3. Look for mixed-use retail/commercial and housing opportunities at Capitola Mall site and along 41st Avenue. • Revisit the ratio of residential to non-residential uses for mixed use product types for greater feasibility. 337
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:3
The following pages provide a comprehensive list of the comments received and are organized and separated into the following topics.
1. Demographics, Geographic Context and Influences
2. Housing Development Process
3. COVID-19 Influences and Response
4. Primary Issues / Concerns
5. Sites Inventory
6. Opportunities / Ideas
7. Strategic Partnerships
1. Demographics, Geographic Context, and Influences
• Capitola is a coastal city with unique constraints
o Hotels bring in major revenue to the City, therefore hotel conversion is not financially viable o Residents are proud to live in Capitola and do not necessarily want to see additional housing and development in their city
• Schools with declining enrollments
o Santa Cruz County
▪ 2019 -1,900 enrollments to now - 1,600 enrollments
▪ Covid and cost of living may be factors
o Santa Cruz City Schools
o Enrollment decline from 7,000 to 6,000 in the last 8 years o 96 teachers have left in the last 8 years because of cost of living, and many can’t find a rental that is affordable
• Many employees in Capitola are leaving their jobs due to cost of living and lack of affordable housing within the city
o Teachers
o Santa Cruz Toyota and Subaru employees
• Many employees currently commute to Capitola
o Prunedale, Salinas, Watsonville, San Lorenzo Valley, San Jose 338
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:4
• Housing navigation is one of the main housing problems in Capitola o Property owners forcing tenants to relocate in order to increase rent o People looking for a rental can’t afford move-in costs (security deposit + first month’s rent) o Cost burden for seniors
▪ Rent taking up most of SSI that seniors receive, leaving very little for food, transportation, etc. ▪ Housing and food insecurity
o Increasing interest in smaller units (more affordable), especially for seniors living by themselves
2. Housing Development Process
• City of Capitola has pre-approved ADU prototypes that can help streamline the ADU permitting process • Make housing entitlement process easier / more streamlined • City of Capitola’s required radius for neighborhood notice is 300ft, which is the state minimum
3. COVID-19 Influences and Response
• Cost of building has significantly increased due to shortage of labor and materials • High demand for contractors has led to increasing costs and delay in projects
4. Primary Issues / Concerns
• Limited available land with existing services
• Lack of affordable housing for employees in Capitola
• Housing allocation numbers are significantly higher than what it was in the past • Negative community preconception towards additional housing and development in Capitola • Not enough action from the City to encourage and bring affordable housing to the City • Hotel conversion is not a viable option in Capitola
• Traffic congestion
o Limited alternative transportation option in Capitola o Lack of connected transportation grid in the region
o Requires significant streetscape changes, which may not be feasible • Housing is a net service sink
o Every new housing unit diminished the level of service in the City (infrastructure, police, fire, etc) • Lack of incentives for businesses to build housing
• Fear towards SB 9
• Density and height limitations
339
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:5
5. Sites Inventory
• Capitola Mall
o Opportunity for mixed-use housing development
o Likely where residents will have jobs, can easily commute to work o Consider subdividing the mall and taking into account leasing duration of tenants, multiple ownership, and feasibility of housing development to identify a site with least disturbance o Merlone Geier proposed converting Sears into 629 housing units in 2019 • 41st Avenue
o Vacant lots along 41st avenue
o Prime for infill/redevelopment
• Land adjacent to King’s Plaza (owned by Ow Commercial) o Interest in multifamily housing (affordable, market rate, etc) • School sites
o Possibly converting a portion of the school into affordable housing o Schools allow up to two ADUs on site for school workers • Churches
o Any underutilized properties or buildings can be an opportunity for affordable housing o Fairfield Inn used to be a church that got converted into a hotel • New Brighton State Park
o A major portion of land within Capitola
o Look into any opportunities for affordable housing
o 600 Park Avenue
• Ideal sites
o Close to jobs
o Adjacent to existing services
o Vacant land
o Underutilized properties
• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
o City has recently launched pre-approved ADU prototypes to help streamline the permitting process and reduce cost
340
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:6
6. Opportunities / Ideas
• Educate property owners
o Exchange of free land for higher density affordable housing units o More profit opportunities for property owners
• Look for opportunities to incentivize property owners to build housing • Capitola Mall and 41st Avenue are high interest opportunity sites o 41st Avenue has opportunity for higher density development • Santa Cruz County has water system plans and Sanitation District has a master plan that shows sufficient capacity in the future
• The City is currently working on adaptive signals to mitigate traffic impacts • Educate Capitola residents by appealing to their need • Increase height limit along 41st avenue to allow for additional housing • Rezone to allow minimum 20 du/acre and increase upper limit • Funnel select residential projects to planning approval to streamline the process • Reduce parking size standards
• Ground lease City-owned properties to non-profit housing organizations
7. Strategic Partnerships
• Habitat for Humanity Monterey Bay
o Completed affordable housing project in Capitola approximately 10 years ago o Has interest in further partnership to build affordable housing in the City • Eden Housing – Non-Profit Affordable Housing Advocate o Eden is partnering with market rate developers to allow more units to be built • School districts
o Have underutilized land that can be used for housing, but don’t have the funds to build • Religious congregations
• Ow Commercial
o Land adjacent to King’s Plaza
o Interested in buying properties for housing
• Merlone Geier
o Capitola Mall
341
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:7
• Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County
o Strong understanding of housing issues in Capitola and directly works with people struggling to find affordable housing
List of Interviewees
Andrea Mares-Quiroz - Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Inc Benjamin Ow, Ow Commercial
Brian Froelich, Senior Planner, City of Capitola
Doug Kaplan, Lomak Group
Elyssa Sanchez - Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Inc Erica Nunez-Zarate - Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Inc Jamie Goldstein, City Manager, City of Capitola
Jane Barr, Eden
Jeff Hodge, Owner of Santa Cruz Toyota and Santa Cruz Subaru Jennifer Cosgrove, Intero
Jessica Khan, Director of Public Works, City of Capitola Katie Herlihy, Community Development Director, City of Capitola Kris Munro, Santa Cruz City Schools
Lourdes Arellano-Perez - Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Inc Michael Lavigne, Compass
Owen Lawlor, Lawlor Land Use
Satish Rishi, Habitat for Humanity Monterey Bay
Scott McPherson, Merlone Geier
Scott Turnbull, SUESD
342
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:8
Planning Commission and City Council Study Sessions
On February 2 and 9, 2023, and June 1 and 8, 2023, public meetings with the Capitola Planning Commission and City Council were held as study sessions focused on the Housing Element Update. Staff and the consulting team made brief presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council that provided an overview of the Housing Element update process, as well as the City’s approach to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The study sessions were properly noticed, agendized, and advertised on the City’s website and social media platforms. Comments from the City Council centered around the sites inventory analysis, ranging from ideas on specific site locations for housing to broader-level ideas to streamline and meet the RHNA housing allocation for the City. 343
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:9
Joint Study Session with Planning Commission and City Council On March 16, 2023, a meeting with the Capitola Planning Commission and City Council was held as a joint study session focused on the sites inventory, analysis, and site selection. Staff and the consulting team made a brief presentation to the Planning Commission and the City Council that provided an overview of the sites inventory, analysis, and site selection for potential allocation for the Housing Element. There were a small number of public comments made during the joint study session, but they were limited to issues relating to existing mobile home developments. The joint study session was properly noticed, agendized, and advertised on the City’s webpage and social media platforms. 344
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:10
Community Workshops
On February 16, 2023, City staff and consultants hosted the first of two community workshops to solicit public input on the 2024-2031 Housing Element. The workshop was advertised on the City’s website and social media platforms, as well as materials posted at public facilities. Invitations to participate were also sent directly to stakeholders via email.
Staff and consultants gave a presentation that provided an overview of the housing element update process. A virtual poll was conducted during the presentation to gather feedback from participants to gauge perceived housing needs and preferred locations for potential future housing. The Community Workshop presentation can be furnished by City staff on request. Participants were able to share their ideas and concepts to address the City’s housing needs and trends by participating in a group discussion at the conclusion of the presentation. 345
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:11
On May 16, 2023, City staff and consultants hosted the second of two community meetings regarding the 2024-2031 Housing Element. The workshop was advertised on the City’s website and social media platforms, as well as materials posted at public facilities. Invitations to participate were also sent directly to stakeholders via email. Staff and consultants gave a presentation that provided an overview and update of the housing element update process. The Community Meeting presentation can be furnished by City staff on request. Participants were able to share their ideas to address the City’s housing needs and trends by participating in a group discussion at the conclusion of the presentation. 346
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:12
Public Review Draft
On May 10, 2023, the Public Review Draft was published online, and printed copies were made available at City facilities, including City Hall, for 30 days. The Public Review Draft was distributed to local and regional stakeholders and organizations listed in the List of Interviewees above. Also, an email notifying over 100 interested parties was sent. 347
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:13
Housing Questionnaire
On November 14, 2022, the City launched an online questionnaire on the Housing Element webpage. A printed poster notifying the public of the questionnaire was provided at public facilities, including City Hall. The questionnaire was made available online until March 21, 2023, with a total of 92 responses. Participants were asked to provide feedback on current housing conditions, concerns, and/or preferences for the Housing Element team to consider. Other questions including demographics, age, and connection to the City of Capitola were asked to better understand the range of participants responding. The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions designed to get input on the following:
• Participants Orientation (Questions 1-5)
• Preferred New Housing Locations (6-7)
• Favored Housing-Related Strategies and Programs (8-10) • Perception of Difficulty Finding Housing (11-14)
• Perceived Condition of Neighborhoods and Properties in Capitola (15-16) • Level of Support for Various Housing Developments (17-19) • Perceived Housing Challenges and Issues (20-29)
Participant Orientation
The survey’s introductory question was aimed at understanding participants’ relationship with the City of Capitola. The majority of respondents, 71%, “live in Capitola.” 40% of participants indicated that they have lived in worked in Capitola for over 21 years. The majority of respondents are over the age of 65 (36%) or between the ages of 35 and 54 (30%).
When asked if particpants rent, own a home, or rent a rental property, the majority (52%) indicated that they “own a home” in Capitola.
348
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:14
Question 1: What is your primary
connection to the City of Capitola?
(select all that apply)
Question 2: How long have you lived
and/or worked in the City of Capitola?
349
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:15
Question 3: What is your age?
Question 4: Do you rent, own a home,
and/or own a residential rental property
within the City? (select all that apply)
350
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:16
Question 5: If you selected other, please write in your response here:
My disabled son lives in Capitola
Own/live on the Capitola-Soquel border.
I live 1.7 miles from Capitola. Drive/bike through daily. Family members live, work and school within Capitola.
I am a Student at UCSC
I own in Live Oak
I do not live or own property in Capitola, but housing is a regional issue. What Capitola does affects adjacent jurisdictions in the region.
I do not live or own property in Capitola
I have a business in Capitola
Student at UCSC who would like to live in Capitola
I rent in unit in SC
I conduct business but do not have a store-front in Capitola I live outside the city limits in Aptos
I live and work in Santa Cruz County.
I own a home in Pleasure Point.
Live in Live Oak area
I am a homeowner in Live Oak, very close to the Capitola line, so we are sort of functionally part of the community, if not technically. own a home in Santa Cruz
I shop and play in Capitola
Live in unincorporated Santa Cruz County
I have family members that rent in Capitola
I rent in Aptos
I own home on 32nd Ave
I do not own residential property in Capitola
I live in Santa Cruz County
My disabled son lives in Capitola
351
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:17
Preferred New Housing Locations
Questions 6 and 7 were designed to identify respondents’ favored locations for new housing in Capitola. The majority of respondents (86%) indicated they preferred new housing to be located in “Area A” and in “older shopping centers/retail areas” (80%).
Question 6: As noted previously, the City of Capitola
is required to plan for at least 1,336 new housing
units during the 2024-2031 planning period. The City
is working to identify strategies to meet this
obligation. Based on the map provided below, please
identify the areas where you think new housing within
the City should be prioritized. (Please select five.)
352
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:18
Question 7: Please select the top opportunity areas
where you would most like to see additional housing
opportunities in Capitola. (Select three choices.)
353
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:19
Favored Housing-Related Strategies and Programs
Questions 8, 9, and 10 asked respondents about their preferred strategies and programs to provide additional housing in Capitola. The majority of participants indicated that they prefer “mixed-use vertical development” for providing additional housing in Capitola. The majority of participants are in favor of the City of Capitola promoting “mixed-use development with both commercial and residential components” as a primary housing-related program.
Question 8: Please rank the following strategies the City should consider implementing to provide additional housing in Capitola.
354
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:20
Question 9: What types of housing-related programs and/or activities do you believe the City should concentrate on over the next eight (8) years? (Please select the top five priorities.) 355
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:21
Question 10: If you selected Other, please write in your response here:
Protect existing neighborhoods from overdevelopment
Place affordable housing equally in the city. Consider the Jewel Box and Depot Hill which seem exempt from this type of housing save for the very few duplexes, et al. Develop in the Rispin Mansion instead of creating another park at a reprehensible cost to the taxpayers.
Let’s not just cram more units in without addressing the needs of the entire community ie, schools, parks, open space, infrastructure maintenance, water, parking.
Assist and support resident owned mobile home parks and reinstate rent control for those residents that are suffering from the loss of it.
Request that fewer additional units be required to be built Eliminate single family zoning
Consider abolishing zoning. Plans to limit the availability of homes are plans for creating homelessness.
My biggest fear is the loss of the ability to be a homeowner. Big developers creating "affordable housing" is rental property. That will never allow folks to gain generational wealth. We need a mix of rentals AND condo/apartment/single family.
Too many vacation rentals are in the area and displacing people who would otherwise live year round in Capitola.
Universal design features for increase in accessibility housing with all housing Capitola will lose its uniqueness without a plan that preserves the existing neighborhood concepts. I mean this is a ten year plan. What are we supposed to look like in 100 years?
Leave R1 neighborhoods alone!
convert unused buildings to housing.
356
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:22
Perception of Difficulty Finding Housing
Questions 11 through 14 asked participants if they agree, disagree, or neither agree nor disagree with the level of difficulty of finding housing in Capitola. The vast majority of respondents indicated that they agree that it is difficult ‘to find affordable rental housing’ (79%) and “affordable housing for ownership” (87%) in Capitola. The majority of respondents indicated that it is difficult “to find rental available housing” (68%) and “available homes for purchase” in Capitola (67%).
Question 11: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: It
is difficult to find affordable rental
housing in the City of Capitola.
Question 12: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: It
is difficult to find affordable housing for
ownership in the City of Capitola.
357
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:23
Question 13: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: It
is difficult to find available rental
housing in the City of Capitola.
Question 14: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: It
is difficult to find available homes for
purchase in the City of Capitola.
358
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:24
Perceived Condition of Neighborhoods and Properties in Capitola Questions 15 and 16 asked participants about their perceived condition of neighborhoods and properties in the City of Capitola. The majority of respondents indicated that they “disagree” that the condition of neighborhoods (streetlights, sidewalks, parks, etc.) is the foremost challenge facing the City of Capitola (56%). When asked if participants perceive the condition of existing housing and property maintenance as the foremost challenge facing the City of Capitola, the majority indicated they “disagree” (59%).
Question 15: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement:
The condition of neighborhoods
(streetlights, sidewalks, parks, etc.) is
the foremost challenge facing the City
of Capitola.
Question 16: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement:
The condition of existing housing and
property maintenance is the foremost
challenge facing the City of Capitola.
359
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:25
Level of Support for Various Housing Developments
Questions 17, 18, and 19 asked respondents about their support of housing developments in the City. When asked if participants ‘agree’ with the support of Accessory Dwelling Units in existing residential neighborhoods, the majority of respondents strongly agreed (70%). When asked if respondents ‘agree’ with support of additional mixed-use housing on 41st Avenue Corridor, the majority strongly agreed (82%). When asked if respondents ‘agree’ with development of mixed-use housing at the Capitola mall, the majority of participants strongly agreed (86%).
Question 17: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement:
I support the development of Accessory
Dwelling Units (Second Units/“Granny
Flats”) in existing residential
neighborhoods.
Question 18: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: I
support the development of additional
mixed-use housing on 41st Avenue
Corridor.
360
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:26
Question 19: Select whether you
agree, disagree, or neither agree nor
disagree with the following statement: I
support the development of mixed-use
housing at the Capitola Mall.
Perceived Housing Challenges and Issues
Question 20 asked participants about their perceived housing challenges and issues. When asked about the main challenges in the City of Capitola, the most favored responses included ‘Too expensive rent/mortgage’ (76%), ‘Lack of available housing’ (65%), and ‘too much housing for short-term rentals’ (41%). While the majority of participants indicated that they have not experienced any housing issues (44.8%), other respondents indicated they have experienced ‘Insufficient income to afford living in Capitola’, ‘Other’, ‘Adult children living at home due to the inability to afford housing’, and ‘struggle to pay rent or mortgage’. When asked about factors affecting housing discrimination in the City, participants selected ‘Not Applicable’ (36%) and ‘Source of Income (including using public assistance for housing payments)’ (25%). Respondents indicated that they felt the ‘City of Capitola’ (32%), ‘Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’ (17.9%), and ‘Santa Cruz County Housing Authority’ (17.9%) were the most prevalent factors in housing discrimination in the City. When participants were asked to select the groups with the greatest need for housing and related services, the most popular responses included ‘Single-parent head of household’ (75%), ‘Young adults (19-24 years old)’ (65.2%), ‘Seniors (65+ years old)’, and ‘Persons experiencing homelessness’ (63%). Other responses included low-income individuals and young professionals. 361
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:27
The final poll question allowed participants to submit free responses related to any ideas that the City should consider for creating more housing opportunities or as part of its Housing Element Update. Ideas included mixed-use development supported by public transit, penalizing illegal short-term rentals, dispersing housing developments throughout the city, and streamlining permit processes, among others.
Question 20: What are the main housing
challenges in the City of Capitola? (choose all
that apply)
362
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:28
Question 21: If you selected Other, please write in your response here:
Maintain the Capitola charm. Resist over development.
Capitola is crowded. There are multiple granny units; they are often illegal. I live in the Heights and there are 5 homes in a very small space. We can hear each other cough. The Rispin Mansion is a boondoggle of epic status. Where is the water coming from for all these additional people? As it is, we keep buckets in my shower, mellow yellow, etcetera and you tell us you are adding more people! City should focus on re-paving streets and placing utilities underground. 41st Avenue is full of potholes yet it is the entrance to this, supposedly, tourist town.
The loss of rent control for low income residents who depended on it for their housing security Too many wildly overpriced homes bought up by wealthy out-of-town second and third home-buyers that then sit empty. We need a vacancy tax to discourage this!
Restrictive zoning
No available vacant land
Mixed use Zoning which allows for 15 minute walkable neighborhoods and access to basic needs without driving Providing relevant service for senior homeowners needing help with home repairs.
NIMBY not in my backyard residents - who oppose everything and anything -1/3 of the houses in Capitola have people living in them. These people vote - just owning property gives no one any say in laws or implementation Capitola could improve safety, bike lanes, etc for bikers No land to build on other than mall site. Need to balance sales tax revenue against cost of services for additional housing, 363
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:29
Question 22: If you live in the City of Capitola,
within the past five (5) years have you experienced
any of the following housing issues? (select all that
apply)
364
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:30
Question 23: If you selected Other, please write in your response here:
My grandson has experienced homelessness. He was born at Sutter Maternity Center to a middle class family.
Live on the outskirts of Capitola, not in the city itself Albeit of an older generation, we worked 47 years each to be able to afford to live then retire here. It rankles to see the culture change to "give me/give me".
None
My apartment building was purchased 101 Grand Ave. the new owners immediately raised our rent by hundreds of dollars and changed our current lease to not including utilities which added another 200.00 on top of the 300.00 additional rent increase. They then stopped maintaining the building. The intention is to use 101 Grand Ave. as an Airbnb with short term renters instead of long term tenants. One by one we all moved out. It was a complete nightmare because as we moved out they started demolishing the units. It was truly the most stressful situation. I happily lived there for 5 years prior to these new owners. They don’t care about human beings. They only care about money. Depot Hill is a charming place to live. Their idea of short term housing in an area that is already lacking in long term housing is bad for the community.
Too many second homes that sit empty nearly year round are destroying the ability to create community and keeping from locals from living in our area.
I have not lived in Capitola
I don’t live in Capitola
N/A
I do not live in the City of Capitola, I'm outside the city limits.
Lack of affordable housing in City of Capitola.
neighbors, who overcrowd their house with tenants, construction materials and work, and rodents, but call the police if someone parks in front of their house - city doesn't seem to care
I have not lived in the city of Capitola.
do not live in Capitola
Heating for home is too expensive for me, even with new heat pump units do not live in the city
I do not live in Capitola, I could not find affordable rental within Capitola.
Limited housing stock for sale
n/a
365
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:31
Question 24: State and federal Fair Housing laws prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing against the protected classes. Of those, which do you think is the most prevalent factor in housing discrimination in the City? (please select one)
366
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:32
Question 25: If you selected Other, please write in your response here:
My street houses people of all races, creeds and income levels.
Income - we are living through the worst income inequality in one hundred years unknown
Question 26: State and federal Fair
Housing laws prohibit discrimination in the
sale, rental, and financing of housing
against the protected classes. Of those,
which do you think is the most prevalent
factor in housing discrimination in the City?
(please select one)
367
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:33
Question 27: Please select the groups
with the greatest need for housing and
related services in the City. (select four
choices)
368
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:34
Question 28: If you selected Other, please write in your response here:
Young professionals (25-35 years old)
Those employed in Capitola
First time home buyers
City Workers, School employees
Students
Middle class earners, like teachers, can't afford a home even if there are two earners in the household.
Senior homeowners needing financial assistance to stay in their homes.
Those with Section 8 Vouchers from Housing Authority is being denied housing because of having Section 8 Vouchers. Individuals and families are being discriminated and is illegal under the State of California with the Department of Fair Housing and Employment. young families, who want to surf
Low income groups
Low income
I only had 2 that I wanted to choose. I don’t agree with forcing a choice so I selected other. unknown
Question 29: Are there any other ideas you would like to suggest the City consider creating more housing opportunities or as part of its Housing Element Update? (Please write in your response) Turn the mall and major roads into mixed use development well-supported by public transit Encourage shared housing
Stiff fines for illegal short term rentals
Rispin, Capitola Mall, other empty spaces.
Develop the Capitola Mall. like Santa Row. Or European Centers with shops and gyms day cares and other services downstairs and 2-3 bedroom apartments upstairs with communal living spaces on the roof .. like Facebook main campus. Hire that architect. Save units for teachers and police and fire fighters to lease/ rent at reasonable rents.
Spread out potential housing sites - do not concentrate all identifies sites in one area The City's plan should equally distribute the housing options throughout the City and not just where there are already a plethora of affordable housing options. A prime example of unequal distribution is the proposed 44th Ave/Capitola Road project which is an area of considerable affordable housing in place.
369
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:35
As previously stated, my wish is to retain the essence of Capitola’s charm and beauty by not cramming units in without a commitment to support all residents in the infrastructure and integrity of the community where taxes are paid.
Encourage developers to create more housing with reduced fees and, if the city of Capitola owns property, move forward with development. The process takes years and we don't have time on our side.
Capitola needs to take into consideration all human circumstances and accommodate all without discrimination. Everyone deserves to have shelter and a place to rest. Not having shelter causes so many other issues in a persons life.
More Granny units really to me just means more studios for rent that are super expensive. It really does not help the situation. In fact it makes the housing situation worse because of the expected rental income that teachers cant even afford.
ADU - ease the restrictions
A better survey. Q #22 makes no sense, many other Qs require uneducated guesses.
We all agree that we need affordable housing. The City of Capitola is beautiful place because of all the work City leaders have done in the past years. We cannot over build just for the sake of more housing. The City must make the hard decisions and keep the charm and quality of life. We can meet the numbers of housing that the state is requesting simply by allow existing family homes add ADUs, Granny Flats or split homes into duplexes. The new housing would allow younger folks and families to move in and at the same time benefiting existing property owners.
Rent reduction or reinstate supplemental financial support for households impoverished by the loss of Rent Control especially in my mobile home park because I live on $100/mo after paying rent, utilities, car insurance and internet.
The City can create housing opportunities without highest density footprints. Development needs to be scaled responsibly and allocated throughout the City; not simply concentrated along the 41st Avenue corridor.
The City of Capitola should streamline permit processes, increase maximum density far above the required 20 du, increase height regulations, and incentivize developers to build affordable housing. Increasing density reduces sprawl Turn the out-dated, failing Capitola Mall into a large scale 100% affordable housing community featuring mixed-use, including retail and restaurants.
AFFORDABLE HOUSE SHOULD BE WELL DESIGNED, PARKED AND LIVABLE. IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTANDARD TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE.
Consider any & all Options! Do not be deterred! How about Redtree property at bottom of freeway exit? - Eliminate single family zoning - Add developer incentives for density/height for Transit oriented development, 100% affordable, student housing, and working family housing (2br+) - Adopt a form based zoning code - Create additional commercial/mixed use zones to allow for "15 minute" walkable neighborhoods - Affirmative further fair housing by specifically encouraging low income and multifamily development in opportunity areas / formerly redlined areas - Add tenant protections to prevent displacement - Update laws to allow ministerial approval by city staff of high-quality projects, i.e. under 50 units, or any 100% affordable projects, and pre-approved ADU standards - Remove parking requirements for new housing - Make a realistic Site Inventory - parcels that can actually be developed based on size, and have real redevelopment interest - Plan for a total number of units that goes at least 30% above the required number for capacity buffer
Consider abolishing zoning. If not completely abolishing zoning consider significantly increasing allowable development by setting much higher height limits, nearly eliminating setback requirements, nearly eliminating parking requirements and other items that impede the construction of housing.
Find several locations near jobs or transit that are zoned to allow 5-over-2 mixed use multi family development. 370
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:36
I believe that private landlords and property management companies are the biggest factor in Fair Housing violations. Per Fair Housing the first qualified renter should be offered the opportunity. Santa Cruz Property Management, RE 831, and others collect 50+ applications and fees before offering the units. There should be classes at the library on how to boost credit scores, get rental packets together and how to report fair housing violations! Affordable homes for first time home buyers and available inventory for long term rentals Develop the mall property into a mixed use, multiple story, including priced/affordable housing, with wrap-around services Approve affordable housing projects through an expedited process.
Looser height restrictions, build downtown, incentives to build affordable housing We are limited on space, and overcrowded as is. Build houses in Merced, Central CA where there is Millions of acres of land! Work with the County to lower Capitola numbers and increase SC / Watsonville that has more land than Capitola. Our infrastructure is taxes, we don’t have the space on our Roads, Water, Sewer, Electrical, and School systems. I want to live in Pebble Beach, but i can afford to. Maybe they will subsides a house i can afford? Less Commercial, more affordable Residential monitor illegal Short Term Rental Build multiple story housing.
Join with other cities to fight the state forcing housing mandates on cities.
Housing should be infill, multi-use, easy access to basic needs, safe-walkable, and close to transit. Urban design should include connecting communities, built with street level vibrancy, easy access community commons an easy walk from development, urban forests and community gardens to connect people with each other, nature, source of food, and access to opportunity via public transit which benefits everyone and the local economy. The Capitola Mall is a great location for housing but don't maintain it as a concrete jungle. This is a great opportunity to create a new walkable community with lots of trees and gardens and connecting spaces, as well as dense housing. Let's create affordable housing that ANYONE would want to live in.
Investigate non-profit models of housing, "social housing" as done in other nations. Also, explore "missing middle" types of multifamily development, townhomes and courtyard complexes.
Support passenger rail and metro as well as more housing near public transit Bay Avenue, around the Nob Hill/CVS area, would be a great place for denser multi-family infill housing as it's in an already-developed zone, offers food and medicine shopping within quick walking distance, and its building heights would be non-disruptive. And: thanks for this survey! Provide resources for financial assistance to seniors trying to stay in their homes and repairing them.
We need more accessible housing for seniors and people with disabilities. The City has a poor record of letting go like Capitola Gardens and not building any affordable housing. We need mixed of workforce housing, families, seniors, and people with disabilities. Universal designed can increase access to accessible housing significantly. The Capitola mall is a perfect and ideal location. instead of lying about how long the permit process takes, tell the truth(a year or more) Pretty much anything to promote density and walkability. Capitola has a weird grid with lots of parking lot surface area, intense arterial "stroads", and a lot of SFDs that are too big and look like they're made of cheap materials. I find it pretty grim, to be honest, and only come out to Capitola because it is convenient to my home in Live Oak (which has all the same problems, FWIW). I think more mixed-use projects and multifamily housing, and more pedestrian friendly streets, would be great for the city and give it a more vibrant character (there are neighborhoods where I am nervous running in broad daylight because all the huge ugly houses are in dumb little cul-de-sacs or whatever, so there are NO eyes on the road, except in the cars that are driving 371
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:37
too fast on all the through streets; it really is pedestrian hell) while at the same time providing badly-needed housing. Making it easier to build ADUs is a great stopgap, and I support that as well as making it easier to build duplexes and triplexes or convert SFDs to duplexes and triplexes, but long-term, Capitola is going to be pretty sad and undesirable if it doesn't densify and do something about its car-centric, hyper-suburban development pattern.
Anything you all can come up with to address that, little by little, is great.
Higher FARs near transit possibilities
Some data would be helpful. I don’t have a way to assess who is being discriminated against or who the vulnerable populations are Take advantage of SB 35 to increase development of housing Does your fee structure incentivize building single-family homes (including second homes) over multi-family homes? Can you shift the incentive so that multiple units make more sense than single family on the expensive lots that are bought and flipped Paths to home ownership.
Yes. Water, sewer, streets, parking, municipal services, parks, youth activities all should be weighted for the impact on the City and adequacy of city services, police and law enforcement, library, pge, water, and impact on existing schools, roads and traffic, and overall quality of life! Allow multilabel adu on large property
Send notice to neighbors and allow them to choose if an ADU is appropriate on their street.
Capitola will never be able to provide 1300+ housing units without destroying the city and residential neighborhoods. The city should maintain its current FAR and max bldg height rules. RESTORE LOCAL CONTROL! If you can't afford to live here, go somewhere where you can.
Rezoning of underutilized industrial land for mixed use development Please increase the infrastructure needed to support more traffic and law enforcement The city should look to Atherton, which is challenging the state mandate. Even though the intentions are different, Capitola is landlocked and lacks undeveloped spheres. The state’s policy is unrealistic.
Increase the housing unit number for the Capitola mall redevelopment plan None
Focus on multi-story tiny studio apartments in Capitola Mall. Watch y tube video "New Yorkers living large in Small Spaces" for tiny apartment ideas. ideas. Also use vacant businesses for apartments- rezone them for business/ housing uses.
Easier and faster permit process. More permissive zoning with little/no ground floor retail requirements. 372
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
APPENDIX B:38
Housing Questionnaire Summary
Participants represented a variety of backgrounds and experiences with the City and had differing opinions on housing needs and implementation strategies. However, several main themes emerged from the questionnaire responses:
• Who participated? The vast majority of participants were homeowners from Capitola and have lived and/or worked in the City limits for over twenty-one (21) years. • Preferred New Housing Locations. Participants were strongly in favor of Area A as the preferred area for the City to prioritize new housing in the City. The top three preferred opportunity areas for additional housing opportunities included older shopping centers/retail areas, underutilized office property, underutilized industrial warehouse space, and vacant properties.
• Favored Housing-Related Strategies and Programs. Participants were supportive of vertical mixed-use development with both commercial and residential components. Many expressed concern for protecting residential neighborhoods from “overdevelopment”, while others support rental and for-sale affordable housing opportunities throughout the city.
• Perception of Difficulty Finding Housing. Participants strongly agreed that it is difficult to find affordable and rental housing and affordable and available housing for ownership in the City of Capitola. • Perceived Condition of Neighborhoods. Participants generally disagreed that the foremost challenges facing the City are the condition of neighborhoods and the condition of existing housing and property maintenance.
• Level of Support for Various Housing Developments. The majority of participants support the development of Accessory Dwelling Units in existing residential neighborhoods and the development of additional mixeduse housing on 41st Avenue Corridor. • Perceived Housing Challenges and Issues. Participants were mixed on the main housing challenges in the City of Capitola, with some expressing that too expensive rent/mortgage costs were the main challenge, while others attributed challenges to lack of available housing and too much housing for short-term rentals. Many participants generally had not personally experienced any housing issues in the City and were mixed on the most prevalent factor of housing discrimination. Participants were mixed on the City of Capitola, Department of Housing and Urban Development, or Santa Crus County Housing Authority being the more prevalent factors in housing discrimination in the City. Participants generally agreed that the groups with the greatest need for housing and related services in the City are Single-parent heads of households, young adults, seniors, and persons experiencing homelessness.
373
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:1
Appendix C: 2015-2023 Housing Element Program Evaluation A. Progress Towards Implementing the 2015-2023 Housing Element Programs The 2015–2023 Housing Element established six primary housing goals. Under each goal, policies were provided that outlined more specifically how these goals could be carried out. Finally, programs were provided that outlined the actual actions that would be taken to facilitate the goals and policies. To review progress made during the 2015-2023 Housing Element, each goal is listed along with implementing programs and a discussion of the actions that have been accomplished.
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Goal 1.0 Housing Production: Diversity in housing type and affordability level to accommodate the needs of Capitola Residents
Policy 1.1 Provide adequate sites and supporting infrastructure to accommodate present and future housing needs of Capitola residents.
Program 1.1a Providing Adequate Housing Sites
• Maintain an inventory of available vacant and prospective sites that can accommodate new housing.
• Maintain Opportunity Sites identified in the Housing Element to meet any outstanding Housing Element RHNA obligation for the 2015-2023 planning period.
• Continue to require housing production goals for housing opportunity sites remaining in Capitola.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City has worked together with applicants to entitle and/or build residential projects throughout the City, including ADU and inclusionary units:
822 Bay Avenue
Entitled as a hotel on 7/21/2022
No net loss findings with ADU development, 4401 Capitola Road (36 units pending), and 1098 38th Avenue.
1575 38th Avenue
Developed with 11 new units. One of the units is an inclusionary unit.
Citywide ADUs
Expected 6 units
2016–2021: 21 units
Most of the housing opportunity sites identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element to accommodate the City’s RHNA are still available for the 2023- 2031 Housing Element cycle. These sites include vacant and underutilized 374
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:2
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished sites, Affordable Housing Overlay sites, ADUs, and commercial zones that allow residential development. All housing sites have zoning in place that will allow residential development at the appropriate densities required by state Housing Element law. The City will continue to maintain an inventory of these housing opportunity sites throughout the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period, as well as include additional sites to satisfy the current required number of RHNA sites.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 1.2 Encourage mixed-use developments.
Program 1.2a Mixed-Use Developments
• Encourage opportunities for the production of mixed residentialcommercial use projects in the CC (Community Commercial), CN (Neighborhood Commercial), CR (Commercial/Residential), and PO (Professional Office) zones.
• Utilize appropriate development standards, design and compatibility review and regulatory and financial incentives to encourage mixed-use development.
• Continue to explore possibilities for mixed use development with current property owners, such as the owners of the opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element and in the 41st Avenue Economic
Development/Mixed Use Revitalization Study.
• Continue to monitor and implement the policies in the 41st Avenue/ Capitola Mall Re-Visioning Plan that addresses the distribution of land uses, mixed-use parcels, transportation alternatives, and urban design. • Monitor and include an update in the annual Housing Element Progress Report for all mixed-use development activities to identify unforeseen barriers that should be addressed and to evaluate additional incentives that may be needed.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: A citywide Zoning Code update was passed in 2018 which encourages mixed use in Regional Commercial (CR), Community Commercial (CC), Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N), and Mixed Use Village (MU-V) zones. The zones were renamed but the areas remained the same.
The City added a new overlay to incentivize development in return for community benefits. Increased height and density are allowed near the Capitola Mall and intersection of 41st Avenue and Capitola Road.
The City also adopted new objective design standards in 2022 for multifamily and mixed use.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 1.3 Provide opportunities for the development of alternative housing.
Program 1.3a Alternative Housing Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City updated the Zoning Code in 2018 and the ADU ordinance in 2020 (previously referred to as Secondary Dwelling Unit Ordinance). As a result, an ADU can be built on 375
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:3
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished • Review and monitor the effect of the Secondary Dwelling Unit Ordinance on neighborhood vitality; consider possible modifications to the parking, height and setback requirements to encourage increased participation, if necessary.
• Review existing zoning codes and the City’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance to determine if modifications to encourage co-housing programs would be appropriate.
• Continue to work with the local mobile home park residents, owners, and the state to improve mobile home park affordability and sustainability.
• Encourage and facilitate the exploration and possible development of other alternative housing types including farmworker housing, factorybuilt housing, live/work units, and Small Ownership Units (SOUs). any lot with a residential use. Limiting factors such as the 5,000-square-foot minimum lot size were removed and setbacks and heights were amended.
Also, the review process is now streamlined, consistent with state law.
The condominium conversion ordinance was not modified during the 5th cycle. Due to the rising rents statewide, apartment rental is a profitable investment option for most property owners. Condominium conversion has not been a trend in the last decade or more.
In 2017, the City was awarded a CDBG grant for housing rehabilitation for up to $7,500 to senior citizens, disabled persons, and income eligible Capitola residents. The program allowed residents to invest in home improvements for energy and water efficiency. The program was available for mobile homes, condos, townhomes, and single-family homes.
The City zoning code update included new standards for single-room occupancy units and factory built ADUs.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 1.4 Periodically review development regulations, permit processes, and fees and their effect on development to ensure that such requirements facilitate housing production and rehabilitation.
Program 1.4a Review Development Regulations
• Review requirements such as the minimum unit size, setbacks, parking requirements, and height restrictions to determine that they are necessary and pertinent and do not pose constraints on the development of affordable housing.
• Evaluate the feasibility of shared parking for mixed-use developments. • Evaluate the feasibility of reduced parking standards for senior and special needs housing.
• Consider development standard modifications, streamlined processing for applications related to the creation of affordable housing, and fee modifications for projects proposing affordable units that are required to apply for variations to the existing development standards.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation:
City zoning code and associated development standards amended and certified by Coastal Commission on June 9, 2021.
The City adopted new parking allowances for mixed use to decrease required parking if a study is completed.
Appropriateness: Program is updated to reflect recent changes to state law for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
376
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:4
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Goal 2.0 Affordable Housing Development: Increased and protected supply of housing affordable to extremely-low, very- low, low and moderate-income households
Policy 2.1 Protect the affordability of existing mobile home parks.
Program 2.1.a Mobile Home Park Technical Assistance and Feasibility Studies
• Provide feasibility and technical assistance funding and predevelopment funding, acquisition, and rehabilitation assistance for resident-controlled and non-profit acquisition of mobile home parks, requiring long-term affordability where possible.
• If conversions of use are contemplated, ensure that resident investment values are preserved and that adequate relocation assistance is provided. To the extent possible, preserve or replace affordable housing units.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: In 2017, the City was awarded a CDBG grant for housing rehabilitation for up to $7,500 to senior citizens, disabled persons, and income eligible Capitola residents. The program allowed residents to invest in a variety of home improvements for energy and water efficiency. The program was available for mobile homes, condos, townhomes, and single-family homes.
The City has not been able to acquire one of the mobile home parks (Cabrillo) as the owner has no interest in selling. The City is coordinating discussions between park tenants and owner for a new lease.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Program 2.1.b Mobile Home Resident Acquisition Projects • Encourage park acquisition or conversion, which will depend on resident/owner interest and funding availability.
• Evaluate necessary infrastructure improvements as part of the acquisition or conversion process.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: See Program 2.1.a Appropriateness: This program is combined with Program 2.1.a in the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 2.2 Encourage continued affordability of affordable rental housing supply in existing mobile home parks, subsidized rental housing, and special needs housing.
Program 2.2a Monitor Affordable Housing Units
• Develop and maintain an AB 987 database to include detailed information on all subsidized units, including those that have affordability covenants.
• Explore funding sources such as HUD Section 208/811 loans, HOPE I and II Homeownership Program funds, HOME funds, CDBG funds, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Programs, California Housing Financial Agency single-family and multi-family programs, and other applicable programs to stimulate private developer and non-profit entity Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City created 17 affordable units through its inclusionary housing program.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element. 377
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:5
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished efforts to develop and finance housing for extremely-low, low and moderate-income households.
• Proactively monitor opportunity sites that may be no longer available for residential development and identify alternative sites.
Program 2.2b Preservation of Rental Housing
• Investigate new funding and financing opportunities to encourage the development, through acquisition of existing housing and new construction, of affordable housing projects that provide long-term affordability through homeownership, non-profit ownership, and residentially owned cooperatives.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City funds an emergency rental assistance program and a security deposit program for low income renters.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element, and the investigation of new opportunities for affordable housing projects is ongoing.
Policy 2.3 Continue participation in State and federally sponsored programs designed to maintain housing affordability, including the HUD Section 8 rental assistance program.
Program 2.3a Section 8
• Continue to participate in the Housing Authority of Santa Cruz County Section 8 Certificate/Voucher Rental Assistance.
