Morro Bay Municipal Code § 17.14.010 Purpose and applicability

The coastal resource protection (CRP) overlay district applies to the "coastal zone" as defined by the Coastal Act (and denoted as the area within the "coastal zone-CZ" overlay district on the zoning map) and is established for the purpose of implementing the Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 of the California Public Resources Code) and to ensure that all development in the Coastal Zone of the city of Morro Bay is consistent with the city's certified local coastal program and the Coastal Act.

A. Development within the CRP overlay district shall conform to all applicable LUP policies, the requirements of this chapter, and all other sections of the IP.

B. Protection of coastal resources shall be a priority in all city actions and decisions, and development must conform to all applicable LCP policies related to hazards, water and marine resources, scenic resources, biological resources and environmentally sensitive habitat areas, cultural resources, and public access and recreation.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

The following terms are used in the implementation plan. See also the definitions listed in land use plan Section 6, glossary and acronyms.

A. Best Available Science. Current, generally accepted, data-driven information, as refined to be most applicable to the local circumstances and conditions, and considering a range of plausible impacts based on multiple time scales, emissions scenarios, or other factors developed to inform further decision-making regarding the range of impacts and vulnerabilities.

B. Coastal Access.

1. Lateral. An area of land providing public access along the shoreline and coastal bluffs.

2. Vertical. An area of land providing a connection between the first public road or use area nearest the sea and the publicly-owned tidelands or established lateral access way.

C. Coastal-Dependent Development or Use. Any development or use which requires a site on, or adjacent to, the sea to be able to function at all.

D. Coastal-Related Development or Use. Any development or use which is dependent on a coastal-dependent development or use.

E. Coastal Beach (or Beach). The sandy area between the low tide and the first line of terrestrial vegetation or development or the toe of an adjacent coastal bluff or seawall, whichever is the most landward.

F. Environmental Justice Communities. Low-income communities, communities of color, and other populations with higher exposure and/or sensitivity to adverse project impacts due to historical marginalization, discriminatory land use practices, and/or less capacity to mitigate adverse impacts.

G. First Public Road Paralleling the Sea. That road nearest to the sea, as defined in Section 30115 of the Public Resources Code, which:

1. Is lawfully open to uninterrupted public use and is suitable for such use;

2. Is publicly maintained;

3. Is an improved, all-weather road open to motor vehicle traffic in at least one direction;

4. Is not subject to any restrictions on use by the public except when closed due to an emergency or when closed temporarily for military purposes; and

5. Does in fact connect with other public roads providing a continuous access system, and generally parallels and follows the shoreline of the sea so as to include all portions of the sea where the physical features such as bays, lagoons, estuaries, and wetlands cause the waters of the sea to extend landward of the generally continuous coastline.

H. Flood (or Flooding). Normally dry land becoming temporarily covered in water, either periodically (e.g., tidal flooding) or episodically (e.g., storm or tsunami flooding), including in relation to sea level rise.

I. Low-Income Household, Area, or Community. Means those with household incomes at or below eighty percent of the statewide median income or with household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low-income by the Department of Housing and Community Development. A) "low-income area" means an area with household incomes at or below eighty percent of the statewide median income or with household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and Community Development's list of state income limits adopted pursuant to Section 50093 (Section 39713 of the Health and Safety Code)

J. Revetment. A type of shoreline protective device typically consisting of a sloped retaining wall; a facing of stone, concrete, blocks, rip-rap, etc. built to protect an embankment, bluff or development against erosion by wave action and currents.

K. Riprap. A type of shoreline protective device consisting of a protective layer or facing of rock, concrete blocks or quarry stone, placed to prevent erosion, scour, or sloughing of an embankment or bluff or to protect development.

L. Sea. The Pacific Ocean and all harbors, bays, channels, estuaries, salt marshes, sloughs, and other areas subject to tidal action through any connection with the Pacific Ocean, excluding nonestuarine rivers, streams, tributaries, creeks, and flood control and drainage channels.

M. Submerged Lands. Lands which lie below the line of mean low tide.

N. Visitor-Serving Development or Use. Stores, shops, businesses, temporary lodging and recreational facilities (both public and private) which provide accommodations, food and services for the traveling public, including, but not limited to, hotels, motels, campgrounds, parks, nature preserves, restaurants, specialty shops, art galleries and commercial recreational development such as shopping, eating and amusement areas.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In addition to any other required permits or approvals, all development, as defined in Coastal Act Section 30106, within the coastal resource protection (CRP) overlay district requires a coastal development permit (CDP) pursuant to Chapter 17.39, Coastal Development Permits (IP), except as specified in Section 17.39.020, CDP Exemptions, and Section 17.39.030, Waivers for Deminimis Development.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect priority land uses as defined by the Coastal Act, including recreation and visitor-serving and coastal-dependent uses for both residents and visitors, development shall conform with all applicable land use plan (LUP) land use designations and land use policies and standards, including, but not limited to, coastal priority uses policies and standards. Development shall only be authorized when the proposed use is allowed per the applicable land use designation, and when it meets all applicable LCP policies and standards.

A. Visitor-serving uses shall have priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry. Public recreational access facilities and uses, such as trails, accessways, and public parks, shall be permissible uses in all zoning districts.

B. In addition to all other applicable regulations, accessory dwelling units, SB 9 related development, and affordable housing density bonus development shall meet the following additional standards:

1. Accessory dwelling units, SB 9 related development, and affordable housing density bonus development are allowed provided they are sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to coastal resources.

2. For ADUs and SB 9, such proposed development shall be consistent with all applicable LCP provisions, including those governing sensitive habitats and their buffers (i.e., wetlands, streams, and ESHA), coastal hazards and corresponding buffers (e.g., meeting necessary beach and bluff setbacks without armoring), public views, and public coastal access.

For all ADUs and SB 9 development within the area shown in Figure 17.14.040(B)(2), the parking reductions specified in Section 17.07.030 A(6) shall not apply, and one off-street parking space per unit shall be required. If enclosed or covered parking for the primary dwelling is converted or demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or SB 9 unit, off-street replacement parking is required.

For all ADUs and SB 9 development, all CDP processing requirements specified in Chapter 17.39 shall be met, including in terms of public noticing and opportunities for appeal to the coastal commission for appealable development, with the exception that no local public hearing shall be required.

3. For affordable housing density bonuses, an analysis of coastal resource impacts associated with the density bonus project (and any alternatives) shall be provided. Such analysis shall identify the Coastal Act and LCP-consistent project for the site, defined as the maximum size, scale, density, and intensity of development (including the number of market-rate and affordable residential units) that can be accommodated on a proposed project site consistent with all Coastal Act and LCP requirements, and without applying any state density bonus law incentives/waivers/concessions. The LCP-consistent project shall be compared against a density bonus project, including clearly identifying any LCP deviations proposed to be sought, the coastal resource impacts associated with such deviations, and the affordable housing benefit being provided. Such analysis shall quantitively and qualitatively identify, compare, and contrast expected coastal resource impacts between the LCP-consistent project and the density bonus project. Such analysis shall also include an analysis of measures that could be applied to the density bonus project(s) to ensure that they do not result in any significant adverse coastal resource impacts (e.g., measures necessary to ensure consistency with all applicable Coastal Act and LCP provisions addressing wetlands, streams, environmentally sensitive habitats, coastal hazards, public recreational access, etc.)

In order to approve a project that deviates from the LCP standards for the site, the approving authority must conclude, based on substantial evidence, that: (a) the approved project encourages housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income with the least amount of Coastal Act and LCP deviation; and (b) there will be no significant adverse coastal resource impacts due to the approved project.

[Figure: FIGURE 17.14.040(B)(2): ADU/SB 9 COASTAL PARKING STANDARDS]

FIGURE 17.14.040(B)(2): ADU/SB 9 COASTAL PARKING STANDARDS

C. Low Cost Visitor Accommodation, Protection of Low Cost Visitor Accommodations.

1. Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to the expansion, reduction, redevelopment, demolition, conversion, closure, cessation, or new development of any project involving visitor overnight accommodations, with the exception of short-term rental lodging that is within residential units.

