Stakeholder summary_mas

Plan Half Moon Bay
Stakeholder Interviews
Summary Report
April 2014
planhmb.org
Plan Half Moon Bay
Stakeholder Interviews
Summary Report
April 2014
Prepared for
City of Half Moon Bay
by
Table of Contents
1
Introduction...................................................................................................................1
2 Assets .............................................................................................................................2 3 Land Use ........................................................................................................................3 3.1 Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) ........................................................................................... 3 3.2 Office ................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Residential .......................................................................................................................................... 4 3.4 Open Space and Agriculture .......................................................................................................... 4 3.5 Priority Uses ...................................................................................................................................... 4 3.6 Wavecrest .......................................................................................................................................... 5 3.7 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 5 4 Development Process and Regulations ......................................................................7 4.1 Permitting ........................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2 Design and Architectural Review ................................................................................................. 7 4.3 Building Height and Massing ........................................................................................................... 7 4.4 Locating New Development .......................................................................................................... 8 4.5 Reuse ................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.6 Cost of Development ...................................................................................................................... 8 4.7 Coastal Development ...................................................................................................................... 8 5 Growth and Economic Development .......................................................................10 5.1 Jobs ................................................................................................................................................... 10 5.2 Opportunities for Economic Development............................................................................. 10 5.3 Attitudes toward Growth ........................................................................................................... 11 5.4 Agriculture ...................................................................................................................................... 11 5.5 Sustainability.................................................................................................................................... 11 i
Plan Half Moon Bay
5.6 Understanding Demand ............................................................................................................... 12 6 Circulation ...................................................................................................................13 6.1 Congestion ...................................................................................................................................... 13 6.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes .................................................................................................... 14 6.3 Parking .............................................................................................................................................. 15 6.4 Local Connections ......................................................................................................................... 15 6.5 Recommended Improvements ................................................................................................... 16 7 Downtown Half Moon Bay .........................................................................................18 8 Public Services and Facilities .....................................................................................19 8.1 Public Safety .................................................................................................................................... 19 8.2 Schools ............................................................................................................................................. 19 8.3 Water and Sewer .......................................................................................................................... 19 9 Recreation and Coastal Access .................................................................................21 9.1 Coastal Access ............................................................................................................................... 21 9.2 Recreation ....................................................................................................................................... 21 10 Governance and the Planning Process ...................................................................23 10.1 Improved Communication and Leadership ........................................................................... 23 10.2 Plan Half Moon Bay Recommendations ................................................................................. 23 Appendix: Stakeholder Interview Participants ..............................................................25 ii
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Introduction
1
Introduction
As part of the General Plan Update, 12 interviews were conducted with stakeholders on March3,
4, and 5, 2014. The interviews were conducted with individuals or groups of two or three, with an
hour allotted for each session, and one was conducted by phone. Stakeholders included local
business owners; property owners; real estate professionals; architects; developers; and
representatives from the Cabrillo Unified School District, Half Moon Bay Planning Commission,
and Half Moon Bay City Council. Interviewers posed questions about the community’s assets and
challenges, and which touched on topics of land use, economic development, circulation, and
coastal resources. The questions were used only as guidance to bring about substantive and
relevant responses. This report summarizes the themes and issues highlighted during these
interviews. A list of interviewees can be found in the appendix.
1
Plan Half Moon Bay
2
Assets
When asked to name Half Moon Bay’s biggest assets, stakeholders pointed to its coastal and rural
setting, its sense of community, and its small-town identity. Stakeholders appreciated the city’s
coastal resources, such as the ocean, beaches, and trails, and the many opportunities for outdoor
activity within the city and throughout the Coastside region. These assets make the city a
destination for tourists and families, and offer easy coastal access for the entire Bay Area
community.
The Half Moon Bay community was described as bright, progressive, active, and dedicated to the
city. Due to the rural nature of its surroundings, low density of developed amenities, and the
weather, the Coastside tends to attract residents who love what it has to offer and who are willing
to sacrifice the benefits of living in a larger or less isolated community. Stakeholders also enjoyed
that the city’s rural character made it a relatively more affordable place to live. They also
appreciated the city’s agricultural resources, and felt that these contributed to its overall identity.
2
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Land Use
3
Land Use
3.1 Planned Unit Developments (PUDs)
Interviewees repeatedly touched on the challenges presented by the city’s Planned Unit
Development (PUD) land use designation. Although this designation was originally intended to
allow for more flexible planning of large tracts of land, the associated requirements have made
them more difficult and costly to develop. One obstacle identified by stakeholders is the fact that
the PUD sites are large and contain many lots with varied ownerships. One example given was the
Venice Beach PUD, which contains 114 parcels with 70 to 80 different ownerships. PUDs at
Dunes Beach and Surf Beach were also cited as examples where fragmented ownership has been a
barrier to development. This is considered a challenge because the Local Coastal Program (LCP)
and Zoning Ordinance require that specific plans be adopted for the entirety of a PUD site before
development may take place (although nowhere does the PUD ordinance explicitly state that all
property owners must agree to the plan). The responsibility for developing specific plans for PUD
sites has been placed onto the property owners; the City has avoided assuming this role. In many
cases, property owners have requested the option of developing partial PUDs. There have been
some instances where this has been successful (examples may be the Carnoustie and Andreotti
properties), but these requests are most often denied.