• Continue to refer residents to the County program and provide information at City Hall and the City’s website.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City continues to participate in the Section 8 program. Currently 206 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) are used in the City
Appropriateness: Program implementation is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 2.4 Preserve existing unrestricted affordable rental housing during the Housing Element planning period Program 2.4a Condominium Conversion Ordinance
• Continue to implement the Condominium Conversion Ordinance Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: There have been no conversion activities in the last decade or more due to the highly profitable rental housing market.
Appropriateness: The ordinance remains in effect but is removed from the Housing Element as a specific program.
Policy 2.5 Promote the development of affordable housing on opportunity sites.
Program 2.5a Affordable Housing Development Program
• Encourage utilization of the Affordable Housing Overlay Ordinance by non-profit affordable housing developers with an emphasis on the development of new housing opportunities that result in long-term affordable housing. Encourage the production of affordable housing Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City promotes the development of affordable units in new developments through its Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, State Density Bonus program, and by encouraging development on opportunity sites and affordable housing overlay sites.
378
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:6
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished units per the City’s 2015-2023 RHNA for very low and low-income housing units (57 units).
• Facilitate the development of affordable housing through the provision of regulatory concessions and density increases under the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
• Collaborate with non-profit organizations, private developers, employers, special needs groups, state and federal agencies and other interested parties to develop affordable housing.
• Continue to utilize available financing to assist with the planning and development of new affordable housing for all ages and household types. Community Development staff will regularly monitor the variety of federal and state funding sources that are available for affordable housing projects. The annual Housing Element Progress Report will include an analysis of the funding sources that have been applied for and that will become available during the coming year.
However, with the comprehensive zoning change to allow mixed use development in many commercial districts, the Affordable Housing Overlay has become obsolete. The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes an action to review and update the Affordable Housing Overlay.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
The Density Bonus ordinance will be programmed for an update.
Policy 2.6 Promote meaningful and informed participation of residents, community groups, and governmental agencies, in local housing and community development activities.
Program 2.6a Public Outreach for Housing and Community
Development Activities
• Maintain communication channels with City residents, community groups, local housing representatives, and other agencies. • Periodically update the City website to provide accurate and up-to-date information regarding public hearings, community events, and City projects.
• Organize community workshops for large development projects.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City proactively encourages participation in community development activities through workshops, community meetings, and public hearings. Zoning code update included over 60 opportunities for the public to participate including workshops, stakeholder groups, surveys, and public meetings.
Appropriateness: Program is expanded to affirmatively further fair housing during the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period.
Policy 2.7 Maintain the City’s Housing Trust Fund.
Program 2.7a Housing Trust Fund
• Maintain the Housing Trust Fund and utilize the available funds to provide loans and grants through the City’s Housing rehabilitation loan and grant program, to assist with affordable housing project feasibility studies and to assist with the permanent financing of acquisition/ rehabilitation projects and new construction affordable housing projects.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City continues to implement the Housing Trust Fund to accrue funds to finance affordable housing activities.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
379
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:7
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Housing Trust Funds must be used to assist households with incomes at or below 80% of the area median income (low-income). • Collect in-lieu fees from the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Augment the Affordable Housing Trust Fund through researching and applying for state or federal funding. Continue to utilize the Housing Trust Fund balance to fund the City’s housing rehabilitation projects and affordable housing development projects.
Policy 2.8 Encourage the production of affordable ownership housing through the City’s Affordable “Inclusionary” Housing Ordinance.
Program 2.8a Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
• Continue to implement the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. • Monitor and include an update in the annual Housing Element Progress Report to evaluate any possible impacts on the costs and supply of housing and to evaluate additional incentives that may be needed.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: In 2021, the City updated the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and completed a nexus-based affordable housing fee analysis for for-sale housing and for-rent housing.
The City’s IHO was updated to incorporate more options for developers to contribute toward Capitola’s housing stock. Also, the inclusionary housing fee was increased based on the nexus study.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Goal 3.0 Special Housing Needs: Accessible housing and appropriate supportive services that provide equal housing opportunities for special needs populations.
Policy 3.1 Encourage the accessibility and utilization of universal design principles in new housing construction as well as through conversion of existing housing to create environments that can be used by all people.
Program 3.1 Barrier-Free Housing
• Implement state accessibility standards.
• Provide technical assistance to encourage barrier-free housing. • Provide financial assistance to homeowners and renters through the City’s Housing Rehabilitation Program, to make needed accessibility improvements; assist 12 households during the planning period. • Provide information on formal reasonable accommodation procedures at City Hall and on the City’s website.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City follows the state accessibility standards as outlined in the building code.
In 2017, the City was awarded a CDBG grant for housing rehabilitation for up to $7,500 to senior citizens, disabled persons, and income-eligible Capitola residents. The program allowed residents to invest in a variety of home improvements for energy and water efficiency. The program was available for mobile homes, condos, townhomes, and single-family homes. 380
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:8
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Information on accommodations is on the website and at City Hall on the meeting agendas.
Appropriateness: Implementation of building code is not included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element as a separate housing program. The updated Housing Element includes program actions to address special needs housing.
Policy 3.2 Promote Fair Housing
Program 3.2a Fair Housing
• Continue to provide funding to agencies such as California Rural Legal Assistance to assist in resolution of fair housing issues. • Provide referral services and fair housing information to tenants and landlords.
• Encourage and support the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and in the sale, rental, and management of housing.
• Continue to provide informational and educational materials on fair housing services for property owners, apartment managers, and tenants at City Hall and the City’s website.
• Continue to monitor and respond, as appropriate, to complaints of discrimination, and refer tenants to the California Rural Legal Assistance and the Office of Consumer Affairs for proper intake, investigation, and resolution of fair housing complaints.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Ongoing effort. We provide referral services to tenants and landlords when asked.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The City recognizes the importance of maintaining fair housing practices and will update this program to reflect changes to state law related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing within the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, with the caveat that it will be implemented upon the identification of a funding source that provides the resources needed to properly administer the program to achieve the objectives established herein.
Policy 3.3 Support and facilitate programs that address the housing needs of special needs groups including the elderly population, homeless persons, female-headed households, extremely low-income households, and persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities.
Program 3.3a Emergency Shelters
• Continue to monitor the inventory of sites appropriate to accommodate emergency shelters.
• Work with the appropriate organizations to ensure the needs of homeless and extremely low-income residents are met.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Ongoing monitoring and provides funding to the County toward regional shelters, as funding permits.
Appropriateness: Program is updated to reflect recent changes to state law for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
381
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:9
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished • Prioritize funding and other available incentives for projects that provide housing for homeless and extremely low-income residents whenever possible.
Program 3.3b Transitional and Supportive Housing
• Continue to monitor the inventory of sites appropriate to accommodate transitional and supportive housing.
• Prioritize funding and other available incentives for housing projects that provide services to homeless and extremely low-income residents whenever possible.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: No transitional or supportive housing was developed during the fifth cycle Housing Element.
Appropriateness: Program is updated to reflect recent changes to state law for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Program 3.3c Housing for Persons with Developmental Disabilities • Seek State and Federal monies, as funding becomes available, in support of housing construction and rehabilitation targeted for persons with developmental disabilities.
• Provide regulatory incentives, such as expedited permit processing, and fee waivers and deferrals, to projects targeted for persons with developmental disabilities.
• Collaborate with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program informing households within the City of housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities. • Provide information on housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities at City Hall and on the City’s website.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Ongoing. The City is currently working with the Dakota Apartment toward rehabilitation and preservation of affordable unit for persons with disabilities.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Program 3.3d Housing for Extremely Low-Income Households • Encourage the development of housing for extremely low-income households by outreaching to housing developers, providing financial or in-kind technical assistance, when available, providing expedited processing, identifying grant and funding opportunities, and offering additional incentives beyond density bonus provisions.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City continues to maintain a proactive approach to support and allow for extremely-low income households and households with special needs. However, no new housing units appropriate to these groups were built during the 2015-2023 Housing Element cycle.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Policy 3.4 Continue the provision of city-initiated incentives, to encourage affordable units in development projects.
Program 3.4a Density Bonus Program
• Provide information on the Density Bonus Program at City Hall and on the City’s website.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Ongoing
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element. In accordance with California Government 382
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:10
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Code 65915 et seq., the City will continue to monitor State requirements related to Density Bonus provisions and amend the Capitola Municipal Code for compliance with changes in State law as applicable during the 2023- 2031 Housing Element cycle.
Policy 3.5 Support the development of accessible and affordable senior rental housing readily accessible to support services; provide assistance for seniors to maintain and improve their homes.
Policy 3.6 Support the development of accessible and affordable housing that is designed to serve all ages.
Policy 3.7 Facilitate and encourage the development of rental units appropriate for families with children, including the provision of supportive services such as child care.
Policy 3.8 Encourage the integration of special needs housing in residential environments, readily accessible to public transit, shopping, public amenities, and supportive services.
Policy 3.9 Encourage the provision of supportive services for persons with special needs to further the greatest level of independence and equal housing opportunities.
Policy 3.10 Investigate and encourage the development of a variety of housing options for seniors including Congregate Housing, Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs), Assisted Living, Mobile Home Parks, cohousing, secondary dwelling units and Independent Living.
Policy 3.11 Encourage the establishment of child care centers and family child care homes in all appropriate zoning districts
Program 3.11a Child Care and Day Care Facilities
• Continue to work with child care providers and the County to promote adequate child care facilities within the community.
• Provide current zoning regulations applicable to child care and daycare facilities information at City Hall and on the City’s website. • Encourage new development to provide child care and day care facilities through a variety of activities, including outreaching to developers; providing financial or in-kind technical assistance, when available; providing expedited processing, identifying grant and funding opportunities; and providing information on the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City’s recreation department created a new partnership with the local schools to provide after school care with special funds to assist low-income families.
The City’s zoning ordinance was updated to allow by right small family home daycare and a minor use permit for a large home daycare.
The City allocated funds out of the youth and early childhood funds of Measure J to offset the cost associated with large home daycare facilities.
The pamphlet is available at City Hall and on the website explaining the standards and available funding.
Appropriateness: Program is revised to focus on housing-related activities for the 2023-2031 Housing Element update. The City would also consider 383
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:11
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished creating objective standards for daycare centers in Commercial Districts to allow daycare centers with a minor use permit.
Goal 4.0 Housing Assistance: Increased Assistance for extremely low, very low, low and moderate income residents to rent or purchase homes
Policy 4.1 Maintain the City’s rental and ownership assistance programs.
Program 4.1a Security Deposit Program
• Assist 7-10 households per year during the planning period. • Continue the funding of the City’s Security Deposit Program which offers income-eligible individuals and families assistance to cover the costs of the security deposit for new rental contracts. • Seek state and federal funding to expand this program.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Current annual funding of $7,500 covers approximately 4 to 5 families.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element, with the goal of increasing funding to assist 7 to 10 households during the planning period.
Program 4.1b Emergency Housing Assistance
• Continue the funding of the City’s Emergency Housing Assistance program that offers eviction and foreclosure prevention in the form of non-reimbursable grants to eligible applicants.
• Assist 20 households per year during the planning period.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Successful ongoing program, given the rent increases and impacts of the pandemic.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Program 4.1c Mortgage Assistance Program
• Assist two households during the planning period
• Continue the funding of the City’s Mortgage Assistance program that offers loans for low and moderate income home buyers to purchase a home in the City.
• Continue to seek federal and state grants through programs such as the State’s BEGIN program to augment the current City and grant funding for this program
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Challenging program due to real estate pricing and having to qualify for low and moderate income. One household qualified for this program during the 5
th cycle. Appropriateness:
Program is updated to reflect the limited funding available and program efforts focus on referral to outside sources of assistance.
Policy 4.2 Explore and pursue City participation in other affordable homeownership assistance programs in the private market.
Policy 4.3 Support the provision of child care services, employment training, rental assistance, and other supportive services to enable households to be self-sufficient.
384
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:12
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Policy 4.4 Seek and support collaborative partnerships of nonprofit organizations and the development community to aid in the provision of affordable housing.
Policy 4.5 Prohibit discrimination in all aspects affecting the sale, rental or occupancy of housing based on status or other arbitrary classification.
Goal 5.0 Neighborhood Vitality: Maintain, preserve and improve the character of existing residential neighborhoods Policy 5.1 Ensure a compatible relationship between new housing and circulation patterns and encourage pedestrian and bicycle friendly communities in order to minimize traffic impacts on quality of life.
Policy 5.2 Protect the integrity of existing single family and multiple family neighborhoods by promoting balanced site design and architecture
Program 5.2a Design Review
• Continue to enforce guidelines to control the size, scale and appearance of single-family residential development to be compatible with Capitola’s traditional or “cottage” character of neighborhoods. • Continue to encourage and require sustainable development practices. • Continue to review new and substantially rehabilitated residential construction to ensure compatibility with existing scale and architectural character of residences in the surrounding neighborhood. • Continue to enforce guidelines to control the size, scale, massing and appearance of multi-residential development to minimize the impacts of any transition from existing single-family residential districts.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City has incorporated new objective design standards into the zoning code for ADUs and Multifamily. The City has also adopted an SB 9 ordinance with objective standards.
Appropriateness: Ongoing implementation of adopted codes is not included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element as a separate housing program.
Policy 5.3 Assist individual neighborhoods in establishing their own identify through the development of neighborhood amenities (pocket parks, lighting, signs, etc.), mixed use neighborhood nodes, and pedestrian and sustainability improvements.
Policy 5.4 Promote the repair, improvement and rehabilitation of housing and encourage replacement of substandard housing to enhance quality of life in neighborhoods.
Program 5.4a Housing Rehabilitation Program
• Continue to seek federal and state grants through programs such as the State’s BEGIN program to augment the current City and grant funding for this program.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The program was not effective due to the administrative burden of a loan program and limited funding.
385
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:13
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished • Assist 12 low-income households during the planning period through the Housing Rehabilitation program.
• Promote sustainable energy practices and encourage more residents and businesses to utilize sustainable energy technologies such as, rooftop solar photovoltaic systems, solar water heaters, and electric vehicle charging stations.
Appropriateness: The 2023-2031 Housing Element revises the program to pursue funding for a repair grant program for seniors and lower income households.
Policy 5.5 Improve the quality of housing and neighborhoods by educating landlords, tenants and property owners about code compliance issues and enforcing compliance with building and property maintenance standards.
Program 5.5a Code Enforcement
• Continue to implement a proactive code enforcement program for health and safety violations through the Building Department and inform residents of rehabilitation assistance when available at City Hall and the City’s website.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: To prevent the deterioration of the existing housing stock, the City staff has continued to bring substandard properties into compliance with the enforcement and implementation of existing development code standards relative to property maintenance. The City’s greatest success was at the Dakota Apartments in which the property management, HUD and the City worked together for the residents to resolve water related issues with the building.
Appropriateness: Program implementation remains appropriate for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Goal 6.0 Resource Conservation Fulfill the City’s housing needs while promoting an environmentally sensitive, compact community that is a pedestrian oriented, neighborhood-centered community, using resources in a sustainable manner Policy 6.1 Encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation Program 6.1a Alternative Transportation Planning
• Direct higher density housing close to transportation corridors, including bus routes and arterial roadways
• Coordinate with transit service providers to expand service to Capitola’s residential and mixed-use districts.
• Promote design of new residential development for people rather than for automobiles.
• Direct City staff, Planning Commission and City Council to consider amending the zoning code to allow for increased height limits in commercial areas to support mixed-use developments.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Various elements of the City’s General Plan provide the goals, policies, and programs that address transitoriented development and alternative transportation modes. Policies includes encouraging development and land uses that enhance a pedestrian-oriented environment; requiring new development to provide for pedestrian and bicycle connections between residential and commercial areas; and supporting projects, programs, policies, and regulations to maintain a balanced multi-modal transportation network.
During the 5
th Cycle, the City was supportive of a conceptual redevelopment project at the Capitola Mall which would have implemented Policy 6.1. 386
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:14
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished Capitola’s zoning code update in 2018 directs higher density housing to be constructed close to transportation corridors.
Appropriateness: This is not included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element as a housing program.
Policy 6.2 Strive to maintain a jobs/housing balance
Program 6.2a City Jobs/Housing Balance
• Encourage housing in close proximity to employment through encouraging residential-commercial mixed-use development. • Encourage the development of housing that will be affordable to the individuals who are employed in locally-centered jobs.
• Continue the policy to inform and market new affordable housing constructed pursuant to Capitola’s housing programs to households that currently live or work in Capitola.
• Periodically conduct a jobs/housing balance study to evaluate the current balance and determine which economic and housing strategies are appropriate.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: The Land Use Element of the General Plan provides the goals, policies, and programs that address City Jobs/Housing Balance. Policies include ensuring that land use decisions balance the needs, interests, and concerns of Capitola’s residents, visitors, and workers, and maintain and protect a healthy balance of commercial and residential uses in the Village. Additionally, the City informed residents of new affordable housing through its website.
Appropriateness: Capitola’s zoning code update in 2018 directs higher density housing to be constructed close to employment centers, specifically 41st Avenue. This is not included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element as a housing program.
Policy 6.3 Promote Green Building techniques, development and construction standards that provide for resource conservation
Program 6.3a City of Capitola Green Building Program
• Encourage and require sustainable development practices. • Continue to implement the mandatory Green Building Program for all major remodels and new construction.
• Update the Program periodically to reflect and utilize new developments in ecological/sustainable technologies.
Effectiveness/Progress in Implementation: Capitola’s Green Building Program is rarely used. state regulations are outpacing the local ordinance.
Appropriateness: Implementation of state building code is not included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element as a separate housing program.
Policy 6.4 Promote the use of renewable energy technologies (such as solar and wind) in new and rehabilitated housing when possible.
Policy 6.5 Ensure that adequate water supplies and sewer services continue to be available for residents and businesses.
Program 6.5a Adequate Water Supplies and Sewer Services Effec2tiveness/Progress in Implementation: The City depends on private water and county sewer.
387
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION
APPENDIX C:15
Goals / Policies / Implementing Programs Actions That Have Been Accomplished • Continue to ensure that water and sewer providers meet their obligation to provide priority to affordable housing projects pursuant to state law.
Appropriateness: Program is updated for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Table C-1: Progress toward Meeting the 2015-2023 Housing Element RHNA Goals Income Category RHNA Goals Total Units Built
Very Low 34 2
Low 23 0
Moderate 26 2
Above Moderate 60 45
Total 143 49
B. Cumulative Impact of the Effectiveness of Addressing Special Housing Needs As a small city, Capitola has limited funding for affordable housing. However, the City was able to provide some assistance to special needs households during the 2015-2023 planning period. Specifically, the City was able to provide rehabilitation assistance, focusing on energy and water efficiency, to seniors, disabled, and lower income households using CDBG funds. The City also funds an emergency rental assistance program and a security deposit program for lower income households. The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, which prioritizes assistance to extremely low income households, seniors, disabled, and persons at risk of homelessness, provides assistance to 206 households in Capitola. 388
Item 8 A.
APPENDIX D: SITES MAP AND INVENTORY
389
Item 8 A.
C
APITOLARD
41ST AVE
BROMMERST
CLARES ST
42ND AVE
46TH AVE
49TH AVE
38TH AVE
45TH AVE
47TH AVE G
R
A
C
E
S
T
PROSPECT AVE
J
A
D
E
S
T
R
ailro
a
d
CLIFF DR
Railroad Soquel Creek
Railroad
CAPITOLA AVE
ESCALONA
DR
CENTRAL AVE
WHARF RD
C
L
A
R
E
S
S
T
BAY AVE
H
I
LL
ST
MONTEREY AVE
PARK
AVE
MONTEREY AVE
ROSEDALE AVE
Soquel Creek
RODEO GULCH RD
ROBERTSON ST
SOQU
E
L
D
R
SOQUEL
AVE
SOQUEL
WHARF
RD
PORTER ST
MA NI ST
CAPITOLA AVE
S
O
Q
U
E
L
D
R
30TH AVE
THOMPSON AVE
PORTOLA D
4 R
1ST AVE
38TH AVE
30TH AVE
·|þ}1
·|þ}1
P
L
U
M
S
T
PI
N
E
ST
GILROY DR
43RD AVE
44TH AVE
48TH AVE
R
E
P
O
S
A
A
V
E
BALBOA AVE
K
E
N
N
E
D
Y
D
R
Capitola
Wharf
City
Hall
Capitola
Bluffs
Capitola
StateBeach
PacificOcean
NewBrighton
StateBeach
PacificOcean
25 14
50 9
35 16-B
77 11
13 6
30 15
8 79
29 47
54 24
23 46
12 7
44 78
43 67
60 58-F
18 52
37 19
42 33
61 63-G
10 48-D
76 26-C
36 34
51 45
74 31
32 65-H
59-F
57-F
49-D
64-H
73 20
75 38
66-H
17-B
1-A
2-A
62-G
3-A
21 22
41 39
40 69
28-C
56-E
68 53-E
70 72
71 80
27-C
54-E
55-E
Mapsanddataaretobeusedforreferencepurposesonly.Mapfeaturesare approximate,andarenotnecessarilyaccuratetosurveyingorengineering standards.TheCityofCapitolamakesnowarrantyorguaranteeastothe content(thesourceisoftenthirdparty),accuracy,timeliness,orcompletenessof anyofthedataprovided,andassumesnolegalresponsibilityforinformation containedonthismap.Anyuseofthisproductwithrespecttoaccuracyand precisionshallbethesoleresponsibilityoftheuser.
BasemapanddatafromCityofCapitolaandSantaCruzCountyGISdata.
DirectallinquirestotheCityofCapitolaPlanningDivisionat(831)475-7300orat [email protected].
Drawnby:RRMDesignGroup;Createdon:February29,2024.
ArcMapGIS.Version10.8.1.Redlands,CA:Esri
RHNASITES
00.250.5M
iles
NOTES
O
MAPFEATURES
CoastalZoneBoundary
SelectedSitesforAnalysis
CityLimit
HOUSINGELEMENTUPDATE:6THCYCLE
SITESINVENTORYANALYSIS
ZONINGDESIGNATIONS
C-C-CommunityCommercial
R-1-SingleFamilyResidential
RM-L-Multi-FamilyResidential,LowDensity
RM-M-Multi-FamilyResidential,MediumDensity
RM-H-Multi-FamilyREsidential,HighDensity
MH-MobileHomePark
MU-V-MixedUseVillage
MU-N-MixedUseNeighborhood
C-R-RegionalCommercial
I-Industrial
P/OS-ParksandOpenSpace
CF-CommunityFacility
PD-PlannedDevelopment
VS-VisitorServing
OtherZoningDistricts
CommercialandIndustrialZoningDistricts
Mixed-UseZoningDistricts
ResidentialZoningDistricts
FEBRUARY29,2024
390
Item 8 A
Table D-1: Housing Element Sites Inventory
Site Address Site # APN
Consolidated
Sites
Single
Owner
Shared
Access
GP
Existing
Zoning
Existing
Density
Min
Density
Max
Density
Realistic Acres IncomeCategory
Units
Lower
Units
Mod
Units
Above
UNITS
Realistic
Capacity
Developer
Interest
Vacant/
NonVacant FAR % ofMax FAR
Building
Age
Improv. /
Land
Ratio
Discontinued/
NonConforming
Use
Existing Uses Special Considerations
2175 41ST AVE 1 034-192-07 A Yes Yes C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.21 Mixed 2 1 1 4 No Non-Vacant 0.38 25.5% 1969 2.74 No 121-MULTI STORES/1 BLDG 2165 41ST AVE 2 034-192-08 A Yes Yes C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.20 Mixed 2 1 1 4 No Non-Vacant 0.24 15.8% 1969 1.46 No 120-SINGLE STORE 2155 41ST AVE 3 034-192-09 A Yes Yes C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.20 Mixed 2 1 1 4 No Non-Vacant 0.33 22.1% 1969 2.22 No 120-SINGLE STORE 2045 A 40TH AVE 4 034-512-01 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.87 Mixed 9 3 6 18 No Non-Vacant 0.41 27.1% 1989 0.48 Yes 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG; office use
2001 40TH AVE 5 034-512-02 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.95 Mixed 10 20 3 0 7 0 20 No Non-Vacant 0.40 26.4% 1989 1.05 No 121-MULTI STORES/1 BLDG 3825 CLARES ST 6 034-261-47 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 1.89 Mixed 10 20 3 0 7 0 20 No Non-Vacant 0.32 21.4% 1992 0.96 Yes 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; discontinued use
Old Pier 1 site; East half
available
3400 CLARES ST 7 034-261-35 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 0.66 Mixed 5 2 25 32 No Non-Vacant 0.29 19.6% 2019 1.89 No 200-RESTAURANT Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
3700 CLARES ST 8 034-261-36 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 1.45 Mixed 10 3 56 69 No Non-Vacant 0.00 0.0% n/a 0.00 No 192-COMMERCIAL PARKING Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1955 41ST AVE B8 9 034-261-53 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 3.94 Mixed 28 9 151 188 No Non-Vacant 0.33 21.9% 1979 4.71 No 161-MINOR SHOPPING CENTER Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1995 41ST AVE 10 034-261-54 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 0.48 Mixed 3 1 18 22 No Non-Vacant 0.28 18.6% 1977 0.41 No 211-SAVINGS & LOAN Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1865 41st AVE 11 034-261-34 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 1.92 3.84 Mixed 28 28 8 9 19 147 55 184 No Non-Vacant 0.28 18.4% 1988 1.55 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; Capitola Mall
Capitola Mall
Utilizing 50% of site
1855 41ST AVE 12 034-261-15 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 1.16 Mixed 17 8 5 3 12 45 34 56 Yes Non-Vacant 0.00 0.1% n/a 0.95 No 192-COMMERCIAL PARKING; Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1855 41ST AVE 13 034-261-38 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 3.57 Mixed 52 26 15 9 37 137 104 172 Yes Non-Vacant 0.59 39.3% 1988 2.15 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1855 41ST AVE 14 034-261-37 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 8.36 Mixed 121 60 36 20 85 321 242 401 Yes Non-Vacant 0.42 28.3% 1978 0.98 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
1855 41ST AVE 15 034-261-51 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 2.59 Mixed 19 6 99 124 No Non-Vacant 0.80 53.3% 1990 3.24 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
4015 CAPITOLA RD 16 034-261-40 B Yes Yes C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 10.05 Mixed 146 72 44 24 101 386 291 482 Yes Non-Vacant 0.24 16.2% 1971 0.09 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
3775 CAPITOLA RD 17 034-261-39 B Yes Yes C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 29 48 0.28 Mixed 4 2 1 1 3 11 8 14 Yes Non-Vacant 0.69 45.7% 1992 0.36 Yes 200-RESTAURANT; Capitola Mall; discontinued use Capitola Mall
4055 CAPITOLA RD 18 034-261-14 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 48 0.68 Mixed 5 2 26 33 No Non-Vacant 0.33 21.8% 1968 0.60 No 210-BANK Capitola Mall Capitola Mall
3720 CAPITOLA RD 19 034-181-14 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.62 Mixed 5 2 4 11 Yes Non-Vacant 0.24 23.7% 1961 0.18 Yes 023-NON-CONFORMING RES; non-conforming use
1625 38TH AVE 20 034-181-03 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.18 Mixed 0 1 2 3 No Non-Vacant 0.25 25.2% 1941 0.39 Yes 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG; nonconforming use 1605 38TH AVE 21 034-181-04 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.14 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.51 51.0% 1962 0.32 Yes 023-NON-CONFORMING RES; non-conforming use
1595 38TH AVE 22 034-181-05 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.13 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.31 30.5% 1962 0.43 No 023-NON-CONFORMING RES 1465 38TH AVE 23 034-181-18 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.29 Mixed 11 3 8 22 No Non-Vacant 0.56 56.3% 1988 0.67 No 322-MINI STORAGE 1404 38TH AVE 24 034-164-41 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 25 1.40 Mixed 18 5 12 35 Yes Non-Vacant 0.10 10.2% 1990 0.98 No 615-OTHER SPORTS CENTER Agility Boulders Gym; Assuming 25 du/ac
1475 41ST Ave 25 034-151-20 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 3.00 Mixed 26 8 17 51 Yes Non-Vacant 0.34 33.9% 1974 1.41 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER Exception - Only utilizing
3.0 ac of site (parking lot)
1395 41ST AVE 26 034-164-12 C No Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.44 Mixed 4 1 3 8 No Non-Vacant 0.27 26.7% 1985 0.89 No 131-MULTI STORES/OFFICES 4055 BROMMER ST A 27 034-164-09 C No Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.12 Mixed 1 0 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.46 46.1% 1962 0.24 Yes 030-SINGLE DUPLEX; nonconforming use 1355 41ST AVE 28 034-164-13 C No Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.20 Mixed 2 0 1 3 No Non-Vacant 0.21 20.7% 1954 0.52 Yes 028-SFR + SECOND UNIT; nonconforming use 1098 38TH AVE 29 034-172-01 R-M RM-M 0 15.0 15 1.98 Low 52 0 0 52 Yes Non-Vacant 0.36 n/a n/a Yes 742-CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL; discontinued use
Rehab - No existing units;
52-unit project
4180 GROSS RD 30 034-141-23 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 2.82 Mixed 30 59 9 0 20 0 59 No Non-Vacant 0.41 27.6% 1977 1.53 Yes 322-MINI STORAGE; nonconforming use 4205 CLARES ST 31 034-222-06 R-M RM-L 0 9.9 10 0.34 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.18 1978 3.69 No 033-TRIPLEX 4180 CLARES ST 32 034-201-42 R-M RM-M 0 15.0 15 0.29 Mixed 0 1 2 3 No Non-Vacant 0.31 1949 4.18 No 020-SINGLE RESIDENCE 1970 41ST AVE 33 034-201-11 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.53 Mixed 6 2 3 11 No Non-Vacant 0.02 1.1% n/a 0.07 No 192-COMMERCIAL PARKING 1840 41ST AVE 34 034-131-15 C-R C-R 0 Unlimited 21 0.69 Mixed 7 2 5 14 Yes Non-Vacant 0.29 19.0% 1984 1.18 No 131-MULTI STORES/OFFICES 1710 44TH AVE A 35 034-124-21 R-M RM-L 0 9.9 15 5.91 Mixed 8 3 5 16 No Non-Vacant 0.20 1979 3.09 No 044-41 - 60 UNITS Capitola Gardens; 0.8 ac available; Assign AHO
4243 CAPITOLA RD 36 034-121-18 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.23 Mixed 0 1 3 4 Yes Non-Vacant 0.35 35.3% 1978 1.29 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 4401 CAPITOLA RD 37 034-123-05 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.63 Low 36 0 0 36 Yes Non-Vacant 0.14 13.5% 1985 1.01 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG The Bluffs; No existing units; 36-unit project
4401 CAPITOLA RD 38 034-124-18 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.18 Mixed 0 1 2 3 Yes Non-Vacant 0.30 29.9% n/a 0.00 No 110-VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND 391
Item 8 A.
Consoli- UNITS Improv. /
Discontinued/
Site Address Site # APN dated
Single Shared GP Zoning Density Density Density Acres Income Units Units Units Realistic Developer Vacant/ FAR % of Building Land NonExisting Uses Special Considerations Sites
Owner Access Existing Existing Min Max Realistic Category Lower Mod Above Capacity Interest NonVacant Max FAR Age Ratio Conforming Use
4525 CAPITOLA RD 39 034-124-06 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.12 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.33 33.3% 1949 0.33 No 020-SINGLE RESIDENCE Congregational; Assigned 2 units
4625 CAPITOLA RD 40 034-022-19 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.12 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Vacant 0.03 3.1% n/a 0.00 No 110-VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND Vacant 4655 CAPITOLA RD 41 034-022-18 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.12 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Vacant 0.00 0.0% n/a 0.00 No 110-VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND Vacant 1750 WHARF RD 42 034-024-10 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.61 Mixed 5 2 3 10 No Non-Vacant 0.00 0.0% n/a 0.06 No 192-COMMERCIAL PARKING 4450 CAPITOLA RD 43 034-111-47 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.07 Mixed 9 3 6 18 Yes Non-Vacant 0.33 32.9% 1986 1.33 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 1430 41ST AVE 44 034-111-52 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.10 Mixed 9 3 7 19 Yes Non-Vacant 0.34 34.3% 1987 1.03 Yes 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER; discontinued use
1408 1/2 41ST AVE 45 034-111-36 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.57 Mixed 5 2 3 10 No Non-Vacant 0.27 27.0% 1961 0.49 No 122-STORE W/ LIVING UNIT 1210 41ST AVE 46 034-101-36 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.17 Mixed 10 20 3 0 7 0 20 No Non-Vacant 0.34 33.9% n/a 7.70 Yes 20-SINGLE STORE; discontinued us Exsting use is discontinued 829 BAY AVE 47 035-381-02 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.82 Mixed 7 2 5 14 No Non-Vacant 0.12 11.7% 1970s 1.94 No 620-CLUB/LODGE HALL While exact age is
unknown, a Google Earth
review indicates the
building is consistent in
age/style with surrounding
structures. Available open
space area - 0.8 ac
831 BAY AVE 48 035-381-03 D No Yes C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.67 Mixed 6 2 4 12 No Non-Vacant 0.29 28.6% 1978 1.00 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 827 BAY AVE 49 035-381-04 D No Yes C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.35 Mixed 3 1 2 6 No Non-Vacant 0.23 22.7% 1970s 1.19 No 122-STORE W/ LIVING UNIT While exact age is
unknown, a Google Earth
review indicates the
building is consistent in
age/style with surrounding
structures.
809 BAY AVE 50 035-021-43 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.70 Mixed 14 0 15 29 No Non-Vacant 1.52 152.2% 1965 10.72 No 160-MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER Exception - Only utilizing
1.7 ac of site (parking lot)
830 BAY AVE 51 036-011-22 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.57 Mixed 5 2 3 10 No Non-Vacant 0.24 24.2% 1973 3.38 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 828 BAY AVE 52 036-011-31 C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.68 Mixed 6 2 3 11 No Non-Vacant 0.18 17.7% 1986 0.62 No 120-SINGLE STORE 911 CAPITOLA AVE 53 036-011-13 E Yes Yes MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.16 Mixed 1 1 1 3 No Vacant 0.00 0.0% n/a 0.00 No 110-VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND; discontinued use Vacant
911 CAPITOLA AVE 54 036-011-14 E Yes Yes MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.10 Mixed 1 0 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.25 25.0% n/a 0.00 No 192-COMMERCIAL PARKING; discontinued use
911 CAPITOLA AVE 55 036-011-12 E Yes Yes MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.08 Low 1 0 0 1 No Non-Vacant 0.94 94.4% 1967 0.53 No 191-OTHER COMMERCIAL USE; discontinued use
911 CAPITOLA AVE A 56 036-011-11 E Yes Yes MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.18 Mixed 2 0 1 3 No Non-Vacant 0.22 22.3% 1934 1.03 No 122-STORE W/ LIVING UNIT; discontinued use
816 BAY AVE 57 036-051-26 F Yes Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.38 Mixed 3 1 2 6 No Non-Vacant 0.16 15.9% 1967 0.32 No 201-FAST FOOD RESTAURANT 816 BAY AVE A 58 036-051-29 F Yes Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 1.36 Mixed 12 23 4 0 7 0 23 No Non-Vacant 0.22 22.3% 1971 3.20 No 161-MINOR SHOPPING CENTER 800 BAY AVE 59 036-051-30 F Yes Potential C-C C-C 0 Unlimited 17 0.44 Mixed 4 1 2 7 No Non-Vacant 0.16 16.1% 1936 0.34 Yes 023-NON-CONFORMING RES; non-conforming use
718 CAPITOLA AVE 60 036-062-11 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.86 Mixed 7 2 6 15 No Non-Vacant 0.24 24.1% 1946 0.86 No 190-MISC MULTI USE 716 CAPITOLA AVE 61 036-062-12 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.50 Mixed 4 1 3 8 No Non-Vacant 0.43 42.9% 1966 1.45 No 131-MULTI STORES/OFFICES 712 CAPITOLA AVE 62 036-062-14 G No Potential MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.27 Mixed 2 1 2 5 No Non-Vacant 0.23 23.2% 1965 1.43 No 122-STORE W/ LIVING UNIT 706 CAPITOLA AVE 63 036-062-15 G No Potential MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.88 Mixed 7 2 6 15 No Non-Vacant 0.24 24.1% 1965 1.45 No 131-MULTI STORES/OFFICES 715 CAPITOLA AVE 64 036-051-34 H Yes No MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.33 Mixed 3 1 2 6 No Non-Vacant 0.32 32.0% 1980 4.00 No 131-MULTI STORES/OFFICES 700 BAY AVE 65 036-051-35 H Yes No MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.50 Mixed 4 1 4 9 No Non-Vacant 0.35 35.1% 1948 0.57 No 122-STORE W/ LIVING UNIT 600 BAY AVE 66 036-051-12 H Yes No MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.29 Mixed 2 1 2 5 No Vacant 0.00 0.0% n/a 0.00 No 110-VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND Vacant 601 BAY AVE 67 035-301-01 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.86 Mixed 7 2 6 15 No Non-Vacant 0.16 16.2% 1974 0.57 No 210-BANK 605 CAPITOLA AVE 68 035-301-16 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.10 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.31 30.9% 1925 0.28 No 020-SINGLE RESIDENCE 603 CAPITOLA AVE 69 035-301-18 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.11 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.32 32.2% 1910 1.08 No 023-NON-CONFORMING RES 525 CAPITOLA AVE 1 70 035-093-03 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.09 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.50 50.1% 1977 0.66 No 180-MEDICAL OFFICE 523 CAPITOLA AVE 71 035-093-04 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.09 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.33 33.4% 1966 0.62 No 181-DENTAL OFFICE 521 CAPITOLA AVE 72 035-093-05 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.09 Mixed 0 1 1 2 No Non-Vacant 0.45 45.4% 1964 0.47 No 180-MEDICAL OFFICE 519 CAPITOLA AVE 73 035-093-06 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.19 Mixed 0 1 2 3 No Non-Vacant 0.29 29.1% n/a 2.51 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 528 CAPITOLA AVE 74 035-094-29 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.38 Mixed 0 2 4 6 No Non-Vacant 0.36 36.1% 1961 2.71 No 180-MEDICAL OFFICE 522 CAPITOLA AVE 75 035-094-37 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.18 Mixed 0 1 2 3 No Non-Vacant 0.36 36.2% 1976 0.78 No 171-MULTI OFFICES/1 BLDG 506 CAPITOLA AVE 1 76 035-094-14 MU-N MU-N 0 Unlimited 17 0.31 Mixed 0 2 3 5 No Non-Vacant 0.17 16.7% 1947 1.96 No 041-5 - 10 UNITS 435 MONTEREY AVE 77 036-072-48 R-1 R-1 0 8.7 10 8.7 5.02 Mixed 5 0 0 3 0 2 5 No Non-Vacant 0.10 21.7% n/a 5.10 No 710-CHURCH Congregational; Assigned 5 units
875 MONTEREY AVE 78 036-041-28 I Yes Yes R-1 R-1 0 8.7 0 1.08 Above 1 0 0 0 1 1 No Non-Vacant 0.16 32.6% n/a 0.00 No 711-OTHER CHURCH PROPERTY Congregational 392
Item 8 A.
Consoli- UNITS Improv. /
Discontinued/
Site Address Site # APN dated
Single Shared GP Zoning Density Density Density Acres Income Units Units Units Realistic Developer Vacant/ FAR % of Building Land NonExisting Uses Special Considerations Sites
Owner Access Existing Existing Min Max Realistic Category Lower Mod Above Capacity Interest NonVacant Max FAR Age Ratio Conforming Use
875 MONTEREY AVE 79 036-041-26 I Yes Yes R-1 R-1 0 8.7 10 8.7 1.99 Mixed 3 0 0 2 0 1 3 No Non-Vacant 0.30 61.6% 1972 15.15 No 710-CHURCH Congregational; Assigned 5 units
837 MONTEREY AVE 80 036-195-02 I Yes Yes R-1 R-1 0 8.7 0 0.07 Above 1 0 0 0 1 1 No Non-Vacant 0.12 21.1% n/a n/a No 801-UTILITY WATER COMPANY Congregational 716 180 1,615 2,511
393
Item 8 A.
APPENDIX E: AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
394
Item 8 A.
