Santa Cruz City Council
December 12, 2023

4. Extremely Low Income (ELI) Households
Housing and support services for ELI households continues to be a critical need in the City. As the private sector offers limited housing opportunities for affordable, ELI housing, the City and nonprofit partners, typically capitalizing on various state and federal funding assistance, provide the vast majority of new ELI housing in the City. The City has employed a wide range of strategies to make great strides in producing ELI housing, on both City-owned properties with City-led developments and in partnership with non-profit developers on privately-held lands. The “Financial Resources” section below speaks to many of the City’s funding strategies that often support ELI households.

The City has entitled four projects (Jessie Street, Pacific Station South, Pacific Station North, and Cedar Street Apartments) through AB 2162’s streamlining of 100 percent affordable projects that contain at least 25 percent supportive housing units. Those four projects total over 300 units, including approximately 91 ELI units including approximately 80 supportive housing units. While the City’s population only requires that projects up to 50 units in size be streamlined through AB 2162, the City Council authorized three of the aforementioned projects to use AB 2162 streamlining even though they exceeded 50 units in size.

The City regularly pursues property acquisitions or assists non-profits in acquiring properties as one way to promote ELI and supportive housing production. The City recently acquired a property at 125 Coral Street and completed a visioning exercise where the preferred uses of that property include physical and mental health clinic space targeted at people experiencing homelessness, a navigation center (homeless shelter with wrap-around services), and affordable housing. While the income levels for the affordable housing component are still to be determined, it is expected that a portion of the units will serve ELI households, offering a place where such households can transition from an entitled 120-unit PSH project on the adjacent parcel that is expected to begin construction in Fall 2023. The City also recently assisted a non-profit developer with their acquisition of 136 River Street by loaning the developer funds for their purchase, and it is expected that a portion of the new homes constructed on that site will serve ELI households. The City also owns property at the northeast corner of Highways 1 and 9, and the City is actively negotiating with Caltrans for acquisition of the property they own at that intersection. The site will ultimately be developed with affordable housing, again, with a significant number of ELI units expected. The City has also entitled a project downtown that includes a new library, childcare facilities, and a 100

22.508
Appendix F: Housing Resources F-10
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
percent affordable housing project containing approximately 124 units, of which 19 are expected to serve ELI households. Construction of that project could start as soon as Fall 2024.

The City also provides a variety of other supports that directly benefit ELI households. The City funds programs that provide tenants with eviction prevention services and legal advice. The City‘s Rental Inspection Service ensures that all tenants, including ELI tenants, regardless of the amount of rent they pay, have safe and healthy housing. The City funds rental assistance programs that provide first and last months’ rent and/or emergency funding for qualifying low-income households, administered through Community Action Board. The City encourages landlords to accept Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher tenants, including ELI tenants, by providing funding to the Housing Authority for mediation services and expanded damage deposits. Chapter 2 of the Housing Element recognizes the great work that the City is doing to protect ELI tenants and expand housing choices for ELI tenants by establishing policies and programs for expanding, promoting, and/or maintaining many of these ELI household supports.

C.City-Owned Land
The City has long‐term leases of City‐owned property with non‐profit organizations. Programs operating on leased City‐owned properties include:
• Housing Developments including Neary Lagoon, Nueva Vista, Sycamore Commons, the Tannery, and Gault Street Senior Housing; affordable housing and PSH developments in process on City property include Pacific Station South (under construction – includes Extremely Low Income and supportive housing units), Pacific Station North (entitled and pursuing building permits – includes supportive housing), and the Library Affordable Housing Project (entitled);
• Housing Matters property on Coral Street;
• Beach Flats Community Center;
• Homeless Services Center;
• Market Street Senior Center;
• River Street Transitional Community Camp;
• London Nelson Community Center, which includes the City-operated Senior Center and Teen Center; and
• Depot Park building, which serves as one of the extreme weather shelter sites.

D.Financial Resources
Providing an adequate supply of decent and affordable housing requires funding from various sources. The following funding sources are utilized to provide financial and other assistance related to the provision of affordable housing.

22.509
Appendix F: Housing Resources F-11
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update

1. Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF)
The City has adopted an Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) to assist the development and preservation of low- to moderate-income housing units. The types of projects eligible for AHTF assistance include the following:
• Creation of new affordable units.
• Preservation of existing affordable housing.
• Assistance with multifamily rehabilitation programs.
• Conversion of market rate units to affordable housing. • Construction of accessory dwelling units.
• Acquisition and rehabilitation of potential limited equity cooperatives. • First time homebuyer loans.
• Predevelopment loans/grants to assist nonprofit and for profit developers with project feasibility studies, site acquisition and design studies for potential affordable housing projects.

In addition, on June 22, 2021, the Santa Cruz City Council approved Resolutions NS-29,841 (Library & Pac South) and NS-29,842 (Pac North) authorizing the City to apply for a Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF) Matching Grant from HCD. In that Resolution, the Metro Pacific Station North Affordable Housing Development was identified as one of the developments eligible to receive funding. As of August 2021, 100 percent affordable rental housing projects eligible to receive Housing Trust funding include:
• 119 Coral Street (New Way Homes)
• Pacific Station North (First Community Housing)
• Pacific Station South (SC Pacific Associates)
• 350 Ocean Street Apartments (For the Future Housing)
• Cedar Street Apartments (Pacific Union Housing Group) • Jessie Street Apartments (MidPen Housing)
• 415 Natural Bridges (County Housing Authority)
• Downtown Library and Affordable Housing Project (EDEN Housing/ For the Future Housing) • Library Affordable Housing
• 801 River
• 831 Water

2. Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV)
The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is a Federal government program to assist very lowincome families, the elderly, and the disabled with rent subsidy payments in privately owned rental housing units. HCV participants are able to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and are not limited to units located within subsidized housing projects. They typically pay 30 to 40 percent of their income for rent and utilities. The Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz(HA) administers and manages the HCVs within the City of Santa Cruz. The City shares information about HCVs and other resources available on the City website and at the public counter.

