Any can we approve tonight's minutes?

Um, I believe so all of you are present at the last meeting, so you will are there any comments or questions on the meeting, the minutes.

So move.

Can I get a second?

I seconded.

All in favor?

I done.

And if anybody is watching online and they would like to participate, uh, they can also comment by raising their hand in the Zoom meeting.

Yes, for non-invent.

Okay, I'm gonna close public comment.

Okay, I'm gonna close public comment then.

Okay.

Um, this kind of a one-time change because we want to introduce a couple new planners.

Um, if you like having the director's report up front, we're glad to accommodate you.

We have no attachment to where it sits in the agenda.

I'm happy not to force your planners to stay to the end of the evening unless they absolutely want to.

So please.

Well, um, I'll also say that tonight's report is just a little longer than usual because I want to brief you on the recent letters from HCD.

Um the that is the state housing community development department.

Um so uh with that, I will introduce our new planners.

Um we have a new assistant planner.

Her name is Ruby Zalduando.

She's right there.

So she comes to us from UC Berkeley where she earned a master's in urban and regional planning and landscape architecture.

She's worked on housing grant administration, and she's been a fishmonger, which I love.

And today's her birthday.

Happy birthday.

Happy to have another Aries uh involved with planning in the city of Half Moon Bay.

Um we also have a new associate planner, um Paul Kitla Hinzee.

Uh Paul studied city planning at Cal Poly's San Luis Obispo, slow, and has had several years of experience working as a consultant planner doing current and long range planning in San Bruno, in Newark, in Portola Valley.

So he left his consulting world because he wants to be more connected to the community that he serves, and we really appreciate that.

Welcome aboard.

Welcome, thank you.

Oh, yeah, it's not on.

Sorry.

So Scott and I are both really excited and very relieved to have them on board.

Um permits that have been issued since the last meeting include the following a tree removal permit at 400 Roosevelt, an ADU permit at 272 Miramontes, another ADU permit at 424 Valdez, and a sign permit at 519 Main Street.

Um go check out C Breeze Art Gallery there on Main Street.

Um also we have a director's hearing scheduled on April 29th, where former senior planner Doug Garrison will return as the designated zoning administrator slash decision maker.

Um here uh proposed coastal development permits for an addition at 132 Kelly, an addition at 960 Pillar CEDAS, and an infill proposal for a single family residence and ADU at 608 Metzger.

So I'm sure as you've heard, uh we received a few letters from um state housing and community development department, HCD.

Um March 24th, HCD published a press release listing Half Moon Bay as one of 15 cities out of compliance with state housing element law.

After that, we received a notice of violation from HCD.

The notice threatens referral to the state AG if the city fails to comply.

And of course, city staff has been working with HCD staff on our housing element.

We received confirmation in February that our housing element is in compliance with state law, um, but they did hold us out of compliance until we um complete rezonings that are uh necessary.

Um those rezonings were already anticipated as part of the larger implementation plan project.

Um but HCD staff advised us not to wait uh until we got through our RFP process, so we started to work on those rezonings immediately.

Um the current status on that is that city staff met with the HCD accountability staff on April 10th.

We discussed the letter and we walked them through our schedule for the rezoning um LCP amendment.

Uh we're also preparing a response, a written response to HCD's notice of violation that corrects errors in their notice and also um provides a path forward.

And in the meantime, HCD staff um has a draft of the rezonings and is conducting a preliminary review of them.

Um that's that's where we stand on that now.

Uh our written response is due to them on April 23rd.

On April 9th, the City Council and City staff received a strongly worded letter from HCD regarding the project at 555 Kelly.

HCD expressed their strong support for the project and indicated that if the current entitlements are not approved, they will hold the city out of compliance with the housing element.

555 Kelly is a pipeline project in our housing element.

City staff has a meeting scheduled with HCD staff this Friday on the 17th to discuss this letter.

These two recent letters actually came after we had already received a separate letter from HCD notifying us that the city's ADU ordinance is out of compliance with state law and must be updated.

So of course the ADU ordinance is part of the implementation plan and already planned as part of the update to the implementation plan.

I have no idea how that would actually work.

So our city is definitely a target of HCDs right now, and we have a lot of work to do to uh to meet their expectations.

And that's the end of my report.

Any comments or questions on the if it's permissible to ask Director Laiko a question?

Um I'm curious if there was any feedback in the April 10th meeting with HCD from them about the timeline of our path forward.

Um they did not provide any feedback.

Um, they did gain a little more understanding of the required review times by uh Coastal Commission staff.

For LCP amendments, Coastal Commission staff asks for six weeks to do a preliminary review of a draft.

Um that that is a major chunk of time when you're uh trying to hurry through some rezonings to satisfy another state agency.

Um it sounds like HCD and the Coastal Commission are working together to expedite matters as much as possible, though.

Thank you.

Commissioner Rev, Mr.

Chairman, just a question for the director.

If this goes a litigation, what happens to planning?

I mean, is all applications stop or do we continue with normal business?

Um if it goes to the attorney general, um a num a couple of things can happen.

They will probably assess fines, but often what they do with those fines is they they don't collect them, they require a local government to set them aside for affordable housing projects.

So they sort of force you to set money aside for an affordable housing project.

Um other legal outcomes from that I'm not so sure of.

Um but the impact of having a housing element that's out of compliance right now, even without the attorney general involved, is that there are some major transportation grants available that we may not be able to qualify for.

So our public works department is writing grant applications, and it's not clear whether or not uh they they'll get the funds that they're seeking because our housing element is out of compliance.

Is there anything else that you know of that we should anticipate if the worst case happens?

I don't know at this time.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you for the update, Leslie.

Um were the um accountability staff from HCD aware of policy one to our local coastal land use plan that says the current implementation plan is subsidiary to the policies that promote housing.

Um well we we made them aware of that.

Um that earlier on in our discussions with them, uh we made them aware of that uh when they wanted us to take the rezonings out of our planned project that's funded with a grant and start on them right away.

Um but that was not acceptable to them in part because it also says in our housing element before you at the beginning of program one, just above it, that we will do those rezonings.

So we did commit to doing them in the housing element.

So fair enough.

And then um just to confirm we already had direction from City Council and staff were working to update the ADU so that it's in conformance with state law and the the fractional uh the direction you said uh you've received to go to a fractional um allocation system.

The current thinking is that would be compliant with state law?

That'll be compliant with the housing element, which HCD deemed to be compliant with state law.

Very good.

And then with 555 Kelly, um I think this planning commission voted 5-0 in support of 555 Kelly.

I know there's some questions that have been raised by members of City Council um about operating plan budgets.

Has um the nonprofit who is running this come forward with a competent financial plan.

Yeah, there um that will be presented to council um at the next I think we're having a special meeting.

I forgot the date of that meeting, I'm so sorry.

Um, but we will have another special meeting to um to bring forward all of the documents and materials that council asked for, and one of those is um an operating and management plan and uh proof of their financial obligations that their financial obligations have been met and they can finance the maintenance and ongoing.

Because I'd hate for us to be held up because our partner hasn't done their job getting us to where we need to be.

So um I'm glad to hear that you expect that they will have that for the next city council meeting because I know they didn't have it for the last city council meeting.

Yeah.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Okay.

So are you uh that's the end of the director's report?

Very good.

So let's move on to the next uh item on the agenda, which I believe is the telecommunications tower.

Scott, would you like to take us away?

Yes, I'd be happy to uh thank you.

Uh Acting Chair Hernandez and uh members of the planning commission, nice to see you this evening.

So the Oh Vice, excuse me.

So 200 Louis Foster Drive, it's a uh the project is uh uh has a it's uh wireless telecommunication facility changes uh to an existing facility.

And the primary component of the project is removal of a monopole and replacement of it of the of the pole with the uh taller one uh slightly uh northeast of the existing location.

Uh several antennas on uh the uh previous water tank uh also were removed, and then the um ground-mounted equipment associated with the tower will also be replaced and relocated.

Now the scope of the work uh is considered development uh given that the the tower will be taller in a new location, uh new equipment uh, and then our use permit uh code chapter of our zoning ordinance requires a use permit for any new uh wireless telecommunication facilities.

So that's the primary reason why this is being presented to the planning commission this evening.

Now the site itself, uh Carter Hill, visible out the back window here, uh is uh includes two parcels, and both are owned and operated by uh Coastide County Water District or CCWD, and is accessed through an easement uh through the adjacent property to the west, and then eventually the high school.

So uh the site currently includes some fairly large water tanks that are being replaced by CCWD, uh, and then the the Verizon equipment.

Now this slide shows the existing site, uh, the existing ground mounted equipment uh shown in yellow, and then the existing tower in red.

Both would be removed and then relocated.

Now this shows the uh the proposed site plan.