Most of the interviewees agreed that the PUD designation should be reformed, both generally and
with respect to specific PUD sites. One suggestion was to break existing PUD districts into smaller
sites that could be planned more easily. A similar suggestion was to allow the development of
partial PUDs. Another approach would use the example of the Laguna Ridge Specific Plan in Elk
Grove, CA, which includes a provision designating participating and non-participating members.
Thus, if the specific plan is approved by a majority of the property owners, non-participating
properties could simply be redesignated.
Another concern was that current requirements for developing PUDs are too vague, making it
difficult to anticipate the uses, impacts, and resource demands that may develop on any given
PUD site in the future. This lack of specificity creates challenges for long-term planning in the
city, including planning around water connections that may need to be reserved for priority uses.
One interviewee suggested that allowable uses for specific PUD areas should be identified and
zoned in order to remove this uncertainty.
3.2 Office
Stakeholders noted that current zoning does not allow for sufficient office space to meet existing
and potential demand. Small companies reportedly have difficulty finding affordable office space,
3
Plan Half Moon Bay
particularly start-up organizations seeking space to grow. Several stakeholders cited the examples
of local companies GoPro and Odwalla, which chose to leave the city, and stated that reasons for
their departure included having outgrown spaces and being unable to expand further. One
interviewee observed that existing commercial properties could be enough to satisfy demands for
office space in the short term, though long-term flexibility would be important in case demand
increases.
3.3 Residential
In several of the interviews, stakeholders indicated that there is not enough housing or enough
variety in housing types to satisfy demand in Half Moon Bay. Interviewees expressed concern
over the loss in population that the city has experienced in recent years, and noted that potential
new residents and younger and senior members of the existing community are having difficulty
finding affordable housing. Stakeholders expressed interest in housing types other than detached
single-family residential, which might require more flexibility in the city’s zoning regulations.
These new housing types could include live-work units, micro-housing, and co-housing that
would offer more options for a broader range of residents. It was also noted that there are very
few rental opportunities on the Coastside as a whole, and that renting in Half Moon Bay can be
unaffordable. Current rental rates were estimated as $2,500 a month for a two-bedroom unit, and
$3,500 a month for a three-bedroom unit.
Some interviewees also saw an opportunity for clustering and increased densities in certain areas,
particularly the urbanized downtown. Where recently there has been an increase in the number of
applications for single-family homes on infill lots, there have also been applications for duplexes,
and the City offers a density bonus for multi-family residences built downtown.
3.4 Open Space and Agriculture
Natural resource conservation is an important issue in the community and is generally supported,
according to interviewees. Half Moon Bay residents tend to be environmentally sensitive because
they value the scenic beaches and diverse habitats of the Coastside.
The Urban Reserve land use designation was identified as a method of preventing urban growth
from taking place on agricultural parcels. However, some stakeholders felt that there needs to be a
discussion of how Urban Reserve land should be planned over the long term. One stated that
there needs to be more realistic specifications for how land might be changed from that
designation. Another felt that the uses on these lands could be better aligned with the needs of the
current environment and population.
3.5 Priority Uses
Stakeholders described the priority use allocations for water and sewer capacity defined in the
existing LCP and associated impacts on housing development. According to one interviewee,
affordable housing was once identified as a priority use, but has since been removed. According to
4
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Land Use
another, the Coastal Commission values the city as a home for visitor-serving uses, and much of
the water district’s priority connections are held for visitor-serving uses. The restrictions on nonpriority water connections acts as a limitation on the development of affordable housing. One of
the stakeholders suggested that affordable housing be returned to priority use status for water and
sewer service.
3.6 Wavecrest
Some interviewees were asked about the Wavecrest area. Interviewees described how the
Wavecrest development was approved by the City, but eventually stopped amidst ongoing
negotiations with the Coastal Commission. Today, any development in that area would be
constrained by the potential population growth and traffic concerns that they could potentially
cause. The current LCP contains a restoration plan for the Wavecrest site that emphasizes open
space, though there does not appear to be any strong impetus for development to occur there.
Given that some of the lands are held in trust—as well as the fact that the site is a large PUD with
many ownerships—the space may simply be maintained as open space for the foreseeable future
and may eventually move into public ownership.
3.7 Recommendations
During the interviews, stakeholders offered a number of specific recommendations regarding
land use, including the following:
•
New development of a shopping center and townhomes at the intersection of highways 1
and 92 is a good idea, offering an opportunity to increase densities, preserve open space
around dense areas, and keep housing prices down.
•
Purissima Street could be a mixed-use street, offer residential space, and provide parking
for people who work downtown.
•
Kelly could be rezoned as commercial; there are already some commercial uses there.
•
Now that the city has been able to direct development onto infill lots, and as other
development concerns (such as water capacity) have changed, it should consider
expanding upon the uses allowable in the open space reserve districts.
•
There are not currently any public electric vehicle charging stations in the city, but there
may be an opportunity to look ahead to future demand and provide them. Tesla is
planning to develop charging stations around the country, but is looking for locations
where drivers could be engaged in other activities for the 30 minutes necessary to charge
a vehicle.
