Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, August 9, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

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

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Regular Meeting – August 9, 2022
Updated August 5, 2022 – Item 29
Updated August 8, 2022 – Items 19 and 29
12:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION, COUNCIL CHAMBERS/ZOOM
3:00 P.M. CONSENT, CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND GENERAL BUSINESS,

COUNCIL CHAMBERS/ZOOM
5:30 P.M. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, COUNCIL CHAMBERS/ZOOM
IMPORTANT NOTICE:

Pursuant to California Government Code 54953(e)(1)(A) and (C), and the City of Santa Cruz’s resolution authorizing continued virtual participation in public meetings given the COVID-19 pandemic, meetings of the Santa Cruz City Council are being conducted with a hybrid format, providing both in-person and virtual participation in order to promote social distancing and protect the health and safety of attendees, staff, and Councilmembers.

In order to minimize exposure to COVID-19, 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, August 8th.

August 9, 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, August 7th 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
12:30 PM
Referral to Closed Session

1. City-owned Property Located on Mount Hermon Road in Scotts Valley, CA, APNs 022-721-07, 022-721-08, and 002-721-09 (ED)
Motion to refer to Closed Session for discussion regarding price, terms of payment, or both.

2. 333 Locust Street, APN 005-033-03 (ED)
Motion to refer to Closed Session for discussion regarding price, terms of payment, or both.

Closed Session

3. Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95)
1) Claimant: Denise Susan Barr
2) Claimant: Progressive West Insurance Company
Claims against the City of Santa Cruz
August 9, 2022 City Council 3
Closed Session (continued)

4. 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

5. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(1))
1) City of South Miami v. DeSantis
11th Cir. No. 21-13657 (request for amicus curiae joinder) 2) City of Santa Cruz v. Regents of the University of California, et al. (Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. 22CV00373)
3) Sunset Farms, LLC v. City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. 19CV01725
August 9, 2022 City Council 4
Closed Session (continued)

6. Real Property Negotiations (Government Code §54956.8) 1) Property: Approximately 8.15 acres located on Mount Hermon Road in Scotts Valley, CA
APNs: 022-721-07, 022-721-08, 022-721-09
Owner: City of Santa Cruz
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and City of Scotts Valley Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both
2) Property: 333 Locust Street
APN: 005-033-03
Owner: Smith Laura Trustee, Mathews William G. and Cynthia S.

Trustees, and Smith Sara Wood, Trustee
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and Laura Smith Trustee et al.

Under Negotiation: Potential Acquisition including price, terms of payment, or both
August 9, 2022 City Council 5
City Council
3:00 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
Presentation

7. Central Coast Community Energy Annual Update
Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification
Additions and Deletions
City Attorney Report on Closed Session
City Manager Report

8. The City Manager will report and provide updates on the City's business and events of interest.

Council Meeting Calendar

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

August 9, 2022 City Council 6
Consent Agenda

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. Minutes of the June 28, 2022 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion to approve as submitted.

12. Certification of Canvass of the June 7, 2022 Primary Election (CC) Resolution confirming and approving the certificate of canvass of ballots and returns for the City of Santa Cruz Primary Election held on June 7, 2022, and declaring the following results:
• Measure E (District Elections) passed by a majority vote of the electorate of the City of Santa Cruz, thus amending the City’s Charter and transitioning to six council districts and an at-large Mayor beginning at the November 8, 2022 election.
• Measure F (Sales and Use Tax) failed, with a majority of the electorate of the City of Santa Cruz voting against.

13. Resolution Ordering an Election for Two Council Seats, Districts 4 and 6, and Mayor for the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election (CC)
Resolution ordering an election, requesting the County Elections Department to conduct the election, and requesting consolidation of the election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election.

August 9, 2022 City Council 7
Consent Agenda (continued)

14. Support for the Protection of Reproductive Rights and Various California Legislative Bills (CN)
Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution expressing the Santa Cruz City Council’s support for the protection of reproductive rights; and
2) Authorize the Mayor to send a letter to state legislators on behalf of the City Council in support of California Assembly Bill 133 (AB 133), Senate Bill 245 (SB 245), Assembly Bill 1356 (AB 1356), Assembly Bill 1666 (AB 1666), Assembly Bill 1918 (AB 1918), Assembly Bill 2091 (AB 2091), Assembly Bill 2134 (AB 2134), Assembly Bill 2223 (AB 2223), Assembly Bill 2626 (AB 2626), and Senate Bill 374 (SB 374).

15. Sister Cities Committee Member Code of Conduct Issues (CN) Resolution admonishing a Sister Cities Committee Member for disrespectful conduct toward a City employee.

16. Liability Claims Filed Against the City of Santa Cruz (FN) Motion to reject the liability claim of a) Denise Susan Barr; and to return as late the claim of b) Progressive West Insurance Company, based on staff recommendation.

17. Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project (c401602) – Notice of Completion (PW)
Motion to accept the work of Alfaro Communications Construction, Inc. (Compton, CA) as completed per the plans and specifications and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion for Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project (c401602).

18. State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvements (c400805) – Contract Amendment 1 (PW)
Motion to approve Contract Amendment 1 to an agreement with WSP USA, Inc. (Dallas, TX) to provide construction management services for the State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvement Project (c400805).

August 9, 2022 City Council 8
Consent Agenda (continued)
The below item was updated to correct the proposal amount in the agenda report and replace the proposal attachment.

19. CCTV Inspection Van – Award Contract (PW)
Motion to award a contract for the purchase of one replacement CCTV Inspection Van from Jack Doheny Company, (Antioch, CA) in the amount of $327,945.34.

20. Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Replacement Project – Notice of Completion (WT)
Motion to accept the work of Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. (Santa Clara, CA) as complete per the plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Replacement Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

21. Resolution to Reimburse Capital Expenditures from Future State Water Resources Control Board Financing for Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project (WT)
Resolution authorizing the Water Department to be reimbursed by State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for costs related to the Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project.

22. Santa Cruz Grand Jury Response (WT)
Motion to authorize the Mayor to respond to the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury on behalf of the City of Santa Cruz.

23. Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabilitation Project – Notice of Completion (WT)
Motion to accept the work of ERS Industrial Services, Inc. (Fremont, CA) as complete per the plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabilitation Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

August 9, 2022 City Council 9
Consent Agenda (continued)

24. Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project – Notice of Completion (WT) Motion to accept the work of Granite Rock Construction, Inc. (Watsonville, CA) as complete per plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

25. Ratification of $100,000 Application Fee for Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act Loan and Related Budget Adjustment (WT) Resolution to approve the budget adjustment ratifying the July 15, 2022 payment of $100,000 Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act application fee and appropriating funds from the Water Department FY 2023 budget for the application fee.

End Consent Agenda
Consent Public Hearings

26. 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-11 Second Amendment of the 555 Pacific Avenue Apartments Development Agreement (ED/PL)
Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2022-11 approving the second amendment of the development agreement between Green Valley Corporation and the City of Santa Cruz for 94 residential condominiums and 4,680 square feet of commercial space within four separate tenant spaces fronting on Pacific Avenue at 555 Pacific Avenue.

27. 109 S. Rapetta Rd. (Application No. CP21-0060) - Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 008-391-15, -16, and -18 – Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to Amend the El Rancho Carbonera Subdivision Map and Modify Lot B to Allow For Residential Development on a Parcel Located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) Zoning District (PL)
Resolution acknowledging the environmental determination and approving the Final Map Amendment and Major Modification, as designed in Alternative 2, to allow for residential development on Lot B in the El Rancho Carbonera Subdivision subject to the attached conditions of approval.

August 9, 2022 City Council 10
General Business

28. Transportation and Public Works Commission Appointment (CC) Appoint one member to the Transportation and Public Works Commission, with a term ending January 31, 2024.

Exhibit A for the below item was amended (8/5/22).

The agenda report and resolution for the below item were updated to amend the proposed ballot question (8/8/22).

29. Resolution Requesting the Placement of a Transient Occupancy Tax Increase on the Ballot of the November 8, 2022 California Statewide General Election (CN)
Motion to:
1) Accept an update on the recent work of the City Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue Committee; and
2) Adopt a resolution requesting that the consolidated November 8, 2022 California Statewide General Election include a general purpose tax measure proposing that the City of Santa Cruz’ current Transient Occupancy Tax rate of eleven percent (11%) be increased to twelve percent (12%) for hotels, motels, inns, and other commercial lodging facilities; and from eleven percent (11%) to fourteen percent (14%) for short-term residential vacation rental properties; and
3) Support the measure for the purposes of: authorizing arguments; providing 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.

Oral Communications
5:30 PM
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.

Adjournment
August 9, 2022 City Council 11

INFORMATION ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – AUGUST 9, 2022

30. Finance Department: Portfolio Management Report – Pooled Cash and Investments as of June 30, 2022 - 7/26/22 (FNFYI 357)

MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – AUGUST 9, 2022

31. Proclaiming July 21, 2022 as “Willy Elliott-McCrea Day” and encouraging all citizens to join in expressing heartfelt appreciation for his forty-four years of service and his numerous contributions to provide nourishment for those in need and wishing him well in his retirement.

Advisory Body Appointments
The following positions are vacant. Council will make appointments at a future meeting.

No current openings at this time.

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.

August 9, 2022 City Council 12
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.

Annual Member Agency
Update
City of Santa Cruz
August 9, 2022

7.1 How Does CCA Work?
“A Partnership to support shared customers”

7.2 7.3
SERVICE AREA 33 COMMUNITIES, FIVE COUNTIES & 8,000 + SQ MILES 4 7.4

CCCE GOVERNANCE
Policy Board: Meets 4 Times Annually
Operations Board: Meets 10 Times Annually
Community Advisory Council: Meets 7 Times Annually
County of
Santa Cruz
City of Santa
Cruz
City of
Watsonville
County of
Monterey
City of
Salinas
County of
San Benito
County of
Santa
Barbara
City of Santa
Maria
Coastal
Cities
Marina
Sand City*
Seaside
Del Rey
Oaks
Peninsula
Cities
Carmel
Monterey
Pacific*
Grove
Salinas
Cities
Greenfield
Gonzales
Soledad*
San Benito
Cities
Hollister*
San Juan
Bautista
Santa Cruz
Cities
Capitola*
Scotts
Valley
San Luis
Obispo
Cities
San Luis
Obispo*
Morro Bay
Paso Robles
South
County
Cities
Arroyo
Grande
Grover
Beach
Pismo*
Beach
SB County
Cities
Guadalupe
Solvang*
Buellton
SB County
Cities
Goleta
Carpinteria*
*City representative
currently serving in a
shared seat.

7.5 ACCOMPLISHMENTS

LOCAL CHOICE
3Cchoice-clean and renewable offering
94% enrollment
Largest CCA service area

ECONOMIC VITALITY
$27 million – Energy programs
Est. $50 million – Customer savings
$25 million – Resiliency Fund

LOCAL SUPPORT
$1 million in Local Vendor Contracts
38 full-time employees
Offices in – Monterey & San Luis Obispo

CLEAN ENERGY
889 MWs of Renewables – solar, wind,
geothermal
261 MWs of battery storage
Pathway to 100% clean and renewable

FINANCIAL STABILITY
Received “A” Rating from S&P
Over $140 M in Rate Stabilization Fund
Service and Loans Paid Off

7.6 Photo Credit: 2020 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 7.7

FAST TRACKING NEW ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
Cost of Service (COS) Rate Design
In 2025, these projects will serve about 61% of CCCE’s retail load 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
RETAIL LOAD %
3CE Executed PPA % State RPS Requirement %
State RPS LT Contracting Requirement % 3CE's Procurement Policy % 72%
16%
4%
8%
SOLAR + STORAGE SOLAR WIND GEOTHERMAL
77%
23%
SOLAR + STORAGE RA
261 MW
889 MW

7.8 RENEWABLE PROCUREMENT
Contracted for $1 billion in long term solar plus storage contracts Shortlisted 7 local projects through its local renewables RFP Joined other CCAs to advance long-duration storage RFP to support grid reliability through existing and new technologies
Issued an RFQ for up to 100MW of front of the meter battery storage, with the potential to island projects for increased resiliency

7.9 CCCE HISTORIC RATES & COVID-19

RESPONSE
2018
3% rebate
2019
5% rebate
Jan – April
2020
7% monthly
discount
May & June
2020
50% Bill
Reduction
July 2020 –
Feb 2022
2% discount

7.10 Long-term rate adoption increases predictability and rate stability Customer choices and transparency improve with simplified customer classes
Rates increase customer rate equity throughout customer segments Rate structure maintains competitive rates across all customer segments
https://3cenergy.org/2022-energy-choices/
2022 CCCE SERVICE OFFERINGS

7.11 City of Santa Cruz
(96.46% Enrollment)
• 23,132 Enrolled Customers
• 20,173 Residential
• 2,912 Commercial

ENERGY PROGRAM FUNDS
• Electrify Your Ride
• 161 Applications
• $208,564 Rebate Amount
• Construction Electrification
• $87,500 Reserved Funds

7.12 $1.3 million FY 18/19
$5.4 million FY 19/20
$6.2 million FY 20/21
$14.1 million FY 21/22
4% of operating revenue

ENERGY PROGRAMS
13 FY 21/22 Energy Programs
Electrify Your Ride - $2.8 million – NOVEMBER 2021
School Bus Electrification - $1 million - OCTOBER 2021
Agriculture Electrification - $600k - OCTOBER 2021
Residential Electrification - $1.6 million
New Construction Electrification - $1.5 million – OCYOBER 2021 Reach Code - $60k
Battery Energy Storage Pilot - $350k
Summer Readiness - $400k
Energy Education, Workforce Development and Innovation Grants - $1 million
Greenhouse Gas Inventory - $64k

7.13 September 30, 2021
COMING MID-NOVEMBER 2021
New and expanded Electrify Your Ride program will incentivize EV's, EV Chargers AND Electric Bikes with our largest energy program budget to date!

7.14 LOCAL ENERGY STORAGE PROJECTS

RATE STABILITY

GRID STABILITY

REDUCED GHGS

LOCAL JOBS

MICROGRID ISLANDING

7.15 MEDIUM AND HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION
Supports electrification of Member Agency fleet vehicles Includes street sweepers, refuse trucks, dump trucks, and first response vehicles Funds dispersed after purchases are made
Coordination with city/county purchasing schedules and policies Incentives tied to cost difference between electric and standard options

7.16 LOCAL OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT
Farm Worker Outreach
10 Farm Worker Outreach events in 2021-2022
Sponsoring La Tri-Color & La Ley radio stations events
Educate on CCCE services & programs in person
Underserved Community Outreach
Presentations to stakeholders & organizations
Latino Elder Outreach Network
Promotores
Lideres Campensinas
Mexican Consulate
Community Advisory Council committee focused on outreach to:

Low-income, food insecure, renters, senior citizens w/ fixed income, tribal & migrant indigenous communities

7.17 Vendor Registry

7.18 Stay Connected with CCCE
Follow us online, join our newsletter and board agenda notification list, and check our extensive FAQ section on the website.
www.3Cenergy.org
[email protected]

1.888.909.6227
@3CEnergy
@3CEnergy
@3CEnergyEnEspanol

7.19 1
City Manager’s Report
August 9, 2022

8.1 2
November
2022
Elections
• Candidate nomination period for the newly
districted November 8 ends August 12
• Period will extend if District incumbents do not
file
• Voters to elect Councilmembers for
Districts 4 and 6, plus the at-large Mayor
• Measures include
• Empty Homes Tax
• Amending the City’s General and Downtown
Plans (Our Downtown, Our Future)
• For discussion later today: Transient
Occupancy Tax
cityofsantacruz.com/elections

8.2 3
New Downtown
Businesses
• Closed a second round of applications for 6-month
retail pop up opportunities at 1122 Pacific Ave. and
515 Pacific Ave.
• New businesses in the Downtown
• Opening or relocating: Botanic & Luxe,
Motherlode Santa Cruz, The Buzz Sushi, Angel
Aura Boutique, and Big Basin Winery Tasting
Room
• Coming soon: Spirit Halloween, Yolked
restaurant, Gobi Mongolian, and Farmers
Insurance Pedro Gonzalez Insurance Agency,
Inc.

8.3 4
Newell Creek Dam Project
Completed • 2-year project to replace the inlet/outlet valves and pipeline
• Reservoir is complete and the three new intakes
are now fully installed
• Excavation of approximately 1,500 feet of the 11-
foot diameter tunnel around the dam is complete
What’s Next
• Installation of new 48-inch pipe installed inside
the tunnel (roughly 1/3 or 500 feet)
• The tunnel will eventually be backfilled to prevent
water exiting

8.4 5
Measure F and
What’s Next
• Failed by only 50 votes
• 8,613 votes against (50.15%) to 8,563
votes for (49.85%).
• Promised to add $8-10 million per year in
additional revenue
• Must continue to pursue additional
revenue streams, and future budget
changes will be forthcoming

8.5 6
Homelessness Response
Oversized Vehicle Ordinance • Appeal to the Coastal Commission heard on July 14
• Commission found that a “substantial issue”
does exist
• Next step is a de novo hearing where the
Commission will act on the permit
Benchlands Closure • Phase 1 of the restoration will begin next week with closure of the upper park
• More detailed update to come in the
quarterly update on August 23

8.6 Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
August 16 Council Chambers/Zoom Study Session ‐ Open to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public September 5
Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public September 25/26
Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public October 4/5
Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public November 11
Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public November 24
November 25
December 18/19
Council Chambers/Zoom Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers/Zoom Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public December 25
December 27 Meeting Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
City Hall Closure ‐ Christmas Day
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)
City Hall Closure ‐ Labor Day
August 23
City Council Meeting Calendar for 2022
November 22
December 13
City Hall Closure ‐ Thanksgiving Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Day After Thanksgiving Day
September 13
September 27
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change

9.1 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/28/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
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 April 20, 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
The highly transmissible omicron variant continues to contribute to the increase in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State. Additionally, other variants of COVID-19 exist, and it is unknown at this time whether other variants may result in a new surge in COVID19 cases. 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, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 12, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 24, 2022, June 14, 2022, and June 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-29,886, NS-29,894, NS-29,900, NS-29,915, NS-29,923, NS29,933, NS-29,942, NS-29,954, NS-29,975, NS-29,987, NS 29,994, and NS-30,005, 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) from the date of its adoption.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Stephanie Duck
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.

See also, BAY AREA HEALTH OFFICERS URGE PUBLIC TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS AS COVID LEVELS RISE (May 13, 2022),
https://www.santacruzhealth.org/Portals/7/pdfs/Coronavirus/ABAHOMaskRecommendationENG.05132022.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 CRUZ 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, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 12, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 24, 2022, June 14, 2022, and June 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos.

NS-29,886, NS-29,894, NS-29,900, NS-29,915, NS-29,923, NS-29,933, NS-29,942, NS29,954, NS-29,975, NS-29,987, NS-29,994, and NS-30,005, 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, the highly contagious omicron variant continues contribute to the increase in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State of California, demonstrating the unpredictable nature of the pandemic, and that transmission rates have the potential to rise quickly; and
WHEREAS, other variants of COVID-19 exist, including an Omicron subvariant, BA.2, and it is unknown at this time whether this or other variants may result in a new surge in COVID-19 cases; 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) forty-three 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 9th day of August, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

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

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

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 28, 2022
10:30 AM
Mayor Brunner opened the City Council Closed Session at 10:33 a.m. in a public meeting in Council Chambers, for the purpose of announcing the agenda, and receiving public testimony.

Roll Call

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

Absent: None.

Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker, Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt (via Zoom), Deputy City Attorney C. Bronson, Director of Economic Development B.

Lipscomb (via Zoom), Director of Information Technology K. Morgan, Director of Planning and Community Development L. Butler (via Zoom), Human Resources Director L. Murphy (via Zoom), Acting Finance Director M. Gomez (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush.

Public Comment
Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period at 10:34 a.m. The following people spoke:

Olivia Martinez spoke regarding item 3.

Sara Neuse spoke regarding item 3.

Jane Doyle spoke regarding item 3.

Joy Schendledecker spoke regarding item 3.

Ted Rossiter spoke regarding item 3.

Katherine Donovan spoke regarding item 3.

11.1 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6143
Public Comment (continued)
Chris Coburn spoke regarding item 3.

Ken Bare spoke regarding item 3.

Anne Hogan spoke regarding item 3.

Tracy Kendall spoke regarding item 3.

Natalia Duarte spoke regarding item 3.

Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period at 11:08 a.m.

Referral to Closed Session
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to refer items 1 and 2 to Closed Session for discussion.

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.

1. City-owned Property Immediately Behind 412 Woodland Way (ED) Motion carried to refer to Closed Session for discussion regarding price of payment, terms of payment, or both.

2. Firefish Restaurant, 25 Municipal Wharf - APN 007-341-01 (ED) Motion carried to refer to Closed Session for discussion regarding the renovation of 25 Municipal Wharf and a potential lease amendment for same.

11.2 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6144
Closed Session

3. 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

4. Real Property Negotiations (Government Code §54956.8) 1) Property: Approximately 400 square feet of property at the edge of Derby Park immediately behind 412 Woodland Way
APN: 003-184-04 (Portion)
Owner: City of Santa Cruz
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and Robin Bass
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both
2) Property: 25 Municipal Wharf, Firefish Restaurant
APN: 007-341-01
Owner: Mark Gilbert
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and Mark Gilbert Under Negotiation: Renovation of 25 Municipal Wharf and potential lease amendment for same.

5. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(1)) 303 Creative LLC, et al., v. Aubrey Elenis, et al.

Supreme Court of the United States Case No. 19-1413
(request for amicus support)

11.3 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6145
Closed Session

6. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation (one potential case)
At this time, the meeting was closed to the public. (See pages 6147—6148 for a report on Closed Session.)

11.4 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6146
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 28, 2022
12:30 PM
Call to Order – Mayor Brunner called the meeting to order at 1:29 p.m. in Council Chambers.

Roll Call

Present: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson (arrived at 1:39 p.m. via Zoom), Golder (via Zoom), Cummings, Brown, Meyers (via Zoom); Vice Mayor Watkins (via Zoom); Mayor Brunner.

Absent: None.

Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker, Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt (via Zoom), Deputy City Attorney C. Bronson, City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Director of Public Works M. Dettle, Director of Planning and Community Development L. Butler (via Zoom), Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb (via Zoom), Acting Water Director H. Luckenbach (via Zoom), Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot (via Zoom), Fire Chief R. Oatey (via Zoom), Director of Information Technology K. Morgan, Acting Finance Director M. Gomez (via Zoom), Acting Recreation Superintendent I. Rae (via Zoom), Associate Professional Engineer H. Yu, Watershed Compliance Manager C. Berry (via Zoom), Homelessness Response Manager L. Imwalle (via Zoom), Park Planner N. Downing (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush.

At this time, Mayor Brunner called on City Clerk Administrator B. Bush to announce additions and deletions.

Presentations

7. Unified Animal Ordinance Update
This presentation was removed from the agenda, as the representatives from the Santa Cruz County Animal Shelter were not able to attend.

11.5 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6147
Presentations (continued)

8. Parks and Recreation Month
Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot spoke. Acting Recreation Superintendent I. Rae gave a presentation on the events Parks and Recreation is hosting in the month of July for Parks Make Life Fun Month.

Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification – None.

Additions and Deletions – City Clerk Administrator B. Bush announced item 7 was removed from the agenda, as the representatives from the Santa Cruz County Animal Shelter were not able to attend. Item 25 was removed from the agenda by staff and would not be heard.

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.

11.6 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6148
City Attorney Report on Closed Session (continued)
Real Property Negotiations (Government Code §54956.8)
1) Property: Approximately 400 square feet of property at the edge of Derby Park immediately behind 412 Woodland Way
APN: 003-184-04 (Portion)
Owner: City of Santa Cruz
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and Robin Bass
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both
2) Property: 25 Municipal Wharf, Firefish Restaurant
APN: 007-341-01
Owner: Mark Gilbert
City Negotiator: Bonnie Lipscomb
Negotiating Parties: City of Santa Cruz and Mark Gilbert Under Negotiation: Renovation of 25 Municipal Wharf and potential lease amendment for same.

Council received a status report from the City Negotiator, and took no reportable action.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Govt. Code §54956.9(d)(1)) 303 Creative LLC, et al., v. Aubrey Elenis, et al.

Supreme Court of the United States Case No. 19-1413
(request for amicus support)
Council received a status report and, by consensus, agreed to join in the amicus brief supporting the State of Colorado.

Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation (one potential case)
Council received a status report, and took no reportable action.

Council Meeting Calendar

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

11.7 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6149
Council Memberships in City Groups and Outside Agencies

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

Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson: Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board (METRO), Santa Cruz County Youth Action Network.

Councilmember Brown: Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), and Area Agency on Aging Advisory Council.

Councilmember Meyers: Mid-County Groundwater Agency, and Cowell’s Working Group.

Councilmember Cummings: Climate Action Task Force, and Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG).

Mayor Brunner: Climate Action Task Force.

Consent Agenda
Councilmember Cummings pulled item 16 for further discussion.

Councilmember Cummings made a comment on item 26.

Director of Public Works M. Dettle responded to Councilmember Brown’s questions regarding item 27.

Associate Professional Engineer H. Yu responded to Councilmembers Brown and Cummings’ questions regarding item 32.

