The Coastside Subregional Planning Project
represents a regional approach to planning. While the concept of regional
planning has historically been difficult for local governments to embrace and
implement, in recent years a renewed interest in more creative and
collaborative planning strategies has emerged. Jurisdictions within the
Coastside Subregion have come to realize that they share certain values,
interests and concerns that can be more effectively pursued from a coordinated,
collaborative planning approach.
The Subregional Planning Process
The role of the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) in regional planning along the Northern California coastline
began prior to the passage of the Coastal Act of 1976, at a time when local
governments were solely responsible for regulating development and its
potentially adverse impacts on fragile coastal resources. As stated in ABAG's
1973 Regional Ocean Coastline Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area, which
represented the Coastal Element of their Regional Plan: |
| Existing and future use of natural
resources, recreation resources, scenic values, and unique agricultural lands
of the coastal area involve decisions which cannot be made solely by local
governments which are not always able to identify larger interests. Although
each governmental level has important contributions to make to a comprehensive
planning and management process, regional, state and national perspectives are
needed. ¹ |
|
One of the primary goals of ABAG's 1973
Coastline Plan was to promote the conservation of the Bay Area's coastal
resources through a subregional planning approach. The 1998 Coastside
Subregional Planning Project reflects a continued commitment to that goal.
With the City of Pacifica serving as the
lead agency, the initial step in the subregional process was the creation of a
project team comprised of agency staff from the Cities of Pacifica and Half
Moon Bay and San Mateo County. With guidance from ABAG, this team reviewed
existing coastal policies, plans and related documents and identified several
issues for inclusion in an Issues Identification Report. Following distribution
of the Report to interested individuals, organizations and agencies, three
public meetings were held to receive community and other stakeholder input.
Based on the comments received, three primary issue areas were identified as
appropriate for further study on a subregional level: mobility, natural
resource protection, and economic vitality.
With the issue areas identified, the
project team drafted a work program that was approved by the City Councils in
Pacifica and Half Moon Bay, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and the
Midcoast Community Council. Agency staff then prepared an Administrative Draft
Report followed by a Preliminary Draft Report that was widely distributed to
stakeholders throughout the subregion. Over the ensuing public comment period,
three additional public meetings were held to receive input from both elected
officials and community stakeholders. After review by agency staff and elected
liaisons from the four governing bodies, agreement was achieved on
incorporation of comments into this Final Report.
Purpose of the Project
The Coastside Subregional Planning Project
addresses the three issue areas identified by the public as appropriate for
future consideration through a coordinated and collaborative planning approach.
This Report describes current conditions in each issue area, identifies
challenges to be approached on a subregional level and presents a series of
recommended actions including changes to planning policies to promote their
resolution.
The active participation of jurisdictions
within the subregion is essential if progress is to be made in resolving the
critical issues confronting Coastside communities. However, possible
implementation strategies, including necessary staff and financial resources
have not yet been identified. The next step will be for liaisons from the four
elected bodies to sit down together to begin crafting a strategy for
implementing the ReportÕs recommendations.
To that end, the liaisons have expressed
support for establishing task forces in each of the three issue areas and have
agreed that additional funding from ABAG and other sources should be pursued.
To succeed, this subregional planning effort will require the ongoing
participation of agency staff, elected officials and community
stakeholders.
Subregion description The Coastside
Subregion is roughly 60 square miles in size and includes the City of Pacifica
to the north, the City of Half Moon Bay to the south and the unincorporated
Midcoast communities of Montara, Moss Beach, Princeton, El Granada and Miramar
in between. The area is defined on its western edge by the Pacific Ocean and to
the east by Skyline Ridge which separates San Mateo County into two distinct
regions, the Coastside and the Bayside.
ISSUE 1: MOBILITY
The steep terrain of the Santa Cruz
Mountain Range divides much of the Coastside from the more accessible lands
around San Francisco Bay and along the Peninsula, hindering safe and reliable
access to the subregion. Limited water and sewer services, protective coastal
planning policies, and constraints on the expansion of the two roads serving
the subregion have, until recently, slowed the pace of development south of
Pacifica and minimized associated increases in congestion.
|
Today however, the subregion suffers
from some of the worst peak-hour traffic in San Mateo County where congestion
increased 125 percent between 1995 and 1996, a rate more than double any other
county in the Bay Area.2 Data in the June 1997 Countywide Transportation Plan
Alternatives Report indicates that the maximum foreseeable public investments
in highway and transit improvements will not be able to prevent congestion in
the subregion from getting even worse by the year 2010.3 In addition to limited
road capacity, other factors contributing to current and projected increases in
congestion include a jobs-housing imbalance, limited access to transit
alternatives, and a strong preference for driving alone to work.