395
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
CONTENTS
i
Contents
A. Introduction and Overview of AB 686............................1
1. Analysis Requirements........................................................................2
2. Sources of Information.........................................................................2 B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues...............................5
1. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach.............................................5
2. Integration and Segregation ................................................................9 a. Race/Ethnicity ..............................................................................9 b. Persons with Disabilities ............................................................17 c. Familial Status ...........................................................................24 d. Income Level..............................................................................32 e. Housing Choice Vouchers..........................................................36
3. Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas ......................................41 a. Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs). 41 b. Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs)...................47
4. Access to Opportunities.....................................................................54 a. Educational ................................................................................60 b. Transportation............................................................................65 c. Economic ...................................................................................76 d. Environmental ............................................................................78
5. Disproportionate Housing Needs.......................................................81 Housing Problems. ............................................................................81 a. Cost Burden...............................................................................81 b. Overcrowding.............................................................................92 c. Substandard Housing Conditions...............................................96 d. Displacement Risk ...................................................................103 Figures
Figure E-1: Capitola Census Tracts and Populations (2021)..............................4 Figure E-2: Regional FHEO Cases by City (2022)..............................................7 Figure E-3: FHEO Inquiries by City (2022) .........................................................8 Figure E-4: Regional Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2020)............................................................................................11 Figure E-5: Regional Racial Segregation by Tract (2020).................................12 Figure E-6: Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2020) ..............15 e. Persons Experiencing Homelessness ......................................106
6. Other Relevant Factors and Local Knowledge.................................112 a. Home Loans ............................................................................112 b. Zoning Code ............................................................................115 c. Land Development History and Patterns..................................117
7. Integration and Segregation ............................................................121 a. Race/Ethnicity ..........................................................................121 b. Persons with Disabilities ..........................................................124 c. Familial Status .........................................................................127 d. Income Level............................................................................133
8. Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas and Access to Opportunities ...................................................................................136 a. TCAC Opportunity Area ...........................................................136 b. Environmental ..........................................................................139
9. Disproportionate Housing Needs.....................................................142 a. Cost Burden.............................................................................142 b. Overcrowding...........................................................................148
10. Summary .........................................................................................150 a. Eastern Capitola ......................................................................150 b. Western Capitola .....................................................................151 C. Contributing Factors ..................................................155
1. Lack of Fair Housing Testing, Education, and Outreach..................155
2. Substandard Housing Conditions ....................................................155
3. Affordable Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas (Citywide) ........................................................................................156 Figure E-7: Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2010) ..............16 Figure E-8: Regional Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2021)............................................................................................19 Figure E-9: Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2021)................22 Figure E-10: Population Aged 65 and Older by Tract (2021)............................23 Figure E-11: Households with Children in Santa Cruz County and Neighboring Cities (2021)..............................................................25 396
Item 8 A.
Figure E-12: Regional Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2021)............................................................................................26 Figure E-13: Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2021).............28 Figure E-14: Children in Married Couple Households by Tract (2021)..............29 Figure E-15: Population Living Alone by Tract (2021).......................................30 Figure E-16: Populations of Children Under Age 18 by Tract (2021) ................31 Figure E-17: Regional LMI Households by Block Group (2015)........................33 Figure E-18: LMI Households by Block Group (2015) ......................................35 Figure E-19: Regional HCV Recipients by Tract (2021)....................................37 Figure E-20: Regional Renter-Occupied Households by Tract (2021)..............38 Figure E-21: HCV Recipients by Tract (2021) ..................................................39 Figure E-22: Renter-Occupied Households by Tract (2021).............................40 Figure E-23: Regional Areas of High Segregation and Poverty (2023).............43 Figure E-24: Regional Poverty Status by Tract (2021)......................................44 Figure E-25: Poverty Status by Tract (2021) ....................................................46 Figure E-26: Regional RCAA Tracts (2019)......................................................49 Figure E-27: Regional Median Income by Tract (2021) ....................................50 Figure E-28: Median Income by Tract (2021) ...................................................52 Figure E-29: Median Family Income by Tract (2021)........................................53 Figure E-30: Regional TCAC Opportunity Area Composite Score By Tract (2021)............................................................................................57 Figure E-31: Capitola TCAC Opportunity Area Composite Score By Tract (2021)............................................................................................59 Figure E-32: School District Boundaries in Santa Cruz County ........................61 Figure E-33: School District Boundaries In and Around Capitola......................63 Figure E-34: Great School Ratings...................................................................64 Figure E-35: Santa Cruz County Transportation Network.................................66 Figure E-36: Transit Provided by Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO).......................................................................................67 Figure E-37: High Quality Transit Stops and Areas in Santa Cruz County........68 Figure E-38: Means of Transportation to Work in Santa Cruz County ..............69 Figure E-39: Santa Cruz County All Transit Performance Score and Map (2019)............................................................................................70 Figure E-40: Jobs Within A 45-Minute Transit Ride in Santa Cruz County .......71 Figure E-41: Capitola Roadway Network..........................................................72 Figure E-42: Capitola Bikeway Network............................................................73 Figure E-43: Bus Service In and Around Capitola.............................................74 Figure E-44: Means of Transportation to Work in Capitola ...............................75 Figure E-45: Capitola All Transit Performance Score and Map (2019) .............76 Figure E-46: Santa Cruz County TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic Score By Tract...............................................................................77 Figure E-47: CalEnviroScreen Scores for Santa Cruz County..........................79 Figure E-48: Local Parks in Capitola ................................................................80 Figure E-49: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Santa Cruz County (2021) ...............................................................................84 Figure E-50: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Santa Cruz County (2021)............................................................................................85 Figure E-51: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Capitola (2014)............................................................................................88 Figure E-52: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Capitola (2021)............................................................................................89 Figure E-53: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Capitola (2014) .........90 Figure E-54: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Capitola (2021) .........91 Figure E-55: Percentage of Overcrowded Households in Santa Cruz County...........................................................................................93 Figure E-56: Percentage of Overcrowded Households in Capitola...................95 Figure E-57: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities in Santa Cruz County......................................................97 Figure E-58: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities in Santa Cruz County.....................................................98 Figure E-59: Percentage of Housing Units Built Before 1990 in Santa Cruz County...........................................................................................99 Figure E-60: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities in Capitola.....................................................................101 Figure E-61: Percentage of Housing Units Built Before 1990 in Capitola........102 Figure E-62: Displacement Risk in Santa Cruz County...................................105 Figure E-63: Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Santa Cruz County (2013-2022).................................................................................106 Figure E-64: Emergency Shelter Housing in Santa Cruz County....................109 Figure E-65: Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Capitola (2013- 2022)*..........................................................................................111 Figure E-66: Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity ......................................114 Figure E-67: Capitola Zoning Map..................................................................116 Figure E-68: Mobile Home Parks in Capitola..................................................118 Figure E-69: Non-White Population by Block Group and Sites Inventory .......122 Figure E-70: Population of Persons with Disabilities by Tract and Sites Inventory......................................................................................125 2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT CONTENTS
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN ii
397
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
CONTENTS
iii
Figure E-71: Children in Married Couple Households by Tract and Sites Inventory......................................................................................129 Figure E-72: Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract and Sites Inventory......................................................................................131 Figure E-73: LMI Households by Block Group and Sites Inventory.................134 Figure E-74: TCAC Opportunity Areas by Tract and Sites Inventory ..............137 Figure E-75: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores by Tract and Sites Inventory .........140 Tables
Table E-1: Racial/Ethnic Composition of Santa Cruz County and Neighboring Cities .........................................................................10 Table E-2: Dissimilarity Indices – Santa Cruz County (1990-2020)...................13 Table E-3: Change in Racial/Ethnic Minority Population (2006-2021)...............14 Table E-4: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – Santa Cruz County (2021)............................................................................................18 Table E-5: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – Capitola (2021)..............20 Table E-6: Change in Households with Children (2006-2021) ..........................27 Table E-7: Households by Income and Tenure – Santa Cruz County (2022) ...32 Table E-8: Households by Income and Tenure – Capitola (2022) ....................34 Table E-9: Poverty Status by Race/Ethnicity (2021).........................................45 Table E-10: Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity (2021)....................54 Table E-11: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps ....................55 Table E-12: TCAC Opportunity Area Scores By Tract in Capitola ....................58 Table E-13: High School Graduation Rates By Race/Ethnicity in Santa Cruz County...........................................................................................62 Table E-14: Housing Problems and Cost Burden By Race/Ethnicity – Santa Cruz County (2019).......................................................................82 Table E-15: Housing Problems, Elderly and Large Households – Santa Cruz County (2019) .......................................................................83 Table E-16: Housing Problems and Cost Burden By Race/Ethnicity – Capitola (2019)..............................................................................86 Table E-17: Housing Problems, Elderly and Large Households – Capitola (2019)............................................................................................86 Figure E-76: Cost Burdened Owner Households by Tract and Sites Inventory......................................................................................144 Figure E-77: Cost Burdened Renter Households by Tract and Sites Inventory......................................................................................146 Figure E-78: Overcrowded Households by Tract and Sites Inventory.............149 Figure E-79: Capitola Sites Inventory .............................................................153 Table E-18: Overcrowded Households in Santa Cruz County ..........................92 Table E-19: Overcrowded Households in Capitola ...........................................94 Table E-20: Substandard Housing Conditions by Tenure in Santa Cruz County...........................................................................................96 Table E-21: Substandard Housing Conditions by Tenure in Capitola .............100 Table E-22: Demographics of Individuals Experiencing Homelessness in Santa Cruz County ......................................................................107 Table E-23: Disposition of Home Loan Applications in Capitola (2021) ..........113 Table E-24: Home Purchase Applications by Race and Ethnicity (2021)........113 Table E-25: Distribution of RHNA by Non-White Population...........................121 Table E-26: Distribution of RHNA by Population of Persons with Disabilities 124 Table E-27: Distribution of RHNA by Children in Married Couple Households .................................................................................128 Table E-28: Distribution of RHNA by Children in Female-Headed Households .................................................................................128 Table E-29: Distribution of RHNA by LMI Household Population....................133 Table E-30: Distribution of RHNA by TCAC Opportunity Area Score..............136 Table E-31: Distribution of RHNA by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score...................139 Table E-32: Distribution of RHNA by Cost Burdened Owners ........................142 Table E-33: Distribution of RHNA by Cost Burdened Renters ........................143 Table E-34: Distribution of RHNA by Overcrowded Households.....................148 Table E-35: Distribution of RHNA Units by Tract and AFFH Variables ...........152 398
Item 8 A.
399
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:1
Appendix E: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) A. Introduction and Overview of AB 686
Assembly Bill 686 requires the inclusion in the Housing Element of an analysis of barriers that restrict access to opportunity1 and a commitment to specific meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair housing.2 AB 686 mandates that local governments identify meaningful goals to address the impacts of systemic issues such as residential segregation, housing cost burden, and unequal educational or employment opportunities to the extent these issues create and/or perpetuate discrimination against protected classes. 3 In addition, AB 686:
• Requires the state, cities, counties, and public housing authorities to administer their programs and activities related to housing and community development in a way that affirmatively furthers fair housing; • Prohibits the state, cities, counties, and public housing authorities from taking actions materially inconsistent with their AFFH obligation;
• Requires that the AFFH obligation be interpreted consistent with HUD’s 2015 regulation, regardless of federal action regarding the regulation;
• Requires an AFFH analysis in the Housing Element (an existing planning process that California cities and counties must complete); and
• Includes in the Housing Element’s AFFH analysis a required examination of issues such as segregation and resident displacement, as well as the required identification of fair housing goals. • Requires an assessment of fair housing to the Housing Element that includes the following components: a summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the City’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; 1 While California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) does not provide a definition of opportunity, opportunity is usually related to access to resources and improvement of quality of life. HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) have created Opportunity Maps to visualize place-based characteristics linked to critical life outcomes, such as educational attainment, earnings from employment, and economic mobility.
2 “Affirmatively furthering fair housing” is defined to mean taking meaningful actions that “overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity” for communities of color, persons with disabilities, and others protected by California law.
3 A protected class is a group of people sharing a common trait who are legally protected from being discriminated against on the basis of that trait. 400
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:2
an analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities, an assessment of contributing factors, and an identification of fair housing goals and actions.
1. Analysis Requirements
An assessment of fair housing must consider the elements and factors that cause, increase, contribute to, maintain, or perpetuate segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, significant disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs.4 The analysis must address patterns at a regional and local level and trends in patterns over time. This analysis should compare the locality at a county level or even broader regional level such as a Council of Governments, where appropriate, for the purposes of promoting more inclusive communities.
For the purposes of this AFFH, “Regional Trends” describes trends in Santa Cruz County. “Local Trends” describes trends specific to the City of Capitola.
2. Sources of Information
The City uses a variety of data sources for the assessment of fair housing at the regional and local level. Sources include:
• California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer 2.0. • U.S. Census Bureau’s Decennial Census (referred to as “Census”) and American Community Survey (ACS). • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordable Strategy (CHAS) reports (based on the 2015-2019 ACS).
Some of these sources provide data on the same topic, but because of different methodologies, the resulting data differ.
For example, the decennial census and ACS report slightly different estimates for the total population, number of households, number of housing units, and household size. This is in part because ACS provides estimates based on a small survey of the population taken over the course of the whole year.5 Because of the survey size and seasonal 4 Gov. Code, §§65583, subds. (c)(10)(A), (c)(10)(B), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42274, 42282-42283, 42322, 42323, 42336, 42339, 42353-42360, esp. 42355-42356 (July 16, 2015). See also 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150, 5.154(b)(2) (2016).
5 The American Community Survey is sent to approximately 250,000 addresses in the United States monthly (or 3 million per year). It regularly gathers information previously contained only in the long form of the decennial census. This information is then averaged to create an estimate reflecting a 1- or 5-year reporting period (referred to as a “5-year estimate”). 5-year estimates have a smaller margin of error due to the longer reporting period and are used throughout this AFFH analysis.
401
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:3
population shifts, some information provided by the ACS is less reliable. For this reason, the readers should keep in mind the potential for data errors when drawing conclusions based on the ACS data used in this chapter. The information is included as it provides an indication of possible trends.
In addition. HCD has developed a statewide AFFH Data Viewer. The AFFH Data Viewer consists of map data layers from various data sources and provides options for addressing each of the components within the full scope of the assessment of fair housing.
402
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:4
Figure E-1 shows the Census tracts in Capitola that will be referred to throughout this Assessment of Fair Housing Issues.
Figure E-1: Capitola Census Tracts and Populations (2021) Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
403
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:5
B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
1. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
Regional Trends
Federal fair housing laws prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex/gender, handicap/disability, and familial status. Specific federal legislation and court rulings include:
• The Civil Rights Act of 1866 – covers only race and was the first legislation of its kind • The Federal Fair Housing Act 1968 – covers refusal to rent, sell, or finance to protected classes • The Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988 – added the protected classes of handicap and familial status • The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) – covers public accommodations in both businesses and in multifamily housing developments
• Rehabilitation Act of 1973 – expanded federal programs and services for persons with disabilities • Shelly v. Kramer 1948 – made it unconstitutional to use deed restrictions to exclude individuals from housing based on race
• Jones v. Mayer 1968 – made restrictive covenants based on race illegal and unenforceable California state fair housing laws protect the same classes as the federal laws with the addition of marital status, ancestry, source of income, sexual orientation, and arbitrary discrimination. Specific state legislation and regulations include:
• Unruh Civil Rights Act – extends to businesses and covers age and arbitrary discrimination • California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Rumford Act) – covers the area of employment and housing, with the exception of single-family houses with no more than one roomer/boarder • California Civil Code Section 53 – takes measures against discriminatory restrictive covenants • Department of Real Estate Commissioner’s Regulations 2780-2782 – defines disciplinary actions for discrimination, prohibits panic selling and affirms the broker’s duty to supervise • Business and Professions Code – covers people who hold licenses, including real estate agents, brokers, and loan officers
• Government Code Section 65008 - prohibits a local government from using public or private land practices, decisions or authorizations to discriminate against low or moderate-income families or individuals. 404
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:6
• Government Code Section 8899.50 - defines and requires public agencies to affirmatively further fair housing.
• Government Code Section 11135 – no person shall be unlawfully denied full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity that is conducted by the state or funded/receives financial assistance from the state.
The City complies with applicable federal and state fair housing laws to ensure that housing is available to all persons without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, disability, familial status, or sex.
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity relates to the ability of a locality and fair housing entities to disseminate information related to fair housing and provide outreach and education to assure community members are aware of fair housing laws and rights. In addition, enforcement and outreach capacity includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing. The following organizations provide legal assistance and mediation services to Santa Cruz County residents:
• California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) – Nonprofit law firm that provides a full range of legal services to low-income residents of Santa Cruz and San Benito County who are under the age of 62. Services include legal information, representation, and advocacy.
• Senior Citizens’ Legal Services – Nonprofit law firm that provides a full range of legal services to low-income residents in Santa Cruz County aged 62 and older. Services include legal information, representation, and advocacy.
• Conflict Resolution Center of Santa Cruz County – Nonprofit organization that provides affordable tools, training, and guided mediation processes for people in conflict. Services include housing mediation, counseling, conflict consultation, and mediation training. • Tenant Sanctuary – Nonprofit organization in the City of Santa Cruz that offers information, education, housing counseling, and advocacy to help renters understand and assert their rights. • Watsonville Law Center – Nonprofit organization that provides free legal services to low-income individuals on the Central Coast.
• Lawyer Referral Service of Santa Cruz County – A low-cost attorney referral agency. • Self-Help Center of the Superior Court of California, Santa Cruz – Free assistance to self-represented customers for basic legal issues.
405
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:7
• Santa Cruz Law Library – Free access to legal information and free assistance with finding the best resources for legal research.
• Tenant Power Toolkit – Collaborative organization that assists with tenant-landlord law issues.
HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
implements federal fair housing laws and investigates
fair housing complaints. Figure E-2 shows FHEO cases
by city in the region in 2022. In most jurisdictions,
including Capitola, the FHEO opened less than one
case per 1,000 people per year. Aptos and Moss
Landing have higher FHEO case rates of 1.26 and 90.9
per 1,000 people, respectively. However, Moss
Landing has a population of only 11.
According to the HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0, 155 total
cases were filed through FHEO between 2006 and
2020. This amounts to approximately 0.58 cases per
1,000 people, a higher rate compared to Santa Clara
County (0.40), San Mateo County (0.43), and Monterey
County (0.36). While there were 155 cases filed, a
single case may be filed with multiple bases for
discrimination. A total of 170 bases of discrimination
were filed during this period. A majority of cases were filed based on disability status (115 cases),
representing 67.6% of all cases filed. An additional 28 (16.5%) were filed on the basis of retaliation, 15 on
familial status (8.8%), 13 on race (7.6%), 12 on national origin (7.1%), 12 on sex (7.1%), two on religion (1.2%), and one on color (0.6%). Of the cases filed on the basis of race, 11 were filed with a Black or African American race basis.
Figure E-2: Regional FHEO Cases by City (2022)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer (2013-2022 HUD), 2023
406
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:8
Local Trends
The HCD Data Viewer 2.0 provides
both FHEO inquiries and cases at
the City level (Figure E-3). While
FHEO inquiries are not official
cases, there is still value to identify
concerns that residents have
about possible discrimination.
These inquiries may not have
been pursued by the resident for
any number of reasons. Inquiries
may have multiples bases of
discrimination.
Between 2013 and 2022, the
FHEO recorded 11 total inquiries
from Capitola residents. Of the 11
inquiries, 5 had no given basis, 5
were on the basis of disability, and
1 was on the basis of familial
status. The 11 inquiries represent
1.1 inquiries per 1,000 people in
Figure E-3: FHEO Inquiries by City (2022)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer (2013-2022 HUD), 2023.
the City. The rate of inquiries in Capitola is comparable to Soquel, but higher than the City of Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, Watsonville, and most other adjacent jurisdictions.
407
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:9
Only two discrimination cases were officially filed through FHEO by Capitola residents between 2013 and 2022. One case was filed on the basis of sex and the other was filed with no specific basis. The two cases account for 0.2 cases per 1,000 people in Capitola. The rate of FHEO cases in the City is comparable to most neighboring jurisdictions.
2. Integration and Segregation
a. Race/Ethnicity
Ethnic and racial composition of a region is useful in analyzing housing demand and any related fair housing concerns, as it tends to demonstrate a relationship with other characteristics such as household size, locational preferences, and mobility. For example, prior studies have identified socioeconomic status, generational care needs, and cultural preferences as factors associated with “doubling up”- households with extended family members and non-kin. These factors have also been associated with ethnicity and race. Other studies have also found minorities tend to congregate in metropolitan areas though their mobility trend predictions are complicated by economic status (minorities moving to the suburbs when they achieve middle class) or immigration status (recent immigrants tends to stay in metro areas/ports of entry).
In addition to an analysis of regional, local, and geographical racial/ethnic population trends over time, HUD provided dissimilarity indices to analyze segregation patterns. Dissimilarity indices are used to measure the evenness with which two groups (frequently defined on racial or ethnic characteristics) are distributed across the geographic units, such as tracts within a community. The index ranges from 0 to 1, with 0 denoting no segregation and 1 indicating complete segregation between the two groups. The index score can be understood as the percentage of one of the two groups that would need to move to produce an even distribution of racial/ethnic groups within the specified area. For example, an index score above 0.60 indicates 60% of people in the specified area would need to move to eliminate segregation.
The following shows how HUD views various levels of the index:
• <0.40: Low Segregation
• 0.40-0.54: Moderate Segregation
• >0.55: High Segregation
408
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:10
Regional Trends
Table E-1 shows racial/ethnic populations in Santa Cruz County, Capitola, and neighboring cities. Countywide, 56.1% of the population is White and 34% of the population is Hispanic or Latino. All selected jurisdictions except Watsonville have White populations exceeding the countywide average of 56.1%. Scotts Valley has the largest population of 78%.
In comparison, Watsonville has a White population of only 12% and a Hispanic/Latino population of 84%. Los Gatos and the City of Santa Cruz have the largest Asian populations of 16.6% and 10.6%, respectively. As presented in Figure E-4, block groups with larger racial/ethnic minority populations, or non-White populations, are more concentrated in southern Santa Cruz County and Monterey County, as well as the area in and around San Jose City area north of Capitola. The central Santa Cruz County areas, including unincorporated block groups and the cities of Santa Cruz and Capitola, tend be comprised of block groups with racial/ethnic minority populations.
As presented in Figure E-5, most tracts in the central Santa Cruz County areas have low-medium segregation or high White segregation. Tracts in the San Jose City area and in parts of southern Santa Cruz County have high person-ofcolor (POC) segregation, consistent with the overall demographics shown in Figure E-5.
Table E-1: Racial/Ethnic Composition of Santa Cruz County and Neighboring Cities Santa Cruz
County Capitola Los Gatos Santa Cruz (City) Scotts Valley Watsonville White alone 56.1% 66.0% 70.1% 60.8% 77.7% 11.9%
Black or African American alone 0.8% 0.2% 0.8% 1.8% 0.4% 0.5% American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
0.1% 0.4% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
Asian alone 4.7% 6.3% 16.6% 10.6% 5.8% 2.5%
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
Some other race alone 0.4% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3%
Two or more races 3.6% 3.8% 3.9% 5.1% 3.5% 0.5%
Hispanic or Latino 34.0% 23.3% 8.3% 21.1% 12.1% 84.3%
Total 272,138 10,041 33,309 62,714 12,317 52,966
Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
409
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:11
Figure E-4: Regional Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2020) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2020 Census), 2023.
410
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:12
Figure E-5: Regional Racial Segregation by Tract (2020) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (OBI, 2020), 2023.
411
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:13
Dissimilarity indices for Santa Cruz County are shown in Table E-2. According to HUD’s definition of the index, nonWhite and White populations countywide are moderately segregated. Segregation between Black and White populations and Asian/Pacific Islander and White populations is considered low, while Hispanic and White populations are highly segregated. Since 1990 dissimilarity indices for the non-White and White populations have increased indicating that segregation has increased countywide.
Table E-2: Dissimilarity Indices – Santa Cruz County (1990-2020) 1990 2000 2010 Current
Non-White/White 47.26 47.95 47.66 53.07
Black/White 28.09 25.72 24.17 33.62
Hispanic/White 54.15 56.53 55.36 58.29
Asian and Pacific Islander/White 26.87 24.76 27.39 35.21 HUD dissimilarity indices are available for entitlement jurisdictions only. HUD dissimilarity indices are not available for Capitola alone.
Source: HUD AFFH-T Data – Dissimilarity Indices, 2020.
Local Trends
Table E-3 shows the racial and ethnic makeup of Capitola’s population. The White population makes up the largest share of the population citywide, representing 66%. Since the 2006-2010 ACS, the White population has decreased 10.6%.
The Black/African American population, Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander population, and population of some other race have also decreased. The Asian and American Indian and Alaska Native populations have seen the largest increases of 112% and 80%, respectively. The Hispanic/Latino population has also grown, representing 16.5% of the population during the 2006-2010 ACS and 23.3% of the population during the 2017-2021 ACS.
Consistent with the citywide demographics, all Capitola tracts have White majority populations. As shown in Figure E-6, there are two block groups in Capitola where more than 40% of the population is non-White. The first is bound by Soquel Wharf Road and 41st Avenue and the second is bound by 30th Avenue and 41st Avenue. It is relevant to note that the second block group mentioned encompasses part of Capitola and part of the unincorporated County area west of the City. Both block groups are on the western side of the City. Since the 2010 Census, shown in Figure E-7, all block groups have seen an increase in non-White populations, consistent with the decrease in the White population citywide. 412
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:14
Like the 2020 Census data in Figure E-6, block group data using the 2010 Census shows the western block groups mentioned previously have larger non-White populations compared to all other block groups.
Table E-3: Change in Racial/Ethnic Minority Population (2006-2021) Race/Ethnicity
2006-2010 2017-2021
Persons Percent Persons Percent
White alone 7,410 75.6% 6,624 66.0%
Black or African American alone 109 1.1% 24 0.2%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 20 0.2% 36 0.4% Asian alone 299 3.1% 634 6.3%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 88 0.9% 0 0.0% Some other race alone 41 0.4% 0 0.0%
Two or more races 212 2.2% 381 3.8%
Hispanic or Latino 1,622 16.5% 2,342 23.3%
Total 9,801 100.0% 10,041 100.0%
Source: 2006-2010 and 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates). 413
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:15
Figure E-6: Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2020) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2020 Census), 2023.
414
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:16
Figure E-7: Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2010) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2020 Census), 2023.
415
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:17
b. Persons with Disabilities
Persons with disabilities have special housing needs because of the lack of accessible and affordable housing, and the higher health costs associated with their disability. In addition, many may be on fixed incomes that further limits their housing options. Persons with disabilities also tend to be more susceptible to housing discrimination due to their disability status and required accommodations associated with their disability.
Regional Trends
According to the 2017-2021 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, 11.3% of the Santa Cruz County population reported having one of six disability types listed in the ACS (hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care difficulties, and independent living difficulties). The percentage of residents detailed by disability are listed in Table E-4 below. The Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander population has the highest disability rate of 24.5%, followed by the American Indian and Alaska Native population (18.3%), Black/African American population (12.3%), and nonHispanic White population (12.2%). All other racial/ethnic groups have disability rates below the County average of
11.3%.
Elderly populations are significantly more likely to experience disability. Approximately 45% of the population aged 75 and older experiences a disability compared to 18.2% of the population aged 65 to 74 and 10.1% of the population aged 35 to 64. Cognitive difficulties and independent living difficulties are the most common disability types in the County, where 5.1% and 5% of the population experiences each, respectively. 416
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:18
Table E-4: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – Santa Cruz County (2021) Total Population Percent with Disability
Total civilian noninstitutionalized population 270,860 11.3% Race/Ethnicity
White alone 185,587 11.9%
Black or African American alone 2,983 12.3%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 1,819 18.3%
Asian alone 13,419 9.9%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 564 24.5% Some other race alone 40,432 9.7%
Two or more races 26,056 9.2%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 152,065 12.2%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 92,252 10.1%
Age
Under 5 years 13,075 2.3%
5 to 17 years 38,861 6.4%
18 to 34 years 72,797 7.2%
35 to 64 years 100,788 10.1%
65 to 74 years 29,515 18.2%
75 years and over 15,824 44.9%
Type
With a hearing difficulty – 3.5%
With a vision difficulty – 2.2%
With a cognitive difficulty – 5.1%
With an ambulatory difficulty – 4.8%
With a self-care difficulty – 2.3%
With an independent living difficulty – 5.0%
Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
Populations of persons with disabilities at the tract-level are presented in Figure E-8. In nearly all tracts in the region surrounding Capitola, less than 20% of the population experiences a disability. There are two tracts in Watsonville and one tract in Capitola where more than 20% of the population has a disability. Beyond these tracts, persons with disabilities are generally not concentrated in a single area of the region. 417
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:19
Figure E-8: Regional Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 418
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:20
Local Trends
As presented in Table E-5, Capitola has a larger population of persons with disabilities compared to the County (15% vs. 11.3%). In Capitola, the American Indian and Alaska Native population has the highest disability rate of 39%, followed by the non-Hispanic White population (18.6%). The disability rate amongst the population aged 75 and older in Capitola,
53.5%, is significantly higher than the rate for this age group countywide (44.9%). Like the countywide trend, cognitive difficulties and independent living difficulties are the most common disability types in the City.
The population of persons with disabilities in Capitola in excess of the countywide trend is likely, in part, due to the population of elderly adults residing in the City. According to the 2017-2021 ACS, the population aged 65 and older in Santa Cruz County represents 16.8% of the countywide population compared to 22.3% in Capitola. Further, the population aged 75 and older represents 8.6% of the population in Capitola compared to 5.9% countywide.
Table E-5: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – Capitola (2021) Total Population Percent with Disability
Total civilian noninstitutionalized population 9,938 15.0% Race/Ethnicity
White alone 8,060 16.3%
Black or African American alone 24 0.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 59 39.0%
Asian alone 632 10.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 26 0.0% Some other race alone 498 9.8%
Two or more races 639 5.6%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 6,540 18.6%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 2,328 8.1%
Age
Under 5 years 213 0.0%
5 to 17 years 1,271 9.1%
18 to 34 years 1,989 4.7%
35 to 64 years 4,318 15.5%
65 to 74 years 1,371 13.9%
75 years and over 776 53.5%
419
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:21
Total Population Percent with Disability
Type
With a hearing difficulty -- 4.8%
With a vision difficulty -- 3.1%
With a cognitive difficulty -- 8.6%
With an ambulatory difficulty -- 6.6%
With a self-care difficulty -- 4.5%
With an independent living difficulty -- 8.2%
Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
There is one tract in Capitola where more than 20% of the population experiences a disability (Figure E-9). This tract is located in the center of the City, bound by the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH), Monterey Avenue, and Soquel Wharf Drive.
The tracts adjacent to the central tract to the east and west have populations of persons with disabilities between 10% and 20%, while the far eastern and western tracts have populations of persons with disabilities below 10%. It is relevant to note that the far eastern and western tracts also include unincorporated County areas outside the City boundaries.
Populations of persons aged 65 and older by tract using the 2017-2021 ACS are shown in Figure E-10. Consistent with the populations of persons with disabilities, the central tract, tract 1218.02, has the largest population aged 65 and older.
Tract 1218.02 is generally bound by the PCH, Soquel Wharf Road, and Monterey Avenue. Tracts 1218.01 (bound by Monterey Avenue to the north, Park Avenue to the east, and Soquel Wharf Road to the west), 1217.01 (bound by 41st Avenue and Soquel Wharf Road), and 1216.02 (south of Cliff Drive and the Union Pacific railroad), where between 10% and 20% of the population experiences a disability, also have larger elderly populations compared to tracts 1217.02 and 1221, where less than 10% of the population has a disability. 420
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:22
Figure E-9: Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 421
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:23
Figure E-10: Population Aged 65 and Older by Tract (2021) Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
422
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:24
c. Familial Status
Under the FHA, housing providers (e.g., landlords, property managers, real estate agents, or property owners) may not discriminate because of familial status. Familial status refers to the presence of at least one child under 18 years old, pregnant persons, or any person in the process of securing legal custody of a minor child (including adoptive or foster parents). Examples of familial status discrimination include refusing to rent to families with children, evicting families once a child joins the family (through birth, adoption, or custody), enforcing overly restrictive rules regarding children’s use of common areas, requiring families with children to live on specific floors, buildings, or areas, charging additional rent, security deposit, or fees because a household has children, advertising a preference for households without children, and lying about unit availability.
Families with children often have special housing needs due to lower per capita income, the need for affordable childcare, the need for affordable housing, or the need for larger units with three or more bedrooms. Single parent households are also protected by fair housing law. Of particular consideration are female-headed households, who may experience greater housing affordability challenges due to typically lower household incomes compared to two-parent households. Often, sex and familial status intersect to compound the discrimination faced by single mothers.
Regional Trends
According to the 2017-2021 ACS, approximately 24.5% of households in Santa Cruz County are households with children. Of the selected jurisdictions shown in Figure E-11, Watsonville has the largest proportion of households with children, representing 38.7% of households citywide. Los Gatos also has a higher share of households with children compared to the County. Only 19.3% of households in Capitola are households with children. In Santa Cruz County,
17.9% of households are married couples with children, 3.4% are single-parent female-headed households, 2.2% are cohabiting couple households with children, and 1% are single-parent male-headed households. Watsonville has the largest share of single-parent female headed households of the selected jurisdictions (7.5%). Capitola and Scotts Valley also have larger shares of single-parent female-headed households compared to the County, Los Gatos, and the City of Santa Cruz.
423
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:25
Figure E-11: Households with Children in Santa Cruz County and Neighboring Cities (2021) Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
Populations of children residing in single-parent female-headed households by tract are presented in Figure E-12. In most tracts in the region, fewer than 40% of children reside in female-headed households. There are a handful of tracts where more than 40% of children are in female-headed households in Capitola, Watsonville, and in the San Jose area.
Tracts where more than 40% of children reside in female-headed households are generally more concentrated in and around incorporated cities rather than unincorporated County areas. 424
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:26
Figure E-12: Regional Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 425
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:27
Local Trends
Capitola has seen a slight decrease in the proportion of households with children in recent years (Table E-6). During the 2006-2010 ACS, there were 918 households with children representing 19.6% of all City households. The most recent 2017-2021 ACS estimates show there are now 898 households with children in Capitola representing only 19.3% of households citywide. All household types with children have decreased since the 2006-2010 ACS except for singleparent female-headed households, which grew 2.8% during this period. As discussed previously, Capitola has a smaller share of households with children compared to the County but a larger share of single-parent female-headed households. Capitola also has a larger elderly population compared to the County, as outlined in Subsection B, Persons with Disabilities, above.
Table E-6: Change in Households with Children (2006-2021) Household Type
2006-2010 2017-2021
Households Percent Households Percent
Married-couple family with children 621 13.3% 575 12.3% Cohabiting couple with children -- -- 78 1.7%
Single-parent, male-headed 81 1.7% 23 0.5%
Single-parent, female-headed 216 4.6% 222 4.8%
Total Households with Children 918 19.6% 898 19.3%
Total Households 4,684 100.0% 4,656 100.0%
Source: 2006-2010 and 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
Figure E-13 shows that tract 1218.01, generally bound by Monterey Avenue and Kennedy Drive to the north, has the largest share of children residing in single-parent female-headed households. According to the HCD AFFH Data Viewer
2.0, 61.8% of children residing in this tract live in female-headed households. Less than 40% of children live in femaleheaded households in all other tracts. Conversely, Figure E-14 shows that fewer than 20% of children in this tract live in married couple households. Tract 1218.01 also has the largest population of persons living alone compared to all other Capitola tracts. Approximately 40% of the population 18 years and over are in households living alone in tract 1218.01.
Figure E-16 shows that there are very few children under the age of 18 residing in tract 1218.01. Only 7.5% of the population residing in this tract are children, compared to 13% to 20% of the population in all other tracts. As shown in 426
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:28
Figure E-10 above, 24.3% of the population in this tract are aged 65 and older compared to 22.3% citywide. Tract 1218.01 also has the second highest median population age of 49.8 years compared to other Capitola tracts. Tract 1218.02 has the highest median age of 52.4. Tract 1218.02 also has a larger population of adults living alone compared to most other areas in Capitola (Figure E-15). Overall, there are very few children residing in tract 1218.01. This section of the City is characterized by an older population, many of which live alone. Cliffwood Heights and Depot Hill, two of Capitola’s more expensive neighborhoods, are located in tract 1218.01.
Figure E-13: Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 427
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:29
Figure E-14: Children in Married Couple Households by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 428
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:30
Figure E-15: Population Living Alone by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 429
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:31
Figure E-16: Populations of Children Under Age 18 by Tract (2021) Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
430
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:32
d. Income Level
Identifying low or moderate income (LMI) geographies and individuals is important to overcome patterns of segregation.
HUD defines a LMI area as a Census tract or block group where over 51% of the population is LMI (based on HUD income definition of up to 80% of the Area Median Income).
Regional Trends
According to Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data based on the 2015-2019 ACS, 40.9% of Santa Cruz County households earn more than 100% of the AMI (Table E-7). Approximately 49% of households countywide earn 80% or less than the AMI and are considered low or moderate income. A significantly larger proportion of renters, 69%, are LMI households compared to owners (35.1%).
As shown in Figure E-17, block groups with larger populations of LMI households are more concentrated in southern Santa Cruz County around Watsonville. Block groups with larger LMI household populations are generally more prevalent around incorporated cities rather than unincorporated County areas. Block groups that are considered LMI areas, where more than half of households are low or moderate income, are also scattered throughout Capitola, the City of Santa Cruz, Gilroy, and the San Jose area.
Table E-7: Households by Income and Tenure – Santa Cruz County (2022) Income Category Owner Renter Total
0%-30% of AMI 9.9% 31.4% 18.5%
31%-50% of AMI 9.7% 18.3% 13.1%
51%-80% of AMI 15.5% 19.3% 17.0%
81%-100% of AMI 11.1% 9.5% 10.5%
Greater than 100% of AMI 53.8% 21.5% 40.9%
Total 57,560 38,255 95,820
Source: 2022 HUD CHAS Data (based on 2015-2019 ACS).
431
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:33
Figure E-17: Regional LMI Households by Block Group (2015) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (HUD 2011-2015), 2023. 432
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:34
Local Trends
Capitola has slightly more renter households than owner households. Approximately 53% of households in the City are renter-occupied. As presented in Table E-8, nearly 54% of households in Capitola are LMI households, a larger proportion compared to the County. Unlike the County, a larger proportion of owners in Capitola are low or moderate income. Approximately 54.5% of owner-occupied households are LMI compared to 53.4% of renters. However, a larger proportion of owner households also earn more than 100% of the AMI compared to renters.
Figure E-18 shows the population of LMI households by block group in Capitola. There are three block groups where 50% to 75% of households are LMI and one block group, encompassing the southwestern corner of the City, where 91% of households are LMI. It is important to note that the block group with an LMI population of 91% encompasses part of Capitola but also extends south of the City to Portola Drive into the unincorporated County area. As mentioned previously, there are two block groups on the western side of the City with larger non-White populations compared to the remainder of Capitola (see Figure E-6). While these block groups are also LMI areas, LMI block groups are not exclusive to areas with larger racial/ethnic minority populations.
Table E-8: Households by Income and Tenure – Capitola (2022) Income Category Owner Renter Total
0%-30% of AMI 20.0% 18.9% 19.4%
31%-50% of AMI 15.0% 13.1% 14.0%
51%-80% of AMI 19.5% 21.4% 20.5%
81%-100% of AMI 8.6% 14.0% 11.4%
Greater than 100% of AMI 36.9% 32.6% 34.6%
Total 2,100 2,360 4,460
Source: 2022 HUD CHAS Data (based on 2015-2019 ACS).
433
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:35
Figure E-18: LMI Households by Block Group (2015)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (HUD 2011-2015), 2023. 434
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:36
e. Housing Choice Vouchers
An analysis of the trends in Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) concentration can be useful in examining the success of the program in improving the living conditions and quality of life of its holders. The HCV program aims to encourage participants to avoid high-poverty neighborhoods and promote the recruitment of landlords with rental properties in low poverty neighborhoods. HCV programs are managed by Public Housing Agencies (PHAs), and the programs assessment structure (SEMAPS) includes an “expanding housing opportunities” indicator that shows whether the PHA has adopted and implemented a written policy to encourage participation by owners of units located outside areas of poverty or minority concentration.
A study prepared by HUD’s Development Office of Policy Development and Research found a positive association between the HCV share of occupied housing and neighborhood poverty concentration and a negative association between rent and neighborhood poverty6. This means that HCV use was concentrated in areas of high poverty where rents tend to be lower. In areas where these patterns occur, the program has not succeeded in moving holders out of areas of poverty.
Regional Trends
Like racial/ethnic minority and LMI household populations, tracts with larger populations of renters receiving HCVs are more prevalent in and around incorporated cities compared to unincorporated County areas. As presented in Figure E19, tracts in Watsonville, Gilroy, and the San Jose area tend to have larger HCV recipient populations. In the area closest to Capitola, including Capitola, the City of Santa Cruz, and Scotts Valley, most tracts have HCV recipient populations of up to 15%.
HCV recipient populations are generally consistent with concentrations of racial/ethnic minority populations, LMI household populations, and populations of children residing in single-parent female-headed households (see Figure E4, Figure E-12, and Figure E-17). These areas also have larger renter populations (Figure E-20). 6 Devine, D.J., Gray, R.W., Rubin, L., & Taghavi, L.B. (2003). Housing choice voucher location patterns: Implications for participant and neighborhood welfare. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, Division of Program Monitoring and Research.
14F14 F
435
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:37
Figure E-19: Regional HCV Recipients by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (HUD 2021), 2023.
