Public Meetings - Half Moon Bay, California

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 17, 2023, primarily to consider AT&T's proposal to replace an existing 50-foot metal cellular tower with a 75-foot monopine tower at the Half Moon Bay High School. The Commission also approved meeting minutes, elected new officers, and heard a Director's Report on the community's response to the January 23 farmworker shooting. Consent Calendar - Unanimously approved the December 13, 2022 meeting minutes. - Unanimously elected Rick Hernandez as Chair and Margaret Gossett as Vice Chair for the coming year. Public Comments & Testimony - Former Commissioner Jimmy Benjamin spoke in public comment, sharing updates on California red-legged frog egg masses found at a Caltrans mitigation wetland and expressing appreciation for the Commission's work. Discussion Items - AT&T Wireless Cell Antenna at Half Moon Bay High School (PDP-22-068): The project involves a Coastal Development Permit, Use Permit, Design Review, and Height Variance to replace a 50-foot metal tower with a 75-foot monopine tower located farther from residential neighbors and classroom buildings. Key points: - The existing tower is on the northeast corner of the football field; the proposed site is approximately 1400 feet from Highway 1, outside the 200-yard visual corridor. - The monopine design is intended to blend with surrounding mature pine trees (70+ feet tall). Visual simulations showed minimal impact. - The height variance request (25 feet above the 50-foot zoning limit) was justified by the need to accommodate potential co-location of other carriers (e.g., Dish Wireless) and improve coverage for emergency FirstNet services. - Staff recommended approval. Public comments received during the process were generally supportive of the relocation and monopine design. - Commissioners questioned the benefit of the extra height, noting that coverage maps showed only marginal improvement from 50 to 75 feet, but the ability to co-locate was a significant public benefit. Commissioner Hazel Joanes emphasized the importance for first responders. - The project also includes standard conditions for nesting bird surveys and tree protection. Key Outcomes - Vote: The Commission unanimously approved (5-0) the project as submitted, including the 75-foot height variance, based on findings in the staff resolution. - Staff Updates: Director Jill shared information on the City's efforts to rehouse displaced farmworkers from the January 23 tragedy, upcoming budget listening sessions, and the transition back to in-person hybrid meetings starting March 2023. - Commission Communications: Commissioners thanked staff for their work on the emergency response and welcomed Commissioner Joanes. - Meeting Adjourned after a moment of remembrance for the shooting victims.

This meeting included the approval of revised minutes, a public hearing for a use permit to sell distilled spirits at a new bar, and an informational update on the relocation of an AT&T cellular antenna at the high school. The commission also heard public comments and received reports from the director. Consent Calendar - Minutes Approval: The commission approved three sets of minutes: the first half of the November 22, 2022 meeting (3-0), the second half of the November 22, 2022 meeting (3-0), and the October 25, 2022 meeting (3-0). Commissioner Gossett abstained on the first set due to absence, and Commissioner Gorn was not present for the entirety of the October 25 meeting. Public Comments & Testimony - Jimmy Benjamin (former Commissioner): Spoke during public comment on non‑agenda items, thanking the commission and staff for their work. He provided reflections on the role of the planning commission as a referee for acceptable development and a goalkeeper for coastal access and resources. - Mike Ferrara: Commented on the school district’s reported plan to pave the foothill alignment, expressing concern about the dangerous intersection with Highway 92 and requesting that the city and Coastal Commission maintain control. He noted he would be willing to request dispute resolution from the Coastal Commission if needed. - Rebecca Ralph (with husband Kevin): Expressed strong support for the use permit at 724 Main Street (Velvet Hippo), describing it as a welcome addition to the south end of Main Street. - Frank Gardy: During the AT&T antenna update, asked about alternative locations, requested story poles, suggested a fake tree design, questioned the total height and elevation, and asked that no lights be allowed on the tower. Discussion Items 1.A – Use Permit for Distilled Spirits at 724 Main Street (Velvet Hippo) - Project Description: A use permit to allow the sale of distilled spirits for on‑site consumption at a new bar called Velvet Hippo, located at 724 Main Street (formerly Arc Grill). The existing business (Sacrilege) operates a restaurant with beer and wine at 730 Main Street. The bar would be open roughly 4–11 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday, with occasional special events. No expansion of the building or outdoor seating is proposed; food service would be ancillary. A building permit is required for interior electrical modifications. - Staff Recommendation: Approval, with findings that the use is consistent with the land use plan and zoning code, and that no significant environmental impact would occur under CEQA. - Commission Discussion: Commissioners expressed support, noting the use aligns with the downtown specific plan and adds vitality to Main Street. Commissioner Gorn asked about the parklet and enforcement of alcohol consumption limits; staff confirmed distilled spirits are limited to inside the restaurant. - Public Comment: One email of support was received (posted on the city website). Two speakers (Rebecca and Kevin Ralph) voiced strong support. - Outcome: The commission voted unanimously (4-0) to approve the resolution. 1.B – AT&T Wireless Cellular Antenna at Half Moon Bay High School (Informational Update) - Background: The project involves relocating an existing AT&T antenna from a stadium light pole to a new tower. A previous permit (PDP-19-021) was approved in 2019 but expired. In December 2021, the permit was extended with milestones, including a requirement to submit a new application by June 1, 2022. - Location Change: A preferred site along the southern property line (near Andrini Brothers) was found to be within a PGE utility easement; PGE refused to allow development. The new proposed location is at the southwest end of the track, near the high school’s football field. The school board was considering this location on the night of this meeting. - Staff Remarks: The new tower would be a fake tree, approximately 72 feet tall (22 feet above the 50‑foot zoning limit). A height exception would be needed. No lights are proposed. Visual simulations and further technical reports will be prepared if the school board approves the location. - Commission Discussion: Commissioners asked about alternative locations (pool