereafter be known as the “City of Pacifica 2040 Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP).”
* * * * *

14.a
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the TBD.

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
______________________________
Sue Vaterlaus, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

14.a
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (5727 : LCLUP #5.1)

EXHIBIT A

REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN (LCLUP)

WITH ALTERNATIVE MODIFICATIONS AS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON TBD

14.a
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution for LCLUP Process Update (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 2 2.1 Parks and
Open Space
Sandy beach areas; including properties that are fully on beaches or coastal dunes or bluffs;
N/A CCC suggested modification adds new
text
2 2.2 Coastal
Development
Review
These exemptions are generally set forth in Section
30610 of the PRC and Sections 13252, 13252, and 13250
of the California Code of Regulations (CCR)
These exemptions are generally set forth in
Section 30610 of the PRC and Sections 13252,
13253, and 13250 of the California Code of
Regulations (CCR).

N/A CCC suggested modification
addresses a typo with the code
sections
2 2.3 LD-I-2 Designed to minimize impacts to public access, recreation, and coastal resources.

Designed to minimize impacts to public access,
recreation, and other coastal resources.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds the
word “other”
2 2.3 LD-I-2: Land
Divisions in
the Coastal
Zone
N/A Prohibited on properties that are within Coastal
Vulnerability Zones, unless the resulting parcels
are set aside for conservation, or unless the
resulting parcels can be developed consistent
with the LCP.

N/A CCC suggested modification restates
Coastal Act prohibition on
intensifying land use/subdividing land
in hazard areas.
2 2.4 LD-I-3: Coastal
Development
Permit
Findings
N/A In advance of updating the Implementation Plan
for conformance with the policies of this 2023
Land Use Plan, the policies of the Land Use Plan
shall provide the standard of review for any
proposed new development, including where
these policies are more protective of ESHA and
other coastal resources and maximizing public
access as consistent with the Coastal Act.

N/A CCC suggested modification resolves
potential conflicts during transition
period following LCLUP certification
until General Plan and zoning
(Implementation Plan, or IP) is
updated.
2 2.4A LD-I-5
Individualized
Determinatio
ns
N/A N/A Ensure decisions on coastal development permits include an individualized, property-specific
determination of policies, conditions of approval,
and other regulations imposed to regulate
development, and ensure regulations imposed on
properties pursuant to the LCLUP are
consistent with applicable state and federal law.

Staff recommends the addition of this
policy to specify that decisions
relating to coastal development
permit issuance will be reviewed
individually in a manner that is
consistent with applicable state and
federal laws.
2 2.4B LD-I-5: Lower
Cost Visitor
and
Recreational
Facilities
Protect lower-cost visitor and recreational
facilities in the Coastal Zone. These include major, free recreational attractions such as Pacifica
Pier and Pacifica State Beach; the public golf course at Sharp Park; the San Francisco RV Park;
California Coastal Trail and other trails, and numerous beaches accessible at no cost.

N/A Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide lower-cost visitor and recreational facilities in the Coastal Zone. These include major, free recreational attractions such as Pacifica Pier and Pacifica State Beach; the public golf course at Sharp Park; the San Francisco RV Park; California Coastal Trail and other trails; lower cost overnight
accommodations; and numerous beaches accessible at no
cost.

The edits are the minimum necessary to
find the LUP in conformance with
Coastal Act Section 30213.
2 2.4C LD-I-9:

CoastalDependent
Industry
Allow new coastal-dependent industry only if alternative locations outside the Coastal Zone are infeasible or more environmentally damaging or
because to do otherwise would adversely affect the
public welfare, and potential impacts to
visual resources, sensitive species and habitat, water
quality are mitigated to the maximum
N/A New coastal-dependent industry that cannot feasibly be accommodated consistent with other policies of this LCP may be permitted only if alternative locations outside the Coastal Zone are infeasible or more environmentally
damaging; permitting the development would not
adversely affect the public welfare; and potential impacts to visual resources, sensitive species and habitat, water The edits are necessary for compliance
with Coastal Act 30260.

14.b
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification extent feasible. quality, and other coastal resources are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. This policy does not apply to a new or expanded oil and gas development, refinery, or
petrochemical facility.
2 2.5 Central
Pacifica
Coastal Zone
Any development of the Quarry site will require detailed evaluation of biological resources to ensure that sensitive habitat and wetlands are protected; the likely footprint of development could be much smaller than the area
designated.

Any development of the Quarry site will require
detailed evaluation of biological resources to
ensure that sensitive habitat and wetlands are
protected; and should be sited and designed to
minimize coastal hazard risks in accordance with
policies in Chapter 5 and 6 of the LUP. The likely
footprint of development could be much smaller
than the area designated.

N/A CCC suggested modification restates
coastal development requirements
related to hazards and refers to the
relevant Chapters 5 and 6 of the
LCLUP.
2 2.6 LD-I-14:

Promenade
Area and
Beach
Boulevard
Property
Enhance the Promenade area as a local community and
tourist destination.

Enhance the Promenade area as a local
community and tourist destination, while also
ensuring that it adequately responds to and
addresses coastal hazard considerations
consistent with the LCP.

Enhance the Promenade area as a local community
and tourist destination, while also ensuring that it
adequately responds to and addresses coastal
hazard considerations consistent with the LCP.

Non-permanent improvements shall not require
additional analysis.

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the policy related to the Beach
Boulevard Promenade. City staff is
generally in support of the suggested
modification; however, City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to clarify that non-permanent
improvements, such as bench and
trash receptacles, do not require
additional analysis. This will help to
streamline any such improvements in
the future.
2 2.6A LD-I-14:

Promenade
Area and
Beach
Boulevard
Property
N/A N/A Delete Staff had previously proposed an
alternative modification that read “Nonpermanent improvements shall not require additional analysis.” Staff is
proposing no longer proposing that
alternative modification due to CR-I-24
which applies to minor development in
shoreline areas.
2 2.6 LD-I-14:

Promenade
Area and
Beach
Boulevard
Property
The preferred use is a hotel if market conditions allow, but other appropriate uses will include a conventional
commercial/residential mixed-use project with cafes,
restaurants, retail, and upper-level housing. The mix of uses for any non-hotel project shall emphasize uses that are of interest to visitors and that generate revenues for the City.

Appropriate uses could include a hotel or
conventional commercial/residential mixed-use
project with cafes, restaurants, retail, and upperlevel housing, if such uses are deemed appropriate considering coastal hazards and the
required protections for coastal resources. The
mix of uses for any proposal shall emphasize uses
that are of interest to visitors and that generate
revenues for the City.

N/A CCC suggested modification
eliminates hotel as preferred use, but
continues to allow a hotel on the site
2 2.7 LD-I-16:

Rockaway
Quarry Site
Enable the responsible development and environmental
conservation of the Quarry Site.

Enable the responsible development and
environmental conservation of the Quarry Site,
considering the potential coastal hazard
constraints (including but not limited to bluff
erosion, slope stability, and flooding), as well as
the biological constraints (specific to sensitive
species, environmentally sensitive habitat areas,
and wetlands) and coastal resource protection
N/A CCC suggested modification restates
coastal development requirements
related to hazards and biological
resources protections.

14.b
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification more broadly.
2 2.7 LD-I-16:

Rockaway
Quarry Site
Allowable development should provide City revenues
substantial public open space, and commercial uses and
public spaces attractive to both visitors and local
residents.

Allowable development should provide
community benefits, including substantial public
open space, and commercial uses and public
spaces attractive to both visitors and local
residents.

N/A CCC suggested modification revised
City revenues to community benefits.
2 2.8 LD-I-20:

Undeveloped
San Pedro
Avenue Site
Establish a Coastal Residential Mixed Use zoning district to allow small-scale visitor-oriented commercial uses as a stand-alone project without any residential
development, or small-scale visitor-oriented commercial uses with residential development at a density range of three to five units per gross acre. Housing may be
clustered, and uses may be mixed vertically or
horizontally. Residential uses may be constructed
attached to or detached from commercial uses, provided
the overall site contains both commercial and residential uses.

Establish a Coastal Residential Mixed Use zoning
district to allow small-scale visitor-oriented
commercial uses as a stand-alone project without
any residential development, or small-scale
visitor-oriented commercial uses with some low
density residential development. Housing may be
clustered, and uses may be mixed vertically or
horizontally. Residential uses may be constructed
attached to or detached from commercial uses,
provided the overall site contains both
commercial and residential uses.

Establish a Coastal Residential Mixed Use zoning
district to allow small-scale visitor-oriented
commercial uses as a stand-alone project without
any residential development, or small-scale visitororiented commercial uses with some low density residential development at a density range of the
lower third of the CRMU density range. Housing may
be clustered, and uses may be mixed vertically or
horizontally. Residential uses may be constructed
attached to or detached from commercial uses,
provided the overall site contains both commercial
and residential uses.

CCC suggested modification increases
the density allowances. After
clarification from CCC staff, that was
not the intent of the revision. City
staff is proposing an alternative
modification that achieves the same
previously approved lower density
range by using different terms that
are preferrable to the CCC staff.

2.8 LD-I-20:

Undeveloped
San Pedro
Avenue Site
Development must include public coastal access and
must provide public open space.

Development must include public coastal access,
provide public open space, and consider all
biological constraints.

N/A CCC suggested modification clarifies
requirements for development of this
site.
2 2.9 LD-I-26:

Enhanced
Visitor Node
Create a visitor-oriented commercial and hospitality
node at Rockaway Beach and on developable portions of
the Rockaway Quarry site which contains distinctive
design, uses, and recreational opportunities.

Taking all site constraints into account, create a
visitor-oriented commercial and hospitality node
at Rockaway Beach and on developable portions
of the Rockaway Quarry site which contains
distinctive design, uses, and recreational
opportunities.

N/A CCC suggested modification restates
coastal development requirements
related to considering site constraints
such as coastal hazards.
2 2.10 Development
Capacity and
Projections
As noted above, the Quarry site’s development capacity
may be further reduced by site-specific analyses of
geotechnical and biological.

As noted above, the Quarry site’s development
capacity may be further reduced by site-specific
analyses of geotechnical and biological
constraints.

N/A CCC suggested modification fixes a
typo.
2 2.11 LD-I-27: Public
Service
Priorities
Ensure that needs generated by development or uses
permitted over the planning period are adequately
served by existing and planned public works facilities.

Ensure that needs generated by development or
uses permitted over the planning period are
adequately served by existing and planned public
works facilities, and plan for the maintenance,
operation, expansion and improvement to public
facilities considering threats from coastal
hazards. Support studies that evaluate the
condition of critical facilities, especially public
works infrastructure that has been identified as
vulnerable to hazards. Studies shall include
alternatives analyses for potential retrofit,
improvements, relocation, or other
considerations.

N/A Ensure that existing and planned public works
facilities accommodate needs generated by
development or uses permitted by the buildout
allowances of this Land Use Plan or by the General
Plan to serve the City’s non-coastal zone areas. Plan
for the maintenance, operation, expansion and
improvement to public facilities considering threats
from coastal hazards, and avoid locating new or
expanded public service facilities in the Coastal
Vulnerability Zone unless no feasible alternative
exists. Support studies that evaluate the condition of
critical facilities, especially public works
infrastructure that has been identified as vulnerable
to hazards. Studies shall include alternatives
analyses for potential retrofit, improvements,
relocation, or other considerations.

CCC suggested modification requires
analysis of alternatives for potential
retrofit or relocation but does not
mandate relocation.

Alternative modification incorporates
reference to the LUP and General
Plan buildout allowances and to
incorporate language from LD-I-37
here instead and remove
redundancies.

14.b
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 2 2.12 LD-I-37: Public
Services for
New
Developments
N/A Public Services for New Development.

Development shall only be approved if it can be
shown that it can be accommodated by adequate
and sustainable public services (including in
terms of water, sewer, and circulation) without
any significant impacts to coastal resources.

Public service development shall be limited to
levels that are sufficient to accommodate LCP
consistent development, including at buildout,
and shall not be allowed if it would be growth
inducing past that threshold.

Public Services for New Development. Avoid locating
new or expanded public service facilities in the
Coastal Vulnerability Zone. If no feasible alternative
exists and a new or expanded public service facility
must be located within the Coastal Vulnerability
Zone, development shall be consistent with this LCP
and the Coastal Act.Development shall only be
approved if it can be shown that it can be
accommodated by adequate and sustainable public
services (including in terms of water, sewer, and
circulation) without any significant impacts to
coastal resources.

CCC suggested modification may
impact infrastructure within the
Coastal Zone that serves areas
outside the Coastal Zone. City staff
alternative modification allows new
or expanded public services within
the CVZ only if no other location can
be accommodated. Additionally, new
or expanded public services within
the CVZ must design in compliance
with other LCP policies, such as
designing for adaptation, and the
Coastal Act.

The portion proposed alternative
modification has been incorporated
into LD-I-27. The new modification
allow development and protects
coastal resources.
3 3.1 Coastal Access
Points
Maintain public parking as part of redevelopment of Cityowned 2212 Beach Boulevard property. Maintain public parking as part of redevelopment of City-owned 2212 Beach Boulevard property
and maintain lateral access along Beach
Boulevard to the Pier.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
requirement for lateral access, which
is a requirement under the Coastal
Act
3 3.1A Coastal Access
Point 13A
N/A N/A Sharp Park, Berm – ADA access on berm Updated to reflect existing conditions. 3 3.2 Coastal Access
Points
N/A Conduct a prescriptive rights study. N/A CCC suggested modification requires additional study
3 3.2 Coastal Access
Points
N/A Conduct a prescriptive rights study. N/A CCC suggested modification requires additional study
3 GP1 PR-I-7:

Adjustment of
Lateral
Shoreline
Easements
This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP
consistency changes. It added the following to the policy:

Alternatively, the Planning Director may determine that lateral access is not necessary.

CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the sentence.

N/A Staff agrees with the CCC suggested
modification from June 2024. The
added language does not clarify how
the Planning Director can make such
determinations. The text is also
confusing because the sentence above
already give the City the ability to
determine when lateral public access is
not necessary.

14.b
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 3 3.3 PR-I-8:

Temporary
Events
N/A Only temporary events meeting all the above
criteria shall require coastal development permit
review, however, the Planning Director may also
exclude from permit requirements temporary
events meeting all the above criteria when:
• The fee is for preferred seating only and more
than 75% of the provided seating capacity is
available free of charge for general public use; or,
• The event is held on sandy beach area in a
remote location with minimal demand for publicv
use, and there is no potential for adverse effect
on sensitive coastal resources; or
• The event is less than one day in duration; or
• The event has previously received a coastal
development permit and will be held in the same
location, at a similar season, and for the same
duration, with operating and environmental
conditions essentially the same as those
associated with the previously-approved event.

The Planning Director (or the Coastal
Commission’s Executive Director if the Planning
Director’s determination is challenged) may
determine that a temporary event, even an event
that might otherwise not require a coastal
development permit per this section above, shall
require a coastal development permit if he/she
determines that unique or changing
circumstances exist relative to the particular
temporary event that have the potential for
significant adverse impacts on coastal resources.

Such circumstances may include, but shall not be
limited to, the following:
• The event, either individually or together with
other temporary events scheduled before or
after the particular event, precludes the general
public from use of a public recreational area for a
significant period of time; or
• The event and its associated activities or access
requirements will either directly or indirectly
impact environmentally sensitive habitat areas,
rare or endangered species, significant scenic
resources (including as mapped on the LCP Land
Use Plan maps or as determined during project
Only temporary events meeting all the above criteria
shall require coastal development permit review,
however, the Planning Director may also exclude
from permit requirements temporary events
meeting all the above criteria when:
• The fee is for preferred seating only and more than
75% of the provided seating capacity is available free
of charge for general public use; or,
• The event is held on sandy beach area in a remote
location with minimal demand for publicv use, and
there is no potential for adverse effect on sensitive
coastal resources; or
• The event is only one day in duration; or
• The event has previously received a coastal
development permit and will be held in the same
location, at a similar season, and for the same
duration, with operating and environmental
conditions essentially the same as those associated
with the previously-approved event.

The Planning Director (or the Coastal Commission’s
Executive Director if the Planning Director’s
determination is challenged) may determine that a
temporary event, even an event that might
otherwise not require a coastal development permit
per this section above, shall require a coastal
development permit if it is determined that unique
or changing circumstances exist relative to the
particular temporary event that have the potential
for significant adverse impacts on coastal resources.

14.b
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification review), or other coastal resources; or
• The event is scheduled between Memorial Day
weekend and Labor Day and would restrict public
use of roadways or parking areas or otherwise
significantly impact public use or access to
coastal waters; or
• The event has historically required a coastal
development permit to address and monitor
associated impacts to coastal
resources.Temporary events located solely within
the Coastal Commission’s original coastal
development permit jurisdiction area require
review and determination of coastal
development permit requirement or temporary
event exemption from the Coastal Commission
other coastal resources; or
• The event is scheduled between Memorial Day
weekend and Labor Day and would restrict public
use of roadways or parking areas or otherwise
significantly impact public use or access to coastal
waters; or
• The event has historically required a coastal
development permit to address and monitor
associated impacts to coastal resources. Temporary
events located solely within the Coastal
Commission’s original coastal development permit
jurisdiction area require review and determination
of coastal development permit requirement or
temporary event exemption from the Coastal
Commission.
3 3.4 PR-I-12:

Coastal Access
Point South of
San Francisco
RV Park
Lateral access along the bluffs should be provided from this coastal access point to City- and Coastal Commissionrequired public access at San Francisco RV Park to the north, and to properties to the south upon future
redevelopment.

Lateral access along the bluffs as well as vertical
trail improvements should be provided from this
coastal access point to City- and Coastal
Commission-required public access at San
Francisco RV Park to the north, and to properties
to the south upon future redevelopment.

N/A Delete CCC suggested modification adds
language to include vertical trail
improvements. With GP consistency
changes a portion of the CCC
suggested modification remain that
should have been deleted as well.
3 3.5 PR-I-24: Sharp
Park
Support the continued operation of golf at Sharp Park
Golf Course consistent with redeveloping source
protection, natural hazard, and coastal vulnerability
policies, and support development of additional
recreational uses in upland portions of the Park located outside the Coastal Zone east of Highway 1.

Support the continued operation of golf at Sharp
Park Golf Course consistent with redeveloping
source protection, natural hazard, and coastal
vulnerability policies, existing CDP terms and
conditions, and support development of
additional recreational uses in upland portions of
the Park located outside the Coastal Zone east of
Highway 1.

Support the continued operation of golf at Sharp
Park Golf Course consistent with redeveloping
resource protection, natural hazard, and coastal
vulnerability policies, existing CDP terms and
conditions, and support development of additional
recreational uses in upland portions of the Park
located outside the Coastal Zone east of Highway 1.

City staff alternative modification
would delete the word “existing,”
which clarifies that a CDP must be
obtained and can be modified
through the appropriate approval
process over time.
3 3.6 PR-G-11: Trail
System
Expansion
Expand the trail system in Pacifica to create a connected trail network with communitywide links to open space
and recreation facilities, as shown on Figure 3-3.

Expand the trail system in Pacifica to create a
connected trail network with communitywide
links to open space and recreation facilities, as
shown on Figure 3-3, and to enhance and
augment California Coastal Trail connections and
connectivity.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds the
California Coastal Trail to the policy.
3 3.6A PR-I-45:

PedestrianOriented
Street
Improvement
Implement Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
recommendations to improve pedestrian orientated
safety and comfort.

N/A To the extent they are consistent with all LCP policies, implement Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
recommendations to improve pedestrian-orientated safety and comfort.

Edits to ensure that implementing the
recommendations of this outside (nonLCP) document would occur in a Coastal Act consistent way.
3 3.7 PR-I-57:

Roadway
Retrofits
Roadway retrofits will require additional analysis. Roadway retrofits will require additional analysis, such as coastal hazard concerns in areas within
the Coastal Zone.

PR-I-57: Bicycle Roadway Retrofits
Additional analysis will be required to identify
roadway retrofits to create complete streets. such as
coastal hazard concerns in areas within the Coastal
Zone. Retrofits will be consistent with this LCP.

CCC suggested modification adds
language that roadway retrofits need
to analyze coastal hazards. The City
alternative modification clarifies that
the policy only applies to roadway
retrofits that do not increase capacity
and are intended to create complete
streets.

14.b
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 3 3.8 PR-I-60:

Roadway
Abandonment
/Vacation and
Public Access
Do not abandon, vacate, or render unusable any Cityowned right-of-way, unless necessary for reasons of public safety or environmental conservation. Whenever
public roadways are proposed to be abandoned, assess
the value of maintaining public pedestrian and/or bicycle access, especially where coastal access can be
maintained or improved. Abandonment/vacation of any
public right-of-way that may negatively affect coastal
resources or public access to the sea will require a
coastal development permit. Any public right-of-way that cannot be maintained in a condition suitable for public use shall be offered to another public agency or private association that agrees to maintain the right-of-way for public use.

Do not abandon, vacate, or render unusable any
City-owned roadways and/or rights-of-way,
unless necessary for reasons of public safety or
environmental conservation. Whenever public
roadways and/or rights-of-way are proposed to
be abandoned, assess the value of maintaining
public pedestrian and/or bicycle access,
especially where coastal access can be
maintained or improved. Abandonment/vacation
of any public roadways and/or rights-of-way
requires a coastal development permit, which
shall only be approved if coastal resources can be
protected in as good or better conditions as exist
at the time of permit evaluation, and subject to
terms and conditions to ensure the public’s
interests are maintained moving forward.

Abandonment/vacation of any public roadways
and/or rights-of-way may require a coastal
development permit, which shall only be approved if
coastal resources can be protected in as good or
better conditions as exist at the time of permit
evaluation, and subject to terms and conditions to
ensure the public’s interests are maintained moving
forward.

CCC suggested modification adds
City-owned roadways, in addition to
public rights-of-way.

City staff’s alternative modification
indicates a CDP may be required (as
opposed to requiring it in all
instances). It is possible certain
vacations may be exempt from CDP
requirements.
4 4.1 Surface Water Some of the watersheds drain directly into the ocean, while other feed one of five.

