Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, March 14, 2023 (part 3 of 3)

The General Plan 2030 includes goals, policies and actions that set forth measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts of increased noise resulting from construction or operation of development projects (HZ3.1.1,HZ3.1.2, HZ3.1.3, and HZ3.1.5). The General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan policies and adherence to City regulations, noise impacts from future development would be less than significant. The General Plan EIR concluded that development accommodated by the plan would result in construction of varying sound level and duration, but with implementation of General Plan policies and actions that set forth measures to minimize exposure construction noise levels, the increase in temporary noise levels from construction-related activities

17.253
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -70- March 2023
would be considered less than significant. General Plan policies seek to minimize and monitor construction noise (HZ3.1.3, HZ3.1.5). In particular, the General Plan seeks to ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses (HZ3.1.3). Development projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and typical conditions of approval include limiting the day and times of day during which construction and/or heavy construction can be conducted, provision of notification to neighbors regarding construction schedules, and implementation of a process to receive and respond to noise complaints. These are some of the types of measures that would be required by the City to manage and minimize construction noise impacts of development projects per proposed General Plan Actions HZ3.1.3 and HZ3.1.5 (SOURCE V.1b, DEIR volume), which would be considered uniformly applied development policies and standards. The project noise study recommends construction best management practices that would minimize construction noise, which will be a condition of project approval, and consistent with the General Plan, would be considered an uniformly applied development standard.

Municipal Code section 24.14.220 indicates that no land or building in any district shall be used or occupied in any manner so as to create noise or vibration in such a manner or in an amount as to adversely affect the surrounding area or adjoining premises. Municipal Code section 9.36.010 prohibits offensive noise between the hours of 10 PM and 8 AM and section 9.36.020 prohibits unreasonably disturbing noises. Furthermore, section 24.14.260 prohibits increases of sound levels above five dBA above the local ambient on a residential property. These regulations are intended to prevent increases in ambient noise levels and would be considered uniformly applied regulations to which the proposed project would be subject to compliance.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site regarding permanent or temporary increases in noise with the application of uniformly applied development standards. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183. (b) Vibration. The General Plan EIR indicates that there were no planned land uses that would be expected to result in generation of groundborne vibration, and that the potential for vibration is mostly associated with construction-related impacts. Construction noise and potential vibration would be performed during daytime hours and be temporary in nature. As indicated above, the General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan policies and adherence to City regulations, noise impacts from construction of future development projects would be less than significant. Municipal Code section 24.14.220 indicates that no land or building in any district shall be used or occupied in any manner so as to create noise or vibration in such a manner or in an amount as to adversely affect the surrounding area or adjoining premises.

The proposed residential use would not result in generation of or exposure to vibration as the proposed uses are not known to be sources of vibration. Construction activities can cause vibration that varies in intensity. The use of pile driving and vibratory compaction equipment typically generates the highest construction-related groundborne vibration levels. Because of the impulsive nature of such activities, the use of the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) descriptor has been routinely used to measure and assess groundborne vibration and almost exclusively to assess the potential of vibration to induce structural damage and the degree of annoyance for humans. To assess the

17.254
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -71- March 2023
potential for vibration to result in structural damage, Caltrans recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec PPV for historic buildings, 0.2 in/sec PPV for fragile buildings, and a conservative limit of 0.12 in/sec PPV for ancient buildings, ruins or extremely fragile buildings that are documented to be structurally weakened (Caltrans 20136).

The noise impact analysis considered vibration resulting from construction activities. Vibrationproducing construction activities are likely to occur during demolition and site preparation with the use of dozers and drilling to clear the site and prepare the foundation of the buildings. The analysis found that vibration levels are not expected to exceed the 0.1 in/sec PPV threshold for human annoyance or the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold for damage to “normal dwelling houses” at the nearest residential properties; the highest construction-related vibration level would be 0.012 (SOURCE V.19). Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site regarding generation of excessive vibration. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(e-f) Airport Noise. The project site is not located near an airport or private airstrip.

14. POPULATION

AND HOUSING
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
DEIR pp. 5-3 to
5-4
DEIR pp. 4.2-2
to 4.2-6, 4.2-12
to 4.2-14
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable None
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
DEIR Appendix
A p. 41
DEIR pp. 4.2-14
to 4.2-15
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable None
(a) Inducement of Substantial Population Growth. The General Plan 2030 EIR estimated population and housing increases that could result from potential development and buildout accommodated by the plan that included 3,350 residential dwelling units with an associated population increase of 8,040 residents by the year 2030. The project would include construction of 124 new dwelling units. The 6 California Department of Transportation. April 2020. “Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual.”

17.255
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -72- March 2023
project would not induce substantial population growth in the City as it would be consistent with population growth projections developed for the City and the amount of development described in the General Plan EIR as described below (SOURCE V.1b, DEIR volume). It is also noted that the proposed project would not be inducing new population growth, but would serve existing households in the city or county that are on waiting lists for affordable housing. The Housing Authority of Santa Cruz County has indicated to City staff that there are a total of 10,851 applicants on the waiting list for affordable housing.

The City had a population of 64,075 people as of January 1, 2022 (SOURCE V.6). The proposed project‘s 124 residential units would house approximately 290 residents based on the City’s existing average household size of 2.33. This is a conservatively high estimate as household sizes in the downtown area at about 1.9 persons per household are slightly lower than the Citywide average, based on Census information. With the additional conservative assumption that all of the project’s residents would be adding to the City’s population, rather than simply moving from other places in the City (as is most likely, given the waiting list for affordable housing), the City’s population would total 64,365.

This is within the adopted regional population forecast of 68,845 for the city of Santa Cruz for the year 2025 (SOURCE V.4a), and also within the population forecast of 64,649 residents in the City in 2025 that was considered in the General Plan 2030 EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially induce unplanned population growth. Since the potential population growth resulting from the proposed project would fall within the total level of development analyzed in the General Plan EIR and is consistent with current regional forecasts, no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Displacement of Existing Housing or People. No housing units exist on the project site. Existing uses on the project site include a small commercial building and paved public parking lot. Therefore, the project would not result in displacement of housing or residents and thus would not result in any impact peculiar to the parcel of the project with respect to this category of impact.

15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection? DEIR pp. 4.6-10
to 4.6-11
DEIR pp. 4.6-2
to 4.6-4, 4.6-33
to 4.6-36
FEIR pp. 3-19
No No None

17.256
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -73- March 2023

4.6-40 to 4.6-41
No No
Payment of
School Impact
Fees
Parks?
DEIR pp. 4.6-13
to 4.6-15
FEIR pp. 3-4 to
3-5
DEIR pp. 4.6-5
to 4.6-20,

4.6-37 to 4.6-40
FEIR pp. 3-20 to
3-22
No No None
Other public facilities? Not Applicable Not Applicable No No None Police and Fire Protection Services. As indicated in Section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered construction of approximately 3,350 residential units within the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b); the proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units and commercial square footage. Thus, the project’s proposed 124 residential units and non-residential space would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential development and buildout accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant for fire and police protection services, which was further supported by subsequent analyses in the Downtown Plan Amendment EIR. Thus, construction of any new public facilities to serve the project would not be warranted with General Plan buildout. Since the proposed project size would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR and would not result in more severe impacts than analyzed in these EIRs, no further environmental analysis is required regarding these public services pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

School Enrollments. The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR and General Plan EIR concluded that buildout of the Downtown Plan and General Plan could result in potentially significant impacts to schools but, with required payment of school impact fees to fund necessary facility expansion and/or additions in conjunction with potential reuse of the former Natural Bridges Elementary School if needed, the impact would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR and General Plan EIR concluded that potential addition or expansion of school classroom facilities is not expected to result in significant physical impacts due to the location of existing facilities within developed footprints.

As the proposed project would be within the amount of development analyzed in the and General Plan EIR and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR and would be within the amount of development

17.257
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -74- March 2023
analyzed in the General Plan EIR, no new or substantially worsened impacts to schools or impacts peculiar to the project or site would occur. No further environmental analysis is required regarding this public service pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3. It is also noted that payment of school impact fees would be required.

Parks and Recreation. See Section IV.E.16 below regarding impacts to parks and recreational facilities.

16. RECREATION
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
DEIR pp. 4.6-13
to 4.6-15
FEIR pp. 3-4 to
3-5
DEIR pp. 4.6-5
to 4.6-20,

4.6-37 to 4.6-40
No No
Parks and
Recreation
Facilities Tax
b) Include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion
of recreational facilities?
DEIR p. 4.6-10 DEIR pp. 4.6-10
to 4.6-11 No No None
(a) Use of Existing Parks and Recreational Facilities. The City has responsibility for management, maintenance and operation of over 1,700 acres of parks and open space lands, and various community/recreational facilities, and oversees development of new parks and improvements within City-owned parks, open space, and community facilities. In the project area, the Santa Cruz Riverwalk provides pedestrian and bicycle access to the multi-use path on the river levee. Other nearby facilities include outdoor courtyards at City Hall and the Town Clock and adjacent mini-park. The project site also is less than one mile to Depot Park and the City’s Main Beach.

As indicated in Section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered construction of approximately 3,350 residential units within the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b, DEIR volume), and the proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. Thus, the proposed project would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The EIR analyses concluded that, while the City does not meet its goal for neighborhood parks of 2.0 acres per 1,000 residents and for community parks of 2.5 acres per 1,000 residents, implementation of General Plan goals, policies, and actions that set forth measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts on park and recreational facilities, as well as compliance with local regulations, would ensure that impacts to parks and recreational facilities resulting from buildout of the General Plan would be less than significant. The Downtown Plan Amendment EIR concluded that with implementation of the proposed General Plan 2030 goals, policies and actions that set forth measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts on parks and recreational facilities and required project payment of park fees, impacts of new development in the downtown area would be less than significant.

17.258
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -75- March 2023
Furthermore, the City imposes a “Parks and Recreation Facilities Tax” (pursuant to Chapter 5.72 of the Municipal Code) on new residential development within the City, payable at the time of issuance of a building permit. The collected taxes are placed into a special fund, and “shall be used and expended solely for the acquisition, improvement and expansion of public park, playground and recreational facilities in the city” (Municipal Code section 5.72.100). The required fees for park expansion and improvements would be considered an application of uniformly applied development standards. (It is noted that projects that have dedicated land or fees in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 23.28 requirements for subdivisions are exempt from this tax). Thus, with implementation of uniformly applied development standards, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities not otherwise addressed in the General Plan and Downtown Plan Amendments EIRs or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183. (b) New Recreational Facilities. The project does not include public recreational facilities. As indicated above, the General Plan concluded that potential impacts to parks and recreational facilities with growth accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

17. TRANSPORTATION

4.4-31 to 4.4-45
No No
GP Actions
M3.1.3, M3.1.4,
M2.3.2
regarding traffic
improvements
and Traffic
Impact Fee
Program
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

4.7-16, 4.7-19
to 4.17-20 Not Applicable No No
GP Policy LU4.2
GP Actions
M3.1.1, M3.1.1
regarding trip
reduction, high
occupant
vehicle travel,
and alternative
travel modes
City VMT
Implementation
Guidelines

17.259
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -76- March 2023

17. TRANSPORTATION

AND TRAFFIC
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
Traffic Impact
Fee Program
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (for
example, sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(for example, farm equipment)?
DEIR p. 4.7-21 DEIR pp. 4.4-45
to 4.4-46 No No None
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? DEIR p. 4.7-22 DEIR pp. 4.6-33
to 4.6-37 No No None
(a) Conflict with Circulation Plan, Policy or Ordinance. The project site is bordered by commercial businesses and Pacific Avenue to the east, Cathcart Street to the south, Cedar Street to the west, and Lincoln Street to the north. Project access will be provided along the southeastern portion of the site, from Cathcart Street, via a new one-way alley and parking garage entrance. The new alley would allow one-way access only in the northerly direction, across the project site, exiting onto Lincoln Street. The parking garage access point would allow both ingress and egress to/from the three-story parking garage. Both access points would be improved with a new driveway approach.

The local roadway network serving the project site includes Pacific Avenue, Cedar Street, Front Street, and Soquel Avenue. The Santa Cruz Metro Transit District (METRO) has bus route service along Cedar Street. Local METRO bus stops are located along Cedar Street/Cathcart Street intersection (Routes 10, 40, 41, and 42) and along Cedar Street/Lincoln Street intersection (Routes 40, 41, and 42). The project site is also approximately 350 feet northwest of the Santa Cruz Metro Center, which provides routes to other locations in the county. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are located in the area, including sidewalks and bicycle lanes along Pacific Avenue, Cathcart Street, Cedar Street, and Lincoln Street.

The project includes 243 parking spaces within the proposed parking garage to support the residential, library, and commercial uses and 258 bicycle parking spaces. The project includes 140 Class 1 (individually locked enclosure, weather and vandalism protected, supervised) bicycle parking spaces and 118 Class 2 (stand to lock to bike wheel or frame) bicycle spaces. The project includes frontage improvements along Cathcart Street, Cedar Street, and Lincoln Street per City standards, including sidewalks.

The General Plan 2030 includes goals, policies and actions that set forth comprehensive measures to reduce vehicle trips, increase vehicle occupancy, encourage use of alternative transportation modes, and promote alternative-sustainable land use patterns, all of which would help reduce vehicle trips, avoid and minimize adverse impacts related to traffic. The City’s General Plan strives to maintain the

17.260
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -77- March 2023
established “level of service” D or better at signalized intersections (M3.1.3). “Level of service” (LOS) is typically used to evaluate traffic operations, in which operating conditions range from LOS “A” (free-flowing) to LOS “F” (forced-flow). Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS C and D on State highway facilities. Delays for signalized intersections are evaluated for the overall peak hour as an “average.” The methodologies for unsignalized intersections also evaluates the delays for the each “critical” movement (e.g. stop sign controlled approaches on the minor street and main line left turn). The City’s General Plan also accepts a lower level of service and higher congestion at major regional intersections if necessary improvements would be prohibitively costly or result in significant, unacceptable environmental impacts (M3.1.4).

According to a traffic study performed for the project, the proposed project would result in a net increase of 2,144 daily trips, including trips from the new library, with 82 new trips occurring the AM peak-hour and 269 trips occurring during the PM peak hour (SOURCE V.17). The study found that all intersections in the project vicinity currently operate under Level of Service (LOS) C or better. With addition of project traffic, all intersections would remain at LOS C or better, except Front Street and Soquel Avenue intersections would operate at LOS D during PM peak hour traffic (SOURCE V.17).

Therefore, because all intersections would operate at LOS D or better, the proposed project would continue to operate at acceptable City LOS levels and would not conflict with City policies regarding traffic congestion. The proposed project is also located in proximity to pedestrian and bicycle facilities that could be used for some of the project’s daily trips.

The City’s General Plan 2030 EIR concluded that adoption and implementation of the General Plan 2030 would accommodate future development that would result in increased vehicle trips and traffic, which would cause changes in some intersection levels of service to unacceptable levels or further deterioration of intersections currently operating at unacceptable levels of service at some locations.

The General Plan EIR did not identify intersections in the project vicinity that would operate at deficient LOS nor did the General Plan EIR did not identify any impacted intersections in the downtown area with development accommodated by the General Plan 2030. Subsequent to adoption of the General Plan, the City adopted a series of amendments to the Downtown Plan that could result in additional development in the downtown area beyond what was considered in the General Plan EIR. However, a traffic analysis conducted for the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR found that traffic associated with development resulting from the Downtown Plan amendments, would not result in degradation of LOS to below acceptable levels at the intersections studied in the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR under the jurisdiction of the City.

Two regional Caltrans intersections (Highway 1 / Highway 9 and Chestnut Street / Mission Street) would continue operate at LOS E as a result of the Downtown Plan amendments. There are improvements identified for the Highway 1/Highway 9-River Street intersection, which are currently under construction, and the Chestnut Street / Mission Street intersection is included in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). These improvements were already required under existing conditions without development resulting from the General Plan or Downtown Plan. Traffic associated with future development in the downtown would not further degrade the LOS at the two Caltrans intersections and would not substantially increase delay (SOURCE V.2b, DEIR volume).

Therefore, the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR concluded that traffic associated with the growth resulting from Downtown Plan amendments would not cause existing or planned intersections to

17.261
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -78- March 2023
operate at an unacceptable Level of Service (LOS) or further degrade intersections that already operate at an unacceptable LOS, resulting in a less-than-significant impact.

The General Plan EIR found that with implementation of the identified intersection improvements and General Plan 2030 policies and actions to reduce vehicular traffic, increase vehicle occupancy and support/encourage use of alternative transportation measures, the identified impact could be reduced to a less-than-significant level at the remaining impacted intersections. However, funding availability likely would remain constrained for major facility improvements and expansion of transit service into the foreseeable future. The General Plan concluded that implementation of recommended improvements and alternative transportation facilities cannot be assured, and that the impact to the intersections identified as operating at unacceptable levels of service under the proposed General Plan 2030 was conservatively assumed to be significant.

The project would be subject to payment of traffic impact fees that are applied uniformly throughout the City to all new development as part of the city-wide TIF program. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to conflicts with policies or regulations regarding the City’s circulation system or peculiar to the project or site. The project does not conflict with General Plan mobility policies regarding level of service goals, transportation improvements, reduction of vehicle trips, and encouraging multi-modal and alternative transportation systems. The project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs that support alternative transportation. Thus, no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

In addition, subsequent to the City Council’s certification of the Final EIR for the General Plan, provisions of CEQA essentially outlawing the use of level of service as a basis for finding significant transportation impacts took effect. Senate Bill (SB) 743, enacted in 2013, created Public Resources Code section 21099, which directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to establish criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas, with the option of creating new statewide criteria. The significance criteria for transit priority areas were to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. In developing the new criteria, OPR and the Secretary were to recommend potential metrics that included, but were not limited to, vehicle miles traveled [VMT], vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated. Section 21099 further provided that, once the CEQA Guidelines had been updated as required by the statute, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service [LOS] or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to [CEQA], except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” Consistent with these directives, the Natural Resources Agency promulgated CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, which became effective in late 2018. It provides that “[g]enerally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts,” with VMT referring to “the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel.” Rather than limit its scope only to transit priority areas, the section changed the approach to assessing transportation impacts under

17.262
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -79- March 2023
CEQA all over the State. By its own terms, however, the section did not require agencies to begin using VMT as a new metric until July 1, 2020. LOS had ceased to be a valid significance criterion as of late 2018, however. (See Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 609, 625-626.)
For these reasons, the City could not find a significant transportation-related effect from the proposed project even if the project resulted in LOS worse than what was anticipated in the General Plan EIR.
(b) Conflicts with State CEQA Guidelines. Subsequent to certification of the General Plan 2030 EIR, amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines at the end of 2018 added a new question of whether or not a project would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

As explained above, this is a new section that codifies the switch from LOS to VMT as the metric for transportation analysis pursuant to state legislation adopted in 2013, SB 743.

CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) indicates that development projects that exceed an applicable VMT threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.

In accordance with the amended CEQA Guidelines, the City has transitioned from intersection LOS formerly used for traffic impact analyses to VMT as the metric for determining potentially significant impacts. The City adopted a VMT transportation threshold on June 9, 2020 in accordance with CEQA and state requirements, as well as VMT Implementation Guidelines that are consistent with the State’s SB 743 Guidelines. The threshold generally establishes that a project exceeding a level of 15 percent below the County-wide average VMT may result in a significant transportation impact. The City’s adopted SB 743 (VMT) Implementation Guidelines include potential Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to help achieve VMT reduction. Updates to the City’s Guidelines were adopted on June 14, 2022.

The City’s guidelines to determine whether a land use project is within the VMT threshold includes a screening process in which situations are identified under which projects are determined to not have a significant impact and further VMT analysis is not required. The guidelines require that each distinct land use for a mixed-use project be analyzed separately unless they are determined to be insignificant to the total VMT. The guidelines also state that housing projects are expected to cause a less-thansignificant impact on VMT if a high percentage of the project is affordable, as determined by the City.

Furthermore, projects, or portions of a project, that meet the screening criteria do not require a CEQA transportation analysis, and such projects, or portions of a project, will have a non-significant CEQA transportation impact based on their project location and characteristics. According to the City’s guidelines, projects that would not be expected to result in a significant VMT impact and that are screened out from further transportation impact review include:
• Small projects that generate fewer than 110 trips per day;

17.263
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -80- March 2023
• Projects near high quality transit: within a ½ mile of a major transit stop or a high quality transit corridor with a combined service interval frequency of 15 minutes or less during the AM and PM peak hours;
• Local-serving retail if a single store is less than 50,000 square feet or project is a localserving project as determined by the City; • Affordable housing projects that provide a high percentage of affordable housing as determined by the City;
• Local essential service, including day care center, public K-12 schools, police or fire facility, medical/dental office building, government offices, and supportive housing types (assisted living, permanent supportive housing, memory care, etc.); • Map based screening; and
• Redevelopment projects that do not result in a net increase in VMT (SOURCE V.3f).

City staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the City’s adopted guidelines. The traffic study concluded that the proposed project meets the screening criteria because it is located in a VMT Efficient Area based on the Santa Cruz County Residential Screening Map, and, therefore, the project is located in an area that produces VMT per capita that is at least 15-percent below the Countywide average (SOURCE V.17). As described above in section (a), the project is also within ½ mile of a major transit stop that provides service at an interval of 15 minutes or less during AM and PM peak hours.

Thirdly, the project includes 124 new residential units that would be 100 percent affordable.

Additionally, each of the project elements can use the screening criteria in the City’s SB 743 Implementation Guidelines as follows.
• Projects near High-Quality Transit: This screening criterion is met as the proposed project is within one-half mile of a high-quality transit stop as defined by California Public Resources Code section 21064 (Santa Cruz Metro Center).
• Local-Serving Retail: This screening criterion covers the net increase of approximate 6,500 square feet space for commercial uses that would be considered local-serving retail uses, which is substantially less than the screening level of 50,000 square feet. • Affordable Housing: This screening criterion is met as the proposed project provides 100- percent-affordable housing with the proposed 124 units of affordable housing, which would be considered a high proportion of affordable housing.
• Local Essential Service: this screening criterion covers the proposed daycare and government offices uses (library) (SOURCE V.3d).

For these reasons, according to the City’s guidelines, the project would not result in a significant impact related to VMT based on the City’s adopted threshold and guidelines would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3.

The General Plan 2030 includes goals, policies and actions that set forth comprehensive measures to reduce vehicle trips, increase vehicle occupancy, encourage use of alternative transportation modes, and promote alternative-sustainable land use patterns, all of which would help reduce vehicle trips and VMT, and avoid and minimize adverse impacts related to traffic. General Plan EIR indicates that

17.264
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -81- March 2023
Policies M3.1.1 and M3.1.2 direct the City to seek ways to reduce vehicle trip demand, reduce the number of peak hour vehicle trips, and encourage high occupant vehicle travel. Implementation of General Plan policies that serve to reduce VMT would be considered uniformly applied development policies or standards. General Plan policies also encourage employment-related strategies (i.e., flextime, telecommuting, parking management, ridesharing) (M3.1.7, M3.1.8, M2.4.4) as ways to reduce vehicle trips, which would also reduce VMT.

Although no VMT standards have been developed within the City at the time the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR was prepared, a preliminary per capita VMT estimate included in the EIR showed that VMT resulting from downtown development would be below existing and projected county-wide estimates, which in large part is a reflection of the project’s location downtown and in proximity to transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities (SOURCE V.2b, DEIR volume).

While the General Plan EIR and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR did not analyze VMT as the requirement to do so was not in place, the proposed project does not exceed the City’s VMT threshold, which was adopted after certification of the General Plan 2030 and Downtown Plan Amendments EIRs. Furthermore, the proposed services to support residents that are included in the project, such as commercial space, child-care, community gathering places, and the library, would serve to reduce VMT, consistent with General Plan policies and actions to reduce vehicle trips.

General Plan Policy LU4.2 encourages land use changes that reduce the need for automobiles. The project locates new residents to a downtown area that supports businesses, employment opportunities, and public transportation; therefore, the project would promote types of transportation other than automobiles.

As indicted above in subsection (a), the project would be subject to payment of traffic impact fees that are applied uniformly throughout the City to all new development as part of the city-wide TIF program. TIF fees are used to address needed traffic improvements at key intersections for circulation and also for alternative transportation improvements; 15 percent of the collected TIF fees are allocated to alternative transportation improvements. In addition, the City’s adopted SB 743 (VMT) Implementation Guidelines include potential Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to help achieve VMT reduction, which serve to reduce project VMT impacts and are considered uniformly applied development standards. The proposed project was designed pursuant to these guidelines and provides: a bus stop on Cedar Street in front of the proposed library, an onsite childcare facility, bicycle parking in excess of City requirements, secure bicycle parking, widened sidewalks, and reduced project parking, all of which are consistent with TDM measures included in the City’s Guidelines, and would serve to further reduce project-generated VMT. Therefore, with this design planned pursuant to the City’s VMT guidelines and payment of required traffic impact fees, the project would not result in impacts peculiar to the project or site with implementation of uniformly applied development policies and standards, and no further environmental analysis is required regarding these public services pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3. (c, d) Design-Safety and Emergency Access. The project has been designed in accordance with standard City requirements, and there are no access designs that would substantially increase hazards; project access and design was reviewed as part of the project transportation study (SOURCE V.17). In particular, the entrance for the parking garage will be set back and an open-air design with

17.265
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -82- March 2023
support pillars will provide exiting vehicles with sight lines in both directions, including of the sidewalk for approaching directions. The project design will provide adequate sight distance for exiting vehicles of both oncoming vehicles and pedestrians. Fire truck access would be provided from the Cathcart Street and along the southern boundary of the property. The proposed alley connecting Cathcart Street to Lincoln Street is proposed to have a width of 20 feet with no overhead clearance restrictions.

Furthermore, the project would be designed in accordance with City police and fire department requirements and would provide for adequate emergency access. Therefore, the project would not result in increased hazards related to project design, would not provide inadequate emergency access, and would not result in new significant impacts or impacts peculiar to the project or site; no further environmental analysis is required regarding these public services pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3.

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL

RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
DEIR pp. 4.4-12
to 4.4-13 Not Evaluated Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
GP EIR
Mitigation 4.9-1
and Municipal
Code section

24.12.430
c) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe?
DEIR pp. 4.4-12
to 4.4-13 Not Evaluated Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
GP EIR
Mitigation 4.9-1
and Municipal
Code section

24.12.430
State Assembly Bill (AB) 52, effective July 1, 2015 after the City’s adoption of the General Plan 2030, recognizes that California Native American prehistoric, historic, archaeological, cultural, and sacred places are essential elements in tribal cultural traditions, heritages, and identities. The law establishes a new category of resources in the California Environmental Quality Act called “tribal cultural

17.266
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -83- March 2023
resources” that considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. Public Resources Code section 21074 defines a “tribal cultural resource” as either:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
(a) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.
(b) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of section 5020.1.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of section 5024.1. (a-b) Tribal Cultural Resources and Consultation. The California Public Resources Code section 21084.2 establishes that “[a] project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” The requirements for review of impacts to tribal cultural resources were added after the certification of the General Plan EIR. In addition, the City provided notice of the proposed DLAHP to local Native American tribes in accordance with AB 52 and to determine whether tribal cultural resource(s) are present within the project area, and if so, whether or not those resources would be significantly impacted by the project. Two responses were received recommending Native American monitoring during construction, but no information was provided regarding tribal cultural resources at the project site.

While there are no known tribal cultural resources meeting the above definition on the project site per the project archaeological report (SOURCE V.12 and V.16a), the project site is located within an area identified as being sensitive for archaeological resources (SOURCE V.1c). As described above in Section IV.E.5, Cultural Resources, the archaeology review and field survey conducted of the project site concluded that the site appears to have a very low potential for archaeological materials and that no prehistoric materials are anticipated to be encountered on the site from project construction or operation (SOURCE V.16a). Section 24.12.430 of the City’s Municipal Code sets forth the procedure to follow in the event that unknown archaeological materials are unearthed during construction, as described in Section IV.E.5 above, and implementation of these standards would be a standard condition of approval. Thus, the project would not result in significant impacts to tribal cultural resources or impacts peculiar to the project or the site with application of uniformly applied development standards. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

17.267
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -84- March 2023

19. UTILITIES AND

SERVICE SYSTEMS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment
facilities, or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or which could cause
significant environmental effects?
DEIR p. 4.5-11
to 4.5-12;

4.8-15
DEIR pp. 4.6-21
to 4.6-25,

4.6-41 to

4.6-43, 4.5-29
to 4.5-38
FEIR pp. 3-2 to
3-19
No No None
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
DEIR pp. 4.8-15
to 4.8-16
DEIR pp. 4.5-3
to 4.5-42
FEIR pp. 3-2 to
3-19
No No
Municipal Code
sections 16.02-
04 regarding
Water
Conservation,
Plumbing
Fixtures, &
Water Service
Charges
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
DEIR p. 4.8-16
DEIR pp. 4.6-21
to 4.6-25,

4.6-41 to 4.6-43
No No None
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
State or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local infrastructure,
or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
DEIR p. 4.6-15
DEIR pp. 4.6-25
to 4.6-27,

4.6-43 to 4.6-44
FEIR p. 3-22
No No None
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
DEIR p. 4.6-15 DEIR pp. 4.6-25
to 4.6-27 No No None
(a) Relocation or Construction of Utilities. Subsequent to certification of the General Plan 2030 EIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G questions were modified to include a new question regarding need for new, relocated, or expanded infrastructure systems. The project would be served by existing utilities, and the General Plan EIR concluded that the City’s wastewater treatment facility would be adequate to handle growth and development accommodated by the General Plan and would not require expansion or construction of facilities to serve future growth; see subsection (c) below.

17.268
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -85- March 2023
Because the size of the proposed project would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not result in more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The project does not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. No further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183. (b) Water Supply. The project site is located within the service area of the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, which serves an approximate 20-square-mile area. The service area includes the entire City of Santa Cruz, adjoining unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County, a small part of the City of Capitola, and coastal agricultural lands north of the City. Water is treated at the City’s Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant (GHWTP), except for groundwater, which is treated as part of the Beltz well system.

The City’s General Plan EIR provides a comprehensive analysis of impacts of water demand within the City’s service area, including potential buildout accommodated by the General Plan. The General Plan EIR predicted that water supplies would be adequate in normal years to serve estimated growth within the City of Santa Cruz water service area, although the document acknowledges that the outcome of the pending Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for anadromous fisheries may affect supplies. The General Plan EIR concluded that impacts to the City’s water supply would be significant and unavoidable during times of prolonged drought and potentially significant during normal years by the year 2030. Measures are identified in General Plan policies and actions to further conserve water, reduce demand and implement a desalination facility to provide a supplemental water supply during droughts. Subsequent to the adoption of the City’s General Plan 2030, the City adopted the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), and in November 2021, the City adopted the 2020 UWMP. The 2015 UWMP reported that water demand in the City’s water service area has ranged between nearly 3,800 million gallons per year (MGY) in 2006 to approximately 2,500 MGY in 2015 (SOURCE V.3j).

The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR concluded that intensified development in the downtown area as a result of the plan amendments represents less than one percent of the total estimated future water demand within the City’s service area, and the demand was within the amount of new multifamily dwellings considered in demand forecasts for the 2015 UWMP that was in effect at the time the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR was prepared. The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR concluded that water supplies would be adequate during average and normal years to serve the estimated development in the downtown area. During periods of dry years and drought, water customers would be subject to water curtailment as enacted by the City. A multiple dry year scenario would require more substantial curtailment of all water customers. However, the EIR concluded that the water demand from additional development in the downtown area (less than one percent of the total water service area demand) would not have significant effects on the levels of water supply or curtailment that would be required throughout the service area. Therefore, Downtown Plan Amendments EIR concluded that the impact of increased water demand on water supplies due to the future development in the downtown area would be less than significant (SOURCE V.2b, DEIR volume).

17.269
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -86- March 2023
The 2020 UWMP reported that annual water use has decreased since the early 2000s, but annual water use fell to a level of about 2.5 billion gallons, similar to the level experienced during the 1970s drought. However, in 2020, demand was still at a similar level as 2015, about 2.6 billion gallons, despite several years above long-term average rainfall from 2016 and 2020. Current projections forecast that water use over the next 25 years, including projected population growth, will increase at a very slow rate to reach approximately 2.8 billion gallons per year by 2045 (SOURCE V.3g).

With implementation of the City’s proposed water rights modifications and water supply augmentation strategies as summarized below, the City projects having sufficient water available in normal years and single dry years to serve anticipated demand throughout the 2020-2045 UWMP planning period. However, the City’s 2020 UWMP predicts that under multi-year drought conditions in the near term (2025) with proposed water rights modifications but before implementation of the planned aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) facilities and planned infrastructure projects, available supplies would meet projected demand in years one through four of the multi-year drought scenario, but would fall short of demand by 27 percent in year five, although such a shortage could occur sooner and persist longer through a multiple dry year period. Under multi-year drought conditions after 2030, with implementation of the ASR and planned infrastructure projects, available supplies would meet projected demand in years one through four of the multi-year drought scenario, and the year-five shortage is anticipated to be substantially reduced with projected shortages no larger than a negligible two percent or five percent with consideration of climate change parameters in dry years (SOURCE V.3g).

