CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
2/23/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Consideration of rezoning, development plan, and a specific plan, to allow for single family residential use for currently existing residential use and uses consistent with single family residential use in order to obtain a grading permit for the unpermitted grading that was subject to the Notice of Violation and a 400 sq. ft. detached carport at 650 Cape Breton Drive (APN 018-170-060, 022-320-200) (File No. 2022-037).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct a public hearing and: (1) introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Rezoning RZ-211-22 and Development Plan DP-87-22 to establish a Planned Development (P-D) zoning district with development plan;” (2) adopt a Resolution to approve Specific Plan SP-180-22 at 650 Cape Breton Drive (APN 018-170-060, 022-320-200); and (3) find the approval of the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15301(Class 1-“Existing Facilities”), 1504(Class 4-“Minor Alteration to Land”) and 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
STAFF CONTACT:
James Lin, Senior Planner
(650) 738-7341
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Project Overview
The project site is located at the eastern terminus of Cape Breton, as shown in Figure 1, and is comprised of two parcels that total approximately 835,400 square feet, or 19.17 acres (82,400 square feet on APN 022-320-200 and 755,000 square feet on APN 018- 170-060). The site sits uphill at the top of Cape Breton Drive. The average slope across the entire site is approximately
52.3 percent. The project site was first developed in the 1970s, prior to that the site was undeveloped. Two single-family homes, one covered arena, and six nonhazardous storage buildings are currently existing on the subject site.
Figure One: Project Site
Pacifica City Council 2
February 23, 2026
The project site has a Hillside Preservation District (“HPD”) overlay on both parcels. The City’s Municipal Code requires that a property owner of property within the HPD obtain certain legislative approvals prior to undertaking any development, which includes grading.
Because of the HPD designation of the site, the proposed project involves a Rezone (RZ-211- 22), Development Plan (DP-87-22), and Specific Plan (SP-180-22) to allow for continued singlefamily residential use of the existing residence and associated improvements. In order to comply with the parking requirements in Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC) Section 9-4.2259(a), the applicant proposes to install an 8-foot-tall, 20-by-20-foot prefabricated carport in front of the existing single-family residence, outside of all required setbacks and on a developed foundation in order to comply with the covered parking requirements for single-family residential use.
Project Background
On May 20, 2021, the City issued a Declaration of Public Nuisance and Intent to Abate (“NOV”) relating to illegal grading that had occurred on the property through the removal of sand/soil without a necessary grading permit. The grading that was undertaken by the applicant involved removing sand/soil from the Covered Horse Arena to areas outside of the Covered Arena on the property. The approximate volume of the relocated soil is 100 to 300 cubic yards. The Owners of 650 Cape Breton Drive, Iglesia Ni Cristo (“INC”), filed a timely appeal and an administrative hearing was held on August 10, 2021. After conducting the hearing, the hearing officer issued a Decision and Order of Public Nuisance Hearing Officer and Notice of Intent to Abate (“Order”) on August 18, 2021, upholding the City’s NOV and concluding that grading, as defined by the City’s municipal code (PMC 9-4.2252(k), did occur on the property without the required grading permit.
Pacifica City Council 3
February 23, 2026
The Hearing Officer, through the Order, directed that INC do the following:
1. Install erosion control measures such as, but not limited to, silt fences, gravel bags, or straw wattles to contain soil piles in their current locations to the satisfaction of the Building Official; and
2. Limit the use of the Covered Arena to its occupancy classification and subject to approval by the Building Official; and
3. Refrain from any additional grading or removal of sand/soil from the property and to obtain a grading permit for the illegal grading/sand relocation that occurred on the Property as set forth in the NOV no later than May 30, 2022.
INC requested more time to file the necessary land use applications to obtain the grading permit required by the Order. The City and INC entered into an agreement to extend the deadline (Attachment J- “Agreement”). The Agreement set forth the agreed upon terms and obligations relating to compliance with the provisions of the Order and extended the May 30, 2022, deadline. The application was subsequently filed by the agreed upon date.
As discussed above, because the parcel is located in the HPD, a grading permit could not be issued until the applicant obtained a zoning reclassification to Planned Development (P-D) District. This reclassification required the preparation of a Development Plan, pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2205 and a Specific Plan to authorize the grading work, pursuant to PMC Section 9-
4.2208. The Agreement required the applicant to submit applications for a P-D designation and a Specific Plan to permit single-family residential use of the existing residence. The proposed uses include those typically associated with single-family residential use, such as home occupations, as outlined on pages 2-5 of Attachment J to the Agreement.
