Santa Cruz City Council
March 22, 2022

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Regular Meeting – March 22, 2022
10:30 A.M. CLOSED SESSION, ZOOM
12:00 P.M. CONSENT, PUBLIC HEARINGS, GENERAL BUSINESS, AND CLOSED SESSION, ZOOM
6:30 P.M. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND GENERAL BUSINESS, ZOOM COVID-19 ANNOUNCEMENT: Due to the Omicron variant, this meeting will be held via teleconference ONLY.

In order to minimize exposure to COVID-19 and to comply with the social distancing suggestion, the meeting may be viewed remotely, using any of the following sources:
 Click on Zoom link (no time delay): https://zoom.us/j/94684401344  Online at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council/council-meetings  Online at Watch – Community Television of Santa Cruz County  Comcast Channel 25
Or: Call any of the numbers below. If one is busy, try the next one.  1-833-548-0276 (Toll Free)
 1-833-548-0282 (Toll Free)
 1-877-853-5247 (Toll Free)
 1-669-900-9128
Enter the meeting ID number: 946 8440 1344
 When prompted for a Participant ID, press #.
 Press *9 on your phone to “raise your hand” when the Mayor calls for public comment.  It will be your turn to speak when the Mayor calls on you. Press *6 to unmute yourself.

The timer will then be set to 2 minutes.

Correspondence to be included in the agenda packet must be received by 5:00 pm on Monday, March 21st.

March 22, 2022 City Council 2
PLEASE NOTE:
 Requests for extra speaking time on items other than Oral Communications must be made by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, March 20th by emailing the Mayor and the City Clerk.

Approval will be confirmed via email.
[email protected] [email protected]
The City of Santa Cruz does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Out of consideration for people with chemical sensitivities we ask that you attend fragrance free. Upon request, the agenda can be provided in a format to accommodate special needs. Additionally, if you wish to attend this public meeting and will require assistance such as an interpreter for American Sign Language, Spanish, or other special equipment, please call the City Clerk’s Department at 420-5030 at least five days in advance so that we can arrange for such special assistance, or email [email protected]. The CalRelay system number: 1-800-735-2922.

Si desea asistir a esta reunión pública y necesita ayuda - como un intérprete de lenguaje de señas americano, español u otro equipo especial - favor de llamar al Departamento de la Secretaría de la Ciudad al 420-5030 al menos cinco días antes para que podamos coordinar dicha asistencia especial o envié un correo electrónico a [email protected]. El número del sistema Cal-Relay es: 1-800-735-2922.

Closed Session
10:30 AM
Closed Session

1. Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95)
1) Claimant: Neil Bernardi-Wright
2) Claimant: Armand Joseph Tiano
Claims against the City of Santa Cruz

2. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) SEIU Temporary Employees
SEIU Service Employees
Mid Managers, OE3
Supervisors, OE3
Fire Management
Fire, IAFF
Police Management
Police Officers Association
Executives
City Negotiator - Lisa Murphy
March 22, 2022 City Council 3
City Council
12:00 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
Presentations

3. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring March 2022 as Red Cross Month

4. Library Mixed-Use Project Update

5. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring March 22, 2022 as Jane Mio Day Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification
Additions and Deletions
City Attorney Report on Closed Session
Council Meeting Calendar

6. The City Council will review the meeting calendar attached to the agenda and revise it as necessary.

March 22, 2022 City Council 4
Council Memberships in City Groups and Outside Agencies

7. The Presiding Officer will provide Councilmembers with the opportunity to update Council on any external committee meetings that occurred since the last Council meeting.

Consent Agenda

8. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire by Sixty (60) Days (CA) Resolution extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire.

9. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with COVID-19 Pandemic by Sixty (60) Days (CA)
Resolution extending by sixty days the Declaration of Emergency in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.

10. Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
Resolution authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

11. Resolution Amending the FY 2022 Budget to Prepare for the Cost of the June 2022 Statewide Primary Election (CC)
Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds to cover the cost of the election to be held on June 7, 2022.

The attachment for the below item was updated.

12. Minutes of the March 8, 2022 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion to approve as submitted.

March 22, 2022 City Council 5
Consent Agenda (continued)

13. U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section, Public Diplomacy Grants Program - Grant Acceptance, Authorization, and Appropriation (CM)
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section, Public Diplomacy Grants Program to complete a year-long academic and cultural Sister Cities exchange program with Sestri Levante, Italy to focus on art, climate change, and tourism.

14. Urban Sustainability Directors Network Emergent Learning Fund Proposal - Grant Acceptance, Authorization, and Appropriation (CM) Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the Urban Sustainability Directors Network Emergent Learning Fund to complete a six-month collaborative regional project entitled Centering Justice: Monterey Bay Climate Response.

15. A Resolution of Support for Workers at Starbucks in Santa Cruz (CN) Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution expressing the Santa Cruz City Council’s support for workers at Starbucks in Santa Cruz who are attempting to form a union, and urging Starbucks to accept card check neutrality or allow these workers to hold a free and fair election so they can vote to form a union.
2) Authorize the Mayor to send a letter on behalf of the City Council to the Starbucks Chief Executive Officer in support of the rights of Starbucks workers to form a union.

16. AB 1690 (Rivas) Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act (CN) Motion to direct the Mayor to send a letter of support urging State Legislators to pass AB 1690, the California Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act.

March 22, 2022 City Council 6
Consent Agenda (continued)

17. City Art of Recovery Design (CARD) Pilot Grant Program Dancing Waters Project (ED)
Motion to approve funding the City Art of Recovery Design (CARD) Pilot Grant Project Dancing Waters in the amount of $117,120 from the Water Percent for Art Fund and authorize the City Manager to execute a Sponsorship Agreement for the project, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

18. Liability Claims Filed Against the City of Santa Cruz (FN) Motion to reject the liability claims of a) Neil Bernardi-Wright, and b) Armand Joseph Tiano, based on staff recommendation.

19. Establishing Juneteenth as a Citywide Holiday (HR)
Resolution declaring Juneteenth (June 19) a holiday for all City employees in the City of Santa Cruz.

20. Encroachment Permit – Accessibility Improvements for 261 Evergreen Street (APN 001-101-06) (PW)
Resolution granting an encroachment permit to Sibley Simon for construction and maintenance of ADA accessible parking, hardscape paths, and curb ramp adjacent to 261 Evergreen Street (APN 001-101- 06).

21. Rising Prices for City Vehicle and Equipment Tires and Fuel – Budget Adjustment (PW)
Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds in the amount of $365,000 to fund rising fuel expenses and tire purchases.

March 22, 2022 City Council 7
Consent Agenda (continued)

22. Resource Recovery Facility Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility Upgrade (c402202) – Advertise for Bids and Award Contract (PW)
Motion to approve the plans and specifications for the Resource Recovery Facility Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility Upgrade (c402202) and authorize staff to advertise for bids and award the contract. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved budget.

23. Library Lane Sewer Improvement Project (c402206) – Notice of Completion (PW)
Motion to accept the work of Precision Grade, Inc. (San Juan Bautista, CA) and authorize the filling of the Notice of Completion for the Library Lane Sewer Improvement Project (c402206).

24. 3rd Quarter FY 2022 Water Department Capital Investment Program Transfer – Budget Adjustment (WT)
Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget and transferring budget appropriations within the Water Department Capital Investment Program (CIP) to update various project budgets with current cost forecasts.

End Consent Agenda
Public Hearings

25. 2022-2023 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Action Plan (ED)
Make initial funding awards for the 2022-2023 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Annual Action Plan for both Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME).

March 22, 2022 City Council 8
Public Hearings (continued)

26. 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-02 Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL) 1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations. 2) Adopt a resolution authorizing and directing the City Manager to submit Ordinance No. 2022-02 and changes to the Downtown Plan as Local Coastal Implementation Plan Amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.

27. Municipal Code Amendments Relating to Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Responding to Modifications Requested by the California Coastal Commission (PL)
Motion to:
1) Adopt resolution acknowledging receipt of the resolution of certification from the California Coastal Commission, including the suggested modifications.
2) Introduce for publication an ordinance amending Chapters 24.04 and

24.12 of the Municipal Code related to small cell wireless telecommunications facilities in response to action by the California Coastal Commission.

General Business

28. Review and Accept the Final Parks and Recreation Department FY 2021 Annual Report (PR)
Review, accept, and provide feedback to staff on the Parks and Recreation Department FY 2021 Annual Report.

March 22, 2022 City Council 9
General Business (continued)

29. Expiration of Statewide Evictions Moratorium – Additional Legal Aid and Support for Tenants Affected by COVID-19 (CM/CA)
Receive a status update on the March 31, 2022 expiration of COVID-19 eviction protections and multi-jurisdictional efforts to provide additional COVID-19-related tenant assistance and direct staff to continue to work with regional partners regarding rental and legal assistance programs and services.

Recess - The City Council will recess to Closed Session.

Closed Session

30. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1))
Don’t Morph the Wharf! v. City of Santa Cruz et al.
(Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. 20CV02731)
March 22, 2022 City Council 10
City Council
6:30 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
Oral Communications Announcement – Community members may address the Council for three minutes or less about any matter not on the agenda. 30 minutes is allocated for Oral Communications. No extra time for groups will be granted.

Oral Communications
General Business

31. Annual Housing Element and General Plan Progress Reports (PL) Accept the 2021 General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports and direct staff to submit the reports to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

March 22, 2022 City Council 11
General Business (continued)

32. Sidewalk Vending Ordinance, Program, and Resource Request (CM) Motion to:
1) Introduce for publication an ordinance repealing Santa Cruz Municipal Code (“SCMC”) Chapter 5.81 (“Vending and Display Devices on City Property”) and adding SCMC Chapter 5.82 (“Sidewalk Vending”); and
2) Adopt a resolution creating a new sidewalk vending permit fee required upon issuance of a sidewalk vending permit; and 3) Adopt a resolution to amend the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds and authorize the City Manager or their designee to complete necessary actions for the resources requested per costs associated with an e-citation platform and devices, permit materials, contract Code Compliance and security staff, and other expenditures; and 4) Direct staff to return to Council with FY 2023 requests, as part of the regular budget and personnel complement change process, to support operational needs for one Senior Code Compliance Specialist, contract Code Compliance staff, contract security staff, and other expenditures.

Adjournment
March 22, 2022 City Council 12

INFORMATION ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS None issued.

MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – MARCH 22, 2022

33. Proclaiming March 7–14, 2022 as “California Arbor Week” and March 10, 2022 as “Arbor Day” and encouraging all citizens to join in recognizing the important work and contributions of the Cabrillo College Horticulture Program and the City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department, and urging students and citizens to plant trees to offset climate change and enhance our local environment and natural world for our present and future generations.

34. Proclaiming March 20, 2022 as “Nowrūz Day” and encouraging all citizens to join in this observance.

35. 3. Proclaiming the month of March 2022 as “Women’s History Month” and calling upon our community and institutions to recognize the incredible contributions that women have made; celebrate the generations of women who have shaped our history, and continue to advance gender equity; and invite all citizens to visit our Santa Cruz Public Libraries and local bookstores to learn more about Women’s History Month events and the important contributions of women in our history.

March 22, 2022 City Council 13
Public Hearing
If, in the future, you wish to challenge in court any of the matters on this agenda for which a public hearing is to be conducted, you may be limited to raising only those issues which you (or someone else) raised orally at the public hearing or in written correspondence received by the City at or before the hearing.

Any person seeking to challenge a City Council decision made as a result of a proceeding in which, by law, a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and the discretion in the determination of facts is vested in the City Council, shall be required to commence that action either 60 days or 90 days following the date on which the decision becomes final as provided in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 Please refer to code of Civil Procedure 1094.6 to determine how to calculate when a decision becomes “final.” The 60-day rule applies to all public hearings conducted pursuant to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, Title 24, Santa Cruz Municipal Code. The 90-day rule applies to all other public hearings.

City Council Agenda Legislative History Addendum
No information was submitted.

City staff is responsible for providing the City Clerk with such documentation and information for the Legislative History Addendum. The information will be on file in the City Clerk’s Department.

The Addendum is a listing of information specific to City Council business, but which does not appear on a Council meeting agenda. Such entities would include, but not be limited to: Court decisions, Coastal Commission Appeals of City Council actions, Closed Session Agreements/Settlements, which are public record, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments, Local Agency Formation Commission.

DOWNTOWN LIBRARY

MIXED-USE P ROJECT
CITY COUNCIL UP DATE March 22, 20 22

4.1 AGENDA
◼ Highlights of Recent Efforts to Date
◼ Update on Sche m atic De sign P rogre ss
◼ Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant Subm ittal ◼ P roje ct Sche dule Update
◼ Next Steps

4.2 HIGHLIGHTS OF RECENT EFFORTS TO DATE
 Council Approve d Update d Conce ptual De sign and Site P rogram m ing  Environm e ntal analysis unde rway
 Arborist Study/ Re port in progre ss
 P hase 1 Cultural Re source s Inve ntory Re port and historical e valuation unde rway  Subm itte d Application for CA Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant

4.3 AGENDA
◼ Highlights of Recent Efforts to Date
◼ Update on Sche m atic De sign P rogre ss
◼ Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant Subm ittal ◼ P roje ct Sche dule Update
◼ Next Steps

4.4 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EVOLUTION

4.5 SCHEMATIC DESIGN P ROGRESS (Drafts )

4.6 SCHEMATIC DESIGN P ROGRESS (Drafts )

4.7 AGENDA
◼ Highlights of Recent Efforts to Date
◼ Update on Sche m atic De sign P rogre ss
◼ Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant Subm ittal ◼ P roje ct Sche dule Update
◼ Next Steps

4.8 Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant
◼ The Budge t Act of 20 21 (SB 129 ) allocate d $4 3 9 m illion in one - tim e funds to the California State Library to addre ss life -safety and critical m ainte nance ne e ds of public library facilitie s throughout California.
◼ Com pe titive Grant P rogram-m axim um grant pe r library facility is $10 M
◼ Re que ste d $10 M in grant-e ligible costs for the Library Mixe d-Use P roje ct
◼ Will he lp fund sustainable fe ature s: gre e n roof, solar pane ls, m ode rnize d HVAC, and acce ssibility fe ature s, am ong othe rs. ◼ For More Inform ation About the Grant P rogram :
https://www.library.ca.gov/grants/infrastructure /

4.9 AGENDA
◼ Highlights of Recent Efforts to Date
◼ Update on Sche m atic De sign P rogre ss
◼ Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant Subm ittal ◼ P roje ct Sche dule Update
◼ Next Steps

4.10 PROJECT SCHEDULE UPDATE

MOVE IN P HASE

2. Com m issioning
3 . Catalogue Move -In

1. P unch List
4 . Grand Ope ning

CONSTRUCTION P HASE

2. Grading and Unde rground Utilitie s
3 . She ll and Core Construction

1. Site Cle aring
4 . Inte riors Construction
5 . Site Work and Landscape

DESIGN & P ERMITTING P HASE
3 . De sign De ve lopm e nt
4 . Construction Docum e nts

2. Sche m atic De sign
5 . Entitle m e nt
6 . P e rm itting

7. Contractor Se le ction
Q4

TEAM BUILDING PHASE

2. AH Developer Selection

3. Master Architect Selection
Q1 Q2

1. Program Delivery Analysis

4. Communications Planning
2020 2021 2022
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2023 2024 2025
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2

1. Concept Design
W e are here, expect ing t o move t o design
development in Q3

4.11 AGENDA
◼ Highlights of Recent Efforts to Date
◼ Update on Sche m atic De sign P rogre ss
◼ Building Forward Library Infrastructure Grant Subm ittal ◼ P roje ct Sche dule Update
◼ Next Steps

4.12 NEXT STEPS
 P roje ct De sign P re -Application to P lanning -Target date 4/1  Continue d Com m unity Outre ach – Sche m atic & De sign De v.  Farm e rs’ Marke t e ngage m e nt- Ongoing
 Update d cost m ode l – Ongoing through Sche m atic De sign  City Council Update 4 /26
 Building Forward Grant Re solution 4 /26
 Full Application to P lanning De pt- Target date 5/23

4.13 DOWNTOWN LIBRARY

MIXED-USE P ROJECT
CITY COUNCIL UP DATE March 22, 20 22

4.14 Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
March 29 3:00 p.m. ‐ 4:00 p.m. Study Session ‐ Open to the Public March 29 4:30 p.m. Council Special Meeting ‐ Open to the Public April 15/16
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
April 19 TBD 5:00 p.m. Special Meeting ‐ Open to the Public TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
May 24 and 25 TBD Budget Hearings
May 30
June 7 TBD 4:30 p.m. Council Special Meeting ‐ Open to the Public TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
July 4
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
September 5
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
September 25/26
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
October 4/5
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
November 11
TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
November 24
November 25
December 18/19
City Council Meeting Calendar for 2022
November 22
City Hall Closure ‐ Thanksgiving Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Day After Thanksgiving Day
June 28
September 13
September 27
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change City Hall Closure ‐ Independence Day
June 14
May 10
Passover (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
April 12
April 26
May 24
City Hall Closure ‐ Memorial Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Labor Day
August 23
July 12 and 26 Meetings Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
August 9
Hanukkah (City observed ‐  sundown to sundown)
Yom Kippur (City observed ‐  sundown to sundown)
Rosh Hashanah (City observed ‐  sundown to sundown)
November 8
October 11
October 25
City Hall Closure ‐ Veteran's Day (observed)

6.1 Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
City Council Meeting Calendar for 2022
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change TBD Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public
TBD Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public
December 25
December 13
December 27 Meeting Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
City Hall Closure ‐ Christmas Day

6.2 Council Membership in City Groups and Outside Agencies (2022) Councilmembers may provide direction, request additional information or that a topic raised be agendized for future Council action. The Presiding Officer may request oral updates from Council Ad Hoc Committees.

City Council Standing Committees Councilmember

Assigned Staff
Community Programs Watkins, Brown, Kalantari-Johnson Tiffany Wise-West Public Safety Watkins, Golder, Cummings Sara De Leon
City Council Ad Hoc Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee Brown, Watkins, Brunner Laura Schmidt Oversized Vehicles Ordinance Ad Hoc Committee Golder, Kalantari-Johnson, Brunner Brian Borguno Charter Amendment Committee Meyers, Golder, Watkins Casey Hemard Health in All Policies Committee Brunner, Kalantari-Johnson, Watkins Tiffany Wise-West External Governmental Agencies/ Intergovernmental
Coordinating Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
(AMBAG)
Cummings, Brown (alternate) Lee Butler
City–Santa Cruz City Schools Committee Watkins, Golder, Kalantari-Johnson Tony Elliot City Select Committee Brunner Matt Huffaker
Library Financing Authority Brunner, Watkins (alternate) Matt Huffaker Homelessness 2x2 Committee Watkins, Brunner Lee Butler
Monterey Bay Air Resources District (City Nominee) Brown Tiffany Wise-West Central Coast Community Energy Policy Board
Central Coast Community Energy Operations Board

Meyers, Brunner (alternate)
Mark Dettle, Tiffany Wise-West (alternate)
Mark Dettle
Santa Cruz County Integrated Waste Management Local
Task Force
Golder, Cummings (alternate)
Bob Nelson, Leslie
O’Malley (staff
alternate)
Santa Cruz County Consolidated Redevelopment
Successor Agency Oversight Board
Meyers Bonnie Lipscomb
Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board (METRO) Meyers, Kalantari-Johnson Claire Gallogly Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation
Commission (RTC)
Brown, Golder (alternate) Nathan Nguyen
Claire Gallogly
(alternate)
Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency Councilmember Meyers, Water Commissioner David Baskin, Water Commissioner Doug Engfer (alternate)
Rosemary Menard

7.1 External Governmental Agencies/ Intergovernmental
Coordinating Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff
Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Water Commissioner Doug Engfer, Former Water Commissioner David Baskin (citizen alternate)
Rosemary Menard
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
(Santa Cruz holds the City Seat through May 2022)
Cummings Matt Huffaker
Joint Powers Authorities/City Groups Staff Appointments Agency Contact Information Santa Cruz County Animal Services
Authority
Laura Schmidt, Bernie Escalante Santa Cruz County Animal Services Authority 2200 7th Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
https://www.scanimalshelter.org/
Santa Cruz Public Libraries Matt Huffaker Santa Cruz Public Libraries 117 Union Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
https://www.santacruzpl.org/
Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 Laura Schmidt Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 495 Upper Park Rd.

Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 471-1000
External Community Organizations Councilmember/Staff Agency Contact Information Area Agency on Aging (AAA) Advisory
Council
Brown, Brunner (Council alternate), Rita
Hester (citizen alternate)
Seniors Council, Clay Kempf
234 Santa Cruz Ave.

Aptos, CA 95003
Phone: (831) 688-0400
Climate Action Task Force Cummings, Dr. Tiffany Wise-West (staff) Dr. Tiffany Wise-West [email protected]
Cowell Working Group Meyers, Tony Elliot (staff) CWG Facilitated by Save the Waves Criminal Justice Council Cummings, Kalantari-Johnson (alternate), Bernie Escalante
Criminal Justice Council of Santa Cruz County
[email protected]
Downtown Management Corporation Meyers, Cummings, Bonnie Lipscomb (staff) Downtown Management Corporation [email protected]
337 Locust Street,
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Santa Cruz County Youth Action Network
Kalantari-Johnson
[email protected]
United Way of Santa Cruz County
4450 Capitola Rd, Ste 106
Capitola, CA 95010
Santa Cruz Community Farmers’ Market Watkins, Brunner (alternate) Bonnie Lipscomb (staff)
Mr. Nesh Dillon Executive Director SCCFM
P.O. Box 8189
Santa Cruz, CA 95061
Visit Santa Cruz County Watkins, Brunner, Bonnie Lipscomb (staff) Visit Santa Cruz County 303 Water Street, Suite 100
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
800-833-3494 or 831-425-1234
Community Action Board (CAB) Kalantari-Johnson, Eve Bertram, UCSC Professor (alternate)
Community Action Board of Santa Cruz
County, Inc.
406 Main St. STE 207
Watsonville, CA 95076
831-763-2147

7.2 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire by Sixty (60) Days (CA) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in Connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire.

BACKGROUND: The CZU August Lightning Complex Fire that began on August 15, 2020, has caused unprecedented damage and destruction in areas of Santa Cruz and San Mateo Counties immediately north of the City of Santa Cruz, and currently constitutes a severe threat to portions of the City and vital City-owned infrastructure in areas of unincorporated Santa Cruz County.

DISCUSSION: Chapter 2.20 of the City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code, at Section 2.20.030, empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity or disaster, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the “earliest practicable time.” During the existence of such emergency, the Director of Emergency Services is also authorized, pursuant to Section 2.20.040(1), to “[m]ake and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency,” also subject to confirmation by the City Council “at the earliest practicable time.” In view of the facts and circumstances described above, on Friday, August 21, 2020, the City Manager declared the existence of a local emergency in the City of Santa Cruz. At its August 25, 2020 regular meeting, the City Council ratified the emergency declaration by Resolution No.

NS-29,704, and the Executive Orders issued pursuant thereto. At its October 27, 2020 regular meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,731 declaring the existence of a State of Emergency in connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire, confirming the proclamation of same dated August 21, 2020 by the Director of Emergency Services, and ratifying Executive Order 2020-19 issued pursuant thereto. At its regular meeting of December 8, 2020, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,750, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days, to February 6, 2021. At its regular meeting of January 26, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,765, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days to March 27, 2021. At its regular meeting of March 9, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,781, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days to May 8, 2021. At its regular meeting of April 27, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29-803, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days to June 26, 2021. At its regular

8.1 meeting of June 22, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,840, further extending the declaration of emergency by another 60 days. At its special meeting of September 21, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,872, further extending the declaration of emergency by another 60 days. At its regular meeting of November 9, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,885, further extending the declaration of emergency by another 60 days. At its regular meeting of December 14, 2021, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,899, further extending the declaration of emergency by another 60 days. At its regular meeting of February 8 2022, the Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29-925, further extending the declaration of emergency by another 60 days.

The attached resolution, if adopted by the City Council, would extend the emergency declaration related to the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire emergency by an additional 60 days, to May 21, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT: Actions taken by the City during a declared emergency are potentially recoverable from Cal OES (California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services) and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). Accordingly, it is recommended that the Council extend the declaration of emergency as provided for herein until it has determined that conditions giving rise to the emergency have been abated.

Prepared By:

Mary-Haley Ousley
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:

Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

8.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ EXTENDING A

LOCAL EMERGENCY DECLARATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE CZU AUGUST

LIGHTNING COMPLEX FIRE
WHEREAS, under Santa Cruz Municipal Code (SCMC) § 2.20.030, the City Manager serves as the Emergency Services Director, and empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity or disaster; and

WHEREAS, in the event of an emergency declaration, as the Emergency Services Director, the City Manager has the authority to take various actions in the City’s interest, including making and issuing “rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency” subject to ratification by the City Council “at the earliest practicable time.” (SCMC § 2.20.040); and WHEREAS, the wildfires known as the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire that began on August 15, 2020 have destroyed structures and threatened numerous residences and acres of valuable wildland and watershed resulting in evacuations and displacement of residents, road closures, areas of isolation, damage to property and utility systems and damage to critical infrastructure and endangered species within unincorporated areas of Northern Santa Cruz County, and currently constitute an imminent threat to portions of the City, as well as vital City infrastructure located outside of City boundaries; and WHEREAS, while the wildfires are contained, as of this date, they have charred tens of thousands of acres in the Counties of Santa Cruz and San Mateo, damaged or destroyed over 900 residences and buildings, and will displace hundreds of residents for several months, if not permanently, many of whom are seeking shelter in the City of Santa Cruz; and WHEREAS, the San Lorenzo River watershed contains significant portions of the area damaged by the wildfires, and the City continues to monitor post-fire hazards and water quality impacts; and
WHEREAS, efforts to assist the affected population and restore the burned area and/or recover from the effects of the wildfire damage, involve assets from Santa Cruz County, City of Santa Cruz, other local governments in Santa Cruz County, and other local governments within California, as well as California State and federal fire and law enforcement assets, the American Red Cross and other volunteer organizations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to his authority as Emergency Services Director, on August 21, 2020, the City Manager declared the existence of a local emergency in light of the foregoing; and

8.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,
2 WHEREAS, at its August 25, 2020 regular meeting the City Council declared a local emergency, and ratified Executive Order No. 2020-17 – Closing All Off-Trail Open Space Areas within Pogonip and Sycamore Grove, by Resolution No. NS-29,704; and WHEREAS, at its October 27, 2020 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.

NS-29,731 declaring the existence of a State of Emergency in connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire, confirming the proclamation of same dated August 21, 2020 by the Director of Emergency Services, and ratifying Executive Order 2020-19 issued pursuant thereto; and
WHEREAS, at its December 8, 2020 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,750, extending the declaration of emergency to February 6, 2021; and WHEREAS, at its January 26, 2021 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.

NS-29,765, extending the declaration of emergency to March 27, 2021; and WHEREAS, at its March 9, 2021 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.

NS-29,781, extending the declaration of emergency to May 8, 2021; and WHEREAS, at its April 27, 2021 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.

NS-29,803, extending the declaration of emergency to June 26, 2021; and WHEREAS, at its June 22, 2021 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.

NS-29,840, extending the declaration of emergency for another 60 days; and WHEREAS, at its September 21, 2021 special meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,872, extending the declaration of emergency for another 60 days; and WHEREAS, at its November 9, 2021 regular meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29, 885, extending the declaration of emergency for another 60 days; and WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2021 regular meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29-899, extending the declaration of emergency for another 60 days; and WHEREAS, at its February 8, 2022 regular meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-925, extending the declaration of emergency for another 60 days; and WHEREAS, although the CZU Lightning Complex fire has been contained, areas of open space, including Pogonip and Sycamore Grove remain in a an extremely dry and fire prone condition, making the risk of wildfire caused by campfires associated with illegal encampments particularly grave; and
WHEREAS, the risk of severe wildfire is further exacerbated by current serious drought conditions and decreasing water supply; and

8.4 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,
3 WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, the City’s emergency response to the CZU Lightning Complex fire will likely be ongoing for several months; and WHEREAS, pursuant to his authority as Emergency Services Director, the City Manager has issued the following executive orders relating to the CZU Lightning Complex Fire emergency:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz (City Council) as follows:

A. That the City Council hereby declares that the local health emergency declaration adopted at its August 25, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,704, and confirmed and readopted at its October 27, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,731, extended an additional 60 days on December 8, 2020 by Resolution No. NS-29,750, January 26, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,765, March 9, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29-781, April 27, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,803, June 22, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,840, and the local health emergency extended an additional 60 days at its special meeting on September 21, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,872, extended an additional 60 days at its regular meeting on November 9, 2021, December 14, 2021, and February 8, 2022 by Resolution Nos. NS29,885, NS-29,899, and NS-29,925 , shall be extended an additional sixty (60) days from its adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630, et seq., by this Resolution; and
B. That, all previously ratified Executive Orders shall remain in force and effect for the duration the emergency, unless sooner rescinded by subsequent City Council action; and PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

8.5 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with COVID-19 Pandemic by Sixty (60) Days (CA)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution extending by sixty days the Declaration of Emergency in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: At its regular meeting of March 10, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,640 declaring a local health emergency in connection with the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Council’s action followed similar actions by California Governor Gavin Newsom on March 4, 2020, and by County of Santa Cruz Health Officer (CHO) Gail Newel on March 6, 2020. On March 16, 2020, the CHO issued a Public Health Order, requiring all Santa Cruz County residents to shelter in place to slow the spread of COVID-19 in the community, and requiring all businesses to cease operations, except for those deemed essential businesses.

On June 15, 2021, as a result of declining positive case counts and hospitalizations, the Governor rescinded a number of restrictions he had instituted to reduce the spread of COVID-19. The Governor did not, however, rescind the proclamation of the State of Emergency he issued on March 4, 2020. Shortly after the Governor rescinded the restrictions, positive cases and hospitalizations began to rise locally and across the state due to the emergence of the highly contagious delta variant. Another COVID-19 variant, known as the omicron variant, emerged in late 2021. Due to being more highly transmissible than the delta variant, the omicron variant quickly became the dominant variant in California and throughout the United States, and resulted in an increase in local COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. Although positive cases and hospitalizations have recently decreased, the nature of the pandemic is unpredictable and transmission rates have the potential to rise quickly. Further, other variants of COVID-19 exist, and it is unknown at this time whether such variants may result in a new surge in COVID-19 cases.

The Council has received updates at its regular meetings related to COVID-19 and has extended the March 10, 2020 declaration of local health emergency at its regular meetings of April 28, 2020, June 23, 2020, August 11, 2020, September 22, 2020, November 10, 2020, December 8, 2020, January 26, 2021, March 9, 2021, April 27, 2021, and June 22, 2021, by adopting Resolution Nos. NS-29,653, NS-29,677, NS-29,695, NS-29,714, NS-29,739, NS-29,749, NS29,766, NS-29,782, NS-29,802, and NS-29,839, at its special meeting of September 21, 2021 by

9.1 adopting Resolution No. NS-29,873, at its regular meetings of November 9, 2021, December 14, 2021, and February 8, 2022 by adopting Resolution Nos. NS-29,884,NS-29,898, and NS-29,924.

DISCUSSION: During a declared emergency the City Manager, acting as the City’s Emergency Services Director is empowered to take various actions in response to the emergency, including making and issuing “rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency” subject to ratification by the City Council “at the earliest practicable time.” The Resolution would extend the emergency declaration by sixty days from the date of its adoption, to May 21, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT: Actions taken by the City during a declared emergency relating to the response and measures taken to slow the spread of the COVID-19 epidemic and mitigate the effects thereof on our community are potentially recoverable from Cal OES (California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services) and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). Accordingly, it is recommended that the Council extend the declaration of emergency as provided for herein until it has determined that conditions giving rise to the emergency have been abated.

Prepared By:

Mary-Haley Ousley
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:

Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

9.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ EXTENDING BY 60 DAYS THE DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY IN CONNECTION WITH THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a state of emergency to exist within the State of California due to the threat posed by COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2020, the County of Santa Cruz Health Officer ("Health Officer"), under her civil authority, declared a Local Health Emergency, finding an imminent and proximate threat to public health and welfare from the introduction of COVID-19 in the County of Santa Cruz; and
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2021, in response to declining COVID-19 case counts and hospitalizations, the Governor lifted a number of restrictions put in place to decrease the spread of COVID-19 during the initial progression of the pandemic, however, the Governor has not rescinded the March 4, 2020 proclamation of a state of emergency within the State of California; and
WHEREAS, despite initial progress made locally and within the state in addressing the pandemic, the emergence of the highly contagious omicron variant caused an increase in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State of California; and WHEREAS, although positive cases and hospitalizations attributable to the highly contagious omicron variant have decreased, the nature of the pandemic is unpredictable and case rates have the potential to rise quickly as the virus evolves; and WHEREAS, in light of the current COVID-19 pandemic, the Santa Cruz City Council declared a local health emergency re COVID-19 by Resolution No. NS-29,640 on March 10, 2020, extended the emergency declaration by Resolution No. NS-29,653 adopted at its regular meeting of April 28, 2020, and further extended the emergency declaration by Resolution Nos. NS-29,677 on June 23, 2020, NS-29,695 on August 11, 2020, NS 29,714 on September 22, 2020, NS-29,739 on November 10, 2020, NS-29,749 on December 8, 2020, NS-29,766, on January 26, 2021, NS29,782, on March 9, 2021, NS-29,802 on April 27, 2021, and NS-29,839 on June 22, 2021, at its special meeting of September 21, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,873, at its regular meeting of November 9, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29,884, and at its regular meeting of December 14, 2021 by Resolution No. NS-29-898, and at its regular meeting of February 8, 2022 by Resolution No.

NS-29,924, extending the Declaration of Emergency for another sixty days.

WHEREAS, under the California Emergency Services Act (Cal. Govt. Code § 8630, et seq.), upon declaration of a local emergency, the City Council must review the need for continuing the emergency declaration at least once every sixty (60) days until it terminates the local emergency; and

9.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,
2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz (City Council) as follows:

A. That the City Council hereby declares that the local health emergency declaration adopted at its March 10, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,640, extended at its April 28, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,653, at its June 23, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,677, at its August 11, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,695, at its September 22, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-19,714, at its November 10, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,739, at its December 8, 2020 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,749, at its January 26, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,766, at its March 9, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,782, at its April 27, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,802, at its June 22, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,839, at its September 21, 2021 special meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,873, at its November 9, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29, 884, at its December 14, 2021 regular meeting by Resolution No.

NS-29,898, and at its February 8, 2022 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-29,924, shall be adopted and extended an additional sixty (60) days pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630, et seq., by this Resolution; and
B. That this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect and shall thereafter terminate on the sixtieth (60th) day after its adoption, unless earlier terminated or further extended by subsequent City Council action.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

9.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

BACKGROUND: On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom issued a proclamation of State of Emergency in response to the developing COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the continued spread of the virus, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 on March 17, 2020, which included a provision authorizing suspensions to the Ralph M. Brown Act’s (“Brown Act”) teleconferencing rules in order to facilitate virtual meetings while public health orders were in place.

On June 11, 2021, the Governor issued Executive Order N-08-21, which provided that the Brown Act teleconferencing suspensions would expire after September 30, 2021. On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361”), an urgency measure taking effect immediately, which amended the Brown Act to allow local legislative bodies to continue using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology provided certain conditions are met.

DISCUSSION: AB 361 allows for teleconferenced meetings during a declared State of Emergency, as defined under the California Emergency Services Act, if one of the following circumstances apply: (1) State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; (2) The legislative body is meeting to determine whether, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or (3) The legislative body has determined that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person presents imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.1 The Governor’s March 4, 2020 proclamation of State of Emergency is still in effect. Measures continue to exist that impose and recommend measures to promote social distancing. The California Department of Public Health (“CDPH”) requires that all individuals wear masks indoors in specific, high-risk settings.2 Further, the CDPH and the Santa Cruz County Health 1 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54953(e)(1)(A)-(C)
2 See CDPH, Guidance for the Use of Face Coverings (Updated February 28, 2022), https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/guidance-for-face-coverings.aspx.

10.1 Officer strongly recommend that all individuals continue to wear masks in indoor public settings.3
Moreover, in recent months, the highly transmissible omicron variant has caused increases in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State. Although positive case rates have recently decreased, the nature of the pandemic is unpredictable and transmission rates have the potential to rise quickly. As such, holding meetings in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees due to the continued spread of COVID-19.

To continue teleconferenced meetings under AB 361, the City Council will need to declare every thirty (30) days that it has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency and either (1) the State of Emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person; or (2) State or local health officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.4
This declaration is needed for any use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361, including for two City meeting models: (1) A City Council hybrid model that uses the City Council Chambers as an in person venue along with teleconference attendance; and (2) Continued use of teleconferencing for City Council and Brown Act City boards, commissions and committees.

At its regular meeting of October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,877, authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue using teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361. At its regular meetings of November 9, 2021, November 23, December 14, 2021, January 11, 2022, February 8, 2022, and March 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-29,886, NS-29,894, NS-29,900, NS-29,915, NS-29,923, and NS29,933, further authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue using teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361.

This Resolution would re-authorize the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue to use teleconferenced meetings for an additional thirty (30) days from the date of its adoption.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Mary-Haley Ousley
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:

Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX
3 See Press Release, Twelve Bay Area Health Officers to Life Most Indoor Mask Mandates on February 16 (Feb. 9, 2022), https://www.santacruzhealth.org/Portals/7/pdfs/Coronavirus/02.09.22%20ABAHO%20Masking_FINAL.pdf. 4 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54953(e)(3).

10.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA AUTHORIZING THE

CONTINUED USE OF TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency, as defined under the California Emergency Services Act, due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, due to the threat of COVID-19, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which suspended certain requirements of Government Code section 54950 et seq., the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”), in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or electronically without a physical meeting place; and
WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which stated that the provision suspending requirements of the Brown Act in Executive Order N-29-20 would remain in effect through September 30, 2021, at which point the suspensions would expire; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361 into law, an urgency measure effective upon adoption, amending the Brown Act to allow legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely during a proclaimed State of Emergency, and either state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, or the legislative body determines that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees;
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29, 877, making its initial finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, November 23, 2021, December 14, 2021, January 11, 2022, February 8, 2022, and March 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos.

NS-29,886, NS-29,894, NS-29,900, NS-29,915, NS-29,923, and NS-29,933, each making a subsequent finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and WHEREAS, as a condition of authorizing the continued use of teleconferenced meetings, the City Council must, every 30 days, reconsider the circumstances of the State of Emergency that exists in the City and the City Council has done so; and WHEREAS, the State of Emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, remains in effect; and

10.3 2
WHEREAS, the California Department of Public Health and the Santa Cruz County Health Officer require that all individuals wear face coverings indoors in specified high-risk settings, and continue to strongly recommend that all individuals wear face coverings in indoor public settings; and
WHEREAS, in recent months, the highly contagious omicron variant has caused an increase in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State of California, and although positive case rates have recently decreased, the nature of the pandemic is unpredictable, and transmission rates have the potential to rise quickly; and WHEREAS, due to the continued impact of COVID-19, the City continues to be concerned about the health and safety of attendees at public meetings should they be held in person and in a shared indoor public meeting space, as such, the City Council desires to take the actions necessary to comply with AB 361 and to continue to hold its meetings remotely.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz (City Council) as follows:

A. The City Council hereby acknowledges that the Governor’s State of Emergency proclamation issued on March 4, 2020 remains in effect; and B. The City Council finds that due to the emergence of the omicron variant and the continued threat of COVID-19, holding in person meetings for the City Council, City Commissions, and City Committees continues to present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

C. The legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including continuing to conduct open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.

D. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) thirty days from the adoption of this Resolution, or (ii) such time the City Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz may continue teleconferencing without compliance with the Brown Act’s prior rules regarding teleconferencing.

10.4 3
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

10.5 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/08/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending the FY 2022 Budget to Prepare for the Cost of the June 2022 Statewide Primary Election (CC)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds to cover the cost of the election to be held on June 7, 2022.

BACKGROUND: On February 22, 2022, Council adopted a resolution calling an election for the purpose of placing a Charter amendment on the June 7, 2022 Statewide Primary Election ballot. The Charter amendment asks voters to weigh in on the City's structure, maintaining the City-Manager form of government, but changing to an at-large, directly elected Mayor and six Council districts.

In addition, on March 8, 2022, Council adopted a resolution calling an election for the purpose of placing a Sales and Use Tax measure on the June 7, 2022 ballot.

DISCUSSION: Ahead of the completion and approval of the FY 2022 budget, funds were not requested by the City Clerk’s division for a June 2022 election. Upon the adoption of the two above resolutions, the City Clerk is requesting to amend the FY 2022 budget to cover the estimated cost of the election.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the election is estimated to be in the range of $109,683 to $182,805 based on figures from the Santa Cruz County Elections Department. This amount fluctuates, based on the number of registered voters at the time of the election and the number of items the City places on the ballot. The City Clerk is requesting the higher estimate.

Prepared By:

Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
Submitted By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

11.1 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
Purpose:

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDENACCOUNTTITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNTTITLE

TOTALEXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTEDBY

DEPARTMENTHEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING

REVIEWED

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
CM/FN Use Only:

Reso #:

BA Ref #:

PROJECT

PROJECT
AMOUNT
AMOUNT
Fiscal Year:

Date:

Council Approval
Administrative Approval

11.2 MINUTES ARE UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED BY COUNCIL
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 8, 2022
10:30 AM
Mayor Brunner opened the City Council Closed Session at 10:30 a.m. in a public meeting via Zoom, for the purpose of announcing the agenda, and receiving public testimony.

Roll Call

Present: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson (via Zoom), Golder (via Zoom), Cummings (via Zoom), Brown (via Zoom), Meyers (via Zoom); Vice Mayor Watkins (via Zoom); Mayor Brunner (via Zoom).

Absent: None.

Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker (via Zoom), Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb (via Zoom), Human Resources Director L.

Murphy (via Zoom), Interim Finance Director B. Magee (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B.

Bush (via Zoom).

Public Comment
Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period at 10:31 a.m. There were no speakers. Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period at 10:33 a.m.

12.1 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5982
Referral to Closed Session

1. City-owned Vacant Parcel (APN 005-048-10) at 915 Cedar Street (ED) MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Meyers, to approve a referral to Closed Session for discussion regarding lease price, terms, or both.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Closed Session

2. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) SEIU Temporary Employees
SEIU Service Employees
Mid Managers, OE3
Supervisors, OE3
Fire Management
Fire, IAFF
Police Management
Police Officers Association
Executives
City Negotiator - Lisa Murphy

3. Real Property Negotiations (Government Code §54956.8) Property: 915 Cedar Street
APN: 005-048-10
Owner: City of Santa Cruz
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and the Glass Jar, Inc.

Under Negotiation: Lease price, terms, or both

12.2 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5983
Closed Session (continued)

4. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1))
City of Arcata, et al. v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-20-585483
At this time, the meeting was closed to the public. (See pages 5985—5986 for a report on Closed Session.)

12.3 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5984
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 8, 2022
11:30 AM
Call to Order – Mayor Brunner called the meeting to order at 11:31 a.m. via Zoom.

Roll Call

Present: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson (via Zoom), Golder (via Zoom), Cummings (via Zoom), Brown (via Zoom), Meyers (via Zoom); Vice Mayor Watkins (via Zoom); Mayor Brunner (via Zoom).

Absent: None.

Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker (via Zoom), Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Director of Public Works M. Dettle (via Zoom), Interim Chief of Police B. Escalante (via Zoom), Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response L. Butler (via Zoom), Interim Finance Director B. Magee (via Zoom), Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb (via Zoom), Director of Information Technology K. Morgan (via Zoom), Human Resources Director L. Murphy (via Zoom), Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot (via Zoom), Interim Fire Chief R. Oatey (via Zoom), Senior Planner S. Neuse (via Zoom), Principal Planner M. VanHua (via Zoom), Homelessness Response Manager L. Imwalle (via Zoom), Deputy City Attorney C. Bronson (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush (via Zoom).

Presentations

5. Downtown Streets Team Presentation
Genevieve Lucas-Conwell, Senior Project Manager of the Downtown Streets Team, gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

12.4 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5985
Presentations (continued)

6. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring March as Women's History Month Mayor Brunner read from a proclamation declaring March as Women’s History Month.

Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification – None.

Additions and Deletions – None.

City Attorney Report on Closed Session
Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) SEIU Temporary Employees
SEIU Service Employees
Mid Managers, OE3
Supervisors, OE3
Fire Management
Fire, IAFF
Police Management
Police Officers Association
Executives
City Negotiator - Lisa Murphy
Council received a status report from the City Negotiator, and took no reportable action.

Real Property Negotiations (Government Code §54956.8)
Property: 915 Cedar Street
APN: 005-048-10
Owner: City of Santa Cruz
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and the Glass Jar, Inc.

Under Negotiation: Lease price, terms, or both
Council received a status report from and gave direction to the City Negotiator, and took no reportable action.

12.5 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5986
City Attorney Report on Closed Session (continued)
Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1))
City of Arcata, et al. v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-20-585483
Council received a report from the City Attorney’s Office and outside special counsel, and took no reportable action.

Council Meeting Calendar

7. The City Council reviewed and did not revise the meeting calendar attached to the agenda.

Consent Agenda
Councilmember Cummings made a comment on item 10.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. There were no speakers. Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved, seconded by Councilmember Meyers, to approve the Consent Agenda.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

8. Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
Resolution No. NS-29,933 was adopted authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

9. Minutes of the February 22, 2022 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.

12.6 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5987
Consent Agenda (continued)

10. Support for California Senate Bill 843 “Taxation: Renters’ Credit” (CN) Motion carried to direct the Mayor to send a letter in support of California Senate Bill 843 “Taxation: Renters’ Credit” to the bill’s author, Senator Steve Glazer, and the members of the Senate Governance and Finance Committee.

11. Wharf Reinforcement Project (45 Municipal Wharf) - Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise for Bids and Award Contract (ED) Motion carried to approve the plans and specifications for the Wharf Reinforcement Project, authorize staff to advertise for bids, and award the contract. Per Resolution No. NS-27,563, the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

The Economic Development Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.

12. Emergency Escalona Drive Culvert Rehabilitation (c401709, c401610) – Authorization to Award (PW)
Motion carried to approve the plans and specifications for the emergency culvert rehabilitation at Escalona Drive and authorize the contract with The Don Chapin Co., Inc. (Salinas, CA), in accordance with Chapter 3.08.160 “Emergency Procurement” of the Municipal Code. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.

13. Central Coast Community Energy Member Agency Planning, Implementation, and Innovation Grant Program – Grant Acceptance, Authorization, and Appropriation (PW)
Resolution No. NS-29,934 was adopted authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds, if awarded, from Central Coast Community Energy Member Agency Planning, Implementation, and Innovation Grant Program for the development of the Master Municipal Transportation and Electrification Plan.

End Consent Agenda

12.7 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5988
Public Hearing

14. Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL)
Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response L. Butler introduced the item and responded to Councilmember questions.

Senior Planner S. Neuse gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Principal Planner M. VanHua responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Unidentified person
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Zennon Ulyate-Crow
Antoine Haddad
Hunter
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Ryan Meckel
Candace Brown
Isadora Alne
Frank
Thairie Richie
Bodie Shargel
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

12.8 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5989
Public Hearing (continued)

14. Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL) (continued) MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Watkins, to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,935 amending the General Plan.  Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,936 amending the Downtown Plan, which will also constitute an amendment to the Local Coastal Program to reflect the elimination of the Small Ownership Unit use and the addition of the new Flexible Density Unit use.
 Introduce for publication Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations.
 Direct staff to submit the final ordinance, if approved, to the Coastal Commission for review, as well as the changes to the Downtown Plan, as changes to the Local Coastal Program.

12.9 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5990
Public Hearing (continued)

14. Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL) (continued) SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,935 amending the General Plan.  Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,936 amending the Downtown Plan, which will also constitute an amendment to the Local Coastal Program to reflect the elimination of the Small Ownership Unit use and the addition of the new Flexible Density Unit use.
 Introduce for publication Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations.
 Direct staff to submit the final ordinance, if approved, to the Coastal Commission for review, as well as the changes to the Downtown Plan, as changes to the Local Coastal Program.
 Prohibit flexible density units in developments with larger, multi-family housing units.

ACTION: The substitute motion failed with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Cummings, Brown.

NOES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

ACTION: The original motion carried with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: Councilmembers Cummings, Brown.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

12.10 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5991
General Business

15. Transportation and Public Works Commission (TPWC) Appointment (CC) City Clerk Administrator B. Bush responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Ryan Meckel
Reggie Meisler
Unidentified person
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Meyers moved, seconded by Councilmember Golder, to extend the application period for this appointment for a minimum of two weeks.

SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to nominate Joy Schendledecker.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings requested to include the action that Council moves forward with the appointment process today.

Councilmember Brown accepted.

ACTION: The substitute motion failed with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Cummings, Brown.

NOES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson stated for the record it’s to allow community members who have interest the opportunity to apply.

Councilmember Meyers stated for the record she simply wants to allow more time.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Meyers requested to amend the original motion to agendize the appointment for the April 12th meeting.

Councilmember Golder accepted.

12.11 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5992
General Business (continued)

15. Transportation and Public Works Commission (TPWC) Appointment (CC) (continued)
ACTION: The original motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Councilmember Cummings stated for the record he would like to ask that there is communications sent out to all Councilmembers so that they can send it out to members of the public so that everybody has an equal opportunity to apply.

16. CORE Investments RFP and Updates on Application Process, Review Panels and Scoring, Award Funding Decisions Process, and Amended Appeal Process (CM) Sustainability and Climate Action Manager T. Wise-West introduced the item.

Randy Morris, Human Services Director with the County of Santa Cruz, gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Reggie Meisler
Serg Kagno
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Golder, to:
 Accept report on the Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Investments Request for Proposals (RFP) amended timelines; review panel process; coordination with funders.
 Direct to staff to return in June 2022 as described.

