Agenda packet — Capitola City Council, February 22, 2024

Revised 2/22/24 4:30 PM
City of Capitola
City Council Meeting Agenda
Thursday, February 22, 2024 – 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
Mayor: Kristen Brown
Vice Mayor: Yvette Brooks
Council Members: Joe Clarke, Margaux Morgan, Alexander Pedersen Closed Session – 5 PM
Closed Sessions are not open to the public and held only on specific topics allowed by State Law (noticed below). An announcement regarding the items to be discussed in Closed Session will be made in the City Hall Council Chambers prior to the Closed Session. Members of the public may, at this time, address the City Council on closed session items only. There will be a report of any final decisions in City Council Chambers during the Open Session Meeting.
i. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—LIABILITY CLAIMS (Gov. Code § 54956.95) Claims Against the City of Capitola
1) Ron Weiner
2) Debbie Sek
ii. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6) Negotiator: Mark Wilson, Labor and Employment Practice, Burke, Williams, & Sorensen, LLP Employee Organizations: Association of Capitola Employees, Police Officers Association, MidManagement Employees, Confidential Employees, Police Captains, and Management Regular Meeting of the Capitola City Council – 6 PM
All correspondence received prior to 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding a Council Meeting will be distributed to Councilmembers to review prior to the meeting. Information submitted after 5 p.m. on that Wednesday may not have time to reach Councilmembers, nor be read by them prior to consideration of an item.

1. Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Council Members Joe Clarke, Margaux Morgan, Alexander Pedersen, Yvette Brooks, and Mayor Kristen Brown.

2. Additions and Deletions to the Agenda

3. Report on Closed Session

4. Additional Materials
Additional information submitted to the City after distribution of the agenda packet.

A. Item 8A - Correspondence Received
B. Item 8B - Correspondence Received
1 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 22, 2024
City of Capitola Page 2
C. Item 8C - Correspondence Received

5. Oral Communications by Members of the Public
Oral Communications allows time for members of the Public to address the City Council on any “Consent Item” on tonight’s agenda, or on any topic within the jurisdiction of the City that is not on the “General Government/Public Hearings” section of the Agenda. Members of the public may speak for up to three minutes, unless otherwise specified by the Mayor. Individuals may not speak more than once during Oral Communications. All speakers must address the entire legislative body and will not be permitted to engage in dialogue. A maximum of 30 minutes is set aside for Oral Communications.

6. Staff / City Council Comments
Comments are limited to three minutes.

7. Consent Items
All items listed as “Consent Items” will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the time the Council votes on the action unless members of the City Council request specific items to be discussed for separate review. Items pulled for separate discussion will be considered following General Government. Note that all Ordinances which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.

A. City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the special meeting on February 8, 2024, and the regular meeting on February 8, 2024.

B. City Check Registers
Recommended Action: Approve check registers dated January 19, 2024, January 26, 2024, and February 9, 2024.

C. State Grant Administration Agreement Amendment
Recommended Action: Approve an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Adams Ashby Group for grant administration services, including Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Administration ($31,527), 2023 Community Development Block Grant Application ($7,500), and 2023 HOME Investment Partnership Program application ($10,000).

D. Capitola Representation on the Bicycle Advisory Committee Recommended Action: Recommend reappointment of Paula Bradley to represent Capitola on the Regional Transportation Committee’s Bicycle Advisory Subcommittee.

8. General Government / Public Hearings
All items listed in “General Government / Public Hearings” are intended to provide an opportunity for public discussion of each item listed. The following procedure pertains to each General Government item: 1) Staff explanation; 2) Council questions; 3) Public comment; 4) Council deliberation; 5) Decision.

A. Update on the Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Recommended Action: Approve Change Order 5 to the Public Works Agreement with Cushman Contracting for the Wharf Project in an amount not to exceed $1,913,000 (for a total contract amount of $10,227,000) and adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget to allocate an amount not to exceed $1,264,000 in funding for the additional project expenditures. 2 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 22, 2024
City of Capitola Page 3
B. Bay Avenue and Hill Street Traffic Safety Update
Recommended Action: Authorize construction of the proposed Bay Avenue/Hill Street intersection quick-build project.

C. Zone 5 Drainage Master Plan Update
Recommended Action: Receive report.

D. Special Events and Park Regulations
Recommended Action: Introduce, by title only, waiving further reading of the text, an ordinance of the City of Capitola repealing and replacing Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 “Special Events” and Chapter 12.40 “Park Regulations” to create a comprehensive permitting system for public assemblies, events, and use of City property.

E. FY 2023-24 Mid-Year Budget Report
Recommended Action: Receive the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Mid-Year Budget Report and adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget.

F. 2023/2024 CDBG Grant Application
Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution authorizing staff to prepare and submit an application under the 2023/2024 Community Development Block Grant Program for the Jade Street Community Center.

9. Adjournment - Adjourn to a Special City Council meeting on March 6, 2024, at 4:00 PM. _____________________________________________________
How to View the Meeting
Meetings are open to the public for in-person attendance at the Capitola City Council Chambers located at 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, California, 95010.

Other ways to Watch:

Spectrum Cable Television channel 8
City of Capitola, California YouTube Channel
To Join Zoom Application or Call in to Zoom:

Meeting
link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83328173113?pwd=aVRwcWN3RU03Zzc2dkNpQzRWVXAydz09 Or dial one of these phone numbers: 1 (669) 900 6833, 1 (408) 638 0968, 1 (346) 248 7799 Meeting ID: 833 2817 3113
Meeting Passcode: 678550
How to Provide Comments to the City Council
Members of the public may provide public comments to the City Council in-person during the meeting.

If you are unable to attend in-person, please email your comments to [email protected] and they will be included as a part of the record for the meeting. Please be aware that the City Council will not accept comments via Zoom.

Notice regarding City Council: The City Council meets on the 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola.

Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials: The City Council Agenda and the complete Agenda Packet are available for review on the City’s website: www.cityofcapitola.org and at Capitola City Hall prior to the meeting. Agendas are 3 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 22, 2024
City of Capitola Page 4
also available at the Capitola Post Office located at 826 Bay Avenue Capitola. Need more information? Contact the City Clerk’s office at 831-475-7300.

Agenda Materials Distributed after Distribution of the Agenda Packet: Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, materials related to an agenda item submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the Reception Office at City Hall, 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, California, during normal business hours.

Americans with Disabilities Act: Disability-related aids or services are available to enable persons with a disability to participate in this meeting consistent with the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Assisted listening devices are available for individuals with hearing impairments at the meeting in the City Council Chambers. Should you require special accommodations to participate in the meeting due to a disability, please contact the City Clerk’s office at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting at 831-475-7300. In an effort to accommodate individuals with environmental sensitivities, attendees are requested to refrain from wearing perfumes and other scented products.

Si desea asistir a esta reunión pública y necesita ayuda - como un intérprete de lenguaje de señas americano, español u otro equipo especial - favor de llamar al Departamento de la Secretaría de la Ciudad al 831-475-7300 al menos tres días antes para que podamos coordinar dicha asistencia especial o envié un correo electrónico a [email protected].

Televised Meetings: City Council meetings are cablecast “Live” on Charter Communications Cable TV Channel 8 and are recorded to be rebroadcasted at 8:00 a.m. on the Wednesday following the meetings and at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday following the first rebroadcast on Community Television of Santa Cruz County (Charter Channel 71 and Comcast Channel 25). Meetings are streamed “Live” on the City’s website at www.cityofcapitola.org by clicking on the Home Page link “Meeting Agendas/Videos.” Archived meetings can be viewed from the website at any time. 4 1
Westly, Austin
From: Carl Pritchard <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 5:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: The wharf house the bait shop shop
To the city council of capitola I would like you to save the bait shop and The wharf house do not tear it down rebuild it it's part of Capitola's History
Sincerely
Carl Pritchard
5 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Dawn Campbell <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 9:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Save the Wharf House and the Bait Shop
Dear City Council,
Please recognize what a great treasure we had with rooftop outdoor dining and a live music venue on the point of the pier/wharf. It draws locals and tourist alike. The bait shop is a source of community young and old. Family have long standing traditions around both establishment. Both businesses and services are so loved by ALL. Unique to Capitola and sadly missed, if the council does not act to repair what is left or include it in the NEW vision design the village will lose a once great draw. Most businesses in the village struggle. The need for unique and diverse options is real, in order to keep locals coming during the slower times of year.

There is NO place like it in our county and the wait list each and every weekend shows that there is a demand for an experience like outdoor roof top dining on the coast. And the ability to buy your bait and sit for a visit are real needs and pleasures that so many get to enjoy.

Please listen to what the people are saying and include the restoration of the Wharf House and Bait Shop in your plans. If it is all about a new design and new wharf. Please see that an outdoor rooftop option is made for the new restaurant design. I sadly do not recall what type of retail if any was in the new design. Think it through and do something FOR the people who currently live here and use the services we so enjoy.

Capitola remains the best place in the county to live and to play. Please keep it that way, with fun and UNIQUE options that everyone can enjoy.

Sincerely,
Dawn E. Campbell
919 Capitola Rd. #47
Capitola, CA 95010
(831) 588-1595
6 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: John Martorella <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 2:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Capitola Wharf
Hello Mayor and members of the council,
Great job so far on the wharf repairs, looking forward to seeing it completed down the road.

It's sad that both buildings need to come down, but it's been long over due and we all know it. Mother nature just sped up this process.

A replacement idea can be a modular building design that has both a smaller restaurant or kiosk and a bait and tackle shop.

I only recommended the modular buildings as they are less expensive and have many designs to choose from.

I know all of you have been getting a lot of feedback on this topic from some interesting individuals, I just wanted to add some constructive ideas.

In any event, thank you for all your hard work and dedication to the city.

John Martorella
505 Riverview Dr.
7 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Steven Henderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2024 11:41 AM
To: City Council
Subject: In support of rebuilding the Wharf House and Boat & Bait shop Council member,
I understand that there is a meeting on the 21st regarding the condition of the buildings on the wharf and that they are too damaged to refurbish.

That they are to be demolished, the options being considered are to demolish and not rebuild, or demolish and rebuild.

Unfortunately I am working and will be unable to attend.

I realize that there will be pros and cons to each option. I am sure you will hear both sides at the meeting so I will not list them here.

Rather than this email dragging on, I will just express my support for any options that retain a Wharf House with upstairs area for music, and the boat and Bait shop.

A bare wharf is much less of an attraction for people to come to the village and spend money, than a wharf with a restaurant, music, dancing and Boat rental and store.

Additionally those assets will retain the wharf as a place that generates income to Capitola in the form of building rent, and sales tax income. If not rebuilt, the wharf will become solely an expense to Capitola.

Thanks
Steve Henderson.
8 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Paul Estey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 8:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Capitola Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Councilmembers:

I am surprised and disturbed by the proposal to move quickly to demolish the Wharf House Restaurant and the Boat and Bait properties. There are several items that I would recommend the council consider before passing the proposed resolution to amended the FY 23-24 budget:
1) The assessment of "total loss" of the Wharf House Restaurant was done by the City's staff. It seems prudent given the nature of building and its popularity with the public to have a third party review the state of building and weigh in on the potential for repairs, if any. That review will not take a significant amount of time and will assure the public that due process was completed before one of the iconic buildings in the city is demolished. 2) Assuming that the conclusion holds that both buildings need to be removed, the City should open up the demolition bidding process to other contractors. This is a substantial change to the original contract which envisaged that all the piling and decking rehab work would be completed with the two buildings intact. It would not be unusual given the circumstances, to open the bidding process to those firms well-versed in demolition of old and unique structures. That strikes me as being fiscally responsible, if nothing else. 3) Moving forward with no plan for replacing the buildings and an implied promise to build something later with some un-identified funding source will leave the public with a bad taste in their mouths. This project spent considerable time in the review process prior to the letting of the contract to begin the work. Now a substantial change in that plan is occurring and there is no end game identified.

Perhaps I am unaware of the need for haste in moving forward with the proposed plans. The contractor bid the job knowing that they would have to work around these buildings so let them continue their work while the City more methodically and transparently determines the long-range plan for the project.

Thank you for your consideration,
Paul Estey
9 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Brigitte Estey <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:34 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Capitola Wharf - Decision to demolish Wharf House and Bait Shop Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my great concern and disappointment with the "process" that has been followed to date with respect to the determination of the future of the Wharf House and Bait Shop buildings. There has been very little public information or ability for public review and feedback for the decisions being made by the City Staff. A decision of this magnitude - the determination of the future of these iconic and beloved structures - should be dealt with in an extremely sensitive and transparent manner. I've seen the City occupy itself with much less significant structures in a much more vigorous manner than these two iconic structures. The Wharf House and Bait Shop have been the happy subject of many family photos, artists paintings, professional photographers as well as family experiences and memories, general public memories both local and worldwide.

A few specific items:

1. I have not seen any details regarding the evaluation and analysis from the experts on the decision that the structures cannot be saved. It would seem to me that a decision of this magnitude would be backed up by expert analysis that would be available for the public to read and ask questions on.

2. The request to approve a budget amendment of $1M for the demolition of the structures should be brought to the attention of the public before any decisions are made about the structures. The dollar amount is quite large and the public should understand how the decision matrix that included this cost arrived at a decision to demolish the structures instead of salvaging them.

3. The promise to rebuild like structures in the future is just that - a promise. The public should understand and weigh in on a detailed plan that includes timeline, funding source, etc. This detailed plan should be an amendment to the existing Wharf plan and get the same review, scrutiny, and public review and opportunity for feedback as the original plan. A one time, one hour town hall with no way to participate remotely and just a few weeks notice appears as an attempt to placate the public.

Bottom line - I'd like to see the city council stand down on approving the budget amendment for demolition and take several steps back and establish a more methodical and transparent process for determining the future of the Capitola Wharf that includes a thoughtful plan for the future of these iconic structures.

Regards,
Brigitte Estey
10 Item 4 A.

Re: Council MeeƟng February 20, 2024
February 22, 2024
Agenda item 8A
Dear Council,
I am unable to aƩend Thursday’s council meeƟng but wanted to give you my thoughts regarding agenda item 8A.

CWEP has raised over 400K for wharf improvements that have been listed in staff reports dated August 24, 2023, and December 14, 2023. A resoluƟon was passed at its August meeƟng codifying these improvements.

Those improvements include:
 Artistic Features: improved entry gate, mosaic art, donor feature, bronze scavenger hunt
 Sightseeing binoculars
 Benches, tables, enhanced light standards, trash receptacles, water filling station with foot wash, fish station
Although tonight’s staff report budget lists CWEP contribution as 400K, it makes no mention of the scope of improvements that have been previously agreed upon, instead only mentions lighting, furniture and viewing stations which the city seems to want Cushman Contracting to provide. What , specifically, would that include?
Considering there is now a large shortfall, I want to make sure all the items we have raised community funds for get funded. It is for this very scenario our group asked for the city’s commitment in two meetings. Often, when push comes to shove at the end of a project, things get cut. This cannot happen with our community-raised funds.

Please ensure that the city is still dedicated to funding all the components CWEP has raised funds for are left intact.

Further, it concerns me that we have not seen a Cushman Contracting bid and have been told there is not one. Keep in mind, the city granted $250,000 to install the CWEP improvements so the CWEP totals only include purchase.

Thank you for your past support of our project, we truly appreciate your continued support.

Gayle Ortiz
11 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: LISA GRUBER <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Capitola Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Council Members,
My husband David and I have been Depot Hill homeowners since 2001. We strongly agree with Paul Estey's email below and did not see a reason to rewrite his letter.

Thanks for your consideration.

Lisa and David Gruber
204 Central Ave
Lisa Gruber
415.385.1471
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Paul Estey <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 8:44 PM
Subject: Capitola Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project To: <[email protected]>
Councilmembers:

I am surprised and disturbed by the proposal to move quickly to demolish the Wharf House Restaurant and the Boat and Bait properties. There are several items that I would recommend the council consider before passing the proposed resolution to amended the FY 23-24 budget:
1) The assessment of "total loss" of the Wharf House Restaurant was done by the City's staff. It seems prudent given the nature of building and its popularity with the public to have a third party review the state of building and weigh in on the potential for repairs, if any. That review will not take a significant amount of time and will assure the public that due process was completed before one of the iconic buildings in the city is demolished.
2) Assuming that the conclusion holds that both buildings need to be removed, the City should open up the demolition bidding process to other contractors. This is a substantial change to the original contract which envisaged that all the piling and decking rehab work would be completed with the two buildings intact. It would not be unusual given the circumstances, to open the bidding process to those firms well-versed in demolition of old and unique structures. That strikes me as being fiscally responsible, if nothing else.
12 Item 4 A.
2 3) Moving forward with no plan for replacing the buildings and an implied promise to build something later with some un-identified funding source will leave the public with a bad taste in their mouths. This project spent considerable time in the review process prior to the letting of the contract to begin the work. Now a substantial change in that plan is occurring and there is no end game identified.

Thank you for your consideration,
Paul Estey
13 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Lorie Satzger <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 7:39 PM
To: City Council; [email protected]
Cc: douglas satzger
Subject: Capitola Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Dear Councilmembers,
Doug and I have been residing in Capitola for 10 years now, and deeply saddened and frustrated to hear that your council is considering taking down the Wharf restaurant and boat house!!! This is so unfair, and we should all have the opportunity to speak out about this change that will so impact the village. The Wharf has been a playground for all, and a huge attraction and money maker for the city. We personally rent the red fishing boats regularly, and love hearing the music from the restaurant and opportunity to dine on the water! These long-standing establishments have been a large reason for our love of Capitola. It’s unique, quaint, and soooo special to the village! So, we are writing to express our concern and sadness for the process currently under discussion to demo the structures at the cost of $1M, without even consulting with city residents and getting a vote. Where is your analysis, and how do we as residents access it? $1M to demo long standing establishments just seems so extreme, and we do not support this in any way!
We vote that we as a village come together, and collectively create a solution. We need a real plan, that is open and in line with the majority of city residents. So, we ask that city council steps down on approving the budget amendment for demolition of the Wharf restaurant, and Boat house. We need a more methodical and transparent process moving forward for the future of the Wharf!
Let’s spend that $1M to rebuild our storm- impacted iconic structures, and maintain the memorable times the Wharf has brought us all over the years!!!
Respectfully,
Lorie Satzger
LSDesign
Interior | Architecture | Design
650.387.9247
loriesatzgerdesign.com
14 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Alfred carlson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 9:20 PM
To: Al Carlson; Kisling, Niels ([email protected]); City Council; Kahn, Jessica; Goldstein, Jamie ([email protected])
Subject: Re: HISTORY OF CAPITOLA WHARF
THIS IS ME IN MIDDLE SEAT OF OUR DORY,THAT MY DAD LAUNCHED OFF THE CAPITOLA WHARF. I FIRST FISH IN CAPITOLA WHEN WAS 7 YEARS OLD IN 1938, I REMEMBER CAPTAIN MITCHELL WELL, AS HELPED LOWER OUR BOAT OFF THE WHARF WITH WOODEN BLOCK AND TACKLE. WITH THE LONG HISTORY

LAUNCHING BOATS OFF THE WHARF WE NEED TO PRESERVE IT IN OUR NEW WHARF ALFRED CARLSON 5000 JEWEL ST
15 Item 4 A.
2 George Mitchell, Manager of Capitola Wharf [1870-195os?] Captain George Mitchell’s journey to California began in 1893. Journeying from Kansas, he arrived in San Jose when he was twenty-three years of age. Having never set eyes on a large body of water before, he was excited by the prospect of getting a glimpse of the Pacific Ocean while in California. 16 Item 4 A.
3 Although he was not very impressed with his first sight of the San Francisco Bay, George’s time near the bay would greatly influence his life
. There he was enchanted by the naptha engine (a combustion engine powered by naptha rather than gasoline) powered boat “Virginia”, which was a frequent cruise boat in Capitola. This idea must have inspired Mitchell, as he acquired two boats like the “Virginia”. Mitchell eventually found his way to Capitola, CA where he became a wharfinger in 1894. He rented skiffs, as well as renting two launches, the “Bessie” and the “Capitola”. The “Bessie” he would rent for cruises; later he owned and operated a commercial fishing boat named “Bessie” as well. George Mitchell wed Kathryn Mitchell and they took up residence at 221 San Jose Avenue in Capitola (Source: “Fisning From the Decks of Capt’n Mitchell’s Old Naptha Launch” newspaper article, unknown date and source. From SC MAH Koehle Twins Collection).

For more than thirty-nine years, George Mitchell managed the Capitola Wharf, and was lauded for his management; state inspector’s visiting the wharf during Mitchell’s management called it the cleanest wharf on the Pacific Coast (Source: “Capitola Pier ‘Cleanest on Pacific Coast’” S.C.

Evening News, 9/10/1933). In 1941, Mitchell remodeled the Capitola wharf and maintained it for many years (“Capitola Wharf Being Remodeled…”S.C. Evening News 8/29/1941). George Mitchell led an eventful life leading cruises in Capitola, witnessing boat accidents, and rescuing youths in danger of drowning while swimming on Capitola beaches (Sources: “ Body of Victim of Boat Upset Found Yesterday” S.C. Sentinel 5/21/1933; “San Jose Boy Rescued From Surf Drowning” S.C. Sentinel 9/10/1933). In 1960, Mitchell’s wife Kathryn passed away. Mitchell preceded her in death though his exact date of passing is unknown at this time (“Kathryn Mitchell Dies in Hospital” S.C. Sentinel 9/6/1960).
17 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: michael routh <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 7:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: wharf Agenda item 8A
Mayor and Council members,
My late friend, Rick Karleen was the wharf owner who built the restaurant building and a new bait shop nearly 50 years ago.

I was Capitola's Mayor in 1979, and Rick approached me aŌer the wharf was damaged to see what could be done. He didn't have the financial capability to repair it. Rick and I developed a plan for the city to purchase the wharf and make the repairs. In a nutshell, we took our plan to city manager Steve Burrell, he negoƟated the details of our agreement, the council approved the purchase, and the city acquired the wharf in exchange for granƟng Rick a 17 year concession lease.

The city gained full control of the wharf in 1983 when it bought the lease rights from Mr. Karleen.

The city purchased the wharf to save this historical Capitola landmark and the businesses on it. The community wanted then, and now, to have the bait shop, boat launch, and small restaurant remain for the residents to enjoy. The bait shop and boat launch are parƟcularly important because they provide fishing and boaƟng access to Soquel Cove for thousands of kids and adults annually that would be denied if these concessions were not replaced. The city needs to conƟnue the historical legacy of the Capitola wharf as a fishing pier with access to the bay, as it's been for nearly 175 years. In addiƟon, the projected '24-'25 budget anƟcipates $131,000 in revenue from wharf concessions and that revenue stream will be an ongoing loss if the buildings are not rebuilt.

The restaurant and bait shop were in need of major repairs regardless of the current storm damage. I'm surprised the city hasn't set aside funds in the budget each year knowing that. So where will you find the funds to rebuild the bait shop and restaurant? I'll tell you - Redirect the $1.65 million budgeted to renovate the community center, delay that project, and apply those funds to the wharf. The city has unƟl 2026 before the community center needs to be completed according to the agreement with the school district. Rebuild the wharf buildings in the funky style they are. Raise them up if necessary. The restaurant, bait shop, and boat launch are what connect local residents to the wharf and bay and need to be rebuilt ASAP. Thank you.

Mick Routh
Crystal St
Capitola
Sent from my iPad
18 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Dennis Norton <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 8:00 AM
To: City Council
Cc: Goldstein, Jamie ([email protected])
Subject: [SPF Softfail] Capitola Boat and Bait
Dear Capitola City Council
The Capitola Wharf with its boat and bait are truly an icon in our community.

One does not exist without the other.

A pier with out a bait shop is not a pier.

The bait shop serves as a bait and tackle service, boat rentals, and a launch point into the Bay.

It also services as. A safety point for sea safety, and the employees are the constant eye on the Pier environment.

This service services as recreaƟon and sports fishing for kids and many-many minoriƟes who use the pier and bait shop on a daily basis.

The pier is a designated United States Coast Guard safe access point out of the Pacific Ocean.

The Boat and Bait must servive if you really want the Pier to survive.

Tearing the Bait Shop down is not acceptable, with out he proper process and careful analysis of it condiƟon by Experts in the construcƟon field, To start with a Structural engineer, which has not been done.

It is the opinion of the present owner of the business ," is the same today as it was before the storm.” The present esƟmate of 1.4 million for removal of the buildings is so far out online, it should be less than half that amount. And esƟmate by the Company that is doing wharf repairs is not acceptable.

It is truly a gouge of public funds. This being funds that the City does not have.

As required by law , this should b a compeƟƟve bid. Why would it not be? The Capitola Wharf is a State Historic Structure, as is in our Historic Ordnance for the City of Capitola, structures that are aƩached to an Historic Structure shall be considered Historic.

The bait shop that was build in the 1930’s should be considered historic, and go thru historic review.

The City needs to do proper analysis before removing this structure.

In foresight, this structure should never be removed, upgraded yes, at well below the 1.4 milling cost to remove.

It will outlast the life of the exisƟng Wharf, which has a very limited life span leŌ in its history.

As do all the Wharfs on the California Coast.

Take 2 months a do proper analysis before considering removal of this great asset.

The Capitola public wants this business and structure to remain.

Thank You
Dennis Norton
16 year Capitola Councilman
7 year Planning Commissioner
4 year mayor
55 year resident
And conƟnual user of pier and Bait shop Place where my kids grew up fishing 19 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Alberto Munoz <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 8:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Capitola Warf Project
Dear City Council Members,
It has come to my attention that there is a proposal to demolish Wharf House Restaurant and the Boat and Bait properties on the Capitola Wharf being fast tracked without giving enough time for public comments. This is very concerning, as these two properties have been a central part of the Capitola Village character and appeal for locals and tourists alike. Especially concerning is the fact that there is no serious plan to replace these buildings except for a vague (not official, and more importantly, not funded!) promise to do something about this later... We know that the most likely outcome of this type of promise is to have future council members stating that they did not make it and that there is no budget (or official plan) to support it anyway.

I would like to ask that the council please do its due diligence with this proposal and that, as part of a decision to proceed, an official plan be provided indicating how these properties will be replaced and how this replacement will be funded.

Thank you for your attention.

Regards,
Alberto Munoz
700 Escalona Drive
Capitola, CA 95010
20 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Molly Ording <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 9:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: What’s House & Capitola Boat & Bait…Do NOT tear down! Good morning. Council Members!
I look forward to aƩending your meeƟng this evening! It is essenƟal that you listen to the voices of your community before even considering such a move!! Beyond the thousands of local and visitor’s fond memories, these historic structures provide essenƟal and unforgeƩable recreaƟonal opportuniƟes and memories..in the past and for the future! Those experiences, and the ones to come, are NOT to be torn down or destroyed without MUCH MORE thorough invesƟgaƟons AND exploraƟon of opƟons! AND….I might add….further community input & invesƟgaƟon with regard to the expense of the proposed wharf restroom versus the loss of these iconic Capitola structures! We all need to look criƟcally at our Coastal treasures and be very careful & deliberaƟve when determining their future within the new realiƟes of climate & coastal change. Please proceed slowly and deliberately and weigh ALL OPTIONS!! Thank you for your aƩenƟon.

Most sincerely,
Molly & Mickey Ording
218 Monterey Avenue
Capitola, Ca.

Sent from my iPhone
21 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Teresa Green <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 1:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Wharf Building
I am unable to aƩend the meeƟng tonight but wanted to share my thoughts.

It is sad that the buildings have been damaged so severely that they must be demolished. The Capitola Boat and Bait shop has been such an integral part of the character of the Wharf that it is hard to imagine not having it. Many memories of them supporƟng the Fishing Derby at the Capitola Begonia FesƟval and later the Capitola Beach FesƟval. Hundreds of kids have been thrilled with fishing off the pier and the Capitola Boat and Bait shop graciously provided prizes to winners.

I feel the character of the Wharf would never come close to our expectaƟons without this business. I hope you can find some way to carry on this important element of the Capitola experience.

Teresa J Green
Resident and Treasurer of the Capitola Beach FesƟval.

Sent from my iPhone
22 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Lori Munoz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 4:32 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Wharf House and Boat Properties
Dear Councilmembers:

I am surprised, disappointed and disturbed by the proposal to move quickly to demolish the Wharf House Restaurant and the Boat and Bait properties. There are several items that I would recommend the council consider before passing the proposed resolution to amended the FY 23-24 budget:
1) I would like to understand the assessment of "total loss" of the Wharf House Restaurant. Who prepared this assessment? Was it completed by multiple impartial parties or was done by the City's staff? At a minimum this decision requires a third party to review the state of the building and weigh in on the potential for repairs. 2) Should the buildings require demolition, the City should open up the bidding process to multiple contractors. 3) Moving forward with no plans is not acceptable. This project spent considerable time in the review process prior to the letting of the contractor begin the work, it is not time to move forward expeditiously without having a thoroughly vetted plan for wharf improvement.

I would like to see Capitola methodically and transparently determine the long-range plan for the project.

I appreciate your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Lori Munoz
23 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Paul Estey <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:48 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Proposed Resolution to Fund Additional Wharf Expenditures Attachments: Screenshot 2024-02-22 at 8.21.56 AM.png
City Council Members:

The presentation in today's (22-Feb-24) City Council Meeting Packet relative to the issues with the Wharf reconstruction/rehabilitation project shows a projected deficit of $1,264,000. This deficit will result from the proposed contract changes for the Wharf reconstruction effort (see below). The resolution does not direct the City to use certain funds to cover this deficit. The current year (FY 23-24) budget General Fund has a reserve of only $500,000 (see below). Note that prior to the pandemic, City Council with the help of the Finance Department rebuilt the City's reserves that were depleted primarily due to the storm drain disaster in 2011. Those reserves were built up further during the pandemic. Now they have been reduced substantially again. The question then is how will the City account for this excess spending? The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) fund has a projected balance of $1,655,400 by the end of this fiscal year. I assume that these funds can be reallocated to the Wharf Project. If so then then there will be less than $400,000 left in the fund balance unless other CIP projects are deferred or cancelled. I am not sure on how the accounting is done for such multi-year projects funded primarily by County, State, or Federal sources. I think that as part of the City's report there should be a report by the Finance Director on the source(s) of the extra funds to cover the proposed overspending so that the public sees how this all washes out.

Thank you for your consideration,
Paul Estey
24 Item 4 A.
2 25
Item 4 A.
3 26
Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Katharine Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 11:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Items A, B and C City Council Agenda
To the City Council,
Tonight you’re discussing a number of issues important to many members of the Capitola community.

Under Item A, the Wharf has been a community icon and gathering place for many years. For that reason a dedicated group of ciƟzens has mounted an effecƟve campaign to raise monies for projects that will make the rebuilt wharf even more special than the original rebuild…”icing on the cake” if you will. Individuals and businesses donated monies thinking that we’re supporƟng these special projects; we trusted that the governmental funds alloƩed for the wharf’s rebuild would cover the original rebuild plans. Please do not allow the Wharf Resiliency Fund to be used in other ways or you’ll discourage future community fundraising efforts such as this one.

Under Item B, a street design that further limits the number of lanes will only increase the type of aggressive driving that I’ve seen increase in the past few years. Drivers oŌen zoom up the right hand lane (going towards Highway 1) then wedge themselves into the leŌ turn lane to get onto Highway 1 North. Especially during the am and pm school commute, traffic oŌen backs up from the Highway 1 off and on ramps past Gayles all the way to Park Avenue. It can take me 20 minutes to get from Park and Monterey Ave. intersecƟon to Highway 1. Now many drivers go onto Rosedale up to Hill and around and I guarantee you many more will do so if traffic is further restricted. Another problem is the right turn lane at Monterey and Park Avenue (turning onto Park) is poorly marked; many people in the right lane go straight …luckily we locals know to watch for that. In sum, the whole of Bay/Monterey deserves more study for traffic improvements. Perhaps flashing lights on the crosswalk like the one on Capitola Avenue near the DMV would suffice for now; they seems to work well.

Under Item C, the long term drainage study being submiƩed does virtually nothing to address the mulƟple drains from Depot Hill directly into the bay. They are shown on several maps and that’s it. When the study menƟons study of various drains, their capaciƟes, their condiƟons, how much they typically disperse…I think they didn’t even look at any of these drains (in fact they show two and there are at least three). The drain near Grand and Saxon failed within the cliff over ten years ago; its “temporary” fix is sƟll in place. A drainage study paid for by some Depot Hill homeowners was submiƩed to the City over ten years ago and is probably sƟll in City archives. These drains are ugly, they spew water like fire hoses directly onto the cliff during rainstorms, and deliver water directly from city streets into the Bay. They should at least be a part of any area drainage study.

Democracy is slow…it’s a pain to have to hear from many ciƟzens with a variety of ideas…but hopefully it helps us consider all alternaƟves and come up with the best outcomes.

Respecƞully,
Katharine and Tom Parker
Capitola
Sent from my iPad
27 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Tory Delfavero <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 1:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Wharf community meeting, agenda item, & follow up Dear Mayor and Council -
Thank you for creating a dedicated space to hear public input on the future of the wharf and share updates.

The showing last night clearly conveyed the importance of the Wharf House and Boat & Bait to the citizens of Capitola and our guests.

The businesses on the wharf have been running an unsanctioned City of Capitola recreation programs since its inception. I got to experience the magic of it as a child and have had the pleasure of my kids spending hours out there fishing, eating french fries, and enjoying time with their friends.

These local businesses have been true stewards of this recreational space.

Anyone that has spent time out there has witnessed the diversity of ages, backgrounds, and financial means.

From the New Brighton fishing club to patrons of live music on the deck - this space serves so many and creates joy that has a ripple effect into our entire community. What a gift! The meeting last night was well run and thoughtful. The Mayor closed the meeting by saying "It will be okay." I would like to ask the City to demonstrate how it will be okay.

The Wharf Working Group on the City's website is a start. But currently it is empty. The Public Works page has some nice content but still requires more digging to find out the latest on "Capitola Wharf Present". It's tough to keep it current but links to agenda items and budgets would help the public follow along. As I know the public needs the context, cost, and challenges to stay informed on this project and understand the decision making process.

The staff last night highlighted the need to tear down the buildings and the community showed up to highlight the need to rebuild them. We don't need fancy - we need salty! Thanks for reading.

Kindly -
Tory Del Favero on Riveview Dr. in Capitola
28 Item 4 A.

Tim Wann Structural Design Inc Ph / Fax 831 479-1513
P.O. Box 3581 C.C.L. 515779
Freedom, Ca. 95019 Registered Civil Engineer 62913
February 21, 2024
City of Capitola Community Development Department
420 Capitola Ave
Capitola, Ca. 95010
Subject: Observation of Structures on Capitola Wharf Post 2023 Storm Event

Capitola Wharf
1400 Wharf Rd,
Capitola, Ca. 95010
To Katie Herlihy, Director Capitola Community Development.

I recently performed a site visit to observe the condition of the existing structures housing the businesses on the Capitola Wharf. The focus was to assess damage and verify structural integrity.

The buildings are of wood frame sitting on a thin reinforced concrete slab supported by the wharf decking. I would estimate that the structures are in excess of 40 years in age.

While the buildings remain standing, there is substantial evidence of damage and decay to the concrete slab supporting the structures. I observed exposed areas compromised by broken and cracked concrete as a result of rusted reinforcing and damage from recent wave action.

It is evident that the slab below the buildings is damaged beyond repair. A primary factor is the high percentage of exposed and corroded reinforcing that will continue to degrade the integrity and strength of the slab. There is no costeffective way to repair or salvage the slab.

Any effort to salvage the wood framed structures would require an elaborate, time consuming, and costly temporary support system in order to remove and replace the slab. This effort would have to assume that the wood framing is in 29 Item 4 A.

February 21, 2024
Observation of Structures on Capitola Wharf Post 2023 Storm Event very good condition with adequate connections, very little damage or rot. This would be unlikely. At the time of my visit, I was not able to determine the complete extent of damage to the wood framing beyond multiple locations with cracks in wall finishes.

As a final and major consideration, the extent of work repairing these structures would trigger the requirement by the California Building Code to upgrade all framing, connections, and affected elements to current standards, only adding to the scope of work.

Based on the costs and effort associated with attempting to repair these structures, coupled with the fact that they inhibit access to properly repair the wharf, it is my opinion that these structures be removed.

Sincerely,
Tim Wann
Tim Wann
30 Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Goldstein, Jamie ([email protected])
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 3:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Proposed Resolution to Fund Additional Wharf Expenditures FYI
From: Goldstein, Jamie ([email protected])
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 3:53 PM
To: 'Paul Estey' <[email protected]>
Cc: Malberg, Jim <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Proposed Resolution to Fund Additional Wharf Expenditures Hi Paul,
The FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes an estimated ending General Fund balance of $1,554,000 with $100,000 designated for the Employee Downpayment Assistance Program, $954,000 designated for Infrastructure (Capital Improvements), and $500,000 as an operating balance. Staff will recommending that we use $500,000 of the $954,000 designated for CIP as we were informed today that the $500,000 wharf grant that was on hold has been approved and returned to the project funding sources. Additionally, staff is working on reducing the budget amendment request from $1,264,000 to $1 million.

The Reserve Funds remain fully funded over the two-year adopted and planned budgets with the only exception being requesting the use of $80,000 of Emergency Reserves for Dec. storm damages during the mid-year budget report.

From: Paul Estey <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:48 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Resolution to Fund Additional Wharf Expenditures City Council Members:

The presentation in today's (22-Feb-24) City Council Meeting Packet relative to the issues with the Wharf reconstruction/rehabilitation project shows a projected deficit of $1,264,000. This deficit will result from the proposed contract changes for the Wharf reconstruction effort (see below). The resolution does not direct the City to use certain funds to cover this deficit. The current year (FY 23-24) budget General Fund has a reserve of only $500,000 (see below). Note that prior to the pandemic, City Council with the help of the Finance Department rebuilt the City's reserves that were depleted primarily due to the storm drain disaster in 2011. Those reserves were built up further during the pandemic. Now they have been reduced substantially again. The question then is how will the City account for this excess spending? The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) fund has a projected balance of $1,655,400 by the end of this fiscal year. I assume that these funds can be reallocated to the Wharf Project. If so then then there will be less than $400,000 left in the fund balance unless other CIP projects are deferred or cancelled. I am not sure on how the accounting is done for such multi-year projects funded primarily by County, State, or Federal sources. I think that as part of the City's report there should be a report by the 31 Item 4 A.
2 Finance Director on the source(s) of the extra funds to cover the proposed overspending so that the public sees how this all washes out.

Thank you for your consideration,
Paul Estey
32 Item 4 A.
3 33
Item 4 A.
1 Westly, Austin
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 10:43 AM
To: Kahn, Jessica
Cc: Gautho, Julia; City Council
Subject: Re: Bay Hill Quick Build Item 2/22/24 city council meeting I’m super curious to see which councillor will put forward the idea of puƫng a right turn lane in for nob hill, dooming the whole project and making the intersecƟon even more dangerous as cars will just keep using it as a lane to conƟnue straight in such a design.

Planters on the curbs would look beƩer and big upside, make it almost safe. PlasƟc bollards are like plasƟc guns, bringing one to a dangerous place as a tool not a toy is never recommended.

They’ll get rid of it this summer for ‘traffic’ anyway. Alexander and Joe for different reasons of authenƟcity might care enough about our neighbors for a permanent build tbf. Betcha I’m right about all this.

SƟll don’t understand why we don’t have a roundabout at Bay/Capitola we already budgeted and spent so much on because one planning commissioner and a few folks are afraid of circles. A kid is going to get killed there eventually. That intersecƟon is so crazy dangerous especially when school lets out. I appreciate y’all. Our staff makes good recs why folks who can’t even read policy have the nerve to ignore y’all is narcissism incarnate.

I’ll be there Thursday. Never know with a human who inspires in the way I do. Might bring a small crowd with me. JM > On Feb 20, 2024, at 10:07 AM, Kahn, Jessica <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> The ulƟmate approval of materials will be at the discreƟon of the Council. However, as currently suggested, the bulbouts will be marked using paint and flexible bollards. Currently, there is no proposal for the inclusion of large planters, etc.
>
> Let me know if I can provide any addiƟonal informaƟon. >
> Thanks, Jessica
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 12:31 PM
> To: Kahn, Jessica <[email protected]>; Gautho, Julia <[email protected]> > Subject: Bay Hill Quick Build Item 2/22/24 city council meeƟng >
> Hello
>
> Please describe the material/type of bollards protecƟng pedestrians at the curbs? How amazing will it be if the council actually does this~
>
34 Item 4 B.
2 > too bad the roundabout at Bay/Capitola remains scuƩled by the planning commissioner who really dislikes roundabouts. If it wasn’t sƟll being delayed that whole secƟon would be in great shape right now for traffic to decrease with this quick build further increasing flow.
>
> Warmly JM
35 Item 4 B.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Laura Nolan <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 4:11 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Proposed Bay Ave-Hill St all way stop controlled intersection changes Hello,
I am a 40 year resident of the Riverview Terrace neighborhood in Capitola.

I live on Center Street, behind Nob Hill. I drive the Bay Avenue/Porter Street corridor several Ɵmes a day.

I understand the importance of making this corridor safe for all users: drives, walkers, and bicyclists. However, I strongly urge you not to do anything that will make the traffic on this busy corridor back up any more than it already does. I turn onto Bay Avenue off of Center Street several Ɵmes a day. I strongly believe any acƟon taken to reduce the lanes at the Bay Ave-Hill St all way stop will result in traffic backed up past Center St which will make an already difficult turn almost impossible.

My suggesƟon is to put the flashing pedestrian crossing lights at the Bay Ave-Hill St all way stop. These flashing lights will effecƟvely noƟfy drivers when pedestrians are actually in the cross walk. I am sure these lights can be adjusted to allow enough Ɵme for pedestrians, even slow ones, to safely cross.

Also, please do not add any more stop lights between Capitola Road and Main Street on this corridor There are already 3 stop lights in this short stretch of road. More stop lights will result in even more backed up traffic.

Laura Nolan
p.s. As an aside, many years ago a median was installed on Bay Avenue, going up the hill from the all way stop toward Gayle’s. This median created a right turn only lane. A fairly narrow one. This median frequently confuses drivers who think they conƟnue on Bay Avenue on it. When they find out they can’t, they have to make an abrupt merge into the lane that does do through. I use that right turn lane every day and have to be extra careful for drivers that are making that abrupt lane change. Also, as long as I’m at it, the landscaping in that median is always an eye-sore, City public works staff never seem to to weed, trim, or plant in it.
36 Item 4 B.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Katharine Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 11:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Items A, B and C City Council Agenda
To the City Council,
Tonight you’re discussing a number of issues important to many members of the Capitola community.

Democracy is slow…it’s a pain to have to hear from many ciƟzens with a variety of ideas…but hopefully it helps us consider all alternaƟves and come up with the best outcomes.

Respecƞully,
Katharine and Tom Parker
Capitola
Sent from my iPad
37 Item 4 B.
1 Westly, Austin
From: Katharine Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 11:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Items A, B and C City Council Agenda
To the City Council,
Tonight you’re discussing a number of issues important to many members of the Capitola community.

Democracy is slow…it’s a pain to have to hear from many ciƟzens with a variety of ideas…but hopefully it helps us consider all alternaƟves and come up with the best outcomes.

Respecƞully,
Katharine and Tom Parker
Capitola
Sent from my iPad
38 Item 4 C.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: City Manager Department
Subject: City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the special meeting on February 8, 2024, and the regular meeting on February 8, 2024.

Background: Attached for Council review and approval are the draft minutes from the special and regular City Council meetings on February 8, 2024.

Attachments:

1. Special Meeting Minutes

2. Regular Meeting Minutes
Report Prepared By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
39 Item 7 A.

City of Capitola
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 08, 2024 – 5:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
Mayor: Kristen Brown
Vice Mayor: Yvette Brooks
Council Members: Joe Clarke, Margaux Morgan, Alexander Pedersen Closed Session – 5 PM

1. Roll Call – The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM. In attendance: Council Members Clarke, Morgan, Pedersen, Vice Mayor Brooks, and Mayor Brown.

2. Oral Communications by Members of the Public - None

3. Closed Session
A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Gov’t Code § 54956.8) Property: Capitola Wharf Buildings, 1400 Wharf Road (APN: 034-072-01) City Negotiator: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: JFS Incorporated (dba Capitola Boat and Bait) Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

4. Report on Closed Session – The City Council met and discussed one item on the Closed Session Agenda. No reportable action was taken.

5. Adjournment – Adjourned at 6:03 PM to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting on February 8, 2024 at 6:00 PM.
____________________________
ATTEST: Kristen Brown, Mayor
____________________________
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
40 Item 7 A.

City of Capitola
City Council Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 08, 2024 – 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
Mayor: Kristen Brown
Vice Mayor: Yvette Brooks
Council Members: Joe Clarke, Margaux Morgan, Alexander Pedersen Regular Meeting of the Capitola City Council – 6 PM

1. Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance – The meeting was called to order at 6:03 PM. In attendance: Council Members Clarke, Morgan, Pedersen, Vice Mayor Brooks, and Mayor Brown.

2. Additions and Deletions to the Agenda – None

3. Presentations
A. Recreation Division Manager Bryant provided a presentation on the Recreation Strategic Plan.

B. Police Chief Dally provided a presentation on the Police Chief's Advisory Committee.

C. Grace Blakeslee, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, provided a presentation to update the City Council on the Zero Emission Passenger Rail & Trail Project.

4. Additional Materials
A. Item 3B – One email received.

B. Item 8B – One email received.

5. Oral Communications by Members of the Public
 Goran Klepic, resident, shared concerns about crime on 41st Avenue.  A representative from 211 shared the 2023 211 Annual Report and shared that February 11th is 211 Day.
 Lowry Fenton & Pam Goodman, Capitola Aptos Rotary Club, shared information about their annual fundraising event benefiting the Treasure Cove UA Playground.  Gary Richard Arnold, resident, spoke about government structure.

6. Staff / City Council Comments
 Council Member Clarke thanked Police and Public Works staff for their work during storm events.
 Vice Mayor Brooks shared that business owners must notarize letters of effective removal in accordance with SB 602, effective January 1, 2024.

7. Consent Items
A. City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the regular meeting on January 25, 2024.

B. Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget Calendar
Recommended Action: Approve Budget Calendar for Fiscal Year 2024-25. 41 Item 7 A.

City Council Meeting Minutes – February 08, 2024
City of Capitola Page 2
Motion to approve the Consent Calendar: Council Member Morgan Seconded: Council Member Clarke
Voting Yea: Council Members Clarke, Morgan, Pedersen, Vice Mayor Brooks, Mayor Brown

8. General Government / Public Hearings
A. Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project
Recommended Action: Receive a progress report on the Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project.

Public Works Director Kahn presented the staff report.

B. Housing Element Update
Recommended Action: Provide preliminary direction to staff regarding amendments to Programs

1.6 and 1.7 of the recently adopted Housing Element that would provide additional incentives for Capitola Mall redevelopment, including a maximum height of 75 feet and an exception for parking garages from the floor area ratio calculation.

Community Development Director Herlihy presented the staff report.

David Geiser, Architect, answered City Council questions on behalf of the Merlone Geier Partners.

City Council discussion included clarification on the economic feasibility of Merlone Geier’s proposed project and number of units and timeline of HCD review and submission.

The City Council supported the Planning Commission recommendation to increase the height limit to 75 feet and increase FAR from 1.0 to 2.0 on the Mall Site and directed staff to consider daylight plane and wrapped parking when adding objective review standards, and to collaborate with Merlone Geier Partners on the project submission.

C. Strategic Plan Project Overview and Timeline
Recommended Action: Receive a consultant report on the process and workplan for the development of a five-year Capitola strategic plan.

Chloe Woodmansee, Assistant to the City Manager, and BerryDunn, project consultants, presented the staff report.