The General Plan EIR predicted that water supplies would be adequate in normal years to serve estimated growth within the City of Santa Cruz water service area, although the documents acknowledge that the outcome of the pending HCP may affect supplies. The General Plan 2030 EIR concluded that impacts to the City’s water supply would be significant and unavoidable during times of drought and potentially during normal years by the year 2030 with growth and development within the City’s water service area if recent water use trends change. Measures are identified in General Plan policies and actions to further conserve water, reduce demand and implement a supplemental water supply during droughts. These include: implementation of the City’s Long-Term Water Conservation Plan to reduce average daily water demand and maximize the use of existing water resources (CC3.1.1); promotion of water conservation (C3.11.2); updating guidelines and standards for new landscaping that emphasizes xeriscaping and other water-conserving practices (CC3.11.1); Implementation of water conservation best management practices (CC3.5.1); and offering water audits and technical assistance to residents and businesses reduce their average daily water use (CC3.5.3).

However, the 2020 UWMP indicates that while the City is vulnerable to water shortages during later years of a multiple dry year period primarily due to the limitation in when and how much water is available to meet system demand, exacerbated by a lack of storage within the system, the City is actively planning and implementing a number of projects and major investments in the water system designed to secure future water supply reliability. Since 2015, the City of Santa Cruz has been pursuing a Water Supply Augmentation Strategy (WSAS) developed by the Water Supply Advisory Committee, a citizen committee, which was formed in 2014 by Santa Cruz City Council with the charge to analyze potential solutions to deliver a safe, adequate, reliable, affordable and environmentally

17.270
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -87- March 2023
sustainable water supply for the City of Santa Cruz. The WSAS portfolio elements, which are being pursued on a concurrent timeline, include:
• Element 0: Demand Management. Demand Management, or conservation, is not considered a water supply for the purposes of the UWMP, but is addressed in the UWMP 2020. • Element 1: Transfers and Exchanges. The City has been piloting water transfers to the Soquel Creek Water District since 2018, as water supplies are available, under a cooperative piloting agreement that extends through 2025. Potential water transfers and exchanges with local water districts in addition to the Soquel Creek Water District, include Central Water District, Scotts Valley Water District, and San Lorenzo Valley Water District, which would be facilitated by the City’s proposed water rights modifications to place of use as briefly summarized below. • Element 2: Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR). The City has been evaluating the feasibility of ASR in both the Santa Cruz Mid-County and in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basins, with current work primarily focused on the portion of Santa Cruz Mid-County Basin within the City of Santa Cruz service area. Pilot testing has been conducted at the existing Beltz 8 and Beltz 12 well facilities to better understand potential water quality and operational constraints.

Implementation of ASR also may occur in the future in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin.
• Element 3: Recycled Water or Desalination. Following completion of the 2017 Desalination Feasibility Update Review Report, further study of recycled water has been prioritized over study of seawater desalination. The City is continuing to examine the use of recycled water through commissioned engineering studies. The 2018 Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study recommendation includes two projects that would provide non-potable reuse in the City. The City is also committed to exploring other reuse opportunities, including:
coordination with Soquel Creek Water District’s Pure Water Soquel project, exploring groundwater replenishment and reuse at Beltz Well system, and exploring groundwater replenishment and reuse in Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (SOURCE V.3g).

The City is also pursuing the Santa Cruz Water Rights Project to support the implementation of the WSAS. The project involves the modification of the City’s existing water rights to increase the flexibility of the water system by improving the City’s ability to utilize surface water within existing allocations. This project also incorporates into the City’s water rights bypass flow requirements for all of the City’s surface water sources which are protective of local anadromous fisheries. The primary components of the Santa Cruz Water Rights Project include:
• Water rights modifications related to place of use, method of diversion, points of diversion and re-diversion, underground storage and purpose of use, extension of time, and stream bypass requirements for fish habitats;
• Water supply augmentation components, including new aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) facilities at unidentified locations, ASR facilities at the existing Beltz Well facilities, water transfers and exchanges and intertie improvements; and
• Surface water diversion improvements, including the Felton Diversion fish passage improvements and the Tait Diversion and Coast Pump Station improvements (SOURCE V.3g).

17.271
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -88- March 2023
In addition, as required by California Water Code and to manage risks due to water supply shortages that can be expected in the future, the 2020 UWMP includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan that addresses how the City’s water system would be managed during a water shortage emergency that arises as a result of drought, which could result in required customer water use reductions (SOURCE V.3g). Furthermore, the City continues to administer its water conservation program, has completed a Conservation Master Plan.

As indicated in section IV.B, the City’s General Plan EIR considered development of approximately 3,350 new residential units throughout the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b, DEIR volume), and the proposed project would be within the total and remaining unbuilt residential development evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Because the number of new residential units falls within the projected number of units within the EIR, the water demand generated by the proposed project would fall within the total level of water demand estimated and analyzed in the General Plan EIR. As indicated above, annual water demand projections are less than what was analyzed in the General Plan EIR, and the City currently predicts potential negligible shortages during multi-year droughts with implementation of proposed water augmentation projects. However, the proposed project would be subject to uniformly applied development standards that include requirements for installation of water conservation fixtures and landscaping for new construction. In addition, the project would pay the required “System Development Charge” for the required new service connection. This charge as set forth in Chapter 16.14 of the City’s Municipal Code is intended to mitigate the water supply impacts caused by new development in the City of Santa Cruz water service area, and the funds are used for construction of public water system improvements and conservation programs. Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to availability of water supplies not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site with implementation of uniformly applied development standards. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Wastewater Treatment Capacity. The project would be served by existing utilities, and the General Plan EIR concluded that the City’s wastewater treatment facility would be adequate to handle growth and development accommodated by the General Plan and would not require expansion or construction of facilities to serve future growth. As indicated in section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered development of approximately 3,350 residential units within the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b), and the proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. The EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential development and buildout accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant for wastewater treatment. Since the size of the proposed project would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts or more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR or impacts peculiar to the project or site. No further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3. (d-e) Solid Waste Disposal. The project would be served by existing utilities, and the General Plan EIR concluded that the City’s landfill would be adequate to handle growth and development accommodated by the General Plan and would not require expansion or construction of facilities to serve future growth. As indicated in section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered development of approximately 3,350 residential units within the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b);

17.272
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -89- March 2023
and the proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. The EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential development and buildout accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant for solid waste disposal. Since the size of the proposed project would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts or more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR or impacts peculiar to the project or site. No further environmental analysis is required regarding solid waste pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3.

20. WILDFIRE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation?
DEIR Appendix
A pp. 35-36
DEIR pp. 4.6-2
to 4.6-5, 4.6-33
to 4.6-37
No No None
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
DEIR Appendix
A pp. 36 Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
DEIR Appendix
A pp. 36 Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
DEIR Appendix
A pp. 36 Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None (a) Emergency Plans. The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (SOURCE V.7). See also Section IV.E.9(f) regarding emergency access.
(b-d) Exacerbation of Wildfire Impacts. Subsequent to the certification of the General Plan 2030 EIR, in 2019 OPR amended the CEQA Guidelines to add wildfire-related impacts and exposure to the Appendix G checklist questions. The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or

17.273
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -90- March 2023
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones; see also 9(g). The project site is located in a local responsibility area. Local responsibility areas are located within incorporated city limits, and therefore, fire protection would be provided by the City’s fire department. The proposed project therefore would not cause any impacts peculiar to the parcel or the project with respect to this category of impact.

The project site is flat and surrounded by development in an urban setting. The project would result in construction of habitable structures, but the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose people or structures to significant risks including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of post-fire conditions. Therefore, no impacts of these kinds would occur. See also section IV.9(g) above.

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS

OF SIGNIFICANCE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar
to Project
or Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Would the project: Standards
a) Have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
DEIR pp. 4.3-17
to 4.3-22,

4.4-12 to 4.4-13
DEIR pp. 4.8-13
to 4.8-21,

4.8-24, 4.8-26
to 4.8-30,

4.8-41, 4.8-38
to 4.8-44,

4.8-48 to

4.8-51, 4.9-10
to 4.9-12,

4.9-19 to 4.9-23
FEIR pp. 3-22,
3-25 to 3-40
No No
GP Action
NRC2.2.1 &
Project
Assessment
Protocols for
Special Status
Species; GP EIR
Mitigation 4.9-1
and Municipal
Code section

24.12.430
b) Have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of the
past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
DEIR pp. 5-4 to
5-14
DEIR pp. 5-8 to
5-36
FEIR pp. 3-27 to
3-33
No No
Downtown Plan
Amendments
EIR Mitigation

5.1 c) Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
DEIR Appendix
A pp. 43, 38 to
39 DEIR pp. 4.13-4
to 4.13-8,

4.13-10 to

4.13-20
No No None

17.274
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -91- March 2023
(a) Quality of the Environment. The project would not degrade the quality of the environment or otherwise affect fish and wildlife habitat as discussed in Section IV.E.4 (Biological Resources) of this Environmental Checklist review. As explained in Section IV.E.4, biological resource impacts are not peculiar to the parcel or the project because they were either adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR or can be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applied development policies or standards. As discussed in Section IV.E.5 (Cultural Resources) and Section IV.E.18 (Tribal Cultural Resources), cultural resources are not peculiar to the parcel or the project because they were either adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR or can be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applied development policies or standards. The project would not result in elimination of important examples of a major period of California history or prehistory. (b) Cumulative Impacts. The General Plan EIR identified potential significant cumulative impacts related noise, population, transportation/traffic, and water supply. Vehicle trips resulting from the proposed project would contribute to cumulative noise impacts. The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR identified significant cumulative impacts related to transportation/traffic, water supply, schools, and cumulative traffic.

Noise. The proposed project would not contribute to cumulative noise impacts since the project is not located in proximity to the road segments subject to the cumulative noise impact (Westside industrial area) as identified in the General Plan 2030 EIR.

Population. The General Plan 2030 EIR identified cumulative population growth as a potentially significant impact due to growth at the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC) in conjunction with growth accommodated by the General Plan. The EIR concluded that cumulative growth (City and UCSC) could result in an average annual growth rate that would exceed historical growth rates and AMBAG population forecast growth rates if the North Campus area is annexed to the City in the next 20 years. UCSC updated its Long-Range Development Plan (LRDP) in 2021 and no longer proposes expansion into the North Campus area, although enrollments were projected to increase. The General Plan EIR considered UCSC enrollment to 19,500 students with provision of additional oncampus housing. According to UCSC’s website, enrollment for the 2021-2022 academic year totaled approximately 19,000 students (SOURCE V.11a).

Regional population forecasts are updated every four years by AMBAG and have been updated since certification of the General Plan 2030 EIR and the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR. Current forecasts project a Citywide population of 72,218 in the year 2030 (AMBAG 2022). The City had a population of 64,075 people as of January 1, 2022 (California Department of Finance 2022). Based on the City’s existing average household sizes, cumulative residential projects7could result in a population increase of approximately 7,684 persons as a result of development of 2,405 new housing units and student housing at UCSC based on average citywide household sizes (2.33 persons per household) and the slightly lower household size in the downtown area (1.9 persons per household, based on Census information). City population as a result of cumulative residential projects could increase to 7 Cumulative projects include the proposed project, projects under construction, approved projects, and reasonably foreseeable pending projects, including residential projects at UCSC.

17.275
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -92- March 2023
approximately 71,759, which would not exceed the regional population forecast for the City of 72,218 in the year 2030 (SOURCE V.4a). Therefore, no new significant cumulative population growth impacts related to cumulative development is expected.

The General Plan 2030 EIR also indicates that regional population forecasts, which are updated every four years, would account for changing trends in cumulative development and growth. Furthermore, it is also noted that the proposed project would not be inducing new population growth, but would serve existing households in the city or county that are on waiting lists for affordable housing. As indicated in Section IV.E.14, Population and Housing, the Housing Authority of Santa Cruz County has indicated to City staff that there are a total of 10,851 applicants on the waiting list for affordable housing. Given this existing waiting list for affordable housing in the county, it is likely that some or all of the future occupants of the proposed project and other affordable housing projects in the City would already be city residents and thus would not result in additional population growth in the City.

Transportation/Traffic. The proposed project would contribute to cumulative traffic impacts analyzed in the General Plan 2030 EIR. However, the General Plan EIR did not identify significant cumulative impactsin the project vicinity. The Downtown Plan Amendments EIR Mitigation Measure 5-1 requires cumulative downtown development projects to pay fair-share contributions for improvements at the following intersections: Front/Soquel, Front/Laurel and Front/Pacific. With implementation of this mitigation, the Downtown Plan EIR concluded that significant cumulative traffic impacts at these three intersections would be mitigated, and a project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would be required to pay traffic impact fees and contribute to downtown improvements as specified in Mitigation Measure 5-1 in the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR.

The project transportation impact study identified one intersection deficiency at the Front Street/Soquel Avenue intersection, but noted that the improvements proposed in the Downtown Intersections Improvement Plan, the LOS and delay could be reduced from F to E and 206.0 to 73.7, respectively (SOURCE V.17). The improvements include modifying the eastbound and southbound approaches While no feasible improvements were identified that would reduce the LOS and delay to LOS D, under the City’s existing General Plan, the City accepts a lower LOS at some major regional intersections such as this one per Circulation Policy 5.1.2.

The previous General Plan and Downtown Plan EIRs’ evaluations of cumulative traffic impacts were based on the traffic congestion metric of LOS, which is no longer applicable due to changes in CEQA described above in Section IV.E.19, which now require traffic impacts to be evaluated based on VMT.

In establishing guidelines, the State Office of Planning and Research issued guidelines that indicate if a project falls below an efficiency-based threshold that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans, there would be no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact.

Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact (SOURCE V.8). As indicated in IV.E.19(b), the proposed project would not result in a significant impact related to VMT, and accordingly, cumulative traffic impacts also would be less-than significant. Future development projects would be individually evaluated for potential VMT impacts, and none have been identified. There are no new significant cumulative transportation impacts to which the proposed project would contribute that have not been addressed in the General Plan EIR.

17.276
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -93- March 2023
Water Supply. The proposed project would contribute to significant cumulative impacts related to water supply identified in the General Plan 2030 EIR and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR. As indicated in these EIRs, development projects would be subject to City requirements for installation of water-conserving fixtures and landscaping in accordance with current Municipal Code and building requirements. Under multi-year drought conditions, the project, like other City customers, would be subject to water use restrictions. The increase in water demand due to the proposed project would not substantially exacerbate water supply reliability in the future or during a drought because the amount of additional demand when spread across all service area customers would not result in any noticeable increase in the timing or extent of curtailment in customer use that would otherwise be implemented during drought conditions.

In addition, the project would pay the required “System Development Charge” that is required for a new or upgraded service connection or where a project adds new residential uses. This charge, as set forth in Chapter 16.14 of the Municipal Code, funds public water system improvements, and is assessed so projects pay the proportional share of the costs of new and existing water facilities necessary to meet the demand resulting from new or enlarged water services. This charge is intended to mitigate the water supply impacts caused by new development in the City’s water service area, and the funds are used for construction of public water system improvements and conservation programs. Payment of the System Development Charge and implementation of other water conservation measures would mitigate the project’s contribution to cumulative water supply impacts.

As indicated in Section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered development of approximately 3,350 residential units within the City to the year 2030 (SOURCE V.1b), and cumulative development, including the proposed project, projects under construction and approved projects, is within the total and remaining estimated unbuilt residential units and non-residential square footage.

Furthermore, as explained in Section IV.E.19(b), projected water demands have decreased since certification of the General Plan 2030 EIR, and the City has an updated UWMP (2020). Cumulative development is within the population projections used in the 2020 UWMP to estimate future water demand. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative water demand would not result in new or more severe significant impacts relating to water supply than analyzed in the General Plan EIR or Downtown Plan Amendments EIR, nor would the project result in any new significant impacts that are peculiar to the site or project that were not considered in these EIRs. The project would be subject to City requirements for installation of water-conserving fixtures and landscaping in accordance with current City Municipal Code and building requirements.

Under multi-year drought conditions, the proposed project, like other City customers, would be subject to water use restrictions. The increase in water demand due to the proposed project would not substantially exacerbate water supply reliability in the future or during a drought because the amount of additional demand when spread across all service area customers would not result in any noticeable increase in the timing or extent of curtailment in customer use that would otherwise be implemented during drought conditions. In addition, the project would pay the required “System Development Charge” for the required new service connection. This charge, as set forth in Chapter

16.14 of the City’s Municipal Code, is intended to mitigate the water supply impacts caused by new development in the City of Santa Cruz water service area, and the funds are used for construction of

17.277
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -94- March 2023
public water system improvements and conservation programs. Payment of the System Development Charge and implementation of other water conservation measures would mitigate the project’s contribution to cumulative water supply impacts. Therefore, the project’s incremental contribution to a significant cumulative water supply impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Because the potential project contribution to cumulative impacts falls within the total level of those analyzed in the General Plan EIR, no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resource Code section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

Schools. The General Plan and Downtown Plan Amendments EIRs concluded that cumulative development could potentially affect school enrollments. The General Plan EIR concluded that this is a potentially significant cumulative impact, but would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with required payment of school impact fees to fund necessary facility expansion and/or additions (City of Santa Cruz, April 2012, DEIR volume). Both EIRs also found that potential addition or expansion of school classroom facilities is not expected to result in significant physical impacts due to the location of existing facilities within developed footprints, and future enrollment could be accommodated without construction of new schools, although some expansion of existing facilities may be necessary (City of Santa Cruz, April 2012, DEIR volume). Therefore, a project’s incremental contribution to this impact as a result of generation of students, including the proposed project, is not cumulatively considerable as the required payment of school impact fees would mitigate the project’s cumulative contribution such that it would no longer be considered cumulatively considerable.

Stormwater. Subsequent to the preparation and certification of the City’s General Plan 2030 EIR and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR, the City has identified a cumulative stormwater conveyance/ capacity issue in the downtown area and is proposing a new pump station to address this issue and ensure adequate stormwater conveyance capacity for a five-year storm event in the downtown. A feasibility study was prepared for the City, including an evaluation of alternative sites for locating a new pump station. The study indicates that the existing 42- to 48-inch stormwater pipeline beneath the toe of the San Lorenzo River Levee, which extends between Soquel Avenue and Laurel Street, is undersized, and the study identifies a preferred location for a new pump station at the southeast corner of the Front Street/Soquel Avenue intersection (SOURCE V.3c). The City proposes inclusion of the new pump station in the City’s upcoming Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Improvement Program. The proposed DLAHP would not result in increased runoff due to an overall reduction in impervious surfaces as a result of the project, and therefore, would not contribute to this identified cumulative stormwater impact.

Conclusion. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts than analyzed in the General Plan 2030 and Downtown Plan Amendments EIRs. Nor would the project result in cumulative water supply or traffic impacts peculiar to the project or site with implementation of uniformly applied development standards. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15183. (c) Substantial Adverse Effects on Human Beings. Neither the General Plan EIR nor the Downtown Plan Amendments EIR identified impacts relating to air or water pollution or noise levels that would result in adverse effects on human beings; see Sections IV.E.3, 10 and 13. Project construction would

17.278
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -95- March 2023
require demolition of existing buildings that may contain hazardous materials (asbestos and leadbased paint). However, as discussed in Section IV.E.9, an uniformly applied development standard to require testing and removal of these materials if found in compliance with applicable regulations is included as a project condition of approval. Thus, no environmental effects have been identified that would have direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings, and the project would not result in new significant impacts peculiar to the project or site that would result in substantial adverse effects on humans.

V. REFERENCES AND DATA SOURCE LIST
Agency Plans and Studies

1. City of Santa Cruz General Plan 2030 and EIR
a. Adopted June 26, 2012. General Plan 2030. Available online at https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/planning-andcommunity-development/long-range-policy-planning/general-plan. b. April 2012. City of Santa Cruz General Plan 2030 Final EIR. SCH #2009032007. Certified June 26, 2012. Includes Draft EIR document, dated September 2011. Available online at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/planning-andcommunity-development/long-range-policy-planning/general-plan. c. July 2018. “Cultural Resources Background Report Update with Policies, Programs, and Maps, City of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz County, California.” Prepared by Dudek.

2. City of Santa Cruz Downtown Plan and Downtown Plan Amendments EIR. a. 2020. Downtown Plan. As amended through January 28, 2020. Available online at:
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8911/6374908388 88870000.
b. October 2017. Downtown Plan Amendments FEIR. SCH# 2017022050. Certified November 14, 2017. Includes Draft EIR document, dated July 2017. Available online at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/planning-andcommunity-development/environmental-documents.

3. Other City of Sana Cruz Adopted Plans and Studies.
a. 2022. Santa Cruz Community Farmers Market and the City of Santa Cruz Joint Statement. October 14, 2022. Accessed December 29, 2022 at https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/91057/638018793 399130000.
b. 2022. Parks & Recreation Commission Agenda Report for December 12, 2022, Subject::
113, 119 Lincoln St: [CP22-0128; TR22-0201] (APNs 005-141-11, -21) – Appeal of the decision of the Director of Parks and Recreation to approve a Heritage Tree Removal Permit for removal of nine (9) Heritage Trees in conjunction with the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project. December 5, 2022.

17.279
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -96- March 2023
c. 2022. Final Soquel Avenue SDPS Feasibility Study, Feasibility Study for Constructing a Stormwater Pump Station at Soquel Avenue. December 2, 2022. Prepared for City of Santa Cruz. Prepared by Schaaf & Wheeler.
d. 2022. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis for 119 Lincoln Street-Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project. November 1, 2022.
e. 2022. City of Santa Cruz 2030 Climate Action Plan Update, Resilient Together. Adopted September 2022.
f. Adopted June 14, 2022. SB 743 Implementation Guidelines, City of Santa Cruz. May 12, 2022.
g. Adopted November 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by the City of Santa Cruz, Water Department. Available online at:
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/water/urban-watermanagement-plan-2020. h. 2021. Library Site Re-Use Visioning Process Final Draft. Prepared by Group 4. June 14, 2021.
i. June 2020. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz Adopting the Use of Vehicle Miles Traveled as the New Transportation Measure of Environmental Impacts.

June 9, 2020 with Draft SB 743 Implementation Guidelines (May 27, 2020). j. Adopted August 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by City of Santa Cruz Water Department.

4. AMBAG.
a. Adopted June 15, 2022. “2022 Regional Growth Forecast.” b. Adopted June 2022. Monterey Bay 2045 Moving Forward, 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy. c. Adopted June 11, 2014. “2014 Regional Growth Forecast”.

5. California Air Resources Board (CARB)
a. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. November 2022. Accessed February 6, at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp.pdf. b. 2022. California Air Resources Board 2022 Scoping Plan—Appendix D, Local Actions.

November 2022. Accessed February 6, 2023 at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-sp-appendix-d-localactions.pdf.

6. California Department of Finance. May 2022. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2022.” Available online at:
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2022/.

17.280
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -97- March 2023

7. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA Map. Available online at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-planningengineering/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/.

8. California Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December 2018. Available online at:
https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf.

9. California Hazardous Materials Database Reviews
a. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2023. Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List). Accessed February 6, 2023 at https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtscs-cortese-list/.
b. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2023. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed February 6, 2023 at
https://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/.
c. CalEPA. 2023. Sites identified with Waste Constituent Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. Accessed on January 17, 2023 at https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseListCurrentList.pdf. d. CalEPA. 2023. Hazardous Waste Facilities Subject to Corrective Action. Accessed February 6, 2023 at https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962- 5a/?emrc=63e1903569867.
e. California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. List of Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker database.

Accessed on February 6, 2023 at
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search?CMD=search&case_number=&busines s_name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&SITE_TYPE=LUFT&oilfield=&STA TUS=&BRANCH=&MASTER_BASE=&Search=Search
f. SWRCB. 2023b. List of Active Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders. Accessed on February 6, 2023 at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/enforcement/c ompliance/.

10. Monterey Bay Air Resources District.
a. Adopted March 15, 2017. 2012-2015 Air Quality Management Plan. Available online at: http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=62318. b. February 2008. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. Available online at:
https://www.mbard.org/files/f665829d1/CEQA_full+%281%29.pdf. c. Adopted April 1996-Revised February 2016. Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act.

11. University of California Santa Cruz.
a. 2023. Facts and Figures. Accessed on January 16, 2023 at https://www.ucsc.edu/about/facts-figures.html.

17.281
Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project
Environmental Review -98- March 2023
b. 2023. Personal communication, Erika Carpenter, Senior Planner, Physical & Environmental Planning Services, Physical Planning, Development & Operations.

Project Studies and Other References

12. Albion Environmental, Inc. March 2022. Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for the Santa Cruz Library Project, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz County, California.

11. BKF Engineers. September 8, 2022. Stormwater Control Plan for Santa Cruz Library Mixed Use.

12. Cornerstone Earth Group. June 2, 2022. Geotechnical Investigation Downtown Library Residential Mixed-Use.

13. Dryad, LLC.
a. December 19, 2022. Consulting Arborist Services for Development – Addendum Report. b. September 8, 2022. Consulting Arborist Services for Development – Addendum Report. c. January 18, 2022. Tree Inventory and Evaluations Downtown Library Project.

14. Dudek.
a. 2023. Phase II Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Report Downtown Library MixedUse Project, Santa Cruz, California. January 2023. Prepared for City of Santa Cruz Economic Development Department.
b. 2023. Special Status Species Potential to Occur Review. c. 2022. Extended Phase I Archaeological Testing Report Downtown Library Mixed-Use Project Santa Cruz, California. November 2022. Prepared for City of Santa Cruz Economic Development Department. Prepared by Dudek.

15. Kimley-Horn. 2023. Transportation Impact Study, Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project. January 31, 2023. Prepared for City of Santa Cruz.

16. Past Consultants, LLC. 2022. Historic Evaluation for 113 – 119 Lincoln St., Santa Cruz, CA. March 14, 2022.

17. Salter. 2023. Noise Impact Analysis Downtown Library Mixed-Use. February 6, 2023.

18. Weber, Hayes & Associates. 2022. Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessment. September 22, 2022.

Report Preparation: City of Santa Cruz Planning and Community Development Department and Economic Development Department in association with Dudek.

17.282

DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE
of Santa Cruz County
PO Box 7763, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 • www.cruzdemocrats.org Feb. 21
TO: Santa Cruz Planning Commissioners
RE: Downtown Library/Housing/Parking Project SUPPORT
Hello commissioners and thank you for your leadership on behalf of the City of Santa Cruz. We know you have to juggle many priorities and balance interests as you move forward.

The County Democratic Party, representing 112,000 Democrats throughout Santa Cruz County, strongly supports the project on the 2/23 agenda. Here’s why:
--125 units of low and very low income housing serves workers, families, students and seniors who need housing. In survey after survey, housing opportunity is the #1 issue challenging Santa Cruz.
--a beautiful new library serves as a community center, open space, safe space for kids as well as a center for study and communication. The child care center is a great addition to a common place like this. Libraries remain one of the few centers in American society where you’re not expected to spend money, which is a beautiful thing --the parking is necessary for workers from nearby areas who have to commute into town. As we understand it, this is a slight reduction in the number of spaces compared to the current surface lots, with an emphasis on bicycle parking as well. Smart move! --several prior councils and commissions have approved this already.

Every project brings challenges but on balance, this is a big improvement for the city.

Thank you again for your efforts and please vote to support this meaningful and transformative upgrade to our wonderful downtown.

Sincerely,
Andrew Goldenkranz
Chair, Santa Cruz County Democrats
[email protected]

17.283
From: Brian- Creative
To: City Plan
Subject: Support for the Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 6:29:19 PM
Hello,
It is long past due for Santa Cruz to move forward with this project. Our library and our community need a facility that reflects the future of Santa Cruz and does not dwells on the past.

The additional housing component will furhter invigorate the downtown. The additional parking will mitigate parking spaces lost in the downtown area. As a side note to the naysayers on parking, take a look at the Santa Cruz demographics we have a high percentage of electric car adoption. The electric car is a more affordable option for the near future vs. "mass transit" in Santa Cruz.

It is in the hands of the planning commission to implement what the majority of voters have legislated and not to be beholden to the vocal minority.

Let this project move forward expeditiously and help to revitalize our downtown corridor.

Thank you,
Brian Smith
703 Spring St, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Creative design & manufacturing
P: +1 831.621.4996 F: +1 831.426.0530

17.284
From: Downtown Forward
To: City Plan
Subject: February 23 Planning Commission: Support Affordable Housing Downtown Library Project Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 4:09:28 PM
Attachments: image.png
Dear Planning Commissioners,
Downtown Forward is writing to encourage you to recommend that the City Council approve the Affordable Housing Downtown Library project.

Downtown Forward supports this project in the context of our broader vision for downtown:
one that includes additional housing, economic vitality in the face of changing trends, continued focus for cultural and community activities, and inviting public spaces. We envision a downtown that reflects commitment to principles of sustainability and equity; that benefits residents, workers and visitors; and that strengthens our sense of community.

Planning first started for this site in 2016, when the City first considered a mixed use project including the downtown library. Over the last seven years, there have been numerous advisory bodies including the Downtown Library Advisory Committee and the City Council Downtown Library Subcommittee that have contributed to the project's evolution.

These outreach efforts have resulted in a project that includes 124 affordable housing units for low and very low income residents, a much improved library (with better daylighting, a green roof, and a stronger street elevation), reduced parking (now 243 spaces), increased bicycle parking (258 parking spaces), and a day care center. The project includes 14 street trees along its frontage, and a three story 10,600 square foot corner commercial space.

In November 2022, Santa Cruz City voters had a chance to demonstrate their preference for this site's future. Measure O proposed to prohibit use of this site for a library or parking garage; and mandated that the Downtown Branch Library stay at its current location. Fifty-nine percent of voters rejected this alternative in favor of the Affordable Housing Library project. This election clearly demonstrated the voters' preference. We urge the Planning Commission to support the voters' choice and support for this project by recommending that the City Council approve this

17.285
application.

Finally, both the affordable housing and library elements of the project will benefit from timely, decisive action on the part of the Planning Commission and the City Council. Receiving full entitlements will allow the affordable housing project to move forward with funding applications, which cannot be submitted until permits are granted. For the downtown library, entitlements make the project more competitive because this helps qualify it as a shovel ready project.

A diverse coalition of community organizations including affordable housing advocates, community dental and health advocates, local merchants, the Downtown Association, the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership, and the local Democratic party have all signed on as supporters of this project. They are another clear demonstration of this project's widespread support.

Thank you for your work for our community, your time and your consideration, Downtown Forward Steering Committee
Cynthia Matthews
Tim Willoughby
Don Lane
Grace Stetson
Ryan Meckel
Vivian Rogers
Janis O'Driscoll
Zach Davis
Casey Beyer
Zoe Carter
Andrew Goldenkrantz
Matt Farrell

17.286

17.287
From: Ingrid Parker
To: City Plan
Subject: Please support the Downtown Library Project including housing Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 8:19:55 AM
To the Panning Commissioners:

My name is Ingrid Parker; I work at the university, my son graduated from Santa Cruz High, and I have lived as a homeowner in Santa Cruz for 25 years. I am a member of COPA and Peace United Church of Christ.

I am writing to ask you to please vote YES on the Downtown Library Project including Housing.

I have read the criticisms of the project, but I appreciate all the work the City has done to come up with a plan that meets our city’s needs. I am convinced that this is the RIGHT project at the RIGHT time. I think many aspects of the design are clever and beautiful.

PLEASE VOTE YES.

Thank you,
Ingrid Parker
Santa Cruz

17.288
From: Jamileh Cannon
To: City Plan
Subject: Support for the Public Library
Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 8:10:44 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I’m writing to voice my support of the proposed Downtown Public Library and mixed use building.

Please help our downtown remain a vibrant, equitable place with tools like a modern library, and homes at all income levels, for our community. This project will have such a positive impact on our City and I urge you to support it’s approval.

Best,
Jamileh Cannon
415.730.2952
[email protected]
We're hiring designers and developers! See available opportunities here. Join Our Team!

17.289
From: Janis O"Driscoll
To: City Plan
Subject: For Consideration at the Feb. 23 Special Meeting of the Planning Commission Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 3:50:12 PM
Planning Commissioners:

On behalf of the Friends of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries, I urge you to combine all the Library Affordable Housing Project permits before you on February 23 and recommend the entire permit package be approved by the Santa Santa Cruz City Council.

This project is critical for housing and library service and represents the best thinking of the community, previous city councils, housing advocates, and library supporters after six years of study and exploration. In November 2022, the voters affirmed the project by defeating an initiative that would have killed it.

The Downtown Branch Library is the hub of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries system. It provides centralized information services to all ten branches as it simultaneously serves as the local branch for city residents. A facility that can properly handle all these demands is long overdue.

As the Friends prepare its fundraising efforts, we see that the importance of timely permit approval is critical. We need permit approval to seek and qualify for funding and apply for grants. This is not a "maybe" project and funders need to know that.

It is time to move forward. The community has reviewed the benefits of the project and the voters have spoken in favor of a bold project that will help revitalize downtown Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of all that has been accomplished and for helping to move the Library Affordable Housing Project closer to completion. --
Janis O'Driscoll
President, Friends of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries

17.290
From: Jeanne O"Grady
To: City Plan
Subject: Vote YES FOR Downtown Library and Housing
Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 6:04:03 PM
From: Jeanne O’Grady, COPA Member, St. John’s Episcopal Church and retired librarian from Santa Cruz Public Libraries
Vote Yes on the Downtown Library Project including Housing! This project has been delayed for too long. It is a good project that will provide a 21st century library for all students and residents of Santa Cruz and the wider county. The partnership between the city and the library will strengthen downtown with much needed low income housing.

Thank you for your service and thank you for voting Yes and moving this project forward for the library and housing.