12.12 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5993
General Business (continued)
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

17. Homelessness Response Quarterly Update (CM/HR)
City Manager M. Huffaker, Homelessness Response Manager L. Imwalle, Deputy City Manager, and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response, and Human Resources Director L. Murphy gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Director of Public Works M. Dettle, Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot, Interim Chief of Police B. Escalante, and Deputy City Attorney C. Bronson responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Unidentified person, Santa Cruz Cares
Brent Adams, The Warming Center
Serg Kagno, Stepping Up Santa Cruz
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Carol Polhamus
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Lynn, Santa Cruz Together
Don Lane
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

At this time, Mayor Brunner heard Oral Communications.

12.13 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5994
General Business (continued)

17.1 Homelessness Response Programming Quarterly Update, Homelessness Response Action Plan, Homelessness Staffing, and Homelessness Response Funding Sources (CM)
MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Meyers, to:
1) Receive updates regarding Council-directed homeless response programs and services including the Camping Services and Standards Ordinance (CSSO) and the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance (OVO).
2) Support the direction of the Homelessness Response Action Plan, acknowledging associated funding requirements and sources, including use of the $14 million from the state for homelessness response. 3) Include under Community Safety in the Action Plan: Work with the County to prioritize and develop a 24/7 non-law enforcement alternative emergency crisis response program and explore federal and state funding opportunities.
4) Return to the Council for final adoption of the Action Plan, by or before the first meeting in May, with information on goals and outcomes for programs and services to determine effectiveness, strategies for targeting and supporting the different homeless populations, and justification for new roles and costs for, including but not limited to, the Community Relations Specialist, Legislation Advocacy, and the Planning Request for Proposal Specialist.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Mayor Brunner requested to amend #3 as follows:

Include under Community Safety in the Action Plan: Work with the County to prioritize and support a 24/7 non-law enforcement alternative emergency crisis response program and explore federal and state funding opportunities.

Councilmembers Cummings and Meyers accepted.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Meyers requested to amend #4 as follows: Return to the Council for final adoption of the Action Plan, by or before the first meeting in May, with a detailed implementation plan including information on goals and outcomes for programs and services including metrics and timeline to determine effectiveness, strategies for targeting and supporting the different homeless populations, and justification for new roles and costs for, including but not limited to, the Community Relations Specialist, Legislation Advocacy, and the Planning Request for Proposal Specialist.

Councilmember Cummings accepted.

12.14 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5995
General Business (continued)

17.1 Homelessness Response Programming Quarterly Update, Homelessness Response Action Plan, Homelessness Staffing, and Homelessness Response Funding Sources (CM) (continued)
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved to adopt the Homelessness Response Action Plan, acknowledging associated funding requirements and sources, including use of the $14 million from the state for homelessness response.

Vice Mayor Watkins withdrew her substitute motion.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Watkins requested to amend item #2 as follows: To adopt the Homelessness Response Action Plan, acknowledging associated funding requirements and sources, including use of the $14 million from the state for homelessness response. Councilmembers Cummings and Meyers accepted.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

17.2 Resolution Amending the City of Santa Cruz Personnel Complement and Classification and Compensation Plans for the City Manager’s Office, Planning and Community Development Department and Police Department to Implement the Homelessness Response Action Plan (HR)
MOTION: Councilmember Meyers moved, seconded by Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, to adopt Resolution No. NS-29,937 amending the Classification and Compensation Plans by administratively implementing staffing to support the City’s new Homelessness Response Action Plan.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

12.15 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5996
General Business (continued)

18. Sidewalk Vending Permit and New Permit Fee, and Conduct, Time, Place, and Manner Ordinance (CM)
This item was continued to the meeting of March 22, 2022, and was not discussed on March 8, 2022.

19. Green Building Education Program Fee Increase (PL)
This item was continued to the meeting of April 12, 2022, and was not discussed on March 8, 2022.

Oral Communications Announcement - The Mayor provided a brief announcement about Oral Communications.

Oral Communications
At 6:32 p.m. Mayor Brunner opened Oral Communications for members of the public who wished to speak regarding items not listed on the City Council agenda.

Jacqueline Tuttle spoke, expressing concern for people waiting for rental relief money from the state when the eviction moratorium ends on March 31st.

Gregory Cole spoke regarding an illegal unit in his home and is suggesting Santa Cruz modify the standards to make it a legal rental unit.

Unidentified person spoke regarding district elections and renters’ credit.

Unidentified person spoke regarding district maps, requesting Council provide feedback to the demographer to redraw the districts.

At 6:44 p.m. Mayor Brunner closed Oral Communications.

At this time, Mayor Brunner returned to Item 17.

12.16 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5997
General Business

20. Resolutions Requesting the Placement of a Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure on the June 2022 California Statewide Primary Election (CN) Mayor Brunner, Vice Mayor Watkins, and Councilmember Brown gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Ron Pomerantz
Barbara Meister
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, to:
1) Accept a report regarding the recent work of the Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee; and
2) Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,938 making emergency findings for placing a general purpose one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax measure on the June 7, 2022 election; and
3) Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,939 requesting that the consolidated June 2022 California Statewide Primary Election include a general purpose one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax measure; and 4) Support the measure for the purpose of authorizing arguments; provide direction regarding the authors; directing the City Attorney to prepare the impartial analysis; and providing direction to the City Manager regarding the preparation of the fiscal analysis, as appropriate. 5) Gather input from Councilmembers to bring back a resolution of intent at the first meeting in April.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson requested to amend #5: Direct the Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee to bring back a resolution of intent at the first meeting in April. Councilmember Cummings accepted.

12.17 March 8, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5998
General Business (continued)

20. Resolutions Requesting the Placement of a Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure on the June 2022 California Statewide Primary Election (CN) (continued) ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Cummings, Brown, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Adjournment - The City Council adjourned at 10:05 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted:

Julia Wood, Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Attest:

Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
Approved:

Sonja Brunner, Mayor

12.18 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/08/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section, Public Diplomacy Grants Program - Grant Acceptance, Authorization and Appropriation (CM)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section, Public Diplomacy Grants Program to complete a year-long academic and cultural sister Cities exchange program with Sestri Levante, Italy to focus on art, climate change and tourism.

BACKGROUND: Climate is one of the major factors in affecting travel motivations and destination choice, and as such the implications of climate change for tourist behavior and demand patterns are significant. Moreover, the topic of climate change impacts and proactive climate adaptation solution planning are often addressed in bureaucratic, technocratic settings, failing to (a) include community members most impacted and (b) make planning processes and solutions generation easy to understand and access.

Santa Cruz and Sestri-Italy both serve as a tourism hotspot for regional, national and global tourism, yet are under extreme threat of climate change related environmental disasters. In both cities, climate change threatens main attractions for tourists - beaches and forests. The tourism industry provides jobs for many local residents, and thus their livelihoods are threatened by climate change. If no adaptation strategies are implemented, both cities’ main coastal tourist attractions, which provide unparalleled ocean and forest recreation, may face increased impacts to these natural assets and the tourism engines they generate. However, there is a lack of information that quantifies the potential impact that climate change may have on tourism demand from the tourist perspective, as well as potential adaptation measures that could counter these impacts leading to changes in tourist visitation behavior.

With the support of the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee, an advisory body to the City, the City has completed many projects, programs and exchanges with Sestri Levante over the past forty years including emerging work in the climate change space.

1. Student Exchange Project, where students are invited to stay with families in Sestri Levante and vice versa;

2. Santa Cruz Sister Cities Hans Christian Andersen Essay competition, part of the Hans Christian Andersen Fables Bay competition held in Sestri Levante;

13.1 3. Development of a Youth Climate Action Platform, a newly created website with an open discussion board developed by students as part of prior student exchanges. The platform goal is to share information on actions and projects to address climate change;

4. An exhibit recently funded by Santa Cruz City Arts Program and Arts Council Santa Cruz County to celebrate Santa Cruz's link with Sestri through a multi-media exhibit combining photos, interviews, and videos (to be exhibited in Sestri Levante in July 2023 and Santa Cruz in September 2023).

5. Numerous prior delegation exchange visits focused on culture, tourism, and economic development.

The U.S. Department of State, U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section Italy invites proposals for programs that strengthen ties between the United States and Italy through cultural and exchange programming that highlight shared values and promote bilateral cooperation. All programs must include a significant American cultural element, such as a connection with American experts, organizations, or institutions in a specific field that will promote an increased understanding of U.S. policy and perspectives. The program will fund projects from $10,000 to $100,000 and that will be executed between summer/fall 2022 and will be completed in 12 months or less. The project team is requesting $92,900 in funding from this opportunity.

Proposals are due on March 31, 2022. The grant opportunity will fund academic, artistic and cultural exchanges as eligible expenses and two of the priority program themes are climate and shared values to promote diversity, key themes staff seek to advance in completing this work.

DISCUSSION: The Sister Cities of Santa Cruz and Sestri Levante and their partner agencies (Santa Cruz Climate Action Program, California State University Monterey Bay, and University of Genoa) seek to bolster connected and coordinated cultural and academic exchange during 2023, engaging sister cities representatives, youth and historically under-represented community members in focused activities centered on the topics of climate change, tourism and art. There are three objectives to the program and activities more fully described in the proposal attached.

Objective 1: Expand cultural exchange and foster existing and new relationships through youth and art focused activities
Objective 2: Establish climate change as an academic exchange topic as it relates to tourism to foster knowledge sharing and advance adaptation solutions.

Objective 3: Connect academic and cultural exchanges in meaningful and accessible ways to bolster tourism, enable further relationship building and catalyze further sister cities exchange planning.

Springboarding off prior efforts across these topics, the impact of these activities will yield important insights into climate change impact characterization and adaptation planning, preventing tourism losses associated with climate change, and will catalyze understanding and action with the broader sister cities communities through accessible exchange opportunities. The tourism study activity specified in the proposal is called out as a priority action in both the City’s Climate Adaptation Plan Update (2018) and the Economic Development Strategy (2021).

The proposed program leverages considerable momentum built over the past 40 years to relaunch and catalyze the Sister Cities relationships in a post-covid era, utilizing traditional methods (in person delegation visits, youth exchanges, receptions, and exhibits) and 21st century methods (e.g., climate science, virtual meetings, virtual reality and gamification). The program methods are designed with equity as a priority through collaboration with frontline community

13.2 groups and draw from best practices in past exchange as well as robust academic methods for survey collection and analysis. The program has the potential to scale to other coastal cities with sister cities exchange programs. The program, will be documented to suit a variety of audiences and is highly replicable at other geographical scales throughout the world.

Through this multi-pronged approach, the proposed program is expected to triangulate to meet the overarching goal and provide meaningful and actionable information that has the potential to (a) engage youth and community members in new information about their hometowns with respect to climate change and build agency in identifying climate adaptation solutions, (b) provide information to decision-and policy-makers to preserve ecotourism and the economic engines they represent for each city, and (c) generate new proposals for further exchange on these important topics.

FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this recommendation will not result in an immediate fiscal impact to the General Fund. The program partners will bring over $85,000 in match funds in the form of in kind labor and materials funded through partner organizations.

Prepared By:

Tiffany Wise-West
Sustainability and Climate
Action Manager
Submitted By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

2. EXHIBIT A - ANNUAL PROGRAM STATEMENT (APS) PROPOSAL FORM.DOCX

13.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ TO TO APPLY FOR, ACCEPT AND EXECUTE A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE U.S.

MISSION ITALY, PUBLIC DIPLOMACY SECTION, PUBLIC DIPLOMACY GRANTS

PROGRAM COMPLETE A YEAR-LONG ACADEMIC AND CULTURAL SISTER CITIES

EXCHANGE PROGRAM WITH SESTRI LEVANTE, ITALY FOCUSING ON ART,

CLIMATE CHANGE AND TOURISM
WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section Public Diplomacy Grants Program invites proposals for programs that strengthen ties between the United States and Italy through cultural and exchange programming that highlight shared values and promote bilateral cooperation; and
WHEREAS, the City’s 2018 Climate Adaptation Plan and 2021 Economic Development Draft Strategy both identify evaluation of climate change’s impact on tourism is a high priority, near-term action; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz desires to pursue a project that would characterize climate change impacts on tourist travel motivations and destination choice, and consequently, the implications of climate change for tourist behavior and demand patterns; WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz desires to continue collaboration with our Sister City Sestri Levante, Italy to foster mutual understanding and exchange on respective climate impacts, solutions and related challenges and opportunities each city faces as coastal tourist destinations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council, of the City of Santa Cruz, hereby:

1. Directs City of Santa Cruz staff to submit the grant proposal package to U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section Public Diplomacy Grants Program to fund the project more particularly described in the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit A for the amount of $92,900.

2. Authorizes the City Manager of the City of Santa Cruz, to apply for, accept, and execute, in the name of the City of Santa Cruz, all necessary applications, contracts and agreements and amendments thereto and appropriate funds from the U.S. Department of State U.S. Mission Italy, Public Diplomacy Section Public Diplomacy Grants Program to implement and carry out the scope of work attached hereto and any project approved through approval of the grant proposal.

13.4 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

13.5 1
Annual Program Statement (APS) Proposal Form.

About your project
Applicant Name: City of Santa Cruz, California
Project Title: Addressing the climate crisis through U.S.-Italy partnerships Requested Budget
Cost Sharing
Program Total (in U.S.

Dollars):
$92,900
$85,000
$177,900
Period of Performance: from October 2022 to September 2023 Primary Location:

Country United States
City/Town Santa Cruz, California
Will your project take place
in additional countries and
cities?
Yes in Sestri Levante, Italy
Priority Program Areas:

Which of the Priority
Program Areas will be
addressed?
Climate: Addressing the climate crisis through U.S.-Italy partnerships Participants and
Audiences:

Describe who the intended
target audiences will be for
the various activity
categories

13.6 2
Project Description
Proposal Summary:

The Sister Cities of Santa Cruz, California and Sestri Levante, Italy and their partner agencies seek to bolster cultural and academic exchange during 2023, engaging sister cities representatives, youth and historically under-represented community members in focused activities centered on the topics of climate change, tourism and art. Launching off from prior activities across these topics, the impact of the proposed activities will yield important insights into climate change impact characterization and adaptation planning, preventing tourism losses associated with climate change, and will catalyze understanding and action within the two sister cities communities through accessible exchange opportunities. The program team will utilize vital local frontline resident (historically marginalized community members who disproportionately suffer the impacts of climate change) expertise and lived experience to supplement best available climate impact modeling expertise to deliver an impactful and meaningful program that will inform both cities’ risk and financial planning, and ultimately contribute to frontline neighborhood agency and resilience building. The program has the potential to scale to other coastal cities with sister cities exchange programs. The program will be documented and presented to a variety of audiences and is highly replicable at other geographical scales throughout the world.

Objective 1: Expand cultural exchange and foster existing and new sister cities relationships through climate change and art focused activities.

Objective 2: Establish climate change as an academic exchange topic as it relates to tourism to foster knowledge sharing and advance adaptation solutions between the two sister cities.

Objective 3: Connect academic and cultural exchanges in meaningful and accessible ways to bolster tourism, enable further relationship building and catalyze future sister cities exchange planning.

Introduction to the Organization or Individual applying:

The City of Santa Cruz is a coastal city, home to the University of California Santa Cruz, nestled on the north side of Monterey Bay. Santa Cruz is a popular tourism destination where tourism accounts for $500 million USD in direct travel expenditures annually. With 4 million visitors and 262 days of sun per year, inland Californians visit coastal Santa Cruz to cool off and other US and international visitors visit to enjoy unparalleled ecotourism. With a friendship established in 1980, Santa Cruz , California and Sestri Levante, Italy, Italy have worked together to create lifelong friendships and bonds. With the support of the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee, an advisory body to the City, the City has completed many projects, programs and exchanges with Sestri Levante over the past forty years. Highlights include

1. Student Exchange Project, where students are invited to stay with families in Sestri Levante and vice versa;

2. Santa Cruz Sister Cities Hans Christian Andersen Essay competition, part of the Hans Christian Andersen Fables Bay competition held in Sestri Levante;

13.7 3

3. Development of a Youth Climate Action Platform, a newly created website with an open discussion board developed by students as part of prior student exchanges. The platform goal is to share information on actions and projects to address climate change;

4. An exhibit recently funded by Santa Cruz City Arts Program and Arts Council Santa Cruz County to celebrate Santa Cruz's link with Sestri through a multi-media exhibit combining photos, interviews, and videos (to be exhibited in Sestri Levante in July 2023 and Santa Cruz in September 2023).

5. Numerous prior delegation exchange visits focused on culture, tourism, and economic development.

The City of Santa Cruz is a recipient of multiple state and federal grants, including for climate change action. Federal US agencies that have funded successful City of Santa Cruz projects and programs across a range of departments including US Department of Homeland Security, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Department of Transportation, US Department of Interior, US Economic Development Agency and the US Department of Energy.

Problem Statement:

Climate is one of the major factors in affecting travel motivations and destination choice, and as such the implications of climate change for tourist behavior and demand patterns are significant. Moreover, the topic of climate change impacts and proactive climate adaptation solution planning are often addressed in bureaucratic, technocratic settings, failing to (a) include community members most impacted and (b) make planning processes and solutions generation easy to understand and access. The aim of this program is to build on prior collaboration to expand and connect academic and arts related activities within exchange visits to address the issues described in this problem statement.

Santa Cruz serves as a tourism hotspot for in-state tourism, national tourism and global tourism, yet is under extreme threat of climate change related environmental disasters. In Santa Cruz, climate change threatens some of the coastal city’s main attractions for tourists - beaches and forests. The tourism industry provides jobs for many local residents, and thus their livelihoods are threatened by climate change. If no adaptation strategies are implemented, the City’s main coastal tourist attractions, which provide unparalleled ocean recreation and beach access to 4 miles of coastline, would be inundated, many as early as 2060.

The City of Santa Cruz is a leader in the coastal climate adaptation community of practice. Over the past 5 years, the City of Santa Cruz has collaboratively worked with community partners and frontline groups to address resilience challenges to the City’s economy, public health and safety, and infrastructure associated with projected coastal flooding due to climate change influenced storms, sea level rise and non-climate influenced tsunamis. The City has experienced combined high tide tsunami events in 2021 and 2014, foreshadowing potential coastal climate change impact projections. The City estimates that property and infrastructure exposed to the impacts projected by the end of the century are valued at over $1 billion USD. With planning and policy documents adopted, the City developed a novel Virtual Reality Sea Level Rise Explorer mobile phone and web based application (https://virtualplanet.tech/santa-cruz ) depicting these impacts and potential solutions through virtual reality renderings to engage its residents and visitors.

However, there is a lack of information that quantifies the potential impact that climate change may have on tourism demand from the tourist perspective, as well as potential adaptation measures that could counter these impacts leading to changes in tourist visitation behavior.

13.8 4
One of the other main attractions for visitors to Santa Cruz is the iconic redwood forests and visitors come for outdoor activities including camping, hiking and mountain biking. Recreation trails to support these activities are within the wildland/urban interface facing elevated risk of wildfires which are predicted to be more frequent and more severe in the future, particularly as California experiences drought conditions. In 2020, 1 mile north of the City, the CZU fire destroyed more than 1,400 homes and businesses. Adding to the devastation, the burn area included much of the county’s most affordable housing and substantial recreation trails. We know very little about how wildfires impact the movement of people away from hazardous air or as a deterrent for tourists. It is not well understood how climate disasters such as wildfires can alter the attractiveness of certain outdoor recreational activities and the revenue they generate in tourism.

Similarly, the Tigullio Gulf in the Eastern Riviera of Liguria (Province of Genoa, NW Italy), which, in addition to Sestri Levante, includes some of the most internationally renowned coastal destinations such as Portofino, Santa Margherita Ligure and Rapallo, is increasingly experiencing the impacts of climate change. The area saw a very early rise of tourism from the second half of the nineteenth century, one of the first cases in Italy, as places like Portofino and Rapallo became very popular destinations of wealthy European visitors, particularly English and German, who took advantage of a very mild climate for winter tourism. Currently, this coastal area is an established summer mass tourism destination, and its economy significantly relies on this sector. In 2019 tourism movement in the area (excluding second homes) was 566,000 arrivals and 1,520,000 visits, respectively about 12% and 10% of Liguria.

In addition to traditional coastal tourism in the Liguria region, in recent years there has been a growth in alternative tourism activities, particularly outdoors, also due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the increasing interest that the public has shown on such outdoors activities. These take place mainly in the immediate inland of the coastal villages, characterized by a developed and well-kept network of trails and minor roads used by hikers, runners and mountain bikers. Alongside climate change, significant landscape modifications are the main reasons for recent destructive weather events. On several occasions in recent years, the area was hit by flash floods, in a general context that saw a rise in hydrogeological events at regional and national level, often with casualties and significant damages. Other extreme events include storms with unprecedented violence, in particular the storm in October 2018 when waves up to 10 meters (33 feet) -high were recorded in the Ligurian Sea. Other effects of climate change include average temperature rise and uneven yearly rainfall distribution, with long dry periods and short and intensively rainy intervals. Particularly in the summer, this situation can lead to drought events and lack of potable water also due to tourist pressure. In addition, the combination of uncontrolled woodland growth due to land abandonment and drought is the main reason for recurring wildfires. Despite these phenomena, there is still little awareness on the effects and impact of climate change by the local and regional governments and among the general public, although some recent measures by the local municipalities and the regional authority, such as the widening of riverbeds, general landscape maintenance, and the improvement of weather alert systems might suggest a change of attitude.

Program Goals and Objectives:

Goal: Between October 2022 and October 2023, the Sister Cities of Santa Cruz and Sestri Levante and their partner agencies will bolster cultural and academic exchange during 2023, engaging sister cities representatives, the public, youth and frontline community members in

13.9 5
focused activities centered on the topics of climate change, tourism and art. These exchanges will also offer opportunities for planning future activities to capitalize on the momentum generated from recent and ongoing exchanges between the two cities The outcome milestones and indicator metrics for each objective are specified in the Program Measurement and Evaluation section of the application.

Objective 1: Expand cultural exchange and foster existing and new sister cities relationships through climate change and art focused activities.

Objective 2: Establish climate change as an academic exchange topic as it relates to tourism to foster knowledge sharing and advance adaptation solutions between the two sister cities.

Objective 3: Connect academic and cultural exchanges in meaningful and accessible ways to bolster tourism, enable further relationship building and catalyze future sister cities exchange planning.

Program Activities:

There are two sets of exchange activities that will be carried out simultaneously in a coordinated and connected fashion to achieve the three program objectives: academic exchange and cultural exchange across the topics of climate change, tourism and art.

Program Planning
The Sister Cities Committee Members (Dr. Ciravolo, Mrs. Tuncer and Mr. Ciotoli, among others) will meet monthly for the duration of the program, regularly in coordination with team members responsible for organizing the academic activities, to plan the delegation visit logistics and cultural activities. The academic collaborators (Drs. Wise-West, Atzori, Mangano and Piana) will conduct a Monthly Virtual Program Team Planning (first Monday of the month 8 am PST/5 pm Italy) for the duration of the program, regularly in coordination with program team members responsible for organizing the cultural activities. Early in the program, each city will recruit frontline community members (e.g., youth, low income, people of color, those living in impacted neighborhoods, etc.) to join the program team as compensated advisors to participate in the planning and conduct of a tourism study.

Local Stakeholder Focus Groups and Interviews
Understanding the reasons that lead tourists to visit Santa Cruz and the Tigullio Gulf (e.g., beaches, moderate temperatures, air quality and redwood forests), or decide not to visit (e.g., wildfires creating poor air quality, flooding, mudslides, and coastal erosion) will rely on information from many different sources. The first task of this activity will involve organizing several focus groups and interviews to gather the perspective of the local stakeholders from both areas on how climate change impacts and adaptation might affect tourist visitation. Local stakeholders that will be engaged in this phase of the activity include current residents, frontline community members, hospitality business owners and managers, non-profit organization managers and leaders, elected government representatives, and managers of government agencies. The focus groups and interviews will be conducted between October and December 2022. The insights gained from the focus groups and interviews will inform the development of the survey to be administered to tourists visiting Santa Cruz and the Tigullio Gulf.

13.10 6
Virtual Youth Climate Action Platform
To generate excitement about the program and its planned activities, and to debut the bilingual Virtual Youth Climate Action Platform, the Sister Cities committees will recruit youth from the 2022 youth exchange participants as well as local environmental clubs to participate in a virtual webinar at a day and time convenient for both cities’ youth. The webinar, co-hosted by the academic and cultural team members, will introduce the program and its team members but focus primarily on demonstrating the Virtual Youth Climate Action Platform, identifying topics of mutual concern to discuss post-webinar via the asynchronous dialog feature. The Platform will also be seeded with discussion topics from the academic collaborators, e.g., links to immersive virtual reality climate change tools (https://virtualplanet.tech/santa-cruz) and games (Mayor of Smogtown (https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2021-net-zero-mayorgame/). Youth will convene again during the planned youth exchanges (planned and funded outside of the scope of this program as a regular activity of the two Sister Cities) and review the Youth Climate Action Platform dialog since the early 2023 webinar.

Santa Cruz Sister Cities Delegation Visit to Sestri Levante In the spring of 2023, a 4-person Delegation (Drs. Wise-West, Civolo, and Atzori, Mrs. Tuncer) will visit Sestri Levante for 6 days to participate in the following activities with their Italian counterparts (Drs. Mangano and Piana and Mr. Ciotolo, one representative to be determined) and the broader Sestri-Levante community.
-Program Launch/Art Exhibit Reception (Sestri Levante City Hall; date/time to be determined), -Future Planning Workshops for both cultural and academic activities in Sestri Levante (Sestri Levante City Hall; date/time to be determined), reviewing the results of the local stakeholders focus groups and interviews and planning the tourism survey activities. - Coastal and forest site visits/walking/biking tours to identify best vantage points for virtual reality renderings and better understand the natural assets of Sestri-Levante that are the subject of the tourism survey.

Team members responsible for the cultural activities from Sister Cities delegation (Dr. Ciravolo, Mrs. Tuncer and Mr. Ciotolo) will also meet with the curator of the Multi-Media Santa Cruz – Sestri Levante Photo Exhibit which will be presented at Sestri Photography Festival (third week in July, 2023). With the curator, the exhibit installation details will be arranged. Exhibit materials will be shipped to Sestri Levante curator in advance of the delegation visit. In June 2023, Youth exchange visits (funded elsewhere as cost share) will take place .

Tourist Surveys
Led by Drs. Atzori, Mangano and Piana, during the summer of 2023, the tourist survey will be administered in both cities at major coastal tourism attraction locations with tourists visiting Santa Cruz and the Tigullio Gulf by youth, students and other frontline groups. Tourists will be presented with hypothetical scenarios of changed climatic conditions. Verbal descriptions and virtual reality images of climate impact scenarios and adaptation measures will be used to ask tourists to imagine (1) what their likely reactions would be in the event of climate change impacts on the destinations’ environmental assets, such as beaches, forests and wildlife and (2) how their reaction might change should adaptation measures be implemented. Dr. Wise-West

13.11 7
will work with Drs. Atzori, Mangano and Piana to produce climate scenario renderings developed with technology partner, Virtual Planet Technologies (VPT), developer of the Santa Cruz Sea Level Rise Explorer Applications VPT has already developed the coastal impact and adaptation renderings for Santa Cruz and will produce 6 additional renderings to support the tourism survey: 1 each forest climate impact and adaptation solution images for Santa Cruz, 1 each coastal flooding impact and adaptation solution images for Sestri-Levante and 1 each forest climate impact and adaptation solution images for Sestri Levante. Surveys with renderings will be designed for ease in viewing through the survey application uploaded to tablets (provided as a cost share) that will be used to administer the survey to the tourists. The survey questions will be purposely developed in a way to reflect the climatic and environmental features of Santa Cruz and the Tigullio Gulf, respectively, as well as the associated climate change impacts and adaptation measures.

The program team members administering the survey will aim to survey 500 tourists in each City and will incentivize participation by offering a $5 gift card to the Santa Cruz Boardwalk (in Santa Cruz) and a free museum ticket to Musel (in Sestri Levante) valued at almost $5. Team members will procure these incentives in advance and offering the incentive has the added benefit of encouraging tourism at both attractions.

Dr. Roberta Atzori will compile the data collected in a database and after completing the data screening and preparation process, both descriptive and inferential analyses will be conducted using statistical software by Dr. Roberta Atzori. Data analysis will include preparing descriptive statistics of subject demographics, respondents’ demographic profiles including age, gender, education, country of residence, and other characteristics. A summary report of data patterns will be prepared in a format accessible by the public by the academic team members collaboratively. It will also include overall program goal and objective indicator metrics and reflections from self evaluation checkpoints after the major program milestones.

The project summaries will be presented at the Delegation Reception in Santa Cruz hosted by the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee and made available to each City’s economic development agency, tourism and conference visitation organizations, frontline community groups, and all program team members.

The final report will become an appendix to the 2023 -2028 Climate Adaptation Plan Update drafted by Dr. Wise-West for the City of Santa Cruz and may be leveraged for presentation in academic and climate practitioner focused fora and publications (outside of the scope of this proposed program). The scalability and replicability of this program activity is a very important factor to consider, as the tourist survey can be adapted and applied in vastly different US and Italian geographies and cultures. The program team will leverage its considerable network of local, regional, state and international collaborators to disseminate the methods and outputs at varying stages of the program to amplify the program’s reach and impact.

Sestri Levante Sister Cities Delegation Visit to Santa Cruz In the fall of 2023, a 4-person Delegation (Drs Mangano and Piana and Mr. Ciotolo, along with one yet to be identified representative, will visit Santa Cruz for 6 days to participate in the following activities with their Santa Cruz counterparts (Drs. Wise-West, Atzori and Ciravolo, Mrs. Tuncer) and the broader Santa Cruz Community.

13.12 8
-Program Reception with Tourism Survey Findings Discussion/Photography Exhibit (Museum of Art and History, Santa Cruz; date/time to be determined) -Program Evaluation Workshops for both cultural and academic activities in Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz City Hall; date/time to be determined)
- Coastal and forest site visits/walking/biking tours to better understand the natural assets of Santa Cruz that are the subject of the tourism survey.

Budget Justification:

Academic Exchange Expenses (500 tourist surveys in each City) Frontline Community Members Compensation to Design + Conduct Survey - Planning Meetings, Training time (2 people each city): 4 people x 40 hours @ $50/hr = $8,000 - Summer 2023 Surveying: 3 days/wk x 3 hr/day x 6 wks x 2 people x 2 cities @ $50/hr = $10,800
Virtual Reality Climate Change Impact and Adaptation Renderings in both Sestri Levante and Santa Cruz:
-Quoted at $5,000 ea x 6 qty = $30,000 total
Survey collection database and analysis software = $3,000 Incentives for tourists to take Surveys: 2 cities x 500 people surveyed per city x $5 credit per person = $5,000 (surveys at major tourist attractions: Santa Cruz Boardwalk and Sestri Levante Musel)
Cultural Exchange Expenses
Delegation and Community Reception in Sestri Levante to launch tourist and climate change survey project and exhibit Sea Walls ocean climate mural artwork - April or May 2023 (Santa Cruz delegation to visit Sestri Levante)
- Space rental = City Hall (free)
- Refreshments = $500
Delegation and Community Reception in Santa Cruz to share findings of tourist and climate change surveys and exhibit artwork from Sestri photography exhibit/festival (Sestri Levante delegation to visit Santa Cruz)
- Space rental = $500
- Refreshments = $500
Translation of Existing Santa Cruz-Sestri Youth Climate Action Platform website into Italian - $2,000
Branded T-shirts, name badges and hats for surveyors and exchange delegations: Quote at $3,200
Curation of Sea Walls ocean climate mural art exhibit in Sestri Levante - $1,000 Printing, mounting supplies, translation of Sea Walls ocean climate mural posters and artist bios - $2,000
Shipment of Sea Walls ocean climate mural art exhibit posters and mounting supplies - $1,000 Shipment of photography and mounting supplies for Sestri Levante photo festival - $1,000 Travel expenses for exchange delegations - 4 delegates each for 2 trips (Santa Cruz→Sestri and Sestri → Santa Cruz)

13.13 9
- Airfare: $1,500 per person x 4 delegates x 2 trips = $12,000 - Accommodations: $250/night x 5 nights x 4 delegates x 2 trips = $10,000 - Surface Transportation (car, uber, train): $300 x 4 delegates x 2 trips = $2,400 - Meals – paid by each person (cost share)
The program team brings over $85,000 USD of in kind labor match to the program as cost sharing as described in the key personnel section of the application.

Project Design and Methods:

The program team members propose multi-pronged activities to achieve the overarching goal bolstering cultural and academic exchange during 2023, engaging sister cities representatives, the public, youth and historically under-represented frontline community members in focused activities centered on the topics of climate change, tourism and art. The program leverages considerable momentum built over the past 40 years to relaunch and catalyze the Sister Cities relationships in a post-covid era, utilizing traditional methods (in person delegation visits, youth exchanges, receptions, and exhibits) and 21st century methods (e.g., climate science, virtual meetings, virtual reality and gamification). The program methods are designed with equity as a priority through collaboration with frontline community groups and draw from best practices in past exchange as well as robust academic methods for survey collection and analysis. Through this multi-pronged approach, the program is expected to triangulate to meet the overarching goal and provide meaningful and actionable information that has the potential to (a) engage youth and community members in new information about their hometowns with respect to climate change and build agency in identifying climate adaptation solutions, (b) provide information to decision- and policy-makers to preserve ecotourism and the economic engines they represent for each city, and (c) generate new proposals for further exchange on these important topics.

Proposed Program Schedule:

October - December 2022
-Monthly Virtual Program Team Planning (first Monday of the month 8 am PST/5 pm Italy) -In person, Local Stakeholder Focus Groups and Interviews to inform Tourism Survey and planning (date and times to be determined)
January / February 2023 - Virtual Youth Climate Action Platform webinar exchange in advance of youth exchange visit (date and time to be determined) January – April/May 2023
-Monthly Virtual Program Team Planning (first Monday of the month 8 am PST/5 pm Italy) -Tourist Survey Development, Data Collection set up
April/May 2023
-Santa Cruz Delegation Visit to Sestri Levante (6 days), including coastal and forest site visits/walking/biking tours
-Program Launch/Art Exhibit Reception (Sestri Levante City Hall; date/time to be determined), -Future Planning Workshop in Sestri Levante (Sestri Levante City Hall; date/time to be determined)
June 2023 Youth exchange visits (funded elsewhere as cost share) June - July 2023 Tourist Survey Administration in both Cities (at Main Beach locations)

13.14 10
July 2023 Multi-Media Santa Cruz – Sestri Levante Photo Exhibit presented at Sestri Photography Festival (third week in July, 2023)
July- August, 2023
Monthly Virtual Program Team Planning (first Monday of the month 8 am PST/5 pm Italy) Tourist Survey Analysis and Summary Documentation Preparation September 2023
Sestri – Levante Delegation Visit to Santa Cruz (6 days), including coastal and forest site visits/walking/biking tours
Tourism Survey Findings Discussion/Photography Exhibit Reception , Evaluation and Future Planning Workshop in Santa Cruz (Seymour Discovery Center, date and time to be determined)
Key Personnel:

Dr. Tiffany Wise-West, P.E. - Dr. Tiffany Wise-West is a licensed professional civil engineer with over 25 years of experience in environmental planning, policy and infrastructure project design and management. Dr. Wise-West obtained her PhD in Environment Studies from the University of California Santa Cruz. She complements her technical skill set with policy, regulatory, and economic expertise in the areas of climate and energy, sustainability, renewable energy microgrid systems, and resilience. Drawing on her interest in innovation and education opportunities, she specializes in collaborating across public, private and academic sectors to deliver award winning and impactful emissions mitigation and climate adaptation initiatives.

Dr. Wise-West has international experience with successful climate change and cultural exchanges through her global adaptation collaboration with the Ocean Climate Platform’s Sea’Ties initiative and the recent planning and featured participation in a delegation to Biarrtiz, France, another Santa Cruz sister city. She was involved in the development of the Sister Cities Youth Climate Action Platform and the Sea Walls mural development. She also has successfully managed several federal and state grants in her role at the City (e.g., funders such as US Dept of Homeland Security, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) with projects being completed on time and on budget. Dr. Wise-West will serve as the program manager, working with academic partners, sister cities representatives, artists and other stakeholders to deliver the outcomes noted and achieve the objectives outlined. Estimated cost sharing for Dr. Wise-West’s time is estimated to be $7,500 (5% of full time equivalent [FTE] workload) over the program duration.

Dr. Roberta Atzori - Dr. Roberta Atzori is an Assistant Professor of sustainable tourism and hospitality management at California State University, Monterey Bay, where she teaches ecotourism management and coastal & ocean hospitality operations. Dr. Atzori obtained her Ph.D. in Hospitality Management at the University of Central Florida, with a dissertation on tourist responses to climate change impacts and adaptation in Florida’s coastal destinations. Her dissertation has been published in the leading academic journals in the field of tourism management and she has been invited to speak at conferences and symposia internationally. She is an Academic Affiliate at the Center for Responsible Travel (CREST) in Washington D.C. and has been the recipient of several research grants aimed at assisting businesses and destinations in the analysis of tourism impacts. Dr. Atzori will be responsible for the design and analysis of the local stakeholders’ focus groups and interviews, and for the tourist survey activities. She

13.15 11
will be devoting an average of 5 hours per week (~12.5% FTE) in support of this program.

Estimated cost-sharing = $18,423
Dr. Stefania Mangano - Dr. Stefania Mangano is Associate Professor of Economic and Political Geography at the University of Genoa, Italy, where she teaches Tourism Geography, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Geography and Political and Economic Geography. Dr.

Mangano obtained her Ph.D. in Geography of Land planning and Environmental Management at the University of Girona (Spain), with a dissertation titled “Tourism in protected natural areas.

Analysis of the objects of tourist consumption and the behaviour of tourists in the natural parks of Liguria.” Dr Mangano published several books in prestigious Italian university publishers, as well as more than 100 academic articles and chapters related to tourism, environment, cultural heritage and governance. She holds several national and international projects on tourism and cultural heritage and she has been invited to speak at conferences and symposia internationally.

She is part of the academic board of some Italian and Spanish academic journals and member of the principal Italian Geography Association. Dr. Mangano will be responsible for the design and analysis of the local stakeholders’ focus groups and interviews, and for the tourist survey activities. She will be devoting an average of 5 hours per week in support of this program.

Estimated cost-sharing = $7,650.

Dr. Pietro Piana - Dr. Pietro Piana - Dr. Pietro Piana is Postdoctoral Fellow in Economic and Political Geography at the University of Genoa (Italy), where he also teaches Human Geography and Geography of Conflicts. In addition, he teaches Coastal and Maritime Tourism at the University of Milano Bicocca. Dr Piana obtained his Ph.D in Human Geography at the University of Nottingham, with a dissertation on landscape changes and topographical art in central and eastern Liguria, including Sestri Levante. His research activity involves the analysis of landscape dynamics in Italian coastal and internal areas in terms of rural depopulation, rewilding processes and tourism development. He has collaborated with several institutions such as Liguria regional authority and natural parks for studies on the relation between landscape and tourism, including the organization of two exhibitions. He has published two books on landscape change in NW Italy, as well as several papers published in international journals. Dr Piana will support the design and analysis of the local stakeholder’s focus groups and interviews, and for the tourist survey activities. He will be devoting an average of 8 hours per week (20% FTE) to support this program. Estimated cost-sharing = $7,000.

Dr. Laura Ciravolo Dr. Laura Ciravolo is the Chair of the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee - Coordination Subcommittee, she has managed the implementation of the Santa Cruz-Sestri Levante Youth Climate Action Website with the support of students from UCSC and SCHS. Dr.

Ciravolo is a CA licensed professional civil engineer with a Ph.D. in Environmental Hydrology from the University of Catania (Italy). With a strong background in projects management, she is currently working at UCSC as a Facility Manager. Dr. Ciravolo will support the project as a mentor for the youth exchange and for the website platform utilization and will facilitate coordination of the exchanges described in the project. Estimated cost-sharing for Dr. Ciravolo’s is $10,000 (or approximately 5% FTE).

Isabelle Giordani Tuncer is a member of the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee and has been chairing the Sestri Levante sub-committee for the last 3 years. Mrs Tuncer has over 20

13.16 12
years of experience in international trade and project management. She first came to the United States as a Fulbright scholar at the University of Texas, School of Law, held positions at the Agricultural Economics Research Institute in Ankara, Turkey and the United Nation Conference on Trade and Development in Geneva, Switzerland. Mrs Tuncer holds a JD from the Université de Droit, d’Economie et des Sciences d’Aix-Marseille, France and an MA in Commercial Diplomacy from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, Monterey, CA.

Isabelle Giordani Tuncer will be responsible for the organization of the events outlined in the proposal. Estimated cost sharing for Isabelle Giordani Tuncer’s time is estimated to be $20,000 (3% of full time equivalent).

Luca Ciotoli is a member of the Sestri Levante City Council. As city councilor, he works in youth and cultural policy in Sestri Levante. For this reason, he has always worked with the Santa Cruz Sister Cities Committee since he became city councilor. In particular, he organized students cultural exchanges, photo exhibitions and several events in Sestri Levante to promote the twinning. Besides his duty as city councilor, he has a degree in Sociology at the University of Trento and is attending the last year of a PhD program in Digital Humanities at the University of Genoa.Luca Ciotoli will be responsible for the organization of the events in Sestri Levante, support the project as a mentor for the youth exchange and for the website platform utilization.

Finally, he will facilitate coordination of the exchanges described in the project. He will be devoting an average of 8 hours per week (20% FTE) to support this program. Estimated costsharing = $7,000.

Program Partners:

Virtual Planet Technologies (VPT; https://virtualplanet.tech/) is the technology partner who will produce high quality virtual reality renderings of coastal and forest climate impacts and adaptation solutions in each city to be used during the tourist surveys. VPT will subcontract to the City of Santa Cruz for $30,000.

Musel is Sestri’s city museum ( https://www.sestri-levante.net/il-musel/) located in downtown Sestri. The project team will purchase 500 tickets at $5/each (total $2,500) to the Museum that the team will distribute to tourists near the primary tourism area in order to incentivize tourists’ participation in the survey.

Santa Cruz Boardwalk is the beachfront amusement park adjacent to Santa Cruz’s Main Beach. The program team will purchase 500 preloaded gift cards with $5 credit (total $2,500) to the Boardwalk that the team will distribute to tourists in order to incentivize tourists’ participation in the survey.
“La Nassa” will assist with recruitment of compensated frontline community members to join planning meetings and conduct tourist surveys in Sestri Levante. “La Nassa” is a local association founded in 2019 to create a network between young people on the Tigullio Gulf.

Community Bridges Nueva Vista Center will assist with recruitment of compensated frontline community members to join planning meetings and conduct tourist surveys in Santa

13.17 13
Cruz, CA. Nueva Vista serves families in the low income, LatinX Beach Flats neighborhood that is situated behind the main tourism area.

Pangea Seed (https://seawalls.org/activation/santa-cruz-usa/) produced public art murals in Santa Cruz that serve as educational tools and conversation-starters, addressing marine environmental issues. Panagea is an art exchange partner; the City will work with Panagea to adapt the murals into a translated art exhibit for exhibition in Sestri Italy.

Visit Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz’s Visitor and Conference Center) will be a recipient of the final summary report
Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History will host the photography exhibit during the Sestri Levante delegation visit and be the site of the reception.

Seymour Discovery Center will host the academic collaborator evaluation workshop during the Sestri Levante delegation visit.

Photography exhibit curator, translation service and shipping vendors to be determined.

Program Media Plan:

Both Cities will draw on their communications managers’ assistance and Sister Cities committees and leverage their extensive social media presence to produce the following media pieces to promote the program. Dr. Wise-West (Santa Cruz) and Mr. Ciotoli (Sestri Levante) will be responsible for ensuring the media plan is implemented. - Social media short campaign (5 post by each delegation during visit, tagging funder and each City)
- Press release (in advance of each delegation’s visit) - Reception with Italian American Club and media invited - Inclusion in Museum / City newsletters
- Academic and regional climate network discussions
Monitoring and Evaluation:

In addition to the outcome milestones and indicator metrics specified, the monitoring and evaluation plan will include self evaluations by the program team after each milestone’s completion to review indicator metrics collected and assess quality, effectiveness and impact of outcomes with an eye toward reporting and future planning refinement. At the conclusion of the year long exchange activities, the program team will also assemble an activity and funding plan for next steps to carry the momentum forward.

Objective 1: Expand cultural exchange and foster existing and new relationships through youth and art focused activities.

13.18 14
- Completion of two sister cities visits by 4 delegates each (one delegation per city) Indicator Metric: Minimum of 4 delegates visit each City (4 funded through proposed program)
- Completion of two delegate/community receptions featuring climate and art Indicator Metric: 2 art exhibit receptions for the public with at least 20 participants in each.

Indicator Metric: QR scan tag accessible short mobile phone survey for participants gauging knowledge building efficacy of climate and art exchange - Completion of a coordinated social media campaign in both cities to highlight the youth and art focused activities
Indicator Metric: A minimum of 5 social media posts by each city promoting climate and art receptions and highlighting other delegation activities, tagging each city and the funder, the US Embassy Italian Mission.

Objective 2: Establish climate change as an academic exchange topic as it relates to tourism to foster knowledge sharing and advance adaptation solutions. - Completion of two frontline community member focus groups to inform tourism survey development, one per City.

Indicator Metric: a minimum of 4 people in each city.
- Completion of two tourism and climate change surveys, one per city.

Indicator Metric: 500 tourist surveys
- Completion of translated survey summaries and presentation for each City reception Indicator Metric: 2 summaries, 2 presentations (1 each for each city) Objective 3: Connect academic and cultural exchanges in meaningful and accessible ways to bolster tourism, enable further relationship building and catalyze further sister cities exchange planning.
- Conduct virtual live and asynchronous youth climate change exchange between cities utilizing existing Youth Climate Action Platform, centering conversation around impacts and solutions.

Indicator Metric: At least 8 youth from each city participates in youth exchange via website
Indicator Metric: Short online survey for youth participants gauging knowledge building efficacy of youth exchange activity
- Install two climate focused, translated art exhibits in free, publicly accessible venues, one from each city exhibited in the other city, featured at exchange receptions but also available for public enjoyment outside of the exchange time periods Indicator Metric: 2 art exhibit receptions for the public with at least 20 participants in each.

13.19 15
- Conduct 3 post event debrief virtual meetings (after youth climate action exchange, after each city’s climate and art reception) among program team members and partners to qualitatively assess effectiveness and impact of events and make adjustments to future planning. The program team member will also conduct one evaluation workshop at the conclusion of the program during the Sestri Levante delegation visit to Santa Cruz.

Future Funding or Sustainability:

The program team has already identified future topics and projects to discuss during the exchange visit planning sessions. For academic exchanges, the teams will explore (1) exporting the Virtual Reality Sea Level Rise Explorer online and mobile phone applications (https://virtualplanet.tech/santa-cruz) to Sestri Levante, (2) adapting the Panagea Sea Walls school curriculum from SC to Sestri and (3) using community-science approaches to coastal change monitoring (e.g., Coast Snap mobile phone crowdsourcing), among other relevant topics that arise over the course of the program. On the cultural exchange side, team members will explore sharing (1) a dedicated logo representing Santa Cruz and Sestri Levante connection has been designed by James Philipps, aka Jimbo, a well known surf artist from Santa Cruz and (2) collaboration on a documentary “Con l’Aiuto di Dio” from FLYING DONKEYS PRODUCTIONS about an old man building a Leudo (the typical Ligurian boat) by himself and a visit from Stefano Quaglierini, a wine evangelist with the largest Instagram following in Italy.

Each Sister Cities committee has a small budget for further planning and will continue to fundraise and provide opportunities for art and youth exchange and maintain the Virtual Youth Climate Action Platform website seeking funding from the City Arts Commission.The academic collaborators will seek funding from their home institutions for next step academic exchanges.

13.20 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Judi Grunstra <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2022 6:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Consent Agenda Item #13
Dear Mayor and Council Members:

In light of city budget woes, I was shocked to read about the money allocated to this program about tourism and climate change, a joint venture between Santa Cruz and our Sister City in Italy.   As I understand the program budget, some people will be paid $50/hour to conduct a survey of visitors.  (Perhaps also to design the survey).  The program seems to provide $12,000 for travel costs (air fare) plus $10,000 lodging, and even T‐Shirts and hats.  As much as I love Italy, how can this expense be justified when you are crying about the "emergency" that is behind a tax increase measure on the ballot?   If I am mistaken that this will come out of the General Fund, even if part of it is "in kind" donations of labor, please forgive me.

But if $85,000 is coming out of the General Fund, rather than matching funds, or money raised by the Sister Cities Committee, please pull this from the Consent Agenda and discuss it, and deny the program.  Do we have to make hard decisions and tighten our belts or don't we????? Thank you.

Judi Grunstra

13.21 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/08/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: Urban Sustainability Directors Network Emergent Learning Fund Proposal - Grant Acceptance, Authorization and Appropriation (CM) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the Urban Sustainability Directors Network Emergent Learning Fund to complete a six month collaborative regional project entitled Centering Justice: Monterey Bay Climate Response.

BACKGROUND: The City and other Monterey Bay agencies are members of the Urban Sustainability Directors Network. Among other many member benefits, USDN offers a new Emergent Learning Fund to support members. It is built for training and problem solving by incentivizing informed, context-dependent local climate work to explore less prescriptive, more multilateral approaches within unique local, metro, and regional contexts.

This new opportunity is designed to better support members by:
• Helping them test and learn how best to center community priorities in the technical and human solutions they use in their climate work.
• Building the hard and soft skill sets needed to cope with uncertainty, so that local solutions can continue to work to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

The quarterly opportunity targets specific, member-identified pain points with small, flexible investments ranging from $5,000 to $15,000 with short (3-6 month) timeframes.

The funding opportunity is timely. The Monterey Bay Area region is experiencing increasing wildfires, catastrophic storm events, extreme heat, and coastal flooding that disproportionately affects the region’s farm, service and tourism workers. In addition, gentrification displacement in our region’s lower-income communities is occurring as higher-income climate refugees move from hotter, drier, more wildfire-prone locations to less expensive communities in the region.