2. Low, Moderate, and High Cost Visitor Accommodations Defined. For purposes of this section, visitor accommodations shall be defined as low, moderate, or high cost as follows:

a. Low Cost. The average daily room rate of all economy hotel and motel rooms in the city of Morro Bay based on the best available information (e.g., as defined in the city's lower-cost visitor-serving accommodations technical memorandum, Smith Travel Research data, etc.), or not to exceed seventy-five percent of the prior year's statewide average daily rate.

b. Moderate Cost. Between low cost and high cost.

c. High Cost. The average daily room rate of all upscale hotel and motel rooms in the city of Morro Bay based on the best available information (e.g., as defined in the city's lower-cost visitor-serving accommodations technical memorandum, Smith Travel Research data, etc.), and must be greater than or equal to is one hundred twenty-five percent of the prior year's statewide average daily rate.

3. Required Low Cost Accommodations. Each development shall provide at least the number of low cost visitor overnight accommodations stated in subsection a below unless a reduction is approved pursuant to subsection b.

a. Number of Accommodations.

i. All removed low cost visitor overnight accommodations shall be replaced on at least a one-to-one ratio; and

ii. New low cost visitor overnight accommodations shall be provided on at least a rate of one new low cost accommodation for every four new high cost accommodations.

b. Reductions. The number of low cost accommodations to be provided may be waived or reduced taking into consideration the feasibility of the project and any additional amenities that would be provided to serve as a lower cost option for families. A request for a reduction in the number of low cost accommodations to be provided shall be accompanied by a feasibility study that explains why providing lower cost accommodations as part of the project is not feasible, whether the proposed project includes amenities that would serve as a lower/moderate cost option for families (e.g., additional beds per unit, suite facilities, kitchen facilities, etc. that should be understood as making the project a lower or moderate cost option), or has other specific factors that make the accommodations more accessible to the general population and serves to increase coastal public access. A request for reduction may also be granted based on other project factors as well, including distance from the shoreline and other visitor-serving amenities, and the amount of lower-cost accommodations in the city (e.g., if the number of low cost visitor overnight accommodations in the city is above the city's goal of fifty percent [i.e., when fifty percent or more of all visitor overnight accommodations in the city are low cost]). This explanation shall address the land value; development costs; a breakdown of the estimated annual revenues (including average daily rate and occupancy rates); operating costs; and any other information necessary to address the feasibility of providing lower cost accommodations on site. The feasibility study shall be prepared at the applicant's expense. A request for a reduction in the number of low cost accommodations is not allowed on state tidelands (e.g. the waterfront master plan overlay), nor is it allowed for any replacement accommodations specified in Section 17.14.040(C)(3)(a)(i).

4. Location. All required low cost accommodations shall be provided on the same lot as the associated visitor serving development except where it is not feasible to provide all lower cost accommodations as required on site and an equivalent combination of on site, off site, and payment of an in-lieu fee, in order of preference, is provided.

a. Off-Site Accommodations. Off-site accommodations shall be located within the city of Morro Bay and shall be completed and ready for use prior to occupancy of the new development.

b. In-Lieu Fee Program. Specific detailed information regarding calculation and use of any fees to be paid in lieu of providing lower cost visitor accommodations within the city shall be included as a condition of approval of the coastal development permit for the visitor accommodations. Fees shall be adequate to cover the cost of providing the equivalent number of required new low cost accommodations for which the CDP is issued (i.e., construction costs). Based on the Turner Construction Cost Index, construction cost per low cost unit in the first quarter of 2022 is one hundred thirty-three thousand dollars, not including land costs. All in-lieu fee payments shall be deposited into a fund established by the city which shall be in an interest-bearing account and shall only be used for the provision of new low cost overnight accommodations, within the city. Funds shall be used for activities that will result in additional low cost visitor accommodations, including, but not limited to, construction, renovation, and permitting costs. The specific low cost requirements for any project funded by the in-lieu fee program shall be determined through the CDP process of the in-lieu fee funded project.

5. Rate Control and Income Eligibility Requirements Prohibited. In no event shall required low cost accommodations be required to:

a. Provide overnight accommodation rental be fixed at an amount certain; or

b. Establish any method for the identification of low or moderate income persons for the purpose of determining eligibility for overnight accommodation rentals in any such facilities.

6. Monitoring of Low Cost Accommodations. The city shall monitor the number of low cost accommodations and report the status of the current number of low cost accommodations within the coastal zone within all staff reports containing visitor serving accommodations. This information shall be forwarded to the coastal commission prior to issuance of the coastal permit.

7. Restrictions to Protect Lower Cost Accommodations. Any project that is required to provide low cost accommodations shall be required to submit annual reporting to the city verifying retention of low cost accommodation.

8. Protection of Short-Term Vacation Rentals (Short-Term Lodging). Most short-term lodging units meet the low cost definition when maximum occupancy is taken into account. Short-term lodgings can accommodate more people than a typical hotel room. They also provide full-sized, equipped kitchens allowing families or larger groups to reduce the overall cost of a visit by allowing them to prepare meals as an alternative to dining out. The city shall continue to allow short-term lodgings in residential units as a means of providing lower cost overnight visitor accommodations while continuing to prevent conditions leading to increased demand for city services and adverse impacts in residential areas and coastal resources. Short-term rentals shall be subject to the standards in Section 17.30.220, Short-Term Vacation Rentals (IP).

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect and maintain the city's unique natural setting and character, to promote orderly development, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable LUP community design and visual resources and viewsheds policies. All standards within the LCP (including with respect to height, setbacks, density, coverage, etc.) shall be interpreted as maximums (or minimums) that shall be reduced (or increased as applicable) to protect and enhance such resources and meet LCP objectives to the maximum extent feasible. Development is subject to the development standards in the applicable zoning district and the following:

A. Design and Siting. Development shall be sited and designed to maintain public views and community character, including through quality design, architectural articulation (including varied offsets and projections), and quality exterior materials and landscaping that respect and emphasize the natural setting and surrounding built environment.

B. Coverage. Building and other site coverage shall be limited to the degree necessary to protect and maintain existing public views, maintain adequate open space to preserve small-scale visual landscapes, protect water quality (including by limiting impervious surfaces), and maintain community character, including thorough requirements for compact design, pervious materials, and maximized landscaping and open space. Utility and related infrastructure shall be sited underground if possible, and shall be screened from view and otherwise camouflaged if unavoidably sited above-ground.

C. Heights. Building and other structure heights shall be limited and upper-story step backs shall be provided to the degree necessary to maintain existing public views, pedestrian scale, and community character. All heights shall be reduced as necessary to ensure that existing blue water views from public vantage points are maintained.

D. Setbacks. Setbacks from streets and property lines shall be applied in a manner designed to maintain public views, maintain adequate open space to preserve small-scale visual landscapes and pedestrian scale, and maintain community character.

E. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking spaces shall be required in the number necessary to ensure that residential, customer, and employee parking needs are provided on-site and do not conflict with public parking needs, including for public coastal access. Factors to consider when determining off-street parking requirements include the size of the lot, proximity to the shoreline, and adequacy of public parking opportunities for public coastal access in the vicinity.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect and maintain agricultural land and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to LUP policies for agricultural uses and the following standards.

A. Prime Agricultural Land. It is the intent of the city that it shall maintain the maximum amount of prime agricultural land in agricultural production to assure the protection of the area's agricultural economy.

1. Special Restrictions on Nonagricultural Use of Prime Agricultural Land. The following special restrictions on uses shall apply to prime agricultural land:

a. Commercial Uses. Commercial recreation, visitor-serving commercial and general commercial uses shall be prohibited on prime agricultural lands.

b. Other Uses. All other uses which are conditionally permitted in the AG district may be permitted on prime agricultural lands only if the following findings are made:

i. No Alternative Building Site. That no alternative building site exists except on prime agricultural lands;

ii. Amount of Conversion Minimized. That the least amount of prime agricultural land possible will be converted to these conditionally permitted uses; and

iii. No Use Conflicts. That the conditionally permitted uses will further the continuance of agricultural production on site and will not conflict with surrounding agricultural land and uses.