22.510
Appendix F: Housing Resources F-12
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
In addition to the HCV program, HUD also has a Project Based Voucher Program. Under the project-based voucher program, the HA enters into an assistance contract with the property owner for specified units and for a specified term. The PHA refers families from its waiting list to the project owner to fill vacancies. Because the assistance is tied to the unit, a family who moves from the project-based unit does not have any right to continued housing assistance. However, they may be eligible for a tenant-based voucher when one becomes available.

Community feedback throughout the Housing Element update indicates that HCVs are difficult to acquire and include long wait times with uncertainty of success. Additionally, while State law bans source-of-income discrimination, community members reported that there are rental ads circulating online stating property owners will not accept HCVs. As a result, the City has included actions in the Chapter 2: Policy Plan to address these issues.

3. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides annual grants on a formula basis to cities to develop viable urban communities by providing a suitable living environment and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income.

Eligibility for participation as an entitlement community is based on population data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau and metropolitan area descriptions published by the Office of Management and Budget. HUD determines the amount of each entitlement grantee’s annual funding allocation by a statutory dual formula which uses several objective measures of community needs, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing and population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas.

CDBG funds can be used for a wide array of activities, including:
• Housing rehabilitation;
• Lead-based paint screening and abatement;
• Acquisition of buildings and land;
• Construction or rehabilitation of public facilities and infrastructure; and • Public services for low-income households and those with special needs.

Each year, the City of Santa Cruz receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City's Economic Development and Housing Department is responsible for administering these funds. These funds must be used to develop viable communities by promoting integrated approaches that provide items such as decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expand economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons.

The City of Santa Cruz administers its own CDBG program and provides additional application information on the City website. The City receives approximately $586,000 in CDBG funds each year from HUD. To obtain funding, applicant projects or programs must meet eligibility requirements and demonstrate that they benefit very low- and low-income persons within the City. The funds are distributed on a competitive basis.

22.511
Appendix F: Housing Resources F-13
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update

4. Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
Through the State HCD, the City is eligible for $1,588,464 in Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds between 2020 and 2025. The funding is intended to assist local governments in addressing their affordable housing needs. For jurisdictions like the City that receive federal CDBG funds directly from HUD, the actual annual amount allocated by HCD will be proportionally based on CDBG funding formulas. For the first year of funding (2020-2021), HCD allocated $264,744 to the City of Santa Cruz. The remaining allocation of funds that is allowed by PLHA grant requirements is $330,930 annually through FY 2024-2025.

The City places the PLHA funds in the AHTF to assist in developing affordable housing. As affordable housing development projects require multiple sources of funding to compile enough funding to be developed, PLHA grant funds are leveraged with several other funding sources including Federal and State Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) financing. The City’s Five-Year PLHA Plan details which activities may be funded through the PLHA.

5. HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
The HOME program provides federal funds for the development and rehabilitation of affordable rental and ownership housing for households with incomes not exceeding 80 percent of area median income. The program gives local governments the flexibility to fund a wide range of affordable housing activities through housing partnerships with private industry and non-profit organizations. HOME funds can be used for activities that promote affordable rental housing and homeownership by low-income households. The City of Santa Cruz receives approximately $436,000 in HOME entitlement funds each year. The City provides additional application information to participate in the HOME program on the City website.

6. SB 2 Grant
To supplement the cost of the City’s effort to update the streamlining process for affordable housing, the City has been awarded an SB 2 Planning Grant Program grant from HCD. The SB 2 program includes improvements to expedite local planning processes. In 2020, the City received $310,000 from the SB 2 Grant.

Furthermore, the City has constantly pursued the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP), Local Early Action Planning (LEAP), and the Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG) as additional funding sources to accelerate housing production. The City also pursues the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) to fund land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development.

7. Inclusionary Housing (Measure O)
Measure O is a 1979 voter-approved initiative that requires residential developers to provide a percentage of the total number of units as affordable to moderate-, low-, or very low-income households. Developers may choose to build the units and designate them as for-sale or as rental units or propose to use an alternative method of compliance to meet the requirement, one of which is the payment of an in-lieu fee. The City’s Inclusionary Ordinance codifies the requirements of Measure O. Under the Inclusionary Ordinance, Under limited circumstances, developers can

22.512
Appendix F: Housing Resources F-14
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
pay in lieu fees rather than providing the required inclusionary housing units. Those fees are deposited into the AHTF and help support affordable housing development in other projects.

E. Opportunities for Energy Conservation

1. Energy Use and Providers
Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), through delivery by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), provides electricity for the City, with natural gas service provided by PG&E. Natural gas is a “fossil fuel” and is a non-renewable resource. The natural gas transmission pipelines within the City are owned and operated by PG&E. Pacific Gas and Electric Company has the capacity and resources to deliver gas except in certain situations that are noted in state law. As development occurs, PG&E will continue to extend its service to accommodate development and supply the necessary gas lines, where such service is necessary. However, the City has a prohibition on installation of natural gas in most new construction, with some minor exceptions. Electricity is provided on an as-needed basis to customers within existing structures in the City. Every year, PG&E expands and improves existing facilities according to demand. 3CE and PG&E offer programs to promote the efficient energy use and assist lower-income customers. PG&E participates in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program and Energy Savings Assistance Program to help homeowners and renters conserve energy and control costs.

Eligible customers receive no-cost weatherization, including attic insulation, energy efficient refrigerators, energy-efficient furnaces, weather stripping, caulking, low-flow showerheads, water heater blankets, and door and building envelope repairs which reduce air infiltration.

2. Energy Conservation
The primary uses of energy in urban areas are for transportation, lighting, water heating, and space heating and cooling. The high cost of energy demands that efforts be taken to reduce or minimize the overall level of urban energy consumption. Energy conservation is important in preserving non-renewable fuels to ensure that these resources are available for use by future generations.

There are also a number of benefits associated with energy conservation including improved air quality and lower energy costs.

Energy conservation strategies can help reduce the consumption of energy, which reduces monthly costs to homeowners and renters. Examples of energy conservation strategies include weatherization (installation of insulation, more energy-efficient window, and other measures to maintain comfortable interior temperature); installation of more efficient appliances; and installation of solar energy systems. Buildings can also be designed to incorporate energy conservation strategies such as cooling materials and building orientation. The City encourages energy conservation strategies, for example, through its green building program, and has seen an increase in solar energy system installations. The City is in the process of expanding an existing building decarbonization and electrification program to improve energy efficiency in existing buildings, to remove natural gas, and to replace the natural gas with energy-efficient electric appliances such as heat pumps.