9. Adjournment – Adjourned at 7:59 PM to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting on February 22, 2024, at 6:00 PM.
____________________________
ATTEST: Kristen Brown, Mayor
____________________________
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
42 Item 7 A.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Finance Department
Subject: City Check Registers
Recommended Action: Approve check registers dated January 19, 2024, January 26, 2024, and February 9, 2024.

Account: City Main
Date Starting Check # Ending Check # Payment
Count Amount
01/19/2024 105250 105287 43 $ 189,049.82
01/26/2024 105288 105329 45 $ 787,929.61
02/09/2024 105330 105424 102 $ 511,653.91
The main account check register dated January 12, 2024, ended with check #105249.

Account: Payroll
Date Starting
Check/EFT #
Ending
Check/EFT #
Payment
Count Amount
01/19/2024 5857 5858 1 $ 2,249.32
01/26/2024 5858 5859 94 $ 223,304.21
02/09/2024 24257 24355 99 $ 198,218.26
The payroll account check register dated January 12, 2024, ended with EFT #24163.

Following is a list of payments issued for more than $10,000 and descriptions of the expenditures:

Check/
EFT Issued to Dept Description Amount
105256 Community Bridges CDD Oct-Dec Meals on Wheels $ 22,018.02 1652 CalPERS Member
Services Division CM PERS Contributions PPE 1/6/24 $ 65,084.57 1653 Employment Development
Department CM State Taxes PPE 1/6/24 $ 13,075.03
1654 Internal Revenue Service CM Federal Taxes & Medicare PPE 1/6/24 $ 41,629.44
105293 Betz Works Inc PW Emergency Storm Cleanup $ 12,600.00 105296 Cushman Contracting Corp
Escrow PW December Wharf Project Retainer $ 31,705.97
105297 Cushman Contracting
Corporation PW December Wharf Resiliency Project Services $ 602,413.39 105298 Donald W Alley PW Soquel Creek Monitoring and
Reporting $ 17,605.81
105304 Kimley-Horn & Associates PW Bay/Hill Intersection Analysis $ 44,114.56 43 Item 7 B.
105309 Moffatt and Nichol PW Wharf Design Services $ 10,676.86 105313 Pacific Gas & Electric PW January Monthly Utilities $ 17,620.13 1659 Wells Fargo Bank Fin December Credit Card
Charges $ 16,121.28
105348 Burke Williams and
Sorensen LLP CM December Legal Services $ 21,616.26
105362 Dudek CDD 723 El Salto Dr Project
Services $ 11,749.75
105371 Group 4 Architecture
Research & Planning CDD City Hall Facilities Needs Assessment $ 11,520.00 105388 McKim Corporation PW Capitola Road Pavement
Rehabilitation Project Services $ 112,394.59
105405 Shape Inc PW Replacement Pumps $ 26,757.32
105419 V&A Consulting Engineers PW Noble Gulch Culvert Condition Assessment Services $ 24,227.40
1662 CalPERS Health Insurance CM January Health Insurance $ 77,718.98 1663 CalPERS Member
Services Division CM PERS Contributions PPE 1/20/24 $ 65,140.65 1665 Internal Revenue Service CM Federal Taxes & Medicare PPE 1/20/24 $ 33,333.68
Attachments:

1. 01-19-24 Check Register

2. 01-26-24 Check Register

3. 02-09-24 Check Register
Report Prepared By: Luis Ruiz, Accountant I
Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk and Jim Malberg, Finance Director Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
44 Item 7 B.
45 Item 7 B.
46 Item 7 B.
47 Item 7 B.
48 Item 7 B.
49 Item 7 B.
50 Item 7 B.
51 Item 7 B.
52 Item 7 B.
53 Item 7 B.
54 Item 7 B.
55 Item 7 B.
56 Item 7 B.
57 Item 7 B.
58 Item 7 B.
59 Item 7 B.
60 Item 7 B.
61 Item 7 B.
62 Item 7 B.
63 Item 7 B.
64 Item 7 B.
65 Item 7 B.
66 Item 7 B.
67 Item 7 B.
68 Item 7 B.
69 Item 7 B.
70 Item 7 B.
71 Item 7 B.
72 Item 7 B.
73 Item 7 B.
74 Item 7 B.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Community Development Department
Subject: State Grant Administration Agreement Amendment Recommended Action: Approve an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Adams Ashby Group for grant administration services, including Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Administration ($31,527), 2023 Community Development Block Grant Application ($7,500), and 2023 HOME Investment Partnership Program application ($10,000).

Background: Paul Ashby, of Adams Ashby Group, has provided grant administration services to the City since 2011 for required HOME Investment Partnership Program reporting related to the Bay Avenue Senior Housing project and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project administration for a variety of qualifying programs. Adams Ashby Group currently has a contract with the City for annual HOME reporting ($3,700/year) and administration of the 2021 CDBG Grant ($35,000).

In 2017, Governor Brown signed a 15-bill housing package aimed at addressing California’s housing shortage and high housing costs. Specifically, it included the Building Homes and Jobs Act, known as Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) to increase the supply of affordable homes in California. The Bill established a $75 recording fee on real estate documents and created the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Fund (PLHA). Beginning in 2019, the Bill authorized the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to allocate 70 percent of PLHA fund moneys to local governments for eligible housing and homelessness activities. The intent of the bill is to provide a permanent, ongoing source of funding to local governments for housing-related projects and programs that address the unmet housing needs of their local communities.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued the first Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) under the PLHA program making affordable housing funding available statewide. HCD calculates and publishes the PLHA allocation annually. The following table includes Capitola’s funding for 2019 – 2021 and estimated funding for 2022 and 2023. Five percent of PLHA funding may be utilized for grant administration.

Year PLHA NOFA
Allocation
2019 $105,092
2020 $180,868
2021 $195,772
2022 (estimate) $74,713
2023 (estimate) $74,712
Total $630,557
On November 10, 2022, the City Council adopted resolution 4294 authorizing staff to submit an application for the PLHA grant and adopted the PLHA five-year plan.

Discussion: On June 23, 2024, the City of Capitola was awarded a PLHA grant. The PLHA application, authorized by the City Council, identified grant funding to be allocated for predevelopment cost of 75 Item 7 C.

7.0 Packet Pg. 2
affordable housing rental projects, very low-income homeless assistance Housing for Health Partnership year-round emergency shelter operations in Santa Cruz County, and project administration. The predevelopment costs of affordable housing rental projects will be utilized to assist the 52-unit affordable housing rental development at 1098 38th Avenue. The very low-income homeless assistance will provide funding for the Housing for Health Partnership year-round emergency shelter operations in Santa Cruz County. Also, five percent of the grant funding is allocated for project administration by Adams Ashby Group ($31,527).

On January 19, 2024, the California Department of Housing and Community Development released the 2022-2023 HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) NOFA. The HOME grant may be utilized for housing rehabilitation for multifamily projects that benefit low-income renters. The Dakota Apartments, located at 3245 Clares Street, include 24 affordable and accessible rental apartments. They were built in 1998 and are identified in the updated Housing Element as an existing affordable housing development in need of rehabilitation. HOME grant applications are due April 9, 2024. Adams Ashby Group can complete the grant application and administer the future grant. The cost to complete the grant application is $10,000 due to the complexity of the application. The City has HOME administration funds available to cover the cost of the application. In March, staff will return to the City Council with an overview of the HOME grant application, the future rehabilitation improvement for the Dakota Apartments, and a resolution authorizing the application to HCD. The property owner, ASI, is currently completing a needs assessment for the property. The total grant funding request is unknown at this time, so the cost of administering the future grant is also unknown.

On January 31, 2024, the California Department of Housing and Community Development released the 2023 CDBG NOFA. At the direction of the City Council, staff will apply for the maximum amount of CDBG funding ($3.3 million) for the Jade Street Community Center renovations. Adams-Ashby Group will complete the 2023 CDBG grant application and, if awarded, administer the grant. The cost for administering the $3.3 million grant is $100,000.

Adams Ashby Group will continue to provide annual reporting for the HOME Investment Partnership Program and grant administration services for the active 2021 CDBG Grant. Paul Ashby has provided annual reporting services for the HOME Investment Partnership Program required for the Bay Avenue Senior Housing project since 2011. The $30M rehabilitation project was funded by many sources, including a Capitola Redevelopment Agency loan and a major State HOME loan, which requires annual reporting. Since 2011, HOME annual reporting services have been $3,700 annually. The cost of annual reporting will increase to $4,100 due to inflation. Paul Ashby has also provided grant administration services for the 2021 CDBG grant, which provides public assistance to Grey Bears, Second Harvest, and Community Bridges. Program administration of the $500,000 grant is $35,000.

In summary, staff is seeking to amend the Adams Ashby Group contract to include PLHA grant administration ($31,527), 2023 CDBG grant application ($7,500), and 2023 HOME Investment Partnership Program application ($10,000). The amended contract will also include current services for HOME reporting ($4,100) and the administration of the 2021 CDBG Grant ($35,000). If the 2023 CDBG Grant and/or the 2023 Home Investment Partnership Program are awarded, staff will return to the City Council for additional modifications to administer the grants.

Fiscal Impact: Funding for the PLHA grant administration ($31,527) would come from the existing PLHA fund balance. Funding to prepare and submit the 2023 CDBG applications ($7,500) would come from existing CDBG fund balance and, contingent upon award, the CDBG program administration will be funded through the 2023 CDBG grant. Funding to prepare and submit the 2022-2023 HOME application ($10,000) would come from the existing HOME fund balance, and, contingent upon the award, the HOME program administration will be funded through the 2022-2023 HOME grant. The annual reporting for the Bay Avenue HOME loan ($4,100) would continue to be funded through available HOME reuse funds.

The existing 2021 CDBG grant administration will continue to be funded the relevant 2021 CDBG grant. 76 Item 7 C.

7.0 Packet Pg. 3
Attachments:

1. Attachment 1: Contract Amendment
Report Prepared By: Katie Herlihy, Community Development Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
77 Item 7 C.
2 nd AMENDMENT TO THE

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
between

CITYOF CAPITOLA AND ADAMS ASHBY GROUP
The City of Capitola and Adams Ashby Group., hereby agree to the following Amendment(s) to the Contract dated February 22, 2023:
1) Increase the contract value from $91,025 to $140,052 for affordable housing and grant preparation and administration services.

All other terms and conditions of the Professional Services Agreement remain in full force and effect.

CONSULTANT: Adams Ashby Group.
__________________________________ Date: ___________________ By:

CITY OF CAPITOLA
___________________________________ Date: ___________________ By: Benjamin Goldstein, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________ Date: ___________________ Sam Zutler, City Attorney
78 Item 7 C.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: City Manager Department
Subject: Capitola Representation on the Bicycle Advisory Committee Recommended Action: Recommend reappointment of Paula Bradley to represent Capitola on the Regional Transportation Committee’s Bicycle Advisory Subcommittee.

Background: The City of Capitola is currently represented on the Regional Transportation Committee (RTC) by Council Member Alexander Pedersen. The RTC has a Bicycle Advisory Subcommittee, which currently has one Capitola representative. Representatives to this committee serve for four years and are appointed by the RTC. The City Council may recommend the appointment or reappointment of Capitola’s representative to this subcommittee before the RTC makes an appointment. Paula Bradley has served as Capitola’s representative since 2020.

Discussion: On February 14, 2024, Paula Bradley indicated she would like to be reappointed to continue serving as Capitola’s representative on the Bicycle Advisory Committee. The RTC advertised the vacancy for this position and received no other applicants who reside within the City.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Attachments:

1. Application
Report Prepared By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
79 Item 7 D.

Postmarked December 30, 2020; received late due to USPS delivery issues. -KC, 1/27/2021 80 Item 7 D.
81 Item 7 D.
82 Item 7 D.
83 Item 7 D.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Public Works Department
Subject: Update on the Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Recommended Action: Approve Change Order 5 to the Public Works Agreement with Cushman Contracting for the Wharf Project in an amount not to exceed $1,913,000 (for a total contract amount of $10,227,000) and adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget to allocate an amount not to exceed $1,264,000 in funding for the additional project expenditures.

Background: The Capitola Wharf is currently undergoing a major renovation through the Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project. The Project is focused on crucial elements such as widening the Wharf, fixing failing pilings, replacing the deck, and adding new restroom facilities. The project aims to ensure the Wharf's long-term resilience. Construction by Cushman Contracting began in September 2023 and has been making steady progress since then.

During the February 8, 2024, City Council meeting, staff reported additional damage from the storm event on December 28, 2023. This included broken piles, exposed drift pins, and splintered timber piles, particularly between newly constructed Bents 27 and 30. The Wharf House Restaurant suffered severe damage and was subsequently deemed a total loss. Assessment of the Boat and Bait building was incomplete as of the last meeting.

Discussion: The Boat and Bait property has been red-tagged since January 2023, with intermittent tenant access. The property encompasses boats on deck, retail items in the shop, and boating and fishing equipment in the garage.

A structural evaluation conducted by the City Engineer and Building Official brought to light foundation issues, including cracking, corrosion, general deterioration, and non-compliance with current codes.

Notable vulnerabilities to water intrusion and inadequate weather protection for doors and windows were observed.

Staff met with local contractors to evaluate options to repair the building, specifically raising the building, replacing the foundation and then bringing the building up to current code standards. However, it was deemed impractical as the cost for building renovation would have likely exceeded the cost for new custom construction due to construction challenges and the extensive structural damage to the building.

Retrieval of belongings from Boat and Bait is currently in progress. These items are stored temporarily, along with salvageable boats, in the lower Pacific Cove Parking Lot. The Capitola Wharf Resiliency Project will progress sequentially, including the demolition of Boat and Bait, hazardous material abatement, Wharf House demolition, repair of Wharf structural elements, and deck replacement. This process may extend the project by an additional six weeks to two months.

Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impacts of the demolition of the Wharf House and Boat and Bait properties are substantial, with an estimated $1M budget for demolition plus an additional $500,000 to rebuild the Wharf under the location of the buildings. Additional repair work at the head of the Wharf is quantified at $100,000. Staff is evaluating options for building demolition and will present any additional options at the hearing.

The overall project budget is detailed below.
84 Item 8 A.

Wharf Resiliency and Public Access Project Budget
Funding
Coastal Conservancy Grant $1,900,000
HUD Grant $3,500,000
Measure F $2,500,000
Insurance from January 2023 Storm Damages $1,000,000
California Natural Resources Agency TBD

FEMA TBD
CWEP Fundraising $400,000
Total Project Funding $9,300,000
Expenses
Initial Contract (inclusive of January 2023 Storm
Damage) $7,740,000
Change Order 1 $104,300
Change Order 2 $43,000
Change Order 3 $213,700
Change Order 4 - Storm Damage (December 2023) $213,000
CWEP – Cushman Construction $313,000
CWEP – Non-Cushman Items $337,000
Building Demolition $1,000,000
Repair Work Under Buildings $500,000
Head of Wharf Repair $100,000
Total Project Costs to Date $10,564,000
Available Funds
Projected Deficit $1,264,000
An allocation of $250,000 has been designated for ancillary enhancements to the Capitola Wharf through the Capitola Wharf Enhancement Project (CWEP). The estimated cost for the procurement and installation of CWEP elements most suitably handled by Cushman (lighting, furniture, viewing stations) is $313,000. A potential project cost savings could involve revisiting the placement of the restroom at the Wharf's end, which could lead to an approximate cost reduction of $300,000, however, restrooms have previously been determined to be an important project component.

The original construction contract signed with Cushman Contracting amounted to $7.74 million. Before the occurrence of the December storm, change orders were executed totaling $361,000. The subsequent storm damage repairs incurred an additional $213,000, resulting in a cumulative change order of $574,000 and a revised contract amount of $8.31M. The contract with Cushman Contracting was originally approved to authorize staff to execute change orders up to 10% of the contract value. With the addition of the building demolition and related repair work, repairs on the head of the Wharf, and the associated costs with implementing the Capitola Wharf Enhancement Project (CWEP), staff recommends a change order to the Public Works Agreement with Cushman Contracting in an amount not to exceed $1,913,000 (for a total contract amount of $10,227,000) and budget amendment in an amount not to exceed $1,264,000. The initial construction budget for this project was $8,900,000, with this change order the project is approximately 15% above the engineers estimate. 85 Item 8 A.

Coordination with FEMA for financial assistance is ongoing, recognizing the potential for additional damage reimbursement in the future. Funding from the California Natural Resources Agency continues to be on hold, with uncertainty about availability until at least July.

Attachments:

1. Budget Amendment Resolution
Report Prepared By: Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
86 Item 8 A.

RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPITOLA
AMENDING THE 2023-24 FISCAL YEAR CITY BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM BUDGET
WHEREAS, it is necessary to adopt the 2023-24 Fiscal Year Budget for all City funds and Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted budget study sessions, heard and considered public comments, had modified and proposed a budget accordingly, and on June 22, 2023, adopted such budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of the budget, the Capitola Wharf and buildings thereon sustained significant damage due to winter storms in 2023 and staff has discovered additional damage to the Capitola Wharf requiring the demolition and removal of the buildings; and WHEREAS, the original project budget did not anticipate the additional cost of demolition and removal of the building; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget to include the $1,264,000 in additional project expenditures; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Capitola that the 2023-24 Fiscal Year Budget is hereby amended, including Exhibit A (Budget Amendment) to this Resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is directed to enter the budget into the City's accounting records in accordance with appropriate accounting practices, and the City Manager, with the Finance Director's assistance, shall assure compliance therewith.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Capitola on the 22nd day of February 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________
Kristen Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ ___
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
87 Item 8 A.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F9D6B4A-5F34-4E69-8385-55F0AC50DBD2 88 Item 8 A.

Wharf
Resiliency and
Public Access
Project
City Council
February 22, 2024
89 Item 8 A.

Project Overview - Wharf Resiliency and Public Access
• Project Key Elements
• Widening, piling
fixes, deck
replacement,
restroom addition
• Ensure the Wharf's
long-term resilience
• Contractor: Cushman
Contracting
• Commencement Date:

September 2023
90 Item 8 A.

Wharf Resiliency
Project – Remaining
Scope • 1. Widening: Anticipated completion within the
next 1-2 weeks.
• 2. Address Buildings: Anticipated demolition • 3. Head of Wharf: Pile replacement and repairs • 4. Bathroom: Installation pending. • 5. CWEP: • Lighting and related electrical work • Furniture installation • Art, Fish station • 6. Other Items: • Signage project • Plaque replacement • Security gate installation • Landing and floating dock 91 Item 8 A.

Building Assessments
Wharf House Restaurant
• Severe structural
deficiencies
• Immediate hazard
92 Item 8 A.

Building Assessments Bait Shop
• Severe structural deficiencies
• Confirmed by independent engineer
93 Item 8 A.

Independent
Evaluation: Tim
Wann Structural
Design
• Wood-framed buildings on wharf, 40+
years old, with deteriorated concrete slab.
• Extensive damage to the slab from rusted
reinforcing and recent waves; beyond
repair.
• Salvaging structures impractical due to
costly support requirements and likely
wood framing issues.
• Incomplete assessment of wood framing,
but repairs would trigger code upgrades.
• Recommendation: Remove structures due
to high cost, complexity, and hindrance to
wharf repairs.
94 Item 8 A.

February 21, 2024 Town Hall
• Supporting Businesses and
Encouraging Tenancy
• Commitment to supporting
businesses on the wharf.
• Strong desire for businesses
to continue operating in the
current location.
• Questions Regarding Demolition
and Financial Stability
• Exploring the necessity of
demolition.
• Assessing financial position
and implications
95 Item 8 A.

Building Assessments
• Preserving the buildings is not feasible due to:
• Extensive repairs needed, including lifting and rebuilding the foundation. • Addressing code non-compliance issues.
• Managing hazardous material concerns.
• Considerations
• High associated costs make these repairs financially impractical. • The projected expenses are likely to exceed the cost of constructing a new building.
• Such repairs would hinder the necessary wharf repairs 96 Item 8 A.

Building Demolition Process
• Content Removal
• Streamlining the removal of contents.
• Facilitating Boat and Bait content removal and storage. • HazMat Challenges
• Addressing hazardous material issues.
• Conducting asbestos abatement.
• Building Demolition
• Completed under emergency permits.
• Inability to use typical heavy equipment due to wharf limitations. • Reliance on manual labor to avoid debris entering the ocean. • Debris Management
• Utilizing small trucks for transportation from head to base of the wharf. • Employing smaller dumpsters near Wharf Road for efficient dumping. • Ensuring proper disposal of debris. 97
Item 8 A.

Recommended Approach for Building Demolition
and Repair within Resiliency Project

1. Obtain emergency permits for the demolition – in progress

2. Initiate a change order with the onsite mobilized contractor to include demolition of buildings in the project scope

3. Execute the demolition of buildings, in line with the Resiliency Project

4. Conduct repairs under the demolished buildings

5. Upon completion of demolition and repairs, resume and finalize the remaining repair work within the overall Resiliency project 98 Item 8 A.

Alternative Approach:

Engage another contractor within Resiliency Project

1. Cease Cushman work, incur holding costs.

2. Obtain new bids, covering demo, abatement, and content removal.

3. Cushman to complete work for new contractor access, incur additional costs.

4. Cushman to implement environmental compliance measures under current permits, incur associated costs.

5. Execute the demolition of buildings, while Resiliency Project is on hold.

6. Commence repairs beneath the demolished structures.

7. Upon completion of demolition and repairs, resume and finalize the remaining Resiliency project work.
99 Item 8 A.

Alternative Approach:

Defer Demolition to End of Resiliency Project

1. Immediate Safety Measures:
• Shore up the wharf house for safety.

2. Partial Project Completion by
Cushman:
• Engage Cushman for project work up
to the wharf house.
• Incomplete project due to safety
concerns.

3. Demobilization of Cushman:
• Cushman demobilizes after
completing their scope.

4. Engineered Plans and Permits:
• Develop new engineered plans.
• Obtain new regulatory permits for
demolition and wharf project
completion.

5. Bid Process:
• Bid out demolition and repair work.

6. Mobilization of New Contractor:
• Award contract to selected
contractor.
• Mobilize new contractor, under new
permit timing conditions.
100
Item 8 A.

Head of Wharf Repairs
• January Damage:
• Head of the wharf sustained damage in January.
• December Damage:
• Additional damage occurred to the head of the
wharf in December.
• Repair Scope:
• Full replacement of decking was planned.
• Additional piles and structural elements were found
damaged and required attention.
• Landing Damage:
• The landing area also incurred damage,
necessitating repair or replacement.
101
Item 8 A.

Head of Wharf Restroom – Portland Loo
• Portland Loo and Credit:
• Portland Loo and credit
option ($200-$300k) due
to building losses
• Project Significance:
• Importance of restroom
facilitesin the project,
supported by dedicated
funding
102
Item 8 A.

Other Items
• Capitola Wharf Enhancement Project
• Scheduled for consideration at the Planning Commission on 3/6/24 • Propose integrating electrical and furniture components into the Cushman contract change order
• Artistic and other elements under separate development • Additional efforts, including
• Educational signage secured through MBNMSF grant.
• Plaque replacement, floating dock, and security gate installation under the existing Cushman contract
103
Item 8 A.

Proposed Change Order -
Cushman Contracting
The total contract cost
exceeds the project
construction estimate by
15%
Initial Contract (inclusive of January 2023 Storm
Damage) $7,740,000
Change Order 1 $104,300
Change Order 2 $43,000
Change Order 3 $213,700
Change Order 4 - Storm Damage (December 2023) $213,000
Current Contract $8,314,000
CWEP – Cushman Construction $313,000
Building Demolition $1,000,000
Repair Work Under Buildings $500,000
Head of Wharf Repair $100,000
Estimate of Change Order 5 $1,913,000
Total Contract Amount $10,227,000 104
Item 8 A.

Project Budget Funding
Coastal Conservancy Grant $1,900,000
HUD Grant $3,500,000
Measure F $2,500,000
Insurance from January 2023 Storm
Damages
$1,000,000
California Natural Resources Agency TBD

FEMA TBD
CWEP Fundraising $400,000
Total Project Funding $9,300,000
Expenses
Cushman Contract w/ CO 1-5 $10,227,000
CWEP – Non-Cushman Items $337,000
Estimated Project Costs $10,564,000
Available Funds
Projected Deficit $1,264,000
105
Item 8 A.

Project Budget –
Amended Deficit Funding
Projected Deficit $1,264,000
Restroom Credit ($200,000)
California Natural
Resources Agency
($500,000)
Projected Deficit $564,000
106
Item 8 A.

Next Steps –
Select Building
Demolition
Option
Cushman Demolition:
•Pros:
•Streamlined coordination with ongoing work.
•Cons:
•May not offer the most competitive pricing.

Alternative Quote:
•Pros:
•Potential for more competitive pricing, albeit marginal •Cons:
•Coordination challenges with ongoing project work.
•Time needed for evaluating and selecting a new contractor Post-Project Demolition:
•Pros:
•No disruption to ongoing project work.
•Cons:
•Delays in addressing potential safety concerns
•Separate mobilization and coordination efforts needed after project completion.
107
Item 8 A.

Next Steps
Portland Loo Installation Decision:
• Evaluate the need of installing the Portland Loo.

Project Completion Projection:
• Anticipated project completion in Fall 2023.

Future Visioning and Public Process:
• Engage in future visioning exercises.
• Initiate a public process to gather input on the future development of the wharf.
108
Item 8 A.

Reccomendation • Approve Change Order 5 to the
Public Works Agreement with
Cushman Contracting for the Wharf
Project in an amount not to exceed
$1,913,000 (for a total contract
amount of $10,227,000) and adopt
a resolution amending the FY 2023-
24 Adopted Budget to allocate an
amount not to exceed $564,000 in
funding for the additional project
expenditures.
109
Item 8 A.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Public Works Department
Subject: Bay Avenue and Hill Street Traffic Safety Update Recommended Action: Authorize construction of the proposed Bay Avenue/Hill Street intersection quickbuild project.

Background: The Bay Avenue and Hill Street (Bay/Hill) intersection is an all-way stop-controlled intersection that provides connectivity to Highway 1 and Capitola Village. The section of Bay Avenue at this location is a four-lane wide roadway with a center left turn lane. The City has received community feedback regarding concerns about pedestrian safety at the crosswalks. During peak hours, the intersection experiences congestion from heavy vehicle and pedestrian cross traffic due to access to the Nob Hill Plaza, the Rispin Bridge crossing, and the surrounding residential and commercial land uses.

The adopted FY 2023-24 budget includes $50,000 to make improvements to this intersection.

During the September 28, 2023, City Council meeting, staff presented various options for the Hill/Bay intersection. In response, an ad-hoc subcommittee, comprised of Council Members Clarke and Pedersen, was formed to collaborate with staff, gather input from adjacent businesses, and solicit public feedback. The subcommittee's primary goal is to explore short-term solutions and present a comprehensive report to the City Council.

In November 2023, the City amended its contract with Kimley Horn to develop options for a short-term (quick build) traffic safety improvement project, incorporating the outcomes of the ad-hoc subcommittee.

The contract also includes an updated traffic analysis for long-term design improvements at the Bay Avenue/Hill Street and Bay Avenue/Capitola Avenue intersections. During a community meeting held on November 29, community members expressed concerns not only about the Bay/Hill intersection but also about safety and maneuverability along the entire Bay Avenue corridor from the Highway 1 off-ramp to the Capitola Avenue intersection.

During the December 14, 2023, City Council meeting, staff was directed to purchase lighted/flashing stop signs and pole reflectors before implementation of the quick-build project, and re-stripe the Hill Street Corridor with reflective paint. Signs arrived ahead of the reflectors and were immediately installed, reflectors will be installed soon. The crosswalk has been re-striped with reflective paint.

Staff has initiated the assessment of long-term options for Bay Avenue. The scope of the traffic analysis has been broadened to encompass Bay Avenue to the Highway 1 off-ramp and the Monterey Avenue intersection, taking into account safety improvements for active transportation along the corridor. The initial analysis is anticipated to be completed in late summer or early fall of 2024.

Discussion: Following direction from the subcommittee, staff conducted meetings with all relevant property owners and organized a community meeting at the Bay Avenue Senior Center on January 31, 2024. Additionally, staff actively communicated with the Capitola representative on the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission’s Elderly and Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee.

The feedback obtained from these interactions is summarized below and included as Attachment 1. 110
Item 8 B.

Property Owners:

Concerns Responses
Worries about potential traffic congestion and extended queues, especially with Crossroad Loop becoming a
shortcut for impatient vehicles
City willing to assist with traffic calming
measures, such as striping and speed humps,
on private-owned Crossroads Loop street to
discourage cut-through vehicle trips. Private
right-of-way improvements funded by property
owner.

Expressions of concern regarding the permanence of
quick-build solutions, emphasizing the need for
sustainable and lasting traffic management measures
City plans a corridor study for long-term
improvements. Acknowledgment of the need for
sustainable and lasting traffic management
measures in long-term solutions.

Specific to Red Tree (Nob Hill Shopping Center):

Primary concern is the reduction of lanes exiting the
center at the intersection, potentially causing queues
that extend in front of the grocery store and impact
pedestrians entering from the parking lot. The
proposed striping for the quick-build project is on the property outside the City's right-of-way and will require permission from the owner for modification
City modified proposed egress from center that
balances improving intersection safety while
maintaining traffic operations and access to the
property.

A secondary concern is the reduction of lanes
approaching the intersection from the freeway,
diverting traffic into the secondary entrance near the
carwash
Traffic analysis considered and found to be
adequate within the existing drive aisle.

Anticipation that some traffic may divert from the
Bay/Hill intersection and use the secondary
entrance at Crossroads Loop with the proposed
quick-build improvements.

Bay Avenue Senior Center:

Concern Response
Night Visibility
Acknowledged concerns. Street lighting will be considered as a long-term future improvement due to funding limitations of the quick-build design.

Pedestrian
Safety
Acknowledged concerns. Offered to explore more permanent options for enhanced pedestrian protection.

Bulb-Out Areas
Inquired about measures for pedestrian safety in bulb-out areas. Assured that the design will confirm sufficient sight distance to maximize pedestrian visibility.

Hardscape
Features
Emphasized the importance of ensuring hardscape features are not too high.

Reiterated commitment to maintaining sight distance with hardscape features.

Road Layout
Preference
Expressed a general preference for a road layout that improves safety. Highlighted that the road layout will be evaluated after construction and can be modified.

After considering feedback from stakeholder groups, the preferred option is the road diet in Figure 1. In collaboration with the subcommittee, a quick build project is proposed, reducing lanes at Bay Avenue approaches to simplify driver navigation. Bulb outs, delineated with paint and bollards, aim to shorten pedestrian crossing distances.
111
Item 8 B.

Figure 1: Quick Build Road Diet Layout
This resembles the road diet option presented to the City Council in September 2023, featuring additional striping and a wider buffer area for bikes. The proposal includes a right-turn-only lane into the carwash entrance at the Nob Hill shopping center, potentially reducing the number of lanes if permitted. The quickbuild utilizes temporary materials and paint; however, speed tables are not part of this project.

The paint design for the bulb-outs is recommended to go beyond a solid color for prominence. Staff suggests consulting with a member of the Art and Cultural Commission designated by the Chair for paint selection on the project.

The implementation of quick-build options at the Bay Avenue/Hill Street intersection is expected to impact traffic, potentially leading to longer queues and negatively affecting Level of Service (LOS). However, these modifications are designed to be reversible, serving as temporary measures to assess their effectiveness. Safety considerations are paramount, with all parties emphasizing the importance of prioritizing safety in the evaluation of these temporary traffic interventions.

Staff proposes scheduling the construction of the quick build project during the period when schools are not in session, specifically aiming for the tentative timeframe of the last week of May or the first week of June, just before the peak summer season.

Fiscal Impact: The current $50,000 allocation for the short-term quick-build project is sufficient for construction and subsequent evaluation of its effectiveness. Future funding needs for construction on Bay Avenue will be determined based on the outcomes of the quick-build project and the identification of the specific long-term project.

CEQA: This project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c), which applies to minor alterations of existing highways and streets involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that which presently exists.

Attachments:

1. Conceptual Design Feedback

2. Final Quick Build Layout
Report Prepared By: Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director; Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
112
Item 8 B.
113
Item 8 B.

Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection City of Capitola
Quick Build Options for Multimodal Safety Improvements February 14, 2024 Public Outreach Comment City and Kimley-Horn Response
1 Gotti Properties (810-816 Bay Ave) Received 1/29/2024 Overall, open to a reduction in service to enhance safety. Noted. Quick build options aim to enhance multimodal safety at Flashing stop signs are too small and concurs that they are insufficient to change driver behavior.

Noted. A combination of various traffic calming measures including flashing stop signs would be needed to improve intersection safety and alter driver behavior.

Concerns about the egress from Dairy Queen onto Bay Avenue. Proposed curb extension with raised bollards next to Dairy Queen egress driveway would maintain existing access condition. The City is willing to assist with providing a modified striping plan for the parking lot to improve vehicle circulation on the property. These private R/W improvements would be funded by the property owner.

Desire for nighttime lighting throughout the entire corridor. Due to funding limitations of the quick-build design, street lighting would be implemented as a long-term future improvement along the Bay Avenue corridor
Regarding long-term future modifications:
• In the short term, like to convert the south entrance into an entranceonly, but unsure about the restriping design of the parking lot. • Favorable towards the idea of a roundabout. There is interest in exploring Dairy Queen's exit as a potential leg of a future roundabout.

The City is willing to assist with providing a modified striping plan for the parking lot to improve vehicle circulation on the property. These private R/W improvements would be funded by the property owner.

Design team will investigate feasibility of Dairy Queen exit as potential intersection leg of a future roundabout
Lomak Property Group (Crossroads Center) Received 1/25/2024 Please consider installing no overnight parking signs on Hill Street, add parallel hash marks for standard vehicle parking only, or any additional efforts to maintain the parking, but discourage RVs and for sale vehicles to be parked on the street approaching the Bay/Hill intersection. The large, oversized RVs add to the congestion in the area.

Noted. City will investigate parking condition on Hill Street and provide parking enforcement and/or parking updates as needed
Appreciate any additional efforts to discourage people from using Loop Road as an alternative to the Bay/Hill intersection, but would like to keep the left turn and left out of Loop Road onto Bay Ave.

The City is willing to assist with providing traffic calming recommendations such as striping and speed humps on the private owned Crossroads Loop street to discourage cut-through vehicle trips as an alternative to the Bay/Hill intersection . These private R/W improvements would be funded by the property owner.
114
Item 8 B.

Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection City of Capitola
Quick Build Options for Multimodal Safety Improvements February 14, 2024 Public Outreach Comment City and Kimley-Horn Response
2 Regarding long-term future modifications:
• Encourage the Council to readdress the roundabout or stop light as a permanent solution at this time. If done correctly, it would make a beautiful entry into Capitola
The City will be conducting a corridor study of Bay Avenue to determine future long-term improvements. Due to funding limitations and permanence of the quick-build design, a potential roundabout would be implemented as a long-term future improvement along the Bay Avenue corridor.

Redtree Partners LP (Nob Hill Plaza) Received 2/8/2024
Prefer for the elimination of the right lane leading south on Bay Avenue at the Hill Intersection rather than at the secondary entrance to the shopping center.

Additionally, expressed concern about the lack of traffic data for the secondary entrance.

We discussed on how eliminating the right turn at the secondary entrance would not likely impact the choice of entry points into the center. We also discussed how retaining the right turn at the Hill Street intersection would not reduce pedestrian crossing distance and may also be perceived as a free right turn.

Emphasize the importance of maintaining the right turn out of the center onto southbound Bay Avenue. Question that queue modeling data does not account for the reduction from two exit lanes to one. Worried about the queue potentially extending in front of the grocery store, impeding pedestrians trying to enter from the parking lot.

Traffic analysis estimates at property was modeled with one outbound lane and vehicle queues were found to be adequate within the existing drive aisle.

City will investigate options that balance improving intersection safety while maintaining traffic operations and access to the property.

Concern revolves around the turning radius for trucks. Steve mentioned providing staff with additional information about the specific delivery trucks servicing the businesses.

Truck turn templates for WB-40 vehicle have been run and quick build intersection design has been modified to accommodate this truck maneuvering in/out of the property. Property owner to provide City with specific delivery vehicle operations.

Eliminating the right turn lanes does not enhance safety at the intersection.

Predominant worry is patrons exiting the center rather than entering.

Studies have shown that reducing pedestrian exposure to oncoming traffic by reducing the number vehicle travel lanes and shortening the crossing distance enhances safety at the intersection. City will investigate options that balance improving intersection safety while maintaining traffic operations and access to the property
Regarding long-term future modifications:
• The solution lies in either a roundabout or a signalized intersection. • Propose implementing a diverter near the crossroads intersection to prevent left turns onto northbound Bay Avenue from the secondary entrance.
• Concerns about the permanence of the quick build.

The City will be conducting a corridor study of Bay Avenue to determine future long-term improvements. Due to funding limitations and permanence of the quick-build design, a potential roundabout would be implemented as a long-term future improvement along the Bay Avenue corridor.
115
Item 8 B.

Redtree Partners LP (Nob Hill Plaza) Received 2/6/2024
Is it possible to keep west bound right lane in place and make it a right turn only lane that ends at our main entrance?
We discussed on how eliminating the right turn at the secondary entrance would not likely impact the choice of entry points into the center. We also discussed how retaining the right turn at the Hill Street intersection would not reduce pedestrian crossing distance and may also be perceived as a free right turn.

How will lane reduction at our main entrance impact delivery trucks to Nob Hill and CVS?
Truck turn templates for WB-40 vehicle have been run and quick build intersection design has been modified to accommodate this truck maneuvering in/out of the property.

How will lane reduction impact egress from our shopping center? Will reducing to one egress lane from the center cause backup in our drive aisle? Traffic analysis estimates at property was modeled with one outbound lane and vehicle queues were found to be adequate within the existing drive aisle.

How many people go in and out of the main entrance on a per hour basis? How many go through the secondary entrance?
Traffic counts at the secondary entrance at Crossroads was not collected. At Bay/Hill intersection the 2022 peak hour traffic at the Nob Hill driveway is:
• AM Peak – 98 outbound, 126 inbound
• Midday – 188 outbound, 138 inbound
• PM Peak – 212 outbound, 183 inbound
How will the change impact traffic at our secondary entrance and traffic volume at that location?
It is anticipated that some traffic may divert from the Bay/Hill intersection and use the secondary entrance at Crossroads Loop with the proposed quick-build improvements.

Does City intend to install a median at the Bay Avenue/Crossroads Loop location to prevent left turns out of our secondary driveway?
A left turn diverter at the secondary driveway would not be feasible since left-turn access at Crossroads Loop would need to remain.

If changes to Bay Avenue/Hill Street intersection cause more issues at the area of our secondary entrance/Crossroads Loop, how will those issues be addressed by the City?
Advantage of the quick build project is that the improvements will be evaluated after construction and can be modified to address any potential issues. Driveway access to the site will be investigated.

How much of option 1 are they currently doing? Currently flashing stop signs have been installed at the intersection Are there options that fall between 1 (very little) and 2 (significant reduction in vehicles)?
A proposed Option 3 layout provides a mix of bike/ped improvements and maintaining existing traffic operations; however compared to the preferred Option 2 Road Diet layout, it does not provide the level of enhance safety that the City is trying to achieve.
116
Item 8 B.

Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection City of Capitola
Quick Build Options for Multimodal Safety Improvements February 14, 2024 Public Outreach Comment City and Kimley-Horn Response
4 Has the City entertained the idea of installing lighting in the street throughout the entire length of the crosswalks?
Due to funding limitations and permanence of the quick-build design, street lighting would be implemented as a long-term future improvement along the Bay Avenue corridor
Pushing traffic to our secondary entrance is less attractive and desirable. What are the long-term impacts to our center?
It is anticipated that some traffic may divert from the Bay/Hill intersection and use the secondary entrance at Crossroads Loop with the proposed quick-build improvements.

Bay Avenue Senior Housing Community Received 1/31/2024
Visibility at night is limited. Are there plans to improve the street lighting condition at the intersection?
Due to funding limitations and permanence of the quick-build design, street lighting would be implemented as a long-term future improvement along the Bay Avenue corridor
For the painted curb extension area, prefer hardscape features (planters, boulders) or more sturdy bollards to enhance protection of pedestrians against vehicles
Noted. Quick build design will investigate the feasibility of more permanent hardscape features for enhance pedestrian protection. Anticipate a reinforced bollard at the beginning of the curb extension complimented with more flexible products.

Advantage of the quick build project is that the improvements will be evaluated after construction and can be modified to address any potential issues.

What ways can pedestrians feel more protected in the extended bulb out areas if it is only striped?
Raised bollards are proposed within the painted bulb out to delineate the area and separate vehicle traffic.

Ensure hardscape features are not too high to allow sufficient sight distance and visibility of pedestrians in the crosswalk
Noted. Quick build design will confirm sufficient sight distance at the crosswalks are provided to maximize pedestrian visibility General group preference of Option 2 – Road Diet layout to improve safety for bikes and pedestrians
Noted.
117
Item 8 B.

Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection City of Capitola
Quick Build Options for Multimodal Safety Improvements February 14, 2024 Public Outreach Comment City and Kimley-Horn Response
5 How does the road diet option impact traffic and congestion through the intersection?
Traffic analysis anticipates that vehicle level of service delay and average vehicle queues will increase at Bay/Hill intersection with the Option 2 Road Diet concept compared to existing conditions.
118
Item 8 B.

NORTH OPTION 2B - ROAD DIET 119 Item 8 B.

Bay Avenue &
Hill Street Intersection
City Council
February 2024
120
Item 8 B.

Project Objectives
Determine feasible “Quick Build” improvements at Bay/Hill intersection to improve multimodal safety and operations

1. Gather community input

2. Utilize existing travel lanes to provide crossing improvements for bikes and pedestrians

3. Enhance bike and pedestrian access, safety, and visibility

4. Maintain acceptable traffic operations
2 121
Item 8 B.

Traffic Analysis Overview

1. Existing Conditions and Traffic Data

2. Traffic Calming Toolbox

3. Public Outreach

4. “Quick-Build” Layout Alternatives

5. Next Steps & Council Direction
3 122
Item 8 B.

Existing Conditions
4 Bay Ave
Hill St
Center St
Nob Hill
Plaza
Bay Ave
Senior
Housing
Post
Office
Rispin Ped
Bridge
123
Item 8 B.

Level of Service (LOS)
5 Capitola Standard
is LOS D
• LOS is measured by average delay in
seconds per vehicle
• LOS is not a measurement of safety
124
Item 8 B.

Existing Level of Service
6 Bay Ave
Hill St
Center St
C C

AM LOS PM LOS
LOS Ranking A to F
LOS D is City Standard
D C
C C
E C
Intersection is
operating at
acceptable LOS
125
Item 8 B.

Existing Conditions – Stop Control
7 Bay Ave
Hill St
Multiple turn conflicts and limited visibility
Long pedestrian crossing distance
Nob Hill Dwy
126
Item 8 B.

Existing Conditions – Conflicts
8 Bay Ave
Hill St Nob Hill Dwy
• 9 vehicle entry lanes and 41
potential conflict points at the
intersection
• Multiple vehicle lanes cause:

1. Multiple conflict points between
vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians
crossing the intersection

2. Confusion of who has right-of-way

3. Higher probability of accidents
127
Item 8 B.

Vehicle Collision
Type Count Primary Collision Factor Collision Severity
Head On 1 Other Property Damage
Sideswipe 3 Improper Turn, Auto R/W Property Damage
Broadside 4
Improper Turn, Auto R/W,
Unsafe Speed Injury, Property Damage
Hit Object 1 Improper Turn Property Damage
Auto/Pedestrian 3 Failure to Yield Injury
12 Total Vehicle Collisions
Bay/Hill Collision Data (11/2017 – 12/2023)
9 128
Item 8 B.
10 Bay Ave
Hill St
Crossroads
Loop
Bay/Hill Collision Data (11/2017 – 12/2023)
Cause of Collision
Auto Right-of-Way
Improper Turn
Failure to Yield
Unsafe Speed
Other
Nob Hill
Plaza Dwy
Nob Hill
Plaza Dwy
Fatal Ped Collision
(11/2023)
Bay/Hill Intersection
Collisions
129
Item 8 B.

Travel Speed Impact to Pedestrian Fatality
11 Source: ITE 130
Item 8 B.

Curb Extension and Road Diet
12 131
Item 8 B.

Curb Extension and Road Diet
13 132
Item 8 B.

Bike and Pedestrian Crossings
14 133
Item 8 B.

Signing Enhancements
15 LED Stop Signs are
installed at Bay/Hill
intersection
134
Item 8 B.

Public Outreach
16 • Subcommittee meetings with City staff and Council members • Outreach with property owners
• Public workshop at Bay Avenue Senior Housing Community 135
Item 8 B.

Community Feedback
17 # General Comment Response / Recommendation
1 Community supports measures to improve
bike and pedestrian visibility and safety
Proposed traffic calming improve multimodal
access and safety
2 Community supports a solution that does
not significantly impede access to adjacent
properties
Proposed options maintain existing driveway
access while improving bike/ped mobility
3 Community supports a solution that does
not significantly impact vehicle operations
A traffic analysis was conducted for the Quick
build options
4 Community supportive in a reduction of
vehicle operations to improve road safety
Proposed options focus on enhancing bike/ped
visibility and reducing exposure to oncoming
traffic
5 Community raised concerns of street lighting
and limited visibility at night
Proposed options to use retroreflective
materials, street lighting to be a long-term
improvement
136
Item 8 B.

Quick Build Layouts
18 • Quick-build projects are reversible, adjustable traffic safety improvements that can be installed relatively quickly
• Quick-build projects are constructed within weeks or months and are intended to be evaluated and adjusted after construction. • Potential for permanent or temporary interim installation 137
Item 8 B.
19 Nob Hill DwyNob Hill Dwy
Nob Hill Dwy
Option 1 – Signing & Striping Option 2 – Road Diet Option 3 – Median Bay Ave
Hill St
Bay Ave
Hill St
Bay Ave
Hill St
Quick Build Layouts
138
Item 8 B.
20 Bay Ave
Hill St
Crossroads
Loop
Center St
Quick Build Option 2 – Road Diet
Stripe right turn only
into Nob Hill driveway Paint curb extension with
bollards & bike lane
Proposed striping
ends at Center St
Lane Transition for
Road Diet with 1 Thru
Lane on Bay Ave
139
Item 8 B.
21 Bay Ave
Hill St
Quick Build Option 2 – Road Diet
5-Lane Ped
Crossing
Existing
140
Item 8 B.
22 Bay Ave
Hill St
Quick Build Option 2 – Road Diet
Painted Curb
Extension
Lane Transition for
Road Diet with 1 Thru
Lane on Bay Ave
Flexible
Bollards
Green Bike
Striping
3-Lane Ped
Crossing
5-Lane Ped
Crossing
Existing Proposed
Flashing LED
Signs
Narrowed
entry & exit
141
Item 8 B.
23 AM Traffic
Operations
Summary
LOS D
6 95% Queue (# cars)
5 Option 2 – Road Diet
Option 3 – Median
LOS B
4 4
3 3
Existing Condition and
Option 1 – Signing & Striping
LOS C
5 3
3 3
3 3
142
Item 8 B.
24 LOS F 10
95% Queue (# cars)
7 Option 2 – Road Diet
Option 3 – Median
LOS C
10 4
3 4
LOS C
8 4
4 3
4 3
Midday
Traffic
Operations
Summary
Existing Condition and
Option 1 – Signing & Striping
143
Item 8 B.
25 PM Traffic
Operations
Summary
LOS D
11 95% Queue (# cars)
3 Option 2 – Road Diet
Option 3 – Median
LOS C
9 4
4 3
LOS C
10 3
3 3
3 Existing Condition and 3
Option 1 – Signing & Striping
144
Item 8 B.