Currently, lower-income communities are excluded from regional climate response solutions due to the lack of collaborative infrastructure existing between justice and environmental organizations. The region has already completed foundation work that can be leveraged to influence the change needed by (1) conducting a survey of justice groups working the region to understand their topical interest and capacity to engage in climate justice work (January 2023), (2) allocation and aggregation of local government funding to hire a regional priority climate project developer and grant writer, (3) equity centered development of USDN member agencies

14.1 climate action plans (in Santa Cruz, Watsonville and Monterey County), and (4) through the Central Coast Climate Collaborative, scoping of JEDI training by justice groups.

DISCUSSION: In order to overcome these challenges and leverage existing work, the project partners developed a scope of work to cultivate relationships and trust within a structured approach to accelerate climate justice work across our three-county region. Taking place between June and October, 2022, the following project deliverables and measures of success are proposed. Progress will be assessed through self-evaluation after each major project milestone and completion of project:
• Engagement of a minimum of 8 compensated justice organizations in project • Completion of Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (JEDI) training by staff in over 50% of the Monterey Bay jurisdictions
• Completion of 1 (1 hour) planning session by justice groups to set agenda for facilitated workplan development sessions
• Completion of 2 (2 hour) facilitated workplan development sessions between justice groups and local climate practitioners
• Deepened connection to regional philanthropic networks • Completion of 2 year workplan/funding strategy for increasing funding and capacity of justice groups
• Completion of Self Evaluation Milestones after 4 activities • Identification of specific next steps and future grants to obtain on local, state and federal scales
Desired Outcomes as indicated from self-evaluations:
• Justice participants indicate an increase in trust and power-sharing in climate planning and funding decisions between justice groups and local climate practitioners • Local government climate practitioners indicate an increase in knowledge of JEDI principles and implementation mechanisms.
• All participants indicate confidence in the process and prospects for big gains in justice focused work in the Monterey Bay.

Through these structured activities, this proposal focuses on increasing the trust, capacity and organization connecting justice and local government climate practitioners, to better direct the flow of resources, accessing future state and federal investments in climate resiliency initiatives and regional climate solutions. As a result, climate work will be more equitable and centered on the needs and concerns of frontline communities, labor and justice groups. The goal for this project is to co-create space for increasing connectivity and alignment within our social justice and environmental worlds and achieve scaled impact as a result.

The Monterey Bay climate practitioners have targeted leveraging the $13,600 grant from USDN and other investments to secure $10M in grant investment for priority climate work over the next 2 years where equity is an expressed priority. Transformative results that could result from this proposal’s funding and completing the activities arising from work plan to be developed include (1) substantial uptake an accessible, locally specific model for JEDI training, (2) on-going antiracism affinity learning circles for JEDI training participants and their organizations, (3) funding dedicated equity staff (e.g., a chief equity officer hired through current fiscal sponsor Santa Cruz County Community Foundation to coordinate with justice groups and/or via a Santa Cruz Gives campaign), and (4) priority access to the Monterey Bay regional climate project developer and

14.2 grant writer collaboratively funded by jurisdictions via fiscal sponsor to gain a substantial chunk of the $10M target climate investment practitioners aim to obtain.

FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this recommendation will not result in an immediate fiscal impact to the General Fund. The program partners will bring substantial match funds in the form of in kind labor funded through partner organizations.

Prepared By:

Tiffany Wise-West
Sustainability and Climate
Action Manager
Submitted By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

2. PROPOSAL.DOCX

14.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ TO APPLY FOR, ACCEPT AND

EXECUTE A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK TO COMPLETE A REGIONAL PROJECT ENTITLED CENTERING JUSTICE:

MONTEREY BAY CLIMATE RESPONSE
WHEREAS, the City is a member of the Urban Sustainability Director Network and as such is eligible for its 2022 Emergent Learning Fund.

WHEREAS, the USDN Emergent Learning Fund’s aim is to support members for training and problem solving by incentivizing informed, context-dependent local climate work to explore less prescriptive, more multilateral approaches within unique local, metro, and regional contexts.

WHEREAS, the City, with other USDN member agencies, the City of Watsonville and County of Monterey Bay, will partner with regional justice groups to leverage prior foundational climate equity work to co-create a climate justice workplan that will bring capacity and resources to justice groups and center resilience for frontline communities in the Monterey Bay.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council, of the City of Santa Cruz, hereby:

Directs City of Santa Cruz staff to submit the grant proposal to USDN to fund the project more particularly described in the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit A for the amount of $13,600.

Authorizes the City Manager of the City of Santa Cruz, to apply for, accept, and execute, in the name of the City of Santa Cruz all necessary applications, contracts and agreements and amendments thereto and appropriate funds USDN to implement and carry out the scope of work attached hereto and any project approved through approval of the grant proposal.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

14.4 1
Emergent Learning Proposal Form

1. Project type. Member-to-Community

2. Project focus. Capacity Building

3. Project title. Centering Justice: Monterey Bay Climate Response

4. Project purpose. The Centering Justice in Monterey Bay Area Climate Response project will co-create a vibrant climate justice network serving the northern Central Coast of California to rapidly scale up capacity and investment in work at the nexus of climate and justice.

5. Amount requested. $14,800

6. Project timeline. May 1, 2022 - October 15, 2022 (6 months)

7. Visualization of impact summary.

Launching from foundational work completed over the past 3 years, this project entails 4 specific foci to increase the trust, capacity and organizational connecting Monterey Bay justice organizations and climate practitioners: training, empowering leadership, co-creating scaling strategies and evaluating our work. As a result, Monterey Bay climate work will be (1) more equitable and centered on the needs and concerns of frontline communities, labor and justice groups and (2) primed for rapid scale up. Our dream goal for this project is to co-create space for increasing connectivity and alignment within our social justice and climate practitioner networks and achieve scaled impact as a result. While next steps will be defined together through co-creation of a work plan, it is envisioned that several transformative activities could result from this proposal’s funding: (1) on-going anti-racism affinity learning circles for potential future justice, equity, diversity and inclusion (JEDI) training, (2) strategies to scale up dedicated regional climate equity staff capacity, and (3) expanded access to state and federal funding for equity focused climate investments. With Monterey Bay climate practitioners targeting securing a minimum of $10M in federal grants over the next 2 years to support mutual climate priorities and dedicating resources to be successful, equity must be front and center. With these aims in mind, this proposal is key to providing the structure needed and will have a high return on investment. Its ambition is also of keen interest to our colleagues across the Central Coast and beyond. With the support of the Central Coast Climate Collaborative (4C), the Monterey Bay climate practitioners and justice organizations will build upon an approach that our South County peers undertook. We will share how we have built on their and our early successes to rapidly scale up our climate justice work.

8. Lead USDN member.

Dr. Tiffany Wise-West, Sustainability and Climate Action Manager City of Santa Cruz, CA [email protected], 831.420.5433

9. Other participants.

Alex Yasbek, City of Watsonville, California, Climate Action Manager, USDN Member and core local government climate practitioner team + participant; brings deep commitment to equity and knowledge of decarbonization priorities; will receive training, deepen relationships with justice groups, and cocreated workplan for going forward

14.5 Urban Sustainability Directors Network
2022 Emergent Learning Fund Request for Proposals
2 Ashley Paulsworth, Monterey County, California, Sustainability Manager, USDN Member and core local government climate practitioner team + participant; will receive training, deepen relationships with justice groups, and co-created workplan for going forwa Michelle Gabrieloff-Parish, Corinne Van Hook-Turner, Sarah Quiroga, Climate Innovations; Session planning, convening, facilitation and evaluation: brings expertise in climate justice facilitation, network mapping, planning, convening and evaluation; will receive additional experience and data to build future work upon
Ana Rosa Rizo-Centino and other members, Central Coast Climate Justice Network; Peer advisors on best practices for strengthening relationships across the region; advise on session planning, convening and facilitation and workplan based on South Central Coast experience; will receive additional experience and bridge existing north and south central coast climate justice networks. As an independent contractor Ana Rosa Rizo-Centino will deliver JEDI training.

Nancy Faulstich and Natalie Olivas, Regeneración Pajaro Valley Climate Action, Watsonville; Climate Justice organization confirmed participant: brings deep localized climate justice knowledge and connections; will receive prioritized attention and focus on funding and capacity building Ray Cancino, Community Bridges; Climate Justice organization confirmed participant: brings deep localized climate justice knowledge and connections; will receive prioritized attention and focus on funding and capacity building
Kirsten Liske and Mariana Ivanko, Ecology Action; non-profit climate practitioner participants, guest participants: bring experience in bridging climate justice and local government climate practitioners and implementing equity-based climate programming; will receive training and information to tailor future funding proposals to improve equity outcomes.

Rachel Couch and Teresa Romero, Central Coast Climate Collaborative (4C) Steering Committee; Project observers, guest participants: bring deep climate justice practitioner experience from sovereign tribal and state government to grassroots level; will receive information to connect north and south climate justice networks and better focus future central coastwide planning to achieve improved equity outcomes.

Kevin Heuer, Community Foundation of Santa Cruz County Rise Together Initiative lead staff; guest participant; brings deep knowledge of equity focused philanthropy and funding strategy; will receive information on priorities and needs of climate justice groups to tailor future funding opportunities

10. Root cause design.

This project will create tangible benefits for low-income predominantly Mexican-heritage communities in Monterey Bay who have historically been underrepresented and under-funded in climate adaptation and mitigation planning. The largely rural tri-county Monterey Bay region of 710,000 is home to thousands of low-income farm and tourism workers comprising communities that are 82% Latinx, with typical annual earnings of $21,665 for people in these industries. Our region’s farm, service and tourism workers are already being disproportionately impacted by the compounding climate-related threats of wildfires, catastrophic storm events, extreme heat that shuts down farm operations and tourism, and coastal flooding, plus disproportionate COVID impacts. Similarly, many frontline community members in the

14.6 Urban Sustainability Directors Network
2022 Emergent Learning Fund Request for Proposals
3 Monterey Bay area live within the coastal flooding and sea level rise hazard zones and are already marginalized people of color with low incomes, low home ownership and high energy burden. Making ends meet is of chief concern when confronted with climate response and climate investments for a just transition. Through a January 2022 survey of over 60 justice groups serving these frontline community members in the Monterey Bay, local government climate practitioners confirmed that justice groups do not currently have the resources or capacity to engage with these issues but are eager to do so.

Empowering these groups to co-lead collaboration between local governments and frontline community groups is greatly needed at this time.

The existential threat of climate change to human health and life offers an opportunity for transformative social change while averting worse-case-scenario projections. We hypothesize that prioritizing immediate investments and long-term planning will help to reverse the disproportionate negative social and environmental burdens carried by the most historically under-invested and disenfranchised communities, including low-income and communities of color. Justice organizations in our region are stepping up their community response, as are climate organizations, to address the multiple crises of our day. Few bridges exist across these sector lines in our region and collaborative infrastructure is lacking.

Some climate practitioners that want to include justice partners in grant efforts lack the trustful relationships and many justice partners lack the capacity to do so. This project aims to begin to create a safe, productive meeting ground where (1) we can connect and build trusting, authentic relationships between these worlds and (2) all parties see the full breadth of community needs more deeply, work together to address structural racism and white supremacy, and align efforts to build more scaled, powerful, diverse responses for our region to achieve emissions reductions and resources.

11. Influencing change.

Currently, lower-income communities are excluded from regional climate response solutions due to the lack of collaborative infrastructure existing between justice organizations and climate practitioners. The region has already completed foundational work to have a cursory understanding of what frontline groups and justice organizations care about right now with respect to climate issues. Because of these insights, we are able to tailor this proposal and the funded activities to rapidly address these concerns while continuing the slow and deliberative trust building necessary for sustained and impactful change we are all seeking.

Prior work to establish these needs and priorities includes: (1) Regeneración’s survey (2018) identified environmental concerns and gauged respondents support for initiatives from a predominantly Spanish speaking set of participants who typically have not participated in community surveys, (2) 4C survey by Ana Rosa Rizo-Centino to gauge central coast equity knowledge, training needs and advise strategic planning (August 2021), (3) completion of 4C strategic visioning process with equity focus (December 2021), (4) climate practitioners’ survey of Monterey Bay justice groups working to understand their topical interests and capacity to engage in climate justice work (January 2022), (5) allocation and aggregation of local government funding to hire a regional priority climate project developer and grant writer (February, 2022), (6) equity centered development of USDN member agencies’ 2nd generation climate action plans (Santa Cruz, Watsonville and Monterey County).

14.7 Urban Sustainability Directors Network
2022 Emergent Learning Fund Request for Proposals
4 The team will engage directly with leaders of the Central Coast Climate Justice Network (CCCJN) in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties to follow a successful trust and movement building model they have piloted that has achieved transformative results. 4C will observe this process.

12. Focus on partnership.

Our approach centers strategically enrolled leaders from very diverse organizations: from justice to environmental groups, grassroots to state agencies, different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, and deeply experienced in justice-movement building to those new to the field. Each leader has demonstrated skill sets and commitment to collaborative efforts and equity in the region as demonstrated by their strategic plans, projects or missions. These leaders are also all leaders in their own networks and have the ability to enroll and influence the broader justice sector in solutions co-generated in the setting of this project. The project will also provide leadership development opportunities by engaging directly in local place-based intersectional work efforts for younger and newer leaders. By providing compensation for justice groups we can support deeper participation.

13. Multi-pronged approach.

Through cultivating relationships and trust within a structured format we will gain alignment across our three-county region and catalyze vibrant a climate justice network that builds capacity and resources for social justice organizations and climate practitioners, connecting to the south Central Coast network.

Climate practitioners are ready to allow justice groups to lead and adapt the proposed framework as needed. We will employ conscious strategies to maximize our impact in our 4 foci: training, empowering leadership, co-creating scaling strategies and evaluating our work.

1. 100% of grant funds go to justice groups and justice leader consultants. City of Santa Cruz is providing project manager and grant administrator as an in kind labor match. Dr. Wise-West will contract with groups identified, help recruit justice groups’ participation. We will:
 Compensate Ana Rosa Rizo-Centino to JEDI train Monterey Bay climate practitioners  Compensate justice groups to design, facilitate and participate in work sessions.  Compensate the CCCJN to advise on intra-regional collaboration opportunities, co-create a high level work plan and evaluate project efforts.
 Compensate the Climate Innovation team to capacity-build a local facilitator, structure work sessions and produce a co-created high level work plan.

2. We will minimize time and cost associated with travel by meeting virtually.

3. We will structure listening time and trust-building activities into planning sessions

4. We share the priority of expanding capacity and funding for justice groups, leveraging other foundational work and infrastructure in place to define critical next step outcomes.

5. We will conduct self-evaluation after each project milestone to course correct and provide an opportunity to evaluate progress toward success.

14. Defining and measuring success.

Progress on the following measures of success will be assessed by the session facilitators leading participants through self-evaluation after each major project milestone and at completion of project:

1. Participation of at least 50% of local governments in Monterey Bay to complete JEDI training.

14.8 Urban Sustainability Directors Network
2022 Emergent Learning Fund Request for Proposals
5 2. Engagement of a minimum of 8 compensated justice organizations in project

3. Completion of 1 (1 hour) planning session between consultant leaders and justice groups to set agenda for facilitated work plan development sessions

4. Completion of 1 (2 hour ) facilitated trust and relationship building session between justice groups and local climate practitioners

5. Completion of 1 (2 hour) facilitated work plan development session between justice groups and local climate practitioners

6. Completion of a high level 2-year work plan and funding strategy for increasing resources and capacity of justice groups

7. Completion of Self Evaluation Milestones after activities.

Desired Outcomes as indicated from self-evaluations:

1. Justice participants indicate an increase in trust and power-sharing in climate planning and funding decisions between justice groups and local climate practitioners

2. Local government climate practitioners indicate an increase in knowledge of JEDI principles and implementation mechanisms.

3. All participants indicate confidence in the process and prospects for big gains in justice focused work in the Monterey Bay.

15. Project plan.
# Activity Deliverable Due Date
1 Activity 1: Training - Contract with Ana Rosa Rizo-Centino to provide preparatory JEDI training for Monterey Bay climate practitioners.

Conduct post activity self-evaluation.

Deliverable 1:

JEDI training
summary
Date: July 15, 2022
2 Activity 2: Empowering leadership - Contract with Central Coast Climate Justice Network and Climate Innovation to advise, design work sessions, convene and facilitate and execute an evaluation strategy.

Conduct a 1 hour paid interview/listening session with 8 justice organizations to incorporate their insights into finalizing the work plan development session agendas and evaluation plan. Coordinate with local government practitioners to set schedule and logistics.

Deliverable 2:

Network map,
Session
Agendas and
Facilitation,
and Evaluation
Plan
Date: Aug 15, 2022

3. Activity 3: Co-Creating Scaling Strategies - Plan and conduct two 2-hour work sessions with local government climate practitioners and compensated justice groups, with guests from economic and philanthropic organizations to deepen trust and relationships and develop workplan and funding strategy. Conduct post-activity selfevaluation.

Deliverable 3:

Network map,
Work Sessions,
Work Plan/
Funding
Strategy
Date: Sept 15,
2022

4. Activity 4: Evaluate our Work - CCJN/CI Conduct post-project selfevaluation and prepare evaluation report on progress toward measures of success and desired outcomes. Complete other grant requirements.

Deliverable 4:

Evaluation
summary
Date: Oct 15, 2022
Budget. The budget for this project in total is $24,240.00. As described in accompanying budget spreadsheet, the project team brings in kind labor and cash match valued at $9,440 with the remainder, $14,800, requested in grant funding.

14.9 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: A Resolution of Support for Workers at Starbucks in Santa Cruz (CN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution expressing the Santa Cruz City Council’s support for workers at Starbucks in Santa Cruz who are attempting to form a union, and urging Starbucks to accept card check neutrality or allow these workers to hold a free and fair election so they can vote to form a union. 2) Authorize the Mayor to send a letter on behalf of the City Council to the Starbucks Chief Executive Officer in support of the rights of Starbucks workers to form a union.

BACKGROUND: In January of 2022, baristas working at the Starbucks located at Ocean and Water Streets and on Mission Street in the City of Santa Cruz filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board to organize into a union, Starbucks Workers United; becoming the first stores in California to do so. The workers have asked for support from elected officials to urge that Starbucks allow their workers to freely decide “without any interference, threats, or intimidation” whether to form a union and bargain collectively with the company's management.

A solid majority of workers at the Starbucks stores on Ocean Street and Mission Street in the City of Santa Cruz have signed union authorization cards, and are demanding stronger protections against COVID-19, safer staffing levels, sufficient security and PPE, affordable healthcare coverage, wages that reward experience and seniority, and more respectful and equitable treatment from management. The poor working conditions baristas say they have long experienced has been exacerbated by pressures due to COVID-19, as workers say they were pressured to come to work even when they were sick. When workers have raised concerns, they were not adequately addressed through the channels available to them.

In response to the national campaign to organize the union, Starbucks Workers United, the company's management has engaged in what workers characterize as “union busting”, including disciplining and firing identified union leaders at multiple stores and utilizing the National Labor Relations Board as an arena to fight union recognition.

DISCUSSION: Council is being asked to support the request of workers at Starbucks locations in the City of Santa Cruz, and nationally, to approve the draft resolution which supports their rights of to form a union and calls on the company’s executives to immediately respect the will

15.1 of these workers and allow them to hold a free and fair election so they can vote to form their union.

In addition, approval of this item would also authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the Starbucks CEO in support of the rights of workers to form their union.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Submitted By:

Sandy Brown
Councilmember
Submitted By:

Justin Cummings
Councilmember
Submitted By:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

2. LETTER FROM MAYOR.DOCX

15.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR WORKERS AT STARBUCKS IN SANTA CRUZ WHO ARE

ATTEMPTING TO FORM A UNION, AND URGING STARBUCKS TO ACCEPT CARD

CHECK NEUTRALITY
WHEREAS, union representation data has shown important benefits for workers, particularly for people of color, including better pay, benefits, working conditions, and job security. The Union Members - 2020 report released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on January 22, 2021 found that in 2020 “[n]onunion workers had median weekly earnings that were 84 percent of earnings for workers who were union members”; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2021, Gallup reported 68% of adults in the U.S. support labor unions, the highest approval rate since 1965, and 77% of young adults (18-34 year olds) support unions; and
WHEREAS, on October 28, 2021, Starbucks issued a press release claiming, “Record Q4 and Full Year Fiscal 2021 Results,” and “Consolidated net revenues of $29.1 billion increased 24% (21% on a 52-week basis) from the prior year”; and
WHEREAS, in December 2021, workers employed at two Starbucks locations in Buffalo, NY, successfully voted to unionize into Starbucks Workers United, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and are currently fighting for a first contract; and WHEREAS, workers at over one hundred Starbucks locations throughout the United States have announced their intention to form a union; and
WHEREAS, it has been reported that Starbucks executives have opposed the unionization of their workforce by employing tactics that workers have described as “union busting”, including closing stores and firing workers identified as union leaders; and WHEREAS, on October 29, 2021, CNBC reported that the National Labor Relations Board ruled in favor of Starbucks Workers United, when Starbucks attempted to prohibit individual stores from holding unionization votes; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz, as an employer, has long-standing policies of card check neutrality, recognizing a union when the majority of a workforce signs union cards, and committing to allow the City’s employees to discuss unionization free from threats, intimidation, anti-union propaganda, anti-union meetings, and lawsuits; and WHEREAS, in January of 2022, baristas working at the Starbucks located at Ocean and Water Streets and on Mission Street in the City of Santa Cruz have filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board to organize into the union, Starbuck Workers United, and have requested support from elected officials to urge that Starbucks allow let their workers to freely decide

15.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,XXX
2 “without any interference, threats, or intimidation” whether to form a union and bargain collectively with the company's management.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ THAT:
1) The Santa Cruz City Council supports Starbucks employees who are organizing to form a union in Santa Cruz, and
2) The Santa Cruz City Council supports workers in their efforts to organize into unions to collectively fight for better wages, benefits, and working conditions in their workplace.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

15.4 Letter of Support:

Kevin R. Johnson, President and CEO – Starbucks
2401 Utah Avenue
South Seattle, WA. 98134
March 22, 2022
In January, in the City of Santa Cruz, baristas working at Starbucks located at Ocean, Water and Mission Streets, filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board to organize into the union, Starbuck Workers United, and have requested support from their elected officials.

The Santa Cruz City Council, noting that the City of Santa Cruz practices union-friendly policies in employment matters, urges Starbucks to do the same and allow their workforce to discuss unionization free from threats, intimidation, and interference.

We support their efforts to assure fair labor practices and workplace democracy. If Starbucks workers in Santa Cruz unionize, the Santa Cruz City Council urges Starbucks to bargain a fair contract such that the workers can have a good standard of living and benefits, based on the area’s high cost of living and affordable housing crisis, and to consider the company’s wealth extended to the frontline service workers, baristas and supervisors not just the top executives and shareholders.

Sincerely,
Sonja Brunner
Mayor

15.5 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 9:48 AM
To: City Council
Subject: 3.22.22 Council Consent Agenda Item # 15 Starbucks Union Support

3.22.22 Council Consent Agenda Item # 15 Starbucks Union Support Dear Council,
As to Item #15, I can only remind you again, the rights of workers NOT to form or join a union is EQUAL to those who do wish to do so.

The government then in support of equal rights should always stay out of it. Always, but you never do.

This is also a privately held corporation, in a free market, who provided new jobs, including construction, additional new taxes, where none had been there before, added convenience I'm sure to the government employees seeking refreshments near the county center, so Starbucks is not the "BAD GUY". There are no bad guys, only private labor and management seeking solutions which again YOU SHOULD STAY OUT OF.

I see more and more inappropriate leftist collectivist measures supported by the Mayor, how unfortunate.

Garrett Philipp - Westside.

15.6 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/11/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: AB 1690 (Rivas) Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act (CN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to direct the Mayor to send a letter of support urging State Legislators to pass AB 1690, the California Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act.

BACKGROUND: In April 2021, the Santa Cruz City Council adopted a resolution recognizing tobacco waste as a public health and environmental threat. Our city of Santa Cruz, California is home to environmentally sensitive habitats like the Monterey Bay Sanctuary, and every effort should be made to continue to protect the natural environment from toxic harms. Promoting health and wellness in our environment and protecting public health is a top priority in our policies.

DISCUSSION: AB 1690: Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act will transition California away from unnecessary, polluting, non-health protective single-use smoking products by phasing out the sale of single-use, non-rechargeable vaping devices and cigarette/cigar “filters.” AB 1690 will be a needed contribution to reduce smoking waste pollution. The bill will help California move away from single-use smoking products that have absolutely no public health benefits, only damaging and toxic pollution affects. Cigarette butts are the number one item found on California beaches and roadways, and account for 34% of the litter collected in our beautiful state, yet data shows that less than 9% of Californians smoke. Most single use cigarette filters are made of a plastic called cellulose acetate. 75% of smokers report disposing of them on the ground or out of a car window. Single use plastic filters persist in the environment for decades, and break down into microplastics that accumulate, causing both biological and environmental harm. Our treasured beaches, oceans, rivers, sea life, wildlife, birds, dogs, plants and humans are irreversibly harmed by these single use smoking waste products.

AB 1690 will help to protect both the health of our environment and California residents’ health.

It will also save taxpayer money currently used for cigarette litter clean up.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

16.1 Submitted By:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
Submitted By:

Justin Cummings
Councilmember
Submitted By:

Martine Watkins
Vice Mayor
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LETTER OF SUPPORT.DOCX

16.2 March 16, 2022
Assemblymember Mark Stone
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0029
Dear Members of the California State Legislature:

The City Council of Santa Cruz, California respectfully urges your AYE vote on AB 1690.

We are proud to support Assembly Bill 1690 by Assembly member Luz Rivas (D-San Fernando Valley): Smoking Waste Pollution Prevention Act.

In April 2021, we adopted a Resolution of the City of Santa Cruz recognizing tobacco waste as a public health and environmental threat. Our city of Santa Cruz, California is home to environmentally sensitive habitats like the Monterey Bay Sanctuary. Promoting the health and wellness in our environment and protecting public health are top priorities for community action and public policy.

AB 1690 will be a needed contribution to the prevention of smoking waste pollution, and will help California move away from single-use smoking products that have absolutely no public health benefits, only damaging and toxic pollution affects. Cigarette butts are the number one item found on California beaches and roadways, and account for 34% of the litter collected in our beautiful state, yet data shows that less than 9% of Californians smoke. Most single use cigarette filters are made of a plastic called cellulose acetate. 75% of smokers report disposing of them on the ground or out of a car window. Single use plastic filters persist in the environment for decades, and break down into microplastics that accumulate, causing both biological and environmental harm. Our treasured beaches, oceans, rivers, sea life, wildlife, birds, dogs, plants and humans are irreversibly harmed by these single use smoking waste products.

AB 1690 will help to protect both the health of our environment and California residents’ health. It will also save taxpayer money currently used for cigarette litter clean up.

16.3 We urge you to prioritize AB 1690, and respectfully ask for your AYE vote.

Sincerely,
Sonja Brunner
Mayor
City of Santa Cruz

16.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Economic Development
SUBJECT: City Art of Recovery Design (CARD) Pilot Grant Program Dancing Waters Project (ED)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve funding the City Art of Recovery Design (CARD) Pilot Grant Project Dancing Waters in the amount of $117,120 from the Water Percent for Art Fund and authorize the City Manager to execute a Sponsorship Agreement for the project, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

BACKGROUND: The year of 2020 was one of layered crises in Santa Cruz. COVID-19 had dramatic impacts on our entire nation and were particularly hard felt by persons of color. These impacts, combined with the growing understanding of structural racism generated protests and demands both nationally and locally for a greater commitment to the principals of equity, inclusiveness, environmental justice, public health system access and sustainable new supports within the community. In Santa Cruz our community was also hit by the devastation of the CZU Lightning Complex Fire. These crises upset the lives of all and have had negative impacts on the City’s economy and fiscal sustainability.

In September 2020, Economic Development staff began exploring with the Arts Commission how an arts grant program loosely patterned off of a City of Santa Monica model might be implemented in Santa Cruz. One of the main objectives of launching such a program was to promote efficiency in the City Arts funding process so that available arts funds could be quickly disbursed into the community to support local artists and promote recovery in our community.

Staff believed there were several ways that a grants program could be more efficient than the established City Arts Program funding model. First, a calendared grants program would lead to more efficient proposal review than the current model of launching separate calls for each of the on-going City Arts programs. Second, an Arts Commission Application Review Committee would allow all of the current City Arts Commission subcommittees mandates to be addressed at once instead of cycling proposals through each of the existing subcommittees. Most importantly, operation of the grants program could be at least in part administered by the Arts Council of Santa Cruz (ACSCC) which was already operating a number of grants programs and had been strengthening its fiscal and staffing infrastructure in this realm.

At their January 13, 2021 meeting, the Arts Commission approved the pilot program now called the City Art of Recovery Design (CARD) Pilot Grant Program. The three main priority funding themes are (1) Economic Recovery, (2) Restorative Justice, and (3) Public Health & Safety. This

17.1 initiative is modeled on a similar program recently launched by the City of Santa Monica. The grants program was sponsored as a means to harness the creativity and vitality of the arts community to contribute to the economic, community, and health recovery of our City. It had the additional objective of serving as a means to infuse the local creative economy with resources in an efficient way since the full time Economic Development City Arts Manager position was eliminated in 2020.

A call to artists for letters of intent (LOI) was issued in March of 2021, with a deadline for submission in April. A panel of thirty community reviewers comprised of a mix of artists, merchants, property owners, non-profit staff, and City employees was recruited to pilot a community informed selection process. The 60 LOI submissions were evaluated for alignment with the program values, artistic excellence, and management capacity. ACSCC staff were instrumental in guiding the artist outreach effort, training program and community panel review process.

In May of 2021, the Arts Commission created an Ad Hoc CARD Application Committee to assess the community panel LOI ranking and recommend 20 LOIs for funding to develop full CARD Pilot Grant Program applications. The Arts Commission approved the Committee funding recommendation at the June 2021 meeting. With funding from the existing City Arts, ACSCC executed individual agreements and disbursed the $1,500 artists’ stipends. The CARD Pilot Grant Program applications were due for submittal in December. At the January 12, 2022 Commission Meeting, staff made a presentation entitled “Meet the Artists Preview.” An update on the application review process was also provided.

The Arts Commission authorized creation of an Ad Hoc CARD Application Review Committee that was composed of Commissioners Carr, Cover, and Lyons. In addition City staff, primarily the Economic Development Business Support Team and the Department Director, reviewed the 20 CARD project applications. City Arts staff heard the questions posed by all of the reviewers and provided answers if they were known. As a tool to focus the review work, the applications were sorted by the evidenced degree of readiness, the date sensitive need for a funding decision, and the complexity of outstanding questions. City Arts staff then focused on the applications that were estimated to be the most ready to present to the Commission for a funding recommendation in March. This sorting of applications was in no way a judgment on the relative strength or worthiness of a proposal.

Over the course of January-February 2022, the Ad Hoc CARD Application Committee met five times. City Arts staff held eleven meetings with applicants to get answers to questions that would provide more clarity about the proposals and strengthen the applications. This process was very collaborative in nature, with the objective to strengthen to proposals and the applicants’ grant writing skills.

In February, the Ad Hoc Card Application Review Committee unanimously voted to move eight projects forward to the Arts Commission at the March 9th meeting. City Arts Staff met with the Water Department Director Menard to approve two of the projects as appropriate for funding from the Water Percent for Art Fund. The other six projects are to be funded by the City Arts existing budgeted general fund budget. At the March 9, 2022 Arts Commission meeting, all eight of the projects were recommended for funding.

17.2 Once a CARD Pilot Grant Program project is recommended for funding there is still work to do before launch of a project. The City Arts staff will work on the execution of a City Sponsorship Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney. Certain deliverables such as a project implementation calendar and a public outreach plan and social media materials, will be included in this agreement along with other standard terms such as insurance and liability requirements.

DISCUSSION: The recommended Dancing Waters project has a budget of $117,120. Dancing Waters is a community generated mosaic mural to be fabricated and installed on the newly purchased building of the 418 Dance Project (The 418 Project) along River Street, adjacent to the San Lorenzo Riverwalk. Dancing Waters will begin by exploring the similarities of stories and symbols told by local Native American tribes and Pacific Island people about water during community design forums. Using feedback from the design forums, local artist Maha Taitano, a Pacific Islander from Guam will design an image for a mosaic mural. The community workshops will be focused around the history of water use and future conservation needed in a developing area along River Street. It is anticipated that 100-200 people will be directly involved in the design and fabrication of the mural and, once installed, the audience will be the thousands of people who travel down the Riverwalk and River Street.

The project funding will be used to underwrite project stipends for participation in the art project, rental fee during the creation of the project for use of interior space at The 418 Project to be used to create the mosaics, supplies and materials needed to create the mosaics, rental fees for installation equipment, an administration fee to CA&E to cover the increase in insurance and liability as well as artists fees.

Mentorship
Lead artist Kathleen Crocetti’s long term vision is to turn Santa Cruz County into the Barcelona of the West Coast. This ambitious goal cannot be accomplished by one person making mosaics no matter how prolific. Using her skills and experience as a teacher for 27 years, she mentors both youth and adults in the art of mosaic making while producing iconic artworks that instill community pride and ownership not only among those who participate in the creation of them but also by the residents who live with and love them. Of the 20 public part works Kathleen has produced in SC County, only 4 of them are of her own design. She believes that diversity makes us stronger and that by mentoring and uplifting other artists, she actively demonstrates solidarity and compassion.

Kathleen’s long term goal, if realized, is to make Santa Cruz County a tourist destination for public art and mosaic enthusiasts. In the short term this project will be directly helping The 418 Project and later the whole of downtown, in particular the revitalization of the San Lorenzo River corridor.

By inviting Maha Taitano to be the image designer and by sharing all aspects of the process of creating public art projects from the inception to completion, Kathleen is elevating a person identified as Pacific Islander. This is an element of restorative justice, and in line with both the City’s and Kathleen’s values of promoting racial equity. Maha’s plan for the image and bringing in local native people to share their stories is another step towards elevating the culture of those who have been oppressed and deserve to have their stories and images celebrated. Santa Cruz has appreciated Islander culture from surfing to tropical flower images and tattoos. This will be a way to give reciprocity and gratitude to the wonderful diverse roots that make Santa Cruz the amazing city it is today.

17.3 Maha Taitano first started working with Kathleen as a volunteer, then as a paid intern, and finally as a project partner. In all of their previous working partnerships the vision and images have been generated by Kathleen or by Kathleen in partnership with the community. This project offers the opportunity to highlight Maha’s unique voice.

Professionally Maha has enjoyed being part of the CARD process from the inception, exploring grant writing and will gain some of the knowledge and skills needed to execute a large scale public work, working as a lead in the project. Artistically she is exhilarated for the opportunity to have her artwork exhibited in a large-scale permanent public art installation just blocks away from her home at the Tannery Art Center.

Below is an excerpt from the artists’ application:

We believe that for a public artwork to be successful it must be relevant to the community and for it to have a long lasting relevance it must also have the ability to transform. This belief system informs all of the work the Community Arts and Empowerment (CA&E) supports and is in line with the CARD Program themes and values.

Relevance is established through the communal creation of public art. Working side by side we invest in the community, ourselves, our youth, our creativity, and our desire to be connected to each other and our place.

The potential to transform is realized at the onset of the project when a group of people engage with each other around common goals. The successful process provides forums for communication that deepen ties, encourage the establishment of community identity and civic pride. The transformational power of relevant public work does not end with all the benefits of the collaborative processes of creating the works as a community; transformation continues when the work is engaging to viewers who experience a sense of awe or learn something about the community or themselves. In this way the viewer is changed and the power of transformation is carried forward.

If the grant application is selected for funding, Kathleen and Maha would then become artists in residence at The 418 Project. For the first few weeks they would work together for cohesive application of the tesserae (mosaic pieces). Then they would take turns occupying the space and engaging with the community. Both artists have a network of artists and friends who will be excited to participate in this project. Both CA&E and The 418 Project have electronic newsletters and active social media platforms they will use to generate community participation.

Mission Hill Middle School will participate in fabrication through their art classes and Santa Cruz High Schools students will be invited to participate in the project to earn their community service graduation requirement. Kathleen is a 21 year veteran art teacher with SCCSD and has the connections to guide the public school participation aspect. In keeping with their shared visions of uplifting young artists Kathleen and Maha will seek out 1-2 young BIPOC artists preferably ones who reside near the neighborhood as paid assistants.

For CA&E this would be the 4th public art project and the first one in Santa Cruz City. The board of CA&E are happy to be expanding both their community reach (predominantly Watsonville) and happy to partner with The 418 Project as the mission statements of both organizations are aligned in their goals to serve and empower the community.

17.4 This project aligns with the pillars of the Health in all Policies goals of public health, equity and sustainability. In fact the values of the CARD Pilot Grant Program itself are grounded in the Arts Commission 2019 Commitment to Equity, Inclusivity, and Environmental Justice (projects that support community healing, reduce disparities in representation and access in the arts advancing social and racial justice issues in our community).

For the Dancing Waters project in Santa Cruz Kathleen is partnering with The 418 Project that recently made the huge commitment of purchasing the vacant property on River Street that was formerly the Riverfront Theater/DNA Comedy Lab. The non-profit movement arts center originally called the Santa Cruz Dance Gallery, was founded in 1993 shortly after the Loma Prieta earthquake when downtown Santa Cruz was still recovering and rebuilding, by modern dancer Rita Rivera. Economic considerations led Rita to share the space with Samba, Capoeira, and African Dance communities, among others. This is how the organization took on its role as Santa Cruz’s downtown avant-garde melting pot.

Since 1993, The 418 Project has provided affordable, accessible programming—a home where artists and entrepreneurs can grow their gifts focusing on Community, Mindfulness, Art, and Embodiment. The non-profit relocated from their home at 418 Front Street to make way for new downtown development. With local financial support, The 418 Project now has a permanent home. The non-profit leaders have worked with the challenges of a levee location and are committed to using their new space to offer a welcoming space to connect communities. Being centrally located and in the heart of downtown Santa Cruz, right on the San Lorenzo River, will serve thousands, especially our marginalized communities, becoming a welcoming home to new and continuing arts businesses.

FISCAL IMPACT: The FY 2022 Water Percent for Art balance of $362,439 will be reduced by $117,120 leaving $219,819 available for future water related public art projects.

Prepared By:

Kathryn Mintz
Development Manager
Submitted By:

Bonnie Lipscomb
Director of Economic
Development
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. CARD PROJECT - DANCING WATERS.PDF

17.5 DANCING WATERS
Kathleen Crocetti & Maha Taitano
418 Project, River St facing wall
envisioning project location for ”Dancing Waters” 6 art mosaic panels

17.6 'DANCING WATERS'
Community generated mosaic mural exploring the similarities of stories and symbols told by local Native American tribes and Pacific Island people about water during many community design forums.

K A T H L E E N C R O C E T T I . C O M
@ M A H A _ T A I T A N O

KATHLEEN

CROCETTI &

MAHA TAITANO

M ULTI DISCIPLINE ARTISTS

KATHLEEN - COMMUNITY ARTS & EMPOWERMENT FOUNDER

MAHA - TANNERY RESIDENT - METAL, FABRIC, PAPERS, TEXTILE ARTIST Activist, relationship builder, project manager, mentor, administrator, true friend, and a bringer of light, love, hope, and community.
current MFA, Vermont College of Fine Arts
BA in Visual Arts, UCSC, Critical Race and Ethnic Studies, UCSC

17.7 17.8
In the artist words, excerpts from their CARD Application Artist: Kathleen Crocetti & Maha Taitano
Project title: Dancing Waters
We believe that for a public artwork to be successful it must be relevant to the community and for it to have a long lasting relevance it must also have the ability to transform. This belief system informs all of the work the Community Arts and Empowerment (CA&E) supports and is in line with the CARD Program themes and values.

Relevance is established through the communal creation of public art. Working side by side we invest in the community, ourselves, our youth, our creativity, and our desire to be connected to each other and our place. The successful process provides forums for communication that deepen ties, encourage the establishment of community identity and civic pride. The transformational power of relevant public work does not end with all the benefits of the collaborative processes of creating the works as a community; transformation continues when the work is engaging to viewers who experience a sense of awe or learn something about the community or themselves.

In this way the viewer is changed and the power of transformation is carried forward.

By design, our process grows communities. This begins with our design forums. Design forums are highly publicized events intended to bring in all stakeholders (Print, radio,and social media).

Kathleen and Maha will co-facilitate the forums at the 418 as artists in residence. The forums will begin with an acknowledgment of the first people to inhabit the land we are using, and a moment of silence to reflect on those people. Once all persons present have been introduced and welcomed to the space Maha and at least one local native person will show images and tell water stories from their cultures.

Lead artist Kathleen Crocetti’s long term vision is to turn Santa Cruz County into the Barcelona of the West Coast. This ambitious goal cannot be accomplished by one person making mosaics no matter how prolific they are. Kathleen is inviting Maha Taitano to be the image designer and by sharing all aspects of the process of creating public art projects from the inception to completion. Maha’s plan for the image and bringing in local native people to share their stories is another step towards elevating the culture of those who have been oppressed and deserve to have their stories and images celebrated. Alongside with the land, Santa Cruz has also appreciated Islander culture from surfing to tropical flower images and tattoos. This will be a way to give reciprocity and gratitude to the wonderful diverse roots that make Santa Cruz the amazing city it is today.

Kathleen and Maha have been friends for years, Maha has worked on several of Kathleen’s projects first as a volunteer, then as a paid intern, and finally as a project partner. In all of their previous working partnerships the vision and images have been generated by Kathleen or by Kathleen in partnership with the community. Maha is a fine artist in her own right. This project offers the opportunity to highlight Maha’s unique voice.⧫

17.9 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 1:49 PM
To: City Council
Subject: 3.22.22 Consent agenda Item # 17, water money art grant

3.22.22 Consent agenda Item # 17, water money art grant Dear Council,
I would remind you using water revenue for any other purpose than delivering water is a total misuse of your monopoly water utility position and needs a full stop. While I will admit its not 100% clear this is what you are doing, it sure seems like it comes out of the water funds.

Funding art, or anything else besides enabling delivery of water with any water service derived funds is such a misappropriation of funds as it is then a stealth tax. Figure it out some other more honest, transparent, and ethical, and less coercive way.

Same goes for any salaries not directly tied to providing water.

It was wrong to create such a fund. It's still wrong to use it this way.

Garrett Philipp - Westside

17.10 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/09/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: Liability Claims Filed Against the City of Santa Cruz (FN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to reject the liability claims of a) Neil Bernardi-Wright, and b) Armand Joseph Tiano, based on staff recommendation.

BACKGROUND: N/A
DISCUSSION: I. Claims to be rejected:
a. Claimant: Neil Bernardi-Wright
Date of occurrence: 12/25/2021
Date of claim: 2/15/2022
Amount of claim: $479.00
Claimant seeks reimbursement for work completed to fix a sewage backup at the Claimant’s residence.

Self-represented
b. Claimant: Armand Joseph Tiano
Date of occurrence: 2/22/2020
Date of claim: 2/15/22
Amount of claim: $353.50
Claimant seeks reimbursement for fees paid as a result of a police arrest due to mistakes in the County’s record keeping system.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Ross Brandon
Risk & Safety Manager
Submitted By:

Bobby Magee
Interim Finance Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

None.

18.1 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 02/24/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Human Resources
SUBJECT: Establishing Juneteenth as a Citywide Holiday (HR) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution declaring Juneteenth (June 19) a holiday for all City employees in the City of Santa Cruz.

BACKGROUND: Juneteenth is also known as Jubilee Day, Emancipation Day, Freedom Day, and Black Independence Day. It commemorates the emancipation of African-American slaves and is often observed for celebrating African-American culture.

Originating in Galveston, Texas, it has been celebrated annually on June 19 in various parts of the United States since 1865. Juneteenth's commemoration is on the anniversary date of the June 19, 1865, announcement of General Order No. 3 by Union Army general Gordon Granger, proclaiming freedom for slaves in Texas, which was the last state of the Confederacy with institutional slavery.

On June 16, 2021, the 117th United States Congress enacted the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act amending Section 6103(a) of Title 5, United States Code, designating Juneteenth National Independence Day as a legal public holiday on June 19 of each year, beginning June 19, 2021. President Joe Biden signed the Act into law on June 17, 2021.

At its regular meeting of November 9, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS29,893, incorporating into the resolution additional action steps for the City to pursue beginning in 2022, to recognize the historical and current existence of racism and white supremacy in the community and endorse action steps for the City of Santa Cruz.

One of the additional action steps was to return to Council in early 2022 with an agenda item including any relevant analyses to declare Juneteenth a holiday starting in June 2022 for all City employees in the City of Santa Cruz.

DISCUSSION: State law does not limit a city’s ability to declare and/or observe a holiday.

While Government Code § 6700 et seq. sets forth the State’s legal holidays, “the Legislature has indicated that cities, through their respective councils, are to have the discretionary power to determine what holidays are to be celebrated by their officers and employees.” (44 Ops. Cal.

Atty. Gen. 28.) As such, the City may adopt by resolution a declaration of Juneteenth as an official holiday.

19.1 If the City Council adopts such a resolution it would mean closing most City offices and giving most City employees the day off with pay. The closing of some City offices for an additional day would mean residents would not have access to services provided at those locations on this day.

This impact could be mitigated by ensuring that ample notice is given to residents regarding the closure of offices, the services that are still available, and ways that the community can still access services via other means, such as online portals. Currently, there are twelve (12) City holidays, which include the following:

January 1 - New Year’s Day
Third Monday in January - Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
Third Monday in February - Presidents Day
Last Monday in May - Memorial Day
July 4 - Independence Day
First Monday in September - Labor Day
November 11 - Veterans Day
Fourth Thursday in November - Thanksgiving Day
Fourth Friday in November - Day after Thanksgiving
December 24 - Christmas Eve (half day)
December 25 - Christmas Day
December 31 - New Year’s Eve (half day)
The City’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Service Employees, SEIU Local #521 states in Section 11.01 Fixed Holidays “The City shall recognize all other days appointed by the President of the United States or the Governor of the State of California as a nationwide or statewide public holiday provided specific prior approval is received from the City Council.” The balance of the City’s MOU’s are silent about recognizing additional holidays.

The City’s recognized employee organizations have been provided with the opportunity to meet and confer to discuss any perceived impacts. The only group that requested to meet was the Supervisory Employees (represented by Operating Engineers Local #3) who wished to discuss the fiscal impact (see Fiscal Impact section below).

FISCAL IMPACT: The additional cost of implementing a holiday is estimated to be approximately $53,000 per year. For employees covered by labor agreements that provide for premium payment for working on a holiday, the estimated cost is $30,000 a year. This is the cost of time worked on the holiday, calculated at time and a half, plus the cost of applicable benefits.

For those employee groups who are allowed to transfer unused holidays to their vacation banks, and then cash those hours out each year or those groups that can actually cash out holiday hours each year the cost is approximately an additional $23,000 a year.

This estimate is subject to change depending on the staffing that is required, and assignments made by operating departments on a given holiday. This cost does not take into consideration any lost productivity or reduced services as a result of the closure of certain City facilities.

19.2 Prepared By:

Joe McMullen
Principal HR Analyst
Submitted By:

Lisa Murphy
Human Resources Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

19.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ TO ESTABLISH

JUNETEENTH AS AN OBSERVED HOLIDAY IN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ WHEREAS, Juneteenth, also known as “Jubilee Day,” “Emancipation Day,” “Freedom Day,” and “Black Independence Day,” is the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the end of slavery in the United States; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2021, the 117th United States Congress enacted the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act amending Section 6103(a) of Title 5, Unites States Code, designating Juneteenth National Independence Day as a legal public holiday on June 19 of each year, beginning June 19, 2021; and
WHEREAS, President Joe Biden signed the Act into law on June 17, 2021; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz declares Juneteenth as an official City holiday in the City of Santa Cruz, commencing on June 19, 2022, and observed annually as a paid holiday for City employees.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

19.4 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Judi Grunstra <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 11:37 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda Item #19
Dear Mayor and Council:

I fully appreciate the significance of June 19, and have attended the city's Juneteenth celebrations from the earliest years.  I have the utmost appreciation for Black culture and understand the importance of furthering anti‐racist actions.   However, I question making June 19 a city holiday with paid leave for city employees.   We are being told it's a fiscal emergency, proposing to raise our taxes, yet here is another $53,000 that the city seems to be able to afford.

Why not also make Cesar Chavez's birthday a city holiday?  Or Harvey Milk's birthday? The city should continue to support the Juneteenth celebration at London Nelson park as it has done for many years.  It is an important community event and perhaps it will even become a national holiday.  But a paid holiday at this time of budget woes?  No.

Thank you.

Judi Grunstra

19.5 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 2:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: 3.22.22 Consent Agenda Item #19 Adding a paid Holiday

3.22.22 Consent Agenda Item #19 Adding a paid Holiday
Dear Council,
I noticed you are adding Juneteenth to the list of paid city employee holidays. I would remind you and educate the public while benefits vary somewhat per position and memorandum; I see some will now have in total now essentially 12 paid holi-days, and 3 days worth of floating holidays. Are those EXTRA floating holidays? With the latest addition, does this add up to around 15 paid holidays, or 12? Whichever it is, it's a lot enjoyed by few employees.

Your analysis indicates this could cost $106,000 a year. For a city barely bailed out fiscally for now facing what pre-existing systemic deficits that have not been addressed will bring and asking taxpayers to increase taxes to the highest in the state...

THIS is NOT a good optic.

I read the average days of paid holidays is 7.6 days nationally and only 3% of workers receive 14 or more days of paid holidays and I can only guess what smaller percentage than 3% gets 15 days. How nice for you. While it’s entirely possible the private sector is being a bit stingy in these matters, I cannot justify the government getting paid or receive more benefits than the private sector that pays the bills. Can you? I imagine if you did try to justify it, you would compare your benefits to the highest benefited government entities. How convenient for you.