You'll see the the sort of the shift uh from uh the of the tower as well as the ground mounted equipment.

And part of the project, part of the reasoning for the project is to sort of um uh separate the CCWD equipment from the Verizon equipment.

So this will provide CCWD with uh more space to uh maintain their their uh facilities and then also Verizon to access the the uh uh wireless telecommunication facilities behind the tanks.

Now uh the main purpose why we why there they the need for a taller tower is because the tanks, the new tanks that CCWDA are in the process of installing are 20 feet taller.

So the the existing tower uh has lost the ability to provide service due to the larger tank.

So this slide shows uh the tank that was recently replaced off to the left, sort of the edge, and you'll notice that it's um you know it basically blocks the uh the view of the um the ability for the uh the tower to transmit signal.

Uh the the tank on the middle of the screen here will also be replaced with a taller tank, uh further blocking the the you know the um the functionality of the existing tower.

Now Verizon did install a uh a temporary tower uh to provide service to Verizon customers uh while the the while the first tank has been installed.

Uh it's known as a um sell-on wheels or referred to as a cow.

Uh so that has been installed on the sites to provide uh Verizon customers with temporary service uh before they you know they figure out what to do about the um you know the uh the lack of coverage from the new tanks or the blocking of the new tanks.

So this is the proposed elevation.

You'll see that the new tower is is quite a bit taller that uh allows the signal to to go over the the new the 20-foot taller uh water tanks, and again the the tank in the middle of the screen there will also be replaced eventually by CCWD with a 20-foot taller tank.

So just to flip between the two, you'll see the height difference uh in comparison to the tanks.

And what's the structure on the left?

Structure on the left is the uh the CCWD water tank that's already been replaced.

So that's existing on site currently.

It's a there's a tank that's 20 feet taller than the old tanks.

So and then the one in the middle will uh will also eventually be replaced with the 20-foot taller tank.

And then this slide just shows a you know more of a zoomed in version of the uh the proposed tower.

It also includes the the new ground mounted equipment, uh more uh sort of the opposite side of the new monopole compared to the uh the water tanks.

And then a zoomed in site plane.

You'll see that the uh the the new monopole will be much closer to the to the ground mounted equipment and separated from the water tanks.

So photographic rendering renderings were also provided.

Uh this is probably the most prominent view uh from Johnston Street downtown in downtown Hapmoon Bay.

Uh you can kind of see where the the tanks being uh replaced.

And then as you can see, the new tower would be painted sort of a green to blend in with the existing eucalyptus trees around the site.

This uh the rendering up on the top left there shows the new tank.

Now the coloring isn't isn't just perfect, it is a little uh more on the concrete side as opposed to a dark brown.

Uh the new tank that's existing on the site is more of a concrete color, and that'll remain as it is right now.

So a little bit about the uh analysis uh telecommunications act.

Uh there are provisions uh updated in 2014 by the Federal Communications Commission that uh limits what cities can you know regulate as far as wireless telecommunication facilities on certain towers.

Uh this one, since uh the height increase would be more than 20 percent and more than 10 percent of the existing tower.

Uh the city does have the ability to uh require discretionary permits and add conditions and uh so a lot of uh sort of the relaxation of of what local agencies can uh require uh don't apply to this project because of the the um the amount of uh increase in height.

Now a couple of policies that apply to telecommunication facilities, policy 939 uh within our land use plan.

Uh the the meat of the policy really uh calls for undergrounding of any of the equipment as possible.

Uh and they they have done that.

The the um the conduit that would be run from the ground mounted equipment to the tower would be undergrounded.

Uh so uh we do feel that there is compliance with this policy.

And then Coastal Act Section 30250.

Uh this does allow for replacement of existing facilities prior to master planning.

Uh so we do feel that this uh this Coastal Act section is important, uh particularly with a um, you know, being in a PUD uh that's uh sort of replacing existing infrastructure.

Now like I said earlier, use permit is required given that uh this is you know a new uh tower and a new location, slightly you know, taller than the existing tower.

Uh so uh it does make sense to require a use permit in this case.

Uh the you know, staff does feel that we can make the findings associated with the use permit, and we did provide the uh you know the sort of the justification for the use permit findings in the resolution.

Uh the project is uh categorically exempt from CEQA.

Uh we feel comfortable uh with the CEQA exemptions that are provided in the staff report.

And then for tonight's meeting, we did uh publish a legal notice in the San Mateo uh Daily Journal.

Uh we also mailed out notices to all the uh surrounding property owners within 300 feet.

Uh we posted the site, although uh the site itself is somewhat landlocked, uh surrounded by other private properties.

We we did the best we could as far as site posting uh close to the high school.

Uh and we did receive some uh notices or some uh letters uh this afternoon today.

Uh we did forward those to all the commissioners with a cover memorandum.

And uh, you know, a couple of things that came up within the comments.

Uh there was a suggestion of uh to uh reach out to the applicant to explore the possibility of a faux uh limbs on the the new tower.

We did convey that information to the applicant, they're looking into that.

Uh they did mention that uh going with some sort of faux tree would increase the the height of the tower a bit, uh so that is something for the commission to consider.

Uh we did ask for some additional uh photo simulations, which we also uh the applicant quickly put to uh uh you know prepared and uh submitted, and we did include that with the memorandum this afternoon also.

Uh let's see one last letter.

Uh there is some concern about uh the applicability of the easement in relation to Verizon uh with the adjacent property owner.

Uh condition draft condition B 7 does require uh the applicant to uh look into this issue and provide uh the easement to the city for review prior to building uh permit issuance.

And we do ask that uh a little bit more language be added to that condition if uh as long as the planning commission is comfortable with that, that um the the easement shall be reviewed uh to the satisfaction of the community development director and city engineer prior to building permit issuance.

So just a little bit of extra language there uh that we recommend adding to condition B7.

Let's see, and then I want to make sure I I'm covering all the questions that were um brought forth today uh in the comments.

Uh there was some mention about the possibility of painting the uh CCWD water tanks, the new water tanks uh for starters.

That is not part of this project.

The the tanks have uh already been reviewed, and the it's really a separate project.

That's it.

That said, I did reach out to to CCWD this afternoon for some additional information on uh the water tank coloring.

And uh very interesting, actually, they get the wealth of information on it.

Uh the the answer is no, that the new tanks will not be painted.

Uh they're designed that they they don't require any painting for longevity.

They're primarily made of concrete.

And uh so the decision has been made not to paint the tanks, and that's really for a cost savings measure that uh the tanks are designed to last roughly a hundred years, and by painting the tanks and maintaining the paint with not having to paint the tanks and maintain the you know, repainted year after year, that's gonna save the the uh the customers of CTWD millions of dollars.

It's it's the largest cost associated with the maintenance of the tanks is the paint right now, which uh I found somewhat interesting.

I'm missing out on a government contract somewhere.

I'd like to get that one.

But they they did follow up that uh, you know, if if anyone from the public or and or planning commission are um would like additional information, they're available uh you know, welcome to stop by CCWD.

Uh they have a lot of information about the tank project.

That let's see, and we are recommending approval.

Uh just a little update on the uh meeting format uh that you know you're welcome to follow.

And that concludes my presentation.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Clarifying questions.

Uh thank you, Chair Hernandez.

Um Scott, you mentioned if I heard you write that adding fake tree elements to it would increase the height of the tower.

I'd I'd like to understand that a little bit better, either from you or the applicant.

Yeah, I would if if it's okay, but uh Vice Chair, I'd like to uh defer this to the applicant.

Uh uh Chris Fallory has a wealth of information on this subject.

So before we bring it up, do you have other questions?

Well, I I'd also like to understand better the question about the easement.

And the and staff's proposed remedy.

Yeah, maybe I'll I can start out with a little information on that, and then uh I'm sure Chris can also uh add to it.

Uh so it's my understanding there is uh an existing easement uh through the the adjacent property that allows Verizon to maintain their existing infrastructure.

The easement doesn't allow for uh construction access.

Now we like I said, through through this condition of approval, we are requiring uh submittal of uh proof of the easement for us to review and approve prior to building permit issuance.

So this this will give the the applicant some time to to work out any concerns with the adjacent property owner.

Uh and so no building permit will be issued until the easement is finalized.

So thank you.

Commissioner Rems.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh just one question, Scott.

Um talking about two different easements, one's for the site and the equip the antenna and the equipment, and then another one for access, or are we talking about just one easement for both?

Same geographic location, multiple easements is the the way I understand it.

So it's just one road that'll but uh you know easement language that I think needs to be updated uh to allow for Verizon to access the site for construction purposes.

So right now they're allowed to access it for uh maintenance, but that's it.

But this is water district property, right?

No.

So it's an adjacent property owner.

Okay.