B. Nonprime Agricultural Land. In addition, it is the city's intent that all nonprime agricultural land within the city suitable for agricultural use shall not be converted to nonagricultural uses unless:

1. Continued or renewed agricultural use is not feasible; or

2. Such conversion would preserve prime agricultural land or concentrate development consistent with Public Resources Code, Section 30250.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect the city's archaeological and historic resources, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable LUP cultural and historic resources policies and the following requirements.

A. Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to development within areas known to contain or suspected to contain cultural resources, including any parcel located within the coastal resource protection-cultural resource (CRP-CR) overlay district on the zoning map and any other parcel containing a known archaeological site recorded by the archaeological site survey office.

B. Requirements.

1. New Development. New development shall be sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to cultural, archaeological, and paleontological resources to the maximum extent feasible. If there is no feasible alternative that can eliminate all impacts to cultural, archaeological, and paleontological resources, then the alternative that would result in the fewest or least significant impacts shall be selected. Reasonable mitigation measures shall be required for proposed developments where impacts to cultural, archaeological, and paleontological resources cannot be avoided through siting and design alternatives.

2. Preliminary Site Survey Required. Before issuance of a land use or construction permit for development within the coastal resource protection-cultural resource (CRP-CR) overlay district, a preliminary site survey shall be required. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist knowledgeable in local Native American culture, paleontologist, or other qualified expert subject to the approval of the director. Any affected Native American tribes with cultural affiliation to the project site should be consulted during the preliminary site survey.

3. Mitigation Plan. If the preliminary site survey determines that proposed development may have an adverse impact on existing, known or suspected cultural resources and avoidance is infeasible, a plan for mitigation shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist, paleontologist, or other qualified expert subject to the approval of the director. The purpose of the plan is to protect the resource through construction activities, project redesign, or other actions to avoid (or mitigate if avoidance is not feasible) the impacts on the resource. Highest priority shall be given to avoiding disturbance of sensitive resources. Lower priority mitigation measures may include use of fill to cap the sensitive resources. As a last resort, the review authority may permit excavation and recovery of those resources. The mitigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the director, and considered in the evaluation of the development request by the review authority. Any affected Native American tribes associated with cultural affiliation to the project site shall be consulted in the development of the mitigation plan and during its implementation.

4. Archaeological Resources Discovery. In the event archaeological resources are unearthed or discovered during any construction activities, the following standards shall apply.

a. Construction activities shall cease, and the community development department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law.

b. In the event archeological resources are found to include human remains, or in any other case when human remains are discovered during construction, the county coroner is to be notified in addition to the community development department so that proper disposition may be accomplished.

c. Construction activities shall not commence until a mitigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional archaeologist reviewed and approved by the director, is completed and implemented. if applicable, the director shall provide pertinent project information to the affected Native American tribe(s) and consider comments prior to approval of the mitigation plan and continue consulting with affected Native American tribes during plan implementation. The mitigation plan shall include measures to avoid the resources to the maximum degree feasible and shall provide mitigation for unavoidable impacts. A report verifying that the approved mitigation plan has been completed shall be submitted to the director prior to occupancy or final inspection, whichever occurs first.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect biological resources in the city's coastal zone, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable land use plan biological communities and/or environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) policies and standards and the following requirements.

A. Purpose. The coastal resource protection-environmentally sensitive habitat (CRP-ESH) overlay district is intended to:

1. Protect environmentally sensitive habitat areas against any significant disruption of habitat values.

2. Maintain and, where feasible, restore the biological productivity and the overall quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes.

3. Protect wetlands for their water quality and habitat value.

B. Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to development within areas known to contain or are suspected of containing sensitive habitat, including:

1. Areas located within or within one hundred feet of an environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) indicated in Figure C-2, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, of the land use plan, or in the city of Morro Bay ESHA review and current conditions mapping report; or

2. Areas containing or located within one hundred feet of a habitat area where there is evidence of the presence of an ESHA, wetland, or other sensitive habitat.

C. Initial Site Resource Survey.

1. An initial site resource survey, prepared within one year of permit application, is required for all coastal development permit applications.

2. The initial site resource survey shall identify the presence or potential for wetlands or sensitive habitat, vegetation, or wildlife species on the site. If the site contains the potential for monarch overwintering or rookeries due to the presence of appropriately sized trees and groves, a seasonally timed survey appropriate for detecting the target species shall be included in the study.

D. Biological Site Assessment.

1. Biological Site Assessment Required. If the initial site resources survey indicates the presence or potential for sensitive habitat vegetation or wildlife species on the site, a biological site assessment report shall be prepared with recommendations as to whether a habitat area constitutes an ESHA.

a. Evaluation. The report shall include a site-specific survey, prepared within one year of completion of the report, and shall evaluate the following attributes when recommending whether a habitat area constitutes an ESHA:

i. The presence of natural communities that have been identified as rare by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

ii. The recorded or potential presence of plant or animal species designated as rare, threatened, or endangered under state or federal law.

iii. The presence or potential presence of plant or animal species that are not listed under state or federal law, but for which there is other compelling evidence of rarity, such as designation as a 1B or 2 species by the California Native Plant Society.

iv. The presence of coastal streams.

v. The degree of habitat integrity and connectivity to other natural areas.

b. Contents. The assessment shall be prepared by a qualified biologist approved by the city and shall, at minimum:

i. Identify and confirm the extent of the ESHA;

ii. Document any site constraints and the presence of sensitive plant or animal species;

iii. Recommend buffers and development setbacks and standards to protect the ESHA;

iv. Recommend mitigation measures to address any allowable impacts; and

v. Include any other information and analyses necessary to understand potential ESHA impacts as well as measures necessary to protect the resource as required by the local coastal program.

vi. Dune ESHA. For all new development within dune ESHA that could impact dune ESHA, and in addition to the biological assessment described above, a qualified, city-approved biologist shall prepare a dune stabilization and/or restoration plan. The dune stabilization/restoration plan shall include, at minimum:

(1) The removal of all nonnative and invasive plants species;

(2) Revegetation with native plant species, including rare and/or endangered species;

(3) Maintenance and monitoring requirements;

(4) Methods for directing public access; and

(5) A schedule for plant establishment including targets for plant variation and density, contingency measures, and reporting.

(6) The dune stabilization/restoration plan shall prohibit the use of any nonnative plant species and shall require that all nonnative species be removed and not allowed to persist. Initiation of restoration activities shall be required prior to occupancy/use of any allowable new development.

E. Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas.

1. ESHA Designation. Any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments shall be designated as an ESHA except existing developed areas.

2. Protection Required. ESHAs shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources shall be allowed. Development in areas adjacent to ESHAs shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade such areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of the ESHA.

3. ESHA Buffers. A protective open space buffer shall be required to horizontally separate ESHA from development areas and provide distance and physical barriers to human and domestic pet intrusion.

a. Size. ESHA buffers shall be of a sufficient size to ensure the biological integrity and preservation of the habitat they are designed to protect. Wetlands shall have a minimum buffer width of one hundred feet, measured from the outer edge of the wetland. For rivers, streams, and riparian areas, the required buffer shall extend at least fifty feet from the outer edge of the riparian vegetation on both sides of the river, stream, and/or riparian area or fifty feet itself (measured perpendicularly from the top of the river, stream, or measure from riparian area bank for areas without riparian direction of the vegetation). All other ESHA shall have a minimum buffer width of fifty feet, measured from the outer edge of the ESHA.

i. Exceptions: Smaller buffers may be allowed pursuant to LUP policies C-1.5 and C-1.6 and only where it can be demonstrated that:

(1) The required minimum buffer is not possible due to site-specific constraints, the site is unusable for the principal purpose if the buffer is not reduced, and the reduction is the minimum necessary that allows the use after all practical design modifications are evaluated;

(2) The proposed narrower buffer would be protective of the biological integrity of the ESHA given the site-specific characteristics of the resource and of the type and intensity of disturbance; and

(3) For wetland buffers, the project is separated from the wetland by topography.

ii. Additional Requirements. Where smaller buffers are allowed, the following additional requirements apply:

(1) Site drainage shall be evaluated to ensure development does not cut off hydrology.