The Jobs-Housing Imbalance
The pursuit of a numerical balance or
ideal ratio between a region's job growth and housing development is widely
accepted as an essential land use objective that can reduce increases in
congestion and enhance mobility. Residents living near their workplace are able
to avoid commuting long distances on the region's already congested roadways.
However, a recent ABAG report reveals that between 1995 and 1997 the net
increase in job growth throughout San Mateo County exceeded housing growth by a
ratio of nearly 8 to 1.4 By the year 2020 net job growth is projected to
outpace net housing growth by more than a 2 to 1 ratio.5
While the future job growth is projected
to exceed housing growth Countywide, within the Coastside subregion, the
opposite is true. Recent ABAG projections for the subregion indicate that new
housing construction will continue to outpace growth in new jobs. While
projections for the period from 2000 to 2020 show Pacifica with a small 5
percent increase in household growth, the Midcoast communities and Half Moon
Bay will together experience a 50 percent increase in housing growth - the
highest rates of housing growth in the county.6
During the same 20-year period however,
job growth within the subregion is projected to average just 20 percent.7 As
with the projected Countywide growth trends, the imbalance in job and housing
growth projected for the subregion over the next 20 years represents a
fundamental obstacle to any comprehensive strategy to address the Coastside's
growing congestion problem.
|
Commute Alternatives
Convenient fixed-rail transit service such
as BART or Caltrain is not readily available to commuters south of Pacifica due
to the area's geography and remote location. Remaining commute alternatives
include telecommuting, bus service, ridesharing and driving alone.
Interviews with transportation managers at
several large Bayside high tech firms and with staff at the region's
transportation systems management agency - Multi-City Transportation Systems
Management Agency (MTSMA) - indicate that very few workers will telecommute on
a regular basis in the foreseeable future.8 Aside from bus service between
Pacifica and downtown San Francisco, commuter bus service in the subregion is
very limited. According to rideshare coordinators who have attempted to
establish Coastside car and vanpools, coast commuters as a group have
demonstrated an exceptionally strong reluctance to give up their cars compared
to commuters in other regions.9 The empty park and ride lots temporarily
established during the closure of Highway 1 at Devil's Slide and the resulting
congestion it created is testament to the level of local resistance to the
rideshare option, even in gridlock conditions.
Commute Patterns
1990 Census data reveals that three out of
four commuters living in the subregion drive alone to work while the others
either carpool (15%) or take transit (4%). Countywide projections indicate the
preference for driving alone to work will continue well into the future as
commute patterns shift further away from jobs concentrated in San Francisco,
which are well served by transit, to widely-dispersed job sites in San Mateo
and Santa Clara Counties and the East Bay, where transit service is limited.10
Countywide projections indicate that by the year 2010, nine out of ten
commuters will continue to drive to work.11
Land Use Reform
Strategies for addressing San Mateo
County's increasing congestion recognize the need for multi-faceted approaches
that combine commute alternatives such as ridesharing and transit with land use
reforms. Reforming land use policies to improve the jobs-housing balance is
identified in the County's Congestion Management Program as a method for
achieving the region's congestion reduction goals.12
The San Mateo Countywide Transportation
Plan: Alternatives Report, the first-ever Countywide analysis of the
combined impact on the transportation system resulting from various land use
and transportation plan scenarios, indicates that by the year 2010, key
segments of Highways 1 and 92 will operate at the lowest level of service
during peak commute periods.13 In addition, improvements in mass transit
systems including Caltrain and BART extensions will not by themselves offer
significant reduction in peak hour congestion Countywide and are even less
effective within the subregion, given the area's geography and remote
location.14 With housing development projected to outpace job growth on the
Coastside over the next twenty year period, reforming coastal land use policies
to foster a jobs-housing balance may represent an important approach to
congestion management in the subregion.
|
Efforts to Balance Projected Job and
Housing Growth
For the past two years planners and
elected officials throughout the County have been developing creative new
strategies to address the region's increasing congestion. Their efforts have
focused largely on strategies to promote a jobs-housing balance through changes
in land use policies intended to encourage the location of new housing closer
to new employment centers, mass transit systems and major transportation
corridors.