Quick Build Option Summary
26 Criteria Existing
Intersection
Option 1
Signing & Striping
Option 2
Road Diet
Option 3
Median
Bike & Pedestrian
Safety & Visibility
Low
41 conflict points
Medium
41 conflict points
Marked crossings
High
32 conflict points
Marked crossings
Curb extensions
Bike lane buffer
Medium
38 conflict points
Marked crossings
Wider ped median
Pedestrian
Crossing Exposure
High
5-lane crossing
High
5-lane crossing
Low
3-lane crossing
Medium
4-lane crossing
Intersection
Level of Service
Good
AM Peak: C
Midday: C
PM Peak: C
Good
AM Peak: C
Midday: C
PM Peak: C
Ok
AM Peak: C
Midday: F
PM Peak: D
Good
AM Peak: B
Midday: C
PM Peak: C
Impact to Vehicle
Queues Low Low Medium Medium
Preferred
Option
145
Item 8 B.

Next Steps
Short Term
• City Council direction on Quick Build Option
• Spring 2024 to Summer 2025: Quick Build improvements and evaluation period
Long Term
• 2024: Bay Avenue Corridor Safety Study
• On-going: Pursue funding opportunities
• Summer 2026 earliest: Bay Avenue corridor improvements pending available funds
27 146
Item 8 B.

Recommended Action
• Authorize construction of the proposed Bay Avenue/Hill Street intersection quick-build project
28 147
Item 8 B.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Public Works Department
Subject: Zone 5 Drainage Master Plan Update
Recommended Action: Receive report.

Background: Santa Cruz County, the City of Capitola and the Zone 5 Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 5) work to protect local water resources by managing creeks and streams, cleaning up trash and pollution, and managing storm drains to minimize flooding. In June 2020 the Zone 5 Board of Directors approved a contract with Schaaf and Wheeler, Consulting Civil Engineers, to complete the District’s Drainage Master Plan Update.

Discussion: Schaaf and Wheeler and their consulting team have prepared the Draft Zone 5 Master Plan Update and will be providing a presentation during this meeting. The draft update includes an evaluation of regional storm drain facilities within Zone 5, recommended capital improvement projects (CIP), and recommended operations and maintenance (O&M) plans.

The recommended CIP includes an extensive list of projects that address system maintenance, structural, and capacity deficiencies and that consider potential climate change impacts. The recommended O&M Plan is robust and emphasizes preventative actions. Implementation of the recommended CIP and O&M Plan will require additional resources (potentially including funding, personnel, and property rights).

Staff from the District and the City of Capitola have reviewed this draft and find it is an appropriate basis for completing the Stormwater Fee Study and election process. The Stormwater Fee Study and election process are anticipated to occur in 2024. Based on the results of the Stormwater Fee Study and election process the District and City of Capitola staff will work with the consultants to adjust the draft and present a Final Zone 5 Master Plan Update that can reasonably be supported.

During their January 30, 2024 regular meeting, the Zone 5 Board of Directors voted to approve and accept the Draft Zone 5 Drainage Master Plan and directed District staff to work with County Public Works, the City of Capitola, Schaaf and Wheeler Consulting Engineers, and their sub-consultants to complete Stormwater Fee Study including completing an election following the Proposition 218 proceedings to support and finalize the Draft Zone 5 Drainage Master Plan.

Fiscal Impact: There are no financial impacts associated with the approval and acceptance of the Draft Drainage Master Plan Update Report.

Attachments:

1. Draft Master Plan Zone 5 - Flood Control and Water Conservation District Report Prepared By: Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
148
Item 8 C.

&
PREPARED BY:

Schaaf & Wheeler
870 Market Street, Suite 1278
San Francisco, CA 94102
PREPARED FOR:

Santa Cruz County
FCWCD Zone 5
701 Ocean Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Santa Cruz County
Flood Control and Water Conservation District – Zone 5
Draft Storm Drain Master Plan Update
2023
149
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Table of Contents
December 2023 i Schaaf & Wheeler
Table of Contents
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. iii List of Tables.................................................................................................................................v List of Appendices.........................................................................................................................v List of Abbreviations..................................................................................................................... vi 1 Executive Summary............................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Background and Context.............................................................................................1-1

1.1.1 Local Agency Responsibilities..............................................................................1-2

1.1.2 Climate Change....................................................................................................1-3

1.2 Study Objective ...........................................................................................................1-3

1.2.1 Regional Stormwater Coordination ......................................................................1-4

1.3 Evaluation....................................................................................................................1-4

1.4 Capital Improvement Recommendations ....................................................................1-4

1.5 Operation and Maintenance Program .........................................................................1-5

1.6 Funding and Financial Plan.........................................................................................1-5

1.7 Conclusion...................................................................................................................1-6 2 Introduction.........................................................................................................................2-1

2.1 Overview......................................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Setting .........................................................................................................................2-1

2.3 Climate ........................................................................................................................2-5

2.4 Existing System...........................................................................................................2-5

2.5 History of Drainage Issues and Flooding.....................................................................2-7 3 Data ....................................................................................................................................3-1

3.1 Data Sources...............................................................................................................3-1

3.1.1 Topography and Aerial Imagery ...........................................................................3-1

3.1.2 GIS Data...............................................................................................................3-2

3.1.3 Field Data Collection and Inspection....................................................................3-5

3.2 Land Use Data and Runoff Characteristics .................................................................3-7

3.2.1 Land Cover...........................................................................................................3-7

3.2.2 Soil Classifications ...............................................................................................3-9

3.2.3 Runoff Curve Numbers.......................................................................................3-11 4 Methodology .......................................................................................................................4-1

4.1 Overview......................................................................................................................4-1

4.2 Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................................................4-1

4.3 Modeling Software.......................................................................................................4-1 150
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Table of Contents
December 2023 ii Schaaf & Wheeler

4.4 Model Operation..........................................................................................................4-3

4.4.1 Input and Output...................................................................................................4-4

4.5 Rainfall Depth and Pattern ..........................................................................................4-6

4.5.1 Climate Change....................................................................................................4-6

4.6 Catchment Data...........................................................................................................4-9

4.6.1 Lag Time ..............................................................................................................4-9

4.6.2 Hydrologic Model................................................................................................4-10 5 Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems ....................................................................................5-1

5.1 Overview......................................................................................................................5-1

5.2 Existing System Evaluation .........................................................................................5-2

5.2.1 System Condition .................................................................................................5-2

5.2.2 Regional System Capacity ...................................................................................5-4

5.2.3 Creek Capacity Deficiencies ................................................................................5-5

5.3 Capital Improvements................................................................................................5-12

5.3.1 Condition/Maintenance Projects.........................................................................5-12

5.3.2 Capacity-Related Projects..................................................................................5-15 6 Capital Improvement Costs ................................................................................................6-1

6.1 Overview......................................................................................................................6-1

6.2 Cost Basis ...................................................................................................................6-1

6.3 Recommended Project Costs......................................................................................6-3 7 Operation and Maintenance ...............................................................................................7-1

7.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................7-1

7.2 Recommendations.......................................................................................................7-2 8 Funding...............................................................................................................................8-1

8.1 Overview......................................................................................................................8-1

8.2 Program Costs.............................................................................................................8-1

8.3 Potential Revenue Sources .........................................................................................8-4

8.3.1 Property-Related Fee...........................................................................................8-4

8.3.2 Special Tax...........................................................................................................8-4

8.4 Other Sources of Revenue..........................................................................................8-5

8.4.1 Development Impact Fees ...................................................................................8-5

8.4.2 Regulatory Fees ...................................................................................................8-5

8.4.3 Benefit-Assessment District .................................................................................8-6

8.4.4 Grants...................................................................................................................8-6

8.5 Summary .....................................................................................................................8-6 151
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
List of Figures
December 2023 iii Schaaf & Wheeler
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Study Area and Existing Storm Drainage System ...................................................1-1 Figure 1-2: Funding Requirements for Stormwater System O&M, Capital Improvements, and Management Across Zone 5 and the City of Capitola.............................................................1-6 Figure 2-1: Santa Cruz County Zone 5 Vicinity Map..................................................................2-2 Figure 2-2: Major Creek Drainage Areas ...................................................................................2-3 Figure 2-3: FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas in the Vicinity of Zone 5...................................2-4 Figure 2-4: Catchments Grouped into Drainage Regions by Receiving Body ...........................2-6 Figure 2-5: Photos of Historical Flooding in Santa Cruz County and City of Capitola ...............2-8 Figure 3-1: FEMA 2017 Region 9 LiDAR DEM in the Vicinity of Zone 5....................................3-2 Figure 3-2: Zone 5 Storm Drainage Network .............................................................................3-4 Figure 3-3: Map of Conduit, Culverts, and Open Channel Where CCTV Inspection was Performed ................................................................................................................................................3-6 Figure 3-4: Existing Land Use Information Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model.3-7 Figure 3-5: Zoning Information Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model...................3-8 Figure 3-6: Hydrologic Soil Group Data Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model...3-10 Figure 4-1: Major Culvert Crossings on Open Channel Alignments in the Regional System ....4-3 Figure 4-2: 24-hour Design Storm Events for Zone 5 ................................................................4-6 Figure 4-3: Near-Term Monthly Rainfall and 24-Hour Design Storm SWMM-CAT Predictions (95010 Zip Code)....................................................................................................................4-7 Figure 4-4: Far-Term Monthly Rainfall and 24-Hour Design Storm SWMM-CAT Predictions (95010 Zip Code)....................................................................................................................4-8 Figure 4-5: USGS PeakFQ Duration-Frequency Curves for Carbonera Creek .......................4-11 Figure 4-6: USGS PeakFQ Duration-Frequency Curves for Soquel Creek .............................4-12 Figure 4-7: Existing and Future Condition Curve Numbers .....................................................4-14 Figure 5-1: Surface Inspection System Condition Ratings Map ................................................5-2 Figure 5-2: CCTV Condition Ratings Map .................................................................................5-3 Figure 5-3: Existing Regional System 25-year Node Flooding Results from InfoSWMM ..........5-4 Figure 5-4: Soquel Creek HEC-RAS Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Conditions (Blue), 3 Feet of SLR with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and 6 Feet of SLR with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green) .............................................................................................5-7 Figure 5-5: 100-year Inundation Extents for Existing Conditions (Blue) and for the Existing Channel and Culverts with 25% Increase in Flow Rates (Red) ..............................................5-8 Figure 5-6: Rodeo Gulch HEC-RAS Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), 3 Feet of SLR with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and 6 Feet of SLR with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green) .....................................................................................................5-9 Figure 5-7: Noble 100-yr HEC-RAS (with Existing Culverts) Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green) ..................................................................................................................5-10 Figure 5-8: Noble 100-yr HEC-RAS (with CIPs Constructed) Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green) ..................................................................................................................5-11 Figure 5-9: Overview Map of Prioritized System Maintenance (OM) Needs ...........................5-14 Figure 5-10: Overview Map of Prioritized System Repair & Replacement (RR) Projects........5-15 Figure 5-11: Map of Prioritized System Capacity Projects.......................................................5-16 Figure 5-12: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects ......................5-18 Figure 5-13: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative Projects Avoiding Private Property Impact5-20 Figure 5-14: Modeled Flood Depth with a 600 cfs Pump Station Noble Alternative ................5-21 152
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
List of Figures
December 2023 iv Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-15: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions .............................................................................................................................5-22 Figure 5-16: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative 1 Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions .............................................................................................................................5-23 Figure 5-17: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative 2 Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions .............................................................................................................................5-24 Figure 5-18: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Future Buildout Catchment Parameters .........................................................................................................5-25 Figure 5-19: Location of Significant System Flooding Impact with Future Condition...............5-26 Figure 5-20: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Future Buildout Catchment Parameters and a 25% Increase in Rainfall Depth.............................................5-27 Figure 5-21: Change in Flooding Depth Due to Potential Climate Change (Future Condition)5-28 Figure 8-1: Future Cost of Each Program Element as a Proportion of Total (Combined)..........8-2 Figure 8-2: Future Cost of Each Program Element as a Proportion of Total for Zone 5 (Top) and City of Capitola (Bottom).........................................................................................................8-3 153
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
List of Tables
December 2023 v Schaaf & Wheeler
List of Tables
Table 1-1: Approximate Cost Ranges of Capital Improvements by Priority...............................1-5 Table 3-1: Catchment Soil Type Summary ................................................................................3-9 Table 3-2: AMC II Curve Number Summary by Land Use and Soil Type................................3-11 Table 4-1: Summary of Model Input and Output for the Regional System Models....................4-5 Table 4-2: Summary of Roughness Parameters by Basin Type..............................................4-10 Table 4-3: Carbonera Creek Peak Flow (cfs) & AMC Evaluation ............................................4-11 Table 4-4: Soquel Creek at Soquel 25-year AMC Evaluation..................................................4-12 Table 5-1: Capital Improvement Summary by Priority (Capacity Improvements and Repair and Replacement Projects)..........................................................................................................5-12 Table 5-2: Priority Maintenance Project Summary ..................................................................5-13 Table 5-3: Priority Structural Deficiency Project Summary (Replacement or Repair)..............5-13 Table 5-4: Capital Improvement Projects Summary (Capacity-Driven) ...................................5-17 Table 6-1: Storm Drain Conveyance Conduit Unit Costs in September 2023 Dollars (Per Linear Foot)........................................................................................................................................6-1 Table 6-2: Storm Drain Structure Unit Costs in 2022 Dollars ....................................................6-2 Table 6-3: Baseline Capacity Project Cost Estimate Summary (Zone 5)...................................6-3 Table 6-5: Baseline Capacity Project Cost Estimate Summary (Within City of Capitola) ..........6-3 Table 6-6: Baseline Repair and Replacement Project Cost Estimate Summary (Within City of Capitola)..................................................................................................................................6-4 Table 6-7: Alternative Project Cost Estimate Summary.............................................................6-4 Table 8-1: Annual Stormwater Program Cost (2023 Dollars, Rounded to Nearest $1,000) ......8-2 List of Appendices
Appendix A – CIP Construction Project Cost Summary Tables Appendix B – CIP Project Detail Tables
Appendix C – High Priority CIP Project Detail Sheets
Appendix D – Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan
154
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
List of Abbreviations
December 2023 vi Schaaf & Wheeler
List of Abbreviations
Ac Acres
BMP Best Management Practices
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CIPP Cured-in-Place Pipe Lining
CFS Cubic Feet per Second
DEM Digital Elevation Model
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS Geographic Information System
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging
NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
O&M Operations and Maintenance
SCCDC Santa Cruz County Design Criteria
SDMP Storm Drain Master Plan
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area
SLR Sea Level Rise
UHM Unit Hydrograph Method
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
155
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
1 Executive Summary

1.1 Background and Context
A significant planning effort has been undertaken to help guide the Santa Cruz County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FCWCD), County of Santa Cruz, and City of Capitola in establishing a prioritized Master Plan Improvement Program for regional systems in the Zone 5 service area, including the City of Capitola.

Three prior drainage studies have been completed for the Zone 5 area. Most recently, the Zone 5 and Zone 6 Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) was completed in 2013. That study sought to develop a capital improvement plan with the goal of meeting a 10-year level of service standard throughout the storm drain network. This study did not include the City of Capitola. Models developed for the prior study remain a valid tool for evaluating impacts on local systems and should also be maintained.

The study area and existing stormwater conveyance system are shown in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1: Study Area and Existing Storm Drainage System 156
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
This master plan is intended to be a planning guide for Zone 5 and is based on best readily available data and information. The recommended projects and activities should be addressed and prioritized based on life safety, potential for property impacts, funding, and public concerns.

The engineering analyses performed for this study are intended to segue into design of projects which are funded. The construction design process should use more detailed improved data including surveys, utility mapping, and property/easement acquisition.

Known ownership of the drainage infrastructure has uncertainty in serval reaches. Engineering and operations analyses were completed on a watershed basis to create a comprehensive document. The proposed improvement projects and maintenance activities are not intended to imply Zone 5 ownership nor responsibility. Communication and coordination will be key elements of completing projects where system conveyance overlaps with private property.

1.1.1 Local Agency Responsibilities
Santa Cruz County, the City of Capitola and the Zone 5 Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 5) work to protect local water resources by managing creeks and streams, cleaning up trash and pollution, and managing storm drains to minimize flooding. Despite these efforts, our community faces significant challenges from climate change and natural disasters, and an aging storm drainage infrastructure.

Protecting Local Beaches and Water Resources from Pollution During a storm, rainwater is "runoff," meaning that it runs off roofs, roads, driveways, parking lots, and many surfaces, washing with it trash and pollutants, including fertilizers, vehicle fluids, pesticides, pet waste and other bacteria sources as it makes its way through storm drains and ditches – untreated – into our streams, rivers, and ocean, impacting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Keeping our beaches open and clean and maintaining shoreline water quality in the Sanctuary is critical for the health of Santa Cruz County residents, visitors, aquatic life, and the local economy.

Minimizing the Damaging Effects of Floods
Natural geography puts lower elevation areas of Santa Cruz County at high flood risk. The severe atmospheric rivers that occurred during the 2023 winter storm season resulted in devastating flooding and underscored the need to prepare for emergencies and to protect local, natural water resources.

Maintaining aging storm drainage systems is essential to helping prevent significant property damage in neighborhoods and loss of life during major floods.

Protecting Public Health and Long-Term Water Supplies
Public agencies in Santa Cruz County recognize the importance of effective storm drainage and watershed management to minimize flooding and protect local waterways, which are vital to the overall health of our ecosystem.

Our region’s system of storm drains, pumps, channels, pipes, culverts, outlets, and lagoons are essential to collect and manage storm runoff to protect our beaches and local waterways from pollution. Keeping these water resources safe and clean is critical to protecting both public health and local wildlife.
157
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
Upgrading and Maintaining Aging, Deteriorating Stormwater System Much of the storm drain infrastructure in Santa Cruz County is more than 50 years old, and many channels, pipes and pumps located on both public and private properties are deteriorating. Without repairs or improvements, local communities face an elevated risk of flooding in our low-lying communities and pollution of our beaches, rivers, and other local water resources.

1.1.2 Climate Change
Climate change impacts on sea-levels and precipitation are addressed to gage future system needs. Capital projects cost presented in this report are based on existing deficiencies and construction costs. Climate adaptation and resiliency should be incorporated into each project as they are funded and designed.

This document does not consider coastal protection needs (e.g., erosion protection, armoring, flood walls, or levees). With a focus on interior drainage systems, the implications of sea level rise (SLR) are contemplated. However, a regional scale solution may be required for coastal protection as well to develop greater resilience against a broader array of climate hazards. This is beyond the scope of this analysis.

1.2 Study Objective
This storm drainage study builds on prior analysis in the Zone 5 service area with a narrower focus on meeting a 25-year level of service standard for regional systems consisting of closed conduits and open drainage ditches. The study looks at the 100-year conveyance of the major creek systems, including Rodeo Creek Gulch, Arana Gulch, Soquel Creek, and Noble Creek.

This study includes the City of Capitola, which was not studied in the 2013 report. Regional facilities include “backbone” closed-conduit systems and open channels where stormwater concentrates from local systems.

The basic objective of this study is to identify capacity issues and project alternatives to mitigate flooding on the regional system.

The tasks completed as part of this study include:
 A condition assessment of various system elements, including pipe systems, open conveyances, and culverts;
 Collection of field data to supplement GIS data for building an existing conditions model of the storm drainage network;
 Examination and refinement of existing drainage area delineations;  Assessment of the performance of existing regional storm drainage systems;  Identification of capital improvement alternatives to reduce flood risk;  Estimation of project costs for the Capital Improvement Program (CIP);  Development of an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Program; and  An evaluation of funding strategies to implement the CIP.

This study applies the same methodologies as the 2013 study to develop hydrologic and hydraulic models of the regional pipe and open conveyance systems. The 2013 study models remain valid tools for evaluating system capacity as needed, in conjunction with other Zone 5 infrastructure projects for development and redevelopment. The two models should be used 158
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-4 Schaaf & Wheeler
hand-in-hand when possible, with the wider system model used to evaluate localized capacity and impacts, and the updated regional system model developed for this SDMP to be used for those projects and changes expected to impart wider system impacts.

1.2.1 Regional Stormwater Coordination
Prior master planning efforts including Zone 5 did not include areas within the City of Capitola’s boundaries. Runoff from portions of Zone 5 outside of Capitola drain into the Noble and Soquel Creeks, which impacts regional drainage systems within Capitola. The City of Capitola has provided funding to support this effort and includes these previously excluded areas in this analysis. Historical drainage issues are well known and recorded in Noble Gulch in particular.

These capacity issues, as well as an evaluation of the condition of these systems, are addressed in this report.

This SDMP primarily forms a guide for addressing regional system capacity issues. However, municipal stormwater management is a multi-faceted endeavor requiring both inter- and intrajurisdictional coordination. Consideration must be given to the impact of new capital assets (CIP), finances, O&M, and regulatory compliance (the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB] National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] Permit).

1.3 Evaluation
This study utilized and further developed InfoSWMM models for Zone 5 built for prior studies.

These models include subcatchment hydrology (rainfall-runoff) and conveyance system hydraulics (dynamic wave routing).

Detailed review, field investigations, analysis, and modeling of the area’s storm drainage system led to several conclusions. We used these conclusions to recommend improvements to the system intended to reduce flood risk for Zone 5’s regional systems.

The recommended improvements are considered planning level and based on currently available information. Detailed project designs will ultimately require more data, including utility locations and any necessary geotechnical information.

We evaluated the current physical condition of the drainage system using pole-mounted camera topside observations. Based on the observed condition during topside investigation, specific reaches were identified for a more detailed CCTV inspection. Most of the observed system is in good condition. However, there are reaches with heavy debris and sediment accumulation.

1.4 Capital Improvement Recommendations
This study includes a CIP based on model results and suggested improvements. Capital projects recommended in this document to address capacity and condition deficiencies are estimated to cost between approximately $37 million and $63 million in 2023 dollars. A range of costs is provided, as for certain projects, multiple alternatives are identified. The actual value of the improvements will ultimately depend upon the final design of each project, which could vary based on several factors, including whether systems are replaced or augmented with new, parallel systems.

It is important to remember that in addition to design and construction, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) must be satisfied for any capital improvement project described in this 159
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
report that may be implemented in the future through the preparation of an appropriate Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), or determined to be categorically excluded.

While projects within public right of way are often preferred, capital improvements identified in this document do pass through privately owned properties in some locations, which may limit feasibility. A summary of estimated costs by priority are summarized in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1: Approximate Cost Ranges of Capital Improvements by Priority Priority Description Approximate Cost
High
High magnitude, high impact flooding
where heavy erosion and property damage
pose major risk; Urgent repairs or
replacement of existing system in very
poor condition
$22,760,000 - $47,760,000
Medium
Moderate magnitude flooding with
relatively extensive impact on regional and
local systems, posing some risk of property
damage or erosion; Repair or replacement
of existing system in poor condition
$7,320,000 - $7,730,000
Low
Low magnitude flooding with relatively low
impact on regional and local systems and
little risk of property damage or erosion;
Low priority repairs
$7,560,000

1.5 Operation and Maintenance Program
Schaaf & Wheeler’s subconsultant, NCE, reviewed the County and City of Capitola existing O&M programs and evaluated the storm drain system maintenance needs. A maintenance plan was developed for the County and City to provide recommendations for asset inventory, analysis and forecasting, work program actions, and tracking and reporting. Associated costs for implementing these recommendations were also developed as part of the funding and financial plan.

1.6 Funding and Financial Plan
Schaaf & Wheeler’s subconsultants, NCE and NBS, worked together with information contained in this SDMP to develop a funding and finance plan that includes funding the recommended O&M and CIP projects within this report, as well as remaining compliant with NPDES Permit Requirements handed down by the State. Costs of implementation are subdivided into four categories: Capital Improvements, Operations and Maintenance, NPDES Permit Compliance, and Program Management. The breakdown of these costs across Zone 5, County of Santa Cruz, and the City of Capitola is shown in Figure 1-2.
160
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
December 2023 1-6 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 1-2: Funding Requirements for Stormwater System O&M, Capital Improvements, and Management Across Zone 5 and the City of Capitola

1.7 Conclusion
This storm drain system analysis provides a tool for agency staff to use in their efforts to reduce both nuisance flooding and the likelihood of more serious stormwater-related hazards to private and/or public property in Zone 5 and City of Capitola communities. This study and capital improvement alternatives are merely the conceptual starting point since funding sources for design and construction have yet to be determined.

Once funding sources have been secured, we anticipate that the County, the City, the Zone 5 Flood Control District, and/or their consultants will perform more detailed studies and alternatives analyses to identify the most affordable and effective capacity and condition improvement projects. It is expected that this will require information gathered as part of the design process, including more detailed topography, utility conflicts, available easements and rights-of-way, construction impacts, permitting needs, and long-term O&M. This report ventures to consider these factors in developing an alternatives analysis for various improvement strategies. However, more detailed information will always provide the best tool in making informed decisions.
161
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
2 Introduction

2.1 Overview
This document provides a capacity analysis and condition assessment of existing storm drain collection systems, a discussion of drainage design standards, and recommended improvement projects to reduce the risk of flooding for regional facilities with estimated costs within Zone 5.

This analysis should be used to guide local agency staff in planning, financing, engineering, and maintaining the regional storm drain infrastructure. Each chapter of this report is intended to identify problems, manage resources, and provide cost-effective and comprehensive solutions.

This chapter provides a general discussion of drainage and flood management systems and issues currently affecting the community. It also describes the objectives of this analysis, explains the criteria used to evaluate storm drain system performance, and presents a summary of the data collected to support this effort.

2.2 Setting
The study area encompasses portions of multiple jurisdictions within Santa Cruz County, including incorporated Capitola, and unincorporated areas to the west and north. The drainage area is situated adjacent to Monterey Bay to the south and the City of Santa Cruz immediately to the west. A vicinity map showing the boundary of Zone 5 overlain with jurisdictional boundaries and regional drainage systems is provided in Figure 2-1. 162
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 2-1: Santa Cruz County Zone 5 Vicinity Map
The study area rests at the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Urban systems consisting of a mix of closed-conduit and drainage ditches generally drain higher ground into creeks and lagoons that attenuate and convey runoff to Monterey Bay.

Land use within Zone 5 is predominantly urban, with a mix of commercial and residential land cover and ranges in elevation from 0 to approximately 700-feet on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The study area, defined by the drainage area to the existing regional stormwater conveyance systems, covers an area of approximately 4.5 square miles (Figure 2-4 shows the area served by the regional conveyance systems).

Three creeks receive drainage from these systems. Their drainage areas cover a larger area, including drainage from upstream of the study area and from local pipe systems that were previously studied but not included in this modeling effort. Arana Gulch, Rodeo Creek, and Soquel Creek convey drainage through Zone 5 from a total area of 3.5 square miles, 3.0 square miles, and 42.5 square miles, respectively. These larger drainage areas are shown in Figure 2-

2. 163
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 2-2: Major Creek Drainage Areas
164
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-4 Schaaf & Wheeler
The low-lying portions of the area to the south rest in, or adjacent to, the FEMA-defined coastal Zone VE Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). Other SFHAs defined within Zone 5 include Zone A, Zone AE (with and without Floodways) and Zone X, primarily centered around creeks and lagoons. Flood hazard areas in the vicinity of the Zone 5 area are shown in Figure 2-3.

Figure 2-3: FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas in the Vicinity of Zone 5 165
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-5 Schaaf & Wheeler

2.3 Climate
The Zone 5 study area generally experiences a mild year-round climate, with warm, dry summers and wet winters. Proximity to the Pacific Ocean results in small daily and seasonal temperature ranges with high relative humidity. The coastal region at the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains also experiences frequent fog and low overcast conditions.

The average annual high temperature is approximately 70°F, and the average annual low temperature is approximately 48°F. Most of the rainfall occurs during fall and winter months of October through April (NOAA1). Mean annual precipitation (MAP) depth varies across the County, with higher elevations in the mountains experiencing generally greater depths due to orographic uplift effects.

Within Zone 5, MAP varies from approximately 30 to 36 inches per year. Countywide, MAP varies from 20 inches per year at low elevations near the southern boundary with Monterey County up to 56 inches per year at higher elevations in the mountains (California-Nevada River Forecast Center2). The average for the nearby Santa Cruz climate station is about 31.4 inches per year (representative of the low-lying urban areas).

The topography of the Santa Cruz Mountains to the north and exposure to Pacific weather systems to the south and west has a defining influence on precipitation patterns in Santa Cruz County. Precipitation events are dominantly orographic, since moist air is lifted over the mountains and then cools and condenses, or cyclonic, where rain is caused by air mass movement from higher barometric pressure regions to lower pressure. Cyclonic events can also be caused by frontal activity. Warm fronts are generally associated with broad bands of lowintensity rainfall, while higher rainfall intensities are typical of cold fronts (Western Regional Climate Center3).

This study also considers the potential impacts of climate change on the stormwater systems.

Anticipated regional and local changes in seasonal precipitation and storm characteristics are available in published research and climate prediction tools provided by the EPA and Cal-Adapt.

This study evaluates the impacts of climate change by increasing the overall depth of the 25- year design storm event to reflect those published predictions.

2.4 Existing System
Runoff generated by precipitation within the Zone 5 area is conveyed through a system of pipes, open ditches, and creeks. All runoff captured by the drainage system ultimately discharges to Monterey Bay, though some is stored in lagoons near the coastline. The study area and existing stormwater conveyance system are shown in Figure 1-1.

Drainage systems within Zone 5 encompass a network of open channel conveyance (e.g., ditches and creeks), inlet structures, and storm drain pipes. The area drains to 20 distinctive, contiguous regional subsystems. These areas can be grouped into eight larger regions by receiving body. These regions drain to three creeks (Arana Gulch, Rodeo Gulch, and Soquel Creek), four Lagoons (Schwan, Corcoran, Moran, and Bonita) and directly to the Monterey Bay, as shown in Figure 2-4.
1 https://www.weather.gov/wrh/climate?wfo=mtr
2 https://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/?product=QPEWYNormal&zoom=11&lat=37.107&lng=-122.081&PNGtypeID=QPEWYNormal 3 https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climate/narrative_ca.php 166
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-6 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 2-4: Catchments Grouped into Drainage Regions by Receiving Body As further development and redevelopment occurs in Zone 5, Santa Cruz County, and the City of Capitola, runoff patterns will be impacted. Some developments will be subject to the requirements of the NPDES permit, while smaller-scale projects may not be. It is difficult to anticipate the exact impact of land use change on storm drainage systems and floodplains.

Emphasis and incentivization of higher density development and increased housing availability and affordability further complicates this effort, but available data can be used to estimate the impacts on some level.

Existing storm drainage facilities must evolve with population and land use change, and this SDMP provides some tools to prepare for and respond to those changes as they occur. This may include case-by-case impact analysis on pipe systems, drainage channels, and floodplains, or feasibility analysis for regional detention or recharge facilities. 167
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-7 Schaaf & Wheeler

2.5 History of Drainage Issues and Flooding
A history of natural disasters, including flooding, is well documented within Santa Cruz County and its incorporated cities. Flooding is documented as far back as 1871 – 1872, when the Santa Cruz Mission, in the San Lorenzo River’s floodplain, was destroyed in its first year of existence.

The December 1955 Christmas Floods are documented as the highest historic flooding in the area, though 90% of the damage caused by the event occurred within the City of Santa Cruz and its downtown area. Although, on Soquel Creek, a peak flow rate of over 15,000 cfs destroyed the Soquel Bridge.

In 1982, flooding due to a roughly 30-year event in Santa Cruz County killed 22 people, injured 50 others, and destroyed several homes and businesses, with damages reaching over $100 million in total4. During the 1982 event, a log jam formed at the reconstructed Soquel Drive bridge and the creek overflowed its banks. According to eyewitness accounts, the event flooded the Old Mill Mobile Home Park, followed within hours by Downtown Soquel, with floodwaters reaching up to 5 feet in depth.

Most recently, the storms of 2022 – 2023 caused a wide range of damage throughout the County and incorporated areas within. In the northern areas of the County, in the Santa Cruz Mountains, landslides and downed trees caused blockage and damage on highways (including Highways 1, 9, and 17) and other roads, requiring closure during cleanup and repairs.

Widespread high flows in streams tributary to the major creeks and rivers washed out culverts, and bridges including: the Bates Creek culvert crossing at North Main Street (within Zone 5), as well as large crossings on Redwood Loge Road and China Grade Road. In many locations, these failures washed out all lanes of the crossing roadway and stranded a number of residents for an extended period of time.

Soquel Creek also overflowed its banks near the Soquel Drive bridge, causing flooding of the Old Mill Mobile Home Park, Porter Street, and surrounding businesses. During that storm, Soquel Creek registered a flow rate of 9,310 cfs, exceeding an estimated 25-year return period based on stream gage statistics. That event also produced a peak flow of very nearly the same magnitude as the 1982 flood (9,700 cfs).

In Capitola, Pacific Ocean waves destroyed a large section of the Capitola Wharf, while high stage and wave propagation along Soquel Creek caused extensive damage to restaurants and other infrastructure along the Creek’s banks.

Historically, both Soquel and the City of Capitola have primarily been affected by flooding from Soquel Creek, which impacts low-lying areas within its floodplain. However, Noble Creek and Tannery Creek floods occurring in March 2011 caused extensive flooding and damage in the City of Capitola. During the 2011 flood event, a large storm drain pipe failed in Noble Gulch, destroying portions of Pacific Cove Mobile Home Park and releasing impounded flood waters downstream. Subsequently, the Mobile Home Park was closed, its tenants were nearly entirely relocated, and the property was converted to a parking lot (Santa Cruz Sentinel).

Photos of various flood events and damages are shown in Figure 2-5. 4 Santa Cruz Public Libraries. The Nature and History of Flooding in Soquel Village. Accessed October 2023. https://history.santacruzpl.org/omeka/files/original/f127e52f2fc2073f773c61a6336186fd.pdf 168
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Introduction
December 2023 2-8 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 2-5: Photos of Historical Flooding in Santa Cruz County and City of Capitola 1955 Flood – San Lorenzo River (Source: Santa
Cruz Public Library)
1982 Flood in Capitola (Source: Capitola Historical
Museum)
2011 Flood in Capitola (Source: Capitola Historical
Museum)
Log Jam at Soquel Dr Bridge During 1982 Flood
(Source: Lassetre, 2009)
Jan 2023 Flooding in Soquel on Porter St (Source:

Santa Cruz Sentinel)
Jan 2023 Flooding near Soquel Elementary (Source:

Santa Cruz Sentinel)
169
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
3 Data

3.1 Data Sources
Schaaf & Wheeler reviewed and used readily available land use, topographic, geological, geographical, and storm drain system data within the study area. Available data, while mostly complete, had some missing or incorrect information.

The existing set of models was updated to reflect improved information and ensure that elevations in the model are on a fully unified datum (the North American Vertical Datum of 1988). Fieldwork was conducted to update missing information and collect additional information on the regional storm drain system to supplement existing GIS databases.

Engineering judgment and assumptions were used to complete remaining data gaps. This chapter summarizes the findings and data acquired as part of this storm drainage study. It also summarizes data limitations, assumptions, and impacts.

3.1.1 Topography and Aerial Imagery
All project data and results are in US units on the NAVD 88 and the State Plane California Zone III coordinate system.

Schaaf & Wheeler created a digital elevation model (DEM) covering the Zone 5 drainage area with available FEMA 2017 Region 9 LiDAR data to aid in developing the hydrologic and hydraulic models for the system analysis. The DEM provides elevations on a continuous grid with a 3-foot resolution on the NAVD 88.

This updated topographic dataset was used to improve the 2012 model data. An updated ground surface elevation was applied to all nodes in the regional system using GIS tools to extract values from the DEM. Invert elevations from the previous model were then updated as well to maintain node depths based on measurements and proper pipe cover throughout the model.
170
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 3-1: FEMA 2017 Region 9 LiDAR DEM in the Vicinity of Zone 5

3.1.2 GIS Data
Santa Cruz County and the City of Capitola provided available GIS data representing storm drain nodes (e.g., inlets, manholes, and outfalls) and storm drain links (e.g., pipes, culverts, and open channels) to Schaaf & Wheeler in GIS formats (e.g., .gdb, .shp, etc). Initial data included:
 Pipe locations and lengths;
 Node types and locations (Drain Inlet – DI, Catch Basin – CB, Outfall – O);  Location of outfalls;
 Depth at approximately 64% of model nodes (344 out of 539); and  Sizes for all pipes.
171
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
The storm network elements were placed in GIS software, then the regional systems (pipes 36- inches and larger in diameter) were isolated. Schaaf & Wheeler identified missing data as well as items in need of verification. Information needed to refine regional system models included:
 Verification of pipe diameters;
 Measurement and documentation of open channel and culvert physical properties; and  Node depth and rim elevations.

The County GIS included ground surface elevations from prior efforts and GIS datasets.

However, the more recent LiDAR was used to verify surface elevations, aid in assigning properties to open channel systems, and develop projects where new storm drainage structures are required. We also used aerial imagery available in ArcGIS to evaluate related data, such as road networks, land use, and the extent of water bodies.

Schaaf and Wheeler conducted field visits in January 2021 to document system condition and collect information, including:
 Structure type (manhole, catch basin, etc.)
 Incoming/outgoing pipe diameters and materials
 Structure and pipe invert depth(s)
 Debris accumulation status (by percentage of depth)
 Depth of standing water
 Priority of maintenance or replacement need
 Whether the pipe required CCTV for further evaluation  Any other relevant notes
System depths were verified at 128 locations, including four that previously had no data available. These were updated or added to the GIS. Some system nodes occurring along open channel segments or in the vicinity of culverts were missing inverts. These were estimated from the same LiDAR data set used to assign ground surface elevations where possible. Inverts were approximated at the ends of the modeled system based on surrounding node inverts, pipe slopes, and minimum pipe cover of three feet. This enabled the use of interpolation tools within the model to fill in missing invert elevation data throughout the system. These interpolated inverts were checked in profiles to ensure a sensible result, with positive pipe slope and pipe cover. Where interpolation tools produced apparently incorrect inverts, they were corrected manually and nearby nodes were re-interpolated as necessary.

The entire storm drain system was used in prior studies to delineate drainage areas to the regional system. Since this study focuses on regional systems, subcatchment areas from prior studies were aggregated into larger catchment areas tributary to those regional conveyance elements. The regional system and associated drainage catchments modeled in InfoSWMM are shown in Figure 3-2. The figure overlays regional catchments on those modeled in the 2013 SDMP for reference.
172
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-4 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 3-2: Zone 5 Storm Drainage Network
Some areas from prior studies do not drain to larger regional systems modeled in InfoSWMM.

Instead, they drain either directly to a major creek, lagoon, or ocean. These areas have been removed from the InfoSWMM models. Drainage from each catchment is routed by the model directly into its respective regional system.

Catchments were also delineated for areas not included in prior plans. These areas include those within the City of Capitola (approximately 0.3 square miles) and those areas draining into Noble Creek from the north (approximately 0.7 square miles).

Other GIS data collected for this planning effort includes land cover and soil characteristics, two essential factors in the development of a hydrologic model. Land use data was defined based on a combination of Santa Cruz County and City of Capitola parcel information obtained in GIS shapefile format. Soils information was acquired from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey system.
173
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-5 Schaaf & Wheeler

3.1.3 Field Data Collection and Inspection
The process of collecting field data and inspecting system condition began with a review of existing GIS, previous studies, as-built drawings, and aerial imagery to identify missing information vital to the SDMP development process. Field data collection included relevant model attributes, including open channel dimensions, pipe depth from the ground surface, pipe sizes, materials, maintenance issues, and condition assessment.

For the pipe system, the condition assessment started with the use of a pole-mounted camera to get a clear image of the pipe from access points (manholes, inlets, outfalls, etc.). Any pipes that were difficult to access or appeared to require more detailed inspection were further assessed with CCTV.

Conditions assessed for pipe systems were:

1. Signs of high or standing water

2. Infrastructure damage (concrete spalling or cracking, failing metal, etc.)

3. Debris or sediment accumulation

4. Depth and pipe material
For open conveyances and culverts, staff utilized cameras to document the condition of approximately 13 miles of open conveyance channels. Photos were geocoded and compared to those collected for the 2013 study.

Conditions documented and assessed for open channels included:

1. Channel erosion, debris, or sediment deposition, and vegetation

2. Channel shape (bottom width, depth, top width)

3. Channel material (natural, concrete lined, etc.)

4. Signs of damage or high water

5. Hydraulic obstructions (dams, weirs, structures, other blockages, in channel) Culverts were assessed using a hydraulic field sheet to document parameters such as culvert size, headwall conditions, and bridge deck properties. Conditions affecting culvert capacity were documented with photos as required. After an initial topside inspection of the system, 59 system elements were identified for additional CCTV inspection. These elements are shown in Figure 3-3.
174
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-6 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 3-3: Map of Conduit, Culverts, and Open Channel Where CCTV Inspection was Performed From field data, photos, and CCTV video, a conditions assessment geodatabase was developed. Regional facilities that were examined during the field data collection period were assessed using two scales. The National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) ratings system was applied to pipes, while two ratings were applied to open conveyances – one for environmental condition (scour, erosion, trash accumulation, illegal dumping, vegetation, etc.) and one for hydraulic capacity (obstructions, sedimentation, debris). 175
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-7 Schaaf & Wheeler

3.2 Land Use Data and Runoff Characteristics

3.2.1 Land Cover
Raw zoning data consisted of approximately 150 different land use types. These were reclassified into 14 categories for the purposes of this analysis. These categories sufficiently represent variability in imperviousness and land use impact on rainfall runoff characteristics.

Current land use derived from County Assessor parcel information is shown in Figure 3-4.

Figure 3-4: Existing Land Use Information Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model 176
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-8 Schaaf & Wheeler
The data was used to verify and update hydrologic parameters from prior studies to reflect conditions affecting existing hydrology as accurately as possible.

Future condition land cover was modified based on County and City zoning data, which is assumed to better represent future development potential across the model areas. Zoning data classified to match curve number tables presented in this report is shown in Figure 3-5 Figure 3-5: Zoning Information Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model 177
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-9 Schaaf & Wheeler

3.2.2 Soil Classifications
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has classified soils into four hydrologic soil groups (A, B, C, and D), according to their infiltration rates. Group “A” soils have low runoff potential when wetted and typically consist of sand and gravel. Group “B” soils are moderately well-draining when thoroughly wetted and consist of loamy sand or sandy loam textures. Group “C” soils have moderately high runoff potential when thoroughly wetted and consist of loam, silt loam, sandy clay loam, clay loam, and silty clay loam textures. Group “D” soils have high runoff potential when thoroughly wet and consist of clayey textures.

Soils within the delineated regional system catchments primarily consist of Watsonville Loam (47.8%) and Elkhorn Sandy Loam (24.3%). The remaining 27.9% of the catchment areas consist of a mixture of other soil types, as summarized in Table 3-1.

A map of hydrologic soil groups in the area is shown in Figure 3-6.

Table 3-1: Catchment Soil Type Summary
NRCS Soil Map Unit
Hydrologic
Soil Group
Area
(Acre)
Percent
of Area
Aptos Loam C 28.1 1.0%
Beaches C 3.2 0.1%
Ben Lomond-Catelli-Sur complex B 28.3 1.0%
Bonnydoon-Rock outcrop complex D 25.6 0.9%
Danville loam C 103 3.5%
Elder sandy loam B 28.1 1.0%
Elkhorn sandy loam B 704 24.3%
Elkhorn-Pfeiffer complex B 81.0 2.8%
Fagan loam C 10.8 0.4%
Lompico-Felton complex C 1.3 0.0%
Los Osos loam C 58.0 2.0%
Nisene-Aptos complex C 22.8 0.8%
Pinto loam C 48.4 1.7%
Soquel loam B 137 4.7%
Tierra-Watsonville complex D 220 7.6%
Water N/A 14.3 0.5%
Watsonville loam D 1,385 47.8%
Total 2,899 100%
178
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-10 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 3-6: Hydrologic Soil Group Data Used in the Development of the Hydrologic Model 179
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Data
December 2023 3-11 Schaaf & Wheeler

3.2.3 Runoff Curve Numbers
The NRCS curve number methodology is applied to aid in estimating runoff from catchments based on soil and land cover characteristics. Curve numbers vary from 0 to 100, with 0 representing no runoff and 100 meaning that all precipitation will run off. Curve numbers have been assigned based on land use categories, imperviousness, and soil types as summarized in Table 3-2. These values account for varying levels of imperviousness across land use types.

Curve numbers can vary for a given drainage area based on the Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC), representing soil moisture content at the start of a storm. AMC can vary between dry (AMC I) and wet (AMC III). Values were initially assigned to the catchments assuming an “average” moisture condition (AMC II), then adjusted based on the methodology presented in Section 4.

Table 3-2: AMC II Curve Number Summary by Land Use and Soil Type Hydrologic Soil Group
Description A B C D
Vacant Land 43 65 76 82
Public Facilities/Rural Lots 49 69 79 84
Rural Developed Lots 57 72 81 86
Low Density Residential 61 75 83 87
Low Density Developed 68 79 86 89
Medium Density Residential 69 80 87 90
Medium Density Development 77 85 90 92
High Density Residential 77 85 90 92
Very High Density Residential 89 92 94 95
Commercial/Industrial (Low Intensity) 81 88 91 93
Commercial/Industrial (High Intensity) 89 92 94 95
Paved Areas with Landscape 90 90 90 90
Roads/Other Paved Areas, Water 100 100 100 100
180
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
4 Methodology

4.1 Overview
The criteria used to evaluate storm drain system performance must be technically sound and simple to understand and apply. Ideally, the same methodology used to analyze system performance for this report will continue to be used for future infrastructure design.

Schaaf & Wheeler applied the same methodology presented in the 2013 SDMP for Zone 5 and Zone 6 to estimate stormwater runoff based on land cover and soil types present in the study area. This approach to modeling applies the NRCS curve number hydrology method to generate runoff hydrographs and dynamic wave hydraulics with Manning’s and Darcy-Weisbach methods to generate hydraulic grades and conveyance system flows.

The hydrologic methodology applied in this analysis is based on the Santa Cruz County Design Criteria (SCCDC) – Part 3. The hydraulic methodology is also based on the SCCDC, with some modification to account for ponding and “storage” of water above ground level. The SCCDC hydraulic requirements primarily deal with flows contained below ground level with freeboard.

The way that the model accounts for this is discussed further in this section.

4.2 Evaluation Criteria
The SCCDC specifies that system designs maintain 8 inches of freeboard between the rim elevation of stormwater structures and the 10-year water surface. For regional systems, however, the County has indicated a desire to explore alternative levels of service.

Schaaf & Wheeler created hydrologic analysis and one-dimensional hydraulic models for the 25-year and 100-year events. For regional systems modeled in InfoSWMM, the 25-year level of service standard was agreed upon as the governing criteria for general storm drain system conveyance. For creeks modeled in HEC-RAS, where FEMA 100-year flood hazard areas are defined, the 100-year event model represents governing criteria. Creeks and pipe/ditch systems were not evaluated in the same model. Instead, water surface boundary conditions were applied where the regional system outfalls to the creeks..

We recommend improvements to reduce the 25-year hydraulic grade to no higher than 0.5 feet above the rim elevation at any location in regional closed-conduit and ditch systems. This represents containment to the top of curb level at the peak of the storm, generally preventing property damage to the greatest extent possible.

4.3 Modeling Software
Zone 5 has opted to continue using InfoSWMM stormwater modeling software by Innovyze (formerly by MWH Soft) as a primary means of assessing system performance, identifying deficiencies, and evaluating and recommending necessary improvements. Physical parameters used in the analysis are based on information detailed in Chapter 3 – Data.

The program works within the ArcMap interface and is capable of applying the hydrologic and hydraulic methods discussed here. However, its full numerical modeling capabilities include modeling overland flow, weirs, pumps, and complex storage areas. These capabilities are not fully utilized by the current regional system InfoSWMM model, but they could be developed 181
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
further for future modeling efforts or for more local studies as projects are designed and constructed.

Other capabilities of the software include import and export of model data, network editing and gap-filling, catchment delineation, and network interpolation and connectivity tools. InfoSWMM can also be used to present results including plan, longitudinal, and cross-section views; animation of results; and presentation of flooding, including water depth and pressure. With the software built to function within ArcMap, results can easily be viewed on background graphics such as maps, aerial photos, and other GIS data.