Uh that's uh the where the road goes over the adjacent property to access the CCWD site.

Okay.

Thanks for clarifying.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

So I'm gonna dig into this a little bit more.

Um if we go back to that map, please.

Um the tower is going to be on CCW property.

Correct.

But you need access for construction, and there's currently no easement with the adjoining neighbor to get that construction access for construction, correct.

For construction.

For maintenance, there's an access road that runs from the high school up, and there's a that that part of the road has an easement.

Correct.

Now the construction would also take construction access easement would also be at the on the same road.

So it's just a different part of the road.

Same same geographic location.

At this point, they don't have authorization from the adjacent property owner to to access the site for construction purposes.

So it's more about language within the easement that doesn't exist, is the way I understand it.

And uh let's see, the the adjacent property owner is here this evening also, he may end up with the case.

Well, he I think he submitted a comment card before he speaks.

I'm trying to understand.

Um like we would, as a city would be asked to compel the neighbor to provide an easement, or is this something that needs to be sorted out between the two parties prior to construction?

It's it's strictly a certain civil matter between the two neighbors.

Okay.

So is this going to do anything to improve the poor performance of Verizon throughout the community?

You know, I I I think that's more of a uh a question for our applicant.

My my understanding is that this will improve the uh service for Verizon customers by increasing the height of the tower.

But um uh the the applicant Chris, he also has his uh engineer here this evening that can provide some some additional information on that subject.

Well, as a Verizon customer, it's tough to get service from my house all the way to Main Street.

So I'd appreciate it if we could uh get some insights on how we make that better.

Um any other comments.

Okay.

Um I'd love to hear from the um applicant addressing the question that was raised by Commissioner Ruddick.

Good evening.

My name is Chris Fowler, and I represent Verizon Wireless.

I want to thank staff for the uh great report he put together.

Yeah, there was a lot of information in there.

Um it was hard to get through.

It was so big.

Um but I did.

Anyway, um I built the original site in 2008, and we have uh an existing monopole at the location, and we had two antennas that were on the tank that was closest to town.

Uh because the Coast Side County Water District wanted to uh redo their water tanks, they asked us to remove the two antennas on the closest tank and develop a site farther back, which we have done.

In the meantime, because things uh well, I don't know what happened, but we had to put up a temp site, and there is currently a temp site there, and you can almost see it out the window here.

And uh it is in the back of the tanks.

And um we would be taking that down and putting up a new tower.

That's 68 feet, eight inches.

And uh the reason for the height is because as you can see, the front tank has been replaced, but the back tank will also be replaced.

Um, and it's going to be taller than the front tank, I believe.

So we needed the additional height in order to clear the two tanks and be able to provide the same coverage we have currently in town as we did with the original site where we had the two antennas on the front tank.

When we built the original site, we did get an easement with Gil Vista properties.

They own they own the property two owners ago, I believe, and I am going to work with Mr.

Narhan on.

We are going to give him a copy of the easement we have, and we do have one.

And it is for construction and maintenance.

And we'll work that out.

But I will make sure that Public Works sees a copy of it so that uh we can put everybody's mind to rest.

Do you have any questions for me?

To your knowledge, is that easement recorded with the county?

Excuse me?

To your knowledge, is that easement recorded with the county?

You know, I I have we had a call with Verizon Legal today, and it's it's notarized, so we we had a good feeling about that.

And then they said, well, let's order some title reports.

So we have ordered title reports for Mr.

Narhan's properties to determine if it was recorded.

Thank you.

Um there was the the question that Commissioner Ruddock raised was um let me back up because it it talks about making this camouflage like a tree.

Um so if you make it look like a tree, it's going to add to the height of the structure.

Yes.

And before you answer, let me give you some context for the question.

The fire district has asked us to consider removing eucalyptus trees throughout the community, thin them, remove them, replace them with other things.

The images we received show the tower hidden by existing eucalyptus trees that are likely to not be there in ten years.

And so we we want to make sure, like we have an obligation in policy 939 that uh Scott Phillips brought up, there's a it's a visual impact to the community.

This is this will be the tallest structure in the city within the city limits.

And you know, we'd like to understand what you're doing to camouflage this when all the eucalyptus trees are removed.

And how much taller will it be if you make it look like a tree versus a huge you know tower, which is what it is today.

Well, originally when we brought the plans in, we were asked to paint the pole uh eucalyptus green.

And otherwise, we didn't really this is the first I've heard that the fire district is going to cull the trees.

Um they're not going to cull the trees.

They're asking us as a community to cull the trees because of the imminent fire risk and new hazard maps that have been put out.

So there's a set of policies that are being finalized by the fire district, and as a community, we're going to be asked to manage these groves of trees.

I don't know how it's going to shake out, but it's unlikely that many of those trees will be there in a very short period of time.

So we need to think about how this design is going to look, including new concrete that could be easily dyed with a pigment and not painted.

We need to think about the visual impacts of these things because it's going to be one of the most prominent structures in town once those trees are no longer there.

No, I understand.

Um we hadn't considered that, but it's always something we can consider.

We've done this in other projects for other cell towers in the city.

I know there's one at the ATT building has used a similar design.

And I I apologize if you didn't know about this, right?

And it's these are questions that you know were raised recently.

Um if do you have a design?

Can you talk about raising what would happen?

I mean, I heard Scott Phillips say that if you make this change, it's gonna make it taller.

Do you have any additional detail to provide on how much taller it would be?

Um usually five feet above where it is.

You've got to have branches above the antennas to make it look like a you know, a cone.

Um remind me how tall the existing structure is.

The proposed the proposed design is 688.

Okay.

So it would be 728 73 somewhere in there.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Well, I I think you I think we understand it now, but the additional five feet is not of the tower, it's of some fairly low profile uh faux branches radiating out from the from the trunk.

Yes.

Okay.

And you know, uh one of the things too that I wanted to bring up is that you know, we have a lot of these around, and you know, in time the branches get old and weathered.

And you know, one of the last sites I was at, we've you know, there was a trash bag at the bottom full of branches.

Um, you know, it takes a little while for that to happen, but we are close to the ocean.

And uh, you know, we do get some problems with the salt air.

So I don't understand your comment.

Are you saying that when you have these faux branches, these faux tree camouflage designs, um they corrode, fall apart, and then you end up with litter.

Is that the what you're saying?

In time, they I wouldn't say they corrode and fall apart, but yes, they the branches fall off and they have to be replaced, and it's kind of a mess.

Okay.

Understood.

Any other clarifying questions?

I don't think so.

Okay.

Is that it?

Thank you.

Yeah, that's great.

Uh, we have some um comments that have been filled out.

Uh appreciate your feedback and uh answering our questions.

Um Frank Garrity.

Do we need to open the public hearing?

And I'm opening the public hearing.

Good evening, Commissioners and staff.

My name is Frank Garrity.

Uh I just want to thank you for hearing my comments and out tonight and give it a special public thank you to Scott and to Bridget for their quick responses to my emails.

Uh you're kind of a behind the scenes group, but I want to give you a public thank you for that, for your responsiveness.

Uh and yeah, and please bear with me for a couple of minutes tonight.

I'm gonna say a lot of things that you have already addressed tonight, Scott has addressed and you have addressed, so I really appreciate that.

But I think it's important that you hear it from uh a representative of the closest most affected neighborhood and slash a member from the public.

Uh we need more and better cell service.

So I support this project.

I'm not here to argue against it.

I'm here to reiterate and expand on one of the items already in your staff report, and to respectfully request that as a condition of approval that you mandate that the applicant to adhere to your policy 939 and disguise this new much taller cell phone tower as a non-reflective green tree.

Uh it also requested in my statements uh or my comments, written comments to paint the tanks the same non-reflective green, but I realize now that's a separate project and don't know what we can do about it at this point.

Anyway, I ask this because as my written comments stated and what the photo I took showed, this site is already visible from our neighborhood, and this seven-story cell tower will certainly be visible from the Highland Park neighborhood, and I believe Highway One.

My further worry and concern is that the tree cover is already sparse.

And if any of these trees die or fall from wind, etc., or as Rick has brought up the calling of the uh fire department requests, uh, then our neighborhood will be fully exposed to this industrial site and seven-story steel tower and on our scenic tree-covered hillside, and I believe the whole city would then pretty much be exposed to it also if any of those trees come down.

So, anyway, go ahead, please approve this project, because we do need better and more cell service, but as a condition of approval, please mandate your policy P-39 requirement to disguise the tower as a non-reflective green tree on the our scenic tree-covered hillside.

Uh thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next comment I have is from Keat Nearhan.

Good evening.

Um Keaton, two times San Mateo Road, Half Moon Bay.

Um I just like to address uh three things.