22.513

Housing Sites Inventory
Appendix G

22.514
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-2
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
A.Introduction
The Housing Element is required by Government Code Section 65583.2 to include an inventory of parcels (or sites) suitable for residential development through the 6th planning cycle to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation for all income levels, as shown in Table G-1.

Table G-1: City of Santa Cruz 6th Cycle RHNA by Income Category Income Category Percent of Area Median Income (AMI) RHNA Very Low-Income 0-50% AMI 859
Low-Income 51-80% AMI 562
Moderate-Income 81-120% AMI 709
Above Moderate-Income >120% AMI 1,606
TOTAL RHNA 3,736
*The Santa Cruz County AMI is $119,300 for a family of four, according to 2022 HCD Income Limits.

Figure G-1 illustrates the sites identified to meet the RHNA shown in Table G-1 above and their projected capacity. These include projects currently in the pipeline, vacant residentially zoned sites, underutilized sites, and infill opportunities – as shown in Table G-2. These sites have been identified throughout the City to provide future development opportunities equitably in areas with high accessibility to resources, public transportation, and employment.

Table G-2: 6th Cycle RHNA Sites Inventory Analysis
Strategies
Very
Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
TOTAL
6 th Cycle RHNA 859 562 709 1,606 3,736

1. Pipeline
Projects
City of Santa Cruz 702 70 1,560 2,332
UC Santa Cruz 0 242 0 242
Total 702 312 1,560 2,574

2. Projected
Housing
ADUs 292 234 58 584
Vacant Residential Land 3 8 63 74
Mission Street Corridor 48 36 219 303
Ocean Street Corridor 96 32 106 234
Soquel Avenue Corridor 40 32 120 192
Water Street Corridor 12 9 38 59
River Street Corridor 0 0 17 17
Downtown 139 52 210 401
Church Properties 32 26 76 134
South of Laurel Area 141 111 320 572
Other In-Fill 270 32 8 310
Total 1,073 572 1,235 2,880
TOTAL UNIT POTENTIAL 1,775 884 2,795 5,454
Buffer Over RHNA 25% 25% 74% 46%

22.515
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-3
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-1: 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory – All Sites

22.516
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-4
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update

1. General Plan Consistency
The City’s 2030 General Plan was adopted in 2012 and amended in October 2019.

In 2022, the City Council approved the “Objective Development Standards for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Housing” project that, among other things, created six new Mixed-Use Zoning Districts affecting 387 parcels and encourages new and higher-density housing development. These rezonings created consistency between the 2030 General Plan and the Zoning Code.

2. Zoning Consistency
Sites identified as part of this 6th Cycle Housing Element inventory are consistent with the City’s existing zoning. No rezoning is proposed.

3. CEQA Streamlining
The 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopted in April 2012, evaluated the impacts of 3,350 new residential units constructed through 2030. CEQA review for the 6th Cycle Housing Element will be included with the project review and adoption.

Generally, projects found to be consistent with site zoning and objective design standards are exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

4. Transportation
Future residential development in Santa Cruz is supported by current and future planned transportation programs, services, and improvements. The City will continue to work with Santa Cruz Metro to ensure that new residential development is adequately served.

5. Infrastructure and Public Services Capacity
Sites identified as part of this Housing Sites Inventory are located in areas that are adequately served by existing and planned infrastructure and public services. The Policy Plan establishes requirements for adequate infrastructure and public services for developments that include housing units affordable to lower-income households.

As described in Appendix E, the Santa Cruz Water Department is responsible for ensuring an adequate water supply to accommodate future water demand requirements to accommodate additional housing development to meet the City’s RHNA requirements through the 6th planning cycle.

6. Public Input
The strategies established in this Appendix are a result of extensive public engagement through meetings with stakeholders, community workshops, comment letters, conversations with property owners and developers, as well as guidance from elected officials.

22.517
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-5
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
B. Development Analysis

1. Development Trends and Demand
Residential development has been very strong during the 5th cycle. The City was successfully able to accommodate well over the entirety of its 5th cycle RHNA with a variety of housing types at all income categories, including a number of SRO developments and supportive housing projects.

Table G-3 below provides examples of the types of residential developments that have been approved and developed in the past few years. It should be noted that the City does not receive development applications with densities below that permitted for the zone.

Santa Cruz is a fairly built-out city with limited vacant land opportunities outside of the UC Santa Cruz campus and environmentally constrained areas. As a coastal community with sensitive environmental areas, development is generally restricted to areas that are currently developed.

Following development and community interest, the City is focusing its 6th cycle candidate sites in areas that are considered underutilized, aging, and in need of rehabilitation. Additionally, General Plan Policy LU3.7.1 “[allows] and [encourages] development that meets the high end of the General Plan Land Use designation density unless constraints associated with site characteristics and zoning development standards require a lower density.” The goal is to continue providing property owners and developers with additional opportunities to maximize use of their properties and create rehabilitated corridors that provide current and future residents with a variety of housing options in walking distance to commercial uses, community resources, employment, and access to transportation. Table G-3 shows that existing uses on recently-developed sites did not create constraints to development. The City has established development classes with characteristics that are applicable to the candidate sites identified. These classifications are based on past development projects, and while some comparisons may not be exact matches for the sites identified, they show a strong correlation with the understanding that every parcel is unique in terms of site characteristics, existing use, ownership, and other factors which can affect future development. The development classes are generally defined as:
 Development Class A: Aging commercial uses with revitalization intentions  Development Class B: Vacant parking lot land
 Development Class C: Existing, aging housing units on underutilized parcels  Development Class D: A religious institution
 Development Class E: Various other uses such as a historic commercial building and an existing homeless shelter
The City’s Inclusionary Ordinance has been utilized in the development of affordable units and will continue to play an important part in future developments. Density bonus incentives have also resulted in the development of additional units beyond what the City’s density limits establish.

Additional details on both the Inclusionary Ordinance and the density bonus ordinance are provided in Appendix E.