(2) Stormwater from the development shall be managed such that it does not contribute sediment or pollutants into the ESHA.

(3) Native vegetation shall be planted between the ESHA and the development.

b. Vegetation.

i. ESHA buffers shall be maintained exclusively with native vegetation to serve as transitional habitat.

ii. Fuel modification zones shall be maintained outside of ESHA buffers.

iii. Invasive plant species shall be prohibited.

4. Design and Siting. Development outside, but within one hundred feet of, an ESHA shall incorporate the following design and site characteristics:

a. Development adjacent to an ESHA shall be designed and sited to protect ESHA resources against any significant disruption of habitat values.

b. Development adjacent to an ESHA shall be compatible with the continuance of ESHA habitat areas.

c. Development adjacent to an ESHA shall be limited to low-impact land uses, such as open space and passive recreation whenever feasible.

d. Development shall not necessitate fuel modification in an ESHA or ESHA buffer.

e. Development lighting adjacent to an ESHA shall minimize impacts to wildlife.

i. All outdoor lighting fixtures shall be designed, shielded, aimed, located, and maintained to direct lighting away from environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and ESHA buffers and to minimize glare, sky glow, and light trespass.

ii. Buildings shall be designed to minimize light trespass from interior lighting.

iii. All lighting shall utilize the best available "dark sky" practices, including the use of lights with the lowest intensity possible for safety purposes and that utilize wavelengths that are the most environmentally protective of organisms active at night and dawn and dusk.

f. Unauthorized structures that impact, or encroach into, ESHA or ESHA buffer shall be removed.

5. Limits on Land Uses. ESHA shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values. Uses within ESHA shall be limited to only those uses that are dependent on those resources. Limited public access improvements (e.g., hiking and educational trails and low-impact camping), minor educational, interpretative and research activities and development, and habitat restoration projects may be considered resource-dependent uses. Measures, including, but not limited to, trail creation, signage, placement of boardwalks, and fencing, shall be implemented as necessary to protect ESHA.

6. Required Findings. No development shall be allowed in an ESHA or ESHA buffer area unless the following findings are made:

a. The resource as identified will not be significantly degraded or disrupted by the proposed development and the development will be compatible with the continuance of the resource.

b. There is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative.

c. All feasible mitigation measures capable of reducing or eliminating project-related impacts have been adopted.

F. Wetlands, Deepwater Areas, and Other Water Areas.

1. Protection Required.

a. The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes shall be protected, maintained and, where feasible, restored.

b. All uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in a manner that will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and that will maintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes.

c. Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and, where feasible, restored.

d. Special protection shall be provided to marine resource areas and species of special biological or economic significance.

2. Channelizations. Channelizations, dams, or other substantial alterations of rivers and streams shall incorporate the best mitigation measures feasible, and be limited to:

a. Necessary water supply projects.

b. Flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing structures in the floodplain is feasible and where such protection is necessary for public safety or to protect existing development.

c. Developments where the primary function is the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat.

3. Removal of Unauthorized Structures. All unauthorized structures that impact, or encroach into, wetlands, deepwater areas, or other water areas shall be removed.

4. Diking, Filling, and Dredging Projects.

a. Limits on Development. Development involving the diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, or estuaries shall only be permitted consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act and under the following circumstances:

i. Only if there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative.

ii. If there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative, mitigation measures shall be provided to minimize adverse environmental effects.

iii. Diking, filling, or dredging projects shall sustain the functional capacity of the wetland, or estuary. In order to establish that the functional capacity is being maintained, the applicant must demonstrate all of the following:

(1) That the project does not alter presently occurring plant and animal populations in the ecosystem in a manner that would impair the long-term stability of the ecosystem; i.e., natural species diversity, abundance, and composition are essentially unchanged as a result of the project.

(2) That the project does not harm or destroy a species or habitat that is rare or endangered.

(3) That the project does not harm a species or habitat that is essential to the natural biological functioning of the wetland or estuary.

(4) That the project does not significantly reduce consumptive (e.g., fishing, aquaculture and hunting) or nonconsumptive (e.g., water quality and research opportunity) values of the wetland or estuarine ecosystem.

b. Limits on Uses. Development involving diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, and estuaries shall be limited to the following:

i. Construction or expansion of port/marine facilities.

ii. Construction or expansion of coastal-dependent industrial facilities, including commercial fishing facilities, and commercial ferry facilities.

iii. In open coastal waters, including estuaries and streams, new or expanded boating facilities, including docks, slips, access ramps, piers, marinas, recreational boating, launching ramps, and pleasure ferries, and the placement of structural pilings for public recreational piers that provide public access and recreational opportunities.

iv. Maintenance of existing and restoration of previously dredged depths in navigational channels, turning basins, vessel berthing, anchorage, and mooring areas, and boat launching ramps.

v. Incidental public service purposes which temporarily impact the resources of the area, such as burying cables and pipes, inspection of piers, and maintenance of existing intake and outfall lines.

vi. Sand extraction for restoring beaches, except in environmentally sensitive areas.

vii. Restoration purposes.

viii. Nature study, aquaculture, or similar resource-dependent activities.

c. Dredged Material Disposal.

i. Dredged material disposal shall be planned and carried out to limit turbidity and to avoid significant disruption to marine and wildlife habitats and water circulation.

ii. Dredged material suitable for beneficial reuse shall be transported for such purposes to appropriate areas and placed in a manner that minimizes adverse effects on the environment.

iii. Dredged material suitable for beach replenishment should be transported for such purposes to appropriate beaches or into suitable longshore current systems.

G. Coastal Dunes.

1. Purpose. This section provides requirements for development in areas with or adjacent to coastal dunes. The intent of this section is to protect coastal dunes as natural habitats and for shoreline protection.

2. Applicability. The requirements of this section shall apply to development in areas with coastal dune habitats.

3. Earthmoving. Earthmoving of beach sand in dune habitat areas shall be limited to dune restoration projects necessary for the protection of coastal resources and existing development.

4. Public Access and Recreation. Public beach access improvements shall be designed, sited, and maintained in a manner to avoid impacts to dune habitats through the use of well-defined footpaths, boardwalks, protective fencing, signage, and similar methods. Recreation improvements shall be designed and sited to avoid dune habitat areas.

5. Restoration of Native Vegetation. Plant materials in coastal dune habitat areas shall be restricted to native plant species appropriate to the habitat type.

H. Mitigation and Monitoring.

1. When Required. Mitigation and monitoring programs, including restoration plans and management programs, are required to minimize adverse impacts to sensitive habitat.

a. ESHA. Mitigation shall be required for allowable impacts to ESHA and other sensitive resources that cannot be avoided through the implementation of siting and design alternatives. Mitigation shall not substitute for implementation of the project alternative that would avoid impacts to ESHA.

b. Wetlands. Feasible mitigation measures shall be required to minimize adverse environmental effects of diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes where the proposed use is consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act and there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative.

