Reprinted with permission from the current issue of Green Footnotes, the newsletter of the Committee for Green Foothills.

Thousands of lots—smaller than today’s standard lots—were created in the first decade of the 20th Century. If all these lots were developed, it would create a serious burden on the Midcoast’s infrastructure.  But two recent court rulings show the way to solving the substandard lot problem.

The San Mateo Coastside experienced a tremendous real estate boom, spurred on by the construction of the Ocean Shore Railroad. San Francisco capitalists and land speculators promoted the railroad as easy transport to coastal resorts – and to inexpensive home sites.  In just a few years, over 55 housing tracts were laid out along the route between San Francisco and Santa Cruz. 

These old tracts were paper artifacts – grids of streets and lots drawn on a map without provision for other necessary improvements such as sidewalks, drainage, and utilities.  Some of these paper streets and lots were located atop creeks, cliffs and bluffs; in fact, the eponymous Ocean Boulevard, a "paper street" in Princeton by the Sea that was never constructed, is now under water.

The Ocean Shore Railroad only operated for 13 years, but its legacy of antiquated subdivisions continues to plague County planners and decision-makers today.  Several of these old subdivisions are composed of thousands of 25-foot by 100-foot lots, which do not meet today’s minimum zoning standards of 5,000 square feet.

San Mateo County has struggled for many years with the thorny issue of how to treat these tiny, substandard lots.  Many are still undeveloped, and are still in common ownership. If each substandard lot were developed separately, the Midcoast area’s limited infrastructure, especially roads, sewer, and water, would be overwhelmed, and its semi- rural ambiance would be lost.

Two recent Court of Appeal decisions (Witt Home Ranch, Inc. v. County of Sonoma (2008) and Abernathy Valley, Inc. v. County of Solano (2009)), have clarified the legal status of lots that were "created" by these ancient subdivision maps and are still in common ownership.

San Mateo County Counsel Mike Murphy recently advised the Board of Supervisors that any owner of contiguous lots who wishes to develop will need to demonstrate through a "chain of title" or history of the deeds whether each of the lots was sold or conveyed separately to different owners.  If so, they will likely be acknowledged as separate legal parcels.  If the lots were always sold or conveyed as one unit, the owner likely has only one legal parcel.  If that parcel is larger than the minimum allowed in the zoning district, and complies with all other applicable zoning requirements, it likely can be subdivided.

The Witt and Abernathy court decisions add new steps for owners who wish to develop, but also provide an opportunity for local governments to ensure that these legacies of the past conform to modern-day land use planning principles.

The county is hold a workshop to discuss housing issues in the unincorporated areas and to present ideas about housing priorities and needs.

The meeting will be Wednesday, September 30, 6 to 8:30 p.m. at the Half Moon Village, 9 Bloom Lane, Half Moon Bay. The meetings will be conducted in English and Spanish. The meeting will focus on only San Mateo County’s unincorporated areas. The Housing Element Update will not apply to cities.

According to the county press release:

The meetings will help San Mateo County planners update the County’s Housing Element, a component of the General Plan. State law requires cities and counties to update the Housing Element every five years so local governments can plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs in the community.

State law recognizes the vital role local governments play in the supply and affordability of housing. The law acknowledges that, in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development.

The State does not require cities and counties to actually build the housing necessary to meet the community’s needs. However, it does require that each community adopt policies and programs to support housing development, as well as provide adequate land at appropriate densities to allow the private and non-profit sectors to meet the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.

San Mateo County’s current Housing Element was adopted in 2003; the County is now updating the Element to cover the period from 2007-2014.

For more information, visit www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/planning/housingelementupdate or call William Gibson or Steve Monowitz, Department of Planning and Building, at 650-363-1816 or 650-363-1855.

A wildfire at the back of Montara has been contained to about half an acre, as of shortly after 4pm, according to Acting Batallion Chief Ken Lord of the Coastside Fire Protection District.

A spotter plane, two tankers, and a helicopter responded, and dropped retardant on the fire.

The call went at about 3pm on Tuesday afternoon. The initial call to 911, and the fire dispatch, said that the fire was off Sunshine Valley Rd, leading to a situation where some fire vehicles were looking for the location in Montara’s back roads for several minutes early on.

View Montara fire in a larger map

More photos after the jump.

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s board of directors approved purchase of a 450-acre portion of Elkus Ranch in Half Moon Bay from the University of California at a public meeting last night.

The University of California will retain the 150-acre lower portion of the property including a retreat center, environmental education and 4-H programs.  The District’s purchase of the uplands portion of the property helps sustain these programs, which provide hands-on environmental science, California history, animal care and agricultural education to over 6,000 youth and adults from the greater San Francisco Bay Area each year.

The property is adjacent to the District’s existing Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve and is an important link in the District’s goal to connect "Purisima to the Sea" by preserving a corridor of public open space from Skyline Ridge to the coast. The District purchased the nearby 260-acre Bluebrush Canyon property from POST in June, and anticipates obtaining two additional properties adjacent to Elkus Ranch within the next two years.