Sent from my iPad

17.291
February 22, 2023
City of Santa Cruz
Attn: Santa Cruz Planning Commission
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
RE: Mixed Use Library Downtown Project
Dear City of Santa Cruz Planning Commission,
Swenson Builders is in support of Downtown Library the complete project package, which includes a new modern library, 124 units of affordable housing, a child care center, commercial space, and shared parking facilities serving all downtown users (for both bikes and cars) - and all designed with high standards of sustainability in both construction and operations.

The proposed new Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project helps the City of Santa Cruz accomplish multiple goals related to public amenities, housing needs, long term parking for office and businesses, and further promotes transit-oriented development. We appreciate you supporting this project and City-wide effort that was supported in the last election.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Jessie Bristow
Development Project Manager
Swenson Builders

17.292

17.293
From: Our Downtown Our Future
To: City Plan
Cc: Lee Butler; Bonnie Lipscomb
Subject: 2/23/23 Planning Commission Hearing on Application for development of 119 Lincoln Street, CP22-0128, APN 005-141-21
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 12:16:20 PM
Planning Commission
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz, California
via email
Re: February 23, 2023, special public hearing by the Planning Commission to consider the application for development of 119 Lincoln Street, CP22-0128, APN 005-141-21.

Dear Planning Commissioners,
Thank you for taking on the task of reviewing the extensive documents associated with the Library/Affordable Housing project – the largest and most expensive mixed-use project ever undertaken by the City of Santa Cruz.

We trust you will take your responsibility as an independent commission seriously in conducting your review and assessing Staff's report and the associated documents before making recommendations to the City Council. Like other developers, the City and its developer are subject to a variety of City and State laws.

In our view, the most important issue for you to address concerns the claim of CEQA exemption. Both the statutory exemption (Code/Section 21083.3) and categorical exemption (Section 15305 and Section 15332) require the project to be in compliance with the land use and design standards in a municipality’s General Plan (and Downtown Plan for projects located in that district of Santa Cruz).

It is true that infill affordable housing projects are granted streamlined ministerial CEQA review and are exempt from undergoing a full EIR if they conform with the City’s General Plan and associated area plans. However, the Staff Report both claims compliance with the General Plan/Downtown Plan yet clearly shows that the project is dramatically out of compliance, as is established by its need to apply for waivers and concessions/incentives through the State Density Bonus Law.

The 2020 Downtown Plan (p. 29 & 66) has clear standards for the Cedar Street Village subarea (within which the subject property is located): “The land use plan and the standards and guidelines strive to preserve and enhance the informal ‘village’ qualities of the Cedar Street Corridor.” Developments within the Cedar Street subarea are allowed a 35' height by right, with the possibility of up to a 4 story, 50' discretionary maximum along the eastern side of Cedar Street. This subarea primarily includes 1 to 2-story buildings and, as the Downtown Plan spells out, is meant to have a human scale and "village" quality. The most important specifics of the design criteria are omitted from the Staff Report's quoted sections concerning the subarea.

Because an 8-story, 84' project, is dramatically out of compliance with the Downtown Plan standards for the Cedar Street Village subarea, the Staff Report asserts that the project would

17.294
need both a waiver and a concession/incentive utilizing the State Density Bonus Law to be legally permitted. Only when a project is out of compliance is a waiver or concession/incentive needed. The report is thus self-contradictory. It claims compliance with the Downtown Plan when asserting CEQA exemption, while also seeking Density Bonus Law benefits not required if the project conforms with the Downtown Plan. Because the project does not conform to the Downtown Plan, the claim to qualify for CEQA exemption is categorically incorrect.

The Planning Commission is tasked with reviewing a project in relation to City laws and alerting the City Council to significant project issues. On that basis, it has a straightforward duty to make clear the City’s choice: either the project will have to conform to the Downtown Plan or it will fail to qualify for a CEQA exemption and should undertake a project EIR.

It is of course possible that there are alternative legal bases on which the City can proceed, but in our reading, the Staff Report does not spell them out.

Sincerely,
John Hall
Lira Filippini
Co-chairs
www.ourdowntownourfuture.org
Our Downtown, Our Future

17.295
1830 Commercial Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95065 P : 831.464.5409 F : 831.464.5416 www.dientes.org
February 22, 2023
Planning Commission
City of Santa Cruz
Via email: [email protected]
Re: Library & Affordable Housing Project Support
Dear Planning Commission,
Dientes Community Dental Care is proud to continue its support of the Library & Affordable Housing Project, including the full package of uses and features. We urge you, the City of Santa Cruz Planning Commission, to approve this project in your meeting on Thursday February 23rd.

In addition to access to a new library, we also look forward to this project helping broaden access to health care services for low-income children and other marginalized populations in our community by including easily accessed parking for patients who will visit our future downtown clinic. All the services that will be included in this project are in need, including a modern library, affordable housing, a childcare center, parking, and commercial space. And, all will add to a more vibrant neighborhood in the City of Santa Cruz.

For these reasons, Dientes Community Dental Care respectfully asks for your AYE vote tomorrow.

Sincerely,
Laura Marcus
CEO, Dientes

17.296
From: Lynda Marín
To: City Plan
Cc: Lee Butler
Subject: Defer Action on Heritage Tree Removal Permit
Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 11:23:24 PM
Attachments: Heritage Trees, Santa Cruz City Resolution No. NS-23-710.pdf Chapter 9.56 PRESERVATION OF HERITAGE TREES AND HERITAGE SHRUBS.pdf Heritage Tree Appeal to City Council 12-21.pdf
Dear Planning Commissioners,
We are a coalition of Santa Cruz community members who are focused on saving a few of the Heritage Trees on Lot 4, all nine of which have been approved to be removed by the Parks and Recreation director as part of the Library, Garage, Affordable Housing construction project. We believe the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution NS-23, 710 supports our efforts to save some of the trees. We recognize that the agenda report says you will not act on the Heritage Tree Removal permit at the February 23rd meeting. However, since the report outlines the process that the permit has undergone and states that “a recommended condition of approval has been added regarding replacement of trees on-site and planting of new trees within the city’s downtown,” we offer these comments and guidance.

On December 12, we appealed the heritage tree removal permit to the Parks and Recreation Commission based on Resolution NS-23, 710. This Resolution governs the only criteria under which a heritage tree can be removed or altered, other than in an emergency.

The criterion used by the Parks Director to issue the Tree Removal Permit is as follows and is, 1 (c) 3 in the Resolution. A heritage tree can be removed only if:
“A construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage tree or trees.”
There is no evidence in the public record that any effort was made to accommodate any of the heritage trees on the project site. In submitting the Entitlements package and applying for a heritage tree removal permit, the Lot 4 developer did not demonstrate any effort to accommodate some of the heritage trees.

The commission rejected the appeal by a split 4 to 3 vote and approved the heritage tree removal permit. The coalition then appealed the Parks and Recreation Commission decision to the City Council. The City Council has folded our appeal of the commission’s decision into a broader consideration of project permits, to be taken up on or after its March 14, 2023, meeting.

The coalition argues that the developer and the Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation director have not followed the procedures set forth in Santa Cruz Municipal Code, chapter 9.56 and the Criteria and Standards set forth in City Council Resolution NS23, 710. Therefore, there is no basis for granting a heritage tree removal permit. We will ask the City Council to direct the developer to alter the current design sufficiently

17.297
to accommodate some of the heritage trees. Likely candidates are the two liquidambars and the smaller magnolia, all next to the Cedar Street sidewalk and all described as “worthy of preservation” by the city’s consulting arborist.

It is appropriate that the Planning Commission not approve a Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the heritage trees on Lot 4 since the grounds for removal (NS-23, 710, 1 c3 quoted above) have not been established. In fact, there has been no attempt to alter the design to accommodate any of the trees, and that omission is evidenced in the public record.

Related to the failure to follow the Heritage Tree Resolution NS-23, 710 are compelling reasons to preserve large urban trees, particularly in the context of a climate emergency.

First of all, trees metabolize carbon dioxide, the global heating gas that has reached an all-time peak in our atmosphere since before humans were on earth. Since the CO2 is stored in the tree’s wood, the larger the tree, the greater the carbon sink. At this level of CO2 in our atmosphere, we need as many big trees literally as we can hang on to. The replacement of sapling trees at a 1 to 1 ratio, as is currently planned, is woefully inadequate. It takes decades for saplings to deliver the ecoservices of large trees, whether they be sequestering carbon or the many other benefits mentioned below. One sapling may never replace a tree that has grown on Lot 4 over decades, as climate disruption will challenge replacement trees in the future much more so than in the years our heritage trees have taken to grow this large.

Other cities with heritage tree resolutions impose ratios of 3-5 saplings planted for every heritage tree removed with the assumption that not all of them will thrive and that it will take a very long time for them to deliver what is lost by cutting down a single large tree.

As temperatures rise, trees are a front-line protection against the effects of the urban heat island which can cause temperatures in a city to be 7 degrees higher on average. Besides absorbing water, trees also release it as vapor through evapotranspiration, producing a cooling effect as they shade buildings and the ground. It’s worthwhile to consider how much energy intensive air conditioning could be avoided with the shade of the two perimeter liquidambars shielding that portion of the new building.

Any heritage trees integrated into this project will also contribute to the respiratory health of the people who live in the building and nearby, many of them low income.

Remarkably, a mature leafy tree can produce enough oxygen to allow ten of us to breathe for a year. That’s important because Santa Cruz is not immune to the air pollution that accompanies our rising temperatures. And with that pollution comes more respiratory disease: asthma, emphysema, and COPD. Air pollution is also known to exacerbate allergies, a very common complaint. Here, too, our trees provide a benefit by filtering out carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide from the air, as well as dust and other particulate matter produced by wood stoves, gas heating and cooking, exhaust, and construction—something Santa Cruz is anticipating much more of.

17.298
Perhaps the most compelling reason, though, to protect and save at least a few of the heritage trees we are so familiar with on Lot 4 is because we love them, the community loves them, and that love for them connects us as surely as the roots and mycelial networks underneath them connect the trees to the earth they grow in.

Countless studies have been published on the mental and emotional benefits trees offer to humans—stress and depression reduction, anxiety relief, cognition and attention span improvement, greater sense of well-being. The killing of especially loved trees will, of course, have the opposite effects. Why would our community do such a rash and unnecessary thing to itself? Saving just a few of them will leave us at least a remnant of those old, familiar, helpful friends and perhaps support a more accepting transition into a future that includes the multi-use project.

We appreciate that the Planning Commission is delaying action on the Tree Removal Permit 22-0201 until our appeal can be heard by the City Council. It is not appropriate that the Planning Commission take any action regarding trees on Lot 4 until the appeal is resolved. This appeal is supported by 13 organizations including the Santa Cruz Group of the Sierra Club, 100 local letter writers, and 896 petitioners.

Respectfully,
Lynda Marin
for Save Some Trees Coalition
Att: Heritage Tree Resolution NS-23,710
Chapter 9.56 Preservation of Heritage Trees and Heritage Shrubs Dec 12, 2022 Heritage Tree Appeal TR22-0201
Enc: Dec 21, 2022 Appeal of the Decision of the City Parks and Recreation Commission (link)
--
Lynda Marín
Save Some Trees Coalition
(831) 458-1416 home
(831) 840-4176 cell
"Not only is another world possible; on a quiet day I can hear her breathing." ~Arundhati Roy
Virus-free.www.avast.com

17.299
Chapter 9.56

PRESERVATION OF HERITAGE TREES AND HERITAGE SHRUBS
* Editor’s Note: Prior ordinances codified herein include portions of Ords. 76-43 and 89-06.

Sections:

9.56.010 Definitions.

9.56.020 Director powers and duties.

9.56.030 Commission powers and duties.

9.56.040 Heritage tree and heritage shrub designation.

9.56.050 Protection of heritage trees and heritage shrubs.

9.56.060 Permits required for work significantly affecting heritage trees and/or heritage shrubs.

9.56.070 Right of appeal.

9.56.080 Emergencies.

9.56.090 State tree care license required.

9.56.100 Mitigation requirements for approved and unapproved removals of heritage trees or heritage shrubs.

9.56.110 Penalty provision.

9.56.010 DEFINITIONS.

For the purpose of this chapter, the following words shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section:
(a) “City” shall mean the city of Santa Cruz, acting by and through its authorized representatives. (b) “Commission” shall mean the city of Santa Cruz parks and recreation commission. (c) “Council” shall mean the city council of the city of Santa Cruz. (d) “Damage” shall mean any action undertaken which alters the existing state of any heritage tree or heritage shrub in any way. This shall include, but is not limited to, the cutting, topping, girdling, or poisoning of any heritage tree or heritage shrub, any trenching or excavating near any heritage tree or shrub, or any action which may cause death, destruction or injury to any heritage tree or heritage shrub, or which places any heritage tree or heritage shrub in a hazardous condition or in an irreversible state of decline. (e) “Department” shall mean the city of Santa Cruz parks and recreation department. (f) “Director” shall mean the director of parks and recreation of the city of Santa Cruz, or his/her designee. (g) “Heritage shrub” shall mean any perennial woody plant or group of woody plants growing on public or private property, of relatively low height, distinguished from a tree by height and by having several stems, and meeting criteria set forth in Section 9.56.040. (h) “Heritage tree” shall mean any perennial plant or grove of perennial plants growing on public or private property, having a self-supporting woody main stem or trunk usually characterized by the ability to grow to considerable height and size and the development of woody branches at some distance above the ground, and meeting criteria set forth in Section 9.56.040. “Heritage tree” shall not include trees planted for agricultural crops such as fruit or nut trees. (i) “Owner” shall mean the owner of real property as shown on the most recent county assessor’s roll. (j) “Person” shall mean any individual, firm, business, partnership, association, public utility, corporation, legal entity, and/or agent, employee or representative thereof. (k) “Private property” shall mean all property within the boundaries of the city of Santa Cruz, as shown on the most recent county assessor’s roll to be owned by persons, firms or corporations other than the city of Santa Cruz or another public agency. (l) “Prune” shall mean the cutting, trimming, detaching, separating or removing of any part of a heritage tree or heritage shrub. (m) “Public property” shall include all property owned by any governmental agency, except those legally exempt from this chapter, within the boundaries of the city of Santa Cruz including those noncontiguous areas incorporated by the city of Santa Cruz. (n) “Removal” shall mean the physical removal of any heritage tree or heritage shrub, or causing the death or destruction of any heritage tree or heritage shrub, through damaging, poisoning or other direct or indirect action.
(o) “Significant work” shall mean the pruning, root pruning, trimming, cutting off, removal or any action altering the physical structure or condition of any heritage tree or heritage shrub. (p) “State tree care license” shall mean either a specialty license for performing tree maintenance on trees over fifteen feet tall, or a landscape contractor’s license, both issued by the state of California.
(q) “Urban forest” shall mean a tree or group of trees, or shrub or group of shrubs, including but not limited to street trees, growing on public or private property within the city limits of the city of Santa Cruz.
(r) “Utility” shall mean a public utility or private utility and includes any pipeline corporation, gas corporation, electrical corporation, telephone, telegraph or other communications corporation, water corporation, sewer system or heat corporation the services of which are performed for, or the commodity delivered to, the general public or any portion thereof. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.020 DIRECTOR POWERS AND DUTIES.

The director of parks and recreation shall be responsible for administering and enforcing this chapter. The director shall have the following powers and duties:
(a) Grant or deny permit applications pursuant to Section 9.56.060, except in the coastal zone, where the zoning administrator shall determine the disposition of applications pursuant to Title 24, the Zoning Ordinance;
(b) Provide technical information to assist owners in maintaining heritage trees and heritage shrubs on private property; (c) Abate public nuisances pursuant to Chapter 13.30;
(d) Review all development and construction plans for the purpose of determining their negative impact on the urban forest; (e) Order the alteration or removal of hazardous trees and shrubs when they are found to pose a threat to other trees or shrubs or to the community in general, pursuant to the criteria and standards adopted by city council resolution;
(f) Make recommendations to the parks and recreation commission pertaining to the management of the city’s urban forest; (g) Determine mitigation requirements for approved and unapproved alterations, damage or removals of heritage trees or heritage shrubs pursuant to the mitigation requirements established by city council resolution.
(Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 95-30 § 1, 1995: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.030 COMMISSION POWERS AND DUTIES.

The parks and recreation commission shall have the following powers and duties:
(a) Make recommendations to the city council concerning policies, programs and decisions relating to the city’s urban forest; (b) Grant or deny permit applications on appeal pursuant to Section 9.56.070. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.040 HERITAGE TREE AND HERITAGE SHRUB DESIGNATION.

Any tree, grove of trees, shrub or group of shrubs, growing on public or private property within the city limits of the city of Santa Cruz which meet(s) the following criteria shall have the “heritage” designation:
(a) Any tree which has a trunk with a circumference of forty-four inches (approximately fourteen inches in diameter or more), measured at fifty-four inches above existing grade; (b) Any tree, grove of trees, shrub or group of shrubs which have historical significance, including but not limited to those which were/are:
(1) Planted as a commemorative;
(2) Planted during a particularly significant historical era; or (3) Marking the spot of an historical event.
(c) Any tree, grove of trees, shrub or group of shrubs which have horticultural significance, including but not limited to those which are:
(1) Unusually beautiful or distinctive;
(2) Old (determined by comparing the age of the tree or shrub in question with other trees or shrubs of its species within the city); (3) Distinctive specimen in size or structure for its species (determined by comparing the tree or shrub to average trees and shrubs of its species within the city); (4) A rare or unusual species for the Santa Cruz area (to be determined by the number of similar trees of the same species within the city); (5) Providing a valuable habitat; or
(6) Identified by the city council as having significant arboricultural value to the citizens of the city. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.050 PROTECTION OF HERITAGE TREES AND HERITAGE SHRUBS.

No person shall allow to exist any condition, including but not limited to any one of the following conditions, which may be harmful to any heritage tree or heritage shrub:
(a) Existence of any tree or shrub, heritage or otherwise, within the city limits that is irretrievably infested or infected with insects, scale or disease detrimental to the health of any heritage tree or heritage shrub;
(b) Filling up the ground area around any heritage tree or heritage shrub so as to shut off air, light or water from its roots; (c) Piling building materials, parking equipment and/or pouring any substance which may be detrimental to the health of any heritage tree or heritage shrub; (d) Posting any sign, poster, notice or similar device on any heritage tree or heritage shrub; (e) Driving metal stakes into the heritage tree, heritage shrub, or their root area for any purpose other than supporting the heritage tree or heritage shrub; (f) Causing a fire to burn near any heritage tree or heritage shrub. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.060 PERMITS REQUIRED FOR WORK SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTING HERITAGE TREES AND/OR HERITAGE SHRUBS. (a) No person shall prune, trim, cut off, or perform any work, on a single occasion or cumulatively, over a three-year period, affecting twenty-five percent or more of the crown of any heritage tree or heritage shrub without first obtaining a permit pursuant to this section. No person shall root prune, relocate or remove any heritage tree or heritage shrub without first obtaining a permit pursuant to this section.
(b) All persons, utilities and any department or agency located in the city of Santa Cruz shall submit a permit application, together with the appropriate fee as set forth by city council resolution, to the department prior to performing any work requiring a permit as set forth in subsection (a) of this section. The permit application shall include the number, species, size, and location of each subject heritage tree or heritage shrub, and shall clearly describe the scope of work being proposed and the reason for the requested action. Any supplemental reports which may be submitted by the applicant and staff are advisory only and shall not be deemed conclusive or binding on the director’s findings. (c) An authorized representative of the department shall inspect the tree or shrub which is the subject of the application. Pursuant to that inspection, the authorized representative shall file with the director written findings.
(d) If, upon said inspection, it is determined that the tree or shrub which is the subject of the permit application meets none of the criteria set forth in Section 9.56.040, no further action on the part of the director or the permit applicant is necessary. (e) If the tree or shrub which is the subject of the permit application meets any of the criteria set forth in Section 9.56.040 based upon a review of the permit application and the inspection report, then the director shall make findings of fact upon which he/she shall grant the permit, conditionally grant the permit specifying mitigation requirements, deny the permit or allow a portion of the proposed work outlined in the permit application to be done. (f) Where three or more heritage trees or three or more heritage shrubs are the subject of any proposed work to be performed, the director shall require that the applicant sign an agreement for preparation and submission of a consulting arborist report. As part of said agreement, the applicant shall be required to deposit with the department an amount of money equal to the estimated cost of preparing the report, as contained in said agreement. (g) The decision of the director shall be final unless appealed to the commission by the permit applicant or any other aggrieved person pursuant to Section 9.56.070. (h) The director shall issue any permit granted pursuant to this section, which permit shall be conspicuously posted near the subject(s) of the permit. (i) Unless appealed, the permit shall take effect ten calendar days after it is issued, except where the tenth day occurs on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, in which case the effective date shall be extended to the next following business day.
(j) All work performed on any designated heritage tree or heritage shrub pursuant to a permit as provided in this section shall be completed within forty-five days from the effective date of the permit, or within such longer period as the director may specify. (k) There shall be no fees or costs charged for permits which are limited in scope to the maintenance and repair work specified by Sections 13.30.060(b) and 15.20.210(c). (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-60 § 1, 1995: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.070 RIGHT OF APPEAL.
(a) Decision or Action of Director. Any person, public agency or utility aggrieved or affected by any decision or action taken pursuant to the authority of this chapter by the director may appeal that decision or action to the commission according to the following rules and regulations:
(1) A written notice of appeal, together with the appropriate fee as set forth by city council resolution, must be received by the secretary of the commission not later than ten calendar days following the date of the decision or action from which such appeal is being taken. If the final day for filing an appeal occurs on a weekend day or holiday, the final filing date shall be extended to the next following business day.
(2) The appellant shall state the basis for the appeal and shall specifically cite which provision of this chapter is relied upon to support the appellant’s contention that the director of parks and recreation acted in error. Any reports which may be submitted by the applicant, appellant or staff are advisory only and shall not be deemed conclusive or binding on the commission’s findings. The appeal must be signed by the appellant or appellant’s representative, and must set forth the mailing address to which the secretary of the commission may direct notice of a hearing.
(3) Upon receipt of the appeal the secretary of the commission shall schedule the matter for a public hearing at the next regularly scheduled business meeting, but not sooner than ten business days after receipt. The commission shall complete its action within thirty days from the date the matter is first scheduled for public hearing, unless appellant and appellee mutually agree to extend said thirty-day period.
(4) Notice of the public hearing shall be sent by first class mail to the permit applicant and appellant at least five calendar days prior to the meeting. (5) Notice of the public hearing shall be conspicuously posted by the director near the heritage tree(s) or heritage shrub(s) in question, at least ten calendar days prior to the meeting. (6) All notices shall include:
(A) The time, place and date of the public hearing;
(B) A brief description of the matter to be considered including a concise description of the heritage tree or heritage shrub in question, its location and scope of work being proposed;
(C) A brief description of the general procedure for submission of comments; (D) The date of the filing of the permit application and the name of the applicant. (7) The commission shall make findings of fact on which it bases its action. The commission may conditionally grant the permit specifying mitigations, deny the permit or allow a portion of the proposed work outlined in the permit application to be done. (8) The commission shall direct the director to issue any permit granted by the commission pursuant to this section, which permit shall be conspicuously posted near the subject(s) of the permit, and maintained at the reference desk of the central branch of the Santa Cruz City/County Library. (9) The decision of the commission shall be final unless appealed to the city council by the permit applicant or any other aggrieved person. (10) Unless appealed, the permit shall take effect ten calendar days after it is issued, except if the tenth day occurs on a weekend day or holiday, in which case the effective date shall be extended to the next following business day.
(11) All work performed on any designated heritage shrub pursuant to a permit as provided in this section shall be completed within forty-five days from the effective date of the permit, or within such longer period as the commission may specify. (b) Decision or Action of Commission. Any person, public agency or utility aggrieved or affected by any decision or action taken pursuant to the authority of this chapter by the commission may appeal that decision or action to the city council. All such appeals shall be made pursuant to Chapter 1.16. (1) Members of the city council shall be exempt from the appeal fee specified in Chapter 1.16 when acting in their official capacity. (2) The city council shall determine all questions raised on appeal pursuant to Chapter 1.16, and the decision of the city council shall be final. (3) Permit applications denied by the city council on appeal shall not be considered for reapplication for a period of one year from the date of the city council’s decision, unless:
(A) There is a significant decline in the health of the subject heritage tree or heritage shrub as certified by a licensed arborist; and (B) Said decline in health has not been caused by the applicant or any person associated with the applicant. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.080 EMERGENCIES.

In the event of an emergency whereby immediate action is required because of disease or because of danger to life or property, a heritage tree or heritage shrub may be pruned, altered or removed by order of the director, or by order of a responsible member of the police, fire or public works department. If not the director, the person ordering the pruning, alteration or removal shall file a comprehensive report immediately thereafter with the director. The director shall prepare the report if he or she orders the pruning, alteration or removal. The director shall forward copies of the report to the commission and council for their information. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.090 STATE TREE CARE LICENSE REQUIRED.
(a) Except as set forth in subsection (b) of this section, no person shall perform any pruning, maintenance, care or removal of any heritage tree or heritage shrub for hire within the city limits of the city of Santa Cruz without a valid state tree care license issued by the state of California. (b) Any person who is the owner of property in the city of Santa Cruz where a heritage tree or shrub needing pruning, maintenance, care or removal is located shall be exempted from the requirements of this section requiring a state tree care license if said owner of property intends to personally perform, and subsequently does personally perform, himself or herself said needed pruning, maintenance, care or removal of said heritage tree or shrub. Said owner shall comply with all other provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.100 MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVED AND UNAPPROVED REMOVALS OF HERITAGE TREES OR HERITAGE SHRUBS. (a) Any person who has obtained an approved conditional tree removal permit shall be required to mitigate said removal pursuant to the approved heritage tree and heritage shrub removal mitigation requirement chart adopted by city council resolution. Prior to commencing any work on a heritage tree(s) or heritage shrub(s) pursuant to an approved conditional tree removal permit, the applicant shall deposit with the city in cash or bond all funds required pursuant to the approved heritage tree and heritage shrub removal mitigation requirement chart. (b) Any person who alters, damages, destroys or removes any heritage tree or heritage shrub on public or private property without an approved permit issued pursuant to this chapter shall be liable to the city for the cost of replacement of said heritage tree or shrub pursuant to the unapproved heritage tree and heritage shrub alteration, damage or removal mitigation requirement chart adopted by city council resolution. In addition, all violations are subject to the penalties prescribed by Section 9.56.110. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

9.56.110 PENALTY PROVISION.

Any person who personally, or through an agent, employee or representative, violates any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a separate offense for each and every act constituting a violation of this chapter. The city attorney shall have the discretion to prosecute any violation of this chapter as either a misdemeanor or an infraction punishable by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars for a first offense and in doubling increments for each successive offense. Each person is guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which such violation is committed, continued or permitted by such person and shall be punished accordingly. In addition, the damage, destruction or removal of any heritage tree or heritage shrub without a permit issued pursuant to this chapter shall render the owner and/or person performing the work liable for the damages set forth in Section 9.56.100(b). The remedies and penalties provided for herein shall be in addition to any other remedies and penalties provided by law, including the remedies and penalties provided for in Title 4. (Ord. 2016-05 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 94-01 § 2, 1994).

The Santa Cruz Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2021-11, passed April 27, 2021.

Disclaimer: The city clerk’s office has the official version of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code. Users should contact the city clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.

City Website: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/
City Telephone: (831) 420-5030
Code Publishing Company

17.300
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Pauline Seales
328 Getchell Street
Santa Cruz
Ca, 95060
Dec 21, 2022
Subject:

APPEAL

OF THE DECISION OF THE CITY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

17.301
APPEAL

OF THE DECISION OF THE CITY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION This is an appeal of the decision made on a 4 to 3 vote by the city of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation (P&R) Commission on December 12, 2022, to not uphold an appeal of the Director of P&R’s prior decision granting a tree removal permit, TR 22-0201, for all nine heritage trees on the city-owned Lot 4 at 113, 119 Lincoln St., Santa Cruz.

This appeal is based on city law concerning heritage trees, the appeal hearing process before the Parks and Recreation Commission, and misrepresentations made to the commission at the hearing.

A. The commission meeting was conducted in a biased, unfair manner that favored the applicant.
• Appellants were informed by commission secretary that the meeting would be following Council Policy 1.1, (Appeals). He gave clear instructions on time limits (15 minutes) for both parties plus 5- minute rebuttal for the appellant. We planned accordingly.

At the start of the hearing the chair changed these policy-set time limits from 15 minutes per side to 25-30 minutes per side. Had we known of this change we would have prepared a more detailed presentation. The chair granted the applicant, at his request, extra time even beyond this extended time-period.
• Council appeal policy grants a 5-minute rebuttal to only the appellant since the burden of proof is on the appellant. This was confirmed by city attorney John Barisone, who was present throughout the hearing. Despite his legal clarification, despite Council Policy 1.1, and over objections from a commissioner, the chair granted rebuttal time to the applicant. Although this decision may be the prerogative of a chair, it is unprecedented and created a biased hearing favoring the applicant.

17.302
B. Misleading Statements in Agenda Report from Parks and Recreation Department influenced commission votes.
• Resolution No. NS-30, 072 codifies the only criteria that allow heritage tree removals in the city of Santa Cruz. The criterion used by the department to justify the removal of the nine heritage trees is

1. (c) (3): “a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees.” This criterion was the only one cited by the director for the granting of the tree removal permit.

This fact is documented in the city file and documented in the email from the city urban forester clarifying the criterion used to justify the tree removals.
• Despite this fact, the staff Agenda Report to the commission on page

4.7 includes a misleading, incorrect statement that “Minimally two of the criteria of Resolution No. NS-30, 072 can clearly be demonstrated to have been met.” The other criterion referenced covers disease, tree failure, etc. A criterion that was NOT used as the basis for the permit should not be referenced as though it had bearing on the issue. In addition, this criterion is not supported by the consulting arborist from Dryad LLC who wrote that, “four of the Heritage trees are worthy of preservation.” The misleading entry in the Agenda Report influenced at least one commissioner’s vote. The commissioner cited the reference to additional criteria in the Agenda Report as further reason for not upholding the appeal.

C. No Attempt to Incorporate Any Trees into a Design.

The appellants presented the commission with detailed evidence from the Public Record that showed there was no attempt to try to incorporate at least some of the heritage trees into a project design. This disregard for the Heritage Tree Resolution persisted despite early letters from environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, reminding the Economic Development Director of the Resolution language and requesting inclusion of some of the heritage trees into the design be taken seriously. Moreover, an email in June 2022 from the city urban forester asked what was being done to try to incorporate some of the heritage trees into the design, as required by the Resolution. Her inquiry went unanswered.

17.303
D. Incorporate a Heritage Tree, then create a Design
The aim of the Heritage Tree Ordinance Resolution 1. (c) (3) is to try to incorporate a heritage tree prior to a final design. To produce a final design that covers the entire site and then claim not a single heritage tree can be accommodated is not in the spirit of heritage tree protection nor in the letter of the law.

E. Addressing the Issue After the Fact.

The only statements from the project architects and city planners regarding the issue of heritage tree inclusion were dated November 17th and December 1st, 2022, long after the tree removal permit was granted and an appeal filed. In other words, after the fact. The statements draw on disingenuous scenarios to try to demonstrate, after the fact, why all the heritage trees could not be incorporated into the project design, without considering whether some of them could be accommodated.

F. A Tiny Portion of the Site Needed to Accommodate Two Trees The buildable site is 58,000 square feet. The liquidambars are next to the sidewalk on the western side. At most they might need 2,000 square feet of the project footprint to thrive. They have a long future and would be a fitting symbol of community values in heritage tree preservation. Their inclusion would also comply with city law as per the criterion to alter a design to accommodate (in this case) two heritage trees. This compliance should have been addressed from the beginning. It is not too late to do the right thing.

G. Please Uphold this Appeal
We urge the City Council to uphold this appeal and deny the Heritage Tree Removal Permit TR 22-0201. We recommend that staff direct the project developer to alter the design to accommodate at least the two liquidambars, which were cited by the consulting arborist as “worthy of preservation.” Such an accommodation would still allow for and uphold all project goals.

Signed: Pauline Seales
On behalf of Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and 11 other groups

17.304

LIST OF CO-APPELLANTS
Tamara Minami [email protected] Youth for Climate Justice Lynda Marin [email protected] Citizens' Climate Lobby Santa Cruz Chapter Pauline Seales [email protected] Santa Cruz Climate Action Network Lira Filippini [email protected] Our Downtown, Our Future Magi Amma [email protected] Santa Cruz for Bernie
Ed Porter [email protected] Peoples Democratic Club of Santa Cruz County
Ellen Farmer [email protected] Ecosystem Restoration Communities Beverly
DesChaux
[email protected] Electric Vehicle Assn CA Central Coast Chapter
Beth Love [email protected] Eat for the Earth
Rick Longinotti [email protected] Campaign for Sustainable Transportation John Hall [email protected] Downtown Commons Advocates
Magi Amma [email protected] Sierra Club

17.305

17.306

17.307
From: Bonnie Bush
To: City Plan
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Special Meeting, Agenda Item #1 Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 7:13:05 AM
Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

Please note: Public Record Act Requests submitted via email, fax, USPS, or dropoff after 5:00 p.m. on a business day, Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays will be processed as received on the next open business day. The 10-day response period begins when the request is received.