Recognition of all national holidays isn’t required. I laughed when I read you justify this by stating you're not prevented by law from doing this, or suggesting that this stuffing of your wallets will somehow bring greater awareness of racism as if you don't do that on an every bi-weekly basis. HAHA!
This is simply a body lining its pockets by milking the cash cow known as the public when the city is financially going under water, the public hurting from ill-considered government Covid policies, and hiring more expensive employees like last meeting in jobs that previously didn’t exist and asking to increase taxes to the highest anywhere. I can only imagine Ceasar Chavez, Indigenous Peoples day, and Malcolm X’s birthday are next to be stuffed into the benefit package.

Garrett Philipp - Westside

19.6 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Encroachment Permit – Accessibility Improvements for 261 Evergreen Street (APN 001-101-06) (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution granting an encroachment permit to Sibley Simon for construction and maintenance of ADA accessible parking, hardscape paths and curb ramp adjacent to 261 Evergreen Street (APN 001-101-06).

BACKGROUND: Sibley Simon has applied for an encroachment permit to construct ADA accessible parking spaces, hardscape walkways and curb ramps adjacent to the Evergreen Cemetery. For detailed plans of the improvements to be made, review the Improvement Plan attachment.

DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the proposed encroachment and recommends approval of the ADA accessibility improvements adjacent to the Evergreen Cemetery. The proposed encroachment is consistent with the public interest and will not interfere with the City’s right-ofway.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. The Museum of Art & History of the McPherson Center, owner of the Evergreen Cemetery, is required to maintain adequate insurance and indemnify the City of Santa Cruz. A permit fee of $777 is charged and will be collected to cover staff administrative and inspection costs.

Prepared By:

Dan Estranero
Associate Professional
Engineer
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOC

2. IMPROVEMENT PLANS.PDF

20.1 RESOLUTION NO. NSRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

GRANTING AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT TO 261 EVERGREEN STREET.

WHEREAS, an application has been filed with Public Works Department of the City of Santa Cruz to construct ADA accessible parking spaces, hardscape walkways and curb ramps adjacent to 261 Evergreen Street; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that approving the application is consistent with the public interest and will not interfere with the City’s right of way; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

1. An encroachment permit is hereby granted to Sibley Simon and to its successors in interest to the property located in Santa Cruz, California to construct ADA accessible parking spaces, hardscape walkways and curb ramps adjacent to 261 Evergreen Street.

2. This permit is subject to the terms and conditions specified in the encroachment permit as presented to Council this date.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that the City Manager, be and is hereby authorized and directed to execute said encroachment permit on behalf of the City.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED:___________________________
Mayor
ATTEST: _____________________________
City Clerk

20.2 C0.1
1" = 50'

COVER - INDEX
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

PROJECT

LOCATION
LEGEND

DESCRIPTION PROPOSED EXISTING

PROPERTY LINE

CENTERLINECURB AND GUTTERSIDEWALK

ABBREVIATIONSAB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE

CONC CONCRETECB CATCH BASINCL CENTERLINECONC CONCRETE

DI DROP INLET/DRAINAGE INLETEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEG EXISTING GRADE (E) EXISTING

FS FINISH SURFACEFL FLOW LINEFS FINISH SURFACE

GB GRADE BREAK

ME MATCH EXISTINGNTS NOT TO SCALENG NATURAL GROUNDP/L PROPERTY LINE

STD STANDARDSDDI STORM DRAIN DROP INLET

TC TOP OF CURBTYP TYPICAL

WV WATER VALVE
CBC CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (2016)
CIVIL SHEET INDEX CIVIL ENGINEER:

SURVEYOR:

C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE STE. 6 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: 831.438.4420
C0.1 - COVER SHEETC1.1 - SITE PLANC1.2 - SITE PLANC1.3 - SITE PLANC2.1 - DETAILSC2.2 - DETAILSC2.3 - DETAILS SURVEYOR:

ALPHA SURVEY4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: 831.438.4420

VICINITY MAP

CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY
CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHOULD ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOBSITE CONDITIONS, INCLUDING THE SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY, DURING THECOURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, AND THAT REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLYCONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED DURING WORKING HOURS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL

DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD THE OWNER AND THE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS HARMLESS FROM

ANY AND ALL LIABILITY, REAL OR ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT, EXCEPTING FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THEOWNER OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.

DISCREPANCIES

IF THERE ARE ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND EXISTINGCONDITIONS WHICH WILL AFFECT THE WORK, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BRING SUCH

DISCREPANCIES TO THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FOR ADJUSTMENT BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPER FITTING OF ALL WORKAND FOR THE COORDINATION OF ALL TRADES, SUBCONTRACTORS, AND PERSONS ENGAGED UPONTHIS CONTRACT.

CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING / STAKING
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE ALL SURVEYING AND OR STAKING BY A LICENSEDSURVEYOR FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.

GENERAL NOTES

1. NO CHANGE TO THE PLANS SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES AND THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ.

2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND INVERTS OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TO

COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIANCE FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

3. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE FOUND IN FIELD. NO WARRANTY IS MADE REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS ORACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES, AND PRESERVE SAME FROM DAMAGE. PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION, VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT THECROSSING POINTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OROWNERS REPRESENTATIVES IF CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ANDSHALL NOT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE CHANGED CONDITION HAS BEEN EVALUATED.CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT (USA) (1-800-227-2600) TWO (2) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO DIGGING. REPAIR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITHCONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATED AND PRESERVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES.

4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY

COMPANIES AND/OR AGENCIES TO VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND/OR LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. AND SHALL NOTIFY U.S.A. @ (800)227-2600 AT LEAST 48-HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EXCAVATION.

5. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTED WITHIN 200 FOOTRADIUS OF THE FIND. OWNER SHALL RETAIN A QUALIFIED ARCHEOLOGIST RETAINED TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE DISCOVERY AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE EVALUATION PROCEDURES.

NOTE:

CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS. CALL USA (800) 227-2600. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY APPARENT CONFLICTS FOR RESOLUTION PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION.

UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES AND USES
CAUTION: THE ENGINEER PREPARING THESE PLANS WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, OR LIABLE FOR, UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES TO OR USES OF THESE PLANS. ALL

CHANGES TO THE PLANS MUST BE IN WRITING AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PREPARER OF THE PLANSC 2016 TODD R. CREAMER, D.B.A. AS C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

THE WITHIN PLANS ARE COPYRIGHTED AS AN UNPUBLISHED WORK BY C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. ALL IDEAS DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS

INDICATED OR REPRESENTED BY THESE DRAWINGS ARE OWNED BY, AND THE PROPERTY OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. AND WERE CREATED,EVOLVED AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON, AND IN CONNECTION WITH, THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANSSHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW SEE
C1.2 SEE C1.1
SEE
C1.3
HWY 1
HWY 9

EVERGREEN ST

CORAL ST HARVEY W BLVD

CORAL ST

POTRERO ST AMAT ST

RIVER ST

MORA ST

HARVEY WEST
PARK

SCOPE OF WORK

ADD ACCESSIBLE HARDSCAPE PATHS AND RAMPS TOA PORTION OF THE CEMETERY AND CONVERT THREE

CLOSEST PARKING SPOTS WITHIN HARVEY WEST

PARK TO TWO ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES WITH AN
ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL INTO THE CEMETERY.

20.3 C1.1
1" = 10'
SITE
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

SITE KEY PLAN
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW Scale: 1":4'
ENLARGED PLAN - SEE DETAIL 1/C2.3 FOR MARKINGS AND DIMENSIONS 1 Scale: 1":4' ENLARGED PLAN
2 HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

SAWCUT LINE

20.4 C1.2
1" = 10'
SITE
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

SITE KEY PLAN
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW Scale: 1:4

ENLARGED PLAN
1 20.5
C1.3
1" = 10'
SITE
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

SITE KEY PLAN
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

20.6 C2.1

AS NOTED

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY

NEW CONCRETE TO EXISTING CONCRETE
FG
#4 REBAR @ 24" O.C. E.W.

Scale: NTS
JOINTS AT CONCRETE PAVING 2
FINISH SURFACE OF PAVING.NA
CONTROL JOINT, TOOLED, 1/4" WIDE;
DEPTH TO EQUAL 1/3 OF SLAB
THICKNESS. (INCLUDING WHERE SLABSTHICKEN) LOCATE PER PLAN. 1/2" TOOLED EDGE AT CONCRETE
PAVING.
1/2" THICK EXPANSION JOINT FILLER
SHALL BE ASPHALT IMPREGNATED FELT.

DEPTH TO MATCH SLAB THICKNESS.DOWEL 12" SMOOTH REBAR X 12" LONG @ 18" O.C. AND 6" CLEAR FROM EDGE OF
SLAB, SLIP ONE END. WHERE ABUTTING

EXISTING CONCRETE, DRILL AND EPOXYDOWEL INTO EXISTING CONCRETE AND SLIP ONE END.

CONCRETE PAVING.

CONTROL JOINT: SECTION

1. 2.

3. LEGEND

4. EXPANSION JOINT: SECTION

5. 6.

7. CONTROL JOINTS SHALL OCCUR WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN.

EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE LOCATED WHERE CONCRETE PAVING MEETS THE BACK OF CURBS, FACE OF BUILDING OR SITE WALLS, AND WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN.

A.

NOTES
B.
6 5
1 7 4
1 3 7

0.50 GRADE
(N) CONCRETE WALK

0.33 MAX

0.5' MIN.
#3 REBAR
Scale: NTS
STANDARD CONCRETE WALKWAY SECTION 1 Scale: NTS CONCRETE MATCH EXISTING 4 Scale: NTS
CONCRETE THICKENED EDGE DETAIL 3
6" RISER TYP.
2" COLOR CONTRASTING STRIPE W/ GROOVES x
LENGTH. TYP. EACH STEP. LOCATE 1" MAX FROM
EDGE OF STEP OR LANDING. TYP. COLOR: YELLOW
1-1/4" MAX. TO EDGE OF NOSING
12" UNIFORM TREADS TYP.
1"

CLOSED RISER
1/2" RADIUS MAX
1% SLOPE TYP.
1'-0"
10" MIN.
8" MIN.
5"
3" CLEAR

REBAR LAYOUT PER STEPS

ON GRADE (TYP)
Scale: NTS
CONCRETE STAIR DETAIL 8
1-1/2"
EXTEND #3 REBAR FROM

STANDARD CONCRETE SECTION
Scale: NTS
HANDRAIL DETAIL 7

ANGLE SHALL MATCH RISE & RUN

SLOPE OF (N) CONCRETE STAIRS
NOTES:

1. ALL HANDRAIL SHALL BE HOT-DIPPED GALVINIZED STEEL. CONTRACTOR SHALL TOUCH-UP

ONSITE WELDING POINTS AND OTHER DISTURBED AREAS WITH
1/8
1/8
ALIGN
Scale: NTS
CONCRETE CURB DETAIL 5
Scale: NTS
ACCESSIBLE RAMP & HANDRAIL DETAIL 6
MAX 2% CROSS
SLOPE
5" CONCRETE
SLAB W/ #4 @
16" OC EA. WAY
COMPRESSIVE MAT'L& CONT. SEALANT
TYP
#4 TOP &BOTTOM TYP
SEE SHEETS C3.1-C3.2
FOR GRADES @ RAMP
& LANDINGS

SLOPE PER PLAN
CORE DRILL 2" DIA. X 4" DEEP HOLES FOR VERTICALS &
INSET IN "SIMPSON Co. ET22" EPOXY GROUT
5" THICK CONCRETE WALK
W/ #4 @ 16" OC EA. WAY
#4 TOP &BOTTOM TYP

0.50 0.5'
EG
(N) CONCRETE WALK

NEW CURB

2.5' MAX.

0.5' MIN.
1/2"R (TYP)
#3 @ TOP
& BOTTOM
#3 @
12" OC
#4 REBAR FROM
SIDEWALK DETAIL 0.5' MIN.

CLASS II 34" RECYCLED

AGGREGATE BASE
CLASS II 34" RECYCLED

AGGREGATE BASE
CLASS II 34" RECYCLED

AGGREGATE BASE

1. REFER TO PLANS FOR NUMBER OF RISERS

2. STAIR SHALL BE 44" MIN WIDE BETWEEN
HANDRAILS.

3. TOP AND BOTTOM LANDINGS SHALL BE 48"
MIN DEEP WITH A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 1:48

IN ANY DIRECTION
NOTES
12W X 18"H REFLECTOR.

SIGN PANEL MINIMUM OF
16 GA. GALV. STEEL W/
PORCLEAIN ENAMELFINISH. WHITE FIGURE ON
A BLUE BACKGROUND. THE
BLUE COLOR SHALL BE EQ.

TO COLOR NO. 15090 IN
FEDEREAL STANDARD595a. ALL LETTERS TO BE PARKING MIN. OF 1" IN HIGH.

ONLY
VAN

ACCESSIBLE

MINIMUM
FINE $250
PER CBC 11B - 502.6.2
Scale: NTS
ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNAGE & FOOTING DETAIL 10
6" MIN
6'-8"
1'-2" MIN.
3"
2'-6"
(4) #3 REBAR, ONE @ EA.

CORNER
1/4" TYP.

FINISH SURFACE
CONC. FOOTING
2" x 2" GALV. STEEL TUBE

BOTTOM OF SIGN

PROVIDE ADDITIONAL

SIGN AT VAN ACCESSIBLE

PARKING SPACE PER CBC
11B - 502.6
1 12" OD GALV. PIPE

FOR VERTICALS &HORIZONTALS
1-1/2" OD GALV.

PIPE TYP.

Scale: 1/4" = 1'
TURNS AT CONCRETE WALL 9
4 C2.2

ROLL & COMPACT SUBGRADE
(N) 4" THICK CONCRETE SLAB3" AB CLASS II / OR SAND

CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT (E) TREE

20.7 C2.2

AS NOTED

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY Scale: 1/4" = 1'
CHANNEL GRATE REVISION DETAIL 1
2- Scale: 1/4" = 1' CHANNEL REVISION SECTION DETAIL 2 EXISTING GRATE TO BE REMOVED Scale: 1/4" = 1'
RAMP SECTION DETAIL 4
1- 1
C2.1
5 C2.1
Scale: 1/4" = 1'
CIRCULAR LANDING SECTION DETAIL 5

RETAINING WALLS - WOOD - STANDARD DETAILSDOUGLASS FIR CONSTRUCTION

1. ALL LUMBER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTION ROUGH (ROUGH

FULL SAWN - UNSURFACED LUMBER CUT TO FULL SPECIFIED
SIZE).

2. POSTS SHALL BE GRADE NO. 1 AND FACING BOARDS
(LAGGING) SHALL BE GRADE NO. 2, OR BETTER, CONFORMING
TO CURRENT WWPA* GRADING RULES.

3. EACH PIECE OF LUMBER SHALL BE GRADE STAMPED BY

AN AGENCY CERTIFIED BY THE BOARD OF REVIEW OF THEAMERICAN LUMBER STANDARDS COMMITTEE AND

MANUFACTURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRODUCE STANDARD
20-70, AS PUBLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.

4. ALL LUMBER AND POSTS SHALL BE PRESSURE TREATED
FOR PRESERVATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT AWPB**

STANDARDS FOR GROUND-CONTACT USE AND SHALLCOMPLY WITH CURRENT UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD NO. 25-12 (UBC STDS).

5. THE FOLLOWING AWPB QUALITY STANDARDS ARE

APPROVED FOR THE PRESSURE TREATMENT OF LUMBER AND
POSTS:
-AWPB LP-22: PRESSURE TREATED WITH WATERBOURNE
PRESERVATIVES (ACA, CCA - SEE NOTE 6).
-AWPB LP-33: PRESSURE TREATED WITH LIGHT
PETROLEUM PENTA SOLUTION.
-AWPB LP-44: PRESSURE TREATED WITH VOLATILE
SOLVENT (LPG) PENTA SOLUTION.
-AWPB LP-55: PRESSURE TREATED WITH CREOSOTE OR
CREOSOTE COAL-TAR SOLUTION.
-AWPB LP-77: PRESSURE TREATED WITH HEAVY
PETROLEUM SOLVENT PENTA SOLUTION.

6. RETENTION OF PRESERVATIVES SHALL BE EQUAL TO, ORGREATER THAN, THE MINIMUM RETENTION SPECIFIED FOR

THE AWPB QUALITY STANDARD USED, EXCEPT RETENTION OF

PRESERVATIVES FOR PRESSURE TREATMENT WITH
WATERBORNE PRESERVATIVES (AWPB STD. LP-22, ACA OR
CCA) SHALL BE EQUAL TO, OR GREATER THAN, 0.60 PCF. THIS HIGHER RETENTION SHALL BE BRANDED OR STAMPED ON THELUMBER.7. TREATMENT OF LUMBER AND POSTS SHALL CONFORM TO CURRENT AWPA*** STANDARD C2.

8. ALL PRESERVATIVES MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE CURRENT AWPA STANDARDS.

9. HANDLING AND CARE OF PRESSURE TREATED WOOD

PRODUCTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF
AWPA STANDARD M4.

10. ALL CUTS, HOLES AND INJURIES SUCH AS ABRASIONS
AND NAIL HOLES SHALL BE FIELD TREATED WITHAPPLICATIONS OF PRESERVATIVES IN ACCORDANCE WITHAWPA STANDARD M4.

11. EACH PIECE OF TREATED WOOD PRODUCE SHALL BE
LEGIBLY BRANDED, MARKED OR OTHERWISE HAVEPERMANENTLY AFFIXED, THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:IDENTITY OF THE TREATING PLAN AND THE YEAR TREATED; THE PRESERVATIVE SYMBOL, E.G: ACA, CCA, ETC; THE AWPB
QUALITY MARK; THE LEGEND, E.G: AWPB LP-22, LP-44, ETC;
THE WORDS "GROUND CONTACT," NAME OR TRADEMARK OFTHE SUPERVISING QUALITY CONTROL AGENCY; RETENTION, ETC. REFER TO THE SPECIFIC AWPB STANDARD USED FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WHICH MAY BE INCLUDED.
* WESTERN WOOD PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION** AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVERS BUREAU*** AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVERS ASSOCIATION

RETAINING WALL GENERAL NOTES

1. MAX WALL HEIGHT USING THIS DETAIL TO BE 4.0'

2. POSTS AND PLANKS TO BE PRESSURE TREATED (PT).

3. CONCRETE: 2500 PSI 28-DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

4. SOIL: SEE SOIL REPORT PREPARED BY DEES & ASSOCIATES

5. PERMEABLE FILL SHALL MEET THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STANDARD SPECIFICATION SECTION 68-1.025, CLASS I,
TAPE A. AS AN ALTERNATE 34" DOWN OPEN GRADED
GRAVEL MAY BE USED.

REMOVE TOP SOIL

AT WALL AND FOOTING
W.P.

Scale: NTS
WOOD RETAINING WALL 6

20.8 C2.3

AS NOTED

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

12.20.18 TC
699-06
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

EVERGREEN CEMENTARY
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7 ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMNTS

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA
DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY

CONCRETE CURB

IDENTIFICATION SIGN
(SEE DETAIL 10/C2.1)
4" WIDE BLUE STRIPE-TYP

PAINT ALL CONCRETE CURBS BLUE WITHIN

ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES
4" WIDE BLUE STRIPES AT PERIMETER AND 4"
WIDE HATCHED LINES AT 36" O.C. MAX.
3'-0" X 3'-0" PAINTED SYMBOL PER
CBC 11B502.6.4 TYP OF 2
WHITE PAINT THE WORDS "NO
PARKING" IN 12" HIGH LETTERS MIN.

WITHIN ACCESS AISLE
VAN

ACCESSIBLE
SPACE
18'-0" MIN.
9'-0" 8'-0" 9'-0"
45°
2'-0" 48" PRECAST CONCRETE WHEEL STOP. TYP OF 2
1'-0" Scale: N.T.S. ACCESSIBLE PARKING STRIPING 1

METAL SIGN
WITH 1" HIGH
(MIN.) WHITELETTERS BLUEBACKGROUND
1'-5" (MIN.)
NOTE:

1. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL INFORMATION
SHOWN AT ASTERISKS (*) WITH CITY PRIOR TO
PRINTING. PRINTING MUST BE PERMANENTLY
AFFIXED.

NOTES:

1. ALL SIGN SUBSTRATES SHALL BE 1/8" THICK

REFLECTORIZED ALUMINUM

2. LETTERS AND GRAPHICS SHALL BE SILK SCREENED

REFLECTORIZED ALUMINUM

3. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE MOUNTED WITH TAMPER PROOF SCREWS
TO GALVANIZED 2" DIAMETER STANDARD STEEL PIPE. PIPE SHALL BE SHOP PRIMED AND PAINTED WITH 2 COATS OF EXTERIOR ENAMEL

4. IN LIEU OF TAMPER PROOF SCREWS, SPOT WELDING END OF

BOLT AFTER NUT INSTALLATION IS ACCEPTABLE

5. PROVIDE 3/4" RADIUS AT ALL SIGN CORNERS 6. SIGNS SHALL

BE MOUNTED IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION

6. CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM WITH DISTRICT FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION. SPECIFIC INFORMATION MUST BE INCLUDED ON PERMANENT SIGN.
1'-10" (MIN.) 7. SIGN SHALL BE INSTALLED ON POST PER DETAIL 1 ON SHEET C2.2.

UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLES

PARKED IN DESIGNATED

ACCESSIBLE SPACES NOT

DISPLAYING

DISTINGUISHING

PLACARDS OR LICENSE

PLATES ISSUED FOR

PERSONS WITH

DISABILITIES WILL BE

TOWED AWAY AT OWNER'S
EXPENSE. TOWED

VEHICLES MAY BE
RECLAIMED AT:
*************** OR BY

TELEPHONING
*************** .

SIGN PER
CBC 11B-502.8
Scale: N.T.S.

UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLE SIGN 3
Scale: NTS
TRUNCATED DOMES 2

2.35" APPROX.

A
A .9" AT BASE .45" AT TOP .2 HT.

TYPICAL SECTION A - A

TYPICAL PLAN

TAPERED EDGES WHERE

EXPOSED

AFFIX TO CONCRETE WITHTHICKENED EPOXY
NOTE: AT MINIMUM, 4" CONC. OVER 2" SAND IS REQUIRED BENEATH ALL TRUNCATED DOMES. INSTALLING TRUNCATED DOMES ON ASPHALT CONCRETE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.

CONCRETE SECTION
(PCC) REQUIRED. SEE

NOTE BELOW

0.65" MIN.

UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLE SIGN(SEE DETAIL 3/C2.3)

20.9 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/11/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Rising Prices for City Vehicle and Equipment Tires and Fuel – Budget Adjustment (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to appropriate funds in the amount of $365,000 to fund rising fuel expenses and tire purchases.

BACKGROUND: The FY 2022 Mechanical Maintenance budget had an original appropriation of $850,000 to purchase fuel for the City of Santa Cruz’s (City) equipment and vehicles. The FY 2022 adopted budget for tires for all City assets was $190,000. Each year has seen slight increases in prices for both commodities, however, the COVID-19 pandemic, supply demands with a reduced workforce, state-wide wildfires and significant international world events have all contributed to inflated prices for both tires and fuel. An increase in gas demand, alongside a reduction in total supply, is contributing to price increases, but increasing oil prices continue to play a leading role in pushing prices higher. Pump prices will likely continue to rise as crude prices continue to climb.

Mechanical Maintenance staff have developed a system to limit tire expenditures as much as possible, where it is most appropriate. To limit unnecessary charges, tire purchase requests have to be carefully evaluated and approved by staff. There must be a critical safety concern for tires to be approved for purchase. Fuel is considered to be gas, diesel, kerosene, propane and compressed natural gas (CNG) for all City vehicles and equipment. During the CZU Wildfire Emergency in August 2020, PG&E conducted an emergency PSPS shut off and the City was required to fuel generators and vehicles, when the cost per gallon had increased dramatically due the COVID-19 market. With another dry winter season, wildfire season is an ongoing threat that more PG&E shut-offs will be decreed. CNG prices fluctuate dramatically as it is tied to rising gas prices.

DISCUSSION: The price of fuel has been increasing recently and various reports anticipate fuel costs to remain at this higher level or to increase further. This budget adjustment is necessary to provide funding for the remainder of the fiscal year depending on the market. As of March 9, 2022, the City’s cost for bulk unleaded and diesel gasoline have increased by 30% within just a couple weeks. For example, the increase from February to March went from $3.74 to $5.43 per gallon for unleaded and $4.14 to $5.38 per gallon for diesel. This can be attributed to international unrest between Russia and the Ukraine, which is uncontrollable by the City.

Rising fuel prices will also contribute to higher prices in freight and shipping in the transportation industry on most commodities as well.

21.1 The cost allocation will be distributed to various funds and activities based on the percentage of use. As the City continues to replace older assets with hybrid or electric options, the fuel budget will eventually decrease slightly as our dependency on fuel will be less significant. Staff are committed to researching alternatives for the City’s future, however, market prices are expected to keep rising.

FISCAL IMPACT: The overall fiscal impact is $365,000. The General Fund impact is based on the usage of the asset user. The Mechanical Maintenance Fund is an internal services account where actual fuel and tire expenditures are charged out to activities in various funds based on usage and need. The cost allocation will be distributed to various funds and activities based on the percentage of use with an additional overhead charge of 22% for tires and 20% for fuels.

Prepared By:

Christina Alberti
Management Analyst
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

21.2 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
3XUSRVH

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDEN ACCOUNT TITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNT TITLE

TOTAL EXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTED BY

DEPARTMENT HEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
&0)18VH2QO\

5HVR

%$5HI

352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
)LVFDO<HDU

'DWH

&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
Clear Form
2022
02/25/2022
Inflation due to COVID and international world events continue to raise the price of fuel and tires for City assets. This adjustment will appropriate funds responsibly for the last four months of this fiscal year. Higher prices have been reflected in the FY23 budget request. 0 811-40-61-7831-53104 Tires 65,000
811-40-61-7831-53320 Gas and oil 300,000
365,000
-365,000
Christin
a Alberti
Digitally signed by Christina Alberti
DN: cn=Christina Alberti, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Public Works,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.02.25 11:19:09 -08'00'
Mark
Dettle
Digitally signed
by Mark Dettle
Date: 2022.03.07
08:29:41 -08'00'
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Finance Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.03.14 08:45:29 -07'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.03.16 13:52:40 -07'00'

21.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Resource Recovery Facility Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility Upgrade (c402202) – Advertise for Bids and Award Contract (PW) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the plans and specifications for the Resource Recovery Facility Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility Upgrade (c402202) and authorize staff to advertise for bids and award the contract. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved budget.

BACKGROUND: The Resource Recovery Facility Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility (Facility) is owned by the City of Santa Cruz (City) and is located at the Resource Recovery Facility at 605 Dimeo Lane. The Facility is operated by the County of Santa Cruz Household Hazardous Waste Program.

The Facility has been in operation for over twenty years and now requires improvements to stay in compliance with the facility permit. Per Resolution No. NS-29,619, as approved by the City Council on January 28, 2020, the City applied for a Household Hazardous Waste Discretionary Grant from the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) for facility improvements in 2020. The grant was awarded in the amount of $223,826 in 2021 DISCUSSION: The improvements to the facility will include the replacement of asphalt flooring with a secondarily contained concrete pad, chemical resistant epoxy coating, standard of care ramps, signage and fencing, and installation of an emergency shower/eye-wash station, among other tasks. Plans and specifications can be found online at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/publicworksprojects
FISCAL IMPACT: The total project cost is estimated at $223,826 and will be covered by the grant in RRF Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility Upgrade project (c402202). There is no impact to the General Fund. These funds are only available for use in the Refuse Fund activities and cannot be used for General Fund activities.

Prepared By:

Scott Glucs
Assistant Engineer
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

None.

22.1 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Library Lane Sewer Improvement Project (c402206) – Notice of Completion (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of Precision Grade, Inc (San Juan Bautista, CA) and authorize the filling of the Notice of Completion for the Library Lane Sewer Improvement Project (c402206).

BACKGROUND: At its June 22, 2021 meeting, City Council approved the authorization to advertise this project and authorized the City Manager to execute the contract. On August 17, 2021 the project was awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Precision Grade, Inc. Construction began on September 13, 2021 and included the installation of a new 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer to provide more capacity for the sewer system and the expansion of the existing pathway to provide better accessibility between Gault Street and Hanover Street on the path adjacent to the Branciforte Branch Library.

DISCUSSION: The work for this project is now complete. The project has been inspected by staff and found to be completed in accordance with the plans and specifications.

FISCAL IMPACT: The total project cost was $347,438.63. This project was funded by two Sewer Capital Investment Program (CIP) projects (c402206 and c401511). There was no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Niao Yan
Assistant Engineer II
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. NOTICE OF COMPLETION.DOCX

23.1 Notice of Completion
(Space above for Recorder’s use only)
This instrument is being recorded for the benefit of the City of Santa Cruz.

No recording fee is required pursuant to Government Code § 27383.

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
(CA Civil Code Sections 8102 and 9204)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

The undersigned is an authorized representative of the owner of the interest or estate stated below.

1. The Owner’s Name and Address. The Project owner is the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation (the “City”). The City’s mailing address is 809 Center Street, Santa Cruz, California 95060. The City of Santa Cruz has the following interest in the subject Property described below: City Right-Of-Way

2. Project Title and Number. The full name of the work of improvement/public works project (the “Project”) which is the subject of this Notice of Completion is: Library Lane Sewer Improvement Project c402206

3. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Installation of a new 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer and the expansion of the existing pathway from 6-feet to 8-feet wide

4. The general site location description or address (the “Property”) of the public improvement is located at: Within the City’s Right-of-Way adjacent to residence at 305 Lee St, 230 Gault St and 727 Hanover St.

5. Name and Address of Contractor. The Contractor on the Project is: Precision Grade, Inc. 107 The Alameda, Suite A, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045.

6. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: January 10, 2022

7. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
DATE: ___________________
Mark Dettle
Director of Public Works, City of Santa Cruz
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz, Public Works
Attn: Niao Yan
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City Clerk’s Department
809 Center Street, Room 9
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

23.2 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: 3rd Quarter FY 2022 Water Department Capital Investment Program Transfer – Budget Adjustment (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution amending the FY 2022 budget and transferring budget appropriations within the Water Department Capital Investment Program (CIP) to update various project budgets with current cost forecasts.

BACKGROUND: The Water Department recently updated capital project cost forecasts with estimates for ending FY 2022. Spending forecasts are tracked monthly and a few times each fiscal year, the Water Department requests a budget adjustment to align current budget appropriations with current cost forecasts.

City Council Policy 12.6, Appropriation Control/Transfers of Appropriations, requires City Council approval of all transfers over $100,000 between CIP projects.

DISCUSSION: No new budget appropriation is requested. The Water Department’s current amended CIP budget is slightly over $114 million and current FY 2022 year-end expenditure forecasts are within the existing amended budget total.

The purpose of the attached budget adjustment is to reduce appropriations in capital projects that are complete or nearing completion and transfer the appropriations to active projects. This will have a net zero impact to the Water Department’s FY 2022 CIP budget but will reduce the amount needed in FY 2023 for active capital projects.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact.

Prepared By:

Malissa Kaping
Management Analyst
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

24.1 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
3XUSRVH

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDEN ACCOUNT TITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNT TITLE

TOTAL EXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTED BY

DEPARTMENT HEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
&0)18VH2QO\

5HVR

%$5HI

352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
)LVFDO<HDU

'DWH

&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
Clear Form
2022
03/02/2022
3rd Quarter FY22 Water Dept CIP Transfer: transferring budget appropriations within the Water Depart CIP to update various project budgets with current cost forecasts. 0 See attached
0 0
Digitally signed by Malissa Kaping
DN: cn=Malissa Kaping, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Water
Department,
[email protected]
om, c=US
Date: 2022.03.02 15:49:30 -08'00'
Rosemar
y Menard
Digitally signed by Rosemary Menard
DN: cn=Rosemary Menard, o=Santa Cruz Water
Department, ou=Water Director,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2022.03.10 12:08:12 -08'00'
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Finance Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.03.16 14:03:07 -07'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.03.16 14:08:05 -07'00'

24.2 P:\_Public\Budgets\!!FY 2022 Budget Adjustments\Drafts\3rd Qtr FY22 Water Dept CIP Transfer3/2/2022 3rd Quarter FY22 Water Department CIP Transfer
Project Number GL Number Project Title
Budget Adjustment
Requested
c700025-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7152-57302 GHWTP Facilities Improvement Project $ Active project, will reduce FY23 request 210,000 c700026-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Beltz 10 and 11 Rehab & Development $ Project closing (172,204) c701502-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7152-57302 GHWTP Flocculator Rehab/Replacement $ Project nearing completion (90,000) c701506-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 University Tank No. 5 Replacement $ Project nearing completion (110,000) c701606-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 NCD I/O Replacement Project $ Active project, will reduce FY23 reque 5,614 st c701609-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 ASR Planning $ Active project, will reduce FY23 request 1,005,000 c701611-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Recycled Water Feasibility Study $ Project nearing completion (350,000) c701701-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Newell Creek Pipeline Rehab/Replacement $ Project nearing completion (30,000) c701705-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Water Supply Augmentation $ Active project, will reduce FY23 request 550,000 c701706-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Aerators at Loch Lomond $ Active project, will reduce FY23 request 60,000 c701707-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7151-57302 CPS 20" RW Pipeline Replacement $ Project nearing completion (220,000) c701708-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7152-57302 Graham Hill WTP Tube Settler Replacement $ Project closing (180,000) c701801-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project $ Project nearing completion (703,000) c701908-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 N Coast System Repair/Replace-Planning $ Project nearing completion (490,000) c701910-100-2020-0 711-70-95-7159-57202 Bay Street Reservoir Storage Building $ Project closing (150,000) c702001-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7151-57302 Distribution System Water Quality Improv $ Add'l funds needed to complete in 3,000 FY23 c702002-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Brackney Landslide Area Pipeline Risk Re $ Active project, will reduce FY23 request 410,000 c702107-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7153-57302 Union/Locust Back-up Generator $ Add'l funds needed to complete in 60,000 FY23 c702109-100-2020-0 711-70-91-7159-57302 GHWTP Gate Entrance Upgrades $ Add'l funds needed to complete in 101,590 FY23 c702201-100-2020-0 711-70-95-7152-57302 GHWTP SCADA Radio System Replacement $ Add'l funds needed to complete in 90,000 FY23 NET TOTAL (FUND 711) $ -
c701610-100-2020-0 715-70-91-7153-57302 ASR Planning- SDC $ To balance SDC funding (100,000) between projects c701612-100-2020-0 715-70-91-7153-57302 Recycled Water - SDC $ To balance SDC funding 100,000 between projects NET TOTAL (FUND 715) $ -

24.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Economic Development
SUBJECT: 2022-2023 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Action Plan (ED)
RECOMMENDATION: Make initial funding awards for the 2022-2023 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Annual Action Plan for both Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME).

BACKGROUND: The City receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) entitlement funding annually from the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In order to obtain these funds, the City must develop and adopt a five-year Consolidated Plan which identifies and analyzes strategies for addressing specific community needs. The Five-Year Consolidated Plan provides strategic direction for housing and community development activities carried out in the City of Santa Cruz.

The City’s current Consolidated Plan (CP) is effective for Program Years 2020-2025 and this is Program Year (PY) 2022. The CP was prepared and submitted for approval to HUD’s Office of Community and Planning Development (CPD) in 2020.

CONSOLIDATED PLAN PROCESS
The Consolidated Plan is divided into six sections.

1. Executive Summary

2. The Process

3. Needs Assessment

4. Market Analysis

5. Strategic Plan

6. First-Year Action Plan
An Annual Action Plan (AAP) is approved for each year covered by the Consolidated Plan as the vehicle to implement CP strategies. AAPs set the annual budget-allocating funds from that year’s CDBG or HOME funding plus any unused/uncommitted funds from prior years or any program income received during the preceding year. The City must annually approve an AAP which specifies activities that will be undertaken during that PY. A core component of the AAP is the budget which determines CDBG and HOME program funding. A draft of the 2022-2023 Action Plan budget is provided as an attachment to this report. Final funding numbers from

25.1 HUD have not yet been provided, so the draft budget is based on estimated funding; final allocations are usually provided by HUD to the City in March, barring delays from Congress. As of the drafting of this report, no additional CDBG-CV or other HUD administered CARES Act funding for the City of Santa Cruz has been announced.

At the February 24, 2022 Community Programs Committee (CPC), the members reviewed application requests and made funding recommendations. The CPC funding recommendations are summarized below in the Budget Recommendations sections. At the March 22, 2022 meeting, we are asking the City Council to vote on a recommended budget and direct staff to draft the AAP which will be available for a 30 day public review period. This plan will be adopted and finalized at the second Public Hearing at the City Council meeting on April 26, 2022. Staff will update the AAP based on the outcome of the April Public Hearing and the AAP will be available for review and public comment for another 15 days before it is submitted to HUD. This year’s AAP will be the second under the 2020-2025 CP.

The AAP is normally due to HUD by mid-May. In recent AAP cycles, government delays in appropriating HUD funds pushed the submission deadline to mid-June. As of this date, HUD has not yet modified the AAP submission date. In order to meet the established HUD deadlines, the dates of the upcoming Public Hearings and final awards cannot be pushed beyond the April 26, 2022 second Public Hearing.

CDBG PROGRAM OVERVIEW
CDBG funds are used for a wide range of community development activities directed toward neighborhood revitalization, economic development, and improved community facilities and services. Activities that can be funded with CDBG dollars include, but are not limited to:
acquisition of real property, acquisition and construction of public works and facilities, reconstruction and rehabilitation of residential and nonresidential properties, homeownership assistance, micro-enterprise assistance, and the provision of public services such as employment, food banks, crime prevention, childcare, health, drug abuse, education, and fair housing counseling. The primary beneficiaries of CDBG funded projects or programs must be very-low, low and moderate-income person(s) and household(s). Other beneficiaries of CDBG funded projects can include: seniors, homeless persons and disabled adults.

HUD regulations limit how CDBG funds are used. The City’s CDBG funded programs or projects must either benefit low income areas (Area Benefit) or low income individuals (Limited Clientele). Programs receiving funding under Limited Clientele requirements must document that at least 51% of their clientele are low income. To qualify under Area Benefit, an activity must be located in and serve a low income neighborhood. The City’s primary low income neighborhoods in the Beach Flats and Lower Ocean make up the City’s HUD Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA). This area is a priority for CDBG funding. HUD approves NRSA designations with the expectation that there will be increased CDBG funding utilized in these areas, therefore ensuring that these areas are improving. Community Based Development Organizations (CBDOs) must be located within the NRSA and must maintain a governing board of directors comprised of a mix of at least 51%: low-income residents, executive level entrepreneurs in the neighborhood and governing members of neighborhood groups. CBDOs located within a HUD approved NRSA can receive funding for Public Services over the usual 15% cap on this category of funding. The City currently has one qualified CBDO - Nueva Vista.

25.2 Staff is currently conducting outreach for the NRSA plan to bring it in alignment with the CP.

This update to the NRSA plan was due to be submitted as an attachment to the AAP May 15th, 2022. The local HUD field office extended this deadline to the next year’s cycle, but staff is continuing to work on the update. The updated NRSA plan will cover a 3 year period, covering programs located in the NRSA, effective through the end of the current CP (2020-2025). Staff is conducting outreach in the community and an online version of the survey in English and Spanish can be found here: www.cityofsantacruz.com/hudprograms

HOME PROGRAM OVERVIEW
HOME program funds are exclusively used to help provide housing for low income households.

This can be done in two ways. Funding assistance can be provided to: (1) help develop or rehabilitate income restricted housing units or (2) support programs that provide financial assistance directly to low income renters or home buyers enabling them to then access or retain housing. To oversee programs and projects using HOME program funding, HUD sets the administration levels at ten percent (10%) of the combined grant allocation plus program income (PI).

Additionally, the City must set aside 15% of each grant to be used only by a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO). The City currently has two qualified CHDOs – Habitat for Humanity Santa Cruz County and Mid-Peninsula the Farm, Inc. First Community Housing (FCH), a non-profit affordable housing developer with CHDO status in San Jose has submitted an application to qualify for CHDO status in Santa Cruz and it is currently in review with City staff. FCH will be working on the Metro Pacific Station North affordable housing project and an affordable housing project at Barrios Unidos. As part of their application for HOME funds this year, FCH is expanding their board into Santa Cruz to become eligible for CHDO status in our jurisdiction this year.

DISCUSSION: CDBG PROGRAM BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS
The 2022-2023 HUD funding levels have not yet been provided to the City of Santa Cruz. The Preliminary Action Plan Draft Budget is based on estimates of prior years’ funding levels. For the 2022-2023 PY, it is estimated that the City will receive approximately $605,000 in CDBG funds from HUD. Combined with program income estimated at $55,000 and unspent funds from prior years of approximately $60,000, the total CDBG budget is expected to be $720,000, with $132,000 of this budgeted for Program Administration costs. Administration funding is set by HUD formula to 20% of the HUD grant plus estimated Program Income.

Administrative funding levels are set by HUD formula and the City is required to maintain existing Rehabilitation programs. Staff and the CPC recommend that the City fund CDBG Public Services at last year’s funding levels for: the Teen Center, Second Harvest Food Bank, Nueva Vista and CRLA. Because the funding recommendations are based on estimates, it is possible that not all of the programs could be funded at their full request in the final AAP budget. If this is the case, any needed reductions will be decided by Council at the upcoming Public Hearings on the AAP. While applications for Public Services have increased over last year’s funding levels, the CDBG funding levels might not correspond with this because they are set by HUD formula. Though CRLA increased their funding application ask by $5,000 for the upcoming year, the CRLA request and award was already increased by $5,000 over the preceding year. If there is an increase in CDBG funding available for public services greater than the estimate, staff

25.3 recommends to increase the funding equally between all public service programs subject to the 15% cap.

The recommendations above would fund Public Services within the cap of 15% set by HUD, although it appears that we are exceeding the HUD mandated Public Service cap by ~$100,000.

The $100,000 awarded to Nueva Vista for Public Services can be excluded from this category due to their current status as a CBDO as described in the background section above, which is why we can fund this category for a total of $185,000.

Staff and the CPC recommend funding all three Capital Improvement Project applications. Staff recommends funding the Parks and Recreation Depot Freight Building renovation at the requested $62,000 in order to paint, update plumbing (new sinks), and improve the worn flooring. In addition to providing public restrooms and classroom space, this space has recently served as a polling place, COVID testing site, and meal distribution site for the homeless. The full funding amount is needed for the project to be completed. Staff also recommends funding the application from CFSC at the full ask of $93,411 to renovate the Santa Cruz Aids Project (SCAP) which provides supportive affordable housing to community members living with HIV/AIDS. The funding will facilitate much needed improvements to maintain safe living conditions in this affordable housing. Improvements will include: needed bathroom and kitchen renovations, fence repair, electrical and plumbing repairs and improvements to energy efficiency.

Staff also recommends using the remaining CDBG funding estimated at $242,589 towards homeless infrastructure projects. When the final grant numbers are announced by HUD, and the exact amount of CDBG funding is known, staff recommends that the homeless infrastructure projects receive any residual funds if the final grant numbers exceed the current projected award amount.

HiAP- The external Public Service programs help in the goal to invest in downtown and other local businesses (with some being located downtown, lower Ocean and the Beach Flats area).

Funding for the Public Service activities is consistent with the Health in All Policies (HiAP) framework, especially the pillars of equity, and sustainability. Because the NRSA allows to fund public services at levels above the 15% cap, the City can provide additional funding to Nueva Vista (the Beach Flats Community Center) and (Familia Center) in order to bring additional funding to the City’s lowest income neighborhoods.

HOME PROGRAM BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS
Proposed HOME program funding recommendations will be divided into three categories:

Program Administration (calculated by formula), Ongoing City Programs, and HOME affordable housing projects which can receive residual receipts development loans. When HOME funds are used for low interest loans, this helps to ensure that the value will stay in the community and helps in the aim to leverage the dollars further (when the development has cash flow in excess of what is needed for its annual operation then the loans can begin to be repaid and can re-fund the HOME pot for additional affordable housing). There will be an estimated $425,000 available for allocation under the 2022-2023 HOME grant, and an additional estimated $125,000 of Program Income. There is also prior year funding of $1,551,517, bringing the total amount available to approximately $2M. A little over $250,000 of that $2M is restricted and may only go to a CHDO. The City is at risk of losing some of the CHDO set-aside funds (approximately $60K) if not awarded to a CHDO this year, and incrementally could lose about the same amount

25.4 each subsequent year until it is awarded and committed to a CHDO project. Staff has received two HOME applications for 2022-2023 HOME funding.

The Housing Authority through its nonprofit New Horizons has submitted a funding application for a 20 unit affordable single room occupancy (SRO) project near Natural Bridges with 19 units at the 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or Very Low Income (VLI) level and one manager’s unit. The application is for $1.49 million of funding for affordable housing construction which would cover over 20% of their total project budget. The project will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council for planning permit and Coastal permit approval in the next few months. The HUD HOME eligibility of this project is still pending, and staff are working with the local HUD field office and the Housing Authority to resolve this issue.

Primarily at issue is the HUD regulation that awards must go directly to an affordable housing developer selected through an RFP process, and the Housing Authority would make up its housing development team through consultants and Housing Authority staff, with New Horizons, as the applicant, having no development experience. HUD regulations only allow funding to go straight to a developer with no pass-through entities. In a recent discussion with the HUD field office, progress was made in determining if the Housing Authority’s application was eligible and it appears that they may be, though staff is still awaiting written confirmation.

First Community Housing (FCH) also submitted an application for Pacific Station North which will provide 95 affordable rental apartments, including a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedrooms (167 bedrooms total) in the City’s downtown. The income levels will be set at 30% AMI or Extremely Low Income for 27 units, 50% AMI (VLI) for 31 units and 60% AMI for 37 units with 2 manager units. A minimum of 23 units will be available to households that are experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness and supportive services will be provided to these households. The project received its planning permit and Coastal permit last year. The application request is for the full HOME funding amount which would be approximately 2% of their total project budget. FCH has considerable development experience in San Jose and is expanding its CHDO board to include Santa Cruz, meaning that it can receive CHDO set-aside funds that have typically been more difficult to award due to the limited number of CHDOs in Santa Cruz.

There is not enough HOME funding available to fund both projects at their full requests. It is a HUD best practice to fund fewer projects at higher levels to ensure that projects are funded at adequate levels so they can move forward. Because HOME administrative, regulatory and reporting requirements are so extensive, staff recommends to fund only one project utilizing HOME funds. HOME requires substantial market analysis and financial leveraging (subsidy layering review) to be completed for any funded project, which is a substantial workload for staff in coordination with an outside consultant. Additionally, the HOME inspections, reporting and monitoring are extensive, requiring significant staff time that would be doubled if spread out across the two projects. The HOME regulatory agreement is a more complicated agreement, which will take months to complete. Staff does not have adequate capacity to complete both the required subsidy layering reviews and the related contracts for both projects. The housing division is already understaffed working on multiple grants and affordable housing projects. For this reason, and as recommended by our HUD field office, the applications are being ranked now by three external reviewers and no city staff. The applications are being ranked based on the categories of project readiness, leveraging of funds/value to the community, progress that would be made towards City goals such as HiAP and progress on Consolidated Plans goals. The ranking will be completed and returned on March 14, 2022, and a summary of the rankings can

25.5 be provided at the March 22, 2022 public hearing. Staff recommends funding only the top ranked HOME application using HOME funds.

Staff is anticipating additional funds will be available, through developer in-lieu fees, which could be available as a loan to whichever project does not receive HOME funds. There could also be additional opportunities for funding such as the next round (year 3) of PLHA funds coming next year that could be made at the time of permanent financing (at construction completion) instead of at construction loan closing.

Recommendations are as follows:

1. Program Administration (restricted to 10% of total HOME Entitlement)

2. CHDO Set Aside

3. HOME Program Housing Projects (All Remaining HOME Entitlement) FISCAL IMPACT: Until funds are committed, there is no fiscal impact for the City from the proposed actions. Under the proposed draft budget approximately $720,000 in CDBG and $550,000 in HOME Program funds may be allocated in a final budget that will be approved as part of the 2022-2023 AAP at the April 26, 2022 City Council meeting. No General Funds are included in the proposed draft budget.

Prepared By:

Tiffany Lake
Principal Management
Analyst
Submitted By:

Bonnie Lipscomb
Director of Economic
Development
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. HUD 2022-2023 ACTION PLAN BUDGET.PDF

25.6 ADMINISTRATION (Formula: 10% of total Entitlement and Program Income) Activity: Grant Administration & Planning $55,000
Applicant: City of Santa Cruz Economic Development
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION $55,000
PROJECTS & PROGRAMS Requested
Funding
Recommended
Funding
Activity: CHDO Set-Aside $63,750 $63,750
Applicant: Certified CHDOs in Santa Cruz
Activity: Future HOME Projects- Reserve $1,982,767 $1,982,767 Applicant: Affordable Housing Projects
$2,046,517 $2,046,517
TOTAL HOME FUNDING BUDGETED AMOUNT $2,101,517

HOME PROGRAM BUDGET
2022-2023 PROGRAM YEAR

TOTAL NEW HOME FUNDING

TOTAL PROJECT/PROGRAM FUNDING

25.7 CDBG & HOME ACTION PLAN

AND BUDGET
1st Public Hearing
Presenting: Tiffany Lake- Housing Principal Management Analyst Jessica de Wit- Housing and Community Development Manager March 22, 2022

25.8 Today’s Goal
Council makes a funding recommendation
for the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan (AAP)
Budget

25.9 Annual action plan
NOFA for CDBG and
HOME
Nov 2021
HUD

GRANT TIMELINE
Applications due
for consideration
Early Jan 2022
Community
Programs
Committee (CPC)
recommendations
Feb 24, 2022
1st Public
Hearing – Initial
Council
Approvals
Mar 22, 2022
Staff review of
applications for
completeness and
eligibility
2nd Public
Hearing – Final
Approval
Late Jan 2022 Apr 26, 2022

25.10 HUD CDBG & HOME Funding
Estimated
2022 CDBG
$605,000
Estimated
2022 HOME
$425,000

25.11 CDBG TOTAL FUNDING
CDBG Funding:

CDBG 2022-23 PY Grant $605,000
Estimated Program Income $55,000
Prior Yr. Funds for
Reprogramming $60,000
ESTIMATED TOTAL $720,000

25.12 ADMIN AND CITY PROGRAMS FUNDING
CDBG Funding:

Total Available $720,000
Administration ($132,000)
Rehab Administration ($5,000)
TOTAL REMAINING $583,000

25.13 REQUESTS

COMMUNITY PROGRAM APPLICATION REQUESTS

PROGRAMS
Teen Center
Second Harvest
CRLA
Nueva Vista
$35,000
$25,000
$30,000
$100,000

25.14 Not subject to activities cap
Recommendations

PROGRAM FUNDING
Teen Center- $35,000 Second Harvest- $25,000 CRLA - $25,000 The Santa Cruz Teen
Center is a recreational
facility dedicated to
creating a safe and
diverse environment for
the teen community.