Some of the watersheds drain directly into the
ocean, while other feed one of five creeks.

The City’s General Plan consistency
changes eliminated this sentence and
the suggested modification is no
longer applicable.
4 4.2 Wetlands N/A Importantly, wetlands in the coastal zone only need meet one parameter (i.e., hydrology, hydric
soils, or hydrophytic species) to be considered a
wetland, as differentiated from three parameter
delineations which require all three to be present
(e.g., ACOE delineations).

Importantly, wetlands in the coastal zone only need
to meet one parameter (i.e., hydrology, hydric soils,
or hydrophytic species) to be considered a wetland,
as differentiated from three parameter delineations
which require all three to be present (e.g., U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers delineations).

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the language; however, City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address typos and expand an
acronym.
4 4.3 ER-I-1: Creek
Protection
and
Restoration.

Requiring a minimum of 100 feet setbacks from the top
of creek banks, or from the outer edge of riparian
vegetation, where it exists, for development proposed
adjacent to creeks, in keeping with City regulations and Best Management Practices. Exceptions to such buffer
requirements should be supported by a biological report demonstrating that the adjusted buffer, in combination
with incorporated siting, design or other mitigation
measures, shall prevent impacts that significantly
degrade the creek. Buffer adjustments should also be
limited to where the entire subject legal lot is within the buffer or where it is demonstrated that development
outside the buffer would have a greater impact on the
creek.

Requiring a minimum of 100 feet setbacks from
the top of creek banks, or from the outer edge of
riparian vegetation, where it exists, whichever is
further, for development proposed adjacent to
creeks, in keeping with City regulations and Best
Management Practices. The 100-foot buffer may
be reduced by the minimum necessary (1) to
avoid a taking (for private development), or (2) to
provide required public services (for public
development), provided that the buffer is as
close to 100 feet as possible, and no less than 50
feet in any case, and provided that creek
resource impacts are avoided as much as
possible, and unavoidable impacts
commensurately mitigated, all as conclusively
demonstrated by a qualified biologist to the
satisfaction of the City, USFWS, and CDFW.

Requiring a minimum of 100 feet setbacks buffers
from the top of creek banks, or from the outer edge
of riparian vegetation, where it exists, whichever is
further, for development proposed adjacent to
creeks, in keeping with City regulations and Best
Management Practices. The 100-foot buffer may be
reduced by the minimum necessary (1) to avoid a
taking (for private development), or (2) to provide
required incidental public services (for public
development), provided that any unavoidable
impacts are commensurately mitigated, that the
buffer is as close to 100 feet as possible, and no less than 50 feet in any case, and provided that creek
resource impacts are avoided as much as possible,
and unavoidable impacts commensurately
mitigated, all as conclusively demonstrated by a
qualified biologist to the satisfaction of the City,
USFWS, and CDFW and applicable resource
agencies.

CCC suggested modification amends
the text to clarify exceptions;
however, the statement “no less than
50 feet in any case” is too prescriptive
and does not consider the quality of
habitat or design alternatives. City
staff proposes to eliminate the
statement and the buffer will be
decided on a case-by-case basis as
informed by a qualified biologist.

Additional text to clarify mitigation
may be needed.
4 4.3 ER-I-1: Creek
Protection
and
Restoration.

N/A Permitted uses within buffer zones are limited to
uses dependent on the resources within these
areas and their buffer zones (i.e. habitat
management and restoration, scientific research
and educational activities, and low-intensity
public access and recreation). Temporary
Permitted uses within buffer zones are limited to
uses dependent on the resources within these areas
and their buffer zones (i.e., habitat management
and restoration, scientific research and educational
activities, and low-intensity public access and
recreation), except where reduced buffer is required
CCC suggested modification added
language to Policy ER-I-2 that
specified allowed uses within a
designated buffer area. City staff is
generally in support of the suggested
modification; however, City staff is

14.b
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification disruption (e.g. less than six months) for the
construction, alteration, repair, and maintenance
of existing or newly permitted facilities or
structures is allowed if there are no feasible
alternatives, the disruption area is restored to its
pre- disruption state or better within one year
from the initial point of impact and there is no
significant ground disturbance.
to avoid a taking or essential for the provision of
public services. Temporary disruption, (e.g. less than
six months) as determined by a qualified biologist in
consideration of on-site specific biological resources, for the construction, alteration, repair, and
maintenance of existing or newly permitted facilities
or structures is allowed if there are no feasible
alternatives, the disruption area is restored to its
pre- disruption state or better within one year from
the initial point of impact and there is no significant ground disturbance.
proposing an alternative modification
to clarify that takings avoidance is a
relevant factor for consideration, as is
provision of public services. City staff
is also clarifying that temporary
disruptions may be permissible if
reviewed and recommended by a
qualified biologist.

The last portion of the first sentence
is redundant and should be removed.
4 4.3A ER-I-1: Creek
Protection
and
Restoration.

Permitted uses within buffer zones are limited to uses
dependent on the resources within these areas and their buffer zones (i.e. habitat management and restoration,
scientific research and educational activities, and lowintensity public access and recreation), except where reduced buffer is required to avoid a taking or essential for
the provision of public services.

Permitted uses within the buffer
(whether reduced or not) can still only
be limited to resource dependent uses.

Please delete.
4 4.4 Plant
Communities
and Wildlife
Habitats
The EIR for the General Plan and Local Coastal Land Use Plan Update includes a more detailed description of each of these communities and habitats. The listed species
and habitats here are not intended to preclude the
possibility that other species or habitat occur within
Pacifica. Species identified with various plant
communities or habitats are not necessarily present in
the Planning Area. Some of these communities are
recognized as “special status communities,” or provide
critical habitat for special status species.

The map is illustrative and for information
purposes only; site-specific biological studies are
required as part of proposed development
review to determine the presence and extent of
plant communities and habitat. The mapped
communities and habitats are not intended to
preclude the possibility that other communities
or habitat occur within Pacifica, nor to
definitively conclude that the plant communities
or habitats identified are present as indicated,
rather the map is a tool to help identify areas
where further evaluation for biological issue may
be relevant.

The map is illustrative and for information purposes
only; site-specific biological studies are required as
part of proposed development review to determine
the presence and extent of plant communities and
habitat. The mapped communities and habitats are
not intended to preclude the possibility that other
communities or habitat occur within Pacifica, nor to
definitively conclude that the plant communities or
habitats identified are present as indicated, rather
The map is a tool to help identify areas
where further evaluation for biological issues may
be relevant.

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the language; however, City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address typos. Additionally, some
of the City’s General Plan consistency
changes eliminated portions of this
text.
4 4.5 Annual
Grasslands
Annual Grasslands Grasslands N/A The City’s General Plan consistency changes eliminated the term
“annual” from the header and the
suggested modification is no longer
applicable.
4 4.6 Northern
Coastal Scrub
Northern coastal scrub habitat is found on undeveloped
slopes, often in a mosaic with annual grasslands.

Northern maritime chaparral, a special-status
community, is included in this category. Northern coastal scrub is dominated by either coyote brush or California sagebrush, depending on slope aspect.

Northern coastal scrub habitat is found on
undeveloped slopes, often in a mosaic with
grasslands. Northern maritime chaparral, a
special-status community, is included in this
category. Northern coastal scrub dominated by
either coyote brush or California sagebrush,
primarily depending on slope aspect.

N/A CCC suggested modification removes
the term “annual” and generalizes
language.
4 4.7 Seasonal
Wetlands and
Ponds
Seasonal Wetlands and Ponds Wetlands and Ponds N/A CCC suggested modification generalizes language

14.b
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 4 4.7 Seasonal
Wetlands and
Ponds
Seasonal Wetlands occur in smaller drainages and
localized depressions, forming ponds or flowing water,
and are underlain by saturated soils during the winter
and spring. Seasonal wetlands also occur along the banks and sediments that accumulate in creeks. Wetlands in
Pacifica are found along riparian areas, drainages, along the coast, and as fresh and brackish water marshes (such as on the Sharp Park Golf Course). Vegetation and
wildlife found in wetlands varies with water
characteristics, inundation patterns, surrounding habitat, and level of disturbance.

Wetlands occur in smaller drainages and
localized depressions, forming ponds or flowing
water. Wetlands also occur along in creeks,
riparian areas, drainages, along the coast, and as
fresh and brackish water marshes (such as on the
Sharp Park Golf Course). Vegetation and wildlife
found in wetlands varies with water
characteristics, inundation patterns, surrounding
habitat, and level of disturbance.

Wetlands occur in smaller drainages and localized
depressions, forming ponds or flowing water.

Wetlands also occur along in creeks, riparian areas,
drainages, along the coast, and as fresh and brackish
water marshes (such as on the Sharp Park Golf
Course). Vegetation and wildlife found in wetlands
varies with water characteristics, inundation
patterns, surrounding habitat, and level of
disturbance.

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the language; however, City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address typos.
4 4.7 Special-Status
Species

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES IN SEASONAL WETLANDS AND
PONDS
The California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter
snake, Leech’s skyline diving beetle, San Francisco forktail damselfly, Tomales isopod, western pond turtle, and
bristly sedge are special-status species that may be found in wetlands around Pacifica. The wetlands in Sharp Park are also known to support saltmarsh common
yellowthroat. Seasonal wetlands and ponds at Mori Point and Sharp Park Golf Course support the California redlegged frog as well as the San Francisco garter snake.

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES IN WETLANDS AND
PONDS
The California red-legged frog, San Francisco
garter snake, Leech’s skyline diving beetle, San
Francisco forktail damselfly, Tomales isopod,
western pond turtle, and bristly sedge are
special-status species that may be found in
wetlands in and around Pacifica. The wetlands in
Sharp Park are also known to support saltmarsh
common yellowthroat. Seasonal wetlands and
ponds at Mori Point and Sharp Park Golf Course
also known to support the California red-legged
frog as well as the San Francisco garter snake.

N/A Generalizes language
4 GP2 Special-Status
Special in
Beach/Intertid
al Habitat
This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP
consistency changes. It added the following to the
paragraph: Pacifica State Beach in the 1970s hosted
nesting Western Snowy Plovers, a Federally listed
threatened species. Since 2003 volunteers have regularly surveyed and monitored the plovers and have seen only
wintering plovers in declining numbers. ESHA is required on the north half of the beach where plovers roost and
feed.

CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the last sentence and
the following clarifying sentence: The northern
half of the beach where plovers roost and feed
qualifies as ESHA.

N/A Staff agrees with the CCC suggested
modification from June 2024 as the
sentence is confusing. The proposed
modification clarifies that this area
contains ESHA.
4 4.8 N/A N/A Dunes
Dune habitat includes areas with sandy
substrates proximate to the marine environment
and may range from bare to vegetated with
species typical of foredune and dune scrub
communities, including non-natives such as ice
plant and invasive grasses. Dune form
topography may or may not be evident,
depending on the condition of the dune and past
land use or invasions, but may be readily
restored. While most dunes occur near sea level,
there are several examples of perched dune
systems atop bluffs in Pacifica, where aeolian
forces have created the substrate and processes
appropriate to support dune vegetation. All areas
that meet this definition of Dunes are
categorically considered ESHA.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds a
new habitat category.

14.b
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 4 4.9 Potential
Environmenta
lly Sensitive
Habitat Areas
(ESHAs)
Figure 4-3 identifies potential ESHAs in the Planning Area.

Potential ESHAs include all designated critical habitat for Endangered or Threatened Species; special status
communities10; and areas designated as “other potential Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas”.

Figure 4-3 identifies potential ESHAs in the
Planning Area in three general categories:
wetland, stream/riparian, and other terrestrial
ESHAs. These potential ESHAs include all current
designated critical habitat for Endangered or
Threatened Species; known special status
communities; and areas designated as “other
potential Environmentally Sensitive Habitat
Areas”. Figure 4-3 is meant to serve as a flag for
further studies to be undertaken when
development is proposed. However, the map is
illustrative and for information purposes only;
site-specific biological studies are required as
part of proposed development review to
determine the presence and extent of ESHA and
its required buffer zone. And other information
than Figure 4-3 may dictate the need for such
studies as well (e.g., site evaluation, other studies
nearby, etc.), even if the area is not mapped as
potential ESHA on Figure 4-3.

However, the map is illustrative and for information
purposes only; site-specific biological studies are
required as part of proposed development review to
determine the presence and extent of ESHA and its
required buffer zone. And oOther information than
Figure 4-3 may dictate the need for such studies as
well (e.g., site evaluation, other studies nearby,
etc.), even if the area is not mapped as potential
ESHA on Figure 4-3.

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the language; however, City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address typos.
4 4.9A Other
Potential
ESHA
Any proposed development on land designated on the
Sensitive and Critical Habitat map (Figure 4-3) as having potential to include an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area requires a site-specific evaluation by qualified
biologists.

N/A Grasslands/Prairie vegetation communities shown on
Figure 4-2 are also mapped on Figure 4-3 as Potential ESHA.

Any proposed development on land designated on the
Potential Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas map
(Figure 4-3) as having potential to include an
Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area requires a sitespecific evaluation by qualified biologists Edits for consistency with the name and
content of Figure 4-3.
4 4.10 ER-G-6:

Coastal
Environment
and Special
Species Status
Communities
Conserve and protect beaches, sand dunes, coastal
bluffs, and special status communities, particularly the Coastal bluff scrub on the northern bluffs.

Conserve and protect beaches, sand dunes,
coastal bluffs, and special status communities,
particularly the Coastal bluff scrub on the
northern bluffs. Prohibit development in coastal
dunes to preserve dune formations, vegetation,
and wildlife habitats. Prevent overuse in dune
areas by mechanisms such as restricting parking
and directing pedestrian traffic through signage
and sand fencing to areas capable of sustaining
such use. Prohibit motor vehicles in dune areas
except for emergency purposes, and prohibit
motor vehicles in non-dune beach areas except
for emergency and essential maintenance
purposes and where previously coastal
permitted.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds new
and clarifying language.
4 4.11 ER-G-7:

Creeks and
Riparian Areas
as Habitat
Protect year-round creeks and
their riparian habitats.

Protect year-round and intermittent creeks and
their riparian habitats.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.

14.b
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 4 4.12 ER-I-21:

Protection of
Biological
Resources
with New
Development
2) Pre-construction plant and wildlife surveys: Project applicants shall engage a qualified biologist to conduct presence/absence biological surveys for sensitive plant and wildlife species prior to construction adjacent to or within identified special status communities and other
sensitive areas identified in Figure 4-3. If special status species are identified, the qualified biologist shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) and establish no-disturbance buffers around the
special status specie to avoid disturbance and direct
impacts to these resources during construction. If no
special status species are detected during surveys, then construction-related activities may proceed. Nesting
birds, in particular, are protected by two means; they
receive protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and nesting raptors (in the order Falconiformes or
Strigiformes) are protected under the State Fish and
Game Code, §3503.5.
2) Pre-construction plant and wildlife surveys:

Project applicants shall engage a qualified
biologist to conduct presence/absence biological
surveys for sensitive plant and wildlife species
prior to construction adjacent to or within areas
identified as potential ESHAs on Figure 4-3, or as
otherwise indicated and needed. If special status
species are identified, the qualified biologist shall
consult with the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) and establish nodisturbance buffers around the special status specie to avoid disturbance and direct impacts to
these resources during construction. If no special
status species are detected during surveys, then
construction-related activities may proceed.

Nesting birds, in particular, are protected by two
means; they receive protection under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and nesting raptors (in
the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes) are
protected under the State Fish and Game Code,
§3503.5.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
4 4.12 ER-I-21:

Protection of
Biological
Resources
with New
Development
3) Require biological resource assessments be conducted prior to approval for any development within 300 feet of creeks, wetlands, or other sensitive habitat areas shown on Figure 4-3 of the General Plan.
3) Require biological resource assessments be
conducted prior to approval for any development
within 300 feet of creeks, wetlands, or other
sensitive habitat areas. Such assessment shall
identify means to avoid impacts to any such
resources (including through siting, design, and
LCP required buffers), and means of enhancing
resources and providing offsetting and
commensurate mitigation for unavoidable
impacts that are LCP allowable.
3) Require biological resource assessments be
conducted prior to approval for any development
within 300 feet of creeks, wetlands, or other
sensitive habitat areas, such as but not limited to
areas in Figure 4-3. Such assessment shall identify
means to avoid impacts to any such resources
(including through siting, design, and LCP required
buffers), and means of enhancing resources and
providing offsetting and commensurate mitigation
for unavoidable impacts that are LCP allowable.

CCC suggested modification clarifies
the requirements; however, City staff
is proposing an alternative
modification to include the reference
to Figure 4-3 of the LCLUP.
4 4.12 ER-I-21:

Protection of
Biological
Resources
with New
Development
4) Require on-site monitoring of biological resources by a qualified biologist throughout the duration of
construction activity.
4) Require on-site monitoring of biological
resources by a qualified biologist throughout the
duration of construction activity and afterwards,
should approval conditions warrant.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
4 4.13 ER-I-23:

Verification of
ESHA
N/A Historical evidence of ESHA N/A CCC suggested modification adds new sub-policy under Verification of ESHA.
4 4.14 ER-I-24:

Management
of ESHA
No new development shall be allowed within primary
habitat areas with the
exception of resource-dependent uses
that can be demonstrated to have no significant adverse impact.

No new development shall be allowed within
ESHA with the exception of resource-dependent
uses (such as habitat management and
restoration, scientific research and educational
activities, and low-intensity public access and
recreation) that can be demonstrated to have no
significant disruption of habitat values.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.

14.b
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 4 4.14 ER-I-24:

Management
of ESHA
• Buffer areas shall be established around all sensitive resources, providing a minimum of 100 feet, and varying as needed to account for feeding, breeding, nesting, and other habitat requirements. Exceptions to such buffer
requirements should be supported by a biological report demonstrating that the adjusted buffer, in combination
with incorporated siting, design or other mitigation
measures, will prevent impacts that significantly degrade the ESHA and will be compatible with the continuance of the ESHA. Buffer adjustments should also be limited to
where the entire subject legal lot is within the buffer or where it is demonstrated that development outside the
buffer would have a greater impact on the ESHA.
• Buffer areas shall be established around all
ESHA, providing a minimum of 100 feet, and may
be expanded as needed to account for feeding,
breeding, nesting, and other habitat
requirements. The 100-foot buffer may be
reduced by the minimum necessary (1) to avoid a
taking (for private development), or (2) to
provide required public services (for public
development), provided that the buffer is as
close to 100 feet as possible, and no less than 50
feet in any case, and provided that ESHA
resource impacts are avoided as much as
possible, and unavoidable impacts
commensurately mitigated, all as conclusively
demonstrated by a qualified biologist to the
satisfaction of the City, USFWS, and CDFW.
• Buffer areas shall be established around all ESHA,
providing a minimum of 100 feet, and may be
expanded as needed to account for feeding,
breeding, nesting, and other habitat requirements.

The 100-foot buffer may be reduced by the
minimum necessary (1) to avoid a taking (for private
development), or (2) to provide required incidental
public services (for public development), provided
that any unavoidable impacts are commensurately
mitigated, that the buffer is as close to 100 feet as
possible, and no less than 50 feet in any case, and
provided that ESHA resource impacts are avoided as
much as possible, and unavoidable impacts
commensurately mitigated, all as conclusively
demonstrated by a qualified biologist to the
satisfaction of the City and applicable resource
agencies, USFWS, and CDFW.

Additional text to clarify that
mitigation may be necessary.
4 4.14 ER-I-24:

Management
of ESHA
• Alteration of landforms, removal of vegetation,
impervious surfaces, noise, light, and glare shall be
minimized.
• Alteration of landforms, removal of vegetation,
impervious surfaces, noise, light, and glare shall
be minimized as much as possible.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
text to clarify exceptions.
4 4.15 ER-I-28:

Construction
during
Nesting
Season
If site work or construction occurs during the nesting
season (February 1 through August 31), then preconstruction breeding bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified wildlife biologist prior to any site disturbance to ensure that no nests will be disturbed or destroyed
during Project implementation. If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by
construction activities, then the biologist shall create a no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around passerine nests and a 500 foot buffer around raptor nests. Work-free
buffer zones shall be maintained until after the breeding season or until after the qualified biologist determines the young have fledged (usually late June through midJuly).

Nests initiated during active construction would be
presumed to be unaffected by the activity, and a buffer zone around such nests is not necessary. However, nests shall be flagged and construction activity shall avoid
killing and/or injuring nesting birds.

If site work or construction occurs during the
nesting season (February 1 through August 31),
then pre-construction breeding bird surveys shall
be performed by a qualified wildlife biologist
prior to any site disturbance to ensure that no
nests will be disturbed or destroyed during
Project implementation. If an active nest is found
sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed
by construction activities, then the biologist shall
create a no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet
around passerine nests and a 500 foot buffer
around raptor nests. Work-free buffer zones shall
be maintained until after the breeding season or
until after the qualified biologist determines the
young have fledged (usually late June through
mid-July).

N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text related to nesting during
construction.
4 4.16 ER-I-30:

Protection of
the California
Red-Legged
Frog and San
Francisco
Garter Snake
To minimize disturbance, require all grading activity
within 100 feet of aquatic habitat shall be conducted
during the dry season (May 1 through October 15) to
protect California red-legged frog and San Francisco
garter snake. A qualified biologist shall conduct
presence/absence surveys for California red-legged frog and San Francisco garter snake prior to construction in or adjacent to riparian areas, grasslands near
ponds/wetlands, or other sensitive habitat. Any
individuals identified shall be treated in consultation with USFWS. Construction shall follow accepted procedures
Allowed construction activity with the potential
to impact California red-legged frogs and San
Francisco garter snake shall be conducted during
the dry season (May 1 through October 15) to
protect California red-legged frog and San
Francisco garter snake. In such cases a qualified
biologist shall conduct presence/absence surveys
for California red-legged frog and San Francisco
garter snake prior to construction in or adjacent
to riparian areas, grasslands near
ponds/wetlands, or other sensitive habitat. Any
N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.