•
Designating more light industrial zones would allow for more flexibility in future
development. Currently, there are no zoning districts available that support office uses.
On the eastern side of the city, the only areas open for development are PUD properties.
•
A shopping center within city limits could relieve some of the traffic on the highways by
allowing locals to run their errands without leaving town.
5
Plan Half Moon Bay
•
6
There is currently a lack of consistency between planning policies and zoning regulations
that prevents development from following the land use plan, and this needs to be
addressed.
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Development Process and Regulations
4
Development Process and Regulations
4.1 Permitting
A number of the interviewees commented on the City’s development permitting system and
expressed the desire to adopt a much more streamlined process. Some comments indicated that
permitting regulations often create unnecessary steps for developers. For example, one
stakeholder pointed out that current zoning regulations do not match underlying subdivisions.
Instead, zoning effectively defines about 85 percent of the city’s lots as sub-standard, which then
triggers extra review and permitting requirements for development on each of those lots.
One interviewee suggested that the Cabrillo Unified School District (CUSD) should not need to
apply to the City for development permits other than those related to grading. Currently, CUSD
needs the City’s approval for all projects, including facilities improvements, in addition to
undergoing review by the Division of the State Architect (DSA), which itself involves strict
requirements. The interviewee pointed to Pacifica as an example, as the Pacifica School District
does not need City approvals for improvements.
4.2 Design and Architectural Review
Two interviews touched on the design and architectural review process. Interviewees discussed
the Architecture Review Commission, which conducted the review procedure with applicants
until it was discontinued after the Beachwood settlement. Interviewees recalled that architectural
review by the commission was informal and enabled developers to expediently address specific
concerns, and observed that the current process as carried out by the Planning Commission is
much more formal and complex.
Another stakeholder expressed displeasure with design review as it impacts the city’s visual
character, wondering how Half Moon Bay could preserve the eclectic nature of the Coastside
when design restrictions require new developments to conform and “fit in.”
4.3 Building Height and Massing
When asked whether there could be a place for three-story buildings in the city, some of the
stakeholders pointed to the Main Street area as a possibility. One thought that some of the
buildings there could have been three stories tall, and that as property owners modernize, they
might appreciate the option to build to three stories. Lesley Gardens, the senior housing project
on south Main Street, could be a positive model of a three-story structure. One interviewee felt
7
Plan Half Moon Bay
that the community may be more supportive of taller building heights if it were presented as a
big-picture concept rather than if it were only associated with a single project.
4.4 Locating New Development
Stakeholders noted that Half Moon Bay contains a large amount of undeveloped space. They
wanted to prioritize the development of infill lots to prevent sprawl, and noted that a number of
infill lots already have water and sewer connections.
4.5 Reuse
One conversation focused on the potential to adapt some of the city’s historic structures for
modern use, which may not be allowed in many cases by existing development regulations. These
could be visitor-serving amenities or other services that build on the character and atmosphere of
the local setting.
4.6 Cost of Development
Through numerous examples, stakeholders showed that a major barrier to development is the
cost in both money and time of the development process. There is a general sense that the
development process is not streamlined enough and thus does not encourage developments that
would provide big-picture benefits for the city in areas such as transportation, design, or
sustainability. As one example, the Pacific Ridge/Ailanto development took 15 years for the
eventual approval of 63 lots. As another, the Nerhan/Podesta development is currently delayed
due to a question of ingress and egress involving both the property and the high school. Though
the project offers many incentives and already has demonstrated tenant interest, it is still far from
entering the permitting stage. Stakeholders requested a more streamlined process that includes
more pre-application processes that offer developers more guarantees and guidance as they work
with the City. An improved development process should also be consistent with promoting larger
sustainability and land use goals.
4.7 Coastal Development
The Coastal Act and the California Coastal Commission figure prominently in the discussion of
development issues in Half Moon Bay. Stakeholders observed that Coastal Commission influence
can complicate and alter proposed developments. There is general frustration with the
bureaucracy of the Coastal Commission and the delays that it imposes: when the City instituted
its 1 percent growth limitation, it took five years for the updated LCP to be approved. Currently,
the City is awaiting Coastal Commission approval on necessary updates to its zoning code. There
is also a concern that, regardless of the public input involved in drafting an LCP, the Commission
can take any liberties in altering the draft during the certification process. This concern is
associated with the San Mateo County Midcoast LCP, which many felt, in its final form, bore little
resemblance to the original document endorsed by the community.
8
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Development Process and Regulations
One stakeholder noted two recent trends in the Commission’s decision making that could have
implications on future development in Half Moon Bay. In the first, many old subdivision
plattings are now considered “antiquated subdivisions,” meaning that the Commission may not
recognize the lots as legitimate parcels. In the second, the Commission has been pursuing lot
retirement as a means of conservation, but has not yet been very consistent.