Second Harvest supports
Santa Cruz County to
provide nourishment
for all community members
through food distribution
programs.

CRLA provides free civil
legal services to
low-income residents of
California's rural counties.

Nueva Vista - $100,000
Nueva Vista Community
Resources is located in
the Beach Flats
Neighborhood offering
programming such as
homework tutoring,
support, counseling, and
parent education.

Total - $185,000
Not subject to activities cap 25.15
Recent CDBG Program Updates
From July 2021- December 2021 SHFB on average provided 50,700 Santa Cruz residents with approximately 1,449,086 pounds of food.

SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK (SHFB)

25.16 Program Success
Nueva Vista Community Resources -Familia Center
of advocacy to their
over 700 unduplicated
clients
Hours
350
received food
distribution
Households
340
● Spanish language services
● Client advocacy
● Rental assistance
● Food pantry
● Enrollment in gov programs
● Advocacy for benefits
● Landlord assistance
● Clothing distribution
Additional Services

25.17 Program Success
provided with
technical assistance to
help their children
with remote learning
Parents/ clients
served with summer
recreational activities
and lunch program
Youths
36 of 1 on 1 homework
tutoring four
afternoons every week.

Youths
50 Nueva Vista Community Resources -Beach Flats Community Center 18 25.18
program success
CRLA assisted
● 53 Santa Cruz residents/
41 households
● 24 households received
legal counsel and advice.

Helping City Residents
California Rural Legal Assistance
(CRLA)

25.19 REQUESTS

COMMUNITY PROJECT APPLICATION REQUESTS

PROJECTS
Depot Park Renovation $62,000
SCAP Renovation $93,411
Homeless Infrastructure $350,000

25.20 Depot Park Freight-
$62,000
Homeless Infrastructure-
$242,589
Renovation to Depot Freight
Building- main room and
restrooms
New emergency encampment
infrastructure site
preparation, hygiene services,
and utility connections
SCAP - $93,411
Renovations to this affordable
housing site-which provides
low-income supportive
housing for persons living
with HIV/AIDS
Total - $398,000
Recommendations

PROJECT FUNDING

25.21 CAPITAL PROJECTS
$398,000
SCAP HousinĀ, Depot FreiĀht BuildinĀ,
Homeless Response Inÿrastructure

SUMMARY

CDBG RECOMMENDATIONS

COMMUNITY PROGRAMS-
$185,000
Nueva Vista Community Services-Beach Flats
and Familia Center, Second Harvest Food Bank,
CRLA, Santa Cruz Teen Center
Total - $583,000

25.22 HOME FUNDING
HOME FUNDING:

HOME 2022-23 PY Grant $425,000
Estimated Program Income $125,000
Administration ($55,000)
CHDO- Set aside ($63,750)
Prior years funding $1,551,517
TOTAL HOME Budget $1,982,767

25.23 HOME FUNDING- Requests
Future Potential Projects Request
Natural Bridges SRO $1,491,888
Metro Pac Station North $1,800,000
TOTAL Available - $1,982,767 TOTAL Requests - $3,291,888

25.24 HOME FUNDING-Recommendations
Future Potential Projects Recommended
Natural Bridges SRO -
Metro Pac Station North $1,800,000
Future Housing Projects/Programs $182,767
TOTAL - $1,982,767 $1,982,767

25.25 OUTREACH
Through the American Rescue Plan (ARP),
the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development will be awarding
$1.2M in programmable funds to the City
of Santa Cruz (City) “to assist individuals
or households who are homeless, at risk of
homelessness, and other vulnerable
populations.” The City is seeking feedback
from the community on the priority of
spending this funding to address needs of
those who are homeless and at risk of
homelessness in Santa Cruz.

You can access the survey at
www.cityofsantacruz.com/hudprograms
(available in English and Spanish.)

25.26 -2nd Public Hearing & present final
HUD budget-April 26, 2022
-Staff submits AAP to HUD for final
approval- DEADLINE May 15, 2022
-Funding available-July 1, 2022
Plan & Next Steps
Based on the initial budget
from this meeting – Staff
will draft the 2022-2023
Annual Action Plan
then

25.27 Questions?

25.28 HOME rankings

25.29 25.30

HISTORY OF NUEVA VISTA

CITY FUNDING

25.31 Consolidated Plan Survey

25.32 25.33
COMMUNITY PROGRAM APPLICATIONS REQUESTS :

Nueva Vista $100,000
Teen Center Community Programs $40,000
CRLA Housing Assistance $25,000
Second Harvest Community Programs $25,000
TOTAL Requests $190,000
TOTAL Available 15% Activities Cap ~$90,000
Not subject to activities cap

25.34 CDBG PROJECT APPLICATIONS REQUESTS :

Louden Nelson Senior Studio $50,000
Market St. Senior
Center Center Renovations $125,000
City of Santa Cruz Homeless Infrastructure $250,000
TOTAL Requests $425,000
Total Available $396,092

25.35 RECOMMENDED PROGRAM FUNDING

PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION
NUEVA VISTA $100,000
TEEN CENTER $40,000
CRLA $25,000
SECOND HARVEST $25,000
Total $190,000

25.36 INITIAL RECOMMENDED PROJECTS FUNDING

PROJECTS RECOMMENDATION
Senior Studio(LN) $50,000
SENIOR CENTER $100,000

HOMELESS
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS $231,500
Total $381,500

25.37 SUMMARY
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
Administration
City Programs
Community Programs
Capital Projects
Total Budget
CDBG

FUNDING

RECOMMENDATIONS

25.38 PROPOSED HOME BUDGET

PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION
SECURITY DEPOSIT PROGRAM $100,000
CHDO SET ASIDE $59,421
Prior Reserve+ New Remainder $1,106,057
TOTALS $1,265,478

25.39 HOME FUNDING
HOME FUNDING:

HOME 2021-22 PY Grant $396,141
Estimated Program Income $30,000
Administration @10% ($42,614)
Prior year funds designated for
Future Housing Projects $881,951
TOTAL for programming $1,265,478

25.40 PLAN AND NEXT STEPS
• Based on the initial budget from this meeting
– Staff will draft the 2021-2022 Annual
Action Plan
• 2nd Public Hearing – Present final
budget-April 27th
• Funding becomes available - July 1st

25.41 QUESTIONS?

25.42 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/10/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Planning
SUBJECT: 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-02 Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL)
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations.
2) Adopt a resolution authorizing and directing the City Manager to submit Ordinance No. 2022- 02 and changes to the Downtown Plan as Local Coastal Implementation Plan Amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.

26.1 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.06, 24.10,

24.12, AND 24.22 OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE AND LOCAL

COASTAL PROGRAM TO CLARIFY CERTAIN REGULATIONS FOR SINGLE-ROOM

OCCUPANCY UNITS AND AMEND REGULATIONS FOR SMALL OWNERSHIP UNITS BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

Section 1. Section 21.06.020 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

21.06.020 DEFINITIONS.

As used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases are defined as follows:

A. “Building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances” shall refer to the current adopted codes specified in Title 18, the California Fire Code and International Fire Code, all as modified, adopted and codified in this code. The phrase “building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances” shall also refer to the city of Santa Cruz zoning ordinance as codified at Title 24, the city of Santa Cruz subdivision ordinance as codified at Title 23, and all provisions of California statutory law and this code pertaining to property-related sanitation, health, safety and nuisance, as well as state regulations promulgated pursuant to California statutory law, for which the city has enforcement authority.

B. “Director” shall refer to the city’s director of planning and community development.

C. “Owner” shall mean any person who owns one or more residential rental dwelling units.

D. “Person” means and includes any individual, partnership of any kind, corporation, limited liability company, association, joint venture or other organization or entity, however formed, as well as trustees, heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, or any combination of such persons. The terms “person,” “owner,” “operator,” and “landlord” may herein be used interchangeably.

E. “Residential rental dwelling unit” shall mean a building or portion of a building that is rented or leased to tenants for residential purposes on a nontransient basis (when one or more tenants reside on the property or rent or lease the property for thirty consecutive days or longer) and which is owned in whole or in part by a landlord. This shall include but not be limited to singlefamily residences, duplexes, triplexes, apartment houses, townhouse dwellings, condominiums, boarding houses, lodging houses, rooming houses, single room occupancy units, flexible density units, hotel and motel units, sober living facilities, fraternities, sororities, and dormitories in the city of Santa Cruz.

26.2 ORDINANCE 2022-02
2 Section 2. Section 24.10.620 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Part 7C: R-T(C) SUBDISTRICT C – BEACH COMMERCIAL

24.10.620 USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT.
(1) The following uses require an administrative use permit and design permit and are subject to other applicable requirements of the Municipal Code (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s land use codes.

Subcategories of uses within these use categories can be found in the land use codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):
(a) Accessory buildings containing plumbing fixtures subject to provisions of Section

24.12.140;
(b) Acting/art/music/dance/studios/schools (610);
(c) Apparel and accessory stores (250);
(d) Churches (500);
(e) Community organizations, associations, clubs and meeting halls (570); (f) Convenience stores, subject to alcohol regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part 12 (240B); (g) Developed parks (710);
(h) Undeveloped parks and open space (700);
(i) Eating and drinking establishments (except bars and fast-food restaurants) subject to live entertainment and alcohol regulations of Chapter 24.12 (280); (j) Educational facilities (public/private) (510);
(k) Flexible density unit (FDU) housing (15 units or fewer) as part of a mixed-use project; (l) General merchandise stores (drug and department stores) (230); (m) Government and public agencies (530);
(n) Home furnishings (270);
(o) Large family daycare homes (no design permit required unless otherwise required as a result of a structural modification to the residence);

26.3 ORDINANCE 2022-02
3 (p) Liquor stores, subject to alcohol regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part 12 (240B); (q) Mixed residential, and commercial developments when multiple family units are located above first floor of commercial uses, subject to the R-T(A) District regulations (830);
(r) Multiple dwellings, townhouse dwelling groups and condominiums (three to nine units) subject to the R-T(A) District regulations (830); (s) Museum and art galleries (600);
(t) Professional offices associated with a visitor-serving use (400); (u) Repairs, alterations, maintenance services to household items (except boat repair) (340);
(v) Single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, fifteen units or fewer (860); (w) Specialty retail supply stores (290);
(x) Supportive and transitional housing (three to nine units) subject to the R-T(A) District regulations;
(y) Temporary structures and uses;
(z) Video rental (360B);
(aa) Sports and recreation facilities, without alcohol sales (720); (bb) Wireless telecommunications facilities, subject to the regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part

15. (2) The following uses require a special use permit and design permit and are subject to other applicable requirements of the Municipal Code (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s land use codes.

Subcategories of uses within these use categories can be found in the land use codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):
(a) Bars/taverns subject to alcohol regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part 12 (280C); (b) Communication and information (550);
(c) Duplexes (810);
(d) Educational facilities (public/private) (510);

26.4 ORDINANCE 2022-02
4 (e) Fast-food restaurants subject to alcohol regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part 12 (280H); (f) Financial, insurance, real estate offices (420);
(g) Flexible density unit (FDU) housing (16 units or more) as part of a mixed-use project; (h) Marine facilities and related uses (560E):
(i) Related research facilities (400L);
(ii) Related storage and warehousing (330);
(iii)Fish/seafood wholesale sales (200F);
(i) Medical/health offices (410);
(j) Mixed residential and commercial developments with noncommercial uses on the ground floor, subject to the R-T(A) District regulations (830); (k) Multiple dwellings, townhouse dwelling groups and condominiums ten units or more subject to the R-T(A) District regulations (840);
(l) Nightclubs/music halls, subject to live entertainment and alcohol regulations in Chapter

24.12, Part 12 (630);
(m) Off-site public/private parking facilities, five or more spaces (930); n) Personal services (except contractors’ yards and mortuaries) (310); (o) Professional offices (400), except as associated with a visitor-serving use; (p) Single-family residences if lot size does not allow multifamily development (800); (q) Single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, sixteen units or more (860); (r) Sports and recreation facilities subject to alcohol regulations in Chapter 24.12, Part 12 (720);
(s) Supportive and transitional housing, ten or more units subject to the R-T(A) District regulations;
(t) Theaters (620);
(u) Triplexes (820);
(v) Utilities and resources (540).

26.5 ORDINANCE 2022-02
5 Section 3. Section 24.10.730 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Part 8: C-C COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT

24.10.730 USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT.

1. The following uses require an administrative use permit and are subject to other applicable requirements of the municipal code (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s land use codes. Subcategories of uses within these use categories can be found in the land use codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):
a. Accessory buildings containing plumbing fixtures subject to provisions of Section

24.12.140;
b. Ambulance services (410B);
c. Auto services and repair subject to performance standards in Section 24.12.900 (350); d. Bakery, handicrafts or similar light manufacturing and assembly uses associated with retail sales if floor area is less than seven thousand square feet and retail sale or service area occupies at least thirty percent of the floor area; e. Brewpubs and microbreweries, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter

24.12;
f. Boat repairs (340D);
g. Building materials/garden supplies (220);
h. Cannabis retail, subject to the commercial cannabis regulations, Part 14 of Chapter

24.12;
i. Churches (500);
j. Communication and information services (550);
k. Community organizations, associations, clubs and meeting halls (570); l. Developed parks (710);
m. Educational facilities (public/private) (510);

26.6 ORDINANCE 2022-02
6 n. Fast-food restaurants or drive-in eating facilities subject to performance standards in Section 24.12.290, and subject to live entertainment and alcohol regulations of Chapter

24.12 (280H);
o. Flexible density unit (FDU) housing, 15 units or fewer; p. Foster family homes;
q. Government and public agencies (530);
r. Lodging (300);
s. Mixed residential and commercial/office developments involving permitted or administrative uses on the ground floor and from three to nine multiple dwellings or condominiums above the first floor;
t. Motor vehicle dealers and supplies (260);
u. Multiple dwellings or condominiums, three to nine units subject to the minimum (net) land area per dwelling unit of the R-M District (830);
v. Off-site public/private parking facilities, five or more spaces (930); w. Recycling collection facilities;
x. Single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, fifteen units or fewer (860); y. Tasting rooms, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12; z. Temporary structures and uses;
aa. Thrift stores (290m);
bb. Undeveloped parks and open space (700);
cc. Utilities and resources (540);
dd. Veterinarians (410A);
ee. Wireless telecommunications facilities, subject to the regulations in Part 15 of Chapter

24.12. 2. The following uses require a special use permit and are subject to other applicable requirements of the municipal code. All industrial classifications from 100 to 155 shall be limited to operations that occupy less than five thousand square feet of floor area and shall comply with all performance standards listed in Part 2 of the Environmental Resource Management

26.7 ORDINANCE 2022-02
7 provisions (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s land use codes. Subcategories of uses within these use categories can be found in the land use codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):
a. Bar and cocktail lounges subject to live entertainment and alcohol regulations of Chapter 24.12 (280C);
b. Carpenter, electrical, plumbing, heating, and furniture upholstery shops; c. Community care facilities;
d. Large family daycare;
e. Contractor/building (310E);
f. Convenience stores, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (240B); g. Fabricated metal products (manufacturing) (150);
h. Fabricated wire products (manufacturing) (155A);
i. Flexible density unit (FDU) housing, 16 units or more; j. Food and beverage preparation (manufacturing) (100); k. Furniture and fixtures (manufacturing) (120);
l. Hospitals (520);
m. Laboratory research experimentation, testing, software development; n. Liquor stores, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12; o. Local/interurban passenger transit (bus, cab) (560B); p. Millwork, textile products, knit goods, woven fabrics, clothing (manufacturing) (105); q. Mixed residential and commercial/office developments, with ten or more multiple dwellings or condominiums, either above commercial uses or units on the same lot (840);
r. Multiple dwellings and condominiums, ten or more units subject to the minimum land area (net) per dwelling unit of the R-M District (840); s. Mortuaries (310I);

26.8 ORDINANCE 2022-02
8 t. Motion picture production (manufacturing) (155E);
u. Nightclubs/music halls subject to live entertainment and alcohol regulations of Chapter

24.12 (630);
v. Rental services (360);
w. Single-room occupancy (SRO) housing sixteen units or more (860); x. Solar equipment (manufacturing) (155C);
y. Sports recreation facilities, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (720);
z. Stone, clay, glass products (manufacturing) (140);
aa. Storage and warehouse when connected with permitted use (330); bb. Wholesale trade (nondurable goods) (200):
(a) Bakery,
(b) Confectionery,
(c) Dairy,
(d) Health foods;
cc. Wholesale trade (durable goods) (210):
(a) Paper products and related (210E),
(b) Special equipment (machine supply) (210F);
dd. Smoking lounges as defined in Section 24.22.748.2 and subject to siting criteria and performance standards in Chapter 5.54.

Section 4. Section 24.10.2370 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Part 24(A): CBD SUBDISTRICT E – LOWER PACIFIC AVENUE

24.10.2370 USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT.

26.9 ORDINANCE 2022-02
9 1. The following uses are subject to approval of an administrative use permit in the Lower Pacific Avenue Subdistrict and possibly other requirements of the Municipal Code (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s Land Use Codes. Further refinement of uses within these categories can be found in the Land Use Codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):

Auto supply stores (260C);
b. Bakery, micro-brewery (subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12), handicrafts or similar light manufacturing and assembly uses associated with retail sales, if floor area is less than seven thousand square feet and retail sale or service area occupies at least thirty percent of the floor area;
c. Brew pubs, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12; d. Churches (500);
e. Communication and information services (550);
f. Community organizations, associations, clubs, and meeting halls (570); g. Developed parks (710);
h. Fast-food restaurants or drive-in eating facilities subject to performance standards in Section 24.14.290 and subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 and Section 24.14.290 (280H);
i. Financial, insurance, real estate offices (420);
j. Financial services (320);
k. Flexible density unit (FDU) housing (15 units or less) as part of a mixed-use project; l. Foster family homes;
m. Government and public agencies (530);
n. Medical/health offices (except veterinarians and ambulance services) (410); o. Off-site public/private parking facilities (930);
p. Professional offices (400);
q. Professional/personal services (except contractors yards and mortuaries) (310); r. Recycling collection facilities;

26.10 ORDINANCE 2022-02
10 s. Sports, recreation and entertainment facilities subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (720);
t. Temporary structures and uses;
u. Utilities and resources (540);
v. Veterinarians (410A);
w. Wireless telecommunications facilities, subject to the regulations in Part 15 of Chapter

24.12. 2. The following uses are subject to approval of a special use permit and design permit in the Lower Pacific Avenue Subdistrict and possibly other requirements of the Municipal Code (numerical references at the end of these categories reflect the general use classifications listed in the city’s Land Use Codes. Further refinement of uses within these categories can be found in the Land Use Codes, but they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of potential uses):
a. Bar and cocktail lounges, subject to alcohol regulations in Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (280C);
b. Community care facilities;
c. Community care residential facilities;
d. Contractor/building (310E);
e. Convenience/liquor stores, subject to alcohol regulations of Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (240B);
f. Flexible density unit (FDU) housing (16 units or more) as part of a mixed-use project; g. Night clubs (amplified live entertainment), subject to alcohol regulations of Part 12 of Chapter 24.12 (630);
h. Single-room occupancy (SRO) (860);
i. General retail merchandise (drug and department stores) exceeding sixteen thousand square feet (230);
j. Smoking lounges as defined in Section 24.22.748.2 and subject to siting criteria and performance standards in Chapter 5.54.

26.11 ORDINANCE 2022-02
11 Section 5. Section 24.12.240, Subsection s. Residential Uses, of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.240 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED.

Number of Bedrooms
Type Efficiency 1 2+
Single-family (including
townhouses), houseboat,
duplex, triplex, multiple
mobilehomes, community
housing projects, other
multifamily dwelling units

1.0 1.0 2.0
Community housing projects,
townhouses, and multifamily
projects of 5 units or more
In addition to meeting above residential parking
requirements, guest parking spaces shall be
provided at a rate 10% of the above standards.

Fractional spaces will be rounded up to the next
whole number.

Lodging, rooming houses and
bed-and-breakfast inns
2 spaces, plus 1 for each bedroom that is rented
Residence halls, dormitories 0.75 space for each guest or occupant Senior housing development 1 for each 3 dwelling units or rooms intended for separate occupancy, plus an area of land equal to
the required off-street parking for multifamily
units, not including required open space, which
could be converted to parking should the retirement
center change to a multifamily residential use
Flexible Density unit (FDU) 1 space for each dwelling unit Single-room occupancy
dwelling unit, less than 300
square feet

0.75 for each dwelling unit
Single-room occupancy
dwelling unit, 300 square feet
or more
1 for each dwelling unit
Accessory dwelling unit The parking standards for accessory dwelling units are as follows (these standards do not affect the
amount of required parking for the primary
residence):

Outside the coastal zone, no off-street parking shall
be required for an ADU and spaces removed to
accommodate an ADU will not require
replacement.

On parcels located inside the coastal zone and
within the designated areas shown in the LCP
Figure “ADU Parking Required” (which follows
this table), at least one off-street parking space shall

26.12 ORDINANCE 2022-02
12 be required for each ADU, and all off-street
parking requirements associated with all other
residential uses at the site shall be met on site,
including replacement parking spaces if any are
removed to accommodate an ADU.

On parcels located inside the coastal zone but not
within the designated areas shown in LCP Figure
“ADU Parking Required” (which follows this
table), zero parking spaces shall be required for
each ADU. When a garage, carport, or covered
parking structure is demolished in conjunction with
the construction of an accessory dwelling unit or
converted to an accessory dwelling unit, those offstreet parking spaces are not required to be replaced. If other parking areas on a site (e.g., a
driveway or other nonstructural parking area) are
removed to provide for an ADU, off-street
replacement parking spaces shall be required for
the primary (non-ADU) residential use.

Section 6. Section 24.12.1050 is hereby added to the Santa Cruz Municipal Code to read as follows:

24.12.1050 PROGRAM STANDARDS.

1. SRO units shall comply with the underlying development standards of the zoning district in which they are located, except that requirements for minimum lot area per dwelling unit shall not apply to SRO units.

2. SRO units shall not be subdivided or individually sold.

Section 7. Part 16 of Chapter 24.12 (Community Design) of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Part 16: FLEXIBLE DENSITY UNIT HOUSING

24.12.1500 PURPOSE.

The purpose of these regulations is to provide additional options for housing by producing incentives for the development of reduced size dwelling units, defined as Flexible Density Units (FDU). This unit type encourages developers to create a community where a variety of income levels and household sizes interact.

26.13 ORDINANCE 2022-02
13 24.12.1510 DEFINITION.
“Flexible Density Unit” or “FDU” is a dwelling unit ranging from two hundred twenty to six hundred fifty square feet that is exempt from General Plan and Zoning Ordinance density standards. Developments including this unit type may consist solely of FDUs or include other residential units.

24.12.1520 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

1. Density. FDU units shall comply with the underlying development standards of the zoning district in which they are located, except that requirements for minimum lot area per dwelling unit shall not apply to FDU units.

2. Unit Size. The floor area of FDU units may range from a minimum of two hundred twenty square feet to a maximum of six hundred fifty square feet.

3. Minimum Dwelling Units Requirement. Residential or mixed-use projects shall contain at least three dwelling units to qualify for use of the FDU unit type. FDU units can count towards this requirement.

4. Open Space. FDU units shall comply with the underlying development standards of the zoning district in which they are located, except that requirements for minimum open space per dwelling unit shall not apply to FDU units. In lieu of the district regulations for open space, minimum usable open space per dwelling unit for FDU units shall be defined by Section

24.12.1530.

5. Storage Facilities. All FDU units shall have access to private usable storage space containing a minimum of two hundred cubic feet. The required storage space may be incorporated into private garages or carports; provided, that the garage or carport has adequate space for a vehicle, as required by Part 3, Chapter 24.12.

6. Bicycle Parking. One Class 1 bicycle storage facility shall be provided for each FDU unit. The required private usable storage space provided for each FDU unit may be utilized to meet this requirement.

7. Covered Parking. Covered parking is not required.

8. Zoning. In addition to the permitted land use districts in Chapter 24.10, FDUs shall be permitted in the Central Business District (CBD) pursuant to the Development Standards and Design Guidelines section of the Downtown Plan.

24.12.1530 OPEN AND COMMON SPACE.

1. Residential or mixed-use projects containing FDUs shall contain at least one hundred fifty square feet of usable open space per FDU unit. This requirement may be met by any combination of private space, outdoor open space, or indoor common space.

26.14 ORDINANCE 2022-02
14 2. Residential or mixed-use projects containing FDUs shall require a minimum of two hundred square feet of outdoor open space and two hundred square feet of indoor common space.

Maintenance areas, laundry facilities, storage (including bicycle storage), and common hallways shall not be included as usable indoor common space. Landscape areas that are less than ten feet wide shall not be included as outdoor open space.

3. Outdoor open spaces and indoor common spaces shall be designed to accommodate appropriate furnishings and shall be furnished for use by residents. Appropriate furnishings for indoor common space may include such items as lounge chair(s) and/or couch(es), table(s) with chairs, writing desk(s), and television(s). Appropriate furnishings for outdoor open spaces may include such items as outdoor bench(es), table(s) with chairs, barbecue(s), and shade umbrella(s).

4. In any residential or mixed use development containing FDUs, common laundry facilities shall be provided on site at the rate of one washer and one dryer per ten residential units that do not contain both a washer and a dryer. Fractional ratios shall be rounded up to the next whole number.

5. Laundry facilities that have a minimum of two washers and two dryers must be provided in a separate room.

Section 8. Section 24.22.362 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby added and shall read as follows:

24.22.362 FLEXIBLE DENSITY UNIT (FDU)
“Flexible Density Unit” or “FDU” is a dwelling unit ranging from two hundred twenty to six hundred fifty square feet that is exempt from General Plan and Zoning Ordinance density standards. Developments including this unit type may consist solely of FDUs or include other residential units.

Section 9. Section 24.22.748.1 (Small Ownership Unit(SOU)) of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby deleted:

24.22.748.1 SMALL OWNERSHIP UNITY (SOU).

A dwelling unit containing no more than one bedroom and a floor area ranging from four hundred to six hundred fifty square feet, located on a separate subdivided parcel and included in a residential development where all dwelling units are SOU units and are offered for sale to the general public.

26.15 ORDINANCE 2022-02
15 Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption for areas of the City outside the Coastal Zone, and shall take effect and be in force upon certification by the California Coastal Commission for areas of the City located inside the Coastal Zone.

PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 8th day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder, Meyers; Vice Mayor Watkins; Mayor Brunner.

NOES: Councilmembers Cummings, Brown.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this __th day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above and
foregoing document is the original
of Ordinance No. 2022-xx and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

26.16 RESOLUTION NO. NSRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AUTHORIZING

AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 24, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE,

AND CHANGES TO THE DOWNTOWN PLAN AS LOCAL COASTAL IMPLEMENTATION

PLAN AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR FINAL

CERTIFICATION
WHEREAS, the Work Program for the City of Santa Cruz Planning and Community Development Department includes amendments to the City Municipal Code and Downtown Plan regulations for Small Housing Units; and
WHEREAS, the City’s adopted 2030 General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, and the Housing Blueprint Subcommittee Recommendations all support efficient use of urban land for housing needs at both market rate and below market rate; and WHEREAS, on February 3, 2022, the Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting and conducted a public hearing to review and consider the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code and Downtown Plan and recommended that City Council adopt the amendments to the Municipal Code as amended by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City Guidelines, the proposed code amendments were determined to be addressed by the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) drafted for the City’s General Plan and approved by the City Council in April, 2012; and
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing at which the proposed amendments to the Downtown Plan were approved; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing at which the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code and were introduced; and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing for the second reading of the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council directs the City Manager to submit the amendments to Title 24 of the Municipal Code, and to the Downtown Plan as Local Coastal Implementation Plan Amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification; and WHEREAS, the City Council now finds:

26.17 1. The proposed amendments to Title 24 and the Downtown Plan are in the public interest as they address existing restrictions that burden the development of housing and support development of a wider variety of housing types.

2. The proposed amendments to Title 24 and the Downtown Plan are consistent and compatible with the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.

3. The proposed amendments to Title 24 and the Downtown Plan are intended to be carried out in a manner fully in conformity with the Coastal Act (CA Section 30510).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby approves the amendments to Title 24 of the City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code, the Downtown Plan and Local Coastal Program are hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereby and made a part hereof.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that amendments to the Local Coastal Implementation Plan will become effective inside the Coastal Zone upon final certification by the California Coastal Commission.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

26.18 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Coral Brune <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 12:36 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote No on FDU
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Coral Brune
Santa Cruz resident

26.19 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Nancy Maynard <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 1:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Item 26 on Agenda do not change density linguistics There are several things wrong with the changes some staff want.

SOU's should not be replaced with FDU's
Exempting units so they don't count in the density limit and still allowing them to count for density bonuses is wrong
SRO's should count....should reflect what is planned and needed.

The proposed changes mislead the people...when regulations can be waived they have no real meaning.

A building with 200 units can be counted as 40 if 40 is the required minimum affordable units.. so wrong We need to wait to understand what really could be built.

I live downtown and find this habit of linguistic gymnastics insults the people who live and work here.

Do not make this change
Nancy Maynard

26.20 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Russell Weisz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 3:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: No on Agenda Item 26
Please vote NO on unlimited density. Exceeding appropriate zoning density would be a big mistake for our City.

Sincerely,
Russell Weisz
Judith Carey
319 Laguna St.

Santa Cruz 95060

26.21 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Bruce <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 4:14 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Flexible Density Units
Hello,
There is an upcoming agenda item (#26) on Tuesday, March 22nd that concerns me.  If passed, it will allow developers to double the height limits and increase density by over 50%!  Yikes!  The impact on water usage and traffic is very concerning.  Who wants to live in such a hive?  That's not why we live here, right? Thank You,
Bruce Larsen

26.22 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Robert Orrizzi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 4:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda Item 26 - March 22, 2022
Hello Mayor Brunner & Council Members,
I am alarmed w/ Staff’s recommendation to Council concerning Flexible Density Units (FDU’s) ‐ Agenda Item 26 this Tuesday.  I remain actively involved w/ the opposition to the recently approved 4 & 5 story development by Novin @ 831 Water Street under the auspices of SB 35.  Due to all the Density Bonuses garnered by offering low income studio apartments, 144 units have been approved on this .9 acre lot located at the busy Water Street B40 intersection.  This lot was zoned for 55 units which would be most welcomed by neighbors.  Density Bonus manipulations are scary.  Obviously, much more housing is needed (and is mandated), but, in my opinion, super high density developments should be limited to downtown.

Please devote appropriate attention to the possible repercussions of approving Section 24.12.1510 / Ordinance 2022‐02 (Page 13).

Thank you once again for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Robert Orrizzi

26.23 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: nancy maynard <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 4:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on 7nlimited density
No other city does this
Vote NO
Nancy Maynard

26.24 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 6:16 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Density
Hi City Council, Please don't give away our city. This much density is dangerous. There is not enough water or room to build this many condos & houses.

Fight the state's laws, developers are in their pockets. If you must build only build low income houses in small development around the county. Please! Jody Bare, Pennsylvania Ave. Santa Cruz

26.25 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ned Cost <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 6:24 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote "NO" on unlimited density
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022, to retain the density control we currently have in our county.

26.26 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: orly laluz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 6:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FDU is not good for our City
Household of four disapproves of this concept

26.27 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 7:27 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FDU Ordinance
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
George Lewis
Santa Cruz
.............................

Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS

26.28 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Scott Family <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 8:22 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Martine Watkins
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: March 22, 2022 Agenda Item 26, changes to SOU ordinance Dear Mayor Brunner and Members of the City Council:

We urge you to vote no on the proposed amendments to Title 24 of the Municipal Code to replace Small Ownership Units (SOUs) with Flexible Density Units (FDUs). We are especially concerned for the part of the city along Soquel Avenue and Water Street where the negative consequences to our commercial and residential neighborhoods could outweigh potential benefits.

Please don’t remove the commercial zoning designation.We have a vibrant, growing mix of local businesses here along Soquel Avenue and Water Street. As one Eastside resident said, “If we can’t find it in the ‘hood we don’t need it.” Removal of mixed-use commercial designation would sabotage the gains our local commercial area has made despite the pandemic. Shoppers come from near and far to “Midtown” stores and enjoy our restaurants. The Auto Zone also brings much needed revenue to the City.

Seriously consider the environmental implications. The increased building density allowed under the FDU model would have major cumulative impacts. As other letters from the public submitted for the March 8 Council meeting show, our Eastside area is already more dense than many in the city. Allowing basically unlimited housing development along or closely adjacent to our narrow streets would increase traffic congestion as well as increase burdens on our water supply and infrastructure such as streets and sewers. Think also of how few evacuation routes there are in case of wildfires. Does it make sense to allow unlimited density here under such circumstances? Would the amendments proposed really result in the desired effect to incentivize developers to actually start building the kind of housing we need in Santa Cruz? Who knows? We need housing which is affordable to local workers making local wages and their families, not luxury and market rate. Please do not approve building-related policies without thinking through the consequences for current and future residents.

Thank you for considering these issues and for your dedication to our community.

Sincerely,
Michael A. Scott
Isabelle B. Scott
Santa Cruz Residents

26.29 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Bill Brooks <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:12 AM
To: City Council
Subject: YES VOTE ON FDU Ordinance.

City Council. Please vote YES on the FDU Ordinance, item #26. We need move housing not more commercial. Please Vote YES. Bill Brooks.

William Brooks
400 Highland Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831 459‐6060

26.30 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Joan Timpany <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FDU Ordinance
Dear Mayor Brunner and City Council members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs without a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50- 80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Sincerely,
Joan DJ Timpany
20 year resident of Seabright

26.31 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Gary marietti <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 9:00 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda #26
Please vote yes for more housing.

Thank you
Gary Marietti
Sent from my iPhone

26.32 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Andree LeBourveau <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 9:28 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on FDU Ordance
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
I am for affordable housing in Santa Cruz City but we need to retain local control and not destroy the community. We are not San Jose!
We can have both if we work together.

I was born and raised in Santa Cruz and am so fortunate to have purchased my grandmother's home on Magnolia Street.

Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Andree LeBourveau
131 Magnolia St.
--
Andrée LeBourveau
Visual Resource Curator
Visual, Applied, & Performing Arts
Cabrillo College
VAPA 1005
(831) 479-6343
M-Th: 8-12pm, F: 7:30-11:30am
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

26.33 2
Library Resource Specialist
Robert E. Swenson Library
Cabrillo College
1020
(831) 479-5028
M-Th: 1-5pm, F: 12-4pm

26.34 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Myra Ritchey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 9:34 AM
To: City Council
Subject: No on FDU Ordinance
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Myra Ritchey

26.35 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: david.conrad.jordan <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:12 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda item 26, new FDU requirements
Please vote YES. And, 100% of new units must be affordable to help alleviate the housing shortage David Jordan
140 Beachview Ave
Santa Cruz CA
Sent from my Galaxy

26.36 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: S & B Barisof <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:14 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Just say "NO" on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022 Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal.

We are just getting out of COVID. We need to understand what projects will be proposed with the huge amount of density we allow. Having these FDUs - not having a density limit - is not wise in the context of the new state laws with new ones coming.

The current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density.

There would be NO density limits for huge developments along our main streets, Mission, Water, Ocean, Soquel, Pacific Ave., River, Front, Cedar, Center, and Beach St.

This is just too drastic of a change. State law says the city cannot down zone so no turning back! Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country!
We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance. This is of huge importance to our town.

Thank you,
Steven & Bonnie Barisof

26.37 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Scott <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FDU Ordinance
Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50- 80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Scott Graham

26.38 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Gary Patton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: "Flexible Density Unit" Proposal - Agenda Item #26 On March 22, 2022 Agenda Attachments: March 21, 2022 Letter To Council re Flexible Density Units.pdf Dear Council Members:

This is my “second time around” in terms of commenting on the proposal to change the zoning ordinance to allow for “Flexible Density Units.” I continue to urge the Council to (1) reject the proposal, and (2), if the Council wants to proceed, to undertake, first, the legally required environmental review.

In the attached letter, I am also suggesting a third alternative. Please consider my very strongly-felt objections, and please also consider the proposed alternative way of proceeding, which would help the City achieve the Council mandate to “preserve and protect residential neighborhood areas and existing City businesses as the City’s highest-level policy priority.

Gary A. Patton, Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 1038
Santa Cruz, CA 95061
Telephone: 831‐332‐8546
Email: [email protected]
Website / Blog: www.gapatton.net
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/gapatton

26.39 Gary A. Patton
Telephone: 831-423-2984
Email: [email protected]
March 21, 2022
Mayor and Members, Santa Cruz City Council
Santa Cruz City Hall
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
RE: Proposed Ordinance Revision Re “Flexible Density Units” Agenda Item #26 - March 22, 2022, Agenda
[Sent by Email to: [email protected]]
Dear Mayor Bruner and Council Members:

I have written to you before to indicate my strong opposition to the proposal that is now before you for a second time, as Agenda Item #26 on your March 22, 2022, agenda. The recommendation before you is that you amend the City’s General Plan, the City’s Downtown Plan, and the City’s Local Coastal Program, and adopt ordinance amendments that would replace “Small Ownership Units” with so-called “Flexible Density Units,” and then allow such “Flexible Density Units” to be included in developments that also include larger multifamily housing units.

This is a very significant proposed change to our existing zoning code, and the effect of this proposed change would be to remove many developments from current density requirements, allowing for outsized and highly impactful developments that could have major adverse community impacts. In effect, adoption of the recommendation presented to you would increase densities wherever “Flexible Density Units” would be allowed.

I continue to urge you to reject this proposal outright.

I continue to urge you to undertake a legally required environmental review of the proposal, if you are not willing simply to deny the staff proposal as currently presented.

I do, however, now have a third recommendation - a proposed alternative that I think the Council should consider, if the Council wants to add “Flexible Density Units” into the housing type mix in our city.

I believe you should take no action on the proposal before you when you consider it tomorrow, and should, instead, refer the following idea to the City Planning Commission, for the Commission’s review, and as a way to make the impacts of the proposed new “Flexible Density Units” proposal more likely to be compatible with what the General Plan envisions, and

26.40 2
what our community wants and deserves to receive, with respect to proposed new developments.

The following proposal is legally permissible, and would help achieve the Council’s direction to staff, adopted on August 27, 2019, that “preserving and protecting residential neighborhood areas and existing City businesses” should be the City’s “highest-level policy priority.”

PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE ACTION
In connection with City Council action to change the zoning ordinance to allow unlimited density through Flexible Dwelling Units (FDUs), the Council should act to lower the height limit in those portions of CC (Community Commercial) zoning districts that abut R-1 districts. I suggest that an appropriate and commensurate reduction should be from the currently allowed 40 feet to 30 feet.

The rationale for this proposed change would be as follows:
• State law prohibits the city from adopting plans or zoning that result in less intensive uses unless commensurate increases are simultaneously enacted. Because this new FDU ordinance is a density increase, the city is allowed a rare opportunity simultaneously to lessen intensities of use. Current minimum size is 400 sq ft & 150 sq ft open space = 550 sq ft needed; proposed minimum is 220 sq ft & 150 sq ft open space = 370 sq ft needed; so about 50% more units could be built. Although they would be smaller, each could still house the same number of people, thus increasing overall density. Lowering base height limits in connection with the changes providing for increased density should be interpreted as consistent with State law.
• State law allows developers to build up to three stories more than zoning allows if they build more affordable housing. The lower the base height limit is, the more incentive developers will have to provide higher percentages of affordable housing so they could build taller buildings. • If a developer still wanted to stay within the three-story building limit, it could be achieved being only 30 feet high; this more modest height would mean lower construction costs and hence potentially less costly units; it may mean that the entire project is residential because mixed use projects are typically taller; that would be positive because the city needs housing more than added commercial space.
• The current forty-foot height limits abutting single-family residential districts allow for buildings that shade neighboring homes, limiting their potential for using solar as well as affecting privacy in conflict with General Plan policies calling for neighborhood protection.

PLEASE require an environmental review of the changes proposed by staff, as the California Environmental Quality Act demands, and please do NOT approve

26.41 3
proposed amendments to the Zoning Code that would allow the inclusion of Flexible Density Units in developments with larger multifamily housing units, as that proposal has been presented to the Council.

Finally, I truly hope that the Council will require the Planning Commission to consider the alternative approach suggested in this letter, which would ameliorate the negative impacts of the “Flexible Density Units” proposals, in its current form.

Thank you for your consideration of my very strongly held views.

Yours truly,
Gary A. Patton
cc: Save Santa Cruz Steering Committee
Other Interested Persons

26.42 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Kristen Sandel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:49 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Oppose Adoption of Ordinance 2022-02 (Item #26) Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please don’t approve final adoption of Ordinance 2022-02 (Flexible Density Units Ordinance). It requires further study and analysis as to its long-term impacts on the future functionality of Santa Cruz as a livable city with sufficient, varied, affordable and accessible housing and commercial spaces for all its residents.

Due to recent state-mandated density bonus laws such as SB 35, SB 330, and others, municipalities like Santa Cruz are undergoing a huge adjustment in policies surrounding land use and zoning, with enormous pressure to build new housing on a larger scale. Because we don’t yet know what the full effects of these laws will be, allowing more time to study and understand their impacts on traffic congestion, water use, GHG emissions and other areas of concern would be a wise step.

As you all are no doubt acutely aware, the city and county of Santa Cruz face an urgent crisis in housing and homelessness. I strongly support the creation of new housing. However, simply allowing greater density and height of new developments does not guarantee accessibility of those housing stocks. Housing accessibility should be one of the city’s most pressing priorities in terms of addressing its housing crisis. One of the ways that developers increase the number of units in a building, beyond height, is to make the total square feet of most units quite small, thus precluding their use by families or by housemate sharing situations. It doesn’t do any good to build hundreds of units in new developments if those units are not usable by a broad range of residents.

Squeezing families out of new developments due to unusably small apartment sizes while replacing existing homes and neighborhoods with higher, denser buildings forces those families to move further out in search of larger, more usable housing and commute farther to work and school, adding to traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

Please consider reviewing the ordinance as it stands and making some additions and amendments for greater inclusivity and accessibility. Thank you for your time and work on this issue.

Respectfully,
Kristen Sandel

26.43 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Barisof <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:51 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Just say "NO" on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022 Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal.

We are just getting out of COVID. We need to understand what projects will be proposed with the huge amount of density we allow. Having these FDUs - not having a density limit - is not wise in the context of the new state laws with new ones coming.

The current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density.

There would be NO density limits for huge developments along our main streets, Mission, Water, Ocean, Soquel, Pacific Ave., River, Front, Cedar, Center, and Beach St.

This is just too drastic of a change. State law says the city cannot down zone so no turning back! Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country!
We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance. This is of huge importance to our town.

Thank you,
Bonnie Barisof

26.44 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: l. leet <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:16 AM
To: City Council
Subject: NO vote
Please vote NO on the FDU ordinance.  March 22.  This is of vital importance Thank You
Laura Leet

26.45 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: A Webb <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 1:16 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Subject: 3.22.22 Agenda #26 - FDU Ordinance
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not having a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

The 130 Center St SRO project recently approved increased by 3 stories and density to 233 units just through current state law bonuses. The 831 Water St project, plus the many downtown projects already approved were similar in density and height increases.

We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

Of further concern is First Responders navigating these high density zones, and lack of a coordinated evacuation plan through these areas, particularly during peak tourist season, warm weather weekends/holiday, school/work travel periods, events, UCSC growth, atop all the large high density developments already approved for downtown & beachfront, with added new traffic to Hwy1/Mission St & downtown when the new National Park opens a few miles north of town (just as in Santa Cruz, these visitors typically arrive by car) https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/visitation-numbers.htm. The heavy traffic from Santa Cruz up the coast during the Pandemic shutdown with more people visiting beaches & parks resulted in an extra 2-3 hrs in traffic in just a 10-mile Hwy 1 stretch, with illegal double-and-triple parking on both sides of the highway and increased accidents and bike/pedestrian hits, resulting in major First Responders delays. We've yet to experience the full impacts on the visitor and business experience, safety and quality of life for residents of what we already have in the pipeline.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Anita Webb
Santa Cruz resident

26.46 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Melvee Filippini <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 11:18 AM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Donna Meyers; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Renee Golder
Subject: Item 26 on 3/22 - FDUs & SRO codification
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Please don't approve this FDU ordinance while we are still reeling over the new state laws, like SB 330, SB 35, the ever changing State Density Bonus Law, and others. We rely on you to understand how these sorts of laws will affect our community and our infrastructure/carrying capacity. And it seems that all of us, even the City attorneys and staff are still figuring out these new laws... as they continue to come down the state pipeline.

Maybe the FDU proposal will be a really useful change in the future. But right now it is very scary to hear our City Council - our representatives - are considering something that will clearly compound the impending density even further. It would circumvent all of our zoning density limits along Mission, Pacific, Water, Ocean, Soquel, Cedar, Center, and many other core streets - by not counting FDUs as units toward a max density, and not counting SROs either (as they are asking you to "codify" with this ordinance).

On top of that, those very same units "would" be counted for calculating the developments' huge density bonuses, compounding the already massive increase demanded by the State Density Bonus Law that allows 50% increase over what our City allows.. and currently up to twice the height.

Aren't we really close to fulfilling our RHNA, with a couple of years still left on this cycle? Please put a pause on this.. as a "possible" good idea for the future, but one that would not be responsible to approve in the context of all of these new state laws and a Density Bonus Law that keeps getting increased and increased.

Thank you for doing your best to look out for us,
Melvee Filippini
130 Belvedere Terrace
Santa Cruz, CA 95062

26.47 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Sarah Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 5:30 PM
To: Donna Meyers; Martine Watkins; Renee Golder; Justin Cummings; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; City Council; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson
Subject: Important Please Read Prior to March 22 Meeting Dear City Council,
Please note Santa Cruz is just coming out of COVID. We cannot densify Santa Cruz to the level possible with the FDU ordinance. This is NO joke. Do not pass the FDUs as you have passed so many other measures as you get in the group vote together without thinking carefully as you continue to do and not research but follow each other and get pressured from people who will not be able to afford the units you are okaying. It is no wonder you follow each other in your vote with the difficulty of your job. Think about what you are doing. Are you requiring any cost limit on what the FDUs can be rented for? No.

Do not vote yes on Item 26 in your meeting on March 22. There is plenty of density in our existing rules. You have not seen more projects proposed because of COVID People are telling you to pass it without understanding what the FDUs are. They are mad because they cannot find affordable housing. Most of the units will be market-rate and the people complaining now will still complain. f you don't believe me just ask them how much they are willing to pay for rent per month. It is definitely not market-rate. Santa Cruz does not have the streets or water to support 10 story buildings!!! Do you understand that? Santa Cruz is NOT San Jose.

Do not make it into San Jose. Do you think UCSC will supply housing if you pass the FDU? Why would they? Think about the consequences of the FDUs. We have SROs. They will get built give it a little time. You would not be smart to not be pressured into passing something we all will regret later. Study the impact of FDUs and calculate if they were built on all the streets you are authorizing. Your responsibility is great. Take it seriously and understand 10 story buildings will cause too much traffic and stress on all those who live here. Does that make sense for a minimal amount of more affordable units? More market-rate housing brings up the AMI and there is research to support this. Work on obtaining grants and funding to facilitate building more affordable housing if you care about the people who complain they want housing built. If you can't do it request the city staff to work on this. You have the power to do that. Do not vote yes on item 26 to allow FDUs in Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time to give this serious consideration.

Sarah Olson

26.48 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Lira Filippini <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 6:02 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Renee Golder Subject: FDU - Agenda Item #26, 3/22/22
Attachments: FDU Zones.png
Dear Mayor Brunner and Santa Cruz City Council Members, Before you vote on the FDU Ordinance, please consider the context of all of the new State Housing Laws that we are just now starting to understand. We haven't even seen the few developments using "some" of them built yet. And there are so many more laws and changes to the existing ones, constantly being incorporated.

If we were not in this particular situation with losing our normal local control over land use - the FDU proposal may have been very innovative and really benefit our community and its housing needs. It's important to acknowledge that and the good work the Staff has done in preparing this.

However, we ARE in this new situation of losing MUCH of our local control, through laws that already dramatically increase height and density way beyond our local regulations. If you pass the FDU proposal right now, before our community has seen how these other new laws will affect us - it may be disastrously reckless, not innovative.