14.b
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification for exclusion and avoidance of California red-legged frog and
San Francisco garter snake and their habitat. Additionally, the biologist shall supervise the installation of exclusion fencing along the boundaries of the work area, shall
conduct environmental awareness training for
construction workers, and shall be present during initial vegetation clearing and ground-disturbing activities.
individuals identified shall be treated in
consultation with USFWS. Construction shall
follow accepted procedures for exclusion and
avoidance of California red-legged frog and
San Francisco garter snake and their habitat.

Additionally, the biologist shall supervise the
installation of exclusion fencing along the
boundaries of the work area, shall conduct
environmental awareness training for
construction workers, and shall be present during
initial vegetation clearing and ground-disturbing
activities.
4 4.17 ER-I-39: Bowl
Site
Establish appropriate zoning for the “Bowl” site along the east side of Palmetto Avenue in Fairmont West for
Planned Development to ensure site planning that
clusters development, avoiding potential flooding or
geotechnical hazards and protecting open space
resources.

Establish appropriate zoning for the “Bowl” site
along the east side of Palmetto Avenue in
Fairmont West for Planned Development to
ensure site planning that clusters development,
avoiding potential flooding or geotechnical
hazards and protecting open space resources,
and taking all other coastal resources site
constraints into consideration.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
4 4.17
A
Viewsheds Several specific viewsheds from Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road are shown on Figure 4-4.

N/A Several specific coastal view corridors from Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road are shown on Figure 4-4.

Edited to match the terminology used in
Figure 4-4.
4 GP3 ER-I-53:

Underground
Utilities
This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP
consistency changes. It added the following to the policy:

This policy applies Citywide.

CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the sentence.

N/A Staff agrees with the CCC suggested
modification from June 2024. The
sentence is deleted to clarify that the
policy applicable only within the coastal
zone.
5 5.1 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.

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, safety, and
coastal resources.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
5 5.2 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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text in an introductory paragraph.
5 GP4 Soil Erosion This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP consistency changes. It added the following to the policy:

Within the Coastal Zone, the City requires new
CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the sentence.

N/A Staff agrees with the CCC suggested
modification from June 2024. The
paragraph is deleted because it is

14.b
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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.
inconsistent with policies within
Chapter 6.
5 5.3 NH-G-1:

Reduce Risk
Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury
posed by geologic and seismic hazards.

Protect coastal resources, and minimize risks of
property damage and personal injury posed by
geologic, seismic and coastal hazards.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
5 5.3A NH-I-3: Fault
Zone
New development shall be sited and designed to
minimize risks from seismic events. Building for human
occupancy shall avoid surface traces of active faults,
consistent with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act and other relevant state laws. (See the Liquefaction and Fault Zones map, Figure 5-1).

N/A 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. (See the Liquefaction and Fault Zones map, Figure 5-1).

City Council approved GP consistency
changes. This alternative modification is
necessary to comply with Coastal Act
Section 30253.
5 5.4 NH-I-9:

Erosion
Prevention
Require erosion prevention of hillside areas by
revegetation or other acceptable methods.

Deleted NH-I-9: 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.

CCC suggested modification deleted
the entire policy related to hillside
erosion prevention. City staff
alternative modification clarifies that
the policy is intended for hillside
erosion, and not bluff erosion.
5 5.5 NH-I-10:

Geotechnical
Studies
• Within 50 feet of a bluff. • Within 300 feet of a bluff edge in Coastal Vulnerability Zones.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
policy to include Coastal Vulnerability
Zones.
5 5.5 NH-I-10:

Geotechnical
Studies
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 life.

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 anticipated life.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
the text to be consistent with new
definitions.
5 5.6 NH-I-17:

Development
in Coastal
Zone
• Not accelerate the need for a shoreline structure or
increase the likelihood of a future seawall beyond the
existing development’s expected life;
N/A N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text related to new development.
5 5.6 NH-I-17:

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

N/A N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text related to small improvements to
align with the Substantial Structural
Modification definition.
5 5.7 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. Flood zones based on the FIRMs are shown in
Figure 5-3.

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
N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.

14.b
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification Vulnerability Maps”). Flood zones based on the
FIRMs are shown in Figure 5-3.
5 5.8 NH-G-2:

Development
in Hazardous
Areas
Protect development in 100-year floodplains and tsunami hazard zones with flood damage prevention programs.

Site and design development in 100-year
floodplains and tsunami hazard zones to
minimize hazard risk without the need for
armoring (e.g. flood damage prevention
programs).

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
5 5.9 NH-I-24: Flood
Hazard
Reduction
Flood Hazard Reduction. Continue to comply with the
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in the Municipal
Code.

Deleted N/A City staff is not proposing an
alternative modification; however,
once the City’s Flood Prevention
Ordinance is certified by CCC an LCP
amendment can be processed to
include the policy in the LCLUP.
5 5.10 NH-I- 26:

Flood Control
Maintenance
Regularly maintain flood control structures, including, but not limited to drainage channels, pipes, culverts, and stream beds.

Regularly maintain flood control structures,
including, but not limited to drainage channels,
pipes, and culverts.

Routine maintenance of streambeds shall conform
to the Coastal Act, including but not limited to
Section 30236.

CCC suggested modification removed
streambeds from the policy.

Significant areas of Pacifica are
serviced by creeks as critical
stormwater infrastructure that
require regular maintenance. City
staff alternative modification clarifies
that all routine maintenance in
streambeds will conform to the
Coastal Act.
5 5.11 NH-I-27: Flood
Control
Structures
Require flood control devices that alter streams to
incorporate best mitigation measures whenever feasible, and only permit them where no other method for
protecting existing structures in the flood plain is
feasible, where such
protection is necessary for public safety, or to protect existing development.

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

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
policy text to include rivers, water
supply, and mention of fish and
wildlife habitat.
5 5.12 NH-I-31:

Critical
Facilities
Location
Site critical public facilities including hospital and
healthcare facilities, emergency shelters, police and fire stations, and emergency communications facilities
outside of the tsunami evacuation zone, and 100-year
flood plains.

Site critical public facilities including hospital and
healthcare facilities, emergency shelters, police
and fire stations, and emergency
communications facilities outside of the tsunami
evacuation zone, 100-year flood plains, and
other portions of the Coastal Vulnerability Zone
over the anticipated life of the development.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
policy text to include Coastal
Vulnerability Zones.

14.b
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification

5.13 NH-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.

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.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
policy text to expand considerations
of ESHA buffers
5 5.14 NH-I-39:

Vegetation
Management
Promote and support the North County Fire Authority’s
Vegetation Management Program to reduce
urban/wildland interface fire hazards.

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.

CCC suggested modification amends
policy to require LCP consistency;
however, City staff is proposing an
alternative modification to address a
grammatical error.
6 6.1 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 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.

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 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.

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

CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory text. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to add language related to balancing
City priorities.
6 6.2 A Coastal Act
Policies
N/A N/A Additionally, for all purposes within 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.

Staff had previously recommended an
alternative modification that would
reinsert reference to Section
30610(g) of the Coastal Act into the
exclusions of the SSM definition.

Upon further discussion with CCC
staff, City staff agrees with the
removal of language referencing
subdivision (g) of Section 30610 of
Public Resources Code from the
exclusion language of the SSM
definition. This code provision within
the Coastal Act is applicable to
properties within the City and would
not equate to a SSM and thus does
not need to be included as an
exclusion in the SSM definition. CCC
staff prefers, and City staff agrees,
that this provision and definition not
be interpreted together.

14.b
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.2 Coastal Act
Policies
Therefore, the policies focus on protection and armoring of the shoreline and reassessment of the adaptation plan in the future. The policies do not include managed
retreat as an adaptation strategy unless and until a
future Local Coastal Land Use Plan amendment and
public input process culminates in supporting the
strategy.

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.

N/A CCC suggested modification clarifies
language to be consistent with the
Coastal Act.
6 6.3 Vulnerability
Assessment -
Pacific
Institute
Study
However, because the Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps
show significant erosion for areas that are protected by existing shoreline protection structures, the Maps
highlight the importance of the existing structures and the vital need for them to be maintained to protect those vulnerable areas.

Deleted 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.

CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory text. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to add language related to the
existing shoreline protections in the
City.
6 6.4 Adaptation
Plan
The cost-benefit analysis section of the Adaptation Plan was not adopted or approved by the City of Pacifica. The purpose of the cost benefit 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 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.

Deleted The cost-benefit analysis section of the Adaptation Plan was not adopted or approved by the City of
Pacifica. The purpose of the cost benefit 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.

CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory text. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to add language related to the costbenefit analysis.
6 6.4 Adaptation
Plan
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 and reassessment of the Adaptation Plan in the future.

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.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.
6 6.4 Adaptation
Plan
Therefore, changes to the cost-benefit analysis 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.

Deleted Therefore, changes to the cost-benefit analysis are not necessary to inform the Coastal Resiliency
policies.

CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory text. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to add language related to the costbenefit analysis.
6 6.4 Adaptation
Plan
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. To the contrary, the City has
rejected managed retreat as a sea level rise adaptation Deleted 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 policies in
CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory text. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to add language related to the
Adaptation Plan and potential future
changes.

14.b
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification policy in this LCP and managed retreat could only
become the policy of the City subsequent to a future
amendment to the LCP.
this LCP and any future changes to these policies will
require an amendment to this LCP.
6 6.5A 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.

N/A Delete An additional modification removes
the entirety of this policy and replaces
it with the policy below.
6 6.5 CR-I-1:

Vulnerability
Identification
and Mapping
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.

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 zone.

Delete CCC suggested modification amends
policy to include Coastal Vulnerability
Zones.

An additional modification removes
the entirety of this policy and
replaces it with the policy below.
6 6.5B CR-I-1: Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
N/A N/A 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.
6 6.6 CR-I-2:

Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text
6 6.6A CR-I-2
Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
The City shall implement its Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Plan as expressed in the general and sub-area 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 N/A Deleted An additional modification removes
this entire text.

14.b
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification trust.
6 6.6B CR-I-2
Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
Development in Coastal Vulnerability Zones may be
approved consistent with the sub-area policies in Section

6.6 if the following findings can be made:

N/A Development located in Coastal Vulnerability Zones
may only be approved if such development,
measured over its full anticipated life, is sited,
designed, and conditioned:

Alternative modification to
demonstrate compliance with Coastal
Act.
6 6.6C CR-I-2
Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
a. The proposed development is sited and designed to
avoid, and where unavoidable, to minimize coastal
hazards and impacts to coastal resources to the
maximum extent feasible, consistent with the Adaptation Plan;
N/A a. To avoid, and where unavoidable, to minimize
risks from coastal hazards to the maximum feasible;
Alternative modification to
demonstrate compliance with Coastal
Act.
6 6.6 CR-I-2:

Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
b. All project impacts on coastal resources are 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-I59. b. All project impacts on coastal resources are
avoided, and where unavoidable, minimized and
mitigated to the maximum extent consistent with
Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-59.
b. To avoid, and where unavoidable, to minimize
and commensurately mitigate to the maximum
extent feasible;
CCC suggested modification amends
policy to prioritize avoidance of
coastal resource impacts
6 6.6 CR-I-2:

Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
c. The project will not pose unacceptable risks to life or property or otherwise create a nuisance; and
c. The project will not pose unacceptable risks to
life or property for the anticipated life of the
development or otherwise create a nuisance;
c. To avoid creating a nuisance; Clarification to align with proposed added definition of “anticipated life”
6 6.6 CR-I-2:

Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
d. The project will not encroach on public trust lands. d. The project will not encroach on public trust lands for the anticipated life of the development;
and
d. To avoid encroachment onto public trust lands;
and
Clarification to align with proposed
added definition of “anticipated life”
6 6.6 CR-I-2:

Development
in Coastal
Vulnerability
Zones
N/A e. The project is designed to assure stability and
structural integrity absent the need for shoreline
protective devices.
e. To assure stability and structural integrity
without reliance on shoreline protection devices,
except as provided in CR-I-38, CR-I-39, CR-I-40.

CCC suggested modification is an
addition of a Coastal Act provision.

City staff alternative modification
clarifies that the policy relates to the
anticipated life of the development
consistent with other policies in the
LCP.
6 6.7 CR-I-3:

Monitoring
Shoreline
Change
The monitoring program shall include yearly (minimum)
shoreline and bluff edge surveys and also establish
thresholds for reassessing the City’s Adaptation Plan.

The monitoring program shall include biannual
(minimum following winter and summer)
shoreline and bluff edge surveys and also
establish thresholds for reassessing the City’s
Adaptation Plan.

The monitoring program shall include biannual
(minimum following winter and summer) shoreline
and bluff edge surveys and also establish thresholds
for reassessing the City’s Shoreline Adaptation
ProgramPlan.

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

CCC suggested modification would
require the City to conduct additional
monitoring. The new requirement
may be too burdensome on City
resources. City staff proposes an
alternative modification that would
allow the City to alternate the areas
that are surveyed and timing in order
to realistically meet the requirements
of this policy. The schedule would be
created in coordination with CCC staff
in order to provide the most valuable
and efficient data.

14.b
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.7A CR-I-4
Assessing
Coastal
Resiliency
Provisions
Implementati
on
The City shall reassess its Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan as expressed in the general and sub-area Coastal
Resilience policies every five years or sooner as required by the shoreline monitoring program (Coastal Resilience Policy CR-I-3). The reassessment shall consider the
following:
• Efficacy of Adaptation Plan and implemented
measures.
• Updated sea level rise projections and risks.
• Potential need to revise adaptation measures or
implement new measures, including review of
emerging engineering, science, and technologies.
• Funding needs and potential funding sources.

The draft findings of the City’s reassessment shall be
disseminated to the public for review and comment prior to being finalized.

N/A The City shall assess implementation of the LCP’s
coastal resiliency provisions at least every five years, where such assessment shall at the 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.
• Updated seal level rise projections and risks.
• The potential need to revise coastal
resiliency measures and/or to implement
new measures, including review of emerging
engineering, science, and technologies.
• Funding needs and potential funding
sources.
• 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 City shall use such assessment 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.

Alternative modification to
demonstrate compliance with Coastal
Act.
6 6.8 CR-I-5:

Shoreline
Adaptation
Program
Within three years of certification of the LCP Land Use Plan update, the City shall adopt a Shoreline Mitigation Program to address the coastal resource impacts of
existing and future shoreline protection projects in the City.

Within three years of certification of the LCP
Land Use Plan update, the City shall adopt a
Shoreline Mitigation Program to address the
coastal resource impacts of existing and future
shoreline protection projects in the City, and it
shall be submitted to the Coastal Commission for
certification as an LCP amendment.

Within 10 years of the certification of this LUP the
City shall develop a Shoreline Adaptation Program
for the City’s shoreline and obtain Coastal
Commission certification of the an LCP amendment
informed by the Plan.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
. Alternative modification to
demonstrate compliance with Coastal
Act. This policy has been expanded to
included specific details regarding
CCC’s expectation of what the scope
of the Program should be and sets a
10-year timeline by which the
Program needs to be certified. This
program is meant to compliment the

14.b
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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-I454 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 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) 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,
Coastal Access and Resilience
Program, associated with the Special
Shoreline Resiliency Areas.

14.b
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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
armoringprotection 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 armoring 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 armoring
shoreline protection structures to
withstand coastal hazard conditions
over time as sea levels rise, the
feasibility and costs of anticipated
maintenance activities, any anticipated

14.b
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification augmentations or replacement that may
be necessary over time as sea levels rise,
and any threshold hazard conditions
beyond which the armoring 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

14.b
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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 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

14.b
Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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.
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-I5934), grants, state/federal funds, and GHADs/CSAs. Opportunities to integrate
adaptation strategies with other
planning processes (e.g., Local Hazard
Mitigation Plans, Capital Improvement

14.b
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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.
6 6.8 CR-I-5:

Shoreline
Mitigation
Program
Until the adoption of a Shoreline Mitigation Program,
coastal resource impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with CR-I-59.

Until the adoption of a Shoreline Mitigation
Program by the City and subsequent certification
by the Coastal Commission, coastal resource
impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with CRI-59.

Deleted CCC suggested modification requires
LCP amendment to incorporate
shoreline mitigation program
6 6.8A CR-I-7
Transfer of
Development
Rights
Program
Use the City’s transfer of development rights (TDR)
ordinance to relocate development rights from Coastal
Vulnerability zones (sending sites) to receiving sites
outside of Coastal Vulnerability zones. Identify areas
where densities and heights may be increased using TDR
credits, including to facilitate affordable housing.

N/A 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.

Clarification of policy text.
6 6.9 CR-I-8: Critical
Transportatio
n
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.

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.

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.

City staff alternative modification
would delete the word “prior,” which
clarifies that a permit must be
obtained and can be modified
through the appropriate approval
process over time.
6 6.10 CR-I-9: Hazard
Prone
Infrastructure
The City will preserve, protect, or relocate hazard prone infrastructure to maintain critical services.

Preservation/protection in situ with shoreline armoring shall be required to meet the requirements of Policies.

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.

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.

City staff alternative modification
would delete the word “prior,” which
clarifies that a permit must be
obtained and can be modified
through the appropriate approval
process over time.

14.b
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.10
A
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.

N/A 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 LCP’s coastal resiliency provisions.

Correction of references.
6 6.11 CR-I-15:

Shoreline
Protection
Structures
N/A 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.

Deleted
An additional modification deletes
this that was a CCC suggested
modification.
6 6.12 CR-I-15: Beach
Nourishment
N/A Beach Nourishment. 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-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. Repeat as
necessary. Mitigate all adverse impacts and
monitor effectiveness over time.

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
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. 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.

CCC suggested modification was an
attempt to organize the document by
taking several policies in the subarea
sections related to Beach
Nourishment and putting them in
Section 6.5 Coastal Resiliency Policies
to apply to the entire Coastal Zone.

However, City staff proposes an
alternative modification that is more
inclusive of all the language that is
included in the 2020 Revised
Certification Draft related to Beach
Nourishment by deleting CR-I-55 and
incorporating the language into CR-1-
15 14.b
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.12
A
CR-I-16:

Additional
Flood
Protection
Measures.

N/A N/A 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.

Reorganization of document and
combined policy text.
6 6.12
B
CR-I-17
Groundwater
Monitoring
N/A N/A The City shall begin groundwater monitoring to help determine needs for dewatering wells in the lowest
portions of the coastal neighborhoods.

An additional modification that
reorganizes the document and also
broadens the applicability of this
policy.
6 6.12
C
CR-I-18
Caltrans
Coordination
N/A N/A The City shall coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate options for protecting Highway 1, if necessary.

An additional modification that
reorganizes the document.
6 6.13
A
Subarea
Descriptions
The following policies and programs implement the nearterm sea level rise adaptation priorities for each sub-area in Pacifica, and identify 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.

The following section discusses implementation the
near-term sea level rise adaptation priorities for
each sub-area in Pacifica, and identifies 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.

Typo correction needed due to
reorganization of chapter.

14.b
Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.13 Sub-area
Policies and
Programs
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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.13 Sub-area
Policies and
Programs
Generally, for all lands within the 2050 Pacific Institute erosion hazard zone11, utilities, roadways and other
public infrastructure should be floodproofed unless other adaptation alternatives are implemented and performing
well.

Generally, for land within the Coastal
Vulnerability zones, 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.

Generally, for land within the Coastal Vulnerability
Zones, 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.

CCC suggested modification amends
text to use Coastal Vulnerability
Zones. Alternative Modification to
address a typo
6 6.13 Sub-area
Policies and
Programs
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 (CR-I-61).

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 the least
environmentally damaging feasible alternative
and consistent with LCP and Coastal Act policies
(CR-I-61).

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 underperformance of protection measures, only if such floodproofing infrastructure is designed to eliminate
or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand
supply, consistent with LCP and Coastal Act policies
(CR-I-16).

CCC suggested modification amends
text to related to floodproofing
infrastructure. City staff is proposing
an alternative modification to clarify
requirements for sand supply.
6 6.13 Sub-area
Policies and
Programs
The City’s overall approach for new development is to
minimize or avoid current and projected future coastal
hazards through siting and design. At the same time,
managed retreat is not included in any of the near-term policies. Managed retreat would be reconsidered if
feasibility and monitoring warranted, as detailed in
Coastal Resilience Policies CR-I-3 and CR-I-4.

The City’s overall approach to address 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.

N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
introductory language specific to
managed retreat. Since the text is not
policy language, staff is not proposing
an alternative modification.
6 6.14 N/A N/A The Special Resiliency Areas (SRA) include the existing shoreline protection structures in the
Rockaway Beach and West Sharp Park sub-areas.

These areas have existing development patterns
with significant amounts of Pre-Coastal Act
development, a mix of public streets and
infrastructure, land use prioritized by the Coastal
Act, and significant unified public coastal access, all protected by broad existing shoreline protection,
that warrant a unique policy approach. The purpose
of modifying policies applicable to this area is to
allow ongoing economic use and vitality of property,
provision of public services, operation of visitorserving uses, and protection of robust coastal access for all persons including persons with disabilities
The Special Shoreline Resilience Area
policies are incorporated at the end
of the chapter.

14.b
Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification within a Special Resiliency Area (SRA). The two SRA
locations are identified in Figure 6-2 and 6-3.
6 6.15 CR-I-17
Shoreline
Management
Plan
N/A N/A The City will establish a funding source for visitor amenity improvements implementation. Funding
sources may include, but not be limited to, grants,
fees, assessments, taxes, and any other lawful public
or private funding sources. The City will create a
funding and implementation plan with specific
projects to improvese visitor amenities in the Special
Resiliency Areas or elsewhere in Pacifica. Creation of
this plan will include community outreach and input.

The plan will be updated every 5 years and 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 amenity improvements and shoreline
protection device removal may occur anywhere
within the City of Pacifica. provided until such time
as the CCC certifies the plan
In order to address many of the CCC
suggested modification’s impacts on
Pacifica’s existing developed
neighborhoods, City staff is proposing
an alternative modification that
would create two SRAs, which would
allow those areas greater flexibility in
permitting requirements and design.