The project would retroactively authorize the grading that occurred at the site with all soil management activities conducted on-site and no removal to an off-site location. Exposed soil areas would be hydroseeded for erosion control.
REQUIRED APPROVALS
The proposed project requires the following three approvals provided in the Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC):
1. Rezoning: The project requires changing the zoning classification of sites APN 022-320- 220 (R-1) and site APN 018-170-060 (C-R) to P-D (Planned Development) to allow for continued single-family residential uses on the site. Because Rezoning is a legislative action, the City Council must take final action on the request under state law and the PMC.
2. Development Plan: The project requires a development plan as part of the rezoning to identify the uses that would permitted in the P-D District. The proposed development plan would allow for continued single-family residential use of the existing residence and associated improvements. Because a Development Plan approval is legislative action, the City Council must take final action on the request under the PMC.
3. Specific Plan: The project requires a specific plan pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2210, for grading in the P-D district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the specific plan, however, since the legislative actions also require the specific plan, the Council must consider this entitlement as well. The approval or denial of a Specific Plan is normally within the discretion of the Planning Commission; however, if the City Council approves the legislative permits, the Council should also consider the Specific Plan in order to approve the project as a whole.
Rezoning (RZ-211-22)
Pacifica City Council 4
February 23, 2026
The project site is located within the R-1/HPD (Single-Family Residential/Hillside Preservation District) zoning district and C-R/HPD (Commercial Recreation/Hillside Preservation District). In accordance with PMC section 9-4.2256, which addresses development procedures and standards in the HPD overlay district, the development proposal would require changing the zoning classification to a P-D (Planned Development) district to allow for land disturbance in the form of site grading. The rezoning would not change the HPD zoning of the site and the resulting zoning classification would be P-D/HPD.
The rezoning is required under PMC Section 9-4.2256 to allow for land disturbance in the form of site grading. Reclassification to P-D within the HPD overlay must occur through the Planned Development process, which requires approval of a Development Plan and Specific Plan.
During the Planning Commission meetings, there was significant discussion about why rezoning was required for the grading on the site and whether there was an alternative to rezoning that the could use to obtain the grading permit. Staff has researched this issue and has not identified any alternative to the requirements in PMC 9-4.2256. Because the site is located in the HPD, the applicant must change the zoning classification to a P-D district to allow for land disturbance in the form of site grading. The discussion of the findings for approval of the Rezoning may be found under the Discussion of Findings in this staff report.
Development Plan (DP-87-22)
Reclassification to P-D in the HPD requires simultaneous approval of a Development Plan, which sets forth permitted uses within the P-D zoned area. The development plan for the project would allow the continuation of single family uses and associated accessory uses, similar to the existing R-1 zoning. The project does not propose any changes of use, as the site is developed with single-family residences and non-hazardous storage buildings. The proposed carport that is required to conform to the current requirement for two covered parking spaces is typical and accessory to the residential use. The discussion of the findings for approval of the Development Plan may be found under the Discussion of Findings in this staff report.
Specific Plan (SP 180-22)
Together, the Development Plan and Specific Plan provide site-specific development standards and establish the framework for permitted land uses, circulation, and grading, consistent with the intent of the Planned Development and HPD overlay districts.
The project does not propose an intensification of use or any new structures aside from the prefabricated carport to satisfy covered parking requirements. It is intended to bring the property into conformance with zoning regulations while allowing for continued residential use and potential accessory uses consistent with single-family residential zoning, such as home occupations. The discussion of the findings for approval of the Specific Plan may be found under the Discussion of Findings in this staff report.
The draft resolution includes condition of approval #2 to stipulate that any changes in use not specifically authorized by this Specific Plan SP 180-22, Rezoning RZ-211-22, and Development Plan DP-87-22, shall be prohibited unless any modifications to the current uses authorized by Specific Plan SP 180-22 are processed and approved by the City.
Discussion of Findings by Staff
The reasons for a Rezoning, and the findings required for approval of a Development Plan and Specific Plan are included in Sections A -C.