9
Plan Half Moon Bay
5
Growth and Economic Development
5.1 Jobs
Local employment was discussed as a factor in the community’s traffic and quality of life
concerns. Many stakeholders pointed to the lack of local jobs as a primary contributor to traffic
problems during commute hours, as so many Half Moon Bay residents must take the highways to
work outside of town. The imbalance between housing and employment in Half Moon Bay also
means that the community’s identity is becoming more closely associated with that of a bedroom
community. Stakeholders agreed that providing new jobs in Half Moon Bay should be a priority,
and that these would ideally be consistent with the needs of the region and the context of the city.
This includes consideration for the aging youth population, who may want to stay and work in
the community. Half Moon Bay is an attractive city in which to live and work; due to its size and
walkability, it could allow for a convenient work-life balance.
Employers like GoPro and Odwalla left the city after running out of space to expand. Among the
negative economic impacts of disappearing employers is the decrease in the number of employees
around to patronize local services during the day. New companies can have a difficult time
finding a place to settle in Half Moon Bay, due the lack of available land in the appropriate land
use designations and other barriers to development.
5.2 Opportunities for Economic Development
In order to provide local employment, the city should consider the types of businesses and
services that would be the best fit for the local environment. A number of the stakeholders
mentioned incubation as an opportunity area: ocean- or coastal-related projects that capitalize on
the city’s location; technology services that would not require large facilities or daily commutes; or
other smaller enterprises. Stakeholders recognized that there are limits to the size of businesses
that could easily settle in Half Moon Bay, as larger businesses would have difficulty finding space.
However, there is the opportunity for smaller companies to start up, grow, and eventually leave.
To encourage small business development, Half Moon Bay would need to offer more office space
and reasonably priced housing, as these are currently difficult to find.
The city should also be looking to attract businesses that meet the demand for local services,
including a greater diversity of businesses, such as clothing shops and professional services like
pediatrics, dentistry, and senior care.
One stakeholder felt that local job development is of such high importance that the city should
include an Economic Development Element in the updated LCP. Establishing LCP policies that
10
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Growth and Economic Development
facilitate jobs creation could potentially ease future interactions with the Coastal Commission
regarding specific economic development projects.
5.3 Attitudes toward Growth
There are mixed attitudes towards growth within the Half Moon Bay community, as well as
differing understandings of what growth or development implies. For some, growth represents an
opportunity to define the city in terms other than as a tourist destination, the Pumpkin Festival,
or a beach community. Growth can also be a means of accommodating the changing demands for
services in a community that is also changing.
The community has struggled to have a balanced conversation about growth. For many,
maintaining the city’s existing character is an important value, and stakeholders noted that most
people are supportive of the 1 percent annual growth limit. However, many community members
also have concerns about traffic congestion and safety, and the lack of appropriate services and
housing types to meet residents’ needs. Stakeholders have found that any proposed developments
face the same resistance from a minority of well-organized interests that are opposed to change.
These interests have successfully stopped many projects from moving through the Planning
Commission and City Council. The result of this opposition is an inability to provide for the city’s
long-term needs or implement a long-term vision, as all of the community’s energy goes to
wondering “if we can build” rather than “what we can build.”
Stakeholders felt that thoughtful and controlled improvements to infrastructure and local services
are possible, and in many cases necessary. They saw a need to reframe development discussions to
be more strategic, pragmatic, and informative, to allow for more well-rounded assessments of
costs and benefits. They saw an opportunity for City advocacy to increase openness towards new
and innovative ideas that would meet the community’s changing demands.
5.4 Agriculture
Some stakeholders were skeptical about the role that traditional agriculture and floriculture would
play in the city’s future. One interviewee observed that the floriculture industry in Half Moon Bay
is becoming increasingly limited by competition from abroad. The city has two agricultural
zoning districts: A-1 for floriculture, and A-2 for all other agricultural uses except pig farming.
Within the city, however, all existing agricultural lands are zoned A-1 exclusively. Regardless,
there were suggestions that other productive land uses could be successful and should be allowed,
such as mariculture and aquaculture, including algae farming and feeding and harvesting fish.
5.5 Sustainability
Stakeholders claimed that Half Moon Bay residents are generally supportive of environmental
values and sustainability. However, it was also noted that sustainable practices in the city—
particularly concerning development and land use—are lacking. One observation was that
11
Plan Half Moon Bay
positive environmental values are often used to support resistance of more progressive actions,
such that good stewardship is overridden by narrow or short-sighted goals.
5.6 Understanding Demand
There needs to be a better understanding of the city’s current demographics and how they are
likely to evolve over time in order to ensure that businesses, services, and housing options are able
to meet the community’s needs. Some stakeholders pointed out the steady aging of the city’s
population, and discussed the growing need for more affordable and accessible homes, improved
non-motorized infrastructure, and health and other services closer to residences.
Others indicated that the younger generation—whether they grew up in Half Moon Bay or are
attracted to Half Moon Bay from other locations—are looking for the ability to live, work, and
play in the city. Though young people may work in the city, they often cannot afford to rent a
home there; additionally there are not enough services to make renting worth the cost. Without
enough services, young professionals are moving elsewhere.
For youth-oriented community members, there are concerns regarding education. Many
Coastside residents have expressed disappointment with the public school system and choose to
send their children to private schools. To meet the demands of families, the area needs to be able
to attract good teachers and administrative staff to serve in the schools, and provide safe and
reliable transportation for students.