22.518
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-6
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
As it relates to the development of ADUs, the City has seen a steady increase year-over-year and continues to receive inquiries and applications. A survey conducted by the City found that approximately 90 percent of ADUs are currently rented to lower income households. More than half the units in the survey responses are utilized by property-owner family members, at affordable rates or for no rent. More analysis on projected ADU development is provided in the Section 3.3 of this Appendix.

As detailed in the Transportation Corridor Opportunity Sites section ahead, the City has identified a number of existing commercial properties with capacity to accommodate additional units or be fully redeveloped with mixed-use or solely residential. These properties were recently rezoned in 2022 to new mixed-use zones to encourage new and higher-density housing development along the City’s main transportation corridors. Existing uses on non-vacant sites in the corridors include predominantly older commercial uses and service-oriented businesses, as well as small auto shops, parking lots, and some office uses. These sites were selected for a variety of reasons, including:
 Underutilization – large surface parking area, capacity to accommodate a greater use of the parcels, and/or an improvement value that is lower than the value of the land.  No recent improvements.
 No parking requirements for future redevelopment.
 Potential for lots to be consolidated to accommodate a larger residential/mixed-use development.
 Property owner and/or developer interest.
 No large chains or national corporations with potentially long leases, such as Safeway or CVS.

As Table G-3 shows, the City has been seeing significant numbers of redevelopment projects on sites with existing uses, and this trend is expected to continue or accelerate as a result of the greater level of certainty provided through the 2022 mixed-use rezonings and new objective standards. Seven projects listed have recently successfully moved forward with entitlements or construction for the redevelopment of previously commercial parcels. The uses previously included active commercial and service-oriented businesses. While the City does not have access to lease information for non-vacant candidate sites, existing uses have not shown to pose a constraint to development feasibility due to incentives and greater development opportunities.

This included uses owned by nation-wide corporations such as Hertz and Wells Fargo (see table G3). Furthermore, the City has recently received inquiries from developers on sites not included in the candidate sites inventory with existing uses such as duplex/triplex residential buildings, general offices, medical offices, a bank, and an auto dealership. While the candidate sites were screened to only include parcels with older structures, the bank that is expected to redevelop with a mixeduse project with upper floor residential uses in the near-term underwent a substantial remodel and completed an over-2,000-square-foot addition in 2016 – further showing that recently improved and active commercial uses are still gathering interest and may not be a constraint to redevelopment potential.

22.519
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-7
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Additionally, the City has seen redevelopment interest for converting existing parking lots to residential or mixed-use. Table G-3 details two recent projects which have resulted in 154 total units. Of the two, one did not need to include parking nor replace lost spaces given its location downtown and AB 2097. Newly added Government Code Section 65863.2 eliminates parking minimums for residential, commercial, or other development projects within one-half mile of a major transit stop. This new legislation applies to all candidate sites located downtown or along/near high quality transit corridors – meaning existing parking proposed for redevelopment will not need to be replaced on those sites.

Lastly, two groups of parcels have been identified for lot consolidation and redevelopment with some existing residential units. Both groupings are under common ownership and existing, older structures are in major need of rehabilitation. This includes 407 & 415 Pacific Avenue and 218, 222, and 228 River Street. Properties adjacent to the 218 River Street group of parcels has recently been subject to a residential development inquiry; these parcels include duplex/triplex buildings and offices, and while they are not included in the sites inventory, they show promise for redevelopment of parcels with existing residential uses as well as redevelopment interest within the neighborhood. As such, existing residential uses are not considered to be a constraint to development.

Table G-3: Residential Development Trends (2019-2022)
Project Acreage Density Units Prior Use New Development Type Prior Commercial Use (Development Class A)
130 Center St 1.19 195.8 233
Commercial –
older auto
body shop and
Hertz auto
rental center
Mixed-use SRO units which received 50%
density bonus under AB 2345. The project
includes 35 very low income units.
150 Felker St 0.412
23 (x 1.5
density
bonus)
32 Commercial –
older office
building
Apartment building with 4 very-low-income
units through density bonus
Pacific Front
Mixed-Use
Development

1.44 142.36 205
Commercial –
existing (public
transit) Metro
Center,
restaurants,
parking lot,
and small
commercial
store fronts
Mixed-use residential and commercial
Pacific Station
South 2.14 32.7 70
Commercial –
parking lot,
retail building,
and an office
building
100% affordable residential mixed-use
development with commercial and medical
offices on City-owned land
Front St/
Riverfront
Project (428,

1.04 168.7 175
Commercial –
older buildings
with retail,
services,
Mixed-use development with 20 affordable
units and commercial uses, which received a
32% density bonus.

22.520
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-8
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-3: Residential Development Trends (2019-2022)
Project Acreage Density Units Prior Use New Development Type 440, 504, 418,
508 Front)
dance studio
and surface
parking
831 Water St 0.91
Max FAR:

1.75 (x
density
bonus =

2.625)
140
Commercial –
older strip
mall with a
mini mart,
MetroPCS,
massage
services,
laundromat, a
car wash
facility, and
surface
parking
Mixed-use SB 35 streamlining project with
50% affordable residential and commercial.
530 Front St 1.06 260.4 276
Wells Fargo
home
mortgage
office building,
surface
parking, and
restaurants,
retail, and
office building
Demolition of existing Wells Fargo building
and restaurant/retail/office building and
consolidation of four parcels to construct a
mixed-use building with residential units
(including a 50% density bonus) and 6,865
square feet of commercial space. Of the 276
units, 28 will be affordable to very lowincome households and 9 affordable to lowincome households.

Prior Parking Lot (Development Class B)
190 West Cliff 2.18 30 89 Parking lot
Mixed-use development with 10 affordable
units and commercial uses, which received a
35% density bonus. New development
included three levels of subgrade parking and
a small number of surface parking.
532 Center St 0.77 84.4 65
Parking lot -–
Calvary Church
owned the site
and leased it
to the City for
use a parking
lot.

Affordable housing project with 16 very lowincome units and 49 low-income unit. No parking was included for the residential and
commercial uses, due to the project’s
location downtown and AB 2097, but the
project did add parking for the church use
only.