A. Rezoning (RZ-211-22)
Pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2256, the project would require changing the zoning classification of sites APN 022-320-200 (R-1) and site APN 018-170-060 (C-R) to P-D (Planned Pacifica City Council 5
February 23, 2026
Development) with a Development Plan for the site as depicted in the project plans. The Commission must provide a written recommendation to the Council on the rezoning. Such recommendation shall include the reasons for the recommendations and shall be transmitted to the Council in the form of a resolution. Council may approve, modify, or disapprove the recommendation of the Commission at a public hearing. In this case, as discussed below, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the rezoning and Development Plan.
The rezoning of the project site to P-D (Planned Development) from R-1 and C-R would occur in the same ordinance as the Development Plan approval. The reasoning provided for the Development Plan approval recommendation, as described below, are hereby incorporated by reference as the reasoning for recommended approval of the rezoning.
B. Development Plan (DP-87-22)
Pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2206, the following findings can be made for the establishment of the Development Plan:
(a) The proposed P-D District can be substantially completed within the time schedule submitted by the applicant.
Findings
The applicant’s proposed project does not involve new construction or demolition of existing structures, and therefore the scope of work is limited in nature and easily achievable within the time schedule submitted by the applicant. To comply with Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC) Section 9-4.2259(a), the applicant proposes to install an 8-foot-tall, 20-by-20-foot prefabricated carport in front of the existing single-family residence, outside of all required setbacks and on a developed foundation, as shown in the project plans (plans entitled “650 CAPE BRETON DR POST-CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN PACIFICA, CALIFORNIA” prepared February 19, 2025).
Because the proposed carport exceeds 120 square feet, a building permit will be required prior to installation. The applicant has indicated that the carport would be installed within 90 days of project approval. Given the minor scope of work, the limited permitting requirements, and the applicant’s proposed schedule, staff finds that the project can be substantially completed in a timely manner consistent with the requirements of PMC Section 9-4.2259(a). (b) Each unit of the development, as well as the total development, can exist as an independent development capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability or adequate assurance that such objective will be attained.
Findings
The project does not include any demolition of existing structures and no new construction other than the pre-fabricated carport. The site is already developed with a single-family residence and associated improvements, and the current configuration has demonstrated the ability to function independently and compatibly within the surrounding neighborhood.
The project’s intent is to bring the existing development into conformance with zoning requirements through the Planned Development process. The continued use of the site for single-family residential purposes is consistent with the character of the area and provides an environment of sustained desirability and stability. No physical or operational changes are proposed that would adversely affect this objective. Therefore, staff finds that the existing development can exist as an independent development capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability or adequate assurance that such objective will be attained. (c) The land uses proposed will not be detrimental to the present or potential surrounding uses but will have a beneficial effect which would not be achieved through other districts.
Pacifica City Council 6
February 23, 2026
Findings
The existing site already contains existing structures for residential use as well as a covered arena previously utilized for equestrian purposes and other non-hazardous storage buildings.
The site is bordered by single-family residences along Cape Breton Drive to the west and undeveloped agriculturally zoned land to the north, east, and south of the site.
Therefore, the City Council finds that the proposed single-family residential use on the subject site will be consistent with the existing developed area on and around the project site; would not be detrimental to any potential future development surrounding the site; and, would not be detrimental to the present or potential surrounding uses and would have a beneficial effect on the same which would not be achieved through other zoning districts. The approval of the project does not authorize any improvements or development beyond those specifically authorized by Specific Plan SP 180-22, Rezoning RZ-211-22 and Development Plan DP-87-22.
Thus, The approval of this project would bring the property into compliance with the building code requirements by allowing the applicant to obtain the retroactive grading permit and would not be detrimental to the present or potential surrounding uses and will have a beneficial effect which would not be achieved through other districts.
(d) The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic, and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the street network outside the P-D District.
Findings
There are no proposed new construction and demolition of existing buildings as part of the application. Access onto the project site is from the eastern terminus of Cape Breton Drive.
Cape Breton Drive is an existing residential street characterized by single-family residences. No new streets are proposed with the project. As there would not be significant additional densities and traffic from the proposed project, as there is no new construction of residences as part of this project, staff finds that the streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic, and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the street network outside the P-D District.
(e) The area surrounding the development can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with the proposed development, and the P-D District uses proposed are in conformance with the General Plan and, where applicable, the Local Coastal Plan, or that changes in the General Plan or Local Coastal Plan are justified.
Findings
The application proposes to rezone from R-1 and C-R to P-D. The proposed project also includes the reclassification of the existing HPD overlay through the Development Plan and Specific Plan process in order to permit the land disturbance pursuant to PMC Section 9-
4.2256.