I ended up um buying the car hail, and uh CCWD has an easement for for their maintaining the tank and uh replacing that tank.

They don't have any rights to uh given an easement to anybody else.

And Mr.

Favreau, I put you never met him before, he called me yesterday and told me that he was going to produce a copy of some agreement.

I don't have one.

When about the property, there's um there's no easement recorded on the property.

Uh furthermore, for the past couple of years, there was no rent paid for it.

So even if he has something, it's null and void.

Anyway, so I just respectfully ask you that.

I think you should continue if you can and make sure that that easement is addressed somehow.

And I did tell CCWD that they didn't have any rights to allow anybody on the property except for for the CCWD.

And um second question I have, which I just everybody has their property rights.

Um there's a uh restriction put in um back um last LCP we had um that you cannot build anything over 160 feet height height all the way around.

And this sits over 200 and uh 300 and I think if I'm right, 340 feet where they are the hill is.

So I think there is a coastal act uh that applies to it.

And uh on the other hand, maybe they are exempt for it.

If it is, that's what it is.

And uh so I really appreciate it if you can just look into the easement and address that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm going to um are there any I see uh Doreen Garrety has her hand raised.

I'm gonna go to the online public comment.

And if anybody else who is online wishes to speak, they can uh click the little icon to raise their hand.

Go ahead, Doreen, you can speak.

Doreen, are you there?

Can you click out the question?

Yeah, I did.

There she go.

Uh there you are.

There you go.

Go ahead, you can speak.

Nope.

No?

Okay.

Yeah, just give you a second, Doreen, if you're there and you can hear us, you're welcome to speak right now.

Okay, I'm gonna close.

I'm gonna close public comment.

Um I have some further clarifying questions, but I'm gonna ask my commissioners if they have other clarifying questions they'd like to raise.

Um Scott, I'm gonna give you a minute to uh plan to address the height question about what's allowable over 160 feet and the policies that are there.

Um the second thing I'm gonna uh ask is I just heard a request to ask for continuance.

Um I think what I'm hearing from staff is a condition of approval is that the easement will have to be sorted out before construction can begin.

Yes.

Yes, that's correct.

So condition B7 requires uh the the easement to be finalized and submitted and reviewed and approved by the city prior to building permit issuance.

Okay.

So the effect of a continuance, the the the result would be the same.

It's just we wouldn't have to have another planning commission meeting on it.

That the issue if the issue is just about the easement.

So that's correct.

It's it's it's really a you know a matter of of w, you know, working out the details on the easement, reviewing it and making sure that it's recorded, of course, uh prior to building permit issuance.

Very good.

Yeah.

Um I'm gonna thank you.

I'm gonna open it up for discussion for my commissioners.

Commissioner Rems, would you like to go first?

I have no problem with the continuance, Mr.

Chairman.

Commissioner Reddick.

I'm sorry, Commissioner Rems.

Did you just say you have no problem with the continuance?

Yes, that's what I I uh I'll respectfully disagree with you on that because I think the condition that Scott has described as being in there is sufficient.

Um I I I do agree that uh a condition of approval uh making sure that the project is uh consistent with policy 9-39 to disguise the tree appropriately does make sense.

I know that we've required that at least once in recent years.

I think it's a good policy in general going forward.

But uh with that condition, I would uh I would uh support the the resolution.

Those two conditions.

Yeah, well, I think it's a little weird that the city has to sort out this easement disagreement, but if if we should have a condition like that, then why not?

If staff up uh recommends that that's a rational thing for the for us to do, then I'm fine with that.

Yes, and it's it's very common to you know add a condition of approval requiring a certain easement prior to building permit issuance.

We have done that on many projects before.

So, Chair Hernandez, you're right.

I I should say with those two conditions, I would be happy to approve the resolution.

Um I'm leaning to that direction, um, unless you feel strongly, Commissioner Rems.

The last speaker, the last public speaker confused me because I just didn't understand if he was the property owner, or if he's saying that he has no agreement to put a monopole or any other thing on his property, and that he hasn't been paid for a few years.

So I don't know if we should look into that and sort that out or get in the middle of it and just approve it and say, well, let them sort it out afterwards.

So I'm I'm leaning towards uh I don't have any problem with the site in general, but there seems to be some tangential issues here that maybe we should just stay away from.

Maybe it would help if Mr.

Phillips restated the condition that he is talking about, including to deal with the uh the easement confusion.

Yes, um Vice Chair, I'd be happy to read the the condition and the additional language that we're recommending to be added to the condition.

So condition B7 access easement to verify construction and maintenance access to the site, the access easement through the adjacent property shall be updated, submitted, and finalized prior to the issuance of building permits to the satisfaction of the community development director and city engineer.

That's for the access.

What about for actually the site where the monopoles gonna sit on?

Is that the same thing?

Is that the access easement that's the same?

I'd like to I'd like to modify the condition to make sure that the I I it's a good point.

I'd like to modify the condition to make sure that both uh access and construction access are clearly defined in the easement.

And uh I I would respectfully ask city staff if they feel like they're getting in the middle of a fight that hasn't been addressed to bring it back to us if if you need us to adjudicate the I see this as two issues.

One being access to the site, and two being the actual construction site that accommodates not only the tower but the equipment and maybe anything else that they need to put on there to operate the site efficiently.

Right.

So I'm under the So is there two owners there?

Is there one owner?

Is there a water district involved?

I mean this thing is spinning here.

Well, no, I mean I I I'll restate what I think I heard and I'll ask city staff for confirmation.

So what I heard is um there's one property owner where the tower and the water top, the cell tower and the water towers are be are being placed.

Correct?

Correct.

And there's an arrangement between in blue on the screen.

Yeah.

And there's an arrangement between Verizon and the owner of that property to put the tower up.

And they have the ability to access that site because it doesn't require an easement on the adjoining neighbor's property for maintenance.

Correct.

And so there's a question of is C CWD allowed to delegate that access to another party.

Is that a question?

That's correct.

And so that easement that C CWD has or a new easement would need to be uh created.

So for construction or for maintenance or for both?

For both, for Verizon based off of you know what we just heard from the adjacent property owner.

So I think I have an understanding of what needs to happen, which is there needs to be an easement for both construction and access, and city staff need to make that determination correct based on whatever civil engagement happens between these two parties.

Based on whatever civil engagement happens between these two parties.

Okay.

I'm okay with that, but I don't want the city getting involved with you know deeply involved in this issue because it seems to me like it's a private issue between the applicant and others.

Right.

So I think the the question is like with a coastal development permit, we can attach a condition that says if you don't have permission to be on that property or access to property, you can't move forward.

That's basically what we're saying.

So the the CDP is null and void if there is no easement.

Is that a fair way to describe it?

Yeah.

We we have to ensure that they have rights to use the property in order to issue a permit, whether it's a planning permit or a building permit.

And because this issue came forward rather late in the process, and we were working off the idea that we could that they had access via CCWD's easement, um, we think a condition of approval requiring them to submit proof of the easement for our review is sufficient as long as it comes in before they apply for their building permit.

Okay.

I'm comfortable with that.

Um I don't have an objection to that.

No, what's that?

I don't have any objection to that.

Okay, very do you have any other comments or discussion on the tower?

Um I I get that painting a tower could add a cost to the maintenance of the water towers.

Um I'm disappointed that the water district didn't come with a more coherent plan to begin with, number one.

Number two, uh like a couple hundred dollars, you put a pigment in the concrete, it changes the color of the concrete for the life of the product project product.

So if city staff can work with the water district before the concrete is poured, um, you know, there's a reasonable way to address this.

We have a few people in town who are experts on concrete, and they can probably provide some guidance.

They're probably the ones who are sourcing the concrete.

So I'm sure there are options to dye it versus have to paint it for the life of the project.

So if you guys have the ability to follow up with the water district on the new water towers, I I would appreciate that.

But in any case, because we do have an obligation to follow policy 939 for a massive water tower that's sitting on top of Carter Hill.

And I think this policy will apply because the same condition is true, the trees may not be there in the future.

And maybe the water district wants to put screening or foliage to mask the trees.

I'm okay with that.

That's probably a reasonable solution, but we have an obligation to protect policy 939.

Okay.

Um questions from city staff?

Are we good?

No, we'll we'll do our best on that front.

Appreciate it.

And I know not everything is entirely in your control.

All right, can I get a motion?

We always like a little fanfare before making a motion.

I'd be happy to make a motion, but I'm a I'm not a hundred percent confident I can word this condition about the easement correctly.

So uh I can make a motion.

Yeah, you're you're the best at that, Chair Hernandez.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the item before us with staff recommendations, including um one, the condition that the final design which will be approved by city staff incorporate uh a tree design consistent with what we've done before.

