|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
VIDEO. City of Pacifica Council approved the Vista Mar on November 23rd, 2020. The decision was based on a typewritten 1980 document. The plan is for 8 luxury condos on a 1.2 acre west-facing hill. The project requires the cutting down of 57 trees. Pacifica has not updated their general plan since 1980. Pacifica’s land use plan is one of the oldest in the state of California.
Note that a General Plan for a City is like the Constitution for how to run the City. It should be updated every 10 years. This plan is 40 years out of date. In particular, does not adequately plan for stormwater runoff and drainage, therefore ignoring environmental impacts (such as alignment with CEQA ~ California Environmental Quality Act) and public safety.
For instance, during the 1982 El Nino, three children died due to a landslide in a year when there were 475 total mudslides in Pacifica. (see below).
The Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan and Responsible Planning (CPUP) is a group of Pacificans who came together in 2020 in response to a pattern of unsustainable development allowed by the City. CPUP is a broad coalition across Pacifica that supports sound planning decisions backed by thorough and unbiased environmental and safety reviews, in compliance with environmental law. We seek to build an informed community by providing resources and technical support. CPUP also aims to work with the City in crafting an updated General Plan that is based on current science and environmental standards, and which provides clear and consistent guidelines for development decisions to ensure that new construction benefits all Pacificans.
www.CPUP.org
VistaMar Project Website
1982 Pacifica Landslide Kills 3 Kids
Press Briefing: Pacificans Sue the City of Pacifica Over Violation of CEQA and California’s Planning and Land Use Laws
Mon December 21 @ 10:00 am – 11:00 am
The Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan and Responsible Planning (CPUP) is a group of Pacificans who came together in 2020 in response to a pattern of unsustainable development allowed by the City. CPUP is a broad coalition across Pacifica that supports sound planning decisions backed by thorough and unbiased environmental and safety reviews, in compliance with environmental law. We seek to build an informed community by providing resources and technical support. CPUP also aims to work with the City in crafting an updated General Plan that is based on current science and environmental standards, and which provides clear and consistent guidelines for development decisions to ensure that new construction benefits all Pacificans.
CPUP Website
Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan and Responsible Planning (CPUP)
CPUP is a coalition of Pacificans from across the city who care about safe, responsible planning. CPUP’s goal is to build community through resource and information sharing, technical assistance, and support for community members who are dealing with environmental and safety concerns about projects in their neighborhoods. We are not NIMBYs – we support sustainable projects that benefit all Pacificans and participate as community members in the General Plan update process.
PRESS RELEASE
December 21st, 2020
Pacificans Sue the City of Pacifica Over Violation of CEQA and California’s Planning and Land Use Laws.
Pacifica, December 21st, 2020 — Kristin Cramer and the Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan and Responsible Planning (CPUP)* filed litigation today against the City of Pacifica to force the City’s compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and California’s Planning and Land Use Laws regarding the proposed Vista Mar development on Monterey Road. The plaintiffs are represented by the Law Offices of Brian Gaffney APC in conjunction with Lozeau | Drury LLP.
The development consists of 8 luxury condominiums on a 1.2 acre property with a 52% slope and a history of landslides. The project would require clearing 57 trees, paving over a probable wetland, and excavating 6,453 cubic yards of soil. At City Planning and City Council meetings, neighbors voiced concerns about environmental degradation, as well as increased risks of landslides and erosion on a hillside that already struggles with flooding on an annual basis.
Four experts from the fields of biology, hydrology, air quality and geology supplied testimony that provided substantial evidence of environmental consequences that are not adequately mitigated. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), such expert testimony requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be performed before development can occur. Despite these laws, the City Council voted to approve the project at the appeal hearing on November 23rd.
“We are community members on a journey of unfortunate discovery. In the beginning we thought the City didn’t understand the problems of the Vista Mar project. We went to great lengths to research and present the technical problems with the site and to our surprise were faced with a City that wasn’t listening and was using a type-written document from 1980 to base its decision-making. We banded together with our collective resources to support what is our last-resort — a legal remedy to compel the city to keep its citizens safe,” said Summer Lee, an artist, who is co-founder of CPUP.
The lawsuit will also focus on the City’s failure to comply with their General Plan, which has not been comprehensively updated since 1980, making Pacifica’s one of the oldest in the state. The General Plan is the set of documents that detail the guiding standards on which a city must base its land use and development decisions. The lawsuit contends that as it stands, the document is legally inadequate, fatally out of date, and internally inconsistent. For example, the Safety Element of the General Plan was altered in 1983, after an El Niño event resulted in over 475 landslides in Pacifica, large-scale evacuations and the unfortunate loss of life. Despite this, the city’s landslide and erosion maps have not been updated to include the City’s most common type of landslide (“debris-flow” slides), which have been recorded on the Vista Mar property. Additionally, the Vista Mar project is inconsistent with numerous General Plan policies which promote protection of significant trees, creeks and riparian habitats, prohibit development on slopes over 40%, maintain natural open space between areas of development, and discourage mass grading and terracing.