Some things to consider:
 The FDUs and codified SROs would increase the base density dramatically, directly increasing the density bonus mandated by the state.
 The new State Density Bonus Law allows up to TWICE the height and 50% density increase over the base density our city allows.
o It also requires the city to "waive" or give "concessions" to most of the site standards that would be the only standards left regulating density.
 Previously, the State Density Bonus Law only allowed 35% density bonuses. Now it's up to 50%, and legislators are actively proposing 100% right now. This is a moving target, going in one direction.  AB 1763 is one of many other new state laws you may not be aware of. o It mandates that a city CANNOT require parking for certain developments. This was used by 119 Coral St, that was approved by the Planning Commission, so Council was not the body to review it, and may not be aware this sort of thing is also happening here now. o This must be taken into consideration when Staff claims that we are strict with our parking regulations.. because these same parking regulations must be waived completely now with certain state laws applied to certain projects.
o AB 1763 also mandates up to 80% density bonus for certain projects!  SB 330 and SB 35 also reduce our ability to enforce our own parking regulations for certain developments close to transit. More laws like this are planned.  There are tons of other new state laws that we have not yet learned about, but will dramatically affect our ability to regulate various aspects of our development.  In this context of constant flux in new state laws, we cannot know what local regulation will be waived or circumvented next. It is imperative that our local regulations do not change in a way that exacerbates this during this period.

26.49 2
 The only bit of local control we retain is keeping our zoning density limits and land use overlays as our density regulations for the base. The FDU ordinance and "codifying" no density limit for SROs, completely negates our zoning density limits for a huge area of the city.

Mission, Water, Ocean, Soquel, Pacific, Cedar, Center, River, Front, Beach, .. and many more streets would be faced with unpredictable and massive densities if you pass this ordinance.

And all of the pink, CC (Community Commercial) areas, would also be changed to allow developers to remove any commercial from their proposals if they have FDU developments. This increases the number of floors with units by 2, increasing the base density and thereby increasing the density bonus potential dramatically again. For a dense population to be sustainable, we need those dense areas to be walk-able, with local businesses included in the majority of these super dense developments.

Our infrastructure and carrying capacity would be completely overwhelmed by this FDU ordinance compounding the new state laws here in Santa Cruz.

We rely on you to make decisions in our municipal affairs, so that we may be sustainable. You've already lost so much of the land-use control our California Constitution has given you, due to the declaration of a housing crisis. Yes, we need "affordable" housing - but every city and county has different access to resources and different infrastructure. That's why you traditionally have the control over land use - so you can ensure we survive as a municipality. Passing this FDU ordinance would jeopardize our ability to survive in the future by overloading our carrying capacity that is already being threatened by the coming effect of the many new state housing laws.

26.50 3
This proposed ordinance should not be given a CEQA exemption. It would affect our entire municipality; there is no way increasing our density capacity this much would not affect all of the major areas of study under the California Environmental Quality Act. This is not a simple swap of SOU to FDU; instead, the ordinance changes the unit size, the commercial allocation, and asks you to actually codify that these types of units and SROs are not counted toward max density.. all the while, still being counted for calculating a density bonus.

Please do not exacerbate the ever-changing density and height increases facing Santa Cruz, by passing this ordinance at this time. Maybe we can wait a couple of years and look at it closely again, after we've settled into all of the new state laws that are coming down the pipeline. If you for some reason feel you need to pass it now, please consider reducing the height limits for the FDU projects, as well as increasing the inclusionary ordinance for FDU and SRO project receiving a density bonus. This would at least mitigate some of the damage to our AMI (area median income) and affordability crisis that would result. SB 330 doesn't allow us to change local code to reduce residential capacity, but it does allow us to balance it - by reducing one element, while increasing another (which the FDU ordinance fundamentally would do). This option is spelled out more clearly by Rick Hyman, and could be sent back to the Planning Commission for consideration.

In a bubble, without looking at the context of the new state housing laws, this FDU proposal could have been a good option. But sadly, it is not responsible to pass it at this time. Thank you for looking at the implications carefully. I can't imagine how difficult it is to weigh so many sources of information in trying to make decisions that affect the future of our City to this extent.

With hope,
Lira Filippini
130 Belvedere Terrace
Santa Cruz, CA 95062

26.51 26.52
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Storey LaMontagne <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:11 AM
To: City Council; Donna Meyers; Sonja Brunner; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Martine Watkins
Subject: Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022.  We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development.  It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate.  Having these FDUs ‐ not have a density limit ‐ is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50‐80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base‐density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St.  We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about.  Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Storey La Montagne
Melrose Avenue

26.53 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Jeanne Thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 9:41 AM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Subject: Agenda Item 26
City Council Member…
I am very concerned about the upcoming agenda of Flexible Density Unit Ordinance for the City Council Meeting tomorrow. I believe we need to keep the density of our city reasonable, since it is a small infrastructure and the ambience of the town would be destroyed by large rapid growth.

I have lived in Santa Cruz 43 years now and cherish its small town feel where people are mostly friendly and neighborly. This ordinance sounds like it would seriously change that. The traffic is already getting out of control on our main streets, and more stop signs and traffic lights are needed to curb the speeders. Our sweet little town just cannot hold the capacity of what you are imagining. Please reconsider this ordinance for the Santa Cruz City region.

Thank you…
Jeanne Thompson
306‐D Market St
Santa Cruz 95060

26.54 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Kyle Kelley <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:48 AM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: YES - Flexible Density Units
Mayor Brunner, Vice Mayor Watkins, and Councilmembers,
At Santa Cruz City Council on 3/22, there will be a second hearing of the Flexible Density Units (FDUs) ordinance (item 26). I'd like to give a more human-scale description of what these units can mean to Santa Cruzans. A Flexible Density Unit is allowed to be a little bit bigger than an SRO (~studio).

Individual homes can be rented or sold, so people can have their own flat. That gives people an opportunity to save, build equity, and have the right size.

As an example, here's a 650 sqft flat that a family of four lives in. It's enough for two bedrooms, kitchen, living, and dining areas. For the kids, they use a bunk bed. Parents have their own room.

Homes like these are an ideal size for
 Students ⅺ🎓ⅽ🎓ⅶ🎓

26.55 2
 Single people 🏽♂
 Couples 💏
 Single parents 👩👦
 Families that want to prioritize spending on things that aren't housing 👨👩👧👧 👩👩👧  Seniors who are downsizing ↢
As a family of four (we're five people now!), this was perfect for us and gave us a great opportunity that cost much less than renting a detached home. Some of my best memories are living there. It was cozy and we lived in a walkable area near parks, shopping, and groceries.

This agenda item might be hard to visualize how these look on the outside. Some will look similar to existing detached homes and still have a cute courtyard like this small apartment complex in the downtown Cedar Street Village area.

The most likely scale we'd see with this unit type is the St. George Apartments, which is all SROs.

New units using FDU could be a little bigger while also having nice community spaces like the St George does below:

26.56 3
Flexible Density Units (FDUs) would open a lot of opportunities for young families, students, and seniors downsizing in Santa Cruz. Please join me in requesting the Santa Cruz City Council to support the flexible density units ordinance. Let's say YES to neighbors, YES to housing.

Kind regards,
Kyle Kelley
--
Kyle Kelley
831-264-7650

26.57 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: nancywm <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:47 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote on March 22
Please vote NO on FDU ordinance! I love Santa Cruz and do NOT want our city to be Los Angeles or San Jose! Please protect Santa Cruz from rapacious development.

And we have a drought!
Nancy Meyberg
214 Lighthouse Avenue
Santa Cruz. 95060
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone

26.58 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: peter wampler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:50 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder
Subject: No on FDU ordinance Agenda Item 26
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022.

Let's wait on the new state rules to roll out so we can learn more about how density and new development laws will impact our local community before we institute rules allowing for greater density.

We have to work together to solve our housing issues, and the need is urgent. However, (as a renter and someone in need of more affordable housing) I believe it is wise to observe and learn for just a little while before we make changes that will affect our community for decades.

For now, please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance until we know more and can make a more informed decision.

Sincerely,
Peter Wampler
120 Sunnyside Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95062

26.59 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Michael Veglia <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:55 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Flexible Density Unit Zoning Change Proposal
Dear SC City Council,
Please consider traffic, parking, single family home neighborhood integrity, and most of all a reliable and not rationed source of drinking water as we face more and more drought due to global warning when you discuss these proposed zoning changes.

The silent majority in Santa Cruz do care, even if/when you may not hear from us except perhaps on election day.

I have lived in Santa Cruz for nearly half a century now and have deep roots here. I have almost always lived in the Eastside (_not_ "midtown" which is a more recent and incorrect name for City limits East of the San Lorenzo river). It seems we in Eastside SC are never heard by our representitives on the City Council in recent years. Our side of city was densely developed in the late 1970s/early 1980s and there simply is not enough parking, traffic is insane, and oh yeah...the city has no consistent drought tolerant water source.

Thank you,
Mike Veglia
Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail on Android

26.60 March 20, 2022
Dear Santa Cruz City Council Members,
Please Vote NO on Agenda Item 26
(FDU)- “Flexible Density Units” …
Currently, Santa Cruz is experiencing many large
developments in the City. Many more are in the
pipeline. Agenda item 26 has not had important
public input. Citizens of Santa Cruz have not been
informed of the Flexible Density Unit Zones.

Santa Cruz would be the very first to implement
such zones of unlimited housing density. Our
infrastructures are limited presently. Demand for
water, parking, traffic, and other resources are at
an all time high.

As elected officials you must protect your
neighbors and your constituents. We count on
you.

This is Risky business
We are already dealing with many new state laws
that take away community input. There are more
to come. Vote NO Agenda Item 26.

Respectfully,
Cathy Puccinelli, 933 N. Branciforte AV, Santa Cruz

26.61 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: John Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:19 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote NO on Agenda item #26!
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Your task is to slow down and listen to the voters of the City, your constituents, not rush into poorly conceived changes in ordinances.

Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs not have a density limit is very concerning in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

I hope you, our City Council, will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

John Hall
Climate Change Calling,
Part I: https://sanatione.iyms.org/2021/9-climate-change-calling/ Part II: https://sanatione.iyms.org/2021/9-climate-change-calling/ John Hall
[email protected]

26.62 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: rebecca bogdan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:43 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner
Subject: Unsustainable density
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you, Rebecca Bogdan

26.63 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:45 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Council meeting of 3/22/22 Item 26: ..New Use Called Flexible Density Units Dear Councilmembers:

If you decide to give final approval to the proposed FDU ordinance, a possible result is that too many developers will choose to build as many very small but mostly non‐affordable units (except for the 20% requirement) that can be fit on a site, while not satisfying the City’s diverse housing needs, but while cumulatively, adversely impacting infrastructure beyond what the General Plan EIR envisioned and provided mitigation for. And, under State law, once smaller and hence more FDUs are allowed, no future adjustments that would lessen their intensity (e.g., returning to a larger than 220 sq. ft. minimum size) could be adopted unless commensurate intensity increases in the City are simultaneously enacted.

Thus, if you do decide to proceed with the proposed revisions, please consider either:

1. placing an initial cap on the number of FDUs or at least on the number of very small FDUs until any impacts of the new revisions become apparent (such a cap can always be raised or eliminated in the future); or

2. taking the rare opportunity to simultaneously lessen an intensity of use, such lowering height limits from 40 to 30 feet in the portions of CC districts that abut single‐family neighborhoods (this might not even be considered a decrease in intensity because additional heights are allowed in return for providing more affordable units).

Sincerely,
Rick Hyman

26.64 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Aldo Giacchino <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda Item #26, Flexible Density
Dear Council Members:

I am strongly opposed to the Flexible Density regulations that the Council is considering.

Flexible Density with no effective limit is, in fact, unlimited density. With the persistent and escalating crisis that we experience with inadequate water supply and overwhelming traffic, it seems insane to consider any increase at all in densities, anywhere in Santa Cruz.

Please, discard this attempt by a city staff that is totally sold-out to developer interests to bring ruin to our town. Thank you.

Aldo Giacchino
1005 Pelton Avenure
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831-460-1538

26.65 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ray Kubick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:26 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; [email protected]; Justin Cummings; [email protected]; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Subject: Please Vote "NO" on FDU and Other Density Increase Plans Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for representing the city's interests at a time when there are so many challenges to balance.

I would like to ask you to vote against blanket housing density changes, such as the Flexible Dwelling Unit type of legislation that blindly (I feel) abdicates reasonable limits on development for Santa Cruz.

I realize that the supply of housing, especially low cost housing, is a challenge that no city has found a solution to and requires extreme measures and funding, but discarding any controls to help developers make a profit that suits them when the city's infrastructure (water supply, roads/sidewalks, and other services) barely supports the current density is a mistake that would be impossible to undo once started.

It is very difficult to manage growth of a city that is one of the very best places to live in the entire country. Everyone wants to live here! On the other hand, we don't want to lose many of the things that make this area great.

Please vote "NO" on agenda item 26, Ordinance 2022-02 which includes Flexible Dwelling Units, tomorrow and any future blanket density/zoning/regulation relaxation, as well.

Thank you for your consideration and service on the council.

Sincerely,
Ray Kubick
1002 Seabright Avenue

26.66 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Michael Urban <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Zoning
Dear Councilmembers,
Please do not amend our zoning regulations in the direction of flexible density. We are already in danger of over-building our city and this measure would put us over the top entirely.

Thank you,
Michael Urban
119 Magnolia St.

26.67 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Henry Hooker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:48 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: Flexible Density Units - YES
Greetings Mayor Brunner and City Council Members,
Regarding Item 26 (FDUs) on the March 22 Council agenda, I would simply like to express my enthusiasm for this modest, but important, change to the zoning ordinance.

By increasing the flexibility for small units, the FDU ordinance allows more diverse groups to access homes for rent or purchase in Santa Cruz, specifically: students, small families, single parents, single people, seniors and anyone who wants a modestly sized, affordable home.

Please vote YES to move this ordinance forward.

Thank you,
Henry Hooker

26.68 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Roe <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:48 PM
To: City Council
Subject: City Zone code
Dear Members,
Please do not promote increased densities that can adversely affect our neighborhoods and small businesses, and that will only make existing water supply and traffic problems worse! thanks
Roe Shapiro

26.69 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Erin Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:49 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson
Subject: Support for flexible density unit ordinance
As a solo renter and downtown resident of over 15 years who works from home, I've seen firsthand how little housing is currently available for tenants like me. I felt like I won the lottery when I secured a modest standalone cottage with a small yard and room for a home office. Santa Cruz is in desperate need of "mid-size" housing, and amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code to allow the building of flexible density units would help greatly. Let's support single women, retirees, students, and all the other Santa Cruz residents who want to live somewhere larger than a shoebox apartment but smaller than a traditional family home.

Erin Lee
Santa Cruz

26.70 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Adrian Pearson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:13 PM
To: City Council
Subject: NO on FDU Ordinance
To Mayor and City Council Members,
Please say "No" to the FDU proposal that is on the Agenda for March 22, 2022.

The topic of density requires an in‐depth look at impacts and unintended consequences, prior to a leap of the magnitude in the proposed Ordinance.

Respectfully,
Adrian Pearson
Resident of Santa Cruz

26.71 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Mark D. Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:23 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: VOTE NO on the FDU Ordinance Agenda Item # 26 Tomorrow Tuesday March 22nd. If it this Ordinance passes without adequate SB35 and California Environmental Quality Act impact analysis you will be personally responsible and liable for increased city damag...

Monday, March 21st, 2022 3:30 p.m.

Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not having a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and a 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Mark D. Lee, APA, AEP
(former City/County Planner of 25 years)

26.72 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Gabrielle Diane Laney-Andrews <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:26 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Subject: FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022
Dear Mayor Brunner and Council Members,
Please vote NO on the FDU Ordinance, Agenda Item 26, March 22, 2022. We have no idea how all of the new state housing laws will affect our local development. It is not a time to pass something like the FDU proposal and provide even more density than we can imagine or accommodate. Having these FDUs - not have a density limit - is very frightening in the context of the new state laws we are just beginning to hear about.

If the current State Density Bonus Law allows developments to go up to twice the height limit in our local zoning, and 50-80% increase in density, I cannot imagine having one of these density bonuses calculated on a base-density that has no maximum limit.

We just had our first SB 35 proposal with 831 Water St. We know there are so many other new development laws that the Council has not fully learned about and we citizens have not learned about. Please retain the small amount of density control we have and don't pass this FDU Ordinance... the only one of its kind in the country.

We believe that our City Council will make the right decision and wait to see how the new state housing laws play out in our community, before enacting the FDU Ordinance.

Thank you,
Gabrielle D. Laney-Andrews
316 Grant St
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

26.73 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Rafa Sonnenfeld <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:34 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: Flexible Density Units are Good for Santa Cruz Good Afternoon Council,
I've spoken in support of this ordinance before, and am glad that we have an opportunity again to explain why the proposed Flexible Density Unit ordinance is good for Santa Cruz, and dispel some of the mischaracterization about the FDU program.

The new FDUs would allow for more home-ownership opportunities in Santa Cruz by creating more choices to create smaller for-sale condo units than the city's code currently allows. These smaller units could potentially allow a modest increase in the number of homes that could be included within the permitted building envelope for a project. Planning staff predict, for example, that a site that currently allows 40 small ownership units on an acre, would likely have no more than about 55 units in that same building under the new FDU program before applying any sort of a state density bonus. As currently written, these homes would still be required to provide on-site parking, and would be subject to 150sf of open space, per unit, required on site, which physically limits the number of units that could be squeezed into a building.

It's important to note that we already allow unlimited SRO units in our zoning code, at an even smaller square footage than these new FDU units would be required to be. The fear-mongering happening over this new ordinance is baseless, since we have already had, for years, more dense housing allowed via SRO than what this new FDU zoning allows. We also need to remember that it would be unlikely for a builder to propose hundreds of tiny, 220sf unit condos in a building, even if they could physically fit them: there has to be a market of people who would actually want to buy them. At the end of the day, this ordinance is about providing flexibility to allow more options for different sized homes, when it makes sense to do so.

The FDU program is a great innovation to allowing more affordable for-sale housing options, and flexibility for residents of Santa Cruz. Our city should be applauded in leading the way on this idea around California. I am also pleased to say that in a recent meeting I had with a planning director of a Southern California city that is looking at creating more affordable housing opportunities, Santa Cruz's FDU program came up, and this city is now looking at adopting their own program using Santa Cruz's innovation as a model.

Thank you for your leadership on this innovative approach for housing options in Santa Cruz. -Rafa Sonnenfeld

26.74 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Janine <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:39 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Cc: Lee Butler; Sarah Neuse
Subject: YES! on FDUs - agenda item #26
Mayor Brunner, Vice-Mayor Watkins, and Councilmembers
I am writing in support of agenda item #26 on Flexible Density Units.

From the presentation by Director Butler and Planner Neuse at the 3/8/22 council meeting, I learned that these units offer flexibility, including in a mixed-use project and that they are still subject to the site standards (height, setbacks, FAR, open space, parking,etc.).

I also learned that these units can address a huge demand for housing in our community. WIth their size range, they can be homes for individuals, couples, and small families. These may be students, they may be seniors, they may be single parents. Let's help people live close to where they work or go to school or find community.

I urge you to move this ordinance forward with a YES vote.

Thank you,
Janine

26.75 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Patrick Cady <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support Flexible Density Units
My name is Patrick Cady and I'm writing in support of the Flexible Density Units ordinance(item 26) being heard at tomorrow's city council meeting. These units would provide a more naturally affordable option for people to live in this community. They would allow young families, seniors, and students an opportunity to live in Santa Cruz. Therefore I encourage the council to support these types of homes.

As always thank you all for your service to this city,
Patrick Cady

26.76 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ron Pomerantz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:44 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Justin Cummings; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Renee Golder; Martine Watkins; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: 3-22-22 Agenda Item #26: 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-02 Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – SROs, SOUs, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL) Re. 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-02 Small Housing Units General Plan, Downtown Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Ordinance Updates – Single Room Occupancy, Small Ownership Units, and a New Use Called Flexible Density Units (PL)
1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations.
2) Adopt a resolution authorizing and directing the City Manager to submit Ordinance No. 2022-02 and changes to the Downtown Plan as Local Coastal Implementation Plan Amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.

Good day Councilmembers and Mayor.

The approval of Item #26 regarding Flexible Density Units (FDUs) without a lengthy, full and open public hearing process reveals a dramatically flawed process. This Ordinance is not a mere administrative change as staff has portrayed. This will dramatically allow for virtually unrestrained development projects as for height, mass, density, and setbacks in certain areas of the City. You will be giving the go ahead for a Corridors Plan on Speed. Such a extensive change must fall under a major General Plan revision and must trigger a CEQA review as well. Intentionally circumventing public scrutiny Is unconscionable for a Council that portrays itself as above reproach. open and transparent.

Tiny FDUs may work for students and young single professionals, but where is staff’s ingenuity to create affordable housing for young families and service workers who need to share space in order to pay skyrocketing rents?
The Downtown Plan extending south of Laurel process is well underway. It makes no sense for you to overlay such a significant change without incorporating these changes within this process.

Approval of the Ordinance before you today will give overwhelming fodder to resist any extension of the Downtown Plan.

I strongly request the FDU Ordinance before you on March 22nd is not approved.

Sincerely,

26.77 2
Ron Pomerantz

26.78 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Doug Engfer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:56 PM
To: Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Renee Golder
Cc: City Council
Subject: CC Agenda Item 26, 22 March 2022 - Flexible Density Units Mayor Brunner and Members of Council -
I hope you and yours are safe and well.

I write today regarding Council’s agenda item 26 on Tuesday, 22 March - Flexible Density Units (FDUs).

In brief, by creating additional flexibility in defining dwelling units as they relate to development density and, in particular, making it more likely that high density housing will serve the needs of families as well as singles, the new FDU definition is a good idea. However, given that the City is subject to SB35, does not have approved objective standards in place, and has not yet had an opportunity to evaluate the intended and unintended consequences of legislation under consideration in Sacramento, I do not believe that now is the time to implement this policy change. By increasing the size of units that qualify under the FDU definition, the policy implicitly drives greater development mass and scale. And, despite the City’s best efforts to work with developers to respect the interests and concerns of our residents, there are few tools available to the City to defend those interests. State-mandated bonuses, concessions and waivers allow self-serving developers to trample local sensibilities, as we’ve seen in the unfortunate pending proposal at 831 Water St.

As noted, the FDU concept has merit. Given today’s circumstances, I would suggest that Council consider making implementation of the concept contingent upon (1) the City no longer being subject to SB35, (2) approval of objective zoning standards for multi-family developments, and (3) evaluation of the impacts of legislation currently pending in Sacramento.

Regrettably, I cannot participate in this week’s Council meeting; I trust that this letter will suffice in communicating my concerns.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration, and for your service to our town.

I stand with Ukraine.

Doug Engfer
Santa Cruz CA

26.79 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Gillian Greensite <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:24 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FDU Agenda Item #26 3/22/22
Dear Mayor Brunner and Santa Cruz City Council Members, This letter is to ask that you not approve the FDU proposal without more carefully considering the consequences for our town. This is especially important given the context of the new housing laws from Sacramento that are and will dramatically change the built landscape in the city of Santa Cruz. The map of proposed zones for FDU’s includes Beach/South of Laurel (B/SOL) including Beach Flats that under the LCP is required to maximize two and three bedroom units for working families. Changing that aspect of the LCP for B/SOL mandates more thought and care and public meetings.

A land‐use  change of this magnitude should trigger an EIR. Absent that study, the impacts are guess work.

This community deserves a better, more considered approach. We hope you will provide that opportunity and not rush to judgment.

Respectfully submitted,
Gillian
Gillian Greensite

26.80 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Zennon Ulyate-Crow (zennonuc) <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:21 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder
Subject: In Support of the FDU Definition
Dear Council,
On behalf of the Student Housing Coalition, we’d like to reiterate our full support for the Flexible Density Units definition on Agenda Item 26.

We have seen how the SOU definition has resulted in a limited number of homes over its lifetime as a policy, and believe that the new FDU definition will lead to more homes of all types in Santa Cruz. Under the new policy a greater number of smaller units will be possible and projects with larger unit sizes will become feasible with the new addition of smaller unit types in the same building.

We know we need to densify our city for the climate and to create more types of living options, so we urge you to support this change.

The Student Housing Coalition is a student‐led organization dedicated to advocacy surrounding the housing crisis based primarily in the Santa Cruz region. We value intersectionality, sustainability, and access to opportunity, with the overall goal of guaranteeing housing as a human right.

Thank you,
Zennon Ulyate‐Crow (he/him)
President, The Student Housing Coalition

26.81 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:42 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Justin Cummings; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sandy Brown; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder Subject: Please vote no on the FDU ordinance
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
Please vote no on the FDU ordinance. You’ve received an enormous amount of communication on this issue despite very little public outreach. One meeting with developers and community, one meeting with community during the pandemic when everyone was distracted and could not meet in person.

The lack of limits on density and density bonuses, the wide area allowed to be developed under this ordinance is the “Corridors” plan greatly expanded. It would deeply affect the Eastside business district along Soquel which is where the larger areas are allowed.

As you’ve read, from many others this plan is even more liberal than the state laws and wouldn’t allow any citizen say-so about developments, which are already severely curtailed by the state laws. We need to be maintaining some citizen rights to choose what developments occur in our town. Given our very small area, 12.7 sq miles, nearly one-third of that open space, this ordinance will turn us into Santa Monica North, only much more dense than even that city.

We do not have the water resources, nor infrastructure to support such density.

Please use the power vested in you to preserve all elements of local control possible, not giving the town over to developers, ignoring the quality of life for those crammed into tiny 220 sq ft warrens of undetermined, unlimited height and density.

Please vote no on the FDU ordinance.

Sincerely,
Maura Kelsea
Michael Brownlee
Seabright residents.

26.82 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Kathleen Tuite <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:42 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Donna Meyers; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson
Subject: In support of the item 26 small housing unit ordinance with FDUs Hello council members!
I just wanted to express my support for the ordinance (item 26) featuring flexible density units to be discussed at tomorrow's meeting. I'm imagining housing that can comfortably house several adults (students, families, seniors) because the space is a little smaller and more affordable than a house or large apartment, but is welldesigned and functional (having multiple bedrooms in a smaller square footage for example) for more than one person living there.

I can think of several friends and acquaintances in this community for whom this type of housing would be a great fit! I'm also thinking of when I've traveled (with my partner, mother-in-law, and child) and was able to stay in an apartment with 3 bedrooms that was smaller than my 2 bedroom house but was a way better utilization of space. I haven't seen that in Santa Cruz (or anywhere in the bay area) that was that dense and urban AND clearly designed for families.

Hoping to see this supported tomorrow,
Thanks,
Kathleen

26.83 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Candace Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:47 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Donna Meyers; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings
Subject: [CAUTION: Verify Sender Before Opening!] 3/22/22 City County Agent Item #26 - 2nd Reasing and Final Adoption of the New Use Called FDU
Attachments: SOU Letter Oct 21 2021 Planning Commission (1).docx Dear City Councilmembers, Vice Mayor and Mayor,
I resubmit my letter from the most recent 3/8/22 City Council meeting, item #2, that was not included in the previous City Council Agenda packet.

I also again say that by unleashing FDU in any development over 3 units and SROs from the density standards set in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and reducing square footage substantially to the lowest in the State, you have unleashed density from the General Plan guidelines.

Density numbers are important as they are tied to many measures in the General Plan. For instances, they are tied to our Water Use Planning as seen with the Water Advisory Committee rigorous process.

By also relieving the requirement for Commercial in FDU projects, it creates Commercial dead zones in the most vibrant Neighborhood Community areas such as Midtown.

This potential issue was considered very problematic by the Corridor Advisory Committee and therefore suggested to be done only as a trial on one Corridor to ensure it was a workable model.

Density impacts the entire Community experience as a part of town, neighborhood, as a viable economic area, as an effective transportation system whether by car, bus, as a pedestrian, or bicyclist or some other means and as a sustainable, safe place for people to gather as a Community.

And then ironically there is no guarantee you will gain any more affordable housing percentage than the less 8% of all housing now. The Housing Authority AMI charts for those in existing Affordable Housing complexes increase making it less affordable. There is no guarantee that a student could afford any of these units when considering 555 Pacific prices of existing SOUs. There is certainly nothing that indicates you are improving the housing market for younger professionals, growing families and the many workers that service the vital tourist industry.

I cannot think of a more reckless measure than this one. Please show some measured approach and establish boundaries that allow you to move forward without failure. Because if it fails, how do you fix it? Some ideas have too much risk to allow it to be done without a methodology to measure its impact with alternatives if there is an adverse impact. It is why in this case CEQA and a comprehensive General Plan Amendment process is paramount.

It is hard to imagine that a City Council would not take a more measured approach and establish some boundaries. Once the density is released from the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, there is no turning back because of State laws.

26.84 2
It is no wonder that NO OTHER Community has taken this approach in the United States.

Bypassing the General Plan and Zoning Ordinances when it comes to density standards in all major developments is not advised and why no other Munipality in the United States has done it.

Sincerely, Candace Brown
Santa Cruz Resident

26.85 Item #2 – October 21, 2021 – Small Housing Units Ordinance Updates-Single Room Occupancy (SRO) and Small Ownership Unit (SOU)
Dear Planning Commission,
The changes to the SOU ordinance open many issues that need to be looked at more closely.

It is noteworthy that there is NO OTHER ORDINANCE OF ITS KIND IN THE COUNTRY. Its original intent was to provide a way for young professionals to enter the market with smaller units as owners rather than renters. The major public concession was that the density minimum per unit was eliminated, and the public benefit was that the units would be sold rather than rented. The loan market does not like a mix of owner and renter units in the same complex and so it makes sense to have owner only units.

Without that goal, the SOU ordinance should be eliminated entirely.

Changing it without CEQA review is something that should not be allowed without the normal public review and analysis process for rezoning and the General Plan Amendment that Advanced Planning said is normally required with something of this significance.

The General Plan Mixed Use Designations below show the areas of discussion originally for higher density that were not matching the higher density of the General Plan for the 4 main designated Corridors of Mission Street, Ocean, Soquel, and Water.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2021/01/10/where-will-new-housing-go-in-santa-cruz/

26.86 However, the map submitted for this discussion of Proposed FDU Zones is much broader and brings up many questions.

The remove of density of 30 to 55 units per acre and removal of the requirement for Mixed-Use Commercial space would have significant impact for the Eastside in particular.

You will note that it would impact primarily Ocean, Soquel, and Water Street all the way to Capitola Road. That area would also include the Auto Zone which brings significant revenue to the city and was therefore not part of the Corridor Plan. What is the revenue impact of eliminating that area? The issue of Equity has been of concern for those involved in the Corridor Plan discussion. The emphasis on Eastside development when 30% of the population are UCSC students has always been a noteworthy point. The existing density below shows that the Eastside already has higher density than the areas near the University and other Corridors heading to the University. There are also significant areas of empty acreage called the Industrial Zone that could be used for Mixed Use Live/Work/Education Housing.

On the map below, each dot is one person and therefore demonstrates the level of density already in place.

26.87 https://santacruzlocal.org/2021/03/13/racial-exclusion-zoning-and-potential-change-in-the-city-ofsanta-cruz/ When one switches to a level of density that is only constrained by FAR (Floor Area Ratio) somewhat and knowing that State Laws allow for further waivers and concessions including height and setback and unconstrained density as proposed with FDU, any area would have to be completely redesigned to accommodate any transportation infrastructure to handle that level of density.

Instead, the areas of vibrant Commercial areas that serve the surrounding Eastside neighborhoods are being targeted for density without the constraint of dwelling units per acre or even with the allowance of Commercial space in the future. This proposal is especially concerning when considering the Economic data from the Corridor Plan. The Economic model shows that if they built out the density at 55 units per acre at 1 parking space per unit at 70% of the density of 2.75 FAR and the remaining 30% as Commercial and with ½ the parking required for Commercial (2 parking spaces per 1,000 sq ft of space rather than 4), from May Street to Morrissey alone, they were short 2550 parking spaces. There is simply not enough space to build at that density and accommodate even one parking space per unit at

26.88 70% housing. 600 spaces are about 8 Whole Foods Parking lots equivalent or about 4 acres and so that would be about 17 acres or 33 Whole Food parking lots not accommodated in the zoning plans.

Of course, you could consider accommodating bus rapid transit on that Corridor and encouraging everyone to take the bus and walk with a Complete Street redevelopment of the Eastside and assume that most would not have a car (even if parked). To do so, 40-50 building would have to be demolished and stepped back on Soquel. Parking would have to be removed on Soquel and Water eliminates another 300 parking spaces and impacts the existing business licenses that require minimum parking for patrons.

Bob Thornton, the owner of the Ebert's building and the third generation Santa Cruz owner, at the Dec 5 th, 2017, City Council meeting said you are trying to put 30 pounds of potatoes in a 5-pound bag....

Sometimes you hope that Common Sense would abound.”
Please strike the SOU Ordinance and do not allow Santa Cruz to be a guinea pig for an Ordinance that DOES NOT EXIST ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTRY.

Sincerely, Candace Brown
Santa Cruz resident

26.89 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Judy Weaver <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on Unlimited Density
Dear Mayor Brunner and Members of the City Council,
Please vote NO on Agenda Item #26 (Flexible Density Units).

The FDU Ordinance would remove limits for housing unit density for newly proposed developments.  For instance, there would be no density limits for huge developments along the main streets of the city of Santa Cruz, including:  Mission, Water, Ocean, Soquel, Pacific, River, Front, Cedar, Center, Beach, and more.  This allows higher buildings with more demand on water, parking plus more traffic as well as demands on every other aspect of our limited resources and infrastructure.

Please retain the small amount of density control we have and do not pass this FDU Ordinance!  Your NO vote will allow the Council to have the time to see how the state housing laws play out in our community, BEFORE considering giving the green light to this Ordinance.

Thank you,
Judy Weaver
Taylor Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

26.90 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ryan Meckel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:53 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Martine Watkins; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Renee Golder; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Donna Meyers
Subject: YES to Flexible Density Units
Dear Mayor Brunner, Vice Mayor Watkins, and Councilmembers, Tomorrow (3/22) you will hear about Flexible Density Units again (item 26). I'm sure you're getting a flood of emails against this ordinance, but I urge you to consider how these would greatly benefit our community. These are small homes, but plenty big for a small family, a couple, college friends, seniors, or anybody who doesn't need (or want) a ton of space!
Because these units can be rented or sold, many people who would not otherwise be able to afford a place in Santa Cruz would have a chance to save for a larger space or even own their own home. We could welcome more families to our amazing city, young people eager to work, and seniors looking for a beautiful space in retirement.

Please support the flexible density units ordinance. It is another tool we can use to calm our housing crisis while also building a better community. We need to say YES to neighbors, and YES to housing.

All the best,
Ryan Meckel

26.91 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: lisa ekström <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 5:00 PM
To: City Council; Sonja Brunner; Justin Cummings; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Renee Golder; Martine Watkins; Donna Meyers
Subject: NO on Ordinance no. 2022-02
Dear Mayor Brunner and City Council Members,
Please VOTE NO on Agenda Item #26 and do NOT adopt Ordinance No. 2022-02.

No other town or community in the US has adopted an ordinance like this one, and there are good reasons for that. What this ordinance proposes strikes many of us as foolhardy, irresponsible, and alarming.

Our community and our environment are already about to be impacted by the effects of the new state laws that will increase density and building heights in ways difficult to foresee or be prepared for.

Several new state laws are taking away our local control of land use and the new state Density Bonus law grants bonuses of up to twice the current height limits as well as 50% increases in density.

There are already serious problems in our community regarding trust of our local government. A decision to approve this ordinance without public engagement and approval — especially when this ordinance would have enormous, difficult-to-imagine effects on all of us for decades to come — would further damage that trust and be indefensible.

Thank you,
Lisa Ekström

26.92 Click to edit Master title style
1 Small Housing Units
Second Reading
City Council, March 22, 2022

26.93 Click to edit Master title style
2 Community Concerns:
2 • FDUs increase density
• No other cities do this
• This proposal increases
height
• This proposal needs an EIR
• The City doesn’t have enough
water for new population
• State Laws keep changing
• SROs remain the densest
housing option
• Form-based codes found
throughout US
• Building envelope is not
changing
• General Plan EIR contemplated
SROs as part of potential development
• Water through 2045: 4%
demand increase; 18%
population increase
• State law does not stand still

26.94 Click to edit Master title style
3 What’s Changing
3 Change Small Ownership
Units (SOUs) to FDUs Single Room Occupancy (SRO)
• Rent OR For Sale
• Remove limit on bedrooms
• Minimum size (400sf to 220sf)
• Adding requirement for
commercial
• Ability to mix with other units
• Nothing
• Codifying policy predating
2030 General Plan

26.95 Click to edit Master title style
4 What’s Not Changing
4 Flexible Density Units Single Room Occupancy (SRO)
• Maximum size
• Parking requirements
• Open Space requirements
• Building Envelope as a density
limit
• Height
• Setbacks
• Floor Area Ratio
• Inclusionary requirements
• Maximum or minimum size
• Parking requirements
• Open Space requirements
• Building Envelope as a density
limit
• Height
• Setbacks
• Floor Area Ratio
• Inclusionary requirements

26.96 Click to edit Master title style
5 Example of development proposals:
5 Standard homes @ 30
homes/acre
With FDUs on the same site
• ~900 sq. ft./home
• Total = 10 homes
• 2 low-income homes
• ~700 sq. ft./home (10) +
400sf/FDU (5)
• Total = 15 homes
• 3 low-income homes

26.97 Click to edit Master title style
6 Example of development proposals:
6 Standard homes @ 30
du/acre
With SROs on the same site
• ~900 sf/homes
• Total = 10 homes
• 2 low-income homes
• ~300 sf/home
• Total = 35 homes
• 7 very-low-income homes

26.98 Click to edit Master title style
7 Example of development proposals:
7 FDUs @ max density
SROs @ max density
• 220 sf/home
• Total = 40 homes
• 8 low-income homes
• 150 sf/home (shared facilities)
• Total = 70 homes
• 14 very-low-income homes
SOUs @ max density
• 400 sf/home
• Total = 22 homes
• 4 low-income homes

26.99 Click to edit Master title style
8 Housing Production and SB 35
8 • SB 35 exempts proposals from CEQA; streamlines review • Objective Residential Design Standards will create design control • SB 35 applies based on meeting RHNA (Housing Element Report) • City needs a minimum of 1,606 new market-rate homes between 2024 and 2031 (803 by end of 2027)
• If met, SB 35 only applies to 50% or more affordable units • If not met, Santa Cruz falls into a more stringent category • All multi-family development becomes eligible for SB 35 (10% affordable)

26.100
Click to edit Master title style
9 Recommendation:
9 Motion to:
1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-02 amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code regulating small housing units including replacing Small Ownership Units with Flexible Density Units and making minor clarifying amendments to the Single Room Occupancy regulations.
2) Adopt a resolution authorizing and directing the City Manager to submit Ordinance No. 2022-02 and changes to the Downtown Plan as Local Coastal Implementation Plan Amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.

26.101
Click to edit Master title style
10 Questions?

26.102
Click to edit Master title style
11 Density Bonus
11 • Conforming base project
• Zoning
• Area Plans
• General Plan
• Density Bonus project
• 35% more units
• Waiver for site standards
• Eligible for concessions

26.103
Click to edit Master title style
12 Density Bonus – Base plan
12 • 130 Center, base project, SRO development
• Meets all zoning and area plan standards
• 155 units

26.104
Click to edit Master title style
13 Density Bonus
13 • 130 Center

26.105
Click to edit Master title style
14 Density Bonus
14 • 130 Center, 50% Density Bonus, SRO development
• Waiver for Height and FAR
• 233 Units

26.106
City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/17/2022
AGENDA OF: 03/22/2022
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Community Development
SUBJECT: Municipal Code Amendments Relating to Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Responding to Modifications Requested by the California Coastal Commission (PL)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt resolution acknowledging receipt of the resolution of certification from the California Coastal Commission, including the suggested modifications. 2) Introduce for publication an ordinance amending Chapters 24.04 and 24.12 of the Municipal Code related to small cell wireless telecommunications facilities in response to action by the California Coastal Commission.

BACKGROUND: The City of Santa Cruz adopted an ordinance making amendments to the City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations, which were heard in April 2019 with final adoption December 2019. The amendments included changes to text that is part of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and therefore subject to review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) prior to taking effect inside the Coastal Zone.

City staff submitted the proposed LCP amendments to the CCC in February 2020. Coastal Commission staff reviewed the amendments and shared concerns over certain aspects of the amendments. City staff then worked with CCC staff to find a compromise. The culmination of that work was a set of recommended modifications to the adopted ordinance that CCC staff presented to the Coastal Commission on February 11, 2022. The Commission passed a motion denying the City’s application for the LCP amendment as proposed and then passed a motion approving the LCP amendment conditional upon the City accepting the modifications requested by Commission staff and incorporating them into the City’s ordinance and LCP Implementation Plan.

City ordinances amending portions of the LCP are submitted to the CCC for review after they have been adopted by the City. LCP amendments are reviewed by Coastal Commission staff, and often CCC staff will have questions about the effects certain ordinances may have on coastal resources or various protected features called out as part of the LCP. In the case of the amendments to the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations made in 2019, CCC staff was not convinced that a few areas the City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ordinance could be reconciled with the LCP, and, therefore, they recommended modifications (edits) to the adopted City ordinance. This report will summarize the content of those modifications and discuss the process of LCP amendment approval.

27.1 DISCUSSION: The City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations have been amended to fully comply with new Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations regarding small cell wireless telecommunication facilities. On September 26, 2018, the (FCC) adopted the Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order In the Matter of Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment (the “FCC Ruling”).

On October 15, 2018, the FCC published the declaratory ruling. The FCC Ruling limits the City’s ability for aesthetic review and requirements to what is reasonable, comparable to requirements for other types of infrastructure deployments, and objective. New shot clock permit processing limitations apply to small cell wireless telecommunications facilities as well as new tolling time periods for the shot clock. The FCC Ruling also includes limitations on the allowable fees that the City can charge.

In an effort to meet the FCC regulations, in April 2019, City Council adopted several amendments to the Wireless Telcommunications Facilities regulations, including: defining small cell facilities and exempting small cell facilities in the right of way from the land use entitltements otherwise required by the regulations,. The modifications indicate that small cell facilities in the public right of way are instead subject to Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 15.38, a new chapter created to streamline permitting of these facilities, and the “Standards and Guidelines policy for small cell facilities in the public right-of-way” that the City Council had adopted by resolution. In short, these facilities are required to obtain an administratively-approved Small Cell Wireless Facilities Permit from the Public Works Department. By streamlining approval of these facilities through Chapter

15.38 and the adopted design standards, permitting timelines will now meet the shot clock limitations.

City staff analyzed the modifications for consistency with the Coastal Act and the Local Coastal Program. Staff found the modifications consistent in that small cell facilities in the public right of way and in the appeal area of the Coastal Zone would still be subject to the Coastal Permit requirements under Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 24.12 Part 3. In addition, while the design standards approved by resolution and associated with Chapter 15.38 are not part of the LCP, they were found to be consistent with the design standards under the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations, which are part of the LCP.

Despite this analysis, Coastal Commision staff suggested modifications to the amendments. The requested modifications generally fall into three categories – (1) incorporating small cell specific design standards within the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ordinance and not only as a separate standard; (2) adding other clarifying language; and (3) allowing Coastal Permits for small cell facilities to be appealed directly to the Coastal Commission or City Council. Each requested modification is discussed in detail in the CCC staff report included as the attachment entitled “Re:

City of Santa Cruz LCP Amendment Number LCP-3-STC-21-0071-2(Wireless Telecommunications Facilities),” and the three categories are also discussed here briefly.

Small cell specific design standards
The requested modifications to Municipal Code Section 24.12.1425 for wireless facility location standards and addition of new Section 24.12.1434 regarding requirements for small cell facilities in the public right of way and within the coastal zone create provisions specific to small cell facilities that are located in the public right of way and that also require a Coastal Permit. These provisions are a collage of standards drawn from the existing location and design standards from the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ordinance and from the City’s “Standards and Guidelines policy for small cell facilities in the public right-of-way.” The modifications therefore do not include substantially new or different standards but format the ordinance in a way that

27.2 clarifies which standards will specifically apply to the small cell facilities in the right of way that require approval of a Coastal Permit. This modification satisfies the Coastal Commission’s desire to retain standards specific to small cell facilities within the LCP, even though these standards would have been applied anyway through the Coastal Permit process and the City’s “Standards and Guidelines policy for small cell facilities in the public right-of-way.” Additional clarifying language
The requested modifications to Municipal Code Section 24.12.1405 make minor adjustments to the definitions by adding a new definition for the word “feasible,” a definition for “small cell aesthetic design standards” and adding clarifying language to the “Stealth facility” definition.

Requested modifications to 24.12.1410 make minor adjustments to the language describing applicability of the Wireless Telecommunications Standards regulations. These adjustments include replacing language regarding amateur radios, radio facilities not licensed by the FCC, and facilities owned by the state or the U.S. with broader language exempting any facility identified by the FCC or CPUC as exempt from local regulations, and clarifying language regarding Over the Air Receptions Devices (OTARDs). City staff agreed with these changes as the definitions provide additional clarity and the applicability modifications bring the language of the ordinance into better alignment with the federal regulations to which this section was already alluding.

The requested modifications to Municipal Code Section 24.12.1415 adds clarifying language for when a Coastal Permit is required, reflecting and reiterating the Coastal Permit requirements already in place and described in Chapter 24.08 Part 3. This section also includes additional language reiterating that small cell facilities in the public right of way are not subject to other land use permit entitlements and that small cell facilities that require a Coastal Permit are also subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.38, a related master license agreement, and the City’s small cell design standards. Staff felt that these changes were not necessary, as the Coastal Permit requirements are already clearly defined in Chapter 24.08, Part 3, and language already exists exempting the small cell facilities in the public right of way from other permit entitlements.

However, Coastal Commission staff was still concerned that these same requirements should be stated clearly in various sections of the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations to ensure clarity to the reader.

The proposed modification to 24.12.1435, which includes the general design requirements for small cell facilities within the public right of way and in the Coastal Zone, includes clarifying language directing small cell facilities within the public right of way to the newly created

24.12.1434 standard section and confims that the standards under 24.12.1435 apply to all other wireless telecommunications facilities. Again, while City staff found this insertion redundant, it served to allay concerns from Coatsal Commission staff regarding clarity for the reader.

24.04.130 adds accessory dwelling unit (ADU) language that was incorporated into the Santa Cruz Municipal Code and the LCP after the 2019 approval of the ordinance amending the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities regulations was approved and makes this section consistent with today’s municipal code. It does not make changes to the munipal code with regard to ADUs.

Appeals direct to Coastal Commission or City Council
The requested modifications to Municipal Code Sections 24.04.130 and 24.04.186 allow Coastal Permits for small cell facilities in the public right of way that are appealable to the Coastal Commission to be appealed directly to the Coastal Commission, eliminating appeals to the Planning Commission and City Council that would otherwise be required under the current ordinance. Similarly, the modifications to these sections would allow such Coastal Permits that are not appealable to the Coastal Commission to be appealed directly to City Council, eliminating

27.3 the appeal to Planning Commission that would be required prior to a City Council appeal under the current ordinance. A minor change in the language of Section 24.12.1415A.2 also refers to these changes in the appeal process. Because it is likely that the timeline associated with multiple appeals is likely to cause the approval process to run out the shot clock, these amendments strike a balance beween the Coastal Commission’s desire to include the option for an appeal with a public hearing as part of the public process and the City’s need to meet the shot clock. City staff pointed out that even with this shortened timeline, given Coastal Commission hearing scheduling timelines, direct appeals to the Coastal Commission could still result in the possibility of running out the shot clock and potentially resulting in a project that would not be consistent with the Coastal Act. To address shot clock expiration concerns, City staff advocated for a provision that would allow for administrative approval of a Coastal Permit (as is currently done for ADU’s).

Unfortunately, City staff was unsuccessful at persuading Coastal Commission staff to change their recommendation.

Overall, staff believes the above discussed amendment modifications by the Coastal Commission represent a negotiation done in good faith and a reasonable compromise.

The California Coastal Act requires the City to either accept the modifications as recommended by the Coastal Commission or withdraw the application entirely. Any edits to the recommended language would require that the City re-start the entire amendment process over again. Given that these modifications are the culmination of over a year-long process and are generally consistent with the approach adopted by Council in 2019, staff recommends that the Council accept these modifications at this time.

Next Steps. Should the City Council introduce the CCC’s changes for publication on March 22, a second reading of the ordinance will take place at the next available Council hearing. As summarized in Attachment 5, the CCC Action Notice, the ordinance will take effect inside the coastal zone as soon as “the Commission’s Executive Director reports to the Commission his determination that the City’s actions are legally adequate, and the Commission does not object to the Executive Director’s determination.” If the City Council moves to adopt the modifications as requested (shown in Attachments 2 and 3), City staff is optimistic that the Coastal Commission could take this action during their May meeting, which would allow the City to operate under the modified ordinance by the middle of that month, being 30 days after the second reading.

Should the City Council disagree with the requested modifications, the ordinance would need to return to the Planning Commission for a formal recommendation to Council and then be resubmitted to the Coastal Commission as a new LCP amendment triggering a new round of review.

Health in All Policies. Health in All Policies is a collaborative approach to improving the health of all people by incorporating health considerations into decision-making across sectors and policy areas. This approach is based on 3 pillars: equity, public health, and sustainability. Health in All Policies aims to ensure that decision-makers are informed about the health, equity, and sustainability impacts of various policy options during the policy development process. The ordinance amendments are consistent with the three pillars in that they do not substantially change the access to, health effects, or power usage of small cell facilities.

Environmental Review. The proposed ordinance amendments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15282(h) of the CEQA Guidelines which specifically exempts any local ordinance implementing sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 of the Government Code.

27.4 FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed modifications do not change what permits are required for a small cell facility in the public right of way, and revenue changes from permit fees therefore are not anticipated. The amendments eliminate potential appeals of facilities to Planning Commission and, in some instances, City Council, which will not affect revenue as appeals to Coastal Permits are processed at no cost to the appellant but will eliminate staff time dedicated to such an appeal and therefore improve staff efficiency. The amendments do not substantially change where such facilities may be located, so changes in property values as a result of these amendments is not anticipated.