The Shoreline Management Plan is
intended to provide other types of
coastal enhancements and benefits,
such as increased coastal access,
while allowing the existing shoreline
protection structures in Rockaway
Beach and West Sharp Park to be
used in technical analysis of hazards
for development in those areas.

The Special Shoreline Resilience Area
policies are incorporated at the end
of the chapter.
6 6.16 CR-I-15:

Shoreline
Protection
Structures (0-
1foot SLR or
260 foot
offset from
bluff toe to
infrastructure)
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 environmentallydamaging alternative, impacts are fully mitigated consistent with CR-I-5, 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-I56 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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.

14.b
Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.17 CR-I-16: Beach
Nourishment
(2 feet SLR or
260-foot
offset from
bluff toe to
infrastructure) .

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-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. Repeat as necessary.

Mitigate all adverse impacts and monitor effectiveness
over time.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.17 ACR-I-17
Transfer of
Development
Rights
(ongoing).

Provide an option to private landowners to voluntarily
transfer development potential as supported by CR-I-7.

N/A Deleted An additional modification deletes this
policy to reorganize and condense the
chapter.
6 6.18 CR-I-18:

Shoreline
Protection
Structures (0-
1 foot SLR or
220-foot
offset from
bluff toe to
infrastructure
or
development)
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-I5 or CR-I-59, as necessary.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.19 CR-I-19: Beach
Nourishment
(0-1 foot SLR
or 220-foot
offset from
bluff toe to
infrastructure
or
development)
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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.20 CR-I-20:

Shoreline
Protection
Structures (0-
1 feet SLR or
70-foot offset
from bluff toe
to
development
Shoreline Protection Structures (0-1 feet SLR or 70-foot offset from bluff toe to development or infrastructure).

Private landowners 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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.

14.b
Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification or
infrastructure)
.
6 6.21 CR-I-21: Beach
Nourishment
(0-2 feet SLR
or 70-foot
offset from
bluff toe to
development
or
infrastructure)
.

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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.22 CR-I-22: Flood
Protection (1
feet SLR)
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.

Flood Protection. Enable property owners to
modify development structures 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.

Deleted City staff alternative modification
would delete the word “prior,” which
clarifies that a permit must be
obtained and can be modified
through the appropriate approval
process over time.

An additional modification removes
this policy to reorganizes the
document and condense the policies.
6 6.23 Sharp Park Golf Course. Strongly support the City and County of San Francisco’s 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.

Deleted Deleted CCC suggested modification deleted
the entire policy related to the Sharp
Park Golf Course. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
that would keep a policy related to
the Sharp Park Golf Course but would
focus on public access and resource
enhancements.

An additional modification removes
this policy to reorganize the chapter.

The policy is reinserted below.
6 6.24 CR-I-24:

Shoreline
Protection
Structures (0
feet SLR)
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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.

14.b
Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.25 CR-I-25:

Structure
Elevation (0-2
feet SLR)
Structure Elevation (0-2 feet SLR). Maintain existing or construct shoreline protection structures if consistent with Policies CR-I-56 and CR-I-57 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 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.

Structure Elevation. 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,
determined via a site-specific study.

Deleted City staff alternative modification
would delete the word “prior,” which
clarifies that a permit must be
obtained and can be modified
through the appropriate approval
process over time.

An additional modification removes
this policy to reorganize the chapter
and condense the policies.
6 6.26 CR-I-26: Beach
Nourishment
(0-1 feet SLR)
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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.27 CR-I-27: Flood
Protection (0
foot SLR)
(0 foot SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.27
A
CR-I-27 Flood
Protection
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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.28 CR-I-28: Flood
Protection (3
feet SLR).
(3 feet SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.28 CR-I-28 Flood
Protection
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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.29 CR-I-29:

Shoreline
Protection
Structure
Shoreline
Protection
Structures (0
feet SLR).

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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.30 CR-I-30:

Shoreline
Protection (2-
3 feet SLR, or
when
backshore toe
(2-3 feet SLR, or when backshore toe is 100 feet from
Highway 1)
Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.

14.b
Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification is 100 feet
from Highway
1).
6 6.30 ACR-I-30:

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

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.31 CR-I-31: Public
Access (0 feet
SLR).
(0 feet SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.31 ACR-I-31: Public
Access
Plan and provide for enhanced public access, consistent with the City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (CR-I-5).

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.32 CR-I-32: Beach
Nourishment/
Public Access
(0 feet SLR).

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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.32 ACR-I-33
Development
Setbacks
(ongoing).

Implement new development shoreline setbacks
consistent with CR-I-44.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.32 BCR-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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.33 CR-I-35:

Shoreline
Protection (2
ft SLR or 100
foot offset
from
shoreline to
infrastructure) .

Shoreline Protection (2 ft SLR or 100 foot offset from
shoreline to infrastructure). Evaluate beach conditions and consider future shoreline protection to protect
existing parking structures and the existing Linda Mar
stormwater and wastewater pump station structures as
necessary.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.34 CR-I-37: Beach
Nourishment
(2 ft SLR or
100 foot
offset from
shoreline to
infrastructure) .

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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.

14.b
Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.34 ACR-I-36
Highway One
Protections
Coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate options for
protecting Highway 1, if necessary.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.35 CR-I-38: Flood
Protection (0
feet SLR).
(0 feet SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.35 ACR-I-38: Flood
Protection
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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.36 CR-I-39: Flood
Protection (2
feet SLR or
100-foot
offset from
shoreline to
infrastructure) .
(2 feet SLR or 100-foot offset from shoreline to
infrastructure)
Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.36 ACR-I-39: Flood
Protection
Floodproof the Linda Mar pump stations (sewer and
stormwater) to mitigate future coastal storm flooding
vulnerabilities to wave run-up as necessary.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.37 CR-I-40:

Groundwater
Management
(0-2 feet SLR).
(0-2 feet SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.37 ACR-I-40:

Groundwater
Management
Begin groundwater monitoring to determine needs for
dewatering wells in the lowest portions of the West Linda Mar neighborhood.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.
6 6.38 CR-I-41:

Shoreline
Protection
Structure
Upgrades.

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.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
reorganizes the document.
6 6.38 CR-I-42: Flood
Protection (0-
1 feet SLR).
(0-1 feet SLR) Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification
generalize policy and reorganized the
document.
6 6.38 ACR-I-42: Flood
Protection
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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.

14.b
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.40 CR-I-19:

Technical
Reports.

Development proposed on the shoreline 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.

Development proposed 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.

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
the text to make the policy applicable
to Coastal Vulnerability Zones,
instead of shoreline properties.
6 6.41 CR-I-1943:

Technical
Reports.
• consider the impacts from the med-high projection
(CalNRA & OPC 2018) of sea-level rise for the anticipated duration of the proposed development;
• consider the impacts from the med-high
projection (CalNRA & OPC 2018; or similar
precautionary projections as reflected in future
updated statewide guidance) of sea-level rise for
the anticipated life of the proposed
development;
N/A consider the impact from the intermediate-high
projections (CalNRA & OPC 2024; or similar
precautionary projections as reflected in future
updated statewide guidance) of sea-level rise for the
anticipated life of the proposed development
CCC suggested modification amends
the text to reflect that best available
science may change over time.
6 6.42 CR-I-1943:

Technical
Reports.
• demonstrate that the development will avoid (or if
unavoidable, minimize) impacts from coastal hazards to
the maximum extent feasible; and
• 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;
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 will be allowed to consider protection
provided by existing shoreline protection structures
when analyzing hazards; may consider CR-I-38, CR-I39 and CR-I-41.

CCC suggested modification reflects
language from the Sea Level Rise
adopted policy guidance. City staff is
generally in support of the
modification; however, staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address the Special Shoreline
Resiliency Areas. The alternative
modification will give the SRA the
ability to use the existing shoreline
protections structures when
analyzing coastal hazards impacts.
6 6.43 CR-I-1943:

Technical
Reports.

N/A • 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
N/Afor 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 asd
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
CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language related to safety
requirements.

14.b
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification impacts as applicable; and
6 6.44 CR-I-2044:

Siting and
Design.

New development on vacant shoreline property shall be
sited and designed to be safe from 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. 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 a waiver of any rights to such protection
structures and where necessary require a removal and
restoration plan, including bonding for large projects, to avoid future shoreline protection structures or project failure.

New development in Coastal Vulnerability Zones
shall be sited and designed to be safe from
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, 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 waive 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.

New Ddevelopment 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. Coastal
development pPermit 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 waive 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 CRI-44. , new development shall be allowed to be sited and designed in reliance on and in consideration of
protection provided by existing shoreline protection
structures.

CCC suggested modification amends
the policy to be applicable to the
Coastal Vulnerability Zone and
reflects current CCC conditions of
approval. City staff is generally in
support of the modification;
however, staff is proposing an
alternative modification to address
the Special Resiliency Areas. The
alternative modification will give the
SRA the ability to use the existing
shoreline protections structures
when siting and designing
development.

Additionally, staff is proposing an
alternative modification to change
the year time period to “anticipated
life.” A CCC suggested modification
added a definition for anticipated life,
staff is proposing this alternative
modification to be consistent
throughout the document.
6 6.45 CR-I-2145:

Assumption of
Risk by Private
Landowners.

Coastal
Hazards Risk
Disclosure
Permit approvals of development on the shoreline shall
require the applicant to record a deed restriction
requiring the owner to assume liability and indemnify
and hold the City harmless and make other
acknowledgments relating to the risks of development on the property.

Permit approvals of development in Coastal
Vulnerability Zones and Tsunami Evacuation
Zones shall require the 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 of development.

Permit Coastal Development Permit approvals of
development in Coastal Vulnerability Zones or and
Tsunami Inundation Zones (Figure 6-2) 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 theyapplicant 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
CCC suggested modification amends
the policy to be applicable to the
Coastal Vulnerability Zone and
Tsunami Evacuation Zone and reflects
current CCC conditions of approval.

City staff is generally in support of the
modification; however, City staff
proposes to change “Evacuation” to
“Inundation” zone. The use of
Tsunami Evacuation Zones for this
purpose is overly broad and not
closely enough related to actual
tsunami hazard conditions. City
staff’s alternative modification will
ensure a requirement more closely
aligned with actual hazard conditions.

Additional modifications include

14.b
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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 of
development. • acknowledge the site is subject to coastal hazards, including but not limited to
episodic and long- term shoreline retreat
and coastal erosion, 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
specific language to be included in
deed restrictions. Additionally, City
Council directed staff to include an
exception clause to this policy. CCC
staff does not agree with the
exception clause because it could
lead to error and omissions in
technical reports that would put the
City and property at risk. The policy is
a disclosure of risks and does not
require action until and if hazards
occur. Staff request Council direction
on this specific topic.

14.b
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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; and
• 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 Tsunami Inundation Zone
for the Anticipated Life of the project.
6 6.45
A
CR-I-23 Bluff
Face
Development
Shoreline protection structures, grading, and landform
alteration on bluff faces are prohibited, except for the following:
• Public access structures where no feasible
alternative means of public access exists; and
N/A Development on bluff faces is prohibited, except for the following:
• Native bluff landscaping; public recreational access
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 providing
such improvements/infrastructure exists; and
Clarifies policy.

14.b
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.46 CR-I-2549:

Substantial
Modifications
to Existing
Structures.

Substantial Modifications to Existing Structures. When a proposed physical improvement to an existing structure
would constitute a Substantial Exterior Structural
Modification (SESM), as defined, the portion of the
project constituting a SESM shall be undertaken
consistent with the LCP and, if applicable, the Coastal Act, including but not limited to Policies CR-I-43 and CR-I44. 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.

Substantial Structural Modifications. When
proposed modifications to an existing structure
constitute a Substantial Structural Modification
(SSM), as defined, such proposed development
shall correct any existing legal nonconformities
and shall be undertaken consistent with the LCP
and the Coastal Act, including but not limited to
Policies CR-I-43 and CR-I-44.

Substantial Structural Modifications. When
proposed modifications to a an existing structure
constitute a Substantial Structural Modification
(SSM), as defined, such proposed development shall
correct any existing legal nonconformities and shall
be undertaken consistent with the LCP and the
Coastal Act, including but not limited to Policies CRI-1943 and CR-I-2044. Except that in Special 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.

CCC suggested modification requires
projects that meet the SSM definition
to correct any existing legal
nonconformities, in order to the
entire site to be compliant with the
LCP and Coastal Act. Staff is generally
in support; however, staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to address the Special Resiliency
Areas. The alternative modification
will give the SRA the ability to correct
only existing nonconformities
associated with coastal hazards
present on the site, rather than a
broader range of potential LCLUP or
zoning nonconformities.
6 6.47 CR-I-2751:

Habitat Sea
Level Rise
Migration
Buffers.

A sea level rise buffer area shall be added to require 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, 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.

An additional sea level rise buffer area shall be
added to required habitat buffers if necessary to
allow for the migration of wetlands and other
coastal habitats caused by sea level rise over the
anticipated life of the development. Habitats
include all wetlands, riparian, intertidal/shoreline
and terrestrial environmentally sensitive habitat
areas (ESHAs) as defined by the Coastal Act. The
sea level rise projection considered shall be
determined based on the type of development
and current State guidance.

A sea level rise buffer area shall be added to
required habitat buffers if necessary to allow for the
migration of wetlands and other coastal habitats
caused by sea level rise over the anticipated life of
the development. The overall buffer area shall
include both the sea level rise and habitat buffer.

Habitats include all wetlands, riparian,
intertidal/shoreline and terrestrial environmentally
sensitive habitat areas (ESHAs) as defined by the
Coastal Act. The sea level rise projection considered
shall be determined based on the type of
development and current State guidance. N/A
CCC suggested modification would
require an additional seal level rise
buffer. Staff is generally in support of
the modification; however, staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to clarify that a buffer area should
include all the buffer requirements.

During the May 23 discussion, City
Council directed staff to keep the CCC
suggested modification and remove
the alternative modification.
6 6.47
A
CR-I-29
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.

N/A 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.

Alternative modification from “Update
the Zoning Ordinance” to “Prohibit”
6 6.47
B
CR-I-30 Soft
Shoreline
Protections
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, 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).

N/A 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. Consider combining beach
replenishment with groin construction to maintain beaches and protect development.

Clarification to policy.

14.b
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.48 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. The beach nourishment program 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.

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 subarea 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.

Delete and incorporated into CR-I-1 CCC suggested modification clarified that beach nourishment needs to be
in compliance with the Coastal Act.

City staff proposes an alternative
modification that would delete CR-I55 and incorporate the language into CR-I-16.
6 6.49 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 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. Activities considered “repair and
maintenance” shall not result in any enlargement or
extension of the shoreline protection structure, 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
Mitigation Program (CR-I-5) and/or Policy CR-I-59.

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,
removed if no longer necessary and/or allowed,
and the area restored. Activities considered
“repair and maintenance” shall not result in any
enlargement or 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 Mitigation Program (CR-I-5) and/or
Policy CR-I-59.

N/ALegally 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, removed if no longer
necessary and/or 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, shall provide mitigation for any new
coastal resource impacts not previously or otherwise
mitigated, including through the City’s Shoreline
Adaptation Program (CR-I-5), Coastal Access and
Resilience Program (CR-I-44) and/or Policy CR-I-34,
shall minimize impacts, and must be found to be the
least environmentally damaging feasible alternative.

CCC suggested modification revises
the policy to align with other
provisions in the LCP, Coastal Act, and
CCC policy. Staff is not proposing
alternative modification. Minor
revision to clarify policy and correct
references.

14.b
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.50 CR-I-3156:

Existing
Shoreline
Protection
Structures
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.

Deleted 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.

CCC suggested modification deletes
text related to modifications to
existing structures. City staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to clarify that maintenance and
modification of existing shoreline
protection structures is allowed.
6 6.51 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 be permitted
consistent Section 30235 of the Coastal Act and with the LCP’s sub-area policies only when required to serve
coastal-dependent uses or protect existing structures or public beaches in danger from erosion, when designed
to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local
shoreline sand supply.

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 or public beaches in
danger from erosion, when there is no less
environmentally damaging feasible alternative
and when designed to avoid, and where
unavoidable, minimize 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.

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
coastal hazards erosion, when there is no less
environmentally damaging feasible alternative and
when designed to avoid, and where unavoidable,
minimize 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.

CCC suggested modification amends
the policy to address alternative
evaluation and minimizing coastal
resource impacts. City staff is
generally in support; however, City
staff is proposing an alternative
modification that would replace the
word “erosion” with “coastal
hazards” in order to be more inclusive
of the variety of coastal hazards
affecting the coastline and in
recognition of the deleted sub-area
policies. Minor revision to correct
references and clarification.
6 6.52 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, or 2) no longer require(s) armoring. 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.

Shoreline protection structures shall only be
authorized until the time when the structure
protected by such shoreline protection structure:
1) is/are no longer present, 2) no longer
require(s) armoring, or 3) is redeveloped
pursuant to the definition of a Substantial
Structural Modification (SSM).

N/A CCC suggested modification amends
the policy related to time limits on
shoreline protection structures. Staff
is generally in support of the
modification, if alternative
modifications to other policies
related to the Special Resiliency Areas
(SRAs) remain.
6 6.53 CR-I-34:

Mitigating
Impacts of
New Shoreline
Protection
Structures.

This policy may be met through compliance with the
City’s Shoreline Mitigation Program (CR-I-5).

N/A This policy may be met through compliance with the City’s Shoreline Adaptation Program (CR-I-5) or Coastal Access and Resilience Program (CR-I-44).

Correction to references
6 6.54 CR-I-36:

Emergency
Shoreline
Protection
Structures
N/A N/A 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
New policy.

14.b
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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 6.55 CR-I-37: Sharp
Park Golf
Course
N/A N/A 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.

Reorganization of chapter
6 6.56 CR-I-38: Public
Infrastructure
Along the
Shoreline in
Special
Resiliency
Areas
N/A N/A 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 6-3 and 6-4 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.

SSRA policy
6 6.57 CR-I-39:

Development
Directly Inland
of Public
Infrastructure
in Special
Resiliency
Area
N/A N/A 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 6-3 and 6-4 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-4319 and CR-I-4420. In addition to meeting the requirements of Policy CR-I-4521, 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 6.58 CR-I-40
Armoring in
Special
Resiliency
Areas
N/A N/A In the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-3 and 6-4, 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,

14.b
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification sidewalks, parking areas, accessways, water and sewer
infrastructure) on the immediate oceanfront of the Special Shoreline Resilience Areas mapped in Figures 6-3 and 6-4.

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). 6 6.58 CR-I-41
Effective Date
of Policies etc.

N/A N/A 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-I434, 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.
6 6.59 CR-I-42
Suspension of
Policies
N/A N/A 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 15 months of
acceptance of the LCP amendment for
filing as identified in Policy CR-I-41, or
o any of the CDP applications that
are required every5 years to
implement projects are not
submitted in complete form, or
o any of the projects required in the Coastal

14.b
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification Access and Resilience 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
within6 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 within8
years of effective certification of the
LUPA that created the requirement for
the Shoreline Adaptation Program (i.e.,
created Policy CR-I-5), 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-I-38, 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.
6 6.60 CR-I-43: End
Date of
Policies CR-I38, CR-I-39,
N/A N/A 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

14.b
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification CR-I-40. 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, 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.
6 6.61 CR
-I-44:

Coastal Access
and Resilience
Program.

N/A N/A 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:
• Enhanced public pathway system seaward of
private development in the Rockaway Beach area.
• Coordinated vertical accessways, landscaping,
benches, picnic tables, bicycle racks, garbage and
recycling receptacles, doggie mitt stations, and
enhanced signage in the Sharp Park area.
• The following projects listed in the program:

14.b
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 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, 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:
• Development of a protocol for requiring mitigation
for development within Special Shoreline Resilience
Areas that is allowed to rely on existing shoreline
protection structures pursuant to CR-I-38 and CR-I39, thus resulting in continued impacts from that armoring.
• Formation of a GHAD, CSA, or similar.
• State or Federal grant funding • Other funding mechanisms identified for adaptation planning and projects as discussed in
Policy CR-I5.

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.

14.b
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification 6 6.61 6.9 Costal
Flooding and
Other Hazard
Standard
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.

N/A Deleted Reorganization of chapter.

G
l
o
s
s
a
r
y

7.1A Acronyms N/A N/A CSA: City Service Area Clarification G
l
o
s
s
a
r
y

7.1B Acronyms N/A N/A SCS: Sustainable Communities Strategy Clarification Glossary 7.1 Anticipated
Life
N/A 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.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds new
text from CCC's adopted guidance for
residential development and critical
infrastructure.

Glossary 7.2 Beach The expanse of sand, gravel, cobble or other loose material that extends landward from the 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 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
N/A CCC suggested modification amends
the text to be consistent with Coastal
Act.

14.b
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification further point separating the dynamic portion of
the beach from the inland area as distinguished
by vegetation, debris or other geological or
historical evidence.

Glossary 7.3 Bluff A high bank or bold headland with a broad, precipitous, sometimes rounded cliff face overlooking a plain or body of water.

Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text to eliminate redundancy.

Glossary 7.4 Coastal
Hazards
N/A Include but are not limited to episodic and longterm 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.

N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language.

Glossary 7.5 Development On land, in or under water, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure; dis- charge 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'bergNejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commencing with Section 4511).

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.’
N/A CCC suggested modification adds new
text to clarify terms used in
document and be consistent with the
Coastal Act.

14.b
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification Glossary 7.6 Environmenta
l Justice
The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental
laws, regulations, and policies
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
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 N/A
The City’s General Plan consistency
changes eliminated this sentence and
the suggested modification is no
longer applicable. However, the
proposed CCC Suggested
Modification is consistent with the
Coastal Act and thus should remain.

Glossary 7.7 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.”
Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text to be consistent with CCC
guidance.

Glossary 7.7A Mean-High
Tide Line
N/A N/A 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.