Prior Residential Use (Development Class C)
119 Coral St 0.77 157 120
6-unit
Transitional
Housing
Supportive housing
727 Hanover St 0.476 23 11 Single-family
home
Market-rate multi-family rental development
with 2 inclusionary units
314 Jessie St 0.43 116.28 50
14 apartments
with accessory
structures
100% affordable multi-family development
with supportive services
Prior Religious Use (Development Class D)
111 Errett Cir 1.62 9.88 12 Church 12 single-family parcels.

22.521
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-9
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-3: Residential Development Trends (2019-2022)
Project Acreage Density Units Prior Use New Development Type 532 Center St 0.77 84.4 65
Parking lot -–
Calvary Church
owned the site
and leased it
to the City for
use a parking
lot.

Affordable housing project with 16 very lowincome units and 49 low-income unit. No parking was included for the residential and
commercial uses, due to the project’s
location downtown and AB 2097, but the
project did add parking for the church use
only.
900 High St
2 (existing
parcel size
is 5.9)
201 40 Church
Affordable housing project with 4 low-income
and 5 very low-income units on a site with an
existing church (Peace United Church) in the
R-1-10 (Single Family) zoning district. The
Project includes a lot split to separate the
church use and the proposed residential
development – resulting in 2 acres dedicated
to just residential. Approximately 20 parking
spaces will be provided for the 40 units.
126 Eucalyptus
Ave

3.97 (existing
parcel size
is 6.97)

3.27 132
School owned
by Shrine of
St. Joseph
Demolition of a school on a church site for a
community care residential facility consisting
of 15 memory care and 61 assisted living
units, support spaces and amenities in the R1-5 (Single Family) zoning district. The Project includes a lot split to separate the existing
church use and the proposed community
care facility. Parking will be provided per the
City’s community care residential facility use
requirements.

Other Prior Use (Development Class E)
350 Ocean St 1.59

50.93 (x 1.275
density
bonus)
63 Dilapidated,
long-vacant
residential
structures
100% very low-income mixed-use
Notes:

1. The new lot has a max of 20 units allowed based on the density of the lot. However, the density was calculated over the entire 5.9 acre site with condition to restrict development on the church site so the overall density remains in the range.

2. The Project has 13 full dwelling units that count towards the density but also provides an additional 61 assisted living units.

This analysis of recent development projects shows that residential development occurs within the City on sites that have existing non-residential uses. As indicated, these example sites share many characteristics with the candidate housing sites in Table G-3. This demonstrates that there is development potential on these sites as well as interest in developing these types of sites for residential uses within Santa Cruz.

2. Smaller Sites
AB 1397 identifies parcels measuring between half an acre and ten acres to be appropriate for the development of affordable housing units. Parcels that are less than half an acre (“smaller”) or above ten acres (“larger”) are not deemed adequate to accommodate lower income housing needs unless past performance shows a tendency for affordable housing projects to develop on

22.522
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-10
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
those types of sites. The City has not identified any larger sites as part of the candidate sites inventory.

The City has, however, identified sites that are considered smaller due to consolidation interest for neighboring properties, as well as larger sites with parcelization potential. Affordable units on smaller sites are assumed through the City’s Inclusionary Housing Program. As detailed in Appendix E, developers of ownership or rental residential developments consisting of five or more dwelling units must make 20 percent of the dwelling units available for sale or rent to low- and moderate-income households at an affordable ownership cost. For example, the City has identified the 0.22-acre 2120 Mission Street property as a candidate site with an expected density of 89 units per acre for a potential of 14 net units, including 3 units affordable to lower income.

Through the Inclusionary Housing Program, a 14 unit development would need to set aside 2.8 units at affordable rates, which equals the assumed 3 units reported in the candidate sites inventory. All smaller sites in the inventory which include affordable units meet the unit minimum for the Inclusionary Housing Program.

Furthermore, Table G-3 and G-5 show the City has a history of development interest in both smaller and larger parcels. For instance, 908 Ocean Street is a 377-unit pipeline project that recently consolidated 20 parcels. This was done following the adoption of the 2030 General Plan and the Ocean Street Area Plan which support higher density development on this corridor.

Program 1.1e is also included in the Policy Plan to adopt ordinance amendments to further facilitate lot consolidation as a method of promoting the development of affordable units on smaller sites.

3. Replacement Units
The inventory of sites includes parcels with existing residential units. As Table G-3 shows, the City has a history of redeveloping and consolidating sites with existing housing units for the development of high density residential projects and mixed-use projects.

A program is included in the Housing Plan to ensure demolished residential units occupied by lower income households, or households subject to affordability requirements within the last five years, are replaced in compliance with Government Code Section 65915.

4. Review Process
The City is committed to ensuring development occurs appropriately and efficiently. Table G-4 provides the review times for residential projects with affordable units. The average time between the submission of a complete application and the completion of entitlements is approximately 4.5 months. The average time between submission of an application and the granting of building permits is approximately a year and a half; while out of the City’s control, the average time between a project receiving entitlements and submitting for building permits is approximately 16 months. It takes an average of a year for projects to receive Certificates of Occupancy. The review process timeframe is not considered a constraint to development, especially when considering that the above does not take into account the amount of time it takes for an applicant to respond to an incomplete determination, nor does it take into account the amount of time it takes an applicant to prepare detailed working drawings for the building permit submittal.

22.523
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-11
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Further evidence that the City’s review and permitting process is not a constraint on development is the large development interest and number of projects proposed throughout the entire community. Market-rate and affordable housing developers alike have shown great interest in developing in Santa Cruz and working with the City to create projects that address the needs of the community.