Prepared by:

Clara Stanger
Senior Planner
Eric Marlatt
Assistant Director of Planning
and Community Development
Submitted by:

Lee Butler
Director of Planning and
Community Development
Approved by:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution acknowledging receipt of CCC Modifications

2. Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance, Clean Copy

3. Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance, track changes Copy

4. Re: City of Santa Cruz LCP Amendment Number LCP-3-STC-21-0071-2(Wireless Telecommunications Facilities)

5. CCC Action Notice

27.5 1
RESOLUTION NO. NSRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ ACCEPTING

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION MODIFICATIONS TO AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 24.04.130, 24.10.510, 24.10.565, 24.12.140, AND

24.12.240 RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, AND

DIRECTING THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO TRANSMIT THE ACCEPTANCE TO THE

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
WHEREAS, pursuant to authority delegated to the City of Santa Cruz by the California Coastal Commission, the City of Santa Cruz regulates development in the portion of the coastal zone that lies within the City Limits and that is outside of the original jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission; and
WHEREAS, City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code Sections 24.04 and 24.12 are implementing ordinances of the Local Coastal Program; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2019, the Santa Cruz City Council adopted Ordinance 2019-06 amending Santa Cruz Municipal Code Sections 24.12.1405, 24.12.1410, and 24.12.1425 to amend existing regulations related to Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, and directed City Staff to submit those amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification; and
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2022, the California Coastal Commission held a public hearing on the amendments to the Local Coastal Program implementing ordinance adopted by the City Council and certified the amendments to the Municipal Code with modifications; and WHEREAS, the modifications proposed by the California Coastal Commission to Santa Cruz Municipal Code Sections 24.12.1405, 24.12.1410, 24.12.1415, 24.12.1425, 24.12.1435,

24.04.130, and 24.04.186 and the addition of Section 24.12.1434 were submitted to the City by correspondence dated February 15, 2022, and
WHEREAS, insofar as the proposed changes to the Municipal Code are amendments to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, the application of the proposed amendments in the coastal zone is statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 and the California Public Resources Code Section 21089.9;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Santa Cruz City Council hereby accepts each of the California Coastal Commission’s suggested modifications to Santa Cruz Municipal Code Sections 24.12.1405, 24.12.1410, 24.12.1415, 24.12.1425,

24.12.1435, 24.04.130, and 24.04.186 and the addition of Section 24.12.1434 as shown in City of Santa Cruz Ordinance 2022-____ and incorporated herein by reference.

27.6 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Santa Cruz City Council hereby directs the Director of the Planning Department or their designee to transmit this acceptance and any adopted ordinance that incorporates these modifications to the California Coastal Commission for concurrence by its Executive Director.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of April, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

27.7 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING TITLE 24 OF THE

SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) AND THE LOCAL COASTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: AMENDING SECTION 24.12.1400 ET SEQ. REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR “SMALL CELL” WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS

FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WITHIN THE COASTAL ZONE, AMENDING SECTION 24.04.130 “DECISION-MAKING BODY WITH FINAL AUTHORITY ON APPLICATION APPROVAL”, SECTION 24.04.186 “APPEALS TO COASTAL COMMISSION”
BE IT ORDAINED By the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

Section 1. Section 24.12.1405 (Definitions) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1405 DEFINITIONS.

A. As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meaning set forth below, unless the context clearly dictates a different meaning.

1. “Amateur radio facilities” are antennas and related equipment for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication, or technical investigations carried out by an amateur radio operator who operates without commercial interest, and who holds a written authorization from the Federal Communications Commission to operate an amateur radio facility.

2. “American National Standards Institute” or “ANSI” is a private organization that develops widely accepted standards for various modern-day equipment.

3. “Antenna” is a device or system of wires, poles, rods, dishes, discs or similar devices used for the transmission and/or receipt of electromagnetic waves.

4. “Base transceiver station” or “BTS” is the electronic equipment housed in cabinets that together with antennas comprises a PCS facility or “site”. The cabinets include an air conditioning unit, heating unit, electrical supply, telephone hook-up and back-up power supply.

5. “California Public Utility Commission” or “CPUC” is the state-level regulatory agency responsible for regulating wireless telecommunications.

6. “Cell” is the coverage area through which wireless receiving and transmitting equipment from a particular cell site successfully propagates.

7. “Cell site” is a parcel of real property or public right-of-way on which a wireless telecommunications facility is to be located.

27.8 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
2 8. “Co-location” is a wireless telecommunications facility comprising a single telecommunications tower, monopole or building supporting antennas owned or used by more than one wireless telecommunications carrier.

9. “Direct-to-home” generally means the distribution or broadcasting of programming or services by satellite directly to the subscriber’s premises without the use of ground receiving or distribution equipment, except at the subscriber’s premises.

10. “Facade-mounted antenna” is an antenna that is directly attached or affixed to any facade of building.

11. “Feasible” shall mean, for the purpose of this Chapter 24.12 Part 15, capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account environmental, social, and technological factors.

12. “Federal Communications Commission” or “FCC” is the federal agency responsible for licensing and regulating wireless telecommunications providers. The agency has primary regulatory control over communications providers through its powers to control interstate commerce and to provide a comprehensive national system in accordance with the Federal Communications Act.

13. “Freestanding monopole” is a structure composed of a single spire used to support communications equipment.

14. “Ground-mounted” is an antenna with its support structure placed directly on the ground.

15. Monopole. See “Freestanding monopole.”

16. “Non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation” or “NIER” means low energy and low frequency electromagnetic energy, including visible light, television, pagers, AM/FM radio, cellular systems, enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR) systems and personal communications services (PCS) systems.

17. “Omni-directional” means an antenna that is equally effective in all directions (360 degrees) and is typically cylindrical in shape, the size of which varies with the frequency for which it is designed. Whip antennas are often referenced by this name.

18. “Panel antenna” means an antenna or array of antennas designed to concentrate a radio signal in a particular area. Panel antennas are typically flat, rectangular, long devices generally three square feet in size, although some technologies utilize larger panel antennas. Also known as directional antennas.

19. “Roof-mounted” means an antenna directly attached or affixed to the roof of an existing building, water tank, tower or structure other than a telecommunications tower.

This type of installation is sometimes called a freestanding roof mounted antenna.

27.9 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
3 20. “Service provider” means a wireless telecommunications provider, a company or organization, or the agent of a company or organization that provides wireless telecommunications services.

21. “Significant gap” is a gap in the service provider’s own wireless telecommunications facilities, as defined in federal case law interpretations of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.

22. “Small Cell Facilities” means, pursuant to 47 CFR 1.6002, any facilities that meet each of the following conditions:

1. The facilities:
a. Are mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height including their antennas; or
b. Are mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or
c. Do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent whichever is greater;

2. Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of antenna), is no more than three cubic feet in volume;

3. All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume;

4. The facilities do not require antenna structure registration by the FCC;

5. The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR 800.16(x); and

6. The facilities do not result in human exposure to radiofrequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified by the FCC.

23. “Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards” means the aesthetic and design standards for small cell wireless facilities adopted by the city council.

24. “Stealth facility” is any telecommunications facility, which is designed to blend into the surrounding environment, and is visually unobtrusive. Examples of stealth facilities may include architecturally screened roof-mounted antennas, facade-mounted antennas painted and treated as architectural elements to blend with the existing building, or elements designed to appear as vegetation, trees, or commonly expected strucures for the area in question. Also known as concealed telecommunications facilities.

27.10 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
4 25. “Stealth technologies/techniques” are camouflaging methods applied to wireless telecommunications facilities which render them visually inconspicuous.

26. “Telecommunications” is any transmission, emission or reception of signals, images and sound or information of any nature by wire, radio, visual or electromagnetic system that work on a “line-of-sight” principle.

27. “Telecommunication tower” is a monopole, lattice tower, free standing tower or other structures designed to support antennas.

28. “Visual impact” means the placement or design of an antenna or the associated equipment and/or buildings such that they are not screened or shielded or are plainly visible and are likely to be noticeable or otherwise conspicuous.

29. Whip antenna. See “Omni-directional antenna.”

30. “Wireless telecommunications facility” is a land use facility that sends and/or receives radio frequency signals. Wireless telecommunications facilities include antennas and all other types of equipment for the transmission or receipt of such signals; telecommunication towers or similar structures built to support such equipment; equipment cabinets, base transceiver stations, and other accessory development. Also referred to as a telecommunication facility.

31. “Wireless telecommunications provider” is any company or organization that provides or who represents a company or organization that provides wireless telecommunications services.

Section 2. Section 24.12.1410 (Applicability) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1410 APPLICABILITY.

A. These regulations shall apply to all property owned by private persons, firms, corporations or organizations, and property owned by the city, and property owned by any agencies of the city, or by any local, state, or federal government agency or political subdivision thereof required to comply with local government regulations or by written agreement.

B. These regulations (Chapter 24.12, Part 15) shall not apply to the following facilities:

1. Amateur radio facilities as provided in 47 Code of Federal Regulations Part 97.

2. Over the Air Receptions Devices (OTARDs) as defined and further provided in 47 Code of Federal Regulations Section 1.4000 et seq.

3. Wireless telecommunication facilities used solely for public safety purposes, installed and operated by authorized public safety agencies (e.g. county 911 emergency

27.11 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
5 services, police, sheriff, fire departments, first responder medical services, hospitals, etc.) and incorporating stealth technologies.

4. Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way outside the coastal zone, which are subject to the requirements of Chapter 15.38 of the Municipal Code.

5. Any other antennas and wireless communications facilities identified by the FCC or the CPUC as exempt from local regulations.

Section 3. Section 24.12.1415 (Permit Requirements and Findings) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1415 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND FINDINGS.

A. Unless a coastal exclusion or exemption as defined in Sections 24.08.230 through

24.08.230.2 applies, and in addition to any other required permit or authorization, a coastal permit shall be required for all wireless telecommunication facilities located within the coastal zone, as follows:

1. For all wireless telecommunication facilities other than Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way as specified in subsection 2 below, the coastal permit shall be governed by the findings and standards in the Local Coastal Program (LCP), including, but not limited to Chapter 24.08 Part 3, as well as the standards and findings specified herein at Chapter 24.12 Part 15.

2. For Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way, the coastal permit shall be governed by the findings and standards in the LCP, including, but not limited to

24.08.200 et seq, as well as the standards and findings specified herein at

24.12.1425 and 24.12.1434. City approval of the coastal permit may be appealed directly to the California Coastal Commission (as further provided in Section

24.04.186).

In case of conflict between the coastal permit and any other permit or authorization, the requirements of the coastal permit shall prevail.

B. Any proposed facade-mounted or roof-mounted wireless telecommunications facility (other than Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way, which are covered by Sections

24.12.1425 and 24.12.1434) that is determined by the zoning administrator to be consistent with all of the requirements of this Part 15, and that incorporates stealth technologies and/or is not visible from public areas, shall require a design permit from the zoning administrator based on the following findings:

1. The wireless telecommunications facility has demonstrated consistency with Sections 24.12.1430 and 24.12.1435 (as applicable).

27.12 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
6 2. The wireless telecommunications facility has been located and designed so as to be compatible with the purpose of Chapter 24.12 Part 15 and the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program (if applicable).

3. The wireless telecommunications facility is in compliance with all FCC and California PUC standards and requirements and with all other applicable requirements of Chapter 24.12 Part 15.

C. Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way within the coastal zone are exempt from the requirements of Sections 24.12.1415 (B) and 24.12.1415 (D) regarding design permit and administrative use permit requirements. Instead, such Small Cell Facilities shall require, in addition to a coastal permit as specified in 24.12.1415(A)(2), the following:

1. A small cell wireless facilities permit in compliance with Chapter 15.38 and the city’s Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards;

2. A master license agreement, in a form approved by the city attorney for the use of a city pole in a specified license area, and shall pay a license fee subject to the city’s fee schedule, if any Small Cell Facilities are proposed to be installed on a city pole controlled by the city and located within the public right-of-way. Any applicant seeking a master license agreement shall pay a master license agreement administrative fee subject to the city’s fee schedule to reimburse the city for reasonable costs in connection with its preparation, review of, and action upon the request for such an agreement. The absence of a city-approved master license agreement shall be an independently sufficient basis to deny any application for a Small Cell Facility on such a city pole.

D. All wireless telecommunications facilities that do not meet the criteria defined in subsections (B) or (C) above, shall require an administrative use permit with a public hearing before the zoning administrator, in addition to a design permit with the required findings provided in subsection (B) above.

E. In approving an application, the city may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate or necessary to further the purposes of this chapter, including, but not limited to, requiring the redesign or relocation of the facility. Alternatively, the city may direct the applicant to resubmit a revised proposal for further consideration.

F. Minor modifications to wireless telecommunications facility equipment design, location, height, and other elements may be allowed, subject to the approval of the zoning administrator, if such modifications are in keeping with the architectural statement and layout design of the original approval, and meet the requirements of this chapter.

Section 4. Section 24.12.1425 (Location Standards) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

27.13 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
7 24.12.1425 LOCATION STANDARDS.

A. Prohibited Zoning Districts. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall not be allowed in the zoning districts listed below, except as set forth in 24.12.1425(B). This prohibition shall also not apply to Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way.

1. Single-Family Residence (RS, R-1).

2. Multiple-Family Residence (RL, RM, RH).

3. Beach Residential (RT(A), RT(D), RT(E)).

4. Ocean Front Recreational (OFR).

5. Flood Plain (FP).

6. Agriculture (EA-20).

B. Wireless telecommunications facilities may be sited in the prohibited zoning districts described above in Section 24.12.1425 (A) with an administrative use permit, in addition to any other required permits; provided, that the applicant can demonstrate to the zoning administrator that:

1. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility would eliminate or substantially reduce one or more significant gaps in the applicant carrier’s network; and

2. There are no viable, feasible, and environmentally (e.g., visually) equivalent or superior potential alternatives (i.e., sites/facility types) outside the prohibited zoning districts that could eliminate or substantially reduce said significant gap(s).

C. Location preference for all wireless telecommunications facilities should be given to the following locations:

1. Locations that do not adversely impact significant public views (e.g., of the beach, shorline, ocean, natural areas, etc.).

2. Industrial or commercial sites.

3. Facilities attached or sited adjacent to existing structures. Appropriate types of existing structures may include, but not be limited to buildings, traffic signals, flagpoles, signs and sign standards.

4. Sites which are not highly visible from adjacent roadways, public areas, parks, schools, greenbelts or other visually sensitive areas, as determined by the zoning administrator.

5. Sites outside the coastal zone, and particularly sites located within the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district (as defined in Chapter 24.10 Part 26) where city decisions can be appealed.

27.14 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
8 D. When feasible and in conformance with other provisions of this chapter, wireless telecommunications providers shall be encouraged to locate their wireless telecommunications facilities on publicly owned or controlled property.

E. Wireless telecommunications facilities are prohibited in all natural areas designated in the General Plan or LCP.

F. To the maximum extent feasible, wireless telecommunication facilities are prohibited within one thousand feet of any public elementary school or daycare facility.

G. Additional Site Location Standards for Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way and in the coastal zone. In addition to the requirements listed above, the following location standards shall also apply to Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way and within the coastal zone:

1. Site locations shall be selected in the following order of preference:
a. Area not visible to the public or area that does not significantly impair public views (such as in alleys, on rooftops, near property corners or side property lines, or in inconspicuous areas);
b. Attached or sited adjacent to existing structures. Appropriate types of existing structures may include, but not be limited to telephone/utility poles and non-decorative light standards;
c. Area not requiring the removal of existing infrastructure, parkway trees or reductions of the parkway landscape planters;
d. Within the public parkway landscaping and requiring only minor alterations to the existing parkway landscaping (including planter size) and/or infrastructure;
e. Within the public right-of-way in a manner that requires significant but feasible alteration to the existing public improvements and/or infrastructure.

2. To the maximum extent feasible, the following site locations shall be prohibited:
a. Facility site locations that lead to removal of any existing public parking areas.
b. Facility site locations directly in front of residences and businesses. c. Facilities with components located within driveway and intersection sight lines.
d. Site locations in Residential and Commercial Zoning Districts that are within 1500 feet of another Small Cell Facility and any associated equipment; provided, however, that this restriction may be waived by the

27.15 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
9 zoning administrator upon a demonstration that the refusal to allow an additional facility within a 1500-foot radius will otherwise violate an applicable state or federal law.
e. Facilities on strand or overhead lines.
f. Facility site locations that will negatively impact public recreation and access, or damage a known or sensitive archeological site. g. Site locations that adversely impact significant public views (e.g., of the beach, shorline, ocean, natural areas, etc.), including those locations identified in Map CD-3 of the Local Coastal Program.

Section 5. Section 24.12.1434 (Requirements For Small Cell Facilities in the Coastal Zone) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby added as follows:

24.12.1434 REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WITHIN THE COASTAL ZONE.

Small Cell Facilities located in the public right- of-way and which require a coastal permit shall comply with the following standards and requirements:

A. Pole Type Preferences. Facilities on poles shall be sited in the following order of preference:

1. On an existing or replacement street light pole;

2. On an existing or replacement structure other than a street light pole or utility pole;

3. On an existing or replacement utility pole.

B. Equipment preferences. Equipment (including, but not limited to, radio units, power supplies, voltage converters, electrical service connections, shut off switches and electric meters) shall be sited in the following order of preference:

1. Within a below-grade equipment vault;

2. In an at grade equipment cabinet provided the size of the cabinet is minimized to the maximum extent feasible; At grade equipment cabinets shall participate in the Traffic Graphics program or pay an in lieu fee depending on the location (i.e. commercial or residential areas) at the discretion of the decision making body.

3. Enclosed at the base of the pole on which the antenna is mounted provided the size of the base of the pole is minimized to the maximum extent feasible;

4. Equipment boxes using stealth techniques mounted on a utility pole, provided the size of the boxes is minimized to the maximum extent feasible.

27.16 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
10 C. Visual, Public Access, and Archealogical Impact Avoidance. To the maximum extent feasible, such facilities shall be sited and designed in a manner that avoids overall visibility, and eliminates or substantially reduces their visual and aesthetic impact upon the surrounding public right-of-way, archeologic resources, public views and public access. Measures to achieve this objective may include, but are not limited to the following:

1. The number of antennas on each site shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible with the goal of minimizing adverse visual impacts.

2. To the maximum extent feasible, the antenna size, cabinet equipment and other facilities shall minimize visual clutter.

3. The project shall use the smallest and least visible antennas feasible to accomplish the coverage objectives. Facilties that are proposed for locations where they would be readily visible from the public right-of-way or from the habitable living areas of residential units within 100 feet shall incorporate appropriate techniques to camouflage or disguise the facility, and/or blend it into the surrounding environment, to the maximum extent feasible.

4. To the maximum extent feasible, facilities shall not be designed in such a manner that will negatively impact public recreation and access, or damage a known or sensitive archeological site.

5. Applicants are encouraged to consider providing architectural treatments and to use “stealth techniques” to reduce potential visual impacts of the facilities to the maximum extent feasible. Stealth techniques are especially encouraged in areas easily visible from a major traffic corridor or commercial center or in residential areas. Stealth techniques may be required as conditions of approval for a coastal permit when determined to be necessary to mitigate adverse visual impacts.

D. Design Standards:

1. Any pole to be installed in the public right-of-way shall be disguised to resemble a utility pole to the maximum extent feasible. Facility’s antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 15 inches. All antennas and screening devices shall be painted or finished to match the pole. All pole or equipment shall be painted or otherwise coated to be visually compatible with existing poles and equipment. Facilities shall be placed on the same vertical axis as the center of the pole.

2. Small Cell Facility installations on existing city infrastructure shall be placed in a manner so that the size, appearance and function of the final installation is essentially identical to the installation prior to the antenna installation taking place.

3. Small Cell Facility installations shall not be located on decorative street light poles.

27.17 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
11 4. Small Cell Facility equipment located above the surface grade in the public right-of-way including, but not limited to those on certain street lights, shall consist of small equipment components that are compatible in structure, scale, function and proportion to the poles they are mounted on. Equipment shall be painted or otherwise coated to be visually compatible with the subject pole (may include public art). Underground vaults shall employ flush-to-grade access portals and vents that are heel shoe safe and slip safe; provided, however, that this restriction shall not apply in flood prone areas.

5. All cables and conduits shall be routed through the interior of the subject pole to be screened from public view; provided, however, that for wood poles, all cables shall be contained within conduit, and conduits shall be mounted and routed in a manner calculated to minimize their visibility to the maximum extent feasible.

6. All base-mounted accessory equipment must be installed within a shroud, enclosure or pedestal integrated into the base of the support structure. All cables, wires and other connectors routed between the antenna and base-mounted equipment shall be concealed from public view.

7. Small Cell Facilities may not encroach onto or over any private or other property outside the public right-of-way without the property owner’s express written consent.

8. To reduce clutter and deter vandalism, excess fiber optic or coaxial cables shall not be spooled, coiled or otherwise stored on the pole outside equipment cabinets or shrouds.

E. Noise Standards. Facilities and all accessory equipment and transmission equipment shall comply with all applicable noise control standards and regulations in the LCP and shall be operated in such a manner as to minimize the amount of noise impacts to adjacent uses and activities to the maximum extent feasible. To the maximum extent feasible fans shall not be used. If not feasible, noise attenuation measures shall be required for all fans. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and for testing and maintenance purposes. At any time, noise attenuation measures may be required by the zoning administrator when deemed necessary.

1. Testing and maintenance activities of Small Cell Facilities which generate audible noise shall occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., weekdays (Monday through Friday, non-holiday) excluding emergency repairs, unless allowed at other times by the zoning administrator. Testing and maintenance activities, which do not generate audible noise, may occur at any time, unless otherwise prohibited by the zoning administrator.

F. Lighting Standards. Small Cell Facilities shall not include any lights that would be visible from publicly accessible areas except for during night maintenance checks or emergencies, and except as may be required under Federal Aviation Administration, FCC, or other applicable regulations for health and safety. Facility lighting shall be designed so as to meet but not exceed minimum requirements for security and safety. All Small Cell Facilities and equipment (such as indicator or status lights) must be installed in locations and within enclosures that mitigate illumination impacts visible from publicly accessible areas, and shall avoid glare and illumination of adjacent properties to the maximum extent feasible. The provisions in this subsection shall not

27.18 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
12 be interpreted or applied to prohibit installations on streetlights or luminaires installed on new or replacement poles as may be required by the city.

G. Signage. Small Cell Facilities must include signage that accurately identifies the site owner/operator, the owner/operator’s site name or identification number and a toll-free number to the owner/operator’s network operations center. Small Cell Facilities shall also include signage for hazardous or toxic materials warning where applicable. Small Cell Facilities may not bear any advertisements, identifying logos, or any other signage unless expressly approved by the city, required by law or recommended under FCC, OSHA or other United States governmental agencies for compliance with RF emissions regulations. To the maximum extent feasible, signs shall be above eye level and hidden from public view with background matching the color of equipment unless otherwise required by the FCC or other regulatory agencies. All signs shall be legible from a distance of at least ten feet from the Small Cell Facility. No sign shall be greater than two square feet in size. The design, materials, colors and location of any signage shall be subject to zoning administrator’s review and approval.

H. Maintenance and Repair.

1. Small Cell Facilities, including, but not limited to, antennas, towers, equipment, cabinets, structures, accessory structures, and signs shall be maintained by the wireless telecommunication provider in good condition and in their approved and/or required state. This shall include keeping all facilities graffiti-free and maintaining security walls/fences in good condition. All graffiti must be removed as soon as practicable, and in no instance more than seventy-two hours from the time of notification by the city.

2. Any landscaping associated with or required in connection with the permitting of the Small Cell Facility, including landscaping of the public right-of-way, shall be maintained in good, healthy condition at all times. Any dead or dying landscaping shall be promptly replaced or rehabilitated by the wireless telecommunications provider.

3. The applicant or successor in interest shall repair, at its sole cost and expense, any damage (including, but not limited to subsidence, cracking, erosion, collapse, weakening, or loss of lateral support) to public utilities, infrastructure, and property, incluidng city streets, sidewalks, walks, curbs, gutters, trees, parkways, or utility lines and systems, underground utility line and systems, or sewer systems or sewer lines that results from any activities performed in connection with the installation and/or maintenance of a Small Cell Facility by applicant or successor in interest. In the event the applicant or successor in interest fails to complete said repair within the number of days stated on a written notice by the city, the city shall cause said repair to be completed and shall invoice the applicant or successor in interest for all costs incurred by city as a result of such repair.

4. All sidewalk panels affected by any work associated with the installation of a Small Cell Facility shall be restored to their original condition.

27.19 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
13 5. Structural foundations must be removed when removing structures from the right-ofway.

I. Security and Safety.

1. Facilities shall be designed to be resistant to and minimize opportunities for unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti, and other conditions that would result in hazardous conditions, visual blight, or attractive nuisances. Facilities may incorporate reasonable and appropriate site security measures, such as locks and anti-climbing devices. No barbed wire, razor ribbon, electrified fences or any similarly dangerous security measures shall be permitted. All exterior surfaces on Small Cell Facilities shall be constructed from or coated with graffiti-resistant materials.

2. Small Cell Facilities shall be reviewed by an electrical engineer licensed by the state according to the following guidelines:
a. Within forty-five days of initial operation or modification of a Small Cell Facility, the wireless telecommunications provider shall submit to the zoning administrator a written certification by an electrical engineer licensed by the state that the wireless telecommunications facility, including the actual radio frequency radiation of the facility, is in compliance with the application submitted, any conditions imposed, and all other provisions of this chapter in order to continue operations past the fortyfive day period. At the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, the zoning administrator may employ on behalf of the city an independent technical expert to confirm and periodically reconfirm compliance with the provisions of this chapter. b. All Small Cell Facilities shall demonstrate continued compliance with all radio frequency standards adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

The wireless telecommunications provider shall hire a professional engineer registered in the State of California, and approved by the zoning administrator to measure the actual radio frequency radiation of the approved facility and determine if it meets the FCC’s standards. A report of all calculations, required measurements, and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the FCC standards shall be submitted to the zoning administrator every three years thereafter. In the case of a change in standards, the required report shall be submitted within ninety days of the date the said change becomes effective. In order to assure the objectivity of the analysis, the city may require, at the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, independent verification of the results of any analysis. If a wireless telecommunications provider fails to supply the required reports or remains in continued noncompliance with the FCC standard, the zoning administrator may schedule a public hearing to consider revocation of the permit in accordance with Section 24.04.225.

J. Natural Disaster. Small Cell Facilities providing service to the government or general public shall be designed to survive a natural disaster without interruption in operation. To this end, the following measures shall be implemented:

27.20 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
14 1. Openings in all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets shall be protected against penetration by fire and windblown embers.

2. The material used as supports for the antennas shall be fire resistant, termite proof, and subject to all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

3. Small Cell Facilities shall be designed to withstand the forces expected during an earthquake in a manner subject to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All equipment mounting racks and attached equipment shall be anchored in such a manner that such a quake will not tip them over, throw the equipment off its shelves, or otherwise act to damage it.

4. All connections between various components of the Small Cell Facility and with necessary power and telephone lines shall be protected against damage by fire, flooding and earthquake.

5. Measures shall be taken to keep Small Cell Facilities in operation in the event of a disaster.

6. An electrical permit from the Planning and Community Development Department shall be required for the electric service associated with construction, installation, repair or alteration of all support structures for Small Cell Facilities.

K. Cessation, Abandonment, or Revocation. Upon 6 months after the cessation or abandonment of the use of a Small Cell Facility under this Section for any reason, or revocation of any applicable permits, the wireless telecommunications provider shall restore the site to its original preconstruction condition to the satisfaction of the city and comply with any notice or other requirements provided in Section 24.12.1435 (J).

L. Transfer of Ownership. In the event that the original permittee sells its interest in or transfers ownership of a Small Cell Facility under this Section, the succeeding carrier shall provide proof of obtaining all required approvals to operate the Small Cell Facility satisfactory to the cty, shall assume all responsibilities concerning the facility, and shall be held responsible to the city for maintaining consistency with all project conditions of approval, including proof of liability insurance. A new contact name for the project shall be provided by the succeeding carrier to the planning and community development department within thirty (30) days of transfer of interest of the facility. Any required signs by the city shall be updated within thirty (30) days to reflect the name and phone number of the new wireless telecommunication provider. The colors, materials and design of the updated signs shall match those of the required and approved signs.

M. Compliance with Applicable Laws.

1. The applicant or successor in interest shall install and maintain permitted Small Cell Facilities in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Building, National

27.21 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
15 Electrical Code, and any and all applicable federal and state laws, codes, and regulations.

2. The applicant or successor in interest shall also install and maintain permitted Small Cell Facilities in compliance with any applicable city noise standards, the city’s Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards, and all other applicable local codes, laws, and regulations, except to the extent that such standards conflict with those specified herein, in which case this section shall apply.

3. Americans with Disabilities Act. All Small Cell Facilities and their locations shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Section 6. Section 24.12.1435 (General Requirements) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1435 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.

The following requirements are applicable to all wireless telecommunications facilities, except for Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way and within the coastal zone, and except for exempt facilities described in Section 24.12.1410:

A. Visual Effect. All proposed wireless telecommunications facilities shall be located so as to minimize their visual impact to the maximum extent feasible. Measures to achieve this objective may include but are not limited to the following:

1. The applicant shall use the smallest and least visible antennas feasible to accomplish the owners/operator’s coverage objectives. All wireless telecommunications facilities proposed for locations where they would be readily visible from the public right-of-way or from the habitable living areas of residential units within 100 feet shall incorporate appropriate techniques to camouflage or disguise the facility, and/or blend it into the surrounding environment, to the maximum extent feasible.

2. Facilities shall be compatible in scale and integrated architecturally with the design of surrounding buildings or the natural setting. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall not be located on city, state or federal registered historic buildings. When proposed within a designated historic district wireless telecommunications facilities shall be limited to facade-mounted facilities only and integrated architecturally with the style and character of the structure and the district or otherwise made unobtrusive. No wireless telecommunications facility shall be sited such that its design and/or construction will damage a known or sensitive archeological site.

3. Whenever possible, base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets and buildings, backup generators, and other equipment associated with building-mounted antennas should be installed within the existing building envelope. If this is not feasible, the equipment shall be low profile, screened, fenced, landscaped, painted, or otherwise treated architecturally to

27.22 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
16 minimize its appearance from off-site locations and to visually blend with the surrounding natural and built environment. Equipment buildings should be designed in an architectural style and constructed of exterior building materials that are consistent with surrounding development and/or land use setting (if applicable) and should be a visually pleasing feature.

4. All ground-mounted base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets, and utility panels for telecommunications facilities shall be limited to a maximum height of ten feet above grade unless other techniques are adopted to ensure minimal visual impact. Base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets, and utility panels that are taller may be partially buried underground or installed by use of another technique to maintain the ten foot height limit. Greater height may be granted upon a finding that it is not possible to meet the height limitation and that adequate screening of the equipment is provided.

5. No advertising signage or identifying logos shall be displayed on wireless telecommunication facilities, except for small identification plates used for emergency notification or hazardous or toxic materials warning.

6. Applicants are encouraged to consider providing architectural treatments and to use “stealth techniques” to reduce potential visual impacts for all telecommunication facilities.

Stealth techniques are especially encouraged in areas easily visible from a major traffic corridor or commercial center or in residential areas. Stealth techniques may be required as Conditions of Approval when determined to be necessary to mitigate adverse visual impacts.

7. All facilities shall be designed to be resistant to and minimize opportunities for unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti, and other conditions that would result in hazardous conditions, visual blight, or attractive nuisances. The zoning administrator may require the provision of warning signs, fencing, anti-climbing devices, or other techniques to prevent unauthorized access and vandalism when, because of their location and/or accessibility, antenna facilities have the potential to become an attractive nuisance. The design of the fencing and other access control devices shall be subject to review. The use of chain-link fencing is discouraged and the use of razor wire is prohibited.

B. Landscaping. Landscaping may be required to visually screen wireless telecommunications facilities from adjacent properties or public view and/or to provide a backdrop to camouflage the facilities. All proposed landscaping is subject to the zoning administrator’s review and approval.

Landscaping guidelines include but are not limited to the following:

1. To the extent feasible, existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized. Additional trees and other vegetation shall be planted and maintained around the facility, in the vicinity of the project site, and along access roads in appropriate situations where such vegetation is deemed necessary to provide screening of wireless communications facilities and related access roads.

27.23 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
17 2. All trees used in landscaping shall be a minimum of fifteen gallons in size and all shrubs in a minimum of five gallons, unless otherwise approved.

3. Existing trees and other screening vegetation in the vicinity of the proposed facility and associated access-ways shall be protected from damage both during and after construction.

4. The applicant shall enter into a landscape performance and maintenance agreement with the city to ensure the installation and establishment of required landscaping. This agreement shall be secured by financial guarantees acceptable to the zoning administrator in an amount equal to 150 percent of the estimated cost of materials and labor for required improvements. The duration of the landscape maintenance agreement shall be for the length of the permit.

5. All landscape design shall meet the water efficiency landscaping requirements of the Municipal Code, including installing or upgrading existing irrigation systems if necessary.

C. Access Roads. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall use existing access roads, where available. Unless visual impacts can be adequately mitigated, no new access roads shall be allowed with any proposed wireless telecommunications facility.

D. Setbacks. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall comply with all applicable setback regulations of the zoning district in which they are situated.

1. All setbacks shall be measured from the furthest extent of a wireless telecommunications facility to the closest applicable property line or structure, with the exception of equipment shelters.

2. Ground mounted or freestanding monopole facilities shall be setback at a distance not less than the height of the structure from any residentially zoned land.

3. Equipment shelters shall be measured from the outside wall of the shelter to the closest applicable property line or structure. Underground equipment shelters or cabinets may adjoin property lines, if approved by the building official.

E. Number of Antennas and Facilities Permitted. The number of antennas allowed per site shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the zoning administrator with the goal of minimizing adverse visual impacts.

F. Noise. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be constructed and operated in such a manner as to minimize the amount of noise impacts to adjacent uses and activities. Noise attenuation measures shall be required for all air-conditioning units. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and for testing and maintenance purposes. At any time, noise attenuation measures may be required by the zoning administrator when deemed necessary.

27.24 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
18 1. Testing and maintenance activities of wireless telecommunications facilities which generate audible noise shall occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., weekdays (Monday through Friday, non-holiday) excluding emergency repairs, unless allowed at other times by the zoning administrator. Testing and maintenance activities, which do not generate audible noise, may occur at any time, unless otherwise prohibited by the zoning administrator.

G. Interference. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be operated in a manner, which complies with the Federal Communication Commission’s regulations regarding signal interference.

H. Maintenance and Safety. All wireless telecommunications providers shall provide signage, as required by the zoning administrator, which shall identify the name and phone number of the wireless telecommunications provider for use in case of an emergency.

1. The design, materials, colors and location of the identification signs shall be subject to zoning administrator’s review and approval. All signs shall be legible from a distance of at least ten feet from the wireless telecommunications facility. No sign shall be greater than two square feet in size.

2. If at any time a new wireless telecommunications provider takes over operation of an existing wireless telecommunications facility, the new wireless telecommunications provider shall notify the planning and community development department of the change in operation within thirty days and the required and approved signs shall be updated within thirty days to reflect the name and phone number of the new wireless telecommunication provider. The colors, materials and design of the updated signs shall match those of the required and approved signs.

3. All wireless telecommunications facilities, including, but not limited to, antennas, towers, equipment, cabinets, structures, accessory structures, and signs shall be maintained by the wireless telecommunication provider in good condition. This shall include keeping all wireless telecommunications facilities graffiti-free and maintaining security walls/fences in good condition. All graffiti must be removed as soon as practicable, and in no instance more than seventy-two hours from the time of notification by the city.

4. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be reviewed by an electrical engineer licensed by the state according to the following guidelines:
a. Within forty-five days of initial operation or modification of a wireless telecommunications facility, the wireless telecommunications provider shall submit to the zoning administrator a written certification by an electrical engineer licensed by the state that the wireless telecommunications facility, including the actual radio frequency radiation of the facility, is in compliance with the application submitted, any conditions imposed, and all other provisions of this chapter in order to continue operations past the forty-five day period. At the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, the zoning administrator may employ on behalf of the city an

27.25 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
19 independent technical expert to confirm and periodically reconfirm compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
b. Every wireless telecommunications facility shall demonstrate continued compliance with all radio frequency standards adopted by the Federal Communications Commission. The wireless telecommunications provider shall hire a professional engineer registered in the State of California, and approved by the zoning administrator to measure the actual radio frequency radiation of the approved facility and determine if it meets the Federal Communications Commission’s standards. A report of all calculations, required measurements, and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the Federal Communications Commission standards shall be submitted to the zoning administrator every three years thereafter. In the case of a change in standards, the required report shall be submitted within ninety days of the date the said change becomes effective. In order to assure the objectivity of the analysis, the city may require, at the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, independent verification of the results of any analysis. If a wireless telecommunications provider fails to supply the required reports or remains in continued noncompliance with the Federal Communications Commission standard, the zoning administrator may schedule a public hearing to consider revocation of the permit. After conducting the hearing, if the hearing body determines that the wireless telecommunications provider has failed to supply the required reports or remains in continued noncompliance, the hearing body may modify or revoke all approvals.

I. Natural Disaster. All wireless telecommunications facilities providing service to the government or general public shall be designed to survive a natural disaster without interruption in operation. To this end, the following measures shall be implemented:

1. Nonflammable exterior wall and roof covering shall be used in the construction of all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets.

2. Openings in all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets shall be protected against penetration by fire and windblown embers.

3. The material used as supports for the antennas shall be fire resistant, termite proof, and subject to all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

4. Wireless telecommunications facility towers shall be designed to withstand the forces expected during an earthquake in a manner subject to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All equipment mounting racks and attached equipment shall be anchored in such a manner that such a quake will not tip them over, throw the equipment off its shelves, or otherwise act to damage it.

5. All connections between various components of the wireless telecommunications facility and with necessary power and telephone lines shall be protected against damage by fire, flooding and earthquake.

27.26 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
20 6. Measures shall be taken to keep wireless telecommunications facilities in operation in the event of a disaster.

7. All equipment shelters and wireless telecommunications facility towers shall be reviewed and approved by the city fire department.

8. A building permit shall be required for the construction, installation, repair or alteration of all support structures for wireless telecommunications facilities equipment.

Wireless telecommunications facilities must be stable and must comply with the Uniform Building Code and any conditions imposed as a condition of issuing a building permit.

9. All reports, certifications and verifications required to be prepared and maintained by this section shall at all times be readily available for public examination and review. To this end, upon the request of any person to the city or any wireless telecommunications provider, the city or provider shall promptly make any such report, certification or verification available for review and/or copying. Reasonable copying cost reimbursement may be required. In addition, the wireless telecommunications provider shall post all current reports, certifications and verifications at the site of the wireless telecommunications facility to which they pertain.

J. Cessation of Operation On-Site.

1. Wireless telecommunications providers shall provide the city with a notice of intent to vacate a site a minimum of thirty days prior to the vacation.

2. A new permit shall be required if a site is to be used again for the same purpose as permitted under the original permit if a consecutive period of six months have lapsed since cessation of operations.

3. All equipment associated with a wireless telecommunications facility shall be removed by the property owner after cessation of the said use for more than six consecutive months, and the site shall be restored to its original pre-construction condition. An exception to this subsection may be made by the zoning administrator for an one extension of up to twelve months if the property owner continues to make a good faith attempt to sell or lease the property as a wireless telecommunications facility site, as certified by a licensed real estate broker who is under contract with a right to sell or lease the property.

4. Any wireless telecommunications provider that is buying, leasing, or is considering a transfer of ownership of an already approved facility shall submit a letter of notification of intent to the zoning administrator.

K. Transfer of Ownership. In the event that the original permittee sells its interest in a wireless telecommunications facility, the succeeding carrier shall assume all responsibilities concerning the project and shall be held responsible to the city for maintaining consistency with all project conditions of approval, including proof of liability insurance. A new contact name for the project

27.27 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
21 shall be provided by the succeeding carrier to the planning and community development department within thirty days of transfer of interest of the facility.

L. Co-location. Where technically, legally, and fiscally feasible, co-location of new wireless telecommunications facilities onto existing telecommunications ground-mounted and freestanding monopole towers shall be required. Co-location may require that height extensions be made to existing towers or wireless telecommunications facilities to accommodate additional users, or may involve constructing new multi-user facilities that replace existing single-user capacity towers.

M. Lighting. The use of exterior lighting shall be manually operated and used only during night maintenance checks and emergencies unless specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other governmental agencies. Facility lighting shall be designed so as to meet but not exceed minimum requirements for security and safety and in all instances be designed so as to avoid glare and illumination of adjacent properties.

Section 7. Section 24.04.130 (Decision-Making Body with Final Authority on Application Approval) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.04.130 DECISION-MAKING BODY WITH FINAL AUTHORITY ON APPLICATION APPROVAL.

The following table indicates the decision-making body who can approve, deny or conditionally approve an application, whether or not a public hearing is required, and the bodies to which appeals can be made:

1. The planning commission and city council may refer certain aspects of any application to the zoning administrator for final action.

2. The zoning administrator may refer any of the matters on which he/she is authorized to act to the planning commission or historic preservation commission.

3. Recommendations for approval on General Plan matters and zoning ordinance text and map amendments shall require a majority vote of the planning commission; all other actions shall require a majority of the hearing body present at the meeting.

27.28 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
22 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
Coastal Permit ZA
(ADU*)
ZA* CPC/CC/CCC*
Administrative Use Permit:

Large family daycare homes,
temporary uses, and half baths
in accessory buildings

ZA CPC/CC
Administrative Use Permit:

Variations to parking design
requirements or variations to
number of required spaces

ZA CPC/CC/CCC
Other uses as listed by
individual zoning districts as
requiring an Administrative Use
Permit

ZA CPC/CC
Conditional Fence Permit ZA ZA CPC/CC
Slope Regulations
Modifications (Variance)
CPC CC
Slope Regulations
Modifications (Design Permit)

ZA CPC/CC
Design Permit ZA CPC/CC
Substandard lots: New twostory structures and secondstory additions, including ADUsZA CPC/CC Large homes per
Section 24.08.450

ZA CPC/CC
Wireless telecommunications
facilities
ZA* ZA CPC/CC
New structures or improvements
to existing structures in the
WCD Overlay which are
exempt or excluded from coastal
permit requirements

ZA CPC/CC
New structures or improvements
to existing structures in the

ZA CPC/CC

27.29 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
23 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
WCD Overlay which require a
coastal permit
Demolition Permit

1. Single-family residential ZA CPC/CC

2. Multifamily residential CPC CC

3. Historic demolition permit HPC CC

4. Nonresidential ZA** ZA** CPC/CC
General Plan Text and Map
Amendments
CPC CC/CCC***
Historic Alteration Permit HPC CC
Administrative Historic
Alteration Permit

ZA HPC/CC
Historic Building Survey:

Building designation, deletion HPC CC
Historic District Designation HPC/CPC CC
Historic Landmark Designation HPC CC
Mobile Homes (Certificate of
Compatibility)

ZA CPC/CC
Mobile Home Park Conversion CPC CC
Outdoor Extension Areas per
Section 24.12.192

ZA CPC/CC
Planned Development Permit CPC CC
Project (Major) Modification Reviewed by ZA or body
approving application
Appeal to next
highest body(ies)
Project (Minor) Modification ZA CPC/CC
Relocation of Structures Permit ZA CPC/CC
Revocation Permit Hearing by ZA or body
approving application
Appeal to next
highest body(ies)
Sign Permit ZA CPC/CC

27.30 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
24 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
Special Use Permit CPC CC
Variance ZA CPC/CC
Watercourse Variance CPC CC
Watercourse Development
Permit

ZA CPC/CC
Zoning Ordinance Text and
Map Amendments
Amendments recommended by
CPC
CPC CC/CCC***
Amendments not recommended
by CPC
CPC CC/CCC***
CCC = California Coastal Commission CC = City Council CPC = City Planning Commission
HPC = Historic Preservation Commission ZA = Zoning Administrator * For projects seaward of the mean high tide line, and in the case of appealable actions, the California Coastal Commission shall be the decision-making body which can finally approve an application. In the coastal zone, all proposed accessory dwelling units shall require a coastal permit (unless they are exempt or excluded from coastal permit requirements) and shall be processed in the manner described in Chapter 24.04 and Section

24.08.200 et seq. (including in terms of public noticing and process for appeal to the Coastal Commission) except that no public hearing shall be required. In addition to all other applicable LCP requirements, standards for ADUs in the coastal zone are specified in Section 24.12.140(10). For Small Cell Facilities projects that are in the public right-of-way and in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where city decisions can be appealed to the California Coastal Commission, appeals shall be made directly to the Coastal Commission. For Small Cell Facilities projects that are in the public right-of-way but are not in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where such Coastal Commission appeals are allowed, appeals shall be made directly to the City Council. ** Such permits shall be issued administratively, without a public hearing, unless a cultural resources evaluation, prepared by a qualified consultant as determined by the zoning administrator, determines that the building or structure is eligible for listing on the city Historic Building Survey.

27.31 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
25 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
*** California Coastal Commission in case of CLUP policy, CLIP elements. **** At a regularly scheduled meeting, a majority of the council may take an action to direct any project or amendment to be called from a lower hearing body prior to a final action or during an appeal period in accordance with Section 24.04.175(2). (Ord. 2020-22 § 2, 2020; Ord. 2016-11 § 2, 2016: Ord. 2016-04 § 1, 2016: Ord. 2012-19 § 6 (part), 2012; Ord. 2012-06 § 1, 2012: Ord. 2008-17 § 2 (part), 2008: Ord. 2006-02 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2004-27 § 3, 2004: Ord. 2004-02 § 6, 2004: Ord. 2003-17 § 10, 2003: Ord. 2003-16 § 10, 2003: Ord. 2000-27 § 1, 2000: Ord. 99-17 § 2, 1999: Ord. 94-34 § 2, 1994: Ord. 94-33 § 5, 1994: Ord. 91-14 § 1, 1991; Ord. 90-09 § 1, 1990; Ord. 86-12 § 1, 1986: Ord. 85-05 § 1 (part), 1985).

Section 8. Section 24.04.186 (Appeals to Coastal Commission) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.04.186 APPEALS TO COASTAL COMMISSION.

1. Coastal permits fall into either of two categories: appealable or nonappealable to the Coastal Commission.

The determination of whether a project is appealable or nonappealable, or categorically exempt, shall be made by the zoning administrator at the time the application is filed. This determination is appealable pursuant to the provision of California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Regulations Section 13569.

2. Coastal permits are only appealable after all city appeals are exhausted except for (a) appeals by members of the Coastal Commission and (b) appeals of city decisions on Small Cell Facilities in the public right of way and in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where city decisions can be appealed to the California Coastal Commission, in which case the appeal may be made directly to the Coastal Commission. No fee shall be charged for coastal permit appeals. a. Only the following coastal permit applications are appealable to the Coastal Commission:
(1) Any major public works project or facility. The phrase “major public works project or energy facility” is the same as used in Public Resources Code

27.32 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
26 Section 30603(A)(5) and these regulations shall mean any proposed public works projects as defined by Section 13012 of the Coastal Commission Regulations, or “energy facility” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 13012 of the Coastal Commission Regulations, or “energy facility” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 30107 and exceeding $50,000.00 in estimated cost of construction. (2) Development approved between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea or within three hundred feet of the inland extent of any beach or the mean high tide line of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance. (3) Developments approved not included within subsection (a)(2) above, located on tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within one hundred feet of any wetland, estuary, stream, or within three hundred feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff.
(a) Subsections (a)(2) and (a)(3) above are shown as the SP-O Shoreline Protection Overlay zone on the zoning map.
(4) Developments approved that are located in a sensitive coastal resource area. b. An appeal may be filed only by the applicant, an aggrieved person as defined by this title, or any two members of the Coastal Commission. An appeal must be filed in accordance with the appeal procedures contained in this title, except that appeals by any two members of the Coastal Commission do not require exhaustion of local appeals and may be made following the decisions of the reviewing body, zoning administrator, zoning board or city council.

However, commissioner appeals taken prior to exhaustion of all local appeals shall be transmitted to the appropriate local appellate body and the appeal to the commission may be suspended pending a decision on the merits by that local appellate body. If the decision of the local appellate body modifies or reverses the previous decision, the commissioners shall be required to file a new appeal from that decision. c. Grounds for appeal, pursuant to subsection (a)(2) above, shall be limited to an allegation that the development does not conform to standards set forth in the certified Local Coastal Program or the Public Access Policies set forth in the California Coastal Act. d. The grounds for an appeal of a denial of a permit pursuant to subsection (a)(1) shall be limited to an allegation that the development conforms to the standards set forth in the certified Local Coastal Program and the public access policies set forth in the California Coastal Act.
e. Appeals to the Coastal Commission pursuant to this section must be filed with the Coastal Commission on forms prescribed by and available from the Coastal Commission.

27.33 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
27 (Ord. 94-42 § 1, 1994: Ord. 94-33 § 8, 1994: Ord. 88-58 § 7, 1988; Ord. 85-47 § 2, 1985: Ord. 85-05 § 1 (part), 1985).

Section 9. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption, except that in the Coastal Zone, the ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption and following the Coastal Commission’s Executive Director reporting to the Commission his determination that the City’s actions are legally adequate and the Commission not objecting to the Executive Director’s determination.

PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 22nd day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this __th day of __, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above
and foregoing document is the
original of Ordinance No. 201X-XX
and that it has been published or
posted in accordance with the
Charter of the City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

27.34 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX
28 27.35
ORDINANCE NO. 2019-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING TITLE 24 OF THE

SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) AND THE LOCAL COASTAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: AMENDING
SECTION 24.12.1400 ET SEQ. REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR “SMALL CELL”

WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WITHIN THE COASTAL ZONE, AMENDING SECTION 24.04.130 “DECISIONMAKING BODY WITH FINAL AUTHORITY ON APPLICATION APPROVAL”, SECTION

24.04.186 “APPEALS TO COASTAL COMMISSION”
BE IT ORDAINED By the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

Section 1. Section 24.12.1405 (Definitions) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1405 DEFINITIONS.

A. As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meaning set forth below, unless the context clearly dictates a different meaning.