The lack of appropriate local services is a problem for all demographics. Several stakeholders
indicated that most residents must travel outside of the city by highway in order to access services
like basic retail and expressed a desire to improve the convenience of shopping in town. Medical
services are also limited on the coast and may become more limited as Sutter Health considers
closing its Seton medical center. Maintaining local medical service is a concern for those who
cannot travel, for those looking to reduce vehicle trips on the highways, and for those who worry
about access and response times for emergency medical services.
Lastly, as a destination for tourism, Half Moon Bay should assess the types of activities that
Northern Californians are interested in doing.
12
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Circulation
6
Circulation
6.1 Congestion
Traffic congestion was a major concern for nearly every interviewee. Most described poor
circulation on highways 1 and 92 during commute hours and during events. The area between
Highway 1, Highway 92, and Main Street, reportedly operates at LOS F during commute hours.
Stakeholders spoke about specific issues along Highway 92, such as the bottleneck that occurs
near the entrances to the Ox Mountain landfill and Lemos Farm on the weekends. One effect of
this traffic is that Half Moon Bay residents have difficulty leaving the city for short trips on
weekends. Inbound traffic on 92 backs up year-round until roughly 4 or 5 pm, and back-ups can
extend as far as I-280. Additionally, traffic and safety concerns have arisen from truck traffic at
the landfill and quarry. One stakeholder explained that 92 was originally conceived with two lanes
in each direction, but that that capacity was considered growth-inducing.
Circulation problems on Highway 1 were identified mainly in the northern part of the city.
Stakeholders said that the southern portion experiences fewer traffic problems. Highway 1
bottlenecks are associated with the Highway 92 junction, the high school, and various entrances
to residential pockets. During commute hours, travelers generally have difficulty entering or
exiting the highway on residential streets, particularly from the eastern portion of the city. A
Caltrans project to place a traffic signal at Terrace Avenue may give drivers a better opportunity
to access the highway, but one stakeholder felt that the location is too close to Highway 92, and
that it would be more effective if it were placed slightly farther north.
School-related traffic was also a concern. For example, Highway 92 presents a challenge for school
bus service. The school district has difficulty locating bus stops near residential clusters due to
insufficient visibility (buses require 1,000 feet of visibility) or lack of space, but students cannot be
expected to walk any distance along the highway in order to meet a bus. Stakeholders also pointed
to the entrance of Half Moon Bay High School as an area that suffers from congestion, and Lewis
Foster Drive—the school’s access road—becomes backed up as drivers wait to turn onto Main
Street. This is also a location where there is potential for vehicular and pedestrian conflict, as
many students must walk to the SamTrans bus stop located there. Another issue concerns
lunchtime traffic, which increases when the open campus high school releases students for the
lunch period, particularly on Kelly Avenue.
In general, stakeholders connected daily congestion with the lack of jobs and local services within
the city. One stated that between 80 and 85 percent of Half Moon Bay’s workforce commutes
outside the city to work. Moreover, the city’s residents must drive to basic shopping and services;
most businesses within city limits are visitor-serving.
13
Plan Half Moon Bay
6.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes
Several of the stakeholders saw a need to improve connectivity throughout the city for pedestrians
and cyclists. Many Half Moon Bay residents currently do not have the option of using nonmotorized forms of transportation due to safety and access concerns associated with crossing or
traveling along the highways. There was general agreement that the existing trail, bicycling, and
sidewalk networks are not extensive enough—despite the compact nature of the city—to allow
residents to move freely between neighborhoods without a car. For example, though Half Moon
Bay’s segment of the Coastal Trail is considered an asset, the city’s existing trail system runs
exclusively north-south, with no east-west routes besides an undercrossing on Highway 1 that
ends at the Wavecrest site. Existing trails also contain gaps or dead ends; some stakeholders
wanted to see these trails completed or extended to connect with neighboring trail segments.
Students were identified as a group that would benefit from an improved bicycle and pedestrian
network. Stakeholders referenced a recent Safe Routes to School audit conducted for the public
school district that found deficiencies in sidewalk presence and maintenance, signage, and street
crossings. Crossings at Highway 1 are reportedly dangerous or inconvenient, with designs that
limit drivers’ visibility of cyclists or pedestrians and allow for higher vehicle speeds. Kelly Avenue
and Silver Avenue were identified as locations with problematic crossings. At Silver Avenue, the
shoulder is very narrow and borders a large slope down into agricultural land. There are
reportedly many students there in the mornings, during times of high traffic. One stakeholder
observed that the development of Ailanto’s residential property will exacerbate the problem
unless there are traffic and multi-modal improvements there.
Stakeholders felt that improved bike lanes, sidewalks, and crossings would allow students to walk
or bike to school. The Safe Routes to School program has allowed the school district to identify
many potential improvement projects; a report of findings is available on the school district’s
website.
One stakeholder explained that the City has recently divorced itself from the responsibility of
sidewalk repair. Some sidewalks in Half Moon Bay are quite old and do not meet modern
standards. For example, the sidewalks near Cunha were built during World War II and were substandard even at that time. The school district generally assumes responsibility for maintaining
the sidewalks near its schools, though the funding it receives from Safe Routes to School does not
currently cover infrastructure improvements.