436
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:38
Figure E-20: Regional Renter-Occupied Households by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 437
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:39
Local Trends
As of April 2023, 206 Capitola households received HCV assistance from the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz. The map in Figure E-21 shows that in Capitola, between 5% and 15% of renters in most tracts receive HCVs. Only
4.5% of renters in tract 1221 on the eastern side of the City receive HCVs. As mentioned above, this tract encompasses the unincorporated County area east of the City and does not reflect Capitola residents alone.
Figure E-21: HCV Recipients by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (HUD 2021), 2023.
438
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:40
Between 40% and 60% of households are renters in a majority of Capitola (Figure E-22). The western tract, tract 1217.02, has the smallest renter population compared to other tracts in the City. Tract 1216.02, which includes the small section of Capitola south of Cliff Drive, also has a smaller renter population. Like tract 1221, tract 1216.02 encompasses the unincorporated County area south of the City and is not representative of Capitola residents alone. Tract 1218.01 has the largest renter population. Regardless of renter-occupied household populations, HCVs are generally distributed evenly throughout the City.
Figure E-22: Renter-Occupied Households by Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 439
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:41
3. Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas
a. Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) In an effort to identify racially/ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, HCD has identified areas of high segregation and poverty. Census tracts that are considered areas of high segregation and poverty are based on a two-stage approach. HCD’s methodology for identifying areas of high segregation and poverty is as follows:
Concentrated Poverty: First, the filter identifies tracts and rural block groups where at least 30% of the population is living below the poverty line. Research has found that the impact of area poverty rates in producing negative outcomes for individuals--including crime, school leaving, and duration of poverty spells--begin to appear after an area exceeds approximately 20% poverty, whereupon the externality effects grow rapidly until the neighborhood reaches approximately 40% poverty.
To prevent college towns from distorting the filter’s concentrated poverty measure, college and graduate students are removed from the poverty calculation in the filter in tracts where they comprise at least 25% of the population.
An internal analysis found that without this adjustment, some tracts with high proportions of college students— many of which have high domain scores—are shown as having poverty rates exceeding 30%, likely due to the Census classifying many unemployed and partially employed students living off-campus up as poor.
The total population living in areas of extreme poverty declined in the 1990s, following government action designed to affirmatively counteract intentionally segregationist public policy. Following national trends, however, concentrated poverty has risen dramatically in California since 2000.
Racial Segregation: Second, the filter relies on a measure of racial segregation to capture which tracts and rural block groups have a disproportionate share of households of color. Setting an absolute threshold (as the federal RECAP metric does) does not account for substantial variation in the racial and ethnic population across California’s counties. To properly account for the features of inequality operating on individuals at the neighborhood level, a relative segregation measure is more appropriate to reflect the experience of residents. The filter thus relies on the location quotient of residential racial segregation (LQ), which is increasingly being used in studies that seek to assess the impact of racial segregation on individual and community outcomes. The LQ is a small-area measure of relative segregation calculated at the residential census tract level that represents how much more segregated 440
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:42
an area (e.g., a census tract or block group) is relative to the larger area (in this case, the county). Tracts that have a LQ higher than 1.25 for Black, Hispanic, Asian, or all people of color are flagged as being racially segregated in comparison to the county. Census tracts and rural block groups that have both a poverty rate of over 30% and that are designated as being racially segregated are filtered into the “High Segregation & Poverty” category. Due to data unreliability at the block group level in the poverty indicator, the “High Poverty and Segregation” category is designated at the tract level in rural areas.
Regional Trends
No areas of high segregation and poverty have been identified in the region surrounding Capitola. The closest areas of high segregation and poverty are in the cities of San Jose and Salinas. Additional areas of high segregation and poverty are located in Stanislaus County, Fresno County, San Francisco, and Alameda County.
Poverty status by tract for the region is presented in Figure E-24. While these tracts have not been identified as areas of high segregation and poverty, likely due to the small non-White populations, the City of Santa Cruz and Watsonville contain tracts where more than 30% of the population is below the poverty level. There are no other tracts with populations of persons below the poverty line exceeding 30% elsewhere in the region, including in Capitola. 441
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:43
Figure E-23: Regional Areas of High Segregation and Poverty (2023) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0, 2023.
442
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:44
Figure E-24: Regional Poverty Status by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 443
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:45
Local Trends
There are no tracts in Capitola that have been identified as areas of high segregation and poverty. Most tracts in the City have populations of people below the poverty level between 10% and 20% (Figure E-25). Tract 1221, encompassing the eastern corner of Capitola and the unincorporated County area east of the City, has a smaller population of persons below the poverty level compared to all other areas of the City. As discussed above, this tract also has a smaller population of renters receiving HCVs (see Figure E-21).
Poverty status by race and ethnicity for Capitola and Santa Cruz County is shown in Table E-9. A larger proportion of Capitola residents are below the poverty line (14.4%) compared to residents countywide (10.9%). In the County, the Asian population has the highest poverty rate of 17.6%, followed by the American Indian and Alaska Native population (17.2%), population of some other race (15.7%), and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander population (15%). In Capitola, the population of some other race has the highest poverty rate of 33.5%. The Black/African American population, population of two or more races, and Hispanic/Latino population also have poverty rates exceeding the citywide average of 14.4%. There are no American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander residents below the poverty level in Capitola.
Table E-9: Poverty Status by Race/Ethnicity (2021)
Race/Ethnicity
Capitola Santa Cruz County
Total Population
Percent Below
Poverty Level Total Population
Percent Below
Poverty Level
Black or African American alone 24 25.0% 2,555 10.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 59 0.0% 1,749 17.2% Asian alone 632 0.0% 10,828 17.6%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 26 0.0% 545 15.0% Some other race alone 498 33.5% 39,068 15.7%
Two or more races 639 25.7% 24,599 10.2%
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 2,328 27.9% 88,738 13.7% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 6,540 10.7% 148,644 8.8% Population for whom poverty status is determined 9,938 14.4% 260,154 10.9% Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
444
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:46
Figure E-25: Poverty Status by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 445
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:47
b. Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs)
While racially concentrated areas of poverty and segregation (R/ECAPs) have long been the focus of fair housing policies, racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs) must also be analyzed to ensure housing is integrated, a key to fair housing choice. According to a policy paper published by HUD, RCAAs are defined as communities with a large proportion of affluent and non-Hispanic White residents. According to HUD's policy paper, non-Hispanic Whites are the most racially segregated group in the United States. In the same way neighborhood disadvantage is associated with concentrated poverty and high concentrations of people of color, conversely, distinct advantages are associated with residence in affluent, White communities. HCD’s methodology for identifying RCAAs is as follows:
HCD has created a new version of the RCAA metric to better reflect California’s relative diversity and regional conditions, and to aid local jurisdictions in their analysis of racially concentrated areas of poverty and affluence pursuant to AB 686 and AB 1304.
To develop the RCAA layer, staff first calculated a Location Quotient (LQ) for each California census tract using data from the 2015-2019 ACS. This LQ represents the percentage of total white population (White Alone, Not Hispanic or Latino) for each census tract compared to the average percentage of total white population for all census tracts in a given COG region. For example, a census tract with a LQ of 1.5 has a percentage of total white population that is 1.5 times higher than the average percentage of total white population in the given COG region.
To determine the RCAAs, census tracts with a LQ of more than 1.25 and a median income 1.5 times higher than the COG AMI (or 1.5x the state AMI, whichever is lower) were assigned a numeric score of 1 (Is a RCAA). Census tracts that did not meet this criterion were assigned a score of 0 (Not a RCAA). 446
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:48
Regional Trends
While there are very few areas of high segregation and poverty in the region, RCAAs are prevalent. As shown in Figure E-26, much of the unincorporated Santa Cruz County areas are considered RCAAs. RCAAs have also been identified in the City of Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, Los Gatos, and throughout the San Jose area. As described above, many of these areas, specifically the unincorporated Santa Cruz County areas, have smaller racial/ethnic minority populations and populations of persons below the poverty line (see Figure E-4 and Figure E-24).
The median income is also highest for tracts in the unincorporated Santa Clara County area along the Santa Cruz County boundary. Tracts with lower median incomes are more prevalent in incorporated cities such as Watsonville, San Jose, and parts of the City of Santa Cruz and Capitola. Lower median incomes are generally consistent with LMI household populations shown in Figure E-17 above.
447
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:49
Figure E-26: Regional RCAA Tracts (2019)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2019 HCD), 2023.
448
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:50
Figure E-27: Regional Median Income by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 449
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:51
Local Trends
There are no RCAAs in Capitola. Capitola tracts have median incomes ranging from $55,000 to $120,000 (Figure E-28).
Tract 1218.02, bound by the PCH, Monterey Avenue, and Soquel Wharf Road, and tract 1217.02 on the western side of the City have higher median incomes compared to all other tracts in Capitola. As discussed previously, tract 1218.02 has a larger population of elderly adults and persons with disabilities compared to other areas of Capitola (see Figure E-9 and Figure E-10). Tract 1217.02 on the western side of Capitola has a larger owner-occupied household population (see Figure E-22). As discussed previously, tract 1218.01 has a large population of older adults living alone (see Figure E-15 and Figure E-16). The median family income at the tract-level is presented in Figure E-29. The median family income is significantly higher for block group 1218.01, containing Cliffwood Heights and Depot Hill, compared to the median household income. A family group is any two or more people (not necessarily including a householder) residing together, and related by birth, marriage, or adoption. A household may be composed of one such group, more than one, or none at all. The household income for this tract is likely lower because elderly adults, who make up a large proportion of this tract population, are more likely to be retired and have fixed or limited incomes. The median family income of $118,625 in tract 1218.01 is a better indicator of income status in this tract. Income alone, specifically for the elderly and retired population residing in this tract, does not accurately reflect this populations’ assets.
While HCD has not identified any RCAAs in Capitola, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) identified the City as an RCAA in its 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan. Jurisdictions identified as RCAAs by AMBAG received a higher share of their RHNA in the lower income categories. AMBAG defines RCAAs as “jurisdictions that are both high income (higher than the regional average for percentage above 200% of the poverty level) and racially-concentrated (above the regional average for percent white non-Hispanic).” The AMBAG RCAA analysis does not target specific tracts like HCD.
450
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:52
Figure E-28: Median Income by Tract (2021)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 451
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:53
Figure E-29: Median Family Income by Tract (2021)
Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
452
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:54
Table E-10 shows median household income by race/ethnicity for Capitola and Santa Cruz County. Santa Cruz County has a higher median income, $96,093, compared to Capitola, $83,726. As mentioned above, Capitola also has a higher poverty rate compared to the County as a whole (see Table E-9). Countywide, the population of two or more races and non-Hispanic White population have the highest median household income, while the Asian population has the highest median household income in Capitola. All other racial/ethnic groups in Capitola have lower median household incomes compared to the citywide average of $83,726.
Table E-10: Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity (2021) Race/Ethnicity
Capitola Santa Cruz County
Percent Distribution Median HH Income Percent Distribution Median HH Income Black or African American alone 0.0% - 0.8% $83,642
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.0% - 0.7% $79,000 Asian alone 5.7% $118,275 4.6% $78,482
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0.6% - 0.2% - Some other race alone 4.0% $55,963 10.2% $68,177
Two or more races 4.7% $76,136 6.5% $105,864
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 16.1% - 23.8% $78,502 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 75.0% $83,679 68.1% $107,361 Total Households 4,656 $83,726 96,476 $96,093
Source: 2017-2021 ACS (5-Year Estimates).
4. Access to Opportunities
Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate the link between place-based characteristics (e.g., education, employment, safety, and the environment) and critical life outcomes (e.g., health, wealth, and life expectancy). Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods.
The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) convened the California Fair Housing Task force to “provide research, evidence-based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state agencies/ departments to 453
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:55
further the fair housing goals (as defined by HCD).” The Task Force has created Opportunity Maps to identify resources levels across the state “to accompany new policies aimed at increasing access to high opportunity areas for families with children in housing financed with nine percent Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs)”. These opportunity maps are made from composite scores of three different domains made up of a set of indicators. Table E-11 shows the full list of indicators. The opportunity maps include a measure or “filter” to identify areas with poverty and racial segregation. To identify these areas, census tracts were first filtered by poverty and then by a measure of racial segregation. The criteria for these filters are:
• Poverty: Tracts with at least 30% of population under federal poverty line; • Racial Segregation: Tracts with location quotient higher than 1.25 for Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or all people of color in comparison to the County.
Table E-11: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps Domain Indicator
Economic Poverty
Adult education
Employment
Job proximity
Median home value
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution Indicators and values Education Math proficiency
Reading proficiency
High School graduation rates
Student poverty rates
Poverty and Racial Segregation Poverty: tracts with at least 30% of population under federal poverty line Racial Segregation: Tracts with location quotient higher than 1.25 for Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or all people of color in comparison to the County Source: California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2020. 454
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:56
TCAC/HCD assigns “scores” for each of the domains in Table E-11 by census tract and computes “composite” scores that are a combination of the three domains. Scores from each individual domain range from 0-1, where higher scores indicate higher “access” to the domain or higher “outcomes.” Composite scores do not have a numerical value but rather rank census tracts by the level of resources (low, moderate, high, highest, and high poverty and segregation).
The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps offer a tool to show areas of highest resource, high resource, moderate resource, moderate resource (rapidly changing), low resource, and high segregation and poverty and can help to identify areas within the community that provide good access to opportunity for residents or, conversely, provide low access to opportunity. They can also help to highlight areas where there are high levels of segregation and poverty.
The information from the opportunity mapping can help to highlight the need for housing element policies and programs that would help to remediate conditions in low resource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty and to encourage better access for low and moderate income and black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) households to housing in high resource areas.
Regional Trends
Tract-level TCAC Opportunity score categories for the region are shown in Figure E-30. This visual representation of TCAC Opportunity Areas in Santa Cruz County is based on a composite score, where each tract is categorized based on percentile rankings of the level of resources within the region. Most of the tracts in the county are high and highest resource areas. Moderate resource tracts are found near Boulder Creek, Twin Lakes and the in the City of Santa Cruz.
Low resource tracts are located in and around the community of Freedom and the City of Watsonville. 455
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:57
Figure E-30: Regional TCAC Opportunity Area Composite Score By Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 456
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:58
Local Trends
TCAC Opportunity Area scores for Capitola have been compiled by tract (Table E-12) and are presented geographically in Figure E-31. The tracts west of Wharf Road (tracts 1216.00 and 1217.00) are high resource areas while the tract between Wharf Road and Park Avenue (1218.00) has a highest resource designation. It should be noted that most of tract 1216.00 is in the unincorporated County. The portion within Capitola is south of the rail line and just on either side of Cliff Drive. Also, the only portion of the tract east of Park Avenue within city limits is New Brighton State Beach; therefore, this tract was not included in the table.
Table E-12: TCAC Opportunity Area Scores By Tract in Capitola Tract Economic Score Environmental Score Education Score Composite Score Final Category 1216.00 0.64 0.61 0.67 4.00 High Resource
1217.00 0.65 0.24 0.64 4.00 High Resource
1218.00 0.86 0.26 0.81 5.00 Highest Resource
Total Households 58,094 38,181 96,275
Source: Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0, 2023; UC Berkeley – TCAC Opportunity Area Scores by Tract.
Note: Most of tract 1216.00 is in the unincorporated County. The portion within Capitola is south of the rail line and just on either side of Cliff Drive. 457
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:59
Figure E-31: Capitola TCAC Opportunity Area Composite Score By Tract (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 458
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:60
a. Educational
Housing and school policies are mutually reinforcing, which is why it is important to analyze access to educational opportunities when assessing fair housing. At the most general level, school districts with the greatest amount of affordable housing tend to attract larger numbers of LMI families (largely composed of minorities). As test scores are a reflection of student demographics, where Black/Hispanic/Latino students routinely score lower than their White peers, less diverse schools with higher test scores tend to attract higher income families to the school district. This is a fair housing issue because as higher income families move to the area, the overall cost of housing rises and an exclusionary feedback loop is created, leading to increased racial and economic segregation across districts as well as decreased access to high-performing schools for non-White students.
Regional Trends
Santa Cruz County has 10 school districts serving about 40,000 students. The boundaries of these districts are shown on Figure E-32 (Santa Cruz Elementary and Santa Cruz High are under the same District office). In terms of public schools, the County has 40 elementary, 12 middle and eight high schools. In addition, the County has charter schools, alternative high schools and alternative schools of choice. 459
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:61
Figure E-32: School District Boundaries in Santa Cruz County Source: California State Geoportal; gis.data.ca.gov
460
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:62
Table E-13 looks at high school graduation rates in the County by race and ethnicity. In the 2021-2022 school year, the graduation rate in the County overall was 86.9%, which was comparable to the state (97.0%). Asian and African American students had the highest rates at 96% while Hispanic students had the lowest graduation rate at 84%. The graduation rates of all groups of students increased between the 2016-2017 and 2021-2022 school years.
Table E-13: High School Graduation Rates By Race/Ethnicity in Santa Cruz County 2016-2017 2021-2022
Students Graduation Rate Students Graduation Rate
African American 30 80.0% 25 96.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native 11 72.7% 12 91.7%
Asian 50 94.0% 81 96.3%
Filipino 28 92.9% 19 94.7%
Hispanic or Latino 1,577 82.4% 1,915 84.2%
Pacific Islander --- --- --- ---
White 1,269 88.7% 1,258 90.4%
Two or more races 79 84.8% 126 89.7%
Not Reported --- --- --- ---
Santa Cruz County 2,610 85.0% 3,476 86.9%
California 493,795 82.7% 497,884 87.0%
Source: California Department of Education, Data Reporting Office. Cohort Outcome Data for the Class of 2016-17 and 2021-22.
Local Trends
As shown in Figure E-33, the majority of Capitola is within the Soquel Union Elementary School District. A small western portion of the City is in the Live Oak District boundaries. High school aged students in the Soquel Union Elementary School District attend Soquel High School located north of Highway 1. This high school is in the Santa Cruz City School District. Those in the Live Oak Elementary District are served by the Cypress Charter High School. 461
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:63
Figure E-33: School District Boundaries In and Around Capitola Source: California State Geoportal; gis.data.ca.gov
462
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:64
Greatschools.org is a nonprofit organization that
rates schools across the states. The Great Schools
Summary Rating calculation is based on four ratings:
the Student Progress Rating or Academic Progress
Rating, College Readiness Rating, Equity Rating, and
Test Score Rating. Ratings at the lower end of the
scale (1-4) signal that the school is “below average,”
5-6 “average.” and 7-10 “above average.”
The schools serving Capitola residents in the Soquel
Union Elementary School District have the following
Great School Summary Ratings:
• Soquel Elementary: 4
• Main Street Elementary: 7
• New Brighton Middle School: 6
• Soquel High School: 6
The schools in the Live Oak District serving Capitola
residents have the following ratings:
• Live Oak Elementary: 6
• Shoreline Middle School: 5
• Cypress Charter High School: 6
Source: Greatschools.org
Figure E-34: Great School Ratings
Looking at high school graduation rates in 2021-2022, Soquel High School reported on two race/ethnic groups: White students had a 98.6% graduation rate and Hispanic students had a 97.3% graduation rate. The Cypress Charter High School reported a 100% graduation rate for White students. 7 7 California Department of Education, Data Reporting Office. Cohort Outcome Data for the Class of 2021-22. 463
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:65
b. Transportation
Access to public transit is of paramount importance to households affected by low incomes and rising housing prices, especially because lower income households are often transit dependent. Public transit should strive to link lower income persons, who are often transit dependent, to major employers where job opportunities exist. Access to employment via public transportation can reduce welfare usage and increase housing mobility, which enables residents to locate housing outside of traditionally low-income neighborhoods.
Regional Trends
The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), along with its partners, obtains and distributes funding to maintain the existing transportation network as well as prepare for future transportation needs. The RTC’s 2045 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), approved in June 2022, looks at future projects throughout the County.
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)8
The following information about the County’s transportation system is from the 2045 RTP:
Santa Cruz County’s transportation network includes facilities for private automobiles, public transit, bicycles, pedestrians, specialized transportation for seniors and people with physical or mental disabilities, transport of goods and services, and emergency vehicles. Santa Cruz County’s main transportation corridors and facilities are limited by the area’s physical barriers of mountains and the sea (Figure E-35). Population settlement patterns are primarily centered along highways, major arterials, and the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL).
Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) buses serve approximately 400 miles of roads throughout the county and cover the majority of roads designated as arterial and collector routes. There are 218 miles of bicycle lanes and bicycle paths which generally follow primary transportation corridors. Sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities are also an important part of the transportation network.
8 Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, 2045 Regional Transportation Plan for Santa Cruz County, June 2022. 464
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:66
There are seven state highways, or State Routes (SR), in Santa Cruz County – SR 1, 9, 17, 35, 129, 152 and 236 (Figure E-35).
Figure E-35: Santa Cruz County Transportation Network
Source: 2045 Regional Transportation Plan for Santa Cruz County (Figure 2.1) 465
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:67
Public transit is operated locally by the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO). METRO provides four types of services: local fixed-route bus service, Highway 17 Express Bus service, ParaCruz ADA-mandated paratransit, and Cruz On-Demand microservices (Figure E-36). METRO operates over 90 buses (including four all electric buses) on 24 fixed routes on approximately 400 miles of roads and four transit centers in Santa Cruz County: Cavallaro Transit Center in Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz METRO Center in Downtown Santa Cruz, Capitola Mall Transit Center, and Watsonville Transit Center in Downtown Watsonville (Figure E-35). In 2023, Metro was awarded $38.6 million from the California State Transportation Agency’s Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) to support 24 zero-emission hydrogenpowered buses and associated fueling infrastructure on a regional level. This will increase service frequency while providing clean energy.
Figure E-36: Transit Provided by Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) Source: 2045 Regional Transportation Plan for Santa Cruz County (Figure 2.3) 466
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:68
Figure E-37 shows the locations of high quality transit stops and areas in the County. These areas are located within the boundaries of the County’s four incorporated cities.
Figure E-37: High Quality Transit Stops and Areas in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 467
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:69
Commuting Patterns in Santa Cruz County
Additional information about transit usage in Santa Cruz County is available by looking at commuting patterns. Figure E-38 shows how people in the County travel to and from their jobs. Approximately 76% of county residents travel by automobile to their job. Of those who drove, 8.6% carpooled. About 11% of workers in the county worked from home.
Public transit was used by 2% of residents for work travel. Five percent of workers walked to their jobs and another 5% used other modes of travel, such as biking.
Figure E-38: Means of Transportation to Work in Santa Cruz County Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates 468
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:70
All Transit explores metrics that reveal the social and economic impact of transit, specifically looking at connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service. According to the most recent data posted (2019), Santa Cruz County has an AllTransit Performance Score of 4.8 (out of 10). The map in Figure E-39 shows that the cities in the county as well as the communities in the central corridor of the county have a higher transit usage.
Figure E-39: Santa Cruz County All Transit Performance Score and Map (2019) Source: AllTransit, https://alltransit.cnt.org/rankings 469
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:71
Figure E-40 shows the areas with jobs located within a 45-minute transit ride.
Figure E-40: Jobs Within A 45-Minute Transit Ride in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 470
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:72
Local Trends
Highway 1 is the major road that goes through Capitola (Figure E-41). In addition to the regional traffic congestion along Highway 1, within the City of Capitola, traffic congestion along the 41st Avenue corridor remains problematic. The County of Santa Cruz completed improvements to the 41st Avenue overcrossing at Highway 1, which include the restriping of the bridge deck to add an additional southbound lane. An adaptive signal and bicycle lane mileage for 41st Avenue have also been added.
Figure E-41: Capitola Roadway Network
Source: City of Capitola General Plan
471
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:73
In February 2011, Capitola adopted an updated Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP). 9 The BTP identifies a number of
existing and proposed bikeways for Capitola, as shown in Figure E-42. In addition, a multi-use trail for bicycles and pedestrians is planned along the Santa Cruz Branch rail line corridor. The long-term plan is for the multi-use trail to cross Soquel Creek along the trestle. In the short term, the rail trail will cross Soquel Creek over Stockton Bridge in the Village until sufficient funds are available to retrofit the trestle to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians.
Figure E-42: Capitola Bikeway Network
9 City of Capitola, Capitola General Plan. Adopted June 26, 2014. 472
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:74
The Capitola Mall Transit Center has a ticket vending machine and has four routes that provide bus service in and around Capitola (Figure E-43). Service begins around 10:30 in the morning until 10:30 at night.
Figure E-43: Bus Service In and Around Capitola
Source: Santa Cruz METRO website, 2023.
In addition to information on bus routes, the City’s website provides information on park and ride locations, ride sharing, bike routes and other means of alternative transportation. 473
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:75
Commuting Patterns in Capitola
Figure E-44 shows the commuting patterns for Capitola residents. The percentage of residents who drive alone (66%) is slightly less than the County (68%). Fewer Capitola workers use public transit (<1%) than the County, but more carpool (10%) and work from home (14%).
Figure E-44: Means of Transportation to Work in Capitola Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates 474
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:76
The All Transit score for Capitola is 5.0, which is slightly higher than the 4.8 for the county (Figure E-45).
Figure E-45: Capitola All Transit Performance Score and Map (2019) c. Economic
Regional Trends
TCAC economic scores are determined using the following variables: poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home value. A complete list of TCAC Opportunity Map domains and indicators are included in Table E-11. TCAC economic scores by tract in the County are presented in Figure E-46. The portions of the County with lower economic scores (0.4 or less) are in the northwest, including the community of Davenport, part of the Twin Lakes community, the southwest and in and near the City of Watsonville. 475
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:77
Local Trends
As shown on Figure E-46, Capitola has favorable
economic opportunity scores. The eastern area of
the City (east of Wharf Road) has the highest
score possible (>0.8-1.0). While the economic
scores are high in Capitola, one concern is the
economic base being dependent of tourism and
how that impacts the types of job opportunities for
residents. This issue is discussed further in the
Other Relevant Factors section of this AFFH.
Figure E-46: Santa Cruz County TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic Score By Tract
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 476
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:78
d. Environmental
TCAC environmental score are based on the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores that was developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to evaluate pollution sources in a community while accounting for a community’s vulnerability to the adverse effects of pollution. Measures of pollution burden and population characteristics are combined into a single composite score that is mapped and analyzed. Higher values on the index indicate higher cumulative environmental impacts on individuals arising from these burdens and population factors.
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) compiles these scores to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. In addition to environmental factors (pollutant exposure, groundwater threats, toxic sites, and hazardous materials exposure) and sensitive receptors (seniors, children, persons with asthma, and low birth weight infants), CalEnviroScreen also considers socioeconomic factors such as educational attainment, linguistic isolation, poverty, and unemployment.
Regional Trends
Figure E-47 shows scores for CalEnviroScreen 4.0 released by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Most of the County has more positive environmental scores, with the exception of the southwest portion south of Aptos. The southwest corner of the City of Watsonville has the most negative environmental factors.
Local Trends
As shown in Figure E-47, Capitola has the most positive environmental scores. The City has a variety of open space and recreational resources, including Capitola Beach and the New Brighton State Beach park. Figure E-48 shows the locations of the local parks in Capitola.
477
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:79
Figure E-47: CalEnviroScreen Scores for Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 478
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:80
Figure E-48: Local Parks in Capitola
Source: Santa Cruz County and RBF Consulting 2011
479
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:81
5. Disproportionate Housing Needs
Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) developed by the Census for HUD provides detailed information on housing needs by income level for different types of households in Santa Cruz County and Capitola. Housing problems considered by CHAS include:
• Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30% of gross income; • Severe housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50% of gross income; • Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room); and • Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom) Housing Problems.
In Santa Cruz County, 44% of households experience housing problems (Table E-14). These problems can be:
1) housing units lacking complete kitchen facilities, 2) housing units lacking complete plumbing facilities, 3) household is overcrowded, and 4) household is cost burdened. Renter households in the County face a greater percentage of problems compared to owner households (60% versus 33%). Black residents face the highest amount of housing problems overall (51.2%). When looking at tenure, 80% of American Indian renter households and 43% of Hispanic owner households experience housing problems. The following section provides an overview of housing problems including cost burden, overcrowding, substandard housing conditions, displacement risk and persons experiencing homelessness.
a. Cost Burden
Housing cost burden, or overpayment, is defined as households paying 30% or more of their gross income on housing expenses, including rent or mortgage payments and utilities. Renters are more likely to overpay for housing costs than homeowners. Housing cost burden is considered a housing need because households that overpay for housing costs may have difficulty affording other necessary expenses, such as childcare, transportation, and medical costs. 480
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:82
Regional Trends
In Santa Cruz County, 44% of households experience housing problems (Table E-14). These problems can be:
1) housing units lacking complete kitchen facilities, 2) housing units lacking complete plumbing facilities, 3) household is overcrowded, and 4) household is cost burdened. Renter households in the County face a greater percentage of problems compared to owner households (60% versus 33%). Black residents face the highest amount of housing problems overall (51.2%). When looking at tenure, 80% of American Indian renter households and 43% of Hispanic owner households experience housing problems.
Cost burden impacts 40% of households in the County. Similar to housing problems overall, renter households experience a higher rate of cost burden than owner households (54% versus 30%). When looking at race and ethnicity, American Indian households have the lowest percentage (25%) while half of Hispanic households in the County are paying more than 30% of their income on housing.
Table E-14: Housing Problems and Cost Burden By Race/Ethnicity – Santa Cruz County (2019) White Black Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander Hispanic All
With Housing Problem
Owner-Occupied 31.0% 34.5% 41.7% 29.4% 0.0% 42.8% 33.1% Renter-Occupied 53.3% 64.8% 57.8% 80.0% 0.0% 72.8% 60.4% All Households 38.2% 51.2% 48.4% 37.0% 0.0% 61.3% 44.0% With Cost Burden
Owner-Occupied 29.5% 34.5% 41.2% 26.5% 0.0% 33.2% 30.4% Renter-Occupied 49.6% 59.2% 51.3% 13.3% 0.0% 61.7% 53.9% All Households 36.0% 48.1% 45.4% 24.5% 0.0% 50.7% 39.8% Source: HUD CHAS Data (2015-2019)
Housing problems and cost burdens can also affect special needs populations disproportionately. Table E-15 shows that renter elderly and large family households experience housing problems and cost burdens at higher rates than all renters, all households, and their owner counterparts.
481
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:83
Table E-15: Housing Problems, Elderly and Large Households – Santa Cruz County (2019) Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied All
Elderly Large Households All Owner Elderly Large Households All Renters Households Any Housing Problem 33.5% 51.1% 33.1% 70.5% 87.9% 60.4% 44.0% Cost Burden > 30% 32.2% 24.7% 30.4% 66.8% 63.0% 53.9% 39.8% Source: HUD CHAS Data (2015-2019)
As shown in Figure E-49, the majority of homeowner overpayment in Santa Cruz County is between 20% and 60%.
Pockets of higher cost burden are found in the cities of Santa Cruz, Capitola and Watsonville as well as along the coastline west of Aptos. The northern portion of Monterey County also has a high percentage (60% and higher) of cost burdened owner households.
Figure E-50 shows cost burden by renter households in the County. Cost burden for renters is less than owners along the northern coastline, north and west of Boulder Creek, and around the community of Aptos. However, for the remainder of the County, renter household face equal or greater cost burden compared to owners. Concentrations of households with 60% or higher overpayment are found in and around Scott’s Valley, Ben Lomond, Santa Cruz, Capitola, Watsonville and along the coastline south of Capitola.
482
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:84
Figure E-49: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Santa Cruz County (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 483
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:85
Figure E-50: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Santa Cruz County (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 484
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:86
Local Trends
Housing problems and cost burden, for Capitola is shown in Table E-16. Overall housing problems and cost burden is higher in Capitola than the County (46% versus 44% and 45% versus 40%, respectively). Over 60% of Asian and Hispanic households face housing problems and cost burden in the city versus around 40% of White households.
Hispanic renter households face the highest percentage in Capitola.
Table E-16: Housing Problems and Cost Burden By Race/Ethnicity – Capitola (2019) White Black Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander Hispanic All
With Housing Problem
Owner-Occupied 40.1% --- 100.0% --- --- 47.2% 42.9%
Renter-Occupied 43.8% --- 33.3% 0.0% --- 69.1% 48.7%
All Households 41.9% --- 64.3% 0.0% --- 62.0% 46.0%
With Cost Burden
Owner-Occupied 40.4% --- 100.0% --- --- 49.1% 43.1%
Renter-Occupied 39.9% --- 33.3% 0.0% --- 66.4% 45.7%
All Households 40.1% --- 64.3% 0.0 --- 60.7% 44.5%
Source: HUD CHAS Data (2015-2019)
Table E-17 shows that elderly renter households face housing problems (90%) and cost burden (76%) at a much greater rate than large households and renter households overall in Capitola. These higher percentages indicate that elderly renters face challenges with rental prices and maintenance issues in the City.
Table E-17: Housing Problems, Elderly and Large Households – Capitola (2019) Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied All
Elderly Large Households All Owner Elderly Large Households All Renters Households Any Housing Problem 39.8% 31.3% 43.1% 90.3% 58.4% 48.7% 46.0% Cost Burden > 30% 39.4% 25.6% 42.9% 76.4% 38.2% 45.7% 44.5% Source: HUD CHAS Data (2015-2019)
485
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:87
Figure E-51 and Figure E-52 shows homeowner cost burden in Capitola between 2014 and 2021. Over the six-year period, 40% to 60% of homeowners faced overpayment. However, tract 1218.01 (located on either side of Monterey Avenue) saw an increase in owner cost burdened households to 60% to 80% since 2014.
Renter cost burden in Capitola is shown in Figure E-53 and Figure E-54. In 2014, 40% to 60% of renter households in the city faced overpayment. In 2021, that percentage dropped to 20% to 40% of renter households in tract 1217.02 (west of 41st Street), 1218.01 (south of Monterey Avenue) and 1218.02 (north of Monterey Avenue).
As mentioned previously, tract 1218.01, where the Cliff Heights and Depot Hill neighborhoods are located, has a large population of older adults living alone. Elderly adults, who make up a large proportion of this tract population, are more likely to be retired and have fixed or limited incomes and therefore are more likely to experience cost burden. According to the 2016-2020 ACS, 57% of households residing in tract 1218.01 are non-family households. Specifically, in tract 1218.01 57.1% of households are single-person households including 22.6% that are senior single-person households (65 or older). In comparison, only 35.7% of households citywide are one person including 14.5% with an elderly person living alone.
Additionally, only 62% of the population aged 16 and older with earnings residing in tract 1218.01 have full-time yearround earnings, consistent with the large population of elderly adults in this tract. However, the median annual earnings for the 62% of persons in tract 1218.01 with full-time year-round work is $53,542, significantly higher than the median of $45,982 citywide. The median income for non-families residing in tract 1218.01 is $80,541 compared to only $61,814 for non-family households citywide.
This is likely due to other sources of income including Social Security payments, pensions, child support, public assistance, annuities, money derived from rental properties, interest, and dividends. While owners appear cost burdened at a higher rate in tract 1218.01, this may not reflect the overall character of the population. The map in Figure E-51 below shows housing costs as a percentage of household income based on earnings in the past 12 months of survey.
Because a large proportion of the population in tract 1218.01 does not earn salaries or wages due to retirement, cost burden in this area appears worse than it may be in reality. As discussed above, the median income, which includes salaries and other income sources, for non-family households in this tract, including elderly adults living alone, is significantly higher in tract 1218.01 compared to the City as a whole. 486
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:88
Figure E-51: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Capitola (2014) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 487
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:89
Figure E-52: Percentage of Overpayment by Homeowners in Capitola (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 488
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:90
Figure E-53: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Capitola (2014) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 489
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:91
Figure E-54: Percentage of Overpayment by Renters in Capitola (2021) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 490
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:92
b. Overcrowding
Overcrowding is typically defined as a housing unit occupied by more than one person per room. A housing unit occupied by more than 1.5 persons per room is considered to be severely overcrowded. Overcrowding typically occurs when there are not enough adequately sized units within a community, when high housing costs relative to income force too many individuals to share a housing unit than it can adequately accommodate, or when families reside in smaller units than they need to devote income to other necessities, such as food and health care. Overcrowding tends to accelerate the deterioration of housing. Therefore, maintaining a reasonable level of occupancy and alleviating overcrowding are critical to enhancing quality of life.
The 2016-2020 ACS indicates overcrowding affected 7% of all housing units countywide, including 3.5% of owner units and 11.9% of renter units. Figure E-55 shows the geographic distribution of overcrowded households. A majority of the tracts in the County have less than 5% overcrowded households. Tracts with 10% or more overcrowded households are located in the communities of Twin Lakes, Aptos, and Freedom and in and around the City of Watsonville.
Regional Trends
Table E-18: Overcrowded Households in Santa Cruz County Persons per Room
Owner Renter Total Overcrowded
# of Households* % of Total # of Households* % of Total # of Households* % of Total
1.0 or less 56,066 96.5% 33,618 88.0% 89,684 93.2%
Overcrowded (1.01 to 1.5) 1,631 2.8% 2,385 6.2% 4,016 4.2% Severely Overcrowded
(1.51 or more)
397 0.7% 2,178 5.7% 2,575 2.7%
Total 58,094 100% 38,181 100% 96,275 100%
Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates *Based on the estimate of occupied housing units
491
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:93
Figure E-55: Percentage of Overcrowded Households in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 492
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:94
Local Trends
Approximately 4% of housing units in Capitola are overcrowded. No units in the city are considered to be severely overcrowded. Renter households have a higher percentage of overcrowding (6%) than owner households (1%).
Capitola’s overcrowding is less than the county overall.
Table E-19: Overcrowded Households in Capitola
Persons per room
Owner Renter Total Overcrowded
# of Households* % of Total # of Households* % of Total # of Households* % of Total
1.0 or less 2,198 98.9% 2,289 94.0% 4,487 96.3%
Overcrowded (1.01 to 1.5) 24 1.1% 147 6.0% 171 3.7%
Severely Overcrowded
(1.51 or more)
0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 2,222 100% 2,436 100% 4,658 100%
Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates *Based on the estimate of occupied housing units
493
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:95
Figure E-56 shows that one tract in the City has between 5% and 10% of overcrowded households. This tract (1217.01) is located between 41 Avenue and Wharf Road.
Figure E-56: Percentage of Overcrowded Households in Capitola Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 494
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:96
c. Substandard Housing Conditions
Incomplete plumbing or kitchen facilities can be used to measure substandard housing conditions. In general, residential structures over 30 years of age require minor repairs and modernization improvements, while units over 50 years of age are likely to require major rehabilitation such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical system repairs.
Regional Trends
According to 2016-2020 ACS estimates, shown in Table E-20, 1% of households in Santa Cruz County lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.4% of households lack complete plumbing facilities. Renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.
Table E-20: Substandard Housing Conditions by Tenure in Santa Cruz County Facility Type Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Total Households Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 0.3% 2.2% 1.0%
Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 0.2% 0.6% 0.4%
Total Households 58,094 38,181 96,275
Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Figure E-57 shows the percentage of households lacking complete kitchen facilities in the County, while Figure E-58 shows households lacking complete plumbing facilities. The northwestern portion of the County (including Davenport), a tract just east of Capitola and two tracts in the southern part of Watsonville lack facilities at a greater percentage than the rest of the County. Ten to 20% of households in the northwest corner of the City of Santa Cruz lack complete plumbing facilities.
As stated above, structures over 30 years of age typically require minor repairs and modernization improvements, while units over 50 years of age are likely to require major rehabilitation. Figure E-59 shows that a majority of the housing stock in the County is at least 30 years old (built prior to 1990). A significant number of Census tracts in Santa Cruz County have 80% to 100% of units built prior to 1990. A tract along Highway 1 in the western part of Watsonville is the only area that has more than half of its housing units built since 1990. 495
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:97
Figure E-57: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 496
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:98
Figure E-58: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 497
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:99
Figure E-59: Percentage of Housing Units Built Before 1990 in Santa Cruz County Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 498
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:100
Local Trends
All housing units in Capitola have complete plumbing facilities. Approximately 1% of renter households lack complete kitchen facilities (Table E-21). These units are located in tract 1317.02, west of 41st Avenue.
Table E-21: Substandard Housing Conditions by Tenure in Capitola Facility Type Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Total Households Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 0% 1.0% 0.5%
Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 0% 0% 0%
Total Households 2,222 2,436 4,658
Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 499
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:101
Figure E-60: Percentage of Housing Units Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities in Capitola Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 500
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:102
According to the 2016-2020 American Community Survey approximately 78% of Capitola’s housing stock is over 30 years old (built prior to 1990). Figure E-61 shows that 80% to 100% of housing units east of Wharf Road are at least 30 years old, while 60% to 80% of units west of Wharf Road are 30 years old or more.
Figure E-61: Percentage of Housing Units Built Before 1990 in Capitola Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 501
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:103
d. Displacement Risk
Displacement occurs when housing costs or neighboring conditions force current residents out and rents become so high that lower-income people are excluded from moving in. As in most areas of the State, rent prices continue to increase in Capitola. The U.S. Census provides information on median contract rents. Between 2010 and 2020, the contract rents increased by 43% ($566) in Capitola and 47% ($552) in Santa Cruz County. Displacement in Capitola has been an issue due to new residents with high paying jobs in Silicon Valley that have the ability to work remotely. Since the pandemic and the increased flexibility in remote work, many renters are displaced during rent increases due to increased competition from higher-paid individuals.
UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project’s (UDP) Estimated Displacement Risk (EDR) model for California identifies varying levels of displacement risk for low-income renter households in all census tracts in the state from 2015 to 2019. 10 The model uses machine learning to determine which variables are most strongly related to displacement at the household level and to predict tract-level displacement risk statewide while controlling for the region. The two income groups used for the model are households earning 0-50% AMI and 50-80% AMI. Tracts are assigned to one of the following categories, with darker red colors representing higher displacement risk and lighter orange colors representing less risk:
• Low Data Quality: the tract has less than 500 total households and/or the census margins of error were greater than 15% of the estimate (shaded gray).
• Lower Displacement Risk: the model estimates that the loss of low-income households is less than the gain in low-income households. However, some of these areas may have small pockets of displacement within their boundaries.
• At Risk of Displacement: the model estimates there is potential displacement or risk of displacement of the given population in these tracts.
• Elevated Displacement: the model estimates there is a small amount of displacement (e.g., 10%) of the given population.
10 California Urban Displacement Project 2022, PlaceWorks 2022, HCD 2022 502
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:104
• High Displacement: the model estimates there is a relatively high amount of displacement (e.g., 20%) of the given population.
• Extreme Displacement: the model estimates there is an extreme level of displacement (e.g., greater than 20%) of the given population.
Regional Trends
Using the UDP EDR model, areas in the County identified at risk of displacement are located in the cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville (Figure E-62).
Local Trends
As shown on Figure E-62, the City of Capitola is considered at lower risk for displacement and there are no concentrations of displacement. However, increasing rents make displacement a continued risk for Capitola. As described in the Needs Assessment chapter of this Element, according to the ACS rents increased by 40 percent between 2010 and 2020. Online rental surveys conducted in 2023 found that rents in Capitola are out of reach for lower income households.
503
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:105
Figure E-62: Displacement Risk in Santa Cruz County
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023. 504
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:106
e. Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Homelessness has become an increasingly reported problem throughout the State. Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness included the general lack of housing affordable to low-, very low-, and extremely low-income persons, an increased number of persons whose incomes fall below the poverty level, reductions in public subsidies to the poor, and the de-institutionalization of people with mental illness without adequate support services necessary for independent living.
Regional Trends
The 2022 Santa Cruz County Homeless Pointin-Time (PIT) Count and Survey Report completed by Applied Survey Research on the
morning of February 28, 2022, found that there
were approximately 2,299 persons experiencing
homelessness in Santa Cruz County. This was
an increase of 6% from the 2,167 persons
included in the 2019 PIT Count and Survey.
Figure E-63 shows the Santa Cruz County PIT
counts from 2013 until 2022. The year 2013 saw
the highest number of persons experiencing
homelessness (3,536) while 2015 saw the
lowest number (1,964).
Figure E-63: Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Santa Cruz County (2013-2022)
Source: Applied Survey Research, Santa Cruz County Homeless Census 505
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:107
Table E-22 shows the demographics of people included in the 2017, 2019 and 2022 PIT Count. The number of unaccompanied minors has decreased from 165 to zero over the last 5 years. Transitional aged youth and families have also decreased. Veterans and people experiencing chronic homelessness have increased during the same time period.
Table E-22: Demographics of Individuals Experiencing Homelessness in Santa Cruz County 2017 2019 2022
Total 2,249 2,167 2,299
Unaccompanied Minors (under 18) 165 51 0
Transitional Aged Youth (18-24) 423 569 222
Families 129 122 50
Veterans 236 151 332
People Experiencing Chronic Homelessness 600 403 921
Race/Ethnicity
White 51% 67% 74%
Black 7% 8% 12%
Multiple Races 10% 14% 9%
American Indian/Alaskan Native --- 10% 3%
Hispanic/Latinx 29% 33% 39%
Gender
Male 74% 67% 66%
Female 26% 33% 32%
Transgender <1% <1% 1%
Health and Disability
Substance Use Disorder 38% 30% 67%
HIV/AIDS 2% 3% 12%
Psychiatric or Emotional Conditions 39% 32% 39%
Physical Disability 38% 26% 57%
Chronic Health Condition 31% 21% 49%
PTSD 32% 30% 35%
Traumatic Brain Injury 18% 12% 10%
Domestic/Intimate Partner Violence 6% 5% 4%
Source: Applied Survey Research, Santa Cruz County Homeless Census 506
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:108
Of those individuals experiencing homelessness,
Whites make up almost three-quarters of the
population. This is an increase from 50% in 2017.
The percentage of Black and Hispanic individuals
has also increased. When comparing these
percentages to the racial makeup of the County
overall, Whites comprise 56% of the population,
Hispanic and Latinos represent 34% and Black
residents make up less than 1%. Black residents
in particular face a disproportionate percentage of
homelessness in Santa Cruz County. The
percentage of males experiencing homelessness
has dropped, with a coinciding increase of female
homeless persons. The number of persons with
psychiatric or emotional conditions was the same
in 2022 as 2017, but persons with substance
abuse issues, physical disabilities, HIV/AIDS,
PTSD and chronic health conditions have all
increased. Overall in the County, the percentage
of residents with a disability increased from 9.3%
in 2010 to 11.3% in 2021. Those persons
experiencing domestic violence slightly
decreased between 2017 and 2022.
While there are many causes that can lead to
homelessness, fair housing issues can sometimes
play a part. The 2022 PIT Count included asking
the primary condition that led to homelessness:
37% of respondents said it was due to eviction
and six percent said it was due to landlords raising the rent. When asked about ways to prevent losing housing, 50% said rent or mortgage assistance, 45% said landlord mediation and 40% stated legal assistance.
Figure E-64 shows the location of emergency shelter housing in the County. The majority of facilities are located in the City of Santa Cruz with 507
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:109
other locations in Twin Lakes and the City of Watsonville. Figure E-64:
Emergency Shelter Housing in Santa Cruz County
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0 (2017-2021 ACS), 2023.
Housing for a Healthy Santa Cruz
A 3-year strategic framework was adopted in 2021 to address homelessness in Santa Cruz County. The 2021 to 2024 Housing for a Healthy Santa Cruz Framework (Framework) was published by the County’s Housing for Health 508
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:110
Division.
11,12 The County’s new Housing for Health Partnership (H4HP) will serve as the Continuum of Care (CoC) for the County and County staff will provide leadership and the backbone administrative support to implement the Framework.
The Framework outlined the following causes of homelessness in the County:
• Housing Affordability Gap
• Health Issues Impacting Living Situations
• Lack of Supportive Connections
• Loss of Hope and Sense of Purpose
To address these causes, the Framework includes the following goals and strategies to meet the following: 1) Reduce the number of households experiencing unsheltered homelessness by 50% and 2) Reduce the number of households experiencing homelessness by 25%:
• Goal #1: Improve the effectiveness of all programs in helping people secure housing. • Goal #2: Expand capacity within the homelessness response system • Strategy #1: Build a Coalition – develop a strong and informed action-oriented partnership with leaders and stakeholders within the community.
• Strategy #2: Prevent Homelessness – use targeted prevention and early intervention housing problem solving to help people and families keep or return to housing as quickly as possible. • Strategy #3: Increase Connections – Expand and improve “Front Door” programs and services including outreach, temporary housing, and supportive services.
• Stategy #4: Expand Permanent Housing – Increase permanent housing and income growth resources and opportunities to become housed.
One effort currently underway by the H4HP to implement the Framework is a redesign of the coordinated entry system for housing services. The changes are necessary since there is insufficient permanent housing to meet the needs of 11 The Housing for Health Division was created in November 2020 within the County of Santa Cruz Human Services Department to support implementation of the Framework and incudes a coalition of resources and partners. 12 County of Santa Cruz, Housing for a Healthy Santa Cruz: A Strategic Framework for Addressing Homelessness in Santa Cruz County, January 2021 to January 2024.
509
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:111
people experiencing homelessness in the County. Only 133 referrals to housing were made in 2022 while over 1,774 persons counted in the 2022 PIT count were living without shelter.13 Local Trends
The number of persons experiencing homelessness in Capitola has increased from one person in 2017 to 35 people in 2022 (Figure E-65). All of these persons were unsheltered.
Figure E-65: Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Capitola (2013-2022)* Source: Applied Survey Research, Santa Cruz County Homeless Census *All unsheltered persons
Capitola Actions to Assist People Who are Homeless
Capitola recognizes the diversity of needs of homeless people. Therefore, the City participates in inter-jurisdictional efforts to comprehensively address the needs of people who are homeless. Capitola is a participating jurisdiction in and contributes a regional share of funding to the Santa Cruz County’s newly created H4HP described above. 13 https://www.homelessactionpartnership.org/GetHelp/CoordinatedEntry.aspx 510
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:112
The cities and county, along with other interested parties, are part of the H4HP to coordinate a regional system for helping people who are experiencing homelessness or at imminent risk of experiencing homelessness. Although there are no homeless shelters or transitional housing projects currently located in Capitola, the City does provide direct financial support to a number of agencies that provide social services to people and families who are homeless. The City provides community service grants on a 3-year cycle to a number of nonprofit organizations who provide services to homeless individuals. Grant amounts vary by organization and City general fund availability. The majority of grants provided are between $7,500 to $15,000. The City has three categories for prioritizing grants. Stable and affordable housing and shelter is the top priority when evaluating grant applications, followed by health and wellness, and the third category of healthy environment.
6. Other Relevant Factors and Local Knowledge
a. Home Loans
Home loan activity in Capitola during 2021 is available through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). Table E-23 shows the total number of applications by loan type as well as the approval and denial rates. Out of the 707 loan applications in 2021, 477 (67%) were for refinance loans, 182 (26%) were for conventional purchase loans, 45 (6%) were for home improvement loans and three (<1%) were for governmentbacked purchase loans. Overall approval rates in the City was 71%. The three government-backed purchase loans had a 100% approval rate, followed by refinance loans (72%), conventional purchase loans (70%) and home improvement loans (60%). Home improvement loans had the highest denial rate, at 22% while 19% of refinance loans were either withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incompleteness. 511
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:113
Table E-23: Disposition of Home Loan Applications in Capitola (2021) Loan Type
Total
Applications Approved Denied Other
Conventional Purchase 182 69.8% 13.7% 16.5%
Government-Backed Purchase 3 100.0% 0.0%` 0.0%
Refinance 477 71.9% 9.4% 18.7%
Home Improvement 45 60.0% 22.2% 17.8%
Total 707 70.7% 11.3% 18.0%
Source: 2021 Home Mortgage Disclosure Data: https://ffiec.cfpb.gov Note: “Approved” loans include loans originated and applications approved but not accepted. “Other” includes loans withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incompleteness.
When looking at the 182 applications for conventional home loans by race and ethnicity, the vast majority (63%) are White, followed by race/ethnicity unknown (20%), Hispanic or Latinx (10%), Asian (3%) and Black or African American (<1%). Loan applicants that identified as more than one race had a 100% approval rate while Asian and Hispanic or Latinx applicants had the lowest (33% and 26%, respectively). While the table shows 100% approval rating for Black or African Americans, it should be noted that only one application was received. Asian applicants in Capitola had the highest denial rate at 50%, while Hispanic or Latinx applicants had the highest percentage of applications withdrawn or closed for incompleteness (32%).
Table E-24: Home Purchase Applications by Race and Ethnicity (2021) Race/Ethnicity
Total
Applications Approved Denied Other
Asian 6 33.3% 50.0% 16.7%
Black or African American 1 100.0% 0.0%` 0.0%
Hispanic or Latinx 19 26.3% 42.1% 31.6%
White 114 75.5% 9.6% 14.9%
More than One Race (Joint) 5 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 37 75.7% 8.1% 16.2%
All applicants 182 69.8% 13.7% 16.5%
Source: 2021 Home Mortgage Disclosure Data: https://ffiec.cfpb.gov Note: “Approved” loans include loans originated and applications approved but not accepted. “Other” includes loans withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incompleteness.
512
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:114
Figure E-66 shows housing tenure by race and ethnicity in Capitola. American Indian/Alaska Native and Some Other Race households are solely renters. Compared to other races and ethnicities, Hispanic households have the lowest percentage of ownership in the city. Given the high denial rate for mortgage applications shown above, Hispanic households may face challenges in ownership opportunities in Capitola.
Figure E-66: Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity
513
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:115
b. Zoning Code
From 2014 to 2020, the City completed a comprehensive Zoning Code update and city-wide rezoning to permit residential and mixed-use development in the commercial and mixed-use zones with no density limits and removed previous barriers to housing. The update included 66 public meetings from August 2014 through July 2019 and an additional 9 hearings in 2019 and 2020 for certification by the California Coastal Commission. Subsequently, the City also amended the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinance and Inclusionary Housing ordinance and added an SB9 ordinance and Objective Standards for Multifamily Development ordinance. Figure E-67 shows the updated Zoning Map, which was approved by the California Coastal Commission. Capitola has a variety of special zones, including the Coastal Zone Overlay and Vacation Rental Overlay. Map, which was approved by the California Coastal Commission. Capitola has a variety of special zones, including the Coastal Zone Overlay and Vacation Rental Overlay. 514
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:116
Figure E-67: Capitola Zoning Map
Source: City of Capitola
Coastal Zone
The City of Capitola’s Local Coastal Program has been certified by the California Coastal Commission, and coastal permits are issued by the City. Within the City of Capitola, the location of a project in the coastal zone generally does not result in a more complex or time consuming development review process. Because the City requires Development 515
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:117
and Design Review (design permit) for nearly all development, the fact that a coastal permit may also be required does not generally result in a substantively different application review process or timing.
Vacation Rental Overlay
The Vacation Rental Overlay (-VRU) zone permits transient rental use in the Mixed-Use Village (MU-V) District and a small portion of Riverview Avenue (within the R-1 zone), subject to a vacation rental permit. Short-term vacation rentals are prohibited outside the -VRU zone. Limiting vacation rentals to the -VRU zone preserves housing in other areas for permanent residents.
c. Land Development History and Patterns
Capitola is a highly desired lifestyle community due to the proximity on the coast, access to good schools and public programs and quality of public infrastructure (parks, walkability, etc). Capitola incorporated in January 1949. As early as the 1850s, Capitola was seen as an escape from inland residents to escape the heat and enjoy the ocean. This identity as a tourist destination has continued and has been a key component for the City. The famous Capitola Mall opened in 1977.
Mobile Home Parks
The City of Capitola also contains a total of eight existing mobile home parks serving a total of 681 households (Figure E-68). While the development of new parks is not being pursued, the preservation of these existing parks is seen as an important part of maintaining existing homes that are modest in size and higher than average in density. Seven of the eight mobile parks have been subdivided and converted into resident cooperatives or have long-term affordability agreements with tenants. Brookvale Terrace and Tradewinds Mobilehome Park are cooperatives with no ongoing affordability agreements with the City. Loma Vista Estates and Wharf Road Manor have affordable housing income restriction that all new buyers must comply with. Turner Lane Mobile home Park also has an income restriction but it is only applicable to seven of the 79 spaces. Castle Mobile Home Estates is owned by a nonprofit and has long term affordability agreements and income restrictions in place. Cabrillo Mobile home Estates had a 12-year affordability agreement in place for rent which expires in June of 2023. As described in the Constraints chapter of this Housing Element, the residents and City staff are currently working together to identify ways to ensure residents are not displaced due to a hike in space rent. As the older manufactured homes and mobile homes in the City’s existing parks 516
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:118
age, the City works to provide financial assistance to park residents who are interested in upgrading with new manufactured homes.
Figure E-68: Mobile Home Parks in Capitola
517
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:119
Affordable Housing
There are currently two federally assisted multifamily rental complexes in Capitola. One is the Capitola Supportive Housing Development (formerly Dakota Apartments), which has 24 units for very low-income households with one or more persons affected by mobility impairment/traumatic brain injury. The project used funding from the Capitola Redevelopment Agency’s Housing Fund, HOME Program Income Re-Use Funds, and the HUD 811 program. The development is owned by the National Handicapped Housing Institute, a nonprofit agency, and restrictions ensure that the units will remain affordable in perpetuity. The second complex, Bay Area Senior Apartments, has 109 units and has a 55-year affordability requirement which will expire in 2065. Fifty of the units are restricted to extremely low-income senior households, 30 units have been restricted to very low-income senior households, 28 units have been restricted to low-income senior households and one, 2-bedroom unit serves as the manager’s unit and is not restricted. Thirtynine units in the development have been set aside to serve seniors who need assistance with certain activities of daily living and qualify under the State’s definition of Chronically Ill. First Community Housing worked in participation with the County of Santa Cruz to provide assistance through the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) program to set aside five units to serve extremely low-income seniors with mental illness who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
Capital Improvements
The City has undertaken several recent capital improvement projects: the new Capitola Library was completed in 2023, the Complete Streets program has been a City focus and has included improvements to Clares Street in 2022/2023 and Kennedy Drive in 2023). The rebuild of the Capitola Jetty was completed in 2021.
Future capital improvement plans include renovating the Jade Street Community Center, updating the Jade Street Park with a fully accessible park, rebuilding the Capitola Wharf (2023/2024), Cliff Drive improvements for coastal resiliency and bike/pedestrian circulation, and Stockton Bridge repairs.
Economic Base
As mentioned earlier in this Element, Capitola is known as the first resort community on the California coast. The City still relies heavily on tourism and retail. As a result, Capitola’s local employment base is comprised of relatively lowwage jobs in the service, retail, and tourism sectors. This combination of low-paying jobs and high cost housing makes it difficult for lower and moderate income households to find housing they can afford within Capitola. 518
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:120
7. Sites Inventory
AB 686 requires a jurisdiction’s site inventory “…be used to identify sites throughout the community, consistent with…” its duty to affirmatively further fair housing. The number of units, location, and assumed affordability of identified sites throughout the community (i.e., lower, moderate, and above moderate income RHNA) relative to all components of the assessment of fair housing is outlined in the following subsections.
RHNA Strategy for Capitola – Providing New Housing and Mobility Options for Residents Given the scarcity of developable residential land in the City and the continuing demand for housing, recycling of underutilized land has been the prevalent trend of development in Capitola. Many of the City’s commercial-zoned corridors allow residential development with no maximum density. These include the Regional Commercial (CR), Community Commercial (C-C) and Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N) zones. Given that Capitola is an almost completely built-out community, with only two vacant lots, the vast majority of the sites inventory include sites within these three zoning areas. There is great potential for including residential units within the commercially zoned areas and roadway corridors given the recent statewide trend of mixed-use projects within commercial areas and declining commercialonly brick and mortar developments. The commercially zoned corridors that are projected to accommodate future housing include Capitola Road, Bay Avenue, and 41st Avenue, which includes the Capitola Mall site (see the Capitola Mall discussion later in this section). The Mixed Use Neighborhood sites are projected to include 173 units and are located along the main roadway corridors of Capitola Road and Capitola Avenue. The projected units for these three commercial and mixed-use zones are distributed across most of the City, and their proximity to main transportation corridors provides opportunities for public transit and potential future light rail travel along the rail corridor.
A developer can request density increase allowances on sites under these mixed-use zones subject to the required provision of 20% of the units set aside to lower income households or a lesser percentage of the units set aside for extremely low- and very low-income households. An option for payment of in-lieu fees may be provided if development of affordable units as part of an eligible project is not feasible. In-lieu fees collected by the City are anticipated to be used exclusively to facilitate the development of affordable housing throughout the community.
The City’s housing strategy as part of the RHNA inventory will increase housing options for all income levels in Capitola as well as new mobility opportunities. This is due to the recent trends of development in Capitola, combined 519
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:121
with the zoning provisions that allow for a variety of mixed-use housing near commercial cores and public transit opportunities, and allowable density increases that can increase the production of affordable housing. a. Integration and Segregation
Race/Ethnicity
The distribution of RHNA sites by non-White populations in Capitola are presented in 520
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:122
Figure E-69 E-69 and Table E-25. As discussed previously, the western side of the City tends to have larger racial/ethnic minority populations compared to the eastern side. Most RHNA units (88.379.9%) are located on the western side of the City in areas where the non-White population comprises 41% to 60% of the population. The remaining 11.720.1% of RHNA units are in block groups where 21% to 40% of the population belongs to a racial or ethnic minority group.
While there are more RHNA units in block groups with non-White populations comprising between 41% and 60% of the population, sites are generally distributed throughout all areas of the City. Further, the City’s RHNA strategy does not disproportionately place lower income RHNA units in block groups with larger racial/ethnic minority populations.
Approximately 7779% of units allocated towards the lower income RHNA are in block groups with non-White populations exceeding 41%, compared to 7882% of moderate income units and 881% of above moderate income units.
Table E-25: Distribution of RHNA by Non-White Population Non-White Population
(Block Group)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
21-40% 164174 22.91.0 % 3936 21.717.9% 9188 5.619.5% 294298 11.720.1% 41-60% 552654 77.179.0 % 141165 78.382.1% 1,524363 94.480.5% 2,2171,182 88.379.9% 61-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
>80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 521
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:123
Figure E-69: Non-White Population by Block Group and Sites Inventory 522
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:124
Note: Sites inventory maps throughout this section include the entire mall site but sites inventory calculations exclude the Kohl’s site. 523
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:125
Persons with Disabilities
The central areas of Capitola tend to have larger populations of persons with disabilities compared to the far eastern and western tracts (
524
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:126
Figure E-70). As presented in Table E-26, 7964% of RHNA units are in tracts where fewer than 10% of the population experiences a disability, including 5459% of lower income units, 6568% of moderate income units, and 7064% of above moderate income units. However, a larger proportion of moderate and above moderate income units are in the tract where more than 20% of the population experiences a disability compared to lower income units.
The City’s RHNA strategy distributes sites throughout the City and does not disproportionately place RHNA units of any income level in tracts with larger populations of persons with disabilities.
Table E-26: Distribution of RHNA by Population of Persons with Disabilities Disabled Population
(Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <10% 388490 54.259.2% 117137 65.068.2% 1,481316 91.770.1 % 1,986943 79.163.7 % 10-20% 216 30.226.1% 2430 13.314.9% 4349 2.710.9% 283295 11.319.9% 20-30% 112122 15.614.7% 3934 21.716.9% 9186 5.619.1% 242 9.616.4% 30-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
>40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 525
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:127
Figure E-70: Population of Persons with Disabilities by Tract and Sites Inventory 526
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:128 527
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:129
Familial Status
Capitola tracts have variable levels of populations of children residing in married couple households ( 528
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:130
Figure E-71 and Table E-27). As discussed previously, there are very few children in tract 1218.01, where only 17.6% of children reside in married couple households and 61.8% reside in single-parent female-headed households.
According to the 2017-2021 ACS, there are only 131 children under the age of 18 residing in tract 1218.01, representing only 7.5% of the tract-wide population. The population of children in female-headed households in this tract is the result of the small sample size and does not appear to reflect the local knowledge of the neighborhoods in the area, such as Cliffwood Heights and Depot Hill.
The largest proportion of RHNA units are in tracts where 60% to 80% of children reside in married couple households.
An additional 9.216.1% of units are in tracts where 40% to 60% of children reside in married couple households and
16.49.6% are in tracts where more than 80% of children reside in married couple households.
As shown in Table E-28 and Figure E-72, 88.379.9% of RHNA units are in tracts where 21% to 40% of children reside in single-parent female-headed households. TheA slightly larger populations percentage of lower income units (231%) that are in tracts where less than 20% of children reside in female-headed households is similar to compared to moderate income units (21.717%). and above moderate income units (19%).
Capitola is made up of tracts with diverse populations of children in married couple and female-headed households.
RHNA units of all income levels are distributed throughout the City regardless of familial status to the greatest extent possible. The RHNA strategy does not disproportionately place lower income units in areas with more single-parent female-headed households. The spread of the sites selected ensures existing populations are served while promoting housing mobility and opportunities throughout Capitola.
Table E-27: Distribution of RHNA by Children in Married Couple Households Children in Married
Couple Households
(Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <20% 0 0.0% 02 10.0% 02 0.04% 04 0.03%
20-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
40-60% 164 22.919.8% 2428 13.313.9% 4347 9.610.4% 231239 9.216.1% 60-80% 440542 61.565.5% 117137 65.068.2% 1,481316 70.21% 9952,038 81.267.2% >80% 112122 15.614.7% 3934 21.716.9 % 9186 20.219.1% 242 9.616.4% Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 529
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:131
Table E-28: Distribution of RHNA by Children in Female-Headed Households Children in FemaleHeaded Households
(Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <20%
20-40%
40-60%
164174 22.921.0% 3934 21.716.9% 9186 5.619.1% 294 11.719.9% 552654 77.179.0% 141165 78.382.1% 1,524363 94.480.5% 2,2171,182 88.379.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
60-80%
>80%
0 0.0 % 02 01.0% 02 0.04% 04 0.03%
0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 530
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:132
Figure E-71: Children in Married Couple Households by Tract and Sites Inventory 531
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:133 532
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:134
Figure E-72: Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract and Sites Inventory 533
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:135 534
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:136
Income Level
Figure E-73Figure E-73 and Table E-29 show the distribution of RHNA sites and units by Low to Median Income (LMI) household population at the block group level. As discussed previously, approximately half of the City is considered an LMI area where more than 50% of households earn low or moderate incomes. Approximately Over 7687% of RHNA units are in block groups that are not considered LMI areas, where only 25% to 50% of households are low or moderate income. A larger proportion of units allocated towards the lower income RHNA are in LMI areas (3329.7%) compared to moderate income units (19.416.9%) and above moderate income units (4.014.2%).
While more lower income RHNA units are allocated in LMI areas, sites accommodating the lower income RHNA are not concentrated in a single area of the City. Further, a majority of lower income units are not located in LMI areas. The City’s RHNA strategy aims to serve existing LMI households while providing additional housing opportunities citywide.
Additionally, actions outlined in this Housing Element intend to increase opportunities and address disproportionate housing needs in areas with larger LMI household populations.
Table E-29: Distribution of RHNA by LMI Household Population LMI Households
(Block Group)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <25% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
25-50% 480582 67.070.3% 145167 80.683.1% 1,550387 96.085.8% 2,1751,136 86.676.8% 50-75% 184194 25.723.4% 3534 19.416.9% 6564 4.014.2% 284292 11.319.7% 75-100% 52 7.36.3 % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 52 2.13.5%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 535
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:137
Figure E-73: LMI Households by Block Group and Sites Inventory 536
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:138 537
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:139
b. Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas and Access to Opportunities TCAC Opportunity Area
All Capitola tracts are highest and high resource areas (Table E-30 and Figure E-74 538
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:140
Figure E-74). The central tract, tract 1218, is a highest resource area, while the eastern and western tracts comprising a majority of the remainder of Capitola, tracts 1217 and 1221, are high resource areas. Consistent with the citywide trend, 9083% of RHNA units are in high resource tracts and 1017% are in highest resource tracts.
Sites accommodating the City’s RHNA will all be located in areas with highly accessible economic, educational, and environmental opportunities based on the HCD/TCAC opportunity scores.
Table E-30: Distribution of RHNA by TCAC Opportunity Area Score TCAC Opportunity Area
Category (Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Highest Resource 112122 15.614.7 % 3936 21.717.9% 9188 5.619.5% 242246 9.616.6% High Resource 604706 84.485.3 % 141165 78.382.1% 1,524363 94.480.5% 2,2691,234 90.483.4%% Moderate Resource 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Low Resource 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
High Segregation and Poverty 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 539
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:141
Figure E-74: TCAC Opportunity Areas by Tract and Sites Inventory 540
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:142 541
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:143
Environmental
As discussed above and shown in Figure E-75Figure E-75, all Capitola tracts have low (positive) CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile rankings. All RHNA units are in tracts scoring within the 20th percentile. The City’s RHNA strategy distributes sites throughout the City to the greatest extent possible. New housing units will be located in areas with access to Capitola’s open space and recreational resources, including Capitola Beach and the New Brighton State Beach park.
Table E-31: Distribution of RHNA by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score CalEnviroScreen 4.0
Percentile Score
(Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent 1-10% 52 7.36.3 % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 52 2.13.5 %
11-20% 664776 92.793.7% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,4591,428 97.996.5 % 21-30% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
31-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
41-50% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
51-60% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
61-70% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
71-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
81-90% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
91-100% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 542
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:144
Figure E-75: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores by Tract and Sites Inventory 543
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:145 544
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:146
c. Disproportionate Housing Needs
Cost Burden
Most areas of the City have populations of cost burdened owners between 40% and 60% (Figure E-76Figure E-76).
There is one tract where more than 60% of owners are cost burdened. Two moderate-income units and two above moderate-income units are located in this tract. All other RHNA units are located in these tracts. where 40% to 60% of owners experience cost burden.
As shown in Figure E-77, Capitola tracts have populations of cost burdened renters ranging from 20% to 60%. Table E33 shows that 893% of units are in tracts where less than 40% of renters are cost burdened. A larger proportion of lower income units (30.226.1%) are in tracts where more than 40% of renters are cost burdened compared to moderate income units (13.313.9%) and above moderate income units (2.710.4%).
The western side of the City where more renters overpay for housing is consistent with the tract with a larger proportion of LMI households (see
Figure E-73). While tThe RHNA strategy allocates a larger proportion of lower income units in tracts with 20 to 40 percent of cost burdened renter populations larger cost burdened renter populations,, however; sites accommodating lower income units are not concentrated in a single area of the City. As mentioned above, the City’s RHNA strategy aims to serve existing LMI households while providing additional housing opportunities citywide.
Table E-32: Distribution of RHNA by Cost Burdened Owners Cost Burdened
Owners (Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-40% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
40-60% 716828 100% 180199 100.099.0% 1,615449 100.099.6% 2,5111,476 100.099.7% 60-80% 0 0.5% 02 10.0% 02 0.00.4% 04 0.00.3%
>80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 545
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:147
Table E-33: Distribution of RHNA by Cost Burdened Renters Cost Burdened
Renters (Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Mode rate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
20-40% 500612 69.873.9 % 156173 86.786.1% 1,572404 97.389.6% 2,2281,189 88.780.3% 40-60% 216 30.226.1% 2428 13.313.9% 4347 2.710.4% 283291 11.319.7% 60-80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
>80% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111480 100.0% 546
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:148
Figure E-76: Cost Burdened Owner Households by Tract and Sites Inventory 547
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:149 548
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:150
Figure E-77: Cost Burdened Renter Households by Tract and Sites Inventory 549
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:151 550
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:152
Overcrowding
There is only one tract in Capitola where more than 5% of households are overcrowded Figure E-78Figure E-78. This tract also has a larger LMI household population and population of cost burdened renters (see Figure E-73 Figure E73 and Figure E-77). As shown in Table E-34, 9.216.1% of RHNA units are in this tract. The proportion of lower income units allocated in this tract is slightly higher (22.919.8%) compared to the proportion of moderate (13.313.9%) and above moderate (2.710.4%) income units.
While there are more lower income units in the tract where more than 5% of households are overcrowded, sites accommodating the lower income RHNA are not concentrated in a single area of the City. Out of the 828 units in the sites inventory, 116units are part of the inventory buffer, as the City’s RHNA allocation for lower income units is 712.
Further, targeted actions outlined in this Housing Element aim to serve existing and future households and reduce housing needs in this area of the City.
Table E-34: Distribution of RHNA by Overcrowded Households Cost Burdened
Owners (Tract)
Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income Total Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <5% 552664 77.180.2% 156173 86.786.1% 1,572404 97.389.6% 2,2801,241 90.883.9% 5-10% 164 22.919.8% 2428 13.313.9% 4347 2.710.4% 231239 9.216.1% 10-15% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
15-20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
>20% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 716828 100.0% 180201 100.0% 1,615451 100.0% 2,5111,480 100.0% 551
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:153
Figure E-78: Overcrowded Households by Tract and Sites Inventory 552
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:154
d. Summary
Table E-35 shows the sites inventory by tract and AFFH variable. The sites inventory is also included as Figure E-79.
RHNA sites are distributed throughout the Capitola over six tracts. This analysis breaks up the tracts into eastern and western Capitola. Eastern Capitola is made up of tracts 1218.01, 1218.02, and 1221, while tracts 1216.02, 1217.01, and 1217.02 are considered Western Capitola. As described earlier, The City’s housing strategy as part of the RHNA inventory will increase new housing options for all income levels in Capitola as well as options for mobility throughout the City. This is due to the recent trends of development in Capitola, combined with the zoning provisions that allow for a variety of mixed-use housing near commercial cores and public transit opportunities, and allowable density increases that can increase the production of affordable housing.
Eastern Capitola
Eastern Capitola is made up of the tracts east of Soquel Wharf Road. Eastern Capitola tends to have smaller non-White populations and cost burdened renter populations. Two of the three tracts are also considered highest resource areas.
The third, tract 1221, is a high resource area. Most of Eastern Capitola is zoned for Single-Family Residential (R-1) uses.
Additional residential zoning designations on this side of the City include Mobile Home Park (MH), Multi-Family Residential, Low Density (RM-L), Multi-Family Residential, Medium Density (RM-M), Multi-Family Residential, High Density (RM-H), and Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N). Approximately 15% of Eastern Capitola is designated open space for New Brighton State Park.
A total of 242246 RHNA units are allocated on this side of the City, including 112122 lower income units, 3936 moderate income units, and 9188 above moderate income units. Eastern Capitola has a non-White population of 27.8%, LMI household populations ranging from 29% to 68%, and populations of overcrowded households ranging from 3% to 4%.
In general, the eastern side of the City has few fair housing issues and small to moderate non-White and LMI household populations. The City’s RHNA strategy ensures that RHNA units of all income levels are allocated throughout the eastern side of the City. The City’s RHNA strategy in Eastern Capitola does not exacerbate conditions related to fair housing. 553
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:155
Western Capitola
This analysis considers Western Capitola to be the area west of Soquel Wharf Road. The western side of the City is comprised of a mix of residential zoning designations including Mobile Home Park (MH), Single-Family Residential (R-1), Multi-Family Residential, Low Density (RM-L), Multi-Family Residential, Medium Density (RM-M), Multi-Family Residential, High Density (RM-H), and Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N). The western side of the City has larger areas zoned for Regional Commercial (C-R) and Community Commercial (C-C) uses compared to the eastern side. The west side also has larger lot sizes and can better accommodate large scale redevelopment projects.
All three tracts on the western side of Capitola are high resource areas. There are more RHNA units allocated on this side of the City compared to the eastern side. The City’s RHNA strategy allocated 2,2691,234 units in Western Capitola, including 604706 lower income units, 141165 moderate income units, and 1,524363 above moderate income units. As discussed in Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities, of this Housing Element, the City’s strategy is to locate higher density housing and mixed-use developments along transit corridors. All of the key housing opportunity sites identified are located directly on existing bus routes, and the majority of them are also in close proximity to the regional transit center and Capitola Mall. The Capitola Mall is located on the western side of the City in tract 1217.02. The non-White populations in Western Capitola block groups are generally higher than block groups on the eastern side. RHNA units are located in LMI block groups within tracts 1216.02 and 1217.01. However, a majority of units are in tract 1217.02 that is not considered an LMI area. Tract 1217.01 also has a larger proportion of cost burdened renters and overcrowded households. While housing problems are slightly more prevalent in this tract, RHNA units, specifically lower income units, are allocated throughout the City and are not concentrated in this section of Capitola alone. Also, it should be noted that the City’s RHNA strategy includes a 16% buffer for lower income units (116 units).
The City’s RHNA strategy ensures sites are distributed throughout the City. There are no units of any income level that are concentrated in a single area of the Capitola. The City’s RHNA strategy, in conjunction with the actions outlined in this Housing Element, promote housing mobility while serving the needs of existing populations. RHNA sites on the western side of the City are located directly on existing bus routes and most are in proximity of the regional transit center and Capitola Mall, ensuring transportation opportunities and resources are highly accessible. The RHNA strategy does not exacerbate fair housing conditions citywide.
554
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:156
Table E-35: Distribution of RHNA Units by Tract and AFFH Variables # of Total Income Distribution OverHouseholds Capacity Above Non-White LMI TCAC Opp. Overpay crowded Tract in Tract (Units) Lower Moderate Moderate Population Households Cat. Renters Households 1216.02 1,212 52 52 0 0 29.7% 91.0% High 49.2% 2.5%
1217.01 1,795 231239 164 2428 4347 41.0% 56.0 – 62.0% High 54.2% 5.6% 1217.02 1,284 1,986943 388490 117137 1,481316 41.0% 26.0 – 43.0% High 27.1% 0.2% 1218.01 1,048 4 0 2 2 27.8% 29.0% Highest 39.7% 3.4%
1218.02 1,136 242 112122 3934 9186 27.8% 48.0 – 68.0% Highest 38.4% 3.8% 555
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:157
Figure E-79: Capitola Sites Inventory
556
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:158 557
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:159
C. Contributing Factors
1. Lack of Fair Housing Testing, Education, and Outreach (High Priority) The City lacks information on fair housing law and discrimination complaint filing procedures on the City website. Current outreach practices may not provide sufficient information related to fair housing, including federal and state fair housing law, and affordable housing opportunities. Cost burdened renters throughout the City and cost burdened owners concentrated in tract 1218.01 may be unaware of affordable housing opportunities. Between 2013 and 2022, the FHEO recorded 11 inquiries from Capitola residents, 5 of which were related to disability status. The City may lack sufficient education and outreach related to reasonable accommodation and ADA laws based on the proportion of complaints related to disability status. The County is also not required to complete an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and does not contract with a specific fair housing provider. Additional action may be needed to ensure residents are aware of fair housing laws and protections. In the 2022 PIT Count, when asked about ways to prevent losing housing, 50% said rent or mortgage assistance, 45% said landlord mediation and 40% stated legal assistance.
Contributing Factors
• Lack of fair housing testing
• Lack of monitoring
• Lack of targeted outreach and accessible fair housing information
2. Substandard Housing Conditions (Medium Priority)
While the City does not have a large proportion of households lacking complete kitchen or plumbing facilities, approximately 78% of housing units are aged 30 years or older and may require minor or major rehabilitation. Aging housing units are most concentrated in the central and eastern areas of Capitola, east of Wharf Road. Additionally, 5.1% of units in tract 1217.02 on the western side of the City lack complete kitchen facilities. Less than 1% of units in all other Capitola tracts lack complete kitchen facilities.
Contributing Factors
• Age of housing stock
• Cost of repairs or rehabilitation
558
Item 8 A.
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT
CAPITOLA GENERAL PLAN
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
APPENDIX E:160
3. Affordable Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas (Citywide) (High Priority) All of Capitola has been identified as high or highest resource areas. Capitola is generally an affluent City with good quality schools, above average environmental conditions, and accessible economic opportunities. However, existing affordable housing options in Capitola are limited. There are only two assisted multifamily rental complexes in the City, Capitola Supportive Housing Development (Dakota Apartments) (24 affordable units) and Bay Area Senior Apartments (108 affordable units). Additional housing opportunities in Capitola, a high resource area, may be especially important due to the County’s overall character. Southern and inland Santa Cruz County has significantly reduced access to opportunities compared to the Capitola/City of Santa Cruz area and northern County. The southern County is comprised of mainly TCAC low and moderate resource tracts, while tracts in and north of Capitola are predominantly high and highest resource areas. Additional housing in Capitola may promote mobility for low income households currently residing in the County.
As described earlier, the City’s housing strategy as part of the RHNA inventory will increase new housing options for all income levels in Capitola as well as options for mobility throughout the City. This is due to the recent trends of development in Capitola, combined with the zoning provisions that allow for a variety of mixed-use housing near commercial cores and public transit opportunities, and allowable density increases that can increase the production of affordable housing.
Contributing Factors
• Lack of affordable housing options
• Location and type of affordable housing
559
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the
Capitola General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report
for the
2023-2031 Housing Element
LEAD AGENCY:
City of Capitola
420 Capitola Avenue
Capitola, CA 95010
Contact: Ms. Katie Herlihy, AICP, Community Development Director PREPARED BY:
Morse Planning Group
Final
Adopted November 9, 2023
560
Item 8 A.
This document has been produced for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources. 561
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.