Unlike prior modeling efforts, all regional systems with outfalls to creeks, lagoons, and Monterey Bay have been placed in a single model for this effort.

HEC-RAS models have been developed for four creeks (Arana Gulch, Noble Gulch, Rodeo Creek, and Soquel Creek). 100-year flows are used as inputs to the HEC-RAS models to evaluate the HGL through the creeks. The major creek crossings are primarily bridges, with the exception of culverts under Highway 1. Since the Zone 5 does not have jurisdiction on the Caltrans culverts, those crossings were not evaluated in detail. The models may underestimate peak water surface elevations at certain outfalls as a result.

However, using a peak water surface elevation from these models is somewhat conservative, given a fairly sizable difference in timing between the peak of local discharge to the creeks and the peak water surface at the outfalls. This is because the creek drainage areas tend to be much larger and less developed.

The biggest impact of including a highway bridge is likely to be on Soquel Creek at Highway 1, where the 25-year water flow rate in the creek can easily cause flooding in the vicinity of Downtown Soquel on its own. At this location, storm system improvements may be deemed beneficial. However, addressing the much more impactful issue of creek overflows is challenging and can be guided somewhat by the RAS model and prior planning efforts.

Culverts on regional ditch conveyances were included in the InfoSWMM model as details of the ditches and culverts were collected in the field that allowed for a detailed evaluation in the modeling system. Figure 4-1 shows these culvert crossings. 182
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 4-1: Major Culvert Crossings on Open Channel Alignments in the Regional System

4.4 Model Operation
InfoSWMM performs two separate calculations for the Zone 5 regional system model. First, a runoff calculation (hydrologic analysis) estimates the amount of water entering the storm drain system from each catchment during a design rainfall event. Second, a network flow calculation (hydraulic modeling) replicates how the storm drain system will convey flows to outlet locations.

Flows resulting from the runoff calculation are used as inflows for the subsequent network flow calculation.

The InfoSWMM runoff model offers a choice of three distinctive infiltration methods: Horton, Green-Ampt, and NRCS curve number. The Zone 5 Regional system models use the NRCS curve number with a dimensionless unit hydrograph method (UHM) to calculate surface runoff.

This analysis uses a 24-hour storm, so the simulation window is set to 24 hours as well.

However, a simulation can be started at any point during the chosen design storm to assess surface runoff for any period of the design storm, with computations made based on a userspecified time step. The 24-hour storm was ultimately chosen because it represents a “balanced” design event that causes some level of saturation of soils prior to the short duration peak flow rates that tend to be the most important factor in determining the required size of local pipe systems. Longer duration storms are more appropriate for large detention facilities 183
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-4 Schaaf & Wheeler
susceptible to high inflow volumes rather than solely high peak flow rates. The Zone 5 system lacks detention systems of this magnitude.

The pipe flow model offers a choice of three flow and hydraulic grade calculation methods:
steady state, kinematic wave, and dynamic wave. Each is distinguished based on the set of forces that they take into account. The Zone 5 storm drain model uses the most comprehensive method, dynamic wave, which incorporates the effects of gravitation, friction, pressure gradient, and inertial forces. Because it accounts for all forces affecting flow characteristics, this method allows the model to accurately simulate fast transients and backwater profiles. In the absence of 2D surface flow routing, flooding above-structure rims is characterized by storage in an artificial basin above the model nodes’ defined ground surface elevations.

Volume stored above these nodes is characterized by a “ponded area” input in square feet.

Without considering ponding spread above the system, the model assumes that essentially the entire peak flow into the node must be forced through the pipe system. This would overestimate flooding depths.

In reality, surcharged flows spread out over street gutters, sidewalks, parking lots, and other areas. This storage volume provides some attenuation of peak flows, impacting the head on the downstream pipe inlet. In general, surcharge in the regional system would pond on the surface directly above, as well as above private and local systems not included in the model. A representative ponded area value of 30,000 square feet is used in the model for closed-conduit systems. For larger ditches, that value is modified up to 450,000 square feet depending on the characteristics of surrounding topography.

Pipe flow simulations can be executed using either a constant or variable time step. Simulations can also be run for any portion of the full time interval defined by the rainfall time series and corresponding calculated runoff hydrograph. A time step of two seconds is used for the Zone 5 models, which is sufficient to model gradients across even the shortest lengths of pipe in the model with relatively high flow velocities.

The HEC-RAS model performs a steady state backwater hydraulic analysis of the open channel profiles based on a series of cross sections defined along a stream centerline. Cross sections were developed using the LIDAR data. FEMA flows were used in 1D, steady state models.

4.4.1 Input and Output
Surface runoff calculations require two types of input data: boundary data and catchment data.

Boundary data for the run-off computation consists of an input rainfall time series representing the design storm event for the model.

Catchment data includes the boundaries of each drainage catchment, along with relevant physical and hydrologic parameters including surface area, runoff curve number, and lag time (or parameters used by the model to calculate lag).
184
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
A summary of model input and output is listed in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Summary of Model Input and Output for the Regional System Models Model Inputs Outputs
InfoSWMM
Runoff
(Hydrologic)
Boundary Data
• Rainfall time series
Urban Catchment Data
• Drainage catchments
• Lag time
• Curve number
Runoff hydrographs for each
individual catchment
InfoSWMM
Pipe and
Channel Flow
(Hydraulic)
Storm Drain Network
• Nodes (catch basins, manholes,
outlets, etc.)
• Links (pipes, culverts, open
channels)
• Cross section data (for open
channel sections)
• Basin geometry (elevation-volume)
• Operational data
• Catchment connections
• Junction losses
• Boundary data (e.g., water
surfaces at outfalls)
• Catchment runoff hydrographs
• Water surface elevation time
series
Water level at each node
Water level in network links
Velocity in network links
Water volume in the system
Discharges
Flood depth and volume above
ground

HEC-RAS
(Open Channel
Hydraulics)
Open Channels
• River/stream centerline
• Cross section geometry
• Roughness
• Culverts/bridges
• Boundary data (water surfaces
and/or inflow)
Water level at cross sections
Hydraulic grade profile
Flow velocity at cross sections
Volume in reaches
185
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-6 Schaaf & Wheeler

4.5 Rainfall Depth and Pattern
In keeping with the methodology applied in the previous master planning effort, the NRCS Type I synthetic, 24-hour rainfall pattern was used (TR-55, Appendix B). Depths for the pattern were adjusted based on local rainfall statistics. To that end, patterns with a 15-minute time interval were modified to create rainfall time series that are considered “balanced” for each return period. Each resulting time series provides total rainfall depths equal to those represented by its respective IDF curve (10-year, 25-year, and 100-year) for durations of 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, and 24 hours.

The 10-year storm used for the previous master planning effort is shown in Figure 4-2 for reference, along with 25- and 100-year storm rainfall timeseries. The 10-year, 25-year, and 100- year 24-hour storm rainfall depths at this location are 7.44 inches, 8.93 inches, and 11.16 inches, respectively.

Figure 4-2: 24-hour Design Storm Events for Zone 5

4.5.1 Climate Change
The models also consider the potential impacts of climate change. This is accomplished by using EPA SWMM Climate Adjustment Tool (SWMM-CAT). The tool provides location-specific adjustment factors for Near-Term (2035) and Far-Term (2060) projects derived from global climate change model developed by the World Climate Research Program. The tool generates adjustment factors for several climate parameters. However, this analysis is primarily concerned with future changes in precipitation. Predictions generated by the tool are shown in Figure 4-3 and Figure 4-4 for near- and far-term cases, respectively.

0.0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 12:00 AM 6:00 AM 12:00 PM 6:00 PM 12:00 AM
Rainfall Depth (in)
100-yr
25-yr
10-yr
186
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-7 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 4-3: Near-Term Monthly Rainfall and 24-Hour Design Storm SWMM-CAT Predictions (95010 Zip Code)
187
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-8 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 4-4: Far-Term Monthly Rainfall and 24-Hour Design Storm SWMM-CAT Predictions (95010 Zip Code)
Cal Adapt provides another source of climate change predictions. For the Regional System Model area, Cal Adapt predicts 30-year average precipitation to increase by approximately 25% under the high emissions model scenarios in their long-term modeling (End-Century, 2070- 2099). For individual extreme storm events, it predicts that End-Century intensities could 188
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-9 Schaaf & Wheeler
increase by 20% on average for the high emissions scenario, and up to 40% for cool, wet climate conditions.

The regional systems models use single storms to evaluate system capacity and identify projects. While the predictions from EPA and Cal Adapt indicate monthly and seasonal increases in precipitation depths on the order of 25 to 40%, single 24-hour design storm change are estimated on the order of 15 to 30%. For a 25-year event, the EPA tool predicts far-term increases in precipitation for a single storm of approximately 24 to 25%. The climate change SWMM model used the design 25-year storm with depths increased uniformly by a factor of

0.25. The climate change model was not used to increase the size of CIPs. It’s instead used to highlight where those CIPs may require additional climate change consideration during design and to identify where additional projects may require consideration in the future. There are only a handful of locations where additional, significant flooding appears in the climate change model. The results presented in Section 5 show that the CIP identified in this document is largely resilient to the expected increases in extreme precipitation events.

4.6 Catchment Data
Catchment inputs include boundaries of each catchment, along with relevant physical and representative hydrologic parameters including surface area, land use characteristics and parameters used to calculate lag times for the unit hydrograph method.

4.6.1 Lag Time
The UHM also requires the definition of lag time for the catchments. The previous master planning method applied a standard lag equation for basins. Lag is a function of the longest flow path, measured from the catchment outlet to the most remote point in the catchment, the centroidal flow path, and the average slope along the principal flow path.

The lag time equation carried through from prior planning efforts in Zone 5 is:
𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑙 = 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝑁𝑁 ∗ �𝐿𝐿 ∗ 𝐿𝐿𝑐𝑐
�𝑆𝑆0
�

0.38 Where: 𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑙 = Lag time (hours)
𝐾𝐾 = 24 (unitless constant)
𝑁𝑁 = Unitless basin roughness factor (NOT the same as Manning’s n values) 𝐿𝐿 = Longest flow path (mi)
𝐿𝐿𝑐𝑐 = The Centroidal flow path length (distance from the outlet to a point orthogonal to the catchment centroid) (mi)
𝑆𝑆0 = The average slope of the longest flow path (ft/mi) 189
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-10 Schaaf & Wheeler
Flow paths were estimated in GIS based on LiDAR topographic data. Elevations were extracted at the top and bottom of the flow paths to estimate slopes. Basin roughness factors are summarized in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2: Summary of Roughness Parameters by Basin Type Basin Type Basin
Roughness (N)
Urban watersheds 0.021*
Rural watersheds with generally clear stream beds and
minimal vegetation growth in drainage reaches 0.05
Rural watersheds with moderate to high levels of vegetation growth, or rock and boulder deposits within the main drainage reaches

0.07 Rural watersheds with dense vegetation or high levels of boulder deposits within the main drainage reaches 0.08
*Calculated from a Manning’s n value of 0.013 by the following equation: 𝑁𝑁 = 0.52𝑛𝑛0.79

4.6.2 Hydrologic Model
The unit hydrograph is a numerical representation of the time response of catchment runoff caused by rainfall applied uniformly over a unit of time. Various unit hydrograph options exist, including NRCS dimensionless, NRCS triangular, Clark, and Snyder.

The InfoSWMM model for Zone 5 uses the NRCS curve number with the NRCS dimensionless unit hydrograph (NRCS, 2007) to estimate catchment runoff hydrographs in response to modeled rainfall events.

Catchment area, time of concentration, and curve number were used as inputs to the InfoSWMM model. Current assessor parcel information and aerial imagery were used to develop curve numbers representative of existing conditions. The parcel GIS shapefile contains an attribute called USECDDESC that was used for existing land use. For the future conditions model, the zoning GIS shapefile was used to update curve numbers to reflect additional development and redevelopment that might occur within Zone 5 and City of Capitola drainage areas based on County and City zoning designations.

4.6.2.1 Curve Number Calibration
In the 2013 study, the AMC was calibrated based on hydrology models for Soquel and Carbonera Creeks. These hydrologic models were revisited to update gage statistics based on more recent flow data and to calibrate AMC to the 25-year storm event specifically. Similar results were produced, and the AMC was selected at I-1/4, representing a generally drier than average condition at the start of a 25-year storm.

Soquel Creek calibration is discussed in the 2013 SDMP. AMC adjustments have been evaluated for the gaged Carbonera Creek basin by a similar methodology. First, gage data has been evaluated to develop a peak runoff frequency curve with USGS PeakFQ (shown in Figure 4-5).
190
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-11 Schaaf & Wheeler
Curve numbers have been assigned to the basin based on land use and soil characteristics and lag calculated based on flow paths and basin slope as described in Section 4.6.1. HEC-1 was then used to estimate peak runoff from the 3.74 square-mile basin for various storm events for AMC I and AMC I-1/4 curve number values. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 4-3 and confirm that AMC I-1/4 remains a valid conservative assumption for a 25-year return period.

Figure 4-5: USGS PeakFQ Duration-Frequency Curves for Carbonera Creek Table 4-3: Carbonera Creek Peak Flow (cfs) & AMC Evaluation Return Period
(Exceedance
Prob.)
PeakFQ
Predicted
Peak FQ
Confidence
Limits
HEC-1 (AMC I) HEC-1 (AMC I-1/4)
100-year (1%) 1,906 1,449 - 2,898 2,064 2,178
50-year (2%) 1,701 1,333 – 2,604 1,787 1,898
25-year (4%) 1,493 1,200 – 2,130 1,411 1,493
10-year (10%) 1,210 994 – 1,581 1,149 1,251
5-year (20%) 986 814 – 1,221 935 980
2-year (50%) 645 528 - 779 536 616
While Carbonera Creek is more representative of a more heavily urbanized condition, the Soquel Creek at Soquel USGS gag has a much longer record, covering the period since 1951, plus an additional historical event in 1937. This gage was also examined in PeakFQ (Figure 4-6), and a 25-year event hydrology model was applied to verify that AMC I-¼ is an appropriate choice (Table 4-4).
191
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-12 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 4-6: USGS PeakFQ Duration-Frequency Curves for Soquel Creek Table 4-4: Soquel Creek at Soquel 25-year AMC Evaluation Peak Discharge (cfs)
PeakFQ Predicted 9,020
AMC I 6,715
AMC I-1/4 8,180
AMC I-1/2 9,390
AMC I-3/4 10,600
AMC II 11,790
For Soquel Creek, the PeakFQ predicted discharge lies in between AMC I-¼ and AMC I-½ hydrologic model results for the basin. Each drainage area possesses its own unique properties, which leads to variability even in adjacent basins. Coupled with the Carbonera Creek calibration results, this provides a regional confirmation based on a relatively extensive gage record that I- ¼ is likely an appropriate choice for a smaller, urban basin.

4.6.2.2 Curve Number Assignment
Catchments were first overlain with land use and soils information in GIS to estimate curve numbers using the values presented in Table 3-2. This was done for both existing land cover conditions and future conditions based on zoning designations. Curve numbers were then adjusted to corresponding AMC I-1/4 values. The result of this process is shown in Figure 4-7. 192
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-13 Schaaf & Wheeler
For many areas of the County and City, using zoning designations actually causes curve numbers to decrease, since commercial/industrial areas would become residential land use types with a lesser percentage of impervious area. Even those developments that are higher density must meet current NPDES permit and local stormwater management design requirements. For most development that substantially increases imperviousness on a site, stormwater detention is required. While these requirements apply to a 10-year design storm, they do impact the characteristics of discharge in other storms and inevitably do decrease peak discharge.

The model is still a useful exercise, as other areas of the model where curve numbers increase may see greater magnitudes of runoff to the regional stormwater systems. The future condition model assumes a worst-case scenario, where lower curve numbers are ignored and development occurring only where curve numbers would increase.

This approach also adequately considers the impact of development subject to detention requirements. Traditionally, residential zoning might decrease curve numbers without considering trends towards allowance of higher density housing. By keeping the curve numbers the same for these catchments, we are effectively considering the possibility that redevelopment is more impervious but subject to detention requirements that would keep peak flows similar to pre-development conditions.
193
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Methodology
December 2023 4-14 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 4-7: Existing and Future Condition Curve Numbers 194
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
5 Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems

5.1 Overview
Zone 5 regional systems have been evaluated based on both their condition and capacity.

Condition assessment was initially performed by Schaaf & Wheeler over multiple days in January 2021. Certain elements of the system were revisited at a later time by a CCTV contractor to better evaluate the condition of the pipes where it could not be ascertained from the surface alone. Capacity analysis has been performed for a number of representative physical basin conditions:
 Existing Land Use and Soil Conditions
 Future Land Use Condition
 Future Land Use Condition with far-term (or end-century) climate change (25% adjustment to 25-year design storm)
Existing land use and soil conditions were first run in InfoSWMM with the existing pipe system to evaluate capacity deficiencies. Pipes were then upsized or added in the model until the deficiency diminished to meet level-of-service standards. These CIPs have been further evaluated with the future land use conditions to ensure that systems will continue to meet levelof-service standards with additional development in the Zone 5 area. Finally, the system with identified projects complete was also evaluated with climate change considered, increasing the magnitude of rainfall time series uniformly by 25% based on far-term predictions from SWMMCAT (shown in Figure 4-4) for a single, 24-hour design storm event.

Modeled projects are primarily developed by upsizing existing pipe or channels. However, in some locations, constraints on the system profile or property ownership may have been identified that make installation of new, parallel pipe systems, with the existing pipe remaining in place, a more feasible means of addressing capacity deficiency.

The results of the existing analysis have also been used to inform prioritization of the projects.

Factors considered for prioritization include the magnitude and extent of flooding reduced by a project, potential for property damage if the project is not constructed, mitigation of flooding occurring in major roadways, known flooding issues or historical damages, and system condition that may exacerbate flooding.

Alternatives exist for all projects. While some are explored to address known challenges, the design process should include alternatives analysis for any CIP project. Parallel pipes, alternative alignments, and LID/open channel replacements for pipe should be considered where cost savings and other opportunities are found.
195
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-2 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.2 Existing System Evaluation

5.2.1 System Condition
After examining available system data and aerial imagery, field inspection was performed for specific system elements (pipes, ditches, and culverts). With topside and CCTV inspections completed, the condition ratings were assigned based on the factors discussed in Section 3.1.3.

NASSCO ratings and open ditches condition ratings are shown in Figure 5-1. Initial input from Zone 5 staff and observations from the surface with a pole-mounted GoPro were used to identify which elements of the system would require further inspection by CCTV.

Figure 5-1: Surface Inspection System Condition Ratings Map Most inspected system elements achieved a rating of “Good.” None achieved an “Excellent” rating. In the northeast portion of Zone 5, two reaches of open channel were identified in “Poor” condition. This condition rating was determined based on the extent of unmaintained vegetation 196
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
posing a capacity restriction. In the southwest portion of Zone 5, multiple reaches of pipe were rated as “Poor” or “Immediate Attention.” These elements require removal of debris and sediment at a minimum.

CCTV ratings are shown in Figure 5-2. On 26th Street, further examination by CCTV revealed that the pipe may require full replacement based on the prevalence of corrosion and cracking.

Figure 5-2: CCTV Condition Ratings Map
The need for maintenance was distinguished in the ratings from condition deficiencies that require replacement of pipes. In some cases, for example, a rating of “Immediate Attention” was applied purely based on a loss of capacity due to an extreme accumulation of sediment and debris. In other locations, pipes were given the same rating for structural deficiencies like corrosion or localized failures.
197
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-4 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.2.2 Regional System Capacity
The regional system model has been used to identify areas where overflow occurs due to a lack of available conveyance capacity. HEC-RAS models of larger open channels (Soquel Creek and Rodeo Gulch) were used to apply reasonable, conservative water surface boundary conditions at modeled system outfalls. The capacity of both closed-conduit and open channel segments are considered.

Results have been processed to visualize the locations of flooding (the depth of stormwater surcharge above ground surface at each node) throughout the Zone 5 regional systems. These areas are shown in Figure 5-3.

Figure 5-3: Existing Regional System 25-year Node Flooding Results from InfoSWMM The model result shows many locations where “flooding” as estimated by the model is 1 foot or greater in depth.

It is important to understand the limitations of a one-dimensional model in order to contemplate the real-world implications of this result. The model utilizes the calculated hydraulic grade line, representing the water surface that would be required for a given flow rate to pass through the system. This does not consider the topography above the pipe system in extensive detail, consisting of roadways, gutters, sidewalks, and landscaping. In reality, some of this flow might 198
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
run down the street in the gutter and enter the system at another inlet. Consideration of these conditions is necessary in interpreting these results and developing projects that mitigate potential flood damage and hazard conditions.

5.2.2.1 Comparison to Prior Modeling Results
There are locations where the model shows more or less flooding than the 2012 – 2013 master planning analysis. Inspection of the model inputs at these locations indicates that various conditions are the primary driver for these differences:
 Changes to the ground surface and invert elevations to reflect updated topographic information and field measurements;
 Updated curve number inputs based on up-to-date land cover and soil unit data;  Removal of capacity restrictions in smaller local systems that was attenuating peak flows into the regional system in prior models; and
 A combination of these factors.

5.2.3 Creek Capacity Deficiencies
There are some locations where creek overflow is a known cause of flooding. HEC-RAS models provide some insight as to the reasons these areas tend to flood.

5.2.3.1 Soquel Creek
Soquel Creek is generally a deeply incised creek with depths of approximately 25 feet from the top of the channel banks to the channel thalweg (the lowest point in the channel cross section).

The one-dimensional HEC-RAS model cross sections show that the areas in the overbanks most prone to flooding, surrounding Soquel Drive bridge, occur where the depth of the main channel is roughly 15 feet. Given the extent of existing development within Soquel Creek’s floodplain, developing solutions for flood impacts is beyond the scope of this study.

A prior planning effort for Soquel Village identified the need to purchase property in the area to mitigate flood damage. The Soquel Village plan was adopted in May 1990 and alluded to developing a resident relocation plan for the Old Mill Mobile Home Park using FEMA funding.

Following the acquisition of property and relocation of residents, the plan considered construction of a park along the west bank of Soquel Creek. Rather than providing flood protection infrastructure, the long-term plan after that initial phase contemplated redevelopment of commercial and industrial properties, bringing new structures into conformance with floodplain and floodway construction guidelines.

Only portions of that plan were implemented, including replacement of the Soquel Drive bridge to prevent debris racking (the accumulation of logs, vegetations, and other debris on a bridge pier, abutment, or culvert face) that historically worsened flooding and some limited acquisition of the Heart of Soquel Mobile Home Park with the Redevelopment Agency. Purchase of the Old Mill Mobile Home Park by local agencies was never completed as the Redevelopment Agency dissolved.

Given current conditions robust flood protection solutions for Soquel Village require additional study and contemplation that is beyond the scope of this study. Potential solutions may include completion of the Soquel Village Plan, flood walls, levees, floodplain retreat, channel capacity improvements, etc.
199
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-6 Schaaf & Wheeler
Climate change has been evaluated with the HEC-RAS model by increasing runoff up to 25% for a 100-year flow rate. This is in line with modifications to precipitation in the storm drain system SWMM models. SLR has been modeled with both 3 and 6 feet of rise added to the existing condition’s downstream water surface boundary. The results of this modeling exercise are shown in Figure 5-4.

At the downstream end of the creek, SLR may have an expansive impact on the City of Capitola and coastal bluffs. Exploring solutions for this is beyond the scope of this report. However, planning for the impacts of SLR in a coastal community should be a priority, and the design and construction of any CIP project should consider the project’s resilience against SLR. This will be essential for the proposed Noble Gulch system improvements near Capitola Avenue. Climate change impacts must also be considered for flood protection solutions (flood walls, levees, floodplain retreat, channel capacity improvements, etc.) implemented upstream. 200
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-7 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-4: Soquel Creek HEC-RAS Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Conditions (Blue), 3 Feet of SLR with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and 6 Feet of SLR with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green)
201
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-8 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.2.3.2 Arana Gulch
Arana Gulch lies near the boundary between Zone 5 and the City of Santa Cruz. Ownership of culvert facilities along the channel varies. A reach of Arana Gulch from Highway 1 (Soquel Avenue) to just downstream of the culvert crossing Capitola Road has been evaluated with a 1- dimensional, steady state HEC-RAS model.

Climate change impacts were modeled for Arana Gulch by increasing peak flow rates by 25%. A 100-year inundation extent for existing conditions with the FEMA effective flow rate is compared to the 100-year inundation extent with climate change in Figure 5-5. Sea level rise does not impact the reach of Arana Gulch analyzed for this effort. Creek elevations are well above even 100-year tidal water surface elevations.

Figure 5-5: 100-year Inundation Extents for Existing Conditions (Blue) and for the Existing Channel and Culverts with 25% Increase in Flow Rates (Red) 202
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-9 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.2.3.3 Rodeo Gulch
Rodeo Gulch is more deeply incised than Soquel Creek, with depths from the upper banks to the thalweg of 40 feet or more. The gulch appears to easily contain an estimated 100-year discharge within the boundary of Zone 5. Flooding has not been observed around Rodeo Gulch that would have been caused by a lack of open channel conveyance at this location.

The HEC-RAS model built for Rodeo Gulch indicates that the 100-year flow rate is well contained in the absence of highly constricted culvert crossings and with a downstream tidal water surface boundary of 10.5 ft NAVD.

Climate change impacts were evaluated with similar conditions to those used for Soquel Creek (3 feet of SLR with a 12% increase in 100-year peak flows and 6 feet of SLR with a 25% increase in peak flows). Results of this modeling exercise are shown in Figure 5-6.

Figure 5-6: Rodeo Gulch HEC-RAS Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), 3 Feet of SLR with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and 6 Feet of SLR with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green)
Climate change impacts are generally isolated to the less incised reach of Rodeo Gulch, downstream of the railroad crossing. Lower reaches of this creek may become more susceptible to tidal boundaries with SLR. The climate change model indicates that the Portola Drive crossing is inundated with high tides and a 100-year peak inflow. However, there does not 203
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-10 Schaaf & Wheeler
appear to be extreme risk to structures based on SLR and increased riverine flows alone. This does not consider any increased threat from coastal erosion or waves.

5.2.3.4 Noble Gulch
A simple HEC-RAS model of the Noble Creek Gulch channel has also been developed.

However, this channel is included in the SWMM model with the closed-conduit systems and culverts that are the primary limit on capacity. Nonetheless, the HEC-RAS model helps to confirm that the channel upstream of Bay Avenue has sufficient capacity to handle a 25-year event. The capacity restrictions in the system are therefore isolated to culverts that are not large enough to convey 25-year peak flows.

The HEC-RAS model has also been used to evaluate the 100-year event peak flow rate and climate change impacts on the channel for two scenarios. In the first scenario, the existing culverts remain in place and in the second, the proposed capacity improvements to the culverts are constructed.

Figure 5-7: Noble 100-yr HEC-RAS (with Existing Culverts) Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green)
204
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-11 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-8: Noble 100-yr HEC-RAS (with CIPs Constructed) Climate Change Model Inundation, Including Existing Condition (Blue), with 12% Increase in Runoff (Red), and with 25% Increase in Runoff (Green)
The model results indicate that with the proposed CIP projects completed (Noble Upstream and Noble Downstream), there is some improvement in the 100-year floodplain. However, even with the CIPs in place, the channel itself lacks conveyance capacity to contain the 100-year peak flow rate. For both scenarios, increased precipitation depth and flow rate associated with climate change predictions does increase flooding outside of the channel and could impact some properties around Plum Street.
205
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-12 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.3 Capital Improvements
Recommendations for capital improvements to the regional systems are broken into two primary categories. One is intended to target reaches of the system in poor condition that are not capacity deficient. The second deals with actual system capacity (pipe and inlets) in the absence of high tailwater in receiving bodies (lakes, lagoons, creeks, etc.).

A summary of all capital improvement projects by priority (including larger repair or pipe lining projects and in-kind replacements of existing pipe in poor condition) is provided in Table 5-1.

This does not include smaller repairs or cleaning.

Table 5-1: Capital Improvement Summary by Priority (Capacity Improvements and Repair and Replacement Projects)
Priority Number of
Projects Length of Pipe* Cost*
High 6 8,110 – 10,210 $22,590,000 - $47,560,000
Moderate 6 1,880 – 3,600 $7,320,000 - $7,730,000
Low 6 2,800 $7,560,000
*For certain projects, multiple alternatives result in a wide variance in cost and pipe length Maintenance items are also identified in this chapter where CCTV or pipe inspection indicated that a significant amount of debris and sediment accumulation or vegetation overgrowth has occurred, but pipes are in otherwise serviceable condition. The cost of these O&M items are not included as capital improvements.

5.3.1 Condition/Maintenance Projects
The system condition evaluation revealed some locations where the system is in need of replacement due to structural defects. These projects are identified separately from capacityrelated projects and have been prioritized based on the severity of identified deficiency. Their purpose is to maintain existing capacity and ensure that failure of a system does not cause flooding.

Some recommended projects are driven completely by the observed condition of one or more system elements (structures, pipes, etc.). O&M issues identified by CCTV and inspection for the development of this SDMP are highlighted in Table 5-2. These are generally locations where sediment and debris has accumulated and may have a mild impact on system capacity or small spot repairs may be needed, but the pipes are in otherwise serviceable condition. They do not carry capital cost, but they allow for prioritization of O&M in portions of the system as part of regular maintenance practices.

Projects where there are structural deficiencies (partial or complete failure of pipe, including severe corrosion or cracking) that necessitate more extensive repair or full replacement are identified in Table 5-3. These projects do not overlap with a capacity deficiency identified by the models. Some are located near capacity projects, making it potentially worth combining these O&M and repair projects with adjacent construction projects. 206
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-13 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table 5-2: Priority Maintenance Project Summary
Project Name Description Approx.

Length (ft)
OM1 Tremont Drive Sediment
Management
Remove high levels of sediment accumulation
from pipes at the end of Tremont Dr 310
OM2 14th Avenue Sediment
Management
Remove sediment, debris, and standing water
from pipes on 14th Ave 360
OM3
Soquel Drive Open
Channel Vegetation
Management
Vegetation management in Crystal Heights Ditch
and Monterey Ave Ditch 4 on the north side of
Soquel Dr
1,220
OM4 Jade St Park near 47th
Ave
Remove settled materials from pipe system at
Jade Park near 47th Ave 300
OM5 Corcoran Cleaning Remove settled materials and small debris from pipe system at Corcoran Ave 590
OM6 17th Ave Cleaning
Remove settled materials from pipe system near
17th Ave (downstream of 17th Ave Repair/CIPP
and upstream of Soquel at 17th capacity project)
305
OM7 41st Ave Cleaning Remove settled materials from pipe system upstream of 41st Ave near Capitola Mall 555
OM8 Soquel Dr near Porter
Cleaning/Repair
Remove sediment deposits from concrete box;
spot repair for old plywood repair 350
OM9 Soquel Dr at Farm Park
Cleaning/Repair
Remove sediment deposits; spot repairs for
displaced or strained joints 500
OM10 Alturas Cleaning Remove sediment deposits and tree debris obstructing pipe 170
Table 5-3: Priority Structural Deficiency Project Summary (Replacement or Repair) Project Name Length
(ft)
Diameter
(inches)
RR1 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane)** 1,020 54-72
RR2 26th Ave (East Cliff to Outfall) 465 12
RR3 Leona Creek Culvert at Capitola Road 185 66
RR4 Webster Street near Pinewood 120 60
RR5 17th Ave Repair/CIPP* 340 54
RR6 41st Ave Repair/CIPP (at Capitola Mall)* 86 42
RR7 Aguazul to Douglas Dr CIPP (near Soquel Dr)* 155 36 *Repair project (assumed CIPP for all). Other projects are assumed to be replacements. **Overlaps with some capacity project alternatives. May not be required as an in independent project Condition-driven projects are prioritized based on the severity of identified defects. The project locations and priorities are shown in Figure 5-9 (OM numbered projects) and inError! Reference source not found. Figure 5-10 (RR numbered projects). 207
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-14 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-9: Overview Map of Prioritized System Maintenance (OM) Needs 208
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-15 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-10: Overview Map of Prioritized System Repair & Replacement (RR) Projects

5.3.2 Capacity-Related Projects
Capacity-related projects are identified to mitigate capacity deficiencies. None of the identified capacity deficiencies occur where system condition ratings of “Poor” or worse were identified.

Projects are shown in Figure 5-11 and summarized in Table 5-4. Model results with all baseline capital improvement projects (no project alternatives) complete are shown in Figure 5-12. 209
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-16 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-11: Map of Prioritized System Capacity Projects 210
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-17 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table 5-4: Capital Improvement Projects Summary (Capacity-Driven) ID Project Length (ft) Pipe Diameters (in)
1 17th - Capitola to Kinsley 2,340 30-42
2 34th Ave Ditch Improvements 400 84-144**
2A* Portola-30th (34th Avenue Ditch Alternative) 1,250 36 3 Portola Downstream of 38th 1,495 48
3A* 38th Ave Downstream 1,515 48**-84**
4 Noble Downstream 1,515 120**-144**
4A* Noble Downstream (Alt. Gravity Alignment) 2,750 84-144** 4B* Noble Downstream (600 cfs Pump Station) 1,550 72-144** 5 Soquel Avenue to Rodeo Creek Gulch 1,340 42
6 38th Avenue - Brommer Pond to Portola 2,115 36
6A* 38th Ave Upstream 395 48**-72**
7 Noble Upstream 660 120**-144**
8 Winkle Farm 65 42
9 Brommer at 30th 160 30
10 Chanticleer 1,100 42
11 Soquel at 17th 960 84-144**
Total: 10,430-14,255
*Project alternatives identified
**Represents a nearest equivalent circular pipe diameter for a proposed box culvert 211
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-18 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-12: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects In some cases, it may not be feasible to meet the desired 25-year standard at every node within Zone 5. Reasons may include constraints on how large system elements can be, utilities or such extensive private property impacts that the construction of new drainage infrastructure along existing alignments is infeasible. Residual flooding beyond 6 inches in depth may also remain at single, isolated nodes in the system. At many of these locations, flooding is not likely to reach the modeled depths since the surrounding topography may provide relief and surface conveyance to portions of the system where capacity is available immediately downslope.

5.3.2.1 Capacity Project Alternatives
For most identified projects, the existing system has been upsized to mitigate capacity deficiencies without changing its alignment. Alternatives for any project that should be explored at a design level include:

1. Installation of parallel pipe in lieu of removal and replacement with larger pipe;

2. Daylighting systems into open channel conveyances where opportunities arise (e.g., development/redevelopment proposals); and

3. Alternative alignments that may address unexpected conflicts with private properties or utilities.
212
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-19 Schaaf & Wheeler
Parallel pipe alternatives take advantage of existing system capacity and may reduce the cost of increasing capacity, allowing for the installation of smaller pipes and circumventing the need for removal and disposal of existing systems that may be in serviceable condition. This may not be the best solution for systems where existing pipe is both capacity deficient and has limited remaining service life.

Daylighting systems into open channel conveyances generally requires a similar level of capital investment as pipe replacement projects, but the approach has numerous benefits. Stormwater conveyance can be integrated into landscaping as a beautification measure, open channels are more accessible for maintenance purposes, and there may be significantly lower replacement cost. This may not be possible for pipe systems along highly trafficked roadways. However, if transportation projects or redevelopment of private properties occurs where stormwater conveyance is in need of capital investment, that may be leveraged to explore these alternatives.

In some cases, alternatives have been identified to address obvious challenges to projects on existing pipe alignments.

Alternatives for two projects are shown in Figure 5-11 that warrant some additional discussion:
34th Avenue Ditch and Noble Downstream. Because much of the existing alignment would be challenging to upsize due to property ownership, these projects have been examined more closely for less costly or disruptive alternatives.

The CIP cost estimates for these projects do include assumptions of property acquisition cost based on approximate property values in the vicinity of the projects. It is likely that for both of these projects, an easement on its own will not be sufficient to construct them. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that property acquisition will be required. This is because some existing systems pass underneath structures or proposed conveyances would need to be installed within the footprint of existing structures.
34th Avenue Ditch Project
The 34th Avenue Ditch project includes an existing 72-inch pipe that runs beneath a mobile home park between 34th Avenue and 30th Avenue. Even if this project is constructible, it is likely that the cost would be much higher than a standard open trenching approach, and it would remain disruptive to residents. Instead, an alternative alignment of new pipe is proposed along Portola Drive and 30th Avenue, intersecting the new system again at the existing outfall location into the channel upstream of Moran Lake. While this would increase the length of pipe required for the project, it would place conveyance within the right-of-way.

Noble
In a similar fashion, Noble Downstream includes a large box culvert that runs through easements across properties on the west side of Capitola Ave. It may not be feasible to protect existing structures if these box sections are to be upsized all the way to Soquel Creek. Instead, a reach of approximately 1,200 feet of new 84-inch pipe would stretch from near Riverview Drive, along Capitola Avenue and Stockton Avenue to a new outfall at Stockton Avenue Bridge.

A second alternative exists at this location. Rather than constructing a long reach of new pipe and a new outfall, a pump station could be constructed in or adjacent to the parking lot near the City Hall building, with a forcemain running through or adjacent to the existing box and outfall to 213
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-20 Schaaf & Wheeler
Soquel Creek. However, it is likely that this option would be far more costly and would eliminate parking spaces in the existing lot (a portion of the lot would be replaced with a wetwell, access points, and a control building). This analysis assumes that the existing undersized gravity outfall continues to function in some capacity.

The flood depth result with the Portola-30th and Noble Downstream Alternative 1 projects is shown in Figure 5-13. Flood depth results are shown with the Noble Pump Station Alternative in Figure 5-14.

Figure 5-13: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative Projects Avoiding Private Property Impact 214
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-21 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-14: Modeled Flood Depth with a 600 cfs Pump Station Noble Alternative 38th Avenue
Systems in the vicinity of 38th Avenue pose a particular challenge. Flooding is prevalent upstream of the railroad, surrounding the existing detention basin at Brommer and 38th. The existing alignment from 38th Avenue to Portola Drive consists of a mix of very shallow closed conduit and open channel systems running through mobile home parks. This also includes a shallow, undersized railroad crossing in close proximity to the nearby mobile homes.

Furthermore, a long reach of the closed conduit system was examined by CCTV and deemed in need of immediate attention for structural deficiencies.

Two projects are identified within public right of way that address the upstream flooding: ‘38th from Brommer to Portola’ (Moderate priority) and ‘Portola Downstream of 38th’ (High priority).

These projects rely on restoring the existing systems by completing repair and replacement project RR1. In theory, equivalent capacity could be provided along the existing alignment.

Alternatives to the two preferred projects have been explored.

However, since the system is extremely shallow, it’s assumed that this would require installation of boxes with a depth equivalent to existing systems. This means that proposed systems for the two identified projects must be wider than existing systems. Existing systems are already situated beneath approximately 40 mobile homes. The cost of the two alternatives reflects the 215
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-22 Schaaf & Wheeler
temporary relocation of residents of the 40 mobile homes (36 for the downstream, high priority project and 4 for the upstream, moderate priority project).

5.3.2.2 Downstream Boundary Conditions
Projects have been initially developed with free outfall conditions. However, the models have been adapted to include constant water surface conditions in the downstream receiving bodies as well. Generally speaking, the regional system continues to perform well in spite of tailwater conditions at outfalls. The exception is systems along Soquel Creek. Upstream of Highway 1, this is not an issue that can be addressed by upsizing gravity systems, as floodplains extend well beyond the banks of the creek and inundate stormwater systems (as shown in Figure 2-3).

This would require larger flood protection projects, as described in Section 5.2.3.

In particular, the Noble Downstream project should be carefully considered in light of potential tailwater conditions. At this location, the model includes boundary conditions representing a 25- year water surface elevation in Soquel Creek to evaluate the three alternatives for Noble Creek.

Water surfaces have been set to an approximate elevation of 15 feet NAVD at the existing outfall near Riverview Avenue and elevation 14 feet at the new Stockton outfall proposed by Noble Creek Alternative 1.

Figure 5-15: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions
216
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-23 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-16: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative 1 Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions
217
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-24 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 5-17: Modeled Flood Depth for Alternative 2 Capital Improvement Projects with Boundary Conditions
The model for Alternative 1 with a high-water boundary condition in Soquel Creek shows that performance is still greatly improved with the new 84-inch outfall at Stockton. This is primarily because the tailwater condition is generally more favorable further downstream in the creek.

The model also indicates that for Alternative 2, a 600 cfs pump station does not provide sufficient capacity when the level in Soquel Creek inhibits the existing gravity line from functioning. The pump station still improves the performance of the system but does not meet the 25-year standard. It is likely that if the pump station is brought forward, additional study will be required considering a wide range of conditions.

In addition to construction feasibility, timelines, and cost, resiliency should be factored into the project development process. Climate change is a complex issue, touched on in this plan by adjusting rainfall depths. However, with backwater impacts of SLR potentially impacting outfalls, pumping may become the only reliable option to prevent or reduce flooding in the area. A detailed economic and engineering analysis should be performed at a project level, including consideration of climate resilience programs that may be undertaken by local agencies. 218
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-25 Schaaf & Wheeler

5.3.2.3 Future Condition CIP Performance
Projects explored by this analysis have also been evaluated with the future buildout condition drainage area parameters. The results of this analysis are presented in Figure 5-18 for the baseline capital improvement projects.

Figure 5-18: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Future Buildout Catchment Parameters
219
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-26 Schaaf & Wheeler
In order to highlight locations where deficiencies would likely require additional projects or increased pipe sizing, change in flooding depth is highlighted in Figure 5-19.

Figure 5-19: Location of Significant System Flooding Impact with Future Condition 220
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-27 Schaaf & Wheeler
The model has been additionally modified with a 25% increase in 24-hour storm depth to account for potential impacts of climate change. This increase has been placed on future buildout catchments. Results of this analysis are presented in Figure 5-20.

Figure 5-20: Modeled Flood Depth for Baseline Capital Improvement Projects with Future Buildout Catchment Parameters and a 25% Increase in Rainfall Depth 221
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Evaluation of Storm Drain Systems
December 2023 5-28 Schaaf & Wheeler
While the model produces the depth of flooding most directly, it is also useful to examine the change in magnitude of flooding. Change in flood depth has been calculated for each node where flooding occurs with and without climate change. The result of this analysis is shown in Figure 5-21. This figure highlights the locations where further planning and design efforts for capital improvements should consider potential climate change impacts to produce the most resilient projects possible. This may be as simple as installing larger pipe for an identified project. However, this analysis also shows significant potential increases in flooding depths where projects are not identified based on current conditions.

Figure 5-21: Change in Flooding Depth Due to Potential Climate Change (Future Condition) 222
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Capital Improvement Costs
December 2023 6-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
6 Capital Improvement Costs

6.1 Overview
Chapter 5 discusses storm drainage system condition, capacity, and known and modeled deficiencies. It further lays out an alternatives analysis for addressing various issues and improving overall system performance and level of service to the community.

This chapter provides an analysis of cost for the proposed alternatives.

6.2 Cost Basis
Costs have been estimated based on a variety of available information, including:
 Cost estimation guides (e.g., RSMeans)
 Inflation indices, published by the Engineering News Record (ENR)  Actual cost and bid data from recent projects
 Engineering judgement
The ENR Construction Cost Index (CCI) for San Francisco as of September 2023 is 15,490, compared with a 20-city average of approximately 13,000. Schaaf & Wheeler performed a detailed unit cost analysis for storm drain pipe and structures. This information has also been used with adjustment based on the ENR CCI to establish unit costs in September 2023 dollars (Table 6-1).

Table 6-1: Storm Drain Conveyance Conduit Unit Costs in September 2023 Dollars (Per Linear Foot)
Item New
Conduit
Removal/Disposal
Unit Cost
12” Pipe -- $30
15” Pipe -- $35
18” Pipe -- $40
21” Pipe -- $45
24” Pipe -- $50
27” Pipe -- $55
30” Pipe $410 $60
36” Pipe $490 $70
42” Pipe $570 $75
48” Pipe $670 $80
54” Pipe $780 $85
60” Pipe $880 $95
66” Pipe $1,010 $100
72” Pipe $1,190 $120
84” Pipe $1,670 $150
96” Pipe $2,010 $200
120” Pipe or 72” x 96” box $2,510 $225
132” Pipe or 96” x 96” Box $2,760 $250
144” Pipe or 96” x 120”
B
$3,010 $300
223
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Capital Improvement Costs
December 2023 6-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
Unit costs have also been estimated for storm drain structures, including connection of new and existing pipe. These are summarized in Table 6-2.

Table 6-2: Storm Drain Structure Unit Costs in 2022 Dollars Connecting Conduit Unit Cost
30” Pipe $17,500
36” Pipe $17,700
42” Pipe $18,300
48” Pipe $18,600
54” Pipe $20,200
60” Pipe $20,600
66” Pipe $22,400
72” Pipe $22,900
84” Pipe $26,100
96” Pipe $28,700
120” Pipe or 72” x 96” box $33,900
132” Pipe or 96” x 96” Box $36,500
144” Pipe or 96” x 120” Box $39,000
Relocation of mobile home residents for certain project alternatives is assumed to include the following costs:
• Four months of temporary housing during construction at $5,000 per month per mobile home • Relocation expenses at the start and end of the project at $20,000 total • Relocation and storage of the mobile homes at $20,000 per home. • $15,000 in additional costs for structural implications of replacing mobile homes over widened, shallow storm drain box sections.

These costs, totaling $75,000 per mobile home are included as “special costs” on projects where mobile home relocation is expected to be necessary. 224
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Capital Improvement Costs
December 2023 6-3 Schaaf & Wheeler

6.3 Recommended Project Costs
The cost of the recommended projects are summarized by priority in Table 6-4 through Table 6-5 for each jurisdiction and each type of capital project (capacity and repair & replacement).

Table 6-3: Baseline Capacity Project Cost Estimate Summary (Zone 5) Priority Project
Pipe
Length
(ft)
Estimated Cost
High
17th - Capitola to Kinsley 2,340 $2,740,000
34th Avenue Ditch Improvements* 400 $2,380,000
Portola Downstream of 38th* 1,520 $2,280,000
Soquel Avenue to Rodeo Creek Gulch 1,340 $1,720,000
Moderate Winkle Farm 65 $110,000
Low
Brommer at 30th 160 $170,000
Chanticleer 1,100 $1,480,000
Soquel at 17th 960 $5,560,000
TOTAL: 7,885 $16,440,000
*Project has alternatives summarized in Table 6-6
Note: Lengths to nearest 5 ft increment, costs rounded to nearest $10,000 Table 6-4: Baseline Repair and Replacement Project Cost Estimate Summary (Zone 5) Priority Project
Pipe
Length
(ft)
Estimated Cost
Moderate
26th Avenue (East Cliff to Outfall) 465 $260,000
Leona Cr at Capitola Rd Culvert 185 $650,000
Webster Street near Pinewood 120 $240,000
Low 17th Ave Repair/CIPP** 340 $240,000
Aguazul to Douglas Drive CIPP (near Soquel Dr)** 155 $70,000 TOTAL: 1,265 $1,460,000
**Project is a probable repair or CIPP project to correct a condition deficiency Table 6-5: Baseline Capacity Project Cost Estimate Summary (Within City of Capitola) Priority Project Pipe Length
(ft) Estimated Cost
High Noble Downstream* 1,820 $10,050,000
Moderate 38th Avenue - Brommer Basin to Portola*† 2,115 $2,600,000 Noble Upstream 660 $3,460,000
TOTAL: 4.595 $16,110,000
*Project has alternatives summarized in Table 6-6
†Project is mostly within City of Capitola, with a small portion in the County **Project is a probable repair or CIPP project to correct a condition deficiency 225
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Capital Improvement Costs
December 2023 6-4 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table 6-6: Baseline Repair and Replacement Project Cost Estimate Summary (Within City of Capitola)
Priority Project Pipe Length
(ft) Estimated Cost
High 38th Avenue (Railroad to Star Lane) Replacement 1,020 $3,100,000 Low 41st Avenue Repair/CIPP (at Capitola Mall)** 85 $40,000 TOTAL: 1,105 $3,140,000
*Project has alternatives summarized in Table 6-6
**Project is a probable repair or CIPP project to correct a condition deficiency Alternatives to Noble Creek, 34th Avenue Ditch, and 38th Avenue area projects are summarized in Table 6-6.