Watershed Compliance Manager C. Berry responded to Councilmember Cummings’ question regarding item 37.

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

Unidentified person spoke regarding items 35 and 12.

Unidentified person spoke regarding items 11 and 12.

Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

11.8 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6150
Consent Agenda (continued)
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to approve the remaining 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.

11. Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
Resolution No. NS-30,005 was adopted authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

12. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the COVID19 Pandemic by Sixty (60) Days (CA) Resolution No. NS-30,006 was adopted extending by sixty days the Declaration of Emergency in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.

13. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire by Sixty (60) Days (CA)
Resolution No. NS-30,007 was adopted extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire.

14. Minutes of the June 7, 2022 City Council Special Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.

15. Minutes of the June 14, 2022 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.

11.9 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6151
Consent Agenda (continued)

16. Amendment of Existing Contract with The Salvation Army for Expanded Shelter Operation at the National Guard Armory Site (CM)
Homelessness Response Manager L. Imwalle and City Manager M. Huffaker responded to Councilmember questions.

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

Serg Kagno
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to authorize and direct the City Manager to execute the amended contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with The Salvation Army for expanded shelter operations including 60 additional shelter beds at the Armory with existing homelessness response funds from the American Rescue Plan Act and State-provided $14 million for homelessness response in an amount not to exceed $3,870,273.39, which represents an increase of $1,727,345.39 from the previously approved $2,142,928 contract for The Salvation Army to operate at the Armory, including flex on funding for ADA-accessible rental minivans and provisions on unemployment insurance for Salvation Army workers.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brown requested to amend to consider an unemployment insurance opportunity in the future with a potential longer-term contract. Councilmember Cummings accepted.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Mayor Brunner requested to broaden the term from “ADA-accessible minivans” to “ADA-accessible transportation.” Councilmember Cummings accepted.

Director of Planning and Community Development L. Butler responded to Councilmember questions.

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.

11.10 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6152
Consent Agenda (continued)

17. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate to Attend the League of California Cities (LOCC) Annual Conference Being Held in Long Beach September 7 - 9, 2022) (CN)
Motion carried to designate Mayor Brunner as the voting delegate, and Vice Mayor Watkins as the alternate in the event that the voting delegate is unavailable, to attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference in Long Beach.

18. Declaring 400 Square Feet of APN 003-184-04 Currently Included within the Boundaries of Derby Park and Located Behind 412 Woodland Way, as Exempt Surplus Property Pursuant to the Surplus Lands Act (Cal. Govt. Code § 54220, et seq.), and Approving the Transfer of the Property to the Owner of the Adjacent Property, 412 Woodland Way (ED)
Motion carried to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,008 declaring an approximately 400 square foot portion of a City-owned parcel designated in the records of the Santa Cruz County Assessor as APN 003-184-04 as exempt surplus property pursuant to the “Surplus Lands Act” (Cal. Govt. Code § 54220, et seq.); and  Approve the transfer of an approximately 400 square foot portion of APN 003-184-04 from the City to Robin Bass, owner of the contiguous property APN 003-184-15, known as 412 Woodland Way.

19. Pacific Station North Affordable Housing Transit-oriented Development Project Ground Lease Authorization for 902, 912, and 920 Pacific Avenue and 333 and 423 Front Street (ED)
Resolution No. NS-30,009 was adopted authorizing the City Manager to enter into any lease(s) and related amendments or documents needed thereto of a non-substantive nature, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for real property located at 902, 912, and 920 Pacific Avenue and 333 and 423 Front Street (APNs 005-152-30, -31, -32, -33 and -05) between the City of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) and/or First Community Housing or its affiliate for the previously approved mixed-use affordable housing project on the subject site.

11.11 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6153
Consent Agenda (continued)

20. Use of AB 2162 Streamlining for Pacific Station North Affordable and Supportive Housing Project (PL/ED)
Resolution No. NS-30,010 was adopted establishing a policy under California State Assembly Bill 2162 that authorizes a unit increase to a maximum of 140 units as a use by right for the Pacific Station North Affordable and Supportive Housing Project that was previously approved for 120 units as a use by right.

21. Pass Through Agreement with Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz County - Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claimant (FN)
Motion carried to:
 Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz County, allowing the City to act as claimant for funds obtained from the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) for FY 2023; and  Authorize funding of $107,813 for FY 2023.

22. Pass-through Agreement with Community Bridges/Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) / State Transit Assistance (STA) of Santa Cruz County - Transportation Development Act Claimant (FN)
Motion carried to authorize and direct the City Manager to execute an agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney with Community Bridges / Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) / State Transit Assistance (STA) to allow the City to act as claimant for funds obtained from the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) for FY 2023.

23. Proposition 4 Appropriations Limit Adjustment Factors (FN) Resolution No. NS-30,011 was adopted approving the selection of the annual adjustment factors to be used in the calculation of the City’s Proposition 4 Appropriations Limit (GANN Limit) based on the adopted budget for FY 2023, with amendments thereto, if any.

11.12 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6154
Consent Agenda (continued)

24. Award Contract to Implement Cityworks, a Computerized Maintenance Management System (IT)
Motion carried authorizing the City Manager to execute contracts, in forms approved by the City Attorney, with Azteca Systems, LLC for licensing and maintenance of the Cityworks software, and with Centricity GIS to assist the City of Santa Cruz (City) with implementing Cityworks, a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS).

25. Award Contract for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Ocean Place (908 Ocean Street) (PL)
This item was removed from the agenda by staff, and was not discussed.

26. Award Contract for Decking and Railing Rehabilitation on the Floating Walkway at Neary Lagoon (PR)
Motion carried to award a contract to Cen-Con, Inc. for the Decking and Railing Rehabilitation on the Floating Walkway at Neary Lagoon in the amount of $407,257.40 and authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney with Cen-Con, Inc.

27. Award Contract for Consulting Engineering Services for Wastewater Treatment Facility Capital Improvement Projects (PW)
Motion carried to award a contract to Brown and Caldwell (San Jose, CA) for Consulting Engineering Services for Wastewater Treatment Facility Capital Improvement Projects in the amount of $3,280,000 and reject all other proposals. 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 budgets.

28. Contract Renewal with Hope Services, Inc. for the Resource Recovery Facility (PW)
Motion carried to authorize and direct the City Manager to execute renewal of an agreement with Hope Services, Inc., (Santa Cruz, CA), in a form approved by the City Attorney, for recycling and litter control services at the City’s Resource Recovery Facility on Dimeo Lane.

11.13 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6155
Consent Agenda (continued)

29. Purchase of Side Loader Refuse Truck (PW)
Motion carried authorizing the purchase of one dual commodity side loader refuse truck in the amount of $440,000 from TEC of California (Oakland, CA).

30. Recycling Center Concrete Floor Upgrade 2022 (c401811) – Advertise for Bids and Award Contract (PW)
Motion carried to approve the plans and specifications for the Recycling Center Concrete Floor Upgrade 2022 (c401811) 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.

31. Lincoln Property Group, BOZ SC Riverfront LLC (508 Front Street) – Approve Parcel Map (PW)
Resolution No. NS-30,012 was adopted approving the Parcel Map for Lincoln Property Group, BOZ SC Riverfront LLC Subdivision (508 Front Street), and authorize the City Manager to execute the Subdivision Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

32. Housing Matters Hygiene Bay Remodel Project (c102205) – Bid Protest and Award of Contract (PW)
Motion carried to overrule the May 25, 2022 bid protest submitted by CRW Industries (Scotts Valley, CA) and to award the Housing Matters Hygiene Bay Remodel Project (c102205) to Selden & Son (Watsonville, CA) or reject all bids.

33. Cell 3B Development Project (c401909) – Consultant Contract Amendment No. 5 (PW)
Motion carried to approve Contract Amendment No. 5 with Tetra Tech BAS for additional construction management services for the Landfill Cell 3B Development Project (c401909) in the amount of $132,000 and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment in a form approved by the City Attorney.

11.14 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6156
Consent Agenda (continued)

34. Trevethan Ave Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810) – Notice of Completion (PW)
Motion carried to accept the work of Devaney Engineering, Inc. (San Francisco, CA) and authorize the filling of the Notice of Completion for the Trevethan Ave Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810).

35. Regional Drought Resiliency Project - Implementation Construction Agreement - Budget Adjustment (WT)
Motion carried to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,013 amending the FY 2022 budget to transfer $1,000,000 within the Water Department's capital budget from the Newell Creek Dam Inlet/Outlet Replacement to a new project for Intertie 1: Santa Cruz – Scotts Valley to be reimbursed through the Multi-Benefit Drought Relief grant program; and
 Authorize the City Manager to execute an Implementation Construction Agreement, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, between the City of Santa Cruz and Scotts Valley Water District to implement the grantfunded Regional Drought Resiliency Project.

36. Program Management Services for Water System Capital Investment Program (WT)
Motion carried to:
 Authorize the City Manager to renew a Master Services Agreement, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, with HDR (Walnut Creek, CA) for Program Management Services for a five-year period; and  Authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment No. 2023-01, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, with HDR for Service Order No. 8 in the amount of $6,747,350.

11.15 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6157
Consent Agenda (continued)

37. Santa Cruz Anadromous Salmonids Habitat Conservation Plan: ASHCP-First Amendment to the Master Services Agreement with Dudek for Environmental Compliance (WT)
Motion carried authorizing the City Manager to execute ASHCP-First Amendment to the Master Services Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for state and federal environmental compliance for the Santa Cruz Anadromous Salmonids Habitat Conservation Plan with Dudek (Santa Cruz, CA) in the amount of $307,050.

End Consent Agenda
Consent Public Hearings
Councilmembers Cummings and Meyers made a comment regarding item 38.

Mayor Brunner opened the public comment period. The following person spoke:

Jessie Bristow spoke regarding item 38.

Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Meyers moved, seconded by Councilmember KalantariJohnson, to approve the Consent Public Hearing 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.

11.16 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6158
Consent Public Hearings (continued)

38. Second Amendment of the 555 Pacific Avenue Apartments Development Agreement (ED/PL)
Motion carried to:
 Introduce for publication Ordinance No. 2022-11 approving the second amendment of the development agreement between Green Valley Corporation and the City of Santa Cruz for 94 residential condominiums and 4,680 square feet of commercial space within four separate tenant spaces fronting on Pacific Avenue at 555 Pacific Avenue; and
 Approve terms for the second amendment of the 555 Pacific Avenue Apartments Development Agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment and related documents in a form to be approved by the City Attorney for the purpose of converting 94 Small Ownership Units (SOUs) to a 100% rental project subject to the City’s current inclusionary requirement of 20% in perpetuity.

39. SitelogiQ Comprehensive Energy Solutions Program – Facility Solutions Agreement (PW)
Motion carried to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,014 to execute a Facility Solutions Agreement with SitelogiQ (Sacramento, CA) for the implementation of certain energyrelated improvements to City of Santa Cruz facilities; and  Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,015 to apply and accept funding for the California Energy Commission ECAA loan program of up to $3,000,000; and  Apply and accept funding for a tax-exempt municipal lease loan of up to $3,500,000; and
 Direct the City Manager 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 budgets.

11.17 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6159
General Business

40. Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Final Award Recommendations (CM)
Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt introduced the item and responded to Councilmember questions.

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

Kimberly Petersen, Program Manager with the County of Santa Cruz, responded to Councilmember questions.

City Manager M. Huffaker responded to Councilmember questions.

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

Unidentified person
Helen Ewan-Storey
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Serg Kagno, Recovery Café Santa Cruz
Maria Cadenas
Reggie Meisler
Unidentified person
Joy Schendledecker
Clay Kempf
David Bianchi
Unidentified person
Jasmeen
Rose Klein
Unidentified person
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

11.18 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6160
General Business (continued)

40. Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Final Award Recommendations (CM) (continued)
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Watkins, to approve FY 2023 Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Investments Request for Proposals final recommended awards in the attachment “List of Recommended Awards” and direct staff to work with Santa Cruz County (County) to execute agreements per the City - County Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) approved on June 7, 2022, for all final recommended awards prior to September 30, 2022.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Watkins requested to add: Direct staff to work with First 5 on how to support childcare providers in Santa Cruz City and/or serving Santa Cruz City families and/or workers accessing the Early Learning Scholarship Program funded through the Children’s Fund.

Councilmember 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.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to direct staff to find the funding of $29,956.72 in order to fund the Harm Reduction Coalition at the full recommended amount in their proposal.

ACTION: The 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.

11.19 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6161
General Business (continued)

40. Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Final Award Recommendations (CM) (continued)
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Watkins, to approve three months of transition funding for all FY 2022 CORE programs that applied for and were not recommended for funding in FY 2023, so that, according to the MOU and amended per this direction, the County can pay the full 3-month transition contract award amounts prior to the agreements being finalized.

MOTION TO AMEND: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to award the bridge funding for one year to total the recommended City allocations from FY 2022 for FY 2023 for CORErecommended programs that reapplied and did not receive funding.

ACTION: The motion to amend was not accepted with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Cummings, Brown.

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

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Mayor Brunner requested to add: Direct staff return in August with funding recommendations. Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson accepted.

ACTION: The original motion, as amended, 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.

11.20 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6162
General Business (continued)

40. Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Final Award Recommendations (CM) (continued)
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, to direct staff to return, with County Human Services Department (HSD), on or before December 13, 2022, with an update on the 3- month transition funding, the newly established contracts and performance tracking mechanisms, efforts to explore other funding sources for current CORE-funded agencies not being recommended for award, progress on the lessons learned review of the request for proposal (RFP) process, and with an estimate of costs for consultants and administrative staff time for the FY 2022/2023 CORE funding process.

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.

41. Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election to be Held on November 8, 2022 (CC)
City Clerk Administrator B. Bush introduced the item.

Acting Finance Director M. Gomez gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

At this time Council heard Oral Communications.

11.21 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6163
General Business (continued)

John Hall, Our Downtown, Our Future
Unidentified person
Cyndi Dawson, Empty Home Tax
Logan Haug
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Joy Schendledecker
Bodie Shargel
Unidentified person
[name unintelligible]
Rose Klein
Erin Twomey
Joe Thompson
Lynn Renshaw
Unidentified person
Spencer Holmes
Pablo Velasquez
Whitney Ramos
Zennon Ulyate-Crow
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Carol Polhamus
Darius Mohsenin
Kaitlyn [last name unintelligible]
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Sabina Holber
Cynthia Mathews
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

Deputy City Attorney C. Bronson spoke and responded to Councilmember questions.

11.22 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6164
General Business (continued)

41. Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election to be Held on November 8, 2022 (CC) (continued)
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to:
1) Direct staff to return to the Council at the earliest possible meeting with a revised fiscal impact report based upon gathering additional information about potential costs to administer the program, in particular in the following areas:
 Ongoing committee administration
 Costs for distributing tax funds
 Startup costs related to the online web portal
2) Accept the certificate of verification of signatures for two initiative petitions; and
3) Amend the May 24, 2022 Council direction related to a report on the impacts of the Our Downtown, Our Future initiative and recommend the full impact report come back to Council no later than September 27, 2022; and
4) Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,016 ordering an election to be held on November 8, 2022 and consolidating the election for the purpose of adding two measures to the ballot: Empty Home Tax and Our Downtown, Our Future, amending the ballot question for the Empty Home Tax as follows:

From:

Shall the City of Santa Cruz establish an “Empty Homes Tax” on residences that are vacant 120 days or more per year in the amount of $6,000 per single-family residence, $6000 per parcel with six or fewer units, and $3,000 per year on condominiums and apartments with 7 or more units, with revenue allocated to affordable housing projects and programs (with 5% of revenue set aside for homeless services), and expenditures overseen by a community oversight committee.

11.23 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6165
General Business (continued)

41. Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election to be Held on November 8, 2022 (CC) (continued)
MOTION (continued):

To:

MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to:
1) Direct staff to return to the Council at the earliest possible meeting with a revised fiscal impact report based upon gathering additional information about potential costs to administer the program in particular in the following areas:
 Ongoing committee administration
 Costs for distributing tax funds
 Startup costs related to the online web portal
2) Accept the certificate of verification of signatures for two initiative petitions; and
3) Amend the May 24, 2022 Council direction related to a report on the impacts of the Our Downtown, Our Future initiative and recommend the full impact report come back to Council no later than September 27, 2022; and
4) When the resolution is adopted, amend the ballot question for the Empty Home Tax as follows:

11.24 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6166
General Business (continued)

41. Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election to be Held on November 8, 2022 (CC) (continued)
MOTION (continued):

From:

To:

Shall the City of Santa Cruz establish an “Empty Home Tax” on residences that are in use less than 120 days per calendar year in the amount of $6,000 per single-family residence, $6,000 per parcel with six or fewer units, and $3,000 per year on condominiums and residential units on parcels with seven or more units, with revenue allocated toward affordable housing projects, 15% for administration, and 5% for homeless sanitation services with administration overseen by a community oversight committee? FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings requested to amend item 1 of the motion as follows:
1) Direct staff to return to Council at the earliest possible meeting with a revised fiscal impact report based upon gathering additional information about potential costs to administer the program in particular to include, but not limited to the following areas:
 Ongoing committee administration
 Costs for distributing tax funds
 Startup costs related to the online web portal
Councilmember Brown accepted.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings requested to include the methodology in which they gathered the information. Councilmember Brown accepted.

11.25 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6167
General Business (continued)

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

NOES: None.

ABSENT: Councilmember Golder.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

MOTION: Councilmember Meyers moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Watkins, to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,016 ordering an election to be held on November 8, 2022 and consolidating the election for the purpose of adding two measures to the ballot: Empty Home Tax and Our Downtown, Our Future including the amendments to the ballot question for Empty Home Tax as approved in the previous motion, and amending the ballot question language for Our Downtown, Our Future as follows:

From:

Shall the City of Santa Cruz General Plan and Downtown Plan be amended to: (1) prohibit construction of the proposed Downtown Mixed Use Library Project and relocation of the Downtown Farmers Market; (2) require development of affordable housing on certain Downtown City-Owned surface parking lots; and (3) designate the use of surplus parking district revenue for Downtown affordable housing development projects, alternative transportation programs for downtown workers and other nonparking related expenditures? To:

Shall the City of Santa Cruz General Plan and Downtown Plan be amended to: (1) prohibit construction of the proposed Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project and relocation of the Downtown Farmers Market; (2) require development of affordable housing on certain Downtown City-owned surface parking lots; and (3) designate the use of surplus parking district revenue for Downtown affordable housing development projects, alternative transportation programs for downtown workers and other non-parking related expenditures?

11.26 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6168
General Business (continued)

41. Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election to be Held on November 8, 2022 (CC) (continued)
MOTION (continued):
 Request the group Santa Cruz for Real Library and Housing Solutions to prepare the argument against the Our Downtown, Our Future ballot measure.
 Request the group Santa Cruz Together prepare the argument against the Empty Home Tax ballot measure.

ACTION: The motion carried with the following vote.

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

NOES: None.

ABSENT: Councilmember Golder.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

At this time Council heard item 42.

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

Oral Communications
At 6:31 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.

Unidentified person spoke regarding energy generation.

Darius Mohsenin spoke regarding the Santa Cruz Pier.

At 6:38 p.m. Mayor Brunner closed Oral Communications.

11.27 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6169
General Business

42. Pogonip Open Space - Pogonip Master Plan Amendment Process for Homeless Garden Project’s Farm and Garden in Upper Main Meadow and Contamination and Clean-up Feasibility Update in Lower Main Meadow (PR) Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot introduced the item and responded to Councilmember questions.

Park Planner N. Downing and Doug Whichard with RMD Environmental Solutions gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Dannettee Shoemaker and Darrie Ganzhorn with the Homeless Garden Project spoke.

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

Kaitlyn [last name unintelligible]
Unidentified person
Mayor Brunner closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Meyers moved, seconded by Mayor Brunner, to accept the report and direct staff to continue next steps to:
 Clean up the contamination to allow for farming to occur in the Lower Main Meadow, Pogonip Open Space, and
 Pursue additional funding to complete the full remediation.

ACTION: The motion carried with the following vote.

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

NOES: None.

ABSENT: Councilmember Golder.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Adjournment - The City Council adjourned at 10:00 p.m.

11.28 June 28, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6170
Respectfully Submitted:

Julia Wood, Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Attest:

Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
Approved:

Sonja Brunner, Mayor

11.29 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/06/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Certification of Canvass of the June 7, 2022 Primary Election (CC) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution confirming and approving the certificate of canvass of ballots and returns for the City of Santa Cruz Primary Election held on June 7, 2022, and declaring the following results:
• Measure E (District Elections) passed by a majority vote of the electorate of the City of Santa Cruz, thus amending the City’s Charter and transitioning to six council districts and an at-large Mayor beginning at the November 8, 2022 election.
• Measure F (Sales and Use Tax) failed, with a majority of the electorate of the City of Santa Cruz voting against.

BACKGROUND: At the meetings of February 22, 2022 and March 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-29,932 and NS-29,939, respectively, calling for an election in the City of Santa Cruz for the purpose of placing measures on the June 7, 2022 ballot.

DISCUSSION: On June 7, 2022, the Statewide Primary Election was held in accordance with law and the votes were cast. The County Clerk certified the results of the election (Exhibit A).

Measure E, a ballot measure to amend the City’s Charter to provide for six council districts and a directly-elected at-large Mayor, passed, with a majority of the votes in favor.

Measure F, a ballot measure to impose a retail transactions and use tax, failed, with a majority of the votes against.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
Submitted By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOC

2. EXHIBIT A

12.1 RESOLUTION NO. NSA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

CONFIRMING AND APPROVING THE CANVASS OF BALLOTS AND RETURNS FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ PRIMARY ELECTION HELD ON JUNE 7, 2022 AND

DECLARING THE RESULTS
WHEREAS, at the meetings of February 22, 2022 and March 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-29,932 and NS-29,939, respectively, calling for an election in the City of Santa Cruz for the purpose of placing measures on the ballot.

WHEREAS, on June 7, 2022, the election so called and ordered was held in accordance with law and the votes were counted; and
WHEREAS, the County Clerk has certified the results of the election.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby certifies the following:

1. The Primary Election referred to above was held in the City of Santa Cruz on June 7, 2022.

2. The certified canvass of returns is set forth in Exhibit “A” and incorporated by reference.

3. A ballot measure proposing a Charter amendment to provide for six council districts and a directly-elected at-large Mayor was submitted to the voters and the votes were cast for and against the measure as follows:

E – City District Elections, 6-
districts and at-large Mayor Vote Count Percent
No 5774 33.45%
Yes 11,490 66.55%
Undervotes 1188
Overvotes 7
Total 18459 100.00%
A majority of the votes cast were in support of this ballot measure. The measure (Measure E) was successful and the Charter will be amended in accordance therewith.

12.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS2

4. A ballot measure to impose a Retail Transaction and Use Tax was submitted to the voters and the votes were cast for and against the measure as follows:

F – Sales and Use Tax Vote Count Percent
No 8613 50.15%
Yes 8563 49.85%
Undervotes 1280
Overvotes 3
Total 18459 100.00%
A majority of the votes cast were against this ballot measure. The measure (Measure F) was unsuccessful.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _______________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

12.3 Statement of Vote
June 7, 2022 Statewide Direct Primary Election
Tricia Webber, Santa Cruz County Clerk
701 Ocean St., Room 310
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831-454-2060 / 1-866-282-5900
831-454-2445 (FAX)
www.votescount.us

12.4 Certification of County Clerk of the Results of the Canvass of the June 7, 2022, Statewide Direct Primary Election
I, Tricia Webber, County Clerk of the County of Santa Cruz, do hereby certify that, in pursuance to the provisions of Elections Code Section 15300, et. seq., I did canvass the results for the votes cast in the Statewide Direct Primary Election held in Santa Cruz County on June 7, 2022, for measures and contests that were submitted to the vote of the voters, and that the Statement of Votes Cast to which this certificate is attached, is true and correct.