area, tennis court area), the use of story poles, tree health, and the height justification. Staff noted that the 72‑foot height is intended to allow future co‑location of other carriers. Commissioner Gossett asked about standard heights; staff explained that the height is determined by engineering needs. Vice Chair Hernandez expressed support for the new location, noting it is farther from classrooms. Commissioner Ruddock preferred to wait for the school board’s decision before further deliberation. - Public Comment: Frank Gardy raised five questions about alternative locations, story poles, a fake tree design, the total elevation, and lights. Staff responded that story poles are difficult for cell towers, a fake tree is proposed, and no lights are required. - Outcome: No action was taken. The item was informational only. Staff expects to return for a formal hearing in late January or February 2023 if the school board approves the location. Director’s Report - Jill Ekas (Director): Reported that this was the last meeting of 2022. She noted that the city council received an update on the Heritage Main Street Ordinance, including a vacancy inventory showing fewer vacancies than in 2019. The council also had a first reading on the update of the California Building Code. The Architectural Advisory Committee will meet early to review 2800 Shamsay and 419 Garcia Avenue. The short‑term rental ordinance is being discussed with Coastal Commission staff for a February 2023 hearing. City Hall will be closed December 26–30. Staff expects to cancel the January 10, 2023 meeting and will meet on January 24, 2023. She suggested a check‑in or retreat at the beginning of the year. Planning Commission Communications - Vice Chair Hernandez: Thanked the city for the Night of Lights event and expressed gratitude to staff. He also noted a project to complete the east side parallel trail from Main Street to Moonridge and encouraged support for it. - Commissioner Ruddock: Thanked Director Ekas, staff, and the city attorney for their work, and wished everyone a happy holiday. - Commissioner Gossett: Thanked staff and noted that the community helped find her daughter during the Night of Lights. Key Outcomes - Unanimous Approval (4-0) of the use permit for distilled spirits at 724 Main Street (Velvet Hippo). - No action taken on the AT&T antenna update; the item will return for a formal hearing after the school board makes a decision. - Minutes approved for three sets (2 for November 22, 2022 and 1 for October 25, 2022). - Meeting adjourned at approximately 9:10 p.m. (estimated).

This meeting, held remotely via Zoom on November 28, 2022, addressed two public hearing items: a contested coastal development permit modification at 225 Valdez Avenue and a policy discussion on the administrative oversight process for minor amendments to coastal development permits. The meeting began at 7:00 PM and was extended to 11:30 PM. Consent Calendar - Approval of the October 25, 2022 minutes was postponed because Commissioners Benjamin and Vice Chair Hernandez were absent at that meeting and could not review the minutes. The item was continued to the next meeting. Public Comments & Testimony - Mike Ferrer (public comment on non-agenda item) expressed concern about the school board's plan to pave Foothill Boulevard, a school easement near a proposed mobile home park. He noted potential environmental impacts, a dangerous intersection with Highway 92, and the need for a coastal development permit and historic study. - Item 1A – 225 Valdez Avenue: Numerous residents spoke. The applicant, Laurie Ellingson, expressed support for the modifications, stating they were within allowable floor area ratio and that changes were made in good faith. Neighbors Paul Nagengast, Hazel Jonas, Bill Coors, and attorney Camus Steinmetz argued that the proposal violated residential design guidelines (especially the 25-foot wall plane limit), was built without permits, and set a bad precedent. They urged denial or stricter conditions. Other neighbors (e.g., Brian, Justin Kern) supported the applicants, noting their transparency and the improvement to the neighborhood. - Item 1B – CDP Amendment Process: Paul Nagengast, Hazel Jonas, Bill Coors, and Camus Steinmetz testified. They requested formal policies, including objective criteria for major vs. minor amendments, neighbor outreach requirements, and disqualification of after-the-fact revisions from minor processing. They supported staff's enhanced noticing proposals but urged stronger measures. Discussion Items - Item 1A (225 Valdez Avenue): Staff presented the history of the project: a coastal development permit originally approved April 2021, with subsequent modifications. The current proposal sought to convert a portion of an approved covered second-story terrace to conditioned space. Staff recommended approval with conditions to limit enclosed space to 50% of the terrace length, require transparent railings, and address skylight articulation. The commission questioned staff about the process of minor vs. major amendments, the unpermitted construction (1.5-foot extension and enclosure of the terrace), and the appeal period. The applicant stated they were comfortable with staff's recommendations. The commission voted 4-0 (Commissioner Gossett recused) to approve the modifications with staff's conditions. - Item 1B (CDP Amendment Process): Staff reviewed the legal framework for major, minor, and ministerial amendments. They proposed enhanced site posting with graphics for original CDP hearings and revised condition language requiring city engineer review for impervious surface changes. Staff also discussed suggestions from the public (neighbor outreach, postcard notices, disqualifying after-the-fact revisions) but expressed concerns about feasibility and over-burden. Commissioners supported the trial of enhanced signage and encouraged memorializing the criteria for minor vs. major amendments in a memo. They also favored continuing to encourage neighbor outreach. The commission voted unanimously to endorse staff's recommendations and direct staff to prepare a follow-up memo with further refinements. Key Outcomes - Item 1A (225 Valdez Avenue): Approved 4-0 (Commissioner Gossett recused) with staff's recommended conditions, including: limiting enclosed conditioned space to 50% of the terrace length, requiring transparent railings (picket, glass, or cable), and addressing skylight articulation. The 1.5-foot extension approved earlier was not revisited. - Item 1B (CDP Amendment Process): The commission confirmed the existing administrative oversight process and directed staff to implement a trial of enhanced site postings (including graphics) for original CDP hearings, and to revise condition of approval language to require city engineer review for changes in impervious surface. Staff will prepare a memo detailing objective criteria for distinguishing major vs. minor amendments, and continue to encourage neighbor outreach. The commission will review the memo at a future meeting.