2. Mitigation Programs. Mitigation programs shall include the following components:

a. Specific mitigation objectives and performance standards designed to measure the success of the restoration and/or enhancement.

b. Provisions for acquiring title or other property interest to the mitigation site.

c. Provisions for the dedication of the restored or created habitat or wetland and associated buffer areas to a public agency or nonprofit entity acceptable to the reviewing authority, or permanent restriction of their use to open space purposes.

d. A monitoring and management program with mitigation objectives and performance standards.

e. Additional Components for Open Coastal Waters, Wetlands, Estuaries, and Streams.

i. Wildlife Contingency Plan. A marine wildlife contingency plan (Plan) shall be developed and approved by the community development director prior to the initiation of any pile driving activities. That plan shall describe specific methods that will be used to reduce pile-driving noise and comply with the standards of this section. Power to the pile driver shall be ramped up to allow marine wildlife to detect a lower sound level and depart the area before full-power noise levels are produced. The plan shall identify a US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)-approved biologist to monitor noise-generating construction within the water-lease area who shall be retained by the applicant. The plan shall describe on-site marine wildlife monitoring and reporting requirements, as well as identify specific conditions when the biological monitor shall be allowed to stop work, such as observance of a marine mammal within one hundred feet of the project area. The biologist shall be responsible to monitor for compliance with all environmental mitigation measures, and regulatory permit conditions (as applicable). The approved biological monitor shall be present onsite during construction and shall have the authority to stop construction if any individuals of southern sea otter are seen within one hundred feet of the project area. Construction will be allowed to resume after sighted otters have left the one hundred-foot radius of the project area or are deemed not in distress by the project biologist on a case by case basis. The species shall not be disturbed or forced from the project site by equipment, noise, or other disruptive activity. The monitor will have discretionary authority to temporarily halt the project if it is determined any otter, or other marine mammal, could be affected by the project, even if the animal is beyond the one hundred-foot boundary. All construction crew employees shall be informed on the requirements of this condition.

ii. Oil Spill Response and Recovery Plan. A project-specific oil spill response and recovery plan that includes specifics on reporting and response procedures, available on-site equipment and contracted services, and responsibilities shall be completed and approved prior to the initiation of construction activities. Specifically, the project shall include the following best management practices (BMPs) and shall be included on building plans submitted for approval:

(1) No refueling of equipment without adequate containment and spill response equipment. The barge shall have only double contained fuel storage below decks, with the spill containment and clean up kits on-site and easily accessible. Spill containment and clean up kits shall include the following:

(a) One hundred fifty feet absorbent boom two hundred square feet absorbent tarp (for use during pile driving operations).

(b) Barrel absorbent pads.

(c) Container absorbent granules.

(2) Rainwater runoff pollution from equipment stored on deck shall be prevented through ongoing equipment maintenance and appropriate double containment.

(3) The work area shall be contained within a boom to prevent debris from falling into the water.

(4) All equipment fueling shall take place on the barge, with containment in-place. No refueling between vessels shall occur.

(5) An absorption tarp shall be placed underneath any portable equipment while in use.

(6) No equipment shall be permitted to enter the water with any petroleum products.

(7) All equipment used during pile driving operations shall be in good condition without fuel or oil leakage.

(8) Should any equipment begin to leak, that equipment shall be removed immediately from the barge and repaired or replaced.

(9) All vessels shall have portable, regularly serviced sanitation equipment. No overboard discharge is permitted.

iii. Pre- and Post-construction Surveys. Applicants shall be subject to the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (CEMP) which requires a pre-construction survey shall be completed within thirty—sixty days prior to issuance of a building permit unless otherwise waived under the Army Corps permitting requirements. Post-construction survey, if required by the CEMP, shall be completed within thirty days of construction completion or as otherwise determined by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in order to determine amount of impact if any and CEMP-required annual reporting and mitigations. Any change in eelgrass extent shall be documented and reported to the community development director. If the report identifies a reduction in eelgrass coverage then a plan shall be prepared to identify the appropriate mitigations necessary and in line with the specifications for mitigation of eelgrass habitat as provided for in the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy, dated October 2014, or successor document.

iv. Noise Mitigation Plan. Vibratory hammers shall be used for pile driving activities where feasible. In the instance anything other than a vibratory hammer is to be used for pile driving activities, a pile driving plan and hydro-acoustical noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the community development director prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that underwater noise generated by pile driving activities is minimized to the maximum extent feasible and does not exceed: (i) an accumulated one hundred eighty seven dB SEL as measured five meters from the source; and (ii) peak dB above two hundred eight dB as measured ten meters from the source as determined by the Fisheries Hydroacoustic Working Group. The plan shall provide for a hydro-acoustical monitor to ensure that underwater noise generated by pile driving activities does not exceed such limits. The plan shall identify the type of method used to install pilings. A bubble curtain shall be employed to contain both noise and sediment. The plan shall also provide for additional acoustical BMPs to be applied if monitoring shows underwater noise above such limits (including, but not limited to, alternative pile driving methods (press-in pile placement, drilling, dewatered isolation casings, etc.) and additional noise dampening measures (sound shielding and other noise attenuation devices).

v. Netting or fencing around and underneath the project site shall be installed to catch and remove debris released during and after construction.

vi. To reduce potential turbidity-associated impacts, silt screens should be used when and where they will be effective. The relatively high tidal currents within Morro Bay could reduce the effectiveness of silt screens and should be considered prior to placing of these screens.

3. Habitat Creation/Restoration.

a. ESHA. Mitigation for impacts to ESHA and other sensitive resources shall be in the form of habitat creation or substantial restoration. The mitigation shall occur on site wherever possible. Off-site mitigation measures shall only be approved when it is not feasible to fully mitigate impacts on site.

b. Wetlands. Mitigation shall occur in the same watershed and in the form of in-kind wetland restoration or creation whenever possible. Where out-of-kind mitigation is necessary, restoration or creation of wetlands shall be of equal or greater biological productivity to the wetland that was filled or dredged. Mitigation may also be permitted in the form of restoration that includes opening equivalent areas to tidal action or providing other sources of surface water.

4. Mitigation Ratios. Adverse impacts shall be mitigated at a ratio necessary to achieve the specific mitigation objectives and performance standards identified in the mitigation and monitoring program and approved by the review authority.

5. Restoration Plans. A restoration and management plan shall be submitted. Restoration plans shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified professional prior to accepting sites for mitigation.

6. Timing. Restoration/mitigation shall occur before or simultaneously with construction of the approved development.

a. Any off-site mitigation site shall be purchased and legally restricted and/or dedicated before impacts to the development site can proceed.

7. In-Lieu Fee for Wetland and/or Eelgrass Impacts. An in-lieu fee may be paid to an appropriate public agency to mitigate wetland and/or eelgrass impacts, if no appropriate mitigation site can be acquired. Payment of an in-lieu fee would only be an option if an applicant is unable to find a potential restoration site. The fee shall be based on the following factors:

a. The habitat type.

b. The costs of acquisition.

c. The cost per acre to restore or create a comparable wetland within the region where the impact occurred.

d. The acreage of the habitat affected, based on the final approved project.

8. Monitoring. Monitoring of mitigation measures shall be for a period of sufficient time to determine if mitigation objectives and performance standards are being met. Midcourse corrections shall be implemented if necessary to meet the objectives or performance standards.

a. Period. Monitoring shall be conducted a period of not less than five years following completion, unless the director determines that a longer mitigation monitoring schedule is appropriate. If performance standards are not met by the specified monitoring period, the monitoring period shall be extended until the standards are met or the applicant shall submit an amendment application proposing alternative mitigation measures and implement the approved changes.

b. Reports. Monitoring reports that document the success or failure of the mitigation shall be provided to the department annually and at the conclusion of the monitoring period.

c. Completion. The restoration shall be considered successful after the success criteria have been met for a period of at least three years with no remediation or maintenance activities other than weeding.