I hereby set my hand and official seal this 5th day of July 2022 at the County of Santa Cruz.
_______________________
Tricia Webber
Santa Cruz County Clerk

12.5 1 E - Santa Cruz City District Elections - Maj 2 F - Santa Cruz City Sales And Use Tax - Maj
1 1 2 2
Registered
Voters
Voters Cast
Turnout (%)
Yes
No
Yes
No
11010 Election Day 2543 52 2.04 % 35 16 21 31
11010 Vote by Mail 2543 1374 54.03 % 938 343 501 811
11010 Total 2543 1426 56.08 % 973 359 522 842
31010 Election Day 4364 105 2.41 % 56 47 43 55
31010 Vote by Mail 4364 2250 51.56 % 1400 707 1066 1018 31010 Total 4364 2355 53.96 % 1456 754 1109 1073
31011 Election Day 5138 100 1.95 % 58 38 36 54
31011 Vote by Mail 5138 2494 48.54 % 1589 737 1147 1158 31011 Total 5138 2594 50.49 % 1647 775 1183 1212
31050 Election Day 2789 64 2.29 % 27 31 31 23
31050 Vote by Mail 2789 1458 52.28 % 907 462 689 656
31050 Total 2789 1522 54.57 % 934 493 720 679
31140 Election Day 4663 102 2.19 % 63 30 42 50
31140 Vote by Mail 4663 2574 55.20 % 1699 728 1126 1263 31140 Total 4663 2676 57.39 % 1762 758 1168 1313
31150 Election Day 2355 50 2.12 % 21 23 24 22
31150 Vote by Mail 2355 945 40.13 % 571 297 460 416
31150 Total 2355 995 42.25 % 592 320 484 438
31160 Election Day 3599 75 2.08 % 43 29 41 29
31160 Vote by Mail 3599 1757 48.82 % 1125 535 848 769
31160 Total 3599 1832 50.90 % 1168 564 889 798
31240 Election Day 1972 51 2.59 % 22 21 22 26
31240 Vote by Mail 1972 777 39.40 % 492 232 352 355
31240 Total 1972 828 41.99 % 514 253 374 381
31560 Election Day 3558 106 2.98 % 57 40 44 53
31560 Vote by Mail 3558 1602 45.03 % 964 523 783 684
31560 Total 3558 1708 48.00 % 1021 563 827 737
31600 Election Day 581 41 7.06 % 24 15 22 19
31600 Vote by Mail 581 183 31.50 % 94 81 93 84
31600 Total 581 224 38.55 % 118 96 115 103
51010 Election Day 1402 22 1.57 % 15 5 9 12
51010 Vote by Mail 1402 533 38.02 % 311 183 305 209
51010 Total 1402 555 39.59 % 326 188 314 221
51080 Election Day 2674 78 2.92 % 45 29 33 41
51080 Vote by Mail 2674 1171 43.79 % 660 438 588 541
51080 Total 2674 1249 46.71 % 705 467 621 582
51090 Election Day 1099 24 2.18 % 8 14 14 10
51090 Vote by Mail 1099 471 42.86 % 266 170 223 224
51090 Total 1099 495 45.04 % 274 184 237 234
Electionwide Election Day 36737 870 2.37 % 474 338 382 425 Electionwide Vote by Mail 36737 17589 47.88 % 11016 5436 8181 8188 Electionwide Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 Total - Election Day 36737 870 2.37 % 474 338 382 425
Total - Vote by Mail 36737 17589 47.88 % 11016 5436 8181 8188 Contest Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613
Printed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:39 PM Data Refreshed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:39 PM Page 137 of 137 Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz 2022 Primary
District Canvass
June 7, 2022

12.6 1 Assessor-Recorder 2 Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector 3 County Clerk
1 1 2 2 3 3
Registered
Voters
Voters Cast
Turnout (%)
SHERI
THOMAS
Write In
EDITH

DRISCOLL
Write In
TRICIA
WEBBER
Write In
Electionwide Total 167659 78902 47.06 % 52302 977 52515 1074 53045 920 California Total 167659 78902 47.06 % 52302 977 52515 1074 53045 920 State Board of Equalization -
District 2
Total 167659 78902 47.06 % 52302 977 52515 1074 53045 920 18th Congressional District Total 29678 8419 28.37 % 6315 153 6377 168 6442 133 19th Congressional District Total 137981 70483 51.08 % 45987 824 46138 906 46603 787 17th Senatorial District Total 167659 78902 47.06 % 52302 977 52515 1074 53045 920 28th Assemby District Total 80543 40694 50.52 % 26258 463 26300 504 26630 453 29th Assembly District Total 33927 10501 30.95 % 7703 177 7776 198 7832 157 30th Assembly District Total 53189 27707 52.09 % 18341 337 18439 372 18583 310 Santa Cruz County Total 167659 78902 47.06 % 52302 977 52515 1074 53045 920 1st Supervisorial District Total 37076 18579 50.11 % 12231 209 12306 231 12431 201 2nd Supervisorial District Total 36812 18136 49.27 % 12094 233 12151 273 12226 211 3rd Supervisorial District Total 31876 16249 50.98 % 10428 151 10496 153 10643 139 4th Supervisorial District Total 23459 6825 29.09 % 5114 126 5176 132 5212 112 5th Supervisorial District Total 38436 19113 49.73 % 12435 258 12386 285 12533 257 City of Capitola Total 6990 3474 49.70 % 2249 53 2250 45 2270 46 City of Santa Cruz Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 12019 175 12076 185 12238 166 City of Scotts Valley Total 8755 4357 49.77 % 2957 58 2967 56 2975 55 City of Watsonville Total 21985 6018 27.37 % 4604 110 4630 124 4683 98 City of Watsonville - District 1 Total 2365 486 20.55 % 375 13 380 12 388 11 City of Watsonville - District 2 Total 2420 540 22.31 % 396 17 405 17 402 18 City of Watsonville - District 3 Total 3370 796 23.62 % 633 13 624 18 642 10 City of Watsonville - District 4 Total 3541 980 27.68 % 728 15 735 17 742 13 City of Watsonville - District 5 Total 2771 629 22.70 % 468 18 467 23 475 17 City of Watsonville - District 6 Total 3418 972 28.44 % 760 20 761 20 767 18 City of Watsonville - District 7 Total 4100 1615 39.39 % 1244 14 1258 17 1267 11 Unincorporated Area Total 93192 46594 50.00 % 30473 581 30592 664 30879 555 Printed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:41 PM Data Refreshed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:41 PM Page 25 of 28 Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz 2022 Primary
District Total Results
Election Date: June 7, 2022

12.7 1 E - Santa Cruz City District Elections - Maj 2 F - Santa Cruz City Sales And Use Tax - Maj
1 1 2 2
Registered
Voters
Voters Cast
Turnout (%)
Yes
No
Yes
No
Electionwide Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 California Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 State Board of Equalization -
District 2
Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613
19th Congressional District Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 17th Senatorial District Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 28th Assemby District Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 Santa Cruz County Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 1st Supervisorial District Total 2543 1426 56.08 % 973 359 522 842 3rd Supervisorial District Total 29019 14734 50.77 % 9212 4576 6869 6734 5th Supervisorial District Total 5175 2299 44.43 % 1305 839 1172 1037 City of Santa Cruz Total 36737 18459 50.25 % 11490 5774 8563 8613 Printed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:41 PM Data Refreshed: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:41 PM Page 28 of 28 Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz 2022 Primary
District Total Results
Election Date: June 7, 2022

12.8 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/06/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution Ordering an Election for Two Council Seats, Districts 4 and 6, and Mayor for the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election (CC) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution ordering an election, requesting the County Elections Department to conduct the election, and requesting consolidation of the election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election.

BACKGROUND: At the June 8, 2022 Primary Election, voters approved a ballot measure amending the City’s Charter to transition to district elections, specifically 6 districts and a directly-elected at-large Mayor.

DISCUSSION: This resolution orders the City of Santa Cruz election for District 4 and 6 Council seats, and Mayor, and requests that it be consolidated with the Statewide General Election on November 8, 2022.

Currently, the incumbents within Districts 4 and 6 are Councilmember Justin Cummings and Councilmember Renee Golder, respectively.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the election is estimated to be in the range of $91,402.50 to $146,244.00 based on figures from the County Elections Department. This amount may fluctuate, based on the number of registered voters at the time of the election and the number of items the City places on the ballot.

Prepared By:

Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
Submitted By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION FOR COUNCIL SEATS 2022.DOCX

13.1 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ ORDERING AN

ELECTION, REQUESTING COUNTY ELECTIONS TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION,

AND REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION OF THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION IN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, NOVEMBER 8, 2022
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10002, the governing body of any city or district may by resolution request the Board of Supervisors of the county to permit the county elections official to render specified services to the city or district relating to the conduct of an election; and
WHEREAS, the resolution of the City Council of the city shall specify the services requested; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10002, the city shall reimburse the county in full for the services performed upon presentation of a bill to the city; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10400, whenever two or more elections of any legislative or congressional district, public district, city, county, or other political subdivision are called to be held on the same day, in the same territory, or in territory that is in part the same, they may be consolidated upon the order of the governing body or bodies or officer or officers calling the elections; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10400, such election for cities and special districts may be either completely or partially consolidated; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10403, whenever an election called by a district, city or other political subdivision for the submission of any question, proposition, or office to be filled is to be consolidated with a statewide election, and the question, proposition, or office to be filled is to appear upon the same ballot as that provided for that statewide election, the district, city or other political subdivision shall, at least 88 days prior to the date of the election, file with the board of supervisors, and a copy with the elections official, a resolution of its governing board requesting the consolidation, and setting forth the exact form of any question, proposition, or office to be voted upon at the election, as it is to appear on the ballot, acknowledging that the consolidation election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Section 10418. Upon such request, the Board of Supervisors may order the consolidation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10418, if consolidated, the consolidated election shall be held and conducted, election boards appointed, voting precincts designated, candidates nominated, ballots printed, polls opened and closed, voter challenges determined, ballots counted and returned, returns canvassed, results declared, certificates of election issued, recounts conducted, election contests presented, and all other proceedings incidental to and connected with the election shall be regulated and done in accordance with the provisions of law regulating the statewide or special election, or the election held pursuant to Section 1302 or 1303, as applicable.

13.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-30,
2 WHEREAS, the resolution requesting the consolidation shall be adopted and filed at the same time as the adoption of the ordinance, resolution, or order calling the election; and WHEREAS, various district, county, state and other political subdivision elections may be or have been called to be held on November 8, 2022;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz hereby orders an election be called and consolidated with any and all elections also called to be held on November 8, 2022 insofar as said elections are to be held in the same territory or in territory that is in part the same as the territory of the City of Santa Cruz and requests the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Cruz to order such consolidation under Elections Code Sections 10401, 10403 and 10418.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the City Council requests the Board of Supervisors to permit the Santa Cruz County Elections Department to provide any and all services necessary for conducting the election and agrees to pay for said services, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Santa Cruz County Elections Department conduct the election for the following offices on the November 8, 2022 ballot:

Seats open Office Term District/Division (if app)
1 Councilmember 4 years 4
1 Councilmember 4 years 6
1 Mayor 4 years At-large
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _______________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

13.3 CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: July 22, 2022
AGENDA OF: August 9, 2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: Support for the Protection of Reproductive Rights and Various California Legislative Bills (CN)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution expressing the Santa Cruz City Council’s support for the protection of reproductive rights; and
2) Authorize the Mayor to send a letter to state legislators on behalf of the City Council in support of California Assembly Bill 133 (AB 133), Senate Bill 245 (SB 245), Assembly Bill 1356 (AB 1356), Assembly Bill 1666 (AB 1666), Assembly Bill 1918 (AB 1918), Assembly Bill 2091 (AB 2091), Assembly Bill 2134 (AB 2134), Assembly Bill 2223 (AB 2223), Assembly Bill 2626 (AB 2626), and Senate Bill 374 (SB 374).

BACKGROUND: Roe v. Wade (1973) became a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled restrictive state regulation of abortion was unconstitutional, and, in most instances, it violated the constitutional right of privacy. This case law created a framework on regulating abortion based on the trimesters of pregnancy and allowed for women to have an abortion without undue restrictive interference from the government.

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) established restrictions that abortions were unconstitutional if they placed an undue burden on women who were seeking abortion before the fetus was viable.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) centered around the State of Mississippi and challenged the state’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The court held that the Constitution of the United States did not confer a right to abortion.

On June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade as well as Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania. v. Casey and thus opened up the states’ abilities to ban or limit access to abortion.

The recent decision will affect many women across the nation, and about half of states are expected to allow abortion bans or limit procedures. However, laws will vary between states, and California will continue to protect the fundamental right under both the U.S. and California Constitutions.

14.1 DISCUSSION: Comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortion, supports the general welfare of every person in the City of Santa Cruz’ physical, psychological, and socioeconomic well-being, and should not be restricted, denied, or criminalized. Restricting, denying, or criminalizing reproductive health care disproportionately impacts marginalized, underprivileged, and vulnerable communities in their ability to seek fundamental rights, health and safety, opportunity, education, and financial and professional stability.

The Council supports the protection and autonomy of reproductive rights and will continue to take appropriate steps to protect the California law preserving safe access to abortion services in California and in Santa Cruz.

To support legislative actions to uphold all persons’ rights to liberty, dignity, and autonomy and its commitment to making Santa Cruz a safe haven for reproductive freedom and access to abortion services, Council recommends having the Mayor reach out in its behalf to support AB 133 and SB 245, AB 1356, AB 1666, AB 1918, AB 2091, AB 2134, AB 2223, AB 2626, and SB 374 that pertain to protecting women’s reproductive rights, public health, safety, and welfare concerns in the City of Santa Cruz, the state, and nationally.

14.2 FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Submitted by: Submitted by: Submitted by:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
Martine Watkins
Vice Mayor
Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson
Councilmember
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

14.3 RESOLUTION NO. NSA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ SUPPORTING AB 133 AND SB 245, AB 1356, AB 1666, AB 1918, AB 2091, AB 2134, AB 2223, AB 2626, SB 374 PERTAINING TO PROTECTION OF REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS WHEREAS, AB 133 and SB 245 eliminate deductibles and ensuring cost is not a barrier to accessing abortion services; and
WHEREAS, AB 1356 creates new crimes under the California Freedom of Access to Clinic Act directed at videotaping, photographing, or recording patients or providers within 100 feet of the facility or disclosing or distributing those images an offense punishable as felonies; updates and expands online privacy laws and peace officer training relative to anti-reproduction-rights crimes; and
WHEREAS, AB 1666 prohibits enforcement of out-of-state fetal heartbeat abortion restriction laws in California; and
WHEREAS, AB 1918 establishes the California Reproductive Health Service Corps (RHSC) within the Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) to recruit, train, and retain a diverse workforce of reproductive health care professionals to work in underserved areas; and WHEREAS, AB 2091 prohibits health plans from releasing medical information related to an individual seeking or obtaining an abortion in response to a subpoena or a request if that subpoena or request is based on either another state’s laws that interfere with a person’s rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civic action; and WHEREAS, AB 2134 establishes a Medi-Cal program to ensure abortion and contraception services are affordable and accessible to all patients and to provide financial support for safety net providers of these services; and
WHEREAS, AB 2223 deletes the requirement that a coroner hold inquests for deaths related to or following known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion and the requirement that an unattended fetal death be treated as a death without medical attendance; this bill does not promote infanticide and instead strives to protect individuals from prosecution for pregnancy-related outcomes; and
WHEREAS, AB 2626 prohibits health care professional licensure boards in California from suspending or revoking the license of a health practitioner for performing an abortion so long as they performed in accordance with state law; and
WHEREAS, SB 374 names reproductive coercion as a form of domestic violence for which a restraining order may be granted under the Domestic Violence Protection Act; and WHEREAS, on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the ruling, Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992),

14.4 which declared a constitutional right to abortion; and WHEREAS, access to comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortion, supports the general welfare of every person in the City of Santa Cruz’ physical, psychological, and socioeconomic well-being, and should not be restricted, denied, or criminalized; and WHEREAS, restricting, denying, or criminalizing reproductive health care disproportionately impacts marginalized, underprivileged, and vulnerable communities in their ability to seek fundamental rights, health and safety, opportunity, education, and financial and professional stability; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz values and dedicates resources to the safety, health, and well-being of its residents; and
WHEREAS, the Council seeks to express its support for the protection and autonomy of reproductive rights;
WHEREAS, the Council will continue to take appropriate steps to protect California law preserving safe access to abortion services in California and support legislative actions to uphold all persons’ rights to liberty, dignity, and autonomy;
WHEREAS, Council’s action demonstrates the City of Santa Cruz’ commitment to making it a safe haven for reproductive freedom and access to abortion services.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Santa Cruz City Council does hereby express its support of AB 133 and SB 245, AB 1356, AB 1666, AB 1918, AB 2091, AB 2134, AB 2223, AB 2626, and SB 374 as passed by the California State Assembly and Senate.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

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

14.5 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: Sister Cities Committee Member Code of Conduct Issues (CN) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution admonishing a Sister Cities Committee Member for disrespectful conduct toward a City employee.

BACKGROUND: On or around March 8, 2022, the City Manager received a complaint from a City employee that, through disrespectful conduct, Sister Cities Committee Member, Doug Hull, had allegedly violated the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct. On or around March 14, 2022, Parks & Recreation Director, Tony Elliot, discussed the complaint with Mr. Hull.

Director Elliot indicated that Mr. Hull was not receptive to the feedback, made no attempts to apologize to the employee, and did not demonstrate that there would be a cessation of disrespectful conduct, going forward.

Since the attempt to resolve the employee complaint was unsuccessful, in accordance with the Code of Ethics & Conduct Policy, an ad hoc committee (Committee) was convened composed of Mayor Brunner, Vice Mayor Watkins, and Councilmember Brown (who is the most senior Councilmember) as an evaluation committee to: determine an initial course of action; assess the validity of the complaint; and, if appropriate, make recommendations for next steps.1 On or around April 5, 2022, this Committee reviewed the initial complaint and met with Mr.

Hull to receive his input and understand his perspective. At this meeting, Mr. Hull made no attempts to apologize for his behavior, nor did he demonstrate that he would refrain from disrespectful conduct, going forward.

After the Committee’s meeting with Mr. Hull, the Committee believed that there was a reasonable chance the complaint had merit, and the Committee referred the matter to the City Attorney’s Office (CAO) for investigation.

The CAO conducted interviews, reviewed documents, and drafted an investigative report that can be found at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/parksrecreation/advisory-bodies/sister-cities-committee. 1 City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct D(B)(2) states: “Upon report of a complaint, an ad hoc committee composed of the Mayor, Vice Mayor and the most senior uninvolved Councilmember will convene as an evaluation committee to determine the validity of the complaint and, if appropriate, an initial course of action as discussed below.”

15.1 The report concludes that Mr. Hull was disrespectful to the employee on one occasion wherein Mr. Hull, in a one-on-one interaction, told the employee in a disrespectful tone that she had made a “serious mistake.” As stated in the CAO’s report2:
[The employee’s] and Mr. Hull’s recollections of what occurred are only slightly different. The key difference is the parties’ interpretations of Mr. Hull’s tone. [The employee] found Mr. Hull’s tone to be disapproving, questioning, serious, threatening, and demeaning. Mr. Hull recalls that his tone was surprised, exasperated, assertive, and annoyed. While tone is something that is difficult to pin down when one is not there to witness it, even Mr. Hull admits that his tone was not respectful. Additionally, phrases like “That was a serious mistake” and “Yes, we will” can reasonably be interpreted as demeaning or threatening, if said in an exasperated or annoyed tone, and Mr. Hull admits to using an exasperated or annoyed tone. A reasonable person would also find it to be confusing and disrespectful for Mr. Hull to emphatically agree to speak with [the employee] after the meeting, and then immediately leave without addressing [the employee] or trying to learn more about the tense interaction that the parties had before the meeting.

Based on this interaction, the CAO determined that Mr. Hull violated the following sections of the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct3:
 “14. Positive Workplace Environment. Members shall support the maintenance of a positive and constructive workplace environment for City employees” (Exhibit F. p. 2.)  “3. Conduct with City Staff. a. Treat all staff as professionals. Clear, honest communication that respects the abilities, experiences, and dignity of each individual is expected. As with Council colleagues, practice civility and decorum in all interactions with City staff.” (Exhibit F, p. 3.)
 “d. Concerns related to the behavior or work of City staff. All concerns regarding staff shall be directed to the City Manager. Councilmembers shall not reprimand employees.” (Exhibit F, p. 3.)
DISCUSSION: The Committee accepts and agrees with the CAO’s findings. Mr. Hull, in the referenced interaction with the employee: failed to treat the employee as a professional; failed to maintain a positive work environment; and reprimanded the employee, which is not the role of a committee member. Additionally, Mr. Hull, in his conversations with Director Elliot and the Committee, failed to take responsibility for his actions and failed to demonstrate that the disrespectful conduct would cease.

It is the policy of the City of Santa Cruz that all employees, volunteers, Councilmembers, Commissioners, Committee Members, customers, contractors, and visitors to the City’s worksites enjoy a positive, respectful, and productive work environment. A workplace where disrespectful conduct is tolerated is prone to morale issues and potential loss of qualified and dedicated employees.
2 See Investigative Report, pp. 2-3.
3 See Investigative Report, p. 3.

15.2 City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct (Section E) sets forth potential options for “Accountability” when the Code of Ethics & Conduct is violated. These options include, but are not limited to, admonishment, censure, and removal from a commission or board.

At this time, the Committee recommends that Mr. Hull be admonished because he was disrespectful toward a City employee and failed to take responsibility for his conduct.

At this time, the Committee does not recommend removal, but the Committee would note that any repeated instances of disrespectful conduct toward a City employee could be grounds for removal from a commission or board.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Submitted By:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
Submitted By:

Martine Watkins
Vice Mayor
Submitted By:

Sandy Brown
Councilmember
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION

15.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

ADMONISHING A SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE MEMBER FOR

DISRESPECTFUL CONDUCT TOWARD A CITY EMPLOYEE
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that service on a City Committee is a privilege that carries with it the responsibility of operating within a framework that will protect the public trust and promote a respectful workplace; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Santa Cruz that all employees, volunteers, Councilmembers, Commissioners, Committee Members, customers, contractors, and visitors to the City’s worksites enjoy a positive, respectful, and productive work environment; and WHEREAS, City Committee and Commission members are responsible for following the “City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct,” which was approved by the Council on September 8, 2020 and can be found here: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/how-do-i/learn-about/citycharter-codes-and-policies; and WHEREAS, on or around March 8, 2022, the City received a complaint from a City staff member alleging that, through disrespectful conduct, Sister Cities Committee Member, Doug Hull, had violated the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct, City staff made attempts to informally resolve the conflict with Mr. Hull, but those attempts were not successful; and
WHEREAS, given that informal attempts to address Mr. Hull’s conduct were unsuccessful, pursuant to the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct, a more formal process ensued, and the City Attorney’s Office (“CAO”) was directed to investigate complaints made against Mr. Hull; and
WHEREAS, as set forth in the CAO’s Investigative Report, one of the complaining employee’s allegations was substantiated, and the CAO determined that Mr. Hull, through disrespectful conduct directed toward a City employee, committed one violation of the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it is of the utmost importance that the City maintain a respectful workplace. A workplace where disrespectful conduct is tolerated is prone to morale issues and potential loss of qualified and dedicated employees; and WHEREAS, Section E of the City of Santa Cruz Code of Ethics & Conduct sets forth potential options for “Accountability”. These options include, but are not limited to admonishment, censure, and removal from a commission or board; and

15.4 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
2 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, at this time, admonishment is an appropriate way to address Mr. Hull’s disrespectful conduct toward a City employee; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that repeated instances of disrespectful conduct toward a City employee could be grounds for removal from a commission or board.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that a formal admonishment is hereby issued to Sister Cities Commission Member, Doug Hull.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

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

15.5 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/26/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: Liability Claims Filed Against the City of Santa Cruz (FN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to reject the liability claim of a) Denise Susan Barr; and to return as late the claim of b) Progressive West Insurance Company, based on staff recommendation.

BACKGROUND: N/A
DISCUSSION: I. Claim to be rejected:
a. Claimant: Denise Susan Barr
Date of occurrence: 6/09/2022
Date of claim: 6/29/2022
Amount of claim: $181.24
Claimant seeks compensation for damage to her vehicle allegedly caused by a third party.

Self-Represented
II. Claim to be returned as late:
b. Claimant: Progressive West Insurance Company
Date of occurrence: 9/07/2021
Date of claim: 6/21/2022
Amount of claim: $3,101.03
Claimant seeks reimbursement for damages to their insured’s vehicle allegedly caused by a City vehicle.

Self-Represented
FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact.

Prepared By:

Ross Brandon
Risk & Safety Manager
Submitted By:

Elizabeth Cabell
Finance Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager

16.1 ATTACHMENTS:

None.

16.2 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/27/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project (c401602) – Notice of Completion (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of Alfaro Communications Construction, Inc. (Compton, CA) as completed per the plans and specifications and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion for Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project (c401602).

BACKGROUND: At its January 25, 2022 meeting, City Council authorized and directed the City Manager to advertise for bids and award the contract for the Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project.

On March 18, 2022 the project was awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder Alfaro Communications Construction, Inc. (Compton, CA) in the amount of $117,700.

The project installed approximately 600 linear feet of PVC conduit and traffic signal pull boxes.

DISCUSSION: The project has been inspected by Public Works staff and found to be constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications.

FISCAL IMPACT: The project is fully funded in the FY 2022 Gas Tax Fund budget in the Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project (c401602) - with a total cost of $110,148.18.

There is no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Dan Estranero
Associate Professional
Engineer
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. NOTICE OF COMPLETION.DOCX

17.1 Notice of Completion (Revised Oct 2021)
(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: Water Street Signal Interconnect Conduit Project c401602

3. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Installed approximately 600 linear feet of PVC conduit and traffic signal pull boxes.

4. The general site location description or address (the “Property”) of the public improvement is located at: Water Street between Market Street and North Branciforte Avenue.

5. Name and Address of Contractor. The Contractor on the Project is: Alfaro Communications Construction, Inc. 15614 S. Atlantic Ave., Compton, CA 90221

6. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: June 2, 2022

7. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on Tuesday, August 9, 2022
DATE: ___________________
Mark Dettle
Director of Public Works, City of Santa Cruz
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz, Public Works
Attn: Dan Estranero
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

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

17.2 Notice of Completion (Revised Oct 2021)

VERIFICATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
I have read the foregoing Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, and I certify that the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated upon my information or belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on ____________________at Santa Cruz, CA
Mark Dettle
Director of Public Works, City of Santa Cruz

17.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/27/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvements (c400805) – Contract Amendment 1 (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Contract Amendment 1 to an agreement with WSP USA, Inc. (Dallas, TX) to provide construction management services for the State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvement Project (c400805).