Stakeholders also had an interest in an expanded trail system east of Highway 1, as well as
alternatives to using the highway. They were interested in east-west trails that would connect the
neighborhoods and amenities on either side of the highway. Opportunities for trail improvements
exist in a number of places; suggestions included the following.
14
•
A Coastal Trail link could be placed on Coastside Land Trust land along the railroad,
though there is some disagreement with the City about maintenance responsibility.
•
The undercrossing at Highway 1 would have connected Pilarcitos Creek to the state park,
but now dead ends at the Wavecrest site. This connection could be completed.
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Circulation
•
There is positive activity north of Half Moon Bay near Princeton Harbor and Sam’s
Chowder House to extend the Coastal Trail. As the trail extends south, it should connect
to the trails at Miramontes Point.
One stakeholder felt that the community would be supportive of trail improvements, and noted
that the City has received a lot of funding for trail improvements in the past. Trail improvements
were also identified as an opportunity to attract cyclists from across the region to enjoy Half
Moon Bay’s facilities.
6.3 Parking
Stakeholders noted that parking in Half Moon Bay is generally sufficient to meet demand with the
exception of Saturdays and event days. Eventually, some of the interviewees said, there may be a
need for additional parking downtown. Parking infrastructure draws funding from the Measure J
sales tax. At one time, the concept of parking meters was introduced, but this was unpopular with
residents.
Some interviewees expressed concern that parking requirements for development were too strict,
with the number of required spaces being far higher than actual parking demand. Others noted
that many Main Street employees will park outside of the store fronts for long periods of time,
preventing visitors from using those spaces.
One interviewee observed that tourists preferred to park in clearly identified paved lots near the
beach, such as the lot at Poplar Beach. However, parking there is limited. Farther south, near the
Ritz Carlton, the beach becomes more difficult for visitors to access due to the lack of parking.
The Ritz provides some public beach parking and offers shuttle service between its parking lot
and the hotel, but generally access remains a challenge. Santa Cruz was identified as a good model
for public parking.
6.4 Local Connections
Interviewees described Half Moon Bay as a series of residential islands laid out against a rural
environment. These islands are generally disconnected from one another, and typically require
access to and from Highway 1 for both cars and pedestrians. Access to Half Moon Bay’s
neighborhoods is limited, and many neighborhoods have only a single ingress/egress onto
Highway 1.
As an example, Half Moon Bay High School is not accessible from the neighboring Highland Park
subdivision, and students must either travel to school via Highway 1 or informal footpaths across
private property. Additionally, the school only has one entry and exit point, which is Lewis Foster
Drive.
Main Street and the beaches are similarly disconnected. Despite being popular visitor
destinations, Main Street and the beaches are separated by the same difficult highway crossings
and lack of non-motorized facilities that separate the city’s neighborhoods. When San Luis
15
Plan Half Moon Bay
Obispo and Cal Poly students documented this disconnect in a recent study of the downtown
area.
6.5 Recommended Improvements
Many of the stakeholders had specific improvements in mind:
16
•
Road-widening improvements to increase capacity on highways 1 and 92 could improve
traffic flow. The stakeholder felt these were unlikely to take place due to growth concerns,
though recently widening projects to improve safety have been approved.
•
Extending the merging area on Highway 92 helped to improve traffic flow there, and
could help on Highway 1 to the north of Highway 92.
•
Foothill Boulevard would offer residents an alternative to Highway 1 and improve
connectivity among the eastern neighborhoods. It was noted that Foothill Boulevard is
already in the city’s Circulation Element and would have been built if a no-growthoriented City Council had not stopped the project. At the time, there were concerns about
the project’s feasibility at its junction with Highway 92, as well as the environmental
sensitivity of the project area. A number of stakeholders had a desire to see this project
completed. One felt it would alleviate traffic even if it did not extend north beyond the
high school campus.
•
If it were ever completed, the Wavecrest Restoration Plan, as included in the current LCP,
would offer an alternative north-south route west of Highway 1.
•
Beach traffic could be routed through Main Street, creating opportunities for visitors to
shop or dine in the downtown area, or to leave their vehicles downtown and travel to the
beach by another means.
•
Longer left turn lanes on the highways could alleviate some of the back-ups.
•
Regarding a large project taking place on the Nerhan and Podesta properties near the
high school, this project could be an opportunity to widen Lewis Foster Road and return
it to the City for maintenance.
•
The Nerhan/Podesta project may also offer an opportunity to install a pedestrian path
through the new developments to allow students to access the high school without
negotiating Highway 1.
•
Highway 92 could be extended to the ocean. Currently, if visitors continue due west on
Highway 92 in search of the beach, they dead-end in the Burger King parking lot. This
extension would be accompanied by a boulevard parallel to the ocean, and the rezoning
of Kelly Avenue for commercial uses.
•
The City and the school district should be working together and with any other relevant
agencies in order to expedite needed improvements.
•
The City and school district should reintroduce or increase school bus service to reduce
morning traffic. This could involve collaboration with SamTrans.
•
The Main Street bridge project offers an opportunity to expand the trail system.