Table 6-7: Alternative Project Cost Estimate Summary
Priority Project Pipe Length
(ft) Estimated Cost
High
(City of
Capitola)
Noble Downstream (Alternative 1 – Gravity Alignment
Alternative) 2,750 $13,010,000
Noble Downstream (Alternative 2 – 600 cfs Pump
Station) 1,560 $32,000,000
High
(Zone 5)
Portola-30th (34th Avenue Ditch Alternative) 1,250 $1,250,000 38th Ave Downstream (Portola Downstream of 38th
Alternative) 1,515 $8,920,000
Moderate
(City of
Capitola)
38th Ave Upstream (Brommer Basin to Portola
Alternative) 400 $3,005,000
More detailed estimates for each project are provided in Appendix A. Further detail, by pipe, is provided in Appendix B. Finally, project-specific data sheets with finer scale mapping are provided in Appendix C for high priority capital projects. 226
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Operation and Maintenance
December 2023 7-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
7 Operation and Maintenance

7.1 Introduction
Santa Cruz County (County) is responsible for a storm drain network consisting of facilities along more than 600 miles of County roads. Municipalities within the County include the Cities of Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, Watsonville, and Capitola. Each city has additional storm drain facilities they are responsible for operating and maintaining. To manage such a large system, the County has established four drainage or flood control zones (Zones 5 – 8) based on defined watersheds associated with urban areas.

The Zones also define the boundaries for O&M activities. Maintenance resources across the County include five crews made up of more than three dozen maintenance staff, three maintenance yards, and various equipment and tools. In addition, each municipality has its respective maintenance resources.

Flood Control Zone 5 includes the urban area encompassing Capitola to the east, Soquel to the north, and Live Oak to the west. The O&M Plan developed for Zone 5 (Appendix D) consists of five critical components.

1. Program Management – Overviews the O&M program, identifies roles and responsibilities, and documents equipment, software, and applications.

2. Asset Inventory – Defines the spatial location and attribute information for the storm drain assets (junctions and conveyances) in the system. Key information includes the horizontal and vertical spatial location, asset type, material, dimensions, maintenance condition, and invert elevations.

3. Analysis and Forecasting – Describes the process of identifying the annual O&M priorities. These priorities help identify storm drain assets that require a work program action during the year. This section presents the queries necessary to identify which assets are inspected, inspection timing and frequency, as well as the O&M cost estimates.

4. Work Program Actions – Describes the procedures, equipment, and methodologies used to implement the O&M program (e.g., visual, emergency, or closed-circuit television [CCTV] inspections; maintenance; repairs or replacements; and capital improvements).

5. Tracking and Reporting – Describes the various elements of the Lucity asset management software and the use of GIS software to navigate to asset locations, tracks inspection and maintenance activities, and reports various analytics to forecast shortterm and long-term needs.

The O&M Plan is one element of the Zone 5 SDMP and establishes a formal program for O&M activities.
227
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Operation and Maintenance
December 2023 7-2 Schaaf & Wheeler

7.2 Recommendations
Santa Cruz County, Zone 5, and the City desire a storm drain O&M program that is proactive, supports a functional storm drain system at the desired level of service, and allows the flexibility to reallocate O&M resources as conditions change. To achieve these goals, the O&M Plan recommends the following enhancements to the existing O&M program:
 Asset Inventory – Improve the accuracy and completeness of the storm drain asset inventory by conducting field verifications of spatial and attribute data. The current asset inventory has various inconsistencies and redundancies that should be addressed to improve the accuracy and completeness of the data.
 Analysis and Forecasting – Implement a proactive O&M program based on the inspection, maintenance, and repair procedures recommended in the O&M Plan. See the O&M Standard Operating Procedures – Proposed table in the O&M Plan in Appendix D.

Implement regular CCTV inspections of the storm drain system. While it is unnecessary to conduct a CCTV inspection on every linear foot of storm drain pipe, up to 5,000 linear feet of pipe each year should be inspected, focusing on priority storm drain pipes. These CCTV inspections will provide critical pipe condition information and allow the County, Zone 5, or the City, to proactively address identified issues before they become major problems.
 Work Program Actions – The O&M Standard Operating Procedures – Existing and Proposed tables present guidelines for inspections, maintenance, and repairs, including documenting the type, frequency, season, and overall process for completing work program actions. This table should not take the place of developing a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedures Manual, which would benefit existing and new O&M staff.
 Tracking and Reporting – Consider implementing robust tracking analytics to determine how O&M work program actions change over time to further optimize the O&M program.
 O&M Plan Linkage to Lucity – The final enhancement to the County’s O&M program will be to link the above recommendations to the Lucity asset management system.

Because Lucity is the overarching framework within which the County manages the Zone 5 storm drain system, any changes to the O&M program must be tied back to Lucity. Asset inventory updates, changes to inspection or repair frequencies, CCTV inspections, tracking or reporting changes must all be linked back to the Lucity system. 228
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
8 Funding

8.1 Overview
This chapter presents the funding strategies and their implications that are available to the County, Zone 5, and City of Capitola to fund capital improvement projects and maintenance program recommendations within this SDMP. This chapter presents a high-level overview of financial options. The project team is also working on a more detailed funding and financial plan that will use information within this SDMP.

This chapter has been prepared following a “revenue requirements” analytical methodology common to financial analyses underlying most utility rates and charges imposed by traditional utilities, similar to the sanitary sewer systems.

While California law does not enable municipalities to impose “utility rates” for stormwater management services, the storm drain system shares similarities to traditional utilities and will likely require a primary, dedicated revenue source akin to rates.

The SDMP includes long-term capital financing requirements to fund equipment, infrastructure, problem-spot maintenance projects, and ongoing operations, maintenance, administration, and regulatory obligations to fund.

Properly managing the program may also require establishing reserves and using debt financing. Therefore, the following analyses have been prepared:
 Evaluation of financing strategies for the CIP;
 Projected debt proceeds and debt service payments;
 Analysis of cash and reserve requirements; and
 Determination of net annual revenue requirements for the program.

8.2 Program Costs
Implementation costs for this SDMP fall under four program elements:
 Program Management/Coordination
 Capital Investments
 Operations and Maintenance
 NPDES Permit Compliance
Several tasks have been evaluated under each of these four major elements to determine funding requirements for a successful stormwater program. Capital investment costs are informed by technical analysis presented in earlier chapters of this document.

A detailed, annualized future cost analysis was performed for Zone 5, the County, and the City of Capitola individually, as well as a combined program cost. Costs associated with the four major program elements are summarized in Table 8-1. Each element as a proportion of total costs is shown in Figure 8-1 for the entire regional system SDMP, and in Figure 8-2 for Zone 5 and Capitola individually.
229
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-2 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table 8-1: Annual Stormwater Program Cost (2023 Dollars, Rounded to Nearest $1,000) Program Element City County Zone 5
Total
Program Management/Coordination $145,000 $114,000 $259,000 Capital Investments $986,000 $1,392,000 $2,378,000
Operations & Maintenance $143,000 $1,994,000 $2,137,000 NPDES Permit Compliance $66,000 $963,000 $1,029,000
Total: $1,340,000 $4,463,000 $5,803,000
Figure 8-1: Future Cost of Each Program Element as a Proportion of Total (Combined) 230
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-3 Schaaf & Wheeler
Figure 8-2: Future Cost of Each Program Element as a Proportion of Total for Zone 5 (Top) and City of Capitola (Bottom)
Program
Management/
Coordination, 2%
Capital Investments,
31%
O&M, 45%
NPDES Permit
Compliance, 22% Program Management/
Coordination
Capital Investments
O&M
NPDES Permit Compliance
Program
Management/
Coordination, 11%
Capital Investments,
73%
O&M, 11%
NPDES Permit
Compliance, 5%
Program Management/
Coordination
Capital Investments
O&M
NPDES Permit Compliance
231
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-4 Schaaf & Wheeler

8.3 Potential Revenue Sources
In establishing a dedicated revenue stream for the SDMP, the County, Zone 5, or City may want to pursue a property-related fee or a special tax. The political feasibility of these mechanisms will likely be critical factors in determining which one the County, Zone 5, or City implements.

8.3.1 Property-Related Fee
A property-related fee is a fee for service attributable to the parcel being charged. A fee for stormwater services may be levied upon the County tax roll and is imposed as an incident of property ownership. As such, it would be subject to the substantive and procedural requirements of California Constitution Article XIII D (known commonly by its enacting ballot measure: Proposition 218).

Following a noticed Public Hearing (assuming lack of written protests being filed by a majority of property owners), the fee must be submitted and approved by a majority vote of the property owners or by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. The amount charged to each parcel must be proportional to the cost of service attributable to that parcel. Due to this proportionality requirement, the costs attributable to public parcels should be paid by City and County revenues (e.g., General Fund appropriation) or by individual County and City departments.

For a property owner election, each parcel generally receives one ballot, and each ballot has one vote regardless of the potential levy amount. In one-parcel-per-vote elections, a large commercial parcel with a calculated levy that is an order of magnitude greater than that of a smaller parcel would have the same, single vote as the smaller parcel, unless some form of weighted voting system is implemented.

The revenue stream from a property-related fee may be used for capital, annual operating, and maintenance costs. This revenue stream could also be pledged as credit support for a revenue bond issued to fund major capital improvements.

8.3.2 Special Tax
A Community Facilities District (CFD) can be formed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. A CFD can fund capital projects as well as ongoing maintenance. Bonds would be issued to pay for capital costs secured by a special tax levy. The same CFD can also fund ongoing maintenance costs through a special tax levy.

There is great flexibility in both the geographic area to be levied and the formula by which to levy when using a CFD. A CFD may include non-contiguous geographic areas. There is no requirement that the special tax is apportioned based on the benefit to any property. Property owned by a public entity is generally exempt from the CFD special tax, ensuring no lingering obligation of other City revenues.

Successful creation of a CFD requires the approval of two-thirds of the registered voters voting in an election. With a voter election, each voter has one vote, regardless of their weighted share of the proposed special tax levy. In a landowner election, the vote is one vote per acre or portion thereof, however landowner elections are only allowed in instances when there are 12 or fewer registered voters in the boundary of the CFD.
232
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
Another type of special tax, typically referred to as a Parcel Tax, may be approved pursuant to Government Code Section 50075 and following. The Parcel Tax may fund ongoing maintenance costs and all or a portion of the Parcel Tax revenue may be pledged as credit support for a revenue bond to fund major capital improvements. Like the CFD, the Parcel Tax must be approved by two-thirds of the registered voters voting in an election. With a voter election, each voter has one vote, regardless of their weighted share of the proposed special tax levy.

The Parcel Tax does not require the recordation of either a Boundary Map or Notice of Special Tax Lien, which are requirements of the CFD. Depending on which entity forms the Parcel Tax, “uniformity” requirements may apply, which limit the flexibility in the structure of the tax.

8.4 Other Sources of Revenue
Although the revenue strategy introduced in this chapter has estimated the full cost to property owners of funding the entire SDMP, there are at least two other additional revenue sources that, if justifiable and collectible on a substantive scale, would reduce that final levy amount needed from the community, or in other words, the total revenue requirement.

The chief benefit of examining the viability of these revenue sources is that both may be approved by consensus of the County, Zone 5, and City alone after proper public noticing and public hearing processes.

8.4.1 Development Impact Fees
A development impact fee is a one-time fee imposed as a condition of approval on new development, infill, or redevelopment that creates new, unmitigated impermeable surface area.

Development impact fees are authorized by Government Code 66000 et seq., created by the Mitigation Fee Act, and commonly referred to as “AB 1600” fees.

A development impact fee may be justifiable for the SDMP under one of two conditions:
 The County, Zone 5, or City has previously invested in drainage infrastructure which has remaining value and is available and/or sized to meet impacts caused by future development/redevelopment.
 The capital and maintenance projects documented in this SDMP are sized to meet stormwater-related impacts caused by future development/redevelopment and not just the demands of existing development.

An impact fee may be based on 1) a “buy-in” to existing infrastructure or 2) the “incremental” costs of new facilities necessary to serve new development that will create additional impermeable surface areas. A combination of these two impact fees may also be used to repay existing customers for historical capital investments. However, they cannot be used to fund operating or maintenance costs, which must be met through the SDMP’s annual fees.

8.4.2 Regulatory Fees
Regulatory fees are imposed to recover costs associated with the City and County’s respective constitutional and statutory power to govern activities, such as development and construction.

For example, within the stormwater program, the County, Zone 5, or City provides services/activities which may be eligible for recovery in a regulatory fee. These services/activities may include:
233
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Funding
December 2023 8-6 Schaaf & Wheeler
 Plan review and site inspection of development/construction that must meet stormwater program regulations. (A common area for stormwater program activity is grading and drainage permitting/oversight.)
 Review of maintenance plans for, and periodic site inspection of, onsite stormwater management/mitigation facilities.
 Inspection of properties documented under the municipal permit as high-pollution risk operations requiring onsite management and/or facilities to mitigate risk to the environment and public rights-of-way.

The statutory limit in imposing these fees is that they may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of service. Most regulatory fees like these have historically been implemented by consensus of the County, Zone 5, or City alone. Data used to justify fee amounts must be prepared and made available to the public in advance of the public hearing.

8.4.3 Benefit-Assessment District
A benefit-assessment district assigns project costs in direct proportion to the benefits received.

Benefit assessment districts are often formed for specific projects within a specific watershed.

The only properties assessed are those that directly benefit from the projects and in direct proportion to that benefit.

8.4.4 Grants
There are grant opportunities for stormwater, flood control and climate adaptation projects in California. These grants are competitive and require a good deal of effort to secure. If the County, Zone 5, or City wishes to pursue grant opportunities, it is recommended they secure a grant writer or dedicate significant staff time to the application process.

8.5 Summary
This SDMP presents capital improvement projects and a maintenance program that exceed the County, Zone 5, and City current funding sources. Consultants NCE and NBS are working on refining and providing more details on what the options presented above would look like specific to the County, Zone 5, and the City. The issues faced in Zone 5 are not unique since most municipalities within California are facing budget shortfalls when it comes to funding storm drain infrastructure. Most California municipalities lack sufficient financial resources to adequately maintain, repair, and upgrade aging storm drainage infrastructure. 234
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix A
December 2023 Schaaf & Wheeler
Appendix A
CIP Construction Project Cost Summary Tables
235
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Construction Project Cost Summary Tables
December 2023 A-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table A-1: Detailed Capacity Project Cost Summary

PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PROJECT SUBTOTALS OTHER COSTS

PROJECT
TOTAL Pipe Length
(LF)
Pipe
Count
# of
Outfalls
Ave Unit
Cost (LF)
Pipe/Demo
Subtotal
Structure
Subtotal
Outfall
Cost
Project
Subtotal
Traffic
Control Mobilization Contingency
Design/
Engineering
Special
Costs
1 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 2,341 9 0 $508 $1,300,000 $160,000 $- $1,470,000 $70,000 $150,000 $590,000 $460,000 $- $2,740,000 2 34th Ave Ditch Improvements High 399 3 0 $2,117 $760,000 $90,000 $- $850,000 $40,000 $90,000 $340,000 $260,000 $800,000 $2,380,000 2A Portola-30th High 1,250 2 0 $490 $610,000 $50,000 $- $670,000 $30,000 $70,000 $270,000 $210,000 $- $1,250,000 3 Portola Downstream of 38th High 1,494 6 0 $670 $1,110,000 $110,000 $- $1,230,000 $60,000 $120,000 $490,000 $380,000 $- $2,280,000 3A 38th Ave Downstream High 1,515 11 0 $2,010 $3,190,000 $140,000 $- $3,340,000 $170,000 $330,000 $1,340,000 $1,040,000 $2,700,000 $8,920,000 4 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 1,515 7 1 $2,617 $4,300,000 $280,000 $100,000 $4,680,000 230,000 $470,000 $1,870,000 $1,450,000 $3,000,000 $11,700,000 4A Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 2,748 8 1 $2,351 $6,600,000 $290,000 $100,000 $6,990,000 350,000 $700,000 $2,800,000 $2,170,000 $- $13,010,000 4B Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 1,550 6 1 $2,415 $3,960,000 $240,000 $100,000 $4,300,000 220,000 $430,000 $1,720,000 $1,330,000 $24,00,000 $32,000,000 5 Soquel Ave to Rodeo Creek Gulch High 1,340 1 0 $570 $760,000 $50,000 $100,000 $920,000 $40,000 $80,000 $330,000 $250,000 $- $1,720,000 6 38th Ave - Brommer Pond to Portola Moderate 2,115 1 0 $490 $1,040,000 $90,000 $- $1,130,000 $60,000 $110,000 $450,000 $350,000 $500,000 $2,600,000 6A 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 395 7 0 $1,670 $700,000 $180,000 $- $880,000 $40,000 $90,000 $350,000 $270,000 $1,375,000 $3,005,000 7 Noble Upstream Moderate 658 3 0 $2,760 $1,720,000 $140,000 $- $1,860,000 $90,000 $190,000 $740,000 $580,000 $- $3,460,000 8 Winkle Farm Moderate 64 1 0 $570 $40,000 $20,000 $- $60,000 $- $10,000 $20,000 $20,000 $- $110,000 9 Brommer at 30th Low 161 1 0 $410 $70,000 $20,000 $- $90,000 $- $10,000 $40,000 $30,000 $- $170,000 10 Chanticleer Low 1,097 5 0 $570 $700,000 $90,000 $- $790,000 $40,000 $80,000 $320,000 $250,000 $- $1,480,000 11 Soquel at 17th Low 961 8 1 $2,675 $2,530,000 $290,000 $100,000 $2,920,000 $150,000 $290,000 $1,170,000 $910,000 $120,000 $5,560,000 Table A-2: Detailed Repair and Replacement (RR) Project Cost Summary

PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PROJECT SUBTOTALS OTHER COSTS

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix B
December 2023 Schaaf & Wheeler
Appendix B
CIP Project Detail Tables
237
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Project Detail Tables
December 2023 B-1 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table B-1: Detailed Capacity Capital Project Summary (by Pipe)

PIPE ID PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PIPE/DEMO SUBTOTALS
Pipe
Length
(LF) Ex. Size Imp. Size
Unit Cost
- Demo
(Per LF)
Unit Cost
– Pipe
(Per LF)
Demo/
New Pipe
Subtotal
Manhole/
Structure
Subtotal
Project
Subtotal
Z5_PIPE_1885 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 80 30 42 $60 $570 $50,600 $18,300 $68,900 Z5_PIPE_1270 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 442 30 42 $60 $570 $278,500 $18,300 $296,800 Z5_PIPE_1326 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 43 18 30 $40 $410 $19,500 $17,500 $37,000 Z5_PIPE_4578 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 94 30 42 $60 $570 $59,000 $18,300 $77,300 Z5_PIPE_1893 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 415 30 42 $60 $570 $261,200 $18,300 $279,500 Z5_PIPE_1896 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 281 18 36 $40 $490 $149,100 $17,900 $167,000 Z5_PIPE_1897 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 304 18 42 $40 $570 $185,200 $18,300 $203,600 Z5_PIPE_1900 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 305 12 30 $30 $410 $134,100 $17,500 $151,600 Z5_PIPE_1903 17th - Capitola to Kinsley High 377 12 30 $30 $410 $166,000 $17,500 $183,500 Z5_PIPE_1882 34th Ave Ditch Improvements High 33 57 x 84 60 x 120 $150 $3,010 $103,000 $39,000 $141,900 Z5_PIPE_2055 34th Ave Ditch Improvements High 306 72 84 $120 $1,670 $546,900 $26,100 $573,000 Z5_PIPE_2696 34th Ave Ditch Improvements High 61 72 84 $120 $1,670 $109,000 $26,100 $135,100 PORTOLA-30th_1* Portola-30th High 350 36 $- $490 $171,500 $17,900 $189,400 PORTOLA-30th_2* Portola-30th High 900 36 $- $490 $441,000 $35,800 $476,800 Z5_PIPE_2293 Portola Downstream of 38th High 74 42 48 $75 $670 $55,200 $18,600 $73,800 Z5_PIPE_2305 Portola Downstream of 38th High 45 36 48 $70 $670 $33,000 $18,600 $51,600 Z5_PIPE_2306 Portola Downstream of 38th High 274 36 x 24 48 $80 $670 $205,500 $18,600 $224,200 Z5_PIPE_2307 Portola Downstream of 38th High 300 42 48 $75 $670 $223,300 $18,600 $241,800 Z5_PIPE_2308 Portola Downstream of 38th High 347 42 48 $75 $670 $258,500 $18,600 $277,100 Z5_PIPE_2312 Portola Downstream of 38th High 455 42 48 $75 $670 $338,900 $18,600 $357,500 238
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Project Detail Tables
December 2023 B-2 Schaaf & Wheeler

PIPE ID PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PIPE/DEMO SUBTOTALS
Pipe
Length
(LF) Ex. Size Imp. Size
Unit Cost
- Demo
(Per LF)
Unit Cost
– Pipe
(Per LF)
Demo/
New Pipe
Subtotal
Manhole/
Structure
Subtotal
Project
Subtotal
Z5_PIPE_498 38th Ave Downstream High 157 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $328,700 $28,700 $357,400 Z5_PIPE_3107 38th Ave Downstream High 367 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $767,300 $28,700 $796,000 Z5_PIPE_5549 38th Ave Downstream High 49 66 48x144 $100 $2,010 $103,400 $- $103,400 Z5_PIPE_5550 38th Ave Downstream High 34 66 48x144 $100 $2,010 $70,900 $- $70,900 Z5_PIPE_5554 38th Ave Downstream High 69 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $145,100 $- $145,100 Z5_PIPE_5555 38th Ave Downstream High 87 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $182,300 $- $182,300 Z5_PIPE_5556 38th Ave Downstream High 86 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $179,100 $28,700 $207,800 Z5_PIPE_417 38th Ave Downstream High 69 72 48x144 $120 $2,010 $146,200 $- $146,200 Z5_PIPE_497 38th Ave Downstream High 91 44x72 48x144 $80 $2,010 $189,400 $- $189,400 Z5_PIPE_2319 38th Ave Downstream High 222 48x96 48x144 $150 $2,010 $478,700 $28,700 $507,400 Z5_PIPE_2558 38th Ave Downstream High 285 66 48x144 $100 $2,010 $601,000 $28,700 $629,700 Z5_PIPE_5438 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 213 70 72 x 96 $100 $2,510 $557,200 $33,900 $591,100 Z5_PIPE_5439 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 51 45 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $134,900 $33,900 $168,700 Z5_PIPE_5429_1 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 564 72 96 x 120 $120 $3,010 $1,766,600 $78,000 $1,844,600 PIPE0003 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 259 48 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $680,200 $33,900 $714,100 Z5_PIPE_5429_2 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 163 72 96 x 96 $120 $2,760 $468,200 $36,500 $504,700 Z5_PIPE_5438 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 213 70 72 x 96 $100 $2,510 $557,200 $33,900 $591,100 Z5_PIPE_5439 Noble Downstream (Alt 1) High 51 45 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $134,900 $33,900 $168,700 Z5_PIPE_5429_1 Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 464 72 96 x 120 $120 $3,010 $1,453,600 $39,000 $1,492,600 PIPE0003 Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 259 48 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $680,200 $33,900 $714,100 Z5_PIPE_5429_2 Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 163 72 96 x 96 $120 $2,760 $468,200 $36,500 $504,700 239
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Project Detail Tables
December 2023 B-3 Schaaf & Wheeler

PIPE ID PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PIPE/DEMO SUBTOTALS
Pipe
Length
(LF) Ex. Size Imp. Size
Unit Cost
- Demo
(Per LF)
Unit Cost
– Pipe
(Per LF)
Demo/
New Pipe
Subtotal
Manhole/
Structure
Subtotal
Project
Subtotal
Z5_PIPE_5429_3 Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 493 72 96 x 120 $120 $3,010 $1,544,100 $39,000 $1,583,100 Z5_PIPE_5429 Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 179 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $470,900 $33,900 $504,800 NOBLE-DS_1* Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 350 84 $- $1,670 $584,500 $26,100 $610,600 NOBLE-DS_2* Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 530 84 $- $1,670 $885,100 $52,200 $937,300 NOBLE-DS_3* Noble Downstream (Alt 2) High 310 84 $- $1,670 $517,700 $26,100 $543,800 Z5_PIPE_2870 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 213 70 72 x 96 $100 $2,510 $557,200 $33,900 $591,100 Z5_PIPE_2891 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 51 45 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $134,900 $33,900 $168,700 Z5_PIPE_2892 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 564 72 96 x 120 $120 $3,010 $1,766,60 $78,000 $1,844,600 PIPE0002 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 259 48 x 72 72 x 96 $120 $2,510 $680,200 $33,900 $714,100 Z5_PIPE_1477_1859 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 163 72 96 x 96 $120 $2,760 $468,200 $36,500 $504,700 Z5_PIPE_2870 Noble Downstream (Alt 3) High 300 72 $- $1,190 $357,000 $22,900 $379,900 CIPCOND_2* Soquel Ave to Rodeo Creek Gulch High 1,340 42 $- $570 $763,900 $54,900 $818,800 PROPCOND_2* 38th Ave - Brommer Pond to Portola Moderate 2,115 36 $- $490 $1,036,300 $89,500 $1,125,800 Z5_PIPE_5557 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 74 54 48x96 $85 $1,670 $130,300 $26,100 $156,400 Z5_PIPE_5558 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 87 44x72 48x96 $80 $1,670 $153,100 $26,100 $179,200 Z5_PIPE_5563 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 38 24x72 36x120 $80 $1,670 $65,900 $26,100 $92,000 Z5_PIPE_3106 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 46 60 48x96 $95 $1,670 $81,700 $26,100 $107,800 Z5_PIPE_3059 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 35 24x72 36x120 $80 $1,670 $61,600 $26,100 $87,700 CUL0006 38th Ave Upstream Moderate 27 65x60 60x72 $120 $1,670 $47,500 $26,100 $73,600 BLUE_AND_GOLD_M
HP_DITCH_1
38th Ave Upstream Moderate 88 65x60 60x72 $120 $1,670 $156,800 $26,100 $182,900 CUL0007 Noble Upstream Moderate 65 48 48 x 120 $80 $2,760 $183,300 $36,500 $219,700 240
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Project Detail Tables
December 2023 B-4 Schaaf & Wheeler

PIPE ID PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PIPE/DEMO SUBTOTALS
Pipe
Length
(LF) Ex. Size Imp. Size
Unit Cost
- Demo
(Per LF)
Unit Cost
– Pipe
(Per LF)
Demo/
New Pipe
Subtotal
Manhole/
Structure
Subtotal
Project
Subtotal
CUL0002 Noble Upstream Moderate 79 72 72 x 120 $120 $3,010 $247,100 $39,000 $286,100 NOBLE_GULCH_2* Noble Upstream Moderate 514 72 x 96 $- $2,510 $1,290,700 $67,800 $1,358,500 Z5_PIPE_3355 Winkle Farm Moderate 64 30 42 $60 $570 $40,100 $18,300 $58,400 Z5_PIPE_2424 Brommer at 30th Low 161 18 30 $40 $410 $72,600 $17,500 $90,100 Z5_PIPE_5610 Chanticleer Low 138 36 42 $70 $570 $88,400 $18,300 $106,700 Z5_PIPE_1594 Chanticleer Low 312 36 42 $70 $570 $199,900 $18,300 $218,100 Z5_PIPE_1595 Chanticleer Low 88 36 42 $70 $570 $56,600 $18,300 $74,900 Z5_PIPE_1864 Chanticleer Low 168 36 42 $70 $570 $107,400 $18,300 $125,700 Z5_PIPE_1873 Chanticleer Low 391 36 42 $70 $570 $250,200 $18,300 $268,400 Z5_PIPE_3314 Soquel at 17th Low 228 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $705,400 $39,000 $744,400 Z5_PIPE_5636 Soquel at 17th Low 35 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $108,400 $39,000 $147,400 Z5_PIPE_1859 Soquel at 17th Low 158 72 84 $120 $1,670 $283,500 $26,100 $309,600 Z5_PIPE_2870 Soquel at 17th Low 38 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $119,200 $39,000 $158,100 Z5_PIPE_2891 Soquel at 17th Low 50 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $155,400 $39,000 $194,400 Z5_PIPE_2892 Soquel at 17th Low 209 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $646,500 $39,000 $685,500 PIPE0002 Soquel at 17th Low 63 54 60 x 120 $85 $3,010 $194,400 $39,000 $233,400 Z5_PIPE_1477_1859 Soquel at 17th Low 179 72 84 $120 $1,670 $320,800 $26,100 $346,900 *Denotes new pipe added to system, rather than upsizing of existing pipe with an existing ID 241
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
CIP Project Detail Tables
December 2023 B-5 Schaaf & Wheeler
Table B-2: Detailed Repair and Replacement Capital Project Summary (by Pipe)

PIPE ID PROJECT PRIORITY

QUANTITIES PIPE/DEMO SUBTOTALS
Pipe
Length
(LF) Ex. Size Imp. Size
Unit Cost
- Demo
(Per LF)
Unit Cost
– Pipe
(Per LF)
Demo/
New Pipe
Subtotal
Manhole/
Structure
Subtotal
Project
Subtotal
Z5_PIPE_498 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 157 72 72 $120 $1,150 $199,700 $18,300 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_3107 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 367 72 72 $120 $1,150 $466,300 $18,300 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_5554 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 69 72 72 $120 $1,150 $88,200 $17,500 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_5555 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 87 72 72 $120 $1,150 $110,700 $18,300 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_5556 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 86 72 72 $120 $1,150 $108,800 $18,300 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_5557 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 74 54 54 $85 $750 $62,000 $17,900 $19,500 Z5_PIPE_5558 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 87 72 72 $120 $1,150 $111,100 $18,300 $22,200 Z5_PIPE_497 38th Ave (Railroad to Star Lane) High 91 54 54 $85 $750 $75,700 $17,500 $19,500 Z5_PIPE_15001 Webster St near Pinewood Moderate 116 60 60 $95 $850 $110,000 $26,100 $19,900 Z5_PIPE_898 26th Avenue (East Cliff to Outfall) Moderate 137 12 12 $30 $200 $31,600 $17,900 $15,900 Z5_PIPE_898_904 26th Avenue (East Cliff to Outfall) Moderate 327 12 12 $30 $200 $75,300 $35,800 $15,900 Leona Creek Culvert Leona Cr. Culvert at Capitola Rd Moderate 185 66 66 $100 $1,520 $299,700 $18,600 $29,200 Z5_PIPE_5534 Aguazul to Douglas Dr CIPP Low 155 36 36 $- $235 $36,500 $17,500 $- Z5_PIPE_1477B 17th Ave Repair/CIPP Low 337 54 54 $- $375 $126,400 $39,000 $- Z5_PIPE_2392 41st Ave Repair/CIPP Low 86 42 42 $- $275 $23,600 $26,100 $- 242
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C
December 2023 Schaaf & Wheeler
Appendix C
High Priority CIP Project Detail Sheets
243
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 1 B. Project Name: 17th - Capitola to Kinsley C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
42 36 1,031
30 24 43
36 33 281
42 39 304
30 27 682
H. Project-Specific Considerations: N/A
I. Alternatives: Leave existing pipe in place and install new parallel pipe to achieve equivalent capacity J. Project Location Map:

Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
30 18
18 18
Capacity Improvement along 17th Ave between Capitola Road and Kinsley Street Upsize pipe on 17th Avenue to mitigate flooding due to undersized pipe between Capitola Road and Kinsley Street/Union Pacific RR
12 C-1 244
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 1 B. Project Name: 17th - Capitola to Kinsley C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
30 7 1,031 LF $60 $62,000
18 6 628 LF $40 $25,000
12 6 682 LF $30 $20,000
Pipe Construction
30 6 725 LF $410 $299,000
42 7 1,334 LF $570 $760,000
36 6 281 LF $490 $140,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $163,000
Outfalls $0
SUBTOTAL $1,470,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $150,000
Traffic Control 5% $70,000
Contingency 40% $590,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $2,280,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $460,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition/Easements $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $2,740,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
Capacity Improvement along 17th Ave between Capitola Road and Kinsley Street MAJOR ITEMS COST QTY. UNIT
Z5_PIPE_1885, Z5_PIPE_1270, Z5_PIPE_4578, Z5_PIPE_1893
Z5_PIPE_1326, Z5_PIPE_1896, Z5_PIPE_1897
Z5_PIPE_1900, Z5_PIPE_1903
Z5_PIPE_1326, Z5_PIPE_1900, Z5_PIPE_1903
Z5_PIPE_1885, Z5_PIPE_1270, Z5_PIPE_4578, Z5_PIPE_1893, Z Z5_PIPE_1896
C-2 245
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 2 B. Project Name: 34th Ave Ditch Improvements C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
60 x 120 120 33
84 42 366
H. Project-Specific Considerations: Mobile homes situated atop existing storm drainage infrastructure I. Alternatives: Install parallel pipe (see Project ID 2A for alternative project alignment within ROW) J. Project Location Map:
72 57 x 84
Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity improvements for culverts between Portola and 30th Upsize existing closed conduit systems (ditches are sufficiently sized) beneath mobile home parks south of Portola and east of 30th Ave
C-3 246
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 2 B. Project Name: 34th Ave Ditch Improvements C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
57 x 84 8 33 LF $150 $5,000
72 9 366 LF $120 $44,000
Pipe Construction
60 x 120 6 33 LF $3,010 $100,000
84 7 366 LF $1,670 $610,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $92,000
Outfalls $0
SUBTOTAL $850,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $90,000
Traffic Control 5% $40,000
Contingency 40% $340,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $1,320,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $260,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition/Easements $800,000
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $2,380,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
Z5_PIPE_1882, Z5_PIPE_2055
Z5_PIPE_2055, Z5_PIPE_2696
Z5_PIPE_1882, Z5_PIPE_2055
Z5_PIPE_2055, Z5_PIPE_2696
Capacity improvements for culverts between Portola and 30th MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-4 247
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 2A B. Project Name: Portola-30th
C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
36 N/A 1,250
H. Project-Specific Considerations: N/A
I. Alternatives: Leave existing pipe in place and install new parallel pipe to achieve equivalent capacity J. Project Location Map:

N/A
Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Alternative parallel pipe alignment on Portola and 30th [DESCRIPTION]
C-5 248
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 2A B. Project Name: Portola-30th
C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
Pipe Construction
36 6 1,250 LF $490 $613,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $54,000
Outfalls $0
SUBTOTAL $670,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $70,000
Traffic Control 5% $30,000
Contingency 40% $270,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $1,040,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $210,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition/Easements $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $1,250,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
PORTOLA-30th_1, PORTOLA-30th_2
N/A
Alternative parallel pipe alignment on Portola and 30th MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-6 249
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 3 B. Project Name: Portola Downstream of 38th C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
48 30 1,176
48 36 45
48 36 274
H. Project-Specific Considerations: N/A
I. Alternatives: Remain on existing parallel alignment (See Project ID 3A) J. Project Location Map:
36 36 x 24
42 Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity improvements on Portola (sized to allevitae flooding north of railroad) Upsize existing pipe in Portola Drive. Works in tandem with upstream project to alleviate flooding north of the railroad near 38th Ave
C-7 250
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 3 B. Project Name: Portola Downstream of 38th C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
42 6.5 1,176 LF $75 $88,000
36 6 45 LF $70 $3,000
36 x 24 6 274 LF $80 $22,000
Pipe Construction
48 7 1,494 LF $670 $1,003,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $113,000
Outfalls $0
SUBTOTAL $1,230,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $120,000
Traffic Control 5% $60,000
Contingency 40% $490,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $1,900,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $380,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition/Easements $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $2,280,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
Z5_PIPE_2293, Z5_PIPE_2305, Z5_PIPE_2306, Z5_PIPE_2307, Z Z5_PIPE_2306
Z5_PIPE_2293, Z5_PIPE_2307, Z5_PIPE_2308, Z5_PIPE_2312
Z5_PIPE_2305
Capacity improvements on Portola (sized to allevitae flooding north of railroad) MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-8 251
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 3A B. Project Name: 38th Ave (Portola D/S 38th Alt) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
48x144 84 857
48x144 54 367
48x144 48 69
48x144 42 222
H. Project-Specific Considerations: Project runs underneath approximately 36 existing mobile homes I. Alternatives: See Project ID 3 for identified alternative J. Project Location Map:
66 72
48x96
44x72 Arch
Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity improvements on system parallel to 38th Ave and Portola Replace existing closed conduit storm drainage infrastructure between railroad and Portola Ave, keeping on existing alignment. System is shallow and runs beneath mobile homes C-9 252
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 3A B. Project Name: 38th Ave (Portola D/S 38th Alt) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
44x72 Arch 7 857 LF $80 $69,000
66 7 367 LF $100 $37,000
72 7 69 LF $120 $8,000
48x96 7 222 LF $150 $33,000
Pipe Construction
48x144 7 1,515 LF $2,010 $3,050,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $144,000
Outfalls $0
SUBTOTAL $3,340,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $330,000
Traffic Control 5% $170,000
Contingency 40% $1,340,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $5,180,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $1,040,000
Site-Specific Costs
Temporary Relocation of Mobile Home Residents $2,700,000 ROW Acquisition/Easements $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $8,920,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
All
Z5_PIPE_417
Z5_PIPE_2319
Z5_PIPE_498, Z5_PIPE_3107, Z5_PIPE_5554, Z5_PIPE_5555,
Z5_PIPE_5549, Z5_PIPE_5550, Z5_PIPE_2558
Capacity improvements on system parallel to 38th Ave and Portola MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-10 253
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4 B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 1) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
72 x 96 N/A 427
72 x 96 N/A 103
96 x 120 N/A 564
72 x 96 N/A 259
96 x 96 N/A 163
H. Project-Specific Considerations: Existing alignment beneath homes and through narrow easement I. Alternatives: See Project IDs 4A and 4B for identified alternatives J. Project Location Map:
72 45 x 72
72 48 x 72
70 Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert Upsize Noble Creek culvert downstream end to provide adequate capacity for a 10-year storm event.

Remain on existing alignment
C-11 254
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4 B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 1) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
70 9 427 LF $100 $43,000
45 x 72 9 103 LF $120 $12,000
72 11 727 LF $120 $87,000
48 x 72 9 259 LF $120 $31,000
Pipe Construction
72 x 96 9 788 LF $2,510 $1,980,000
96 x 120 11 564 LF $3,010 $1,700,000
96 x 96 11 163 LF $2,760 $450,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $285,000
Outfalls $100,000
SUBTOTAL $4,680,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $470,000
Traffic Control 5% $230,000
Contingency 40% $1,870,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $7,250,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $1,450,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition/Easements $2,900,000
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $100,000
CIP TOTAL $11,700,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
Z5_PIPE_5429_2
Z5_PIPE_5438, Z5_PIPE_5439, PIPE0003, Z5_PIPE_5438,
Z5_PIPE_5439
Z5_PIPE_5429_1
Z5_PIPE_5429_1, Z5_PIPE_5429_2
PIPE0003
Z5_PIPE_5438, Z5_PIPE_5438
Z5_PIPE_5439, Z5_PIPE_5439
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-12 255
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4A B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 2) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
96 x 120 #N/A 958
72 x 96 #N/A 259
96 x 96 #N/A 163
72 x 96 #N/A 179
84 N/A 1,190
H. Project-Specific Considerations: N/A
I. Alternatives: See Project IDs 4 and 4B for identified alternatives J. Project Location Map:

N/A
48 x 72
72 72
72 Ex. Size (in) Replacement Pipe
Size (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert Replace existing culvert downstream of Monterey Ave, but install a new parallel pipe on Capitola Ave and Stockton to re-route drainage to a point along Soquel Creek with lower HGL C-13 256
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4A B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 2) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
72 11 1,299 LF $120 $156,000
48 x 72 9 259 LF $120 $31,000
Pipe Construction
96 x 120 11 958 LF $3,010 $2,880,000
72 x 96 9 438 LF $2,510 $1,100,000
96 x 96 11 163 LF $2,760 $450,000
84 10 1,190 LF $1,670 $1,987,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $286,700
Outfalls $100,000
Site-Specific Costs
Utility Relocation $0
ROW Acquisition $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
SUBTOTAL $6,990,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $700,000
Traffic Control 5% $350,000
Contingency 40% $2,800,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $10,840,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $2,170,000
CIP TOTAL $13,010,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
NOBLE-DS_1, NOBLE-DS_2, NOBLE-DS_3
Z5_PIPE_5429_2
Z5_PIPE_5429_1, Z5_PIPE_5429_3
PIPE0003, Z5_PIPE_5429
Z5_PIPE_5429_1, Z5_PIPE_5429_2, Z5_PIPE_5429_3, Z5_PIPE_ PIPE0003
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-14 257
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4B B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 3) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
72 N/A 300
72 x 96 N/A 213
72 x 96 N/A 51
96 x 120 N/A 564
72 x 96 N/A 259
96 x 96 N/A 163
H. Project-Specific Considerations: New pump station requires detailed design study I. Alternatives: See Project IDs 4 and 4A for identified alternatives J. Project Location Map:
48 x 72
72 70
45 x 72
72 N/A
Ex. Diameter (in) Replacement Pipe
Diameter (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert Gravity improvements to downstream Noble Creek culverts; Construct new pump station and forcemain (~72") for greater resilience to sea level rise. Requires detailed siting, capacity, and alternatives analysis study
Pump station (detailed
siting/ alternatives
study required
C-15 258
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 4B B. Project Name: Noble Downstream (Alt 3) C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
72 11 727 LF $120 $87,000
70 9 213 LF $100 $21,000
45 x 72 9 51 LF $120 $6,000
48 x 72 9 259 LF $120 $31,000
Pipe Construction
72 9 300 LF $1,300 $390,000
72 x 96 9 523 LF $2,510 $1,310,000
96 x 120 11 564 LF $3,010 $1,700,000
96 x 96 11 163 LF $2,510 $409,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection #VALUE!
Outfalls #VALUE!
SUBTOTAL #VALUE!
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% #VALUE!
Traffic Control 5% #VALUE!
Contingency 40% #VALUE!
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL #VALUE!
Engineering/Inspection 20% #VALUE!
Site-Specific Costs
Pump Station #VALUE!
ROW Acquisition #VALUE!
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting #VALUE!
CIP TOTAL #VALUE!
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
Z5_PIPE_5429_2
Z5_PIPE_5429_1
NOBLEPS_Forcemain
Z5_PIPE_5438, Z5_PIPE_5439, PIPE0003
Z5_PIPE_5439
PIPE0003
Z5_PIPE_5429_1, Z5_PIPE_5429_2
Z5_PIPE_5438
Capacity Improvement at downstream end of Noble Creek Culvert MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-16 259
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 5 B. Project Name: Soquel Ave to Rodeo Creek Gulch C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Type: Capacity
G. Description:
42 N/A 1,340
H. Project-Specific Considerations: N/A
I. Alternatives: Replace pipe through existing private properies with larger or parallel system J. Project Location Map:

N/A
Ex. Diameter (in) Replacement Pipe
Diameter (in)
Parallel Pipe Diam
(in) Length (ft)
Capacity Improvement along Soquel Ave, from upstream of Mattison to Rodeo Cr Gulch Install new outfall pipe connecting existing pipe system to Rodeo Creek Gulch along Soquel Ave to alleviate flooding on private properties adjacent to Mattison Lane C-17 260
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix C: High Priority CIP Project Sheets
A. Project ID: 5 B. Project Name: Soquel Ave to Rodeo Creek Gulch C. Project Location:

D. Priority: High
E. Project Cost

DIAM AVE DEPTH UNIT
(in) (ft) COST

BASELINE CONSTRUCTION COST
Pipe Demo/Disposal
Pipe Construction
42 7 1,340 LF $570 $764,000
Structures
Manhole/Catch Basin Connection $54,900
Outfalls $100,000
SUBTOTAL $920,000
Mobilization/Demobilization 10% $90,000
Traffic Control 5% $50,000
Contingency 40% $370,000
CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $1,430,000
Engineering/Inspection 20% $290,000
Site-Specific Costs
ROW Acquisition $0
Environmental/Jurisdictional Permitting $0
CIP TOTAL $1,720,000
*Totals rounded to nearest $10,000
CIPCOND_1
N/A
Capacity Improvement along Soquel Ave, from upstream of Mattison to Rodeo Cr Gulc MAJOR ITEMS QTY. UNIT COST
C-18 261
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Regional Systems Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Appendix D
December 2023 Schaaf & Wheeler
Appendix D
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan
262
Item 8 C.

Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan
Operations and Maintenance Plan
Santa Cruz County, CA
November 10, 2023
Prepared for:

Santa Cruz County
701 Ocean Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Prepared by:

Dave Rios, CPESC, CPSWQ
Associate
Jason Drew, CPESC, CPSWQ
Principal
NCE
1003 W. Cutting Blvd., Suite 110
Point Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620
NCE Project Number: 1045.03.55
263
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
264
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction.......................................................................................1

1.1 Asset Management Cycle.................................................................. 1

1.2 O&M Program Elements and Definitions .............................................. 2

1.3 Key Management Questions.............................................................. 2

1.4 Roles and Responsibilities................................................................. 3

1.4.1 Management Team .................................................................... 3

1.4.2 Operations Team ....................................................................... 5

1.5 Equipment ..................................................................................... 6

1.6 Software and Applications .............................................................. 11 2 Asset Inventory ...............................................................................12

2.1 GIS Asset Dataset Overview ........................................................... 12

2.2 Condition Assessment Data Collection .............................................. 12

2.3 Zone 5 Storm Drain System Summary and System Map ...................... 13

2.4 Asset Inventory Updates ................................................................ 13 3 Analysis and Forecasting .................................................................14

3.1 Definitions ................................................................................... 14

3.2 O&M Priorities............................................................................... 15

3.3 Cost Estimates.............................................................................. 16 4 Work Program Actions .....................................................................17

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................. 17

4.2 Inspections .................................................................................. 17

4.2.1 Visual Inspections.................................................................... 17

4.2.2 Emergency Inspections............................................................. 19

4.2.3 CCTV Inspections..................................................................... 19

4.3 Maintenance................................................................................. 19

4.4 Repairs........................................................................................ 20

4.5 Documentation ............................................................................. 21

4.5.1 Work Plans ............................................................................. 21 5 Tracking and Reporting....................................................................22

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................. 22

5.2 Tracking and Reporting Software ..................................................... 22

5.2.1 ESRI GIS................................................................................ 22 265
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
ii

5.2.2 Lucity .................................................................................... 23

5.3 Asset Tracking and Reporting.......................................................... 23

5.3.1 Web Applications ..................................................................... 23

5.3.2 Asset Tracking ........................................................................ 24

5.4 Annual Reporting .......................................................................... 25

5.4.1 Annual NPDES Report............................................................... 25

5.4.2 Internal O&M Reporting ............................................................ 26 6 Recommendations ...........................................................................27 List of Figures
Figure 1. Storm Water Asset Management Cycle............................................... 1 Figure 2. Vactor Truck at Brommer Yard ......................................................... 7 Figure 3. Sweepers at Brommer Yard ............................................................. 7 Figure 4. CCTV Camera Truck Located at Brommer Yard.................................... 8 Figure 5. Storm Drain CCTV Camera............................................................... 8 Figure 6. Miscellaneous Brommer Yard Equipment ............................................ 9 Figure 7. Field Tablet Running Lucity ............................................................ 10 Figure 8. Ventis MX-4 Handheld Multi-Gas Detector ........................................ 10 Figure 9. Simpkins Ditch and Outfall with Trash Rack ...................................... 18 Figure 10. Rodeo Gulch at Corcoran Lagoon Outfall......................................... 19 Figure 11. 38th Avenue Detention Basin ....................................................... 20 List of Tables
Table 1. Existing Storm Drain System Asset Summary .................................... 13 266
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
iii
List of Appendices
Appendix A
Schaaf and Wheeler Condition Assessment Attribute Tables Appendix B
Existing Zone 5 O&M Program System Map
Appendix C
Sample Work Orders
Appendix D
Sample Particulate Reduction Chart and Associated Lucity Reports Appendix E
Sample Internal O&M Reports
Appendix F
Existing O&M Standard Operating Procedures
Appendix G
Sample Work Plan
Appendix H
Proposed O&M Standard Operating Procedures
267
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
iv
List of Abbreviations
App Application
CCTV closed-circuit television
County Santa Cruz County
ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute
GIS Geographic Information Systems
Lucity Lucity Asset Management System
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O&M Operations & Maintenance
Water Board Regional Water Quality Control Board
268
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
1 1 Introduction
Santa Cruz County (County) is responsible for a storm drain network consisting of facilities along more than 600 miles of County roads. Municipalities within the County include the cities of Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, Watsonville, and Capitola.