City Council directed staff to add a
definition for Mean High Tide Line.

While the Coastal Act makes several
mentions of “mean high tide,” the
Coastal Act does not contain a
definition. Staff is recommending an
alternative modification to add a new
definition similar to Policy CR-I-46.

Glossary GP5 Mitigation This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP consistency changes. It replaced the definition with the following: 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.

CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the definition.

N/A Staff agrees with the CCC suggested
modification from June 2024. The
definition is deleted because it relies on
the California Environmental Quality Act
definition, which may not be applicable
to all projects within the coastal zone.

14.b
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification Glossary GP6 Mitigation
Measure
This edit was added in October 2023 as part of the GP
consistency changes. It added the following: Action taken to avoid, minimize, or eliminate environmental impacts.

Mitigation includes: avoiding the im-pact 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.

CCC Suggested Modification from June 2024
recommended deletion of the definition.

Glossary 7.8 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.”
Deleted N/A CCC suggested modification deletes
text to be consistent with CCC
guidance.

Glossary 7.9 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 pre- pared.

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 runup,” “storm flood area,” and “flood prone area.” N/A CCC suggested modification adds
clarifying language to be consistent
with CCC guidance
Glossary 7.10 Substantial
Exterior
Structural
Modification
(SESM)
Substantial Exterior Structural Modification (SESM): Any physical improvement which modifies an existing
structure, as defined, to achieve any of the following:
i) a seaward encroachment of the structure; or
ii) removal or replacement of 50 percent or more of the linear length of the exterior walls, 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
iv) an increase of the existing building footprint equal to 50 percent or more;
but excluding any of the following:
i) removal, replacement, or maintenance of nonstructural components of exterior walls such as siding, shingles,
and roofing materials and windows;
Substantial Structural Modifications (SSM): Any
physical improvement which modifies an existing
structure in any of the following ways:
i) 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
ii) an addition that includes new floor area equal
to 50 percent or more of the structure’s total
existing floor area; or
iii) an increase of the existing building footprint
equal to 50 percent or more;
but excluding removal, replacement, or
maintenance of nonstructural exterior
components such as decorative siding, shingles,
Substantial Structural Modifications (SSM): Any
physical improvement which modifies an existing
structure in any of the following ways:
i) 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
ii) an addition that includes new floor area equal to
50 percent or more of the structure’s total existing
floor area; or
iii) an increase of the existing building footprint
equal to 50 percent or more;
howeverbut excluding, but not limited to removal,
replacement, or maintenance of nonstructural
exterior components, such as: decorative
i) plywood roof sheathing;
CCC suggested modification deletes
text to be consistent with CCC
guidance. Staff is generally in support
of the modification; however, staff is
proposing an alternative modification
to clarify that nonstructural elements
and waterproofing materials are not
part of the SSM definition.

14.b
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Chapter Modific
ation
Number
Policy Number
and/or Subject
Addressed
City's Certification Draft CCC Suggested Modification Draft Alternative Modification Brief Summary/Justification ii) development on any site which is protected from
coastal erosion by an existing, permitted shore- line
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. and windows.

Incremental changes that cumulatively amount
to replacement of 50 percent of more over time
shall also be considered a SSM.
ii) underlayment;
iii) siding;
iv) shingles;
v) other roof materials; and
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;
ix) remedial actions to address termite
infestation and dry rot; and
x) other modifications required to comply
with State and/or Federal laws and
regulations, such as disabled
accessibility improvements and seismic
retrofits/upgrades.

Incremental structural changes that cumulatively
amount to replacement of 50 percent or more over
time shall also be considered a SSM.
that this provision and definition not
be interpreted together. Staff is
proposing an alternative
modification, new Modification No.

6.2A, that provides the clarification
on the applicability of Section
30610(g) of the Coastal Act.

Additionally, staff has incorporated
direction provided from Council at
the March 2
nd meeting to include
general non-structural property
upgrades, remedial actions, and other
modification required by State and/or
Federal laws in the SSM exclusions.

Glos
sary

7. 1
1 Tsun
ami
Inun
datio
n
Zone
N/A N/A 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).

Staff recommends an alternative modification to add a new definition to clarify and provide guidance on the Tsunami Inundation Zone.

14.b
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Attachment B Summary Table With Alternative Modifications (5727 : LCLUP #5.1)

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

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 v i l ’ s S l i d e T u n n e l
g
Lan

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
to 30 d
develo
Densi

SAN PEDRO AVE
Note:

City of Pacifica
Local Coastal
Land Use Plan
August 2024

REVISED

CERTIFICATION
DRAFT

14.c
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) Pacifica City Council
Sue Vaterlous, Mayor
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor Pro Tem
Mary Bier
Tygarjas Bigstyck
Christine Boles
Planning Commissioners
Samantha Hauser, Chair
Alex Ferguson, Vice Chair
Lauren Berman
Daniella Devine
James Godwin
Chris Redflied
Greg Wright
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Christian Murdock, Planning Director

14.c
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) May 2013
CityofPacifica
Local Coastal
Land UsePlan
August 2024
Prepared for
City of Pacifica
by
DKS Associates
Economic & Planning Systems (EPS)
ESA

14.c
Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) This page intentionally left blank.

14.c
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose of the Local Coastal Land Use Plan .............................................1-2

1.2 Planning Context........................................................................................1-4

1.3 Local Coastal Land Use Plan Requirements ..............................................1-4

1.4 Relationship to Other Plans and Regulations .............................................1-5

1.5 Guide to Using This Document...................................................................1-6

1.6 Plan Administration ....................................................................................1-8 2 Land Use and Development ................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Coastal Act Framework ..............................................................................2-2

2.2 Current Land Use Pattern...........................................................................2-3

2.3 Land Use Framework .................................................................................2-6

2.4 Coastal Development Priorities ................................................................ 2-14

2.5 Development Capacity and Adequacy of Public Services......................... 2-29 3 Public Access and Recreation.............................................................. 3-1

3.1 Coastal Act Framework ..............................................................................3-2

3.2 Coastal Access...........................................................................................3-2

3.3 Open Space and Recreation .................................................................... 3-12

3.4 Trail System ............................................................................................. 3-20

3.5 Bicycle and Pedestrian Network ............................................................... 3-25

3.6 Roadway Network and Planned Improvements ........................................ 3-30

3.7 Public Transportation................................................................................ 3-38

3.8 Parking..................................................................................................... 3-42

3.9 Environmental Justice .............................................................................. 3-44 4 Environmental and Scenic Resources................................................. 4-1

4.1 Coastal Act Framework ..............................................................................4-2

4.2 Hydrology and Water Quality......................................................................4-3

4.3 Biological Resources................................................................................ 4-12

4.4 Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing.............................................................. 4-26

14.c
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 ii

4.5 Cultural Resources................................................................................... 4-28

4.6 Scenic and Visual Qualities ...................................................................... 4-30 5 Natural Hazards.................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Coastal Act Framework ..............................................................................5-2

5.2 Seismic and Geologic Hazards...................................................................5-2

5.3 Flooding ................................................................................................... 5-13

5.4 Fire Hazards............................................................................................. 5-18 6 Coastal Resilience………………………………………………………… 6-1

6.1 Coastal Act Framework ..............................................................................6-2

6.2 Sea Level Rise Key Findings......................................................................6-3

6.3 Preparation of Policies................................................................................6-4

6.4 General Policies ....................................................................................... 6-12

6.5 Coastal Resilience Policies ...................................................................... 6-13

6.6 Sub-Area Policies and Programs.............................................................. 6-15

6.7 New Shoreline Development Standard Policies........................................ 6-25

6.8 Shoreline Protection Structure Standard Policies ..................................... 6-28

6.9 Coastal Flooding and Other Hazard Standard Policies............................. 6-30 A Policies in Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act.......................... A-1 B Coastal Vulnerability Zone Maps ........................................................B-1 References .....................................................................................................................R-1 Glossary ..................................................................................................................... G-1

14.c
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Pacifica and the Pacifica Coastal Zone....................................................................... 1-3 Figure 2-1: Current Land Use Distribution in the Coastal Zone............................................. 2-4 Figure 2-2: Existing Land Use in the Coastal Zone...................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-3: Land Use Diagram .......................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-4: Sub-Areas and Specific Sites....................................................................................... 2-16 Figure 2-5: Pacifica Coastal Zone, North..................................................................................... 2-19 Figure 2-6: Pacifica Coastal Zone, Central .................................................................................. 2-21 Figure 2-7: Pacifica Coastal Zone, South...................................................................................... 2-24 Figure 3-1: Coastal Access................................................................................................................. 3-4 Figure 3-2: Parks and Open Space System................................................................................... 3-15 Figure 3-3: Trail System.................................................................................................................... 3-22 Figure 3-4: Bicycle Network ........................................................................................................... 3-27 Figure 3-5: Roadway Network and Planned Improvements.................................................... 3-32 Figure 3-6: Transit Routes and Facilities ...................................................................................... 3-39 Figure 4-1: Hydrology ......................................................................................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-2: Vegetation....................................................................................................................... 4-17 Figure 4-3: Potential Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas............................................... 4-20 Figure 4-4: Visual Resources........................................................................................................... 4-32 Figure 5-1: Liquefaction and Fault Lines......................................................................................... 5-5 Figure 5-2: Slope Failure and Shoreline Protection Structures................................................. 5-8 Figure 5-3: Flood Zones................................................................................................................... 5-15 Figure 5-4: Fire Hazards................................................................................................................... 5-20 Figure 6-1: Coastal Resilience Subareas......................................................................................... 6-7

14.c
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Correspondence Between Coastal Zone Chapters and General Plan Elements........................................................................................... 1-7 Table 2-1: Land Use Classifications and Density and Intensity Standards .......................... 2-12 Table 2-2: Residential Development Capacity in the Coastal Zone Under the Local Coastal Land Use Plan.................................................................. 2-31 Table 2-3: Non-Residential Development Capacity in the Coastal Zone Under the Local Coastal Land Use Plan.................................................................. 2-32 Table 3-1: Coastal Access Points.................................................................................................... 3-6 Table 3-2: Regional Parks and Beaches in the Coastal Zone ................................................. 3-13 Table 3-3: Mode Priorities by Roadway Type ........................................................................... 3-31 Table 3-4: Definition of Multi-modal Level of Service Indicators.......................................... 3-33 Table 3-5: Beach Visitor Parking ................................................................................................... 3-42 Table 6-1: Proposed Future Sea Level Rise (SLR) Amounts for Various Scenarios with Associated Probability of Occurrence ........................... 6-5 Table 6-2: Summary of Methods and Data Sources for Economic Analysis....................... 6-10

14.c
Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) 1 INTRODUCTION
The Pacifica 2040 Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) is a policy document for the long-range development of the portion of the City of Pacifica within the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Zone includes all land west of State Route 1, as well as Shelldance Nursery and some land south of City limits (see Figure 1-1, City of Pacifica and Coastal Zone). The LCLUP is an essential component of the City’s Local Coastal Program as required by the California Coastal Act. The LCLUP has been developed in tandem with the General Plan, which provides the direction for the future growth of the City, and articulates a vision of what Pacifica aspires to be.

14.c
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 1-2

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN
The California Coastal Act requires every city and county lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP). The LCP consists of two parts: a local Local coastal Coastal land Land use Use plan Plan (LCLUP)or plans, which specify specifies the intended uses of land within the Coastal Zone; and, an implementation plan comprised of the zoning ordinances; zoning district maps; and other actions which taken together implement the local coastal land use plan and Coastal Act provisions.

These provisions seek to ensure that public access to and along the shoreline is maintained; that water quality, marine life, and environmentally sensitive habitat areas are protected; and that coastal visual resources and special communities are preserved. The Coastal Act establishes calls for certain land use prioritiesuses within the Coastal Zone to have priority over other uses: recreation and visitor-serving uses, fishing, boating, and other coastal-dependent uses, and public works and industrial facilities needed to support priority uses. Other resource-based uses are also prioritized by the Coastal Act.

The Coastal Act is implemented through a partnership between the California Coastal Commission and local counties and cities, including Pacifica. By certifying an LCP, the Coastal Commission grants authority to the local jurisdiction to issue coastal development permits that are required for nearly all types of development1in the Coastal Zone. The LCLUP is the first and primary element of the City’s LCP. The LCLUP is consistent with the Coastal Act and will serve as the standard of review for the City to update its zoning code and any other implementing tools needed in the Coastal Zone, and apply to the Coastal Commission for recertification of the LCP.

The City of Pacifica’s previous LCLUP was certified in March 1980, and included two areas of deferred certification: Shelldance Nursery and the Quarry Site. The Coastal Commission retained permit-issuing authority in these deferred certification areas during the term of the prior LCLUP. The City has obtained certification of the Shelldance Nursery and Quarry Site in this LCLUP. The City’s certified Implementation Plan dates to June 1994.

Why Update Now?
The City of Pacifica last comprehensively updated its General Plan and LCLUP in 1980. In the nearly more than 40 years since then, many of its goals have been carried out, including a zoning codeZoning Ordinance with regulations to protect slopes and preserve open space, and the revitalization of the Rockaway Beach area. Many issues facing Pacifica are enduring but the legal environment governing land use, environmental preservation, housing, climate change adaptation and resiliency, and other planning issues has changed. New priorities have emerged with a new generation of Pacifica residents and stakeholders. The General Plan and LCLUP update will providehas provided for a comprehensive assessment of current conditions, and it allows today’s residents to express a vision for the future.
1 See Glossary for Coastal Act definition of “development.”

14.c
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1-3
Figure 1-1: Pacifica and the Pacifica Coastal Zone

14.c
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 1-4

1.2 PLANNING CONTEXT
Regional Location
Pacifica is within the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose metropolitan area, and at its northern end is just 10 miles from downtown San Francisco. The cities of Daly City, South San Francisco, and San Bruno border the City on the north and east, and include urban development up to the City’s borders. Much of the land to the southeast and south is preserved as units of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, State and County parks, and the San Francisco watershed, and rural and agricultural land is prevalent to the south. The Pacific Ocean borders Pacifica to the west. Access to Pacifica is primarily via State RouteHighway 1 (SR 1, or Coast Highway) and State Route 35 (SR 35, or Skyline Boulevard).

Historic Development
Pacifica remained a mainly agricultural and undeveloped area untilPacifica’s earliest development occurred with the construction of the Ocean Shore Railroad in 1905, stimulated developmentsubdivided and developed a series of small, coastside communities, including Edgemar, Salada Beach, Brighton Beach, Vallemar, Sharp Park, Pedro PointRockaway Beach, and Rockaway BeachTobin (San Pedro Terrace-by-theSea). These communitiesneighborhoods, together with Pacific Manor, Westview, Fairway Park, and Linda Mar incorporated in 1957 as the City of Pacifica. The City grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s, and most of its current housing-56 percent as of 2020-was built during those decades. Growth slowed in the 1970s, and then slowed further in the following decades, owing to the scarcity of developable land and infrastructure constraints. About 540 housing units have been built over the last 20 years, along with a limited amount of commercial development.

The Coastal Zone
Land within Pacifica west of State Route 1, as well as the Shelldance Nursery property located east of SR 1 and some additional land east of SR 1 south of City limits, is part of the Coastal Zone, subject to Pacifica’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan and the policies of the California Coastal Act. Pacifica’s Coastal Zone comprises approximately 1,286 acres of land, or about 15 percent of the Planning Area. It includes a high proportion of the City’s commercial land and visitor destinations. The Pacifica Planning Area boundary, Coastal Zone boundary, and City limits are shown in Figure 1-1.

Pacifica's Coastal ZoneThese coastal sub-areas represent geographical areas with varied types of development, contains a wide variety of land uses, including public recreation areas, distinct residential neighborhoods, visitor-serving and neighborhood commercial development, and highly sensitive wildlife and vegetative habitats. The varied types of development of each coastal sub-area and the geographic relationships between them are an inherent and vital part of the character of the City. The General Plan and LCLUP strive to designate land uses and intensities suitable to the unique circumstances of each coastal area, adequately meet the needs of the City's residents and visitors, and be consistent with State Coastal Act policies. Chapter 2 provides detailed area maps and summary descriptions of seven identified sub-areas in Pacifica’s Coastal Zone.

14.c
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1-5

1.3 LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Local Coastal Programs
The California Coastal Act of 1976 gave the California Coastal Commission broad authority to ensure that development along the coastline would protect and enhance coastal resources. The Commission carries out this responsibility in partnership with local governments, through the development and certification of LCPs.

California Public Resources Code (PRC) Sections 30000 et seq. establish the State’s coastal management policies and the procedures for preparation, approval, and certification of LCPs.

In 2015, Governor Brown put into effect two regulatory requirements regarding climate change. These include Senate Bill 379, which requires local agencies to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in long range planning documents; and Governor’s Executive Order No B-30-15, which directs state agencies to factor climate change into planning decisions. This order has been promulgated by the Coastal Commission to include climate adaptation into LCPs.

In 2016, Governor Brown also signed into law Assembly Bill 2616 (AB 2616), amending the Coastal Act to give the Coastal Commission authority to specifically consider environmental justice when making permit decisions. This legislation also cross-references existing nondiscrimination and civil rights law in the Government Code and requires the Governor to appoint an environmental justice Commissioner.

Local Coastal Land Use Plan
To meet the requirements of State law, the LCLUP must comply with the requirements of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act (Section 30512.2 of the PRC), and also be “sufficiently detailed to indicate the kinds, location, and intensity of land uses, the applicable resource protection and development policies, and, where necessary, a listing of implementing actions.” (Section 30108.5 of the PRC). During all phases of the LCLUP’s development, the public as well as affected agencies must be provided with extensive opportunities to participate (Section 30503 of the PRC). In the case of the Pacifica General Plan and LCLUP update, the planning process, including public participation, is detailed in Section 1.1 of the General Plan.

Implementation Plan
The implementation component of the LCP comprises the zoning ordinances, zoning district maps, and other implementing actions within the Coastal Zonewhich taken together implement the local coastal land use plan and Coastal Act provisions. These are typically referred to together as the Implementation Plan (IP).

The LCLUP and IP work in tandem to implement Coastal Act provisions.

1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND REGULATIONS
The Local Coastal Land Use Plan and the General Plan
The General Plan and LCLUP updates have been conducted in tandem. While they are two separate documents, much of the descriptive text and many of the policies are overlapping. Policies that are included in both the General Plan and the LCLUP are marked with a in the General Plan.

14.c
Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 1-6
Much of the background text is also the same in both documents. Detailed discussion of Coastal Act requirements and goals is included only in the LCLUP, while issues that are not relevant to Coastal Act requirements and goals are covered only in the General Plan. The term “Planning Area” is used to refer to the General Plan’s Planning Area, while the term “Coastal Zone” is used to refer to the area subject to the LCLUP. Each plan has a different organizational structure, to match its purpose. Plan organization is covered in Section 1.5. One environmental impact report (EIR) describes the expected environmental impacts of both plans.

Plan Bay Area
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), and Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) have adopted the “Plan Bay Area in 2013.” which serves as the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for the region. An update, Plan Bay Area 2040, was adopted in 2017 and forecasts transportation needs through the year 2040. Plan Bay Area 2050 will focus on four key issues—the economy, the environment, housing and transportation—and will identify a path to make the Bay Area more equitable for all residents and more resilient in the face of unexpected challenges. MTC and ABAG adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 in October 2021.

This Plan will be the San Francisco Bay Area’s Regional Transportation Plan, and will satisfy the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) requirement established by Senate Bill 375, which will demonstrate how the region will meet greenhouse gas emission targets. The effort is focused on bringing together transportation, land use, and housing policies at the regional scale to support greenhouse gas emissions reduction while ensuring mobility. Regional priorities for transportation investments will influence Pacifica’s future circulation system.

Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan
A consortium of State and federal agencies, including the California Department of Natural Resources and the US Army Corps of Engineers, is organizing a series of Regional Sediment Management (RSM) plans. The primary focus is on facilitating the movement of excess clean sand to areas experiencing high levels of erosion. Goals include restoring and preserving beaches; sustaining recreation; enhancing public safety; and restoring coastal habitats. The San Francisco Littoral Cell Coastal RSM Plan is currently being developed for the coastline between the Golden Gate and Pedro Point Headlands. The Plan’s purpose is to assist communities by providing information for decision-makers and offering recommendations specific to the coastlines of San Francisco, Daly City and Pacifica. The Pacifica General Plan and Local Coastal Land Use Plan may provide a vehicle for enacting RSM recommendations.

1.5 GUIDE TO USING THIS DOCUMENT
Plan Organization
This section describes the organization of the Pacifica 2040 Local Coastal Land Use Plan and the structure of guiding and implementing policies. The LCLUP is organized to follow the topical sections of the Coastal Act policies, and is organized as follows:

14.c
Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1-7

1. Introduction. This chapter summarizes the key themes and initiatives of the Plan. It covers the Plan’s purpose, process, planning context, State requirements, relationships to other plans, plan organization (here), and requirements for administration of the Plan.

2. Land Use and Development. This chapter describes the existing land use pattern and provides the physical framework for land use and development in the Coastal Zone. It enumerates development demand and capacity, and provides detailed descriptions of land use issues by sub-area. It describes how the land use plan and related policies support development prioritized under the Coastal Act.

3. Public Access and Recreation. This chapter includes policies, programs, and standards to ensure that public access to the coast is provided according to the policies of the Coastal Act, serving as the public access component of the Plan. It identifies future street and traffic improvements, and addresses walking, biking, transit, and parking to enable a multi-modal circulation system in the Coastal Zone. This chapter also contains policies relating to regional open spaces and beaches, the trail system, and parks and recreation, as they pertain to Coastal Act policies to ensure the public has adequate access to coastal recreation opportunities.

4. Environmental and Scenic Resources. This chapter includes policies relating to hydrology and water quality, biological resources, agriculture and coastal sediment, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, and historic and archaeological resources and conservation. It also addresses water supply, sewerage, solid waste management, and recycling, as well as stormwater management and sustainable site planning. It also includes urban design policies to improve the city’s visual quality and livability, including its neighborhoods, mixed-use areas, hillside and coastal areas, and scenic routes. Policies are presented in terms of their satisfaction of Coastal Act provisions.