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission met on Tuesday, October 25, 2022, via teleconference. The meeting included approval of minutes, two public hearings, a director's report, and commissioner communications. The Commission unanimously approved a coastal development permit for a new home and ADU on a substandard lot, and continued a culvert replacement project to a date uncertain pending additional studies. Consent Calendar - The Commission unanimously approved the draft minutes from the September 27, 2022 meeting. (Motion by Commissioner Ruddock, second by Commissioner Gossett, vote 3-0) Public Comments & Testimony - Item 1A (63 Guerrero): The applicants, Stefan and Kirsten, expressed excitement and gratitude for staff guidance. Their architect, Una Kinsella, highlighted the design's compatibility with the neighborhood and commitment to soundproofing between the ADU and primary residence. No other public comments were received. - Item 1B (Culvert Replacement): No public comments were offered during the public hearing period. - General Public Comment: No members of the public spoke during the non-agenda public comment period. Discussion Items Item 1A: Coastal Development Permit for 63 Guerrero Street Staff planner Ocoee Wilson presented the proposal for a new 2,176 square-foot, two-story single-family residence with a 297 square-foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on a 4,376 square-foot substandard lot. The lot is substandard for R1B1 zoning (requires 6,000 sq ft), but the project seeks no variances. The design conforms to single-family residential guidelines, includes dark-sky fixtures, maximizes passive heating/cooling, and minimizes privacy impacts. The project received significant support from the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) and the applicants hosted a neighborhood gathering. Commissioners praised the outreach, design, and lack of variances. Commissioner Gossett inquired about noise dampening between the ADU and master bedroom; architect Una Kinsella confirmed sound transmission coefficient (STC) ratings would be met. The Commission unanimously approved the resolution (PDP-22-042). Item 1B: Coastal Development Permit for Culvert Replacement at Pullman Watercourse Scott Phillips presented the proposal to replace two failing culverts (24-inch and 18-inch) with one 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe near the western terminus of Pullman Watercourse within Half Moon Bay State Park. The existing culvert, installed in the 1980s, has caused the roadway and coastal trail to fail; the parking lot has been closed since 2020. Staff recommended a continuance to a date uncertain to allow for a hydrological analysis and a more detailed coastal access plan and construction timeline. Commissioner Gossett raised concerns about upstream impacts and whether the study should consider the entire watercourse. City Engineer Maz Busygina noted a stormwater master plan update is underway. State Parks Senior Environmental Scientist Joanne Kerbavaz explained the urgency of the fix and the ease of restoring riparian vegetation. Roads and Trails Manager Chris Pereira described the historical failures and the advantage of a single larger culvert for debris passage. The Commission unanimously voted to continue the item to a date uncertain. Director's Report - Jill Ekas reported that the November 8 meeting is cancelled due to Election Day; the November 22 meeting is expected to proceed (pending commissioner availability). - Upcoming director hearings include items at 84 Valencia, 660 Filbert, 923-925 Near Montes, 648 Myrtle, and 775 Railroad Avenue. - The Coastal Commission hearing on the short-term rental ordinance on October 14 resulted in a continuance with staff directed to work on compromises. The city facilitated Spanish translation at the meeting, which was well-received. The Commission expressed hope for a favorable outcome. Planning Commission Communications - Commissioner Gossett and Commissioner Gorn attended a planning commissioner training in Santa Clara where ex parte communications were discussed. Chair Gorn will begin requiring disclosure of ex parte communications at future meetings. Key Outcomes - Item 1A (63 Guerrero): Unanimous approval (3-0) of Resolution for Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review (PDP-22-042). - Item 1B (Culvert Replacement): Unanimous motion (3-0) to continue the item to a date uncertain, with direction to staff to prepare a hydrological analysis and a detailed coastal access plan and construction timeline. - Meeting adjourned at approximately 9:30 PM.