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Circulation
•
If Johnson Street prioritized bicycle and pedestrian traffic, it could connect a loop
between Poplar and the beach.
•
The Circulation Element should include discussion about specific highway improvements
as well as a capital improvement plan.
•
Highway 92 needs an eastbound climbing lane.
•
The Circulation Element should be the last element to be finalized, addressing issues in all
of the other elements.
•
Plan for a traffic bridge over Pilarcitos Creek at the north end of Purissima Street,
rejoining Main Street at Stone Pine Road. This would enable circulation around the
downtown area, could include a one-way couplet, and could create a new ingress and
egress to the large parcel on the southeast side of highways 1 and 92.
•
Install footbridges across Pilarcitos Creek at the northern ends of Church and Johnson
streets.
•
Create a strand along the beach (like Ocean Avenue in Pacific Grove) that would connect
Kelly Avenue through Balboa Boulevard to Pilarcitos Avenue, the Venice Beach PUD,
Alameda Avenue, and up to Mirada. This would create another parallel route, easing
traffic and providing additional emergency access points.
17
Plan Half Moon Bay
7
Downtown Half Moon Bay
A number of the stakeholders commented on a lack of activity and people in the downtown area.
Some pointed out the high turnover rate of many of the businesses there, estimating that most
new businesses close after about three years. One stakeholder observed that half of the area’s retail
space is vacant. In general, stakeholders attributed the lack of activity to the area’s visitor-serving
orientation, noting that there are very few businesses there that can meet Half Moon Bay
residents’ everyday needs. According to some stakeholders, the downtown area was once much
busier, with a greater mix of local-serving businesses, such as butcher shops and clothing stores.
Today, for groceries, clothing, and other services, residents must travel by highway to the two
shopping centers outside of town. Downtown merchants feel that residents do not support their
businesses, but residents feel that downtown businesses do not serve their needs. One interviewee
noted that the situation may improve now that Cunha’s has reopened, and identified other similar
businesses that have enjoyed local support over the years.
Another factor that may be contributing to downtown inactivity is the lack of housing within
walking distance. Where 30 or 40 years ago, there were upper-floor residential units along Main
Street, today this is no longer the case. There is some movement to bring housing to the Main
Street corridor, but it faces challenges in both design and traffic. Stakeholders identified a number
of barriers to housing development in the downtown area: the Measure D growth limit,
bureaucracy, lack of leadership, and a reactive attitude towards development rather than a
proactive one.
When asked if parking was a concern downtown, stakeholders responded that parking is not
currently an issue because the downtown area is not successful, but recognized that the
relationship between parking and retail is a “chicken-and-egg” problem.
18
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Public Services and Facilities
8
Public Services and Facilities
8.1 Public Safety
The interviewees had a favorable impression of the City’s partnership with the San Mateo Sheriff’s
Department. The current arrangement provides services that are more comprehensive than what
the City was able to provide on its own, and costs the City less than if it were to maintain its own
police force. Additionally, the Sheriff’s Department brings a great deal of knowledge and
experience, which was able to help resolve the recent concerns of graffiti and gang activity.
8.2 Schools
According to stakeholders, the school district has a need for additional space and physical
improvements. It is currently utilizing a bond to upgrade current schools, but cannot apply the
bond towards building new schools. Hatch Elementary was identified as being over capacity. This
has impacts for the district’s English-Spanish immersion program, which is housed at the
elementary school. Due to the lack of capacity, the program has been struggling to meet demand.
Interviewees from the Cabrillo Unified School District said that the district would be interested in
establishing a K-5 or K-8 school for the immersion program, ideally within Half Moon Bay city
limits. Though the district owns property in El Granada, it does not expect to receive permission
to develop that site.
When asked if there were any preferences for the location of such a school, stakeholders replied
that anywhere within the city would be acceptable as long as there was a safe ingress and egress,
although a more northern location might be more advantageous. One consideration was that
currently the district needs to bus students from Moon Ridge, on Miramontes Point Road
southeast of the city, north through Half Moon Bay to attend school in Montara.
8.3 Water and Sewer
Based on stakeholder conversations, water and sewer service is one of the main factors governing
development in the city. One concern in that regard is that the General Plan and Local Coastal
Program do not match the regulations regarding the sewer and water districts. The number of
agencies responsible for water and sewer provision, most of which are separate from the City, also
presents challenges for development. The sewer authority has three member agencies, each with a
different outlook on development. Granada Sanitary District (GSD) often behaves as a land use
agency, and is in the process of seeking reorganization through the Local Agency Formation
19
Plan Half Moon Bay
Commission (LAFCo) to provide more services. One stakeholder felt that GSD is motivated to
limit its sewer capacity in order to limit growth in its jurisdiction, from Frenchman’s Creek
northward. The City of Half Moon Bay provides sewer service for the remainder of the city, and
its interests are aligned with those of the City Council.
The water district, meanwhile, is concerned with serving the policies of the LCP. In the past, water
capacity has been a means of limiting the development of infrastructure, thus limiting growth.