BACKGROUND: At its May 6, 2020 meeting, the City Council authorized staff to advertise and award for construction management (CM) services for the State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvement Project (c400805) (Project). A request for proposals was advertised and three firms were selected for interviews. As a result of these interviews, the City of Santa Cruz entered into a contract with WSP USA, Inc. (WSP) for CM services in late November 2020.

DISCUSSION: The Project ran into delays totaling approximately five months, first because of the presence of juvenile steelhead fish in the Arroyo de San Pedro Regalado and then because of delays in PG&E’s relocation of a 12 kV electrical transmission line. Additional delays have been incurred because of the discovery of unmapped utilities in the Route 9 section of the Project. The current estimation for completing the Project is September 2022. This contract amendment for WSP is necessary to extend their service to the conclusion of the project.

FISCAL IMPACT: The current contract with WSP is $595, 976. The cost of the contract amendment for WSP to complete the project is $312,292, bringing the new contract amount to $908,268. This additional cost will be funded by Gas Tax funds. There is no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Joshua Spangrud
Senior Civil Engineer
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. PROPOSAL.PDF

18.1 Basis For Estimate
1) Construction ends September 2022
2) Annual labor escalations of 3.5% to be effective in January 3) Additional rain days not included in estimate
Tuesday, May 31, 2022

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

COST TO COMPLETE ESTIMATE
FROM:

WSP USA INC.

TO:

Approved: _________________________
HIGHWAY 1 & 9 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NUMBER C400805

18.2 HIGHWAY 1 & 9 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WSP USA INC.

COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY

WSP BURDENED LABOR COSTS
LABOR $ 275,208

OVERTIME
$ -
SUBTOTAL $ 275,208
SUBCONSULTANT(S):

Pacific Crest Engineering $ 30,000
Material Testing/Source Inspection
SUBTOTAL $ 30,000
WSP EXPENSES: $ 16,808
SUBTOTAL $ 16,808
TOTAL $ 322,016
BALANCE ON 3/31/22 $ 9,724
ADDITIONAL REQUEST $ 312,292

18.3 YEAR:

POSITION NAME FIRM April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Project Manager Bruce Shewchuk, PE WSP 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 32 Resident Engineer Jake Jones, PE WSP 160 160 80 80 80 80 80 80 0 800 Electrical Oversight Hossien Shamai WSP 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 24 Construction Inspector David Ho WSP 80 80 80 80 80 80 0 0 0 480 Construction Inspector (2nd Shift) Timothy Hamilton WSP 0 0 48 48 48 48 0 0 0 192 Project Administrator William Sievers WSP 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 16 Staff performing inspection services are subject to prevailing wage rates 1,544

OVERTIME HOURS
YEAR:

POSITION NAME FIRM April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Inspector David Ho WSP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Staff performing inspection services are subject to prevailing wage rates 0 Construction Management Services - City of Santa Cruz
Proposed Labor Schedule
2022
Post Construction
TOTAL
HOURS
TOTAL
HOURS
2022
Construction Post Construction
Construction

18.4 HIGHWAY 1 & 9 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

BILL TOTAL TOTAL

POSITION NAME FIRM HRS RATE TOTAL HOURS COST
Project Manager Bruce Shewchuk, PE WSP 32 229.97 $7,359.04 32 $7,359 Resident Engineer Jake Jones, PE WSP 800 183.69 $146,952.00 800 $146,952 Electrical Oversight Hossien Shamai WSP 24 183.18 $4,396.32 24 $4,396 Construction Inspector David Ho WSP 480 160.64 $77,107.20 480 $77,107 Construction Inspector (2nd Shift) Timothy Hamilton WSP 192 194.26 $37,297.92 192 $37,298 Project Administrator William Sievers WSP-GSO 16 130.95 $2,095.20 16 $2,095 1,544 $275,207.68 1,544 275,208 $

STRAIGHT TIME LABOR COSTS
April 1, 2022- Dec 31, 2022

18.5 WSP USA INC.

UNIT
UNIT QTY COST ($) SUBTOTAL ($)

EXPENSES

A) VEHICLES, VEHICLE O&M, COMPUTERS,

FIELD EQUIPMENT, SAFETY EQUIPMENT, SURVEY EQUIPMENT
Hours
Bruce Shewchuk, PE 32 $11 352
Jake Jones, PE 800 $11 8,800
Hossien Shamai 24 $11 264
David Ho 480 $11 5,280
Timothy Hamilton 192 $11 2,112
$ 16,808
ESTIMATED EXPENSES $ 16,808
HIGHWAY 1 & 9 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

ESTIMATED EXPENSES

18.6 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/27/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: CCTV Inspection Van – Award Contract (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to award a contract for the purchase of one replacement CCTV Inspection Van from Jack Doheny Company, (Antioch, CA) in the amount of $327,945.34.

BACKGROUND: The State Water Board General Order for Waste Discharge Requirements requires the City to implement a system-specific Sewer System Management Plan that includes provisions to provide proper and efficient management, operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer system. A key component of the maintenance work is the ability to video inspect the sanitary system to identify deficiencies and to prevent sanitary sewer overflows.

DISCUSSION: The Wastewater Collection Division currently uses a closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection van with camera equipment that was purchased in 1998. The van is past due on the vehicle replacement schedule. The analog camera equipment is obsolete and unsupported.

The modern digital replacement equipment will provide a visual condition assessment and inspection record of underground sanitary and storm pipeline and system conditions. Public Works Engineering will use this data to identify projects and focus Capital Investment Program (CIP) efforts to rehabilitate and replace sewer pipes that are at risk of collapse or prone to more frequent blockages due to pipe defects.

Section 3.08.170 of the Municipal Ordinance allows the City of Santa Cruz (City) to buy from cooperative purchasing agreements when it is in the best interest of the City to do so. National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) Sourcewell obtains competitively and formally bid contracts which can be used by participating member municipal agencies, including the City. The NJPA Sourcewell quoted price from contract# 120721-RVL, for the complete CCTV Inspection Van is $327,945.34, which includes 9.25% sales tax. By utilizing the Cooperative Purchasing method, the NJPA Sourcewell Contract pricing is 96% of the manufacturer’s list price, providing a cost savings to the City versus purchasing through traditional methods. The cooperative purchasing agreement provides a cost avoidance to the City of $13,117.81 in addition to a savings in staff time.

FISCAL IMPACT: There are adequate funds in the FY 2023 Public Works Wastewater Enterprise Fund budget for this purchase. There is no impact to the General Fund.

19.1 Prepared By:

Anne Hogan
Wastewater Systems Manager
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Meeting Date: - Agenda Item Caption: CCTV Inspection Van – Award Contract (PW)

2. PROPOSAL.PDF

19.2 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 Date: 7/11/2022
1 Branch: 1700
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 CUSTOMER:
1 ADDRESS:
1 CITY, STATE, ZIP:
1 PHONE:
1 EMAIL:
1 ATTN:
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
N/A
17758
1 Sourcewell Contract #120721-RVL
City of Santa Cruz
110 California Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831/420-5066
[email protected]
Filipina Warren
DOHENYCOMPANY.COM
PROPOSAL ID:

RAPIDVIEW ID:
2022 Price List Customer Initials: ____ 19.3
1 LIST
1 Standard Cameras:
1 V0494050 $ 21,489.00 $ 21,489.00
1 904055000 $ 2,211.00 $ 2,211.00
1 1 Camera Head Accessories:
1 901601040 $ 516.00 $ 516.00
1 1 T66 Tractor and Accessories:
1 905211031 $ 762.00 $ 762.00
1 905253031 $ 340.00 $ 340.00
1 905210091 $ 668.00 $ 668.00
1 905210191 $ 913.00 $ 913.00
1 905216291 $ 1,219.00 $ 1,219.00
1 905215991 $ 1,418.00 $ 1,418.00
1 1 T76 Tractor and Accessories:
1 904110390 $ 1,440.00 $ 1,440.00
1 900410891 $ 1,644.00 $ 1,644.00
1 904401491 $ 1,418.00 $ 1,418.00
1 900406691 $ 1,503.00 $ 1,503.00
1 1 Vehicle Mounted Control Units:
1 V1976007 $ 33,383.00 $ 33,383.00
1 1 Reels:
1 V8029020 $ 37,422.00 $ 37,422.00
1 1 Camera Cable:
1 80072300 $ 16,953.00 $ 16,953.00
1 1 Reel Accessories:
1 904350020 $ 737.00 $ 737.00
1 802617031 $ 1,123.00 $ 1,123.00
1 8025975001 $ 510.00 $ 510.00
1 1 HD Systems:
1 V9052009 $ 13,177.00 $ 13,177.00
1 V9052021 $ 2,211.00 $ 2,211.00
1 V9049001 $ 23,241.00 $ 23,241.00
1 V9040013 $ 6,521.00 $ 6,521.00
1 904116031 $ 7,620.00 $ 7,620.00
1 V4011007 RETRUS 2.0 HD Back-eye Camera for HD Systems $ 5,994.00 $ 5,994.00 1 1 Computer Systems:
1 V0001017 $ 3,640.00 $ 3,640.00
1 T76/86 Camera Elevator
BS 7 - Vehicle Mounted Control EDI for ALL SYSTEMS
ORION 3 Zoom HD/SD Adaptive
KUV 2.7 Cable Deflection Pulley for Standard and Fiber Optic Cable with holder and rope Adapter - 8HD-10HD (req. to connect Orion 3 to CB3.2 or CC 2.1-5-1 HD) 19" Industrial PC Package
T76/86/PANO 2 Treaded Wheelset for 12" and up on T76 (Hard) T76/86 3.2 S HD Camera Base Module
Camera Connection Type 2-8 HD for SD Cameras and Orion 3 (SD or HD Modes) T76 HD Camera Tractor
Tungsten Carbide Wheels for T66 in 5" and up
Large Pneumatic Tires for T76/86/PANORAMO/LISY (Black)
Tungsten Carbide Wheels for T66/PANO 150 in 6" and up
Pressure Test Set
Additional Weight Kit for T66 (Heavy and Light)
Larger T66 hook for use with poles (optional)
Treaded Wheel set for 5" pipe for T66/6" for PANORAMO 150 (HARD) Treaded Wheel set for 6" pipe for T66/8" for PANORAMO 150 (HARD) Tungsten Carbide Wheels for T76/86/PANO 2 in 6" and up
Tungsten Carbide Wheels for T76/86/PANO 2 in 8" and up
KW505 FO2 4K (PANORAMO 4K capable) Synchronized Power Cable Reel Cable Cleaning Brush for KW305/310/505
FOX2 FO4 HD 4K Dual Fiber Camera Cable Type 00/20 - 1640 feet T66.1 HD Camera Tractor
KW305/505 Upper deflection pulley (attaches to boom)
2022 Price List Customer Initials: ____ 19.4
1 Chassis:
1 $ 62,494.20 $ 62,494.20
1 1 Rapid View Build Out Options:
1 VZ000744 Cargo Van Conversion for GAS Chassis $ 39,066.00 $ 39,066.00 1 * Rear backup camera
* Commercial Genset (GAS)
* Walk-thru design with partition wall and door
* 12v LED Lighting
* Roof Air
* Exterior shore power package with extension cord
* Auxiliary battery and charging system
Front Office:
*Vinal flooring in Office
* Carpeted walls in studio
* Laminated base cabinetry
* Laminate countertops in studio
* Mounted high-quality monitor in office
Workspace:
* Heavy-duty, 5 drawer toolbox
* High-quality monitor in workspace for monitoring camera operation * 14 gallon pressurized wash down system
* Butcher block workbench
* Laminate Cabinets
* Overhead laminate cabinets with easy-open hardware
Safety:
* Directional Arrow board at rear
* Strobe light mounted on front roof.
1 VZ000311 $ 2,296.00 $ 2,296.00
2 Equip Sales $ 900.00 $ 1,800.00
1 1 Wincan Software:
1 H-VITEK CARD PCI $ 3,780.00 $ 3,780.00
1 1 Additional Accessories
1 TRP01 $ 486.00 $ 486.00
1 Poleset $ 430.92 $ 430.92
1 52846 $ 39.96 $ 39.96
1 VLOC3-CAM $ 2,241.00 $ 2,241.00
1 1
1 Sourcewell Build-Quote Summary
1 $ 300,707.08
1 $ 12,028.28
1 $ 288,678.80
1 1 $ 7,000.00
1 $ 3,500.00
1 $ 300,178.80
1 1 $ 27,766.54
1 $ 327,945.34
1 Ford Transit VanWagon XL - R
Vitec Card PCI
22 WIDESCREEEN " 4:3 Monitor - Metal Case/Glass Front - HDMI, DP, DVI, CVBS, S Video, KW Reel Cabinet (Long Version for LISY) with sliding aluminum drawer and LISY JDC-18' of Fiberglas Poles, Mounting Bracket and IBAK Adapter 3" Tiger Tail
Field Training:

Total:

Module/Options/Chassis Total:

Options Sourcewell Discount 4%:

Module/Options Total per Sourcewell Price Schedule:

Freight and PDI:

Santa Cruz, CA Sales Tax - 9.25%:

Total with Sales Tax:

Vivax-Metrotech VLOC3 Locator with Carry Bag
JDC -Top Manhole Roller
2022 Price List Customer Initials: ____ 19.5
1 1
Customer:
1 By:
1 Date:

Email:
• Execution of this Proposal by Seller and Buyer constitutes a binding agreement between the parties. • Sales Price does not include any applicable sales taxes. Buyer is responsible for and agrees to pay all applicable sales tax. • The Sale of New Equipment Terms and Conditions are incorporated into and made a part of this Proposal upon acceptance and execution of this Proposal by both parties.
• Acceptance of this Proposal is subject to availability of the Equipment listed above.

Terms and Conditions
This proposal becomes a contract for delivery and payment of the merchandise listed above only when signed by the customer or one of its officers. • If this Proposal is not executed by both parties within thirty (30) calendar days from the Proposal Date, this Proposal shall become null and void, unless subsequently executed by both Buyer and Seller.

Thank you for your consideration of this proposal.

Sincerely yours,
Stephanie Prescott
Stephanie Prescott
Regional Sales Representative
760-644-5147
[email protected]
2022 Price List Customer Initials: ____ 19.6

INVOICE INFORMATION
Sold to: Name
Address
Contact
Phone #
Email Address:

Ship to: Name
Address
Contact
Phone #
Email Address

PLEASE SELECT TYPE OF BUSINESS
Environmental ___________Petro Chemical_______ Gas & Oil______________Sewer & Water_______ Industrial Plant___________Utility_______________ Municipal_____________ Other_______________ Customer Signature:

19.7 d/d>
/E&KZDdKE&KZD
DƵƐƚďĞƚǇƉĞĚ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĞŶƐƵƌĞĂĐĐƵƌĂƚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƐƵďŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ͘ŶǇƌĞͲŝƐƐƵĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŝƚůĞ ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶŐĨƌŽŵŝŶĂĐĐƵƌĂƚĞĚĂƚĂŵĂǇďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽĂΨϮϱϬ͘ϬϬƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐĨĞĞ͘ Name
Address
Contact
Phone #
Email Address
County: _________________________________
Fed ID# _________________________________
Title Mailed to: Name
Contact
Phone #
Email Address
Lienholder: Name
Address
Contact
Phone #
Email Address
Customer Signature:
;/Ĩ ŶŽ ůŝĞŶŚŽůĚĞƌ ĞǆŝƐƚƐ͕
ΖEŽƚƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞΖ ŵƵƐƚ ďĞ
ŶŽƚĂƚĞĚŝŶEĂŵĞĨŝĞůĚͿ
Title Assigned to:
;/ŶD/͕K,Θ/E͗DƵƐƚďĞ
WŚǇƐŝĐĂůĚĚƌĞƐƐͿ
;EĂŵĞĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌ
ƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞƌŽĨƚŚĞƵŶŝƚͿ
(Must be Physical Address)
;ŽŵƉĂŶǇŽƌďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐƚŚĂƚǁŝůů
ďĞƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƵŶŝƚͿ
ϳϳϳŽŚĞŶǇƌŝǀĞ
EŽƌƚŚǀŝůůĞ͕D/ϰϴϭϲϳ
ƚϮϰϴͲϯϰϵͲϬϵϬϰ
ƉϮϰϴͲϯϰϵͲϮϳϳϰ
ĚĚƌĞƐƐ

19.8 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/05/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Replacement Project – Notice of Completion (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. (Santa Clara, CA) as complete per the plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Replacement Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

BACKGROUND: The Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant (GHWTP) was constructed in the 1960s and is accessed by a ~200 foot driveway off of Graham Hill Road which, in addition to providing access to the GHWTP, provides access to a single-family residence. The driveway is part of the GHWTP parcel owned by the City, with the right of ingress/egress provided to the single residence.

Beyond the access point to the single-family home is the GHWTP security system including gate, an access control barrier arm, and cameras. The gate was approximately 17 feet wide and allowed for only one direction of traffic, either entering or exiting. With significant capital investment being made at the GHWTP, the site requires access by multiple construction crews, large equipment, and staging areas while simultaneously accommodating the ongoing day-to-day operation of the facility.

This project modified the driveway to a two-lane, two-way road with lane markings, and the existing security gate and gate arm were replaced with two separate gates to allow for simultaneous entering and exiting of traffic from GHWTP. A right turn slip lane was added to facilitate egress onto Graham Hill Road. The existing security system, including access control and cameras, was relocated. Engineered gravel strips were installed on both sides of the new driveway to provide space for staging vehicles during days of significant traffic.

On March 23, 2021 City Council approved the project Plans and Specifications and authorized staff to advertise for bids and award the contract. Two bids were received with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder.

DISCUSSION: During the course of construction, a combination of design changes and varying field conditions led to a series of negotiated change orders totaling $91,986.42. Several changes included modifications to the decomposed granite pathway, potholing and relocating the existing

20.1 Comcast utility, overages on various bid items, asphalt modifications, and the addition of a subcontractor to program the gate. Because this exceeded the project contingency, a mid-year CIP budget transfer approved by City Council on March 22, 2022 authorized additional funds.

All services required under the contract have now been completed, inspected by Water Department staff, and found to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.

The contractor made a good-faith effort to meet the requirements of the City’s Local Hire Ordinance by employing local residents for 36% of its overall labor. The contractor also made a good faith effort to employ apprentices as evidenced by employing apprentices for 17% of its overall labor.

FISCAL IMPACT: The final cost of all work under this contract was $542,536.42. The project was funded from the Water Department Capital Investment Program, project c702109 Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Upgrades.

Prepared By:

Heidi R. Luckenbach
Deputy Director/Engineering
Manager
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. GHWTP ENTRANCE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT_NOC.DOCX

20.2 (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
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA 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. 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: (Check One) □ Fee □ Joint Tenancy □ Lessee □ Purchaser Under Contract for Purchase  Other: City Property

2. Title of Project. The full name of the work of improvement/public works project (the “Project”) which is the subject of this Notice of Completion is: Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant Gate Entrance Replacement Project

3. Project Number. CIP# c702109 CWO# 2021-003

4. Property Location/Address. The Property site location description or address (the “Property”) on which the Project was constructed is located in the City of Santa Cruz, County of Santa Cruz, State of California at: 715 Graham Hill Road.

5. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: June 03, 2022

6. Name of Contractor. The name of the Contractor on the Project is: Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc.

7. Address of Contractor. The address of the Contractor on the Project is: 1390 Norman Ave., Santa Clara, CA 95054

8. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Modification of the driveway to a two-lane, two-way road with lane markings, and the existing security gate and gate arm were replaced with two separate gates to allow for simultaneous entering and exiting of traffic from GHWTP. A right turn slip lane was added to ease egress onto Graham Hill Road. The existing security system, including access control and cameras, was relocated. Engineered gravel strips were installed on both sides of the new driveway to provide space for staging vehicles during days of significant traffic.

9. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on 9th of August, 2022 .

DATED:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

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

20.3 VERIFICATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
The undersigned, being duly sworn, says:

That I am the City Manager (or his/her official designee) of the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation in the State of California. I have read the attached Notice of Completion and know and understand its contents. I declare under penalty of perjury that the facts stated in the Notice of Completion are true and correct, to the best of my knowledge.

Executed on , at Santa Cruz, California.

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz

20.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Resolution to Reimburse Capital Expenditures from Future State Water Resources Control Board Financing for Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing the Water Department to be reimbursed by State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for costs related to the Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement Project.

BACKGROUND: The Water Department's Long-Range Financial Plan developed over the last several years contemplates funding essential capital improvements. Loans are needed to provide resources required to construct necessary infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement projects through FY 2027.

DISCUSSION: The Department proposes to borrow funds and use the proceeds to fund the Newell Creek Pipeline (NCP) replacement project, which is part of the five-year Capital Investment Program. Funding from existing reserves and fund balances to complete these projects is not available and debt financing is a fiscally responsible and prudent way to make the necessary system investments and reinvestments and will take advantage of current market conditions which make the cost of borrowing very low due to historically low interest rates.

Council adoption of this Resolution for Reimbursement will allow funds expended after the resolution passage date for the NCP to be reimbursed from proceeds resulting from a future State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan. Without the resolution, the City is limited by the federal tax code to reimbursement of expenditures incurred 60 days or less prior to the SRF Loan. Adopting the resolution does not obligate the City to borrow money. Rather, it puts the City in a position to reimburse current and anticipated near term capital expenditures from Loan proceeds in the event the City does borrow money from SRF.

FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action has no impact on the FY 2023 budget. In the absence of a reimbursement resolution, the City would be limited to reimbursing only expenditures incurred within 60 days of closing the Loan. This short time frame would preclude a significant amount of capital expenditures from being eligible to be funded from the SRF Loan.

Prepared By:

David Baum
Water Chief Financial Officer
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager

21.1 ATTACHMENTS:

1. NCP RESOLUTION.DOCX

21.2 RESOLUTION NO. NSRESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AUTHORIZING

THE WATER DEPARTMENT TO BE REIMBURSED BY THE STATE WATER

RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD FOR COSTS RELATED TO THE NEWELL CREEK

PIPELINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz (the “City”) desires to finance the costs of constructing and/or reconstructing certain public facilities and improvements relating to its water system including certain treatment facilities, pipeline and other infrastructure related to the Newell Creek Dam Pipeline Replacement (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the City intends to finance the construction and/or reconstruction of the Project or portions of the Project with monies (“Project Funds”) provided by the State of California, acting by and through the State Water Resources Control Board (“State Water Board”); and
WHEREAS, the State Water Board may fund the Project with proceeds from the sale of obligations the interest upon which is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes (the “Obligations”), and
WHEREAS, prior to either the issuance of the Obligations or the approval by the State Water Board of the Project Funds the City desires to incur certain capital expenditures (the “Expenditures”) with respect to the Project from available moneys of the City; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that those moneys to be advanced on and after the date hereof to pay Expenditures are available only for a temporary period and it is necessary to reimburse the City for the Expenditures from the proceeds of the Obligations.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, ORDER AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby states its intention and reasonably expects to reimburse Expenditures paid prior to the issuance of the Obligations or the approval by the State Water Board of the Project Funds.

Section 2. The reasonably expected maximum principal amount of the Project Funds is $41.5 million.

Section 3. This resolution is being adopted no later than 60 days after the date on which the City will expend moneys for the construction portion of the Project costs to be reimbursed with Project Funds.

Section 4. Each City expenditure will be of a type properly chargeable to a capital account under general federal income tax principals.

21.3 Section 5. To the best of our knowledge, this City Council is not aware of the previous adoption of official intents by the City that have been made as a matter of course for the purposes of reimbursing expenditures and for which tax-exempt obligations have not been issued.

Section 6. This resolution is adopted as official intent of the City Council in order to comply with Treasury Regulation §1.150-2 and any other regulations of the Internal Revenue Service relating to the qualification for reimbursement of Project costs.

Section 7. All the recitals in this Resolution are true and correct and this City Council so finds, determines and represents.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

I do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a resolution duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the City Council as date above.

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

21.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Santa Cruz Grand Jury Response (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to authorize the Mayor to respond to the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury on behalf of the City of Santa Cruz.

BACKGROUND: Each year the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) issues reports and requires certain agencies and departments to respond. In many cases the respondents are department heads and administrators. In other cases the respondent is an agency itself. This year the Grand Jury is requiring a response to the report “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn” from the Santa Cruz City Council.

DISCUSSION: Following the approach that previous Councils have adopted for responding to the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury Reports, Council is being requested to authorize the Mayor to respond, on behalf of the Council, to the report requiring a response to the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations. Staff has prepared responses for Council review. Upon approval, responses will be submitted to the Grand Jury.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared/Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. CIVIL GRAND JURY RESPONSE – OUR WATER ACCOUNT IS OVERDRAWN.DOCX

22.1 Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 Page 1 of 13 The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Requires the
City Council, City of Santa Cruz
to Respond by August 22, 2022
to the Findings and Recommendations listed below
which were assigned to them in the report titled
Our Water Account Is Overdrawn
Beyond Conservation:

Achieving Drought Resilience
Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c).

Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report.

Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response.

22.2 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 2 of 13 Instructions for Respondents
Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations.

Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05:

1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information:

1. AGREE with the Finding, or

2. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or

3. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why.

2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information:

1. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or

2. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or

3. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or

4. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.

3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses:

We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated August 9, 2022.

4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both
The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati [email protected] and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury [email protected].

If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to [email protected].

22.3 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 3 of 13 Findings
F1. If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County. __ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The City of Santa Cruz’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan is implemented as needed and at the stage appropriate to respond to forecasted drought conditions.

A major goal of implementing curtailments when needed is to protect water supplies necessary to ensure public health and safety. Without water supply augmentation that is planned and under development, should supply conditions be severe enough (presumably after multiple consecutive years of drought), water use for commercial uses would be prioritized for greater levels of curtailment than water for human consumption, sanitation and public health and safety uses. If Stage 5 water curtailments were ever required, water users in the City of Santa Cruz water service area, and those owning or working in water-using businesses such as hotels, motels, guest houses, vacation rentals or restaurants would be greatly impacted by those curtailments. Whether the economic impact of such curtailment would be felt countywide is not known.

22.4 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 4 of 13 F3. Inter-district water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated.
__ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

A finding that implies that work on water transfers has not been ongoing and that it should be accelerated is a significant misrepresentation. Beginning in 2016, Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District developed and piloted a water transfer project agreement that was renewed and extended in 2021. Implementation of that agreement involved significant work to assess the compatibility of surface water from Santa Cruz with groundwater from Soquel Creek Water District to ensure transferred water was safe for use by Soquel Creek customers. Following completion of this work, and work with the State Division of Drinking Water to amend Soquel Creek’s operating permit to include use of transferred surface water, water has been transferred (when supplies have been available), to allow wells in the western part of the Soquel Creek service area to rest.

The City’s experience working with Soquel Creek on water transfers has created a model for how the operation of water sharing agreements could be developed throughout the region. It is currently being used as a model in the development of project feasibility work plans for the potential transfer of water between water providers in the Santa Margarita groundwater basin area.

22.5 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 5 of 13 F4. Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. __ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

In theory, collecting and storing surface water flows during wet conditions in local groundwater basins is an obvious solution to local water supply reliability and groundwater sustainability issues. In practice, however, many factors can influence the success of this approach. The most obvious examples are the geological characteristics of local aquifers and their ability to accept and retain injected water, and, of course, a reliable supply of local surface water to use as a source of supply.

Additionally, the implication of this finding is that steps should have already been taken to implement storing available surface water in local aquifers, rather than acknowledging that progress has already occurred. For example, water stored by Santa Cruz during the winter of 2022 is being used by Santa Cruz as part of summer 2022’s supply. Also, as noted in the response to finding F3, it has taken seven years of consistent and careful work to reach a point where ASR has been demonstrated to work in two wells in the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin. Additional evaluations to expand this supply augmentation strategy are ongoing.

F5. The City of Santa Cruz’s completion of the water rights revision project is a critical element of enabling district collaboration in support of county-level drought resilience.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The Water Rights Project approved by the City Council, along with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, in late 2021 is the culmination of more than a decade of work to update the City’s water rights. Changes made address 21st century operating challenges and incorporate critically important bypass flows for threatened steelhead trout and endangered coho salmon. Among other things, the Project opens up and aligns the places of use for Santa Cruz’s San Lorenzo River water rights, which enables (but doesn’t require) water sharing among water providers in mid and northern Santa Cruz County.

22.6 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 6 of 13 F6. Limited inter-district water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept.
__ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

It is not correct to say that the limited experience with water transfers between Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek demonstrates that this approach can work elsewhere.

As noted in the responses to findings F3 and F4 above, numerous technical factors contribute to the success or failure of water transfer proposals and their ability to contribute to increased drought resiliency in mid and northern Santa Cruz County.

F7. Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues.
__ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

It is correct to note that City of Santa Cruz’s wastewater resources that could potentially be used as part of a recycled water drought-resiliency project are not fully allocated and are available for potential development. We understand this Finding to be incorrect for the City of Watsonville.

22.7 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 7 of 13 F8. Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The Grand Jury correctly finds that substantial communication and collaboration occurs among local water agencies, but incorrectly finds that collaboration is narrow and limited in scope.

Santa Cruz County’s water agency staffs work well and effectively together over a wide range of topics, including forming collaborative staffing groups to support local groundwater sustainability planning, working on regional grant applications and their implementation, collaborating among surface water providers to update the staterequired source water protection focused Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo River watershed, engaging in ongoing communications and coordination about water conservation, drought messaging, and education and outreach and, over many decades, financially supporting the Regional Water Management Foundation that facilitates a range of collaborative efforts including IRWM planning.

22.8 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 8 of 13 F9. Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.
__ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

A review of the problem statement in the 2015 Water Supply Advisory Committee Final Report on Agreements and Recommendations demonstrates that this statement is incorrect (see page 27 of the document in reference #3 in the Grand Jury’s report).

For Santa Cruz, water conservation has been a long-standing commitment and an element of its water supply reliability strategy, but the Committee’s problem statement clearly indicated that conservation alone cannot solve Santa Cruz’s water supply reliability problem.

Since City Council approval of the Water Supply Advisory Committee’s recommendations for water supply reliability and drought resiliency in 2015, SCWD has consistently communicated progress on the recommendations to the community.

These communications include a monthly e-newsletter “Our Water, Our Future”, a biannual update in the SCMU Review Utility newsletter, a dedicated water supply/WSAC annual report, numerous news media stories, radio interviews, and quarterly updates to the public on progress implementing the water supply augmentation strategy during Water Commission meetings.

22.9 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 9 of 13 F10. The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The premise underlying this finding is if a water supply district had the funding, resources, and charter to develop county-centric drought resilience infrastructure the problem the Grand Jury has identified would not exist. This premise is false.

Individual water agencies in the County do have or have the authority needed to generate the resources and funding needed to address the issue the Grand Jury has described. Many local water agencies are taking steps needed to improve their district’s drought resiliency. As described elsewhere in this response, there is ample evidence that these agencies work effectively together and are continuously demonstrating regional cooperation and collaboration necessary to address the County’s water supply reliability, resiliency and sustainability.

F11. The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Groundwater Sustainability Agencies were formed for a specific purpose and, in many cases, are focused on a specific groundwater basin that may not cover an entire county. Their task is specific to the issues in a particular groundwater basin and to the mandated to plan for and implement strategies to achieve groundwater sustainability in their specific groundwater basins within a 20-year timeframe. Their charters reflect this focus. Staffing and agency resourcing strategies actively engage leaders and technical staffs of local water supply and water resource management agencies to maximize the effectiveness of both the planning process and the implementation of groundwater sustainability plans, which directly and indirectly affect all the agencies involved.

22.10 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 10 of 13 F12. There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The Grand Jury is correct that there is no single agency with county-wide jurisdiction that is responsible for developing and implementing actions to ensure drought resilience. However, the City of Santa Cruz disagrees with the assertion that a central county-level agency would do a better job of planning for and implementing county drought resilience for the following reasons:
1) The Grand Jury’s recommendation for creating a new, single agency is based on the premise that it could and would do something the existing water supply agencies are not doing. The City’s perspective is that:
a) Any county-wide drought resiliency system must be built on the foundation of existing water resource management infrastructure and systems. To contemplate any other approach would be impractical due to the cost of duplicating existing facilities and systems.
b) The water resources needed to actually achieve drought resiliency in the County are already in use by existing water providers in meeting the needs of their customers.
c) Even if funding for infrastructure and systems apart from those already in existence was identified, there are no additional, un-allocated water resources available to be developed and deployed to produce drought resiliency. d) So the new agency would have to work so closely with existing water providers in achieving its mission, making it difficult to imagine how this additional layer of government would add value or have any real scope for exercising authority over existing water agencies, or their infrastructure, systems or resources. 2) Because of Santa Cruz’s geographical isolation and lack of access to any of California’s state water resources and facilities, existing water agency leaders know that regional and individual agency drought resiliency solutions are going to have to come from working together. As demonstrated in several responses to the Grand Jury’s report, regional elected officials and staff of these agencies are already and have been for years actively engaged in this work.

22.11 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 11 of 13 Recommendations
R1. By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver droughtresilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__
HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__
REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The City of Santa Cruz does not believe that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies are the right agencies to undertake the task described. Rather, the City’s perspective is that existing water suppliers are the agencies with the right kind of staff, experience and the financial resources needed to undertake the planning and projects necessary to provide regional drought resiliency and, in fact, have been taking concrete steps in recent years to achieve this goal.

The Pure Water Soquel project, the City’s Water Supply Augmentation Strategy, including active work on ASR in the Mid-County basin, and active work on ASR and recycled water applications in both the Santa Margarita and Mid-County basins are providing actionable results highlighting project development and implementation.

Funding has been allocated, and financing for project planning and construction has been included in annual budgets and multi-year capital improvement programs.

These steps are indicative of significant progress by just the City and Soquel Creek water agencies and other local agencies have similar actions underway.

22.12 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 12 of 13 R2. By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029.

Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency.
__ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__
HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__
REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The implication of this recommendation is that what is lacking is a “one stop shop” solution where interested members of the community can go to see the whole problem and solution laid out. The City’s perspective is that, to the extent that there is public interest in water supply reliability, those interested want to know more about what is going on to address climate change and drought resiliency in their specific service areas than about the broader picture described in this recommendation.

Santa Cruz uses a variety of communication and outreach mechanisms to communicate to its water service customers about what problems the utility is working to solve, and what solutions are under consideration or development. Regional collaboration is always described but system specific issues that drive project selection in individual water service areas aren’t usually included because the details quickly become complicated and thus, actually reduce the effectiveness of the intended communication.

22.13 Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 Page 13 of 13 R3. By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division.
__ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__
HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__
REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

This recommendation is duplicative of work already planned and completed by several of the local water agencies and is not needed at this time.

22.14 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabilitation Project – Notice of Completion (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of ERS Industrial Services, Inc. (Fremont, CA) as complete per the plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabiliation Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

BACKGROUND: The Beltz Water Treatment Plant (BWTP) is located in the Live Oak area of the City Water Department’s water service area. The BWTP serves an important role in supply reliability with the ongoing purpose of treating groundwater from the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin to meet the community’s water demands during the peak summer months. In addition, it has year-round utility and importance as stand-by water supply during emergencies.

The BWTP treats groundwater from Beltz wells 8, 9 and 10. (The Department has another well in this basin, Beltz 12, which, while also treating groundwater, has its own treatment facility.) As part of the treatment process, the BWTP includes two identical pressure filters that function in parallel.

In September 2020 the City hired Luhdorff & Scalmanini Consulting Engineers (LSCE) to perform a routine condition assessment of the BWTP including both pressure filters. The results indicated the need to rehabilitate or replace at least one of the filters for improved system reliability. Following a cost/benefit analysis staff selected rehabilitation. This consideration was informed by the fact that a full rehabilitation of the Beltz treatment plant is being considered to incorporate additional water supply from aquifer storage and recovery. In January 2021 LSCE submitted a Filter Repair Program that included a scope, schedule, and engineer’s estimate for the work required, and with all available data being equal, staff selected Filter #1.

DISCUSSION: On March 23, 2021, City Council approved the project Plans and Specifications and authorized staff to advertise for bids and award the contract. Only one bid was received and a contract with ERS Industrial Services, Inc. was executed on June 28, 2021.

Two change orders were needed to address differing site conditions; the project contingency was not exceeded.

Change Order #1 for $15,841 was issued due to additional welding work.

23.1 Change Order #2 was a zero-cost change order but changed the scope of work from Filter #1 to Filter #2. Once a more in-depth internal inspection could be conducted, Filter #1 was found to have more corrosion than initially anticipated and the project scope and funds were redirected to Filter #2.

The project included cleaning and inspecting the interior of the vessel, furnishing and installing new PVC underdrain pipes filter media, disinfection, filter testing and recommissioning.

All services required under the contract have now been completed, inspected by Water Department staff and found to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.

The contractor made a good-faith effort to meet the requirements of the City’s Local Hire Ordinance. Due to the nature of the work, short duration of the project, and small crew, the cumulative local hiring percentage was 1% of overall labor hours as reported on prevailing wage statements. The contractor also made a good faith effort to employ apprentices; however again, due to the nature of the work, apprentices made up 0% of the overall labor.

FISCAL IMPACT: The final cost of all work under this contract was $316,951. The project was funded from the Water Department Capital Investment Program, project c702108 Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabilitation Project.

Prepared By:

Heidi R. Luckenbach
Deputy Director/Engineering
Manager
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. NOC FOR BWTP FILTER REHABILITATION PROJECT.DOCX

23.2 (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
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA 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. Owner’s Name and Address. The Project owner is the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation (the “City”).

2. Title of Project. The full name of the work of improvement/public works project (the “Project”) which is the subject of this Notice of Completion is: Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter Rehabilitation Project

3. Project Number. CIP# c702108 CWO# 2021-002

5. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: June 13, 2022

6. Name of Contractor. The name of the Contractor on the Project is: ERS Industrial Services, Inc.

7. Address of Contractor. The address of the Contractor on the Project is: 2120 Warm Springs Court, Fremont, CA 94539

8. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Repair the City of Santa Cruz Beltz Water Treatment Plant Filter and replace filter media to bring the filter back into service. The filter is used in a groundwater treatment plant for removal of iron and manganese present in the water supply. Project included replacement of underdrain piping, new filter media, disinfection, testing and recommissioning.

9. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on 9th of August, 2022 .

DATED:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

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

23.3 VERIFICATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
The undersigned, being duly sworn, says:

Executed on , at Santa Cruz, California.

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz

23.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/27/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project – Notice of Completion (WT) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of Granite Rock Construction, Inc. (Watsonville, CA) as complete per plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project and to authorize the Water Director to sign the Notice of Completion as the Owner’s Authorized Agent.

BACKGROUND: The City’s Laguna Creek Diversion Facility (Facility) is an important source of raw water to the North Coast System, which provides a combined 15 to 35 percent of the City’s overall water supply.

The Facility was constructed in 1890 in support of the City of Santa Cruz’s first municipal drinking water system. Original infrastructure included a stone masonry dam and diversion flume and a pipeline constructed of cast iron. Although the overall condition of the Facility is good, operation and maintenance of the facility has been an ongoing challenge due to sedimentation issues, and modern safety and regulatory requirements. The goals of the Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project (Project) are to address the environmental, operational and safety constraints of the site.

On March 9, 2021 City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted a resolution adopting Findings of Fact and a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program and approving the Project and the Plans and Specifications and authorized staff to advertise for bids and award the contract. Four bids were received with Granite Rock Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder.

DISCUSSION: Over the course of the work, three change orders were necessary including:

1. Structural modifications to accommodate unanticipated geometry conditions of the diversion flume foundation;

2. Additional earthwork for access road improvements, and over-excavation for foundation footings; and

3. Additional electrical and mechanical work to accommodate design modifications.

The contractor’s competitive pricing for these change orders allowed for the project to come in just 5% over the base bid, well within the standard contingency of 10%.

24.1 All services required under the contract have now been completed, inspected by Water Department staff, and found to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.

The contractor made a good-faith effort to meet the requirements of the City’s Local Hire Ordinance by employing local Santa Cruz County residents for 35% of its overall labor hours.

The contractor also made a good-faith effort to employ apprentices as evidenced by its request to the appropriate Apprenticeship Committees and utilizing two apprentices in the course of their work.

FISCAL IMPACT: The final cost of all work under this contract, including change orders, was $1,488,360, increased from the contractors base bid of $1,410,500. The project was funded from the Water Department’s Capital Investment Program budget, project c701801 Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project.

Prepared By:

Taylor Kihoi
Associate Professional
Engineer
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LAGUNA CREEK DIVERSION RETROFIT PROJECT NOC.DOCX

24.2 (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
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA 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. Owner’s Name and Address. The Project owner is the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation (the “City”).

2. Title of Project. The full name of the work of improvement/public works project (the “Project”) which is the subject of this Notice of Completion is: Laguna Creek Diversion Retrofit Project

3. Project Number. CIP# c701801 CWO# 2020-004

4. Property Location/Address. The Property site location description or address (the “Property”) on which the Project was constructed is located at: 3030 Smith Grade Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060

5. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: July 13, 2022

6. Name of Contractor. The name of the Contractor on the Project is: Granite Rock Construction, Inc.

7. Address of Contractor. The address of the Contractor on the Project is: 350 Technology Drive, Watsonville, CA 95076-2488

8. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Retrofit of the existing Laguna Creek Diversion Facility including construction of a new intake structure and appurtenances, valve control vault, stream bank protection, monitoring and control equipment, and access and safety upgrades.

9. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on 9th of August, 2022.

DATED:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

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

24.3 VERIFICATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
The undersigned, being duly sworn, says:

Executed on , at Santa Cruz, California.

Rosemary Menard
Water Director, as Owner’s Authorized Agent
City of Santa Cruz

24.4 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 07/25/2022
AGENDA OF: 08/09/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Ratification of $100,000 Application Fee for Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act Loan and Related Budget Adjustment (WT) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution to approve the budget adjustment ratifying the July 15, 2022 payment of $100,000 Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act application fee and appropriating funds from the Water Department FY 2023 budget for the application fee.

BACKGROUND: The Water Department’s Long-Range Financial Plan developed over the last several years contemplates funding for essential capital improvements. Loans are needed to provide resources required to construct necessary infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement projects through FY 2027.

DISCUSSION: Administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Water Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act (WIFIA) Loan Program provides low-interest loans for major water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Often used in conjunction with State Revolving Fund Loans, WIFIA loans offer favorable interest rates, flexible repayment terms, and limited financial covenants and security pledges.

On June 23, 2020, Council authorized the Water Department to submit a Letter of Interest to the WIFIA program for several capital improvements and if selected by the EPA, to submit a full application. In December 2021, the EPA announced that the City was officially selected to apply for a $181 million loan, funding 49% of four projects: Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant (GHWTP) Facility Improvements Project, Newell Creek Pipeline Replacement (Felton to GHWTP) Project, University Tank 4 Project, and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Project.

Water anticipates financing the balance of the projects with a State Revolving Fund Loan, grants, internal funding, and revenue bonds.

Staff, with the assistance of Carollo consultants, submitted the loan application and the required $100,000 application fee to the EPA on July 15, 2022. The application review, loan structuring, and negotiation are expected to be completed in approximately six months. Formal approval for the WIFIA loan has been tentatively scheduled to be brought before City Council in early calendar year 2023
FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in Fund 711, Water Operations, and the fee will be reimbursed by the loan proceeds.

25.1 Prepared By:

David Baum
Water Chief Financial Officer
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

25.2 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
2023
07/14/2022
Appropriate funds from Fund 711 for WIFIA loan application fee 0 711-70-90-7101-58914 Loan origination fee 100,000
100,000
-100,000
David
Baum
Digitally signed by David Baum
DN: cn=David Baum, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Water
Department,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.07.26 09:34:13 -07'00'
Rosemar
y Menard
Digitally signed by Rosemary Menard
DN: cn=Rosemary Menard, o=Water Department
Director, ou=Santa Cruz Water Department,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2022.07.26 09:43:22 -07'00'
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Finance Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.07.28 13:46:53 -07'00'
Elizabet
h Cabell
Digitally signed by Elizabeth Cabell
DN: cn=Elizabeth Cabell, o=City of Santa Cruz,
ou=Finance Department,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2022.07.28 16:08:13 -07'00'

25.3 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-11

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ APPROVING

THE SECOND AMENDMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN

GREEN VALLEY CORPORATION (DEVELOPER) AND THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ FOR 94 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS (SMALL OWNERSHIP UNITS) AND 4,680

SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE WITHIN FOUR SEPARATE TENANT SPACES FRONTING ON PACIFIC AVENUE AT 555 PACIFIC AVENUE
WHEREAS, Green Valley Corporation, owners of property located at 555 Pacific Avenue (“applicant”), also known as Assessor’s Parcel Number 007-023-17 constructed an approved project (CP13-0021) including a four-story building with 94 residential Small Ownership Units (SOUs) and 4,680 square feet of ground floor commercial space with outdoor seating and belowgrade parking structure located on a vacant lot in the CBD-E/CZ-O/FP-O zoning district; and WHEREAS, Section 24.12.1530 of the Zoning Ordinance previously prohibited the rental of more than 50 percent of the Small Ownership Units (SOUs) in any project; and WHEREAS, The applicant applied for a Development Agreement on October 19, 2015 to allow for temporary rental of up to 100% of the 94 proposed Small Ownership Units (SOUs); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 7, 2016, and recommended that the City Council execute the Development Agreement with the Green Valley Corporation to allow a temporary rental period for the SOUs; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted the requisite public hearing and approved Ordinance No. 2016-02 on January 26, 2016 allowing a 15 year transition rental period for the SOUs specified in the Development Agreement with several conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 2, 2022, and unanimously recommended that the City Council execute the proposed Second Amendment to the Development Agreement with the Green Valley Corporation to allow conversion of the SOU project to a 100% rental project with a 20% inclusionary requirement in perpetuity.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that the following terms are hereby approved:

Section 1. Second Amendment of the Development Agreement allows for a conversion of the SOUs to 100% rental units with 20% or 19 of the rental units provided as the City’s required inclusionary units in perpetuity of which seven (7) units will be reserved for Very Low Income households at 50% of Area Median Income (AMI) rents and 12 units will be reserved for Low Income households at 80% of AMI rents. The CC&Rs will be updated to reflect the change from an SOU project to a 100% rental project in a manner consistent with the provisions set forth in the City’s Municipal Code.

26.1 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-11
2 Section 2. This ordinance shall be in force and take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption.

PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 28th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:

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

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this ___ 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. 2022-11 and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
_________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

26.2 Proof of Publication
(2015 C.C.P.)
I, the undersigned, declare:

That I caused the attached legal notice/advertisement to be published in the Santa Cruz Good Times, a weekly newspaper published and circulated in the County of Santa Cruz, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of California in and for the County of Santa Cruz, under Proceeding No. 68833; and that the legal notice/advertisement was published in the above-named newspaper on the following date(s), to wit:

July 27, 2022
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

This 27th day of July, 2022, Santa Cruz, California
____________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Julia Wood

26.3 DECLARATION OF POSTING

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ )
On the 25th day of July, 2022, I posted conspicuously in three public places within the City of Santa Cruz, Ordinance No. 2022-11, to wit:

1. City Hall: 809 Center Street: Bulletin Board outside Room 9/10

2. City Hall: Bulletin Board outside Council Chambers

3. The City of Santa Cruz website
The document, posted in its entirety, consists of pages 1—2.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 25th day of July, 2022, in Santa Cruz, California.
_______________________________
Julia Wood
Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Julia Wood

26.4 CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: August 5, 2022
AGENDA OF:

DEPARTMENT:

August 9, 2022
Planning and Community Development
SUBJECT: 109 S. Rapetta Rd. (Application No. CP21-0060) - Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 008-391-15, -16, and -18 – Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to Amend the El Rancho Carbonera Subdivision Map and Modify Lot B to Allow For Residential Development on a Parcel Located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) Zoning District (PL)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution acknowledging the environmental determination and approving the Final Map Amendment and Major Modification, as designed in Alternative 2, to allow for residential development on Lot B in the El Rancho Carbonera Subdivision subject to the attached conditions of approval.

BACKGROUND: The project proposes a Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 and a Final Map Amendment to the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map to allow for residential development on Lot B (the subject parcel, originally designated as common open space) and to adjust the boundaries between the adjacent townhome parcels (APNs 008-391-15 & 008-391-16). Per Municipal Code Section 23.44.060, modifications to a recorded final map must be authorized by the “advisory body,” defined by Section 23.44.010 as the decision-making body which approved the map. Because the City Council granted entitlement of the Planned Development Permit, including adoption of the final El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map, approval by the City Council of the proposed map amendment is required.

The subject parcel is approximately 15,208 square feet in size and was created under project #97-279, a Tentative Map, Design Permit, and Planned Development to develop a 3.4 acre lot, formerly a reservoir, into a residential subdivision. The original application proposed fourteen single-family dwellings and seven townhomes. However, the project was approved as nine single-family dwellings, two townhomes, and the subject parcel (known as Lot B), used as common open space. The two existing townhouses remain subject to an affordable housing Participation Agreement currently in effect, requiring their maintenance as income-restricted affordable housing stock in perpetuity.

27.1 conservation buffer at the westerly limits of the subdivision and for upkeep of an open-space vegetated buffer situated between the subdivision, El Rancho Drive, and Highway 17 at the easterly portion of the development, the latter of which constitutes Lot B. The original intent of Lot B as common area forming a natural buffer and transition space between the rural County and suburban neighborhood is evident based on the recorded final map for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision, which identifies Lot B as C.A. (Common Area) and P.U.E. (Public Utility Easement); the original Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision that list the common areas as Lot A, Lot B, and Lot C; and the Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plant prepared for the project, which labels the subject parcel as common area.

Consequently, in 2012, City staff made the applicant aware that the amendments were completed without City approval and were therefore not permitted or recognized. As a result, Lot B has remained vacant as open space in accordance with its approved use under project #97-279. In March 2013, the Rancho Carbonera Owners Association (“HOA”) finalized and recorded a Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims, in which the HOA fully relinquished ownership of Lot B and any financial rights and responsibilities towards maintaining the property as common open space for the subdivision to the current owner of the property. No permits were obtained for the change in use of Lot B or the transfer of ownership.