22.524
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-12
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-4: Review Process Timeframe Trends (2018-2022)
Project Units Application
Submitted
Entitlement
Complete
Building
Permits
Certificate of
Occupancy Review Time Affordability
Completed Entitlement
335 Golf Club Dr 10 5/1/2018 7/18/18 - - 2.5 months  1 deed-restricted L 190 West Cliff Dr 89 4/7/19 10/22/19 - - 6 months  8 deed-restricted VL  2 deed-restricted L
111 Errett Cir 16 2/12/20 5/12/20 - - 3 months  2 deed-restricted L 916 Seabright Ave 9 4/2/2020 9/22/20 - - 5.5 months  1 deed-restricted L 508 Front St 175 7/19/2019 1/12/21 - - 18 months  15 deed-restricted VL  5 deed-restricted L
902 Pacific Ave 95 5/6/21 6/2/21 - - 1 month
 56 deed-restricted VL
(27 extremely low)
 37 deed-restricted L
727 Hanover St 11 6/22/21 7/7/21 - - 2 weeks  2 deed-restricted L 831 Water St 140 8/17/21 12/16/21 - - 4 months  55 deed-restricted L 130 Center St 233 9/14/21 1/25/22 - - 4 months  35 deed-restricted VL 415 Natural
Bridges Dr 20 12/15/21 4/26/22 - - 4 months  20 deed-restricted VL 314 Jessie St 50 11/15/21 1/2½/22 - - 6 weeks  48 deed-restricted VL Average Review Time 4.5 months
Building Permits Granted
801 River St 7 9/16/19 11/6/19 1/27/21 - 27 months  1 deed-restricted L 100 Laurel St 205 10/26/18 12/11/18 5/18/21 - 31 months  Market-rate only 448 May Ave 4 5/22/20 6/23/20 7/8/21 - 19 months  Market-rate only 532 Center St 65 N/A 5/12/22 8/24/22 - 3 months*  16 deed-restricted VL  48 deed-restricted L
818 Pacific Ave 70 11/13/20 12/2/20 6/28/22 - 19 months  59 deed-restricted VL  10 deed-restricted L
202 Frederick St 7 4/11/22 N/A 7/21/22 - 3 months  1 deed-restricted L  2 L
Average Review Time 17 months
Certificates of Occupancy Granted
555 Pacific Ave 94 N/A N/A N/A 4/26/18 N/A  14 deed-restricted M 630 Water St 20 N/A N/A 1/18/18 1/7/20 24 months*
 11 deed-restricted L
 6 L
 2 M
708 Water St 41 N/A N/A 4/9/18 4/23/20 24 months*  11 deed-restricted VL  29 deed-restricted L
1547 Pacific Ave 79 N/A N/A 8/3/20 Approx. 3 yrs.  12 deed-restricted L 711 Pacific Ave 7 N/A N/A 8/13/19 9/21/20 19 months  7 L 350 Ocean St 63 N/A N/A 4/22/19 2/16/22 34 months*  62 deed-restricted VL Average Review Time 27.4 months
Notes:

VL – Very Low-Income
L – Low-Income
M – Moderate-Income
*Based on earliest available date

22.525
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-13
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
C.Pipeline Projects

1. City of Santa Cruz
“Projects in the pipeline” are defined as projects that have applied for entitlements, have recently received Planning approval, and/or have submitted for Building permits that have not yet been approved and issued. As shown in Table G-5 and Figure G-2, there are currently 51 projects in the pipeline that will provide additional residential units that will contribute towards meeting the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA requirements. These projects range from single-family to large large-scale mixed-use developments with multi-family units. Many of these projects include affordable units as a component of the development, through deed restrictions as a result of the Inclusionary Ordinance, and/or as part of a density bonus application. Projects listed as “Applied” are currently going Planning review to ensure compliance with the City’s Zoning Code and projects listed as “Entitled” are either currently working with the Building Department to receive building permits or they have just recently received entitlements and will be submitting building plans shortly.

Pipeline projects generally move forward quickly without obstacles, except for rare occasions. For entitlements that have been approved during approximately the past six years, only two projects have had their entitlements expire, and one those resubmitted with more proposed units due to the City’s newly adopted flexible density units ordinance. Projects listed below do not have any known barriers or phasing requirements, and they should thus move forward without delays.

Table G-5: Pipeline Projects
Address
Net
Dwelling
Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Affordability Status (as of July 2023)
1800 Soquel 84 7 6 71 Lower Applied
515 Soquel 43 7 0 36 Lower Applied
908 Ocean 377 55 0 322 Lower Applied
915 Water 104 14 0 91 Lower Entitled
119 Lincoln 124 123 0 1 Lower Entitled
902 Third 32 12 0 20 Lower Applied
1013 Pacific 17 2 0 15 Lower Entitled, Applied for
building permit
1024 Soquel 12 1 0 11 Lower Entitled
109 S Rapetta 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
111 Errett 12 0 2 10 Above
Moderate
Entitled, project seeking
funding for building
permit stage
1129 Soquel 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled
1133 East Cliff 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Entitled, applied for
building permit
118 Ortalon 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Entitled
119 Coral 121 120 0 1 Lower Entitled, Applied for
building permit

22.526
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-14
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-5: Pipeline Projects
Address
Net
Dwelling
Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Affordability Status (as of July 2023)
122 Benito 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
126 Eucalyptus 13 2 0 11 Lower Entitled, in CEQA
litigation
130 Center 233 35 0 198 Lower Entitled, Applied for
building permit
135 Gharkey 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Applied
137 Pryce 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Applied
140 Fairland 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled
1459 High 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled
150 Felker 32 4 0 28 Very Low Entitled, Applied for
modification to add 3
additional units
1811 Mission St 25 4 0 23 Lower Entitled
190 West Cliff 89 10 0 79 Lower Entitled, approved by
Coastal Commission
1930 Ocean
Street Ext
32 5 0 27 Above
Moderate
Entitled
2035 N Pacific 26 5 0 21 Lower Applied
300 Ingalls Alley 161 24 0 137 Lower Applied
218 Seabright 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
247 High 7 1 0 6 Above
Moderate
Applied
352 Market 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Applied
415 Natural
Bridges
20 20 0 0 Lower Under construction
446 La Fonda 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled
501 Cedar 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
530 Front 276 37 0 239 Lower Entitled, Applied for
building permit
600 Encinal 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled
719 Darwin 6 1 0 5 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
726 San Juan 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled
831 Water St 140 0 55 85 Lower SB35 ministerial review
approved, project seeking

22.527
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-15
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-5: Pipeline Projects
Address
Net
Dwelling
Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Affordability Status (as of July 2023)
funding for building
permit stage
900 High 40 9 0 31 Above
Moderate
Applied
902 Pacific 127 125 0 2 Lower Applied
912 Western 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Entitled, Applied for
building permit
916 Seabright 9 1 0 8 Above
Moderate
Entitled
1130 Mission St 59 8 0 51 Lower Applied
162 Hagemann
Ave
7 1 0 6 Above
Moderate
Applied
903 Cedar 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Applied
101 Felix 80 14 2 0 Lower Applied
624 Isbel 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Entitled
415 Linden 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled
409 Linden 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled
135 Vista
Branciforte
1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Entitled
716 Monterey 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Entitled

2. University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC)
In addition to projects currently in the City’s review pipeline as shown in Table G-5, the University of California Board of Regents have granted project approval and financing of approximately $146 million for the development of the on-campus 3,000-bed Student Housing West (SHW) Project.