From: lisa ekström <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 11:55 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Planning Commission Special Meeting, Agenda Item #1 Dear Planning Commission,
Reviewing the Agenda Report of over 1,600 pages for this special meeting, it becomes only more apparent how enormous, enormously expensive, complicated, and consequential this proposed project is.

In light of that, there are a number of aspects of this project that many of us in the community have serious concerns about. But I'm writing about just one of them today, since time is pressing as you consider this meeting's recommendation.

Our own Heritage Tree Resolution states that Heritage Tree shall only be altered or removed when “A construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees or shrubs.” We can certainly revise the planned design to save and include at least some of the valuable Heritage Trees on Lot 4. The plan and design have already undergone a series of revisions in response to community concerns, and the design would be vastly improved to include some of the Heritage Trees, particularly those at the edge of the site.

One possibility of finding accommodation for the trees in the design is to consider that the commercial space alone in this project is now approximately 10,000 sq ft. The City Council had asked for a commercial space of 7,000 up to 9,000 sq ft. and frankly even that could be

17.308
too much considering how much commercial space downtown has been sitting unoccupied and unused for some time now.

Another possibility of finding the space to accommodate some of these valuable trees is by reducing the number of parking spaces for the project. According to the staff's report, the City’s parking regulations require 122 parking spaces for this project. However, the project proposes 243 parking spaces. The 120+ additional spaces are not only unnecessary, they would be expensive environmentally and financially far beyond any possible benefit.

Let us follow both the letter and spirit of our law regarding our Heritage Trees. It is not only entirely viable, it's vital to make this priority.

Thank you,
Lisa Ekström
Santa Cruz
--

17.309
From: Mark Seelos
To: City Plan
Subject: In Support of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 9:45:49 AM
Dear Santa Cruz Planning Commission,
Firstly, thank you for your work bringing important public benefits and housing to our community.

I am writing to express my strong support for the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project. I request that the project is permitted exactly as proposed. Please grant the Nonresidential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, and LotLine Adjustment to demolish the existing surface parking lot and structures and construct the Library Mixed-Use/Affordable Housing Project.

This is an incredibly important project that is key to addressing the housing crisis in our community.

Sincerely,
Mark Seelos
Santa Cruz, CA

17.310
From: Maryse Postlewaite
To: City Plan
Subject: Vote YES for Downtown Library and Housing
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 2:30:30 PM
As a resident of Santa Cruz, I, Maryse Postlewaite, a member of COPA, support the needed housing project downtown.

I appreciate your work and your vote YES.

Thank you,
Maryse Postlewaite
Sent from my iPad

17.311
From: Matt Farrell
To: City Plan
Subject: Support for Affordable Housing Downtown Library Project Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 9:11:32 AM
Commissioners,
I urge you to approve the required permits for the Affordable Housing Downtown Library Project. This project has been the result of almost seven years of community planning and input. It has been supported by a wide and compelling range of community organizations and several City Councils.

As a result of this process, the proposed project now includes 124 units of affordable housing, a day care center, reduced car parking, increased bicycle parking, and much improved library design which provides a greener and more welcoming facility than the current downtown branch.

As we all know we, as a region, are facing a housing crisis, especially in the area of affordable housing. To move forward and receive needed funding in a competitive environment, the sooner this project receives entitlements the sooner it can qualify for funding.

Thanks for your time and consideration,
Matt Farrell
922 Windsor Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
831 331-7496

17.312
From: Mira Haslam
To: City Plan
Subject: Vote YES for Downtown Library and Housing
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 5:44:35 PM
Planning Commissioners,
I am a COPA member and also a member of Peace United Church of Christ. I have lived in Santa Cruz County since 1975 and have watched the changes in the rental and housing market. I have 2 daughters who struggle to pay for rental housing. One is living in a small 2 bedroom apartment with a family of 5, the largest place they can afford.

I am in favor of this project, hoping it will affect housing prices and give working people decent places to live.

Thank you for your time. Please VOTE YES. Mira Haslam
--
Mira S. Haslam
552 Bean Creek Road SPC 203
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831-227-9504

17.313
From: Tracy Wells Miller
To: City Plan
Subject: Please vote YES for Downtown Library and Housing! Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 3:32:06 PM
Dear County Commissioners,
I'm a priest serving the Episcopal church in Aptos and a resident of the Blacks Beach neighborhood of Santa Cruz, writing to encourage you to vote YES on the downtown library and housing project when it comes before you tomorrow. My colleagues at Calvary Episcopal downtown have been working very hard on this plan to get 100+ units of very affordable housing built downtown, and COPA, of which St. John's is a founding member organization, has been an advocate of housing on this site since 2016.

I moved to Santa Cruz in 2017 when I was hired at St. John's, and I am still living in rental housing because of the high cost of living here. I can't imagine how people working at minimum wage can manage to afford housing in this county, and I am a strong advocate of anything we can do to provide more units of truly affordable housing for our county's essential workers.

With gratitude for all you do for our community,
The Rev. Tracy Wells Miller
---
Mother Tracy J. Wells Miller, Rector
Episcopal Church of St. John the Baptist
125 Canterbury Drive
Aptos, CA 95003
www.st-john-aptos.org
831-708-6828 (text preferred)
Pronouns: she / her
The mission of St. John's is to love God and love neighbor as Jesus did:
welcoming all, serving humbly, teaching compassion,
and making no peace with injustice.
"What does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?"
Micah 6:8
My days off are Mondays and Tuesdays. I do not typically check email on those days. (I work Wednesdays through Sundays.)

17.314
From: [email protected]
To: City Plan
Subject: Feb 23, 2023 Planning Commission meeting: Library/Affordable Housing Project Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 2:23:59 PM
Dear Commissioners:

Following below are my earlier comments on the Library/Affordable Housing Project. I didn’t see them in the packet, so I am forwarding them to you. These suggestions remain valid and I urge you to incorporate them should you decide to approve the project.

In particular, the staff report notes that the alley will be one-way to serve motor vehicles. It should allow for two-way bicycle traffic. Pavement types and treatments, signing and other design elements should foster primarily bicycle and pedestrian use in the spirit of the City’s Alley Plan – motor vehicle traffic should be secondary and limited to emergency and necessary service vehicles. Admirably, the staff report notes that, “Conditions of approval are included that require the final alley design to comply with the design requirements in the Downtown Plan by including such features as decorative lighting and pavement.” However, recommended condition #54a only refers to “sidewalk.” It needs to be augmented to also apply to the alley, to reference compliance with the City’s Alley Plan, and to prioritize bicycle and pedestrian use of the alleyway.

This is especially important given the uncertain future of Cathcart Street. The traffic analysis was performed when it was (and assumed to stay) two-way. However, Cathcart is currently one-way where it fronts the subject site (the other lane including the bike lane is occupied by businesses), and the staff report notes that the City has made permanent its parklet program. Even if Cathcart is fully restored to two-way traffic with adequate bike lanes, the additional ingress and egress traffic due to the parking garage will render it less desirable to bike on. Thus, in some cases it may be more convenient and desirable for cyclists to use the alleyway -- they should be allowed and welcomed to.

Thanks for including revised conditions to ensure that there will be attractive, safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian circulation features in and around the project if you decide to approve it.

Rick Hyman
Santa Cruz
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2022 1:07 PM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: FW: sept21Community Meeting Announcement - Library/Affordable Housing Project From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2022 11:22 AM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: RE: sept21Community Meeting Announcement - Library/Affordable Housing Project

17.315
Hi: I listened to this meeting about the library and garage and offer the following recommendations.

In the garage, there should be some resident bicycle parking close to each elevator that accesses the residential units. It appeared from the presentation that all of the bike parking was by Lincoln Street; if so, about half should be relocated to be by Cathcart Street. The enticement to use a bike in part is that it is much more convenient to just wheel out of your home or garage and start biking rather than starting up a car, driving, and then having to park it. The more convenient it is to use a bike – e.g., being able to store it as close to where you live or to where you access your living quarters, the better. Also, in that regard, residents who want to bring their bikes to their units should be allowed to do so, and consideration should be given to providing some bike parking opportunities on their floors. Also, some of this bike parking needs to be made conveniently accessible to residents’ visitors.

It also appeared from the presentation that there was some separate bike parking for library patrons by the library entrance. Please ensure that this is adequate. The current downtown library actually removed some of its bike parking and subsequently it was sometimes hard to find an available rack when patronizing the library; so there definitely needs to be more bike parking than is at the current library. Additionally, library staff and commercial employees should have some separate secure bike parking available.

I also second the comment that some of the bike parking should be configured for non-standard sized bikes, such as recumbents, tandems, cargo bikes, and trailers.

Additionally, I didn’t see or hear anything about the alley, now next to Toadal Fitness. Currently, one can bike through there (I often find it useful to access the farmers market), but it is not very attractive nor safe, due to its very narrow width while allowing motorists on it. The appearance should be enhanced and preferably motor vehicles should be prohibited; if some motor vehicle use is allowed the alley should be widened with strict motor vehicle controls. With more traffic emanating from the parking garage, I can envision it getting more bicycle use to avoid street congestion, as well as to access the businesses that have alleyway entrances. The City has an adopted Alley Plan and program and this would be the time to implement these for this alley.

I look forward to you incorporating these suggestions into the plans.

Thanks,
Rick Hyman

17.316
February 22, 2023
Santa Cruz Planning Commission
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Subject: Support for Downtown Library Affordable Housing Project Dear Chair Kennedy and Santa Cruz Planning Commissioners, On behalf of the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership (MBEP), we write to express our strong support for the Downtown Library Affordable Housing Project that serves as a model for affordable, mixed-use higher-density projects on a major commercial corridor in our region.

The City’s Downtown Library Mixed Use Affordable Housing Project which includes 124 affordable units within 300 feet of a major transit center addresses access to more affordable housing by leveraging an intelligent use of available space in a prime location which is in line with our policy recommendations advocating for infill development to optimize land use for housing, community services, and climate resilience.

Since 2019, we have had the opportunity to participate in the visioning process for the Downtown Mixed-Use Library Project thanks to staff’s robust community engagement efforts throughout this process. We look forward to next steps leading to completion of this visionary project — one that fulfills broadly-shared community goals of a first class downtown library, affordable housing, and a multi-modal, vibrant downtown.

Thank you for your leadership in addressing the lack of affordable housing and for promoting sustainable transportation, affordable housing, and livable communities with your support of this exemplary project.

Sincerely,
Tahra Goraya, MA, MPA
President & CEO
3180 Imjin Road, Suite 102
Marina, CA 93933 831.915.2806

17.317
From: Tina Andreatta
To: City Plan
Subject: Please support the Library Affordable Housing Project Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 10:53:21 AM
Dear Planning Commission,
Without any additional delays, please support the Library Affordable Housing Project. An overwhelming majority of Santa Cruz County residents and voters want the complete project to move forward as quickly as possible. The project as gone through the arduous process of public involvement.

The Library Affordable Housing Project Package includes:
- Needed and appreciated a new modern library; which greatly benefits countless people and residents. - Needed and appreciated 124 units of affordable housing. We need affordable housing now, not a few years from now.
- Needed and appreciated a child care center benefitting community families. This is a wonderful opportunity supporting our infants, toddlers, and young children.
- Needed and appreciated locally owned businesses will be in the building. - Needed and appreciated shared parking facilities- which will serve all downtown users, whether bikes or cars.

On a personal note, for the past 26 years my bookclub friends and I use many of our local libraries for borrowing books; borrowing audio books; downloading e-books; attending classes, lectures or programs; and other activities held at different libraries.

Sincerely,
Tina Andreatta
Santa Cruz County resident

17.318
City of Santa Cruz Planning Commission
809 Center Street, Room 10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
[email protected]
February 23, 2023
Dear Planning Commission Chair Kennedy and Planning Commissioners, On behalf of the Santa Cruz County Business Council, I write to express our support for 113 and 119 Lincoln Street and respectfully request your “aye” vote for the project.

The Santa Cruz County Business Council (SCCBC) was founded in 1996 to provide a collective voice for countywide business owners and executives. Our large and growing number of members practices informed advocacy for countywide businesses and communities. As Santa Cruz County undergoes a profound period of recovery and growth, we strive to be leaders of projects, policies and practices that promote economic and community vitality. 113 and 119 Lincoln Street is one of those projects.

We feel support for this project is critical to the revitalization of the downtown corridor. This project has long been considered a part of the piece of the puzzle of success for the area, since 2016. Due to the good work of the City Council and public input, the evolution and improvement of this project now includes more units of affordable housing, less car parking, more bike parking, a better library design and a daycare center. There was overwhelming support for this project by Santa Cruz voters in the November election cycle and SCCBC encourages continuing that support.

The City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element also calls for “transit-oriented housing...redeveloping underutilized sites with the Downtown and along major corridors, increasing density, and facilitating housing at key opportunity sites.” The project meets the mark on each of these objectives, adds 124 affordable units to contribute to the fulfillment of our RHNA goals and provides housing that is critical to attracting and retaining qualified professionals for a sustainable local workforce.

We are grateful for strong and enlightened leadership in addressing our local housing crisis. Approval of 113 ns 119 Lincoln Street will set an important precedent for smart development, affordable and walkable cities, and a thriving Santa Cruz economy. We urge you to support this important project.

Sincerely,
Zoe Carter
Executive Director
Santa Cruz County Business Council

17.319
From: Dahlia O Dahlia
To: City Council
Cc: Pauline Seales
Subject: Save some trees!!!!
Date: Tuesday, March 07, 2023 9:18:04 AM
Sent from my iPhone

17.320
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Debbie Downing <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 7:47 AM
To: City Council
Cc: William Parkin
Subject: Removal of Trees Related to Proposed Library/Mixed Use Project 113, 119 Lincoln Street Attachments: 2023 03 06 Letter to City Council.pdf
Attached please find our letter from William Parkin in connection with the matter referenced above. Please contact our office if you have any questions.

Very Sincerely,

17.321
March 8, 2023

VIA EMAIL
The Honorable Fred Keeley and City Council
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street, Room 10
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
[email protected]
Re: Removal of Trees Related to Proposed Library/Mixed Use Project; 113, 119 Lincoln Street
Dear Mayor Keeley and Members of the Council:

This law firm represents Save Our Big Trees with respect to the proposed library/mixed use project and submits these comments on its behalf. Our client is concerned that the City has not adequately considered alternative designs that avoid the removal of heritage trees along the periphery of the library/mixed use project site. Moreover, the City is not following it own tree ordinance and resolution, which it requires of private property owners. The City does not have to remove trees along the periphery of the project site and can spare these trees with modest redesign while still moving forward with the proposed project.

The arborist report identified nine heritage trees on the library site. Four of these trees are considered worthy of preservation in the consulting arborist’s report. Three of these four trees could remain with slight modifications to the development plans. The City’s Urban Forester granted a removal permit for all of these trees. That decision was appealed to the Park and Recreation Commission. As the staff report to the Commission acknowledges, that retention of the trees would require “physical modifications….” However, the staff report concludes that “Given the limited size of the lot and constraints inherent to its dimensions, as supported by the narratives included in the memoranda by the project architects, with which City staff concur, no reasonable alteration of the proposed site plan would allow retention of the trees while simultaneously achieving the Project's objectives of creating a mixed-use development….” This statement is preposterous as it relates to trees on the periphery of the project site and along a sidewalk and street.

On December 12, 2022, the Commission denied the appeal and upheld the decision of the Director on a 4-3 vote. That decision has been appealed to the City Council. Our understanding is that the Council will consider the appeal in tandem with its consideration of the project

17.322
Mayor Keeley and City Council
Re: Removal of Trees Related to Proposed Library
March 8, 2023

Page 2 ends

approval. For the reasons stated below, the Council should direct the project architect to make modifications to the plan to save three trees on the periphery of the project site.

In 2013, the City attempted to amend its Heritage Tree Ordinance and Resolution NS23,710. This office filed suit on behalf of Save Our Big Trees and the Court of Appeal found in favor of our client in a published opinion. Save Our Big Trees v. City of Santa Cruz (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 694. In that case, the City attempted to create more reasons for tree removal and expand opportunities to cut more trees, including but not limited to financial and economic burdens to property owners. Since our client’s victory, Resolution NS-23,710 remains intact and the criteria for tree removal remains a high bar. However, through this action, the City is ignoring its obligations under the tree ordinance and is pretending that it does not have to follow the criteria for its own projects.

One of the criteria for removal in NS-23,710 relied on by staff and the Commission is found in subdivision 1.(c)(3): “A construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees or heritage shrubs.” The removal of the trees along the sidewalk on the periphery of the site on this basis renders the above referenced criteria meaningless. If a public project cannot be slightly modified to accommodate the trees on the periphery of a project site, then any project can simply propose development throughout the four corners of a project site and not have to make alterations to retain heritage trees on its periphery. This is absurd. The City is attempting to circumvent its own standards and impliedly graft onto the resolution the less onerous criteria that were rejected in Save Our Big Trees v. City of Santa Cruz. In fact, the decision of the Parks and Recreation Commission was based on unsupported statements that the project cannot be altered in any manner to accommodate the trees on the periphery of the site.

For the foregoing reasons, the City Council should direct the project architect to review the matter and propose alterations that could accommodate both the project and the trees. In fact, the trees can be incorporated into the design in a manner that enhances the finished product.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.

Very truly yours,

WITTWER PARKIN
William P. Parkin
cc: Client

17.323
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Seb Baum <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 3:28 PM
To: City Council
Attachments: 20230308_152540.jpg

17.324

17.325
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Charles Cseuz <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 4:39 PM
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Save Some Trees

17.326
2 17.327
3 Sent from my iPhone

17.328
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Laurie Love <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 5:45 PM
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Please Save the Lot 4 Heritage Trees
Dear City Council,
I am a resident of Santa Cruz and have lived here for 34 years. I urge you to save the heritage trees on Lot 4. Please do whatever is possible in your power to require that any development on this property leaves the heritage trees intact. Please do not allow these trees to be cut down for building or any other reason. The trees have been growing here for several decades, providing shade, carbon‐sink, beauty, and peacefulness to many residents, including myself. Please honor them and us by saving them.

Thank you,
Laurie Love
Santa Cruz, CA

17.329
2 17.330
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Laurie Love <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 5:45 PM
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Please Save the Lot 4 Heritage Trees
Dear City Council,
I am a resident of Santa Cruz and have lived here for 34 years. I urge you to save the heritage trees on Lot 4. Please do whatever is possible in your power to require that any development on this property leaves the heritage trees intact. Please do not allow these trees to be cut down for building or any other reason. The trees have been growing here for several decades, providing shade, carbon‐sink, beauty, and peacefulness to many residents, including myself. Please honor them and us by saving them.

Thank you,
Laurie Love
Santa Cruz, CA

17.331
2 17.332

17.333

17.334

17.335

17.336

17.337

17.338

17.339

17.340

17.341
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dave Evans <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 7:58 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear SC Council
As a longtime, fulltime resident of Santa Cruz, I wholeheartedly support the downtown library project.

The city desperately needs affordable housing solutions and this highly voter endorsed project MUST proceed. As our city's leadership, please take the long view. Just as is being done with consideration to speed up the long term strategy for West Cliff Drive protection as the signal indicators of erosion have leapt forward far faster than originally forecasted, so has our need for housing.

Please pay no attention to the NIMBY voices and the anti‐inclusive elitist voices who want to preserve a past fantasy of Santa Cruz that no longer exists and serves our community. We need to include ALL our citizens in our city planning.

Please APPROVE.
sincerely ‐ Dave Evans
600 Pelton, 18 year fulltime resident
‐‐
_______________________________
David J. Evans
[email protected] | 408.857.1903
_________________________________________________

17.342
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gerry Mandel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 8:07 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear City Council Members,
As a resident of downtown Santa Cruz (Washington Street), I have followed the progress of the Library/Affordable Housing project closely. I appreciate how the project has evolved over time in response to local citizens’ comments and suggestions, and I look forward to using our beautiful new state‐of‐the‐art library once the project is built.

I urge you to support the project in its current form at your meeting on March 14, without adding last‐minute changes or conditions that could delay it or make it infeasible.

Sincerely,
Gerry Mandel

17.343
From: Curt Coleman
To: City Council
Subject: Please approve complete the Library/Affordable Housing Project on March 14 Date: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 8:10:53 AM
I support this project and urge you to support it with your vote.

Thank you for your service to Santa Cruz.

Curt Coleman

17.344
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brent Haddad <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 8:26 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! To the City Council:

I write to express my support for the proposed new library/affordable housing project. I hope you will vote in favor of it at your meeting on Tuesday, March 14.

Sincerely,
Brent Haddad
Resident of Santa Cruz
‐‐
Brent M. Haddad, MBA, Ph.D.

Professor of Environmental Studies
University of California, Santa Cruz

17.345
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Connie <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 8:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now!” Please approve the library/affordable housing project as it has been designed. This has been a long slog to get us to where we are today. I think it will be a beautiful addition to our downtown and I hope it can continue to move forward without delay.

Thank you,
Connie Maschan
Santa Cruz

17.346
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Matthew Marichiba <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 9:13 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! And I approve of this message.

Matthew Marichiba
931 Sumner St, Santa Cruz, CA 95062

17.347
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: fred willoughby <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 9:30 AM
To: City Council
Subject: March 14 meeting Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project Attachments: Scan.pdf

17.348

17.349
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Benjamin Levine <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 1:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve!
Dear Council Members,
Please approve the Library, Housing, parking, bike parking and childcare plan! It will provide much needed housing, a higher quality library, and my favorite touch a rooftop patio. I can't wait to relax up there with a good book and watch my children play. This is the vision of the Santa Cruz I want to live in. ‐ Benji Levine

17.350
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: geri lieby <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 1:34 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve Complete Library/Affordable Housing Project Hello,
Please approve this project. I love trees but sometimes one must sacrifice a bit for the greater good. And what could be more important than affordable housing, a childcare center and an environmentally built state of the art library which will enhance the lives of so many?
geri lieby
[email protected]

17.351
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Gretchen regenhardt <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 4:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear Mayor Keeley and Councilmembers,
I write to urge immediate and unconditional approval of the downtown library/affordable housing project currently under consideration. As a legal aid attorney for more than 30 years, I saw first‐hand the suffering of low‐income residents throughout Santa Cruz county and in the City of Santa Cruz particularly who struggled every day to find and keep housing they could afford. Everyone knows we have an affordable housing crisis. Please take a step in the right direction to approve this excellent project!
Thank you.

Gretchen Regenhardt
(former) Regional Director
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc.

17.352
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Diane Sipkin <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 8:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear City Council Members:

I am writing to urge you to support the complete Library/Affordable Housing project as it has evolved over time , without adding any last‐minute conditions that would render the current plan infeasible or cause further delay and expense.

This project would be a wonderful addition to both our city and county and would benefit so many.

Thank you,
Diane Sipkin
322 Pelton Ave, Santa Cruz

17.353
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: judy warner <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 12:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please do approve the new library
Long planned and needed, this project gives so much to Santa Cruz, plus housing! Many of us would love to visit the new library during our lifetime. Go for it!
Judy Warner

17.354
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Clara E Minor <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 1:08 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now...

I urge you all to support the complete project as it has evolved over time, without adding last-minute conditions that would render the current plan infeasible or cause further delay and expense. This has been a long-time coming and the time to implement it is NOW.

This is an amazing plan and shud be given your YES votes on March 14! Sincerely~
Clara E Minor
‐‐
Clara E Minor
Master Instructor-Trainer
831-458-0900
minorsan.com

17.355
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Matt Farrell <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 1:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve the Downtown Library/Affordable Housing Project Now Mayor Keeley and Council members,
Please approve the Downtown Library/Affordable Housing Project at your March 14 meeting. This project has been in various stages of review and design since 2016.

It now includes the branch library, 124 units of affordable housing, a child care facility, 243 parking spaces, 258 bicycle parking spaces, and commercial space.

Last November, Santa Cruz City voters decisively rejected Measure O which would have stopped this project. This campaign included many forums and discussions with both opponents and proponents of the project included.

Please respect the will of the voters and move forward with this critical project.

Matt Farrell
831 331‐7496

17.356
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: charles stover <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 9:36 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please approve library project now
Dear City Council,
Please approve the library project now with no further delays.

Thank You,
Charles Stover

17.357
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Max Copperman <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 10:20 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve complete Library/Affordable Housing Project Dear Council Members,
I am writing to urge you to approve the Library project. I have been a supporter of the project for the past few years. I think it will be and asset for our community, providing much needed resources and adequate space for an up‐to‐date library as well as affordable housing.

Regards,
Cynthia White

17.358
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Donna Thomas <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 10:58 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! I hope you will uphold the will of the people and vote to complete the project. It is the right thing to do.

Thank you,
Donna Thomas

17.359
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Shannon Tracy <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 11:41 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please APPROVE the complete Library/Affordable Housing Project Dear City Council members,
I am writing to urge you to support the complete Library/Affordable Housing project as it has evolved over time, without adding last-minute conditions that would render the current plan infeasible or cause further delay and expense.

Local voters demonstrated their overwhelming support for the project by defeating Measure O in November. As a librarian and SC community member since 1985, who raised 2 children here, I am very excited about this investment in the future of our downtown. I believe that a new 21st century library with additional housing, a childcare center, shared parking facilities, and that utilizes green building and sustainable practices, will improve our city immeasurably! Sincerely,
Shannon Greene
831-419-4656

17.360
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Deborah Peronto <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2023 11:27 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now!” Santa Cruz City Council,
I am writing to urge you to support the downtown Library and a Affordable Housing as it has been most recently approved by the Planning Commission. This will provide much needed housing to the downtown area which will help resolve parking an traffic problems that exist now as people cannot live near where they work. This library as planned will support modern library services to the entire Santa Cruz County public library system as well as to all who live and work in the city and surrounding areas.

Please vote to approve now to avoid any more unnecessary delays.

Debby Peronto, a lifelong library user.

17.361
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sara Webb <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 2:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Housing for SARC recipients
Dear Mayor Keeley and City Councilmembers,
my name is Sara Webb and I am a resident of the City of Santa Cruz with a son who has a disability.

It's very hard to find rental units that meet his needs and the ADA accessible developments are already all full. I support the development of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing project because our city needs more deeply affordable housing near jobs, public transit, parks and services.

In my experience looking for affordable housing in the City of Santa Cruz I have struggled to find housing that is affordable to me because of my limited income. By setting aside 11 of the proposed homes for people with developmental disabilities who will benefit from on-site supportive services funded by San Andreas Regional Center this project will allow people like my son to live independently in our community.

Sincerely,
Sara Webb

17.362
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Christine Kiebert-Boss <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 2:15 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project Dear Mayor Keeley and City Councilmembers, my name is Christine Kiebert-Boss and I am a resident of the City of Santa Cruz. My son has a disability. I support the development of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing project because our city needs more deeply affordable housing near jobs, public transit, parks, and services. In my experience looking for affordable housing in the City of Santa Cruz, I have struggled to find housing that is affordable to me because of my limited income. By setting aside 11 of the proposed homes for people with developmental disabilities who will benefit from on-site supportive services funded by San Andreas Regional Center this project will allow people like my son to live independently in the community we grew up in.

Thank you
Christine

17.363
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sheree Storm <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 5:10 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Laura Marcus
Subject: Support for Library & Affordable Housing Project Attachments: Dientes Letter of Support Library and Affordable Housing Project 030923.pdf Dear City Council,
Please see the aƩached leƩer of support of the Library & Affordable Housing Project up for approval tomorrow.

Thank you,
Sheree
Sheree Storm | Chief Business Development Officer
5300 Soquel Ave, Suite 103, Santa Cruz, CA 95062 | direct 831‐600‐8256 Dignity through Dentistry | dientes.org

17.364
1830 Commercial Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95065 P : 831.464.5409 F : 831.464.5416 www.dientes.org
March 9, 2023
City Council
City of Santa Cruz
Via email: [email protected]
Re: Library & Affordable Housing Project Support
Dear Mayor Keeley and Councilmembers,
Dientes Community Dental Care is proud to continue its support of the Library & Affordable Housing Project, including the full package of uses and features. We urge you, the City Council, to pass the proposal as approved by the Planning Commission with no additional changes to the scope in your meeting on Tuesday, March 14th.

For these reasons, Dientes Community Dental Care respectfully asks for your AYE vote tomorrow.

Sincerely,
Laura Marcus
CEO, Dientes

17.365
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: ofelia baeza <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 9:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project:

Dear Mayor Keeley and City Councilmembers,
My name is Ofelia Baeza and I am a resident of the City of Santa Cruz with a disability. I support the development of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing project because our city needs more deeply affordable housing near jobs, public transit, parks and services. In my experience looking for affordable housing in the City of Santa Cruz I have struggled to find housing that is affordable to me because of my limited income. By setting aside 11 of the proposed homes for people with developmental disabilities who will benefit from on-site supportive services funded by San Andreas Regional Center this project will allow people like me to live independently in the community we grew up in.

Thank you,
Ofelia Baeza

17.366
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 10:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: 3.14.23 Agenda Item #17 Library/garage/housing

3.14.23 Agenda Item #17 Library/garage/housing
Dear Council,
I think it is completely in keeping with the socialist agenda of Santa Cruz city leadership to sacrifice public property to subsidize as many poor people who can't afford to live here as possible (although it is actually a small number, and a permanent sacrifice).

The good news is there is only so much of that, so when you get done sacrificing it all, your goals of no cars will be achieved because no one can park anywhere downtown.

That's OK with me, I never go there unless I have to, homeless and crime and all, just reserve a few streets with passable traffic so I can drive to Capitola the back way.

I look forward to home ownership rates plunging so I can feel very privileged having worked so hard and earned every penny to buy a house, debt free, and independent of the government as much as I have achieved.

Please keep the high density stuff downtown, no need to spread the misery around.

Thanks again, Garrett Philipp

17.367
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Vivian Rogers <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:29 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote YES to move the Library Affordable Housing Project forward Dear Members of the Santa Cruz City Council,
I cannot tell you enough how excited I will be with your favorable vote tonight for the movement forward on Item 17, the Library Affordable Housing Project. Your affirmative vote will create a generous library with space and programs for all our citizens! Please vote YES tonight on Item 17 (per your current Agenda). Your support will allow us to have a library that is more than a repository of good-to-great books. You will be approving the construction of a citizen's palace where (to name just a few):
 Students can find a quiet place to study alone or work with a tutor, do vital research online, or meet with other students to work on a group project without bothering others.  Parents can meet up with other parents for a librarian-led sing-along, book reading, and crafts hour.

 Individuals can research subjects in private and with confidence, or meet with free housing counselors, immigration attorneys or tax preparers in library meeting rooms.  Job seekers can access online job resources.

 Musicians can show off their talents while music-lovers enjoy their lunch hour.  Families can find out about their ancestors.
 And YES where readers can enjoy a wide selection of fiction and non-fiction.

Please Vote YES tonight and allow Santa Cruz to have a wonderful and generous library for ALL of its citizens.

Vivian Rogers

17.368
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please support Library/Affordable Housing Project! Please pass the resolution on Tuesday’s agenda to support moving forward with the Library/Affordable Housing Project, including upholding the Parks and Recreation Commission’s approval of the Heritage Tree Removal Permit.

Non‐native parking lot trees, whose destructive roots will present a continuing problem for any construction (note the current sidewalk damage) will be properly replaced with appropriate young trees.

Please keep the proposed project moving forward!
Dennis Hagen
Westside
Santa Cruz

17.369
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Kathleen Wright <[email protected]>
Date: March 10, 2023 at 10:54:57 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
By including the heritage trees in the design of the library, you improve the big box look of the building, you affirm to some extent your promises made to protect the trees, you mollify a great deal of anger of a good proportion of your constituency, you model a willingness to cooperate, and you model attention to climate changes issues, not least of all.

Thank you for your consideration.

Kathleen Wright
[email protected]
721 Bay St. Apt 212,
Santa Cruz, California 95060-5964

17.370
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Mitchell Lachman <[email protected]>
Date: March 10, 2023 at 11:21:48 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.371
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mitchell Lachman
[email protected]
116 Laguna Street
Santa Cruz, California 90405

17.372
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Santa Cruz YIMBY Support for Library and Affordable Housing Project on March 14th agenda (Item #17) Date: Friday, March 10, 2023 12:27:44 PM
Attachments: Santa Cruz YIMBY Letter in support of the Downtown Santa Cruz Library-March-14-2023.pdf March 10, 2023
To: Santa Cruz City Council
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
Re: Support for Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project We are writing in support of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project, Item #17 on your March 14, 2023 agenda. We urge you to adopt the staff recommendation to approve the permits and move this project forward.

We respect the many years of community participation and city staff work that have resulted in a complex and remarkable plan for lots of affordable housing, shared parking, a welcoming library, and a daycare center. The defeat of Measure O is a clear message that this project should move forward.

We advocate for sustainable growth with more homes near transit such as the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project, located near the downtown Metro station. We must respond to the climate crisis by seizing these opportunities to locate affordable housing near jobs and schools, with options for public transit, biking and walking.

We generally support reducing the need for new parking supply, ending the mandatory minimum parking requirements for housing projects, and allowing more people to live closer to transit, without the need to own a car. The current Downtown Library project results in no net new parking, and facilitates the construction of more affordable housing on other downtown lots. Given the approximately 12,000 people on the Housing Authority List, the need for more affordable housing is undeniable and urgent.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is proud to support the partnership between the City of Santa Cruz and selected affordable housing developers Eden Housing and For the Future Housing. Eden Housing has an extensive portfolio of properties serving our county’s low income families and at-risk populations.

We urge the City Council to move this historic project forward, for a huge improvement to our library system, for the reduction of climate impacts from transportation, and for delivering long promised affordable housing.