Prior to 2015, the City’s Municipal Code permitted amendments to final maps only to correct errors or address omissions. In 2015, Section 23.44.060 of the Subdivision Ordinance was adopted which permits amendments to any final map or parcel map for reasons other than error or omission, if the necessary findings can be made. The new ordinance provides an opportunity to legalize the above described unpermitted changes that were made to the CC&Rs, Assessor’s Parcel Map, and to the ownership of Lot B without the benefit of permits.

In 2021, the applicant submitted the subject application for Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to the Project #97-279. The application was scheduled for consideration at the regular Planning Commission hearing of June 2, 2022 and placed on the consent calendar but

27.2 given the length of the agenda, was continued to a date certain in order to afford adequate consideration of an agendized policy discussion.

On June 8, staff conferred with the applicant and discussed options for reconfiguration of the site to allow for conversion of the townhouse lots to single-family residential parcels which provides greater conformance to codified standards of the R-1-7 zoning district and greater conformance to the definition of a Townhouse Unit and Dwelling Group as specified in the Zoning Ordinance.

The reconfiguration was also recommended to designate greater open space to the affordable units.

On June 21, the applicant submitted two alternative site plans, including an option preferred by the applicant and owner (Alternative 1), which retains the site plan as previously proposed and additionally illustrates the footprint of a potential new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear portion of Lot B; and a second alternative (Alternative 2) as a tentative map with arrangement of lots more closely conforming to requirements of the Municipal Code, as recommended by staff. See the attached staff report of the Planning Commission dated June 30, 2022 for a detailed analysis of both proposals.

On June 30, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a Special Meeting, at which the Commission discussed the proposed project. At that hearing, the applicant characterized Lot B as a remnant lot which had been inadvertently designated as common-area space in the CC&Rs due to a clerical error, after which the CC&Rs and subdivision map were revised once the inclusion was discovered. This position is more fully articulated in the attached correspondence from Ed Newman, the applicant’s attorney dated February 2. 2102. The Planning Commission queried staff about the original intent of Lot B; staff replied that, while not disputing the assertion of the applicant, records accessible to City staff lack evidence regarding the occurrence of an erroneous inclusion of Lot B in the CC&Rs. The applicant also requested the deletion of condition of approval number 17, which requires that the CC&R’s are revised to reflect Lot B as a single-family parcel. The applicant opposed this condition, again maintaining that the subject lots were never managed by the HOA. After considering the two alternative site plans, the Commission voted 5 to 1 to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Map Amendment and Modification to Permit #97-279 based on site Plan Alternative 2, and approval of the conditions as recommended by staff.

DISCUSSION: For a thorough description of site and entitlement history and an in-depth analysis of the project’s consistency with the original Planned Development Permit findings, open space, density, inclusionary housing, tree removal, and the California Environmental Quality Act, please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report dated June 30, 2022 and associated documents.

Alternative Lot Configurations
The applicant has submitted two alternative site plans presenting separate lot configurations for consideration by the City Council. Both options would require a map amendment adjusting the property line between the open space area and the two townhouse parcels (Parcel A and Parcel B) to the east. In each of the two scenarios, the property line between Lot B would be adjusted to transfer three off-street parking spaces approved through Planning Project #97-279 as guest parking for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision to the townhome lots, with APN 008-391-15 (Parcel B) acquiring two spaces and APN 008-391-16 (Parcel A) acquiring one space. In both alternative site plans, the lot lines would be deleted and rearranged such that the resulting

27.3 configuration will more closely resemble single-family lots rather than mapped townhouse footprints on a large common area parcel.

In the first alternative (Alternative 1), the boundaries of the townhouse lots would be revised to eliminate the portions of the common open space area that separate the parcels (see the triangular area between lots 10 and 11 in the Recorded Subdivision Map attachment) and that provide the common area upon which the townhouse footprints are mapped. The resulting adjacent lots would be separated by a single lot line; the rear line of each parcel would also be modified from its approved linear boundary to include a combined angled/flared configuration (see attached Project Plans - Alternative Site Plan 1). Both Parcels A and B would increase in size compared to their sizes as approved through Project #97-279, with APN 008-391-15 enlarged from 3,229 square feet to 4,403 square feet, and APN 008-391-16 increased from 3,286 square feet to 5,433 square feet, however, the majority of the open space area would be dedicated to the proposed market-rate lot, which would comprise 11,886 square feet, more than double the size of the larger of the two affordable lots. The applicant has illustrated the footprint of a potential future detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear portion of the market-rate lot. In this option, the proposal is to maintain the townhouses, however, the mapping would no longer be consistent with the definition of a townhouse development pursuant to the city zoning ordinance in that the common area lot would be eliminated and the separate lots would eliminate the design of a “townhouse group.” While the detached design of the townhouses is also not consistent with current code, the units were approved as such with the original Planned Development Permit and are permitted to remain.

In the second alternative site plan (Alternative 2), the rear lot line of each existing townhouse parcel would be extended to align to the frontage along El Rancho Drive and the townhouses would be redefined as restricted affordable single-family parcels. In the second alternative, all three parcels (including both APN 008-391-15 and APN 008-391-16) would encompass land in excess of 7,000 square feet, consistent with the minimum lot size specified by the Zoning Code for the R-1-7 zoning district and allowing for a more equitable division of open space between the two affordable lots and one market rate lot. While neither parcel A nor B would provide the minimum width of 70’ as specified by standards of the R-1-7 zoning district, such variations were permitted through Planned Development Permit #97-279. All three resulting lots would comply with minimum code standards for parcel size, characteristic of the surrounding lots featuring single-family homes. Further, with boundary lines extending to El Rancho Drive, the parcels would enclose private yard areas that include gentler slopes, affording greater functionality as outdoor amenity space when compared with the lots of more limited size as presented in the first alternative site plan. The existing residential units would continue to serve as income-restricted affordable housing stock, in conformance with the Participation Agreement which remains in effect. Further, all three lots would retain the possibility for Accessory Dwelling Units in the future.

At its hearing of June 30, 2022, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project as presented in Alternative 2 and staff continue to recommend approval of the project as shown in Alternative 2, subject to the findings and conditions of approval included in the draft resolution attached.

Modification of CC&R’s
Planned Development Permit #97-279, which included the creation of Lot B and the townhouse lots, authorized the creation of a common-interest development requiring establishment of a

27.4 homeowners association governed by recorded CC&Rs. As denoted in the CC&Rs, among other responsibilities, the HOA is required to maintain, repair, replace, restore, operate and manage all of the common area and ensure ongoing implementation of the Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan required in connection with the approval of Project #97-279. The CC&Rs additionally include Use Restrictions to manage operations within the development, such as right to lease, signage, animal keeping, garbage maintenance, and architectural control.

The applicant and property owner maintain that Lot B (an open space parcel mapped with two affordable townhouse units) was never intended to be maintained by the HOA or provided as open space for the benefit of the development as a whole. As described above, the recorded map identifies the Lot B as “CA” or Common Area, and the CC&R’s refer to the lot as common area in the description of the land, however, the CC&R’s do not include a reference to Lot B in the specific descriptions of Common Open Space. The City is not a party to CC&R’s and does not typically enforce CC&R’s with the exception of Section 23.37.010.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires Community Housing Developments to be responsible for the creation of an HOA with CC&R’s that that provide for the “construction, maintenance, repair, and reconstruction of the common areas.” This clause benefits the City in that issues related to excessive junk, trash, debris, and weeds can be monitored and addressed internally by the HOA rather than through the city’s code enforcement process. It is not standard practice for the City to allow for individual parcels in a single development to be exempt from Section 23.37.010.1 and if that were to occur, one would assume that the conditions of approval, staff report, or meeting minutes would reflect that decision. In this case, there is no record of such discussions or decisions, however, the city records do not appear to be entirely complete.

Multiple discussions with the applicant, property owner, the property owner’s attorney, and the City Attorney’s office have concluded that the city records are unclear on the matter and there is disagreement regarding how Lot B was intended to be used at the time of the subdivision. The HOA de-annexed Lot B during the time when it was designated as open space on the subdivision map; however, it is unclear if the HOA would have an interest in annexing the parcel back into the HOA if it is approved as a buildable lot. Annexation of the market rate lot into the HOA could be of benefit in that an additional lot could reduce the overall contribution of dues towards maintenance of other open space areas to existing members and it would ensure that the lot is developed and maintained under the same restrictions as the other lots in the development. In May 2021, the HOA submitted a letter of support for the proposed developed of Lot B but is silent on the issue of re-annexation. Therefore, staff recommends condition of approval #17 that would require the HOA to vote on the annexation of the market rate parcel. If a favorable vote is achieved, the lot would be required to be annexed into the HOA. Alternatively, if the vote fails, then the market rate lot would not be subject to annexation. This would let the existing owners in the HOA decide whether the lot should be annexed, and it would not delay the map recordation if the owners in the HOA chose not to annex the market rate property.

For the affordable lots, Economic Development Department housing staff, in coordination with a third party attorney specializing in affordable housing, determined that the affordable lots should not be annexed into the HOA, as the dues and other obligations would be a financial hardship for the tenants or subsequent occupants.

Because these discussions occurred after the June 30, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, the updated condition was not considered by the Planning Commission in their recommendation for approval of the project, however, the majority of the Commission was supportive of the lot being

27.5 annexed into the HOA. At that meeting, the majority of the Commission also recommended that the affordable lots be annexed into the HOA, however, based on the more recent discussions with Economic Development Department housing staff described above, the staff recommendation is to leave the affordable lots out of the HOA.

Health in all Policies (HiAP)
HiAP is a collaborative approach to improving the health of all people by incorporating health considerations into decision-making across sectors and policy areas. HiAP is based on 3 pillars:
equity, public health, and sustainability. The goal of HiAP is to ensure that all decision-makers are informed about the health, equity, and sustainability impacts of various policy options during the policy development process. The project supports the pillar of equity by providing additional housing stock in an area previously developed for residential use, which is well-served with sidewalks, streets trees, and access to public transportation. As an infill proposal, the project will provide for efficient use of space within an area of existing suburban development, and, through provision of ready access to adjacent public rights-of-way, including streets and sidewalks, will encourage a sustainable and healthy lifestyle by promoting use of alternative forms of transportation, such as travel on foot and by bicycle. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with the three pillars of the HiAP and is recommended as an efficient use of the land.

Public Correspondence
The subject application has elicited email messages from a single party expressing concern regarding the proposed conversion of Lot B for residential use, in addition to several letters of support which have been attached to this report and included in the public record for the project.

Summary and Recommendation
The project will allow for the construction of a new single-family home on a vacant, undeveloped lot in an existing neighborhood of single-family homes and would allow for the conversion of two affordable townhouses to affordable single-family lots. The modification presented under Alternative 2 is not in conflict with any of the public benefits established in conjunction with the original Planned Development Permit in that the development will continue to be required to maintain the protected natural resource area to the east of the Misty Court, the vegetative buffer between El Rancho Drive and the subdivision will be maintained through a mapped 10-foot wide vegetative buffer, replanting of native species will occur within the vegetative buffer as mitigation for heritage tree removal, the units approved as townhouses will continue to be restricted as affordable in perpetuity, and the affordable units will be located on lots of a size comparable to the market rate lots. The project will foster infill development and increase available housing stock, facilitating additional opportunities for siting of a residence served by existing utilities and accessible to employment opportunities, recreational areas, and natural and cultural amenities within City limits, while helping to offset the State’s ongoing housing crisis. Ongoing maintenance of the existing Participation Agreement currently in place will maintain consistency with the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance, continuing to afford opportunities for provision of affordable housing. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council approve the Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to amend the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map and modify Lot B, as designed in Alternative 2, allowing for residential development of that parcel, based on the Findings below and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A.

27.6 FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid fees to compensate for costs associated with staff’s processing of this application. The project, if approved, will contribute to increased property tax revenue to the City, and the project developer will be required to pay City impact fees, generating additional sources for funding of municipal services, the costs of which will generally be offset by the fees and taxes.

Prepared by:

Timothy Maier
Senior Planner
Submitted by:

Lee Butler
Director of Planning &
Community Development
Approved by:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Resolution, including Findings and Conditions of Approval

2. Project Plans – First Alternative Site Plan

3. Project Plans – Second Alternative Site Plan

4. Recorded Subdivision Map

5. Staff Memo to the Planning Commission regarding the Subdivision Map

6. Staff Memo to the Planning Commission Regarding CEQA Documents and Conditions of Approval of Project #97-279 (related to CP21-0060)

7. Letter from the Law Firm of Newman Marcus dated February 2, 2012

8. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated June 30, 2022

9. June 30, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

10. Public Correspondence

27.7 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. NS-29-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

ACKNOWLEDGING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

DETERMINATION AND APPROVING A FINAL MAP AMENDMENT AND MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #97-279 TO AMEND THE EL

RANCHO CARBONERA SUBDIVISION MAP AND MODIFY LOT B TO ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A PARCEL LOCATED IN THE R-1-7 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE) ZONING DISTRICT (APPLICATION NO. CP21-0060) WHEREAS, on May 4, 2000, the Planning Commission (formerly, “Zoning Board”) conducted a public hearing for review of an application for Planned Development Permit #97- 279 by project applicant Mr. Steve Benedum and UCSC Foundation for a Tentative Subdivision Map, Planned Development Permit, and Design Permit to construct a 13-lot subdivision, including four (4) townhouses, nine (9) single-family lots, and a common open space parcel, on a

3.4-acre site located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) zoning district; WHEREAS, an Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Program were prepared for the project consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, at the duly-noticed May 4, 2000 hearing, the Planning Commission, after hearing public testimony, voted to recommend to the City Council 1) adoption of the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and 2) approval of the project with the condition that two (2) townhouse units be eliminated and additional conditions requiring project modifications be added; and
WHEREAS, On July 25, 2000, the City Council, after hearing public testimony at a dulynoticed public hearing, voted to 1) adopt the Negative declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and 2) approve Permit #97-279, granting entitlement of a Tentative Subdivision Map (Rancho Carbonera Subdivision), Planned Development Permit, and Design Permit, authorizing the creation of an eleven (11)-lot residential subdivision of a 3.4 acre vacant site, resulting in nine (9) single-family lots, two (2) townhouses, and a common open space parcel (Lot B) for the project located at 505 El Rancho Drive in the Carbonera Estates area; and WHEREAS on June 12, 2001, the City Council, after hearing public testimony at a duly noticed public hearing, voted to approve the Final Map for Tract No, 1406, Rancho Carbonera Subdivision,
WHEREAS, on August 12, 2021, the Planning and Community Development Department received an application filed by John Swift, (“applicant”) to amend the recorded map and modify Permit #97-279 to change the use of Lot B from open space to a buildable lot; WHEREAS, the project site and its development is governed by the standards and guidelines contained in Municipal Code Title 23, the Subdivision Ordinance; Municipal Code Title 24, the Zoning Ordinance; and the City of Santa Cruz General Plan/Local Coastal Plan; and

27.8 WHEREAS, the project requires no further review under CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code CEQA Section 15305 (Class 5 categorical exemption) and the analysis conducted pursuant to that section; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing on June 2, 2022 voted to continue discussion of the project to a Special Meeting of June 30, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing (Special Meeting) on June 30, 2022 and, after hearing public testimony and considering the two alternative site plans presented by the applicant (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2), voted 5-1-0 to recommend approval of the Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Permit #97-279 based on site Plan Alternative 2 to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on August 9, 2022 to consider the application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now makes the following findings:

With Respect to the Environmental Determination

1. Public Resources Code Section 21084 requires CEQA Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Class 5, Section 15305 allows a lead agency to consider, without further CEQA review, minor alterations in land use limitations, “including, but not limited to, minor lot line adjustments… not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.” Based on the review of the proposed modifications, the project will not result in new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified and -analyzed significant impacts. Similarly, there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information of substantial importance that would result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in significance of previously identified impacts. Based on the level of previous environmental review and degree of proposed project modifications, the City has determined that the scope of the project constitutes minor revisions to the original entitlement, and no substantial changes in the project or environmental conditions have occurred since adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. No exceptions to the Class 5 categorical exemption pertain to the proposed project. Additionally, all Mitigation Measures as required for entitlement of the original development shall remain in place and continue to be maintained and enforced.

23.44.060 Required Findings for Additional Amendments

2. There are changes in circumstances that make any or all of the conditions of the map no longer appropriate or necessary;

27.9 The Rancho Carbonera Owners Association (HOA) has relinquished ownership of Lot B.

Lot B has remained vacant as open space, but the HOA no longer desires to maintain the property. Additionally, the HOA has provided a letter, dated May 3, 2021, supporting the proposed conversion of Lot B to eventual residential use. Since the time that the lot was established, the statewide and local deficiency in housing stock has intensified, and the state has implemented various laws that support the streamlined approval of housing projects, including the construction of single-family dwellings. The development of the property for residential purposes would assist in resolving the unmet need for availability of housing, rendering the proposed residential use of the parcel appropriate and the amendment to the recorded subdivision map necessary;

3. The modifications do not impose any additional burden on the fee owners of the real property;
The modification will not impose any additional burden on the fee owners of the property, as the HOA has relinquished ownership of the parcel to a private party for intended development for new housing, and is no longer financially responsible for the property.

The new owner will not incur any additional burden resulting from the Minor Modification to Planned Development Permit/Design Permit 97-0279;

4. The modifications do not alter any right, title, or interest in the real property reflected on the recorded map; and
The Rancho Carbonera HOA and the applicant have reached a settlement agreement over Lot B, finding that it is no longer necessary or useful to the planned development, and the HOA shall relinquish any right, title, or interest in the property that was previously recorded on the map;

5. The advisory body finds that the map as modified conforms to Section 23.16.050.4.

Any modification shall be set for public hearing before the appropriate advisory body. The advisory body shall confine the hearing to consideration of, and action on, the proposed modification.

The Planning Commission finds that the map as modified in site plan Alternative 2 conforms to Section 23.16.050.4 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. The modification has been heard before the Planning Commission at a public hearing on June 30, 2022; Modifications to Planned Development, Section 24.08.780

6. Proposed modifications maintain the original purpose and reasons for approval of the planned development and are consistent with the original conditions of approval.

Planned Development Permit 97-279 was approved by the City Council on July 25, 2000, allowing for the creation of an eleven (11)-lot residential subdivision of a 3.4 acre vacant site, resulting in nine single family lots, two townhouses, and a common open space parcel (Lot B). The proposed modification would allow for residential development of one parcel

27.10 (Lot B), a minor revision to Planned Development Permit #97-279 which would not alter its original purpose or reason for approval and which would remain consistent with the original conditions of approval;

7. All proposed modifications meet the regulations for the district in which the planned development is located, unless such modifications conform with previously approved planned variations.

The proposed modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 would allow for development for residential use of a parcel originally designated for purposes of open space, remaining consistent with the parcel’s General Plan designation of L (Low Density Residential) and Zoning designation of R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) without request for any deviation from the development standards of the R-1-7 zoning district.

Additionally, the proposed modification would render Parcel A and Parcel B (originally two townhome lots) consistent with the R-1-7 requirements for minimum lot size while accommodating exceptions to codified R-1-7 standards for lot width due to constraints derived from subdivision boundaries, thereby maintaining the purpose of the Planned Development Permit for the existing El Rancho Carbonera subdivision by facilitating creativity in development design and incorporating variation from typical standards of the R-1-7 zoning district which serve public objectives more fully than development plans permitted under conventional zoning regulations; and

8. Proposed modifications(s) maintain usable open space originally approved for the site.

With modifications to the use of Lot B as included in site plan Alternative 2, the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision would continue to exceed the required amount of open space as approved under Planned Development Permit #97-279 and as required for yard areas as specified in development standards of the R-1-7 zoning district. Each singlefamily lot maintains large yards, with many such yards remaining adjacent to a conservation easement which provides additional open space. The boundary adjustment for Parcel A and Parcel B (originally two townhome lots) results in their conformance to the minimum lot size standards as codified in the R-1-7 zoning district, provides greater availability of open space than was originally approved by providing additional private land area to the parcels, and creates a site arrangement effecting the functionality of Parcel A and Parcel B consistent with lots featuring single-family homes NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz hereby acknowledges the CEQA determination and approves the Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to amend the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map as illustrated in site plan Alternative 2 and modify lot B to allow for residential development on a parcel located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) zoning district, subject to the Findings listed above and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and made a part hereof.

27.11 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

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

27.12 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29-XX
EXHIBIT "A"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT ON PROPERTY AT
109 South Rapetta Rd. – CP21-0060
Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Permit #97-279 to amend the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map and modify Lot B to allow for residential development on a parcel located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) zoning district.

1. If one or more of the following conditions is not met with respect to all its terms, then this approval may be revoked.

2. All plans for future construction which are not covered by this review shall be submitted to the City Planning and Community Development Department for review and approval.

3. This permit shall be exercised within three (3) years of the date of final approval or it shall become null and void.

4. An amending map or certificate of correction certified by the city surveyor or city engineer shall be filed or recorded in the office of the county recorder in which the original map was filed. Upon that filing or recordation, the county recorder shall index the names of the fee owners of the real property reflected on the original recorded map, and the appropriate tract designation shown on the amending map or certificate of correction in the general index and map index respectively.

5. A copy of the recorded deed of the new parcel shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development of the City of Santa Cruz.

6. The use shall meet the standards and shall be developed within limits established by Chapter

24.14 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code as to the emission of noise, odor, smoke, dust, vibration, wastes, fumes or any public nuisance arising or occurring incidental to its establishment or operation.

7. The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Any errors or discrepancies found therein may result in the revocation of any approval or permits issued in connection therewith.

8. All conditions of approval for Planning Permit #97-279 shall remain in effect.

9. The development of the site shall be in substantial accordance with the approved plans submitted and on file in the Department of Planning and Community Development of the City of Santa Cruz. All aspects of construction must be completed prior to occupancy. Major modifications to plans or exceptions to completion may be granted only by the City authority which approved the project.

27.13 10. All requirements of the Building, Fire, Public Works and Water Departments shall be completed prior to occupancy and continuously maintained thereafter.

11. Adequate provisions shall be made to supply water to each of the premises covered by this application. The design of water facilities shall be to standards of the Water Department, and plans therefore must be submitted to the Water Department Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.

12. Any person exercising a development permit or building permit who, at any time in the preparation for or process of excavating or otherwise disturbing earth, discovers any human remains of any age or any artifact or any other object which reasonably appears to be evidence of an archaeological/cultural resource or paleontological resource, shall:
a. Immediately cease all further excavation, disturbance, and work on the project site; b. Cause staking to be placed completely around the area of discovery by visible stakes not more than ten feet apart forming a circle having a radius of not less than one hundred feet from the point of discovery; provided, that such staking need not take place on adjoining property unless the owner of the adjoining property authorizes such staking; c. Notify the Santa Cruz County sheriff-coroner and the city of Santa Cruz planning director of the discovery unless no human remains have been discovered, in which case the property owner shall notify only the planning director; d. Grant permission to all duly authorized representatives of the sheriff-coroner and the planning director to enter onto the property and to take all actions consistent with this section.

13. The 10’ vegetation buffer located along existing Lot B shall remain planted with Coast Live Oaks, in a ratio of two (2) replacement trees for each one (1) tree removed, with minimally twenty (20) percent of the replacement trees being Coast Live Oaks.

14. No construction of any buildings or structures shall be permitted within the 10’ vegetation buffer at existing Lot B.

15. Prior to the commencement of any construction related activities on Lot B, the applicant shall obtain approval of an administrative level Design Permit.

16. All requirements of the Arborist Report and Tree Protection Survey by Kurt Fouts dated August 21, 2021 shall be met.

17. Prior to recordation of the revised subdivision map, the El Rancho Carbonera Homeowners Association (“HOA”) shall vote on the annexation of the market rate lot (formerly Lot B). The applicant shall submit official meeting minutes as evidence of the vote. If the vote supports annexation, the annexation shall be formalized prior to map recordation. If the vote does not support annexation, it shall not be required in order to amend the map. This would not preclude the El Rancho Carbonera Homeowners Association and the owner of Lot B from mutually agreeing to annex the property into the HOA in the future.

18. The affordable lots (formerly Parcels A and B on Lot B) shall not be managed by the HOA or subject to the CC&R’s.

27.14 19. Noise generated by construction equipment and activities associated with construction of future housing shall be ameliorated through noise-reducing equipment and techniques to ensure compliance with the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for Planned Development Permit #97-279.

27.15 27.16

27.17 27.18

27.19 27.20

27.21 03/21/2022

27.22 27.23

27.24 27.25
K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:43:19 PM 27.26 K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:57:38 PM 27.27 K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:44:42 PM

27.28 27.29

27.30 27.31

27.32 From: Timothy Maier
To: Tess Fitzgerald
Subject: Please Include as an Agenda Item - re: Request by A. Schiffrin Date: Thursday, June 02, 2022 9:17:54 AM
Attachments: 100M09 - Recorded Subdivision Map.pdf
Good morning Commissioner Schiffrin,
Attached is the recorded subdivision map for the Rancho Carbonera development.

