OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Half Moon Bay Planning Commission Special Meeting - September 25, 2024

Planning CommissionWednesday, September 25, 2024
BodyHalf Moon Bay, California
SessionPlanning Commission
DateWednesday, September 25, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:51

Welcome to the special meeting for the City of Half Moon Bay Planning Commission on Tuesday, September 24th, 2024.

1:01

At this point, Bridget is going to go over the Zoom protocol for this meeting.

1:07

I'm just going to make it short and sweet.

1:09

We um do have PCT live on their website and on Channel 27.

1:15

We are doing uh Spanish interpretation, like always.

1:19

And if you have a green card for public comment that is not scheduled on the or comment that's not on the agenda, you can speak at the general comment section.

1:29

If not, we have um time for public comment during the specific item.

1:34

Um for those of you that are on Zoom, please raise your hand virtually and we will um call upon you.

1:41

Um I think that's it in a nutshell, we didn't have any correspondence.

1:44

This is a briefing, so um that's all I have, so I'll turn it back to you.

1:49

Thank you, Bridget.

1:50

So let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

2:12

Can you please conduct the roll call?

2:14

Yes.

2:15

Um Commissioner Reddick.

2:16

I am here.

2:17

Thank you.

2:18

Welcome back.

2:19

Um Commissioner Hernandez is not here at the moment.

2:22

Uh Commissioner Gorn.

2:23

Here.

2:24

Commissioner, um, I'm sorry, Vice Chair Johannes is absent this evening, and we have Chair Gossett.

2:30

Present.

2:31

We have three commissioners present at this time.

2:35

Okay, so we'll move on to the approval of the minutes from June 25th, 2024.

2:43

Oh, well after.

2:46

We could do it after the minute.

2:52

All the commissioners were present that evening, so we should have a we have a quorum to approve, if if so, and inclined.

3:00

I move to approve.

3:02

I'll second that.

3:04

Um those in favor?

3:06

Yes.

3:07

Okay.

3:07

Motion uh minutes approved.

3:09

Okay, and now we will move on to public comment.

3:12

And Dave Shore wouldn't.

3:17

Good evening, and thank you.

3:19

Um it's not possible to address the deficiencies of the EIR on the Hyatt Hotel project in three minutes of verbal comment, so more will be submitted in writing within the next week.

3:28

Bottom line, this project has significant and unavoidable impacts on visual resources as clearly delineated in the EIR.

3:35

Under CEQA normal procedures, this means that the project as proposed at 34 feet in height cannot be approved.

3:42

For reasons unclear, staff is recommending pushing this through anyway through the mechanism of adopting a statement of overriding considerations.

3:49

This strikes me as rather strange.

3:52

After all, the planning department is typically enforcing regulations and code rather than encouraging working around them or ignoring the rules altogether.

4:01

As a very simple analogy, if I tried to put up a 12-foot fence in my backyard, my neighbor would call the planning department, somebody would promptly be knocking on my door, telling me that plainly the rules don't allow for a 12-foot fence, and I can't do that.

4:13

Regarding the Hyatt project, there's an analogy here.

5:00

It's quite unfortunate that the EIR process is structured such that you're effectively given only the choice between the project that the applicant wants or no project at all.

5:08

Staff is basically daring you to turn this down with their heavy thumb on the scale.

5:12

It would be much better if there could be an open and honest discussion among all parties about project alternatives, which include smaller buildings of lower height, which would not impact visual resources.

5:21

As was suggested by the AAC several years ago.

5:25

When you consider this project two weeks from now, I hope that you focus on the big picture here.

5:29

The ask from the developer and planning staff to make significant exceptions to the rules for this project.

5:34

According to City Code, LUP, Coastal Commission, and in the opinion of most people here in town, it is not justified.

5:41

I ask that you please do not get bogged down in details like plant selection and color palette.

5:46

That's exactly what the developer wants you to do to divert your attention from the bigger and more important issues at play.

5:51

Again, please remember the precedent set by this planning commission in 2022, denying the five foot by 12 foot Caltrans message sign.

5:59

Those conditions of denial specifically called out impermissible impact to visual resources.

6:05

The visual impact of this hotel upon the nature and character of our town are quite literally orders of magnitude greater than that of the denied Caltrans message sign.

6:14

I know that all of you take your work very seriously, with great attention to detail and a lot of effort embedded in that.

6:21

I trust that you'll make the right decision here and deny the project as proposed.

6:26

Thank you.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Planning And Zoning████████████████████████████████████████40%
Public Engagement██████████████████████████26%
Public Comment█████████████████████21%
Procedural████████8%
Transportation Safety█████5%
Summary of Proceedings

Half Moon Bay Planning Commission Special Meeting - September 25, 2024

The Half Moon Bay Planning Commission held a special hybrid meeting on September 25, 2024 (the agenda listed the meeting as Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 6:00 PM, but the instruction specifies this date). The meeting focused on a briefing and subcommittee selection for Objective Design Standards (ODS), heard public comment regarding the Hyatt Place Hotel project, and approved the minutes from June 25, 2024.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes (June 25, 2024): Motion by Commissioner Ruddock, seconded by Commissioner Gorn, to approve the minutes. Unanimously approved (Commissioner Hernandez was absent, Vice Chair Joanes absent, three commissioners present voted yes).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Dave Shore spoke in opposition to the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel project. He argued that the project's Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies significant and unavoidable visual resource impacts, and under CEQA, the project as proposed (34 feet tall) cannot be approved. He criticized staff for recommending adoption of a statement of overriding considerations to push the project through, comparing it to ignoring building codes. He urged the commission to deny the project, noting the precedent set in 2022 when the commission denied a Caltrans message sign due to visual impacts. He stated the hotel's visual impact is "orders of magnitude greater" than that sign.