1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Statutory Authority and Requirements........................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Purpose of an Initial Study ........................................................................................................... 1-3
1.3 Responsible and Trustee Agencies............................................................................................... 1-3
1.4 Incorporation by Reference ......................................................................................................... 1-4
2.0 Project Description.................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Project Location............................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 Environmental Setting.................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.3 Existing General Plan and Zoning ................................................................................................. 2-1
2.4 Project Description....................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.5 Permits and Approvals ............................................................................................................... 2-11
3.0 Supplemental Environmental Checklist Form........................................................................................... 3-1
4.0 Environmental Analysis............................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1 Aesthetics..................................................................................................................................... 4-7
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources........................................................................................... 4-11
4.3 Air Quality................................................................................................................................... 4-15
4.4 Biological Resources................................................................................................................... 4-21
4.5. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources....................................................................................... 4-27
4.6. Energy......................................................................................................................................... 4-33
4.7 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 4-35
4.8 Greenhouse Gases...................................................................................................................... 4-43
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.............................................................................................. 4-47
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality..................................................................................................... 4-53
4.11 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................... 4-63
4.12 Mineral Resources...................................................................................................................... 4-67
4.13 Noise........................................................................................................................................... 4-69
4.14 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................. 4-73
4.15 Public Services............................................................................................................................ 4-77
4.16 Recreation .................................................................................................................................. 4-81
4.17 Transportation............................................................................................................................ 4-85
4.18. Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................................................... 4-91
4.19 Wildfire..................................................................................................................................... 4-103
4.20 Addendum Determination ....................................................................................................... 4-109
4.21 References................................................................................................................................ 4-111
4.22 Report Preparation Personnel.................................................................................................. 4-113 562
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 ii
List of Exhibits
Exhibit 2-1 Regional Location Map................................................................................................................. 2-2 List of Tables
Table 2-1 Regional Housing Needs Assessment 2023-2031......................................................................... 2-8 Table 2-2 Comparison of Sites Inventory and RHNA................................................................................... 2-9 Table 2-3 Inventory of Land Suitable for Residential Development Summary............................................ 2-9 Table 2-4 Summary of Housing Units......................................................................................................... 2-10 Table 4.14-1 2020 and 2040 Population and Housing Projections................................................................. 4-75 Table 4.18-1 Soquel Creek Water District Projected Demands for Water...................................................... 4-96 Table 4.18-2 City of Santa Cruz Water Department Projected Demands for Water ...................................... 4-97 563
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Capitola General Plan 2023-2031 Housing Element (herein referenced as the “project,” “proposed project,” or “2023-2031 Housing Element”) involves adoption and implementation of these General Plan components.
Following a preliminary review of the proposed project, the City of Capitola has determined that the proposed project is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS
This environmental document has been prepared in conformance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.); CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of CEQA, as adopted by the City of Capitola.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15051 and 15367, the City of Capitola (City) is identified as the Lead Agency for the proposed project. This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15164 (Addendum to an EIR on Negative Declaration) and 15168 (Program EIR) to explain the rationale for determining that the proposed Capitola 2023-2031 Housing Element would not create any new or substantially more severe significant effects on the environmental that were not analyzed in the Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
In determining whether an Addendum is the appropriate document to analyze modifications to the General Plan EIR, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states:
(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
Since the Capitola General Plan EIR has been certified, the environmental impacts of subsequent activities proposed under the General Plan must be examined in light of the impact analysis in the certified EIR to determine if additional CEQA documentation must be prepared. One of the standards that applies is whether, under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent EIR in support of further agency action on the project. Under these guidelines, a subsequent shall be prepared if any of the following criteria are met:
564
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-2
(a) When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and count not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
As demonstrated in the environmental analysis contained herein in the Addendum, none of the conditions that had been analyzed in the Capitola General Plan EIR would change with adoption of the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance meeting the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 has been identified in the environmental analysis.
The environmental documentation, which is ultimately selected by the City in accordance with CEQA, is intended as an informational document undertaken to provide an environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions relevant to the project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits and other discretionary approvals would be required.
565
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-3
1.2 PURPOSE OF AN INITIAL STUDY
The purposes of an Initial Study are to:
1. Identify environmental impacts;
2. Provide the lead agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a negative declaration;
3. Enable an applicant or lead agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is required to be prepared;
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of the project;
5. Document the factual basis of the finding in a negative declaration that a project would not have a significant environmental effect;
6. Eliminate needless EIRs;
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used for the project; and
8. Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined not to be significant, and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15063 identifies specific disclosure requirements for inclusion in an Initial Study.
Pursuant to those requirements, an Initial Study shall include:
A description of the project, including the location of the project Identification of the environmental setting
Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries
Discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any Examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls
The name(s) of the person(s) who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study
9. With regards to the context of an Addendum, the Initial Study serves as the basis for substantial evidence that none of the elements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring a subsequent EIR are triggered.
1.3 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES
Certain projects or actions undertaken by a Lead Agency require subsequent oversight, approvals, or permits from other public agencies in order to be implemented. Such other agencies are referred to as Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15381 and 15386, as amended, Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies are respectively defined as follows:
566
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-4
“Responsible Agency” means a public agency, which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which [a] Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term “responsible agency” includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency, which have discretionary approval power over the project. (Section 15381)
“Trustee Agency” means a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project, which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. Trustee Agencies include; The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, The State Lands Commission; The State Department of Parks and Recreation and The University of California with regard to sites within the Natural Land and Water Reserves System. (Section 15386)
For this project, the City of Capitola is the Lead Agency and has the sole responsibility of processing and approving the project. There are no Responsible or Trustee Agencies that have oversight, approval, or permit responsibility associated with the project, or require consultation with the City of Capitola. In addition, no other agency is required to approve the 2023-2031 Housing Element, but the 2023-2031 Housing Element will be reviewed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development for the purpose of determining whether it complies with the requirements of State Housing Element law.
1.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Pertinent documents relating to this Initial Study have been cited in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, which encourages incorporation by reference as a means of reducing redundancy and length of environmental reports. The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this EIR. Information contained within these documents has been utilized for this Initial Study. These documents are available for review at the City of Capitola Community Development Department located at 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, California 95010, and online, if available, with the links provided below.
The Capitola General Plan. The Capitola General Plan (General Plan) is the City's "blueprint" for all future development and conservation within the community. The General Plan has seven State-mandated elements:
Land Use; Housing; Open Space; Conservation; Safety; Noise; and Mobility, and includes an optional, Economic Development Element.
On June 26, 2014, the Capitola City Council adopted the General Plan Update to replace the City's previous 1989 General Plan. The General Plan Update provides new goals and policies to promote sustainability, improve protections of residential neighborhoods and historic resources, and enhance economic vitality. The 2015-2023 Housing Element was adopted by the Capitola City Council on November 25, 2015 and certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on February 4, 2016. The Land Use Element of the General Plan was updated on March 13, 2019.
Capitola General Plan | City of Capitola California
The Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Capitola General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse Number [SCH No.] 2013072002) evaluates the environmental effects associated with the adoption and implementation of the General Plan Update initiated by the City of Capitola.
567
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-5
General Plan Update EIR Conclusions. The General Plan Update (GPU) EIR reviewed the following topics:
Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology, Soils and Seismicity, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services (Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services, Police Protection, School Services, Library Services), Parks and Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
The GPU EIR concluded the following significant unavoidable impacts:
Air Quality – Impacts AIR-2 and AIR-6
Hydrology and Water Quality – Impacts HYDRO -2 and HYDRO -9 Transportation and Traffic – Impacts TRANS-1 and TRANS-6 Utilities and Service Systems – Impacts UTIL-1, UTIL-2, and UTIL-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Impacts GHG-1 and GHG-3
The GPU EIR concluded all other impacts were less than significant.
The City Council certified the GPU EIR on June 26, 2014, as well as adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant, unavoidable impacts, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
The GPU EIR can be found on the City’s website using the following link under the Supporting Documents heading.
Capitola General Plan | City of Capitola California
Capitola Municipal Code. The Capitola Municipal Code (Municipal Code), codified through Ordinance 1060, passed June 8, 2023, consists of codes and ordinances adopted by the City. These include standards intended to regulate land use, development, health and sanitation, water quality, public facilities, and public safety.
Title 15 of the Municipal Code, Buildings and Construction (revised March 2023), specifies rules and regulations for construction, alteration, and building for uses of human habitation and occupation. Title 16 of the Municipal Code, Subdivisions (revised April 2023), regulates and controls the division of land within the city. Title 17 of the Municipal Code, Zoning (revised April 2023), identifies land uses permitted and prohibited according to the zoning category of particular parcels and establishes the development standards and regulations for each zone.
Capitola Municipal Code (codepublishing.com)
568
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 1-6
This page intentionally left blank.
569
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the City of Capitola General Plan Update EIR For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Capitola is a coastal community located along the Monterey Bay. The City of Capitola is centrally located in Santa Cruz County, east of the City of Santa Cruz; Refer to Exhibit 2-1, Regional Location Map. With a land area of 1.7 square miles, Capitola is home to a population of approximately 10,000 residents. Highway 1 runs east-west along the northern border of the City. Highway 17 is located northwest of Capitola and connects the coastal communities to Silicon Valley and San Francisco Bay Area to the north.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.2.1 EXISTING LAND USES
Capitola is a unique coastal community with its own special sense of place. Capitola is a popular visitor destination due to its beaches, historic charm, visitor amenities, and scenic location. The heart of Capitola is the Village, which features an assortment of shops, restaurants, vacation rentals, and recreational amenities. An assortment of residential neighborhoods contributes to the unique identity and family-friendly character of the community.
Capitola is also home to the Capitola Mall, King’s Plaza, and other region-serving retail establishments along 41st Avenue.
Capitola has been fully urbanized for many years, and development includes a mix of housing types, employment districts with commercial and industrial uses, park and recreational amenities, and convenient transportation choices.
2.3 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS
Not Applicable (Citywide).
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is the adoption and implementation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The 2023-2031 Housing Element represents an update of the City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element. The Housing Element is an integral component of the City’s General Plan, as it addresses existing and future housing needs of all types for persons of all economic segment groups in the City. The Housing Element serves as a tool for decision-makers and the public in understanding and meeting housing needs in Capitola. While the law does not require local governments to actually construct housing to meet identified needs, it does require that the community address housing needs in its discretionary planning actions.
570
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the City of Capitola General Plan Update EIR For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-2
Exhibit 2-1 Regional Location Map
Source: City of Capitola General Plan Update EIR (December 2013) 571
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-3
PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The Housing Element is one of the seven mandatory elements of a General Plan. Through policies, procedures, and incentives, it provides an action-plan for maintaining and expanding the housing supply in the City of Capitola.
The Housing Element is organized into the following sections and appendices.
Sections Appendices
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Housing Needs Assessment
Chapter 3: Constraints on Housing Production
Chapter 4: Housing Need and Opportunities
Chapter 5: Housing Plan
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms
Appendix B: Community Outreach Summary
Appendix C: 2015-2023 Housing Element Program
Evaluation
Appendix D: Sites Inventory
Appendix E: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
(AFFH)
Capitola’s Housing Element for the 6th cycle planning period of June 30, 2023 to December 15, 2031 describes policies and programs that include:
Identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, resources, and constraints; A statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for preservation, improvement and development of housing;
Identification of adequate sites for housing; and
Adequate provision for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community.
Element
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583, the housing element contains four basic parts:
1. Analysis of demographic, social, and housing characteristics, current and future housing needs due to population growth and change, and other factors affecting housing need;
2. Analysis of governmental and nongovernmental constraints that affect the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for all income groups and people with disabilities;
3. Inventory of resources available to address the City’s housing needs, including available land for housing, as well as the financial resources and administrative capacity to manage housing programs; and
4. Specific actions or programs to address the development, improvement, and conservation of housing to meet current and future needs. This includes goals, policies, and specific housing programs. 572
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-4
HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
The 2023-2031 Housing Element goals and policies are listed below. Refer to the 2023-2031 Housing Element (separate document) for a full description of the programs associated with each goal.
GOAL 1.0 HOUSING PRODUCTION
Diversity in housing types and affordability levels to accommodate the needs of Capitola residents.
Housing Production Policies
Policy 1.1 Provide adequate sites and supporting infrastructure to accommodate present and future housing needs of Capitola residents.
Policy 1.2 Encourage mixed-use developments.
Policy 1.3 Provide opportunities for the development of alternative housing options, such as Accessory Dwelling Units.
Policy 1.4 Periodically review development regulations, permit processes, and fees and their effect on development to ensure that such requirements facilitate housing production and rehabilitation.
GOAL 2.0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Increased and protected supply of housing affordable to extremely-low, very-low, low, and moderate-income households.
Affordable Housing Policies
Policy 2.1 Encourage continued affordability of affordable rental housing supply in existing mobile home parks, subsidized rental housing, and special needs housing.
Policy 2.2 Continue participation in state and federally sponsored programs designed to maintain housing affordability, including the HUD Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program.
Policy 2.3 Preserve existing unrestricted affordable rental housing during the Housing Element planning period.
Policy 2.4 Promote the development of affordable housing.
Policy 2.5 Maintain the City’s Housing Trust Fund.
Policy 2.6 Encourage the production of affordable ownership and rental housing through the City’s Affordable “Inclusionary” Housing Ordinance.
GOAL 3.0: HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
Accessible housing and appropriate supportive services that provide equal housing opportunities for special needs populations.
Special Housing Needs Policies
Policy 3.1 Support and facilitate programs that address the housing needs of special needs groups, including the elderly population, homeless persons, single-parent headed households, large households, 573
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-5
extremely low-income households, and persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities.
Policy 3.2 Continue the provision of city-initiated incentives to encourage affordable units in development projects.
Policy 3.3 Support the development of accessible and affordable housing that is designed to serve all ages and is readily accessible to support services.
Policy 3.4 Provide assistance for seniors and disabled to maintain and improve their homes.
Policy 3.5 Facilitate and encourage the development of rental units appropriate for families with children, including the provision of supportive services such as childcare.
Policy 3.6 Encourage the integration of special needs housing in residential environments, readily accessible to public transit, shopping, public amenities, and supportive services.
Policy 3.7 Encourage the provision of supportive services for persons with special needs to further the greatest level of independence and equal housing opportunities.
Policy 3.8 Investigate and encourage the development of a variety of housing options for seniors including Congregate Housing, Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs), Assisted Living, Mobile Home Parks, co-housing, accessory dwelling units, and Independent Living.
Policy 3.9 Encourage the establishment of childcare centers and family childcare homes in all appropriate zoning districts.
GOAL 4.0: HOUSING ASSISTANCE
Increased assistance for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income residents to rent or purchase homes.
Housing Assistance Policies
Policy 4.1 Maintain the City’s rental and ownership assistance programs.
Policy 4.2 Explore and pursue City participation in other affordable homeownership assistance programs in the private market.
Policy 4.3 Support the provision of childcare services, employment training, rental assistance, and other supportive services to enable households to be self-sufficient.
Policy 4.4 Seek and support collaborative partnerships of nonprofit organizations and the development community to aid in the provision of affordable housing.
GOAL 5.0: NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY
Maintain, preserve, and improve the character of existing residential neighborhoods.
Neighborhood Vitality Policies
Policy 5.1 Ensure a compatible relationship between new housing and circulation patterns and encourage pedestrian and bicycle-friendly communities to minimize traffic impacts on quality of life. 574
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-6
Policy 5.2 Protect the integrity of existing single-family and multifamily neighborhoods by promoting balanced site design and architecture.
Policy 5.3 Assist individual neighborhoods in establishing their own identity through the development of neighborhood amenities (e.g., pocket parks, lighting, signs), mixed-use neighborhood nodes, and pedestrian and sustainability improvements.
Policy 5.4 Promote the repair, improvement, and rehabilitation of housing and encourage replacement of substandard housing to enhance quality of life in neighborhoods.
Policy 5.5 Improve the quality of housing and neighborhoods by educating landlords, tenants, and property owners about code compliance issues and enforcing compliance with building and property maintenance standards.
GOAL 6.0: RESOURCE CONSERVATION
Fulfill the City’s housing needs while promoting an environ-mentally sensitive, compact community that is pedestrian-oriented and neighborhood-centered, using resources in a sustainable manner.
Resource Conservation Policies
Policy 6.1 Encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation.
Policy 6.2 Strive to maintain a jobs/housing balance.
Policy 6.3 Promote Green Building techniques, development, and construction standards that provide for resource conservation.
Policy 6.4 Promote the use of renewable energy technologies (such as solar and wind) in new and rehabilitated housing when possible.
Policy 6.5 Ensure that adequate water supplies and sewer services continue to be available for residents and businesses.
GOAL 7.0: AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
Equal access to housing opportunities regardless of one’s unique characteristics as protected by local, state and federal fair housing laws.
Fair Housing Policies
Policy 7.1 Promote meaningful and informed participation of residents, community groups, and governmental agencies in all local housing and community development activities.
Policy 7.2 Comply with federal, state, and local Fair Housing and anti-discrimination laws, and affirmatively further fair housing for all, ensuring equal access to housing regardless of their special circumstances as protected by fair housing laws.
Policy 7.3 Promote housing mobility by expanding housing choices and increasing housing opportunities in higher resource areas.
Policy 7.4 Protect tenants from discriminatory housing practices and displacement. 575
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-7
Policy 7.5 Promote the integration of affordable and special needs housing projects in existing neighborhoods.
Policy 7.6 Collaborate with and support efforts of organizations dedicated to eliminating housing discrimination.
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
California Government Code Article 10.6, Section 65580 – 65589.8, Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 sets forth the legal requirements for a housing element and encourages the provision of affordable and decent housing in suitable living environments for all communities to meet statewide goals. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a statement by the City of Capitola of its current and future housing needs identified in a policy document that sets forth the City’s goals, policies, and programs to address those identified needs.
Specifically, Government Code Section 65580 states the housing element shall consist of “…an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, polices, quantified objectives, financial resources and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing.” The housing element must also contain a housing plan with quantified objectives for the implementation of the goals and objectives described in the housing element. State law requires the housing element be updated every eight years or as otherwise required by State law.
Government Code Article 10.6, Section 65589 – 65589.8, Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 sets forth the legal requirements for a housing element and encourages the provision of affordable and decent housing in all communities to meet statewide goals. This Initial Study evaluates the environmental effects of the adoption and implementation of the Capitola 2023-2031 Housing Element. The planning period is from June 30, 2023 through December 15, 2031.
Government Code Section 65583 requires that housing elements include the following components:
A review of the previous element’s goals, policies, programs, and objectives to ascertain the effectiveness of each of these components, as well as the overall effectiveness of the Housing Element;
An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints related to the meeting of these needs;
An analysis and program for preserving assisted housing developments; A Statement of community goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the preservation, improvement and development of housing;.
A program which sets forth an eight-year schedule of actions that the City is undertaking or intends to undertake, in implementing the policies set forth in the Housing Element.
Several factors influence the demand for housing in the City of Capitola. Four major “needs” categories considered in the Housing Element include:
1) housing needs resulting from overcrowding;
2) housing needs that result when households are paying more than they can afford for housing; 576
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-8
3) housing needs of "special needs groups" such as the elderly, large families, female heads of households, households with persons with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities), and the homeless;
4) housing needs resulting from population growth in the City and surrounding region California housing element law requires that each city and county develop local housing programs designed to meet their “fair share” of housing needs for all income groups. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), Housing Policy Division develops the Regional Housing Needs Assessments (RHNA) for each region of the State, represented by councils of governments. The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) determines the housing allocation for each city and county within its three-county jurisdiction, which includes Santa Cruz County. AMBAG assigned Capitola a housing allocation of 1,336 units, as shown in Table 2-1, Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2023-2031. The RHNA covers the period of June 30, 2023 through December 15, 2031.
TABLE 2-1
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION 2023-2031
Income Category Number of Units
Extremely Low Income 215
Very Low Income 2151
Low Income 282
Moderate Income 169
Above Moderate Income 455
Total Units 1,336
Source: City of Capitola, 2023-2031 Housing Element (July 2023) Notes:
1. The City has a RHNA allocation of 430 very low income units (inclusive of extremely low income units). While the RHNA did not separately define housing needs for extremely low income households, the very low income allocation can be split evenly between very low- and extremely low income households.
Residential Sites Inventory
The inventory is detailed in 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4: Housing Need and Opportunities.
Comparison of Sites Inventory and RHNA
Properties identified in the sites inventory have the combined capacity to accommodate approximately 1,453 additional housing units on underutilized sites. These sites, and the associated existing land use regulations, can facilitate the production of 448 extremely low-/very low-income units, 298 low-income units, 239 moderateincome units, and 468 above-moderate-income units during the planning period. Refer to Table 2-2. 577
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-9
TABLE 2-2
COMPARISON OF SITES INVENTORY AND RHNA
LOWER MODERATE ABOVE
MODERATE TOTAL
RHNA 712 169 455 1,336
Site Inventory
Recyclable Land* 840 195 455 1,480
Rezone/Overlay Sites* 0 0 0 0
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) 10 30 10 50
TOTAL 850 225 455 1,530
Surplus/Deficit +138 +56 -- +194
Source: City of Capitola, 2023-2031 Housing Element Table 4-7 (October 2023) Notes:
*Includes vacant sites, underutilized land, and pending projects An inventory of land suitable for residential development is shown in Table 2-3.
TABLE 2-3
INVENTORY OF LAND SUITABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
EXTREMELY
LOW / VERY
LOW INCOME
LOW INCOME MODERATE
INCOME
ABOVE
MODERATE
INCOME
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL
CAPACITY
6th Cycle RHNA 430 282 169 455 1,336
R-1 (Churches) 6 4 --- --- 10
RM-L 5 3 4 6 18
RM-M 31 21 1 2 55
MU-N 49 33 30 61 173
C-R 297 198 119 274 888
C-C 105 76 41 102 324
CF 7 5 --- --- 12
ADUs 6 4 30 10 50
TOTAL 506 344 225 455 1,530
Source: City of Capitola, 2023-2031 Housing Element Table 4-8 (October 2023) Notes:
*Includes vacant sites, underutilized land, and pending projects 578
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-10
Summary of Residential Capacity on Vacant, Recyclable, and ADU Sites The analysis indicates that the City’s inventory of underutilized/recyclable sites, along with entitled units under plan review and potential Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) production has the potential for the development of 1,453 residential units on existing residential properties and within existing zoning categories. A detailed sites inventory table is also presented in 2023-2031 Housing Element Appendix D.
Table 2-4 shows the distribution of the City’s RHNA allocation and low and very-low income units. While the projects focus on areas rich in transit and other amenities, the projections are spread throughout the City in various districts and neighborhoods. This includes infill single-family, ADUs and multiple-family, high density corridors, urban density corridors, and transit-oriented development.
TABLE 2-4
SUMMARY OF HOUSING UNITS
SUB-AREA
LOW AND
VERY LOW
INCOME UNITS
TOTAL UNITS PERCENT OF
RHNA
Residential Recycling
Single Family Zone (Religious Sites Only) 10 10 0.7%
Multi-Family Residential Zones 60 73 5.4%
Commercial Zones That Permit Residential Projects 676 1,212 90.8% Mixed Use Neighborhood Zone 82 173 12.9%
Community Facility Zone (Schools Only) 12 12 0.9%
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) 10 50 3.7%
TOTAL* 850 1,530 114.5%
Source: City of Capitola, 2023-2031 Housing Element Table 4-9 (October 2023) Notes:
*Total RHNA for lower and very low: 712; total RHNA is 1,336 The 2023-2031 Housing Element identifies sites evaluated previously for potential environmental impacts in the General Plan Update EIR. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Update identifies a range of tentatively reserved sites that could be developed to meet the City’s 6th cycle RHNA throughout Capitola. Some of these sites may differ from those identified in the City of Capitola General Plan and could require land use changes in the future that would allow for increased density or other provisions.
Government Code Section 65583 (c)(1)(A) states that cities have up to three years from the time a Housing Element is adopted to rezone sites, including adoption of minimum density and development standards. The sites inventory (provided in 2023-2031 Housing Element Appendix D) yields housing units that provide more than 100 percent of the RHNA requirements. Furthermore, each future development proposal associated with implementation of the Housing Element would be subject to environmental analysis, as applicable, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) and as required by State law, to evaluate potential impacts specific to that proposal.
579
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-11
Housing Element Assumptions
This document is based on the following assumptions:
1. General Plan Consistency. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is consistent with the adopted City of Capitola General Plan. As the General Plan is updated in the future, the City will ensure that the updated General Plan is consistent with the policies contained in the Housing Element.
2. Purpose of Housing Element Environmental Review. This Initial Study is not intended to and does not address the particular impacts of future housing projects on any site identified in the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The Initial Study is limited to the review of potential environmental impacts resulting from the adoption and implementation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element and is not intended to analyze impacts of current or future specific development activities.
3. Project-Specific Environmental Review. In the City of Capitola, all housing development proposals are subject to a CEQA review process.
2.5 PERMITS AND APPROVALS
The City of Capitola is the Applicant. The project requires the following City of Capitola legislative/discretionary approvals:
General Plan Amendment
580
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 2-12
This page intentionally left blank.
581
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 3-1
3.0 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
FOR USE WHEN THE CITY IS REVIEWING SUBSEQUENT DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS PURSUANT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OR CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT.
1. Project Title: 2023-2031 Housing Element
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Capitola
11333 Valley Boulevard
Capitola, CA 91731
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Ms. Katie Herlihy, AICP, Community Development
P: 831.475.7300 ext 216
E: [email protected]
4. Project Location:
The City of Capitola is centrally located in Santa Cruz County, east of the City of Santa Cruz with a land area of 1.7 square miles; Refer to Exhibit 2-1, Regional Location Map. The project applies to all properties within the municipal boundaries of the City of Capitola.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
City of Capitola
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
6. General Plan Designation: Not Applicable (Citywide)
7. Zoning: Not Applicable (Citywide)
8. Previous Environmental Document: Please describe the previously adopted ND or MND or the previously certified EIR (include the date the document was adopted or certified, the date the project was approved by the City, the date the NOD was filed with the County, and a summary of potentially significant effects identified in the CEQA document).
The Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report concluded the following significant unavoidable impacts:
Air Quality – Impacts AIR-2 and AIR-6
Hydrology and Water Quality – Impacts HYDRO -2 and HYDRO -9 Transportation and Traffic – Impacts TRANS-1 and TRANS-6 Utilities and Service Systems – Impacts UTIL-1, UTIL-2, and UTIL-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Impacts GHG-1 and GHG-3
The GPU EIR concluded all other impacts were less than significant.
The City Council certified the GPU EIR on June 26, 2014, as well as adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant unavoidable impacts, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
582
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 3-2
9. Description of the Project:
Refer to Section 2.4, Project Description.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Capitola is a coastal community located along the Monterey Bay. The City of Capitola is centrally located in Santa Cruz County, east of the City of Santa Cruz. Highway 1 runs east-west along the northern border of the City. Highway 17 is located northwest of Capitola and connects the coastal communities to Silicon Valley and San Francisco Bay Area to the north.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement).
Refer to Section 2.5, Permits and Approvals.
12. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality While not required, the City complied with Tribal Cultural Resources consultation requirements and formal notification was sent to eight tribes. The City received no requests for consultation. 583
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-1
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
In accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21178.1, this Modified Initial Study has been prepared to analyze whether any new or more significant environmental impacts could occur from implementation of the proposed project. The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project. This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The issue areas evaluated in this Initial Study include those cited in Section 3.0.
As the General Plan EIR has been certified, the environmental impacts of subsequent activities proposed under the General Plan must be examined in light of the impact analysis in the certified EIR to determine if additional CEQA documentation must be prepared. One of the standards that applies is whether, under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, there are new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR in support of further agency action on the project. Under these guidelines, a subsequent or supplemental EIR shall be prepared if any of the following criteria are met:
(a) When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and count not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 584
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-2
As demonstrated in Environmental Analysis Sections 4.1 through 4.19, none of the conditions that had been analyzed in the General Plan EIR would change with adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance meeting the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 has been identified.
A Housing Element does not propose or require development of any residential use, rather, it establishes local goals, policies, and actions the City would implement and/or facilitate to address identified housing issues. In accordance with State law, Housing Elements must be updated every eight years to establish current housing and land use strategies reflective of changing needs, resources, and conditions.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Future development proposals would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. 1) A finding of “No New Impact/No Impact” means that the potential impact was fully analyzed and/or mitigated in the prior CEQA document and no new or different impacts will result from the proposed activity. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No New Impact/No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No New Impact/No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No New Impact/No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) A finding of “New Mitigation is Required” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document and that new mitigation is required to address the impact. 3) A finding of “New Potentially Significant Impact” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance or be avoided.
4) A finding of “Reduced Impact” means that a previously infeasible mitigation measure is now available, or a previously infeasible alternative is now available that will reduce a significant impact identified in the previously prepared environmental document.
5) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
6) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. 585
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-3
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the proposed action. c) Infeasible Mitigation Measures. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible that would in fact be feasible or that are considerably different from those previously analyzed and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. d) Changes in Circumstances. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause a change in conclusion regarding one or more effects discussed in the original document. 7) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
8) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
9) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
10) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; b) differences between the proposed activity and the previously approved project described in the approved ND or MND or certified EIR; and
c) the previously approved mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
586
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-4
NEW SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OR SUBSTANTIALLY MORE
SEVERE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS COMPARED TO THOSE
IDENTIFIED IN THE PREVIOUS CEQA DOCUMENT
The subject areas checked below were determined to be new significant environmental effects or to be previously identified effects that have a substantial increase in severity either due to a change in project, change in circumstances or new information of substantial importance, as indicated by the checklist and discussion in Section 4.1 through Section 4.19.
Aesthetics Land Use and Planning
Agriculture and Forestry Resources Mineral Resources
Air Quality Noise
Biological Resources Population and Housing
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Public Services
Energy Recreation
Geology and Soils Transportation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildfire
Hydrology and Water Quality
587
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-5
LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION
On the basis of this evaluation:
No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no "new information of substantial importance" as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND or MND or previously certified EIR is adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project without modification.
No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no "new information of substantial importance" as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND, MND or previously certified EIR adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; however, minor changes require the preparation of an ADDENDUM.
Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous ND, MND or EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, all new potentially significant environmental effects or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects are clearly reduced to below a level of significance through the incorporation of mitigation measures agreed to by the project applicant.
Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT MND is required.
Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, only minor changes or additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project in the changed situation. Therefore, a SUPPLEMENTAL EIR is required.
Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT EIR is required. 588
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-6
This page intentionally left blank.
589
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-7
4.1 AESTHETICS
Would the project, except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? B. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C. In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). In an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Note: Certain projects within a transit priority area need not evaluate aesthetics (Public Resources Code Section 21099).
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the aesthetics impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
AESTHETICS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
AES-1: The proposed Plan would not have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista. Less Than Significant Impact Not Applicable AES-2: The proposed Plan would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, within a State scenic highway.
No Impact Not Applicable
AES-3: The proposed Plan would not result in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of Capitola or its surroundings.
Less Than Significant Impact Not Applicable
AES-4: The proposed Plan would not create a new source
of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Less Than Significant Impact Not Applicable
AES-5: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to aesthetics.
Less Than Significant Impact Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 590
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-8
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON A SCENIC VISTA? The GPU EIR identified that one of the guiding principles of the General Plan includes the protection and enhancement of natural resources including the beaches, creek, ocean, and lagoon which contribute to Capitola’s scenic beauty. Future development under the General Plan would be subject to existing laws and regulations that serve to protect scenic vistas in the Plan Area. The City’s zoning ordinance includes provisions that regulate building height, building placement, and establish standards for lot coverage and usable open space.
The General Plan includes policies and actions relevant to the protection of scenic vistas: Policy LU-4.7 Planning Projects, Action LU-5.1 Design Review, Policy LU-6.9 Capitola Wharf, Policy LU-7.3 Scenic Resources, Action LU-7.1 Village Design Guidelines, and Policy LU-10.1 New Development. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts to a scenic vista with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The City of Capitola is a largely built out community with a mix of residential, commercial/industrial, and parks/open space uses. One of the General Plan guiding principles includes the protection and enhancement of natural resources including the beaches, creek, ocean, and lagoon which contribute to Capitola’s scenic beauty.
There are no officially designated scenic vistas or view corridors in Capitola. However, there are many places in the City that allow for expansive views of the community, ocean to the southwest and foothills to the north.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT PROPOSED PLAN HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON A SCENIC VISTA.
The General Plan includes policies and actions relevant to scenic vistas: Policy LU-4.7 Planning Projects, Action LU-5.1 Design Review, Policy LU-6.9 Capitola Wharf, Policy LU-7.3 Scenic Resources, Action LU-7.1 Village Design Guidelines, and Policy LU-10.1 New Development. The GPU EIR concluded less than impacts to scenic vistas with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements. 591
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-9
The proposed project does not involve construction on any particular site in the City. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; and General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project.
Adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not substantially alter the visual character of the City, nor would it have adverse impacts relative to the scenic vistas. Thus, impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGE SCENIC RESOURCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, TREES, ROCK OUTCROPPINGS, AND HISTORIC BUILDINGS WITHIN A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY?
The General Plan includes policies relevant to scenic resources: Policy LU-10.4 Highway 1 Interchange and Policy LU-12.6 McGregor Property. The GPU EIR concluded no impacts to scenic resources within a State scenic highway with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and regulatory requirements.
There are no officially designated scenic highways within the City limits of Capitola. However, Highway 1 which passes through Capitola is eligible to become officially designated. No scenic vistas, trees, rock outcroppings, or state scenic highways occur within the City of Capitola. The proposed project applies to the entire City, and the 2023-2031 Housing Element only identifies sites where new housing may be developed consistent with adopted land use policy. The proposed project does not involve construction at any particular site in the City. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. IN NONURBANIZED AREAS, WOULD THE PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE THE EXISTING VISUAL CHARACTER OR QUALITY OF PUBLIC VIEWS OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS? (PUBLIC VIEWS ARE THOSE THAT ARE EXPERIENCED FROM PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE VANTAGE POINT). IN AN URBANIZED AREA, WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE ZONING AND OTHER REGULATIONS GOVERNING SCENIC QUALITY?
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relevant to the protection of scenic vistas and the preservation of the character of existing distinct neighborhoods: Policy LU-1.1 Community Character, Policy LU1.2 Design Quality, Action LU-1.1 Design Guidelines, Goal LU-2, Policy LU-2.1 Historic Structures, Policy LU-2.2 Modification Standards, Policy LU-2.3 Preservation Incentives, Policy LU-2.4 Public Awareness, Policy LU-3.1 Historic Structures, Policy LU-3.3 Infill Development, Goal LU-4, Policy LU-4.2 Neighborhood Diversity, Policy LU4.3 Existing Housing, Policy LU-4.5 Neighborhood Amenities, Policy LU-4.6 Natural Features, Goal LU-5, Policy LU5.1 Neighborhood Characteristics, Policy LU-5.2 Development Impacts, Policy LU-5.3 Mass and Scale, Policy LU5.5 Architectural Character, Action LU-5.1 Design Review, Policy LU-7.1 New Development Design. The GPU EIR 592
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-10
concluded less than significant visual character impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions.
The City of Capitola is considered an urbanized area. The proposed project involves a policy-level document, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Therefore, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific visual impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project.
However, future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; and General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures visual character and scenic quality impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. WOULD THE PROJECT CREATE A NEW SOURCE OF SUBSTANTIAL LIGHT OR GLARE WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS IN THE AREA? The City of Capitola is located within a moderately urbanized context. Future development under the General Plan would create new sources of light and glare. However, regulations in the Municipal Code and policies in the General Plan would substantially minimize adverse impacts. The General Plan includes a policy relevant to light and glare: Policy LU-5.2 Development Impacts. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant light and glare impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policy.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals, nor does it address new lighting sources. As such, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific light and glare impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project. Generally, potential glare and lighting glare impacts can be mitigated through use of non-reflective building materials and lighting that is shielded downward.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; and General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project. The case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project ensures that light and glare impacts are addressed through minimization and/or mitigation. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 593
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-11
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
C. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
D. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
E. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 allows environmental issues for which there is no likelihood of significant impact to be “scoped out” and not analyzed further in an EIR. It was determined that the proposed Plan (General Plan) would not result in significant impacts with respect to Agriculture and Forestry Resources, and as such were not analyzed in the GPU EIR.
594
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-12
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT CONVERT PRIME FARMLAND, UNIQUE FARMLAND, OR FARMLAND OF
STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE (FARMLAND), AS SHOWN ON THE MAPS PREPARED PURSUANT TO
THE FARMLAND MAPPING AND MONITORING PROGRAM OF THE CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY, TO NON-AGRICULTURAL USE?
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. No properties in Capitola are designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland). Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH EXISTING ZONING FOR AGRICULTURAL USE, OR A WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT?
The City and surrounding area are developed and urbanized. No agricultural land exists or is zoned for agricultural use within the City, and no property within the City is under a Williamson contract. The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals.
Therefore, the proposed project would not affect any land zoned for agricultural uses and would not conflict with a Williamson Act Contract. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 595
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-13
C. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH EXISTING ZONING FOR, OR CAUSE REZONING OF, FOREST LAND (AS DEFINED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 12220(G)), TIMBERLAND (AS DEFINED BY PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 4526), OR TIMBERLAND ZONED TIMBERLAND PRODUCTION (AS DEFINED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 51104(G))? There is no zoning designation for forest land in the City of Capitola, and no areas within the City are classified as forest or timberland as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526. Forestry operations do not occur within the City. Also, no property within the City supports trees capable of 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, or that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN THE LOSS OF FOREST LAND OR CONVERSION OF FOREST LAND TO NON-FOREST USE?
Refer to Response 4.2.C.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. WOULD THE PROJECT INVOLVE OTHER CHANGES IN THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT, WHICH, DUE TO THEIR LOCATION OR NATURE, COULD RESULT IN CONVERSION OF FARMLAND, TO NONAGRICULTURAL USE OR CONVERSION OF FOREST LAND TO NON-FOREST USE? The City contains no forest land, nor is any property within the City zoned for agriculture. The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in changes to the environment that lead to the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use or forest land to a non-forest use. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 596
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-14
This page intentionally left blank.
597
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-15
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? B. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
C. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? D. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the air quality impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
AIR QUALITY – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
AIR-1: Citywide construction activities under the proposed Plan would result in a considerable increase of criteria pollutants, and thus, could violate air quality standards.
Significant AIR-1a
AIR-1b Less Than Significant
AIR-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in an overall increase in mobile and stationary source
emissions within the City, which could exceed Monterey
Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District air quality
standards.
Significant AIR-2: No Mitigation Available Significant Unavoidable AIR-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in an overall increase in odors within the City. Less Than Significant Not Applicable Less Than Significant AIR-4: Implementation of the Capitola General Plan could result in an overall increase in localized and carbon
monoxide hotspot emissions within the city, which could exceed Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District air quality standards.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable Less Than Significant AIR-5: The proposed Plan may conflict with or hinder
implementation of the Association of Monterey Bay Area
Government’s regional comprehensive plan guidelines and the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District Air Quality Management Plan.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable Less Than Significant AIR-6: Regional air quality emissions resulting from
operational buildout of the Capitola General Plan could impact regional air quality levels on a cumulatively
considerable basis.
Significant AIR-6 Significant Unavoidable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 598
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-16
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY PLAN?
B. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF ANY
CRITERIA POLLUTANT FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS NON-ATTAINMENT UNDER AN APPLICABLE FEDERAL OR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD? The General Plan includes the following relevant goals, policies, and actions: Goal OSC-3, Policy OSC-3.1 Air Quality Management Plans, Policy OSC-3.2 Development Design, Policy OSC-3.3 Best Management Practices, Policy OSC3.6 Sensitive Receptors. Policy OSC-3.7 Roadway Materials, Policy SN-4.4 Green Building, Goal OSC-4, Policy OSC4.1 On-Site Energy Generation, Policy OSC-4.2 Grid-Neutral Development, Policy OSC-4.3 Photovoltaic Panels, Policy OSC-4.4 Solar Heaters, Policy OSC-4.5 Solar Access, Policy OSC-4.6 Passive Solar Design, Goal OSC-11, Policy OSC-11.1 Solid Waste Diversion, Policy OSC-11.2 City Diversion Rate, Policy OSC-11.3 Demolition Material Recycling, Policy OSC-11.4 Building Design, Policy OSC-11.5 Recycling and Composting Space, Policy OSC-11.6 Reusable Goods, Policy OSC-11.7 Consumption/Waste Reduction, Action OSC-11.1, Action OSC-11.3 Recycled Asphalt Pavement, Goal LU-3, Policy LU-3.1 Land Use Diversity, Policy LU-3.2 Walkability, Policy LU-3.4 Transit and Pedestrian Access, Policy LU-3.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections, Policy LU-3.7 Regional Outlook, Goal MO-1, Policy MO-1.1 Responsive Transportation Services, Policy MO-1.2 Reduced Vehicle Trips, Policy MO-1.3 Regional Collaboration, Policy MO-1.4 Highway 1 Capacity, Action MO-1.2 Regional Plan Implementation, Action MO-1.3 Highway 1 Crossings, Goal MO-2, Policy MO-2.1 Complete Streets, Policy MO-2.3 Community Context, Policy MO2.4 Maintenance, Policy MO-2.5 Existing Rights-of-Way, Policy MO-2.6 Non-Motorized Connectivity, Action MO2.1 Complete Street Standards, Action MO-2.2 Capital Improvement Program, Action MO-2.3 Dedications, Action MO-3.2 Signal Timing, Policy MO-6.5 Transportation Alternatives, Policy MO-7.1 Regional Cooperation, Policy MO7.2 Transit-Friendly Development, Policy MO-7.6 Rail Service, Action MO-7.1 Improved Transit Coverage, Policy MO-8.1 Bicycle Transportation Plan, Policy MO-8.2 Regional System, Action MO-8.3 Bicycle Connections, and Action MO-8.5 Highway 1 Interchanges.
The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan would have significant unavoidable impacts relative to conflicting with an applicable plan and net increase of criteria pollutants under Federal or state air quality 599
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-17
standards with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, regulatory requirements, and mitigation measures AQ-1 and AQ-2.