The surrounding neighborhood is substantially developed with single-family residences. The sizeable land area that is not developed is the Sweeney Ridge portion of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), which is northeast of the project site and is owned by the Federal government and outside the City’s jurisdiction for planning and zoning.
Therefore, the City Council finds that the area surrounding the project site can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with the proposed development. There is no proposed new construction other than the pre-fabricated carport and no demolition of existing buildings as part of the application. The approval of this project would bring the property into compliance with the building code requirements by allowing the applicant to obtain the Pacifica City Council 7
February 23, 2026
retroactive grading permit. The uses proposed are consistent with the General Plan, in that they are principally residential in nature.
(f) The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and, if applicable, Local Coastal Plan
Findings
The proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan and its policies that are intended to continue to implement the requirements of the Hillside Preservation District (HPD), including submission of siting and grading plans.
The applicant is taking the necessary steps to comply with the requirements of the Hillside Preservation District (HPD), including the submission of siting and grading plans, in order to apply for a retroactive grading permit for the previously unpermitted grading work. This staff finds that the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, as discussed above. (g) Any proposed commercial development can be justified economically at the location proposed and will provide adequate commercial facilities for the area.
1. Any exception from the standard district requirement is warranted by the design Of The Project And Amenities Incorporated In The Development Plan.
Findings
No commercial development or any new construction or demolition of existing buildings are proposed; therefore, staff find that these findings are not applicable. (h) The project is consistent with the City's adopted Design Guidelines.
Findings
There are no proposed new construction and demolition of existing buildings as part of the application. A prefabricated carport is proposed to be installed through a building permit on the existing foundation. Therefore, staff finds that the finding is not applicable.
C. Specific Plan (SP-180-22)
Pursuant to PMC Section 9-4.2209, the City Council shall approve a specific plan only upon making the following findings:
(a) That the specific plan is consistent with the approved development plan.
Findings
An approved development plan contains a list of approved uses for an area with P-D zoning.
The approved uses in a development plan are implemented with approval of one or more specific plans which specify the site layout, architectural design, and other detailed parameters of individual projects proposed for construction. The application for the proposed project includes the development plan and the specific plan together. Staff finds that the Specific Plan would allow the existing single-family residential uses and uses such as home occupations, in accordance with the PMC provisions in order to obtain a retroactive grading permit and is consistent with the Development Plan.
(b) That the specific plan is consistent with the City's adopted Design Guidelines Findings
There are no proposed new construction and demolition of existing buildings as part of the application. A prefabricated carport is proposed to be installed through a building permit on the Pacifica City Council 8
February 23, 2026
existing foundation. The carport is being proposed by the applicant to meet the covered parking requirements as part of the PMC. Sec 9-4.2259(a). Therefore, staff finds that the finding is not applicable.
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation for Denial The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the proposed project on August 4, 2025, and November 17, 2025. At the public hearing on November 17, 2025, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council disapproval of the Specific Plan SP180-22 (“Development Permit”), and to recommend City Council denial of Rezoning RZ-211-22 and Development Plan DP-87-22 (“Legislative Approvals”) by adopting Resolution No. 2025- 016 (Attachment C). The minutes from the Planning Commission hearings on August 4, 2025, and November 17, 2025, are included as Attachment E and Attachment F, respectively.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The City Council, in its capacity as the legislative body of the City and in the exercise of its police power under the California Constitution, may consider and approve legislative actions on behalf of the City. The City Council is not bound by specific findings when approving legislative items, and may consider all information relevant to the public health, safety, and welfare of persons within the City.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Written public comments received from public hearings conducted by the Planning Commission made be found in Attachment G and H. Public comments received following noticing ahead of the February 23, 2026, City Council hearing up until February 11, 2026 may be found in Attachment I.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) REVIEW
Staff analysis supports that the proposed project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a Class 1 (“Existing Facilities Section 15301(e)), Class 4 (“Minor Alteration to Land” 15404(a)) and the Common Sense Exemption (CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3)).
Class 1, “Existing Facilities,” consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The types of "existing facilities" itemized below are not intended to be all-inclusive of the types of projects which might fall within Class 1. The key consideration is whether the project involves negligible or no expansion of use.
Examples include but are not limited to:
(e) Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than:
(1) 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is less; or
The subject proposal would allow for the Applicant to retroactively apply for a grading permit.