Discussion Items

  • Objective Design Standards (ODS) Briefing and Subcommittee Representative Selection: Staff (led by Akoe) presented an overview. ODS are being developed in response to SB 35 and SB 423, which require ministerial approval for qualifying housing projects in the coastal zone effective January 1, 2025. The goal is to create objective, definable standards aligned with Half Moon Bay's character, applicable mainly to multifamily and mixed-use affordable housing. A consultant (MIG) is working on seven tasks: walking tour, setting analysis, Coastal Commission coordination, design options analysis, public hearings, and adoption targeted for January 2025. Commissioners Gorn and Ruddock asked clarifying questions about affected parcels and committee size. Staff noted the subcommittee would typically have one planning commissioner, but could accommodate two. Commissioner Ruddock nominated Commissioner Hernandez and Commissioner Gorn to serve. A motion to select both was made and seconded. Public comment was opened and closed with no speakers. The motion passed unanimously.
  • Director's Report: Interim Community Development Director Steve McCarris reported on upcoming meetings: October 3 (Stone Pine Cove project), October 9 (Hyatt Place Hotel special meeting), and joint AAC/Planning Commission study session in November for ODS. The ODS schedule is ambitious but on track for City Council adoption in January 2025. He also updated on a request from Commissioner Hernandez regarding public transportation standards, noting it had been elevated to the City Manager. Commissioner Ruddock asked about the Seymour dump; staff indicated they are awaiting information from the county and will report later.

Key Outcomes

  • Minutes Approved: Unanimous approval of June 25, 2024 minutes.
  • Subcommittee Selection: Commissioners David Gorn and Rick Hernandez were selected to serve on the ODS ad hoc subcommittee (with staff and consultants). They will attend the AAC walking tour on September 26, 2024 as observers.
  • Next Steps for ODS: Walking tour September 26, Joint AAC/Planning Commission study session in November 2024, City Council study session in November/December 2024, and adoption hearings in January 2025, followed by Coastal Commission certification.
  • Upcoming Hearings: The Hyatt Place Hotel project will be heard at a special meeting on October 9, 2024.

Meeting Transcript

Welcome to the special meeting for the City of Half Moon Bay Planning Commission on Tuesday, September 24th, 2024. At this point, Bridget is going to go over the Zoom protocol for this meeting. I'm just going to make it short and sweet. We um do have PCT live on their website and on Channel 27. We are doing uh Spanish interpretation, like always. And if you have a green card for public comment that is not scheduled on the or comment that's not on the agenda, you can speak at the general comment section. If not, we have um time for public comment during the specific item. Um for those of you that are on Zoom, please raise your hand virtually and we will um call upon you. Um I think that's it in a nutshell, we didn't have any correspondence. This is a briefing, so um that's all I have, so I'll turn it back to you. Thank you, Bridget. So let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Can you please conduct the roll call? Yes. Um Commissioner Reddick. I am here. Thank you. Welcome back. Um Commissioner Hernandez is not here at the moment. Uh Commissioner Gorn. Here. Commissioner, um, I'm sorry, Vice Chair Johannes is absent this evening, and we have Chair Gossett. Present. We have three commissioners present at this time. Okay, so we'll move on to the approval of the minutes from June 25th, 2024. Oh, well after. We could do it after the minute. All the commissioners were present that evening, so we should have a we have a quorum to approve, if if so, and inclined. I move to approve. I'll second that. Um those in favor? Yes. Okay. Motion uh minutes approved. Okay, and now we will move on to public comment. And Dave Shore wouldn't. Good evening, and thank you. Um it's not possible to address the deficiencies of the EIR on the Hyatt Hotel project in three minutes of verbal comment, so more will be submitted in writing within the next week. Bottom line, this project has significant and unavoidable impacts on visual resources as clearly delineated in the EIR. Under CEQA normal procedures, this means that the project as proposed at 34 feet in height cannot be approved. For reasons unclear, staff is recommending pushing this through anyway through the mechanism of adopting a statement of overriding considerations. This strikes me as rather strange. After all, the planning department is typically enforcing regulations and code rather than encouraging working around them or ignoring the rules altogether. As a very simple analogy, if I tried to put up a 12-foot fence in my backyard, my neighbor would call the planning department, somebody would promptly be knocking on my door, telling me that plainly the rules don't allow for a 12-foot fence, and I can't do that. Regarding the Hyatt project, there's an analogy here. It's quite unfortunate that the EIR process is structured such that you're effectively given only the choice between the project that the applicant wants or no project at all. Staff is basically daring you to turn this down with their heavy thumb on the scale. It would be much better if there could be an open and honest discussion among all parties about project alternatives, which include smaller buildings of lower height, which would not impact visual resources. As was suggested by the AAC several years ago. When you consider this project two weeks from now, I hope that you focus on the big picture here.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com