Um not then the second would be to um require that uh the I think you provided language to us, so we want to make sure we have a condition that requires that the easement be addressed by the parties prior to a building permit being issued.

And if it's not addressed, uh please bring it back to us if you need to.

We'll leave it at your direction if you need us to get involved.

I'll second that motion.

Can I get a roll call vote?

Yes.

May I may I ask for discussion?

Go ahead, please.

We we can open for discussion.

Go ahead.

Yeah, may I ask a question?

I'm worried about the timing right now.

Do you want to modify something?

Put some kind of date certain on that or within six months or drops that or I mean I think if it is it.

I I don't need I don't think it's necessary to put a date certain.

I understand the concern.

I I think sometimes when we do these things, it I mean, if it if it's not adjudicated in six months, bring it back to us for discussion.

Okay.

Or maybe just I mean, I don't know.

I mean, to me, the alternative is the applicant can change the design.

Okay.

So it would be to the satisfaction of the director that's a good idea.

I think I I would roll forward.

I think that's a good question, Steve.

Do you have thoughts?

Well, I think all the parties will be motivated to solve it, and I would keep it as simple as possible.

I'm okay with that.

Okay.

Scott, are you comfortable with the motion that we've made?

Yes.

All right.

Can we get a roll call vote?

Yes.

Commissioner Rems?

Yes.

Commissioner Ruddick.

Yes.

Vice Chair Hernandez?

Yes.

Motion approved.

Three zero.

Okay, we're gonna move on.

Thank you.

Um we're gonna move on to the next item, which is an update from Coastide Land Trust on the Coastal Access Project and Habitat and Wildlife Stewardship at Wave Crest.

Welcome, farmer Planning Commissioner Sarah Polgar.

Hello.

Great.

Well just one second.

Oh, we can't see the presentation.

Oh, can you see it now?

Okay, great.

Um, um good evening, commissioners.

Thank you for for having me uh today.

My name is Sarah Polgar.

I am the chief operating officer as well as the Wavecrest Coastal Access Project Manager for Coastside Land Trust.

And I'm very excited to be able to give you an update about the project and some other stewardship planning that uh Coastside Land Trust is doing at Wave Crest.

I also want to just introduce uh Barbara Lohman, who's uh seated behind me, our board president, uh, who's been very involved in the stewardship planning work that I'm gonna discuss today.

Um so I'm gonna dive right in to the coastal access project update.

I know that's something you guys are very interested in.

And um we here we are in April of 2026.

We started the project last late last uh July last year, and we've accomplished quite a bit.

We've got the coastal trail and connector trails installed, the compacted gravel.

You can see the example in the photo on the right.

And we have the parking lots in open with the trash service going.

We have a restoration of the casual trails out there, as well as areas that had been um eroded and were gullied.

Uh those have been reshaped and revegetated uh to restore the habitat.

And the end of Redondo Beach Road, which everybody probably recalls was a bit of a disaster.

Um that is looking much better.

It's also been restored.

We've done uh quite a bit of the split rail fencing.

Um basically the south half of the project site has uh got split rail fencing installed.

We did have to pause that with the weather um until it dries out, we'll continue that.

And then the South Beach Access stairway is the is underway, the construction of that, right?

As we speak.

Well, not right this moment, but um we still have coming in 2026.

Uh the rest of the the fencing, the split rail fencing, and then signage will be installed.

We will also be doing trail tune-ups and repairs as well as there's one section of connector trail that we did not install yet, and that's because that was an it goes through it kind of connects the coastal trail to the top of the south beach access stairs.

And so we needed to restore that area.

It was fully gullied, and so we reshaped it, res uh reseeded it, it's regrown in, and we will install that connector trail because people really want to be able to get down to the beach access stairs easily.

So that's coming as well.

Um and then we will for finalize or formalize the north beach access.

Right now it's a it's a path.

Um that's was in the plans because we needed to have access to be able to the bottom to the beach essentially to be able to build the beach access stairs on the south side.

Uh interestingly, everybody or everybody I've talked to really likes the path, so there's a chance that we could do additional work to formalize that that as a path or build the stairs.

It's DBD.

Um, but either way, you would be hearing about that, and that's something we plan to move forward with um the summer as well.

Uh we do still need that regardless.

We need the path right now for the South Beach access stairs.

Um and then we have the restroom, which we're planning to uh build in the fall, so September, October time frame.

So lots still to come.

And if we go to the next slide, I have included some photos just to show you kind of where we're at.

Obviously, the stairs are the big uh change most recently.

Um they're even further up the the cliff face now.

Um so and um it they're going very rapidly.

I I think I calculated they've only been working for three weeks, and so it seems like they'll be done in any day now, but uh the stairs may be done, but there still are quite a few things.

So it's still probably about a month and a half to two months of work left on the stairs, the railings, we have a landing up top.

There's work on the trail itself above there, etc.

So the stairs are coming though, um, but they're looking good.

And then a big change is the uh in the bottom left, uh kind of across the the page is the end of Redondo Beach Road.

I don't know if folks I probably should have included a before photo because prior to the uh closing this off with the these concrete split rail fencing and putting the boulders there.

The this area had been where everybody parked.

It was a big there were tons of uh giant sinkholes, and there was a dumpster off to the right that was always um brimming with uh dump you know, trash, etc.

Um, and people doing illegal dumping.

It's definitely looking much better.

This photo is actually taken back a couple weeks ago at least, and so it's even grown in more since then.

We did decide to leave a space between an opening in the fence so that folks could continue to go out to the the point out there.

It's a beautiful spot, and um you know it's it's really people enjoy kind of getting to the end of the Redondo Beach Road and being able to go out there and see that.

So that's a big success.

Top left is the um is the uh trailhead at the at Redondo Beach Road.

So basically, if you turned right from where the previous photo was looking, this is what you see.

There's obviously we will have a permanent trailhead sign right now, that's just the temporary sign.

Um we ended up using boulders to prevent uh vehicle access uh into that area.

We wanted some way to prevent it without that kind of felt natural and was still inviting, kind of fit the scene, and then also um people seem to like sitting on those boulders as well.

So it's been uh a good success.

Interestingly, we've discovered that people like to do a loop from the parking lots down Redondo Beach Road up to this, do this loop back along the coastal trail now to the parking lot.

So that's become popular.

Again, in the parking lot, actually shown in the bottom right, just the trailhead on the uh over to the right is the trailhead, and you can just see the trash receptacles.

Um again, we use boulders in the parking lot to kind of keep people from parking right in front of the the entrance to the trail.

We will again when we install the signage have the trailhead sign there.

This was the signage that you reviewed last fall in September.

Um then if you just scroll up just a teensy bit, uh you can see that uh kind of nondescript photo of a green area.

And what I like about that is that this is taken about midpoint of the coastal trail, and it's looking down what used to be a big casual, eroded casual trail.

And so our contractor ripped it up and mixed in soil from the excavated uh trail.

And prior to the project, uh Coast Side Land Trust volunteers had collected chorus' popcorn flower seed.

That's a rare plant, the popcorn flower.

And then just a couple months ago, we went ahead and spread it in this area.

And you see this kind of light white dusting there.

That's all of course is popcorn flower that's grown in.

So it's taking it advantage of its opportunity, which is fantastic because that's a uh priority for us in terms of mitigation and restoration.

We want to enhance the air, increase the areas where we have popcorn flower, and it's definitely working.

So we're very excited about that.

That's a big accomplishment.

Um I'm gonna pause here because I'm gonna shift gears, and I want to give you an opportunity.

I'm not sure the the format for this.

If it's okay for us to do, you could ask questions now, or if you want me to continue, I can continue.

You're giving us an update on the coastal trail uh and the project work.

So I think if people have questions around that or comments, um I I welcome it from my fellow commissioners.

Well, thank you, Sarah.

Very exciting.

I uh yesterday at noon I walked around for a couple miles out there to check it out, and I have to congratulate you on the on the how well the crushed granite surface is working out there, because that was after several days of well, not torrential, but substantial rains.

And there in my two-mile walk, there was only one area where I saw any danger of anybody getting muddy.

So that's that's that's uh uh quite different from the from the days not long ago when uh when wave crest could turn into a sea of mud.

You know, one question I had for you spurred by my experience yesterday, at the top of that north ramp down to the beach, I encountered a couple who were on their bikes and they had brought these big robust bike locks with them, and they and they locked their bikes up and headed down to the beach.

And right after that, this family of two adults and two kids came on their bikes and they didn't have locks, and they were wondering if it if they ought to abandon the bikes and go down.

But but anyway, it made it made me wonder if part of your vision at any point was um bike racks either north or south.

Yes, um, and that's actually in part of the requirement.

So in finalizing the north and south beach access, we will be putting in uh the uh bike racks for those.