The March 16, 2023, UCSC Regents meeting described the housing project in detail and is the basis for the City’s unit and affordability calculations. There are two phases to the SHW Project with different types of housing in each. More detail on these two phases and the types of units they will produce is provided below:
 Hager Development: 140 two-bedroom apartments for students with families and a childcare center. Construction is set to begin in early 2024, with families moving into the units as early as fall 2025. In 2025-2026 projected costs, each unit would cost renters approximately $28,800. The 2022 Area Median Income (AMI) for a two-person household is currently $114,500; housing costs would need to be set below $34,350 to be considered Below Market Rate (BMR). Assuming that the AMI will increase by 2025, the projected annual cost of $28,800 would be considered BMR. As such, rental costs may be affordable to very low- and low-income households. Following input from the community and given

22.528
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-16
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
the estimated cost projections, the City is considering all 140 units towards meeting the moderate-income RHNA category, instead of the lower income RHNA category.  Heller Development: Six new buildings that will provide housing for about 2,700 undergraduate students and 220 graduate students. These buildings will include approximately 780 apartment-style undergraduate units and approximately 165 units for graduate student housing – resulting in about 945 new housing units. This phase is anticipated to be completed in fall 2028. The University anticipates approximately half of the undergraduate units to be BMR; however, rental costs are calculated on a per-bed basis, and thus the total unit cost may increase to market rate. Feedback from UCSC students and stakeholders included reports of students seeking more affordable, shared housing off-campus instead of on-campus undergraduate housing. Additionally, it is not certain at this time that these apartment-style undergraduate units would meet the State’s current definition of a unit for Housing Element purposes. Given these factors, the 780 undergraduate units have not been included in the inventory of sites. The 165 graduate apartment units would cost renters $20,916 annually and are considered BMR. However, the census definition of a unit reduces the number of countable graduate units to just apartment units for couples and families, resulting in a final 102 graduate family units.

Similar to the Hagar Development, these graduate units may include rates affordable to lower income households once constructed, but for the purposes of this Housing Element they are being considered at the moderate-income category.

A total of 242 moderate-income units are counted towards RHNA as a result of these two UCSC projects. The City will continue to track the development of the SHW Project and engage the UCSC campus to provide for the needs of students on- and off-campus. As noted in Appendix C, the City has an estimated 20,635 total students enrolled in undergraduate and graduate programs.

22.529
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-17
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-2: Pipeline Projects

22.530
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-18
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
D.Projected Housing

1. Accessory Dwelling Units
Throughout the 5th Cycle, the City of Santa Cruz has been an award-winning leader in promoting and permitting the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior ADUs (JADUs) in the City. This includes efforts to incentivize ADUs, waiving permitting fees for deed-restricted lowincome units, legalizing unpermitted units, and a streamlined review process. These efforts, in addition to State mandates, are anticipated to further increase ADU production.

HCD has supported a strategy for estimating future development of ADUs based on the average number of ADUs from past performance (2018 to 2023). As shown in Table G-6, the City has over tripled ADU production between 2018 and 2023. Based on this past performance, it is anticipated an additional 584 ADUs can be accommodated during the 2023-2031 planning period.

Table G-6: Past Performance and Projection of ADU Development Year ADU Permitted and Projected
2018 35
2019 46
2020 67
2021 80
2022 99
2023 119*
Annual Projection 73 ADUs per year
2024 73
2025 73
2026 73
2027 73
2028 73
2029 73
2030 73
2031 73
Projection Period Total 584
* Based on the number of applications submitted and reported in the 2022 APR.

Affordability Assumptions
The City assumed a percentage of ADUs will be affordable based on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA Technical Memo, which consists of the following steps:

1. Calculate maximum rent limits for RHNA income categories for one-person and two person households by county.

2. Survey rents for ADUs in the ABAG region.

3. Use survey data to determine proportion of ADUs within each income category.

4. Create assumptions of how many persons will occupy each ADU, finalize proportions.

Using ABAG’s method, and an added conservative factor of ten percent for lower income units, Table G-7 shows estimated ADU projections for Santa Cruz by income category.

22.531
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-19
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Table G-7: ADU Projections by Income Category
Income Category Percentage Units
Low- and Very Low-Income 50% 292 units
Moderate-Income 40% 234 units
Above Moderate-Income 10% 58 units
Total 584 units
The City has performed informal, voluntary surveys of rental pricing for ADUs annually for the past three years. These surveys have indicated that a significant percentage of ADUs are provided at no or low cost to family members or friends and that in general, the majority of ADUs are rented at low-income rents or below. For the 2022 survey, 89 percent of respondents who provided rental cost data were charging at or below the low income rent for their units.

2. Vacant Residential Land
The City has an estimated 15 parcels that are currently vacant and residentially zoned. These parcels have a density range from five to 152 dwelling units per acre. Conservatively, a redevelopment capacity of 80 percent was applied to each of the sites; however, given the development trends described in this Appendix, it is possible that actual capacity could be greater.

Affordability assumptions include 25 percent of potential units for lower income units and 20 percent for moderate income units.

22.532
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-20
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-3: Vacant Residential Land

22.533
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-21
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update

3. Infill Opportunity Areas
As part of the sites inventory analysis, the City has identified a number of “Opportunity Areas” to accommodate additional units based on existing zoning. This includes permitted residential redevelopment in the areas listed in Table G-8. The table provides a summary of the residential unit and affordability capacity for each Opportunity Area category.