The County Planning and Building Division
is currently developing a balanced growth program for future job and housing
growth.15 If adopted, this program would be incorporated into the Land Use
Element of the County's Congestion Management Plan. Yet, in its current form,
the proposed balanced growth strategy does not address the Coastside
subregion's unique jobs-housing imbalance where, in contrast to every other
subregion in the county, a lack of job growth is projected to create a
substantial surplus in housing.
The amount of residential development
currently allowed by existing land use plans in the subregion would create a
surplus of approximately 4,800 potential housing units above the number that
would be needed to accommodate projected growth in Coastside jobs by the year
2015.16 If these housing units are built, and no parallel increase in job
growth occurs, the subregion's jobs-housing imbalance will expand and further
complicate all other strategies to reduce increases in Coastside congestion.
Therefore, in developing land use policy for the Coastside, it is crucial for
the County to acknowledge the importance of promoting a jobs-housing balance in
the subregion by fostering additional job growth while exploring the
feasibility of allowing other land uses in areas now zoned exclusively for
housing.
|
ISSUE #2: ECONOMIC VITALITY
An Economic Development Strategy for
the Coast Subregion
Pacifica, the Midcoast and Half Moon Bay
together share a common economic asset: the scenic beauty and natural resources
of the San Mateo County Coastline. Each community has an individual as well as
a collective interest in promoting land uses that both capitalize on and
conserve the natural resources and scenic qualities of the entire subregion.
As discussed in the mobility section
above, a lack of jobs suitable for the Coastside's professional workers has led
to a jobs-housing imbalance and increased congestion as residents commute to
job sites outside the subregion. The creation of an economic development
strategy promoting businesses that provide jobs for the subregion's
professional workers has the potential to improve the jobs-housing balance,
reduce increases in congestion and stimulate the local economy.
Regional Economic Recovery
Constraints and Opportunities For The
Coast Subregion
The strength of the Bay Area economy and
the job growth it has created continues to attract businesses seeking the
region's well-educated and entrepreneurial workforce. The impact of the
continued economic recovery on the subregion can be viewed in terms of both the
constraints on the area's ability to accommodate the growth as well as the
potential opportunities such growth presents.
Job growth in the services and high tech
manufacturing industries in San Mateo County and adjacent counties translates
to increased demands within the subregion for housing and the infrastructure
needed to accommodate it. Although existing plans in the subregion allow for
substantial residential development over the next 20 years, there are major
constraints on the Coastside's ability to provide the necessary infrastructure
- particularly road capacity and water supplies - to adequately serve
populations associated with this level of development. In addition, inadequate
water supplies are likely to constrain future commercial and industrial
development in Moss Beach, Montara and the Half Moon Bay Airport vicinity.17
Beyond infrastructure constraints, the
Coastside is characterized by a number of unique environmental constraints
which, if ignored, could lead to the unnecessary destruction of the coastal
resources that provide the very basis for much of the subregion's economic
vitality. For example, over 2,000 acres of farmland in the subregion is
currently occupied by agricultural operations which in 1997 accounted for a
combined average gross production value estimated at $81.6 million.18
Converting farmland to non-agricultural development would eliminate a
significant coastal resource and reduce the Coastside's agricultural
productivity. In addition, such loss of farmland would also alter the rural
character of the subregion, itself a fundamental element of the Coastside
economy.
State Coastal Act policies require that
development not have significant adverse effects on coastal resources either
individually or cumulatively.19 Hence, an economic development strategy must
consider the Coastside's carrying capacity, or ability to accommodate growth
and development within limits defined by natural resource capabilities.
At the same time, opportunities created by
the region's economic recovery are exemplified by proposed strategies to
develop new businesses within the subregion. Creating quality local jobs
appropriate for the Coastside's professional workers will foster a jobs-housing
balance, enabling residents to work closer to where they live. Fewer commute
trips outside the subregion will reduce increases in congestion and improve
economic productivity both locally and throughout the County.