Um we will also be putting in the interim a sign on the bollard at the top of the the um the the path because it's very steep to just let people know you should walk your bike because regardless of what we whatever we do in the interim, we really want people to be more careful that a lot of people have just decided, oh I'll just go down.

So um, yeah, so we will do that, and we we will be putting in the bike uh racks as well.

Uh they they are part of the the uh plan set.

Great, thank you.

Um I think the trail is uh I've been on the trail many times, uh both in dry weather and wet weather.

Uh I read online that um uh film crew damaged the trail, and I noticed when I was out there running that parts of the trail appear to be liquefied.

I think there's one in the cover of the or in the review.

Um where is uh have you heard back from our friends at Apple about the damage they caused to uh the trail?

I have heard that they have received the claim and are investigating it, and I have followed up multiple times, but I have not heard anything further.

So um I have I will be following up with the uh engineers' estimate of cost, because I I gave them approximate, but at the time the engineer hadn't had a chance to determine the specific repairs.

Because in some places it the you know the damage is minor, it'd be a pretty quick, but there's a couple places, probably the ones you're referring to, that are serious.

They're they're you know, it the so the native soils have been destroyed, so it's it's quite a bit to repair them.

Fortunately, those are probably relatively short the the intense repairs are relatively short distance, but it's it's definitely gonna take work.

It will be in c part of our to be clear, regardless.

We had to go back in, for instance, to put in the connector trail.

We were going to be doing work this summer regardless, but we were not obviously anticipating this.

So I am gonna be following up again.

Um I am a pessimist, so I don't have high hopes, but um, regardless, we will be fixing the trail.

Uh we we have to um to to make it last.

Um, if if you uh think the city could help um in any way, um I suspect the mayor would probably uh be happy to lend her voice to um what you guys are trying to get you know get the damage covered.

So thank you.

I don't have any other questions or comments.

Mr.

Chairman, could would you like to elaborate on your uh film crew comment and the Apple thing?

Because I'm not aware of that.

So um there's a movie that was being filmed in Half Moon Bay, or uh uh a movie, I think, um uh by Jason Siegel.

He's the producer and the main actor in it.

And the my understanding, which Sarah can correct me if I get this wrong, is that the film crew asked for permission to use the site and they were given direction on the conditions with which they could do it.

And they failed to follow those conditions, and as a result of bringing heavy equipment in, uh they basically broke the grading on the trail so that now instead of having a clear trail where water runs under efficiently, the trail actually liquefies when it gets wet.

So that's that's my understanding.

Yeah, in a nutshell, exactly.

So I think the what I read in the review is that the uh coastside land trust is reached out to Apple to Apple TV to address the damage that their crew caused.

So yeah, and we we did submit a formal um claim for the damages.

Um where is that point of liquefying?

Uh there's a couple, there's two points that are probably the easiest.

One is at the where the kind of the biggest gully comes in at the midpoint approximately um of the trail.

There's a a large gully um and it's that's gonna require major repair.

I I think coast side the most no.

I think coastside buzz actually has a photo with maps of the locations where the damage is.

So I think if you go to the coastside buzz site, I think you can see those.

And I've I've stepped through the mud on a few runs.

Yeah, I don't know why I put this.

It's only when you're when it's really saturated.

Okay.

Yeah.

They need a permit for that.

Well, we are still we were still gonna have to do uh quite a bit of touch-up anyways, and we were going to be having to do the um installation of the additional connector trail.

So within our existing permit, um, we we were going to be having to do additional work on the entire entire trail now.

Some of the stuff that we're we're gonna have to, you know, essentially reconstruct the stra the trail.

But that is we have a permit for that.

Well, I was referring to Apple.

Did they need a permit for their filming out there?

I think they've followed, I think they conformed with the law, and I'm seeing a nod of the head from Leslie, because there was, I think the harbor district, and within the city there was permitting.

Is that correct?

They had yeah, they went they had several event type permits from fire district, the city, and the harbor district, yeah.

Okay.

Thanks for that clarification.

I didn't know that.

Well, thank you.

That's what happens when you read our news.

I sorry, I wasn't meaning to name it.

I wasn't trying to take a jab at you, I apologize.

Oh, it was in the review, and it was also on um Coastside Buzz.

But you should be missing.

I don't catch all the articles either.

All right, Sarah, uh, would you like to continue?

Yes.

Um the next slide is kind of starts us on um coastside land trust wave crest stewardship planning.

So about a year ago we embarked on doing some focused stewardship planning for the wave crust area.

And this was prompted by our kind of years of efforts at you know, restoration work at at stu at Wave Crest, particularly in the f our 50 acres uh property, which I'll show in a second.

But uh we're uh out there trying to remove invasives, there's always new invasements, there's so many, we feel like it's whack-a-mole, um, frankly.

And so there and then we're meanwhile right seeing that grassland bird species, what we're called what I've I've put here, grassland obligate bird species and obligate is kind of how it sounds.

These are bird species that that rely on grasslands to feed, to nest, et cetera.

They those those birds be we just weren't seeing as many.

And um, so we we wanted to know well, what what should we be doing?

How do we prioritize our efforts to better support the kind of that enhance the habitat that would support those birds?

And you know, they are a good focus because we already know grassland birds populations are declining everywhere and and here as well.

But we also know that wave crust is is well suited to support these birds, especially migrating raptors.

These birds kind of treat this area as like a stop, a rest stop along the way.

And we want to keep this space really usable and good for them so that they have better success.

Uh and then we also knew that if we made the conditions good for Grasslands birds, that would mean that the conditions are also good for the other native coastal prairie species that we we want to support out there, the the plants, the insects, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians.

And so it made a lot of sense to use these grassland birds as a focal kind of species for our uh stewardship planning.

And we in particular looked at white-tailed kites, uh northern harrier, which you can see in the photos, that's the top right, the white-tailed kite is on the left, and then savannah sparrows.

There's good representative species of what we should be kind of working towards for supporting uh the the grassland birds.

So if we go to the next slide, you can see the planning area is wave crest.

It's specifically CLT's owned properties in the wave crust area in that orange outlined area.

And we receive funding from the San Mateo County Bird Alliance as well as some CLT donors to uh enable us to do this planning work.

We brought on an ecologist who specializes in grasslands birds, as well as a botanist who is uh very familiar with coastal prairie restoration, and we had our stewardship committee members and other experts help us review the existing conditions and understand kind of what's going on.

And our key findings were that numerous and aggressive crows are preventing grassland birds from hunting and nesting in uh the wave crust area, and that the trees and shrubs are rapidly overtaking the grasslands.

So if you go to the next slide, you can see a little bit about crows.

So American crow populations are exploding in the Bay Area.

Yeah, that's a great photo of so um that kind of says it all.

Um but the the their populations are exploding.

If you look at the graph on the left, the what that shows it shows the Corvid abundance over time, and Corvids refers to ravens, crows, and jays, and the red line, the one that spikes up at the end, is crows.

And this data, these data are the Crystal Springs Christmas bird count circle, like that area which includes Half Moon Bay.

So it includes other areas as well, but includes Half Moon Bay, and what you see after the over the past what three to four years is an enormous jump in crow uh populations.

And so I just want to emphasize that we're not alone.

It's happening across the Bay Area, and um it's not like our community did something wrong, you know, and that we're suddenly it's just happening uh and it's it's having a big impact.

I personally love crows.

I find them really interesting, they're super intelligent and interactive, um, and it's their intelligence that helps them exploit anthropogenic sources of food like open dumpsters and trash receptacles and even you know uh roadkill, things like that.

They're also skilled predators, they can uh get eggs and young from other species nests, and they are relentless at harassing and mobbing other birds, especially raptors, and in our area, especially the smaller grassland raptors like your kites and your carriers.

And right now we have two active nests in the cypress trees at Smithfield Ballpark, uh, and they are, you know, they're able to nest there because there's a constant food source, like a dumpster that has food you know available.

Um that was there before, but now there's just enough, and they're they're one of the challenges with crows is that they're communal or a cooperative, I guess you call it nesters.

So you get it's not just the crow, the pair that's nesting, there's crows that support them and chase off other birds and help to help them secure and make sure they have enough food for their nesting.

So you get a lot of crows.

And we even just a few years ago there weren't crows nesting um there.

So this is relatively new, and in probably five to seven years ago, there were actually um there was actually a uh nest, I think a kite nest there.

So we are seeing a shift uh for sure.

Um and then the other issue, if we go to the next slide uh that I referenced the tree and shrub um encroachment.

This one's gonna be a little hard because the slides are darker than I would have liked, but um, what this is showing is our CLT's 50 acres.

And so what you can see is that I've outlined, I'm focusing in on that.

That that's roughly outlined by the white box.

And you can I'm sorry, Sarah, we lost the view of your uh slides.