“It is shocking to find that the City has not updated its General Plan Safety Element given the technical information in the reports that they themselves commissioned. We are genuinely concerned with neighborhood safety given the history of landslides and flooding on this hillside and we do not have adequate scientific information on which to base the planning review of the project. The 1980 General Plan calls for thorough geotechnical investigations and somehow the City has allowed the project to rely on only two shallow soil borings, neither of which were done where the buildings are proposed,” said Christine Boles, a neighbor and licensed architect.
In reaction to the events of the Vista Mar project approval, CPUP, an unincorporated organization, was formed to address a wider pattern of similar decision-making throughout the City. CPUP believes this state of affairs is enabled by a General Plan that has not been brought up to date to consider the current state of scientific data and the city’s infrastructure, and asserts that until the General Plan is updated, all other development that raises the same issues in regard to the General Plan should be put on hold.
*CPUP is a project of Pacifica’s Environmental Family, a 501(c)(3) organization that supports environmental stewardship and education in the City of Pacifica. For more information, go to www.CPUP.org
Author: Coastside Buzz
Me
The Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan (CPUP) are using their opposition to the Vistamar project as a cudgel to try to force the City of Pacifica to update its General Plan. CPUP is trying to get the courts to force what it has not been able to achieve through the political process. Instead of petitioning the City Council, it is petitioning the Superior Court of San Mateo Count. This is an improper use of the litigation process and is destined to fail.
CPUP complains that the Pacifica General Plan is out of date because it was originally passed in 1980. They say, although the law does not require this, that the General Plan should be updated every 10-years. General Plans are updated when events occur within a city that call for rethinking the direction of land use provided by the General Plan. What has happened in Pacifica since 1980 that would warrant so drastic an attack on the City through the courts to try to force a General Plan update? In reality, not much.
Since 1990, Pacifica’s population has grown only 2.6% by about 1,000 residents. The population in 1990 was 37,670 and in 2019 was 38,674. During this time there has been very little economic development in the City. There have been a few small residential projects, like Vistamar, but no new office buildings, shopping-centers, big box retail, and recreational development. There has been one small hotel project at Rockaway Beach. If you want to go to Trader Joe’s, Costco, Target, or Whole Foods you have to go to one of the adjacent cities because they are not found in Pacifica. Other than increased traffic on highway 1 coming from Half Moon Bay, nothing significant has happened in Pacifica to warrant an immediate emergency update to the General Plan.
Pacifica is a coastal community, much like Half Moon Bay and Santa Cruz. These cities have been booming with all sorts of new high-quality developments that are raising the standard of living and bringing new employment and housing opportunities to their communities. The Ritz Carlton Hotel in Half Moon Bay is a good example. They have used the tax revenues from this prosperity to revitalize their downtown areas and public buildings. None of this has happened in Pacifica.
Where is this pattern of unsustainable development about which CPUP complains?
CPUP has attacked the City of Pacifica for approving the Vistamar project. The Planning Staff hired an outside consulting firm to evaluate the project for CEQA compliance and an outside law firm to evaluate the project for legal compliance. Both consultants said Vistamar complies with the law. CPUP complains that Vistamar will pave over wetlands (it is really a drainage swale) and cut down 57 trees (51 of which are saplings). The City conditioned its approval on the Army Corp of Engineers, California Fish & Game, and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board evaluating the swale and issuing approvals. As for the 57 trees, the project sponsor agreed to replace every one of them with healthy trees more suitable to Pacifica’s climate. As for the 6 heritage trees to be removed, the sponsor agreed to first consider moving and replanting them and, if this is not possible, then replacing them with 18 trees of large size that are more suitable to this location. Finally, CPUP says there are geotechnical hazards on the site from superficial debris flow landslides. There is no evidence of this on this site for over 30-years. Here too the sponsor agreed to have a geotechnical engineer conduct a site stability study, subject to review by both the City Engineer and an independent outside consultant hired by the City. For every objection raised by CPUP the City fashioned an appropriate response.
Perhaps CPUP should try talking with members of the City Council rather than using litigation to achieve the changes in the General Plan they would like to see.
This story about the lawsuit tells only one side of the story. Here is the other side:
The Vista Mar Project has complied with every ordinance, policy, and standard adopted and in effect by the City of Pacifica. It conforms to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and all other applicable laws and ordinances applicable to this development. The project sponsor has not asked for any variances or other exceptions to the law in seeking this approval.
The California legislature recognizes we have a statewide housing shortage and declared on October 9, 2019 a housing emergency in effect until January 1, 2025. On that day, the Housing Crises Act of 2019 was signed into law. One provision of the law is applicable here. It is Government Code Section 65589.5 which states:
“(o) A housing development project shall be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application including all of the information required … is submitted.”
The Vista Mar Project has submitted all the information required by law and is subject only to the laws in effect at this time. That is the law.
Vista Mar has complied with the law.
Forty Years? Holy Smokes!
Pacifica may have the oldest General Plan in California!
Many jurisdictions undertake such a revision process every ten to 15 years.
https://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/resources__finalbook_0.pdf
How often is my (city/county) required to update their general plan? By statute, the general plan is required to be updated “periodically.” While there is no requirement for how often to update the general plan, the planning period has traditionally been 15-20 years. Some cities and counties update their general plans as often as every 5 years, while others update in portions over time.
https://opr.ca.gov/docs/General_Plan_Guidelines_FAQ.pdf