This informational session was held remotely by the Half Moon Bay Planning Commission. The primary agenda item covered updates on the Housing Element for Cycle 6, including the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 480 units (with a 20% buffer for planning purposes), the realistic capacity buffer, and a detailed site inventory. The commission also approved the minutes from August 23, 2022, and heard public comment. Note: The agenda and transcript indicate the meeting occurred on September 27, 2022, but the meeting date is listed as October 3, 2022 per the task instructions. This discrepancy is noted. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes (August 23, 2022): Unanimously approved by all commissioners present. Public Comments & Testimony - Mike Ferrara (former mayor): Expressed concern about the legality of the RHNA number (480 units), arguing that Measure D limits growth to 1% (with an optional 0.5% in downtown) and that 480 exceeds that. He questioned how the state arrived at the number. Discussion Items - Housing Element Overview: Staff (Mike Noche, Housing Coordinator, and Jill, Senior Planner) presented the Cycle 6 RHNA allocation, income limits for San Mateo County (AMI for family of four: $166,000; low-income: $93,200–$149,100), and the realistic capacity buffer (20% above RHNA, requiring planning for 576 units). They explained adjustment factors for site capacity (zoning, affordability, infrastructure, environmental, non-residential/non-vacant). - Site Inventory and Pipeline Projects: Key sites include 555 Kelly Avenue (combined with Ted Adcock parking lot, 40 units of affordable farm worker housing), Hilltop Mobile Home Park expansion (32 units), Paseo del Mar (150–200 units), and a list of key vacant/non-vacant sites (360–420 units total). ADU projections: 112 units over 8 years (based on past average of 14/year). - Commissioner Questions and Concerns: - Vice Chair Hernandez asked about the baseline for Measure D growth (1% or 1.5%), the absence of city-owned property like Beechwood from the site list, and the practical implications of the significant increase in very low/low-income unit requirements. He sought clarity on the “so what” for the city. - Commissioner Benjamin questioned the model behind the RHNA number, the city’s authority to deny projects that would hinder affordability goals, and the need to harmonize the Housing Element with other General Plan elements (safety, circulation, etc.). - Commissioner Gossett inquired about the 880 Stone Pine Road site (dam issues) and public input processes. - Staff and City Attorney Responses: - City Attorney Winter explained that the RHNA number is set by the state and cannot be changed; the city’s obligation is to plan for the number, not necessarily build it. Consequences for non-compliance are limited for Half Moon Bay due to its coastal zone status (exempt from SB 35 streamlining). The main risk is failing to certify the Housing Element, which could lead to lawsuits or permit impacts. - Staff noted that the city did not challenge the RHNA because it prioritized affordable housing and had not produced enough very low/low-income units in Cycle 5. The site list is consistent with the Land Use Plan (LUP) and was born from the LUP build-out analysis. - Measure D constraints: Staff acknowledged that Measure D allocations (currently 570–600 for the cycle) are sufficient to cover the 480 RHNA and the 20% buffer, but careful phasing is needed to avoid overwhelming the system. The city has received developer feedback about constraints. - Public input: Staff have conducted outreach (interviews, meetings) and will release the draft Housing Element for a minimum 30-day public comment period before submission to HCD. Key Outcomes - No votes were taken on the Housing Element update; it was an informational item. - Staff will continue drafting the Housing Element, with a draft expected for public review in the coming months. The commission will receive future updates and vet pieces of the document. - The next regular meeting is scheduled for October 11, 2022, with a public hearing on a use permit for a new bar. - Staff highlighted upcoming items: LUP cleanup, building code update, Measure D review, and an update on the short-term rental ordinance (scheduled for Coastal Commission hearing on October 14, 2022).

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission met remotely on August 25, 2022, at 7:00 PM, with Chair David Gorn presiding. The meeting included approval of minutes, public comments on a non-agenda hotel project, and decisions on two mural sign permits and a Caltrans variable message sign. All votes were recorded. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes (August 9, 2022): The minutes were approved as amended by Commissioner Benjamin to include reference to level of service (LOS) issues under the Local Coastal Program, in addition to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) requirements. The motion passed 5-0. Public Comments & Testimony - Non-Agenda Public Comments (Hyatt Hotel Project): Three speakers addressed the commission regarding a proposed Hyatt hotel at the southern gateway of Half Moon Bay. - Janet Clark (Pescadero resident) expressed concerns about visual impact on the historic Johnson House and gateway character, traffic at the newly upgraded intersection, and argued that the land should be used for community housing instead of a hotel. - Rick Southern opposed the project, stating it is too large (1.5 football fields), conflicts with city code and environmental policies, and would create a poor gateway image. He described the opposition as a cross-section of the community, not anti-development. - Dave Shore argued the project threatens the small-town charm embedded in the Local Coastal Land Use Plan and noted that cumulative less-than-significant impacts may become significant. Discussion Items - Item 1A: Mural Sign Permit at 448 Main Street (Cunha’s Market) - Staff presented a proposal for a permanent