Sincerely,
Santa Cruz YIMBY

17.373
Santa Cruz YIMBY Mission: We envision a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, abilities, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. In response to the ever-increasing cost of living, we advocate for more affordable housing to meet the needs of our growing population.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is a chapter of YIMBY Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization.

17.374
March 10, 2023
To: Santa Cruz City Council
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
Re: Support for Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project We are writing in support of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project, Item #17 on your March 14, 2023 agenda. We urge you to adopt the staff recommendation to approve the permits and move this project forward.

Sincerely,
Santa Cruz YIMBY
Santa Cruz YIMBY Mission: We envision a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, abilities, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. In response to the ever-increasing cost of living, we advocate for more affordable housing to meet the needs of our growing population.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is a chapter of YIMBY Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization.

17.375
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Leslie Conner <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 4:35 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Housing Project
To the Santa Cruz City Council:

On behalf of our Board of Directors and the thousands of Santa Cruz City patients we serve, I am writing in support of the downtown Library/Affordable Housing project as it has been proposed to you.

For nearly 50 years, Santa Cruz Community Health has provided high quality care to all people, regardless of their ability to pay. As a Federally Qualified Health Center, we are also designated a Health Care for the Homeless site, providing special services to improve the health of unhoused individuals. In all, we serve the physical, emotional, and social needs of over 11,000 people, over 2,000 of whom are unhoused.

The housing crisis in our community continues to worsen with no end in sight. The need for affordable housing is the number one social issue facing our patients. If we could write prescriptions for affordable rentals we would do so without hesitation as that is surely the fundamental “treatment” that so many of our patients’ lives depend upon.

We understand that some individuals object to the scope of the project and its location. Unfortunately, as a community we do not have the luxury of shutting down affordable housing proposals at this time. Collectively, our City, our County, and our State have waited too long to build new housing stock. The fear of change can no longer be an excuse to prevent people – young and old – from accessing a safe and secure roof over their heads. It is demeaning to all of us to live in a community where too many children have no place to call home, and too many times we have to avert our eyes from individuals living in deplorable conditions on the street. The Library/Housing project is one important step in the right direction.

We urge you to support the Library/Affordable Housing project as is.

Thank you.

Leslie Conner
CEO
Leslie Conner, MPH (she, her)
Chief Executive Officer
Santa Cruz Community Health
831.427.3500 x134 | [email protected]
125 Water St. A2 Santa Cruz, CA 95060

17.376
2 “Give people what they need: a home to live in and health care to be well.

Don’t ask who deserves it: Everybody deserves it.”
‐ Howard Zinn, Historian and Civil Rights Activist
Our Mission ‐ To improve the health of our patients and the community and advocate the feminist goals of social, political, and economic equality.

The information contained in this message is intended only for the recipient, and may be a confidential communication or may otherwise be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please be aware that any dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify me by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

17.377
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Sheree Storm <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 5:10 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Laura Marcus
Subject: Support for Library & Affordable Housing Project Attachments: Dientes Letter of Support Library and Affordable Housing Project 030923.pdf Dear City Council,
Please see the aƩached leƩer of support of the Library & Affordable Housing Project up for approval tomorrow.

Thank you,
Sheree
Sheree Storm | Chief Business Development Officer
5300 Soquel Ave, Suite 103, Santa Cruz, CA 95062 | direct 831‐600‐8256 Dignity through Dentistry | dientes.org

17.378
1830 Commercial Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95065 P : 831.464.5409 F : 831.464.5416 www.dientes.org
March 9, 2023
City Council
City of Santa Cruz
Via email: [email protected]
Re: Library & Affordable Housing Project Support
Dear Mayor Keeley and Councilmembers,
Dientes Community Dental Care is proud to continue its support of the Library & Affordable Housing Project, including the full package of uses and features. We urge you, the City Council, to pass the proposal as approved by the Planning Commission with no additional changes to the scope in your meeting on Tuesday, March 14th.

For these reasons, Dientes Community Dental Care respectfully asks for your AYE vote tomorrow.

Sincerely,
Laura Marcus
CEO, Dientes

17.379
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: ofelia baeza <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 9:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Support for Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project:

Thank you,
Ofelia Baeza

17.380
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2023 10:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: 3.14.23 Agenda Item #17 Library/garage/housing

The good news is there is only so much of that, so when you get done sacrificing it all, your goals of no cars will be achieved because no one can park anywhere downtown.

That's OK with me, I never go there unless I have to, homeless and crime and all, just reserve a few streets with passable traffic so I can drive to Capitola the back way.

Please keep the high density stuff downtown, no need to spread the misery around.

Thanks again, Garrett Philipp

17.381
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Vivian Rogers <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:29 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote YES to move the Library Affordable Housing Project forward Dear Members of the Santa Cruz City Council,
I cannot tell you enough how excited I will be with your favorable vote tonight for the movement forward on Item 17, the Library Affordable Housing Project. Your affirmative vote will create a generous library with space and programs for all our citizens! Please vote YES tonight on Item 17 (per your current Agenda). Your support will allow us to have a library that is more than a repository of good-to-great books. You will be approving the construction of a citizen's palace where (to name just a few):
 Students can find a quiet place to study alone or work with a tutor, do vital research online, or meet with other students to work on a group project without bothering others.  Parents can meet up with other parents for a librarian-led sing-along, book reading, and crafts hour.

Please Vote YES tonight and allow Santa Cruz to have a wonderful and generous library for ALL of its citizens.

Vivian Rogers

17.382
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:38 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Please support Library/Affordable Housing Project! Please pass the resolution on Tuesday’s agenda to support moving forward with the Library/Affordable Housing Project, including upholding the Parks and Recreation Commission’s approval of the Heritage Tree Removal Permit.

Please keep the proposed project moving forward!
Dennis Hagen
Westside
Santa Cruz

17.383
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

Thank you for your consideration.

Kathleen Wright
[email protected]
721 Bay St. Apt 212,
Santa Cruz, California 95060-5964

17.384
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.385
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mitchell Lachman
[email protected]
116 Laguna Street
Santa Cruz, California 90405

17.386
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Santa Cruz YIMBY Support for Library and Affordable Housing Project on March 14th agenda (Item #17) Date: Friday, March 10, 2023 12:27:44 PM
Attachments: Santa Cruz YIMBY Letter in support of the Downtown Santa Cruz Library-March-14-2023.pdf March 10, 2023
To: Santa Cruz City Council
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
Re: Support for Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project We are writing in support of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project, Item #17 on your March 14, 2023 agenda. We urge you to adopt the staff recommendation to approve the permits and move this project forward.

Sincerely,
Santa Cruz YIMBY

17.387
Santa Cruz YIMBY Mission: We envision a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, abilities, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. In response to the ever-increasing cost of living, we advocate for more affordable housing to meet the needs of our growing population.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is a chapter of YIMBY Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization.

17.388
March 10, 2023
To: Santa Cruz City Council
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
Re: Support for Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project We are writing in support of the Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project, Item #17 on your March 14, 2023 agenda. We urge you to adopt the staff recommendation to approve the permits and move this project forward.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is a chapter of YIMBY Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization.

17.389
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Leslie Conner <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 4:35 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Housing Project
To the Santa Cruz City Council:

On behalf of our Board of Directors and the thousands of Santa Cruz City patients we serve, I am writing in support of the downtown Library/Affordable Housing project as it has been proposed to you.

We urge you to support the Library/Affordable Housing project as is.

Thank you.

Leslie Conner
CEO
Leslie Conner, MPH (she, her)
Chief Executive Officer
Santa Cruz Community Health
831.427.3500 x134 | [email protected]
125 Water St. A2 Santa Cruz, CA 95060

17.390
2 “Give people what they need: a home to live in and health care to be well.

17.391
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: David Brody <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 4:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve Library/Housing Project
Dear Councilmembers,
I am wriƟng to express First 5 Santa Cruz County’s conƟnued support for the Downtown Library/Affordable Housing project and to encourage you to support the complete project as it has evolved over Ɵme and not add any condiƟons that would render the current plan infeasible or cause further delay and expense.

The First 5 Santa Cruz County Commission has endorsed and re‐affirmed its support for the Library Housing Project 3 separate Ɵmes since 2016, most recently in June of 2022. We understand the vital importance of the new library to children and families in our community and the enƟre SCPL network. We also recognize the urgent need for the affordable housing units and the child care center that will come with it.

We strongly encourage you to approve the item before you as is and allow this vital and widely supported project to move forward.

Sincerely,
David G. Brody
Executive Director
First 5 Santa Cruz County
Mail: P.O. Box 1457, Capitola, CA 95010
Office: 4450 Capitola Road, Suite 106, Capitola, CA 95010 Phone: 831-465-2214 | Email: [email protected]
Website: www.first5scc.org

17.392
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Erin Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 5:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now The voters of Santa Cruz spoke loudly in November when they defeated the deceptive Measure O by huge margins. We want the new downtown library and affordable housing project built! I've lost track of how many letters I've written on this issue; how many public comments I've submitted to various city entities; and how many neighbors I've spoken to in order to rally support. It has felt like a part‐time job pushing back against the obstructionist NIMBYs who think 4 dying trees are more important than housing their neighbors or investing in freely available education through libraries (or at least that's the fig leaf for their actual objections to the project, which are probably more along the lines of, I've got mine so forget you). The farmer's market will be just fine two blocks away from its current location. Think of all the citizens who want this project built but don't have the time or the informational resources to realize they have to keep writing letters and showing up at city meetings to repeat over and over, YES, we want this library and housing project built! I've lived downtown for over 20 years and I can see the project site from my front porch, and I'm in favor of this project. I also have a master's degree in library and information science, and realize the power of libraries in leveling the playing field when it comes to access to information. This project is a statement of our values as a city: we're in favor of housing and educational justice. Let's get it done!
Regards,
Erin Lee

17.393
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Joe <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 6:20 PM
To: City Council
Subject: mixed use project for Lot 4
Dear council members‐
I am writing to offer my support of the mixed use project proposed for Lot 4. As a 47 year resident of Santa Cruz I have seen many changes to our community. I have been able to sustain both my home and business, Atlantis Fantasyworld, through the many challenges of the the last 40 years. I believe that this project is crucial to the sustainability of our downtown.

The Cooper House used to be the heartbeat of downtown. Since the 1989 earthquake we haven't recaptured that heartbeat. I believe a state of the art library will provide that community center.

Housing is a major part of the project and in conjunction with the day care center will provide a much needed opportunity for downtown workers.

Retention of some outdoor parklet dining combined with additional project development in the next five years will put a strain on public parking. Yes, we need to combat climate change but we need to do it sensibly. Our biggest industry downtown is tourism and if we don't provide enough parking for future visitors we threaten the continued sustainability of the commercial aspect of downtown. Even if everyone drives electric vehicles they will need to park them somewhere. This project offers some relief for the lost parking we will sustain.

I truly believe this project will bring more families downtown and revitalize our overall appeal as an entertaining destination for locals and tourists.

Joe Ferrara
Atlantis Fantasyworld ‐ 47 years downtown
Downtown Commisioner (2nd Term)
Twice Past President of the Downtown Association

17.394
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 7:01 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: These Mature Trees Belong in our Wonderful Town Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Lynne Nicol <[email protected]>
Date: March 10, 2023 at 6:54:01 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: These Mature Trees Belong in our Wonderful Town Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
As a resident of Santa Cruz since 1967, raising my ecologically aware children here, and being so proud of the emphasis our town puts on conservation, preservation, and wise decisions, it is shocking to me that this library project has been designed with no regard for these important trees.

Our very lives depend on incorporating the natural landscape into our progressive improvements. How delightful it would be for decisions to be made to save these trees.

Please, please do consider, again, keeping our trees. They make a statement that is very important -- for creature comfort -- we care about the natural environment -- and it teaches our younger generations to care.

How proud I will be to have these trees gracing our new library complex.

Thank you.

Lynne Nicol
Lynne Nicol
[email protected]

17.395
2 216 Naglee Ave
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.396
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 9:15 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Margaret Bolmlick <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 5:50:05 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.397
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Margaret Bolmlick
[email protected]
160 Peck Terrace
Santa Cruz , California 95062

17.398
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 9:16 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Suzanne Kent <[email protected]>
Date: March 10, 2023 at 9:16:05 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.399
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Suzanne Kent
[email protected]
250 Calvin Pl.

Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.400
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 9:16 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Nancy Shanfeld <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 6:36:09 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.401
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Nancy Shanfeld
[email protected]
1627 King Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060-5203

17.402
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 9:16 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Eva Brunner <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 8:55:41 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
In keeping with the city climate action plan, I do not understand how you can justify cutting down these large established trees. Saving three heritage trees is better than nothing, but I am startled that any of them are going to be destroyed, especially in favor of cars. PLEASE SAVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE.

Santa Cruz quality of life is a lot to do with nature. We should be integrating trees and green spaces into our town not destroying them in favor of high-rises and parking garages.

Please explain to me how the City of Santa Cruz justifies destruction of huge established heritage trees while touting it's Climate Action Plan, not to mention the City heritage tree ordinance.

I am so disappointed in what is happening to our town all in favor of developers dreams. Think of the places you visit that you enjoy the most. Are they all high rises, concrete and cars? Is this what we really want for our town? Let's find balance and not destroy all the good.

17.403
2 Eva Brunner
Santa Cruz 95060
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Eva Brunner
[email protected]
105 Routier St
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.404
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Save the Trees, Save our Trust in City Government Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Barbara Riverwoman <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:28:06 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Save the Trees, Save our Trust in City Government Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees and and the peoples' TRUST! If the trees are destroyed in violation of our City's ordinances, not only will we lose our beautiful and health sustaining trees, but we will lose trust in our City's willingness to follow our own laws. These are not trivial laws, but laws crafted to protect our planet, our health, the beauty of our City. Is this the kind of leadership you really want to model?
Please listen to the voices of thousands and thousands of residents who are profoundly shocked at this action on the part of the City.

Sincerely,
Barbara Riverwoman
Barbara Riverwoman
[email protected]
2120 N. Pacific Ave. #46
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.405
2 17.406
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Julia Ribeiro <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:37:43 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.407
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Julia Ribeiro
[email protected]
5510 Coast Road
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.408
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Katie Excoffier <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:37:45 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.409
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Katie Excoffier
[email protected]
33 Crest Ln
La Selva Beach, California 95076

17.410
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Jack McCourt <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:40:44 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzians who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.411
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jack McCourt
[email protected]
291 Juanita rd
Boulder Creek, California 95006

17.412
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:45 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Laura Wilson <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:41:37 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.413
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Laura Wilson
[email protected]
2255 Venice Dr
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.414
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 11:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Deborah Hayes <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 11:47:24 AM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.415
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Let’s be the progressive community that we want to be! It’s the right thing to do, to save the old, heritage trees. For beauty, for the community, for the climate! Thank you for your consideration.

Deborah Hayes
[email protected]
1969 Ocean St Ext
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.416
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 12:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include Heritage Trees in Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: ANNE MITCHELL <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 12:06:54 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include Heritage Trees in Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending community events, or stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In this climate emergency we need the value of our biggest trees as a big carbon sink.

17.417
2 Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to ask architects to INCLUDE SOME TREES in design..

Thank you for your consideration.

Anne Mitchell

ANNE MITCHELL
[email protected]
575 Soquel Ave
Snta Cruz, California 95062

17.418
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 12:50 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Direct your architects to redesign to protect our Heritage trees, downtown Santa Cruz library site
Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Natalie Goff <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 12:48:39 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Direct your architects to redesign to protect our Heritage trees, downtown Santa Cruz library site
Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am asking that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to alter their plans. Please, insist that the architects integrate as many heritage trees as possible in the plan.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. In a climate emergency, we must prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency, city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

The current plan to remove the trees ignores the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution that states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. Were the architects given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4

17.419
2 in the project design? Was the city arborist consulted? Now is the time to correct these oversights.

Thank you,
Natalie Goff
Forty year Downtown Santa Cruz resident
Natalie Goff
[email protected]
2120 N. Pacific Avenue #9
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.420
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 1:02 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: ingrida mednis <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 1:00:55 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.421
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.
ingrida mednis
[email protected]
620 Washington St Apt 4
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.422
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: amelia conlen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 2:21 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Hello Mayor Keeley and Council members,
Please approve Item #17 on Tuesday's agenda to move forward with the Downtown Library/Affordable Housing project.

Voters have made it clear that this project has community support, and we urgently need the affordable units that it provides. Infill housing is the best way for us to reduce car trips and achieve our Climate Action Plan goals. And ‐ I must admit that I'm jealous of the other upgraded libraries in Capitola and Boulder Creek! The planned new downtown library would be a tremendous upgrade and a new community gathering place.

Don't miss the opportunity to build a world‐class library and much‐needed affordable housing. Please approve this project on Tuesday.

Sincerely,
Amelia Conlen
Santa Cruz resident

17.423
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 3:39 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Mary Nelson <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 1:45:12 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.424
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mary Nelson
[email protected]
1036 Cayuga
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.425
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 3:39 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: carol pruitt <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 1:19:13 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.426
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.
carol pruitt
[email protected]
p. o. box 4161
santa cruz, California 95063

17.427
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 4:28 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: The Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design can & should include our Heritage Trees! Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Alissa Klar <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 3:49:01 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: The Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design can & should include our Heritage Trees! Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am urgently requesting that the city council follow the in place Heritage Tree Resolution and require the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to incorporate as many of the existing Heritage trees on the site into their design. The trees provide beauty and shade to residents and visitors alike. A mature tree like these absorbs Carbon Dioxide and other toxins in the air reducing pollution and releasing moisture. It takes years for a newly planted sapling to grow to the point that it would replace the benefits the trees already provide to us.

For years I have shopped at the farmers market, resting under their canopy, my kids played Celtic music under those trees for so many events. People in Santa Cruz will miss those trees, and new generations will never get to benefit from them if they are all just cut down.

17.428
2 carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Alissa Klar
[email protected]
9665 Brookside Ave.

Ben Lomond, California 95005

17.429
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nadene Thorne <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 6:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Arbor Day
Your proclamation of March 16th as Arbor Day strikes me as a bit peculiar, and also ironic.

Traditionally, Arbor Day is celebrated on Luther Burbank's birthday, March 7 (1849). Your selection of the 16th of March seems somewhat arbitrary, making me wonder if you were aware of the Luther Burbank connection?
Ironic, in that the city is "celebrating" the planting of trees (affirmed in our Climate Action Plan), and yet in the same meeting you propose to authorize numerous permits to progress the new library‐garage‐housing project and the demolition of ALL the trees on that property. Yes, I know this issue has been litigated before, but it doesn't make it the right decision when there was no attempt to even incorporate the existing trees into this project. And ‐ where is the funding for any of it? What's the rush in removing the trees? Nadene Thorne
140 Averitt Street
Santa Cruz 95060

17.430
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 8:25 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Christine Hawley <[email protected]>
Date: March 11, 2023 at 5:20:57 PM PST
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.431
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

We need to include climate considerations and heritage trees and our development plans.

Every time!!!!! Please let’s think of the future and not just the economic aspects. Thank you Christine Hawley
[email protected]
122 Kirby Street
Santa Cruz , California 95060

17.432
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:44 AM
To: Rosemary Balsley; City Council
Cc: Susan Cavalieri; Lynda Marin; John Hall; Lira Filippini Subject: Fwd: Save Some Trees
Attachments: anon3.HEIC; anon2.HEIC; anon1.HEIC
Hi Rosemary.

After spending some time with the immense agenda package you assembled for the City Council on Tuesday I realised that a lot of our photos were missing so I'm resending them. Thanks for all your hard work.

Pauline Seales
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 5:36 PM
Subject: Save Some Trees
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Lots more people who love trees are getting photos with our signs. Most used their own phones and will be sending the photos to you. These three today did not have their own phones with them.

Many people are very disturbed to hear that ALL the trees will be cut. We are asking for a minor design alteration in the Lot 4 project to save the two liquidambars and the smaller magnolia close to Cedar st.

Pauline Seales

17.433
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:46 AM
To: Rosemary Balsley; City Council; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save Some Trees
Attachments: IMG_0496.jpg
Please include for Tuesday
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Susan Cavalieri <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 12:04 PM
Subject: Save Some Trees
To: City Council <[email protected]>, Pauline Seales <[email protected]> Dear City Councilmembers,
Please save some heritage trees on Lot 4.

Our city needs trees to mitigate the worsening impact of climate heating and those of us who live downtown need big trees for our emotional and physical health. Thank you, Susan Cavalieri Sent from my iPhone

17.434

17.435
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:54 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Lot 4 TREES
Attachments: Mary O.HEIC
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: mary odegaard <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 9:27 PM
Subject: Lot 4 TREES
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Dear City Council,
The trees on lot 4 need to be incorporated into the design of any project planned for that lot. I am speaking up for the trees, they are a vital part of our environment and provide incredible beauty and clean air for all of us. As council members insist that the trees are incorporated into the design, Sincerely Mary Ødegaard

17.436
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:59 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save Some Trees
please include
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 3:56 PM
Subject: Save Some Trees
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>

17.437

17.438
4 We love the trees!
Sincerely,
Nettie

17.439
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:06 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save the trees at farmers market
sent previously ‐ please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Tim Ferguson <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 8:14 PM
Subject: Save the trees at farmers market
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>

17.440
2 17.441
3 Greeting city council members,
These trees have lived here a long time, and even if a new building is built, they should be kept. They should continue to flourish, and grace the downtown with their beauty. We love having trees in our sidewalk, and these ancient trees should get to stay. Please keep them with whatever plans move forward , thank you for your time .

Sincerely,
Tim Ferguson
Santa Cruz local

17.442
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:09 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Please save some trees
Attachments: IMG_3257.jpg
Please include for mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Gumdrop <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 6:27 PM
Subject: Please save some trees
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Please save some of the trees at Lot 4, Cedar St
Thank you…Lyle Ryan

17.443

17.444
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:10 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Susan Cavalieri; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin Subject: Fwd: Save Some Lot 4 Trees
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Richard Stover <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 4:38 PM
Subject: Save Some Lot 4 Trees
To: City Council.Group <[email protected]> Dear City Council Members,
How about doing something nice for the planet and for all of the citizens of Santa Cruz! With just a little resolve on your part, some of the trees at Lot 4 can be saved. If you do this one small thing you will be showing how much you care (or don't) about the environment, both globally and locally.

I've seen a report that some of the trees on Lot 4 are not very healthy, although that seems to mean they may live only another 10 or 20 years. That doesn't seem like a valid argument for destroying them all now.

If you save some of the trees, then even if some of them die in the decades to come, the new library will have been designed to accommodate those trees and new trees can be planted in their place. If you don't save some of the trees, you will have chosen to eliminate all high canopy trees permanently at that site.

That would be a tragic loss for the downtown and the whole community.

Please do something good for our future, save some Lot 4 trees.

17.445

17.446
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:11 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Please save some trees!
Attachments: image0.jpeg
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Tad <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 3:02 PM
Subject: Please save some trees!
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Dear SC council ‐
I’m sending this email to request that you put real consideration into incorporating preservation of some of our old growth trees on Lot 4. Many of us voted against the use of this lot for a new library for many reasons. The removal of these trees is one of them. Now that this development has been pitched hard & voted on, can we please look at the possibility of incorporating those trees which are in good shape into the design? Let’s please consider how long they’ve been there & how much they are loved & the many pluses they bring our voters & visitors.

Sincerely,
Thomas (Tad) Veltrop
Sent from my iPhone

17.447

17.448
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:14 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save The Trees!!!
Attachments: 5920EE14-091C-44F7-BCF1-31566412EF67.jpeg
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Floratura <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 11:05 PM
Subject: Save The Trees!!!
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Please let us save the trees!!
Thank you,
Tatiana Peña

17.449

17.450
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:16 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save some trees
Attachments: IMG-0953.jpg
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Greg Rohrbach <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:04 PM
Subject: Save some trees
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Really hope some of these trees remain. They are beautiful and great to be around in the city.

Greg Rohrbach

17.451

17.452
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:17 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: SAVE SOME TREES!!!!
Attachments: 20230212_162013.jpg
Please include for mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: twardwell <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:17 AM
Subject: SAVE SOME TREES!!!!
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Please be more creative with your planning and save these trees! Sent from my Galaxy

17.453

17.454
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:18 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save Some Trees
Attachments: Save Some Trees - Keven Cook.jpg
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Keven Cook <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 9:58 AM
Subject: Save Some Trees
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Dear City Council and Mayor Keeley,
I'm hoping that you can find a way to save some of the trees on Lot 4, especially those along Cedar St. Please ask the architect of the planned parking structure, library, and housing mixed‐up use project to follow the City's heritage tree ordinance and create a design that incorporates these trees.

Large trees in the urban forest create habitat for birds and are one of the answers to the climate crisis. I am a 25 year resident of Santa Cruz and a downtown homeowner. Previously, I lived over the hill and came to Santa Cruz to be closer to the ocean and nature. Please don't allow Santa Cruz to become a concrete jungle like San Jose. Evidence of this process already being underway is the massive concrete building being built at Pacific Ave and Laurel St, which I like to call Terrazas Tower after former mayor David Terrazas, who was formerly a city planner for San Jose.

As current mayor Fred Keeley says, this is now an inflection point. Please make it a positive inflection point, not a negative one.
‐ Keven Cook

17.455

17.456
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:20 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri; Lira Filippini; John Hall Subject: Fwd: SAVE SOME TREES
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Conscientious Cog <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 10:09 AM
Subject: SAVE SOME TREES
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
They are alive. Please don’t remove them from our city. They deserve life and we deserve them.

17.457
2 17.458
3 17.459
4 Thank you for your time and effort.
~Ann C. Niland
(Per/They/Them)

17.460
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:21 AM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Please Save Some Trees
Attachments: Pauline.HEIC
Please include for Mar 14
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 7:11 PM
Subject: Please Save Some Trees
To: City Council <[email protected]>
People are very upset about the imminent destruction of ALL the trees on Lot 4.

We are asking for the design to be modified to save some of them.

17.461
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Michael Polhamus <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 9:33 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear Mayor Keeley & Santa Cruz City Council,
On behalf of the Democratic Women's Club, we would like to urge the City Council to approve the Library Mixed Use Project as currently proposed. The Democratic Women's Club is proud to have supported the Library Mixed Use Project from its inception. This included our club's endorsement of a no vote on Measure O for the 2022 midterm election. We would urge the City Council to not place any additional conditions for approval this late in the process so as not to render the project infeasible or to cause further expense. The people of Santa Cruz overwhelmingly support this project and we request it be approved without further delay.

Thank you for your service to the City of Santa Cruz.
‐‐
Mike Polhamus
[email protected]

17.462
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: cindy jackson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 12:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE Library/Affordable Housing Project
Dear City Council,
Please approve the Library/Affordable Housing Project on your agenda this Tuesday, 3/14. The project has been improved and adapted with TONS of community input since its original concept and it is time to move forward.

We absolutely, positively need:

The additional affordable housing units included in the project A comfortable, attractive, and NEW downtown branch library Thank you for approving the project so grants can be submitted and real progress can be made.

Cindy Jackson
831-535-2548

17.463
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: kathy verhagen <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve library/affordable housing
Time to move this along. Kathy Verhagen

17.464
From: Pauline Seales
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Susan Cavalieri; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin Subject: Fwd: Please Retain Large Trees in Lot 4
Date: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:15:19 PM
Please include for Mar 14 meeting
Thanks
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mary Scheller <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 3:40 PM
Subject: Please Retain Large Trees in Lot 4
To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Dear City Council Members,
I strongly urge you rethink the design of the new development at Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz to incorporate the largest existing trees, some of which are at least 30-50 years old.

In addition to their crucial environmental benefits (such as carbon-storage, oxygen creation, air cleansing, much-needed shade, trees absorb water, help control flooding, cool the air and enhance sensory and emotional well-being.)
A single mature tree on average is equivalent to 10 air conditioning units running 20 hours a day. Their cooling helps mitigate the urban heat effect which can cause temperatures in a city to be 7 degrees higher.

Given the City's initiative to address climate change and create a more resilient Santa Cruz, retaining several of the mature and aesthetically beautiful trees is a no-brainer.

With the devastating loss of trees due to wildfire, storms, flooding, new construction, road expansion and more, holding onto our mature trees is absolutely critical.

Thank you for your consideration -- I encourage you to
rethink and act with courage and compassion for
these decades-old icons of nature.

Sincerely,
Mary Scheller
Santa Cruz, CA

17.465

17.466
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:18 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: LOT 4 TREES
Attachments: IMG_0068.jpg
Please include for March 14 council meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Sandra Cohen <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:46 PM
Subject: LOT 4 TREES
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Please save as many as possible. Not asking for all of them. Thank you! Sandra Cohen
172 Peach Terrace
Santa Cruz CA 95060
Sent from my iPhone

17.467

17.468
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:19 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save trees
Attachments: IMG_2107.jpg
Please include for Mar 14 council meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: HealthCMi Info <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:34 PM
Subject: Save trees
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent from my iPhone

17.469

17.470
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:21 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Save the trees
Please include for Council Mar 14 meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Greg Chansky <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 9:22 AM
Subject: Fwd: Save the trees
To: <[email protected]>
Sent today
Begin forwarded message:

From: Greg Chansky <[email protected]>
Date: February 23, 2023 at 9:20:27 AM PST
To: [email protected]
Subject: Save the trees

17.471
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:24 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Some trees
Attachments: IMG_4327.JPG
Please include for council meeting 3/14
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Barbara Riverwoman <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 12:13 PM
Subject: Some trees
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>, Susan Cavalieri <[email protected]> It is truly bewildering that in our city,at this point in time, with climate change looming, you would design a project that Includes the destruction of 10 trees. I don’t know what you can do, if anything, to remediate this travesty. The least you could do is to save two trees and then plant at least 25 trees for each of the ones you destroy. Thank you. Barbara Riverwoman
Sent from my iPhone

17.472

17.473
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:28 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Heritage trees and the Lot 4 project
Please include in Mar 14 meeting materials
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: John Hall <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 4:27 PM
Subject: Heritage trees and the Lot 4 project
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Fred Keeley <[email protected]> Dear members of the City Council,
In March, you will consider the question of whether a permit should be granted for the removal of all Heritage trees on Lot 4, conditional on the project receiving funding and an approved building permit.

As you know, this permit was appealed to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the appeal was denied on a split 4‐ 3 vote. I think this will shows that there are serious legal issues concerning whether to consider accommodating some of the heritage trees in an altered design for the project.

Beyond the legal issues, there is part environmental, social and aesthetic ones. The importance of mature trees environmentally is beyond question. And socially, trees make a difference to a sense of place.

Finally, aesthetically, from an urban planning point of view, an important civic building such as a downtown library deserves a prominence and focal entrance that is presently missing from the proposed design. This project, however it is constructed, will shape the sense of place in the streetscape in its neighborhood for decades and decades. Although some people seem to like the current design, I think it could be greatly improved by accommodating mature trees and including them in a courtyard entrance.

Some people have compared this project to the Watsonville city library that is combined with a parking garage. If you take a look, you will see that the Watsonville library is set back further from the curb and better sited in relation to open space. Hopefully, Santa Cruz can do at least as well architecturally as Watsonville.

Thank you for your work and for your consideration,
John Hall

17.474
2 17.475
3 . . . . . . . .

John Hall
[email protected]

17.476
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:29 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Do not cut down these trees!
Please include for mar 14 council meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Cash Compton <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 9:18 AM
Subject: Do not cut down these trees!
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Cutting healthy trees down for “development” is a shame. Please protect and save these trees! They provide valuable shade, wildlife habitat, beauty, and many other benefits to the community. We need more trees, not less!

17.477
2 Thank you,
Cash Compton

17.478
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:31 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Please reconsider❣
Attachments: PXL_20230215_231011441.jpg
Please include for Mar 14 council meeting
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Please reconsider❣
To: <[email protected]>

17.479

17.480
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:31 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Please reconsider❣
Attachments: PXL_20230215_231011441.jpg
Please include for Mar 14 council meeting
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Please reconsider❣
To: <[email protected]>

17.481

17.482
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:33 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd: Urban Tree Canopy
Please include for Mar 14 council meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Wendy King <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 4:39 PM
Subject: Urban Tree Canopy
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Dear City Council,
I understand that there is an effort nationwide to have as much tree canopy coverage as possible in cities ‐ for beauty and for mitigating climate impact from all the roads, cars and concrete.

My question to you: what is our current Urban Tree Canopy (UTC) percentage? And what is our goal? With the number of mature trees being cut for highway widening, we are certainly reducing our current UTC. It seems to me that it would be feasible to design new building developments that save mature trees, especially downtown, especially where the library/ parking garage is planned.

I appreciate your efforts and look forward to learning more about Santa Cruz City Urban Tree Canopy coverage.

Thank you,
Wendy King
Santa Cruz City resident/ tax payer

17.483
2 17.484
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Marcia Poms <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:37 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Library/Affordable Housing Project
Please approve the Library/Affordable Housing Project.

We need more affordable housing units.

We need a new, comfortable, attractive downtown branch.

The Nov defeat of Measure O illustrates wide support for a mixed use development with a library, parking, childcare and affordable housing.

I see the need to move forward with this project.

Thank you.

Marcia Poms
Library Patron and supporter

17.485
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Pauline Seales <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:38 PM
To: City Council; Rosemary Balsley; John Hall; Lira Filippini; Lynda Marin; Susan Cavalieri Subject: Fwd:

Please include for Mar 14 council meeting
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Frank Horst IV <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 8:18 AM
Subject:

To: [email protected] <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Save The Trees, and keep the space for the farmers market and community. To enrich healthy lifestyle and able to keep Santa Cruz weird. Instead of building up, let's grow up with stories and community space to pass on to the next generations.