9. Easements and Dedications. Where on-site or off-site preservation of an ESHA, wetland, stream, or mitigation area and buffers to each are required as a condition of approval of a coastal development permit or other authorization, a guarantee of protection through direct dedication, offer to dedicate, or conservation easement shall be required. The protection guarantee shall identify the precise location and area to be set aside for preservation along with evidence of the legal ability over that area to restrict that area and/or convey a property interest in that area.

a. Timing. Prior to the approval of a coastal development permit, the method and form of the protection guarantee shall be approved by city attorney. The protection guarantee shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder prior to the issuance of a building permit.

b. Management and Funding. A management plan and funding plan shall be required to ensure appropriate management of the habitat area in perpetuity.

c. Method of Protection Guarantee. A method of access guarantee shall be chosen according to the following criteria:

i. Deed Restriction. A deed restriction shall be used only where an owner, association or corporation agrees to assume responsibility for maintenance of and liability for the habitat area, subject to approval by the reviewing authority.

ii. Grant of Fee Interest or Easement. A grant of fee interest or easement shall be used when a public agency or private organization approved by the reviewing authority is willing to assume ownership, maintenance and liability for the habitat.

iii. Offer of Dedication. An offer of dedication shall be used when no public agency, private organization or individual is willing to accept fee interest or easement for habitat maintenance and liability. These offers shall not be accepted until maintenance responsibility and liability is established.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to enhance public views and the scenic qualities of the city's coastal zone, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable land use plan visual resources and viewsheds policies and the following requirements.

A. Site-Specific Visual Analysis. The following documentation and requirements shall be provided for all CDP applications within scenic areas, including those described in Figures C-6 and C-7 of the LUP and any other development that may adversely impact public views:

1. A site plan that identifies all public view corridors and pictures of existing public views of and including the project site from public viewing areas, including all before and after public views of and towards the ocean.

2. Project plans that confirm height is within the requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. Exceptions are allowed only for chimneys, vents, and similar vertical extensions, not to exceed an additional four feet, and not to comprise more than five percent of a building's roof area. In all cases, heights may be further limited in order to meet LCP scenic resource protection requirements.

3. When trees defined as major vegetation are proposed for removal, ribbons, or other method of identification showing the location of trees proposed for removal, must be installed.

4. Illustration showing the colors, textures, and architectural styles to show the exterior façades are compatible with development on adjacent blocks and the city's overall architectural character and do not cause the project to stand out from surrounding built and natural features.

5. Any other information deemed necessary to determine the visual impact of the proposed project, including but not limited to analysis of the heights of existing buildings within one hundred fifty feet of the proposed structure; story poles and netting showing proposed ridgelines; and visual simulations to help identify potential visual impacts.

B. Exterior Lighting. Where exterior lighting is proposed, a plan showing the location, types, and intensity of the proposed lights is required. At a minimum, the exterior lighting plan must include the following:

1. Lighting that is designed to minimize light spill into natural areas by using cut-off fixtures, directing light to the ground, and not flooding the site with light.

2. Lighting that is minimally visible from coastal beaches and bluffs, and off-shore locations.

3. Lighting that uses cut-off, shielded, or downward fixtures (i.e., the bulb is not directly visible) and is between 2600 and 3500 Kelvin and has a CRI of eighty-five or greater.

4. Lighting that does not blink or flash unless required for navigation, safety, or similar purposes.

5. Unless shielded from the coast by buildings or vegetation, trail lighting that is mounted on bollards no greater than 4 feet tall and with the lighting shielded from the coast.

6. Anti-reflective window glazing, awnings, or other anti-glare methods on south- and west-facing elevations and those elevations visible from public view points.

C. Landscaping. Development shall minimize the removal of existing native vegetation, and shall provide for landscaping improvements that include removal of non-native and/or invasive species, and plantings of noninvasive native plants in a manner sited and designed to enhance coastal habitats and public views.

1. Landscaping Plan. For projects that include landscaping that may impact public views, a plan showing the type, location, and mature height of all trees and shrubs shall be required. At a minimum, the landscaping plan must include vegetation types and maintenance provisions that ensure, during both the growing stage and at maturity, plantings will not significantly encroach into a public view corridor or significantly obstruct public views to and of the ocean and shoreline areas.

D. Ancillary and other Structures. Ancillary and other structures shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

1. Fencing and Hedges. Fencing and hedges shall be minimized to avoid negative impacts to public views (particularly blue water views) from roads, sidewalks, and other public viewing areas.

2. Public Utilities. Public utilities shall be placed underground whenever feasible. When underground installation is infeasible, utilities shall be placed outside of public view and/or appropriately screened with landscaping when feasible.

3. Telecommunication Facilities. Telecommunication facilities shall be sited and designed to avoid adverse impact coastal views, and alternatives shall be considered and required where such impacts can be avoided. Unless inconsistent with federal telecommunications law, such facilities shall not be allowed in agricultural lands, in EHSA/wetlands and other sensitive habitats, or in the waterfront district. Undergrounding of such facilities shall be required whenever feasible. If undergrounding of such facilities is not feasible, co-location of such facilities shall be encouraged and screening shall be required when feasible.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect life, property, and coastal resources from coastal hazards, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use Plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable land use plan coastal hazards policies and the following requirements.

A. Hazards Evaluation Report.

1. Initial Site Assessment. The director shall conduct an initial site assessment screening of all permit applications to determine whether the site is or will be subject to geologic or other hazards over a timeframe of a minimum of one hundred years. Geological or other hazards are defined to include:

a. Earthquake hazard zones;

b. Areas subject to tsunami runup or episodic and long-term shoreline retreat (including beach or bluff erosion) including as related to sea level rise;

c. Unstable slopes and areas with moderate or greater landslide or liquefaction potential; and

d. Flood hazard areas, including those areas potentially inundated by future sea level rise.

e. The screening shall include a review of reports, resource maps, aerial photographs, site inspection, and the city's hazards maps. Absence of mapping shall not alone be considered absence of hazard, and local site conditions shall be examined at the time of permit application using the best available science.

2. Hazards Report. Where the initial site assessment reveals that the proposed development is located in potential coastal hazards areas mapped in Figures PS-7 and PS-8 of the LUP, within the coastal resource protection-sea level rise (CRP-SLR) overlay district, or in or within one hundred feet of an area potentially subject to geologic or other hazards over the one hundred-year assessment time frame, a hazards report consistent with LUP coastal hazards policies shall be prepared. The hazards report shall at a minimum provide for:

a. Purpose. The report shall be prepared by a qualified geologist/engineer and shall identify the potential impacts of erosion, episodic and long-term shoreline retreat, flooding, inundation, storm waves, high seas, tidal scour, and tsunamis, including in relation to sea level rise, over the life of the development. The report shall recommend any mitigation measures or modifications to the project that are needed to ensure that the project is consistent with all applicable land use plan coastal hazards policies.

b. Content. The report shall, at a minimum, contain the following sections:

i. Summary.

ii. Geology of the project area.

iii. Wave, tide, and current trends.

iv. Erosion trends and episodes in project area.

v. Seasonal beach profiles and trends.

vi. Impacts from coastal hazards on the proposed project.

vii. Description of project alternatives to avoid/minimize coastal hazard impacts.

viii. Mitigation of coastal hazard impacts.

ix. Conclusions and recommendations

x. Coordination with other agencies, groups, or consultants.

xi. Report preparer's qualifications.

xii. References.

c. Coastal Hazards Analysis. The report shall at a minimum document the following:

i. Regional and local geologic setting, including topography, natural landforms, soil/rock types, thickness of soil or depth to bedrock, and other relevant properties such as erosion potential.

ii. Information about potential coastal hazards at the site, including normal and maximum tidal surges, wave conditions (including maximum expected wave height and frequency/magnitude of wave/tidal surge), storm conditions (including storm waves from a one hundred-year event or a storm that compares to the 1982/83 El Niño event).

iii. Long-term average annual erosion rates, based on photogrammetric analysis, LiDAR data, and peer reviewed studies and reports, etc., quantified in distance per year (e.g., six" per year). The long-term average annual erosion rate should be broken down separately for any differing geologic units (e.g., erosion for the upper bluff terrace deposits may differ from erosion for a harder lower bluff substrate) to the extent that these long-term rates differ.

iv. Episodic or rapid erosion, based on recent observations from the project site or nearby areas of comparable geology.