mural commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Pumpkin Festival. The mural was selected by a city-formed mural advisory committee and endorsed by the Parks and Recreation Committee and City Council. The sign permit requires compliance with the sign code including a 4-square-foot artist acknowledgment. - Public comment: Former Mayor Mike Ferrara questioned whether the depiction of a farm worker was glamorized and whether the farm worker community was consulted. Another speaker supported the mural as vibrant and appropriate for the performance space at MacDutra Park. - Commission discussion: Vice Chair Hernandez praised the mural’s inclusion of local landmarks. Commissioner Benjamin asked about the process for future artwork changes; City Manager Matthew Chittister explained a 10-year agreement with the property owner and a public de-accessioning process. The commission confirmed the mural meets sign code requirements. The motion to approve passed 5-0. - Item 1B: Mural Sign Permit at 508 Main Street (Private Building Facing MacDutra Plaza) - Staff described a private mural project that had been reviewed by the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) with suggestions for incorporating a door and adding landscaping. The city’s Public Works offered to replace existing hydrangeas with native drought-tolerant grasses to improve visibility of the mural. An encroachment permit will be required for installation. - No public comments were received. - Commission discussion: Commissioner Gossett expressed concern about plant maintenance, but Director John Dowdy clarified that the site has bubbler irrigation. Vice Chair Hernandez noted the door’s stark contrast and suggested the artist consider integrating it into the design. The mural was found to conform to the sign ordinance. The motion to approve passed 5-0. - Item 1C: Coastal Development Permit for Caltrans Variable Message Sign (VMS) – Continued from July 12, 2022 - Staff presented the proposal for a 5-foot by 12-foot electronic sign on northbound Highway 1 near the southern city limit, including guardrail replacement and three new cypress trees for screening. The item had been continued to allow preparation of findings for denial. Caltrans is the lead agency for CEQA and prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration. - Public comment: Mike Ferrara opposed the sign as unaesthetic and unnecessary. Lenny Roberts (Green Foothills) supported denial, citing the unique scenic character of Half Moon Bay and the availability of other traffic information methods. - Commission discussion: Commissioner Ruddock supported approval, citing the sign’s unobtrusive siting (in a wooded dip), reduction in size per AAC input, and potential public safety benefits for traffic management during emergencies (e.g., tunnel closures). Commissioner Benjamin opposed, arguing that better alternatives exist (e.g., AM radio advisory signs) and that the sign’s size and location conflict with scenic policies (Coastal Act 30251 and LCP policies 9-1, 9-2). Vice Chair Hernandez and Commissioner Gossett agreed the sign was not necessary and did not conform to the LCP. Chair Gorn expressed reluctance but voted to deny as the necessity was not proven. The motion to deny passed 4-1, with Commissioner Ruddock dissenting. Key Outcomes - Minutes approved (5-0) with amendment. - Mural at 448 Main Street (Cunha’s Market): Sign permit approved (5-0). - Mural at 508 Main Street: Sign permit approved (5-0). - Caltrans VMS on Highway 1: Coastal Development Permit denied (4-1). The resolution for denial will be finalized. The decision may be appealed to the City Council. - Future Meetings: The first Planning Commission meeting in September 2022 was canceled; the next meeting will be the second meeting of the month. No AAC meeting was scheduled for August. - Commissioner Reports: Commissioner Benjamin noted a biological study for a culvert replacement under the Pullman watercourse (State Parks project) is open for public comment. Vice Chair Hernandez introduced a new puppy.

This was a non-decision-making public hearing to receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel at the south end of Main Street. The meeting included presentations from city staff, CEQA consultants, and the applicant, followed by extensive public testimony and commission deliberation. The public comment period remains open until September 13, 2022. Consent Calendar - The Planning Commission approved the minutes from the July 26, 2022 meeting (motion by Commissioner Ruddock, second by Commissioner Gossett, approved 4-0-1, with Chair Gorn abstaining as he was not present at that meeting). Public Comments & Testimony - Kathy Kalanto (30+ year resident) expressed concern about parking (108 spaces for 102 rooms being insufficient given existing street parking demand), the building's design resembling other hotels, traffic safety at the new intersection, and the height of the structure. She preferred open space. - Carly Ann Young asked about the height of the three-story building (not listed in the presentation) and raised concerns about evacuation capabilities for the mid-coast, citing a Lake County court case (Genoc project) that denied approval due to inadequate emergency evacuation planning. She requested that cumulative impacts of all coastside projects be considered. - David Pasternak submitted a detailed statement on traffic, arguing the analysis omitted weekend afternoon gridlock and used counterintuitive assumptions. He urged the commission to consider the broader aesthetic impact on the community's gateway character. - Judy Taylor praised the applicant's responsiveness and urged continued collaboration, noting that something will be built on the site and that the property owner cares about the community. - Larry Gandleman (30+ year resident) supported the project, stating that traffic and emergency egress are inherent challenges of living on the coast, and that the applicant has made many changes over six years. He