While all existing structures and buildings on site remain, the proposed project includes the Pacifica City Council 9
February 23, 2026
installation of an 8-foot tall, 20-by-20 foot prefabricated carport in order to comply with the covered parking requirements as part of the PMC. Sec 9-4.2259(a). This would be a negligible expansion of existing use to allow a 400-square-foot carport to be installed on the site.
Class 4, “Minor Alteration to Land” consists of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees except for forestry and agricultural purposes. Examples include but are not limited to:
(a) Grading on land with a slope of less than 10 percent, except that grading shall not be exempt in a waterway, in any wetland, in an officially designated (by federal, state, or local government action) scenic area, or in officially mapped areas of severe geologic hazard such as an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or within an official Seismic Hazard Zone, as delineated by the State Geologist.
The subject proposal for a P-D (Planned Development) designation and a Specific Plan for the property would allow for the Applicant to retroactively apply for a grading permit. The approximate volume of the relocated soil taken from the covered arena is 100-300 cubic yards.
The average slope of where the unpermitted grading took place is calculated at 0 percent.
Because the project is consistent with the requirements for a Class 1 and Class 4 exemption and none of the exceptions to applying an exemption in Section 15300.2 apply; there is substantial evidence in the record to support a finding that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA.
Additionally, the project would be exempt under the Common Sense exemption in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) as CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Here, the proposed project is for a P-D (Planned Development) designation and a Specific Plan for the property would allow for the Applicant to retroactively apply for a grading permit. The P-D and Specific Plan approvals would not have a significant effect on the environment as they are administrative actions. The grading that was undertaken by the applicant involved removing sand/soil from the Covered Arena to areas outside of the Covered Arena on the property. The approximate volume of the relocated soil is 100-300 cubic yards, which also would not have a significant effect on the environment as the amount is relatively minor and the location from the covered arena to outside the covered arena would not have a significant effect on the environment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the Development Permit and Legislative Approvals would enable the applicants to retroactively obtain a grading permit to approve previous land disturbance, obtain building permit to install an 8-foot-tall, 20-by-20-foot prefabricated carport in front of the existing singlefamily residence, outside of all required setbacks and on a developed foundation to comply with Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC) Section 9-4.2259(a), and comply with the Order issued on August 18, 2021.
Staff has conducted the necessary analysis in addition to concerns raised by the Planning Commission and determined that, as conditioned, the project would satisfy all zoning regulations and applicable development standards and would be consistent with the General Plan. The project would result in a rezone from R-1/HPD and C-R/HPD to P-D/HPD. The rezone is intended to support the reclassification within the HPD overlay in order to allow land disturbance through site grading. Rezoning within the HPD overlay can only be reclassified through the Planned Development process, which involves the approval of a Development Plan Pacifica City Council 10 February 23, 2026
and Specific Plan to allow for single-family residential use. The rezoning only authorizes the existing residential land uses and potential accessory uses consistent with single-family residential zoning. The Development Plan and Specific Plan only authorize the retroactive grading permit. The project does not propose an intensification of use any new structures other than the carport that is required to comply with the covered parking requirements for the existing residential use. Any future development of the site beyond residential use would require future approval through the same process. A condition of approval has been included to specify that requirement.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council approve Rezoning (RZ-211-22), Development Plan (DP-87-22), and Specific Plan (SP-180-22).
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The Council may deny the requested Legislative Approvals, which would have the effect of denying the overall project.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Review of the proposed resolution and ordinance is not directly associated with a City Council goal or an item on the City Council’s Work Plan. Serving in a legislative capacity is a routine function of the City Council as part of its normal governance process as established in the Pacifica Municipal Code and in State Law.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impact. Processing costs for this item are paid by the applicant.
ORIGINATED BY:
Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A - Ordinance (PDF)
Attachment B - Draft Resolution (DOCX)
Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution for Denial(PDF) Attachment D - Project Plans (PDF)
Attachment E - Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 20250804 (PDF) Attachment F - Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 20251117 (PDF) Attachment G - Combined_Public Comments_650 Cape Breton_Item 4_Before_Noon_08042025 (PDF)
Attachment H - Public Comments Received Item 1 - 11-17-2025 City of Pacifica Planning Commission Hearing (PDF)
Attachment I - Public Comments Received Up Until 2-11-26 (PDF) Attachment J - Approved_ Agreement_COC Owners of 650 Cape Breton - 2022-09-06 (PDF) Attachment K - Geotechnical Report (PDF)
Attachment L - Environmental Sampling Summary (PDF)