Each city has additional storm drain facilities they are responsible for operating and maintaining.

To manage such a large system, the County has established four drainage or flood control zones (Zones 5-8) based on defined watersheds associated with urban areas. The Zones also define the boundaries for operations and maintenance (O&M) activities. Maintenance resources across the County include five crews made up of more than three dozen maintenance staff, three maintenance yards, and various equipment and tools. In addition, each municipality has its respective maintenance resources.

This Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Plan is one element of the Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan and establishes a formal program for O&M activities. The O&M Plan consists of five critical components 1) Program Management 2) Asset Inventory 3) Analysis and Forecasting 4) Work Program Actions and 5) Tracking and Reporting.

1.1 ASSET MANAGEMENT CYCLE
Storm water asset management is an
iterative and evolving process that
provides a comprehensive means of
cost effectively operating,
maintaining, and investing in storm
drain systems. Figure 1 illustrates
this process. The baseline asset
inventory provides the information
necessary to analyze and forecast
inspection, maintenance, and repair
needs. As needs are identified, work
program actions – including
inspections, maintenance, and repairs
– create new data. This new
information is captured as part of
tracking and reporting and is managed
within the County’s existing Lucity
asset management and Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) software. As repairs are made and targeted capital improvement projects are implemented to improve the storm drain network, the Figure 1. Storm Water Asset
Management Cycle
269
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
2 asset inventory is updated, thus completing the cycle. Together, the elements of this cycle comprise the County’s O&M Program. The O&M Program is fluid and changes over time to meet the County’s needs. Therefore, this O&M Plan should be revisited and updated every 3-to-4 years to maximize its effectiveness.

1.2 O&M PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND DEFINITIONS
Asset Inventory – Defines the spatial location and attribute information for the storm drain assets (junctions and conveyances) in the system. Key information includes the horizontal and vertical spatial location, asset type, material, dimensions, maintenance condition, and invert elevations. Primary asset types include:
• Structures – Structures are assets where storm water enters/exits the system. Some structures include trash and sediment trap features. Other structures provide access points for maintenance (e.g., inlet, catch basin, manhole, outfall).
• Conduits – Conduits are linear assets that carry storm water between structures either above or below ground to a receiving water outfall or other portion of the storm drain system (e.g., pipe, culvert, open channel).

Analysis and Forecasting – Describes the process of identifying the annual O&M priorities; these priorities help identify storm drain assets that require a work program action during the year. This section presents the queries necessary to identify which assets are inspected, inspection timing and frequency, as well as the O&M cost estimates.

Work Program Actions – Describes the procedures, equipment, and methodologies used to implement the O&M Program (e.g., visual, emergency, or closed-circuit television [CCTV] inspections; maintenance; repairs or replacements; and capital improvements). Details regarding capital investments including repair, replacement, and capital projects are described in the Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan.

Tracking and Reporting – Describes the various elements of the Lucity asset management software and the use of GIS software to navigate to asset locations, track inspection and maintenance activities, and report various analytics to forecast short-term and long-term needs. This section also summarizes annual internal and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) reporting.

1.3 KEY MANAGEMENT QUESTIONS
As previously mentioned, an O&M Program should evolve and change, as necessary, to meet the needs of the managing jurisdiction and describe the current O&M Program. This section provides questions asked in the development of this O&M Plan and that the County should consider as it implements its O&M Program. 270
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
3 This list is not intended to be exhaustive; rather, the questions illustrate the sitespecific storm drain concerns and challenges that directly inform the County’s O&M Program.
• What are the County’s O&M Program goals?
• What specific outcomes does the County desire from its O&M Program? • What resources (financial and personnel) are currently available to support the O&M Program?
• What existing work program actions does the County implement on a routine or periodic basis as part of the O&M Program?
• What frequency should work program actions be executed? • How do existing or future routine maintenance agreements with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife factor into the O&M program? • What equipment is used by in-house staff to perform work program actions? • Should the O&M program be completed in house and/or with vendors? • What reports or analysis should be done to analyze and forecast O&M needs? • How can the County best leverage their existing GIS and Lucity asset management software?
• What processes should be in place for documenting inspections, maintenance, and repairs?
• Is using digital handheld devices a good approach to capturing inspection and maintenance records?
• What level of documentation for standard operating procedures is recommended?

1.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The County has a Management Team and an Operations Team responsible for implementing its O&M Program.

1.4.1 Management Team
The Management Team oversees the overall storm water program and manages the maintenance crews, with varying responsibilities distributed across three maintenance yards within the County. The team consists of Program Managers (one from the County and one from the City of Capitola), a Superintendent and Crew Supervisors, and a GIS Manager.

Program Managers
Program Managers are responsible for the coordination and overall implementation of the County Storm Water Program. They are responsible for securing adequate financial and personnel resources to successfully implement the O&M Program. The Program Managers also provide critical support to the Operations Team with the identification and resolution of issues as they arise.
271
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
4 At the time this O&M Plan was written, the following County and City staff were assigned the role of Program Managers:
• Steve Wiesner – Assistant Director of Public Works who also oversees the County’s O&M Program
• Rachel Fatoohi – Santa Cruz County Storm Water Program Coordinator • Jessica Kahn – City of Capitola Public Works Director Superintendent & Crew Supervisors
The Superintendent and Crew Supervisors coordinate day-to-day activities identified throughout the County. Crew Supervisors (one for each of the five County maintenance crews) receive direction from the Superintendent and delegate work assignments to their crew. Issues identified in the field are conveyed to Crew Supervisors, and if necessary, to the Superintendent or Program Managers for resolution.

At the time this O&M Plan was written, the following County staff were assigned the roles of Superintendent or Crew Supervisor:
• Alex Sandoval – Superintendent
• Augie Waltrip – Assistant Superintendent Roads
• Elliot Vega – Assistant Superintendent Drainage, Special Crew • Vacant – Drainage Crew Supervisor (manages 6 staff)
• Gavino Mosqueda – Special Crew Supervisor (manages 14 staff) • Jose Ramirez – North County Supervisor (manages 11 staff) • Mark Hernandez – Mid-County Supervisor (manages 11 staff) • Henry Munoz – South County Crew Supervisor (manages 11 staff) GIS Manager
The GIS Manager is responsible for maintaining the storm drain system’s geospatial data and the integration of these data with the County’s Lucity Asset Management System (Lucity). The County uses GIS to record the spatial location of storm drain assets and considers the GIS dataset to be a foundational component of O&M. The attribution and condition assessment history, including previous inspections and maintenance actions, is handled within Lucity, and will be integrated into the GIS in the near future. Both of these systems are overseen by the GIS Manager.

Over time, the GIS manager has continued to develop and improve the spatial accuracy of mapped assets and the schema (i.e., list of attributes) to make querying and reporting capabilities more powerful. As Lucity integration improves over time, more functions of Lucity are forecasted to become available to staff. This includes Lucity Mobile, which will enable better visualization of and navigation to assets.
272
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
5 A variety of applications and software are currently being utilized by operations staff to perform their duties. The GIS Manager develops and controls some of these applications, including Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) ArcGIS web applications and mobile applications (Field Maps and Survey123). Other software, including aspects of Lucity and Google Earth for traffic control, are managed by others.

At the time this O&M Plan was written, one person was assigned the role of GIS Manager:
• Bryan Kriete – GIS Analyst for Santa Cruz County Public Works

1.4.2 Operations Team
The Operations Team1includes five maintenance crews with varying numbers of staff. The Operations Team also includes the Superintendents and Crew Supervisors as described above, who are responsible for managing and delegating daily operations. In addition, contractors (currently Sergey Mariniuk of Fastlane Tek) periodically support Lucity troubleshooting or custom reporting.

Below, each crew is described and their various responsibilities are outlined.

Drainage Crew
The Drainage Crew, based out of the Wilson Yard, consists of six staff supervised by a supervisor whose position is currently vacant. This crew is responsible for drainage asset inspection related to five separate flood zone districts (Zone 5, 6, 7, 8 and the Pajaro Storm Drain Maintenance District) and maintenance of county culverts (there is some crossover with the Road Crews), catch basins, pipes, open channels relative to the flood zone districts. Drainage also maintains unique facilities like the 38th Avenue detention basin and Shell Rd pump station.

Special Crew
The Special Crew, based out of the Brommer Yard, consists of 14 staff supervised by Gavino Mosqueda. This crew maintains materials in the yard, calibrates meters, inspects/maintains unique assets like traffic control devices, road markings, guardrails, street sweeping, litter and maintains silt and grease traps in all County zones. The Special Crew is also responsible for inspecting and maintaining assets associated with the NPDES.
1 Details about the Operations Team, including photos from Brommer Yard, and descriptions of work program actions were from a field meeting with the Operations Team, Santa Cruz County, March 2021.
273
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
6 Road Crews
There are three Road Crews, including the North County, Mid-County, and South County crews. The Road Crews are responsible for roadway-related assets on over 600 miles of County roads. Crews focus mostly on pavement repairs, roadside mowing and ditch clearing. Road crews assist in cross culvert inspections/replacements as well as minor visual inspections of Zone 5 inlets.

North County Crew
The North County Crew, based out of the Felton Yard, consists of 11 staff supervised by Jose Ramirez. This crew is responsible for County road culverts, catch basins, and other roadway assets west of Highway 17.

Mid-County Crew
The Mid-County Crew, based out of the Brommer Yard, consists of 11 staff supervised by Mark Hernandez. This crew is responsible for County road culverts, catch basins, and other roadway assets from Highway 17 to the Spreckles Drive area.

South County Crew
The South County Crew, based out of the Wilson Yard, consists of 11 staff supervised by Henry Munoz. This crew is responsible for County road culverts and catch basins along their maintained road network.

1.5 EQUIPMENT
The following list summarizes existing equipment stored at the Brommer Yard.

Based on current staffing levels, the equipment and supplies appear adequate for O&M staff to perform their current work activities.
• Vactor Truck (Figure 2)
o Used every day in the fall between August and October for NPDES work
o Used ad-hoc other times of the year
o One vactor truck is available for use
274
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
7 Figure 2. Vactor Truck at Brommer Yard
• Sweepers (Figure 3)
o Two sweepers including a Vac Sweeper and Elgin Conveyor sweeper o Run multiple times per week following a pre-set route o Sweepers are run simultaneously at times
o Takes about one month to sweep Zone 5
o Sweeping quantities are calculated in Lucity
o Average 2,500 miles of sweeping each year
Figure 3. Sweepers at Brommer Yard
275
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
8 • CCTV camera truck (Figure 4)
o New addition in 2021
o 400 feet of cable
o Superintendent and supervisors direct use of camera truck o No routine program in place, used to video specific neighborhood as part of a long-term study
o Storm drain CCTV camera (Figure 5)
Figure 4. CCTV Camera Truck Located at Brommer Yard
Figure 5. Storm Drain CCTV Camera
276
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
9 • Misc. equipment (Figure 6)
o Backhoe, dump truck, excavators, loaders, and other equipment available to all County staff including O&M
o Tablets (total tablet count not determined, each person assigned a tablet)
o Android tablets run Lucity, Collector, and Survey123 – currently meeting the needs of field staff (Figure 7)
o Various handheld equipment including a Ventis MX-4 handheld multigas detector (Figure 8) Figure 6. Miscellaneous Brommer Yard Equipment
277
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
10 Figure 7. Field Tablet Running Lucity
Figure 8. Ventis MX-4 Handheld Multi-Gas Detector
278
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

INTRODUCTION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
11 1.6 SOFTWARE AND APPLICATIONS
County O&M staff rely on a suite of software packages and other applications to document, track, report, and forecast the management history of storm drain assets. The County uses two key software: ESRI ArcGIS and ArcGIS Online to manage the geospatial component of their assets and the Lucity asset management software to manage the work order system through inspection, maintenance, and repair cycles. Lucity and ESRI are integrated to the extent that Operations staff are able to track ongoing work program actions, and Program Managers are able to run end-of-year summaries to present program progress.

Additional details regarding O&M reporting and tracking, as it relates to the suite of software package used by the County, are provided in Section 5. 279
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

ASSET INVENTORY SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
12 2 Asset Inventory

2.1 GIS ASSET DATASET OVERVIEW
Effective storm water asset management relies on a complete and accurate asset inventory. The County’s GIS asset dataset contains detailed information about the storm drain system, including the critical spatial and attribute information. This dataset is described below.

The County’s GIS data are stored in an Enterprise geodatabase housed on a County server and managed by the GIS Manager. The geodatabase contains all County assets. Two feature datasets within the geodatabase contain the storm drain data used by the O&M team. The Storm Water feature dataset contains two “classes” – Storm Water Structures and Storm Water Conduits. The Transportation feature dataset contains a single class called Maintained Channels (referred to as “Open Channels” within the O&M Program).

The Storm Water Structures class includes several asset types: catch basin/inlets with trash capture devices, catch basin/inlets, manholes/junctions, outfalls, and detention basin. The Storm Water Conduits class includes pipes and culverts. The Open Channels class has a single asset type, Open Channel. Each of these feature classes contains key attributes used to further describe each asset (e.g., material, dimensions, elevation). Details related to the feature classes and their associated assets are available within the geodatabase.

Unique aspects of the storm drain asset inventory include a regional storm water basin located in the City of Capitola, but maintained by Zone 5. Additionally, the network of open channels maintained by Zone 5 includes approximately 5 to 10 priority channels, which require multiple visits across the year to inspect and maintain.

2.2 CONDITION ASSESSMENT DATA COLLECTION
This section describes the condition assessment completed to support development of the Storm Drain Master Plan for Zone 5. Schaaf and Wheeler conducted the condition assessment during the summer of 2020. The objectives of this field effort were to:

1. Assess the condition of the regional storm drain open conveyance system and culvert crossings included within the open conveyance system.

2. Collect storm drain system attributes to inform subsequent hydrologic and hydraulic modeling.
280
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

ASSET INVENTORY SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
13 3. Develop a conditions assessment geodatabase using a simplified National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) ranking approach to further assess the regional facilities.

4. Provide the County with an updated regional storm drain asset geodatabase.

Additional information or attributes collected during the data collection effort are presented in Appendix A.

2.3 ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN SYSTEM SUMMARY AND SYSTEM MAP
The existing Zone 5 storm drain system described in this O&M Plan includes the large diameter conduits, adjoining structures, and open channels. This regional storm drain system defines the study area for the Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan2.

The system map is presented in Appendix B and the asset summary is presented below (Table 1):

Table 1. Existing Storm Drain System Asset Summary

2.4 ASSET INVENTORY UPDATES
Periodic updates to the asset inventory are made in order to ensure the spatial and attribute information is up to date. ESRI Field Maps, or previously ESRI Collector, are used to update attribute information during inspections. New data are sent to the County’s GIS Specialist who reviews the data, assigns a new Lucity ID, and then integrates the data into the Lucity system upon receipt of new asset information.
2 Schaaf and Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers. 2022. Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan.

GIS
Layer
Asset Type Count Notes
Trash Capture Devices 3
This number seems low, but it represents what is includ 5 SDMP Collection Service" Structures Layer from the A
data
Catch basins/Inlets 245 I combined inlets and catch basins Manhole/Junctions 238 I combined manholes/junctions and silt and grease stru Outfalls 63
Detention Basins 1 38th Avenue Detention Basin
Pipes 417
Culverts 58
Open Channels 124
Structures Conduits
Existing O&M System
281
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
14 3 Analysis and Forecasting
This section describes the analysis and forecasting activities including establishing program definitions, defining O&M priorities, and presenting the O&M budget. This information helps shape the County’s O&M Program and determines which storm drain assets require a work program action during the year. It is important to note that within an annual O&M Program cycle, not all storm drain assets will require a work program action such as an inspection, maintenance, or repair.

3.1 DEFINITIONS
Santa Cruz County uses Lucity to manage the O&M workflow of inspections, maintenance, repairs, and reporting. This system is described in more detail in Section 5. The following definitions are provided as context for analysis and forecasting within the O&M Program. However, this O&M Plan is not intended to replace formal training with the Lucity system.

Assets – As described previously, these are the individual storm drain components (e.g., inlets/catch basins, pipes, or open channels) that are included in the storm drain system.

Service Requests – Requests are developed when a member of the public fills out a request on the Santa Cruz County – My Santa Cruz County website or requests are called into Dispatch. Service requests are manually or automatically entered into Lucity for the crew supervisors to review. Service requests are then attached to a Work Order and will be linked to the data. Requests typically result in inspection or maintenance.

Tasks – Tasks include the specific work program actions identified within a work order. For example, the main task included within the Appendix C (pages 9-12) work order is “NPDES-Catch Basin Cleaning.” Tasks log what equipment and personnel were part of the Work Order.

Work Orders – Work orders are used to track work program actions (inspections, maintenance, or repairs) performed by the maintenance crews. For example, the Superintendent developed a work order for routine or annual trash capture device cleaning for Zone 5 as well as Countywide. Appendix C presents the work order for annual trash capture device cleaning for Zone 5.

Work orders are created any time a crew member visits an asset to perform a work program action (e.g., inspection, maintenance, or repair). Each work order contains the assigned crew, start and end date, list of locations and assets, and assigned resources (e.g., vac truck, employee, and equipment).
282
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
15 3.2 O&M PRIORITIES
The following O&M priorities guide current inspection, maintenance, and repair work program actions for the County, per the Existing O&M Standard Operating Procedures table (Appendix F).
• Annual visual, emergency, and new construction inspections will be performed on all asset types3.
• Priority asset types will be inspected at least once per year4. The remainder of the system will be inspected on an as-needed or requested basis. • Catch basin/inlets with trash capture devices, silt and grease structures, and open channels are the priority assets for the County and are visually inspected multiple times per year.
• Storm drain pipe CCTV inspections will be performed on an as-needed basis.

No current routine CCTV inspections are in place.
• Asset maintenance frequency depends on the asset type. o Open channels are inspected at least twice per year.
o Silt & grease traps are hydrovaced annually.
o Priority drainage inlets are maintained multiple times per year. • Minor repairs are completed on storm drain assets as issues are noted during inspections or requests are filed.
• Major repairs are handled by the County’s civil engineering group.

As discussed in Section 1.4, each Crew Supervisor has a specific set of assets or portion of the storm drain system they are responsible for inspecting, maintaining, and repairing. In addition to the routine activities performed by each crew, emergency inspections or maintenance may be performed by any crew at any time and are typically addressed on an as-needed basis.

The Drainage Crew maintains a running list of their open channels that require routine maintenance; repair needs are noted during inspections. The Special Crew has a single, pre-developed work order for routine or annual trash capture device cleaning (Appendix C) and work orders for sweeping within Zone 5. No other Special Crew assets have a pre-developed work order and work program actions are identified during ongoing inspections. The Road Crew have an established maintenance schedule for approximately 60 percent of the year (30 out of 52 weeks). The remaining 40 percent of the year is dedicated to emergency response and winter preparedness.

Future O&M priorities are addressed in Section 6.
3 No visual inspections are proposed for pipes; no new construction inspections are anticipated for open channels.
4 Storm drain pipes will be inspected during ongoing CCTV inspections, on an emergency basis, and following the construction of new assets.
283
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
16 3.3 COST ESTIMATES
Understanding the financial resources invested to implement the current O&M Program (Section 3.2) and required to support the proposed future O&M Program (Section 6) is critical. A fiscal analysis was prepared as part of the Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan and included evaluating existing and proposed O&M Program costs. This section overviews those costs and detailed information can be found in the appendices of the Storm Drain Master Plan.

Current Program – Based on the fiscal analysis, the County’s current O&M expenditures approximate $834,000 annually. Of this total, approximately $709,000 is related to work program actions including inspections, maintenance, and repairs. An additional $40,000 is spent on tracking and reporting and $85,000 on equipment-related costs. These O&M-related expenses correspond to the Existing O&M Standard Operating Procedures table (Appendix F).

Proposed Program – The Proposed O&M Standard Operating Procedures table (Appendix H) formed the basis for the future costs which approximate $2.1 million, in 2023 dollars. The work program actions for inspections, maintenance, and repairs will approximate $1.9 million. Tracking, reporting, and equipment costs are approximately $200,000.
284
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

WORK PROGRAM ACTIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
17 4 Work Program Actions

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The work program actions performed on the storm drain system include inspections, maintenance, and repairs. The overall process for inspecting and maintaining the storm drain system is described below. Detailed information about the Existing O&M Standard Operating Procedures is provided in a table within Appendix F. The table presents the type, frequency, season, description, and documentation requirements for each asset type.

4.2 INSPECTIONS
The following sections describe the storm drain inspections conducted within Zone 5, including visual, emergency, and CCTV. Through an agreement with the City of Capitola, County staff also maintain the 38th Avenue detention basin. The purpose of inspections is to 1) document the condition of the storm drain assets, and 2) identify any follow-up work program actions that are necessary.

4.2.1 Visual Inspections
Visual inspections are routine visits to storm drain assets in order to observe the condition and function of the assets. Within Zone 5, priority storm drain assets include full trash capture devices, open channels, and a single detention basin.

Additionally, there are a few non-full-trash-capture manholes/inlets/catch basins that are inspected when time allows.

Trash/Sediment Capture Devices
Trash/Sediment capture devices include storm drain inlet/catch basins with sumps (silt/grease trap), screens for capturing floatables, or hydrodynamic separators such as the Contech CDS storm water treatment facility, which includes separation chambers and physical screens. These devices are important assets for the County and are inspected up to two times each year. At a minimum, these devices are inspected annually from August to October.

Open Channels
There are 58 open channels within Zone 5 that are inspected twice each year, including 10 higher priority channels that are monitored more frequently. Open channel inspections involve either walking the entire length of the asset or inspecting a specific location. Examples of open channels within Zone 5 are presented below.

Simpkins Ditch (Figure 9) is one of the higher priority ditches that requires regular maintenance. The open ditch and adjoining structures and conduits are located behind the Simpkins Family Swim Center. This facility experiences debris and 285
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

WORK PROGRAM ACTIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
18 garbage build-up behind an existing trash rack. Maintenance is required in the spring, summer, and fall. Storm events also trigger the need for maintenance.

Figure 9. Simpkins Ditch and Outfall with Trash Rack
Rodeo Gulch (Figure 10) outfalls to Corcoran Lagoon, along Portola Drive and near Richmond Drive. This facility and adjoining structures and conduits require periodic maintenance. However, conducting maintenance is complicated because of existing regulatory permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that limit the type of maintenance and time of year maintenance can be performed. 286
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

WORK PROGRAM ACTIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
19 Figure 10. Rodeo Gulch at Corcoran Lagoon Outfall

4.2.2 Emergency Inspections
Emergency inspections are conducted when there is a documented issue with one or more storm drain assets. Emergency inspections occur on an as-needed basis.

The Operations Team responds to approximately 12- 24 emergency inspections annually, but the frequency varies depending on annual storm activity.

4.2.3 CCTV Inspections
In January 2021, the O&M Program purchased the hardware and software necessary to conduct CCTV inspections. Prior to this purchase, the County’s Sewer (Sanitation) Division would be hired to conduct targeted CCTV inspections and routine CCTV inspections were not conducted. The County is in the process of determining a reasonable level-of-effort for annually televising storm drain pipes (e.g., 5,000 feet of pipe each year).

4.3 MAINTENANCE
Inspections often lead to follow-up maintenance on storm drain assets. However, there are assets within the storm drain system that require routine or scheduled maintenance. The following storm drain asset maintenance is scheduled each year, based on historical observations and recurring maintenance needs:
• Open channels – Maintained up to two times per year.
• Trash captures devices – Maintained at least once per year. • Conduits/inlets/outlets – Visited as time permits, often following open channel maintenance (e.g., drainage patrols).
287
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

WORK PROGRAM ACTIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
20 • Drainage inlets – Priority assets maintained annually, through visual inspections conducted by road crews during “storm patrol”. • Soquel Creek at Bargetto Bridge – Annual vegetation management and invasive plant species removal.
• 38th avenue detention basin - The 38th Avenue detention basin (Figure 11) is a unique storm drain asset that is within the Capitola City limits but is maintained by Zone 5. This basin includes a series of overflow channels, head gates, pumps, and sumps that help control water levels during large rain events. There are four (two large and two small) pumps that are monitored by the Sanitation Division. During 2020 and 2021, significant maintenance was performed at the 38th Avenue detention basin, including removal of 400 cubic yards of material, constructing a perimeter fence, installing plantings, replacing, and maintaining the pump system, and confirming the system was operational.

Figure 11. 38th Avenue Detention Basin

4.4 REPAIRS
Spot repairs are completed by the Operations staff as they are identified. There have been no major repairs within Zone 5; however, major repairs in other County zones are typically handled by the senior civil engineering team (e.g., Leona Creek at Capitola Road).

In 2020, approximately 12 culvert replacement projects were completed. The County’s Superintendent maintains a list of culvert projects for all of the roads and drainage crews and these projects are completed as time permits. 288
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

WORK PROGRAM ACTIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
21 4.5 DOCUMENTATION

4.5.1 Work Plans
The day-to-day activities for the O&M team are site- and case-specific. As a result, there are no standard operations procedures in place to guide work program actions. Site-specific work plans are developed, and in some cases reused, for recurring work program actions. Work plans include a description of the work program action including a checklist and a work zone map created using Google Earth that shows road closures, signage, and flagger requirements. These work plans are distributed at tailgate meetings and outline tasks for all involved staff. A sample work plan is provided in Appendix G.
289
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TRACKING AND REPORTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
22 5 Tracking and Reporting

5.1 INTRODUCTION
The Tracking and Reporting5 element completes the Storm Water Asset Management Cycle and links back into the asset inventory, the foundation of the O&M Program. Changes to the storm drain system might include updated attribute or spatial information, new or removed storm drain assets, or changes to the storm drain reporting. These modifications will be reflected within the GIS and Lucity system to ensure the storm drain system is up-to-date, complete, and accurate.

There are several key software packages used Countywide and by the County’s O&M Program within Zone 5. These software packages as well as their primary uses are described below. This section also includes a description of the County’s ongoing tracking and reporting. Finally, the County’s annual reporting is described.

5.2 TRACKING AND REPORTING SOFTWARE

5.2.1 ESRI GIS
ESRI is the industry standard for creating, analyzing, managing, and presenting geospatial information. The County uses the full suite of ESRI software described below.

ArcGIS Desktop – ArcGIS Desktop is the legacy software platform that is still available for use, but currently outdated and no longer supported. ArcGIS Desktop or ArcMap will be retired on March 1, 2026. This software appears to still be in use at the County for day-to-day GIS operations.

ArcGIS Pro – ArcGIS Pro supports data visualization, basic and advanced analysis, data management, and data sharing across the suite of ArcGIS platforms. ArcGIS Pro is the industry standard in geospatial software. Usage of ArcGIS Pro at the County is assumed to be widespread; however, the O&M Program has not fully integrated this new software package.

ArcGIS Online – ArcGIS Online is a cloud-based software used to create and share geospatial information through interactive web maps and web applications. ArcGIS Online is the primary clearinghouse for the County’s O&M geospatial data and along with Lucity (discussed in detail below), this software is used to visualize and share the County’s storm drain GIS.

ArcGIS Field Maps – ArcGIS Field Maps, formerly ArcGIS Collector, is an all-in-one application (app) that leverages ArcGIS Online-developed web maps to support mobile field data collection, editing, asset locating, and real-time location reporting. 5 Tracking and Reporting details were obtained during a series of virtual meetings with County staff including the Stormwater Program Manager, Superintendent, and GIS Manager from February through December 2021.
290
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TRACKING AND REPORTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
23 While this app is not available to everyone, it is used by field inspectors and technicians to locate and update storm drain asset attribute information, perform sign inventories, support road closures, track rodents, and support the culvert discovery and assessment project.

ArcGIS Survey123 – ArcGIS Survey123 is a form-centric mobile app used to create, share, and analyze survey information. Currently, the County uses ArcGIS Survey123 to support road closures and the culvert discovery and assessment project.

5.2.2 Lucity
Lucity is a comprehensive GIS and web-enabled software solution geared toward local governments, public works, and utility departments. While Lucity offers a mapping and spatial viewer, the power of the software is its form-based graphical interface and robust database backbone. Lucity allows users to manage an asset inventory, assess the condition of assets, and determine maintenance needs, all within the software.

Lucity is the cornerstone of the County’s asset management system and is used across various departments. Lucity is the framework for tracking inspections, maintenance, and other operational activities discussed herein.

5.3 ASSET TRACKING AND REPORTING
Asset tracking and reporting within Zone 5 are closely linked and typically managed by the Maintenance Superintendent and the County’s Storm Water Coordinator.

Asset tracking and reporting also include web applications developed for specific data updating or inventorying needs.

Below is a description of the web applications, asset tracking, as well as the annual reports produced each year that summarize inspection, maintenance, and NPDESrelated activities.

5.3.1 Web Applications
The County’s GIS Manager has developed a series of web maps and web applications that support ongoing data tracking and maintenance. They also use third-party CCTV software. These are summarized below.

Drainage Channels Application
There are numerous mapped open channels across the County. Some of these channels are maintained by the County, while other channels are on private property. There are also a variety of unmapped channels that need to be verified as County maintained assets or as privately maintained channels. Additionally, the ingress and egress locations for these assets need to be documented. 291
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TRACKING AND REPORTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
24 The purpose of the drainage channel application is to identify unmapped open channels and identify acceptable access points to the County-maintained assets.

Culvert Discovery and Assessment Application
Storm drain culverts are located within urban, rural, and mountainous areas of the County. While the Zone 5 culvert inventory is mostly complete, the County-wide inventory continues to be updated. Many of the existing culverts are mapped and include relevant attribute information (e.g., diameter, material, conditions). Yet, additional work is needed to adequately map and describe all existing culverts within the County.

The purpose of the culvert discovery and assessment application is to enable County staff to identify unmapped culverts, populate relevant attribute information for unmapped culverts, and update inaccurate information for existing mapped culverts.

GraniteNet (Third-party CCTV software)
GraniteNet is a third-party CCTV system that includes both software and hardware.

The GraniteNet system is used for closed pipe inspection and rehabilitation planning. This tool is used primarily within the Sanitation Division, but also has the ability to be used on the storm drain system. Currently, the storm water program uses this tool as needed. There is an interest to better leverage the GraniteNet system for conducting storm drain pipe CCTV inspections and rehabilitation planning.

5.3.2 Asset Tracking
Ongoing asset tracking within Zone 5 is the responsibility of the Maintenance Supervisor. Management metric reports are generated through the Lucity system and provide a glimpse or snapshot into how the O&M Program is functioning.

Of the approximately 16 standard management metric reports, 7 reports are storm drain asset-related and include the following:
• Ditch cleaning mileage and collected volume
• Culvert maintenance/cleaning
• Culvert repair and replacement
• Sweeping mileage
• Culvert replacement footage
• Storm debris removal
• CCTV inspections
292
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TRACKING AND REPORTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
25 The Maintenance Superintendent runs management metric reports periodically and defines the time period of interest. For example, to understand whether culvert repair and replacement work program actions may differ among the crews, a report will be generated to calculate how many feet of culvert repair or culvert replacements have occurred for each crew over a given time period. This information informs not just resourcing decisions (e.g., does a crew need more staff), but also budget allocations (e.g., does one crew need more financial resources in order to meet culvert repair or culvert replacement demands).

5.4 ANNUAL REPORTING
The County prepares reports on an annual basis in support of their NPDES program and to inform the budgeting and resourcing for the O&M program. Each of these reports are described in more detail below.

5.4.1 Annual NPDES Report
Santa Cruz County is a traditional small municipal separate storm water sewer system (MS4) permittee covered under the Phase II MS4 general permit (State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) Water Quality Order No. 2013-001- DWQ). This program is managed by the County’s stormwater coordinator. The Phase II general permit covers municipalities that serve less than 100,000 persons.

The Phase II general permit conditions require municipalities to report annually how their program ensures pollutant discharges are reduced, protects water quality, and broadly satisfies the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean Water Act of 1972.

Each year, Santa Cruz County is required to prepare and submit an Annual Report to the Water Board, per the requirements of the NPDES Phase II MS4 permit. The purpose of the Annual NPDES Report is to present an evaluation of the storm water program, summarize the effectiveness of best management practices and goals, and identify improvement opportunities.

One area of focus for the County’s NPDES program is particulate reduction. The County’s Annual NPDES Report must present the volume of solids removed each year which is directly informed by O&M management metric reports. Specifically, particulate reduction is estimated over time using MS4 program-effectiveness software and ongoing County-derived tracking information from Lucity. These data are captured as maintenance crews complete work program actions and record the information into Lucity. The following reports summarize the ongoing O&M activities that directly inform the particulate reduction estimates. • Ditch cleaning mileage and collected volume
• Culvert maintenance/cleaning
• Sweeping mileage
293
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

TRACKING AND REPORTING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
26 • Storm debris removal (also includes vegetation removal) Samples of the metric reports and particulate reduction chart are presented in Appendix D.

5.4.2 Internal O&M Reporting
The O&M Superintendent produces periodic reports that help inform workloads, resourcing, and budgeting. These reports are produced using the Lucity software and are summarized below. Sample reports are included in Appendix E. • Management metric reports
o Ditch cleaning
o Culvert maintenance/cleaning
o Culvert repair and replace
o Sweeping mileage
• Roads Reports
o Completed work orders by crew
o Employee hours by activity type
o Drainage crew work orders
o Flap gate work orders
294
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

RECOMMENDATIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
27 6 Recommendations
Santa Cruz County desires a storm drain O&M program that is proactive, supports a functional storm drain system at the desired level of service, and allows the County flexibility to reallocate O&M resources as conditions change. In order to achieve these goals, NCE makes the following recommendations for the O&M Program:
• Asset Inventory – Improve the accuracy and completeness of the storm drain asset inventory by conducting field verifications of spatial and attribute data. The current asset inventory has various inconsistencies and redundancies that should be addressed to improve the accuracy and completeness of the data.
• Analysis and Forecasting – Develop and implement a proactive O&M program that has the necessary resources to inspect, maintain, and repair storm drain assets at recommended frequencies. See the O&M Standard Operating Procedures – Proposed table in Appendix H.

Implement regular CCTV inspections of the storm drain system. While it is unnecessary to conduct a CCTV inspection on every linear foot of storm drain pipe within the County, up to 5,000 linear feet of pipe each year should be inspected, focusing on priority storm drain pipes. These CCTV inspections will provide the County with critical pipe condition information and allow the County to proactively address identified issues before they become major problems.
• Work Program Actions – The O&M Standard Operating Procedures – Existing and Proposed tables present guidelines for inspections, maintenance, and repairs, including documenting the type, frequency, season, and overall process for completing work program actions. This table should not take the place of developing a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedures Manual, which would benefit existing and new O&M staff.
• Tracking and Reporting – The County should continue the ongoing tracking and reporting activities as described above in Section 5. Additionally, implementation of robust tracking analytics is recommended to determine how O&M work program actions change over time to further optimize the O&M Program.
• O&M Plan Linkage to Lucity – The final enhancement to the County’s O&M program will be to link the above recommendations to the Lucity asset management system. Because Lucity is the overarching framework within which the County manages the Zone 5 storm drain system, any changes to 295
Item 8 C.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

RECOMMENDATIONS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CA
ZONE 5 STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN NOVEMBER 10, 2023
28 the O&M program must be tied back to Lucity. Asset inventory updates, changes to inspection or repair frequencies, CCTV inspections, tracking or reporting changes must all be linked back to the Lucity system. 296
Item 8 C.

Distribution and Quality Control
Zone 5 Storm Drain Master Plan
Operations and Maintenance Plan
Santa Cruz County, CA
November 10, 2023
Copy 1: Schaaf and Wheeler (digital)
Copy 2: Project File (digital)
Quality Control Reviewer:

Jason Drew, CPESC, CPSWQ
Principal
NCE Project No. 1045.03.55
297
Item 8 C.

Appendix A

SCHAAF AND WHEELER CONDITION ASSESSMENT ATTRIBUTE TABLES 298
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
299
Item 8 C.

Open Channels
Material Dimensions
(LxWxH, Inches)
Invert In
(Inches)
Invert Out
(Inches) Maintenance Condition Debris (%) Debris (location) Water (%) Channel Condition Priority NOTES Concrete Good 5 - immediate attention
Asphalt Fair 4 - poor
Soil/Earth Poor 3 - fair
Rock 2 - good
Vegetation 1 - excellent
Other
300
Item 8 C.

Pipes
Material Diameter
(Inches)
Invert In
(Inches)
Invert
Out
(Inches)
Maintenance
Condition
Debris
(location)
Debris
(%)
Water
(location)
Water
(%) CCTV CCTV Rating CCTV
Priority NOTES
RCP Good Yes 5 - immediate attention High
CMP Fair No 4 - poor Moderate
HDPE Poor 3 - fair Low
VCP 2 - good
PVC 1 - excellent
See notes
301
Item 8 C.

Culverts
Type Material
Diameter /
Dimensions
(Inches)
Crossing Type Inlet
Configuration
Invert In
(Inches) Outlet Configuration Invert Out (Inches)
Maintenance
Condition
Debris
(%)
Debris
Location
Water
(%)
Water
Location CCTV CCTV Rating CCTV Priority NOTES
Circular RCP Ditch Relief Open Pipe Open Pipe Good Yes 5 - immediate attention High Rectangular / Box CMP Ephemeral Headwall Headwall Fair No 4 - poor Moderate Arch HDPE Creek Box Rock Dissipator Poor 3 - fair Low
See Notes VCP See Notes See Notes See Notes 2 - good
PVC 1 - excellent
See Notes
302
Item 8 C.

Structures
Type Material
Diameter /
Dimensions
(Inches)
Invert In
(Inches)
Invert Out
(Inches)
No Dumping,
Drains to Bay
Marking?
Debris
(%)
Water
(%) Structure Condition Structure
Priority NOTES
Inlet RCP Yes - good, fair 5 - immediate attention High Outlet CMP Yes - bad 4 - poor Moderate
Manhole HDPE None 3 - fair Low
Treatment VCP 2 - good
Detention PVC 1 - excellent
Pump See Notes
303
Item 8 C.

Appendix B
EXISTING ZONE 5 O&M PROGRAM SYSTEM MAP
304
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
305
Item 8 C.

Document Path: P:\Active Projects\Schaaf & Wheeler - 1045\1045.03.55 Santa Cruz Zone 5\GIS\AGP\SC Zone 5 - Drios.aprx Zone 5 Boundary
City of
Santa Cruz
City of Capitola
Ta
n
n
e
r y Gul c h
L e
o
n a
C r e e k
S
o
q
u
e
l
C r e e k
A r
a
n
a
G
u
l
c
h
N
o
b
l
e
G
u
l
c
h
R o
d
e
o
C
r
e
e
k
G
u
l
c
h
38th Ave,
Detention
Basin 41ST AV
S
O
Q
U
E
L
S
A
N
J
OS
E
RD
S
O
Q
U
E
L
S
A
N
J
OS
E
RD
17TH AV 7TH AV

CAPITOLA RD

BROMMER ST

PORTOLA DR

SOQUEL DRSOQUEL DR
Santa Cruz
County
Maintenance Zone 5
Capitola City Limits
Santa Cruz City Limits
Structures
Catch Basin/Inlet
Manhole/Junction
Detention Basin
Outfall
Trash Capture Device
Conduits
Pipe
Culvert
Open Channels
0 800 1,600
Feet
¯ 1 in. = 1,600 ft.

FIGURE
1 Storm Drain Facilities
Master Plan Update
Operations & Maintenance Plan
Zone 5 Regional
Storm Drain System Map
SOURCE
Bing Aerial Basemap, Santa Cruz County
Note: Storm drain assets presented on this map are maintained by various entities including County of Santa Cruz, City of Capitola, and private landowners. This map is not intended to communicate maintenance and operations responsibilities Draft
306
Item 8 C.

Appendix C

SAMPLE WORK ORDERS
307
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
308
Item 8 C.