said the southern gateway needs improvement and the hotel would support Main Street merchants. - Hazel Jonas (20-year resident) questioned the adequacy of the DEIR comment period, suggesting more public forums. She asked if the applicant is bound to the Hyatt Place brand, how the city determined it provides low-cost accommodations (noting Santa Cruz Hyatt Place rates of $419-$481), and whether additional feasible alternatives could avoid significant impacts. - Rick Sutherland asked for clarification on significant and unavoidable impacts for alternative two (the 102-room hotel). He expressed sympathy for the applicant but suggested the project may not fit Half Moon Bay, and that the 16-to-32-foot building separation made an imperceptible difference. - Leslie Hunt (30+ year resident) was surprised that only aesthetics were identified as significant, given major concerns about traffic, storm drainage, and sewage. She questioned current hotel occupancy rates and the need for another hotel, and called the design barracks-like. - Brian Holt (13-year resident) supported the project, arguing that visual resources are subjective and that the site currently is a fallow field. He said the project would support an outdoor recreation economy and that the community has an obligation to welcome visitors sustainably. - Paul McGregor (40+ year resident) supported alternative two, praising the applicant's efforts to lower and push back buildings. He said the development provides jobs, bike paths, and landscaping, and allows visitors to stay in Half Moon Bay instead of driving over the hill. - Roy Solome supported the project, saying it draws visitor traffic south of Highway 92, alleviating congestion north of town. He felt alternative two looks appropriate and not out of scale. - David Abloby (spoke as Half Moon Bay resident) supported the project, noting the applicant's commitment to using recycled materials. He argued that emergency egress concerns are irrelevant for 140 cars in a community-wide evacuation, and that the southern gateway needs an appropriate structure. - Chad Hooker (AAC member speaking personally) stated that from his perspective at the highway median, the view of the upland hills is already largely blocked by street trees, the theater, and affordable housing, so the hotel's impact on the ridgeline is not significant. Discussion Items - Commissioner Benjamin focused on the scope of the DEIR. He noted that some public comments raised concerns about inconsistency with the Land Use Plan (LUP) and Coastal Act policies (e.g., 30251, 912) that may not be fully addressed in the aesthetics section. He urged including a land use compatibility analysis. He also asked for more analysis of alternative two, specifically the reasonably foreseeable development of the Seymour Street subdivision, and welcomed the inclusion of emergency evacuation and wildfire concerns in the final EIR. - Commissioner Gossett requested an acronym appendix for the EIR and noted inconsistencies in acronym definitions. She asked about the proposed subdivision for alternative two, noting that a new wetland was found on the residential site, which conflicts with LUP policy. She also questioned whether the traffic study covered worst-case conditions (e.g., holidays, pumpkin season), and whether the analysis of schools, parks, and public facilities was complete (the question marks in the checklist were confusing). - Commissioner Ruddock expressed interest in the proposed 32-foot building separation variant, but said the simulation slide was poor. He asked about wetland delineation confirmation from the 2021 biologist survey, the lack of street trees along Highway 1 in the plans, and data on heights of neighboring structures (e.g., fire station tower). He also noted that trees along Highway 1 could mitigate massing concerns. - Vice Chair Hernandez emphasized clarity on the ridgeline impact for alternative two, noting that the EIR should state that alternative two does not have a significant unavoidable impact on ridgeline views (from viewpoints 2 and 3). He called for better context on the town boulevard concept (LUP policy 912) and Coastal Act obligations (30213, 30212.5) regarding public accommodations and lower-cost housing. He also requested that the executive summary clearly address public concerns about sewage, water, and traffic, making the document more accessible. - Chair Gorn asked for clarification on whether the significant unavoidable impacts listed in table 2-1 apply to the proposed project or include alternative two. Staff confirmed that table 2-1 is for the proposed project only; alternative two's conclusions are in chapter 5. He also noted that the traffic analysis's counterintuitive result (improved service levels) could be explained by queueing theory, and urged that the scope of the traffic study cover the entire network. He expressed concern about certifying the EIR before the project is ready, and asked about the planning commission's role if a statement of overriding considerations is needed. Key Outcomes - No decisions were made. The meeting was for receiving comments on the DEIR. - The public comment period remains open until 5:00 PM on September 13, 2022. Comments can be submitted via email (HyattHotel@hmbcity.com), mail, or in person at City Hall. - Staff and CEQA consultants (Circle Point) will compile all comments and prepare responses in the Final EIR. The Final EIR will also include any corrections or clarifications. - The applicant presented a variant of alternative two with a 32-foot building separation (instead of 16 feet). Staff noted this has not been studied and would be considered in the final EIR if directed. - The Planning Commission will hold a future hearing to consider certification of the Final EIR and project approval (including potential findings of overriding considerations). - The next Planning Commission meeting is in two weeks (August 23, 2022) and will include a Caltrans variable message sign item and a muramural proposal.