1. “Amateur radio facilities” are antennas and related equipment for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication, or technical investigations carried out by an amateur radio operator who operates without commercial interest, and who holds a written authorization from the Federal Communications Commission to operate an amateur radio facility.

2. “American National Standards Institute” or “ANSI” is a private organization that develops widely accepted standards for various modern-day equipment.

3. “Antenna” is a device or system of wires, poles, rods, dishes, discs or similar devices used for the transmission and/or receipt of electromagnetic waves.

4. “Base transceiver station” or “BTS” is the electronic equipment housed in cabinets that together with antennas comprises a PCS facility or “site”. The cabinets include an air conditioning unit, heating unit, electrical supply, telephone hook-up and back-up power supply.

5. “California Public Utility Commission” or “CPUC” is the state-level regulatory agency responsible for regulating wireless telecommunications.

6. “Cell” is the coverage area through which wireless receiving and transmitting equipment from a particular cell site successfully propagates.

7. “Cell site” is a parcel of real property or public right-of-way on which a wireless telecommunications facility is to be located.

27.36 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
2 8. “Co-location” is a wireless telecommunications facility comprising a single telecommunications tower, monopole or building supporting antennas owned or used by more than one wireless telecommunications carrier.

9. “Direct-to-home” generally means the distribution or broadcasting of programming or services by satellite directly to the subscriber’s premises without the use of ground receiving or distribution equipment, except at the subscriber’s premises.

10. “Facade-mounted antenna” is an antenna that is directly attached or affixed to any facade of building.

11. “Feasible” shall mean, for the purpose of this Chapter 24.12 Part 15, capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account environmental, social, and technological factors.

12. “Federal Communications Commission” or “FCC” is the federal agency responsible for licensing and regulating wireless telecommunications providers. The agency has primary regulatory control over communications providers through its powers to control interstate commerce and to provide a comprehensive national system in accordance with the Federal Communications Act.

13. “Freestanding monopole” is a structure composed of a single spire used to support communications equipment.

14. “Ground-mounted” is an antenna with its support structure placed directly on the ground.

15. Monopole. See “Freestanding monopole.”

16. “Non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation” or “NIER” means low energy and low frequency electromagnetic energy, including visible light, television, pagers, AM/FM radio, cellular systems, enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR) systems and personal communications services (PCS) systems.

17. “Omni-directional” means an antenna that is equally effective in all directions (360 degrees) and is typically cylindrical in shape, the size of which varies with the frequency for which it is designed. Whip antennas are often referenced by this name.

18. “Panel antenna” means an antenna or array of antennas designed to concentrate a radio signal in a particular area. Panel antennas are typically flat, rectangular, long devices generally three square feet in size, although some technologies utilize larger panel antennas. Also known as directional antennas.

19. “Roof-mounted” means an antenna directly attached or affixed to the roof of an existing building, water tank, tower or structure other than a telecommunications tower.

This type of installation is sometimes called a freestanding roof mounted antenna.

27.37 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
3 20. “Service provider” means a wireless telecommunications provider, a company or organization, or the agent of a company or organization that provides wireless telecommunications services.

21. “Significant gap” is a gap in the service provider’s own wireless telecommunications facilities, as defined in federal case law interpretations of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.

22. “Small Cell Facilities” means, pursuant to 47 CFR 1.6002, any facilities that meet each of the following conditions:

1. The facilities:
a. Are mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height including their antennas; or
b. Are mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or
c. Do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent whichever is greater;

2. Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of antenna), is no more than three cubic feet in volume;

3. All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume;

4. The facilities do not require antenna structure registration by the FCC;

5. The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR 800.16(x); and

6. The facilities do not result in human exposure to radiofrequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified by the FCC.

23. “Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards” means the aesthetic and design standards for small cell wireless facilities adopted by the city council.

24. “Stealth facility” is any telecommunications facility, which is designed to blend into the surrounding environment, and is visually unobtrusive. Examples of stealth facilities may include architecturally screened roof-mounted antennas, facade-mounted antennas painted and treated as architectural elements to blend with the existing building, or elements designed to appear as vegetation, trees, or commonly expected strucures for the area in question. Also known as concealed telecommunications facilities.

27.38 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
4 25. “Stealth technologies/techniques” are camouflaging methods applied to wireless telecommunications facilities which render them visually inconspicuous.

26. “Telecommunications” is any transmission, emission or reception of signals, images and sound or information of any nature by wire, radio, visual or electromagnetic system that work on a “line-of-sight” principle.

27. “Telecommunication tower” is a monopole, lattice tower, free standing tower or other structures designed to support antennas.

28. “Visual impact” means the placement or design of an antenna or the associated equipment and/or buildings such that they are not screened or shielded or are plainly visible and are likely to be noticeable or otherwise conspicuous.

29. Whip antenna. See “Omni-directional antenna.”

30. “Wireless telecommunications facility” is a land use facility that sends and/or receives radio frequency signals. Wireless telecommunications facilities include antennas and all other types of equipment for the transmission or receipt of such signals; telecommunication towers or similar structures built to support such equipment; equipment cabinets, base transceiver stations, and other accessory development. Also referred to as a telecommunication facility.

31. “Wireless telecommunications provider” is any company or organization that provides or who represents a company or organization that provides wireless telecommunications services.

Section 2. Section 24.12.1410 (Applicability) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1410 APPLICABILITY.

A. These regulations shall apply to all property owned by private persons, firms, corporations or organizations, and property owned by the city, and property owned by any agencies of the city, or by any local, state, or federal government agency or political subdivision thereof required to comply with local government regulations or by written agreement.

B. These regulations (Chapter 24.12, Part 15) shall not apply to the following facilities:

1. Amateur (including ham and short-wave) radio facilities as provided in 47 Code of Federal Regulations Part 97. on private property provided that the antenna does not exceed sixty-five feet in height or is not more than twenty-five feet above the height limit prescribed by the regulations for the district in which the facility is located, whichever is less.

2. Amateur (including ham and short-wave) radio facilities on public property provided the facilities do not exceed sixty-five feet in height or are not more than twenty27.39 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
5 five feet above the height limit prescribed by the regulations for the district in which the facilities are located, whichever is less.

2. Wireless telecommunications facilities, which are not licensed by the Federal Communications Commission and are determined by the planning director to have little or no adverse visual impact.

2. Over the Air Receptions Devices (OTARDs) as defined and further provided in 47 Code of Federal Regulations Section 1.4000 et seq..Direct-to-home satellite services smaller than two feet in diameter provided that such facilities are in accordance with other sections of this title.

5. Any wireless telecommunications facility located on land owned by one of the public entities listed below and operated for the public entity’s public purpose only and not for commercial reasons:
a. The United States of America or any of its agencies; b. The state or any of its agencies or political subdivisions of the state not required by state law to comply with local zoning ordinances.

3. Wireless telecommunication facilities used solely for public safety purposes, installed and operated by authorized public safety agencies (e.g. county 911 emergency services, police, sheriff, fire departments, first responder medical services, hospitals, etc.) and incorporating stealth technologies.

4. Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way outside the coastal zone, which are subject to the requirements of Chapter 15.38 of the Municipal Code.

5. Any other antennas and wireless communications facilities identified by the FCC or the CPUC as exempt from local regulations.

Section 3. Section 24.12.1415 (Permit Requirements and Findings) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1415 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND FINDINGS.

A. Unless a coastal exclusion or exemption as defined in Sections 24.08.230 through

24.08.230.2 applies, and in addition to any other required permit or authorization, a coastal permit shall be required for all wireless telecommunication facilities located within the coastal zone, as follows:

1. For all wireless telecommunication facilities other than Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way as specified in subsection 2 below, the coastal permit shall be governed by the findings and standards in the Local Coastal Program (LCP), including, but not limited to Chapter 24.08 Part 3, as well as the standards and findings specified herein at Chapter 24.12 Part 15.

27.40 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
6 2. For Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way, the coastal permit shall be governed by the findings and standards in the LCP, including, but not limited to

24.08.200 et seq, as well as the standards and findings specified herein at

24.12.1425 and 24.12.1434. City approval of the coastal permit may be appealed directly to the California Coastal Commission (as further provided in Section

24.04.186).

In case of conflict between the coastal permit and any other permit or authorization, the requirements of the coastal permit shall prevail.

B. Any proposed facade-mounted or roof-mounted wireless telecommunications facility (other than Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way, which are covered by Sections

24.12.1425 and 24.12.1434) that is determined by the zoning administrator to be consistent with all of the requirements of this Part 15, and that incorporates stealth technologies and/or is not visible from public areas, shall require a administrative design permit from the zoning administrator based on the following findings:

1. The wireless telecommunications facility has demonstrated consistency with Sections 24.12.1430 and 24.12.1435 (as applicable).

2. The wireless telecommunications facility has been located and designed so as to be compatible with the purpose of Chapter 24.12 Part 15 and the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program (if applicable).

3. The wireless telecommunications facility is in compliance with all FCC and California PUC standards and requirements and with all other applicable requirements of Chapter 24.12 Part 15.

C. Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way within the coastal zone are exempt from the requirements of Sections 24.12.1415 (B) and 24.12.1415 (D) regarding design permit and administrative use permit requirements. Instead, such Small Cell Facilities shall require, in addition to a coastal permit as specified in 24.12.1415(A)(2), the following:

1. A small cell wireless facilities permit in compliance with Chapter 15.38 and the city’s Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards;

2. A master license agreement, in a form approved by the city attorney for the use of a city pole in a specified license area, and shall pay a license fee subject to the city’s fee schedule, if any Small Cell Facilities are proposed to be installed on a city pole controlled by the city and located within the public right-of-way. Any applicant seeking a master license agreement shall pay a master license agreement administrative fee subject to the city’s fee schedule to reimburse the city for reasonable costs in connection with its preparation, review of, and action upon the request for such an agreement. The absence of a city-approved master license agreement shall be an independently sufficient basis to deny any application for a Small Cell Facility on such a city pole.

27.41 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
7 D. All wireless telecommunications facilities that do not meet the criteria defined in subsections (B) or (C) above, shall require an administrative use permit with a public hearing before the zoning administrator, in addition to aA design permit with the required findings provided in subsection (B) above.shall also be required to be made
E. In approving an application, the city may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate or necessary to further the purposes of this chapter, including, but not limited to, requiring the redesign or relocation of the facility. Alternatively, the city may direct the applicant to resubmit a revised proposal for further consideration.

F. Minor modifications to wireless telecommunications facility equipment design, location, height, and other elements may be allowed, subject to the approval of the zoning administrator, if such modifications are in keeping with the architectural statement and layout design of the original approval, and meet the requirements of this chapter.

Section 4. Section 24.12.1425 (Location Standards) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1425 LOCATION STANDARDS.

A. Prohibited Zoning Districts. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall not be allowed in the following zoning districts listed below, subject only to except as set forth in

24.12.1425(B). This prohibition shall also not apply to Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way.

1. Single-Family Residence (RS, R-1).

2. Multiple-Family Residence (RL, RM, RH).

3. Beach Residential (RT(A), RT(D), RT(E)).

4. Ocean Front Recreational (OFR).

5. Flood Plain (FP).

6. Agriculture (EA-20).

B. Exceptions to Prohibited Districts. Wireless telecommunications facilities may be sited in the prohibited zoning districts described above in Section 24.12.1425 (A) with an administrative use permit, in addition to any other required permits; provided, that the applicant can demonstrate to the zoning administrator that:

1. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility would eliminate or substantially reduce one or more significant gaps in the applicant carrier’s network; and

27.42 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
8 2. There are no viable, feasible, and environmentally (e.g., visually) equivalent or superior potential alternatives (i.e., sites/facility types) outside the prohibited zoning districts that could eliminate or substantially reduce said significant gap(s).

C. Location preference for all wireless telecommunications facilities should be given to the following locations:

1. Locations that do not adversely impact significant public views (e.g., of the beach, shorline, ocean, natural areas, etc.).

2. Industrial or commercial sites.

3. Facilities attached or sited adjacent to existing structures. Appropriate types of existing structures may include, but not be limited to buildings, telephone and utility poles, traffic signals, flagpoles, signs and sign standards.

4. Sites which are not highly visible from adjacent roadways, public areas, parks, schools, greenbelts or other visually sensitive areas, as determined by the zoning administrator.

5. Sites outside the coastal zone, and particularly sites located within the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district (as defined in Chapter 24.10 Part 26) where city decisions can be appealed.

D. When feasible and in conformance with other provisions of this chapter, wireless telecommunications providers shall be encouraged to locate their wireless telecommunications facilities on publicly owned or controlled property.

E. Wireless telecommunications facilities are prohibited in all natural areas designated in the General Plan or LCP.

F. To the maximum extent feasible, wireless telecommunication facilities are prohibited within one thousand feet of any public elementary school or daycare facility.

G. Additional Site Location Standards for Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way and in the coastal zone. In addition to the requirements listed above, the following location standards shall also apply to Small Cell Facilities located in the public right-of-way and within the coastal zone:

1. Site locations shall be selected in the following order of preference:
a. Area not visible to the public or area that does not significantly impair public views (such as in alleys, on rooftops, near property corners or side property lines, or in inconspicuous areas);

27.43 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
9 b. Attached or sited adjacent to existing structures. Appropriate types of existing structures may include, but not be limited to telephone/utility poles and non-decorative light standards;
c. Area not requiring the removal of existing infrastructure, parkway trees or reductions of the parkway landscape planters;
d. Within the public parkway landscaping and requiring only minor alterations to the existing parkway landscaping (including planter size) and/or infrastructure;
e. Within the public right-of-way in a manner that requires significant but feasible alteration to the existing public improvements and/or infrastructure.

2. To the maximum extent feasible, the following site locations shall be prohibited:
a. Facility site locations that lead to removal of any existing public parking areas.
b. Facility site locations directly in front of residences and businesses. c. Facilities with components located within driveway and intersection sight lines.
d. Site locations in Residential and Commercial Zoning Districts that are within 1500 feet of another Small Cell Facility and any associated equipment; provided, however, that this restriction may be waived by the zoning administrator upon a demonstration that the refusal to allow an additional facility within a 1500-foot radius will otherwise violate an applicable state or federal law.
e. Facilities on strand or overhead lines.
f. Facility site locations that will negatively impact public recreation and access, or damage a known or sensitive archeological site. g. Site locations that adversely impact significant public views (e.g., of the beach, shorline, ocean, natural areas, etc.), including those locations identified in Map CD-3 of the Local Coastal Program.

Section 5. Section 24.12.1434 (Requirements For Small Cell Facilities in the Coastal Zone) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby added as follows:

24.12.1434 REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WITHIN THE COASTAL ZONE.

Small Cell Facilities located in the public right- of-way and which require a coastal permit shall comply with the following standards and requirements:

27.44 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
10 A. Pole Type Preferences. Facilities on poles shall be sited in the following order of preference:

1. On an existing or replacement street light pole;

2. On an existing or replacement structure other than a street light pole or utility pole;

3. On an existing or replacement utility pole.

B. Equipment preferences. Equipment (including, but not limited to, radio units, power supplies, voltage converters, electrical service connections, shut off switches and electric meters) shall be sited in the following order of preference:

1. Within a below-grade equipment vault;

2. In an at grade equipment cabinet provided the size of the cabinet is minimized to the maximum extent feasible; At grade equipment cabinets shall participate in the Traffic Graphics program or pay an in lieu fee depending on the location (i.e. commercial or residential areas) at the discretion of the decision making body.

3. Enclosed at the base of the pole on which the antenna is mounted provided the size of the base of the pole is minimized to the maximum extent feasible;

4. Equipment boxes using stealth techniques mounted on a utility pole, provided the size of the boxes is minimized to the maximum extent feasible.

C. Visual, Public Access, and Archealogical Impact Avoidance. To the maximum extent feasible, such facilities shall be sited and designed in a manner that avoids overall visibility, and eliminates or substantially reduces their visual and aesthetic impact upon the surrounding public right-of-way, archeologic resources, public views and public access. Measures to achieve this objective may include, but are not limited to the following:

1. The number of antennas on each site shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible with the goal of minimizing adverse visual impacts.

2. To the maximum extent feasible, the antenna size, cabinet equipment and other facilities shall minimize visual clutter.

3. The project shall use the smallest and least visible antennas feasible to accomplish the coverage objectives. Facilties that are proposed for locations where they would be readily visible from the public right-of-way or from the habitable living areas of residential units within 100 feet shall incorporate appropriate techniques to camouflage or disguise the facility, and/or blend it into the surrounding environment, to the maximum extent feasible.

4. To the maximum extent feasible, facilities shall not be designed in such a manner that will negatively impact public recreation and access, or damage a known or sensitive archeological site.

27.45 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
11 5. Applicants are encouraged to consider providing architectural treatments and to use “stealth techniques” to reduce potential visual impacts of the facilities to the maximum extent feasible. Stealth techniques are especially encouraged in areas easily visible from a major traffic corridor or commercial center or in residential areas. Stealth techniques may be required as conditions of approval for a coastal permit when determined to be necessary to mitigate adverse visual impacts.

D. Design Standards:

1. Any pole to be installed in the public right-of-way shall be disguised to resemble a utility pole to the maximum extent feasible. Facility’s antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 15 inches. All antennas and screening devices shall be painted or finished to match the pole. All pole or equipment shall be painted or otherwise coated to be visually compatible with existing poles and equipment. Facilities shall be placed on the same vertical axis as the center of the pole.

2. Small Cell Facility installations on existing city infrastructure shall be placed in a manner so that the size, appearance and function of the final installation is essentially identical to the installation prior to the antenna installation taking place.

3. Small Cell Facility installations shall not be located on decorative street light poles.

No faux or otherwise nonfunctioning street lights, decorative elements, signs, clock towers, or artificial trees or shrubs or other such nonfunctioning screening elements made to resemble other objects shall be permitted.

4. Small Cell Facility equipment located above the surface grade in the public rightof-way including, but not limited to those on certain street lights, shall consist of small equipment components that are compatible in structure, scale, function and proportion to the poles they are mounted on. Equipment shall be painted or otherwise coated to be visually compatible with the subject pole (may include public art). Underground vaults shall employ flush-to-grade access portals and vents that are heel shoe safe and slip safe; provided, however, that this restriction shall not apply in flood prone areas.

5. All cables and conduits shall be routed through the interior of the subject pole to be screened from public view; provided, however, that for wood poles, all cables shall be contained within conduit, and conduits shall be mounted and routed in a manner calculated to minimize their visibility to the maximum extent feasible.

6. All base-mounted accessory equipment must be installed within a shroud, enclosure or pedestal integrated into the base of the support structure. All cables, wires and other connectors routed between the antenna and base-mounted equipment shall be concealed from public view.

27.46 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
12 7. Small Cell Facilities may not encroach onto or over any private or other property outside the public right-of-way without the property owner’s express written consent.

8. To reduce clutter and deter vandalism, excess fiber optic or coaxial cables shall not be spooled, coiled or otherwise stored on the pole outside equipment cabinets or shrouds.

E. Noise Standards. Facilities and all accessory equipment and transmission equipment shall comply with all applicable noise control standards and regulations in the LCP and shall be operated in such a manner as to minimize the amount of noise impacts to adjacent uses and activities to the maximum extent feasible. To the maximum extent feasible fans shall not be used. If not feasible, noise attenuation measures shall be required for all fans. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and for testing and maintenance purposes. At any time, noise attenuation measures may be required by the zoning administrator when deemed necessary.

1. Testing and maintenance activities of Small Cell Facilities which generate audible noise shall occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., weekdays (Monday through Friday, non-holiday) excluding emergency repairs, unless allowed at other times by the zoning administrator. Testing and maintenance activities, which do not generate audible noise, may occur at any time, unless otherwise prohibited by the zoning administrator.

F. Lighting Standards. Small Cell Facilities shall not include any lights that would be visible from publicly accessible areas except for during night maintenance checks or emergencies, and except as may be required under Federal Aviation Administration, FCC, or other applicable regulations for health and safety. Facility lighting shall be designed so as to meet but not exceed minimum requirements for security and safety. All Small Cell Facilities and equipment (such as indicator or status lights) must be installed in locations and within enclosures that mitigate illumination impacts visible from publicly accessible areas, and shall avoid glare and illumination of adjacent properties to the maximum extent feasible. The provisions in this subsection shall not be interpreted or applied to prohibit installations on streetlights or luminaires installed on new or replacement poles as may be required by the city.

G. Signage. Small Cell Facilities must include signage that accurately identifies the site owner/operator, the owner/operator’s site name or identification number and a toll-free number to the owner/operator’s network operations center. Small Cell Facilities shall also include signage for hazardous or toxic materials warning where applicable. Small Cell Facilities may not bear any advertisements, identifying logos, or any other signage unless expressly approved by the city, required by law or recommended under FCC, OSHA or other United States governmental agencies for compliance with RF emissions regulations. To the maximum extent feasible, signs shall be above eye level and hidden from public view with background matching the color of equipment unless otherwise required by the FCC or other regulatory agencies. All signs shall be legible from a distance of at least ten feet from the Small Cell Facility. No sign shall be greater than two square feet in size. The design, materials, colors and location of any signage shall be subject to zoning administrator’s review and approval.

27.47 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
13 H. Maintenance and Repair.

1. Small Cell Facilities, including, but not limited to, antennas, towers, equipment, cabinets, structures, accessory structures, and signs shall be maintained by the wireless telecommunication provider in good condition and in their approved and/or required state. This shall include keeping all facilities graffiti-free and maintaining security walls/fences in good condition. All graffiti must be removed as soon as practicable, and in no instance more than seventy-two hours from the time of notification by the city.

2. Any landscaping associated with or required in connection with the permitting of the Small Cell Facility, including landscaping of the public right-of-way, shall be maintained in good, healthy condition at all times. Any dead or dying landscaping shall be promptly replaced or rehabilitated by the wireless telecommunications provider.

3. The applicant or successor in interest shall repair, at its sole cost and expense, any damage (including, but not limited to subsidence, cracking, erosion, collapse, weakening, or loss of lateral support) to public utilities, infrastructure, and property, incluidng city streets, sidewalks, walks, curbs, gutters, trees, parkways, or utility lines and systems, underground utility line and systems, or sewer systems or sewer lines that results from any activities performed in connection with the installation and/or maintenance of a Small Cell Facility by applicant or successor in interest. In the event the applicant or successor in interest fails to complete said repair within the number of days stated on a written notice by the city, the city shall cause said repair to be completed and shall invoice the applicant or successor in interest for all costs incurred by city as a result of such repair.

4. All sidewalk panels affected by any work associated with the installation of a Small Cell Facility shall be restored to their original condition.

5. Structural foundations must be removed when removing structures from the rightof-way.

I. Security and Safety.

1. Facilities shall be designed to be resistant to and minimize opportunities for unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti, and other conditions that would result in hazardous conditions, visual blight, or attractive nuisances. Facilities may incorporate reasonable and appropriate site security measures, such as locks and anti-climbing devices. No barbed wire, razor ribbon, electrified fences or any similarly dangerous security measures shall be permitted. All exterior surfaces on Small Cell Facilities shall be constructed from or coated with graffiti-resistant materials.

2. Small Cell Facilities shall be reviewed by an electrical engineer licensed by the state according to the following guidelines:
a. Within forty-five days of initial operation or modification of a Small Cell Facility, the wireless telecommunications provider shall submit to the zoning

27.48 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
14 administrator a written certification by an electrical engineer licensed by the state that the wireless telecommunications facility, including the actual radio frequency radiation of the facility, is in compliance with the application submitted, any conditions imposed, and all other provisions of this chapter in order to continue operations past the forty-five day period. At the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, the zoning administrator may employ on behalf of the city an independent technical expert to confirm and periodically reconfirm compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
b. All Small Cell Facilities shall demonstrate continued compliance with all radio frequency standards adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

The wireless telecommunications provider shall hire a professional engineer registered in the State of California, and approved by the zoning administrator to measure the actual radio frequency radiation of the approved facility and determine if it meets the FCC’s standards. A report of all calculations, required measurements, and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the FCC standards shall be submitted to the zoning administrator every three years thereafter. In the case of a change in standards, the required report shall be submitted within ninety days of the date the said change becomes effective. In order to assure the objectivity of the analysis, the city may require, at the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, independent verification of the results of any analysis. If a wireless telecommunications provider fails to supply the required reports or remains in continued noncompliance with the FCC standard, the zoning administrator may schedule a public hearing to consider revocation of the permit in accordance with Section 24.04.225.

J. Natural Disaster. Small Cell Facilities providing service to the government or general public shall be designed to survive a natural disaster without interruption in operation. To this end, the following measures shall be implemented:

1. Openings in all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets shall be protected against penetration by fire and windblown embers.

2. The material used as supports for the antennas shall be fire resistant, termite proof, and subject to all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

3. Small Cell Facilities shall be designed to withstand the forces expected during an earthquake in a manner subject to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All equipment mounting racks and attached equipment shall be anchored in such a manner that such a quake will not tip them over, throw the equipment off its shelves, or otherwise act to damage it.

4. All connections between various components of the Small Cell Facility and with necessary power and telephone lines shall be protected against damage by fire, flooding and earthquake.

27.49 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
15 5. Measures shall be taken to keep Small Cell Facilities in operation in the event of a disaster.

6. An electrical permit from the Planning and Community Development Department shall be required for the electric service associated with construction, installation, repair or alteration of all support structures for Small Cell Facilities.

K. Cessation, Abandonment, or Revocation. Upon 6 months after the cessation or abandonment of the use of a Small Cell Facility under this Section for any reason, or revocation of any applicable permits, the wireless telecommunications provider shall restore the site to its original preconstruction condition to the satisfaction of the city and comply with any notice or other requirements provided in Section 24.12.1435 (J).

L. Transfer of Ownership. In the event that the original permittee sells its interest in or transfers ownership of a Small Cell Facility under this Section, the succeeding carrier shall provide proof of obtaining all required approvals to operate the Small Cell Facility satisfactory to the cty, shall assume all responsibilities concerning the facility, and shall be held responsible to the city for maintaining consistency with all project conditions of approval, including proof of liability insurance. A new contact name for the project shall be provided by the succeeding carrier to the planning and community development department within thirty (30) days of transfer of interest of the facility. Any required signs by the city shall be updated within thirty (30) days to reflect the name and phone number of the new wireless telecommunication provider. The colors, materials and design of the updated signs shall match those of the required and approved signs.

M. Compliance with Applicable Laws.

1. The applicant or successor in interest shall install and maintain permitted Small Cell Facilities in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Building, National Electrical Code, and any and all applicable federal and state laws, codes, and regulations.

2. The applicant or successor in interest shall also install and maintain permitted Small Cell Facilities in compliance with any applicable city noise standards, the city’s Small Cell Aesthetic/Design Standards, and all other applicable local codes, laws, and regulations, except to the extent that such standards conflict with those specified herein, in which case this section shall apply.

3. Americans with Disabilities Act. All Small Cell Facilities and their locations shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Section 6. Section 24.12.1435 (General Requirements) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.12.1435 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.

27.50 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
16 The following requirements are applicable to all wireless telecommunications facilities, except for Small Cell Facilities in the public right-of-way and within the coastal zone, and except for exempt facilities described in Section 24.12.1410:

A. Visual Effect. All proposed wireless telecommunications facilities shall be located so as to minimize their visual impact to the maximum extent feasible. Measures to achieve this objective may include but are not limited to the following:

1. The applicant shall use the smallest and least visible antennas feasible to accomplish the owners/operator’s coverage objectives. All wireless telecommunications facilities proposed for locations where they would be readily visible from the public right-of-way or from the habitable living areas of residential units within 100 feet shall incorporate appropriate techniques to camouflage or disguise the facility, and/or blend it into the surrounding environment, to the maximum extent feasible.

2. Facilities shall be compatible in scale and integrated architecturally with the design of surrounding buildings or the natural setting. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall not be located on city, state or federal registered historic buildings. When proposed within a designated historic district wireless telecommunications facilities shall be limited to facade-mounted facilities only and integrated architecturally with the style and character of the structure and the district or otherwise made unobtrusive. No wireless telecommunications facility shall be sited such that its design and/or construction will damage a known or sensitive archeological site.

3. Whenever possible, base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets and buildings, backup generators, and other equipment associated with building-mounted antennas should be installed within the existing building envelope. If this is not feasible, the equipment shall be low profile, screened, fenced, landscaped, painted, or otherwise treated architecturally to minimize its appearance from off-site locations and to visually blend with the surrounding natural and built environment. Equipment buildings should be designed in an architectural style and constructed of exterior building materials that are consistent with surrounding development and/or land use setting (if applicable) and should be a visually pleasing feature.

4. All ground-mounted base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets, and utility panels for telecommunications facilities shall be limited to a maximum height of ten feet above grade unless other techniques are adopted to ensure minimal visual impact. Base transceiver stations, equipment cabinets, and utility panels that are taller may be partially buried underground or installed by use of another technique to maintain the ten foot height limit. Greater height may be granted upon a finding that it is not possible to meet the height limitation and that adequate screening of the equipment is provided.

5. No advertising signage or identifying logos shall be displayed on wireless telecommunication facilities, except for small identification plates used for emergency notification or hazardous or toxic materials warning.

27.51 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
17 6. Applicants are encouraged to consider providing architectural treatments and to use “stealth techniques” to reduce potential visual impacts for all telecommunication facilities.

Stealth techniques are especially encouraged in areas easily visible from a major traffic corridor or commercial center or in residential areas. Stealth techniques may be required as Conditions of Approval when determined to be necessary to mitigate adverse visual impacts.

7. All facilities shall be designed to be resistant to and minimize opportunities for unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti, and other conditions that would result in hazardous conditions, visual blight, or attractive nuisances. The zoning administrator may require the provision of warning signs, fencing, anti-climbing devices, or other techniques to prevent unauthorized access and vandalism when, because of their location and/or accessibility, antenna facilities have the potential to become an attractive nuisance. The design of the fencing and other access control devices shall be subject to review. The use of chain-link fencing is discouraged and the use of razor wire is prohibited.

B. Landscaping. Landscaping may be required to visually screen wireless telecommunications facilities from adjacent properties or public view and/or to provide a backdrop to camouflage the facilities. All proposed landscaping is subject to the zoning administrator’s review and approval.

Landscaping guidelines include but are not limited to the following:

1. To the extent feasible, existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized. Additional trees and other vegetation shall be planted and maintained around the facility, in the vicinity of the project site, and along access roads in appropriate situations where such vegetation is deemed necessary to provide screening of wireless communications facilities and related access roads.

2. All trees used in landscaping shall be a minimum of fifteen gallons in size and all shrubs in a minimum of five gallons, unless otherwise approved.

3. Existing trees and other screening vegetation in the vicinity of the proposed facility and associated access-ways shall be protected from damage both during and after construction.

4. The applicant shall enter into a landscape performance and maintenance agreement with the city to ensure the installation and establishment of required landscaping. This agreement shall be secured by financial guarantees acceptable to the zoning administrator in an amount equal to 150 percent of the estimated cost of materials and labor for required improvements. The duration of the landscape maintenance agreement shall be for the length of the permit.

5. All landscape design shall meet the water efficiency landscaping requirements of the Municipal Code, including installing or upgrading existing irrigation systems if necessary.

27.52 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
18 C. Access Roads. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall use existing access roads, where available. Unless visual impacts can be adequately mitigated, no new access roads shall be allowed with any proposed wireless telecommunications facility.

D. Setbacks. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall comply with all applicable setback regulations of the zoning district in which they are situated.

1. All setbacks shall be measured from the furthest extent of a wireless telecommunications facility to the closest applicable property line or structure, with the exception of equipment shelters.

2. Ground mounted or freestanding monopole facilities shall be setback at a distance not less than the height of the structure from any residentially zoned land.

3. Equipment shelters shall be measured from the outside wall of the shelter to the closest applicable property line or structure. Underground equipment shelters or cabinets may adjoin property lines, if approved by the building official.

E. Number of Antennas and Facilities Permitted. The number of antennas allowed per site shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the zoning administrator with the goal of minimizing adverse visual impacts.

F. Noise. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be constructed and operated in such a manner as to minimize the amount of noise impacts to adjacent uses and activities. Noise attenuation measures shall be required for all air-conditioning units. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and for testing and maintenance purposes. At any time, noise attenuation measures may be required by the zoning administrator when deemed necessary.

1. Testing and maintenance activities of wireless telecommunications facilities which generate audible noise shall occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., weekdays (Monday through Friday, non-holiday) excluding emergency repairs, unless allowed at other times by the zoning administrator. Testing and maintenance activities, which do not generate audible noise, may occur at any time, unless otherwise prohibited by the zoning administrator.

G. Interference. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be operated in a manner, which complies with the Federal Communication Commission’s regulations regarding signal interference.

H. Maintenance and Safety. All wireless telecommunications providers shall provide signage, as required by the zoning administrator, which shall identify the name and phone number of the wireless telecommunications provider for use in case of an emergency.

1. The design, materials, colors and location of the identification signs shall be subject to zoning administrator’s review and approval. All signs shall be legible from a distance of at

27.53 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
19 least ten feet from the wireless telecommunications facility. No sign shall be greater than two square feet in size.

2. If at any time a new wireless telecommunications provider takes over operation of an existing wireless telecommunications facility, the new wireless telecommunications provider shall notify the planning and community development department of the change in operation within thirty days and the required and approved signs shall be updated within thirty days to reflect the name and phone number of the new wireless telecommunication provider. The colors, materials and design of the updated signs shall match those of the required and approved signs.

3. All wireless telecommunications facilities, including, but not limited to, antennas, towers, equipment, cabinets, structures, accessory structures, and signs shall be maintained by the wireless telecommunication provider in good condition. This shall include keeping all wireless telecommunications facilities graffiti-free and maintaining security walls/fences in good condition. All graffiti must be removed as soon as practicable, and in no instance more than seventy-two hours from the time of notification by the city.

4. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be reviewed by an electrical engineer licensed by the state according to the following guidelines:
a. Within forty-five days of initial operation or modification of a wireless telecommunications facility, the wireless telecommunications provider shall submit to the zoning administrator a written certification by an electrical engineer licensed by the state that the wireless telecommunications facility, including the actual radio frequency radiation of the facility, is in compliance with the application submitted, any conditions imposed, and all other provisions of this chapter in order to continue operations past the forty-five day period. At the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, the zoning administrator may employ on behalf of the city an independent technical expert to confirm and periodically reconfirm compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
b. Every wireless telecommunications facility shall demonstrate continued compliance with all radio frequency standards adopted by the Federal Communications Commission. The wireless telecommunications provider shall hire a professional engineer registered in the State of California, and approved by the zoning administrator to measure the actual radio frequency radiation of the approved facility and determine if it meets the Federal Communications Commission’s standards. A report of all calculations, required measurements, and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the Federal Communications Commission standards shall be submitted to the zoning administrator every three years thereafter. In the case of a change in standards, the required report shall be submitted within ninety days of the date the said change becomes effective. In order to assure the objectivity of the analysis, the city may require, at the wireless telecommunications provider’s expense, independent verification of the results of any analysis. If a wireless telecommunications provider fails to supply the required reports or remains in

27.54 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
20 continued noncompliance with the Federal Communications Commission standard, the zoning administrator may schedule a public hearing to consider revocation of the permit. After conducting the hearing, if the hearing body determines that the wireless telecommunications provider has failed to supply the required reports or remains in continued noncompliance, the hearing body may modify or revoke all approvals.

I. Natural Disaster. All wireless telecommunications facilities providing service to the government or general public shall be designed to survive a natural disaster without interruption in operation. To this end, the following measures shall be implemented:

1. Nonflammable exterior wall and roof covering shall be used in the construction of all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets.

2. Openings in all above ground equipment shelters and cabinets shall be protected against penetration by fire and windblown embers.

3. The material used as supports for the antennas shall be fire resistant, termite proof, and subject to all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

4. Wireless telecommunications facility towers shall be designed to withstand the forces expected during an earthquake in a manner subject to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All equipment mounting racks and attached equipment shall be anchored in such a manner that such a quake will not tip them over, throw the equipment off its shelves, or otherwise act to damage it.

5. All connections between various components of the wireless telecommunications facility and with necessary power and telephone lines shall be protected against damage by fire, flooding and earthquake.

6. Measures shall be taken to keep wireless telecommunications facilities in operation in the event of a disaster.

7. All equipment shelters and wireless telecommunications facility towers shall be reviewed and approved by the city fire department.

8. A building permit shall be required for the construction, installation, repair or alteration of all support structures for wireless telecommunications facilities equipment.

Wireless telecommunications facilities must be stable and must comply with the Uniform Building Code and any conditions imposed as a condition of issuing a building permit.

9. All reports, certifications and verifications required to be prepared and maintained by this section shall at all times be readily available for public examination and review. To this end, upon the request of any person to the city or any wireless telecommunications provider, the city or provider shall promptly make any such report, certification or verification available for review and/or copying. Reasonable copying cost reimbursement may be required. In addition, the wireless telecommunications provider shall post all

27.55 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
21 current reports, certifications and verifications at the site of the wireless telecommunications facility to which they pertain.

J. Cessation of Operation On-Site.

1. Wireless telecommunications providers shall provide the city with a notice of intent to vacate a site a minimum of thirty days prior to the vacation.

2. A new permit shall be required if a site is to be used again for the same purpose as permitted under the original permit if a consecutive period of six months have lapsed since cessation of operations.

3. All equipment associated with a wireless telecommunications facility shall be removed by the property owner after cessation of the said use for more than six consecutive months, and the site shall be restored to its original pre-construction condition. An exception to this subsection may be made by the zoning administrator for an one extension of up to twelve months if the property owner continues to make a good faith attempt to sell or lease the property as a wireless telecommunications facility site, as certified by a licensed real estate broker who is under contract with a right to sell or lease the property.

4. Any wireless telecommunications provider that is buying, leasing, or is considering a transfer of ownership of an already approved facility shall submit a letter of notification of intent to the zoning administrator.

K. Transfer of Ownership. In the event that the original permittee sells its interest in a wireless telecommunications facility, the succeeding carrier shall assume all responsibilities concerning the project and shall be held responsible to the city for maintaining consistency with all project conditions of approval, including proof of liability insurance. A new contact name for the project shall be provided by the succeeding carrier to the planning and community development department within thirty days of transfer of interest of the facility.

L. Co-location. Where technically, legally, and fiscally feasible, co-location of new wireless telecommunications facilities onto existing telecommunications ground-mounted and freestanding monopole towers shall be required. Co-location may require that height extensions be made to existing towers or wireless telecommunications facilities to accommodate additional users, or may involve constructing new multi-user facilities that replace existing single-user capacity towers.

M. Lighting. The use of exterior lighting shall be manually operated and used only during night maintenance checks and emergencies unless specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other governmental agencies. Facility lighting shall be designed so as to meet but not exceed minimum requirements for security and safety and in all instances be designed so as to avoid glare and illumination of adjacent properties.

27.56 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
22 Section 7. Section 24.04.130 (Decision-Making Body with Final Authority on Application Approval) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.04.130 DECISION-MAKING BODY WITH FINAL AUTHORITY ON APPLICATION APPROVAL.

The following table indicates the decision-making body who can approve, deny or conditionally approve an application, whether or not a public hearing is required, and the bodies to which appeals can be made:

1. The planning commission and city council may refer certain aspects of any application to the zoning administrator for final action.

2. The zoning administrator may refer any of the matters on which he/she is authorized to act to the planning commission or historic preservation commission.

3. Recommendations for approval on General Plan matters and zoning ordinance text and map amendments shall require a majority vote of the planning commission; all other actions shall require a majority of the hearing body present at the meeting.

Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
Coastal Permit ZA
(ADU*)
ZA* CPC/CC/CCC*
Administrative Use Permit:

Large family daycare homes,
temporary uses, and half baths
in accessory buildings

ZA CPC/CC
Administrative Use Permit:

Variations to parking design
requirements or variations to
number of required spaces

ZA CPC/CC/CCC
Other uses as listed by
individual zoning districts as
requiring an Administrative Use
Permit

ZA CPC/CC
Conditional Fence Permit ZA ZA CPC/CC

27.57 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
23 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
Slope Regulations
Modifications (Variance)
CPC CC
Slope Regulations
Modifications (Design Permit)

ZA CPC/CC
Design Permit ZA CPC/CC
Substandard lots: New twostory structures and secondstory additions, including ADUsZA CPC/CC Large homes per
Section 24.08.450

ZA CPC/CC
Wireless telecommunications
facilities
ZA* ZA CPC/CC
New structures or improvements
to existing structures in the
WCD Overlay which are
exempt or excluded from coastal
permit requirements

ZA CPC/CC
New structures or improvements
to existing structures in the
WCD Overlay which require a
coastal permit

ZA CPC/CC
Demolition Permit

1. Single-family residential ZA CPC/CC

2. Multifamily residential CPC CC

3. Historic demolition permit HPC CC

4. Nonresidential ZA** ZA** CPC/CC
General Plan Text and Map
Amendments
CPC CC/CCC***
Historic Alteration Permit HPC CC
Administrative Historic
Alteration Permit

ZA HPC/CC
Historic Building Survey:

27.58 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
24 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
Building designation, deletion HPC CC
Historic District Designation HPC/CPC CC
Historic Landmark Designation HPC CC
Mobile Homes (Certificate of
Compatibility)

ZA CPC/CC
Mobile Home Park Conversion CPC CC
Outdoor Extension Areas per
Section 24.12.192

ZA CPC/CC
Planned Development Permit CPC CC
Project (Major) Modification Reviewed by ZA or body
approving application
Appeal to next
highest body(ies)
Project (Minor) Modification ZA CPC/CC
Relocation of Structures Permit ZA CPC/CC
Revocation Permit Hearing by ZA or body
approving application
Appeal to next
highest body(ies)
Sign Permit ZA CPC/CC
Special Use Permit CPC CC
Variance ZA CPC/CC
Watercourse Variance CPC CC
Watercourse Development
Permit

ZA CPC/CC
Zoning Ordinance Text and
Map Amendments
Amendments recommended by
CPC
CPC CC/CCC***
Amendments not recommended
by CPC
CPC CC/CCC***
CCC = California Coastal Commission CC = City Council CPC = City Planning Commission
HPC = Historic Preservation Commission ZA = Zoning Administrator

27.59 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
25 Public Hearing Requirement and Decision-Making Body
Which Can Approve an Application
No
Public
Hearing
Public Hearing Permits/Actions****
Action Recommendation Action
Appeal Bodies
(in order)
* For projects seaward of the mean high tide line, and in the case of appealable actions, the California Coastal Commission shall be the decision-making body which can finally approve an application. In the coastal zone, all proposed accessory dwelling units shall require a coastal permit (unless they are exempt or excluded from coastal permit requirements) and shall be processed in the manner described in Chapter 24.04 and Section

24.08.200 et seq. (including in terms of public noticing and process for appeal to the Coastal Commission) except that no public hearing shall be required. In addition to all other applicable LCP requirements, standards for ADUs in the coastal zone are specified in Section 24.12.140(10). For Small Cell Facilities projects that are in the public right-of-way and in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where city decisions can be appealed to the California Coastal Commission, appeals shall be made directly to the Coastal Commission. For Small Cell Facilities projects that are in the public right-of-way but are not in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where such Coastal Commission appeals are allowed, appeals shall be made directly to the City Council. ** Such permits shall be issued administratively, without a public hearing, unless a cultural resources evaluation, prepared by a qualified consultant as determined by the zoning administrator, determines that the building or structure is eligible for listing on the city Historic Building Survey.
*** California Coastal Commission in case of CLUP policy, CLIP elements. **** At a regularly scheduled meeting, a majority of the council may take an action to direct any project or amendment to be called from a lower hearing body prior to a final action or during an appeal period in accordance with Section 24.04.175(2). (Ord. 2020-22 § 2, 2020; Ord. 2016-11 § 2, 2016: Ord. 2016-04 § 1, 2016: Ord. 2012-19 § 6 (part), 2012; Ord. 2012-06 § 1, 2012: Ord. 2008-17 § 2 (part), 2008: Ord. 2006-02 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2004-27 § 3, 2004: Ord. 2004-02 § 6, 2004: Ord. 2003-17 § 10, 2003: Ord. 2003-16 § 10, 2003: Ord. 2000-27 § 1, 2000: Ord. 99-17 § 2, 1999: Ord. 94-34 § 2, 1994: Ord. 94-33 § 5, 1994: Ord. 91-14 § 1, 1991; Ord. 90-09 § 1, 1990; Ord. 86-12 § 1, 1986: Ord. 85-05 § 1 (part), 1985).

27.60 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
26 Section 8. Section 24.04.186 (Appeals to Coastal Commission) of Title 24 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended to read as follows:

24.04.186 APPEALS TO COASTAL COMMISSION.

1. Coastal permits fall into either of two categories: appealable or nonappealable to the Coastal Commission.

The determination of whether a project is appealable or nonappealable, or categorically exempt, shall be made by the zoning administrator at the time the application is filed. This determination is appealable pursuant to the provision of California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Regulations Section 13569.

2. Coastal permits are only appealable after all city appeals are exhausted except for (a) appeals by members of the Coastal Commission and (b) appeals of city decisions on Small Cell Facilities in the public right of way and in the portion of the Coastal Zone Overlay zone district where city decisions can be appealed to the California Coastal Commission, in which case the appeal may be made directly to the Coastal Commission. No fee shall be charged for coastal permit appeals. a. Only the following coastal permit applications are appealable to the Coastal Commission:
(1) Any major public works project or facility. The phrase “major public works project or energy facility” is the same as used in Public Resources Code Section 30603(A)(5) and these regulations shall mean any proposed public works projects as defined by Section 13012 of the Coastal Commission Regulations, or “energy facility” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 13012 of the Coastal Commission Regulations, or “energy facility” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 30107 and exceeding $50,000.00 in estimated cost of construction. (2) Development approved between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea or within three hundred feet of the inland extent of any beach or the mean high tide line of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance. (3) Developments approved not included within subsection (a)(2) above, located on tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within one hundred feet of any wetland, estuary, stream, or within three hundred feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff.
(a) Subsections (a)(2) and (a)(3) above are shown as the SP-O Shoreline Protection Overlay zone on the zoning map.
(4) Developments approved that are located in a sensitive coastal resource area. b. An appeal may be filed only by the applicant, an aggrieved person as defined by this title, or any two members of the Coastal Commission. An appeal must be filed in accordance with the appeal procedures contained in this title, except that appeals by any

27.61 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
27 two members of the Coastal Commission do not require exhaustion of local appeals and may be made following the decisions of the reviewing body, zoning administrator, zoning board or city council.

However, commissioner appeals taken prior to exhaustion of all local appeals shall be transmitted to the appropriate local appellate body and the appeal to the commission may be suspended pending a decision on the merits by that local appellate body. If the decision of the local appellate body modifies or reverses the previous decision, the commissioners shall be required to file a new appeal from that decision. c. Grounds for appeal, pursuant to subsection (a)(2) above, shall be limited to an allegation that the development does not conform to standards set forth in the certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) or the Public Access Policies set forth in the California Coastal Act.
d. The grounds for an appeal of a denial of a permit pursuant to subsection (a)(1) shall be limited to an allegation that the development conforms to the standards set forth in the certified Local Coastal Program and the public access policies set forth in the California Coastal Act.
e. Appeals to the Coastal Commission pursuant to this section must be filed with the Coastal Commission on forms prescribed by and available from the Coastal Commission. (Ord. 94-42 § 1, 1994: Ord. 94-33 § 8, 1994: Ord. 88-58 § 7, 1988; Ord. 85-47 § 2, 1985: Ord. 85-05 § 1 (part), 1985).

Section 9. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption, except that in the Coastal Zone, the ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption and following the Coastal Commission’s Executive Director reporting to the Commission his determination that the City’s actions are legally adequate and the Commission not objecting to the Executive Director’s determination.

Section 9. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after final adoption.

PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this __th day of __, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

27.62 ORDINANCE NO. 2019-XX
28 PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this __th day of __, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: __________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above
and foregoing document is the
original of Ordinance No. 201X-XX
and that it has been published or
posted in accordance with the
Charter of the City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

27.63 STATE OF CALIFORNIA — NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT
725 FRONT STREET, SUITE 300
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
PHONE: (831) 427-4863
FAX: (831) 427-4877
WEB: WWW.COASTAL.CA.GOV
F16a
Prepared January 21, 2021 for February 11, 2022 Hearing To: Commissioners and Interested Persons
From: Kevin Kahn, Central Coast District Manager
Ryan Moroney, Central Coast District Supervisor
Subject: City of Santa Cruz LCP Amendment Number LCP-3-STC-21-0071-2 (Wireless Telecommunications Facilities)

SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The City of Santa Cruz proposes to amend its Local Coastal Program (LCP) by updating LCP Implementation Plan (IP) standards associated with wireless telecommunications facilities, including a series of changes specific to small-cell wireless telecommunication facilities. As proposed, small-cell wireless facilities that are located in the public right-of-way would not be subject to existing LCP wireless provisions, and would instead be subject to a new Municipal Code section that is not part of the LCP. Thus, within the coastal zone, the standard of review for coastal development permit (CDP) purposes of such facilities would be the LCP’s general and broader policies requiring protection and enhancement of coastal resources, and not its wireless-specific provisions. The primary intent behind the proposed amendment is to more quickly process such permit applications in light of federal timing requirements.1 While the existing LCP’s non-wireless provisions that would apply in such cases provide a robust policy framework to protect and enhance coastal resources (and these policies would remain unchanged and continue to govern in any case), those policies are also appropriately augmented by the IP’s existing wireless telecommunication facilities provisions. These existing provisions provide detailed standards specific to these unique types of facilities, and addresses their particular issues and contexts. For example, it includes specific application requirements regarding siting and design, colocation analysis, visual screening, and a hierarchy of where such facilities are, and are not, allowed to be located. The existing wireless provisions also include technical requirements, including third-party technical review to justify any deviation from required 1 Specifically, the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012” (also known as the “Spectrum Act”) and its associated implementing regulations set certain requirements regarding the time period for review and action on such applications. Most relevant here, the Spectrum Act imposes a time period (or “shot clock”) by which a local jurisdiction must act on permit applications for small-cell wireless facilities.