The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) is one of 35 air quality management districts established to protect air quality in California. It is responsible for regulating stationary, indirect, and area sources of pollution within the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB). The MBUAPCD's jurisdiction includes Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito Counties. The City of Capitola is located in the NCCAB.
Construction-Related Impacts. The GPU EIR concluded that with the implementation of GPU EIR Mitigation Measures AIR-1a and AIR-1b, impacts would be less than significant.
Operational-Related Impacts. The GPU EIR concluded that no mitigation was available to reduce operationalrelated emissions, thus, impacts associated with the GPU would remain significant and unavoidable.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. And while adoption and implementation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element would not directly result in the construction of new housing or pollutant emissions, it could facilitate housing construction consistent with adopted land use policy, which could then create potential pollutant emissions. A case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be necessary to ensure that potential pollutant emissions do not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, or be inconsistent with Federal, State, and local air quality standards; the applicable Air Quality Management Plan; and the General Plan goals, policies, and standards relative to air quality.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Federal and State laws, regulations, and air quality standards; applicable Air Quality Management Plan; MBUAPCD rules and programs; Municipal Code requirements; and General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, relative to air quality.
The previously noted goals, policies, actions, laws, regulations, standards, rules, and programs along with GPU EIR Mitigation Measures AIR-1a and AIR-1b ensure proposed project impacts are reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and that ambient air quality standard impacts remain as less than significant, while the air quality plan remains as significant and unavoidable as there are no applicable mitigation measures.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS?
Land uses that are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others are referred to as sensitive receptors. Land uses such as primary and secondary schools, hospitals, and convalescent homes are considered to be sensitive to poor air quality because the very young, the old, and the infirm are more susceptible to respiratory infections and other air quality-related health problems than the general public. Residential uses are 600
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-18
considered sensitive because people in residential areas are often at home for extended periods of time, so they could be exposed to pollutants for extended periods. Per the GPU EIR, sensitive receptors within the City of Capitola include residential uses, schools, and libraries.
The GPU EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not directly result in increased population or new development. However, future development could result in mobile sources of emissions associated with vehicle trips, as well as project-level construction related emissions. Sensitive receptors could be potentially subject to stationary and/or vehicular emissions and pollutants such as toxic air contaminants from stationary sources, carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from vehicular traffic, and/or diesel emissions from constructionrelated emissions.
The GPU EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan could result in increased exposure of sensitive land uses to localized concentrations of TACs that would exceed Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District’s (MBUAPCD) recommended significance thresholds. However, future development within Capitola would be required to comply with MBUAPCD rules and regulations, including Rule 1000: Permit Guidelines and Requirements for Sources Emitting Toxic Air Contaminants. Additionally, any potential source of stationary emissions would be subject to MBUAPCD review and approval to ensure emissions do not create or substantially contribute to air quality violations. Stationary sources with potential toxic air contaminants would also be subject to MBUAPCD review and approval to ensure that there are no significant impacts to adjacent residents, sensitive receptors and/or other land uses. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts relative to localized emissions and carbon monoxide impacts to sensitive receptors.
The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts relative to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relevant to substantial pollutant concentrations: Goal OSC3, Policy OSC-3.5 Health Risk Assessments, Policy MO-3.1 Arterial Streets, Policy MO-3.2 Street Widening, Policy MO-3.3 Level of Service Standard, Action MO-3.1 Neighborhood Traffic, Action MO-3.2 Signal Timing, and Action MO-3.3 Traffic Monitoring. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant pollutant concentration impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that establishes City direction for facilitating housing development pursuant to adopted land use plans. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the density and intensity standards set forth in the General Plan and current Zoning Ordinance.
In addition, future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and air quality standards; MBUAPCD rules; Building Code requirements; Municipal Code requirements; General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs; and GPU EIR Mitigation Measures AIR-1a and AIR-1b. The GPU EIR identified Mitigation Measure Mitigation Measures AIR-1a and AIR-1b would reduce impacts to less than significant for residential and other sensitive land uses. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not directly result in the exposure of persons to substantial pollutant concentrations. 601
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-19
The previously noted goals, policies, actions, laws, regulations, standards, rules, programs, and mitigation measure ensure proposed project impacts are reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and that air quality impacts to sensitive receptors remain as less than significant.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN OTHER EMISSIONS (SUCH AS THOSE LEADING TO ODORS) ADVERSELY AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE?
Potential operational airborne odors could be created by cooking activities associated with the residential and commercial (i.e., food service) uses within the City. These odors would be similar to existing residential and food service uses throughout the city and would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the new buildings. Restaurants are also typically required to provide ventilation systems that avoid substantial adverse odor impacts.
The General Plan accommodates the development of residential, commercial, industrial, public/religious, and open space/parks/recreation uses. These uses are not identified by the MBUAPCD as significant odor generators.
Additionally, the policies included in the General Plan would reduce mobile and stationary source emissions and odors associated with diesel fuel by focusing on land use patterns that improve air quality, reduce air pollution from stationary sources, and encourage/enable more sustainable transit behavior. Consequently, implementation of the General Plan would not create operational-related objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the City. The GP EIR concluded odor impacts to be less than significant.
The General Plan includes a policy relevant to odors: Policy SN-4.3 Sensitive Receptors. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant odor impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policy.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that establishes City direction for facilitating housing development pursuant to adopted land use plans. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the density and intensity standards set forth in the Capitola General Plan and current Zoning Ordinance.
Adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not directly result in the exposure of persons to other emissions or odors. However, future development proposals associated with implantation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Federal and State laws, regulations, and air quality standards; applicable Air Quality Management Plan; MBUAPCD rules and programs; Municipal Code requirements; and General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, relative to air quality. The previously noted goals, policies, actions, laws, regulations, standards, rules, and programs along with GPU EIR Mitigation Measures AIR-1a and AIR-1b ensure proposed project impacts are reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and that other emissions or odor impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 602
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-20
This page intentionally left blank.
603
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-21
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
B. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
C. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
D. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
E. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
F. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the biological resources impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
BIO-1: The proposed Plan would not result in significant impacts to special-status plant and animal species in the Plan Area.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
BIO-2: The proposed Plan would not result in significant impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
BIO-3: The proposed Plan would not result in significant impacts to federally protected wetlands. Less Than Significant Not Applicable BIO-4: The proposed Plan would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
604
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-22
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
BIO-5: The proposed Plan would not conflict with
Capitola’s Community Tree and Forest Management
Ordinance.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
BIO-6: The proposed Plan would not conflict with the
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Management
Plan.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT, EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH
HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON ANY SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS A CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR
SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE? Subsequent projects under the General Plan that would involve development in areas where special status plant and animal species may occur would be subject to separate project-level environmental review pursuant to CEQA in order to identify and mitigate impacts to special-status species. Applicable federal, State, and local regulations, along with the proposed Plan goals, policies, and actions, would reduce potential impacts to special-status plant and animal species.
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to special-status plant and animal species: Goal OSC6, Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects, Policy OSC-6.4 Regulatory Compliance, Policy OSC-6.6 Monterey Bay, Policy OSC-6.7 Regional Collaboration, Goal OSC-7, Policy OSC-7.1 Riparian Landscaping, Policy OSC-7.2 Soquel Creek, Policy OSC-7.3 Creek Alterations, Policy OSC-7.4 Creek Alteration Impacts, Policy OSC-7.5 Creek Restoration, Policy OSC-7.6 Wetland Protection, Policy OSC-7.7 Biological Study, Policy OSC-7.8 Wetland Habitat, Policy OSC-7.9 Creek Recreation and Access, and Action OSC-7.1 Riparian Plant List. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions. 605
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-23
Various special status plant and animal species are known to occur or could potentially occur within the City.
Although development within natural resource areas or areas potentially containing special-status plant and animal species is not anticipated, there is the potential for future development associated with implementation of the proposed project to significantly impact, either directly, or through habitat modifications, special status plant and wildlife species.
The proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any sensitive species. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON ANY RIPARIAN HABITAT OR
OTHER SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, REGULATIONS OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE?
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actionsrelative to riparian habitats: Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects, Policy OSC-6.4 Regulatory Compliance, Policy OSC-6.6 Monterey Bay, Policy OSC-6.7 Regional Collaboration, Policy OSC-7.1 Riparian Landscaping, Policy OSC-7.2 Soquel Creek, Policy OSC-7.3 Creek Alterations, Policy OSC-7.4 Creek Alteration Impacts, Policy OSC-7.5 Creek Restoration, Policy OSC-7.6 Wetland Protection, Policy OSC-7.7 Biological Study, Policy OSC-7.8 Wetland Habitat, Policy OSC-7.9 Creek Recreation and Access, and Action OSC-7.1 Riparian Plant List. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions.
Riparian corridors in the City include the woodland along the west side of Soquel Creek from the Stockton Avenue Bridge to the Highway One overpass (Soquel Creek Riparian corridor), the Noble Gulch Riparian corridor, and the Tannery Gulch Riparian corridor. These corridors provide important natural resources, visual relief, and support for numerous wildlife and native vegetation.
The proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON FEDERALLY PROTECTED WETLANDS AS DEFINED BY SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, MARSH, VERNAL POOL, COASTAL, ETC.) THROUGH DIRECT REMOVAL, FILLING, HYDROLOGICAL INTERRUPTION, OR OTHER MEANS?
The General Plan includes policies relative to wetlands: Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects, Policy OSC-6.4 Regulatory Compliance, Policy OSC-6.6 Monterey Bay, Policy OSC-6.7 Regional Collaboration, Policy OSC-7.1 Riparian Landscaping, Policy 606
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-24
OSC-7.2 Soquel Creek, Policy OSC-7.3 Creek Alterations, Policy OSC-7.4 Creek Alteration Impacts, Policy OSC-7.5 Creek Restoration, Policy OSC-7.6 Wetland Protection, Policy OSC-7.7 Biological Study, Policy OSC-7.8 Wetland Habitat, Policy OSC-7.9 Creek Recreation and Access, and Action OSC-7.1 Riparian Plant List. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions.
Future development activities within the City could potentially result in significant impacts to federally protected wetlands. Existing regulations would help to ensure that development associated with the proposed project would not cause a significant impact to federally protected wetlands. Compliance with the Local Coastal Plan, General Plan, and Municipal Code, would minimize potential impacts to wetlands. Future development associated with implementation of the proposed project could involve development in areas of potential wetlands, and would be subject to separate project-level environmental review pursuant to CEQA in order to identify and mitigate impacts.
The proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE MOVEMENT OF ANY NATIVE
RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY FISH OR WILDLIFE SPECIES OR WITH ESTABLISHED NATIVE RESIDENT
OR MIGRATORY WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, OR IMPEDE THE USE OF NATIVE WILDLIFE NURSERY SITES?
The General Plan includes policies relative to native residents, migratory wildlife corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites: Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects., Policy OSC-6.4 Regulatory Compliance, Policy OSC-6.6 Monterey Bay, Policy OSC-6.7 Regional Collaboration, Policy OSC-7.1 Riparian Landscaping, Policy OSC-7.2 Soquel Creek, Policy OSC-7.3 Creek Alterations, Policy OSC-7.4 Creek Alteration Impacts, Policy OSC-7.5 Creek Restoration, Policy OSC-7.6 Wetland Protection, Policy OSC-7.7 Biological Study, Policy OSC-7.8 Wetland Habitat, Policy OSC-7.9 Creek Recreation and Access, and Action OSC-7.1 Riparian Plant List. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions.
Given the urbanized context of the City and the extent of existing development, opportunities for wildlife movement in the urbanized portion of the City are limited. Existing development, including buildings, major roadways, or other similar improvements, represent substantial barriers to wildlife movement. However, Soquel Creek runs through the middle of the City into the Monterey Bay. The creek is a year-round water source for the wildlife in the adjoining riparian corridor as well as an important wetland habitat. The lagoon area of the creek is the only significant habitat for migratory non-marine waterbirds within Capitola. In addition, the Creek and Lagoon supports steelhead with resident trout and non-sport species and southwestern pond turtles.
Monarch butterfly habitats are located along Soquel Creek and in the Escalona Gulch area. These areas provide overwintering sites for the migrating Monarch butterfly and are considered environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA). The orientation of the groves to wind and sun, the size and density of the trees, and the quiet, undisturbed setting are among the factors that make these sites among the few in Santa Cruz County suitable for the butterflies. Both Escalona Gulch and Soquel Creek Monarch butterfly groves lie within areas designated for preservation as open space. Just outside the city limits between New Brighton Road and New Brighton State Park 607
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-25
campground is another overwintering site for Monarch butterflies. This grove is partly on State Park property and partly on private residential parcels.
The proposed project does not propose any changes to Soquel Creek or changes in land uses to areas containing Monarch butterfly habitats. Wildlife would continue to move within these areas.
Compliance with the Local Coastal Plan, General Plan, and Municipal Code, would minimize potential impacts to wildlife movement. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH ANY LOCAL POLICIES OR ORDINANCES PROTECTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SUCH AS A TREE PRESERVATION POLICY OR ORDINANCE? The General Plan includes several policies relative to tree management and tree removal: Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects, and Policy OSC6.4 Regulatory Compliance. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions.
Municipal Code Chapter 12.12, Community Tree and Forest Management, establishes regulations relating to the protection, planting, maintenance, removal, and replacement of trees, and sets forth the process for development of a comprehensive plan for the planting and maintenance of a sustained community forest within the City.
The proposed project would not directly involve removal of trees; however, future development associated with implementation of the proposed project could potentially involve the removal of trees within the City. The Community Tree and Forest Management Ordinance requires a tree permit prior to the removal of any non-fruit bearing trees within the City. Permits for heritage tree removal are discretionary and are approved by the planning commission only in accordance with CEQA and if specific findings can be made. Permits for non-heritage tree removal are ministerial and are approved by the community development director or designee if specific findings can be made.
The proposed project would not conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or trees.
Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 608
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-26
F. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF AN ADOPTED HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN, NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN, OR OTHER APPROVED LOCAL, REGIONAL, OR STATE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN?
The General Plan includes policies relative to an adopted plan: Policy LU-3.7 Regional Outlook, Policy LU-13.4 New Brighton State Beach, Policy LU-13.6 Beach Management, Policy LU-13.7 Beach Structures, Action LU-14.3 Coastal Recreation, Policy OSC-6.1 Natural Diversity, Policy OSC-6.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Policy OSC-6.3 Development Projects, Policy OSC-6.4 Regulatory Compliance, Policy OSC-6.6 Monterey Bay, Policy OSC-6.7 Regional Collaboration, and Policy OSC-6.8 Eco-Tourism. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan policies and actions.
The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan is the only conservation related plan that is applicable to Capitola.
The proposed project would not conflict with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan.
Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 609
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-27
4.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5?
C. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
D. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the cultural resources impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
CULTURAL RESOURCES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
CULT-1: The Plan would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in Section 15064.5.
Less Than Significant
CULT-2: Construction activities associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
Significant CULT-2 Less Than Significant
CULT-3: Construction activities associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan could directly or
indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Significant CULT-3: Refer to Mitigation
Measure CULT-2 Less Than Significant
CULT-4: Construction activities associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan could disturb human Significant CULT-4: Refer to Mitigation Measure CULT-2 Less Than Significant 610
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-28
CULTURAL RESOURCES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries.
CULT-5: The Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less-than significant cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources.
Less Than Significant
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Tribal Cultural Resources
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) was signed into law in 2014 and added tribal cultural resources thresholds to CEQA Guidelines Appendix G.
The GPU EIR was certified in June 2014 and was not subject to AB 52. However, the GPU EIR included an extensive analysis of potential impacts to cultural resources. The GPU EIR found there is the potential for discovering such resources during construction of future development proposals in Capitola.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A HISTORICAL RESOURCE AS DEFINED IN CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.5? The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to historic resources: Goal LU-2, Policy LU-2.1 Historic Structures, Policy LU-2.2 Modification Standards, Policy LU-2.3 Preservation Incentives, Policy LU-2.4 Public Awareness, Action LU-2.1 Historic Structures List, Action LU-2.2 Public Outreach, Action LU-2.3 Historic Preservation Guidelines, Action LU-2.4, Goal LU-7, Policy LU-7.1 New Development Design, and Policy LU-7.3 Scenic Resources. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and regulatory requirements. 611
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-29
There are 65 designated historic structures that are listed or are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Historic Resources Inventory, or the Capitola Register of Historic Features within the city. In addition to designated historic structures, there are also several potential historic structures that have been identified by the City. Additionally, four areas of the City are identified as National Register Historic Districts.
The GPU EIR noted that future development and/or redevelopment activities within or adjacent to these sites or districts could potentially cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource and concluded impacts to be less than significant.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Thus, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific historical resource impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project. Instead, a case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be carried out to ensure that historically significant buildings and resources are preserved, as applicable, and that the future development proposals are consistent with all applicable General Plan goals and policies and Municipal Code regulations relative to historic resources. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.5? The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to archaeological resources: Goal LU-2, Policy LU2.4 Public Awareness, and Action LU-2.2 Public Outreach. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, regulatory requirements, and mitigation measure CULT-2.
The City of Capitola contains areas identified by the Local Coastal Program as having a likelihood of prehistoric cultural resources, including archaeological resources. Future development and/or redevelopment activities within these areas could potentially cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a known or unknown archaeological resource.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Thus, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific archaeological resource impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project. Instead, A case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be carried out to confirm the absence or presence of archaeological resources, as applicable, and that the future development proposals are consistent with all applicable General Plan goals and policies and Municipal Code regulations relative to archaeological resources, as well as GPU EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-2. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 612
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-30
C. WOULD THE PROJECT DISTURB ANY HUMAN REMAINS, INCLUDING THOSE INTERRED OUTSIDE OF FORMAL CEMETERIES?
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant with mitigation impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and mitigation measure CULT-4.
The GPU EIR identified that future development could have a significant environmental impact if it would disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. The City of Capitola is built on the location of an Indian village that existed for more than a 1,000 years and contains areas identified within the Local Coastal Program Map I-1 as having a likelihood of prehistoric cultural resources. There are no other formal cemeteries within the City of Capitola.
Human remains are defined as any physical remains of a human being. The term "human remains" encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of associated cultural resources (funerary objects) with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact.
Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects.
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) provides guidance that agencies shall consult with organizations on whose aboriginal lands the remains and cultural items might be discovered, who are reasonably known to have a cultural relationship to the human remains and other cultural items.
In the event human remains are encountered during earth removal or disturbance activities associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project, all activities would cease immediately and a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor would be immediately contacted.
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Thus, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific historical resource impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project. Instead, A case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be carried out to confirm the absence or presence of human remains, and that the future development proposals comply with Health and Safety Code and Public Resources Code protocols. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 613
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-31
D. WOULD THE PROJECT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCE, DEFINED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21074 AS EITHER
A SITE, FEATURE, PLACE, CULTURAL LANDSCAPE THAT IS GEOGRAPHICALLY DEFINED IN TERMS
OF THE SIZE AND SCOPE OF THE LANDSCAPE, SACRED PLACE, OR OBJECT WITH CULTURAL VALUE TO A CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE, AND THAT IS:
1. LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES, OR
IN THE LOCAL REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES AS DEFINED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECCTION 5020.1(K)?
2. A RESOURCE DETERMINED BY THE LEAD AGENCY, IN ITS DISCRETION AND SUPPORTED BY
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, TO BE SIGNIFICANT PURSUANT TO CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION (C) OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5024.1? IN APPLYING THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION (C) OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5024.1, THE LEAD AGENCY
SHALL CONSIDER THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESOURCE TO A CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE.
Tribal Consultation
Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014 (AB 52), requires that Lead Agencies evaluate a project’s potential to impact “tribal cultural resources.” Such resources include “[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical resources or included in a local register of historical resources.” AB 52 also gives Lead Agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a “tribal cultural resource.”
Also, per AB 52 (specifically Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21080.3.1), Native American consultation is required upon request by a California Native American tribe that has previously requested that the City provide it with notice of such projects.
While tribal consultation is not required for an Addendum, the City contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in July 2023 requesting a list of potential Native American contacts for consultation. The NAHC provided a Tribal Consultation List to the City on July 27, 2023. In addition, the City reviewed its list of tribes that had requested AB 52 notification.
The City sent letters via email for the purposes of SB 181 and AB 52 consultation to eight tribes listed below on August 2, 2023:
1. Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
2. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band – Ed Ketchum, Vice-Chairperson
3. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band – Valentin Lopez, Chairperson
4. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista – Irene Zwierlein, Chairperson 1 SB 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) (Public Resources Code Section 65352.3) requires cities and counties to contact and consult with California Native American tribes prior to amending or adopting any general plan or specific plan, or designating land as open space. 614
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-32
5. Costanoan Ohlone Rumsen-Mutsen Tribe – Patrick Orozco, Chairman
6. Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan – Kanyon Sayers-Roods, MLD Contact
7. Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan – Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson
8. Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band – Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson The City’s letter specifically noted that the Housing Element is required to be updated every eight years, and within Santa Cruz County, jurisdictions are required to prepare, adopt, and receive certification from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of their 6th cycle Housing Element by December 15, 2023. As such, the City respectfully requested that each tribe respond within 30 days for the both the SB 18 and AB 32 consultation.
At the conclusion of the 30-day period, the City received no requests for SB 18 or AB 52 consultation. However, the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of San Juan Bautista and A.M.T.B. Inc. provided a Letter of Response to the City on August 17, 2023. The Letter of Response provided recommendations regarding cultural sensitivity training, qualified California trained archeological monitors to be present during earth movement, and qualified native American monitors during earth movement. In addition, hourly rates for monitoring were provided in the Letter of Response.
Impact Analysis
Whatever the linguistic affiliation, Native Americans in and around the City of Capitola exhibited similar organization and resource procurement strategies. Villages were based on clan or lineage groups. Their home/base sites are marked by midden deposits, often with bedrock mortars. During their seasonal rounds to exploit plant resources, small groups would migrate within their traditional territory in search of specific plants and animals. Their gathering strategies often left behind signs of special use sites, usually grinding slicks on bedrock boulders, at the locations of the resources.
Given the long-standing history of the multiple tribes in and around the City of Capitola, there is the potential that the construction of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would impact tribal cultural resources. Past construction and development practices in the City were not as sensitive to tribal cultural resources as current practices. Thus, ground-disturbing activities, such as grading or excavation, could disturb previously unidentified subsurface resources.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Thus, it is not possible at this time to conduct an assessment of potential site-specific tribal cultural resource impacts relative to future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project. Instead, A case-by-case review of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be carried out to confirm the absence or presence of tribal cultural resources, as applicable, and that the future development proposals are consistent with all applicable General Plan goals and policies and Municipal Code regulations relative to tribal cultural resources. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 615
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-33
4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
B. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The GPU EIR disclosed that buildout of the General Plan would entail the commitment of nonrenewable and/or slowly renewable energy resources. As the community continues to develop, the GPU EIR noted that both residential and nonresidential development would require further commitment of energy resources in the form of natural gas and electricity generated by coal, hydroelectric power, or nuclear energy. Increased motor vehicle travel within the City resulting from the General Plan also would be accompanied by increased consumption of petroleum products. However, the GPU EIR did not identify any impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, or due to a conflict with or obstruction of a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
The AMBAG Regional Energy Plan was developed and adopted in 2006, and later updated in 2008. The objective of the regional energy plan to lay out the region’s joint approach to establishing an energy vision through objectives, goals, and action plans that will mitigate future energy impacts on the region. This cooperative approach is leveraged to reduce overall costs and challenges of compliance with AB 32 requirements. The 2006 Energy Plan laid out a set of four Plan objectives, goals, and action steps for the region, as listed in GPU EIR Table
4.15-7. As shown in GPU EIR Table 4.15-7, the General Plan would be consistent with the AMBAG Regional Energy Plan.
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts to energy resources.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the 616
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-34
City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DUE TO
WASTEFUL, INEFFICIENT, OR UNNECESSARY CONSUMPTION OF ENERGY RESOURCES, DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION?
B. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT A STATE OR LOCAL PLAN FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY OR ENERGY EFFICIENCY?
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code and California Green Building Standards Code, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential energy impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. The proposed project would not result in impacts to energy resources, or conflict with or obstruct any plans addressing renewable energy or energy efficiency. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 617
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-35
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4) Landslides?
B. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
D. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? E. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
F. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the geology and soils impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
GEO-1: The proposed Plan would not expose people or
structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving surface rupture along a known active fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; and landslides.
Less Than Significant
GEO-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Less Than Significant 618
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-36
GEOLOGY AND SOILS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
GEO-3: Development under the proposed Plan would not
result in a significant impact related to development on unstable geologic units and soils or result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
Less Than Significant
GEO-4: Development under the proposed Plan would not
create substantial risks to life or property as a result of its location on expansive soil.
Less Than Significant
GEO-5: Development under the proposed Plan would not
result in impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of wastewater.
Less Than Significant
GEO-6: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to geology and soils.
Less Than Significant
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING:
1. RUPTURE OF A KNOWN EARTHQUAKE FAULT, AS DELINEATED ON THE MOST RECENT ALQUISTPRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONING MAP ISSUED BY THE STATE GEOLOGIST FOR THE AREA OR BASED ON OTHER SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF A KNOWN FAULT? REFER TO DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SPECIAL PUBLICATION 42.
The GPU EIR concluded that no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones have been identified within the City Area.
Therefore, the risk of surface fault rupture within the City Area is considered low. 619
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-37
California, including the City of Capitola, is subject to the effects of seismic activity due to the active faults that traverse the area. Active faults are defined as those that have experienced surface displacement within Holocene time (approximately the last 11,000 years) and/or are in a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
No Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones exist within the City of Capitola. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
2. STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING?
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to seismic ground shaking: Goal SN-2, Policy SN-2.1 Development Restrictions, Policy SN-2.2 Mitigation, Policy SN-2.3 Seismic Analysis, Policy SN-2.4 Bluff Erosion, Policy SN-2.5 Retrofits, Policy SN-2.6 Hazard Considerations, Policy SN-2.7 Public Outreach, Policy SN-2.8 Critical Facilities and Services, Policy SN-2.9 State Standard, Action SN-2.1 Funding, Action SN-2.2 Transportation Infrastructure, Action SN-2.3 Data Accuracy, and Action SN-2.4 URM Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The City of Capitola, similar to the rest of California, is located within a seismically active region as a result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. The City is subject to seismic ground shaking due to the close proximity and potential earthquake magnitude of the San Andreas, the Zayante, and the Palo Colorado-San Gregorio faults.
The intensity of groundshaking and degree of impact would depend upon the magnitude of the earthquake, distance to the epicenter, and the geology of the area between the epicenter and the development site.
Additionally, the soil and geologic structure underlying a development site would influence the amount of damage that the site may experience. Potential damage to existing and new structures cannot be precluded. Structural vulnerabilities in older buildings that are less earthquake resistant are most likely to contribute to the largest source of injury and economic loss, as a result of an earthquake. Damage to infrastructure, including roadways, bridges, water and wastewater lines, gas lines, power poles, storm drainage, and other public facilities, could also occur due to an earthquake event.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. The California Building Code includes specific design measures, which are based on the determination of Site Classification and Seismic Design Categories specific to a project site. These design measures are intended to maximize structural stability in the event of an earthquake. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 620
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-38
3. SEISMIC-RELATED GROUND FAILURE, INCLUDING LIQUEFACTION?
4. LANDSLIDES?
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to seismic ground shaking: Goal SN-2, Policy SN-2.1 Development Restrictions, Policy SN-2.2 Mitigation, Policy SN-2.3 Seismic Analysis, Policy SN-2.4 Bluff Erosion, Policy SN-2.5 Retrofits, Policy SN-2.6 Hazard Considerations, Policy SN-2.7 Public Outreach, Policy SN-2.8 Critical Facilities and Services, Policy SN-2.9 State Standard, Action SN-2.1 Funding, Action SN-2.2 Transportation Infrastructure, Action SN-2.3 Data Accuracy, and Action SN-2.4 URM Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and regulatory requirements.
Seismic agitation of relatively loose saturated sands, silty sands, and some silts can result in a buildup of pore pressure. If the pore pressure exceeds the overburden stresses, a temporary quick condition known as liquefaction can occur. Liquefaction effects can manifest in several ways including: 1) loss of bearing; 2) lateral spread; 3) dynamic settlement; and 4) flow failure. Lateral spreading has typically been the most damaging mode of failure.
In general, the more recent that a sediment has been deposited, the more likely it will be susceptible to liquefaction. Other factors that must be considered are groundwater, confining stresses, relative density, and the intensity and duration of seismically-induced ground shaking.
The geologic and topographic characteristics of an area often determine its potential for landslides. Steep slopes, the extent of erosion, and the rock composition of a hillside all contribute to the potential slope failure and landslide events.
Capitola contains areas with slopes greater than 50 percent, which are susceptible to landslides and mudflows as shown on GPU EIR Figure 4.5-3. The majority of these areas are coastal bluffs, escarpments of decomposed rock, or soil resulting from erosion or faulting with a vertical elevation of at least 10 feet. Coastal bluff areas within Capitola that have steep topography include Cliff Drive and surrounding open space as well as shoreline residences and open space areas of the Depot Hill neighborhood, between the Village and New Brighton State Park. In addition to the coastal bluffs, there are areas along Soquel Creek, Nobel Gulch, and Tannery Gulch that have steep slopes that could be susceptible to landslides and mudflows.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code, preparation of site-specific geologic studies, project-specific conditions, and mitigation measures as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures seismic-related ensures ground failure impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval, and that earthquakeinduced landslides impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 621
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-39
B. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL SOIL EROSION OR THE LOSS OF TOPSOIL? The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to soil erosion or loss of topsoil: Goal SN-2, Policy SN-2.1 Development Restrictions, Policy SN-2.2 Mitigation, Policy SN-2.3 Seismic Analysis, Policy SN-2.4 Bluff Erosion, Policy SN-2.5 Retrofits, Policy SN-2.6 Hazard Considerations, Policy SN-2.7 Public Outreach, Policy SN-2.8 Critical Facilities and Services, Policy SN-2.9 State Standard, Action SN-2.1 Funding, Action SN-2.2 Transportation Infrastructure, Action SN-2.3 Data Accuracy, and Action SN-2.4 URM Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project involving demolition and/or construction activities would be subject to compliance with the California Building Code, as well as the requirements set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm Water General Construction Permit for construction activities. The NPDES Storm Water General Construction Permit requires preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, which would identify specific erosion and sediment control Best Management Practices that would be implemented to protect storm and non-storm water runoff during construction and post-development activities, inclusive of low impact development (LID) design considerations and operational and maintenance requirements. Compliance with the California Building Code and NPDES would minimize effects from erosion and ensure consistency with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Control Plan. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that soil erosion impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT BE LOCATED ON A GEOLOGIC UNIT OR SOIL THAT IS UNSTABLE, OR THAT
WOULD BECOME UNSTABLE AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT, AND POTENTIALLY RESULT IN AN
ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE LANDSLIDE, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE, LIQUEFACTION OR COLLAPSE?
Refer to Responses A.1.3 and A.1.4.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT BE LOCATED ON EXPANSIVE SOIL, AS DEFINED IN TABLE 18-1-B OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (1994), CREATING SUBSTANTIAL RISKS TO LIFE OR PROPERTY? The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to expansive soils: Goal SN-2, Policy SN-2.1 Development Restrictions, Policy SN-2.2 Mitigation, Policy SN-2.6 Hazard Considerations, Policy SN-2.7 Public Outreach, Policy SN-2.9 State Standard, and Action SN-2.3 Data Accuracy. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of the aforementioned General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and regulatory requirements.
622
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-40
Expansive soils can be a problem, as variation in moisture content will cause a volume change in the soil. Expansive soils heave when moisture is introduced and contract as they dry. During inclement weather and/or excessive landscape watering, moisture infiltrates the soil and causes the soil to heave (expansion). When drying occurs the soils will shrink (contraction). Repeated cycles of expansion and contraction of soils can cause pavement, concrete slabs on grade and foundations to crack. This movement can also result in misalignment of doors and windows.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code, preparation of site-specific geologic studies, project-specific conditions, and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that expansive soil impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE SOILS INCAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SUPPORTING THE USE OF
SEPTIC TANKS OR ALTERNATIVE WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS WHERE SEWERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE DISPOSAL OF WASTE WATER?
All existing development within the City is connected to a sewer system for the disposal of wastewater. The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to connect to a sewer system, as well as comply with all applicable regulations, development standards, project-specific conditions, and mitigation measures, as applicable. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that septic tank or alternative waste water disposal system impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
F. WOULD THE PROJECT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY DESTROY A UNIQUE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE OR SITE OR UNIQUE GEOLOGIC FEATURE?
The City of Capitola contains areas identified within the Local Coastal Program Map I-1 as having a likelihood of prehistoric cultural resources, including paleontological resources. The entire coastal bluff area in Capitola is composed at least partially of the Purisima Formation. Paleontological resources found within the City have been located in this Purisima Formation. The GPU EIR identified that future development and/or redevelopment within Archaeological/Paleontological Sensitivity Areas could potentially destroy a unique paleontological resource, and would be subject to the Coastal Act, Municipal Code, and GPU EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-2 to avoid or mitigate impacts to paleontological resources.
623
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-41
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. There is the potential that future development projects could uncover paleontological resources or unique geologic features. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that unique paleontological resources or geological features impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and GPU EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-2.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 624
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-42
This page intentionally left blank.
625
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-43
4.8 GREENHOUSE GASES
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
B. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the greenhouse gas emissions impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
GHG-1: GHG emissions associated with the proposed
Plan would exceed MBAUAPCD’s proposed GHG
significance threshold of 2,000 MTCO2e per year.
Significant GHG-1 Significant Unavoidable
GHG-2: The proposed Plan would not conflict with
applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
GHG-3: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in a significant cumulative impact with respect to GHG
emissions.
Significant
GHG-3:
Implement Mitigation
Measure GHG-1
Significant Unavoidable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate 626
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-44
development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT GENERATE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THAT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT? B. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH AN APPLICABLE PLAN, POLICY, OR REGULATION ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING THE EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE GASES? The General Plan includes numerous policies relative to greenhouse gas emissions, plans, policies, or regulations, which are restated on GPU EIR pages 4.15-17 to 4.15-22. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts and significant unavoidable impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and mitigation measures.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code and California Green Building Standards Code, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes.
In addition, the General Plan includes goals and policies in the Open Space and Conservation Element that address that following topics:
General Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship
Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Air Quality
Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Conservation
Biological Resources
Water Quality and Conservation
Food Production
Waste Reduction
The Open Space and Conservation Element goals and policies support actions to reduce the use of resources and energy, and thus, the creation of greenhouse gas emissions. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be subject to these policies, as applicable.
The GPU EIR identified that Mitigation Measure GHG-1 (Preparation, Adoption, and Implementation of Climate Action Plan) would be applicable to future development proposals in the City. The City adopted its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) on October 22, 2015. The CAP identifies strategies and actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from City government operations and community activities to support the State of California’s efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change.
627
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-45
Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures greenhouse gas emissions or conflicts with adopted plans, policies, and regulations remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 (Climate Action Plan).
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 628
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-46
This page intentionally left blank.
629
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-47
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? D. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
F. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the hazards and hazardous materials impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS– SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
HAZ-1: The proposed Plan would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HAZ-2: The proposed Plan would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HAZ-3: The proposed Plan would not result in significant impacts associated with hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed school.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HAZ-4: Implementation of the Plan would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment as a result of development on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
630
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-48
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS– SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
HAZ-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area due to development within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport.
No Impact Not Applicable
HAZ-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Plan Area due to development in the vicinity of a
private airstrip.
No Impact Not Applicable
HAZ-7: The proposed Plan would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HAZ-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HAZ-9: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less-than-significant cumulative impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous materials.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element. 631
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-49
A. WOULD THE PROJECT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE ROUTINE TRANSPORT, USE, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS? B. WOULD THE PROJECT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT
THROUGH REASONABLY FORESEEABLE UPSET AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS INVOLVING THE RELEASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT?
C. WOULD THE PROJECT EMIT HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS OR HANDLE HAZARDOUS OR ACUTELY
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, SUBSTANCES, OR WASTE WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE OF AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL?
D. WOULD THE PROJECT BE LOCATED ON A SITE WHICH IS INCLUDED ON A LIST OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES COMPILED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65962.5 AND, AS A RESULT, WOULD IT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT? The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan would result in no impact or less than significant impacts relative to following hazards: a) significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, b) the project creates a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, c) the project emits hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, d) the project is located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
The General Plan includes numerous policies relative to hazards and hazardous materials plans, policies, or regulations, which are restated on GPU EIR pages 4.6-10 to 4.6-22. The GPU EIR concluded no impacts or less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
Routine Transport, Use or Disposal of Hazardous Materials The General Plan includes policies relative to the routine transport, use or disposal 0f hazardous materials: Policy SN-4.1 Mitigation Processes., Policy SN-4.3 Sensitive Receptors; Policy SN-4.4 Green Building, Policy SN-4.5 County Coordination, Action SN-4.1 City Staff Training, and Action SN-4.2 Municipal Code Review. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
Businesses that use, transport, or dispose of hazardous materials are required to comply with Federal, State, and local hazardous materials regulations. Specifically, truck traffic, including trucks that transport chemicals, is restricted to designated routes per Municipal Code Chapter 10.48.
A number of facilities currently operate within the City of Capitola that use, store, or dispose of hazardous materials. These operations, if improperly designed or managed, could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of such materials. However, compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the handling of these materials minimize this risk.
632
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-50
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code, project-specific conditions, and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval.
Hazardous Materials
The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to hazardous materials: Policy SN-4.1 Mitigation Processes, Policy SN-4.2 Site Assessments, Policy SN-4.3 Sensitive Receptors, Policy SN-4.4 Green Building, Policy SN-4.5 County Coordination, Action SN-4.1 City Staff Training, Policy SN-5.1 Coordination with Other Agencies, Policy SN5.2 Community Groups, Policy SN-5.3 Emergency and Evacuation Routes, Policy SN-5.4 Urban Area Security Initiative, Action SN-5.1 Emergency Response Plan, Action SN-5.2 County Preparedness Exercises, Action SN-5.3 Preparedness Training; Action SN-5.4 Preparedness Outreach, Action SN-5.5 Critical Facilities, and Action SN-5.6 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The General Plan would facilitate new development, including residential, commercial, and mixed-use, within the city. Some new development, particularly in non-residential areas, could occur on properties that could be contaminated. Construction of new buildings and improvements would have the potential to release potentially hazardous materials, including contaminated soils, into the environment during site grading and excavation operations. Similarly, demolition of existing structures would potentially result in the release of hazardous building materials (e.g., asbestos, lead paint) into the environment. Use of hazardous materials after construction could potentially include cleaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other materials used in the regular maintenance and operation of the proposed uses.
Also, a number of sites in the City are listed on the Cortese Database, compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Some of the sites are listed as closed, indicating that they have been investigated and/or remediated to the satisfaction of the lead responsible agency (i.e., RWQCB, DTSC, or DEHS). However, compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the handling of these materials minimize this risk.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, including but not limited to the most current adopted version of the California Building Code, project-specific conditions, and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures that impacts remain as less than significant impacts with implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval.
633
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-51
Hazardous Emissions, Materials, Substances, or Waste Within ¼-Mile of an Existing or Proposed School The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to hazardous emissions, materials, substances within ¼- mile of an existing or proposed school: Policy SN-4.1 Mitigation Processes, Policy SN-4.2 Site Assessments, Policy SN-4.3 Sensitive Receptors, Policy SN-4.4 Green Building, Policy SN-4.5 County Coordination, Action SN-4.1 City Staff Training, Action SN-4.2 Municipal Code Review, Policy SN-5.1 Coordination with Other Agencies, Policy SN5.2 Community Groups, Policy SN-5.3 Emergency and Evacuation Routes, Policy SN-5.4 Urban Area Security Initiative, Action SN-5.1 Emergency Response Plan, Action SN-5.2 County Preparedness Exercises, Action SN-5.3 Preparedness Training, Action SN-5.4 Preparedness Outreach, Action SN-5.5 Critical Facilities, and Action SN-5.6 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
New Brighton Middle School and Opal Cliff ’s Elementary School are located within the City. Both of these school sites are surrounded by residential neighborhoods and are located more than ¼-mile from any existing or planned non-residential land uses.
While the risk of exposure to hazardous materials cannot be eliminated, measures can be implemented to maintain risk at acceptable levels. Compliance with measures established by Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies are considered adequate to offset the negative effects related to the use, storage, emission, and transport of hazardous materials at future development sites within ¼-mile of a school.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable policies, regulations, and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment, or involve the transportation, use, or storage of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN AN AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN OR, WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS
NOT BEEN ADOPTED, WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT,
WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN A SAFETY HAZARD FOR PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA?
The General Plan included no policies relative to an airport land use plan or safety hazards for people residing or working within two miles of an airport. The GPU EIR concluded no impacts.