20
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Recreation and Coastal Access
9
Recreation and Coastal Access
9.1 Coastal Access
In general, coastal access in Half Moon Bay is in good condition, though there is room for
improvement and expansion. The trail system and parking infrastructure eases access along the
northern beaches, though the paved trail is interrupted near the Wavecrest site. Some potential
improvements to the bluffs along Poplar Beach were identified, including a separate access for
equestrian use and improved pedestrian access to the beach. Parking is considered adequate at
Poplar, though there has been discussion about adding more.
Access in the southern portion of the city is more of a concern, as parking becomes more limited
and the bluffs become more prominent. At one time, the owner of the golf links was asked to
build beach access at Redondo Beach Road as a condition of a cease and desist order for placing
unauthorized riprap. Due to feasibility concerns, the location of the access point was moved next
to the Halstead property. The project was dropped after the Halstead property claimed a takings.
9.2 Recreation
According to the interviews, the city has a deficit of recreation facilities and services. Though the
Coastside as a whole contains a large amount of public park land, little of it is located in Half
Moon Bay. Neither the City nor the County maintains many recreational facilities that are easily
accessible to the Half Moon Bay community, with the exception of Smith Field.
Interviewees explained that the majority of the recreational facilities in the city are owned and
maintained by the school district, and that they are used extensively by students and the public.
The facilities are well-maintained, but the district has been unable to fund installation and
maintenance on its own, instead relying on private donations. Even with the district’s facilities,
there is additional demand for more playfields. Even with soccer fields at Cunha Middle School
and a general-purpose field at Hatch Elementary, and facilities at El Granada (a County school), it
can be difficult to schedule all the sports organizations that need field time. The school district
also owns the only public pool on the Coastside. CUSD’s master plan includes plans to build a
new pool at Half Moon Bay High School, but the project has not been funded yet. Even with its
facilities, there are some demands that the school district is unable to meet, such as the
community’s need for a dedicated dog park.
Stakeholders expressed a desire for the City to devote more resources to public and recreational
spaces, as well as provide more recreation services. However, it was recognized that the City has
very little money in its budget to devote towards the Parks and Recreation Department. In fact,
21
Plan Half Moon Bay
City parks are maintained by the Department of Public Works, and recreation programming is
offered in partnership with the City of San Carlos. In the past, the City had attempted a jointpowers project with the County to turn the Johnson House property into park land with ball
fields, but the proposal was voted down by the Board of Supervisors. In contrast, the City’s recent
acquisition of Smith Field was considered by one stakeholder to be a step in the right direction. A
development that could have an impact on recreation in the city is the Granada Sanitary District’s
LAFCo application to become a recreation service provider, which will go to ballot in June 2014.
22
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Governance and the Planning Process
10 Governance and the Planning Process
10.1 Improved Communication and Leadership
From the perspective of a resident or business owner, one of the city’s greatest challenges is the
lack of continuity in leadership that has led to unpredictability and an inability to successfully
pursue any single vision over the long term. Stakeholders wanted to see a more stable City
government supported by staff who are aggressive, experienced, proactive, and creative.
Another challenge is a lack of communication and cooperation among agencies both locally and
regionally. At the local level, the Planning Commission and City Council are improving their
communications with one another despite a recent history of disagreement. At the regional level,
the City and region should be more involved in larger-scale regional planning. The Midcoast is
not very effective at regional planning, and the Planning Commission has no interaction with any
other planning agency in the area. Service provision, transportation, schools, and other issues are
all of common interest along the coast.
10.2 Plan Half Moon Bay Recommendations
Stakeholders had the following recommendations and words of advice for the Plan Half Moon
Bay project:
•
The LCP needs to be updated in terms of local land uses. The current LCP includes
project areas that no longer exist. For example, the “Andreotti property” refers to Cypress
Cove--the Stone Pine area-- and the “Mormon Church property” located behind that is
now vacant.
•
The updated LCP needs to have updated and more realistic projections for buildout and
water usage.
•
Potential groups for targeted outreach efforts include seniors and the different housing
communities, which may have different perspectives on transportation and access to
housing.
•
Be aware that there is a concern that public input will be set aside at the end of the
planning process as the project makes its way through the Coastal Commission.
•
It may be best to minimize the involvement of the Coastal Commission by separating the
LCP from the General Plan. Otherwise, it can be difficult for the City to make necessary
changes to planning documents in the future.
23
Plan Half Moon Bay
24
•
Commercial addresses and business owners should have an equal opportunity to give
input even if they are not residents.
•
To advertise events, consider ads in the newspapers, including the Daily Journal.
Stakeholder Interviews Summary
Appendix: Stakeholder Interview Participants
Appendix: Stakeholder Interview Participants
Allan Alifano, Half Moon Bay City Council
Steve Flint, Flint Strategies
Edward Love, Architect
Keet Nerhan, K.N. Properties
Keeton Nerhan, K.N. Properties
Naomi Patridge, Half Moon Bay City Council
Tony Roerhick, Superintendent, Cabrillo Unified School District
Phil Rosenblatt, Half Moon Bay Planning Commission
Peter Smith, Property owner and resident
Judy Taylor, Alain Pinel Realtors
Ed Watkins, Construction Manager, Cabrillo Unified School District
David Worden, Windward Commercial Real Estate Services
25