5. Natural Hazards. This chapter addresses the hazards posed by seismic and geologic hazards, flooding, impacts of accelerated sea level rise, and wildland fires, and provides detailed policies that respond to Coastal Act provisions for minimizing adverse impacts.

6. Coastal Resilience. This chapter addresses the unique challenges of adapting to climate change, especially sea level rise (SLR). It provides policies to allow for protection of existing development and to design new development in a manner adaptable to the changing coastline.

Table 1-1 shows how the chapters in the LCLUP related to General Plan Elements.

TABLE 1-1: CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN COASTAL ZONE CHAPTERS AND GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS LCLUP Chapter Related General Plan Elements
Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Land Use and Development Chapter 4: Land Use Chapter 3: Public Access and Recreation Chapter 5: Circulation Chapter 6: Open Space & Community Facilities
Chapter 4: Environmental and Scenic Resources Chapter 7: Conservation Chapter 3: Community Design
Chapter 5: Natural Hazards Chapter 8: Safety
Chapter 3: Community Design
Chapter 6: Coastal Resilience Chapter 8: Safety
Source: Dyett & Bhatia, 2019.

Policy Structure
Each chapter of the Plan includes background information to establish the context for policies in the chapter.

This background information is followed by two sets of policies, which together articulate a vision for Pacifica’s Coastal Zone that the Plan seeks to achieve:

14.c
Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 1-8
• Guiding Policies are the City’s statements of its goals and philosophiesy. • Implementing Policies represent commitments to specific actions. They may refer to existing programs or call for establishment of new ones.

Policies provide guidance for development review, infrastructure planning, community facilities and services, and protection for the city’s resources, by establishing planning requirements, programs, standards, and criteria for project review. Explanatory material or commentary in italics accompanies some policies to provide further clarification of their application to particular sites or situations. The use of “should” or “would” indicates that a statement is strongly recommended but not mandatory; details will need to be resolved in LCP implementation. The use of “shall” or “must” indicates that a statement is mandatory.

Where the same topic is addressed in more than one chapter, sections and policies are cross-referenced.

Maps, Diagrams and Land Use Classifications
The maps and diagrams in the LCLUP illustrate a number of policies relating to land use, coastal access, circulation, environmental and scenic resources, and hazards. These maps and diagrams, and in particular the Land Use Diagram in Chapter 2, are important parts of the plan that contain information not presented anywhere else. All maps, diagrams, and figures are adopted parts of the Plan; however, their use is subject to any disclaimers or limitations set forth on the maps or elsewhere in this LCLUP.

The maps and diagrams included in the LCLUP reflect the best available information at a programmatic, or city-wide, level2. Maps and diagrams including biological resources such as special status species, wetlands, and streams, indicate areas where the presence of these resources are most likely to occur. However, additional information regarding such resources will become available through site-specific review of proposed projects, through future map/diagram updates, and through other means. Thus, protection of resources is not limited to those areas that are mapped in this document, and site-specific analyses shall be utilized wherever possible to ensure maximum protection of resources.

Appendix, Glossary and List of Acronyms
Appendix A presents the coastal resources planning and management policies that comprise Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act, or Section 30200 et seq. of the Public Resources Code. The policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act are hereby incorporated by reference into the LCLUP. Chapter 3 organizes these policies in six topical areas, which guide the organization of the LCLUP chapters: Public Access, Recreation, Marine Environment, Land Resources, Development, and Industrial Development.

The Plan concludes with a glossary to define important terms and concepts, and a list of acronyms that may appear in the preceding chapters.
2 The Vulnerability Zone Maps included in Appendix B will need to be updated to reflect new information regarding shoreline protection structures.

14.c
Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1-9

1.6 PLAN ADMINISTRATION
Amendments to the Plan and Periodic Review
The LCLUP is less flexible than a General Plan in that its amendment, even after certification, requires the approval of the Coastal Commission as well as the City. An exception exists for minor amendments and de minimis amendments if approved by the Coastal Commission’s executive director. Any such approval must be reported to the Coastal Commission for concurrence in order to be considered approved and certified.

Although Pacifica's LCLUP and General Plan are integrated, the coastal policies are clearly identified in order to facilitate the amendment process should that be desired in the future. The Coastal Commission periodically reviews certified LCPs to ensure that coastal resources are being effectively protected (Section 30519.5 of the PRC).

14.c
Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) 2 LAND USE AND

DEVELOPMENT
The purpose of this chapter is to describe existing and planned land use in the Coastal Zone and present the policy framework that will guide the City on development decisions. The chapter includes the Land Use Diagram, land use classifications, standards for density and intensity, and limitations on development. The land use framework for each sub-area is then provided in greater detail. Guiding and implementing policies aim to define the Coastal Zone’s physical development and reinforce the community’s vision while supporting Coastal Act goals.

14.c
Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-2

2.1 COASTAL ACT FRAMEWORK
The California Coastal Act establishes certain priorities for the location and type of new development along the coast. These may be summarized in three broader categories: concentration of development; prioritization of coastal-dependent, visitor and recreation uses; and provision of public access and services. 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 by reference into this chapter.

Coastal Act Policies
Article 2: Public Access
• Section 30211 Development shall not interfere with the public’s right of access to the sea. • Section 30212 New development, shoreline access.
• Section 30213 Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities; encouragement and provision; overnight room rentals
Article 3: Recreation
• Section 30221 Oceanfront land; protection for recreational use and development • Section 30222 Private lands; priority of development purposes • Section 30223 Protect upland areas necessary to support coastal recreational uses Article 4: Marine Environment
• Section 30235 Shoreline protection devices permitted when necessary to serve coastal-dependent uses or protect existing structures or beaches
Article 5: Land Resources
• Section 30240 Development in environmentally sensitive habitat areas Article 6: Development
• Section 30250 Location; existing developed area
• Section 30251 Protection, preservation, and enhancement of scenic and visual quality of coastal areas • Section 30252 Maintenance and enhancement of public access • Section 30253 Requirements for new development
• Section 30254 Public works facilities
• Section 30254.5 Terms or conditions on sewage treatment plant development; prohibition • Section 30255 Priority of coastal-dependent developments Article 7: Industrial Development
• Section 30260 Encouragement for coastal-dependent industrial facilities to locate or expand

14.c
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-3

2.2 CURRENT LAND USE PATTERN
Background
Before visitation by the Portola expedition in 1769, Pacifica was home to the Costanoans, now known as the Ohlone, who were stewards of the land for thousands of years. Pacifica remained primarily agricultural until after the San Francisco Earthquake in 1906. Land speculators, stimulated by the construction of the Ocean Shore Railroad in 1905, subdivided and developed a series of small coastside communities including Edgemar, Vallemar, and the areas now known as Sharp Park, Pedro Point, and Rockaway Beach. These communities, together with Pacific Manor, Westview, Fairway Park, and Linda Mar incorporated in 1957 as the City of Pacifica. The city grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s, and most of its current housing was built during those decades, primarily east of Highway 1. Growth slowed in the 1970s, and then slowed further in the following decades, owing to the scarcity of developable land and infrastructure constraints. The Pacifica Coastal Zone is described in more detail by land use type in the paragraphs that follow.

Current Land Use Pattern
Parks and Open Space
The Coastal Zone covers 998 acres, not including road rights-of-way. Nearly half (479 acres) of this land is preserved as open space. This includes Mori Point, the Northern Coastal Bluffs, and Pedro Point Headlands, current and likely future parts of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area; Sharp Park Golf Course; and Pacifica State and Sharp Park Beaches.

Residential
Residential use makes up 21 percent of the Coastal Zone and 69 percent of developed land1in the Coastal Zone, covering 206 acres. Most residential land in Pacifica’s Coastal Zone (70 percent) contains single-family housing, but multi-family housing is the most prevalent housing unit type (57 percent of all housing units) in the Coastal Zone. Multi-family units are interspersed among single-family houses and commercial uses in the West Sharp Park neighborhood and concentrated along the coast in the West Edgemar-Pacific Manor neighborhood. The Coastal Zone also includes Pacifica’s only mobile homes and most of the City’s mixed use development, which account for 2 and 1 percent of housing units in the Coastal Zone, respectively.

Commercial, Industrial, and Mixed Use
The Coastal Zone includes 41 acres of commercial uses. Commercial land is located at Pacific Manor and Pedro Point shopping centers, and in commercial districts at Rockaway Beach, Palmetto Avenue, and Francisco Boulevard. Pacifica has a small amount of mixed-use development, mostly along Palmetto Avenue in West Sharp Park, in Rockaway Beach, and in Pedro Point. Overall, West Sharp Park has the greatest mix of uses throughout the neighborhood. Hotels, along with most visitor-serving commercial uses, are primarily in the Rockaway Beach neighborhood. The Coastal Zone also has a small amount of industrial land (13 acres) located along Palmetto north of the West Sharp Park commercial area.

Public and Institutional Uses
Public, community, and institutional uses occupy 39 acres of land in the Coastal Zone, including Ingrid B. Lacy Middle School; the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant; City Hall; the Sharp Park branch library; and other public administrative buildings.
1 Developed land includes all land uses except for Open Space, Agriculture, or Vacant/Undeveloped.

14.c
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-4
Agriculture and Recreation
There are approximately nine acres of land with agricultural-related uses in the Coastal Zone, outside city limits, at Shamrock Ranch along Highway 1.

Undeveloped and Vacant Land
Vacant or undeveloped land covers 206 acres or 20 percent of land in the Coastal Zone. About 29 acres of this land is outside City limits. Undeveloped land is present along the Northern Coastal Bluffs, the Rockaway Quarry site, Rockaway Headlands, and Pedro Point Headlands. Smaller vacant “infill” lots are scattered in neighborhoods. Given environmental factors such as slope and sensitive species, there are constraints on the development potential of many of these sites.

Figure 2-2 maps the Coastal Zone land use pattern, while Figure 2-1 charts the relative distribution of land by land use in the Coastal Zone.

Figure 2-1: Current Land Use Distribution in the Coastal Zone Open Space
48%
Public/
Community/
Institutional 4%
Residential Uses
21%
Commercial
and Mixed
Use 4%
Industrial Uses
1%
Agriculture,
Undeveloped,
or Vacant 22%

14.c
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-5
Figure 2-2: Existing Land Use in the Coastal Zone

14.c
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-6

2.3 LAND USE FRAMEWORK
The Land Use Diagram, (Figure 2-3) illustrates the community’s vision for land use in 2040. It reflects the Coastal Act priorities presented in Chapter 1, as well as the planning themes laid out in the General Plan. The land use classifications depicted indicate the use and form of development. New development will be guided by Plan policies and programs for hillside and open space preservation; and in infill housing, commercial, and mixed use development.

Land Use Diagram
The Land Use Diagram is a graphic representation of planned land use classifications; it will be used in conjunction with policies established in the Plan to review and approve, modify or deny proposed development projects. The Land Use Diagram includes a legend that shows land use categories whose densities and allowable uses are specified in the Land Use Classifications section.

Land Use Classifications
Land use classifications establish allowed uses, maximum density and intensity, and the type and character of development that is expected. Details on development standards are established in the Implementation Plan through the zoning ordinance, and more than one zoning district may be consistent with a General Plan/LCLUP land use classification.

According to State law, the General Plan must establish standards of population density and building intensity for each land use classification. The General Plan and LCLUP stipulate residential densities in housing units per gross acre; population density can be obtained by applying average persons per housing unit2to the housing unit densities. For nonresidential uses, the Plan specifies a maximum permitted ratio of gross floor area to site area (Floor Area Ratio or FAR). Recommended density and intensity standards do not imply that development projects must be approved at the maximum intensity specified for each use. Zoning regulations consistent with General Plan policies and/or site conditions may reduce development potential within the stated ranges. Table 2-1 shows gross density standards for residential categories and FAR standards for the other uses.

Residential
Pacifica’s six five residential classifications provide for a range of densities, consistent with neighborhood character and planned land use.

TRANSITIONAL OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL
In the Transitional Open Space Residential (TOSR) designation, residential and recreation uses are allowed at a gross density of up to one unit per 10 acres (or 0.1 units per gross acre). Existing legal lots less than 10 acres in area shall be allowed to develop one dwelling unit consistent with all other applicable zoning and development standards. The density assumed for buildout calculations is 0.08 units per gross acre.

OPEN SPACE/AGRICULTURE/RESIDENTIAL
In the Open Space/Agriculture/Residential (OSAR) classification, residential, agriculture, and recreation uses are allowed at a gross density of up to one unit per five acres (or 0.2 units per gross acre). Farm worker housing may be permitted on sites zoned for agricultural uses, consistent with State law, and shall not be included in density calculations for a site. The allowable density on a site will be determined by slope, geology, soils, access, 2 Based on 2013-2017 American Community Survey data, the number of persons per total housing units is 2.77.

14.c
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-7
availability of utilities, public safety, and open space values. The density assumed for buildout calculations is

0.15 units per gross acre.

VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
The Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) classification provides for development of 0.2 to 2.0 units per gross acre (or 0.5 to 5.0 acres per dwelling unit). Residential care facilities, schools, and community uses are permitted.

The density assumed for buildout calculations is 1.5 units per gross acre.

LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
The Low Density Residential (LDR) designation provides for is intended for single-family housing development ranging from three to nine dwelling units per gross acre. Single-family residential is the primary use intended for LDR areas. Residential care facilities, schools, and community uses are permitted. Clusters of small-lot development as well as standard subdivisions will be allowed. Buildout is calculated at 6.5 units per gross acre.

MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
The Medium Density Residential (MDR) designation is intended for a mix of housing types, including smalllot single-family, attached single-family, apartments, duplexes, townhomes and in mobile home parks at a density range of 10 to 15 units per gross acre. Residential care facilities, schools, and community uses are permitted. Buildout is calculated at 12.5 units per gross acre.

HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
The High Density Residential (HDR) designation is intended for multi-family apartments, stacked flats, condominiums and townhomes in multi-story buildings located near shopping areas and transit. The density range will be 16 to 21 dwelling units per gross acre. , except that. sSites of 0.5 acres or more in size may develop up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. For lawful nonconforming sites less than 5,000 square feet in area, the allowable density shall be 10 to 15 units per gross acres. Residential care facilities, schools, and community uses are permitted. Buildout is calculated at 25 units per gross acre.

Mixed Use
The Plan provides three mixed use classifications to create areas where housing and active commercial uses may be integrated. Visitor-oriented commercial uses are allowed as-of-right in all mixed use areas within the Coastal Zone, except hotels in the Coastal Residential Mixed Use designation.

COASTAL RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE
The Coastal Residential Mixed Use (CRMU) designation is intended for sites in the Coastal Zone with residential mixed use development potential, including mixed use with housing and retail, and/or small-scale visitor-oriented commercial uses such as retail, vacation rental, or time-share units. Residential uses are allowed in the same building as commercial uses above the ground floor (vertical mixed use) and in other locations attached to or detached from commercial uses on the same site (horizontal mixed use). Hotels are not permitted.

Coastal access and public open space must also be provided, and environmental resources must be evaluated and protected. Sites may be developed up to an overall density of up to 15 units per gross acre, with clustering and sensitive site planning. Site-specific policies may further define residential densities. Non-residential development may have an FAR up to 0.5 FAR. The total FAR (residential and non-residential) cannot exceed

1.0. Buildout is calculated at 15 units per gross acre and 0.10 FAR of non-residential use.

14.c
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-8

MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD
In the Mixed Use Neighborhood (MUN) classification, new development may include multi-family housing and building with ground-floor retail, restaurant or service uses and housing or offices. Residential uses are allowed in the same building as commercial uses above the ground floor (vertical mixed use) and in other locations on the same site (horizontal mixed use). Public or community uses and hotels may be permitted at appropriate locations. The MUN classification allows a density range of 16 to 26 units per gross acre and nonresidential development with an FAR up to 1.0. on sites that are 5,000 square feet of area or greater. Sites of

0.5 acres or more in size may develop up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. For lawful non-conforming sites less than 5,000 square feet in area, the allowable density shall be 10 to 15 units per gross acres and nonresidential development FAR up to 0.5. The total FAR (residential and non-residential) cannot exceed 2.0. on sites with 5,000 square feet of area or greater, and cannot exceed 1.0 on sites with less than 5,000 square feet of area. Buildout is calculated based on a 0.25 FAR for non-residential uses and 25 residential units per gross acre.

MIXED USE CENTER
The Mixed Use Center (MUC) classification is intended for high-density mixed use development, including public or community uses and hotels. Allowable uses include ground-floor retail, restaurant or personal service uses and housing or offices on upper levels. on upper levels. Ground floor commercial uses must be constructed along the street frontage but are not required on the interior of a site. Residential uses are allowed in the same building as commercial uses above the ground floor (vertical mixed use) and in other locations on the same site (horizontal mixed use). The MUC classification permits housing at a density range of 30 to 50 units per gross acre and a 2.5 FAR of non-residential development, provided the overall FAR does not exceed

2.5. For lawful non-conforming sites less than 5,000 square feet in area, the allowable density shall be 16 to 26 units per gross acres and a non-residential development FAR up to 0.5. Buildout is calculated at an FAR of

0.35 for non-residential uses and 2532 units per gross acre for housing.

14.c
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-9
Figure 2-3 Land Use Diagram

14.c
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-10
Commercial Uses
The General Plan and LCLUP establish five commercial classifications to accommodate a variety of potential commercial activities. Visitor-oriented commercial uses are allowed as-of-right in all commercial areas within the Coastal Zone.

RETAIL COMMERCIAL
The Retail Commercial (RC) classification is intended for retail, restaurant, and service uses, typically in singleor two-story buildings within shopping centers or on sites in the Highway 1 corridor. New development will be pedestrian-oriented. Offices may be located above the ground floor. The maximum FAR is 1.0. Buildout is calculated with an FAR of 0.25.

OFFICE/COMMERCIAL
The Office/Commercial (OC) classification permits offices as well as retail and service uses, typically in single- or two-story buildings. The maximum FAR is 1.5; buildout is calculated with an FAR of 0.35.

SERVICE COMMERCIAL
The Service Commercial (SC) classification is for industrial and heavy commercial uses, such as auto repair, equipment rental, storage, and materials salvage. The maximum FAR is 0.6; buildout is calculated with an FAR of 0.25.

VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL
The Visitor-Serving Commercial (VC) designation is intended to foster and protect areas that attract and cater to visitors, including hotels or a visitor attraction, such as an interpretive center or conference center, restaurants, retail and services, commercial recreation, or other compatible uses. Larger sites, with developable areas of two acres or larger, shall require a hotel, lower-cost overnight accommodation, or visitor attraction as part of new development. The maximum FAR is 3.0. Buildout is calculated with an FAR of 0.35.

LOW-INTENSITY VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL
The Low-Intensity Visitor-Serving Commercial (LIVC) district allows uses that create public access to the coastal setting and are adaptable to changing environmental conditions: campgrounds, rustic lodging, concession stands, warming huts, outdoor event sites, and similar uses. Existing permitted businesses that do not conform to the description of LIVC may remain until voluntarily redeveloped by the property owner or abandonment of the use has occurred pursuant to the nonconforming use zoning provisions of the Pacifica Municipal Code (cessation of the use for 12 months, under current zoning provisions). In these areas, the designation indicates the long-term goal of transition to recreation-oriented land uses. Development may occur at up to 0.20 FAR, but must have an overall very low-intensity character on sites of more than one acre. Buildout is assumed at 0.05 FAR, recognizing the large land areas and minimal building expected to support recreational uses.

Public and Community Uses
Designations for public uses such as schools, civic buildings, utilities, and public parking areas are designated on the Land Use Diagram, and summarized below. Public park land is covered separately in the following section.

PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC
The Public and Semi-Public (PSP) designation indicates public or private schools, libraries, police and fire stations, and other civic and community uses. In the case that public facilities are converted or sold for new

14.c
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-11
uses, Plan land use classifications shall be updated. If a public school is discontinued, any proposed new use should be compatible with the adjacent neighborhood. The maximum FAR in this district is 1.0. Buildout is assumed at 0.35 FAR.

BEACH AND COMMUTER PARKING
The Beach and Commuter Parking (BCP) designation applies to areas where the priority use is public parking to serve beach visitors and/or transit users. Sites are located adjacent to Pacifica State Beach and at Crespi Drive and Highway 1. Beach parking at the City’s Beach Boulevard property serving Pacifica Pier and Sharp Park should be conserved as part of development of that site.

UTILITIES
The Utilities (U) designation indicates the location of water tanks, communications facilities including wireless communications facilities, and other utilities serving the City. The maximum FAR in this district is 1.0.

Parks and Open Space
Pacifica is defined in large part by its open space system, with extensive land preserved as public open space, or designated for conservation. These categories are detailed below.

PARK
The Park (P) designation is applied to public land either now developed for active recreation use or intended for future recreation development. The designation applies to City parks as well as to park or open space areas whose primary character is undeveloped and natural, or that is managed for use by residents of the larger region and beyond. The City does not have permitting authority on lands owned by other public agencies.

CONSERVATION
The Conservation (C) district takes the place of the Greenbelt district from the previous General Plan. It applies to publicly- or privately-owned open areas not intended for development. Non-structural development, such as trails and viewing areas, is allowed. These areas may include:
• Watershed lands;
• Sandy beach areas, including properties that are fully on beaches or coastal dunes or bluffs; • Land which is physically unsuitable for development due to geotechnical hazards, excessive steepness, wetlands, ESHA, or other environmental constraints, or lies within stream channels; • Areas to remain undeveloped as a result of density transfer or clustered development, or covered by open space, recreational or scenic easements;
• Open areas providing a physical and visual buffer between developed or open areas; and • Open space required as mitigation for environmental impacts.

Urban Reserve
The Urban Reserve (UR) designation is created to apply to private lands outside of City limits but within the Planning Area. The City does not have permitting authority in this area. The Pacifica General Plan and LCLUP intends for agriculture and residential development with a minimum site area of 105 acres per dwelling unit to be the predominant uses on land designated Urban Reserve. Existing legal lots less than 10 acres in area shall

2.1 14.c
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-12
be allowed to develop one dwelling unit maximum, consistent with all other applicable zoning and development standards.