At the time of approval of Project #97-279, the 15% inclusionary requirement in place resulted in the provision of 2 affordable units. The 2 townhouses are the affordable units per the original entitlement.

I’d be glad to answer any other questions.

Best regards,
Tim
Timothy Maier, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Santa Cruz
(831)420-5129
cityofsantacruz.com
From: Andrew Schiffrin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2022 8:59 AM
To: Lee Butler <[email protected]>; Timothy Maier <[email protected]>; Samantha Haschert <[email protected]>
Subject: 109 SOUTH RAPETTA PROJECT
Hi -
Thank you for adding the COA and MND/Initial Study for the original project to the agenda material. I hadn't understood that the project approved by the City Council was for 11 units and the Common Open Space parcel was to serve all 11 units.

While the information provided is useful, I would like to see the parcel map/site plan for the original project. Also, since it was for 11 units, what were the inclusionary requirements? I seem to have missed them in the COA.

I intend to visit the site later this morning so would appreciate receiving the original site plan as soon as possible.

Thank you.

Andy Schiffrin

27.33 27.34

27.35 27.36

27.37 P:\_Public\0staffmembers\Tim Maier\Projects\S Rapettta 109 -Modification to Recorded Subdiv Map\Memo_CEQA Documents, COAs of Project 97-279.doc

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: 5/31/22
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Timothy Maier, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: CEQA Documents and Conditions of Approval of Project #97-279 (related to CP21-0060)
Staff received a request from Commissioner Schiffrin for review of the documents prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Conditions of Approval for Project #97-279, the entitlement which application CP21-0060 seeks to modify. CP21-0060 includes an application for a Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to amend the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map and modify Lot B to allow for residential development on a parcel located in the R-1-7 zone district.

Project #97-279 was approved by the City Council on July 25, 2000, and included adoption of a Negative Declaration and Tentative Subdivision Map, as well as entitlement of a Planned Development Permit and Design Permit to create an 11-unit subdivision on 3.4 acres, including nine (9) single-family lots and two (2) townhomes. Please note that the Initial Study (IS), Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Conditions of Approval of Project #97-279 are posted to the Planning Commission hearing agenda, which is accessible via link https://ecm.cityofsantacruz.com/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/Search?dropid=4&mtids=117.

27.38 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.39 15/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.40 16/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.41 17/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.42 18/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.43 19/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.44 20/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.45 21/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.46 22/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.47 23/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.48 24/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.49 25/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.50 91/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.51 92/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.52 93/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.53 94/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.54 95/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.55 96/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.56 97/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.57 98/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.58 99/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.59 100/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.60 101/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.61 102/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.62 103/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.63 104/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.64 105/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.65 106/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.66 107/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.67 108/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.68 109/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.69 110/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.70 111/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.71 112/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.72 113/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.73 114/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.74 115/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.75 116/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.76 117/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.77 118/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.78 119/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.79 120/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.80 10/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.81 11/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.82 12/342 5/31/22, 8:53 AM Print Document
https://vapponbase.cityofsantacruz.org/AppNet/PrintHandler.ashx 27.83 13/342 From: Steve Benedum [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 10:17 AM
To: Timothy Maier <[email protected]>
Cc: Samantha Haschert <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: ROCA Common area
Tim & Samantha,
Please find the attached letter from Newman Marcus explaining that the discrepancy in the CC&R’s was a clerical error by his office. Attachment #2 is a copy of the Rancho Carbonera Public Report which clearly states on page 11 that lots 10, 11 and lot B are not part of the subdivision. Attachment #3 is a copy of the deed showing the transfer of common area lots A & C to the RCOA that was executed at the same time as the CC&R’s, this transfer did not include lot B.

The CC&R’s recorded 2/20 2002 contained conflicting descriptions of the common areas in the CC&R’s.

When this was discovered, the CC&R’s were changed to conform to the deeds and Public report. There was no material change to the subdivision, therefore no permit was necessary to correct a clerical error.

Best Regards
Steve Benedum

27.84 SANTA CRUZ (SC), CA Document:DED 2002.72506 Page:1 of 3 Printed on:6/8/2022 1:55 PM
Branch :SFW User :JPAR

27.85 SANTA CRUZ (SC), CA Document:DED 2002.72506 Page:2 of 3 Printed on:6/8/2022 1:55 PM
Branch :SFW User :JPAR

27.86 SANTA CRUZ (SC), CA Document:DED 2002.72506 Page:3 of 3 Printed on:6/8/2022 1:55 PM
Branch :SFW User :JPAR

27.87 27.88

27.89 27.90

27.91 27.92

27.93 27.94

27.95 27.96

27.97 27.98

27.99 27.100

PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2022
AGENDA OF: June 30, 2022
ITEM NO: CP21-0060 109 South Rapetta Rd
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Final Map Amendment and Major
Modification, as designed in Alternative 2, based on the environmental determination, and the Findings and Conditions of Approval in the attached Draft Resolution.

PROJECT DATA
Property Owner: Steve Benedum APN: 008-391-15, -16, and -18 Project Applicant: John Swift
Application Type: Final Map Amendment and Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 to amend the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map and modify Lot B to allow for residential development on a parcel located in the R-1-7 zone district.

Zoning: R-1-7 (Single Family Residence)
Project Consistency: Consistent with the zone district.

General Plan: L (Low Density)
Project Consistency: Consistent with the General Plan designation Land Use - existing: Vacant Open Space
- proposed: Single Family Residential
- surrounding: Single Family Residential
Lot Area: 15,208 square feet (existing area of Lot B, prior to proposed map amendment)
Proposed Lot Area: 7,718 square feet (proposed area of Lot B, following map amendment)
Coastal Review: Not in Coastal Zone
Environmental Review: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines, Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, Section 15305.

Planning Staff: Lane Zorich & Timothy Maier

27.101

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 2

BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is approximately 15,208 square feet and was created under project number 97- 279, a Tentative Map, Design Permit, and Planned Development to develop a 3.4 acre lot, which was formerly a reservoir, into a residential subdivision. The application was originally for fourteen single-family dwellings and seven townhomes. However, the project was approved as nine singlefamily dwellings, two townhomes, and the subject parcel (known as Lot B), used as common open space.

The approved project included a program of public benefits in exchange for a number of variations to the R-1-7 development standards, including a Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management plan that was approved and implemented primarily for the eastern portion of the site and for creation of an open-space vegetated buffer between the subdivision and El Rancho Drive and Highway 17, the latter of which constitutes Lot B. The original intent of Lot B as common area and as a rural buffer and transition space between the rural County and the suburban neighborhood is evident based on the recorded final map for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision, which identifies Lot B as C.A. (Common Area) and P.U.E. (Public Utility Easement) and the original Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision that list the common areas as Lot A, Lot B, and Lot C. Furthermore, the use of Lot B is called out in the original staff report for the project and was discussed during the July 25, 2000 City Council meeting and indicates that the intent of the large parcel was to provide common open space for the residents of the subdivision and to provide a vegetative buffer between the subdivision and Highway 17.

In January 2012, the City became aware that the CC&R’s for the subdivision were altered without the benefit of permits to remove Lot B as common area. The City was not notified of this change prior to its execution, which is in conflict with condition #19 of Resolution 97-279, which states that the Homeowners Association (HOA) shall not remove conditions and restrictions from the CC&R’s that were specifically required by the City without first obtaining an amendment to the Planned Development and Design Permits. Additionally, the Assessor’s Parcel Map was revised to remove the common-area designation of Lot B, and the ownership of Lot B was transferred from the HOA to Mr. Benedum, a private owner. In 2012, City staff made the applicant aware that the amendments were completed without City approval and were therefore not permitted or recognized. As a result, Lot B has remained vacant as open space in accordance with its approved use under project #97-279. In March 2013, the Rancho Carbonera Owners Association finalized and recorded a Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims, in which the HOA fully relinquished ownership of Lot B and any financial rights and responsibilities towards maintaining the property as common open space for the subdivision to Mr. Benedum. No permits were obtained for the change in use of Lot B or the transfer of ownership.

Prior to 2015, the City’s Municipal Code permitted amendments to final maps only on the basis of correcting errors or omissions. In 2015, Section 23.44.060 of the Subdivision Ordinance was adopted which permits amendments to any final map or parcel map for reasons other than error or omission, if the necessary findings can be made. The new ordinance provides an opportunity to legalize the above described unpermitted changes that were made to the CC&Rs, Assessor’s Parcel Map, and to the ownership of Lot B without the benefit of permits.

27.102

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 3
The subject application was scheduled for consideration at the regular Planning Commission hearing of June 2, 2022 and placed on the consent calendar. On the day of the hearing, staff received a series of questions from a member of the Planning Commission and had previously received one letter of public correspondence on the item. Anticipating likely removal of the application from the consent calendar for further discussion, and, in order to afford adequate attention to agendized items of Citywide significance, staff suggested that the Commission elect to continue the subject application to a date certain. At the June 2 public hearing, the Planning Commission deferred review of the project to a Special Meeting of June 30, 2022.

On June 8, staff conferred with the applicant and project owner and discussed options for proposed reconfiguration of the lot, including conversion of the townhouse lots to single-family residential parcels with greater conformance to codified standards of the R-1-7 zoning district. Such a revision would achieve two goals: 1) It would transfer additional and more functional open space area to the lots with affordable units, which presumably benefitted most from the adjacent open space, and 2) It would eliminate two townhouse lotsthat, with this modification, no longer function as townhouse lots, in that there will no longer be shared amenities between the two units. On June 21, the applicant submitted two alternative site plans, including an option preferred by the applicant and owner, which retains the site plan as previously proposed and additionally illustrates the footprint of a new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear portion of Lot B; and a second alternative as a tentative map with arrangement of lots more closely conforming to requirements of the Municipal Code, as recommended by staff. See below for an analysis of both proposals.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject parcel is an approximately 15,208 sq. ft. vacant lot. The parcel is zoned R-1-7 (SingleFamily Residential – 7,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) with a Low Density Residential (L) General Plan Land Use Designation. The property has a gentle downslope easterly towards Misty Court and currently has a number of trees located on site, including eucalyptus, cypress, and oak. It is located within the El Rancho Carbonera Subdivision and serves as the boundary between city limits and unincorporated Santa Cruz County. The surrounding area includes large, residential lots which are located within a semi-forested landscape. Highway 17 is directly to the west with singlefamily residential development to the north, east, and south of the parcel.

The project proposes a Major Modification to Planned Development Permit #97-279 and a Final Map Amendment to the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map to allow for residential development on Lot B and to adjust the boundaries between the adjacent townhome parcels (APNs 008-391-15 & 008-391-16). Per Municipal Code Section 23.44.060, modifications to a recorded final map must be authorized by the “advisory body”, defined by Section 23.44.010 as the decisionmaking body which approved the map. Because the City Council granted entitlement of the Planned Development Permit, including adoption of the final El Rancho Carbonera subdivision map, approval by the City Council of the proposed map amendment will be required following the Planning Commission’s recommendation.

27.103

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 4

ANALYSIS
Alternative Lot Configurations
The applicant has submitted two alternative site plans, incorporating separate lot configurations, for the Planning Commission’s consideration. Each of the two options would include a map amendment adjusting the property line between Lot B and the two townhouse parcels (Parcel A and Parcel B) to the east. In each of the two scenarios, the property line between Lot B would be adjusted to transfer three off-street parking spaces approved through Planning Project #97-279 as guest parking for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision to the townhome lots, with APN 008-391- 15 (Parcel B) acquiring two spaces and APN 008-391-16 (Parcel A) acquiring one space. In both alternative site plans, lot lines would be deleted and rearranged such that the rectangular townhouse parcels approved through the initial entitlement would be modified to include larger parcels of revised geometries.

First Alternative Site Plan
In the first alternative (Alternative 1), the boundaries of the townhouse lots would be revised to eliminate the portion of Lot B which separates the parcels, resulting in adjacent lots separated by a single lot line; the rear line of each parcel would also be modified from its approved linear boundary to include a combined angled/flared configuration (see Attachment 2). Both parcels would increase in size compared to their sizes as approved through Project 97-279, with APN 008- 391-15 enlarged from 3,229 square feet to 4,403 square feet, and APN 008-391-16 increased from 3,286 square feet to 5,433 square feet. In this option, the applicant has additionally illustrated the footprint of a detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear portion of Lot B.

The existing townhomes were approved through Planned Development Permit #97-279 as detached units surrounded by a common area parcel (Lot B) maintained by the HOA as shared open space. Per Zoning Code Section 24.22.524, a townhouse lot is “not subject to the minimum lot area/width standards for the underlying zoning district” and “may include private open space area for the townhouse dwelling.” The parcel layout as included in the first alternative site plan proposed does not conform to the current definition of a Townhouse Dwelling Unit or a Townhouse Lot, in that the residential units are detached, and the lots are not part of a larger townhouse dwelling group. Relevant definitions as identified in the Municipal Code follow:

24.22.524 Lot, Townhouse. A lot created for a single townhouse dwelling as part of a larger townhouse dwelling group. A townhouse lot is not subject to the minimum lot area/width standards for the underlying zoning district. A townhouse lot would follow the footprint of townhouse dwelling but may include private open space area for the townhouse dwelling.

24.22.318 Dwelling, Townhouse. A single dwelling unit in a townhouse group, located or capable of being located on a separate lot; and being separated from the adjoining dwelling unit by an approved wall, extending from the foundation through the roof and structurally independent of the corresponding wall of the adjoining unit.

24.22.322 Dwelling, Townhouse Group. A group of not fewer than two townhouse dwellings, arranged side-by-side and separated from any other townhouse group by a yard

27.104

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 5
area. All townhouse dwelling groups shall comply with the underlying zoning district development standards.

Generally, applications for townhouse projects are submitted as common-interest subdivisions including mapped building footprints situated within a larger parcel of common area featuring shared amenities. As individual lots maintained by a private owner without intervening open space, the revised maps as presented in the first alternative constitutes a further departure from typical townhome design and more closely resembles a subdivision of substandard lots. The enlarged Parcel A and Parcel B would additionally contain rear yards characterized by steep slopes having questionable usability as private yard area. In order to allow for the proposed configuration in this site plan, the Planning Commission would need to approve the creation of small lots in association with the larger Planned Development project.

Second Alternative Site Plan
In the second alternative site plan (Alternative 2), the shapes of both parcels would be revised, as in the first alternative; however, the rear lot line of each parcel would be extended to align to the frontage along El Rancho Drive. A tentative map has been submitted showing the revised boundary arrangement. In the second alternative, all three parcels (including both APN 008-391- 15 and APN 008-391-16) would encompass land in excess of 7,000 square feet, consistent with the minimum lot size specified by the Zoning Code for the R-1-7 zoning district. Further, this option would allow the existing detached stand-alone townhouse lots to continue to function in a manner consistent with single-family lots as effectively entitled through Planning Project #97-279.

Through dialog with the applicant and property owner, staff recommended that Parcel A and Parcel B be revised for greater conformance to the R-1-7 zoning standards. As presented in the second alternative, neither lot would provide the minimum width of 70’ as specified by standards of the R-1-7 zoning district, consistent with exceptions as allowable through Planned Development Permit #97-279; however, the lots would comply with minimum Code standards for parcel size, characteristic of lots featuring single-family homes. Further, with boundary lines extending to El Rancho Drive, the parcels would enclose private yard areas including gentler slopes affording greater functionality as outdoor amenity space when compared with lots of more limited size as presented in the first alternative site plan. The existing residential units would continue to serve as income-restricted affordable housing stock, in conformance with the Participation Agreement which remains in effect. Further, all three parcels would retain the ability to construct Accessory Dwelling Units in the future.

Major Modification to a Planned Development
The approved Planned Development Permit for the subdivision included variations to street standards, lot frontages on a private street, lot size and configurations standards, building setbacks, and fence height regulations. The proposed amendment to the approved plans, including both alternative site plans, is consistent with the original purpose and reasons for approval of the Planned Development Permit and is consistent with the original conditions of approval, in that the addition of a new parcel supports the original intent of the subdivision to provide for residential uses while protecting the surrounding natural resources and maintaining a vegetative buffer between the dwelling units and El Rancho Drive and Highway 17.

27.105

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 6
As aforementioned, the map amendment would adjust the property line between Lot B and the two townhouse parcels to the east to transfer three off-street parking spaces approved as guest parking for the subdivision to the townhome lots, with APN 008-391-15 acquiring two spaces and APN 008-391-16 acquiring one space. The subdivision continues to exceed the requirements for guest parking provided in Section 24.12.240 of the Zoning Ordinance, as eight spaces are located along the private streets of Misty Court and South Rapetta Road within the subdivision.

While the conversion of Lot B from common open space into a developable lot would reduce open space available to the neighborhood, the subdivision would continue to comply with zoning district standards, which do not specify a minimum area of required common open space. All of the existing single-family lots would maintain large private yard areas, and many of the lots abut a conservation easement which provides additional open space. The two townhouse lots that currently benefit from the adjacent open space area will gain additional undeveloped land through the proposed boundary adjustment.

A Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan was implemented on the site after the approval of the subdivision, and this plan aims to provide fire protection, reduce erosion potential, enhance on-site habitat, prevent further loss of native habitat by the encroachment of non-native species, and restore the Carbonera Creek riparian zone. Condition of Approval #76, of Planned Development Permit #97-279, which is Mitigation Measure #10 of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared for that entitlement, requires maintenance of the Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan by the Homeowners Association in perpetuity. A biological report dated May 24, 2021, prepared by Kathy Lyons of Biotic Resources Group, states that no special-status plant species were identified, or are expected to occur, on the project site, and that the subject parcel does not support any sensitive plant community types. A biotic review letter prepared by the same consultant dated February 1, 2022 confirms that the work associated with the Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan was completed and continues to be maintained in accordance with the conditions of approval of Planned Development Permit #97-279.

Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Consistency
The Low Density (L) Residential General Plan land use designation provides for densities between

1.1 and 10.0 dwelling units per acre. The project approved by the original Planned Development Permit included nine single-family parcels and two townhomes, at a density of 4.6 units per acre, which is consistent with the General Plan designation for the project site. The addition of Lot B as a developable single-family lot within the subdivision would increase the overall density to 5 units per acre, which is also well within the density range as specified in the General Plan. Furthermore, the increased density is supported by General Plan Policy LU3.7.1, which seeks to develop properties at the higher end of the density range on sites that are free of constraints associated with site characteristics. The project is also supported by General Plan Goal LU1.1, which promotes infill development as a tool to increase the housing stock of the City while preserving parcels designated for open space. “Infill Development,” as defined by General Plan 2030 is, ³'HYHORSPHQW RI YDFDQW ODQG
XVXDOO\ LQGLYLGXDO ORWV RU OHIWဩRYHU SURSHUWLHV
LQ DUHDV DOUHDG\
largely developed.” The subject lot satisfies this definition in that it constitutes a remnant parcel of the original land division and is surrounding by existing development.

27.106

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 7
In accordance with the entitlement of Planned Development Permit #97-279, a condition of approval is recommended that requires approval of a Design Permit prior to any future development on the property. A Design Permit was included along with Planned Development Permit #97-279 to ensure conformance of the proposed site configuration to the City's Zoning Ordinance and other applicable plans and policies; conditions of approval of that entitlement required that individual Design Permits be obtained for the development of each individual parcel in the subdivision. All future plans for development of Lot B must meet the development standards for the R-1-7 zoning district and the variations approved as part of the original Planned Development Permit. Like all single-family parcels throughout the State of California, this project is entitled to create one Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and one Junior ADU (JADU) per parcel.

Inclusionary Housing Requirement
City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 24.16.020.1.a. states that affordable (inclusionary) housing requirements “are applicable to all residential developments that create two or more new and/or additional dwelling units or SRO units at one location.” Because the proposed project would create only one new ownership lot, the proposal is exempt from provision of additional affordable housing or payment of an equivalent in-lieu fee. City staff, in conjunction with the City Attorney’s Office, evaluated the potential for applying the inclusionary ordinance to the whole of the subdivision rather than the single structure created by the modification. However, as Code Section

24.16.015(28) defines “Residential Development” as being limited to new or additional units, and existing units are neither “new” nor “additional,” it was determined that the existing units could not be counted towards the inclusionary requirement. The subdivision would continue to comply with the inclusionary housing requirement in place during the time of its original entitlement through ongoing maintenance of a Participation Agreement which allocates the two existing townhouses as affordable housing units.

Tree Removal
A tree survey and protection plan for the property was prepared by consulting arborist Kurt Fouts on November 11, 2020 and revised on August 31, 2021. The survey identifies the health and structure of eighteen trees on Lot B and recommends eleven for removal, including eight heritage trees, due to poor condition or high potential for adverse impacts. The report also makes specific recommendations pertaining to the preservation of the seven trees which will remain, including three heritage trees, including tree protection fencing and the utilization of root protection buffers.

The City’s Urban Forester has reviewed the report and agrees with all of the recommendations incorporated in the arborist report. Heritage trees removed will be required to be replaced at a 2:1 ratio, and twenty percent of the replacement trees must be Coast Live Oaks, in accordance with the conditions of approval for the original project. Furthermore, a condition of approval has been included which requires the replacement trees to be planted along the vegetation buffer on Lot B to maintain the area of separation between the subdivision and Highway 17.

Noise Analysis
Due to the proximity of the subject parcel (Lot B) to Highway 17 and El Rancho Drive, a technical memorandum (acoustic study) dated January 6, 2021 was prepared by Rincon Environmental Consultants to evaluate the impacts of unwanted sound to the site and to evaluate compliance with allowable thresholds for noise as specified in the City’s General Plan and codified in the Zoning Ordinance. The technical memorandum states that, at the time of data collection, existing levels of

27.107

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 8
exterior noise complied with standards specified in the General Plan, and projections of interior noise, based on data for noise-attenuation of wood construction identified in the California Building Code, would result in compliance with City and State standards for future residential construction at the subject lot. Additionally, as stated in the acoustic study, noise generated by construction equipment and activities associated with construction of future housing could be ameliorated through noise-reducing equipment and techniques to ensure compliance with the MMRP approved for Planned Development Permit 97-279; a condition of approval has been added requiring such compliance.

Environmental Review
An Initial Study (IS) was prepared for Planned Development Permit #97-279 and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was adopted on July 25, 2000, pursuant to requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It has been determined that no additional CEQA analysis is necessary, as the proposed modification would facilitate an amendment to a subdivision map accommodating future development of a single-family home, which is consistent with the requirements of CEQA Section 15305, a Class 5 categorical exemption which enables minor alterations in land use limitations, “including, but not limited to, minor lot line adjustments… not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.” The proposed revision to the recorded subdivision would allow for minor revisions to the property lines of existing lots and enable development on a lot with an average slope of less than 20%, at a residential density compliant with the range identified in the General Plan and not resulting in any changes in the intended land use or allowed density, and would thereby satisfying the stipulations of the Class 5 categorical exemption. A biological report dated May 24, 2021, prepared by Biotic Resources Group, states that no specialstatus plant species were identified, or are expected to occur, on the project site, and that the subject parcel does not support any sensitive plant community types. Further, a letter prepared by the same consultant dated February 1, 2022, specifies that vegetation removal at the project site was conducted consistent with the Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan (RVMP) as required by the conditions of approval of Planned Development Permit #97-279.

Based on the review of the proposed modifications, the project will not result in new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified and -analyzed significant impacts. Similarly, there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information of substantial importance that would result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in significance of previouslyidentified impacts. Based on the level of previous environmental review and degree of proposed project modifications, the City has determined that the scope of the project constitutes minor revisions to the original entitlement, and no substantial changes in the project or environmental conditions have occurred since adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. No exceptions to the Class 5 categorical exemption pertain to the proposed project. Additionally, all Mitigation Measures as required for entitlement of the original development would remain in place and will continue to be maintained and enforced.

27.108

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of June 30, 2022
SUBJECT: 109 South Rapetta Rd. – Project No. CP21-0060
PAGE 9
informed about the health, equity, and sustainability impacts of various policy options during the policy development process. The project supports the pillar of equity by providing additional housing stock in an area previously developed for residential use, which is well-served with sidewalks, streets trees, and access to public transportation. As an infill proposal, the project will provide for efficient use of space within an area of existing suburban development, and, through provision of ready access to adjacent public rights-of-way, including streets and sidewalks, will encourage a sustainable and healthy lifestyle by promoting use of alternative forms of transportation, such as travel on foot and by bicycle. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with the three pillars of the HiAP and is recommended as an efficient use of the land.

SUMMARY
The proposed project is consistent with all the required site development standards and policies of the General Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the project as designed under Alternative 2 based on the Findings and the Conditions of Approval in the attached Draft Resolution.

Submitted by:

Lane Zorich
Associate Planner
Timothy Maier
Senior Planner
Approved by:

Samantha Haschert
Principal Planner
Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution, including Findings and Conditions of Approval

2. Project Plans – First Alternative Site Plan

3. Project Plans – Second Alternative Site Plan

4. Biotic Report

5. Arborist Report

6. Vegetation Restoration and Management Plan Update

7. Acoustic Report (Noise Study)

8. HOA Letter of Support dated May 3, 2021

9. Public Notice Mapping Radius

27.109
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. NS-29-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

ACKNOWLEDGING THE CEQA DETERMINATION AND APPROVING A MAP

AMENDMENT AND MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #97-279 TO AMEND THE EL RANCHO CARBONERA SUBDIVISION MAP AND MODIFY

LOT B TO ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A PARCEL LOCATED IN THE R-1-7 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE) ZONING DISTRICT (APPLICATION NO.