17.486
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: earljan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 1:39 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! It's very important for our community health.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

17.487
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 2:22 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Sue Myers <[email protected]>
Date: March 12, 2023 at 12:25:44 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.488
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sue Myers
[email protected]
225 Alhambra Ave., #11
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.489
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 2:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: elfe kuesters <[email protected]>
Date: March 12, 2023 at 2:17:42 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.490
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.
elfe kuesters
[email protected]
546 dry well
boulder creek, California 95006

17.491
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Margie Bowles <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 2:38 PM
To: City Council
Subject: “APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now!” Please! complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now!” We voted on it. It needs to be done. The more you delay the more expensive this will be and we need it now!
Voting Citizen of Santa Cruz County!!!

17.492
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robert Grimes <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 3:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Library Affordable Housing Project Now!
Dear City Council Members,
Please approve the downtown branch construction for the library and for affordable housing. They cannot move forward with grants and project specifics without your approval.

We need 124 units of permanently affordable housing units.

We need a new, comfortable, attractive downtown branch.

The Nov. defeat of Measure O illustrates wide support for a mixed use development with a library, parking, childcare and affordable housing.

Norma Jean Grimes
9 Palma Avenue, La Selva Beach, CA 95076
‐‐
Bob & Jeanne Grimes
9 Palma Ave
La Selva Beach, Ca. 95076
831‐708‐2387

17.493
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Martha Dexter <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 4:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear City Council members,
I write to encourage you to approve the complete Library/Affordable Housing project NOW. This project has been in the works for years with many, many opportunities for public engagement that have made the project better and better. Now is the time to get to work building it! No more delays! Martha Dexter
Former member, Library Advisory Commission, SC Public Libraries Former member, Downtown Library Advisory Committee (DLAC) Former member, Joint Library Powers Board
Resident, City of Santa Cruz

17.494
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jfbergs <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 4:41 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda # 17
Please approve permits for Downtown Library and affordable housing project. It's a wonderful project that will make the city a better place.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone

17.495
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 6:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Joyce Mangouney <[email protected]>
Date: March 12, 2023 at 4:24:46 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I believe that the values of a city are reflected in the quality and number of its street trees. I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

17.496
2 Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Joyce Mangouney
[email protected]
215 Bay St. #215
SAnta Cruz, California 95060

17.497
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 6:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Integrate our health heritage trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Isabelle Scott <[email protected]>
Date: March 12, 2023 at 4:42:40 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Integrate our health heritage trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Dear City Council:

Action speaks louder than words. Santa Cruz is a Tree City USA member and should live up to the name by saving as many healthy heritage trees as possible on the site of the Garage/Library/Housing project. For many reasons—environmental advantages and beauty among them— please direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to integrate as many healthy heritage trees as possible into the design.

It is now even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

See article referenced at end of this message.*
Thank you for your time and effort on behalf of our community.

Isabelle Scott

17.498
2 *Why keeping one mature street tree is far better for humans and nature than planting lots of new ones
Published: February 1, 2021 10.35am EST
“Until there is acceptance that large trees, taking decades to reach maturity, have significant value – a fact based on scientific evidence – we will continue to see spurious but convenient assertions that higher numbers of small replacement trees are adequate compensation to facilitate development.”
See https://theconversation.com/why-keeping-one-mature-street-tree-is-far-better-for-humansand-nature-than-planting-lots-of-new-ones-154114 Isabelle Scott
[email protected]
418 Sumner Street
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.499
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 6:29 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Trees Please.. Heritage Trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Melvee Filippini <[email protected]>
Date: March 12, 2023 at 6:22:19 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Trees Please.. Heritage Trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
This project is already so much better than when it was just going to be a parking garage. It can be better still.

Please ask your staff and the developer to incorporate some of the perimeter heritage trees into the design. It would not stop or even hold up the project. And yet it would make the project so much more inviting for everyone now and for future generations.

It would also be more equitable for the people living in the low income housing. Tree equity is a very important element as we encourage people to drive less (or not have cars), they need to have access right where they live to large older trees. Small replacement trees, that will never get very big (by design) are not equal to heritage trees in their carbon sequestering or their psychological effect. This is all scientifically documented.

As a final great improvement to the Lot 4 project, please incorporate two or three of the perimeter heritage trees.

17.500
2 Thank you for your consideration.

Melvee Filippini
Melvee Filippini
[email protected]
130 Belvedere Terrace
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.501
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 6:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Becky Steinbruner <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:13 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.502
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Becky Steinbruner
[email protected]
3441 Redwood Drive
Aptos, California 95003

17.503
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 8:06 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Council meeting of 03/14/2023 Item #17 new library/garage Dear Council Members:

I was graƟfied that the Planning Commission raised these issues concerning the proposed new library/garage at their hearing:
Strategies for activation of the alley to provide for a high-quality environment and facilitate travel of bicyclists and pedestrians
Number and types of bicycle parking spaces, including stalls corresponding to the demand for parking of electric bicycles, whose dimensions exceed those of manual bicycles However, I do not see that the recommended condiƟons of approval reflect these concerns. I would urge you to include specific direcƟves in these regards, if you decide to approve the project. Please ensure that such new projects create safe, inviƟng, and convenient walking and bicycling environments.

Please refer to my previous correspondence on these maƩers, included in the packet, for more detail.

Thanks,
Rick Hyman

17.504
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 8:46 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Judi Grunstra <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 8:44 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am a librarian who has closely followed this project since 2016. I have spent hundreds of hours reading documents, attending meetings and giving constructive, informed feedback to mayor, city staff, fellow concerned citizens.

It is a pity that city leaders remained blind to the benefits of a Town Commons on Lot 4. It seemed to fit perfectly with the Health in All Policies framework and the Climate Action Plan.

The city is blatantly ignoring its Heritage Tree Ordinance. Please require Jayson Architects to redesign the project to at least accommodate the beautiful Liquidambar trees close to Lincoln,

17.505
2 and possibly a large Magnolia near Cedar. It is disingenuous to claim that planting small trees provide the benefits of the heritage trees on the site.

We don’t even have guaranteed funding for the library, garage or housing yet! Deny the tree-cutting permit. Don’t let your legacy be the Great Magnolia Massacre.

Judi Grunstra
Judi Grunstra
[email protected]
220 McMillan Dr
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.506
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Robin Holland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now! Dear City Council,
I'm writing to express my full support for the Library/Affordable Housing Project. I've watched the progress since inception. This project has been developed with significant attention to detail, including listening intently to public input and with careful consideration of local ecologic and economic priorities.

Please approve the project. Let's build this!
Robin Holland
Brand Consulting
RobinHollandInternational
415-342-5546
[email protected]

17.507
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:28 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Tim Kensit <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:26 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Dear City Council:

I moved to this town in the early 80's because it had a feeling of community with a progressive agenda. Santa Cruz in this time of global climate change should be a leader in a very aggressive, progressive agenda in preserving the planet. We need to set an example for the State, the U.S. and the world. Action really starts here.

Scott, as a representative of my district, please listen to us. Take the lead and vote for climate first! Yes, we need affordable housing and every city owned lot that is put up for development

17.508
2 should be for affordable housing (this includes the hotel project). Open space is important downtown and trees. Don't listen to City Staff that states "it won't pencil out" or "were too far along to change direction". Climate-wise I hope we are not to far along.

Fred, I know you are truly "progressive". Stop bending to the developers direction but give direction to the developers.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tim Kensit
Tim Kensit
[email protected]
144 Anthony St.

Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.509
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: janeshopper <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now Very important! Please
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

17.510
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: earlvcole <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE complete Library/Affordable Housing Project now Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

17.511
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 9:59 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Unanimous Support for Downtown Library from Downtown Association of Santa Cruz Board Attachments: DTA Statement of Support for the Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project and Opposition to the ODOF Ballot Measure.pdf
Dear Respected Santa Cruz City Council Members,
We urge you to approve the Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project as proposed tomorrow! The Downtown Association of Santa Cruz manages the Business Improvement Assessments in the Downtown District.

Our Board of Directors is comprised of and elected by the Downtown business owners. After years of community input and responsible planning, our Board is unanimously in favor of the project now proceeding. (See related statement attached.)
This project is a much needed family attraction in Downtown that will increase the vibrancy and health of our neighborhood. Thank you for allowing our community to benefit without delay! Warmly,
Jorian Wilkins
Executive Director
Cell | 303‐905‐1424
Downtown Association of Santa Cruz
www.DowntownSantaCruz.com
Instagram | Facebook | Newsletter
Don’t Miss the Spring Wine Walk
Get Your Organization Noticed! | 2023 Sponsorship Opportunities

17.512
Statement of Support for the Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project and Opposition to the ODOF Ballot Measure
The Santa Cruz Downtown Association (DTA) Board of Directors believes that a larger modern library in the Downtown, with the amenities that communities have come to expect from a twenty-first century library, will contribute to a thriving downtown business community both as a resource to businesses and as a draw to Downtown for community members from all walks of life.

Additionally, the DTA believes that combining a library with 125 units of permanently affordable housing, a child care facility, and replacement parking to serve all downtown activities including residential, business, civic and cultural uses leverages tax payer dollars to their greatest potential and further contributes to the vibrancy of our Downtown.

Furthermore, the DTA recognizes the incredible contribution the Downtown Farmers Market makes to civic life and endorses the ongoing collaboration between the Farmers Market and the City of Santa Cruz to identify a home for the Farmers Market that includes dedicated and permanent market infrastructure.

With this in mind, and while recognizing that Downtown business owners have a diversity of opinions on this subject, the elected Board of Directors of the Downtown Association of Santa Cruz is in unanimous support of the completion of the Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project as a family-friendly asset to our city center and has voted unanimously to oppose the ODOF Ballot Measure that would block this project from completion.

17.513
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 10:05 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Kristen Sandel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 10:05 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty. They are part of the fabric and the history of downtown.

17.514
2 The Santa Cruz City Council and the County Board of Supervisors have both recently declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the most important measures of a city's health is the number, maturity, and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of our urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees, which provide the greatest amount of cooling, moisture preservation, urban habitat and carbon sequestration. Downtown Santa Cruz has relatively few mature, large trees in its public spaces. City leaders should be protecting our biggest trees and incorporating them into its climate strategies for the future, as it takes many decades to replace the value of what the city currently has.

Many heritage trees, including beautiful liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution, which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Please direct the project architects for the Downtown Library, Garage & Affordable Housing Project to provide a design alteration to accommodate and save as many of the heritage trees on Lot 4 as possible.

Thank you for considering my views.

Kristen Sandel
[email protected]
PO Box 183
Ben Lomond, California 95005

17.515
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Elizabeth Powers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 10:20 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Approve complete library/affordable housing project now Please seriously consider the following:

We need 124 units of permanently affordable housing units.

We need a new, comfortable, attractive downtown branch.

The Nov defeat of Measure O illustrates wide support for a mixed use development with a library, parking, childcare and affordable housing.

Thank you,
Elizabeth (Betsy) Powers

17.516
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:22 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Joan Peterson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:10 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.517
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Joan Peterson
[email protected]
314 Laurent Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.518
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Glenys Davidson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing to you in an effort to support the heritage trees.

Not sure why these trees were uniformly put on the chopping block- several of the trees are perimeter trees.

I did not support the Mega Library project, but was overruled by the democratic voting process. But there were many people opposed- will minority voices be heard? It would be nice to know that SOME consideration is being given to existent and longstanding emblems of "old Santa Cruz"- especially since they are pretty and easily

17.519
2 accommodated.

Let's do ONE right thing in this rush to develop.

Sincerely,
Glenys Davidson
Glenys Davidson
[email protected]
125 Sutphen
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.520
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Listening to the old is always wise
Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Dee Roe <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:14 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Listening to the old is always wise
City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I have lived in the Santa Cruz area for 49 years (hard to believe!) You learn over that time how precious the things are that last and create a beautiful place in which to raise your children, see them become a part of this community and care for your elderly parents, while aging yourself in this beautiful area I call home. It's easy to take something like those trees for granted, especially if you're young or new to the area. But I've loved those trees all the years I brought my kids into Logos for books or gone to get my vegetables at the Farmer's market.

They are part of what makes Santa Cruz the unique special place it is.

17.521
2 When making big decisions, there is always competing interests and opinions. You can move buildings a little to the left or the right but trees take their time, giving shade and color and a foundation to a town. Unlike quick decisions, these trees have taken generations to leave their mark. Let them have their say.

Dee Roe
[email protected]
220 Mar Vista Dr
Aptos, California 95003

17.522
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Jean Elliott <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:15 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.523
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jean Elliott
[email protected]
728 Darwin St
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.524
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:23 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Nadene Thorne <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:16 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.525
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Nadene Thorne
[email protected]
140 Averitt Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.526
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:39 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Susan Shackman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:33 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.527
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Susan Shackman
[email protected]
140A Trescony Street
Santa Cruz , California 95060

17.528
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:44 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Preserve our trees: Incorporate them in Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: bob morgan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:40 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Preserve our trees: Incorporate them in Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am a frequent visitor to downtown and the Farmers Market, even though I live in Live Oak.

For the 27 years my family has lived in Santa Cruz we've loved the beautiful shade trees on Lot 4 and I'm writing today to ask that as many of these trees as possible be incorporated into the design of the new library on Lot 4
We value the aesthetic value the trees add to Cedar Street, especially in the fall and spring when the two mature deciduous liquidambar trees sprout with new green leaves after the

17.529
2 winter. In fall, both trees blaze with color--they are spectacular and stand out for all to see coming and going down Cedar.

Urban trees are important for both the beauty they bring to a streetscape, and the shade they provide in a warm, sunny climate that increasingly will see more heat island effect from more buildings and concrete in downtown--we need the trees on Lot 4 for a healthy mind and a healthy environment.

From the beginning of the design of this project, the heritage trees were never accommodated. I've never seen one published design plan that has included them. Please do this now. The two liquidambar trees can border a beautiful courtyard entrance to the new library, two healthy, mature trees announcing our community commitment to a new library and to nature. At least one magnolia, on the perimeter of Lot 4, along Cedar, could provide shade and beauty to the new child care facility. Kids love trees! I urge you to direct the project architects for the Downtown Library, Garage & Affordable Housing Project to provide a design alteration to accommodate and save as many of the heritage trees on Lot 4 as possible.

Thank you for your consideration.

Bob Morgan
bob morgan
[email protected]
3135 Artimus Lane
Santa Cruz , California 95062

17.530
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: eric grodberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:50 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Library / Affordable Housing Project
Dear Mayor Keeley and Council,
Support Democracy: Please approve the project. The project was put to a public vote and the folks who want to stop the project lost overwhelmingly. If Council accedes to opponents' demands to modify the project, it will be a direct slap in the fact to democracy.

Support Facts: Furthermore, the opponents' demands that Council retain up to five of the existing trees on site because of a supposed recommendation by the arborist is false.

Mr. Young, the licensed arborist who evaluated the Lot 4 trees (all of which are non-native), found that all of the trees were unhealthy and/or in problematic growing environments. He noted that five of the trees could possibly be retained, but only with extensive modifications to the Library/Affordable Housing project. He recommended against both retention and transplantation. Contrary to the Measure O folks' assertions, this is what he actually wrote.
"These trees will continue to increase in size exacerbating current conditions. Many of the conditions observed can be expected to worsen over time. ... In my opinion, it is ill advised to retain these trees on site unless extensive design accommodation can be undertaken to enhance their growing condition and reduce risk. ...

Consider removing and replacing all twelve trees with sound specimens that will not achieve large size. and provide sufficient growing spaces."
Support Affordable Housing and a Modern Library: Retaining any trees on site will result in a less viable project and compromises that could result in less affordable housing, a reduction in library space, a reduction in income and increased cost for the project and the retention of non-native unhealthy trees not suitable for the site that will eventually have to be removed.

Regards,
-Eric Grodberg

17.531
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:50 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Karsten Mueller <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:46 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.532
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Karsten Mueller
[email protected]
50 Quail Crossing
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.533
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:50 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: JANEL GARVIN <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:46 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I understand that the city voted to condemn the pretty little gathering place that Lot 4 had become in order to construct yet another concrete parking garage however, the trees that have lived in that spot for many years should still be protected. The artist renderings of the structure with its "Brutalist" style will be an enormous eyesore,but it might be helped some little bit to keep the Heritage trees in place.

17.534
2 It's against the city's interest (and tree ordinance) to mow down these beautiful trees. If we have to have the parking garage, let's at least save the trees and require the contractor work around them.

Save the trees - after all, maybe we'll get lucky and the money for the parking garage will never materialize!

JANEL GARVIN
[email protected]
603 Washington St
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.535
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Ryan Meckel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:53 AM
To: City Council
Subject: APPROVE the Library/Affordable Housing Project! Dear Council,
Please approve the downtown library and affordable housing project. We get so much with this project ‐ a new, state‐of‐ the‐art library, 124 units of permanently affordable housing, childcare for those who live or work downtown, and an overall much more productive use of what is currently a parking lot in the heart of our downtown.

I'm glad that the city has been working with the farmers market to work on finding a new space and I know they'll thrive wherever they end up. With our climate and housing crises, it is more important than ever that we build housing near to where people can work, shop, and socialize. This project meets all of those goals, please approve it.

Sincerely,
Ryan Meckel

17.536
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:54 AM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Kathleen Roberts <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:51 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.537
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Kathleen Roberts
[email protected]
154 Trescony Street
Santa Cruz CA, California 95060

17.538
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:07 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: dave laughlin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:49 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Hi Fred, here's a great opportunity to bring different parts of the community together. We all know that the project's architects can easily modify the design ever so slightly to accommodate at least some of these symbolic trees. Its a great opportunity for leadership from the Mayor's office. I hope you, and the other council members assess the community benefit versus the very modest cost. I suspect that, by the time the garage project is actually built, the cost of saving a few trees will be a rounding error in the over all cost.

Any way, good luck in your new functions.

17.539
2 dave laughlin
[email protected]
1614 King
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.540
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:10 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Deborah Wine <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:09 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.541
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Deborah Wine
[email protected]
1190 7th Ave
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.542
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:15 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Martha Keeler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:14 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.543
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Martha Keeler
[email protected]
218 Bronson St
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.544
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Incorporate Heritage trees in Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Robert Hayek <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:22 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Incorporate Heritage trees in Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am extremely disappointed and frustrated to hear that this project, that I supported and voted for, threatens the large heritage trees that help give our downtown character, beauty and an important sense of continuity that reaches back into our history.

PLEASE…direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to integrate a few of these magnificent heritage trees into the design. I urge you to remember and remind the architects that a large part of how the success of this project will be measured, includes the satisfaction of this community and whether or not our voices are heard and honored.

17.545
2 Small, young trees can never replace the majesty and spirit that large old trees lend to a community space and an architectural space.

I ask that you honor the trust placed in you by the Santa Cruz community, by factoring in two additional critical considerations. First, the emergency crisis, that has been declared at the city and county level in Santa Cruz. This commitment would naturally point to the preserving of such trees whenever possible. The second is the city’s Heritage Tree Resolution, which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. This requirement appeared to not have been adequately pursued.

Thank you for your consideration.

Robert Hayek
[email protected]
124 Alta Ave
Santa Cruz , California 95060

17.546
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:30 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Jeff Arnett <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:29 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.547
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

As a fifty-five year resident of Santa Cruz, I have sadly seen many heritage tees sacrificed for "progress." I urge you to direct the project architects for the Downtown Library, Garage & Affordable Housing Project to provide a design alteration to accommodate and save as many of the heritage trees on Lot 4 as possible.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jeff Arnett
[email protected]
112 Pine Place, #2
Santa Cruz, California 95060-3648

17.548
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: jarwoodsc Wood <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:32 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please save the Heritage Trees!
Dear Fred Kelley and Council Members,
Please do whatever you can to save the trees on Lot #4. Follow the Heritage Tree Ordinance and incorporate as many trees as possible into the new Library design!
Thank you,
Joy Wood
Santa Cruz
Get Outlook for iOS

17.549
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Coral Brune <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:29 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Dear Santa Cruz City Council,
Here are reasons to include trees in the Downtown Garage, Library and Housing Design:

The city failed to follow its own Heritage Tree Resolution by not making any attempt to include any of the trees in the design.

17.550
2 The community LOVES the trees. The trees have many benefits--shade, pollution filtering, carbon absorption, beauty, emotional and mental well-being.

When small saplings are planted it takes years for their maturity. Replacement saplings do not equal heritage trees. A tree will live and out live the youngest person's lifetime. A young person definitely needs and wants a tree .It is a relationship, part of our own nervous systems when when we let it support us that way. I have spent many an early time near a big tree.

These trees did not do any errors to deserve being killed and they will out give any building when sun is too hot, rain is too intense, winds are beyond duration. A tree's sturdy support can save an individual's life. Smaller trees would be uprooted in such a storm. Tree trunks and large branches are sturdy and dependable. If water ever fills the downtown area, a tree will be able to survive. Buildings that have damage may cost much more to repair. Large buildings are un -useful when electricity or generator power is out.

Trees can bring back hope and compassion.

Trees are so welcoming in a city such as ours. Why has Santa Cruz become popular? it is for its nature and not large tall buildings.

Thanks so much for your considering the inclusion of trees in this project.

Sincere regards,
Coral L. Brune
Coral Brune
[email protected]
1040 River Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.551
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Juanita Usher <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 12:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Library Project
Dear City Council — While it is interesting that you have the authority to ok permits for this project, the BIG question remains — Where is the money supposed to come from to accomplish this project? Thank you, Juanita Usher

17.552
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Susan Cavalieri <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:02 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Lot 4 heritage trees
Dear City Councilmembers,
The two liquidambars at Lot 4 stand as sentinels to connect our past and our present.

The current level of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421 ppm according to the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. To put this into perspective, the value was 325 ppm on the 1st Earth Day in 1970 when these trees were much smaller and our future was less threatening. Then, in 1988, the CO2 level increased to 350 ppm. Higher levels were predicted to result in catastrophic climate disruption according to many scientists, including NASA chief scientist, James Hanson. As the level has continued to rise above 350 ppm we have witnessed drought, flooding, severe storms, sea level rise, extreme heat and biodiversity loss. What we will experience on Earth Day 2073, 50 years from now, is unknowable but climate chaos will certainly be worse.

Saving some heritage trees on Lot 4 and planting many more trees in the “Cedar Street Village” will mitigate air pollution and heat and provide residents with the mental and physical support needed to face extreme conditions.

We must save some Lot 4 heritage trees for our future!
Thank you,
Susan Cavalieri
City of Santa Cruz

17.553
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Nita nita <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:05 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Saving heritage trees
Dear council,
I’m writing to urge you to please save trees that are gracing Lot 4. These trees should have been included in the original footprint for the project and their neglect is not excusable.

Their beauty and value in our downtown environment cannot be overstressed. In this time of climate crisis and over pavement of the natural land we need to do what we can to preserve some nature in our downtown.

I think we will all be happier to see some representatives Of natural maturity.

Thank you,
Nita Hertel

17.554
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Larry Holland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:10 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote to APPROVE the Library/Affordable Housing Project tomorrow Dear Councilmembers,
I think that the current Library/Affordable Housing/Daycare/Parking plan is a sound one, one that our city greatly needs and desires. A strong majority of voters have agreed.

Therefore I strongly urge that you all vote in favor of this plan moving forward without adding any further conditions or delays. The city and its residents have studied, reviewed, and pondered it from all angles. And it's time to proceed ad get it built!
Thanks for your consideration,
Larry Holland
A resident of downtown Santa Cruz

17.555
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Jessie Bristow <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Item 17: 3.14.2023 Council Meeting
Attachments: Library Letter Swenson 3.13.2023 CC.pdf
Good afternoon,
Please find attached our support letter for the Mixed‐Use Library Downtown Project.

17.556
March 13, 2023
City of Santa Cruz
Attn: Santa Cruz City Council
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
RE: Mixed Use Library Downtown Project
Dear Mayor Keeley, Vice Mayor Golder, and City Councilmembers Swenson Builders is in support of Downtown Library complete project package, which includes a new modern library, 124 units of affordable housing, a childcare center, commercial space, and shared parking facilities serving all downtown users (for both bikes and cars) - all designed with high standards of sustainability in both construction and operations.

The proposed new Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project helps the City of Santa Cruz accomplish multiple goals related to public amenities, housing needs, long term parking for office and businesses, and further promotes transit-oriented development. We appreciate you supporting this project and the City-wide effort that was supported in the last election.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Jessie Bristow
Development Project Manager
Swenson Builders

17.557

17.558

17.559

17.560

17.561

17.562

17.563

17.564

17.565

17.566

17.567

17.568

17.569

17.570

17.571

17.572

17.573

17.574

17.575

17.576

17.577

17.578

17.579

17.580

17.581

17.582

17.583

17.584

17.585

17.586

17.587

17.588
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Andrew Goldenkranz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 2:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Downtown Housing/Library proposal--SUPPORT
Hello Mayor Keeley and Council members,
I am writing this as chair of the Santa Cruz County Democratic Party. We have taken a strong position in favor of the downtown library and housing project and urge you to support it at your 3/14 meeting.

It's hard to say you're in favor of affordable housing if you're not willing to support solid proposals. Last week at the city Planning Commision we heard excellent questions about sustainable building materials, outside space for the child care center, and parking and transit passes for residence. This substantial good faith resulted in a unanimous vote from the Planning Commission. This project, with associated benefits like a sustainable agreement for htr Farmer's Market, brings a dynamic new heartbeat for our downtown community.

I'm also on the board of Santa Cruz Community Health. We operate three clinics downtown, in Live Oak, and in Ben Lomond, and are working as part of the Metro South project for a new downtown home. We have about 150 employees, most of whom are commuting up from Watsonville and Monterey County. They want to be able to live, park, and shop where they work, in a way that benefits the whole community.

As you know, a definitive majority of voters decided to move this project forward last November. Your Council has shown positive leadership in looking for affordable housing opportunities. We support your efforts and look forward to using this project as an anchor for other sustainable efforts to increase availability and access to below market rate housing. The market is good at solving market rate problems, but is not equipped to successfully address the need for below market rate housing. That's where you, the upcoming housing element decisions, non profit partners, and projects like this bring our community forward. We look forward to working with you on this and other opportunities.

Thank you for all you do for our community.

Andrew Goldenkranz (he, him)
[email protected]
831‐588‐8262 (c)

17.589
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:03 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Gail Jack <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:16 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

17.590
2 climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

I urge you to direct the project architects for the Downtown Library, Garage & Affordable Housing Project to provide a design alteration to accommodate and save as many of the heritage trees on Lot 4 as possible. The current plan is not people friendly , it does not encourage residents and their families to come to this location. Saving our trees will be a help to overcoming the sterility of this plan and will aid in our fight against climate change.

Thank you for your consideration.

Gail Jack
[email protected]
116 Goss Ct.

Santa Cruz, California 95065

17.591
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Mary Kline <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:50 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.592
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mary Kline
[email protected]
211 Eucalyptus Avenue
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.593
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 2:20 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.594
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.
[email protected]
112 fife lane
Aptos, California 95003

17.595
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Laura Sutherland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 2:31 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.596
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Laura Sutherland
[email protected]
P.O. Box 1632
Capitola, California 95010

17.597
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:04 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Barbara Hobbs <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 2:49 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.598
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Barbara Hobbs
[email protected]
279 Sims Road
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.599
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:15 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Judith Weaver <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:13 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.600
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Judith Weaver
[email protected]
202 Taylor St
Santa Cruz , California 95060

17.601
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:31 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Mary McGranahan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:30 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.602
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mary McGranahan
[email protected]
225 Mount HermonRoad
Scott's Valley, California 95066

17.603
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:39 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Robert Friest <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:37 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
I am writing on behalf of the heritage trees on Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz (since they cannot speak for themselves). I ask that the city council direct the architects of the Lot 4 Library, Garage & Housing Project to consider the integration of as many heritage trees as possible into the design. These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

Recently the Santa Cruz City Council and Board of Supervisors both declared a climate emergency. The city council has also adopted a Health in All Policies framework. One of the

17.604
2 most important measures of a city's health is the number and distribution of its trees. In a climate emergency it becomes even more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering. In a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Robert Friest
[email protected]
1316 Broadway Apt. C
Santa Cruz, California 95062

17.605
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Zoë Carter <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:44 PM
To: City Council
Subject: [CAUTION: Verify Sender Before Opening!] Public Comment - 113-119 Lincoln Street Attachments: _SCCBC Letter of Support_113-119 Lincoln Street_03132023.docx Hi there,
Please find attached public comment supporting the Downtown Library Affordable Housing Project from SCCBC. We respectfully request that this be circulated to the Council for consideration.

Thank you so much!
‐Z
‐‐
Zoë G. Carter
Executive Director
Santa Cruz County Business Council
831-588-6173
Sign up for our newsletter!

17.606
Santa Cruz City Council
809 Center Street, Room 10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
[email protected]
March 13, 2023
Dear Mayor Keeley and Councilmembers,
On behalf of the Santa Cruz County Business Council, I write to express our support for 113 - 119 Lincoln Street, the Downtown Library Affordable Housing Project, and respectfully request your “aye” vote for the project.

We feel support for this project is critical to the revitalization of the downtown corridor. This project has long been considered a part of the piece of the puzzle of success for the area, since 2016. Due to the good work of the City Council and public input, the evolution and improvement of this project now includes more units of affordable housing, less car parking, more bike parking, a better library design and a daycare center. There was overwhelming support for this project by Santa Cruz voters in the recent November election cycle and SCCBC encourages continuing that support.

The City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element also calls for “transit-oriented housing...redeveloping underutilized sites with the Downtown and along major corridors, increasing density, and facilitating housing at key opportunity sites.” The project meets the mark on each of these objectives, adds more than 100 affordable units to contribute to the fulfillment of our RHNA goals and provides housing that is critical to attracting and retaining qualified professionals for a sustainable local workforce.

We are grateful for strong and enlightened leadership in addressing our local housing crisis. Approval of 113 - 119 Lincoln Street, the Downtown Library Affordable Housing Project will set an important precedent for smart development, affordable and walkable cities, and a thriving Santa Cruz economy. We urge you to support this important project.

Sincerely,
Zoe Carter
Executive Director
Santa Cruz County Business Council

17.607
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: John Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:49 PM
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush; Rosemary Balsley
Subject: Fwd: urgent Agenda item 17 packet item
Attachments: HERITAGE_TREE_APPEAL__TR22-0201_-_STATEMENT_AND_ATTACHMENTS.PDF Dear Mayor Keeley and Members of the City Council:

For whatever reason, the original appeal by Save Some Trees to the Parks and Recreation Commission concerning the heritage tree removal permit for Lot 4 was not included in the agenda packet for item 17 on tomorrow’s city council agenda.

We think it is crucial that the Council have this appeal document. It is attached.

Thanks for your consideration,
John Hall
Begin forwarded message:

From: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: urgent Agenda item 17 packet item
Date: March 13, 2023 at 3:22:58 PM PDT
To: John Hall <[email protected]>
Hi John,
Yes, the deadline is 5pm tonight. Can you please send a separate email with a PDF of the appeal to [email protected]?
Bonnie Bush, CMC
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831-420-5035
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

17.608
2 From: John Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 3:19 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>; Bonnie Bush <[email protected]> Cc: Rosemary Balsley <[email protected]>; Rosemary Balsley <[email protected]> Subject: urgent Agenda item 17 packet item

Hello, Bonnie,

We think it is crucial that the Council have this appeal document. I’m hoping that it can be included in the agenda packet, with special notice given to it as an important addition.

Sorry for the late notice.

Best wishes,

John

https://ecm.cityofsantacruz.com/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Documents/ViewDocument/HERITAGE%20TREE %20APPEAL%2C%20TR22‐0201%20‐
%20STATEMENT%20AND%20ATTACHMENTS.PDF.pdf?meetingId=1838&documentType=Agenda&itemId =27983&publishId=38925&isSection=false
. . . . . . . .

John Hall
[email protected]

17.609
Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Commission
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Contact: Pauline Seales, [email protected]
Statement of Appeal, December 6, 2022
Introduction.

We are a diverse group of organizations who are jointly appealing the tree removal permit TR22-201 (attachment 1) applied for on October 12, 2022, for the removal of all heritage trees from Lot 4. Granting this permit would violate the city’s heritage tree ordinance.

It should be noted that many citizens are greatly upset by the proposed tree removal. The value of mature trees in urban communities is not simply the purview of “tree huggers.” It is well documented by scientific research (attachments 2 & 3). Trees have been found especially valuable in urban neighborhoods.

Commissioners should also be aware that the City’s Climate Action Plan 2030, passed by the Council in 2022, includes planting many more trees and maintaining existing trees to absorb greenhouse gasses and other toxins (attachment 4).

In this statement, we present findings of facts, analysis of facts, and the specifics of our appeal requests. We conclude that the tree removal permit should be rejected. The garage/ library/ housing plan could and should include retention of at least a few of the heritage trees. The City’s failure to accommodate any of the heritage trees violates its own laws.

Findings of fact.

1. City Council resolution NS-23, 710 (attachment 5) references SCMC 9.56 (webpage 1) and states, in part, that “this resolution, and the criteria and standards hereby adopted, shall be used to determine the only circumstances under which any heritage tree … may be altered or removed,” and includes Exhibit A, “Criteria and Standards,” which states, “A heritage tree … shall only be altered or removed in the following circumstances. (c) One or more of the following findings are established by the applicant and confirmed by the Director of Parks and Recreation: … (3) A construction project designed cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees” [emphases added].