There are no private airstrips within or in the near vicinity of the City. The nearest airstrip, the Monterey Bay Academy airstrip, is located approximately 6.5 miles southeast of the City.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
634
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-52
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
F. WOULD THE PROJECT IMPAIR IMPLEMENTATION OF OR PHYSICALLY INTERFERE WITH AN ADOPTED EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN OR EMERGENCY EVACUATION PLAN? The General Plan includes policies relative to emergency response on evacuation plans: Policy SN-5.1 Coordination with Other Agencies, Policy SN-5.2 Community Groups, Policy SN-5.3 Emergency and Evacuation Routes, Policy SN-5.4 Urban Area Security Initiative, Action SN-5.1 Emergency Response Plan, Action SN-5.2 County Preparedness Exercises, Action SN-5.3 Preparedness Training, Action SN-5.4 Preparedness Outreach, Action SN5.5 Critical Facilities, and Action SN-5.6 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The Santa Cruz County Operational Area Emergency Management Plan establishes a comprehensive approach to the organizational structure and emergency management responsibilities in Santa Cruz County, including prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. Capitola is also within the region covered by the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI), which provides federal financial assistance for terrorism preparedness planning.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not impair the implementation of the Santa Cruz County Operational Area Emergency Management Plan or interfere with other applicable emergency response or evacuation plans. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 635
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-53
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? P B. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
P
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
1) Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? P 2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? P
3) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
P
4) Impede or redirect flood flows? P
D. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? P
E. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? P
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the hydrology and water quality impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
HYDRO-1: The proposed Plan would not violate any water
quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Less Than Significant Not Applicable HYDRO-2: The proposed Plan could substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level.
Significant No Mitigation Available Significant Unavoidable HYDRO-3: The proposed Plan would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the Plan Area or vicinity, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or Less Than Significant Not Applicable
636
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-54
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site.
HYDRO-4: The proposed Plan would not create or
contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HYDRO-5: The proposed Plan would not otherwise
substantially degrade water quality. Less Than Significant Not Applicable HYDRO-6: The proposed Plan would not result in a
significant impact with respect to the placement of housing or structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HYDRO-7: The proposed Plan would not expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam.
No Impact Not Applicable
HYDRO-8: The proposed Plan would not result in
significant adverse effects related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
HYDRO-9: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable development, could
result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to hydrology and water quality.
Significant No Mitigation Available Significant Unavoidable Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT VIOLATE ANY WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE
REQUIREMENTS OR OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE SURFACE OR GROUND WATER QUALITY?
The General Plan includes policies relative to water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, degradation of surface or ground water: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC-8.2 Non-Point Source Pollution, Policy OSC-8.3 637
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-55
Best Management Practices, Policy OSC-8.4 Landscaping and Re-Vegetation, Policy OSC-8.5 Native Plants, Policy OSC-8.6 City Properties, Policy OSC-8.7 Regional Collaboration, Policy OSC-8.8 Drainage Plans, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, and Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
Surface water and groundwater quality in the City of Capitola is similar to that which is characterized for other urbanized areas surrounding the City and within Santa Cruz County. The City encourages development projects to be designed with pervious materials and landscaped areas to enhance on-site capture and absorption of stormflows. Also, through the implementation of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program requirements, the City guards against high pollutant loads and erosive materials in surface runoff.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to provide for the elimination/reduction of pollutant discharges, including capture and treatment of dry weather and first flush runoff in a manner consistent with Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) requirements. All storm water discharges must comply with applicable provisions of Santa Cruz County’s NPDES permit. As a co-permittee, the City is responsible for implementation of the requirements of the NPDES permit issued to the County. Consistent with CCRWQCB/NPDES and City requirements, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be required throughout construction processes of future development proposals, thereby controlling potential discharge of pollutants, preventing sewage spills, and avoiding discharge of sediments into streets, stormwater channels, or waterways. In addition, long-term water quality impacts associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would also be avoided through the implementation of structural, non-structural and treatment control BMPs and operational and maintenance requirements that are identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for each future development proposal to ensure that long-term water quality impacts are minimized. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY DECREASE GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES OR INTERFERE
SUBSTANTIALLY WITH GROUNDWATER RECHARGE SUCH THAT THE PROJECT MAY IMPEDED SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT OF THE BASIN?
The General Plan includes policies relative to water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, degradation of surface or ground water: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC-8.2 Non-Point Source Pollution, Policy OSC-8.3 Best Management Practices, Policy OSC-8.4 Landscaping and Re-Vegetation, Policy OSC-8.5 Native Plants, Policy OSC-8.6 City Properties, Policy OSC-8.7 Regional Collaboration, Policy OSC-8.8 Drainage Plans, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, and Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded significant unavoidable impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
The City has been fully urbanized for many years with established hydrology and water quality systems. 638
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-56
The City of Capitola water providers are Soquel Creek Water District (SqCWD) and the City of Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD). Approximately 90 percent of the total water used by the City of Capitola is provided by the SqCWD, which serves the areas primarily east of 41st Avenue. Approximately 10 percent of the total water used by the City of Capitola is provided by the SCWD, which serves the areas primarily west of 41st Avenue.
The SqCWD relies solely on groundwater from aquifers underlying the Soquel-Aptos area. The SqCWD extracts groundwater from the deep water-bearing zones within the Purisima formation. Several SqCWD wells are located in this unit; however, SqCWD also operates production wells in the other units. The SqCWD also extracts groundwater from the semi-confined and unconfined units of the Aromas, a 400-foot thick aquifer divided into two units. The uppermost unit is about 225 feet thick, and the lowermost unit is about 175 feet thick. All of the SqCWD production wells in the Aromas are located in the lowermost unit.
Water supply for the SCWD relies entirely on rainfall, surface runoff, and groundwater infiltration occurring within watersheds located in Santa Cruz County. No water is imported from federal, State or other outside sources. The supply system is comprised of four main production elements, 1) the North Coast streams, 2) the San Lorenzo River, 3) Loch Lomond Reservoir, and 4) the Live Oak ground water wells.
The General Plan could result in an increased demand of up to 124 acre-feet/year (afy), which could indirectly result in the over-drafting of the groundwater table. In addition, other cumulative projects within the Basin could further exacerbate this impact. As such, groundwater impacts were concluded to be significant unavoidable.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be reviewed by the City to determine if there is any change to existing runoff conditions or potential increases in the amount of impervious surfaces. In addition, future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable policies, regulations, and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as significant unavoidable impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE
OR AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF STREAM OR RIVER, IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD:
1. RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL EROSION OR SILTATION ON- OR OFF-SITE?
2. SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE RATE OR AMOUNT OF SURFACE RUNOFF IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD RESULT IN FLOODING ON- OR OFF-SITE?
3. CREATE OR CONTRIBUTE RUNOFF WATER WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING
OR PLANNED STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS OR PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF POLLUTED RUNOFF?
The General Plan includes policies relative to runoff capacity or polluted runoff: OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC8.4 Landscaping and Re-Vegetation, Policy OSC-8.8 Drainage Plans, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, and 639
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-57
Action OSC-8.3. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. As such, the proposed project does not propose to alter the existing drainage pattern of any site in the City, nor does it propose to alter any streams or rivers resulting in substantial erosion, surface runoff resulting in flooding, or runoff existing the system’s capacity. Any future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would occur on urban land consistent with adopted land use policy, which provides for protection of existing drainage courses. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
4. IMPEDE OR REDIRECT FLOOD FLOWS?
The General Plan includes policies relative to runoff capacity or polluted runoff: OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC8.4 Landscaping and Re-Vegetation, Policy OSC-8.8 Drainage Plans, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, and Action OSC-8.3. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Infrastructure exists with the City, and thus, storm water runoff associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would continue to be conveyed and discharged into the local stormwater system. Additionally, construction of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be restricted within the individual site boundary.
As such, implementation of the proposed project would not lead to on-site or off-site siltation or erosion impeding or redirecting flood flow. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT IN FLOOD HAZARD, TSUNAMI, OR SEICHE ZONES, RISK RELEASE OF POLLUTANTS DUE TO PROJECT INUNDATION?
Flooding
The General Plan includes policies relative to flooding and flood hazards: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC8.8 Drainage Plans, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
According to FEMA and shown on GPU EIR Figure 4.7-2, all of Soquel Creek (within the City limits) and a portion of Noble Gulch are located within the 100-year flood zone. The flood zone is relatively narrow and generally follows the flow path of the main channel. Moving upstream from the creek mouth, the elevation of the 100-year 640
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-58
flood zone (i.e., the base flood elevation) becomes progressively higher than the water surface elevations associated with the periodic formation of the Lagoon during the summer months.
Noble Gulch is a significant drainage that flows into Soquel Creek at the Village. Approximately 30+ years ago, the last approximately 2,000 feet of the Gulch (east of Bay Avenue) was diverted via a 72-inch drainage pipe that extends under the current Pacific Cove Mobile Home Park. During a heavy storm in March of 2011, rushing water overwhelmed the drainage pipe creating an upwards surge that tore apart the ground beneath several mobile homes. The water cascaded down Capitola Avenue into the Village, causing considerable damage to homes and businesses. This storm event and the failed drainage pipe, demonstrates the potential risks and vulnerability of flooding in the Village. Storm events occur relatively frequently and the Village is located at the end of Soquel Creek which is a very large watershed. Flows associated with large storm events often result in significant amounts of vegetation debris including trees and limbs which can get blocked, particularly at the Stockton Bridge, further exacerbating flood conditions.
Dam Inundation
Based on the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, there are no levees or dams that would impact the City upon failure.
Tsunami
The General Plan includes policies relative to tsunamis: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, and Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
As shown on GPU EIR Figure 4.7-3, nearly all of Capitola Village is located within the tsunami inundation area, as mapped by California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA). Other areas include a portion of Soquel Creek, from Capitola Beach to approximately one river mile upstream to Highway 1, and a portion of Noble Gulch (about ¼-mile), which flows into Soquel Creek. The Capitola shoreline would also be inundated. However, while the coastal cliffs would block inland flows, substantial erosion would likely occur as the result of a tsunami.
In the event of a tsunami, people or structures within these areas could be exposed to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death due to flooding. The tsunami inundation area, as mapped by Cal EMA, is considered a maximum estimate (i.e., based upon the maximum tsunami run-up), taking into consideration a number of extreme, yet realistic, tsunami sources.
Seiche
The General Plan includes policies relative to seiches: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, and Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
A seiche is an oscillation wave generated in a closed or partially closed body of water, which can be compared to the back-and-forth sloshing in a bath tub. Seiches can be caused by winds, changes in atmospheric pressure, underwater earthquakes, tsunamis, or landslides into the water body. Bodies of water such as bays, harbors, reservoirs, ponds, and swimming ponds can experience seiche waves up to several feet in height during a strong 641
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-59
earthquake. The City is located within an inundation zone of tsunamis generated by earthquakes, as discussed above, and includes large bodies of water, such as Soquel Cove and Soquel Lagoon. Therefore, seiches could result along beach areas and creeks within the City in association with a tsunami event.
Mudflow
The General Plan includes policies relative to mudflow: Policy OSC-8.1 Creek Areas, Policy OSC-8.9 Impervious Surfaces, Action OSC-8.1 Stormwater Infrastructure, Action OSC-8.2 Funding for Stormwater Management, and Action OSC-8.3 Stormwater Management Program. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
Mud and debris flows are mass movements of dirt and debris that occur after intense rainfall, earthquakes, and severe wildfires. The speed of a slide depends on the amount of precipitation, steepness of the slope, and alternate freezing and thawing of the ground. Based on the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, due to steep topography, there is a potential for mudflows to occur below Wharf Road and above Soquel Creek, which could impact the Stockton Avenue Bridge and the Village.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals.
Implementation of the proposed project could result in the placement of housing within a flood hazard area, as well as subject to a tsunami, seiche, or mudflow hazards. Future development within the City could result in the placement of structures in existing FEMA-designated 100-year Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). Municipal Code Chapter 17.50 includes standards for construction in flood hazard zones. Future development within the 100-year flood zone requires the placement of fill to elevate structures above the 100-year floodplain elevation. In order for a project to be considered outside of the floodplain and no longer subject to special flood hazard requirements, the project applicant has to submit an application to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for a Letter of Map Revision – Fill (LOMR-F) after the fill has been placed. After FEMA has revised the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) to show that the project is now outside of the SFHA, the City would no longer be required to apply the minimum National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) floodplain management standards to structures built on the land and the mandatory flood insurance requirements would no longer apply.
Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
E. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN OR SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN? The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (Basin Plan) is the Regional Water Quality Control Board's master water quality control planning document. It designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives for waters of the State, including surface waters and groundwater. It also includes programs of implementation 642
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-60
to achieve water quality objectives. The current Basin Plan consists of the 2019 Basin Plan edition and all of the following amendments approved after March 2019.
The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin Plan2 is the water quality control plan for the geographic area that encompasses all of Santa Cruz, San Benito, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties as well as the southern one-third of Santa Clara County, and small portions of San Mateo, Kern, and Ventura Counties. Included in the region are urban areas such as the Monterey Peninsula and the Santa Barbara coastal plain; prime agricultural lands as the Salinas, Santa Maria, and Lompoc Valleys; National Forest lands, extremely wet areas like the Santa Cruz mountains; and arid areas like the Carrizo Plain. The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses, establishes water quality objectives, and contains implementation programs and policies to achieve those objectives for all waters addressed through the Basin Plan.
In 2014, the Governor signed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) into law and took effect on January 1, 2015, which requires governments and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. SGMA empowers local agencies to form Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage basins sustainably and requires those GSAs to adopt Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) for crucial groundwater basins in California. The SGMA is the first legislation in the state’s history to mandate comprehensive sustainable groundwater resources management.
Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Sustainability Plan3
The Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA or Agency) was formed under SGMA to develop this Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP or Plan) for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Basin). The Basin is classified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as a high priority basin in a state of critical overdraft because of seawater intrusion. Based on this critical overdraft designation, the MGA is required to submit its Board adopted GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020. The MGA initiated development of this GSP in 2017 to guide ongoing management of the Basin with a goal to achieve and maintain groundwater sustainability over a 50-year planning and implementation horizon.
While the SGMA would revolutionize groundwater management in California, MGA member agencies began studying groundwater and managing the Basin long before SGMA was passed into law. The City of Santa Cruz Water Department and Soquel Creek Water District acquired interests in groundwater pumping in the Basin, and together with Santa Cruz County commissioned the first hydrogeologic study of the Basin in the mid-1960s (USGS, 1968).
Seawater intrusion identified in the Basin in the 1980s required water managers to develop an extensive monitoring network of wells to monitor the Basin’s groundwater and to help improve understanding of the Basin, and to implement water conservation and groundwater management strategies to balance groundwater demand with the Basin’s groundwater budget.
A Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) was prepared for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin, and was approved by the California Department of Water Resources in June 2021. The GSP presents detailed 2 Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (ca.gov), accessed August 16, 2023 3 Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Sustainability Plan , https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/service/gspdocument/download/3166, accessed August 16, 2023
643
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-61
information to understand the occurrence of groundwater in the Basin and provides solutions to achieve the Basin’s sustainability goals. The GSP and Executive Summary are organized following DWR’s guidance documents (DWR, 2016):
Executive Summary
Section 1: Introduction to the MGA
Section 2: Plan and Basin Setting
Section 3: Sustainable Management Criteria
Section 4: Projects and Management Actions to Achieve Sustainability Section 5: Plan Implementation, Budget and Schedule
Section 6: References and Technical Studies used to Develop the GSP Projected Future Basin Conditions, Land Use and Water Use The GSP includes projects and management actions to stop the advancement of seawater intrusion and to maintain sustainability under future Basin conditions that will be impacted by changes in land use, water use, and climate. The projected climate change effects include 2.3 feet of sea level rise by 2070 and a warmer and drier climate that has an average temperature increase of 2.4°F, a decrease in precipitation of up to 3.1 inches per year, and a 6% increase in evapotranspiration. Land use patterns are assumed to be unchanged while accommodating projected regional population growth of 4.2% pre-2035 and 2.1% post-2035. Projected nonmunicipal groundwater demand for domestic use assumes pre-drought (2012 – 2015) water demand of 0.35 acre-feet per year per household. Groundwater demand for larger institutions such as camps, retreats, and schools, and agricultural irrigation are assumed to remain the same as historical demands.
Future development projects associated with implementation of the proposed project would be subject to applicable requirements from the GSP and Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency. The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals.
The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or a sustainable groundwater management plan. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 644
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-62
This page intentionally left blank.
645
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-63
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Physically divide an established community?
B. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the land use and planning impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
LAND USE – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
LAND-1: The proposed Plan would not physically divide an established community. Less Than Significant Not Applicable LAND-2: The proposed Plan would not conflict with an
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
LAND-3: The proposed Plan would not conflict with the
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Management
Plan.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
LAND-4: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable development in the
surrounding area, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to land use and planning.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
646
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-64
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT PHYSICALLY DIVIDE AN ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY? The GPU EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development throughout the City.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals nor provide for new land use uses that would physically divide or disrupt established neighborhoods or create physical barriersin Capitola. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DUE TO A CONFLICT
WITH ANY APPLICABLE LAND USE PLAN, POLICY, OR REGULATION ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING OR MITIGATING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT?
The General Plan includes policies relative to conflicts with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect: Policy LU-1.1 Community Character, Policy LU-2.1 Historic Structures, Policy LU-3.3 Infill Development, Policy LU-3.4 Transit and Pedestrian Access, Policy LU-3.7 Regional Outlook, Policy LU-13.4 New Brighton State Beach, Policy LU-13.6 Beach Management, Policy LU-13.7 Beach Structures, and Action LU-14.3 Coastal Recreation. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
The City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs; however, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The 2023-2031 Housing Element enhances the General Plan goals and policies calling for additional housing types and expanding the supply of housing.
The adoption and implementation of the proposed project further enhances the goals, policies, and actions in the General Plan, would not conflict with goals or objectives contained within regional plans, or cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with projectspecific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
647
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-65
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 648
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-66
This page intentionally left blank.
649
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-67
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
B. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 allows environmental issues for which there is no likelihood of significant impact to be “scoped out” and not analyzed further in the EIR. It was determined that the General Plan would not result in significant impacts with respect to Mineral Resources, and as such were not analyzed in the GPU EIR.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AVAILABILITY OF A KNOWN MINERAL RESOURCE THAT WOULD BE OF VALUE TO THE REGION AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE STATE? The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Within the City, there are no known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the State. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts. 650
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-68
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AVAILABILITY OF A LOCALLY-IMPORTANT
MINERAL RESOURCE RECOVERY SITE DELINEATED ON A LOCAL GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN, OR OTHER LAND USE PLAN?
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. There are no known locally important mineral resource recovery sites in the City. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as no impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 651
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-69
4.13 NOISE
Would the project result in:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
B. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the noise impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
NOISE – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
NOISE-1: Construction-related activities resulting from implementation of the proposed Plan would not result in the generation of noise levels in excess of established standards.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
NOISE-2: Construction-related activities resulting from implementation of the proposed Plan could generate or
expose persons or structures to excessive ground-borne
vibration.
Significant Noise 2a
Noise-2b Less Than Significant
NOISE-3: Future noise levels associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan could contribute to an exceedance of the City’s noise standards resulting in
potential noise impacts to sensitive receptors.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
NOISE-4: The Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to noise.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, 652
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-70
and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN GENERATION OF A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY OR
PERMANENT INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT IN EXCESS
OF STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE LOCAL GENERAL PLAN OR NOISE ORDINANCE, OR APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF OTHER AGENCIES?
B. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN GENERATION OF EXCESSIVE GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION OR GROUNDBORNE NOISE LEVELS?
The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to noise levels, and groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels: Policy SN-7.1 Noise Sensitive Land Uses, Policy SN-7.2 Noise Level Standards, Policy SN7.3 Noise Control Ordinance, Policy SN-7.4 Acoustical Analyses, Policy SN-7.5 Rail Service, and Action SN-7.1 Noise Ordinance Effectiveness. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts and less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in Excess of Standards Established in the General Plan, Noise Ordinance, or Applicable Standards. The GPU EIR concluded that construction-related activities resulting from implementation of the General Plan would not result in the generation of noise levels in excess of established standards.
While adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not directly result in the construction of housing, implementation of Housing Element policy would facilitate the construction of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project consistent with adopted land use policy.
Typically, residential uses do not generate high noise levels. However, individual residential development projects may result in the exposure of persons to noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan or Noise Ordinance. Without identifying the location of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project, it is not possible to determine if they would be placed near land uses that would generate noise levels or groundborne vibrations that would exceed acceptable standards.
Future development proposals would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, and mitigation measures. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts. 653
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-71
Ground-Borne Construction Vibration Noise. The GPU EIR concluded that with the imposition of regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measures Noise-2a and Noise-2b, ground-borne construction vibration noise impacts are less than significant.
While adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not directly result in the construction of housing, implementation of Housing Element policy would facilitate the construction of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project consistent with adopted land use policy.
However, individual residential development projects may result in the exposure of persons to ground-borne construction vibration noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan or Noise Ordinance.
Without identifying the location of future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project, it is not possible to determine if they would be placed near land uses that would generate noise levels or groundborne vibrations that would exceed acceptable standards.
Future development proposals would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, and mitigation measures. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN THE VICINITY OF A PRIVATE AIRSTRIP OR AN AIRPORT LAND
USE PLAN OR, WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED, WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC
AIRPORT OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT, WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS?
There are no airports in Capitola. The closest airport is the Watsonville Municipal Airport, a public airport in Watsonville located approximately 8 miles to the southeast of Capitola. Any aircraft overflights do not contribute significantly to the ambient noise environment in the City.
The proposed project involves policy-level documents, and as such, does not include any site-specific development designs or proposals. Adoption and implementation of the proposed project would not expose future residents or workers in the City to substantial sources of airport or heliport of noise in the City. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 654
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-72
This page intentionally left blank.
655
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-73
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the population and housing impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
POPULATION AND HOUSING – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
POP-1: The Plan would not induce substantial unexpected population growth, or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, either directly or indirectly.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
POP-2: The Plan would not displace substantial numbers
of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
POP-3: The proposed Plan would not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
POP-4: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to population and housing.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
656
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-74
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT INDUCE SUBSTANTIAL UNPLANNED POPULATION GROWTH IN AN AREA,
EITHER DIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE, BY PROPOSING NEW HOMES AND BUSINESSES) OR INDIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE, THROUGH EXTENSION OF ROADS OR OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE)? The General Plan includes policies relative to local and regional population growth: Policy LU-1.3 Compatible Development, Policy LU-1.6 Balanced Community, Policy LU-3.3 Infill Development, Policy LU-5.1 Neighborhood Characteristics, Policy LU- 5.2 Development Impacts, and Policy LU-3.7 Regional Outlook. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development throughout the City.
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) is the responsible agency for developing and adopting regional housing and population forecasts for the Counties and Cities of Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz, and provides population projection estimates in five-year increments.
AMBAG developed the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2045 MTP/SCS). Federal and state law requires that AMBAG prepare a long-range transportation plan every four years.
The draft 2045 MTP/SCS was released for public review and comment on November 22, 2021. On June 15, 2022, the AMBAG Board of Directors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy; adopted CEQA Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; made a finding that the SCS achieves the greenhouse gas reduction targets established by the California Air Resources Board; adopted the Final 2022 Regional Growth Forecast; and adopted the Final 2045 MTP/SCS.
AMBAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the Capitola 2023-2031 housing element period is 1,336 housing units.
4 As of 2020, the City of Capitola included a population of 10,108 and 5,554 households. The 2045 MTP/SCS projects a 2040 population of 11,049 and 6,017 households for the City of Capitola. Refer to Table 4.14-1, 2020 and 2040 Population and Household Projections.
4 AMBAG, 2022 Regional Growth Forecasts, Appendix A_2022 RGF (ambag.org) 657
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-75
TABLE 4.14-1
2020 AND 2040 POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS
2020 2040 Change
2020 - 2040
Population 10,108 11,049 941
Households 5,554 6,017 463
Sources:
AMBAG, 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) As previously noted, the 2023-2031 Housing Element projects 1,336 housing units during the eight-year period.
Adoption and implementation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element provides for adequate sites to accommodate the 2023-2031 RHNA number of 1,336 housing units. Assuming 2.125 persons per household, the City’s population could increase by up to 2,832 persons.
AMBAG is responsible for both the developing the Regional Growth Forecast and RHNA, and would be responsible for modifying future population and household growth projections to accommodate the 2023-2031 Housing Element and future housing element RHNA numbers for the City of Capitola. And therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth within the City either directly or indirectly.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, and mitigation measures. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 5 U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Capitola city, California, accessed August 16, 2023 658
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-76
B. WOULD THE PROJECT DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF EXISTING PEOPLE OR HOUSING, NECESSITATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING ELSEWHERE? The 2023-2031 Housing Element sets forth policies and programs that encourage and facilitate housing production, as well as aim to preserve and enhance the existing housing stock. While no new development would be authorized by the adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element, the future development of vacant properties or underutilized properties with existing homes could result in the displacement of existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Displacement would be evaluated, if needed, as part of a future proposal’s development review and environmental impact processes, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce impacts relative to the displacement of people or residential structures.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. This can include, but is not limited to, Municipal Code requirements; General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs, including those identified in the proposed project, and mitigation measures. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 659
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-77
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
1) Fire protection?
2) Police protection?
3) Schools?
4) Parks?
5) Other public facilities?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the public services impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
PUBLIC SERVICES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
SVCS-1: The proposed Plan would not result in the
provision of or need for new or physically altered protection facilities, the construction or operation of which could cause significant environmental impacts.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
SVCS-2: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable development would
result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to fire protection service.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
SVCS-3: The proposed Plan would not result in the need
for construction or expansion of police facilities. Less Than Significant Not Applicable SVCS-4: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable growth, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to law enforcement services.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
SVCS-5: The proposed Plan would not result in the
provision of or need for new or physically altered school facilities, the construction or operation of which could cause significant environmental impacts.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
SVCS-6: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable growth in the SUESD service area, would result in less than significant
cumulative impacts with respect to schools.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
660
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-78
PUBLIC SERVICES – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
SVCS-7: The proposed Plan would not result in the
provision of or need for new or physically altered library facilities.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
SVCS-8: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable development, would
result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to libraries.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PROVISION OF NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES, NEED
FOR NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF
WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN
ACCEPTABLE SERVICE RATIOS, RESPONSE TIMES OR OTHER PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR ANY OF THE PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. FIRE PROTECTION?
2. POLICE PROTECTION?
The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to fire and police protection: Policy SN-3.1 Cooperative Agreements, Policy SN-3.2 Public Education, Policy SN-3.3 City-Owned Space, Policy SN-3.4 Development Review, Policy SN-3.5 Fire Hazard Risk Assessment, Policy SN-3.6 Fire Safety Plans, Policy SN-3.7 District Support, Action SN-3.1 Invasive Species, Action SN-3.2 Sign/Address Marking Visibility, Action SN-3.3 Emergency Access, Policy SN6.1 Police Services, Policy SN-6.2 New Development, Policy SN-6.3 Physical Site Planning, Policy SN-6.4 Lighting Plans, Policy SN-6.5 Bars and Nightclubs, and Policy SN-6.6 Crime Prevention Outreach. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies. 661
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-79
Buildout of the GPU could create an increased demand for fire and police protection services in the Central Fire Protection District (CFPD) and the Capitola Police Department service areas. However, the increase in population, units, and jobs would occur throughout a 20-year period, thereby distributing the increase over multiple years. In addition, the potential for increased service calls distributed over a longer period of time reduces impacts to existing facilities.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element include policies and programs to facilitate the production of future housing development. As such, new housing units associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project could require additional fire and police protection services and facilities for the Central Fire District of Santa Cruz County (CFD) and Capitola Police Department.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. In addition, as part of its annual budget process and periodic review of its contracts with the CFD and the Capitola Police Department, the City evaluates fire and police protection service levels, and adjusts budgets accordingly to meet identified demand and service goals. This process would continue through the course of the proposed project. With continued application of these programs, the City would be able to address anticipated increased service demands. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
3. SCHOOLS?
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts to schools.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs to facilitate the production of future housing development. As such, new housing units associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project could require additional school services and facilities within the Soquel Union Elementary School District (SUESD) and Santa Cruz City Schools (SCCS).
New residents in the future housing developments could place an increased demand on school facilities within SUESD and SCCS. As allowed by State law, the Districts collect fees for new residential construction to help offset the costs of providing additional education facilities and services. Such fees would be paid by developers at the time individual building permits are issued. Pursuant to SB 50, payment of fees to the School Districts is considered 662
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-80
full mitigation for project impacts, including impacts related to the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, or other performance objectives for schools. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
4. PARKS?
Refer to Section 4.16, Recreation.
5. OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES?
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts to libraries.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
The Santa Cruz Public Libraries system consists of 10 branches located at various locations throughout Santa Cruz County. The Capitola Branch Library located at 2005 Wharf Road serves about 9,846 residents in the city of Capitola in Santa Cruz County. The library is a part of Santa Cruz Public Libraries, which maintains over 392,344 volumes and circulates about 2 million items per year, including local history collections and research materials.
It provides in-person tech help, homework help, preschool storytime, Bridge club, Youth chess club, and Health Insurance Counseling for all patrons.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact processes. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 663
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-81
4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the parks and recreation impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
PARKS AND RECREATION – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
PS-1: The proposed Plan would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks and recreational facilities in order to maintain an acceptable ratio of parkland per
thousand residents.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
PS-2: The proposed Plan would not increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur, or be accelerated.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
PS-3: The proposed Plan would not include or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
PS-4: The proposed Plan, in combination with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable growth, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to parks and recreational facilities.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, 664
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-82
and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT INCREASE THE USE OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL PARKS
OR OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SUCH THAT SUBSTANTIAL PHYSICAL DETERIORATION OF THE FACILITY WOULD OCCUR OR BE ACCELERATED?
The GPU EIR The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts to parks and recreation.
Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development, including park and recreation facilities, throughout the City.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs to facilitate the production of future housing development. New residents in future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project could place an increased demand on City park facilities. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact process. Quimby Act park fees paid or other fair share park requirements of new residential developments are used to acquire and/or improve park facilities, which would reduce the impact of additional residents in the City. Potential impacts to recreation facilities associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be mitigated on a project-by-project basis, as applicable, per Municipal Code requirements. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 665
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-83
B. DOES THE PROJECT INCLUDE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OR REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OR
EXPANSION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WHICH MIGHT HAVE AN ADVERSE PHYSICAL EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT?
The proposed project does not include plans for or construction of any recreational facilities. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensure impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 666
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-84
This page intentionally left blank.
667
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-85
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? B. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b)?
C. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? D. Result in inadequate emergency access?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the transportation and traffic impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
TRANS-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
cause intersection operations to degrade to unacceptable LOS E at the Porter Street and Highway 1 northbound
ramps intersection during the AM peak hour in 2035.
Significant TRANS-1 Significant Unavoidable
TRANS-2: The proposed Plan would not result in a change in air traffic patterns including either an increase in traffic levels of a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
TRANS-3: The proposed Plan would not substantially
increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
TRANS-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in inadequate emergency access. Less Than Significant Not Applicable TRANS-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
conflict with adopted policies, plans, or program regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
TRANS-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable project, would result in additional cumulatively considerable impacts.
Significant TRANS 6:
Implement TRANS-1 Significant Unavoidable
Source: Capitola General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (June 2014), Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 668
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-86
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes policies and programs that are applicable City-wide and are designed to facilitate the construction of housing units to meet the City’s share of the regional housing need. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 4, Housing Need and Opportunities identifies potential residential sites and densities, inclusive of recyclable residential land, religious facility sites and State land housing, vacant and non-vacant land, and the Capitola Mall site. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Chapter 5, Housing Plan identifies the Goals, Policies, and Programs and Quantified Objectives that are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans.
The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
A. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT WITH AN APPLICABLE PLAN, ORDINANCE OR POLICY
ADDRESSING THE CIRCULATION, INCLUDING TRANSIT, ROADWAY, BICYCLE, AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES?
The General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions relative to transportation and traffic: Goal MO-1, Policy MO1.1 Responsive Transportation Services, Policy MO-1.2 Reduced Vehicle Trips, Policy MO-1.3 Regional Collaboration, Policy MO-1.4 Highway 1 Capacity, Action MO-1.1 Funding, Action MO-1.2 Regional Plan Implementation, Action MO-1.3, Goal MO-2, Policy MO-2.1 Complete Streets, Policy MO-2.6 Non-Motorized Connectivity, Goal MO-3, Policy MO-3.1 Arterial Streets, Policy MO-3.2 Street Widening, Policy MO-3.3 Level of Service Standard, Policy MO-3.4 Reduced Standards, Policy MO-3.5 Impact Fees, Action MO-3.1 Neighborhood Traffic, Action MO-3.2 Signal Timing, Action MO-3.3 Traffic Monitoring, Action MO-3.4 Impact Fees, Action MO3.5 Financing, Goal MO-4, Action MO-4.1 Bay Avenue Roundabout, Goal MO-6, Policy MO-6.1 Traffic Congestion, Policy MO-6.2 Parking Supply, Policy MO-6.3 Signage, Policy MO-6.4 Balanced Parking Approach, Policy MO-6.5 Transportation Alternatives, Policy MO-6.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections, and Policy MO-6.7 General Environment. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts and significant unavoidable impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development, roads, and transportation systems.
All future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be evaluated, if applicable, for potential conflicts with relevant circulation plans, ordinances, or policies relative to transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and roadway facilities. Thus, it is not anticipated that adoption and implementation of the proposed project would significantly impact the effectiveness or performance of existing pedestrian, bicycle, or multipurpose trail facilities, nor would it limit the accessibility for pedestrians or future cyclists, or their ability to utilize existing facilities.
In addition, there is the potential for future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project at specific locations throughout Capitola to contribute to congestion on roadways and at intersections. The City may also require specific roadway or signal improvements to address impacts directly 669
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-87
attributable to a specific development proposal. In addition, future development would be subject to GPU EIR Mitigation Measures TRANS-1 and TRANS-6, as applicable. These practices would continue as a means of addressing potential traffic concerns associated with individual projects.
Roadway System Level of Service. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact process.
The GPU EIR concluded that despite the imposition of regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measures TRANS1 and TRANS-6, impacts are significant and unavoidable. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as significant and unavoidable impacts.
Transportation and Traffic. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact process.
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts for TRANS-2, TRANS-3, TRANS-4, and TRANS-5. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
B. WOULD THE PROJECT CONFLICT OR BE INCONSISTENT WITH CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.3 SUBDIVISION (B)?
At the time the GPU EIR was certified in certified in 2014, SB 743 was not in place and thus, the GPU EIR did not evaluate this threshold.
The 2018 updates to the CEQA Guidelines included a new threshold requiring a determination of consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 requires an analysis of Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMTs), in accordance with California Senate Bill (SB) 743. Level of Service (LOS) had been used as the basis for determining the significance of traffic impacts as standard practice in CEQA documents for decades. In 2013, SB 743 was passed, which is intended to balance the need for LOS for traffic planning with the need to build infill housing and mixed-use commercial developments within walking distance of mass transit facilities, downtowns, and town centers and to provide greater flexibility to local governments to balance these sometimes-competing needs. At full implementation of SB 743, the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) replaced LOS as the metric against which traffic impacts are evaluated with a metric based on VMTs. The City of Capitola 670
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-88
will implement CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 for applicable development applications submitted after July 1, 2020 to determine whether the development would have a significant transportation and traffic impact.
Public Resources Code Section 21099 defines Transit Priority Areas (TPAs) as an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a Transportation Improvement Program. Public Resources Code Section 21155(b) defines High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs) are defined as areas within one-half mile of a fixed guideway transit stop or a bus transit corridor where buses pick up passengers at a frequency of every 15 minutes or less during peak commuting hours.
All future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be evaluated, if applicable, for VMT impacts and any development-related mitigation measures.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development, roads, and transportation systems. Within the City of Capitola or Santa Cruz County, there are no TPAs/HQTAs.6 There is the potential that
future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be located within ½-mile of the existing or future TPAs/HQTAs with access to Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO), and thus, would have the potential to reduce vehicle miles travelled (VMT).
METRO offers fixed-route and paratransit services (ParaCruz) throughout Santa Cruz County and operates a commuter service via the Highway 17 Express to San Jose Diridon Station. In addition, Santa Cruz METRO offers a microtransit service, Cruz On-Demand, operated by METRO’s trained ParaCruz operators, extending METRO’s service area three quarters of a mile from any of METRO’s fixed bus routes, excluding Highway 17 and the UCSC campus.
METRO currently operates 24 routes. Routes include 4, 10, 15, 18, 19, 20, 22, 35/35A, 40, 41, 42, 55, 66, 68, 69A, 69W, 71, 72/72W, 74S, 75, 79, 91X, WC, and Hwy-17 Express. In addition, METRO provides four Transit Centers:
Santa Cruz METRO Center (Pacific Station): 920 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz, CA Watsonville Transit Center: 475 Rodriguez St., Watsonville, CA Cavallaro Transit Center: 246 Kings Village Road, Scotts Valley, CA (Not Staffed) Capitola Mall Transit Center: 1855 41st Ave., Capitola, CA (Not Staffed) Roadway System Level of Service. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact process.
6 Transit Priority Areas (2021) | Transit Priority Areas (2021) | Metropolitan Transportation Commission (ca.gov), accessed August 16, 2023 671
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-89
The GPU EIR concluded that despite the imposition of regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measures TRANS1 and TRANS-6, impacts are significant and unavoidable. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as significant and unavoidable impacts.
Transportation and Traffic. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or in and of themselves authorize any development within the City. While the City is required by State law to facilitate development commensurate with its allocated share of regional housing needs, no change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
Future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards, along with project-specific conditions and mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce potential impacts required as part of the development review and environmental impact process.
The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts for TRANS-2, TRANS-3, TRANS-4, and TRANS-5. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
C. WOULD THE PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A DESIGN FEATURE (E.G., SHARP CURVES OR DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS) OR INCOMPATIBLE USES (E.G., FARM EQUIPMENT)?
The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to design hazards: Policy MO-2.2 Design Standards, Policy MO-2.3 Community Context, Action MO-2.1 Complete Street Standards, Policy MO-4.2 Standards, Policy MO-4.4 Driveways, Policy MO-4.6 Traffic Calming, Policy MO-8.6 Curb Cuts and Driveways, Action MO-8.4 Intersection Standard, Action MO-8.5 Highway 1 Interchanges, Action MO-9.2 Obstacles and Obstructions. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts a with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development, roads, and transportation systems.
Future development proposals would be evaluated to determine the appropriate land use permit for authorizing its use and the conditions for their establishment and operation. At a minimum, compliance with relevant Municipal Code standards would be required. In addition, future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be subject to review and approval by the City of Capitola Community Development and Public Works Departments. Access to a future development proposal site would be required to comply with all City design standards, which preclude the potential for dangerous conditions.
Also, future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be evaluated to ensure that adequate access and circulation to and within the future development site is provided. Access to the site must comply with all City design standards and would be reviewed by the City of Capitola and the Central Fire District of Santa Cruz County (CFD) to ensure that inadequate design features or incompatible uses do not occur and that they are designed to meet adopted standards. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts. 672
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-90
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard.
D. WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS? The General Plan includes policies and actions relative to emergency access: Action SN-2.2 Transportation Infrastructure, Action SN-3.3 Emergency Access, and Policy MO-2.1 Complete Streets. The GPU EIR concluded less than significant impacts with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, and regulatory requirements.
The City of Capitola has been urbanized for many years with established development, roads, and transportation systems.
No change in the location or nature of allowable development would be authorized by the 2023-2031 Housing Element. However, the 2023-2031 Housing Element does include policies and programs that would facilitate the production of future housing development. The City of Capitola and the Central Fire District of Santa Cruz County (CFD) would review the future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project in order to ensure that they are designed to meet adopted standards and provide adequate emergency access. In addition, roadways and driveways associated with future development proposals associated with implementation of the proposed project would be required to meet CFD emergency access standards, as well as comply with requirements from CFD and Capitola Police Department on a project-by-project basis. Thus, adoption and implementation of the proposed project ensures impacts remain as less than significant impacts.
Conclusion: No New Impact. The changes associated with the proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts in this regard. 673
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-91
4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
New
Mitigation
No New
Impact/
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
A. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
B. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? C. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
D. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
E. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
General Plan Update EIR
The table below summarizes the utilities and service systems impacts and mitigation measures, if applicable.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
WATER
UTIL-1: Buildout of the proposed Plan may result in
insufficient water supplies from existing entitlements and resources in 2035.
Significant None Available Significant Unavoidable
UTIL-2: The proposed Plan would require the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which may cause significant environmental effects.
Significant None Available Significant Unavoidable
UTIL-3: The Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable development, may result in
significant cumulative impacts with respect to water supply.
Significant None Available Significant Unavoidable
SANITARY WASTEWATER (SEWER)
UTIL-4: The proposed Plan would not exceed wastewater
treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
UTIL-5: The proposed Plan would not require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
Less Than Significant Not Applicable
674
Item 8 A.
Addendum to the Capitola General Plan Update EIR
For the 2023-2031 Housing Element
Final | November 2023 4-92
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance With
Mitigation
UTIL-6: The proposed Plan would not result in a
determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.