I'm a bit of a fidgeter.

I worried that I kicked a cable or something.

Not that I'm aware of just give it a second.

Well, I can't preview that I'm gonna be I'm focusing on our 50 acres.

And in part because when we were looking at the previous um the wave crust area where we're doing this planning, obviously that's an area where CLT owns a larger parcel, and we spend a lot of our um stewardship efforts.

And so we have a lot of opportunity there to restore habitat.

So that's one of the reasons I'm really focusing in on the 50 acres, because that's where we can have an effect.

Um there any questions so far?

Are those the only crow nests you know about in the relevant geography?

I'll be honest, we did not look beyond the wave crust area.

So I am sure there are other crow nests, um, but we we were really focused, we wanted to focus on where we owned land and and you know, within Wavecrust even.

And um, so yeah, so we we were kind of had a narrow focus perhaps.

But that doesn't mean that we don't want to do additional planning work.

Um, and one of our our uh I don't talk about this on my slides, but I can mention that we are looking at monitoring, starting off to understand baseline conditions of crows, and so we're actually starting that any day now and working with an expert on crow um corvid control, who's done a lot of who's done work in Big Basin, for instance, to help with like education and and reducing the number of crows.

So that's something we're moving forward with.

I see crows in the west of railroad area on an almost daily basis these days, but I I have no idea where they nest.

Some of those I've understood are kind of like the equivalent of unruly teenagers who just come to hang out and like like you know, smoke and drink.

Um so that's what I heard is that they're any taco bell.

Any taco bell, exactly.

So I'm not sure that those ones are nesting, but there are obviously some that are.

Uh yeah.

Um to the Sierra Foothills or something like that.

Uh no, no such plans.

Uh they have to willingly move on.

Um it's a reducing the attractive nuisance.

Oh, you guys can see now?

The core.

I'm glad I'm not in charge of that system.

There's an OSHA violation happening under here, and by the way, this desk is falling apart.

So you guys need to get a hot glue gun and take some take some work there.

Well, one option is to go sit in the audience for the presentation and then return.

Oh, okay.

Sure, we can do that.

But you can't use that, but I think it's working now.

Is it working now?

Oh, you know, okay.

Yeah.

Maybe maybe we just sit in the audience.

Yeah, and then we can ask for a question.

And then Rick's not.

All right.

Or you can have my chair.

It's got to be there's a chair here, too.

Did I hear uh you say that you're trying to control the crow population in Hafmung Bay?

Well, I'll talk a little bit about kind of what our priorities are.

We haven't done anything yet.

Um so we're trying to, but we we will be.

Um that is something that we'd like to work on, is we're doing they love my car.

Yeah.

And I don't like that.

Yeah, I yes, they they can be such trouble.

The sooner the better.

Yeah.

Well, um, do you want me to continue?

Okay.

Are you able to see from your computer?

No, you can come up in here.

No, I'm I can look up here.

Okay.

Um so uh this just shows uh that our 50 acres, and you can see the you know the coastal trail uh on the left side.

Um on the left, the the furthest to the left is was an aerial imagery taken just in November.

You can see the dark uh tree tunnel on the north and south edges of the property, and then that kind of arm that comes down, that's the eucalyptus grove.

And actually in the left side photo, you can see the there's kind of like a little light around it.

That's sawdust because at that time when that photo was taken, we just were in the midst of the uh fuel reduction and monarch habitat improvement project that the resource conservation district did in partnership, or they they did that on our property.

Um, and so that was under underway.

And um what you can see in the on the left side, and I kind of zoomed in on there's a there's a lot of trees that have started spreading up from the tree tunnel into the open area, the middle area.

And then also there's this kind of blob on the upper left or kind of middle left of the open area that is now all kind of a monoculture of tall coyote brush.

So if you compare that with 10 years prior, there are definitely trees on the, you know, in at the 2015 photo, but they're fewer and much smaller.

And then also it's very hard to see here, but in the the there's there's coyote brush, but it's not a monoculture, it's it's interspersed, it's kind of mixed in with grasslands.

Uh so you have uh just uh like patches of coyote brush.

And then if you go back all the way to 20 uh 2005, uh there are virtually no trees and just little patches of uh coyote coyote brush.

Um so you this is really changing fast.

And so if you go to the next slide, um I can, you know, I wanted to discuss like why does this matter at Wavecrust?

And and really it's because this is happening so fast.

Coyote brush, Monterey Cypress, and Monterey Pine.

I will say that almost all of the encroaching trees are Monterey Cypress.

Um there's only a couple of Monterey pine, but they spread so rapidly and they convert the grasslands to scrub and forest habitat, and this process does not reverse course on its own.

This is not something where you can let nature take its course and then we'll get grasslands again someday.

Nope, it's gonna be all Monterey Cypress, a monoculture.

Um maybe the coyote brush will hold out for a bit.

But um, so that the habitat conversion is bad for grasslands birds.

Um they pre feed on prey that prefers grasslands.

So these prey are voles and gophers and insects and snakes.

You can see that great photo that Barbara Dye took of a raptor that's caught a snake.

Um I think that's the best photo.

Um, and um another challenge for them is it's just harder for them to hunt in areas where there's too much tree or shrub cover.

They have to be able to see and to access their prey.

Otherwise, they can't catch it.

Smaller raptors, these are the ones most affected by the crow harassment.

They lose out first in this conversion of habitat.

They eat smaller prey, like the voles and the gophers, which don't compete so well with the larger prey, such as rabbits that can survive in the scrub habitats.

So basically rabbits can be eaten by some of the larger birds like a great-horned owl or um maybe a red-tailed hawk, but those smaller raptors that are already having a hard time because they're getting harassed by the raptor the uh crows, they're already harassed by the bigger raptors, you know, then they also don't have as much prey that's suitable for them.

Uh and then there are species such as the sparrows and harriers that nest in grasslands.

Now, I'm not aware of sparrows and harriers nesting in the 50 acres right now, but I know for a fact that they nest in the grasslands to the north, uh, north of Poplar Street.

So we we could have really, you know, that's another important habitat uh that you're losing or uh function that you're losing.

And then the other impacts of habitat conversion to scrub and forest that I'm sure you guys are aware of and would care about is um not that you don't care about the habitat loss, but also just these are important is to mention is there's an increased risk of damaging wildfire.

So you go from having a grasslands fire to a you know forest fire essentially, and it burns hotter, it damages the soils, it can spread much further, much faster, um, it can become catastrophic.

And then you have the loss of the view shed.

Uh so if you go back to the previous slide and you look at the change over time, you know, realistically the eucalyptus arm of you know that's coming down from the top hasn't changed in 20 years, right?

But the the number of trees that between the tree tunnel and the the bottom of the arm has, and so you're losing that view shed from highway one, which is to the east over time, because those trees that's the only view, frankly, from highway one of the ocean you have there, but the trees are uh that are encroaching into the grasslands are taking that away.

So it's another consideration of kind of this conversion.

So if we go now to the uh one after next slide, so next slide and then the next one.

I wanted to just touch on CLT's stewardship priorities.

Like these are the ones that I I want to emphasize because I think they're relevant to you and the city as a partner in all of this.

And one is that we CLTs would like to reduce the number of crows by reducing anthropogenic sources of food.

And the the key word here is reduce, not eliminate.

We just need to, if we can have a fewer, that would help those birds have a better chance, like a fighting chance essentially.

And they've been able to survive with crows, just not this many.

And so if we can reduce the amount of food sources that are available, and one way is that we're already working with the city and coordinating on how on identifying and how we can help install suitable wildlife-proof trash receptacles, first at Smithfield and ideally at some point later, you know, at Poplar.

But that's something that we're we're really interested in doing.

Um and then also working with the city, not just the city, but state parks, uh the school district, and other partners on developing like a crumb clean, I hate I don't know what that's a weird way to say it, but basically a leave no trace kind of education and outreach campaign, especially especially for public access sites for visitors coming to our city to help them understand why it's so important to um to not to have this free food, easy food out for um crows.

And then the other piece that we're really um prioritizing is that on our 50 acres parcel, we want to restore grasslands, and we need to do this, and we want to remove the encroaching trees and coyote brush.

And I want to emphasize encroaching trees.

So I've circled for because what we're talking about are the really the trees that are moving on to that are growing into the grasslands.

We're not talking about the the uh tree tunnels or you know, the perimeter trees or anything like that.

It's just these trees that are taking over the grasslands, and then also reducing the monoculture of coyote brush so that we have it, it becomes more of a mix of grass and and coyote brush, um, so which can support the species.

And these these trees are you know, they don't look very impressive in the aerial photo, but if you uh you know we have our volunteer crew standing underneath the um, and that's just the the only that that set of trees right there is one dot um the furthest to the north and the right on the photo on the right, uh kind of to the left of where it says tree, there's one the biggest dot there.