HALF MOON BAY'S ECONOMIC ANAD BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Opportunities for Subregional
Applications
The recent Economic and Business
Development Strategy Report commissioned by the City of Half Moon Bay
analyzes opportunities created by the regional economy to develop a local job
market in Half Moon Bay that can also be applied to the subregion as a whole.
As in Half Moon Bay, the creation of quality jobs for workers in Midcoast
communities and in Pacifica may be one of the most critical elements of any
long-range Coastside economic development strategy.
By applying the strategies outlined in the
Half Moon Bay Report to the subregion, significant opportunities emerge to
develop the coastal economy given the demand among small high tech firms in the
surrounding region for highly skilled workers and the need for medium sized
office space and light manufacturing facilities.20 Capitalizing on the existing
entrepreneurial talent within the subregion to promote indigenous business
development and expansion, together with strategic attraction of businesses
from outside the area, could lead to the creation of a job market suitable for
the Coastside's professional workers.21
Balancing Business Development With Other Economic Sectors
A finite supply of developable land and
limited water and transportation capacity will require communities to evaluate
the public revenue generating capacity of various land use scenarios to
identify the most desirable mix of residential, commercial, light industrial,
retail and visitor serving development. In addition, a review of land use
policies and zoning ordinances may be necessary to determine the feasibility of
locating new commercial and industrial facilities in the subregion.
ISSUE #3: NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT
Covering approximately 60 square
miles, the subregion contains roughly 22 miles of coastline and vast amounts of
publicly and privately held open space. Given its proximity to a large
metropolitan population rapidly approaching seven million people, the subregion
represents a unique recreational resource of regional significance to the Bay
Area and the state.
Local Preservation Efforts
A survey of existing open space lands
recently completed by the Greenbelt Alliance indicates that over the next 30
years as many as 570,000 acres may be subdivided and developed throughout the
Bay Area including over 3,000 acres within the Coastside Subregion.22 Four
private, nonprofit land trusts have formed in recent years and are coordinating
their efforts with regional land trusts, open space districts and state and
federal resource agencies to acquire and protect the subregion's diminishing
agricultural and open space lands.
Funding for open space protection within
the subregion is being pursued through a variety of strategies including
expansion of the boundaries of both the Midpeninsula Open Space District and
the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Efforts to obtain additional state
and federal funds are also being actively pursued. These efforts represent the
most promising attempt in over a decade to secure public support and funding
for the acquisition and preservation of open space within the subregion.
|
The California Coastal Trail
The California Coastal Trail is envisioned
as a contiguous trail system linking coastal recreation and shoreline access
points along the state's 1,100-mile coastline while providing walkers, hikers,
and bicyclists with an alternative to vehicular travel to and along the
coastline.Within the subregion, shoreline recreation and access policies
encourage the development blufftop vista points, beach access stairways, and
related access support facilities such as parking and signage. However, while
areas of the subregion benefit from Coastal Trail and related access
facilities, much of the shoreline and blufftop land along the Coastside
designated for public shoreline access lacks the suggested access
improvements.23
The implementation of shoreline access
policies in areas of the subregion has been hampered by a variety of factors: a
lack of public funding, limited private development that might be required to
provide public access and to fund improvements, and recent court rulings
restricting local government's ability to exact public access benefits from
private development.
State and local governments administer
shoreline access policies by ensuring that individual development proposals
include some provision for public shoreline access. However, while regulatory
practices have in some cases increased shoreline access, in other cases,
private development has diminished coastal recreation opportunities. Numerous
offers to dedicate public trail easements, intended to mitigate a project's
impacts on public access, have remained unaccepted and unavailable for public
use, further reducing public shoreline access.
While LCP policies direct local and State
agencies to coordinate their efforts in implementing shoreline access policies,
there is no mechanism to facilitate the communication required to achieve the
recommended coordination. Although the State Department of Parks and Recreation
is encouraged to assume the major responsibility for the acquisition,
development, and maintenance of public shoreline access, a process for
implementing the access improvements outlined in the local coastal programs is
needed. In addition, coordination between agency departments within the
subregion needs to be enhanced to implement shoreline access improvments on
land and easements owned by the local jurisdictions.
|
|