v. Ground and surface water conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes caused by the development (e.g., introduction of sewage effluent and irrigation water to the groundwater system, and alterations in surface drainage).

vi. For coastal bluffs, quantitative slope stability analyses (including a description of the factors of safety for the site and structures on it, and a breakdowns, as appropriate, for the factors of safety applying to the full bluff profile.

vii. Expectations for the near-term (three to five years) changes to the site, considering current erosion and related conditions (including wave and storm conditions).

viii. Expectations for longer term changes, including the effects of sea level rise.

ix. Effect of the proposed development (including siting and design of structures, septic system, landscaping, drainage, and grading) and impacts of construction activity on the stability of the site and the adjacent area.

d. Mitigation of Coastal Hazards Analysis. The report shall include a detailed analysis of alternative options to avoid identified erosion/site stability hazards, including non-armoring alternatives. At a minimum the analysis shall include:

i. Evaluation of alternatives including avoiding proposed development; relocation of any threatened structures, including an analysis of any technical feasibility questions and an estimate of expected costs to be borne by the property owner to relocate; partial removal of threatened elements, again with a clear analysis and estimate of how this would be accomplished; and site drainage controls and native plant revegetation.

ii. Expectations on the degree of protection for each alternative must be provided, including an estimate of the number of years of stability provided to the structure or development being protected (absent additional armoring or other measures) associated with each option.

iii. A combination of different alternatives should be considered when appropriate, such as for example, vegetation, surface water controls and periodic nourishment; or the use of incremental responses tied to identified triggers.

B. Coastal Hazard Risks Acknowledged. Coastal hazard risks shall be acknowledged by deed restriction for all development that at some point during its lifetime may be subject to coastal hazards consistent with LUP coastal hazards policies (e.g., Policy PS-3.6).

C. Shoreline Development.

1. Purpose. This section provides standards for development proposed on lots that border the ocean or bay, where careful design and development practices are necessary to preserve significant coastline features, implement applicable provisions of the general plan and local coastal program, and comply with the Coastal Act.

2. Applicability. This section applies to all development, including expansion of existing uses, proposed to be located on or adjacent to a beach or coastal bluff, except in the Embarcadero as provided in paragraph b. Embarcadero, below.

a. Coastal Bluff. A landform that includes a scarp or steep face of rock adjacent to the bay or ocean and meeting one of two parameters:

i. The toe is now or was historically (generally within the last two hundred years) subject to marine erosion.

ii. The toe of which lies within an area otherwise identified in Public Resources Code Section 30603(a)(1) or (a)(2).

b. Embarcadero. The provisions of this subsection 17.14.100 C. shoreline development, do not apply to development in the Embarcadero as specified in LUP Policy LU-8.7.

3. Geologic Report. Permit applications for development or expansion of existing uses proposed to be developed on or adjacent to a beach or coastal bluff shall include a geologic report prepared by a licensed engineering geologist or a professional civil engineer with expertise in soils and foundation engineering, or a registered geologist with a background in engineering applications. Such report shall include a scaled map showing location of the bluff edge, the toe of the bluff, and other significant geologic features by distance from readily identified fixed monuments such as the property line, centerline of the road nearest the bluff, or inside of curb face. The report shall include an analysis of beach erosion, wave run-up, inundation and flood hazards, including those due to sea-level rise; and consider, describe, and analyze the following:

a. The impact of construction activity on the stability of the site and adjacent area;

b. Bluff geometry and site topography, extending the surveying work beyond the site as needed to depict unusual geomorphic conditions that might affect the site;

c. Historic, current, and foreseeable bluff and shoreline erosion and possible changes in shore configuration and sand transport;

d. Geologic conditions, including soil, sediment, and rock types and characteristics, in addition to structural features such as bedding, joints and faults;

e. Evidence of past or potential landslide conditions, the implications of such condition for the proposed development, and the potential effects of the development on landslide activity;

f. Ground and surface water conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes caused by the development;

g. Potential erosion of the site and mitigation measures to be used to ensure minimized erosion problems before and after construction (i.e., landscape and drainage design);

h. Effects of marine erosion on coastal bluffs;

i. Potential effects of seismic forces resulting from a maximum credible earthquake;

j. Any other factor that might affect slope or bluff stability;

k. A tsunami hazard assessment, including sea-level rise and tsunami wave runup calculations;

l. Evaluation of off-site impacts of development (e.g., development contributing to geological instability) and the additional impacts that might occur due to the proposed development (e.g., increased erosion along a footpath).

m. An evaluation of whether the development, as proposed or modified, could be safely established on the property for a one hundred-year period without a shoreline protective device and without taking into account the effect of any existing shoreline protective device;

n. Measures to mitigate potential impacts; and

o. Other matters as determined relevant to the property by the report preparer or city engineer.

4. Coastal Bluff Face Development. No development shall be permitted on a coastal bluff face, except for engineered staircases or accessways to provide public beach access and pipelines for scientific research or coastal-dependent industry. Drainpipes shall only be allowed where no other less environmentally damaging drain system is feasible and the drainpipes are designed and placed to minimize impacts to the coastal bluff face, toe, and beach. Drainage devices extending over the coastal bluff face shall not be permitted if the property can be drained away from the coastal bluff face.

5. Structures on the Beach. No permanent structure shall be permitted on a dry, sandy beach except a facility necessary for public health and safety, such as lifeguard towers, and recreation facilities, such as beach volleyball courts.

6. Setbacks. Proposed development must be set back from the top of the coastal bluff, as provided by this subsection. Additional setbacks may be required to accommodate public access in compliance with Section 17.14.110, Coastal Access.

a. Coastal Bluff Setback Requirements. New development must be set back equal to a sufficient setback to maintain a minimum factor of safety of at least one and one-half for a minimum of one hundred years based on a site-specific geological or geotechnical engineering study. In no case shall the minimum setback be less than twenty feet from the coastal bluff edge.

i. No development, except pathways, stairways, fencing, signage, and other features associated with a public accessway or a necessary pipeline associated with a public facility, will be permitted within the bluff retreat setback identified in site-specific geologic reports.

b. Non-Bluff Coastline Setbacks. Structures proposed within five hundred feet of the mean high tide line in areas that lack coastal bluffs, shall be set back equal to a sufficient setback so the proposed structure would not be expected to be subject to shoreline erosion or other hazards for the structure's lifetime or for fifty years, whichever is greater, based on a site-specific shoreline erosion rate and shoreline hazards study. In no case shall the minimum setback be less than twenty feet from the coastline or property line adjacent to the ocean or bay, whichever results in a greater setback.

c. Landscaping. Drought-tolerant landscaping shall be installed and maintained in the required setback.

7. Erosion Control. Proposed development must be designed and constructed to incorporate appropriate erosion-control measures, consistent with the city's grading standards.