17.610
2 /

2. Beginning as early as July 6, 2021, numerous organizations and individuals have communicated with City staff and the City Council, drawing attention to the heritage tree ordinance and requesting that the City and its developer adhere to the ordinance in relation to the development of the Lot 4 project. The City’s Director of Economic Development and the Mayor acknowledged receipt of certain of these communications.

3. The arborist’s report submitted by Torrey Young of Dryad LLC on January 18, 2022 (webpage 2), states that “all twelve [trees] could be retained on site.” According to the report, using its tree number notation, trees #4, 7, 9, 10, and 11 are “worthy of preservation”; other trees on Lot 4 would require extensive preservation and site improvement efforts. Of these trees, trees #4, 10, and 11 – all heritage trees – are on the perimeter of Lot 4, adjacent to the Cedar Street sidewalk; they are recommended for preservation with “specific maintenance.” They are thus strong candidates for accommodation in a Lot 4 development project. The other trees – trees #1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 – either are not judged worthy of preservation or fall in the interior of the Lot 4 footprint and thus could not easily be accommodated in a project design.

4. In a June 17, 2022 letter (attachment 6), Michael Guth, executive committee chair of the Sierra Club, wrote, “It appears that the city and the architect are failing to follow the legal requirements of the city’s Heritage Tree Removal Resolution,” and requested a “mid-course correction” to “alter the current design” to conform with the City’s heritage tree ordinance.

5. A June 21 email (attachment 7) from Leslie Keedy, City arborist, to Tony Elliot, Bonnie Lipscomb [cc: Travis Beck, Brian Borguno], asked, “Have any design changes been asserted that would save any trees per the res[olution] requirement?” The email spells out a plan for the City to have Dryad LLC review the Lot 4 plan and draft a follow-up so that the Economic Development department can respond to the Sierra Club with reports about the trees assessment in relation to the actual Lot 4 plan.

6. On June 22, 2022, the City’s Director of Economic Development, Bonnie Lipscomb, emailed Michael Guth of the Sierra Club (attachment 8), stating that designs for the Lot 4 project to that point were “conceptual in nature,” that the project architect was aware of the heritage tree ordinance, and that the project team was reviewing the site layout and trees to see if any of them “could be accommodated in the new design.”

7. There is no evidence in the public record that the project architect for the project team made any statements concerning adherence to the heritage tree ordinance.

17.611
3 /

8. On August 22, 2022, a Senior Planner for the City advised City project coordinator Brian Borguno (attachment 9) that the project land use application “required a Heritage Tree Removal Permit.”

9. On September 9, 2022, Torrey Young of Dryad LLC sent an addendum to its January 18, 2022, arborist report (webpage 3) to Economic Development Director Bonnie Lipscomb. The addendum refers to “Review of the impact of construction based on revised site plans entitled ‘Entitlements Package 04/29/22’,” and states that “all 12 trees on site must be removed to accommodate construction. Specifically, the building footprint encompasses an area including all twelve trees.”

10. On September 9, 2022 (the same day that Dryad submitted its arborist report addendum), Eden Housing and For the Future submitted development application CP 22-0018 with plans for the Lot 4 project (webpages 4). The project narrative (webpage 5) does not include any mention of heritage trees or the heritage tree ordinance. Neither the project submission letter (webpage 6) nor the project narrative includes any discussion of the Dryad LLC arborist’s report of January 18, 2022. The project submission cover letter states that “reports in progress” include a tree removal application. The footprint of the project design for Lot 4 does not represent any substantial change from earlier “conceptual” plans presented to the City Council in December 2021 and May 2022.

11. The application for the heritage tree removal permit, TR22-0201, dated October 12, 2022, states that the Removal Permit is “Requesting permit issuance at time of building permit” (emphasis added).

12. The application for the heritage tree removal permit, October 12, 2022, includes a “For office use only” statement signed by Leslie Keedy, Forester, stating that, as of October 14, 2022, she has completed an inspection and recommends, “Remove trees as planning & E.D. approved by staff plan for construction.” Leslie Keedy adds a parenthetical statement, “(NOTE! No cutting prior to council funding & measure approvals.)”

13. The October 22, 2022, heritage Tree Removal application notice (attachment 10) for the Lot 4 development states that the application is conditional on “Measure O election results and City Council deliberation of library project agenda item and issuance of building permit.” (The City website [webpage 7] states the matter differently, namely that “The Heritage Tree Removal Permits are conditional on the Planning Application approval and requested to be issued at the time of construction expected to take place in 2024” [emphasis added].)

17.612
4 /

14. In relation to SCMC 9.56.020(d), the public record does not demonstrate that the Director of Parks and Recreation has reviewed all development and construction plans for the purpose of determining their negative impact.

15. In relation to SCMC 9.56.020(g), the public record does not show that the Director of Parks and Recreation has determined mitigation requirements pursuant to the City Council resolution NS-23, 710.

16. In relation to SCMC 9. 56.060(e), the public record does not demonstrate that the Director of Parks and Recreation has made findings of fact upon which he/she would base granting the permit applied for, after a city official inspection report.

17. In relation to 9. 56.070(a)(11), no development permit for the project has been approved, and the permit applicant thus is not in a position to conform with the ordinance requirement that all work be completed within 45 days of the effective date of the permit.

18. Although the permit application is framed as “conditional,” there is no citation of any general Santa Cruz precedent or provision in chapter 9.56 of the SCMC for granting a permit conditionally.

Analysis of facts

1. Unless the developer and the Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation director can demonstrate that they have followed the procedures set forth in SCMC and the criteria and standards set forth in City Council resolution NS-23, 710, there is no basis for granting a heritage tree removal permit.

2. The application for a development permit made on September 9, 2022, makes no reference to the Dryad arborist’s report of January 22, 2022. It provides no indication that the project architect considered alternatives in design that might accommodate heritage trees. The application also does not include any discussion of why the project design could not be altered to accommodate selected heritage trees. Unless it can be demonstrated that such alternatives were considered in advance of submitting an application for a development permit, it has to be concluded that the developer failed to conform to SCMC 9.56 and City Council resolution NS-23, 710 prior to submitting its application.

17.613
5 /

3. The arborist’s report addendum sent on September 9, 2022, makes statements about the necessity of removing all trees on Lot 4 to “accommodate construction” in reference to “entitlement” site plans dated April 29, 2022, that is, before the date of June 22, 2022. On that date, Economic Development Director Bonnie Lipscomb emailed Michael Guth, stating that designs for the Lot 4 project were “conceptual in nature,” that the project architect was aware of the heritage tree ordinance, and that the project team was reviewing the site layout and trees to see if any of them “could be accommodated in the new design.” Because the arborist’s addendum conclusions are based on a “conceptual” plan set predating the June 22, 2022, email, that addendum is irrelevant to any claim that the heritage tree ordinance has been followed.

4. The arborist report addendum does not indicate that the arborist was asked to consider or did consider whether any alternative approach to construction would accommodate keeping some of the trees on Lot 4.

5. The submission of the development application on the same day that the arborist report addendum was sent, September 9, 2022, demonstrates that the development application could not have taken into substantial account any statements in the arborist report addendum.

6. The applicant for the project development is applying for a tree removal permit for a project that has not received a development permit. Such an application is premature. In the absence of any City legal precedent or SCMC stipulation of such a process, a “conditional” application for heritage tree removal has no standing for consideration by either the City or its Parks and Recreation Commission.

Appeal
We hope that the Commission takes seriously the science and human experience that demonstrates the invaluable benefits offered by trees, heritage or not. Although our appeal recognizes those benefits, it is based upon adherence to laws that govern heritage trees in the city of Santa Cruz. The City and the developer have failed to comply with those laws in applying for and issuing a conditional permit for their removal.

1. We request that the Parks and Recreation Commission deny the Heritage Tree Removal Permit on the grounds that the developer has not demonstrated a good-faith effort to accommodate the heritage trees in the plans for the Lot 4 development.

2. We request that the Parks and Recreation Commission deny the Heritage Tree Removal Permit on the grounds that the procedures specified in SCMC 9.56.060(e) have not been

17.614
6 /
properly followed in that the Director has not reviewed development and construction plans and the City inspection report, and made findings of fact on that basis.

3. We request that the Parks and Recreation Commission withhold any further consideration of a permit for removal of Heritage trees on Lot 4 until such time as the developer has demonstrated a good faith effort to accommodate heritage trees in the design for the development, which certainly could include preservation of trees #4, 10, and 11, along the west side of the development, adjacent to the sidewalk, facing Cedar Street.

4. We request that the Commission not issue any “conditional” permit, as there is no basis in the SCMC 9.56 or City Council resolution NS-23, 710 for the issuance of conditional permits, nor is there any such procedure to be found more widely in the SCMC.

5. If our appeal is not granted, we request that the Commission direct the Director of Parks and Recreation to issue a Heritage tree removal permit for trees on Lot 4 only at such time, and if and only if the development proposal for the Lot 4 mixed-use project has received full City Council approval, all necessary permits, and complete financing to fund construction.

List of Referenced Webpages and Attachments

Webpages.

Webpage 1. Santa Cruz Municipal Code chapter 9.56, “Preservation of Heritage Trees and Heritage Shrubs,” https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruz/html/SantaCruz09/SantaCruz0956.html.

Webpage 2. Arborist Report, https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/91505.

Webpage 3. Arborist Report Addendum,
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/91507.

Webpage 4. Project Plans Set Package, 9-8-22,
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/90869/638001412453600000.

Webpage 5. Project Narrative,
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/90875/638001412470630000.

Webpage 6. Project Cover Letter 9-8-22,
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/90871/638001412459870000.

Webpage 7. Downtown Library & Affordable Housing Project, https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/economicdevelopment/development-projects/mixed-use-library-project.

17.615
7 /

Attachments.

1. October 12, 2022, Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201.

2. Cavalieri, Susan, and Pauline Seales, “Benefits of trees.”

3. Weiss, Peter, et al., “Shade as a climate option.”

4. Seales, Pauline, “Considerations based on the City of Santa Cruz 2030 Climate Action Plan.”

5. City Council resolution NS-23, 710.

6. June 17, 2022, letter of Michael Guth, executive committee chair of the Sierra Club, to Bonnie Lipscomb, Director of Santa Cruz Department of Economic Development.

7. June 21, 2022, email from Leslie Keedy, Santa Cruz City arborist, to Tony Elliot, Bonnie Lipscomb [cc:

Travis Beck, Brian Borguno].

8. June 22, 2022, email from Bonnie Lipscomb, Director of Santa Cruz Department of Economic Development, to Michael Guth, executive committee chair of the Sierra Club.

9. August 22, 2022, email from Timothy Maier to Brian Borguno, with attached Land Use Application form.

10. October 18, 2022, Tree removal permit application TR22-0201, posted notice #2.

17.616
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 1.

17.617

17.618

17.619

17.620

17.621

17.622

17.623

17.624
Benefits of trees by Susan Cavalieri and Pauline Seales The following is a short review of a wide range of current literature about the benefits of trees with brief excerpts from each source.

Why large trees are essential for healthy cities 2022 City Monitor Trees are important elements of our urban landscape. With more than 50 per cent of the world’s population living in cities, it is impossible to imagine cities without the many services and benefits trees provide to residents and ecosystems. …………..

Trees with a larger trunk diameter have a greater woody biomass (amount of wood), which allows them to store more carbon than smaller trees. Similarly, trees’ ability to intercept precipitation and air pollutants increases with greater canopy size (the tops of dominant trees) and total leaf area (the total area of all leaves), which are both associated with greater overall tree size. As a result, larger trees are generally more effective than smaller ones at providing essential regulating services for urban environments and, especially, in a changing climate.

Benefits of Urban Trees: University of Illinois Extension, 2019 On an annual basis, it is estimated that US urban trees provide $18 million in economic benefits by reducing air pollution, energy use, and pollutant emissions while increasing carbo sequestration. A more diverse and mature urban forest has been shown to increase both environmental and economic benefits of trees. While other infrastructure depreciates over time, trees appreciate as they mature. Compared to planting or maintenance costs, the annual benefit from trees far outweighs their costs.

Urban Trees and Human Health: A Scoping Review By National Library of Medicine, 2020 Overall, urban trees and forests appear to remove a variety of air pollutants, which may in turn reduce some of the negative health outcomes associated with air pollution, although the magnitude of this benefit varies under different circumstances.

Overall, findings indicate that trees may reduce the incidence of various types of crime and possible influencing factors include the size, location, and health status of the trees.

Our findings support the growing public recognition of urban trees as an essential component of health-supportive environments
6 Ways Trees Benefit All of Us Nature Conservancy 2020
#1: Trees eat the greenhouse gases that cause climate change—for breakfast.

More like breakfast, lunch and dinner. Trees’ food-making process, photosynthesis, involves absorbing carbon dioxide from the air and storing it in its wood. Trees and plants will store this carbon dioxide throughout their lives, helping slow the gas’s buildup in our atmosphere that has been rapidly warming our planet. Smarter management of trees, plants and soil in the US alone could store the equivalent carbon of taking 57 million cars off the road!
STREET TREES SF Urban Forest Plan 2014
San Francisco’s trees work hard each day to improve our quality of life and the urban environment. They purify the air, reduce stormwater runoff, beautify neighborhoods, increase property values, and improve our health and well-being.

Trees increase San Francisco’s desirability as a place to live, work and visit. This “green infrastructure” is essential to the city’s sustainability. These pages describe some of the specific social, economic and environmental services provided by trees and other forms of landscaping
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 2.

17.625
Trees In Urban Design
This article contained the following summary
Trees: The Critical Infrastructure Low-Income Neighborhoods Lack | The Pew Charitable Trusts 2021 Trees provide important public health benefits, starting with the cooling shade they provide. A study published last year in the journal Environmental Epidemiology found that heat causes thousands of excess deaths in the United States each year, far above official estimates. City and state leaders expect climate change to worsen the threat.
“Trees are nature's air conditioners, and we're starting to talk about them as a real adaptation investment,” said Shaun O’Rourke, a managing director at the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank who also serves as the state’s chief resilience officer.

Even in cities with strong tree planting programs, leaders have found they’re still losing canopy cover each year as urban sprawl and development :uproots existing trees to make way for housing. Forestry experts say cities need strong tree protection ordinances to have a chance of reaching their goals. 5 reasons why cities need a healthy tree cover | World Economic Forum 2022

1. Tree cover acts as natural climate control mitigating the urban heat island effect

2. Carbon dioxide vacuums with large trees storing more CO2 which is released back into the environment when the tree is cut down.

3. General health indicators improve with urban trees

4. Local community builders as trees improve the quality of life that can attract greater business opportunities and raise real estate prices by 3-15%.

5. A good tree cover promotes urban biodiversity for birds that live off insects, sap and fruits of urban trees.

Short Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4eE9Fqu1yE 3 minute Nat Cons video

17.626
Shade as a Climate Option - Temperature measurements at paired sun-shade locations in Santa Cruz, CA during a heat wave
Peter Weiss-Penzias, Jarett Jones, Saleem Mokatrin, Isabella Trask University of California, Santa Cruz, Department of Environmental Studies October 25, 2022 [email protected]
Introduction
Prevalence of shade trees in urban areas significantly controls the temperature of the surface in these areas, moderating the temperature fluctuations. This is especially important in minimizing summertime temperature extremes during heat waves, which can reach unhealthy levels in some urban areas. Many people are susceptible to extreme heat which causes life threatening conditions and mortality. Tree cover in urban areas is also associated with socioeconomic class, with poorer neighborhoods having many fewer trees resulting in average temperatures that can be 4-8°C hotter in poorer neighborhoods compared to richer neighborhoods, which presents a disproportionate risk to human health across classes (Macdonald et al., 2021).

Localized temperature measurements may in fact reveal even more disparity in temperatures between areas with shade and without much shade. Previous studies used temperature measurements from satellites on a kilometer grid scale, but this may be too coarse to understand the effects of shade on temperature moderation on the spatial scale of a city-block.

This research project set out to compare temperatures taken on a 1-min timescale at six locations in a relatively small region of downtown Santa Cruz. Three locations were chosen based on each location having a large sunny area with no shade and a group of trees where there was shade all day. The basic question we wanted to address was if there was a significant difference between the three locations in the shade-sun paired temperatures and whether that difference could be explained by relative amounts of tree cover between the three locations.

Locations
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants, Attachment 3

17.627
The above map shows the 6 locations used for the deployment of thermometers. Locations 1 and 2 were the sun/shade pair at the Civic Auditorium and Walnut St., respectively. Locations 3 and 4 were at the Farmer’s Market parking lot (sun and shade, respectively). Locations 5 and 6 were in the Trader Joe’s parking lot (sun and shade, respectively). Of the three locations, the Trader Joe’s parking lot has the lowest overall tree coverage on the scale of a city block.

Temperature Measurement Device and Deployment
We used six identical devices purchased from Amazon.com: Gove Hygrometer Thermometer, Wireless Thermometer, Mini Bluetooth Humidity Sensor. These have a bluetooth range of up to 262 ft and the data were retrieved weekly during the experiment.

The Govee thermometers were deployed on August 18, 2022 until September 10, 2022 using a power lift truck and zip-ties with the help of the City of Santa Cruz. The thermometers were attached to tree branches in the shade, and to light poles where there was no shade (“in the sun”) at a height of 5-7 meters. The data in this report are from August 31 until September 10 when a severe heat wave occurred.

Results - The Labor Day Heat Wave of 2022
Figure 1: Raw 1-min temperature data from six thermometers in Downtown Santa Cruz over the time period when a severe heat wave occurred.

17.628
Figure 2: Close up in time showing the hottest 4 days in downtown Santa Cruz N total
(1 min
data)
Mean oF Standard
Deviation
oF
Minimum
oF
1st
Quartile
oF
Median
oF
3rd
Quartile
oF
Maximum
oF
Civic Sun 15840 70.5 12.1 51.1 60.8 66.0 81.0 102.4
Civic
Shade
15648 68.4 8.6 53.8 62.2 66.0 74.5 96.8
Farmers
Market
Sun
15444 69.4 10.9 52.3 61.3 65.5 77.9 99.5
Farmers
Market
Shade
15840 68.9 8.2 54.3 63.1 66.7 74.5 94.5
Trader
Joes Sun
15840 73.0 10.2 54.5 65.7 70.0 80.1 102.2
Trader
Joes
Shade
12294 66.7 8.3 51.6 60.8 64.8 72.3 93.2
Table 1: Statistics on the measurements from six thermometers over the period Aug 31 - Sep 10, 2022.

17.629
avg delta T (sun -
shade) all times
avg delta T (sun -
shade) morning
avg delta T (sun -
shade) afternoon
Civic 1.79 -2.56 5.27
Farmers Market 0.57 -1.47 4.94
Trader Joes 5.53 4.92 8.93
Table 2: The average temperature differences between the sun and shade pairs at the same location.

Positive numbers indicate the thermometer in the sun is warmer than the one in the shade and negative numbers indicate the opposite. Afternoon is defined as 12:00 to 17:00 and morning is 01:00 to 06:00.

Discussion
Not surprisingly the thermometers in the sun had higher mean temperatures than the ones in the shade (Table 1). However, when we look at the difference between temperatures between the sun/shade pair of thermometers, we see that while daytime temperatures were higher at the sunny location, at night for two of the sites (Civic and Farmer’s Market) the temperatures were higher on the thermometer in the shade (Table 2). This indicates that the presence of the trees moderated both the high and low temperatures.

The temperature trends at the Trader Joes parking lot locations were quite different from the other two sites.

The thermometer in the sun at this site had the highest mean temperature (Table 1) and the highest daily maximum temperature (Figure 1 and 2). The sun thermometer also had the highest nighttime temperature (Figure 1 and 2), much different than any of the other thermometers.

The difference between the sun and shade thermometers at the Trader Joes parking lot was 4.92°C during the morning and 8.93°C during the afternoon, indicating the anomalously high temperatures experienced at this site compared to the others.

The Trader Joes parking lot has very few trees and this could be a reason why we observed this anomalous temperature behavior. However, we can’t rule out other explanations such as being closer to the river and great air flow coming from the ocean/upriver. However, that a clear temperature pattern was observed in line with our original hypothesis, suggests that further study is warranted to determine the effects of shade cover on temperature patterns in urban spaces.

Reference:

McDonald RI, Biswas T, Sachar C, Housman I, Boucher TM, Balk D, et al. (2021) The tree cover and temperature disparity in US urbanized areas: Quantifying the association with income across 5,723 communities. PLoS ONE 16(4):
e0249715. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249715

17.630
Appeal of Permit for removal of Lot 4 heritage trees
Pauline Seales,
Considerations based on the City of Santa Cruz 2030 Climate Action Plan The City Climate Action Plan 2030 adopted by city council in 2022 has extensive references to maintaining and expanding the city urban forest.

Clearly cutting down mature trees and replacing them several years later with immature saplings does not fit with this plan.

Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 4.

17.631
In addition the plan includes this about reducing parking for single passenger vehicles.

So cutting down heritage trees to build a garage violates the Climate Action Plan as well as the heritage tree ordinance.

17.632
I
I
I
RESOLUTION NO NS-23,710

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANT A CRUZ RESCINDrNG RESOLUTION NO. NS-21,433 REGARDING THE ADOPTION

OF CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR THE ALTERATION OR REMOVAL

OFHERITAGE TREESANDSHRUBS
WHEREAS, Chapter 9.56 of the Sama Cruz Municipal Code titled "Preservation of Heritage Trees and Heritage Shrubs" authorizes the alteration or removal of any hentage tree or hentage shrub only under circumstances to be set forth by City of Santa Cruz City Council resolution;and WHEREAS, it is the llltention of the City Council ofth_e City of Santa Cruz that this resolution, and the criteria and standards hereby adopted, shall be used to determine the only circumstances under which any heritage tree or hentage shrub may be altered or removed.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby adopts the critena and standards set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference mcorporated herein for the detem1ination of the crrcumstances under which any heritage tree or hentagc shrub may be altered or removed, and that Resolution No. NS-21,4331s hereby rescinded.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of Apnl, 1998, by the following vote AYES·
NOES.

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

Councibnembers:

Counc1lmembers:

Councilmembers:

ATTEST: __ /;,,
City Clerk
Be1ers, Rotkm, Hernandez, Mathews, Kennedy,
Mayor Scott.

None
Campbell
None.

Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 5.

17.633

17.634
Bonnie Lipscomb
Economic Development Director
City of Santa Cruz
June 17, 2022
Dear Ms. Lipscomb,
The Sierra Club is monitoring the proposed mixed-use project for Lot 4 in downtown Santa Cruz.

Among other concerns, we are especially attentive to the preservation of the onsite heritage trees.

We watched the recent presentation to council on the project from Jayson Architecture. Given the widespread interest in this project it was surprising that no public comment was allowed.

It appears that the city and the architect are failing to follow the legal requirements of the city’s Heritage Tree Removal Resolution. As you know, among other criteria, a heritage tree can be removed only if “a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees or shrubs.” 1. (3) Criteria and Standards Exhibit A. You may also recall that the Criteria and Standards were subject of a lawsuit in 2015 in the published case, Save Our Big Trees v. City of Santa Cruz, when the city sought to change and weaken the Heritage Tree Removal Criteria. The Appellate Court judges ruled against the city.

Sierra Club members have shared with us that they wrote to you at the beginning of this process, drawing your attention to the above-mentioned criterion and asking that whoever was chosen as architect for the project be advised of the city’s legal requirement vis a vis its Heritage Trees. Apparently, you agreed to do so.

Since that time, Jayson Architecture was selected to design the mixed-use project and has publicly shared the initial project design both in a community zoom and at council. The presented design makes no accommodation for any of the existing heritage trees. The architect made no mention of the heritage trees at either the zoom meeting or in his presentation to Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 6.

17.635
council. That omission suggests he was either not advised of the city’s law or he was advised and ignored it. When a council member asked about the heritage trees following the architect’s presentation to council, he replied that the trees were in the center of the lot so couldn’t be preserved and the new project will have a lot of greenery to make up for the loss of heritage trees.

That is not how the Heritage Tree Resolution works. Either the architect should have developed a design to accommodate as many trees as possible given that some are next to the sidewalk or explained in detail why and how a design to accommodate any heritage tree was impossible.

Not, less appealing but impossible.

That there is an arborist’s report expected at some point and after the design is fixed does not make sense. Obviously the first step was for an arborist evaluation of each tree, then deliberation with the architectural team on design options for preserving as many viable heritage trees as possible. That none of these steps was apparently taken demonstrates a disregard for the public, for heritage trees and the city’s obligation to both.

It is not too late to make a mid-course correction. The design is still preliminary. The Sierra Club respectfully requests that considering the above, the city give direction to Jayson Architecture to alter the current design to comply with city’s legal obligations with respect to its heritage trees.

We look forward to hearing back from you on this matter.

Sincerely,
Michael A. Guth
Executive Committee Chair
Sierra Club, Santa Cruz Group
cc.

City Manager Matt Huffaker
[email protected]
Jayson Architects
[email protected]
Mayor Sonja Brunner
[email protected]

17.636
1 Julia Wood
From: Leslie Keedy
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 1:58 PM
To: Tony Elliot; Bonnie Lipscomb
Cc: Travis Beck; Brian Borguno
Subject: RE: Letter
Attachments: Letter-report, Dryad, LLC, 21045, 01-18-22.pdf; Letter-report COPY, Dryad, LLC, 21045, 01-18-22.pdf; Sierra Club ltr to City of Santa Cruz lot 4 trees.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi the attached arborist report was prepared as somewhat of a pre‐project review, to address if trees are worthy of preservation in general terms, to evaluate their current condition tree by tree, & also to speak to relocation potential which is not recommended by the consultant or myself. It appears that the arborist report was not shared at the council presentation if the SC letter is accurate.

Have any design changes been asserted that would save any trees per the reso requirement? Also it is std that the project arborist review the actual development plans & make a recommendation based on the plan for removal & retention so Dryad should be paid to review the plan & then draft a follow‐up letter specific to the plan stating that trees will not be retained for this project given the plan & reiterate that many are not worthy of retention.

When ED responds to SC it should contain the tree reports & the current assessment of the trees relative to the actual proposed plan.

In the future if you want me to be a panelist when you go to council I’m happy to sit in on these tree technical matters.

LKeedy
From: Tony Elliot <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 12:42 PM
To: Leslie Keedy <[email protected]>
Cc: Travis Beck <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter
FYI – Please do not share. For your information.

Tony Elliot
Director
City of Santa Cruz Parks & Recreation Department
323 Church St. Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(831) 420‐5366
www.santacruzparksandrec.com
The Parks & Recreation Department’s mission is to provide quality public spaces and experiences that build a healthy community, foster equity, and better the environment.

Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 7.

17.637
City of Santa Cruz response to Sierra Club letter re: Lot 4 trees (June 17, 2022) On 6/22/2022 5:29 PM, Bonnie Lipscomb wrote:

Hello Mr. Guth,
Acknowledging receipt of your letter. As you may not be aware, we have not formally submitted an application for the total mixed-use project which includes multiple project components including housing, commercial, and a daycare center in addition to the library. The designs and presentations to Council have been project updates on the library component of the project specifically and have been conceptual in nature.

Our project architect is also aware of the heritage tree ordinance and the project team has been reviewing the site layout and trees to see if any could be accommodated in the new design. We have been in regular communication with our City attorney regarding full compliance with the heritage tree ordinance. As we move forward in the process, we will return to Council with more information.

Sincerely,
Bonnie
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 8.

17.638
From: Timothy Maier
To: Brian Borguno
Cc: Bonnie Lipscomb; Samantha Haschert
Subject: Required Steps for Submittal of Land Use Application - Library Mixed-Use/Affordable Housing Project, 119 Lincoln St. (CP22-0128)
Date: Monday, August 22, 2022 11:45:47 AM
Attachments: image001.jpg
Lincoln St 119 Application CP22-0128.pdf
Form 4 Use Permit Information.pdf
Form 5 Variance.pdf
Form 10 Demolition-Conversion Authorization Permit.pdf
Form 14 Lot Line Adjustment.pdf
Form 17 Density Bonus.pdf
Form 2 - Project Design Data.pdf
Hi Brian,
Attached, please find the project application form and supplemental information forms for review of the Library Mixed-Use/Affordable Housing Project, 113 and 119 Lincoln St. (CP22-0128).

As proposed, the scope of work requires a Nonresidential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Lot-Line Adjustment, Sign Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to demolish the existing surface parking lot and structures and construct the project encompassing a new, approximately 38,000 sq. ft. City library; parking structure with up to 350 parking spaces; 100% affordable housing component comprising approximately 124 residential units; approximately 10,000 sq. ft. commercial tenant space; 1,800-2,500 sq. ft. commercial childcare facility; new roof deck(s); and associated site improvements at 113 and 119 Lincoln St. (CP22-0128).

The project application form includes the estimated fees, list of required application materials, and associated forms. The application has been given the project number CP22-0128.

Please complete the following steps to submit your application:

1. Plans can be uploaded and payment can be made on the “My City of Santa Cruz” website. a. If you are a first-time user, visit the following link to register. Your temporary password will be sent to you. https://www.mycityofsantacruz.com/register b. If you are already registered, simply log in at www.mycityofsantacruz.com

2. Navigate to “Business Center”

3. Select “Building and Planning Permits” button

4. Enter Application/Permit Number, as shown above

5. Follow online prompts
Please note that submittal of an uploaded application form, plans, and required documents and payment of all fees is required to initiate staff review of the project proposal. You will receive a confirmation email message once the application has been submitted and is under review.

Feel free to contact me, should you have any questions.

Best regards,
Tim
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 9.

17.639
Timothy Maier, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Santa Cruz
(831)420-5129
cityofsantacruz.com
logo

17.640
P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application & Zoning Clearances\Land Use Applications\LU Applications- Word Docs\Universal Land Use Application Rev 7-1-20.docx

LAND USE APPLICATION
Department of Planning &
Community Development
809 Center Street, Room 10
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
www.cityofsantacruz.com
(831) 420-5100 phone
(831) 420-5434 fax
APPLICATION # DATE STAMP

RECEIVED BY
ZONING

CODE ENFORCEMENT
PROJECT ADDRESS ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER (APN)
PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT*

NAME NAME

ADDRESS ADDRESS

CITY/STATE/ZIP CITY/STATE/ZIP

PHONE PHONE

EMAIL EMAIL

CERTIFICATION
“I hereby certify that the facts given on this application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and I agree to, and authorize, such investigations as are deemed necessary by the City of Santa Cruz City Planning Department for the preparation of reports related to this application, include the right of access to the property involved. In submitting this application, I agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, LWVRIILFLDOV officers, employees and agents
&LW\3DUWLHV
, from and against any claim,DFWLRQRUSURFHHGLQJDJDLQVW&LW\3DUWLHV includingSD\PHQWRI attorney
fees and litigation costs
, arising out of or in any way related to the City’s processing, consideration or approval of this applicationWRWKHIXOOHVWH[WHQW SHUPLWWHGE\ODZ.”
(OHFWURQLFVFDQQHGDQGHPDLOHGVLJQDWXUHVDUHDFFHSWHGDQGWUHDWHGDVDQRULJLQDODQGOHJDOO\ELQGLQJRQWKHSDUWLHV APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE* If applicant is not the property owner, an owner-agent form is required. 2 DATE
APPLICATION TYPE(S) – STAFF USE ONLY FROM THIS POINT

APPEALS

BOUNDARY/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (14)

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

COASTAL PERMIT (11)

CONDITIONAL FENCE PERMIT (6)

CONDITIONAL DRIVEWAY PERMIT

DEMOLITION AUTHORIZATION PERMIT – RESIDENTIAL (10)

DEMOLITION AUTHORIZATION PERMIT – HISTORIC (2)

DESIGN PERMIT (2)

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

EXTENSION AREA (15)

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (12)

HISTORIC ALTERATION PERMIT (7)

HISTORIC BUILDING SURVEY DELETION

HISTORIC DESIGNATION

MINOR MODIFICATION (2)

MAJOR MODIFICATION (2)

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

RECONSTRUCTION PERMIT (2)

SIGN PERMIT (2)

SLOPE MODIFICATION (2,5)

SPECIFIC PLAN

SUBDIVISION (13)

USE PERMIT – ADMINISTRATIVE (2,4)

USE PERMIT – SPECIAL (2,4)

VARIANCE (5)

WATERCOURSE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

WATERCOURSE VARIANCE

ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (12)

OTHER

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CP22-0128
TM

CBD/FP-O
N/A
119/113 Lincoln St. 005-141-21
City of Santa Cruz City of Santa Cruz Econ. Develop. Dept./For the Future Housing, Inc. 809 Center St. 809 Center St./945 W. Julian St.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Santa Cruz, CA 95060/San Jose, CA 95126 831-420-5150 831-420-5150/408-374-1553
[email protected] [email protected]/[email protected] Nonresidential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Lot-Line Adjustment, Sign Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to demolish the existing surface parking lot and structures and construct the Library Mixed-Use/Affordable Housing Project encompassing a new, approximately 38,000 sq. ft. City library; parking structure with up to 350 parking spaces; 100% affordable housing component comprising approximately 124 residential units; approximately 10,000 sq. ft. commercial tenant space; 1,800-2,500 sq. ft. commercial childcare facility; new roof deck(s); and associated site improvements (anticipated environmental determination: statutory, categorical exemptions).