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission met remotely on the date indicated above. The agenda and transcript call the meeting Tuesday, July 26, 2022, at 7:00 PM PT; the timestamp supplied for this summary is 2022-07-27 09:00 UTC. Commissioners considered a General Plan conformance determination for a city property acquisition and received an extensive housing element update, including the 555 Kelly Avenue affordable housing proposal. Acting Chair Rick Hernandez led the meeting in the absence of Chair David Gorn, with Commissioners James Benjamin, Margaret Gossett, and Steve Ruddock participating. Approval of Minutes - The commission approved the draft minutes from the July 12, 2022, meeting. Acting Chair Hernandez recused himself after stating he was not present at that meeting. The vote was 3-0-1, with Commissioners Gossett, Ruddock, and Benjamin voting yes and Hernandez abstaining. Public Comments & Testimony - Dave Shore spoke in opposition to the proposed Hyatt hotel and draft EIR, saying the applicant had ignored feedback from 2017, a July 2020 Architectural Advisory Committee meeting, and a September 2021 joint study session. He argued the project violates numerous city code and LCLUP provisions, including protections for visual resources, and requested robust discussion at the August 9 study session. - David Pasternak, a 45-year coastside resident, raised infrastructure concerns and argued that limited water, traffic, and hospital access should take priority over a hotel. He urged the commission to redirect priorities toward housing for children and workers. - Catherine Murdoch, a 50-year resident, opposed the hotel proposal, citing inadequate water supply, congested traffic, loss of open space and views, and the creation of low-paying jobs. - Rick Sutherland opposed the Hyatt proposal as drafted, stating it was not harmonious with Half Moon Bay's small-town character and would be an irreversible "albatross." - During the housing element item, Dave Shore spoke again, expressing support for affordable housing and suggesting the Hyatt parcel could be used for very-low-income housing. He also voiced concerns about the 555 Kelly proposal's four-story height, parking, and the need to change downtown height limits. Discussion Items 1.A General Plan Conformance Determination – West of Railroad Parcel (APN 064-022-120) - Staff requested a resolution finding that the city's acquisition of an undeveloped, unaddressed parcel in the West of Railroad Planned Development area conforms to the General Plan and Local Coastal Land Use Plan. - The intended use is to leave the parcel natural or incorporate it into planning efforts such as the Poplar Gateways project, green infrastructure planning, coastal trail retreat planning, and natural-resource protection. - Commissioner Ruddock recused himself because his residence is close to the West of Railroad PD. No public comment was offered. - Commissioners Benjamin and Gossett both expressed support for the staff report and resolution. 1.B Housing Element Public Outreach, Site Inventory, and 555 Kelly Avenue - Staff from the Community Development Department, including new Housing Coordinator Mike Noche, presented an informational update. - Outreach statistics: approximately 163 participants attended five meetings; focus groups with seniors and ALAS each had eight attendees; staff also consulted stakeholders and service agencies. - Key outreach themes: farm workers cannot afford stable housing; overcrowding and substandard conditions are common; illegal subleases and price gouging affect tenants without formal leases; teachers and essential workers struggle to remain in Half Moon Bay; affordable-housing developers need larger projects for financing feasibility. - The city's existing deed-restricted affordable inventory totals 424 units over roughly 50 years. - Income limits were highlighted: for a family of four, the low-income (80% AMI) maximum is $149,000 per year; the single-person AMI in San Mateo County is $116,000. Farm-worker incomes average about $20,000 per year. - The current RHNA cycle requires 480 units, up from 240; the state has shifted a larger share toward very low- and low-income categories. - The site inventory was narrowed from roughly 1,000 potential units to the highest-quality sites with at least a 20% buffer over the RHNA. It includes pipeline projects, about 100 ADUs based on a three-year average, and key vacant/non-vacant sites. Update highlights included workforce housing overlay sites, mobile home parks, Hatch school district property, and 880 Stone Pine, where about 120 affordable units are now considered feasible on at least four acres. A previously considered Wavecrest post-office site was ruled out after wetland damage. - 555 Kelly Avenue: the city-owned site purchased in 2017 is about 20,000 square feet. An RFQ/P released February 15, 2022, with a May 23, 2022, extended deadline, drew one proposal from Mercy Housing and ALAS. The proposal is a four-story, 40-unit affordable farm-worker housing development with studios and one-bedrooms, a resource center managed by ALAS, and management by Mercy Housing. City Council on July 19, 2022, authorized staff to prepare an exclusive negotiating agreement for pre-development activities; the vote was reported as 4-0 with one recusal/abstention. Affordable rent for an acutely low-income single person earning about $17,000 per year would be $436 per month, against average studio/one-bedroom rents around $2,000 per month. - Commissioner discussion included questions about zoning, Measure D allocations, HCD review standards, coastal resource consistency, ADU counting methodology, safeguards for mobile home park affordability, and the definition of downtown. Staff said a ballot measure would be required to change downtown boundaries, but the Measure D rating system could be amended to favor town-center sites. Director's Report & Commission Communications - Upcoming meetings: August 9 will include a study session on the Hyatt draft EIR and two mural proposals; August 23 will return the Caltrans variable message sign item to a date certain. - The short-term rental ordinance scheduled for a Coastal Commission certification hearing was delayed for one to two months at city staff's request. Coastal Commission staff have concerns about the primary-residence requirement, the 60-night cap on unhosted rentals (the commission had recommended 90 nights), and the eight-guest occupancy cap. Public comment is still being accepted. - Commissioner Benjamin announced he would be absent from the September 13 meeting and noted the passing of Harpo Marks, owner of Cafe Society. Commissioner Ruddock also reported he would be absent on September 13. - The commission unanimously voted to adjourn in memory of Harpo Marks. Key Outcomes - Approved the July 12, 2022, meeting minutes by a 3-0-1 vote. - Approved Resolution for General Plan Conformance for the West of Railroad parcel on a 3-0 vote, with Commissioner Ruddock recused. - Took no action on the housing element item; it was informational and will return with a firm schedule after consultant analysis. - Received notice that City Council authorized staff to prepare an exclusive negotiating agreement with Mercy Housing/ALAS for 555 Kelly Avenue. - Adjourned in memory of Harpo Marks by unanimous vote.