1.00 Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Status: Closed In Field
Status Date:

Problem: Zone 5 - Drainage
Main Task: NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
WO Number: 2021/06/01-021 Category: Storm Structure
7/16/2021 10:26 am
Location: 647 MELLO LN
Asset: Z5_SGMH_4875 BROMMER YARD
Supervisor:

Lead Worker:

Priority:

Account #:

Proj No - Acct:

Project:

Reason:

Vega, Elliot
NPDES Zone 5 Stormwater Structures
Regular
Assigned By:

Assigned Date:

Start Date:

End Date:
10139 Sandoval, Alex
6/1/2021
7/1/2021
6/1/2021
7:00 AM
4:30 PM
7:00 AM
Cause:

Assigned Crew: Roads Special Crew
Override
Notifications
Problem
Overdue
Lead Worker
Task
Supervisor
Project ID:

Project Name:

Received By: Hard Lock WO
Inspected By: Publically Available
Sched Start Date:

Contractor:

Inspector Comments:

Request Comments for Work Order
ROUTINE CLEANING OF ZONE 5 SILT AND GREESE TRAPS
Location
Department:

Division:

Area:

Owner:

Location:

Classification:

Sub-Division:

Sub-Area:

Roads
Roads-Drainage
Comments for Crew
Maintenance Zone: Alternate Zone:

External Source: External WO ID:

X Coord Y Coord General Location
Address Address 2
Work Order Locations
6,124,289.13537681 1,815,156.45989989 645 MELLO LN
647 MELLO LN 7TH AVE
6,123,083.33070180 1,814,028.95362473 430 LAKE AVE ACROSS FROM 430 LAKE AVE EATON ST
6,123,164.49392530 1,813,547.00905056 333 LAKE AVE
4515 LAKE AVE CARMEL ST
6,123,331.97784230 1,813,130.68934515 430 LAKE AVE ACROSS FROM 135 5TH AVE LAKE AVE
6,125,369.60139172 1,811,854.70305198 191 14TH AV
14TH AVE
6,125,814.15365222 1,812,645.32548648 21400 E CLIFF DR

CLIFF DR
6,125,803.36889689 1,812,085.42339106 15TH AV

TWIN LAKES SB
6,126,313.86984439 1,812,519.93728581 229 16TH AV
16TH AVE
6,126,542.50226113 1,812,011.53836823 JOHAN'S BEACH DR
6,128,336.17124598 1,812,222.23939039 CORCORAN AND E. CLIFF

PORTOLA DR
6,131,219.18122797 1,811,596.64287256 680 30TH AVE
680 30TH AVE
Page: 1
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 309
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
6,130,052.98342913 1,809,807.50340623 22811 E CLIFF DR
22811 CLIFF DR PALISADES AVE
6,128,808.33992106 1,810,579.08093131 101 26TH AV
6,135,630.93946481 1,814,434.98496489 4825 PORTOLA DR
6,126,294.41450273 1,820,146.50700639 630 BOSTWICK LN
6,131,303.86445755 1,814,668.50811990
6,126,305.66415213 1,815,484.65510964 1185 OMAR CT
1185 OMAR CT EL DORADO AVE
6,126,291.60807788 1,815,542.52015139 1175 BROMMER CIR
1175 OMAR CT EL DORADO AVE
6,133,657.94505122 1,812,646.12896256 821 41ST AVE
41ST AVE
6,125,155.17301480 1,816,959.73549281 1255 7TH AVE
7TH AVE
6,127,298.63559139 1,814,522.15506615 979 17TH AVE
6,128,314.37273313 1,812,220.78401272 2300 PORTOLA DR

0.00000000 0.00000000 23211 E CLIFF DR
6,130,526.08090813 1,814,177.78173915 BROMMER YARD
2700 BROMMER ST DARLENE DR
6,130,273.56336856 1,814,813.71911556 BROMMER YARD
6,130,287.45244838 1,814,813.71911556 BROMMER YARD
6,130,402.90005213 1,812,601.94204307 2533 PORTOLA DR EAST OF 6,128,138.64080113 1,812,257.50375555 116 CLEARWATER CT

CLEARWATER CT
6,128,713.44378538 1,812,548.40606089 15TH AV
515 CORCORAN AVE ALICE ST
6,127,125.62511064 1,812,690.60689197 1715 MATTHEWS LN

MATTHEWS LN
6,126,318.90559547 1,812,586.27245498 21501 E CLIFF DR

CLIFF DR
6,126,254.32239130 1,812,623.42493972 21501 E CLIFF DR
21501 CLIFF DR
6,125,874.19454263 1,812,816.66307031 21401 E CLIFF DR
21401 CLIFF DR
6,124,166.65989996 1,812,444.32391998 TWIN LAKES SB

TWIN LAKES SB
6,123,880.16440997 1,812,929.20287147 200 7TH AV
7TH AVE
6,124,351.98925371 1,814,533.03594990 216 HARBOR BEACH CT 6,125,740.14198922 1,817,995.67403772 715 TANNER CT
715 TANNER CT
6,126,297.75635955 1,817,360.58934990 938 ADELAIDA CT

ADELAIDA CT JOSE AVE
6,126,659.94231497 1,816,826.57991923 1125 HARPER CT
1125 HARPER CT EL DORADO AVE
6,126,691.54067697 1,816,202.95616648 1413 EL DORADO AVE

EL DORADO AVE
6,126,302.92990564 1,815,476.97271031 OMAR LN
Page: 2
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 310
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
6,125,414.94841389 1,815,828.33191572 CAPTAINS CT DRIVEWAY WEST

BROMMER ST CAPTAINS CT
6,128,781.57619506 1,812,336.50819072 CORCORAN AND E. CLIFF

PORTOLA DR
6,128,815.78806889 1,810,579.08093131 101 26TH AV
6,131,617.54132363 1,809,805.63398740 33RD AT E CLIFF DR 23211 CLIFF DR 33RD AVE
6,128,808.38552463 1,810,578.34864931
6,131,490.89131448 1,809,923.46019532 BROMMER AVE
119 32ND AVE E CLIFF DR
6,131,777.97341748 1,809,954.67010665 111 34TH AVE
CLIFF DR 34TH AVE
6,132,021.15895472 1,810,260.34108323 35TH AND E. CLIFF 6,132,269.47768380 1,810,425.53596281 23615 E CLIFF DR
CLIFF DR 36TH AVE
6,132,788.89626439 1,810,815.74778081 E CLIFF AT MANZANITA 6,133,167.26427406 1,811,022.00655465 3840 E CLIFF DR
6,133,664.45159988 1,811,332.63946356 500 41ST AVE
500 41ST AVE
6,134,817.90565780 1,813,287.27564615 4520 OPAL CLIFF DR

OPAL CLIFF DR
6,131,290.21979980 1,815,080.10080065 1380 30TH AVE
30TH AVE
6,131,959.96452330 1,818,189.11393955 3141 GROSS RD

GROSS RD
6,131,453.75753047 1,818,040.08864707 3330 VIA GARGANO

VIA GARGANO
6,130,889.41253056 1,818,857.26122531 110 GREYSTONE CT

GREYSTONE CT
6,129,479.54658389 1,818,327.79312414 2199 CHANTICLEER LN

CHANTICLEER LN
6,130,281.26446864 1,816,953.48189640 1730 WILLA WAY

WILLA WAY
6,130,414.42430730 1,816,902.78744398 2542 MACIEL AV

MACIEL AVE CAPITOLA RD
6,130,709.59005556 1,816,560.33406064 2546 CAPITOLA RD

CAPITOLA RD
6,129,575.24750797 1,816,622.60296498 2170 AMBER LN

AMBER AVE WOODROSE AVE
6,129,400.16977413 1,815,686.12649147 2284 IVY LN
2236 IVY LN
6,127,196.75948280 1,816,708.66545689 1245 HARPER ST

HARPER ST PESCE WAY
6,127,047.39495213 1,817,698.48040639 1115 CAPITOLA RD
6,126,151.81308189 1,818,285.17509915 1723 GREY SEAL RD

GREY SEAL RD
6,126,941.38105655 1,818,558.59187515 1910 JOSE AV

JOSE AVE
6,128,283.91446072 1,817,976.85452156 1851 16TH AVE
16TH AVE CAPITOLA RD
6,128,278.43087588 1,819,448.70787705 1465 RODRIGUEZ ST

RODRIGUEZ ST DUSTIN WAY
6,125,956.73145105 1,818,464.99363714 7TH AV
7TH AVE
Page: 3
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 311
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
6,125,157.67399405 1,818,570.26803289 15TH AV

CAPITOLA RD
6,128,949.54403497 1,820,926.07204831 2617 17TH AVE
17TH AVE
6,130,770.20312330 1,822,134.27107547 2445 CAMDEN CT

CAMDEN CT
6,132,409.00496380 1,821,302.20088923 S RODEO GULCH @ SOQUEL 6,136,029.52528180 1,820,364.88353814 2700 PORTER ST

PORTER ST
6,136,156.82555214 1,820,962.71337923 2800 PORTER ST
2800 PORTER ST
6,135,912.87722114 1,825,115.00199065 ALDO CT

ALDO CT
6,139,094.28982155 1,821,074.43330014 2750 ORCHARD ST
2750 ORCHARD ST
6,139,922.79111731 1,821,265.94210348 3003 CHEN WAY

CHEN WAY
6,140,257.78782263 1,821,424.42669465 3060 CUNNISON LN

CUNNISON LN
6,140,773.80811605 1,820,054.50226915 MONTEREY AVE
6,143,348.36267821 1,820,973.07589132 BASELINE DR

BASELINE DR
6,143,504.56610598 1,822,236.22756448 3139 CORTE CABRILLO

SOQUEL DR
6,143,637.11833431 1,822,927.63366197 3170 CORTE CABRILLO

CORTE CABRILLO
6,143,587.24868339 1,823,108.23238215 3210 CORTE CABRILLO

CORTE CABRILLO
6,143,529.82655413 1,822,863.05045781 3165 CORTE CABRILLO

CORTE CABRILLO
6,143,512.85677180 1,822,588.89385389 3139 CORTE CABRILLO

CORTE CABRILLO
Page: 4
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 312
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Work Order Assets
System ID 1 System ID 2 Completed
Object Type Description 1 Description 2
Odometer Hourmeter Othermeter PM Description Asset ID
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4875 6/1/2021

BROMMER YARD
34131 8:45 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19424 6/1/2021

BROMMER YARD
45587 11:20 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19425 6/1/2021

BROMMER YARD
45588 10:50 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19437 6/1/2021
2533 PORTOLA DR EAST OF
45589 11:35 am
Storm Structure
Z5_IL_2232 6/2/2021
Sediment weir (S&W)
19485 8:40 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4718 6/1/2021
116 CLEARWATER CT
18963 1:05 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4317 6/14/2021
15TH AV
19862 8:15 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4724 6/1/2021
1715 MATTHEWS LN NCS
18965 1:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4722 6/2/2021
21501 E CLIFF DR 2.2' 3.2'
20741 9:10 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4721 6/4/2021
21501 E CLIFF DR CS/ Baffle Added
18964 8:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3743 6/15/2021
21401 E CLIFF DR also seen on F-27
19017 12:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4855 6/4/2021

TWIN LAKES SB
18942 11:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4856 6/1/2021
200 7TH AV
18931 2:05 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19410 6/2/2021
216 HARBOR BEACH CT
45586 9:35 am
Storm Structure
Z5_IL_3335 7/1/2021
1255 7TH AVE V-64
22307 7:34 am
Comment: CAN NOT LOCATE
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_2756 6/2/2021
715 TANNER CT GOOD COND
22144 10:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4603 6/4/2021
938 ADELAIDA CT Catch Basin
18943 12:45 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_990 6/2/2021
1125 HARPER CT
19283 11:10 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4864 6/2/2021
1413 EL DORADO AVE
18937 11:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19413 6/2/2021

OMAR LN
45596 12:50 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4757 6/2/2021
1185 OMAR CT FAIR COND, ODOR
18974 2:45 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4918 6/3/2021

CAPTAINS CT DRIVEWAY WEST
17327 8:20 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4810 6/2/2021
1175 BROMMER CIR GOOD COND, STANDING WATER
18986 2:15 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3888 6/3/2021
645 MELLO LN Filtration station
19082 11:40 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3911 6/4/2021
430 LAKE AVE ACROSS FROM GOOD COND, RIGHT NEXT TO R072716D 17326 9:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4877 6/4/2021
333 LAKE AVE
34135 9:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3951 6/4/2021
430 LAKE AVE ACROSS FROM
19115 10:00 am
Page: 5
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 313
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4868 6/3/2021
191 14TH AV FAIR COND, ODOR, MOSQUITOS, GARBAGE
18939 1:00 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4694 6/3/2021
21400 E CLIFF DR
20726 1:40 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4847 6/3/2021
15TH AV MED. SIZE DOG, DEAD 11 FT DOWN HAS BEEN REMOVED BY ANIMAL CO 18926 2:05 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4623 6/7/2021
229 16TH AV
20045 8:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19415 6/3/2021

JOHAN'S BEACH DR
45598 3:00 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4853 6/14/2021
CORCORAN AND E. CLIFF
18929 9:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4328 6/14/2021
680 30TH AVE NEXT TO PHONE POLE
18703 10:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_3551 7/1/2021
22811 E CLIFF DR
18685 7:25 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19420 6/7/2021
23211 E CLIFF DR
45603 10:20 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19417 6/10/2021
101 26TH AV
45600 8:45 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3932 6/7/2021
33RD AT E CLIFF DR Double Bolted Drop Str GOOD COND
20835 12:45 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4870 56360 6/10/2021 8:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3713 6/10/2021

BROMMER AVE
18345 9:20 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4851 6/15/2021
111 34TH AVE
18337 8:15 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19421 6/15/2021
35TH AND E. CLIFF
45604 8:45 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4850 6/15/2021
23615 E CLIFF DR
18336 10:10 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19422 6/7/2021

E CLIFF AT MANZANITA
45605 10:55 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_19423 6/15/2021
3840 E CLIFF DR
45606 10:50 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_3747 6/7/2021
500 41ST AVE
18346 1:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_IL_1454 6/28/2021
821 41ST AVE
18534 7:45 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4865 6/14/2021
4520 OPAL CLIFF DR Manhole # 2, Silt and Grease trap, NEEDS A NEW BOTTOM 18338 11:15 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4749 6/7/2021
1380 30TH AVE FAIR COND, ODOR, STANDING WATER
18969 3:10 pm
Storm Structure
CA_SGIL_2889 6/14/2021
4825 PORTOLA DR
55810 12:45 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4672 6/8/2021
3141 GROSS RD GO
18953 10:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4660 6/8/2021
3330 VIA GARGANO GO
18952 10:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4860 6/10/2021
110 GREYSTONE CT Drop Manhole
18934 10:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4604 6/10/2021
2199 CHANTICLEER LN
18944 11:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4709 6/4/2021
1730 WILLA WAY GO
18960 1:15 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4710 6/7/2021
2542 MACIEL AV GO
20046 2:10 pm
Page: 6
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 314
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4783 6/8/2021
2546 CAPITOLA RD
18978 11:25 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4729 6/4/2021
2170 AMBER LN
18966 1:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4858 7/1/2021
979 17TH AVE
18933 10:40 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19436 6/8/2021
2284 IVY LN FAIR COND, ODOR
18940 12:40 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4747 6/8/2021
1245 HARPER ST FAIR COND, ODOR, PPP IS BROKEN
18968 1:10 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_MH_4872 6/10/2021
1115 CAPITOLA RD
56356 11:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4862 6/8/2021
1723 GREY SEAL RD GO
18935 1:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4605 6/8/2021
1910 JOSE AV
20638 3:20 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_MH_4800 6/10/2021
1851 16TH AVE
18982 2:00 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4645 6/8/2021
1465 RODRIGUEZ ST
18949 2:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4854 6/24/2021
7TH AV aprox. 5' from invert to ex. ground
18930 8:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4867 6/10/2021
15TH AV GOOD COND
18938 1:15 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4717 6/10/2021
630 BOSTWICK LN
18962 2:50 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4846 6/14/2021
2617 17TH AVE
18925 1:45 pm
Comment: WE CANNOT ACCESS TRAP DUE TO TEMP METAL FENCE AT ADDRESS 2617 Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4745 6/14/2021
2445 CAMDEN CT BAD COND, STANDING WATER
20753 1:50 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_19438 6/15/2021
S RODEO GULCH @ SOQUEL
45590 2:10 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_MH_4807 6/14/2021
2700 PORTER ST
17758 2:50 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4712 7/1/2021
2800 PORTER ST Inlet with a silt and grease trap
17746 6:15 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4708 6/28/2021

ALDO CT GO
17745 8:25 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4873 6/24/2021
4941 E WALNUT ST
17741 11:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_2557 6/24/2021
2750 ORCHARD ST
17970 1:00 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4730 6/28/2021
3003 CHEN WAY
17747 9:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4866 6/24/2021
3060 CUNNISON LN
17740 1:40 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_0001 6/28/2021

MONTEREY AVE
56350 9:40 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4814 6/28/2021

BASELINE DR
17760 10:30 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4780 6/16/2021
3139 CORTE CABRILLO
17756 1:00 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4732 6/16/2021
3170 CORTE CABRILLO FAIR COND, DEBRIS, SILT
17749 1:30 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4731 6/16/2021
3210 CORTE CABRILLO FAIR COND, SILT, STANDING WATER, MA 17748 1:55 pm
Page: 7
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 315
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4733 6/16/2021
3165 CORTE CABRILLO GOOD COND, STANDING WATER
17750 2:20 pm
Storm Structure
Z5_SGIL_4734 7/1/2021
3139 CORTE CABRILLO BAD COND, DEBRIS, SILT, PPP NEEDS R 17751 8:00 am
Storm Structure
Z5_SGMH_4852 6/28/2021
2300 PORTOLA DR
18928 11:20 am
Page: 8
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 316
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Tasks/Resources
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/1/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/1/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

1.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/1/2021 6/1/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/1/2021 6/1/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL C. 6/1/2021 6/1/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/2/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/2/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

9.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/2/2021 6/2/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/2/2021 6/2/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL C. 6/2/2021 6/2/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/3/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/3/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

1.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/3/2021 6/3/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/3/2021 6/3/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL C 6/3/2021 6/3/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/4/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/4/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

1.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 14495 Miller, Joshua 9.50 $0.00 6/4/2021 6/4/2021
13903 Craig, Ariel 9.50 $0.00 6/4/2021 6/4/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.50 $0.00 ARIEL CRAIG 6/4/2021 6/4/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/7/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/7/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

6.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/7/2021 6/7/2021
Page: 9
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 317
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/7/2021 6/7/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL C. 6/7/2021 6/7/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/10/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/10/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

3.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/10/2021 6/10/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/10/2021 6/10/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL C. 6/10/2021 6/10/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/14/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/14/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

1.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/14/2021 6/14/2021
14298 Garcia, Gabriel 9.00 $0.00 6/14/2021 6/14/2021
7277 Phariss, Kevin 9.00 $0.00 6/14/2021 6/14/2021
13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/14/2021 6/14/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 02-123 2001 DODGE 2500 PICKUP 9.00 $0.00 GABRIEL GARCIA 6/14/2021 6/14/2021 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL CRAIG 6/14/2021 6/14/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/15/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/15/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

6.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 6/15/2021 6/15/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 6/15/2021 6/15/2021
14414 Williams, John 9.00 $0.00 6/15/2021 6/15/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL CRAIG 6/15/2021 6/15/2021
02-152 2003 GMC SIERRA 3/4 TON
PICKUP

9.00 $0.00 JOHN WILLIAMS 6/15/2021 6/15/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/16/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/16/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

4.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 3.50 $0.00 6/16/2021 6/16/2021
Page: 10
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 318
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
14495 Miller, Joshua 3.50 $0.00 6/16/2021 6/16/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 3.50 $0.00 JOSH MILLER 6/16/2021 6/16/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 6/28/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 6/28/2021
Status: Complete
UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

6.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 6.50 $0.00 6/28/2021 6/28/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 6.50 $0.00 6/28/2021 6/28/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 6.50 $0.00 JOSH MILLER 6/28/2021 6/28/2021
Roads Special Crew
Vega, Elliot
Crew: Start Dt: 7/1/2021
Supervisor:
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
End Dt: 7/1/2021
Status:

UOM:
*Cal'c UC:
# of Units: *Unit Cost:
$0.00

1.00 $0.00
*Task Cost:$0.00
Employee
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 13903 Craig, Ariel 9.00 $0.00 7/1/2021 7/1/2021
14495 Miller, Joshua 9.00 $0.00 7/1/2021 7/1/2021
Equipment
Resource UOM Units *Total Cost Alt Description Start Dt End Dt 04-100 2004 VacCon Sewer
Cleaning Truck
Hours 9.00 $0.00 ARIEL CRAIG 7/1/2021 7/1/2021
Page: 11
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 319
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Task Material Kit
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
5420 NPDES-CATCH BASIN CLEANING
Material Kit Description Units Est Units UOM Make Model 0 0
*Actual *Estimated *Difference
WO Duration
Labor Hours
Labor Costs
Material Costs
Fluids Costs
Equipment Costs
Contractor Costs
Misc. Costs
Total Costs
Projected Complete:

Repair Type:

Subcontractor:

Profit Center:

WO Hours:
*Unit Cost:

Unit of Measure:

Quantity:

0.00 0.00

0.00 $0.00
210.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 $0.00
Each

87.00 0.00
249.50 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Use Task Info: True True
Lock:

Lock:

Page: 12
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 320
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
Last Name:

Customer Number:

State:

City:

Address:

Customer Name:

Customer ID:

Billing
Billed Party
Phone:

Fax #:

Cell #:

E-mail:

Imported to Financials:

Billing Processed:

Billing Required:

Payment Method:

Payment Received:

Date Bill Sent:
*Billing Amount:

Incoming Account #:

Invoice Number:

Zip:

Billing Data
Contact Name:

Simple Work Orders
Employee:

End Date:

Hours:

Asset Type: Storm Structure
CS
General Ledger:

General Key:

General Object:

Job Ledger:

Job Object:

Job Key:

PM Code and Description Closed
Associated PMs
NPDES_Z5 NPDES Zone 5 Stormwater Structures
Item Description By Date Time
Tracking
From Routine Work NPDES_Z5 - NPDES dpw447 6/1/2021 7:34 AM Zone 5 Stormwater Structures
Work Order Creation
Status Change From New Work Order to Closed In Field dpw447 7/16/2021 10:26 AM WO User 23: Addl Work Required:

Overflow:

Property Damage:

Cleanup:

Bike Lane Related:

WO User 28:

WO User 29:

RQ_Stat_Change:

WO User 4:

Spill Vol. Gallons:

User 13:

NA:

Investigated Date:

User 11 Date:

WO User 25 Date:

Real or False Alarm:

PM Type:

WO User 3:

WO User 16:

WO User 17:

WO User 18:

PrevReqStatus:

Road:

WO User 21:

WO User 50:

WO User 51:

Job Number:

Add'l Work Description:

Reported By:

Data History:

Work Metrics:

WO User 32:

WO User 33:

WO User 34:

WO User 35:

WO User 36:

WO User 37:

WO User 38:

WO User 39:

MileMarker_or_PM:

WO User 41:

WorkMetricsNum:

Volume:

District:

Item Count:

WO User 46:

WO User 47:

WO User 48:

Page: 13
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 321
Item 8 C.

Work Order Detail Report 11/4/2021
7:21 AM
WO User 52:

WO User 53:

WO User 54:

WO User 55:

WO User 56:

WO User 57:

WO User 58:

WO User 59:

WO User 60:

WO User 61:

WO User 62:

WO User 63:

WO User 64:

WO User 65:

WO User 66:

WO User 67:

WO User 68:

WO User 69:

WO User 70:

WO User 71:

WO User 72:

WO User 73:

WO User 74:

WO User 75:

WO User 76:

WO User 82:

WO User 83:

WO User 84:

WO User 85:

WO User 86:

WO User 102:

WO User 103:

WO User 104:

WO User 105:

WO User 106:

WO User 92 Date:

WO User 93 Date:

WO User 94 Date:

WO User 95 Date:

WO User 96 Date:

WO User 97 Date:

WO User 98 Date:

WO User 99 Date:

WO User 100 Date:

WO User 101 Date:

WO User 77:

WO User 78:

WO User 79:

WO User 80:

WO User 81:

WO User 87:

WO User 88:

WO User 89:

WO User 90:

WO User 91:

WO User 107:

WO User 108:

WO User 109:

WO User 110:

WO User 111:

WO Creator: dpw447 WO Creation Date: 6/1/2021 PM Trigger: Rec #: 104921 Page: 14
* A 'Hidden' field indicates permission to view the secured field is turned off . WO#: 2021/06/01-021 322
Item 8 C.

Appendix D

SAMPLE PARTICULATE REDUCTION CHART AND ASSOCIATED LUCITY REPORTS 323
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
324
Item 8 C.
325
Item 8 C.
9/9/2021 Department of Public Works - County of Santa Cruz Sweeping Mileage by Supervisory District Report 8:30 AM Report Period from 9/1/2020 to 9/9/2021
Sweeping Mileage
WO Entry (older) WO Asset Entry Volume Collected
Sweeping Mileage
District 111.11 194.25
District 1 78.26 184.60
District 2 29.79 24.75
District 3 41.28 60.60
District 5 98.94 215.75
Total Mileage for this period (WO Entry)
***NOTE: To see details of corresponding Work Orders for each district, please Double-Click District Number or Mileage for specific District. Detail page wiill open in new report tab Total Mileage for this period (WO Asset Entry) 359.38
Total Mileage for this period (All Entries)
Total Volume Collected (All Entries) 679.95
ot\LucityReportServer\ReportsCustom\Work\SCC_Metrics_SweepingMileage.rpt Page 1 of 1 326 Item 8 C.

Department of Public Works - County of Santa Cruz
NPDES Program: Storm Structures Solid Materials Collected 9/9/2021
8:32 AM
Reporting Period: from
Zone Number Structures Inspected / Struct. Cleaned /
Solid Materials
Collected (Cu. Yds.)
Total Zone
Structures
9/1/2020 to 9/9/2021
Zone: 5
Block: 0 2 2 1.78
Block: B2 0 1 1 0.56
Block: B3 0 1 1 0.26
Block: CC1 0 33 33 159.96
Block: Z5SG 0 34 34 47.06
Total for Zone: 5 0 71 71 209.61
Zone: 6
Block: Z6SG 0 9 9 10.20
Total for Zone: 6 0 9 9 10.20
Zone: 7
Block: 0 1 1
Block: Z7SG 0 9 9 16.63
Total for Zone: 7 0 10 10 16.63
Zone: 8
Block: 0 1 1
Block: B1 0 7 7 0.93
Block: Z8SG 0 4 4 3.13
Total for Zone: 8 0 12 12 4.06
Total for this period: 0 102 102 240.49
C:\inetpub\wwwroot\LucityReportServer\ReportsCustom\SCCSD_NPDES_MaterialCollectedByZoneBlock Page 1 of 1WebFLT.rpt 327 Item 8 C.

Appendix E

SAMPLE INTERNAL O&M REPORTS
328
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
329
Item 8 C.
330
Item 8 C.

Appendix F

EXISTING O&M STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
331
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
332
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
Catch
Basin/Inlets
with Trash
Capture
Devices
Visual Inspect all facilities 1 time each year Conduct inspections in summer/fall Conduct catch basin inspection survey to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including:1. Inspect grate for damage or maintenance issues2. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage3. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the curb flows lines, top of grate, or within the facility using hand tools or vactor truck Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair grate damage2. Repair damage to structure walls or opening3. Repair or replace catch basin steps4. Remove and replace damaged storm drain emblems Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Catch Basin /
Inlets Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect grate for damage or maintenance issues2. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage3. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the curb flows lines, top of grate, or within the facility using hand tools or vactor truck Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair grate damage2. Repair damage to structure walls or opening3. Repair or replace catch basin steps4. Remove and replace damaged storm drain emblems Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Manhole /
Junction Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect lid or grate for damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage4. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment If traffic control is necessary, work plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair grate or lid damage2. Repair damage to structure walls or opening3. Repair or replace manhole steps Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Visual Inspect facilities, as time permits
Following completion of open channel inspections
Following the work plan, conduct field inspection to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including:1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect headwall for physical damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the outfall structure for physical damage or debris accumulation4. Inspect riprap or other dissipation structures for debris accumulation, or erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the outfall pipe or immediately downstream using hand tools, heavy equipment, or vactor truck Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect headwall for physical damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the outfall structure for physical damage or debris accumulation4. Inspect riprap or other dissipation structures for debris accumulation, or erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Outfall
Structures
Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair culvert inverts2. Repair any damage to the headwall structure3. Repair damage to the pipe4. Repair damage to dissipation structures including erosion or misplaced riprap5. Replace pipe O&M Standard Operating Procedures - EXISTING
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans Maintenance Repairs Documentation
333
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - EXISTING
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Visual Inspect facilities annually
Conduct annual inspection in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, the inspector should visit the following detention basin locations: inlet, inlet slope, forebay, basin slopes, riparian vegetation, water quality, outlet, outlet low flow pipes, vector controls, perimeter fence, etc.At a minimum, the following observations should be made: 1. Vegetation growth (too much/too little)2. Erosion or stability issues of side slopes or basin bottom3. Debris at the inlet or outlet4. Trash accumulation5. Invasive weeds6. Excessive floating material in wet basins Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the inlet, outlet, or other basin areas using vactor truck or other equipment Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Emergency detention basin inspections should focus on addressing the reported issue. Additional observations, consistent with a visual inspections, should be conducted.

Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Detention
Basins
Structures
Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair erosion or stability issues along basin side slopes or basin bottom2. Repair any damage to the inlet or outlet pipe3. Repair damage to pumps, fences, gates, etc. 334
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - EXISTING
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Following the work plan, inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes2. Repair pipe cracks or spalling3. Address any erosion issues Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

CCTV
Conduct CCTV inspections on an asneeded basis As-needed Conduct CCTV inspection per Standard Operating Procedure. n/a n/a n/a n/a Visual Inspect facilities, as time permits
Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance using hand tools or a vactor truck may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the culvert inlet or outlet2. Remove damaged concrete or other material from within the culvert
Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Visual
Inspect priority facilities 2 times each year
Conduct inspections in spring and late fall before wet season Following the work plan, inspect open channels to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect trash rack or grate structure2. Inspect the headwall or dissipation structures3. Inspect the open channel for any debris accumulation4. Inspect open channel any erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove vegetation and log jams2. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the channel3. Remove any blockage from any trash racks or gate structures Emergency As needed on an emergency basis As-needed
Emergency open channel inspections should focus on addressing the reported issue. Additional observations, consistent with a visual inspections, should be conducted.

Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes adjacent to the channel2. Repair trash racks or other grates associated with the channel Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes2. Repair pipe cracks or spalling3. Address any erosion issues4. repair any headwall damage5. Invert repairs Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details.

Open Channel
Pipes
Culverts
Conduits
335
Item 8 C.

Appendix G

SAMPLE WORK PLAN
336
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
337
Item 8 C.

DI & Silt/Grease Trap maintenance
Work Plan
DI & Silt/Grease trap maintenance is an operation that consist of cleaning various types of sub surface structures. When using our Vac-Con vehicle to clean out vaults, proper PPE is to be used at all times when in operation. Hardhats, Vests, Gloves, Eye protection and Ear protection must be worn. The boom of the Vac truck shall keep a 10’ minimum distance from any overhead wires present. To secure your job site, 28” cones shall be placed approximately 10’ apart, in a fashion that safely transitions traffic around your work zone.

When doing work with no road encroachment or minor road encroachment on a 40 mph/less and doesn’t include heavy commercial vehicles a minimum lane width of 9’ must be kept. Where the opposite shoulder is suitable for carrying vehicular traffic and of adequate width, lanes may be shifted by use of traffic channelizing devices. Road Work Ahead signs shall be placed at no less than 250’ before entering the work zone. If the work zone follows all above stipulations but is on a road of 40mph/over or includes heavy commercial vehicles additional signs, Flagger Ahead and Prepare To Stop, shall be added in the appropriate distance specified by the MUTCD chapter 6 documents. A additional flagger shall be used to help the flow of traffic safely.

Gas monitors are to be used at all time before opening a manhole cover lid style structure. A open air lid is not required to be gas checked prior to opening but, if any unusual odor is present monitor the structure safely.
338
Item 8 C.

STREET SWEEPING WORK PLAN
Street sweeping is a mobile operation that moves continuously, therefore no stationary TTC signage is needed. While operating the sweeper on county roads all high intensity rotating, flashing, oscillating, or strobe lights must be on. Place an 18” cone at the rear of the vehicle when parked. A hard hat and reflective vest must be worn at all times when out of the vehicle on county roadways. A hard hat must be worn during the clean-up of sweepers as well as when performing pre and post ops. The sweepers are all equipped with truck mounted attenuators (arrow boards) The County’s policy is not to use the arrow to send traffic around the sweeper so the lights on the board should just be a flashing bar. When approaching an obstacle that you must go around such as a parked car or low hanging tree branch, make sure the travel lane you are pulling into is clear. Obey all traffic laws when operating. You must stop at red lights and stop intersections. When operating one of the Schwarze Sweepers, remember the blast orifice is very close to the ground. If you see an irregularity in the road surface which may cause damage to the blast orifice pick up the sweeping head until you’re clear of the hazard and report its location to your supervisor at the end of your shift. If you need to pull off the road onto a pull out, be aware of uneven surfaces that may cause damage to the blast orifice. Use a combination of your mirrors and the back-up camera for backing. Remember if you are not sure how close you are to something get out and look.

Date:______________________________________
Supervisor:_________________________________
Print: Sign:
339
Item 8 C.

Appendix H

PROPOSED O&M STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
340
Item 8 C.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
341
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
Visual
Inspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Inspect all facilities 2-3 times each year Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, conduct “windshield” survey to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including:1. Inspect grate for damage or maintenance issues2. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage3. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the curb flows lines, top of grate, or within the facility using hand tools or vactor truck Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect grate for damage or maintenance issues2. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage3. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
Construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

New construction should be fully functional. If there is a maintenance issue the contractor should address as part of the completing the end of the project punch list. If maintenance is necessary and the contractor has been released, perform any necessary maintenance including:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the curb flow lines, top of grate, or within the facility using hand tools or vactor truck O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Documentation
Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details Structures
Catch
Basin/Inlets
with Trash
Capture
Devices
Maintenance Repairs
Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair grate damage2. Repair damage to structure walls or opening3. Repair or replace catch basin steps4. Remove and replace damaged storm drain emblems Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details Asset Type Inspection
Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair grate damage2. Repair damage to structure walls or opening3. Repair or replace catch basin steps4. Remove and replace damaged storm drain emblems Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Work Plans
Catch Basin /
Inlets
342
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans
Visual
Inspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Inspect all facilities annually Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, conduct field inspection to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including:1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect lid or grate for damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage4. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the top of grate or within the facility using hand tools or vactor truck Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect lid or grate for damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the structure walls or structure opening for any physical damage4. Inspect the facility for any built up debris, trash, or sediment Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
Construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans
Visual
Inspect all facilities annuallyInspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, conduct field inspection to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including:1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect headwall for physical damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the outfall structure for physical damage or debris accumulation4. Inspect riprap or other dissipation structures for debris accumulation, or erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the outfall pipe or immediately downstream using hand tools, heavy equipment, or vactor truck Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed

1. Inspect for blockages2. Inspect headwall for physical damage or maintenance issues3. Inspect the outfall structure for physical damage or debris accumulation4. Inspect riprap or other dissipation structures for debris accumulation, or erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
Construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans
Visual
Inspect all facilities annuallyInspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, the inspector should visit the following detention basin locations: inlet, inlet slope, forebay, basin slopes, riparian vegetation, water quality, outlet, outlet low flow pipes, vector controls, perimeter fence, etc.At a minimum, the following observations should be made: 1. Vegetation growth (too much/too little)2. Erosion or stability issues of side slopes or basin bottom3. Debris at the inlet or outlet4. Trash accumulation5. Invasive weeds6. Excessive floating material in wet basins Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the inlet, outlet, or other basin areas using vactor truck or other equipment Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Emergency detention basin inspections should focus on addressing the reported issue. Additional observations, consistent with a visual inspections, should be conducted.

Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
Construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans
Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Following the work plan, inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

New construction should be fully functional. If there is a maintenance issue the contractor should address as part of the completing the end of the project punch list. If maintenance is necessary and the contractor has been released, perform any necessary maintenance using hand tools or vactor truck including:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the pipe2. Remove damaged concrete or other material from within the pipe CCTV
Conduct CCTV inspections once every 10 years routinely and on an emergency basis Spring - Summer
Conduct CCTV inspection per Standard Operating Procedure n/a n/a n/a n/a Visual
Inspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Inspect all facilities annually Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance using hand tools or a vactor truck may be necessary:1. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the culvert inlet or outlet.2. Remove damaged concrete or other material from within the culvert Emergency Inspect facilities on an emergency basis As-needed Inspect the storm drain pipe to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect the pipe for any debris accumulation2. Inspect pipe for physical damage3. Inspect the pipe for cracks and/or spalling Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility New
Construction
Inspect facilities prior to releasing contractor and within 1 year following construction As-needed
New construction should be inspected for consistency with the construction drawings. Inconsistencies should be reported to the County Engineer, punch list developed, and issues corrected or resolved.

New construction should be fully functional. If there is a maintenance issue the contractor should address as part of the completing the end of the project punch list. If maintenance is necessary and the contractor has been released, perform any necessary maintenance including:1. Conduct hydro flush cleaning2. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the culvert inlet or outlet.3. Remove damaged concrete or other material from within the culvert Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes2. Repair pipe cracks or spalling3. Address any erosion issues4. Repair any headwall damage Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairsWork Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Culverts
Conduits
Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes2. Repair pipe cracks or spalling3. Address any erosion issues Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details Pipes
346
Item 8 C.

GIS
Layer Asset Type Type Frequency Season Description
O&M Standard Operating Procedures - PROPOSED
Maintenance Repairs Documentation
Asset Type Inspection
Work Plans
Visual
Inspect all facilities annuallyInspect priority facilities before, during, and after storm events Conduct annual inspections in late fall before wet season Following the work plan, inspect open channels to document structural, maintenance, or other conditions including the following:1. Inspect trash rack or grate structure2. Inspect the headwall or dissipation structures3. Inspect the open channel for any debris accumulation4. Inspect open channel any erosion including scour, rilling, gullying, and seepage Depending on the results of the inspection, the following maintenance may be necessary:1. Remove vegetation and log jams2. Remove built up debris, trash, or sediment from the channel3. Remove any blockage from any trash racks or gate structures Emergency As needed on an emergency basis As-needed
Emergency open channel inspections should focus on addressing the reported issue. Additional observations, consistent with a visual inspections, should be conducted.

Perform necessary maintenance to reestablish the function of the facility Following each inspection, maintenance, and repair action, the general Work Order Form will be filled out in Lucity. This forms includes the following information: asset type, ID, start/end date/time, tasks performed, and Work details Work Plans will be developed in advance of performing scheduled maintenance and repairs. A sample work plan and template is available. All work plans should include a list of staff, equipment, traffic control requirements, a map, the specific work to be completed, and other considerations while performing the maintenance or repairs Perform the following repairs, as necessary:1. Repair or replace damaged pipes adjacent to the channel2. Repair trash racks or other grates associated with the channel Open Channel
Conduits
347
Item 8 C.

Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Zone 5 Drainage
Master Plan
Dan Schaaf, PE
348
Item 8 C.

Overview
▪Team
▪Project Goals
▪Methods
▪Results
▪Recommendations
▪Next Steps
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
349
Item 8 C.
▪County Staff
▪Capitola Staff
▪Schaaf & Wheeler
✓ Project Management
✓ Hydrology/Hydraulics
✓ Capital Projects
▪NCE
✓ O&M Plan
✓ Funding Strategy
▪NBS
✓ Financial Plan
▪Presidio Systems
✓ Condition Assessment
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Team
County City of
Capitola
Schaaf &
Wheeler NCE NBS Presidio Systems
350
Item 8 C.
▪Create Holistic Study of Zone 5
▪Provide Recommendations for:
✓ Improving Capacity of Regional System
✓ Channel and Culverts Projects
✓ Address Condition Concerns
▪Improve Operations & Maintenance Program
✓ Develop a Better Procedure
✓ Improve Reporting
✓ Optimize Equipment and Labor
▪Funding Strategy
✓ Develop Plan
✓ Implementation
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Goals
351
Item 8 C.

Methods
▪Capacity
✓ County and City GIS
✓ 25-year & 100-year Rainfall
▪Condition
✓ Field Observations
✓ CCTV
✓ NASCO Ranks
▪Operations & Maintenance
✓ Work with County/City Staff
✓ Evaluate Existing Procedures
✓ Evaluate Equipment
▪Funding
✓ Evaluate Existing Program
✓ Determine Necessary Changes
✓ Polling and Outreach
✓ Fee Modeling Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
352
Item 8 C.

Capacity Results
▪Capacity Maps
✓ 25-year for Pipes
✓ 100-year for Channels
✓ Works with 2013 Study
▪Costs
▪Priorities
▪Climate Impacts
✓ Sea-Level Rise
✓ Precipitation Changes
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
353
Item 8 C.

Capacity Results
▪Capacity Maps
▪Costs
✓ $19M County
✓ $13.5M Capitola
▪Priorities
✓ High
✓ Moderate
✓ Low
▪Climate Impacts
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
354
Item 8 C.

Condition Assessment Results
▪CCTV and Topside
▪NASCCO Ratings
▪Costs
✓ $4.5M
▪Priority
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
355
Item 8 C.

Operations & Maintenance Results
▪O&M Procedure Changes
▪O&M Cost $2.1M Annually
▪NPDES $1M Annually
▪Equipment Needs
▪Personnel Needs
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Focus on Proactive
Data Driven O&M
Resources Focused
on Areas and Assets
w/ Greatest Needs
and ROI
Resource Needs Do
Increase
New Program
Efficient
Repeatable
Predictive
356
Item 8 C.

Financial Analysis Results
▪Current Spending and Income
✓ ~$1M O&M, ~$100K Impacts, Roads Fund
▪Possible Funding Mechanisms
✓ Impact Fees
✓ General Fund
✓ General Obligation Property Tax
✓ Uniform Parcel Tax
✓ Special Tax
✓ Property Related Fee
✓ Special Assessment
▪Other Sources
✓ Grants
✓ Partnerships
✓ Development Fees Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
County Capitola
357
Item 8 C.

Capacity Recommendations
▪Capacity CIPs
✓ Phase the High Priority Projects
✓ Study Alternatives
✓ Coordinate w/ Other Agencies
▪Condition CIPs
✓ Address Critical Issues First
✓ Study Alternatives
✓ Couple with Capacity Projects
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
358
Item 8 C.

Operations Recommendations
▪O&M Program
✓ Implement Study Findings
• Phased Approach
• Get Training
• Procedural Changes Take Time
• Purchase and Implement Lucidity
✓ Reporting
✓ Continue to Improve Program
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
359
Item 8 C.

Funding Recommendations
▪Involve County and City Staff
▪Find Best Mechanism(s)
▪Public Outreach
▪Identify Key Stakeholder
▪Identify Champions
▪Polling
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
360
Item 8 C.

Next Steps
▪Alternatives Analyses
▪Monitor System Performance
▪Start Implementing O&M Program
▪Develop a Funding Strategy
▪Design
▪Construction
Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
361
Item 8 C.
4853-6983-0821 v1
Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Police Department
Recreation Department
City Manager Department
Subject: Special Events and Park Regulations
Recommended Action: Introduce, by title only, waiving further reading of the text, an ordinance of the City of Capitola repealing and replacing Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 “Special Events” and Chapter 12.40 “Park Regulations” to create a comprehensive permitting system for public assemblies, events, and use of City property.

Background: The proposed ordinance replaces the existing Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 regarding Special Events and Chapter 12.40 regarding City Parks.

Special Events
The City’s permitting process for special events is established largely by administrative policies. This has resulted in confusion from the public regarding procedure and requirements for obtaining permits to conduct special events on City Property, such as streets and sidewalks. The proposed ordinance replaces Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 and the existing administrative policies with a procedure for obtaining permits to conduct special events on City property while protecting the public’s First Amendment rights of assembly and speech.

Park Regulations
The City’s parks currently operate on a first-come, first-served basis. The Recreation Division manages the scheduling and rental of all park fields and courts, each with associated rental fees; however, the Municipal Code does not include a process for the public to reserve areas of City parks for exclusive use for small, personal events such as birthday or graduation parties. Additionally, the City has no means of regulating the activities, like bounce houses or erecting shade structures, at these events.

Discussion: The proposed ordinance intends to protect the Constitutional rights of the people of Capitola to peaceably assemble and protest in the City’s public spaces. The proposed revisions to the Municipal Code also create a mechanism for cost recovery and use charges to the extent authorized by law, while not unduly impacting the viability of special events in the City.

Special Events
The proposed revision to Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 establishes a permitting system for special events in the City, which generally mirrors the existing process the City has used over the last decade to permit special events. The primary changes are intended to clarify what differentiates a minor from a major event, and explicitly allowing Constitutionally protected expressive activity. Similar to the City’s existing processes, the proposed ordinance identifies three categories of special events on public property that would require a permit:

1. Minor Special Events: an organized assemblage between 75 and 200 people, not requiring closure of a major street (as defined in proposed Section 9.36.020(H)) or a street in a singlefamily or multi-family zone. 362
Item 8 D.

2. Neighborhood Special Events: an event organized for up to 200 people requiring closure of a street in a single-family or multi-family zone. This replaces the City’s Block Party Permit.

3. Major Special Events: any of the following:
a. Any organized assemblage of more than 200 people on any public property gathering for a common purpose under the direction or control of a person; or b. Any organized assemblage on any public property gathering for a common purpose under the direction or control of a person or organization and that requires closure of a Major Street; or
c. Any other organized assemblage conducted by a person for a common or collective use, purpose, or benefit which shall require extensive use of City public services for police regulation, monitoring or control, erecting barriers, or traffic control, parking needs that will exceed the capacity of the venue, or that will significantly interfere with normal use and operation of public right-of-way for travel.

The following events/activities would not require permits under the proposed Chapter 9.36:

1. Constitutionally protected expressive activity on City-owned, controlled, or maintained property that is not a Minor, Neighborhood, or Major Special Event;

2. Activities on school grounds;

3. Spontaneous events, under certain conditions;

4. Activities comprising or involving construction, maintenance, or requiring a City-issued encroachment permit; or

5. Filming, as regulated by Chapter 9.62. (Proposed § 9.36.030(B).) The proposed ordinance defines expressive activity as “conduct, the sole or principal object of which is the expression of opinion, views, or ideas protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” and includes, but is not limited to, “public oratory and distribution of literature” (Proposed § 9.36.020(E).) The Police Chief (or his/her designee) would issue Minor and Neighborhood Special Event Permit applications. In general, the City Council would issue Major Special Event Permit applications. However, permit applications for recurring Major Special Events, defined as Major Special Events that recur every year, do not require new or different levels of City services from year to year, and that did not present major public safety or traffic issues in the prior year may be reviewed and issued by the Police Chief or designee without City Council approval. The proposed Chapter 9.36 also requires the Police Chief or designee to provide annual updates to the City Council regarding Minor and Major Special Events from the prior year. (Proposed § 9.36.070(E).)
The proposed ordinance provides that the City Council shall set Special Event application fees and fees to recover costs for safety services (such as public safety personnel, solid waste and recycling services, City lifeguard services, and traffic control costs) by resolution.

Parks Regulations
The proposed revision to Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 establishes a permitting procedure for renting portions of City parks and recreation facilities for exclusive use and to ensure compliance with Constitutional prerogatives protecting freedom of speech and assembly. Under these proposed revisions, organizers of events requiring exclusive use of the Park at Rispin Mansion, Esplanade Park, Monterey Park, Jade Street Park, or McGregor Park must obtain a permit from the City Manager, or his/her designee. Moreover, individuals who wish to use powered equipment or temporary structures (such as a bounce house or shade structure) in a City park or recreation facility must also obtain a permit pursuant to the requirements of the Chapter. However, if the event requiring exclusive use of one of the named parks above would be considered “expressive activity,” it would instead be subject to the Special Events permitting requirements discussed above. The proposed ordinance also requires a permit for exclusive use of a City Recreation facility, such as softball fields or the bandstand.

Similar to the proposed Special Events Chapter above, the City Council may also adopt a resolution establishing fees to recover the City’s cost of processing applications or for providing services for events in City parks and recreation facilities. (Proposed § 12.40.120.) 363
Item 8 D.

Fiscal Impact: The proposed ordinance provides for the City Council to adopt, by resolution, fees to recover the City’s costs of processing applications for Special Events and Parks permits (discussed above), and costs associated with providing services to support and staff these proposed events. The City’s fee schedule currently sets some of these fees. However, staff intends to conduct an internal review of the costs associated with these events and return to the City Council with proposed revisions to the City’s fee schedule if necessary.

Attachments:

1. Ordinance – Chapter 9.36

2. Ordinance – Chapter 12.40
Report Prepared By: Sarah Ryan, Administrative Captain, Nikki Bryant, Recreation Division Manager Reviewed By: Tamar Burke, Assistant City Attorney
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
364
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
ORDINANCE NO. ____

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPITOLA
REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 9.36 “SPECIAL EVENTS” AND REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 12.40 “PARK REGULATIONS” OF

THE CITY OF CAPITOLA MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, the United States Constitution and California Constitution guarantee the right of the people to peaceably assemble and speak or protest in public places; and WHEREAS, the City of Capitola intends to protect these Constitutional rights of the people of Capitola to peaceably assemble and protest in the City’s public spaces; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide a coordinated process for managing special events and events in City parks and recreation facilities to ensure the health and safety of event patrons, residents, workers, and other visitors, and to prohibit illegal activities from occurring at special events consisting of expressive activities; and
WHEREAS, the City also wishes to create a mechanism for cost recovery and use charges, to the extent authorized by law, while not unduly impacting the viability of events; and WHEREAS, the City intends to update its existing permitting requirements for the City’s streets, sidewalks, parks, and open spaces to protect the rights of the people to peaceably assemble, as well as to protect and conserve those parks and open spaces.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPITOLA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: Findings. The above recitals are hereby declared to be true and correct findings of the City Council of the City of Capitola.

Section 2: Repeal and Replace Chapter 9.36 – Special Events, of Title 9 – Public Peace, Morals and Welfare of the Capitola Municipal Code. Chapter 9.36 – Special Events, of Title 9 – Public Peace, Morals and Welfare is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced to read as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 3: Repeal and Replace Chapter 12.40 – Park Regulations, of Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places of the Capitola Municipal Code. Chapter 12.40 – Park Regulations, of Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced to read as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 5: Codification. This ordinance shall be codified in the Capitola Municipal Code. 365
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
Section 6: CEQA. The City Council finds that the adoption and implementation of this Ordinance are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act under section 15061(b)(3) in that the City Council finds there is no possibility that the implementation of this Ordinance may have significant effects on the environment.

Section 7: Publication; Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from its passage and adoption.

Section 8: Certification. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be posted and/or published in the manner required by law.

This Ordinance was introduced at the meeting of the City Council on the 22nd day of February, 2024, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of March, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Kristen Brown, Mayor
Attest: ___________________________
Julia Gautho, City Clerk

Approved as to form:
___________________________________
Samantha W. Zutler, City Attorney
Exhibits:

A. Chapter 9.36 – SPECIAL EVENTS
B. Chapter 12.40 – PARKS REGULATIONS
366
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
Exhibit A
Chapter 9.36 – SPECIAL EVENTS
Sections:

9.36.010 – Purpose and intent.

9.36.020 – Definitions.

9.36.030 – General provisions.

9.36.040 – Minor Special Event Permit application.

9.36.050 – Neighborhood Street Closure Event Permit application.

9.36.060 – Major Special Event Permit application.

9.36.070 – Review process.

9.36.080 – Denial/revocation of Special Event Permit.

9.36.090 – Applicable fees.

9.36.010 – Appeals.

9.36.110 – Interference with Expressive Activity prohibited.

9.36.120 – Hold harmless.

9.36.130 – Display of Special Event Permit.

9.36.140 – Administrative regulations or policies.

9.36.150 – Penalties.

9.36.010 – Purpose and intent.

The purpose of this Chapter is to protect the First Amendment rights of the people of Capitola to peaceably assemble and/or protest in the City’s public places and to establish the least restrictive and reasonable time, place, and manner regulation of these activities. It is further intended to provide a coordinated process for managing special events to ensure the health and safety of event patrons, residents, workers, and other visitors, to prohibit illegal activities from occurring at special events, and to create mechanisms for cost recovery and use charges, to the extent authorized by law, while not unduly impacting the viability of special events.

9.36.020 – Definitions.

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall be construed as defined in this Chapter:

1. “Applicant” means any individual, corporation, partnership, trust, non-profit organization, association, group or other business entity or organization who seeks a Special Event Permit under this chapter to Organize a Special Event. For purposes of this Chapter, “Applicant” includes sponsors of the proposed Special Event.

2. “Application” means a form approved by the city manager or his/her designee, which an Applicant must submit pursuant to Section 9.36.030.

3. “Assembly” means the assembling or coming together of a number of persons for a particular purpose.
367
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1

4. “City property” means all real property and improvements owner, operated or controlled by the City within the City’s jurisdiction. City property includes, but is not limited to, City Hall, police and fire facilities, recreational facilities, parks, libraries, and streets and sidewalks.

5. “Expressive Activity” means conduct, the sole or principal object of which is the expression of opinion, views, or ideas, protected by the First Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution. Expressive activity includes, but is not limited to, public oratory and distribution of literature.

6. “Issuing Entity” means either:

A. the police chief or designee for Minor Special Events, Neighborhood Street Closure Events, and recurring Major Special Events that were held in the prior year with no major public safety or traffic issues and which do not require new or different levels of City services from the prior year;
B. the City Council for Major Special Events or upon referral by the police chief or designee.

7. “Major Special Event” means any of the following:

A. Any organized assemblage of more than two hundred (200) persons at any public place, public property, or public facility which is to gather for a common purpose under the direction or control of a person; or
B. Any organized assemblage at any public place, public property, or public facility which is to gather for a common purpose under the direction or control of a person or organization and that requires closure of a Major Street; or C. Any other organized assemblage conducted by a person for a common or collective use, purpose or benefit which shall require extensive use of City public services for police regulation, monitoring or control, erecting barriers, or traffic control, parking needs that will exceed the capacity of the venue, or that will significantly interfere with normal use and operation of public right-of-way for travel.