17.641
P:\_Public\Dept Forms\Land Use Application & Zoning Clearances\Land Use Applications\LU Applications- Word Docs\Universal Land Use Application Rev 7-1-20.docx

HEARING BODY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COASTAL REVIEW

Staff Review (OTC)

Zoning Administrator

Historic Preservation Commission

Planning Commission

City Council

Categorical Exemption

(Mitigated) Negative Declaration

Environmental Impact Report (EIR)

Outside of CZ-O

Exclusion – Zone ___

Exemption

State Coastal Commission

Appealable to State Coastal Commission

Not Appealable to State Coastal Commission
APPLICATION FEES – ALL APPLICATIONS MADE TO CORRECT VIOLATIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE ARE SUBJECT TO DOUBLE FEES.

APPLICATION INTAKE –
NO PUBLIC HEARING $1
*5((1%8,/',1*5(9,(:

$GGLWLRQDOIHHVPD\EHFKDUJHGIRUPXOWLSOHUHYLHZV
KU
MINOR MODIFICATION $1,

DOCUMENT HANDLING –
NO PUBLIC HEARING $

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT $1,5 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT $

APPLICATION INTAKE –
PUBLIC HEARING $2
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE $1,

RECONSTRUCTION
PERMIT $3,0
DOCUMENT HANDLING –
PUBLIC HEARING $1
COASTAL PERMIT $1,
SIGN PERMIT $3
PUBLIC NOTICE $28
COASTAL PERMIT EXCLUSION $13

SLOPE MODIFICATION
BETWEEN 10’-20’
$

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
– CATEGORICAL EXEMPT $1

$1
SLOPE VARIANCE –
LESS THAN 10’
$

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
– NEG DEC/INITIAL STUDY $

RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL

DEMOLITION PERMIT
68%',9,6,21

/2725
!

/27
$

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
– STATUROTY EXEMPTION $5,3
DESIGN PERMIT – MULTI-RES/
COMMERCIAL $42/1,000 SF
USE PERMIT –
ADMINISTRATIVE $

MITIGATION MONITORING
– MINOR (DEPOSIT) $500
DESIGN PERMIT – LARGE
HOUSE/SUBSTANDARD $3,0
USE PERMIT – SPECIAL $3,

MITIGATION MONITORING
– MAJOR (DEPOSIT) $6,
DESIGN PERMIT – REMODEL/
SITE ALTERATION $1,

VARIANCE $3,
ARBORIST REVIEW $ FIRE REVIEW $11

WATERCOURSE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT $

ARCHAEOLOGICAL REVIEW $7 POLICE REVIEW $3

WATERCOURSE
9$5,$1&( $3,1

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
(DEPOSIT) $ EXTENSION AREA $2

ZONING MAP
AMENDMENT (DEPOSIT) $6,
BIOTIC REVIEW $14 FENCE – NO PUBLIC HEARING
(OTC) $1,
OTHER

DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT (DEPOSIT) $5,2
FENCE – PUBLIC HEARING $ SUBTOTAL $

STAFF RESEARCH/
ZONING INFO ($14/HR) $ HISTORIC ALTERATION PERMIT $ TECHNOLOGY FEE (5% OF SUBTOTAL) $
ABANDONMENT $ MAJOR MODIFICATION $2,
TOTAL $

REFERRAL ROUTING

Architectural Consultant

Bicycle/Transportation

Building

City Attorney

City Manager

County Environmental Health

County Fire Marshall

Economic Development

Fire

Housing (5 units)

Parks & Recreation

Police

Public Works

Traffic Engineer

Transit District

Urban Forester

Wastewater

Water

Water Conservation

______________________________

______________________________
NOTES
%8,/',1*5(9,(:

$GGLWLRQDOIHHVPD\EHFKDUJHGIRUPXOWLSOHUHYLHZV
$1KU
$
APPEAL $
OTHER $
✔
✔ ✔
✔
✔ ✔
✔ ✔ 137,045.76
✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔ ✔
✔ ✔
$130/hr.
151,032.76
7,551.64
158,584.40

17.642

REQUIRED MATERIALS
The following materials must be submitted in order for the application to be deemed complete. All sheets within a plan set must be internally consistent and must be consistent with associated technical reports. Note: Details, plan sheets, and reports that are not required as part of the Planning Application may be required as part of the Building Permit application.

The below information may be presented on combined or individual plan sheets. If sheets are combined, please make sure that the information is clearly presented or the application may not be deemed complete.

Please speak with the Planning Counter in advance of submitting an application if there are extenuating circumstances related to the project or parcel that could affect the required application materials.

ALL PROJECTS

1. Digital Application
Materials must be submitted in .pdf format and on a flash drive. Hardcopy materials will not be accepted. Other forms of delivery such as email attachments, downloadable links, and third party transfer services (ex. Dropbox) will not be accepted.

2. Land Use Application and all additional required forms

3. Signed Owner-Agent Form

4. Fee Payment (cash, check, VISA, MasterCard)

5. Site Plan (1’=1/8” scale or larger)
x Contact information for preparer, property owner, business owner, architect, etc. x Date of preparation and dates of revisions
x Property address
x Assessor’s Parcel Number
x North arrow
x Scale
x Vicinity map
x Property lines with dimensions
x Adjacent Streets and alleys
x All existing and proposed easements for parking, access, utility, sewer, water, stormdrain, and all easements on surrounding properties benefiting the subject property.
x Existing structures and their uses
x Building footprints of adjacent properties and use of adjacent properties x Building setbacks
x Off-street parking, bike parking, and loading and circulation areas. Include dimensions, and labeled as compact, standard, accessible, and/or electric vehicle supply equipment installed (EVSE), bike parking labeled as Class 1 or Class 2. Parking and bike calculations must be provided on a separate 8.5” x 11” sheet. x Fencing labeled as existing to remain, existing to be demolished, and/or proposed new. x Slope contours (contour interval shall be two feet for slopes up to 20% and 5 feet for slopes over 20%) x Existing trees and shrubs labeled as to be preserved or to be removed. Indicate circumference of all existing trees measured 4.5 feet from grade. If circumference is larger than 44 inches (14 inches in diameter) and tree is proposed for removal, a Heritage Tree Removal Permit is required.
x The centerline, riparian corridor, development setback area, and management area of any creeks or waterways in close proximity to the area of proposed disturbance or on the subject parcel. Setbacks must be consistent with the Citywide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan.
x Locations of existing and proposed on-site lighting features. x Locations, dimensions, and design (elevations) of trash enclosures designed to Public Works specifications. x Accurate location of all existing and proposed utilities. x Location of existing and proposed sewer, water and storm drain lines, manholes, inlets, outlets etc. x For projects less than 2500 square feet of new and replaced impervious surface area, preliminary drainage improvements clearly showing proposed and existing low impact design measures identified in City’s Best Management Practices for Development Projects. See attached stormwater plan requirements and materials for projects greater than 2500 square feet.

17.643
x In accordance with the prohibition on natural gas infrastructure, projects that require Design Permit approval must include the following statement on the cover sheet of the architectural plans (“Natural Gas-Free Design as required by SCMC

6.100”) and must be designed in accordance with Chapter 6.100 of the Municipal Code. Existing buildings undergoing alterations, additions, or tenant improvements are exempt. For new construction not requiring a Design Permit, the prohibition effective date is October 29, 2020. The ordinance may be viewed at:
http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showdocument?id=79473 Note: The 2019 Santa Cruz Green Building checklists contain many features to optimize all-electric building design and may be viewed at: http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/greenbuilding It is strongly advised your energy professional is engaged with the project's design team at the project's outset.

6. Improvement Plans
Required for any project that includes a modification of a property line, the division of land, the construction of a new building, or the expansion of an existing building footprint, except for single-family dwellings and projects that only require Design Review due to the zone district or due to substandard lot.
x Survey prepared by a licensed surveyor that includes: the footprints of existing buildings and retaining walls on the site, fully dimensioned public right-of-way improvements for both sides of the adjacent streets showing accurate locations for existing and proposed facilities such as streets, curbs, sidewalks, street trees, utility poles, electroliers, traffic signals, storm sewers, sanitary sewers, fire hydrants, median islands, project driveways, driveways on adjacent street frontages, bus stops, drainage inlets, and manholes.

7. Topographic Map Required for any lot with slopes 10% or greater and prepared by a licensed surveyor. x Clearly differentiate 30% to 49% slope areas and 50% or greater slope areas with shading or cross-hatching. x Provide gross lot area and net lot area.
x For lots with slopes greater than 30% the topographic map must show all proposed improvements and existing buildings and structures to remain.

8. Floor Plan(s) (1/4”=1’ scale)
x Total gross floor area
x Total square footage of leasable floor area
x Room labels for each room
x Identify existing walls to remain (solid line), existing walls to be removed (dashed line), and new walls (bold/colored solid line)
x Seating areas with tables and chairs for commercial restaurants

9. Elevations (1/4”=1’ scale) Required for all sides of buildings. x Building heights
x Existing and proposed grade lines.
x Exterior materials and colors. A full color and materials board is required for projects that require Planning Commission or City Council approval.
x Vertical or diagonal setback lines, if project subject to a setback/height ratio. x Finished floor and top of plate elevations

10. Context
The following materials are required for all projects with the exception of single-family residential development on residentiallyzoned, standard-sized parcels that meet all of the site development standards for the zone district or as permitted by front yard averaging.
x One schematic streetscape elevation illustrating building height and mass in relationship to both structures on either side of the applicant’s property, if applicable. The schematic elevation may be a single-line drawing at a scale of 1/8” = 1’ and must include building height and roof pitch. (See attached examples) x Detailed rendering of the project with accurate site context. An accurate depiction of the structure(s) superimposed on the project site in the proposed location either as a photosimulation or rendering. Include both structures on each side of the applicant’s property, accurate streetscape improvements, topography, and trees/landscaping. The rendering must accurately reflect the location, height, and design of the structure(s) and improvements, as shown on the final set of plans proposed for approval.

11. Landscape Plan
Required for all projects that include front or exterior side yard open space area. Include planting plan (location, common and botanical name, container size, and quantity), paving, exterior lighting, fences/walls, screening, existing trees and vegetation. The landscape plan may be subject to the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.

17.644

12. Building and Site Sections (See attached example)
x Required for all projects involving new multi-family residential, commercial or industrial development, or any development proposing stepped or terraced buildings. Building Sections that include existing and finished grades, building height measured from finished grade to the midpoint of the roofline, except finished floor elevations, and ceiling height. x Street Cross Section including the proposed improvements on the subject property, the accurate width of the right of way, and structures/improvements on the opposite site of the street. x Site Cross Sections that include the proposed improvements on the subject property and the two adjacent parcels and improvements on either side of the property. The cross section should be through the tallest element of the building.

13. Roof Plan
x Include roof dimensions, shape, pitch, and location, size, and screening of all exterior mechanical equipment. x Include locations of all new downspouts and show if they will be connected to drainage piping or disconnected to downspouts.

14. Demolition Plan
x Identify existing structures and their uses and show structures to be removed in dashed lines. x Investigative demolition is required for all projects that include the demolition of exterior walls on a nonconforming structure to ensure that the walls proposed to remain in place are in good condition and are structurally safe to remain. Investigative demolition shall be completed by a California licensed structural engineer and shall include a report prepared by the engineer detailing the process, results/conclusions, and recommendations.

15. Stormwater and LID Assessment Checklist
The appropriate Stormwater and LID Assessment Checklist (Appendix A of the City’s Best Management Practices Manual Stormwater BMP’s) must be completed and submitted with all projects: http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/LID

16. Preliminary Grading Plan (1”=10’ minimum scale)
A grading plan, prepared by a licensed civil engineer, is required if project includes over 50 cubic yards of grading. Over excavation and recompaction does not in itself require the submittal of a separate grading plan. Grading plan shall include:
x Cut and fill quantities and typical cross sections
x Limits of grading
x Existing and proposed contours. Contour interval shall be two feet for slopes up to 20% and 5 feet for slopes over 20%. x Details and sections for new retaining walls including top and bottom of wall elevations, type of material, drainage for walls, temporary over excavation limits, type of wall construction.

17. Shadow Study
Diagram for new multi-family residential, commercial and industrial development that clearly demonstrates shading effects on adjacent properties. Shadow study shall include the following:
x Winter/Summer shadow lines at 9:00 am, noon, and 3:00 pm on June 21st and December 21st. x All structures on adjacent properties.
x Height and number of stories of adjacent structures.

18. Wall Section(s)
Required for projects that include new buildings or additions for multi-family residential, commercial, or industrial uses. x Show roof parapet, window recesses, trim details, wall treatments, etc.

19. Details of Exterior Architectural Elements
Show canopies, balconies, parapets, trim, doors, eaves, reveals, soffits, returns, finish materials, recesses, etc.

20. Storm Water Control Plan
See attached form

21. Preliminary Engineered Improvement Plans
Required for all large multi-family projects, for projects where street improvements are proposed within a public right-of-way, and/or for projects where off-site improvements will be necessary. The preliminary engineered improvement plan shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and shall include:
x Drainage details and calculations
x Circulation: Circulation details including points of ingress and egress; existing right-of-way (full street) and proposed rightof-way, utilizing guidelines established by the Public Works Department.

17.645

22. Historic Evaluation
Prepared by a qualified historian for additions and remodels on parcels that are listed in the City’s Historic Building Survey or that are located in a designated Historic District.

23. Sign Plans
Required for all projects that include new signs subject to approval of a Sign Permit. x Site plan including property boundaries, existing buildings/structures, landscaping and parking areas, proposed sign locations.
x Elevations including sign locations, building height, and building and/or tenant space width for wall signs. x Sign Design including size (area and key dimensions), materials, size, colors, and lettering. x Attachment/Mounting Details/Sections
x Lighting Specifications/Details/Sections
x Photographs of existing signs and proposed sign locations as needed)

24. Use Information
Required for projects that include uses subject to approval of a Use Permit. x Total gross floor area of building and tenant space measured to the exterior of the walls and including all areas of the building such as corridors/hallways, bathrooms, storage areas, etc. x Labels for each room
x Identify all tenant improvements. Existing walls to remain shall be identified by a solid line, existing walls to be removed shall be identified by a dashed line, and new walls shall be identified by a bold/colored solid line x Seating areas with the accurate number of tables and chairs proposed for new restaurants. x Location of existing and proposed grease traps and vent ducts. x A copy of the menu for new food service facilities with alcohol service. x Design details and dimensions for new or existing extension seating areas. x Operations Narrative: Indicate the hours of operation, number of employees, frequency and type of commercial vehicles entering and exiting the site per day, potential nuisance features such as nature and extent of noise, smoke, dust, fumes, and other such features generated by the use and types of controls proposed, list any corrosives, gases or chemical agents which will be used at the site and the method of storage, handling and disposal of such products, description of live entertainment proposed and frequency, and ABC license type if alcohol service is proposed. x Food Service Facility Wastewater Discharge Questionnaire x For Community and Day Care Facilities, submit the number and ages of children or adults to be served.

25. Other:_________________________________________________________________________________________________ SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING MATERIALS IF REQUIRED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form 523
Prepared by a qualified historian for the demolition of structures that are greater than 50 years old.

Reason:____________________________________________________________________________________________ Geotechnical/Soils Report
Prepared by a licensed engineer for: new construction located within 20 feet of a 30% or greater slope; for new multi-family residential projects of more than four units located on a mapped high liquefaction area; new commercial, industrial, public, or quasipublic structures proposed for construction within a mapped high liquefaction areas; and for any new habitable structures located in the Coastal Zone seismic hazard area.

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Acoustical Study
Prepared by an acoustic professional for all new development capable of producing noise or exposing residents or commercial tenants to noise in excess of the noise standards in the General Plan. The acoustical study shall evaluate existing noise conditions, estimate future noise impacts based on the noise level classifications in the General Plan, and recommended noise attenuation methods.

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________

17.646
Traffic Impact Study (TIS)
City Staff will determine a need for and level of TIS based on an initial assessment of the transportation attributes, motor vehicle traffic generation, and parking generation of the proposed project. A TIS will be required if a proposed project disrupts existing pedestrian, bicycle, or transit circulation. Projects that are estimated to generate 50 or more vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour require a TIS. At a minimum the parking component of a TIS will be required for any project not meeting the City parking requirement for parking.

See Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.*
Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Arborist Report
Prepared by a certified arborist for projects that include the removal of heritage tree or that include land disturbance within 10- feet of the trunk of a heritage tree on the subject or adjacent property. The arborist report should include a full tree survey of the site, identification of heritage trees, and recommendations for removal and mitigation or preservation.

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Archaeological Report (see list of archaeological consultants) Prepared by a qualified archaeologist for projects located within areas that are mapped as highly sensitive for archaeological resources and for sites that are mapped as sensitive for archaeological resources and include projects that are not eligible for an exemption.

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Biotic Report (see list of biological consultants)
Prepared by a qualified biologist for all projects that are mapped for sensitive species/habitats or for land disturbance adjacent to a creek, wetland, or other mapped watercourse.

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Geologic Investigation
Prepared by a qualified professional and consistent with the California Division of Mines and Geology guidelines for all development proposed within one hundred feet of a coastal bluff Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ Notice of Violation
A Notice of Violation has been issued and requires the timely submittal of information to determine if unpermitted work can be retained. The following additional information is required:

Reason:___________________________________________________________________________________________ SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL FORMS:
Form 2 Project Design Data Form 10 Demolition – Conversion Authorization Permit Form 3 Multi-Tenant Parking Matrix Form 11 Coastal Permit Form 4 Use Permit Form 12 Amendments
Form 5 Variance Form 13 Subdivisions and Minor Land Divisions Form 6 Conditional Fence Permit Form 14 Lot Line Adjustment Form 7 Landmark- Historic Alteration Form 15 Application for Revocable License to Operate Ext. Area Form 8 Relocation of Structures Form 16 Fee Waiver Supplemental Application Form 9 Residential Allocation Form 17 Density Bonus

✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔

17.647
Appeal of Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application 22-0201 Santa Cruz Climate Action Network and Co-Appellants
Attachment 10.

17.648
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 4:28 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: PLEASE DON'T LET DEVELOPERS CUT DOWN THE 2 LIQUID AMBER TREES in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design
Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: JoyPhyl Taub Greenleaf <[email protected]> Date: March 13, 2023 at 4:19:55 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: PLEASE DON'T LET DEVELOPERS CUT DOWN THE 2 LIQUID AMBER TREES in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design
Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
These trees are beloved by generations of Santa Cruzans who have enjoyed them while shopping at the farmers market, attending all manner of community events, or just stopping to rest in their shade and beauty.

In a climate emergency it becomes more critical to prioritize the preservation and nurture of urban trees, particularly large, heritage trees that provide the greatest amount of cooling and carbon sequestering.

IN a climate emergency city leaders should be elevating the value of our biggest trees especially.

17.649
2 architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

PHYL TAUB GREENLEAF

ELDER ACTIVIST FOR PLANET EARTH
JoyPhyl Taub Greenleaf
[email protected]
1555 merrill St. #75, 1555 merrill ST #75
SC, California 95062

17.650
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Lira Filippini <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 4:54 PM
To: City Council; Fred Keeley; Martine Watkins; Scott Newsome; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Renee Golder
Subject: Lot 4 Project; 3/14/2023; Agenda item 17
Dear Mayor Keeley and Council Elect,
First, apologies for the length; I am not known for my brevity (this is actually short for me). Thank you for wading through the extensive agenda packet and ushering in the last leg of a long saga.

Now that the majority of city voters chose this project as the path to affordable housing and a new library, I'm hoping it can be developed in the form that is most pleasing and beneficial to everyone in our diverse community. Hopefully it will have the green roof, solar power, higher‐end finishes and rooftop garden, etc... For these lovely elements, it seems clear that funding and grant timelines are very important. I also truly believe incorporating the two liquidambars into the entrance or front would be beautiful ‐‐ as well as a step toward community healing. No programmatic goals need to be changed for this to happen, as I will explain briefly further down. Here's an image of what it could look like (the trees are actually closer to Lincoln).

I'm concerned that failure to follow the Heritage Tree Ordinance and Resolution could result in a drawn out timeline, putting funds in jeopardy (State Library Grant funding timelines). It also would mean longer before we have a new library and new homes for people who need them. From my personal research and review of all public records and materials, it is pretty clear the ordinance was not properly adhered to. This is understandable when looking at how complex the project is... and you add in a ballot measure that jeopardized the whole project, it makes sense that the ordinance was not front of mind for the developers and architects.

It has also been brought to my attention that there are some questions around CEQA exemption and the parking garage specifically (ingress/egress, height, etc..) that make it unlikely to fall under the protections provided by case law of Wollmer v. City of Berkeley.

But I don't think going down that rabbit hole is helpful here. I'm hoping that if some effort is made to mend community division by incorporating a few perimeter trees, everyone will let go of the other issues and let this project be the best it can be now that we know for sure it is happening.

17.651
2 With such a large architectural team including both Jayson Architecture and For the Future Housing, I have full faith that they can do some design alterations to include just those two trees... and do them relatively quickly too. Clearly the other heritage trees the Dryad arborist report deemed as "worthy of preservation" would be ridiculous to try to include; they are interior to the parcel and would need a complete new design instead of more modest alterations.

Here's a quick review of how this is possible. The City Council previously approved programmatic goals that include 7‐ 9,000 SF of commercial tenant space.

The square footage in the current design (shown in the screenshot below) is 11,950 SF according to the current entitlement project plans (pg 3). That means that the current design includes 3‐5,000 SF of excess commercial space.

17.652
3 We have more than enough space for the two liquidambars. To incorporate those two trees, it would require less than 3,000 square feet total (including all floors up where they are located). They are trees numbers 10 and 11 in the arborist's chart below (provided by Jim Rendler from For the Future Housing). When you add up the floors for those two trees it is less than 3,000 SF.

Clearly there is enough space for all programmatic goals to be FULLY achieved and also include these beautiful heritage trees. Nothing would be jeopardized; the whole project would be enhanced physically and equitably.

Over the years this project concept has grown and changed, you have been part of many improvements. I truly hope we can move this project forward with this one final improvement. It would bring a meaningful remnant from decades of community events and markets to the parcel's new life and new purpose.

17.653
4 Thank you for your time and consideration,
Lira Filippini
130 Belvedere Terrace
Santa Cruz, CA 95062

17.654
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 5:03 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Schaefer Roemmele <[email protected]>
Date: March 13, 2023 at 4:53:14 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

Many heritage trees, including majestic liquidambars and magnolia trees, currently grow on the 1.55-acre Lot 4 parcel in Santa Cruz. The current plan to remove all of them ignores the

17.655
2 city’s Heritage Tree Resolution which states that a heritage tree cannot be removed unless a construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate it. No member of the City Council or the Parks and Recreation Commission has ever provided any evidence that the architects were given direction to consider the heritage trees on Lot 4 in the project design.

Now is the time to correct that oversight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Schaefer Roemmele
[email protected]
144 Anthony St
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.656
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 5:03 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include the heritage trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren James <[email protected]>
Date: March 13, 2023 at 4:56:09 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include the heritage trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Please save the trees, they provide a safe space for birds that travel the coast line, and are beautiful pieces of nature that help Santa Cruz retain it's coastal town vibe. The trees give so much oxygen in spite of the pollution that surrounds them, and they are something to protect and incorporate.

We can't plant heritage trees, we can only plant saplings which don't take out the same amount of carbon, or provide the same amount of shade that older trees do. Please tell the architects to incorporate them in the design, it isn't hard to include the trees in the plan, and keep them there like how the trees are at the current library.

Just as well, looking at trees reduces stress, and keeps the city from looking like a concrete jungle. Embrace the urban nature, protect the trees, they are just as important as the ocean that we're next to.

Thank you for your consideration.
- Lauren James, downtown santa cruz resident who walks by these trees every day

17.657
2 Lauren James
[email protected]
516 Center St.

Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.658
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Bonnie Bush
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 5:03 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Bonnie Bush, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
831‐420‐5035
Begin forwarded message:

From: Lisa Ekstrom <[email protected]>
Date: March 13, 2023 at 5:00:38 PM PDT
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Include our trees in the Downtown Garage, Library & Housing design Reply‐To: [email protected]

City Clerk Bonnie Bush,
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for your considerations on these very important and far-reaching decisions.

I think all of us care deeply for the future of our community, and that we share strong concern for the climate emergency we’re all facing. I just learned that Mayor Keeley has proclaimed this Thursday, the 16th, as Arbor Day and is encouraging us all to plant trees to offset climate change and enhance our environment.

I also recently heard someone say, “If you want accomplish nothing, convince people that they’re on opposite sides of each other.”
I think we’ve all known the frustrations of that experience.

For example, it could appear that one person’s passionate protection of our Heritage Trees could be at cross-purposes with another person’s equally passionate push to get more affordable housing built as soon as possible.

17.659
2 But what if we’re not at cross-purposes?
What if it’s not YES or NO?
What if “Trees -OR- Housing” is both a misleading and unproductive choice? In fact, as we need to bring more density and housing to downtown, we are actually going to need our big trees all the more. As we work to create more much-needed affordable housing downtown, those big trees will be even more of a crucial front-line protection against the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere, working to support environmental health and human health, even community health.

I appreciate the talk of planting more sapling trees as part of this project but realistically, it will take a long time for those new trees to protect us as the Heritage Trees do. And when a large tree is destroyed, the CO2 it has been industriously storing is then released back into the environment.

So what can we do together, honoring our need to affordably house more of our community AND honoring the trees that have been protecting us and can continue to protect our community?
I want to see what we can accomplish by listening to each other and working together with respect and imagination.

I come from a family of architects and have years of experience with how large projects change and refine in their scope. I urge you to direct the architects for the Downtown Library, Garage & Affordable Housing Project to create a design alteration to honor, accommodate, and save as many of our heritage trees on the site as possible. It will be well worth it to all of us.

Thanks very much,
Lisa Ekström
Santa Cruz
Lisa Ekstrom
[email protected]
202 Taylor St
Santa Cruz, California 95060

17.660
Nonresidential Demolition Authorization Permit,
Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Lot-Line
Adjustment, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit
Downtown Library
Affordable Housing
Project (CP22-0128)
113, 119 Lincoln St.

17.661
2 • Combine 2 adjacent lots
• Demolish commercial building, City
surface parking lot
• Construct Downtown Library Affordable
Housing Project
Project Overview

17.662
3 Project Site
N

17.663
4 Existing Conditions, Southwest– from
Cedar St./Cathcart St.

17.664
5 Existing Conditions, Northwest – from
Cedar St./Lincoln St.

17.665
6 • New 273,194 sq. ft., 8-story building • Downtown City library • 3 stories, approx. 38,069 sq. ft. • Parking garage • 3 stories, 243 parking spaces • Affordable housing • 5 stories, 124 residential units • Commercial tenant space • 3 stories, 9,598 sq. ft. • Childcare facility • 1 story, approx. 1,231 sq. ft.

Proposed Project

17.666
24 Site Plan

17.667
31 West, East Elevations
West Elevation (View from Cedar Street)
East Elevation (View from Alley) 17.668
32 North, South Elevations
North Elevation (View
from Lincoln Street)
South Elevation (View from
Cathcart Street)

17.669
35 Density Bonus

17.670
36 Affordable Housing
• 13 studio
• 48 1-BR
• 32 2-BR
• 31 3-BR

17.671
40 • 12 trees to be removed
• 9 Heritage Trees
• 26 new street trees
• 14 on-site, 12 off-site
• New green roof
• plus other landscaped planting areas
Heritage Tree Removal Permit

17.672
41 74. Electric Vehicle Parking: 25 parking spaces shall be provided with Level 2 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) before occupancy; 99 additional parking spaces shall provide the electrical capacity to add Level 1 EVCS in the future. electrical infrastructure for future expansion shall also be incorporated in the design, including conduit.

75. Accommodation of Future Food Service Use: All The
ground floor commercial spaces shall be constructed to
accommodate a future food service use. Plans shall also show the locations of grease traps, grease lines, and grease storage facilities.

Modifications to Conditions of Approval

17.673
44 • Project exempt per
• Statutory exemption Section 21083.3
• Categorical exemption Section 15332
• Categorical exemption Section 15305
• CEQA analysis attached to staff report and available to public CEQA

17.674
45 • All findings for project approval made
• Additions to conditions of approval
• Staff recommends that City Council
• Acknowledge the environmental determination and
• Approve Nonresidential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Lot-Line Adjustment, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based upon findings included and conditions of approval attached to staff report
Recommendations

17.675
46 • Staff and applicant available to answer questions and provide information
• Thank you!
Questions

17.676
Give our trees a chance!
Save Some Trees Coalition

17.677
Co-appellants
of our appeal
Youth for Climate Justice
Citizens' Climate Lobby Santa Cruz Chapter
Santa Cruz Climate Action Network
Our Downtown, Our Future
Santa Cruz for Bernie
Peoples Democratic Club of Santa Cruz County
Ecosystem Restoration Communities
Electric Vehicle Assn, CA Central Coast Chapter
Eat for the Earth
Campaign for Sustainable Transportation
Downtown Commons Advocates
Sierra Club
Thousands of people in
Santa Cruz belong to
these organizations.
896 individual people
signed our fall 2022 tree
cutting permit appeal.

17.678
Introduction
• On December 12, 2022, the Parks & Rec Commission denied our appeal and upheld the tree removal permit with a 4-3 vote.
• The City can honor our Heritage tree ordinance & resolution by incorporating 2 or more perimeter trees while fulfilling all programmatic goals of the project on Lot 4.

17.679
How we got here. The appeal.

The January 2022 report of the City’s arborist consultant, Dryad, identified 5 Heritage trees on Lot 4 as “worthy of preservation.”

17.680
Public records support the appeal
• “A construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees….”
• June, 2022: Michael Guth (Santa Cruz Sierra Club) wrote to City Staff asking the developer to “alter the current design to comply with city’s legal obligations with respect to its heritage trees.”

17.681
• Based on preliminary conceptual plans, the arborist addendum indicates: “…the building footprint encompasses an area including all twelve trees.”
• The trees were never considered for the design and project program. • The question becomes:

Can they be incorporated without changing the project’s goals?

17.682
The space is there
• According to Jim Rendler of For the Future Housing: Incorporating liquidambars would take less than 3,000 square feet total.

17.683
Council Approved 7-9,000 SF for Commercial
Programmatic Goals

17.684
Council approved 7-9,000 SF for commercial
It’s currently at 11,950 SF
That’s 3-5,000 more than approved 17.685
Here we are
By including A FEW trees, the project could be enhanced.

And there’s space for it!
The Heritage tree resolution was largely disregarded until the appeal.

The Library/Affordable Housing complex, environment, streetscape, and the community would benefit.

17.686
We know you value our urban forest
The City Council’s Heritage
Tree Ordinance and resolution
as well as your Health in All
Policies (HiAP) offer important
ways to protect and enhance
the environment of Santa Cruz.

17.687
Other
Cities
are planting
lots of trees
San
Francisco
ref5

17.688
Multiple Health
Outcomes
Details of the MANY
significant health
outcomes from mature
urban trees.

From a recent article in Yale
Climate Connections

17.689
Social Benefits
Many recent academic studies
have shown that trees in cities
not only provide numerous
health benefits, but are a
central equity issue.

Low income neighborhoods traditionally have unequal access to trees. Preserving our large urban trees promotes equity, supporting HiAP.

17.690
Heat Island Effect HEAT ISLAND
It’s been
documented that
people in urban
areas suffer far
more in heat
waves. As the city
grows to meet
RHNA, this will
become important
for Santa Cruz.

Planting and
preserving urban
trees helps to
reduce this effect.

Ref 8

17.691
Size Matters
One study reports that the annual net benefit of planting large tree species is 92% higher than that of a small tree species.

Planting saplings, even where the ratio 3 or 5 to 1, will not provide the many ecoservices that large trees provide now, or even in 30-40 years.

Trees with a larger trunk diameter store more carbon than smaller trees.

Larger trees are generally more effective at providing essential regulating services for urban environments - especially, in a changing climate.

From ref 1 17.692
Santa Cruz values our large old trees

17.693

17.694
Their Heritage In Your Hands
Perhaps a Magnolia for the Child Care Center?

17.695
How to save some trees?
Move ahead with a Heritage tree removal for certain trees.

Approve the Heritage tree removal permit for removal of the following rees on Lot 4: trees #s 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12

17.696
• Asking for a design alteration to incorporate some trees • Setting a date to consider both options
• Choosing between alternatives and moving forward
Please Consider

17.697
Thank you!
We are happy to answer questions.

We would look forward to this project being the best that it can be.

17.698
References

1. Why large trees are essential for healthy cities 2022 City Monitor

2. Benefits of Urban Trees: University of Illinois Extension, 2019

3. Urban Trees and Human Health: A Scoping Review Nat.Library of Medicine, 2020

4. 6 Ways Trees Benefit All of Us Nature Conservancy 2020

5. STREET TREES SF Urban Forest Plan 2014

6. Trees In Urban Design Crabtree Group Inc. Salida, CO

7. Trees: The Critical Infrastructure Low-Income Neighborhoods Lack | The Pew 2021

8. 5 reasons why cities need a healthy tree cover | World Economic Forum 2022

9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4eE9Fqu1yE 3 minute Nat Cons video

10. Yale Climate Connections FEBRUARY 28, 2023

17.699

18.1 18.2

18.3 18.4

18.5 18.6

18.7 18.8

18.9

Santa Cruz City CouncilMarch 14, 2023

Santa Cruz City Council
March 14, 2023