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission met remotely on July 15, 2022, to consider two public hearing items: a coastal development permit for a Caltrans variable message sign (VMS) and a coastal development permit with variances for a new single-family residence. The agenda and transcript list the meeting date as Tuesday, July 12, 2022, at 7:00 PM, but the metadata supplied for this summary specifies July 15, 2022; this summary uses that date. Commissioners Benjamin (acting chair), Ruddick, and Gossett were present; Chair Gorn and Vice Chair Hernandez were absent. The commission approved the Grove Street residence project, continued the Caltrans sign item to August 23, 2022, and directed staff to prepare findings for denial. Consent Calendar - The commission unanimously approved the draft minutes of the June 14, 2022 meeting, with a motion by Commissioner Ruddick and second by Commissioner Gossett. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comment was offered during the general public comment period. - For the Caltrans VMS item, a written comment from Half Moon Bay resident Hazel Jonas was read into the record. Jonas opposed the coastal development permit, stating that: (1) the staff report lacks specific benefits to Half Moon Bay residents; (2) Caltrans only considered a no-project alternative; (3) the project favors travelers over residents, and Caltrans did not consider equity/community impacts; and (4) the sign would deteriorate the scenic corridor along Highway 1. The letter was emailed to the Planning Commission, not staff, and was read into the record during the hearing. Discussion Item: 549 Grove Street (PDP-20-011) - Staff presented a proposal for a new single-family residence on a substandard lot at 549 Grove Street, requiring a street-facing side yard setback variance and a parking exception. - A new survey showed the lot is one foot wider than previously believed, changing the site's classification from "severely substandard" to "substandard." This triggered a 15-foot street-facing side yard setback (previously 10 feet) and a requirement for an additional covered parking space. - The applicant revised the design: the footprint shifted two feet east, and the second story was slightly enlarged (chiefly a larger master bedroom). The request sought a variance to reduce the street-facing setback from 15 feet to 9 feet (a six-foot encroachment) and a parking exception to eliminate the extra covered space. - Staff recommended approval, finding unique circumstances due to the narrow, irregular lot. Commissioner Ruddick and Commissioner Gossett expressed support; Acting Chair Benjamin also supported, while noting concerns about highway noise for future residents. - Outcome: The commission approved the coastal development permit, variance, parking exception, and architectural review by a 3-0 vote (Ruddick, Gossett, Benjamin). Discussion Item: Caltrans Variable Message Sign (PDP-22-03) - Staff presented a Caltrans request for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review to install a new variable message sign within the Caltrans right-of-way south of Miramontes Point Road on Highway 1. The sign would be 12 feet wide and 5 feet tall on two wooden posts, with guardrail replacement, trimming of eucalyptus trees, and planting of three Monterey Cypress trees as a visual buffer. - The project is part of a larger Caltrans effort from Daly City to Half Moon Bay; only the Half Moon Bay portion was before the commission. Caltrans is the lead agency under CEQA and adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) in May 2021; the city is a responsible agency. - The Architectural Advisory Committee had recommended adding cypress trees and reviewing sign size. Caltrans added three trees. No comments were received during the 45-day public comment period for the biological assessment. - Applicant representatives (Nandini and Almong of Caltrans) explained that the sign would be used only for emergencies or incident management, not continuously, and was placed before decision points (e.g., near Highway 92) to give motorists advance warning. They stated the sign would have battery backup, be maintained about twice a year, and have adjustable LED brightness. - Commissioner Gossett raised concerns about California Coastal Commission letters opposing VMS signs and the impact on Highway 1's scenic corridor. Commissioner Ruddick visited the site and found minimal visual impact, supporting the project for public safety benefits. Acting Chair Benjamin questioned the utility, visual impact, alternatives analysis, equity, and potential privacy implications of vehicle detection systems. - Staff noted that with only three commissioners present, three affirmative votes were needed to approve the resolution. Commissioner Gossett moved to continue the item to August 23, 2022, and direct staff to prepare findings for denial based on Land Use Plan policies 9-1, 9-2, 9-12, and Zoning Code Section 18.37.030(B)(3) (scenic/visual resource protections). Commissioner Ruddick seconded. - Outcome: The motion to continue to August 23, 2022, with direction to prepare denial findings passed 2-1 (Ruddick and Benjamin yes; Gossett no). The VMS coastal development permit was not approved; the public hearing is continued. Director's Report and Communications - Director Jill Ekas reported: the next meeting is tentatively July 26, 2022; the Housing Element update is in progress; the Hyatt EIR will begin circulating (minimum 45 days, extended to 60 days); a mural project is upcoming; the city council will receive a presentation on 555 Kelly Avenue affordable housing; the Coastal Commission will consider the short-term rental ordinance in August; and a training opportunity is available in San Jose in October. - Commissioner Ruddick asked about bluff erosion near Poplar; Director Ekas said the city engineer and public works inspector had checked the area and a fuller update would be provided at the next meeting. - No planning commission communications were offered. Key Outcomes - Approved (3-0): Coastal Development Permit, street-facing side yard setback variance, parking exception, and architectural review for 549 Grove Street. - Continued (2-1): Caltrans VMS coastal development permit to August 23, 2022; staff directed to prepare findings for denial, citing Land Use Plan policies 9-1, 9-2, 9-12, and Zoning Code 18.37.030(B)(3). - Unanimous: Approval of June 14, 2022 meeting minutes and reversal of the public hearing agenda order. - The meeting was adjourned after the director's report and communications.