Sites within the Urban Reserve land use designation that are annexed into the City of Pacifica should receive a land use designation consistent with the applicable density prior to annexation. Actual density may be limited by the physical conditions of a site such as geological hazards, access, and potential habitat. For sites larger than 50 acres, the City should work with San Mateo County to ensure that subdivision and development be considered in the context of a Plan Update.

TABLE 2-1: LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS AND DENSITY AND INTENSITY STANDARDS Land Use1
Residential Density
(units per gross acre): Range2
Non-Residential Intensity
(FAR): Maximum3
Residential
TOSR Transitional Open Space Residential Up to 0.1
OSAR Open Space/Agriculture/Residential Up to 0.2
VLDR Very Low Density Residential 0.2 to 2
LDR Low Density Residential 3 to 9
MDR Medium Density Residential 10 to 15
HDR High Density Residential 16 to 21
304
Mixed Use
CRMU Coastal Residential Mixed Use Up10 to 15 0.5
MUN Mixed Use Neighborhood 16 to 26
304

1.0 MUC Mixed Use Center 30 to 50 2.5
Commercial
RC Retail Commercial 1.0
OC Office/Commercial 1.5
SC Service Commercial 0.6
VC Visitor-Serving Commercial 3.0
LIVC
Low-Intensity Visitor-Serving
Commercial 0.2
Public and Community Uses
PSP Public and Semi-Public 1.0
U Utilities 1.0
BCP Beach and Commuter Parking
Parks and Open Space and Urban Reserve
P Park
C Conservation
UR Urban Reserve Up to 0.2 0.1
Notes:

1. Though the density for Urban Reserve is shown, n ono development is projected in these areas.

2. Density ranges are rounded to the nearest whole number, except where less than 1 unit per acre. Senior or affordable housing may be developed at up to 1.5 times the maximum with the Density Bonus program.

3. For mixed use designations, the following maximum total FAR, including both residential and non-residential uses, is established:

CRMU: 1.0 FAR maximum; MUN: 2.0 FAR maximum; MUC: 2.5 FAR maximum.

4. Sites of 0.5 acres or more in size may develop up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.

Source: City of Pacifica, Dyett & Bhatia, 20212019.

14.c
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-13
Coastal Development Review
The LCLUP aims to ensure that the goals of the California Coastal Act are furthered by land use actions and policies that affect land within the Coastal Zone as defined by the California Coastal Commission.

The City’s zoning code features a Coastal Zone (CZ) Combining District, with development regulations based on Coastal Act goals. These include the provision of public access to the shoreline and recreational opportunities, the protection and enhancement of the coastal environment, and the prioritization of coastaldependent and visitor-serving uses. The Coastal Zone requirements supplement the underlying zoning regulations on all property subject to the LCLUP. and new development must obtain a coastal development permit on all property subject to the LCLUP.

Pursuant to the Coastal Act, certain categories of development are exempt from coastal development permit requirements. These exemptions are generally set forth in Section 30610 of the PRC and Sections 13252, 132523, and 13250 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Policies
Implementing Policies
LD-I-1 Zoning Consistency. Update the Zoning Ordinance and zoning map and apply zoning to all land within the City, consistent with General Plan and LCLUP policies and land use designations.

LD-I-2 Land Divisions in the Coastal Zone. Continue to require coastal development permits for all land divisions within the Coastal Zone. Land divisions in the Coastal Zone shall be:
• Designed to minimize impacts to public access, recreation, and other coastal resources. • Designed to minimize site disturbance, landform alteration, and the removal of native vegetation for development or fire safety.
• Prohibited on properties that include any areas that are within or adjacent to an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) unless the resulting parcels can be developed without building or requiring vegetation clearance in the ESHA or ESHA buffer, or are set aside for conservation., or unless the resulting parcels can be developed consistent with policies protecting sensitive habitats including but not limited to a prohibition on building or requiring vegetation clearance in the ESHA or ESHA buffer.
• Prohibited on properties that are within Coastal Vulnerability Zones, unless the resulting parcels are set aside for conservation, or unless the resulting parcels can be developed consistent with the LCP.
• Permitted only in areas with adequate public services to serve development on the resulting parcels.
• Any land division that would result in a parcel that could not be developed in accordance with the policies of this LCLUP is not allowed.

2.3 2.2

2.3 14.c
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-14
LD-I-3 Coastal Development Permit Findings. For all development that requires a coastal development permit, continue to require written findings that it is consistent with all LCLUP policies and Implementation Plan provisions of the City’s certified Local Coastal Program.

If there is a conflict between a provision of this LCP and a provision of the General Plan, or any other Cityadopted plan, resolution, or ordinance not included in the LCP, and it is not possible for the development to comply with both the LCP and such other plan, resolution or ordinance, the LCP shall take precedence and the development shall not be approved unless it complies with the LCP provision. In advance of updating the Implementation Plan for conformance with the policies of this 2023 Land Use Plan, the policies of the Land Use Plan shall provide the standard of review for any proposed new development, including where these policies are more protective of ESHA and other coastal resources and maximize public access as consistent with the Coastal Act.

LD-I-4 Coordinate with the County to protect the Urban Reserve. Coordinate with the County to ensure that new development in unincorporated areas occurs at a maximum density of 10 five acres per unit, and request that subdivision of 50 acres or more is subject to master planning and annexation as a condition of any urban development.

A General Plan amendment also will be required, and a LCLUP amendment will be required for land within the Coastal Zone.

LD-I-5 Individualized Determinations Ensure decisions on coastal development permits include an individualized, property-specific determination of policies, conditions of approval, and other regulations imposed to regulate development, and ensure regulations imposed on properties pursuant to the LCLUP are consistent with applicable state and federal law.

2.4 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
Concentrated Development
The Coastal Act seeks to concentrate new development along the coast in already-developed areas and areas where it will not adversely affect coastal resources (Section 30250). Pacifica’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan reinforces the clear distinctions between areas of preserved open space (nearly 50 percent of the Planning Area) and established neighborhoods. It seeks to ensure that sensitive coastal open spaces on the Northern Coastal Bluffs and Pedro Point Headlands are preserved and enhanced, while promoting new development in and directly adjacent to the Rockaway Beach and West Sharp Park districts, and make these areas more commercially vibrant and transit-supportive, as described in Section 30252. These efforts are clearly defined in policies of this section as well as policies for each sub-area detailed in Section 3.3.

Coastal-Dependent, Visitor-Serving and Recreational Development Section 30255 of the Coastal Act states that “coastal-dependent developments shall have priority over other developments on or near the shoreline.” Lower-cost visitor and recreation facilities (Section 30213); recreational uses and development (Section 30221); and coastal-dependent industry (Section 30260) are specifically called out. Section 30222 provides that “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.”

2.4A

2.4 14.c
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-15
San Francisco and San Mateo Counties are major tourist destinations, attracting domestic as well as international travelers. The nine-county Bay Area region accounts for almost 30 percent of the visitor-generated tax receipts in California. Located along scenic Highway 1, south of San Francisco, Pacifica enjoys exposure to a number of visitors to the County’s coast, State parks, and other attractions. Pacifica itself has a wealth of public park land and amenities along the coastline, including Pacifica State Beach and the Pacifica Pier at Sharp Park Beach.

The current demand for hotel rooms in Pacifica is served by six moderately-priced hotels with a total of 282 rooms. A majority of these hotels are clustered around Rockaway Beach. Pacifica is also home to the San Francisco RV Park. These accommodations are shown on the Existing Land Use map, Figure 2-2. The General Plan provides a tourism-related economic development strategy that will help Pacifica to better leverage its coastal location and other physical and cultural amenities, and a land use plan that emphasizes visitor-oriented commercial development.

In the Visitor-Serving Commercial (VC) designation, for larger sites (with developable areas of two acres or larger), a hotel, lower-cost overnight accommodation, or visitor attraction is a required part of new development. Development on large sites may also include restaurants, retail and services, commercial recreation, or other compatible uses. New inns, resorts, or other overnight lodging should enliven the Rockaway Beach district and provide a basis for integration with any new development which may ultimately be approved on the Quarry site. Such uses can enhance the public’s enjoyment of the coastal setting.

The extensive public lands in Pacifica’s Coastal Zone and the recreation opportunities they afford are protected with Park and Conservation designations. The LIVC district allows uses that create public access to the natural setting and are adaptable to changing environmental conditions. Low-intensity visitor-serving development along northern Palmetto would add new ways of enjoying the coast. Potential uses with a low development impact and which are readily relocated to adapt to evolving coastal conditions, such as rustic lodging or “hikers' huts,” could occur on the Rockaway Headlands and enrich the recreational appeal of both Pacifica State Beach and Rockaway Beach for visitors.

Energy Facilities and Coastal Dependent Industries
Pacifica does not currently contain any coastal-dependent industry or energy facilities, and the Plan does not accommodate the new development of these uses. The types of industries that are the subject of Coastal Act policies—tanker facilities, oil and gas development, refineries, and thermal electric generating plants—are not foreseen to be feasible or appropriate. However, in keeping with the Coastal Act, new coastal-dependent industries may be permitted in the Coastal Zone under specific conditions, as outlined in the policies below.

Sub-Areas and Specific Sites
Pacifica's Coastal Zone extends from the eastern edge of Highway 1 to the Pacific Ocean. The Coastal Zone features a wide variety of land uses, including public recreation areas, distinct residential neighborhoods, visitorserving and neighborhood commercial development, and sensitive wildlife habitats. The varied types of development of each coastal sub-area and the geographic relationships between them are an inherent and vital part of the character of the City. The LCLUP strives to designate land uses and intensities suitable to the unique circumstances of each coastal area, adequately meet the needs of the City's residents and visitors, and be consistent with State Coastal Act policies.

Figure 2-4 shows seven sub-areas. Sub-areas may be referred to as neighborhoods at times. The “sub-area” designation is not intended to correspond with any jurisdictional boundaries, but to help readers understand

14.c
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-16
the way the LCLUP affects Pacifica’s distinct geographic areas. Figure 2-4 also identifies specific sites that are the subject of Plan policies. This chapter contains land use policies for specific sites. In many cases, site-specific policies touch on a range of issues, including biological resources and natural hazards.

Figure 2-4 also serves as a key map for the three maps that follow, showing these sub-areas and specific sites at a larger scale. These maps show LCLUP land use at the parcel level, as well as coastal access points; park opportunity sites; coastal view corridors; trails and proposed trail improvements. The sub-area maps and the sub-area descriptions below are intended to demonstrate how various aspects of the Plan—including land use, parks and recreation facilities, coastal access, and environmental resources and hazards—work together in the more localized context. The maps do not show different information than is contained in other LCLUP maps.

14.c
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-17
Figure 2-4: Sub-Areas and Specific Sites

14.c
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-18
Northern Pacifica Coastal Zone
Figure 2-5 covers the Coastal Zone north of Sharp Park, including Fairmont West; West Edgemar-Pacific Manor; and West Sharp Park. This area includes Palmetto Avenue, the Pacifica Pier and Promenade, the Pacific Manor shopping area, and the northern coastal bluffs.

FAIRMONT WEST
Fairmont West is a small residential area in northwestern Pacifica between Highway 1 and the Pacific Ocean, extending from Daly City along the Northern Coastal Bluffs. It is separated from inland neighborhoods by the highway and a significant grade change. Fairmont West is composed mainly of single-family houses, with a condominium development and a neighborhood park. Palmetto Avenue is Fairmont West’s principal roadway, and provides open views of the Pacific Ocean. The National Park Service owns approximately 14 acres of land on the northern coastal bluffs along the west side of Palmetto Avenue as part of the GGNRA.

Given the extraordinary natural and scenic value, the interest of public access, and the potential erosion hazards, undeveloped land on the northern coastal bluffs is designated Open Space/Agriculture/Residential, and identified as a priority for permanent conservation. Sensitive, clustered development could occur on the east side of Palmetto.

GGNRA plans to continue to manage its land along the northern coastal bluffs as a “natural zone” emphasizing protection of habitat and natural coastal processes. No formal beach access exists or is planned. Undeveloped land west of Palmetto Avenue contains areas of Coastal bluff scrub, which is considered a special status community of high value, important for stabilizing sand dunes. The entire bluff-top area is currently undeveloped and offers an open, highly scenic view of the entire length of Pacifica's coastline.

WEST EDGEMAR-PACIFIC MANOR
West Edgemar-Pacific Manor is an established coastal neighborhood extending from north of the Oceanaire Apartments (formerly Land’s End Apartments) to south of the San Francisco RV Park between Highway 1 and the ocean. The area is centered on the Pacific Manor shopping center. Multi-family development accounts for over 90 percent of the area’s approximately 870 housing units. West Edgemar-Pacific Manor’s residential areas have the highest density in Pacifica.

As envisioned by the Plan, redevelopment and/or shopping center improvements will enhance the area’s walkability, help integrate the commercial center with its coastal setting, and improve the area’s visual appeal.

The City-owned bluff-top land along the west side of Esplanade Avenue may present an opportunity to develop a small park, if this can be done without aggravating slope instability. Esplanade Avenue is also identified as a future bluff-top coastal access point, which may be achieved by redesigning the Esplanade right-of-way to enhance views and pedestrian access. Progressive coastal erosion has led to demolition of residential structures in the 300- and 500-blocks of Esplanade Avenue, and remains an important factor when considering future development potential of sites located along the bluff-top.

WEST SHARP PARK
Sharp Park is one of Pacifica’s original beach communities. Its western and eastern portions are divided by Highway 1. The northern half of West Sharp Park includes some of Pacifica’s only industrial and service commercial uses. The southern half of the neighborhood has a mixture of single-family and multi-family housing, with retail commercial uses prevailing along Palmetto Avenue, and commercial and civic buildings along Francisco Boulevard. A majority of the neighborhood’s approximately 900 housing units are in multifamily buildings. West Sharp Park includes many of Pacifica's community facilities, including a branch of the

14.c
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-19
San Mateo County Library, the Pacifica Resource Center, City Hall, and Council Chambers. The neighborhood features the Pacifica Pier and Beach Boulevard Promenade, and public parking for the Pier, Promenade, and Sharp Park Beach.

The Plan envisions the area along northern Palmetto west of Palmetto Avenue transitioning to Low-Intensity Visitor Serving Commercial uses over time. The transition is necessary to account for progressive coastal erosion which has advanced into many bluff-top sites along Palmetto Avenue in this area. Coastal erosion is an important factor to consider when reviewing future development of sites located along the bluff-top.

Southern Palmetto Avenue will grow into a higher-density mixed use corridor, supported by higher-intensity development on Francisco Boulevard, and with an enhanced connection to the coast achieved with redevelopment of the Beach Boulevard property. The Beach Boulevard Promenade and park, together with the Pier and Sharp Park Beach, provide extensive recreation opportunities, and are tremendous assets for both the neighborhood and the City. The maintenance of park facilities, the pier, and public parking at this location is a high priority. Views to and along the ocean are essential to the neighborhood's character and must be maintained.

14.c
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-20
Figure 2-5: Pacifica Coastal Zone, North

14.c
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-21
Central Pacifica Coastal Zone
Figure 2-6 shows the central section of Pacifica’s Coastal Zone. The map includes Sharp Park Golf Course, the West Fairway Park neighborhood, Mori Point, the Rockaway Quarry, Rockaway Beach, the Rockaway Headlands, and the Shelldance Nursery.

SHARP PARK GOLF COURSE, WEST FAIRWAY PARK, AND MORI POINT The central stretch of Pacifica’s coast includes Sharp Park Golf Course, Mori Point, and the small single-family subdivision of West Fairway Park. Sharp Park Municipal Golf Course is part of a land bequest made to the City and County of San Francisco early in the 20th Century on the condition that the land be used for public park or recreation. Laguna Salada and its marsh, located on the western side of the golf course, provide habitat for the San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog. West Fairway Park is a small single-family residential subdivision. On the south, the neighborhood meets the base of undeveloped Mori Point, managed as part of Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

The Plan designates Sharp Park Golf Course and Mori Point as regional park land. Current characteristics may be maintained, and environmental restoration will be a priority. The West Fairway Park neighborhood's existing land use is reinforced by the Plan’s land use designations.

Sharp Park Beach is open to the public between the Pier and Mori Point, while Sharp Park Golf Course provides a unique recreational asset. Mori Point is a spectacular section of the GGNRA. The General Plan proposes trail improvements and critical new trail segments that would link the coastal trails with the inland ridges. This segment of the Pacifica coastline includes view corridors from Highway 1 into Sharp Park Golf Course and toward Mori Point and Mori Ridge that will be preserved.

ROCKAWAY BEACH, QUARRY, AND HEADLANDS
Rockaway Beach is a small, pedestrian-oriented area with shops, restaurants, and lodging and a small beach, with parking and other amenities. The vacant Quarry site occupies about 94 acres west of Highway 1 and south of Mori Point. About 30 acres of the site are on slopes of 35 percent or steeper. The Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant, at the north end of the former quarry, releases treated wastewater into Calera Creek, which has a naturalized channel, a restored riparian corridor, and a paved walking and cycling path. The Headlands is a rocky promontory separating Rockaway Beach and Pacifica State Beach, and is crossed by a scenic trail.

14.c
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-22
Figure 2-6: Pacifica Coastal Zone, Central

14.c
Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-23
The Quarry site is Pacifica's most visible potential development site. Prior to any future development, the property owner must complete reclamation of the former quarry pursuant to the State Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and the Pacifica Municipal Code.

Approximately half of the site, including the upland areas and the Calera Creek riparian corridor, is designated for Conservation. This area will remain open space, with trail improvements connecting Mori Point with Rockaway Beach. The Flats and the Pad overlooking Rockaway Beach are designated for Visitor-Serving Commercial development, supporting such potential uses as a resort hotel, boutique hotels, visitor attractions, and retail uses integrated with the Rockaway Beach district. Redevelopment of the Quarry site could expand this visitor-oriented area. Any development of the Quarry site will require detailed evaluation of biological resources to ensure that sensitive habitat and wetlands are protected; and should be sited and designed to minimize coastal hazard risks in accordance with policies in Chapter 5 and 6 of the LUP. Tthe likely footprint of development could be much smaller than the area designated. While housing may be proposed as part of a plan for the site, Ordinance No. 391 provides that rezoning to allow residential uses may occur only if approved by a residential uses are only authorized after a vote of the electorate. Figure 4-4 of the 2040 General Plan indicates removal of the Hillside Preservation District (HPD) overlay from the Flats portion of the site, which would also require approval by a vote of the electorate. Development in the Quarry Flats should include new public open space. The existing Rockaway Beach district also offers opportunities for infill and redevelopment, subject to an appropriate assessment of potential coastal hazards and vulnerabilities. The Plan envisions the Rockaway Beach district growing into a more distinct and high-profile visitor destination, with strong links to the natural setting of beaches, headlands, and ridges.

The Plan proposes new coastal trail segments, and new trails would link the coastal trails with the inland ridges.

Improvements to Highway 1 should ease travel, accommodate vehicles as well as bikes and pedestrians, and improve access into the Rockaway Beach district. Coastal views from Highway 1 toward Mori Point, Cattle Hill, and the Rockaway Headlands are important in establishing the identity of this area and Pacifica as a whole.

The United States Geological Survey established the place name “Aramai Point” for the Rockaway Headlands in 2021 in recognition of the indigenous peoples that occupied the area prior to European settlement.

Southern Pacifica Coastal Zone
Figure 2-7 shows the southern part of the Coastal Zone, including Pacifica State Beach, Shelter Cove, and the Pedro Point neighborhood, as well as Pedro Point Headlands.

PACIFICA STATE BEACH
Pacifica State Beach, also known as Linda Mar Beach, is a long sandy beach on a small bay formed by the Rockaway Headlands and Pedro Point. Pacifica State Beach is an outstanding recreational asset for the City and attracts over one million visitors annually from the region and beyond for its surfing, beach environment and scenery in close proximity to San Francisco. Recent restoration work and improvements to parking and access have helped to ensure that the beach will remain a popular natural environment for years to come. Views from Highway 1 toward the crescent sweep of Pacifica State Beach, the Headlands, and Pedro Point are a defining element for Pacifica, and will be preserved across the protected park land.

Pacifica State Beach supports primarily wintering and/or migrating Western snowy plovers, a federally threatened bird species. The beach must continue to be managed to ensure that recreational use does not interfere with the species' habitat requirements. Steelhead trout from the Central California Coast Ecologically Significant Unit are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Steelhead are known to

2.5 14.c
Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-24
spawn in several parts of San Pedro Creek, and the City will continue to support the preservation of viable steelhead migration.

PEDRO POINT AND SHELTER COVE
The Pedro Point neighborhood sits on the slope of the promontory that marks Pacifica’s southern boundary.

The neighborhood is characterized by single-family houses climbing up the slope, with some commercial development, including a small shopping center, on the flat land near the beach. The neighborhood is separated from the coastline by the berm of the former Ocean Shore Railroad. Pedro Point abuts City-, County-, and State-owned land at the Point’s higher elevations. This land is within the Golden Gate National Recreation Area’s legislative boundary, and could be included in the park in the future. The western tip of Pedro Point descends to Shelter Cove, where another cluster of houses exists on a single 17-acre parcel. Land access to Shelter Cove has been limited to steep pedestrian trails since the former roadway to the area washed out in the 1980s.years ago.

The Plan reinforces existing land use patterns for all developed parts of the sub-area. There is potential for Pedro Point shopping center and adjacent parcels to accommodate some new retail development, which could provide local convenience shopping as well as visitor-oriented businesses. The Plan retains flexibility for any future development on the vacant site west of the shopping center, which could have residential and smallscale commercial and visitor-oriented uses. Development of the site will require detailed evaluation of coastal hazards/vulnerabilities and biological resources to ensure that any sensitive habitat and wetlands that may exist on the site are protected; thus, the footprint of development could be smaller than the area designated. Future development should include a small park and access to the berm and the beach beyond. Completion of the Devils Slide Tunnel project has provided the opportunity to create a new trailhead and trails through open space land on the headlands.

SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
San Pedro Mountain and Pedro Point Headlands define the southern boundary of Pacifica’s Sphere of Influence, which includes the undeveloped 73-acre, 986-lot Tobin Park subdivision (located outside the Coastal Zone). The Plan designates existing public open space in the Sphere of Influence as Park, and designates all other land as Urban Reserve. The Urban Reserve area is intended to remain largely undeveloped.

14.c
Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-25
Figure 2-7: Pacifica Coastal Zone, South

14.c
Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-26

POLICIES
Guiding Policies
LD-G-1 Coastal Development. Ensure that development maximizes beach and coastal open space access and is orientated as much as possible to each that access reflects the surroundings of the particular coastal environment in use, design, and intensity.

Policies related to coastal access are provided in Chapter 3.

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

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

LD-G-4 Higher-Density Housing. Locate higher-density housing outside of Coastal Vulnerability Zones and in accessible places close to community shopping areas and transportation.

LD-G-5 Commercial Area Revitalization. Facilitate the revitalization of shopping areas and the creation of distinct commercial districts in Pacifica, resulting in wider shopping and dining opportunities for residents, enhanced attractions for visitors, increased sales tax revenues, and a stronger community image.

LD-G-6 Compact Mixed Use Development. Facilitate compact mixed use development on sites with good access to transit. consistent with the Land Use Diagram. Mixed use development may include housing or office space with retail, restaurants, or personal service businesses.

LD-G-7 Open Space Conservation and Habitat Protection. Protect beaches, oceanfront bluffs, wetlands, riparian corridors, Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA), ridgelines, hillside areas adjacent to existing open space, and areas that support critical wildlife habitat and special status species.

LD-G-8 Changes in Density or Intensity of Land Use in Coastal Vulnerability Zones. Do not increase the density or intensity of land use designations beyond those indicated in the LCLUP for sites located within Coastal Vulnerability Zones.

Policies related to Natural Hazards are provided in Chapter 5 and policies related to Coastal Resilience are provided in Chapter 6.

14.c
Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-27
Implementing Policies

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
See Chapter 3 for policies concerning public access and recreation, Chapter 4 for policies that concern environmental and resource protection, Chapter 5 for protection from natural hazards, and Chapter 6 for policies concerning sea level rise adaptation.

LD-I-5 Lower Cost Visitor and Recreational Facilities. Protect, encourage, and where feasible, provide lower-cost visitor and recreational facilities in the Coastal Zone. These include major, free recreational attractions such as Pacifica Pier and Pacifica State Beach; the public golf course at Sharp Park; the San Francisco RV Park; California Coastal Trail and other trails, lower cost overnight accommodations; and numerous beaches accessible at no cost.

LD-I-6 Oceanfront Land for Recreational Use. ProtectPrioritize use of land adjacent to Sharp Park and Pacifica State Beaches for low-intensity recreational use. Allowable uses should include those with a low development impact and which are readily relocated to adapt to evolving coastal conditions, such as recreation outfitters, campgrounds, rustic lodging, hikers’ huts, or view restaurants.

LD-I-7 Development Priority for Visitor-Serving and Recreational Uses. Allow visitor-oriented uses as-of-right in all areas designated for Visitor-Serving Commercial or Low-Intensity Visitor-Serving Commercial, and all commercial or mixed-use districts within the Coastal Zone.

Development on Visitor-Serving Commercial sites with developable areas of two acres or larger must include a visitor attraction, hotel, conference center, or similar use, and may also include a range of retail and service uses.

Smaller sites may have any visitor- or pedestrian-oriented retail or service use.

LD-I-8 Walkable and Transit-Oriented Development. Facilitate higher-density, mixed use development at specific locations along the coastline where an active, pedestrian environment is desired. as shown on the Land Use Diagram (Figure 2-3).

Future development along Palmetto Avenue and at the Eureka Square site; on lower Linda Mar Boulevard and Crespi Drive in West Linda Mar; at the Pacific Manor Shopping Center; and at Rockaway Beach and Quarry are easily accessible along the Highway 1 corridor and transit routes. Such development should help to make the coastline more accessible to residents and visitors.

LD-I-9 Coastal-Dependent Industry. Allow New coastal-dependent industry that cannot feasibly be accommodated consisted with other policies of this LCP may be permitted only if alternative locations outside the Coastal Zone are infeasible or more environmentally damaging or because to do otherwise permitting the development would not adversely affect the public welfare; and potential impacts to visual resources, sensitive species and habitat, water quality, and other coastal resources are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. This policy does not apply to a new or expanded oil and gas development, refinery, or petrochemical facility.

Future development of oil and gas facilities, refineries or petrochemical facilities, or thermal electric generating plants may be permitted only according to the terms established in Sections 30262, 30263, and 30264 of the Coastal Act. Conditions of Approval shall ensure consistency with all Coastal Act policies.

2.4B

2.4C

14.c
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-28
LD-I-10 Aquaculture. If oceanfront land is found to be suitable for coastal-dependent aquaculture, give such use priority over non-coastal-dependent uses.

POLICIES FOR SPECIFIC SITES
LD-I-11 Pacific Manor. Establish appropriate zoning for the Pacific Manor Shopping district to fFacilitate Retail Commercial improvements and Mixed Use redevelopment. in the Pacific Manor shopping district.

Redevelopment or improvements should enhance the area’s walkability and visual appeal, and should include pedestrian realm improvements that help to integrate the district with its coastal setting.

LD-I-12 Northern Palmetto. Support the transition to low-intensity visitor-serving commercial uses over time along the west side of Palmetto Avenue in northern West Sharp Park, and require improvement of the visual appearance of permitted older industrial uses when improvements are proposed to these uses.

Geotechnical studies are required to determine the “net developable area.” New uses are required to provide appropriate setbacks along the coastal bluffs to protect new structures from loss during their design life, and to provide public access to and along the shoreline.

LD-I-13 Palmetto Avenue. Enhance Palmetto Avenue between north of Paloma Avenue and Clarendon Road as a pedestrian-oriented main street with retail, restaurants and services as well as multi-family housing and mixed-use development.

This will foster a character that will attract both residents and tourists and will follow standards and guidelines established in the Sharp Park Specific Plan.

LD-I-14 Promenade Area and Beach Boulevard Property. Enhance the Promenade area as a local community and tourist destination, while also ensuring that it adequately responds to and addresses coastal hazard considerations consistent with the LCP.

Non-permanent improvements shall not require additional analysis.

Redevelopment of the city-owned 2212 Beach Boulevard property should provide an anchor for Palmetto Avenue and enhance the beachfront experience. The preferred use is a hotel if market conditions allow, but other aAppropriate uses will could include a hotel or conventional commercial/residential mixed-use project with cafes, restaurants, retail, and upper-level housing, if such uses are deemed appropriate considering coastal hazards and the required protections for coastal resources. The mix of uses for any non-hotel project proposal shall emphasize uses that are of interest to visitors and that generate revenues for the City.

LD-I-15 Francisco Boulevard. Facilitate office commercial as well as retail development along the three blocks of Francisco Boulevard north of Santa Maria Avenue, and higher-intensity mixed use development on the three blocks between Santa Maria Avenue and Montecito Avenue.

A core of high-intensity and civic uses here should help to support retail and restaurants along Palmetto Avenue by bringing more residents and workers and by enhancing visibility from Highway 1.

LD-I-16 Rockaway Quarry Site. Enable the responsible development and environmental conservation of the Quarry Site, considering the potential coastal hazard constraints (including

2.6 2.6A

2.6 2.7

14.c
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-29
but not limited to bluff erosion, slope stability, and flooding), as well as the biological constraints (specific to sensitive species, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, and wetlands) and coastal resource protection more broadly.

Preparation of a specific plan for the Quarry site could achieve the desired development outcomes. Allowable development should provide City revenues community benefits, including substantial public open space, and commercial uses and public spaces attractive to both visitors and local residents. Uses may include an inn or hotel; shops and restaurants; performance or conference spaces; and public uses. Ordinance No. 391 provides that residential uses are only authorized after a vote of the electorate. Development should be integrated with the Rockaway Beach district, to create an expanded visitor-oriented area in a memorable natural setting.

Environmental protection is a priority at this site and includes preserving upland areas as open space, preserving the riparian corridor along Calera Creek, and preserving critical habitat. Any development of the Quarry site will require detailed evaluation of potential geotechnical hazards and biological resources to ensure safe use of the site and that sensitive habitat and wetlands are protected; the likely footprint of development could be much smaller than the area designated.

LD-I-17 Rockaway Beach. Facilitate continued improvements in the Rockaway Beach district and promote infill development emphasizing active ground-floor and visitor-oriented uses and links to the Quarry site.

The Rockaway Beach area could be included in a specific plan that also covers the Quarry site.

LD-I-18 Rockaway HeadlandsAramai Point. Facilitate very low-intensity visitor-serving commercial use on the HeadlandsAramai Point between Rockaway and Pacifica State Beach.

Maintain the Coastal Trail connecting the two beaches. Any use on this site must recognize the limited opportunity for vehicular access.

Potential uses should have a low development impact and able to be readily relocated to adapt to evolving coastal conditions, such as rustic lodging, hikers’ huts, or similar uses.

LD-I-19 Pedro Point Shopping Center. Facilitate improvements to the existing Shopping Center that result in an improved orientation to the coastal environment and that result in more efficient use of the property with regards to parking, while enhancing its appeal for both neighborhood residents and visitors. Maintain beach access along the Shoreside Drive. right-of-way.

LD-I-20 Undeveloped San Pedro Avenue Site. Establish a Coastal Residential Mixed Use zoning district to allow small-scale visitor-oriented commercial uses as a stand-alone project without any residential development, or small-scale visitor-oriented commercial uses with some low density residential development at a density range of the lower third of the CRMU density range at a density range of three to five units per gross acre. Housing may be clustered, and uses may be mixed vertically or horizontally. Residential uses may be constructed attached to or detached from commercial uses, provided the overall site contains both commercial and residential uses. Development must include public coastal access and must provide public open space, and consider all biological constraints.

A wetland survey conducted according to the requirements of Coastal Commission regulation 13577 (Title 14, California Code of Regulations) is required to delineate potential wetlands on the site as part of the development

2.7 2.7

2.8 2.8

14.c
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-30
application and environmental review process. An assessment of potential geotechnical hazards must also be part of the development application and environmental review process, including assessment of the Ocean Shore railroad berm under hazard and vulnerability scenarios consistent with policies in Chapters 5 and 6.

CREATING A DESTINATION
LD-I-21 Town Center Sharp Park Area. Use the Sharp Park Specific Plan to guide future development in the West Sharp Park area, as well as adjacent areas east of Highway 1 such as Eureka Square. Through a combination of mixed use land use designations/zoning, streetscape improvements such as undergrounding overhead utility lines, targeted public investment, and marketing strategies, promote Palmetto Avenue as a pedestrian-oriented destination with shops and services for residents and visitors alike. The Sharp Park Specific Plan must be certified by the Coastal Commission before taking effect in the Coastal Zone.

LD-I-22 Business Improvement District. Work with property owners and the Palmetto Business Association to establish a Business Improvement District (BID) to finance local public improvements in the corridor.

LD-I-23 City-Owned Catalyst Projects. Use city-owned properties as catalysts for new development in the Palmetto area and elsewhere in the city.

For key opportunity sites such as the Old Wastewater Treatment Plant site on 2212 Beach Boulevard, the City may issue Request for Proposals for development. Learning from past request for qualifications (RFQ) processes for 2212 Beach Boulevard site will inform strategies to make the site more attractive and marketable as part of a future RFQ for a hotel developer.

LD-I-24 Recycling Center Relocation. Work with Recology, Inc. to identify a new location for a recycling yard its vehicle maintenance facility located on Palmetto Avenue at Pacific Avenue to free up land for visitor-based economic development.

LD-I-25 Increase Tourism. Prepare a multi-faceted program to encourage tourism, focusing on:
• Attracting new hotels or inns, a visitor’s center or other key attraction, tourism-based shopping, and other components; and
• “Branding” and marketing Pacifica’s parks, open spaces, beaches, and other natural amenities.

LD-I-26 Enhanced Visitor Node. Taking all site constraints into account, Ccreate a visitor-oriented commercial and hospitality node at Rockaway Beach and on developable portions of the Rockaway Quarry site. which contains distinctive design, uses, and recreational opportunities.

A key component of this strategy would be to pursue a boutique or high end/resort-oriented hotel and supporting tourist-oriented shopping and dining opportunities.

2.5 DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY AND ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SERVICES One purpose of the General Plan and LCLUP is to ensure that the City can accommodate projected population and job growth over the planning period (to 2040). To meet the requirements of State housing law, the City

2.9 14.c
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-31
must also have adequate sites where housing affordable to moderate- and low-income households can reasonably be developed. The Plan seeks to meet these needs while also satisfying other community goals and ensuring safety and environmental protection. This section estimates projected demand for new housing and non-residential space, and the development potential provided under the General Plan land use framework.

Population and Employment

POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Pacifica grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s, but has grown very little since then. The City gained an average of 790 persons per decade in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s but saw a decline of 1,600 people from 2000 to 2010.

In 2017, Pacifica’s population was 39,141, an increase of six percent from a population of 36,805 in the 2010 Census, and an increase of about 2 percent over its population of 38,390 in 2000. Between 2000 and 2017, the City added 440 housing units, as average household size increased slightly from 2.73 to 2.77 persons.

As in much of the state, Pacifica’s population has grown older in recent decades. Between 2000 and 2017, the 25-to-44 age cohort declined from 33 to 26 percent of the population, and there were also declines in the cohorts age 5 to 17. Meanwhile the 45-to-64 group grew from 27 to 32 percent and the population age 65 or greater rose from 10 to 15 percent.3
According to the Longitudinal Household Employer Dynamics Survey, the Planning Area had 4,725 jobs in 2017, an increase from 4,169 jobs in 2015.
4 Development Capacity and Projections
Development capacity is calculated based on assumptions about new residential and non-residential development that could be built under the Plan’s land use designations and their respective densities and intensities.

As described in the General Plan, there are an estimated 1,280 acres of vacant or underutilized land classified for residential or mixed use in the Pacifica Planning Area. Buildout of an estimated 80 percent of opportunity sites at projected densities would result in a total of 1,040 new housing units. This Plan conservatively uses the 2017 ACS population estimate of 39,141 as a baseline and assumes that Pacifica and its Sphere of Influence will reach a projected population of 41,878 by 2040, based on this development capacity.5 There are an estimated 117 acres of vacant or underutilized land classified for commercial or mixed use, citywide (mixed use land is also counted in the residential capacity analysis). The Rockaway Quarry site accounts for 49 acres, the portion of the site’s 94 total acres that would be potentially available for Visitor-Serving Commercial (VC) development based on the area mapped with this designation. As noted above, the Quarry site’s development capacity may be further reduced by site-specific analyses of geotechnical and biological constraints. Realistic development of opportunity sites would result in an estimated 645,400 square feet of net new non-residential building area. The greatest amount of new building area would be in the VC category, reinforcing the importance of this sector to Pacifica’s economic development strategy. Much of the VC potential is on the Quarry site, which site has proven challenging to develop in the past. New development is estimated to accommodate approximately 1,470 new jobs over the planning period. 3 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2013-2017 4 U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD), 2019 5 Total population calculated by multiplying 5% vacancy rate by total buildout of 1,040 units; assumes current rate of 2.75 people per household.

2.10 14.c
Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-32
The General Plan uses what may be considered a high-growth scenario for two principal reasons. First, much of the potentially developable land in Pacifica may be challenging to develop, so providing capacity to accommodate higher growth is more likely to translate to development that meets the needs of slower population growth. Second, there will be a need to provide adequate sites for housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households, to meet regional housing requirements.

Coastal Development Potential
Within the Coastal Zone, including all land west of Highway 1 as well as the Shelldance Nursery, the Planning Area has an estimated development capacity for 334 net new housing units on 78 acres of vacant or underutilized land. Nine in 10 of these units would be in Medium or High Density or Mixed Use areas, and potentially affordable to moderate- and low-income households. See Table 2-2.

TABLE 2-2: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY IN THE COASTAL ZONE UNDER THE LOCAL

COASTAL LAND USE PLAN
General Plan Land Use
Vacant or
Underutilized
Acres1
Permitted
Density
Range (units
per acre)
Projected
Density
(units per
acre)2
New Housing
Units at
Buildout3
Residential Districts
Transitional Open Space Residential
-

0.1 or less NA -
Open Space/Agriculture/Residential with Open Space 42 0.2 or less 0.15 - Very Low Density Residential
- 0.2 to 2 1.5 -
Low Density Residential
8 3 to 9 6.5 30
Medium Density Residential
5 10Up to 15 12.5 40
High Density Residential
1 16Up to 214 25 10
Mixed Use Districts
Coastal Residential Mixed Use 5 Up to 155
15 50
Mixed Use Neighborhood 12 16 to 264 25 190
Mixed Use Center
5 30 to 50 32 102
Urban Reserve
Urban Reserve - NA 0.1 -
Total Residential Development Potential on
Opportunity Sites
78 4,128
Existing Units on Underutilized Sites 78
Net New Residential Potential 78 334
Notes

1. Acreages are shown rounded to the nearest whole number, but more detailed numbers are used in calculations.

2. Projected density is informed by average current density of projected land uses and allowable density ranges.

3. A "net-to-gross factor" of 80% is applied to all development potential to account for need for additional streets on large sites. A "flex factor" of 80% is applied to account for property owner priorities and site constraints.

4. Sites of 0.5 acres or more in size may develop up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre.

5. The Undeveloped San Pedro Avenue Site shall be limited to 3-5 dwelling units per gross acre as provided in Policy LD-I-20.

Sources: San Mateo County Assessor’s Office, 2010; City of Pacifica, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019202119.

14.c
Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-33
The Coastal Zone also has an estimated capacity for approximately 154,300 net new square feet of nonresidential development on 110 acres of vacant or under-utilized land (land designated for mixed use is counted both here and in the residential capacity analysis.) About two-thirds of the new development capacity would take place in the Visitor-Serving Commercial category, including the Quarry site. See Table 2-3.

14.c
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) PACIFICA LOCAL COASTAL LAND USE PLAN – REVISED CERTIFICATION DRAFT, AUGUST 2024 OCTOBER 2023FEBRUARY 2020 2-34
TABLE 2-3: NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY IN THE COASTAL ZONE UNDER THE LOCAL

COASTAL LAND USE PLAN
General Plan Land Use
Vacant or
Underutilized
Acres1
Maximum
NonResidential
FAR
Projected
NonResidential
FAR2
New NonResidential Sq.

Ft. at Buildout3
Mixed Use Districts
Coastal Residential Mixed Use 5 0.5 0.10 13,500
Mixed Use Neighborhood 12 1.0 0.25 75,900
Mixed Use Center
5 3.0 0.35 43,400
Commercial Districts
Retail Commercial
13 1.0 0.25 85,000
Office/Commercial
1 1.5 0.35 13,100
Service Commercial
0 0.6 0.25 1,100
Visitor-Serving Commercial (not including Rockaway
Quarry)
9 2.5 0.35 82,900
Rockaway Quarry Site4
49 0.5 0.35 448,400
Low-Intensity Visitor-Serving Commercial
16 0.2 0.05 21,000
Public Facilities and Open Space Districts
Public/Institutional
0 1.0 0.35 1,300
Total Non-Residential Development Potential on
Opportunity Sites
110 785,600
Existing Non-Residential Development on
Underutilized Sites
631,300
Net New Non-Residential Potential 110 154,300
Notes

1. Acreages are shown rounded to the nearest whole number, but more detailed numbers are used in calculations.

2. Projected intensity is informed by average current intensity of projected land uses and allowable intensity ranges.

3. A "net-to-gross factor" of 75% is applied to all development potential to account for need for additional streets on large sites. A "flex factor" of 80% is applied to account for property owner priorities and site constraints.

4. Approximately 49 acres of the 94-acre Quarry site would be potentially developable. This acreage is counted separately from the Visitor-Serving Commercial classification.

Sources: San Mateo County Assessor’s Office, 2008; City of Pacifica, 2008; Dyett & Bhatia, 2013.

Public Facilities and Services
A critical function of planning is to evaluate the capacity for existing public facilities and services to handle growth, and to identify long-term needs. In the Coastal Zone, public works facilities should be sited and designed to support development that furthers the goals of the Coastal Act (Section 30254). This section summarizes the projected demand for water and wastewater services, and other utilities, based on the land use framework described above. This framework intends to be consistent with Coastal Act priorities, including visitor-oriented development, public access and recreation, and environmental and scenic protection. The Plan’s approach to the roadway network is covered in Chapter 3.

Potable Water Supply
The North Coast County Water District (NCCWD), an independent water purveyor, supplies water to Pacifica and part of San Bruno. The district gets its water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) through the Hetch Hetchy system. The District also has rights to a limited amount of surface water from the South Fork of San Pedro Creek for six months of the year. Pacifica’s water is pumped from San Andreas Lake and the Harry Tracey Water Treatment Plant in Millbrae via a main distribution line under Skyline Boulevard,

14.c
Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: Attachment C Redlined LCLUP (5727 : LCLUP #5.1) CHAPTER 2: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
2-35
to the Milagra Ridge storage tank. From there, water for northern Pacifica is pumped to the Christian Hill tank on Skyline Boulevard and then distributed by gravity to smaller tanks and to customers. Water for southern Pacifica is piped from the Milagra Ridge tank to the Royce tank, off Fassler Avenue, and then to smaller tanks and to customers. Overall, the system is divided into 34 pressure zones, each separated by pressure-reducing valves.6 The NCCWD has adopted a 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) that describes its water supply; past, current, and projected water use; and water conservation targets, among other water resource information.

Pacifica City CouncilAugust 12, 2024

Pacifica City Council
August 12, 2024