8. Shoreline Protection Restrictions. Development shall be sited and developed to be safe from coastal bluff retreat, waves, or flood hazards without the use of any shoreline protective device. Existing and new shoreline protection devices shall be consistent with LUP coastal hazards policies.

a. All permits for development on coastal blufftop or shoreline lots that do not have a legally established shoreline protection structure shall have conditions of approval requiring that prior to issuance of any grading or construction permits, the property owner record a deed restriction against the property to ensure that no shoreline protection structure will be proposed or constructed to protect the development, and expressly waiving any future right to construct such devices.

b. Proposed development shall not be approved where the review authority determines that shoreline protective structures will be necessary to protect it at any point in the development's lifetime.

c. A shoreline protective structure may be allowed where consistent with LUP policies with conditional use permit and coastal development permit approval, only when the approval body makes the following findings:

i. The shoreline protective structure is consistent with all applicable LUP policies;

ii. Non-structured alternatives to the protective devices have failed;

iii. The shoreline protective structure is located to avoid significant rocky points and intertidal areas;

iv. The shoreline protective structure proposed is the least environmentally damaging, feasible alternative;

v. The shoreline protection structure is designed to maintain lateral beach access, where feasible; and

vi. The shoreline protection structure is designed to respect natural land forms and minimize visual impact to the extent possible, through means including the use of visually compatible colors and materials.

vii. New shoreline protective devices shall be sited and designed to avoid coastal resource impacts to the maximum extent feasible through: eliminating or mitigating all adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply (including sand and beach area that are lost through the shoreline protective device's physical encroachment on a beach, fixing of the back beach, and prevention of new beach formation in areas where the bluff/shoreline would have otherwise naturally migrated, and the loss of sand-generating bluff/shoreline materials that would have entered the sand supply system absent the device); protecting and enhancing public recreational access; protecting and enhancing public views; minimizing alteration of, and being visually subordinate to, the natural character of the shoreline; avoiding impacts to archeological resources; and protecting other coastal resources as much as possible. Shoreline protective devices shall be required to mitigate impacts to shoreline sand supply, public access and recreation, and any other relevant coastal resource impacts in twenty-year increments, starting with the building permit completion certification date. Permittees shall apply for a coastal permit amendment prior to expiration of each twenty-year mitigation period, proposing mitigation for coastal resource impacts associated with retention of the shoreline protective device beyond the preceding twenty-year mitigation period, and such application shall include consideration of alternative feasible mitigation measures in which the permittee can modify the shoreline protective device to lessen its impacts on coastal resources. Shoreline protective devices shall only be authorized until the time when the qualifying development that is protected by such a device is no longer present, constitutes redevelopment, and/or no longer requires armoring, at which time the shoreline protective device shall be removed and the site restored.

9. Liability. For any development on a beach or shoreline subject to wave action, erosion, flooding, landsides, sea-level rise, or other hazards associated with development on a beach or coastal bluff, the property owner shall execute and record a deed restriction that acknowledges and assumes these risks and waives any future claims of damage or liability against the city and agrees to indemnify the city against any liability, claims, damages, or expenses arising from any injury or damage due to such hazards.

D. Flood Hazards. Habitable space is prohibited at elevations subject to wave and/or flood risk, including risk due to sea level rise.

E. Geologic, Slope, and Stability Hazards. The following standards apply to all development within areas of geologic hazards; very high, high, and moderate landslide potential; high or moderate liquefaction potential; and areas with other soil or slope stability issues.

1. Subdivisions. Land divisions, including lot line adjustments and SB 9 development, are prohibited in areas subject to geologic, seismic, and other hazards unless it is demonstrated by the subdivider that all lots in the new subdivision will have sufficient buildable land area that is situated outside the hazardous portions of the property and outside of any hazard setback areas.

2. Geotechnical, Soil, and Engineering Studies. Site-specific geotechnical, geologic, soil, and/or structural engineering studies that assess the degree of hazard on the proposed site and recommend any appropriate site design modifications or considerations as well as any other mitigation measures shall be prepared.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)

In order to protect the public's access to the coast, and to maintain consistency with the LCP's land use plan (LUP), development shall conform to all applicable land use plan coastal access and Embarcadero policies and the following requirements.

A. Purpose. This section provides procedures and standards for the preservation, dedication, and improvement of public access to and along the shoreline and coastal bluff tops, in conjunction with development in the coastal zone. The intent is to:

1. Ensure that public rights of access to the shoreline are protected as guaranteed by the California constitution and achieve the basic state goals of maximizing public access to the coast, as set forth in the Coastal Act (Sections 30000 through 30900).

2. Implement the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act (Sections 30210 through 30255) and the applicable policies of the coastal land use plan.

3. Ensure public access to coastal bluff tops, where feasible.

B. Applicability. The public access procedures and standards of this section shall be carried out in a reasonable manner as to the rights of the individual property owner with the public constitutional right of access pursuant to Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution.

1. Protection of Existing Coastal Access. Development shall not interfere with public rights of access to the sea where the rights were acquired through use or legislative authorization. Public access rights may include the use of dry sand and rocky beaches to the bluff or first line of terrestrial vegetation.

2. Access Requirements. Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast shall be provided in new development projects, except where:

a. It would be inconsistent with public safety or the protection of fragile coastal resources;

b. Adequate access exists nearby;

c. Agriculture would be adversely affected;

d. Access at the site would be inconsistent with policies of the local coastal program, other than those requiring access;

e. Requiring or providing the access would be inconsistent with federal or state law; or

f. The activity is not considered "new development." New development does not include:

i. Replacement of any structure pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (g) of Section 30610.

ii. The demolition and reconstruction of a single-family residence; provided, that the reconstructed residence shall not exceed either the floor area, height or bulk of the former structure by more than ten percent, and that the reconstructed residence shall be sited in the same location on the affected property as the former structure.

iii. Improvements to any structure which do not change the intensity of its use, which do not increase either the floor area, height, or bulk of the structure by more than ten percent, which do not block or impede public access, and which do not result in a seaward encroachment by the structure.

iv. The reconstruction or repair of any seawall; provided, however, that the reconstructed or repaired seawall is not seaward of the location of the former structure.

v. Any repair or maintenance activity for which the commission has determined, pursuant to Section 30610, that a coastal development permit will be required unless the commission determines that the activity will have an adverse impact on lateral public access along the beach.

For purposes of this section, "bulk" means total interior cubic volume as measured from the exterior surface of the structure.

C. Standards for Public Access.

1. Lateral Access. Lateral access pursuant to Coastal Access Policies LU-7.1, LU-7.2, and LU-7.3 of the LUP shall be provided and shall consist of an offer to dedicate an easement or a grant of easement for open and unobstructed public accessways along the waterfront revetment (or shoreline, if no revetment exists, between the mean high-tide line to the first line of vegetation or an appropriate landward feature on sites along the Embarcadero and similarly developed areas).

2. Vertical Public Access. Vertical access pursuant to Coastal Access Policy LU-7.4 of the LUP shall be provided and consist of an offer to dedicate an easement or a grant of easement for open and unobstructed vertical access to the shoreline.

3. Public Accessways. All public accessways shall be properly signed and conform to coastal conservancy/coastal commission access standards and guidelines.

D. Prescriptive Rights. In areas where it is established that the public acquired a right of access through use, custom, or legislative authorization, development shall not interfere with or diminish such access. This requirement will be interpreted to allow flexibility in accommodating both new development and continuation of historic public parking and access.

E. Access Title and Guarantee. Where public coastal accessways are required by this chapter, approval of a coastal development permit will require guarantee of the access through deed restriction or dedication of right-of-way or easement. Before approval of a coastal development permit, the method and form of the access guarantee will be approved by the city attorney and recorded in the office of the county recorder, identifying the precise location and area to be set aside for public access. The method of access guarantee will be chosen according to the following criteria:

1. Deed Restriction. To be used only where an owner, association, or corporation agrees to assume responsibility for maintenance of and liability for the public access area, subject to approval by the director.

2. Grant of Fee Interest or Easement. To be used when a public agency or private organization approved by the director is willing to assume ownership, maintenance and liability for the access.

3. Offer of Dedication. To be used when no public agency, private organization, or individual is willing to accept fee interest or easement for accessway maintenance and liability. These offers will not be accepted until maintenance responsibility and liability are established.

4. Maintenance. A dedicated public accessway shall not be required to be opened to public use until a public agency or private association approved by the city council agrees to accept responsibility for maintenance and liability of the access, except in cases where immediate public access is approved through a deed restriction.

F. Timing of Access Implementation. The type and extent of access to be dedicated and/or constructed and maintained, as well as the method by which its continuing availability for public use is to be guaranteed, shall be established as provided by this chapter at the time of planning permit approval (e.g., conditional use permit and/or coastal development permit approval).

1. Dedication. Shall occur before issuance of construction permits or the start of any construction activity not requiring a permit.

2. Construction of Improvements. Shall occur at the same time as construction of the approved development, unless another time is established through conditions of planning permit approval.

(Ord. No. 662, § 2, 12-13-23)