CP21-0060)
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2000, the Planning Commission (formerly, “Zoning Board”) conducted a public hearing for review of an application for Planned Development Permit #97- 279 by project applicant Mr. Steve Benedum and UCSC Foundation for a Tentative Subdivision Map, Planned Development Permit, and Design Permit to construct a 13-lot subdivision, including four (4) townhouses, nine (9) single-family lots, and a common open space parcel, on a

3.4-acre site located in the R-1-7 (Single Family Residence) zoning district; WHEREAS, an Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Program were prepared for the project consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, at the duly-noticed May 4, 2000 hearing, the Planning Commission, after hearing public testimony, voted to recommend to the City Council 1) adoption of the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and 2) approval of the project with the condition that two (2) townhouse units be eliminated and additional conditions requiring project modifications be added; and
WHEREAS, On July 25, 2000, the City Council, after hearing public testimony at a dulynoticed public hearing, voted to 1) adopt the Negative declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and 2) approve Permit #97-279, granting entitlement of a Tentative Subdivision Map (Rancho Carbonera Subdivision), Planned Development Permit, and Design Permit, authorizing the creation of an eleven (11)-lot residential subdivision of a 3.4 acre vacant site, resulting in nine (9) single-family lots, two (2) townhouses, and a common open space parcel (Lot B) for the project located at 505 El Rancho Drive in the Carbonera Estates area; and WHEREAS on June 12, 2001, the City Council, after hearing public testimony at a duly noticed public hearing, voted to approve the Final Map for Tract No, 1406, Rancho Carbonera Subdivision,
WHEREAS, on August 12, 2021, the Planning and Community Development Department received an application to amend the recorded map and modify Permit #97-279 to change the use of Lot B from open space to a buildable lot; WHEREAS, the project site and its development is governed by the standards and guidelines contained in Municipal Code Title 23, the Subdivision Ordinance; Municipal Code Title 24, the Zoning Ordinance; and the City of Santa Cruz General Plan/LCP; and

27.110
WHEREAS, the project requires no further review under CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code CEQA Section 15305 (Class 5 categorical exemption) and the analysis conducted pursuant to that section; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing on June 2, 2022 voted to continue discussion of the project to a Special Meeting of June 30, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing (Special Meeting) on June 30, 2022 and, after hearing public testimony and considering the two alternative site plans (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2), voted X-X-X to recommend approval of the Final Map Amendment and Modification to Permit #97-279 based on site Plan Alternative 2 to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on XXXX to consider the application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now makes the following findings:

With Respect to the Environmental Determination

23.44.060 Required Findings for Additional Amendments

2. There are changes in circumstances that make any or all of the conditions of the map no longer appropriate or necessary;

27.111
The Rancho Carbonera Owners Association (HOA) has relinquished ownership of Lot B.

The new owner will not incur any additional burden resulting from the Minor Modification to Planned Development Permit/Design Permit 97-0279;

5. The advisory body finds that the map as modified conforms to Section 23.16.050.4.

Any modification shall be set for public hearing before the appropriate advisory body. The advisory body shall confine the hearing to consideration of, and action on, the proposed modification.

The Planning Commission finds that the map as modified in site plan Alternative 2 conforms to Section 23.16.050.4 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. The modification has been heard before the Planning Commission at a public hearing; Modifications to Planned Development, Section 24.08.780

6. Proposed modifications maintain the original purpose and reasons for approval of the planned development and are consistent with the original conditions of approval.

27.112
(Lot B), a minor revision to Planned Development Permit #97-279 which would not alter its original purpose or reason for approval and which would remain consistent with the original conditions of approval;

7. All proposed modifications meet the regulations for the district in which the planned development is located, unless such modifications conform with previously approved planned variations.

8. Proposed modifications(s) maintain usable open space originally approved for the site.

27.113
PASSED AND ADOPTED this XX day of XX 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

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

27.114
RESOLUTION NO. NS-29-XX
EXHIBIT "A"

1. If one or more of the following conditions is not met with respect to all its terms, then this approval may be revoked.

2. All plans for future construction which are not covered by this review shall be submitted to the City Planning and Community Development Department for review and approval.

3. This permit shall be exercised within three (3) years of the date of final approval or it shall become null and void.

5. A copy of the recorded deed of the new parcel shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development of the City of Santa Cruz.

6. The use shall meet the standards and shall be developed within limits established by Chapter

8. All conditions of approval for Planning Permit #97-279 shall remain in effect.

27.115

10. All requirements of the Building, Fire, Public Works and Water Departments shall be completed prior to occupancy and continuously maintained thereafter.

13. The 10’ vegetation buffer located along Lot B shall remain planted with Coast Live Oaks, in a ratio of two (2) replacement trees for each one (1) tree removed, with minimally twenty (20) percent of the replacement trees being Coast Live Oaks.

14. No construction of any buildings or structures shall be permitted within the vegetation buffer at Lot B.

15. Prior to the commencement of any construction related activities on Lot B, the applicant shall obtain approval of an administrative level Design Permit.

16. All requirements of the Arborist Report and Tree Protection Survey by Kurt Fouts dated August 21, 2021 shall be met.

17. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) in effect for the El Rancho Carbonera subdivision shall be revised to include the subject parcel (Lot B, as shown on the recorded subdivision map) authorized for residential development under this permit.

18. Noise generated by construction equipment and activities associated with construction of future housing shall be ameliorated through noise-reducing equipment and techniques to ensure compliance with the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for Planned Development Permit #97-279.

27.116

27.117

27.118

27.119

27.120

27.121

27.122
03/21/2022

27.123

27.124

27.125

27.126
K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:43:19 PM

27.127
K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:57:38 PM

27.128
K:\28440 - Benedum - 109 S. Rapetta Rd\Dwg\28440 TENTATIVE MAP.DWG, 6/21/2022 1:44:42 PM

27.129
Biotic Resources Group
Biotic Assessments i Resource Management i Permitting
2551 S. Rodeo Gulch Road #12 i Soquel, California 95073 i (831) 476-4803 i [email protected] May 24, 2021
Mr. Steve Benendum
Phoenix Properties
475 Thin Edge Road
Santa Cruz, CA 95065
RE: 109 Rapetta Road, Common Area Lot Review
Dear Mr. Benedum,
The Biotic Resources Group has conducted a review of APN 008-391-18 at 109 Rapetta Road, as per your request. The 0.492-acre parcel is identified as common area as part of the Rancho Carbonera residential development.

Location of Parcel (approximate)
In 2001, as a Condition of Approval for the project, the City required the preparation of a Habitat Restoration and Vegetation Management Plan (RVMP) for the project site. The Plan identified actions within the common area parcel, which included: removal of small eucalyptus trees, limbs, and duff; installation of native trees and shrubs as per a landscape plan; limb/prune all trees so no

27.130
109 Rapetta Road, Parcel Review 2 May 24, 2021
limbs overhang structures or roofs; and removal all eucalyptus trees within 30 feet of the townhouses Biotic Resources Group, January 2001).

I conducted a site visit to the parcel on December 14, 2020 and observed that the RVMP appears to have been implemented and to have met the objectives. The undeveloped portion of the parcel was viewed to document existing vegetation. As per the RVMP, there were no eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus) trees around or overhanging the two townhouses. Other than the mature eucalyptus trees located in the southern portion of the parcel, invasive plant species were limited to young sprouts of French broom (Genista monspessulana) and one acacia (Acacia sp.). Other vegetation includes a Monterey cypress (Cupressus macrocarpa), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and California bay (Umbellularia californica). A planted pistache (Pistache sp.) and St. John’s wort (Hypericum sp.) grow along Rapetta Road.

The understory vegetation is sparse due to leaf litter and bark peels from the eucalyptus trees; however, common grasses and forbs were observed, such as wild oat (Avena sp.), bur chervil (Anthriscus caucalis), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis).

No special status plant species were observed, or are expected to occur on the parcel. This is due to the lack of suitable habitat and the disturbed/residential uses associated with the area. The area does not support any sensitive plant community types.

Please call me if you have any questions on this review.

Sincerely,
Kathleen Lyons
Plant Ecologist
Cc: John Swift, Swift Consulting Services, Inc.

27.131
ARBORIST REPORTTree Inventory, Construction Impacts & Protection Plan for:
109 Rapetta Road
APN: 008-39-118
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
11/16/2020
Revised 3/4/2021
2nd Revision 5/18/2021
Prepared for:

Steve Benedum
109 South Rapetta Road
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Prepared by:

ISA Certified Arborist WE0681
Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ)

27.132
Table of Contents SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1 Background.................................................................................................................. 1 Assignment .................................................................................................................. 1 Limits of the Assignment.............................................................................................. 2 Purpose and use of the report...................................................................................... 2 Resources.................................................................................................................... 2 OBSERVATIONS ...................................................................................................................3-8 DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................. 9 Species List.................................................................................................................. 9 Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods..................................................................... 9 Condition Rating ........................................................................................................ 10 Suitability for Preservation ......................................................................................... 10 Tree Protection Zone ................................................................................................. 11 Critical Root Zone ...................................................................................................... 11 Root Disturbance Distance…………………………………………………………………12
Construction Impacts to Subject Trees ……….………………..……………………………………………..13-14 Impact Level……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..14 Mitigation Measures for Subject Trees ...................................................................... 15 Tree Protection Specifications..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……..16 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………..17
RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………………………………………...18

27.133
Attachments: Appendix A - G
Appendix A – Tree Assessment Chart
Appendix B – Criteria for Tree Assessment Chart
Appendix C – Tree Protection Plan, Sheet T1
Appendix D – Bibliography
Appendix E - Glossary
Appendix F - Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions
Protecting Trees During Construction
Project Arborist Duties & Inspection Schedule
Tree Protection Fencing
Tree Protection Signs
Monitoring
Root Pruning
Tree Work Standards & Qualifications
Protected Tree City of Santa Cruz
Appendix G - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions

27.134
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 7/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 1

SUMMARY
This report provides the following information:

1. A summary of the health and structural condition of 18 trees.

2. A preliminary evaluation of anticipated construction impacts to the trees.

3. Recommendations for retention or removal of assessed trees based on their condition and anticipated construction impacts.

4. Tree protection specifications to mitigate anticipated impacts to retained trees. The Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A is the condensed reference guide to inform all tree management decisions for the trees evaluated.
The project includes construction of a new home at 109 South Rapetta Road, Santa Cruz. Eighteen trees within or near the project limits were inventoried, including eleven “protected” trees.
Seven trees, including three “protected” trees are suitable for incorporation into the project. Eleven trees are in poor condition or will be highly impacted and are not suitable for incorporation into the project.
Trees retained will require mitigation methods to reduce construction impacts including tree protection fencing and other treatments.
A total of eight “protected” trees are recommended for removal. If removals are permitted, replacement trees will be required.

Background
Plans will be submitted to the City of Santa Cruz Planning Department, for construction of a new home at 109 South Rapetta Road, Santa Cruz. Mr. Steve Benedum, owner, requested my services, to assess the condition of eighteen trees within or near the project limits, and the construction impacts that may affect them. Further, to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to meet City of Santa Cruz planning requirements.

Assignment
Provide an arborist report that includes an assessment of the trees within the project area. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter, height and canopy diameter spread), condition (health and structure), and suitability for preservation ratings.

To complete this assignment, the following services were performed:
Tree Resource Evaluation: Inventory, evaluate and assign suitability for preservation ratings for subject trees.
Plan Review: Reviewed provided plans including: Improvement Plans, Rancho Carbonera Subdivision, by Boman & Williams, Consulting Civil Engineers, dated 2/2001. Construction Impact Assessment: Combine tree resource data with anticipated construction impacts, to provide recommendations for removal or retention of trees. Tree Protection Plan: Develop tree protection specifications to mitigate anticipated impacts to retained trees.
Mapping: Tree canopies were plotted onto: Site Plan, Sheet CV, by The Final Draft, and a Tree Protection Plan, Sheet T1, was created.

27.135
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 7/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 2
Limits of the Assignment
The information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection on 11/11/2020.

The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without climbing, dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the trees in questions may not arise in the future.

Purpose and use of the report
The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a project. The report is to be used by the owner/developer, their agents, and the City of Santa Cruz, as a reference for existing tree conditions and to help satisfy the City of Santa Cruz planning requirements.

Resources
All information within this report is based on site plans as of the date of this report.

Resources are as follows:
Site Plan, by The Final Draft, dated 2/7/2021.
Site Visit, Tree Inventory & Condition Evaluation on 11/11/2020, at 109 South Rapetta Road, Santa Cruz
City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code – Chapter 9.56 Preservation of Heritage Trees (applicable sections).

27.136
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 3

OBSERVATIONS
The proposed development is located on a sloped parcel at 109 South Rapetta Road (Image #1). I inventoried 18 trees including eleven “protected” trees and seven “not protected” trees.

Species accessed included nine blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus), three Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa), two coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and one each, coast redwood, (Sequoia sempervirens) California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica), Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinenesis), and blackwood acacia (Acacia melanoxylon).

Image #1 – Undeveloped lot at 109 South Repetta Road.

Most of the eleven “protected” trees were blue gum eucalyptus. Two Monterey cypress and one coast live oak inventoried are also “protected”.

Most blue gum were in fair condition, but branching structures were reduced since the trees are growing close together in a grove.

27.137
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 4
Three blue gum were in poor condition with significant limb dieback and reduced branching structure (Images #2 & 3).

Image #2- Tree T26, blue gum eucalyptus (circled). Trunk bows to east. The minimal branching structure is unbalanced with a weight bias to east.

27.138
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 5
Image #3- Tree T19, blue gum eucalyptus. Limb dieback and minimal branching structure.

T19

27.139
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 6
One blue gum has a trunk cavity with active decay in cavity (Image #4).

Image #4 – 7ree T19, blue gum eucalyptus.

27.140
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 7
Three Monterey cypress are growing in a row along the back of the property adjacent to El Rancho Drive(Image #5). The trees appear to be sited outside the property line. Two are “protected” size and one, T21, with a 13-inch diameter is below the protected trunk size threshold.

Image #5– 7ree T21, Monterey cypress (circled).

The trees were probably planted to screen El Rancho Drive and grow underneath the overhead power lines. The trees have been pruned for clearance from the lines. Two are in fair condition and a third, T22 is in poor condition. Cypress T22, has poor structure since it has been topped for overhead clearance, and all growth on one side has been removed.

27.141
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 8
Two coast live oak were inventoried, one T28, in a young tree and is in good condition. The second, T11, is mature and is a “protected” size tree. The tree is located at the front of the propoerty and overhangs South Rapetta Road(Image #6).

Image #6 – Trees T11, coast live oak. The canopy has a weight bias to the east and grows over South Rapetta Drive.

Other trees inventoried include several “not protected” young trees, including a coast redwood, a California bay laurel, a Chinese pistache, and a blackwood acacia. All were in good or fair condition.

T11

27.142
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 7/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 9

DISCUSSION
Species List
TOTAL SUBJECT TREES: 18 Trees
Protected: 11
8 Blue Gum Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus)
2 Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa)
1 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia)
Not Protected: 7
7 different species. See Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A for complete list.

Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods
Site evaluations were made on 11/11/2020. The inventory included all trees within the project limits. The health and structural condition of each tree was assessed and recorded. Based on the trees health and structural condition, each trees suitability for preservation was rated and recorded. The recorded data is included in the Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A, of this report. Detailed criteria for each assessment rating category are included in Appendix B – Criteria for Tree Assessment Chart.

27.143
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 10
Condition Rating – Protected Trees
A trees condition is determined by an assessing both the health and structure, then combining the two factors to reach a condition rating. Tree condition is rated as poor, fair or good. The quantity of trees assigned for each category (good, fair or poor), is indicated below:

Tree Condition Rating
Good - 0
Fair - 7
Poor - 4
Suitability for Preservation- Protected Trees
A trees suitability for preservation is determined based on its health, structure, age, species characteristics and longevity using a scale of good, fair or poor. The quantity of trees assigned to each category (good, fair or poor), is listed below.

Suitability Rating
Good - 0
Fair – 7
Poor - 4
Protected Trees Recommended for Removal Due to Poor
Condition/Suitability for Preservation
- Four Trees
T15, T19,7 T26 -Blue Gum Eucalyptus

27.144
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 11
Tree Protection Zone
The tree protection zone (TPZ), is a defined area (radius from trunk), within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to minimize potential injury to designated trees during construction.

The size of the optimal TPZ can be determined by a formula based on 1) trunk diameter 2) species tolerance to construction impacts, and 3) tree age (Matheny, N. and Clark, J 1998). In some instances, tree drip line is used as the TPZ. Development constraints can also influence the final size of the tree protection zone.

Fencing is installed to delineate the (TPZ), and to protect tree roots, trunk, and scaffold branches from construction equipment. The fenced protection area may be smaller than the optimal or designated TPZ area in some circumstances. Tree protection may also involve the armoring of the tree trunk and/or scaffold limbs with barriers to prevent mechanical damage from construction equipment. See Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions – Appendix E.

Once the TPZ is delineated and fenced (prior to any site work, equipment and materials move in), construction activities are only to be permitted within the TPZ if allowed for and specified by the project arborist.

Where tree protection fencing cannot be used, or as an additional protection from heavy equipment, tree wrap may be used. Wooden slats at least one inch thick are to be bound securely, edge to edge, around the trunk. A single layer or more of orange plastic construction fencing is to be wrapped and secured around the outside of the wooden slats. Major scaffold limbs may require protection as determined by the City arborist or Project arborist. Straw wattle may also be used as a trunk wrap and secured with orange plastic fencing.

Data has been entered in the Tree Assessment Chart – Appendix A, which indicates the optimal Tree Protection Zone for each tree.

Additional general tree protection guidelines are included in Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions – Appendix G.

Critical Root Zone
Critical Root Zone (CRZ) is the area of soil around the trunk of a tree where roots are located that provide critical stability, uptake of water and nutrients required for a tree's survival. The CRZ is the minimum distance from the trunk that trenching that requires root cutting should occur and can be calculated as three to the five times the trunk Diameter at Breast Height (DBH). For example, if a tree is one foot in trunk diameter than the CRZ is three to five feet from the trunk location. We will often average this as four times the trunk diameter or 1ft. DBH = 4ft.

CRZ (Smiley, E.T., Fraedrich, B. and Hendrickson, N. 2007).

27.145
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 12
Root Disturbance Distance
No one can estimate and predict with absolute certainty what distance from a tree, a soil disturbance such as excavation for construction should be, to ensure it will not significantly affect tree stability or health. Or to what degree, (low, moderate or high), a tree might be impacted. There are simply too many variables involved that we cannot see or anticipate.

However, three times the D.B.H. (diameter at breast height), is a widely accepted minimum used in the industry for root disturbance, on one side of the trunk, and is supported by several research studies including (Smiley, Fraedich & Hendrickson 2002, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories). This distance is often used during the design and planning phases of a project in order to estimate root loss due to construction activities. This distance is a guideline only and should be increased for trees with significant leans, decay or other structural problems.

The ISA, International Society of Arboriculture- Root Management (2017) publication recommends, “cutting roots at a distance greater than six times the trunk diameter (DBH) minimizes the likelihood of affecting both health and stability. This recommendation is given further direction by the companion publication, A.N.S.I. (American National Standard) A300 (Part 8)- 2013 Root Management, when roots are cut in a non-selective manner, i.e. in a straight line on one side of a tree. It says, if the cutting is “within six times the trunk diameter (DBH), mitigation shall be recommended”. Further, A.N.S.I. recommends the “minimum distance from the trunk for root cutting should be adjusted according to trunk diameter, species tolerance to root loss, tree age, health and site condition”.

In general, root cutting that occurs at a distance less than six times the diameter of a tree should be undertaken by hand digging and hand (or Sawzall), root pruning. These methods help mitigate root loss impacts.

27.146
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 13
Construction Impacts to Subject Trees
Four “protected” trees will be impacted by the project. The project elements that will impact the trees include:
Grading
Home Foundation
Driveway
Trees T14,16, 17,19 & T20, blue gum eucalyptus, will be within the grading limits for the new home or driveway, will be highly impacted, suffering significant root loss and will require removal, (Image #7).

If grading for the new home occurs with 12-feet of tree T11, coast live oak, it will suffer some root loss that can be tolerated and will require mitigation methods to reduce root loss impacts, (Image #7).

Trees T15,T19 and T20 are also in poor condition and should be removed regardless of impacts.

Image #7 – Protected trees to be removed due to high construction impacts, T14,T1 T17, and T20. Prot ected trees to be removed due to poor condition and high construction impacts, T1 7 Tree T11, coast
live oak will be moderately impacted.

T20
T19
T17
T16 T15
T14
T11
T28
T18

PORCH/ ENTRY
Y YY
Y
Y
Y
Y Y

27.147
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 14
Impact Level – Protected Trees
Impact level rates the degree a tree may be impacted by construction activity and is primarily determined by how close the construction procedures occur to the tree. Construction impacts are rated as low, moderate, high. The quantity of trees assigned for each category (low, moderate, high), is indicated below:

Impact Rating
Low - 5
Moderate –
High -

27.148
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 15
Mitigation Measures for Retained Trees
The trees retained on this project will require some or all the following methods to protect them from the impacts described above and to minimize root loss during the construction phases. Tree Protection Fencing (all trees).
Hand trenching.
Supervised root pruning.

Tree protection specifications are included on the Tree Protection Plan, Sheet T1. This plan sheet with specifications shall become an element of the final plan set.

Replacement Trees
As mitigation for trees removed, replacement trees will be required for the six protected trees recommended for removal. Based on the preliminary site plan, there is room to plant replacement trees throughout the new site plan.

In general, one 15-gallon replacement tree is required for each “protected” tree removed.

Replacement trees should be planted away from structures and where they have enough room to develop. Do not install trees where overhead wire exist. The trees must receive supplemental irrigation equal to their establishment requirements for the first two years. Applicants may elect to pay an in-lieu fee to the tree trust fund of $150 for off- site mitigation. (Contribution to the Tree Trust Fund are used to purchase street trees, trees for projects, etc.)

27.149
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 16
Tree Protection Specifications & Recommended Sequence
(These specifications are included on the Tree Protection Plan, sheet T1) Land Clearing & Grubbing Phase:

1. Tree Removal – Remove trees recommended for removal. Grind stumps.

2. Tree Protection Fencing - Install Tree Protection Fencing, in location indicated on Tree Protection Plan Sheet T1, prior to grading.

Construction Phase:

1. Grading – Hand trench and root prune prior to grading if it will occur within 12-feet of tree T11, coast live oak (see tree protection plan Sheet T1, for location).

27.150
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 17

CONCLUSION
The Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A is the condensed reference guide to inform all tree management decisions for the trees evaluated.
The project includes construction of a new home at 109 South Rapetta Road, Santa Cruz. Eighteen trees within or near the project limits were inventoried, including eleven “protected” trees.
Seven trees, including three “protected” trees, T11, coast live oak, and T2 & T23, Monterey cypress, are suitable for incorporation into the project. Eleven trees are in poor condition, or will be highly impacted, and are not suitable for incorporation into the project, including eight “protected” trees, T14, T15, T16, T17, T19, T20, T25, & 26 blue gum eucalyptus.
Trees retained will require mitigation methods to reduce construction impacts including tree protection fencing and other treatments.
A total of eight “protected” trees are recommended for removal. If removals are permitted, replacement trees will be required.

27.151
Tree Inventory & Protection Plan 11/16/2020
109 S. Rapetta Road Page 18

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Obtain all necessary permits prior to removing or significantly altering any trees on site.

2. Remove all trees highly impacted or in poor condition as recommended in Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A.

3. Follow tree protection specifications for T11, coast live oak, and tree T16 blue gum eucalyptus in areas indicated on Tree Protection Plan, sheet T1.

Respectfully submitted,
Kurt Fouts ISA Certified Arborist WE0681A
Kurt Fouts

27.152
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter
@ 54
inches
a.g.

Protected
Tree
Crown
Height &
Spread
(Diameter)
Health
Rating
Structural
Rating
Suitability for
Preservation
(Based Upon
Condition)
Tree
Protection
Zone (in
feet from
trunk)
Construction
Impacts
(Rating &
Description)
Retention
or
Removal
Code
Comments
T11 coast live oak
(Quercus agrifolia ) 14" Yes 25'X15' Fair Fair Fair 18' Low -
Moderate
(Root loss,
excavation)
R.T., I.M.
14' from new home foundation. 15 degree trunk lean over S. Rapetta Road, with weight bias to east. Requires minor clearance pruning for vehicle access at new driveway.

T12 Chinese pistache
(Pistacia chinensis) 3" No 10'X5' Good Good Good 12' Low (Root loss, excavation) R.T. 8' from new home foundation. Young staked tree.

T13
blackwood acacia
(Acacia
melanoxylon )
5" No 20'X10' Fair Fair Fair 18' Low (Root loss,
excavation) R.T. 8' from new home foundation.Co-dominant trunks at 2' above grade.

Page 1 of 4 ends

Santa Cruz City CouncilAugust 9, 2022

Santa Cruz City Council
August 9, 2022