8. “Major Streets” means the streets in the City of Capitola which serve to deliver significant traffic through the City, and include: 38th Avenue, 41st Avenue, 42nd Avenue between Jade Street and Capitola Road, 45th Avenue, 47th Avenue between Portola Drive and Capitola Road, 49th Avenue between Capitola Road and Wharf Road, Bay Avenue, Capitola Avenue, Capitola Road, Clares Street, Cliff Drive, Esplanade (not including the portion of the Esplanade directly adjacent to Esplanade Park), Gross Road, Hill Street, Jade Street, Kennedy Drive, McGregor Drive, Monterey Avenue, Park Avenue, San Jose Avenue between Esplanade and Capitola Avenue, Stockton Avenue, and Wharf Road..

9. “Minor Special Event” means an organized assemblage of at least seventy-five (75) and at most two hundred (200) persons at any public place, public property, or public facility which is to gather for a common purpose under the direction or control of a person and which does not 368
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
require Major Street closure and does not require closure of a street in a single-family or multifamily zone.

10. “Neighborhood Street Closure Event” means an event organized for the assemblage of up to two hundred (200) persons requiring the closure of a street in a single-family or multi-family zone.

11. “Organize” means to organize, operate, manage, stage, promote, sponsor or carry on a Special Event, as defined.

12. “Organizer” means the person responsible for managing and leading the proposed Special Event, as defined, on the day or days of the Special Event.

13. “Permittee” means any person that has been issued a Special Event Permit in accordance with this Chapter.

14. “Special Event” refers to any or all of a Major Special Event, Minor Special Event, or a Neighborhood Street Closure Event.

15. “Special Event Permit” means a permit issued by the Issuing Entity to Organize a Major Special Event, a Minor Special Event, or a Neighborhood Street Closure Event, as defined, consistent with the provisions of this Chapter.

9.36.030 – General provisions.

A. Permit Required. Except when expressly provided pursuant to the terms of a permit, lease, or contract which has been specifically authorized by the City Council, no person shall operate any Special Event regulated by this Chapter without first obtaining a Special Event Permit in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, unless exempt as set forth below.

Special Event Permits must set forth the applicable noise limit if the proposed event shall exceed the noise regulations set forth in Chapter 9.12.

B. Exempt Activities:

1. Any Expressive Activity on City owned, controlled, or maintained property not otherwise considered a Minor Special Event, Major Special Event, or Neighborhood Street Closure Event.

2. Activities on school grounds, which are exempt from the requirements of this Chapter.

3. Spontaneous events which are occasioned by news or affairs coming into public knowledge less than forty-eight hours prior to such event may be conducted on City property without the Organizers having to obtain a Special Event Permit if all of the following factors are satisfied:
i. The spontaneous event does not impede vehicular traffic or violate regulations regarding pedestrian and vehicular traffic; ii. The Organizer provides the police chief or designee with at least four (4) hours of prior notice of the spontaneous event; and 369
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
iii. The location where the spontaneous event it to be conducted has not been previously rented, reserved, or otherwise obligated to another use in accordance with established City policies and procedures for use and/or rental of City facilities.

4. Activities comprising or involving construction, maintenance, or requiring a Cityissued encroachment permit.

5. Filming, as regulated by Chapter 9.62.

C. Events or gatherings which require a permit pursuant to other chapters of the Municipal Code, including but not limited to group activities in City-owned parks pursuant to Chapter 12.40, shall not be considered spontaneous events.

D. Major Streets: The police chief or designee shall review all Applications to determine whether closure of Major Streets is required. The police chief or designee shall make factual findings supporting his or her determination, including whether the proposed Special Event poses specific health or and safety issues requiring closure of Major Streets, including but not limited to impacts to traffic and use of City resources, as a result of the proposed Special Event.

9.36.040 – Minor Special Event Permit Application.

A. To receive a Minor Special Event permit, an Applicant must file a complete Application with the police chief or his/her designee on a form approved by the city manager at least forty-five (45) days before the proposed Minor Special Event. An Application is considered complete when it includes all of the following information:

1. A description of the proposed use, event, or activity;

2. The street or other public property and the specific area or areas thereof which will be utilized in connection with the proposed Minor Special Event, including a whether the proposed Minor Special Event will require closure of any street, a description of noise generating equipment, as well as circulation plan and site layout;

3. The manner in which the public property will be utilized;

4. Proof of insurance, as required by the City;

5. The date or dates and the specific times thereof, including set-up and tear-down, that the public property is to be utilized for the proposed Minor Special Event;

6. The name, address, and telephone number of the Applicant(s) for the proposed Minor Special Event permit;

7. The name, address, and telephone number of the Organizer, in the event the City must contact said individual on the day or day(s) of the proposed Minor Special Event; and

8. Other information as deemed necessary by the police chief or his/her designee to ensure public safety.

B. The police chief or designee shall review and issue or deny the Minor Special Event Application within thirty days (30) of receipt of a completed Application, unless the applicant and the City mutually agree to a later date.

C. Minor Special Event permits are issued on the condition that the Applicant receives approvals and/or any other necessary permits from relevant governmental agencies.

9.36.050 – Neighborhood Street Closure Permit Application 370
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
A. To receive a Neighborhood Street Closure permit, the applicant must file a complete Application with the police chief or his/her designee on a form approved by the city manager at least thirty days (30) days before the proposed Neighborhood Street Closure Event.

An Application is considered complete when it includes all of the following information:

1. A description of the proposed use, event, or activity;

2. The specific area of the street that will be closed in connection with the Neighborhood Street Closure Event;

3. Evidence of the Applicant’s and Organizer’s residence on the specific area of the street request for closure.

4. Consent of at least six (6) additional households or fifty percent (50%) of the households located within the requested street closure area, whichever is less;

5. Map or site layout of the Neighborhood Street Closure Event site;

6. Proof of insurance, as required by the City;

7. The manner in which the public property will be utilized;

8. The date and the specific times thereof, including set-up and tear-down that the street is to be closed;

9. The name, address, and telephone number of the Applicant and Organizer(s) to be contacted regarding the Application, permit, and the Neighborhood Special Event;

10. Other information as deemed necessary by the police chief or his/her designee to ensure public safety.

B. The police chief or designee shall review and issue or deny the Neighborhood Street Closure Event Permit Application within thirty (30) days of receipt of a completed Application unless the applicant and the City mutually agree to a later date.

C. Neighborhood Street Closure Event permits are issued on the following conditions:

1. The Applicant submits proof that all households within the street closure area are notified of the street closure ten (10) days prior to the Neighborhood Street Closure Event; and

2. The Applicant has received approvals and/or any other necessary permits from relevant governmental agencies.

3. All households located within the street closure area shall be permitted to attend Neighborhood Street Closure Events free of charge.

9.36.060 – Major Special Event Permit Application
A. To receive a Major Special Event permit, an Applicant must file a complete Application with the police chief or his/her designee on a form approved by the city manager at least ninety (90) days before the proposed Major Special Event. An Application is considered complete when it includes all of the following information:

1. A description of the proposed use, event, or activity;

2. The street or other public property and the specific area or areas thereof which will be utilized in connection with the proposed Major Special Event, including a whether the proposed Major Special Event will require closure of Major Streets or other streets, a description of noise generating equipment, a circulation plan and site layout, including a parking or shuttle plan for transportation to and from the proposed Major Special Event;
371
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1

3. The manner in which the public property will be utilized;

4. The date or dates and the specific times thereof, including set-up and tear-down, that the public property is to be utilized for the described Major Special Event;

5. The name, address and telephone number of the Applicant(s);

6. Proof of insurance, as required by the City;

7. The name, address and telephone number of the Organizer of the proposed Major Special Event, in the event the City must contact said Organizer on the day or day(s) of the proposed Major Special Event;

8. A completed safety and security plan;

9. Other information as deemed necessary by the police chief or his/her designee to ensure public safety;

10. Certification of completeness by the police chief or his/her designee.

B. The City Council shall review and issue or deny the Application no later than the second regular City Council meeting following the submission of a completed Application or thirty days, whichever is later, unless the applicant and the City mutually agree to a later date.

C. Major Special Event permits are issued on the condition that the Applicant receives approvals and/or any other necessary permits from relevant governmental agencies.

9.36.070 – Review process.

A. Subject to the criteria for denial set forth in Section 9.36.080, the Issuing Entity shall issue a Special Event Permit if it is determined that all of the following criteria have been met:

1. The proposed use of City property for the Special Event is not otherwise governed by or subject to any other permit procedures provided elsewhere in this Code.

2. The Application is complete and includes all the information required by this Chapter.

3. The preparation for or the conduct of the proposed Special Event will not unduly impede, obstruct, or interfere with the operation of emergency vehicles or equipment in or through the particular Special Event area or adversely affect the City’s ability to perform municipal functions or furnish City services in the vicinity of the Special Event area.

4. The proposed Special Event does not otherwise present a substantial safety, noise, environmental, or traffic hazards, considering the number of participants and proposed location, such as to endanger the health or safety of the event participants, general public, or City employees, which cannot be adequately remedied by reasonable traffic control and other safety measures.

B. In deciding whether to approve an Application, no consideration may be given to the message of the proposed Special Event, the content of speech, or the identity or associational relationships of the Applicant(s) or Organizer(s).

C. The Issuing Entity may condition the Special Event Permit to mitigate health, safety, and impacts to City services.

D. Recurring Special Events: Major Special Events that recur every year, and which do not require new or different levels of City services from year to year and which did not present major public safety or traffic issues in the prior year may be reviewed and issued by the police chief or designee without City Council approval. 372
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
E. Annual Special Event Update: The police chief or designee shall provide the City Council with an annual report on the Minor and Major Special Event Permits that were issued in the prior year, summarizing any issues that were identified and, to the extent necessary, outlining any procedural changes for the following year.

9.36.080 – Denial/revocation of Special Event Permit.

The Issuing Entity may deny any Application for a Special Event Permit or revoke such a Permit if the Issuing Entity finds any of the following:

A. One or more of the approval criteria specified in Section 9.36.070 is not or can no longer be met;
B. The Applicant has knowingly made a false, misleading or fraudulent statement of fact to the City in the Application process;
C. The Application is incomplete or does not contain the information required by this Chapter;
D. The Application does not satisfy the requirements of this Chapter; E. The Applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval, including, but not limited to:

1. Remittance of fees, charges, or deposits,

2. Submittal of an indemnification agreement and/or proof of insurance for the Special Event as required by the City;

3. Timely submittal of all required documents; or

4. Obtaining approvals and/or any other necessary permits from relevant governmental agencies.

F. The Applicant or Organizer has damaged City property and has not paid in full for such damage or has other outstanding and unpaid debts related to a prior Special Event Permit issued by the City.

G. The proposed Special Event is scheduled to occur at a location and time in conflict with another Special Event already permitted or that can be permitted to another Applicant that submitted an Application first in time, or is in conflict with City-sponsored programming.

H. The proposed Special Event would require the diversion of public safety or other City employees from their normal duties so as to unreasonably reduce adequate levels of service to any other portion of the City, or the proposed Special Event will adversely affect the City's ability to reasonably perform municipal functions or furnish City services.

I. The proposed Special Event is in conflict with applicable provisions of any federal, state and/or local laws.

J. The Application was submitted less than 30 days before the proposed Neighborhood Street Closure Event, 45 days before the proposed Minor Special Event, or 90 days before the proposed Major Special Event.

9.36.090 – Applicable fees.

Special Event Permit Application fees pursuant to this Chapter shall be established by Resolution of the City Council. Applicants shall pay Application fees upon submittal of the Application to 373
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
the City for review. Where a Special Event requires street closure, barriers, or other infrastructure, the Applicant shall pay such fees as may be established by resolution of the City Council for traffic control and relating municipal expenses, including, but not limited to, public safety, services, solid waste and recycling services, building inspections, City lifeguard services, traffic control, and any other applicable fees. Additionally, use of City buildings or facilities shall be subject to any use or rental fees established by the City.

9.36.010 – Appeals.

An Applicant may appeal the denial or revocation of a Special Event Permit by the police chief or designee in accordance with the appeal process set forth in Chapter 2.52 of this Code.

9.36.110 – Interference with Expressive Activity prohibited.

It shall be unlawful for any person to interfere with a Special Event permitted under this Chapter by engaging in the following acts when done with the intent to cause interference:

A. Blocking, obstructing, or impeding the passage of participants, vehicles, or animals in the Special Event along the Special Event route; B. Walking or running, driving a vehicle, riding a bicycle or skateboard, or using any similar device through, between, with, or among participants, vehicles, or animals in the Special Event;
C. Dropping, throwing, rolling, or flying any object toward, among, or between participants, vehicles, or animals in a Special Event.

9.36.120 – Hold harmless.

Each Permittee shall execute a hold harmless agreement in a form approved by the City agreeing to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City against losses and liabilities incurred from the willful or negligent acts or omissions of the Permittee or its officers, employees, and agents. If City property is destroyed or damaged by reason of Permittee’s Special Event and the damage or destruction is directly attributable to the Permittee, the Permittee shall reimburse the City for the actual replacement or repair cost of the destroyed or damaged property. Nothing in this provision shall require a Permittee to indemnify the City from claims or losses occasioned by the reaction of third parties to Expressive Activity at the Permittee’s Special Event.

9.36.130 – Display of Special Event Permit.

A copy of the Special Event Permit shall be available at the event site and shall be exhibited upon demand of any City official.

9.36.140 – Administrative regulations or policies.

The city manager, or designee, may adopt administrative regulations or policies that are consistent with and that further the terms and requirements set forth within this Chapter, and as may be necessary to coordinate multiple uses of public property, assure preservation of public property 374
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
and public places, prevent dangerous, unlawful uses, protect the safety of persons and property and to control vehicular and pedestrian traffic. All such administrative regulations or policies must be in writing.

9.36.150 – Penalties.

Violations of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to any laws and remedies available to the City including but not limited to enforcement as a misdemeanor and/or public nuisance pursuant to Title 4 of this Code.
375
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
Exhibit B
Chapter 12.40

PARK REGULATIONS
Sections:

12.40.010 – Purpose of chapter.

12.40.020 – Definitions.

12.40.030 – General Principles.

12.40.040 – Group activities – Permit required.

12.40.050 – Sound standard.

12.40.060 – Application for permit.

12.40.070 – Criteria for issuance.

12.40.080 – Conditions of approval.

12.40.090 – Permit holder responsibilities.

12.40.100 – Revocation of permit.

12.40.110 – Appeal of decision.

12.40.120 – Establishment of fees.

12.40.130 – Prohibited activity in parks or facilities.

12.40.140 – Park regulations.

12.40.150 – Park and Recreation facility hours.

12.40.160 – Penalty for violation.

12.40.010 Purpose of chapter.

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the use of parks and other recreation facilities of the City for the optimum use and enjoyment of residents of Capitola; to establish standards to prevent the misuse and destruction of the facilities; to establish regulations to insure the safety and comfort of users of the facilities as well as persons residing or owning property in the vicinity of the facilities; and to protect the First Amendment rights of the People of Capitola to peaceably assemble in the City’s public parks.

12.40.020 Definitions.

1. “Applicant” means any individual, corporation, partnership, trust, non-profit organization, association, group or other business entity or organization who seeks a Permit under this chapter. For purposes of this Chapter, “Applicant” includes the organizer of the event, responsible for coordination and management of the event on the day or days of the event.

2. “Expressive Activity” shall have the same definition as set forth in Chapter 9.36 of this Code.

3. “Park(s)” means and includes every park owned and maintained by the City together with any accompanying parking lot or staging area, which is owned, managed, or 376
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
controlled by the City of Capitola for the recreational use and/or enjoyment of the public. Parks do not include the beach.

4. “Permit” means a permit issued by the City of Capitola issued pursuant to this Chapter.

5. “Recreation Facility” means fields, courts, pools, amphitheaters, the Capitola Bandstand at Esplanade Park, areas specifically designed for organized activities such as, but not limited to, baseball, softball, soccer, tennis, basketball, skateboarding, bicycling, and organized group gatherings which are owned, managed, or controlled by the City of Capitola for the recreational use and/or enjoyment of the public.

6. “Refuse” means any garbage, trash, bottles, cans, papers, ashes, food and vegetable material, rubbish, industrial wastes, animal waste, grass clippings, tree or shrub pruning or any other discarded substance, matter, or thing, whether liquid or solid.

12.40.030 General principles.

The following principles shall govern use of Parks and Recreation Facilities:

A. Parks and Recreation Facilities primarily are intended for the use and enjoyment by residents of Capitola;
B. Public recreation services should be available to all Capitola residents without discrimination as to race, religion, gender identity, economic status, or any protected status; C. The public recreation program should include a wide variety of activities, including passive enjoyment, to appeal to different interests, ages, and abilities, and should not merely be limited to physical activities, outdoor activities, daytime activities, or to the interests of children or others of special categories;
D. Parks and Recreation Facilities are intended to be used, subject to applicable regulations, for:

1. Informally by residents,

2. For programs sponsored by the city,

3. For joint city-school programs,

4. For organized group activities.

E. Commercial activities in Parks and Recreation Facilities are not permitted, except for activities sponsored by the City of Capitola or as otherwise authorized in this Code.

12.40.040 Permit required.

A. To ensure equal access to City Parks and open space areas, preservation of these spaces and due to limitations of size, parking availability, and open areas, activities involving the exclusive use of any area of a Park is prohibited, except with a permit for the specific Parks 377
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
listed below. Specific areas within the following Parks that are available for exclusive use shall be identified in the application forms:

1. The Park at Rispin Mansion

2. Esplanade Park

3. Monterey Park

4. Jade Street Park

5. McGregor Park
B. Activities involving the exclusive use of Recreational Facilities shall require a permit and are subject to the standards and regulations contained in this Chapter.

C. Use of Powered Equipment or Temporary Structures, including, but not limited to, shade structures and bounce houses: Any person wishing to use equipment requiring a power source or erect a structure larger than 100 square feet or taller than 10 feet in a Park shall obtain a permit therefore, and is subject to the standards and regulations contained in this chapter.

D. Applicants shall remit an application review fee upon submittal of a permit application to the City for review.

E. It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in any use of any Park or Recreational Facility for which a permit is required pursuant to this Chapter without obtaining such a permit, except where such activity is regulated by other provisions of this Code, such as Chapter 9.36. Nothing in this section shall require persons or entities to obtain a permit for Expressive Activities, where such activity is addressed by Chapter 9.36 of this Code.

12.40.050 Sound standard.

A. In recognition of the rights of residents in the vicinity of Parks to enjoy the comfort of their homes in normal peace and quiet, as well as the right of citizens to enjoy a reasonable peace and quiet in appropriately designed Parks, the use of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, machine or device for producing or reproducing sound, or any device which produces noise in such a manner as to unreasonably disturb the peace, quiet, and comfort of persons is prohibited in all Parks, unless otherwise specified on a permit issued by the City.

12.40.055 Open Play Hours at the Capitola Bandstand
A. For purposes of this Section, “Open Play Hours” means between 9:00 a.m. through 12:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays.

B. The sound limitations in this Chapter shall not apply to the use of musical instruments at the Capitola Bandstand at Esplanade Park during Open Play Hours, however amplification of any kind is not permitted.
378
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1

12.40.060 Application for permit.

1. Any individual or group desiring to reserve any Park or Recreation Facility, or any portion thereof, pursuant to Section 12.40.040, shall apply to the city manager, or his/her designee, in writing on a form approved by the city manager.

2. A complete application must be submitted to the city manager, or his/her designee, not less than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the desired reservation.

12.40.070 Criteria for denial.

The city manager, or his/her designee, shall deny a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter if the city manager, or his/her designee, determines the application meets any of the following criteria:

A. The information contained in the application, or supplemental information provided, is not complete or is materially false or misleading.

B. The Applicant has failed to submit a complete application, supply satisfactory evidence of insurance, or has not remitted the fees or deposits as required by the Chapter.

C. The Park or Recreation Facility, or portion thereof, is unavailable for the period for which the permit is requested.

D. The area proposed for the Applicant’s use or activity could not physically accommodate the number of participants expected to participate in a safe manner.

E. The proposed use, activity or event is not compatible with the uses established for the requested Park or Recreation Facility or portion thereof during the date or time requested, in that it unreasonably interferes with use of the Park by others.

F. The proposed use has a realistic potential to create a threat to the public health, safety or welfare, or to damage public property, which may not be adequately remedied by reasonable traffic control, barriers, and/or other safety measures.

G. The proposed use would require the diversion of public safety or other City employees from their normal duties so as to unreasonably reduce adequate levels of service to any other portion of the city, or the event will adversely affect the City's ability to reasonably perform municipal functions or furnish city services.

H. The proposed use, event or activity will have a substantial adverse environmental impact.

I. The proposed use would be in conflict with applicable provisions of any federal, state and/or local law.
379
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
J. The proposed use is commercial and not otherwise authorized by this Code.

12.40.080 Conditions of approval
Permits issued pursuant to this Chapter are subject to such reasonable conditions as the city manager or his/her designee may determine necessary to coordinate multiple uses of public property, assure preservation of public property and public places, prevent dangerous, unlawful uses, protect the safety of persons and property, ensure compliance with noise requirements set forth in Chapter 9.12, and to control vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around the Park and/or Recreation Facility. These conditions may include conditions for waste management and restoration of the Park, environmental protection, conditions to ensure safe accommodation of an event’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic, indemnification and hold harmless of the City, and reasonable designation of alternate sites, times, or dates in the event of conflict with available resources.

12.40.090 Permit holder responsibilities.

After a person obtains a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter, that permit holder must:

1. Comply with all rules and regulations and all applicable City Ordinances as though the same were incorporated into the permit.

2. Comply with all conditions imposed by the permit.

3. Inform all attendees of the conditions of the permit and the applicable rules and regulations.

4. Make Permit available at the event site and shall be exhibited upon request of any City official.

12.40.100 Revocation of permit.

Any permit for the use of the premises shall contain a provision that the city manager or his/her designee shall have the power to revoke such permit and to require the immediate removal of all persons from said premises upon their finding:

A. That the Applicant misrepresented or misstated any material fact in their application; or
B. Applicant damaged City property or violated permit conditions; or C. That the activity or any significant part thereof taking place on said premises is contrary to State or local law or is endangering life and/or property.

12.40.110 Appeal of decision.

An Applicant may appeal the denial or revocation of a permit by the city manager or designee in accordance with the appeal process set forth in Chapter 2.52 of this Code. 380
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1

12.40.120 Establishment of fees.

Application fees pursuant to this Chapter shall be established by Resolution of the City Council.

Where an event organized pursuant to this Chapter requires City services or infrastructure, the Applicant shall pay such fees as may be established by resolution of the City Council for municipal services, including but not limited to public safety services, solid waste and recycling services, traffic control, and any other applicable fees. Additionally use of City buildings or facilities shall be subject to any use or rental fees established by the City.

12.40.130 Prohibited activity in Parks and Recreation Facilities.

The following activities are prohibited in any Park or Recreation Facility:

A. Exclusive use of any Park or Recreation Facility without a permit therefor, or use of any Park or Recreation Facility by any group for which a permit is required without such permit;
B. Commercial activities not otherwise authorized by this Code; C. Golf, except in designated areas;
D. Motor-driven vehicles;
E. Discharging weapons;
F. Removal of turf, soil, grass, tree, shrub, or portion thereof; except as such work may be done by authorized City employees;
G. Lighting or maintaining fires, except as otherwise permitted by this Code or posted notices in specific Parks, however UL or ASMI listed manufactured gas (LPG or NG) outdoor flame devices (such as gas BBQs or gas fire-pits) that comply with the Fire Code are permitted at Jade Street and Monterey Parks;
H. Overnight use of parks, other than city-sponsored activities or other activities which have received a permit from the City to conduct such after-hours activities; I. Play or practice baseball or softball in areas not specifically designated for baseball and softball activities;
J. To possess or consume alcoholic beverages, except as expressly permitted by the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control;
K. To cause, create, encourage, or threaten to cause any disturbance which may reasonably result in injury or property damage, or disturb the peace, comfort and security of the park patrons or employees;
381
Item 8 D.
4880-8702-5317 v1
L. Off-leash dogs, except as designated pursuant to applicable park regulations; dogs shall be permitted on leash pursuant to Section 6.14.200.

M. Use of a Park or Recreation Facility in such a fashion as to violate a posted notice restricting that Park or Recreation Facility’s use to one or more specified recreational uses.

N. Bounce houses shall not be permitted at Esplanade Park.

O. Any activity that is contrary to applicable law or is endangering life and/or property.

12.40.140 Park and Recreation Facility regulations.

The city manager shall be and is authorized and directed to promulgate such rules and regulations that are consistent with and that further the terms of the requirements herein. The regulations may permit any of the activities prohibited in this chapter in any defined and prescribed area provided that a suitable area is set aside for such activity, and said areas are signed and posted, indicating the type of use permissible, and the rules applicable to said use, if any.

12.40.150 Park hours.

All Parks located in the City shall, except for areas otherwise posted, be closed from sunset (the time when the upper limb of the sun disappears below the sensible horizon as a result of the diurnal rotation of the earth) until six a.m. in the morning, unless explicitly extended in a permit issued by the City.

12.40.170 Penalty for violation.

Violations of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to any laws and remedies available to the City including, but not limited to, enforcement as a misdemeanor and/or public nuisance pursuant to Title 4 of this Code.
382
Item 8 D.
2024 SPECIAL

EVENTS & PARK

REGULATIONS
Nikki Bryant &
Sarah Ryan
383
Item 8 D.

Purpose
• Introduce the Special Event
application process
• Introduce Park Regulation
permitting process
• Create a comprehensive permitting
system for public assemblies,
events and use of City property
384
Item 8 D.

Special Events
– Current
Process • Police Department issues SE permits

1. Major SE Permits - > 200 attendees
and impacts to city services

2. Minor SE Permits - < 200 attendees
and minimal impacts to city
services
2023 Staff Issued 10 General SE
Permits, 26 Minor SE Permits, and 5
Permits to the Art & Cultural
Commission
385
Item 8 D.
10 Major Special Events
• Beyond the Flood
Benefits Concert
• February Surfer’s Path
10k/5k
• Capitola Art & Wine
Festival
• May Surfer’s Path Half
Marathon
• Capitola Beach Festival
• Capitola Custom Classic
Car Show
• Women on Waves
• Wharf to Wharf
• October Surfer’s Path
Wahine 10k/6k
• Oktoberfest
386
Item 8 D.
26 Minor Special Events
• Village Sip and Stroll (3 total)
• California Coast Classic Ride
• Operation Surf
• Veteran Surf Alliance Paddle Out
• Fill the Boot for Muscular
Dystrophy
• Halloween Parade
• Skate-Tola
• Surfing Santa
• Walk for Angelman’s Syndrome
• Food Truck Fridays Event at
Monterey Park
• First Responder’s Surf Contest
• AIDS/Lifecycle Bicycle Ride
387
Item 8 D.

Special Event Process
Current Proposed Changes
Minor Event- no threshold specification Minor Event- 75-200 people not requiring road closures.

General Event- no threshold specification Major Event- more than 200 people requiring closure of “major” road.

No mention of constitutionally protected
activity
Updated language to protect expressive
activity protected by the First
Amendment
No set fee schedule for special events Council shall set special event application fees and cost recovery fees for services
needed to support the event.

Encroachment Permit Eliminated, determined not necessary based on the updated process. 388
Item 8 D.

Park Use Permit
• Currently first come first serve
Recreation manages field and court rentals
• The public inquires often on process for small gatherings and allowable equipment in parks (bounce houses, BBQ)
• The Park Use permit would provide a procedure for renting portions of the City’s parks for use by small groups up to 74 people and not “expressive activity”
• The application packet will detail required information for renting and location options available for permit.
389
Item 8 D.

Not Permitted: Bounce
Houses or BBQ
390
Item 8 D.
391
Item 8 D.
392
Item 8 D.

Fiscal Impact
• Staff is currently working on a fee study to update to the City’s fee schedule. That updated fee schedule will include recommended billing rates for City resources associated with Special Events. Staff expects the fee study and schedule to be presented to Council this Spring. 393
Item 8 D.

Recommendation
• Introduce, by title only, waiving further reading of the text, an ordinance of the City of Capitola repealing and replacing Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 9.36 “Special Events” and Chapter 12.40 “Park Regulations” to create a comprehensive permitting system for public assemblies, events and use of City property.
394
Item 8 D.

Questions
395
Item 8 D.

Major Streets
38th Avenue, 41st Avenue, 42nd Avenue between Jade Street and Capitola Road, 45th Avenue, 47th Avenue between Portola Drive and Capitola Road, 49th Avenue between Capitola Road and Wharf Road, Bay Avenue, Capitola Avenue, Capitola Road, Clares Street, Cliff Drive, Esplanade (not including the portion of the Esplanade directly adjacent to Esplanade Park), Gross Road, Hill Street, Jade Street, Kennedy Drive, McGregor Drive, Monterey Avenue, Park Avenue, San Jose Avenue between Esplanade and Capitola Avenue, Stockton Avenue, and Wharf Road.
396
Item 8 D.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Finance Department
Subject: FY 2023-24 Mid-Year Budget Report
Recommended Action: Receive the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Mid-Year Budget Report and adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget.

Background: The Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 Mid-Year Budget Report provides an update on the City’s financial status as of December 31, 2023, and recommends budget adjustments for FY 2023-24 that reflect current projections. The City’s major revenue sources are currently tracking slightly below budget projections while General Fund expenditures are slightly ahead of projections but are expected to end the year at or below budget.

The City ended FY 2022-23 slightly ahead of budget estimates returning an additional $46,000 to the General Fund balance. The estimated June 30, 2024, General Fund Balance consists of:

FY 2022-23 City Council Goals $400,000
Employee Down Payment Assistance Program $100,000
Future Capital Improvement Projects $954,000
Operating Contingency Balance $546,000
Total Balance $2,000,000
Discussion: General Fund revenues are performing below expectations, primarily due to sales tax. All other General Fund revenues are performing as expected but are showing signs of leveling off following the growth experienced over the last few years. Expenditures are tracking consistent with the FY 2023-24 Amended Budget.

Staff has reviewed the data for the first half of the fiscal year’s General Fund activities and is recommending budget amendments to revenues as well as expenditures.

Revenues
The FY 2023-24 adopted budget included approximately $8.6 million of sales tax revenue which is consistent with receipts in the prior fiscal year. At the mid-point of this fiscal year sales tax receipts are below the prior year by $312,000 (6.8%). Assuming a similar level of economic activity as the prior year for the remainder of this fiscal year, sales tax estimates should be reduced by $300,000.

Property tax revenues are slightly above budget estimates while TOT is slightly below budget estimates. Licenses and permits, intergovernmental revenues, and service charges are all performing as anticipated, while fines and forfeitures are down $130,000 (37%) primarily due to decreased parking citation revenue. Staff anticipates that all of these revenues will end the year close to budget projections.
397
Item 8 E.

Expenditures
City departments have consistently maintained expenditures within the adopted budget. Through December the General Fund has expended 59% of the budget while being 50% through the year.

The primary reason is that the City prepaid the annual $2.1 million Unfunded Actuarial Pension Liability (UAL) in July 2023 as opposed to making monthly payments, resulting in a savings of approximately $75,000. This results in personnel costs showing higher as a percentage of the budget as we amortize the payment over the course of the year.

Budget Amendments
Staff is requesting budget amendments in the General Fund due to several unanticipated events as well as unanticipated cost increases. Staff suggests a sales tax revenue reduction of $300,000 as well as expenditure increases totaling $130,000.

Expenditure increases are due to additional storage needs for the Museum, additional usage of part-time employees in Police for traffic calming on Bay Avenue, Police Department overtime related to the fatal hit and run investigation, murder investigation, and emergency response during the December storm event, correction of an error in charges for the Police Department T-1-line, additional Police Officer training, repair of parking pay stations damaged during the December storm, additional funding for tree maintenance on Park Avenue, and increased costs related to fleet management as listed below.

Revenue
Amount Description
$ (300,000) Reduction of Sales Tax Revenue
Expenditures
$ 75,000 Personnel – Hit & Run and Murder Investigations, Dec. storm response $ 6,000 Training – Catching up following pandemic
$ 28,000 Administrative budget amendments for supplies
$ 21,000 Billing error/correction
$ 130,000 Total
Additionally, staff is requesting budget amendments in Special Revenue Funds for Housing Element updates and legal fees, CDBG grant application expenses, HOME application for rehabilitation of the Dakota Apartments, and replacement pumps for the Lawn Way Pump Station as listed below:

Expenditures
Amount Description
$ 80,000 Emergency Reserve - Storm Damage – possible FEMA/Cal OES reimbursement if emergency declared
$ 25,000 General Plan Update Fund – Housing Element Implementation 398
Item 8 E.
$ 50,000 General Plan Update Fund – Legal fees – Housing Element $ 7,500 CDBG Fund – Grant application
$ 10,000 HOME Reuse Fund – Dakota Apartments Rehab Project $ 30,000 Equipment ISF – Lawn Way Pump Station equipment replacement $ 202,500 Total
Fiscal Impact: If approved, the requested budget amendment would reduce the June 30, 2024, estimated General Fund balance to approximately $1.6 million, a reduction of $430,000 from previous estimates.

The impact on the Special Revenue Funds would be a reduction of the estimated fund balance within each of the listed funds.

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Budget Amendment
Report Prepared By: Jim Malberg, Finance Director
Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
399
Item 8 E.

RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPITOLA
AMENDING THE 2023-24 FISCAL YEAR CITY BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM BUDGET
WHEREAS, it is necessary to adopt the 2023-24 Fiscal Year Budget for all City funds and Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted budget study sessions, heard and considered public comments, had modified and proposed a budget accordingly, and on June 22, 2023, adopted such budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of the budget staff has identified several necessary budget amendments that better reflect current FY 2023-24 projections; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Capitola that the 2023-24 Fiscal Year Budget is hereby amended, including Exhibit A (Budget Amendment) to this Resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is directed to enter the budget into the City's accounting records in accordance with appropriate accounting practices, and the City Manager, with the Finance Director's assistance, shall assure compliance therewith.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Capitola on the 22
nd day of February 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________
Kristen Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ ___
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
400
Item 8 E.

General Fund
Incr / (Decr.)$ Fund Account Purpose
$ (300,000) 1000-00-00-000 3130.xxx Sales Tax
$ 3,000 1000-50-51-000 4450.150 Supplies Museum Collection $ 5,000 1000-20-20-000 4120.100 Wages - Temporary & Seasonal - Police $ 70,000 1000-20-20-000 4130.000 Overtime - Police
$ 21,000 1000-20-20-000 4375.103 T-1 Line - Police
$ 6,000 1000-20-20-000 4400.100 Training & Memberships - Police $ 15,000 1000-30-32-000 4450.500 Supplies -General - Fleet $ 10,000 1000-30-32-000 4450.504 Supplies - Auto - Fleet $ 130,000 Net increase in expenditures
$ (430,000) Total net increase/(decrease) in General Fund budget Other Funds
$ -
$ 25,000 1313-00-00-000 4305.900 Contract Services - General - General Plan Update $ 7,500 1351-00-00-000 4345.202 Contract Services - Grant Admin - CDBG Program Income $ 50,000 1370-00-00-000 4320.101 Legal Services - General - HOME Reuse $ 10,000 1370-00-00-000 4345.202 Contract Services - Grant Admin - HOME Reuse $ 30,000 2212-00-00-000 4650.400 Capital Outlay - Machinery & Equipment - Parks - Lawn Way $ 80,000 1020-00-00-000 4385.500 Contract Services - Disaster - Emergency Reserve $ 202,500
$ (202,500) Total net increase in Other Fund budget
Expenditures
MYE - Summary of Changes
Revenue
Expenditures
Revenue
401
Item 8 E.

Fund Account Purpose
Current Budget Amendment Amended
1,436,646 (150,000) 1,286,646 1000-00-00-000 3130.103 Bradley Burns 1,546,215 (150,000) 1,396,215 1000-00-00-000 3130.104 Bradley Burns 402
Item 8 E.

Fiscal Year
2023-24
Mid-Year
Budget
Report
February 22, 2024
403
Item 8 E.

General Fund Balance Summary
FY 2022-23 City Council Goals $ 400,000
Employee Down Payment Assistance Program $ 100,000
Future Capital Improvement Projects $ 954,000
Operating Contingency $ 546,000
Total Balance $ 2,000,000
404
Item 8 E.

FY 2022-23 Ongoing City Council Goals
Community Center (short-term needs) $ 150,000
Funding City Hall Options $ 50,000
Bluff / Cliff Drive Study $ 50,000
Noble Gulch Engineering Feasibility Analysis $ 50,000
Fire Risk Reduction (Eucalyptus Groves) $ 50,000
Peery Park Bridge Maintenance $ 50,000
Total $ 400,000
405
Item 8 E.

General Fund Balance Summary
FY 2022-23 City Council Goals $ 400,000
Employee Down Payment Assistance Program $ 100,000
Future Capital Improvement Projects $ 390,000
Wharf Resiliency & Public Access Project
If Item 8A. was approved earlier this evening $ 564,000 Operating Contingency $ 546,000
Total Balance $ 2,000,000
406
Item 8 E.

Financial Highlights
• Sales Tax performing below projections
• Approximately $312,000 below the prior year
• Property Tax
• Slightly above estimates
• Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
• Slightly below estimates
• All other FY 2022-23 revenues and expenditures tracking close to budget projections
• Revenues - Fines down, building permits and recreation fees up • Expenditures – minor amendments due to unanticipated events and cost increases
407
Item 8 E.

Revenue Review
Account Y-T-D
Activity
% of
Budget
Prior Year
Activity $ Change % Change
Taxes $ 6,440,904 43% $ 6,777,146 ($ 336,242) (6.3%)
Licenses & Permits 282,778 44 229,774 53,004 23.1
Intergovernmental 35,470 28 59,402 (23,932) (40.3)
Charges for Services 971,490 45 1,000,345 (28,855) (2.9) Fines & Forfeitures 219,011 36 348,557 (129,546) (37.2) Use of Money & Property 69,762 36 73,711 (3,950) (5.4)
Other 59,989 50 30,977 29,011 9.37
Total $ 8,079,403 43% $ 8,519,912 ($ 440,509) (5.2%)
408
Item 8 E.

Expenditure Review
Account Y-T-D
Activity
% of
Budget Prior Year $ Change % Change
Personnel $ 7,045,703 60% $ 6,710,066 $ 335,637 5.0%
Contract Services 1,972,343 57 1,864,839 62,503 3.4
Training / Memberships 104,478 60 74,336 30,142 40.5
Supplies 519,688 86 339,244 180,443 53.2
Grants & Subsidies 62,500 50 62,500 0 0
Internal Service Funds 808,921 50 722,250 86,671 12.0
Other financing uses 1,269,394 55 1,635,662 (366,268) (28.9) Total $ 11,738,025 59% $ 11,408,897 $ 329,129 2.9%409
Item 8 E.

Proposed General Fund
Budget Amendments
Amount Description
Revenue
($300,000) Sales Tax revenue reduction
Expenditures
$ 75,000 Personnel – Hit & Run & Murder Investigations, Dec. storm response
6,000 Training – catching up following pandemic
28,000 Administrative budget amendments – supplies
21,000 Billing error / correction
$ 130,000 Total
($ 430,000) Net impact to General Fund Balance 410
Item 8 E.

Proposed Reserve & Special Revenue Fund
Budget Amendments
Amount Description
Expenditures
$ 80,000 Emergency Reserve – Storm Damage – possible FEMA/Cal OES reimbursement if emergency declared
25,000 General Plan Update Fund – Housing Element Implementation 50,000 General Plan Update Fund – Legal Fees – Housing Element 7,500 CDBG Fund – Grant Application
10,000 HOME Reuse Fund – Dakota Apartments Rehab Project 30,000 Equipment ISF – Lawn Way Pump Station equipment replacement $ 202,500 Total
411
Item 8 E.

Budget Amendment Summary
• Fiscal Impact
• If approved, reduces estimated June 30, 2024,
General Fund balance by $430,000
• Reduces estimated June 30, 2024, fund balances
in respective reserve and special revenue funds
412
Item 8 E.

FY 2024-25
Budget
Process
• Goal Setting – March 6, 2024
• Proposed Budget distribution
• May 3rd
• Proposed Special City Council meeting
budget hearings
• May 16th
• May 30th
• June 6th (If necessary)
• June 20th (If necessary)
• Proposed Finance Advisory Committee
meetings
• May 14th (special meeting)
• May 21st
• June 4th (special meeting, if necessary)
• Proposed Budget Adoption
• June 27th
413
Item 8 E.

Recommended Action
• Receive Fiscal Year 2023-24 Mid-Year
Budget Report and Adopt Proposed
Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year
2023-24 Budget
414
Item 8 E.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 22, 2024
From: Community Development Department
Subject: 2023/2024 CDBG Grant Application
Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution authorizing staff to prepare and submit an application under the 2023/2024 Community Development Block Grant Program for the Jade Street Community Center.

Background: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program authorizes the use of funds to assist low- and moderate-income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. There are two types of CDBG programs:
“entitlement” and “non-entitlement”. Large metropolitan cities and urban counties are entitled to receive annual grants under the “entitlement” program direct from HUD. The City falls within the “non-entitlement” program which is administered by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and where the City can apply for funding under a competitive application process.

The City is required to conduct public outreach regarding potential CDBG-eligible projects that could be considered for an application, including holding a public hearing to discuss potential application(s) and allow for public input. On August 9, 2023, in anticipation of the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) release, staff held a public meeting to seek public input regarding the overall CDBG program and potential projects the community might be interested in seeking.

However, HCD did not release the NOFA as originally planned. Instead, only jurisdictions whose projects were applied for in 2020, but not yet funded due to insufficient funding, were eligible to apply for 2023 funding in October 2023. On January 31, 2024, HCD released an amendment that allows a jurisdiction to apply for up to one project that has been designed and is ready to construct to apply for funding, up to a maximum of $3.3 million. A total of $19 million is available for the entire State. Jurisdictions are not eligible to request funds for “programs”. Therefore, only one project is being considered for this round of funding.

Discussion: In order to be considered eligible, a suggested project/activity must meet one or more of the three National Objectives listed in CDBG Federal Statutes:
 Benefit to low- and moderate-income persons;
 Prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or
 Meeting an urgent community need that poses an immediate threat to the health and welfare of the community (State designates when the “urgent need” objective is allowed for a NOFA).

The benefit to low- and moderate-income persons is the most predominately used National Objective. In order to benefit low- or moderate-income persons, the project must either benefit an area that is comprised of at least 51% low- or moderate-income households, or benefit individually qualified households (i.e., each household is income-certified). Fifty-three percent of the City’s households qualify as low- or moderate-income households, based on the 2015 American Community Survey.

In addition to meeting one of the three National Objectives, the project must also fall under one of the categories listed below.
 Public Improvements: Project must be located in and serve a predominantly residential area within the city. Examples include water and sewer facilities, flood and drainage facilities, accessibilityrelated street improvements (i.e., curb ramps), and utilities. 415
Item 8 F.
 Public Facility: Examples include the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of buildings used for public purposes such as training, health services, education, senior and recreation centers, nutrition, shelter, daycare, temporary housing, and fire protection.  Housing Project:
 Multi-Family (five or more units at a specific site) Housing Rental Rehabilitation Project (with or without acquisition): loan for repairs and improvements of renter-occupied units for sites where the majority of the tenants qualify as low- or moderate-income households.  Acquisition of Real Property for Multi-Family (five or more units at a specific site) Projects:
acquisition of a site where the majority of the tenants qualify as low- or moderate-income households.
 Public Improvement Project in Support of New Housing: Examples include water and sewer facilities necessary to serve new housing developments designated for low- and moderate-income households.

In order to provide the City Council with a list of potential projects, staff reviewed City Council-adopted policies, the City’s Capital Improvement Program, and potential projects that fit into the category of “shovel ready”. To best meet the CDBG criteria for this NOFA, staff is recommending the following project:

Public Facility: Jade Street Community Center Rehabilitation. The City of Capitola is proposing to renovate the Jade Street Community Center located at 4400 Jade Street. The entire building will be upgraded, including the interior layout, exterior finishes, and landscape. No additions to the building are proposed. The project is divided into two distinct phases. Interior improvements in Phase A, proposed to be funded by the CDBG grant, include updated layout, mechanical, ADA improvements, and finishes.

Exterior improvements in Phase B, anticipated to be primarily funded by the pending $1.0M in the state budget, include an updated entryway, new siding, a new roof, and updated landscaping and flatwork.

Fiscal Impact: If successful, the $3.3 million requested would be 100% grant-funded. Adams Ashby Group, the City CDBG consultant, will be preparing the application for $7,500. The costs associated with the preparation of the application are an eligible expenditure under the existing CDBG grants that the City currently has with HCD.

Attachments:

1. Resolution
Report Prepared By: Katie Herlihy, Community Development Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk and Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
416
Item 8 F.

Resolution of the City Council of the City of Capitola, California RESOLUTION NO. Insert Number

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING AND THE

EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT AND ANY AMENDMENTS
THERETO FROM THE 2023 AND/OR 2024 FUNDING YEAR OF THE STATE

CDBG PROGRAM
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Capitola as follows:

SECTION 1:

The City Council has reviewed and hereby approves the submission to the State of California of one or more application(s) in the aggregate amount, not to exceed, of $3.3 Million for the following CDBG activities, pursuant to the 2023 and 2024 CDBG NOFAs:

List activities and amounts
Activity (e.g. Public Services,
Infrastructure, etc.)
Dollar Amount Being Requested for the
Activity
General Administration $ 100,000
Community Center Rehabilitation $ 3,200,000
$
$
$
SECTION 2:

The City Council hereby approves the use of Program Income in an amount not to exceed $0.00 for the CDBG activities described in Section 1.

SECTION 3:

The City Council acknowledges compliance with all state and federal public participation requirements in the development of its application(s).

SECTION 4:

The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the City Manager or designee*, to execute and deliver all applications and act on the City’s behalf in all matters pertaining to all such applications.
417
Item 8 F.

SECTION 5:

If an application is approved, the City Manager or designee*, is authorized to enter into, execute and deliver the grant agreement (i.e., Standard Agreement) and any and all subsequent amendments thereto with the State of California for the purposes of the grant.

SECTION 6:

If an application is approved, the City Manager or designee*, is authorized to sign and submit Funds Requests and all required reporting forms and other documentation as may be required by the State of California from time to time in connection with the grant.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Capitola held on 2/22/2024 by the following vote:

AYES: Enter # of votes or names
NOES: Enter # of votes or names
ABSENT: Enter # absentees or names
ABSTAIN: Enter # of abstains or names
Kristen Brown, Mayor
Capitola City Council

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
City of Capitola
I, Julia Gautho, City Clerk of the City of Capitola, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by said City Council on this 22nd day of February, 2024 and that said resolution has not been amended, modified, repealed, or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.

Julia Gautho, City Clerk of the City of Capitola,
State of California
418
Item 8 F.

Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG)Program
- 2023 Notice of Funding Availability
City Council Meeting February 22, 2024
419
Item 8 F.
2023 Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA)
• Capitola is in non-entitlement program
• Housing and Community Development Department (HCD)
released approximately $19 million on January 31, 2023
• Funds are provided as grants for wide range of activities, including housing, public services, economic
development, infrastructure and more
• All CDBG funds must meet a national objective: benefit low/moderate income persons, aid in prevention of slums and blight, or meet an urgent need
420
Item 8 F.
2023 Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA)
• Applications for this NOFA will only be accepted
for Infrastructure and Public Facility Projects
• Applications must be “shovel ready” (i.e.

Environmental complete, site control in place,
project is ready to go to bid upon award)
• Applicants may apply for 1 one project for up to
$3.3 million
• Application window will open on March 1st
421
Item 8 F.
2023 Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA)
• City staff is recommending an application be
submitted for Jade Street Community Center
Rehabilitation
• Staff would request the full $3.3 million for this
project
• Project is “shovel ready” and would meet CDBG
requirements
422
Item 8 F.

Recommended Action
• Receive staff report
• Open public hearing
• Receive public comment
• Close public hearing
• Direct staff to submit an application to CDBG for
the Community Center Project and execute
attached resolution
423
Item 8 F.

QUESTIONS
424
Item 8 F.

Capitola City CouncilFebruary 22, 2024

Capitola City Council
February 22, 2024