Under District ownership, the Elkus Ranch uplands will continue to be grazed, and remain closed until a public planning process looks at opportunities for public access balanced with agriculture, grazing, cultural and environmental preservation

Half Moon Bay recently reviewed its real estate holdings to see if there was anything they could sell. Darin Boville took a copy of the city’s presentation on the properties it holds and linked the properties to Google maps.

You can see the presentation here, but if you want more detail about their locations, see Darin’s story at Montara Fog. There are five more slides after the jump.

Paul Perkovic is MWSD Board President but his letter expresses his individual opinion, not official Board or District policy. He’s running for re-election this year. Coastsider welcomes letters from all candidates for public office on the Coastside.

The risks resulting from San Mateo County allowing private wells without adequate groundwater studies are highlighted in the article “Midcoast water policies blamed for failing well” in last week’s Half Moon Bay Review and Pescadero Pebble.

Montara Water and Sanitary District, not the County, initiated Local Coastal Program changes to give existing homes priority for new public water connections when their wells fail. Coastal Commission action on that LCP amendment has been postponed again. Meanwhile, rather than moving other existing homes with wells to public water supplies before their wells fail, the County wants to reserve priority water for even more “affordable housing” – beyond the hundreds of units already proposed – before allowing new connections.

Contrary to the claim in the HMB Review article, MWSD has never “bailed out a private household well.” MWSD has operated the Montara / Moss Beach water system only since August 2003, during which time the District has developed a major new source of low-cost, high-quality drinking water, among many other improvements. The Review’s reporter asked me about an alleged case from the early 1990s, but that would have been considered by the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the prior corporate owner of the Montara water system, Citizens Utilities Company of California. I explained that I did not know the details of any exceptions to the moratorium considered by the CPUC.

Public water wells, as opposed to wells for single-family homes, must go through extensive environmental studies and monitoring to ensure they do not have adverse impacts. I support development of a groundwater management plan for the Midcoast that would determine safe yields from each of our many Coastal aquifers as a pre-requisite for permitting further private wells. As indicated in the recent Kleinfelder report to the Board of Supervisors, the cumulative effects of the County’s current policy could leave many homeowners with private wells in the same situation as the family in your article, if aquifers are overdrawn during an extended drought. The County has not studied the interactions of many wells in close proximity.

MWSD is working to bring existing well-based homeowners onto the public water system as soon as possible. Everyone in our community should enjoy adequate supplies of safe, reliable, high-quality water sufficient to meet their needs.

Lines are already being drawn in the next big battle over Beachwood. Half Moon Bay will take possession of the property at the end of August. At that point, the city will have a strong incentive to maximize development of the property.

On July 20, the Sierra Club’s Mark Massara has sent Half Moon Bay mayor John Muller a sharply-worded letter seeking clarification about quotes from Muller and city manager Michael Dolder about the future disposition of Beachwood in the County Times.

In particular, Massara took issue with Muller referring to the city’s 100 foot wetlands buffer as arbitrary and outrageous, and the city manager’s reference to repackaging Beachwood for sale.

You can see the letter after the jump.

Bob Pilgrim is a Pacifica resident who has been involved in local conservation/preservation efforts for many years in Pacifica, both as a member of Pacificans for Sustainable Development and the Sierra Club’s Loma Prieta Chapter for the Peninsula. This story is reprinted with permission from Pacifica Riptide, because the status of Highway 1 is a critical issue for every coastal community in California, particularly in neighboring cities

In June 1980, Pacifica City Council adopted a new General Plan, the work product of Ironsides and Associates of Oakland. This was revised, published, and adopted by Pacifica City Planner Michael Crabtree in October 1990. His revision (now 19 years old) has stood the test of time, and it’s fair to say the taxpayers got their money’s worth by virtue of Crabtree’s contribution. 

But City Council realizes that the existing General Plan is now out of date, and has contracted with Dyett and Bhatia of San Francisco to create a new plan at a projected cost of about $1 million. The purpose? At least two elements of the plan can use updating: seismic/safety and circulation. 

This writer has learned that the new circulation element will contain language about a six-lane road between Westport Drive and Fassler Avenue. The ostensible reason for doubling the road’s carrying capacity is to facilitate the morning commute for drivers going out of town between 7. and 9 a.m. The increase in carrying capacity is to create a "segment" that allows Caltrans to connect Interstate 280 with the tunnels at Devil’s Slide. There is nothing new about this Caltrans/Pacifica approach to induce population growth on the San Mateo coast; this activity has been continuous since the Adopted Alignment first surfaced in 1958.

After an initial brainstorming session and a five-hour Saturday workshop that included a short hike to Mirada Surf, the Traffic & Trails charrette will conclude with the presentation of some concepts developed as a result of those meetings.

I had an opportunity to spend some time talking with Dan Burden, the consultant who is managing the process and saw some of the ideas they’re working on.

It includes a vision of Highway 1 unlike anything you’ve seen, perhaps in the entire state.

Come to the presentation of the concept plan, Tuesday, June 30 in the El Granada Elementary School multiuse room at 7pm.