February 13, 2003


Set Time:

9:30 a.m.


Hearing Date:

March 4, 2003



Honorable Board of Supervisors



Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Coastal Development Permit for an expansion to Barbara's Fishtrap Restaurant to allow development of a new enclosed deck and increase indoor seating capacity from 63 to 95. The project is located at 281 Capistrano Road, in the unincorporated Princeton area of San Mateo County. This project is appealable to the California Coastal Commission.




Deny the appeal and uphold Planning Commission's decision to approve the Coastal Development Permit, County File No. PLN 1999-00758 (Formerly USE 91-0008), by making the required findings and adopting the conditions of approval.




The applicant is proposing an expansion to the existing restaurant by constructing a new enclosed deck that will allow for 32 additional indoor seats. The proposed development of 917.6 square feet includes a new walk-up window, new restrooms and a bar. This new development will increase the indoor seating capacity from 63 to 95.




On October 23, 2002, the Planning Commission considered the project. Based on staff analysis and the testimony presented, the Commission approved the project (3-0, Commissioners Bomberger and Nobles absent) by making all the relevant findings and adopting a set of conditions. This decision has been appealed by Keet Neerhan. Please see Section D of the staff report for discussion of the key issues of the appeal.



In September 1999, the applicant filed for a Use Permit Amendment and Coastal Development Permit for the proposed project. At that time, the California Coastal Commission determined that the area of the proposed expansion of the restaurant was within their jurisdiction. Therefore, the County processed only the Use Permit Amendment and on April 20, 2000, the Zoning Hearing Officer approved the Use Permit Amendment.


In a letter dated August 14, 2002, the California Coastal Commission informed the applicant that upon further review, it was determined that the area of the proposed expansion did not fall within their jurisdiction and advised that a Coastal Development Permit should be obtained from the County Planning Division.


The applicant then requested that the County process and issue a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the proposed expansion. The Planning Commission considered and approved the CDP on October 23, 2002. Their decision has been appealed.


The appellant's main issue is related to dispute of easement rights over parking areas. As explained in the staff report, this issue is considered a civil issue and not subject to a resolution by the County.


Staff has reviewed the project against the Local Coastal Program Policies and found the project to be in compliance. Staff believes that the project, as conditioned, conforms to all applicable policies and therefore recommends approval.