That's that's that tree's uh grow.

It's they're big and they're they're growing fast.

Um and then the uh so in addition to getting the money to do this and and moving forward with this, we do need help addressing a permit challenge because the city heritage tree requirement is for replacing um replanting one for one when there's a removal of a tree, like a monoray cypress um that has a diameter of 12 inches or more at um kind of breast height DBH.

And you can see one of our volunteers is measuring one of the trees in the photo above, just one of those, and that tree is 16 inches diameter.

Um, so we would have to replant an invasive species that we're actually trying to remove so that we can restore grasslands habitat, which is completely counter to what we're trying to do, and it would make it prohibitive to do the project, frankly.

So, in it in an effort to restore a habitat that's that's dwindling and that's critically important for kind of iconic species that we really love seeing these birds that are so important um to kind of our character, our community character, but also they draw lots of tourists, um, and they're just great to have.

Um we face some we face some challenges in just in getting this project um done.

So that's another area where I think that's really relevant for the planning commission in the city to be aware of.

So um I'd be happy to answer any questions, and you asked, I think, um Commissioner Rems about uh crow uh crow, you know, reducing the crow populations.

Did uh if you have did that answer your questions about kind of what we're exploring and and pursuing not really, but uh okay.

Um is there other people let you go with it, run with it, you know.

Okay.

Um is there anything I can clarify about it?

No, I just see a lot of crows all over the place.

I mean, everywhere I go, there's crows quaw caw quaw.

And they're they're actually kind of funny in at times, particularly when I walk the dog, they kind of taunt the dog.

And um but I just think there's there's too many, and I see them uh around the bend from where I live.

Uh there's a person who feeds the critters, raccoons and other things in their that population is exploding, and the crows are picking up all the crumbs from that, so they just uh dive into all those dishes at the local pocket park around the corner where I live.

And so it's feral cats and raccoons and crows that we're dealing with in my neighborhood.

Yeah, and I know that the city had pursued a uh maybe an ordinance on feeding wildlife and and had a lot of messaging around that in previous years, and that's something to um explore kind of because that I think a lot of times folks may not realize the impact of that and what it what happens as a result.

Um I think from the perspective of the wave crest stewardship, even just reducing a bit the uh availability, the kind of steady availability of food like from the dumpsters would reduce, for instance, would probably um uh prevent the crows from nesting at Smithfield.

That might and and then and we don't know for sure, uh but we can't, in a sense, if we don't do anything, frankly, the populations are likely to just continue growing.

So would they just move somewhere else that would move down the coast?

You know, I I don't know.

Um I don't have a good answer for that.

I'm I'm not sure.

That's a very telling chart you have there.

It's it's practically vertical.

Yeah.

And that's that's um just in the kind of the for the kind of circle of uh counts that are can include Half Moon Bay.

But it it I've seen articles in SF Gate about what's happening in San Francisco.

They're experiencing the same things.

We're we're not alone.

Um but also there's uh uh not a lot known about how to effectively get crows to you know control CORVID populations or crow populations in particular.

And so we're a little bit in uncharted territory, but if it's still better to in uh to try to remove the the people sources of food if we can.

Thank you, Sarah.

That's oh, I'm sorry.

If you look at you for just one more minute.

The thought just occurred to me that I work on walk on the beach a lot when the weather permits.

And I've noticed um quite a few more than usual this year so far of dead birds on the beach, whether they be seagulls or other types of species that I'm not familiar with, but I just thought it was interesting.

Do you know anything about that?

I don't um I know sometimes we see populations of myrrhs that that wash up.

Um, but I I haven't read anything or heard anything specifically.

I'm wondering if it has anything to do with the the uh sea lion population or seals that have that particular virus that birds can get when they start chewing on dead seals and critters that wash up.

That's possible, I guess.

So I'm just wondering, but there's an extraordinary amount, it's probably two or three to one from over last year.

I mean, they're just kind of like sprinkled throughout.

Wow.

All along coastal beaches.

So thank you.

Commissioner Riddick.

Yeah, uh well.

Well, thanks, Sarah.

It's fascinating.

I um I uh am very supportive of the goal of uh not letting those the advancement of the of the forest take over the grasslands.

Um I've all my life been a frequent visitor to Yosemite Valley, and a lot of people don't realize that the beautiful as Yosemite Valley is today before the coming of the Europeans, it was all a big meadow, a grassy meadow.

There were there were virtually no trees in the valley.

The the grazing of sheep in there accelerated the trees getting victory over the grasses, but but in any case, I know from even from the CLT signage out on that trail that the cycle of the of the forest threatening the grasslands is a known thing.

I would certainly hope that there'd be a flexible approach to our heritage tree policy to allow those things to come out and and uh be replaced with something somewhere else that would that would be a coherent uh uh approach to the problem.

I'm uh do you have any other pieces of your presentation, Sarah?

No, but I I can comment that um in this setting, I think one of it is very it's very context dependent.

And in this setting, trees just uh there is no real uh place for them in the you know, in the meadow, like the grasslands.

And so replacing them just doesn't make sense because you're trying the whole point of the restoration is to um reduce the them because they take over.

And I think um the in many respects, like one of the challenges of when they're you know, without having the flexibility built in, it means that you have to kind of forge a new path.

And so honestly, from a perspective of uh a project proponent, like trying to do a restoration project, it can be just as expensive to get through the planning and permitting process as the actual work could be.

And that's where you kind of go, oh, it's a it's a challenge.

So um that's the one of the benefits of having the flexibility built into the permit is that it makes it easier for staff to to be able to make that you know allowance.

Um it's just uh kind of an observation, having frankly been on both sides of permitting.

Um this is a presentation and we're kind of having an informal discussion.

So um what I'm gonna do is first of all, thank you, Sarah.

I think this is wonderful.

Um I am gonna ask if there are any um public comments on this item from any members of the public.

Not seeing anything.

Okay.

So I just want to take it back for discussion and get feedback from my colleagues.

And if if we need to bring Sarah back to the dais, I I'd appreciate it.

Do you guys have any feedback or comments?

Well, one last thing.

I'm very interested in the crow monitoring idea you mentioned, and if if it if CLT uh comes up with a way on your website or some other way to keep us posted on that, I think a lot of us would be fascinated to to watch that is to see that data.

Oh, for sure.

And we might enlist you in helping to collect it.

So yes, definitely.

I would just like to add um uh my gratitude for your being here and giving us an update and a report.

Uh just echo the chairman's uh wishes uh we wish you success and thank you for being here.

Thank you.

Um I I I think I learned a lot in this process in preparation for this.

I actually spoke to somebody who is a professional crow hazer, as he would describe it.

So there are wildlife specialists who have various techniques to chase the crows away.

Um the biggest thing though that I learned prior to coming here and was reiterated by Sarah's presentation is that getting rid of the fast food um dumpsters, garbage cans without lids, uh has a tremendous impact on um the crows and and um ravens.

Uh and so the extent to which uh my suggestion is the extent to which city staff, as we think about summer planning, would normally we talk about trash cans and receptacles and what we're doing.

And as we think about Smith Field, the extent to which we can proactively work with CLT and parks and recreation uh staff can think about what are we going to do with open trash containers.

I think it'd be helpful for us to evaluate that.

Um because it's not just crows, you also have rats um getting into the garbage at Smithfield.

Um I don't think anybody wants to have their little kids having to deal with rats running around um an open garbage cans and open dumpsters.

Um the uh other piece of uh feedback that I have is um I think I know we're going through the implementation plan, and there are things that have to be done urgently and immediately, but I think we're looking at the heritage tree uh policy as part of the implementation plan.

And I'll just say from my perspective, the land trusts, not just CLT, but POST and Midpen and individuals who are own tracts of land, um we want to encourage them to restore the wildlands.

We want to be able to have these raptors and other native species here.

So I mean the cost of doing a restoration is similar to the cost of replacing the trees.

So the extent to which um somebody who's acting as a steward for the land has a restoration plan that's backed by biology, uh backed by science, backed by a coherent plan.

I think we need to think about modifying the way that the heritage tree policies work.

I I I I'm actually in favor of not requiring like it doesn't make sense to me to require somebody to replace trees.

One one, they're invasive, two um the cost of doing so reduces the likelihood that there's money to be spent on other restoration projects.

So I think we just need to think through those things.

And I think is uh and I I know many people are volunteering and participating in these these things.

So I'd love as we go through this to think about how we're approaching that, especially think about how the policy applies for people who are significant landowners who are engaged in conservation activities.

I think we we need to think about that differently.

So um any other feedback?

No, I that's very well said, Rick.

I I support that a hundred percent.

Okay.