Table G-8: Infill Opportunity Areas
Site Areas Buildable
Acreage
Assumed
Density
Realistic
Capacity
Net Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Total
Units
Transportation
Corridors 13.97 Varies 80% 25% 196 units
20%
109 units
55%
483 units 788
Downtown and River
Street 4.46 Varies 80% 25% 139 units
20%
52 units
55%
227 units 418
Church Properties 14.59 10/ 20 50% 75%
32 units
20%
26 units
5%
76 units 134
Other Sites 7.95 30/ 5 100%/
30%
25%
270 units
20%
32 units
55%
8 units 310
TOTAL 59.34 - - 637 219 794 1,650
Transportation Corridor Opportunity Sites
In 2022, the City Council approved the “Objective Development Standards for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Housing” project that, among other things, created six new Mixed-Use Zoning Districts affecting 387 parcels and encourages new and higher-density housing development. These rezonings also created consistency between the 2030 General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance.

These mixed-use areas are in close proximity to commercial uses, community resources, and public transportation; namely, along the Ocean Street, Mission Street, Water Street, and Soquel Avenue corridors.

These corridors were analyzed previously by the City as part of their effort to make the development intensities between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance consistent subsequent to the City’s adoption of the updated General Plan in 2012. The initial effort to correct this discrepancy was known as the Corridors Plan. This work was paused in 2017 and then stopped by the City Council in August of 2019 due to concern over the level of housing intensity included in the adopted General Plan. The City’s adoption of the Objective Development Standards in 2022 created six new mixed-use zoning districts, thereby addressing the development intensity inconsistencies between the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance.

Further review of these corridors was done as part of this Housing Element update to identify additional underutilized properties that have the most potential to redevelop during the 6th Cycle.

These properties were screened based on a number of criteria. First, using assessor’s data from the County of Santa Cruz, commercial, surface parking, and vacant parcels were identified as “underutilized” where the land value exceeded improvement value. Parcels were further screened based have one or more of the following factors; 1) a review of aerial and street view imagery to identify successful business unlikely to be redeveloped in the 6th Cycle, 2) ownership patterns, 3)

22.534
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-22
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
expressed developer interest, 4) recent development trends along each corridor, and 5) City planning staff knowledge.

During the Objective Standards project in 2020, Strategic Economics studied six projects 1 submitted to the City and determined that the average unit size was a gross 860 square feet2. The mix included 33 percent studios, 49 percent one-bedrooms units, 16 percent two-bedroom units, and two percent three-bedroom units. These findings show the typical development standard is 1000 sf per unit gross and that Santa Cruz attracts lower bedroom counts and smaller unit sizes in projects. This assessment has been applied to development areas that use Floor Area Ratios (FAR) to govern intensity of the site. For example, in mixed-use corridors where the most common FAR is 2.75, the density would be approximately 139 dwelling units per acre. The development capacity is assumed at 80 percent to consider any commercial components and potential parking area, as established above.

This realistic capacity of 80 percent also takes into account the potential for 100 percent nonresidential development in infill areas. The City analyzed projects in mixed use zones since 2018.

There was a single 100 percent non-residential project out of eighteen projects (6 percent), a car dealership located at 1605 Soquel Avenue. However, the entitlement for that project has since expired so there have been no exclusively non-residential projects in mixed use infill areas since 2018. The City left 1605 Soquel Avenue off of the Sites Inventory should the property seek another entitlement for the same use. Based on this approach, the 80 percent realistic capacity for infill areas is sufficient to account for non-residential ground floor uses and for potential 100 percent non-residential uses.

Table G-9 identifies about 14 acres with existing capacity to produce 788 additional units. The locations of these sites are shown in Figures G-4 through Figure G-7. The parcels in these corridors predominantly include underutilized sites with older commercial uses such as small store fronts, service-oriented businesses, office buildings, as well as surface parking lots. All non-vacant parcels were screened for property owner/developer interest in redevelopment and/or potential for greater use of aging, un-improved, and underutilized parcels. Existing commercial and office uses are not deemed to cause potential future constraints to redevelopment, and should a mixed-use project be proposed on the site, existing businesses may have the opportunity to remain. A number of surface parking lots were also identified due to shared ownership and lot consolidation potential. Parking spaces lost to redevelopment along the corridors will not require replacement due to AB 2097 (2023), the City’s local ordinance implementing AB 2097, and the availability of on-street parking, transit access, and growing walkability/active transportation improvements.

Furthermore, the City maintains open communication with developers and property owners to discuss opportunities and resources. This allows the City to provide specific technical assistance 1 350 Ocean Street, 418 Pennsylvania Avenue, 908 Ocean Street, 1024 Soquel Avenue, 1800 Soquel Avenue, and 2415 Mission Street
2 Following public comment, the City conducted another analysis of seven additional projects (524, 532, 538 Center Street; 130 Center Street; 150 Felker Street; 119 Coral Street; 530 Front Street; Pacific Front Laurel; 247 High Street) and found the average unit size was 826 gross square feet. As such, the conservative assumption of a larger 860 square feet remains appropriate.

22.535
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-23
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
and facilitate development which ultimately serves the greater vision for Santa Cruz. For example, developers recently inquired about acquisition of two adjacent parcels with separate ownership, collectively totaling two-thirds of an acre, with existing medical office, general office, service, and surface parking uses. Neither site is currently listed on the 6th Cycle Sites Inventory. The developer indicated that they were going to put down a deposit on the purchase of the sites based on City staff provided feedback as to the mixed-use development potential with upper floor residential.

This demonstrates the assistance staff provides in facilitating housing development, even outside of formal application or pre-application processes, and it demonstrates the viability of mixed-use redevelopment, even when active uses are present on commercial sites and even in the highinterest rate environment that has arisen over the past year.

Additionally, the City has at least two recently-approved, pending, or forthcoming entitlement applications on each of the corridors listed in Table G-9. All but one of those entitlement sites has existing development (one was vacant), and all but one of the built sites have active uses – mostly existing commercial but one with two existing single-family homes. The site with vacant businesses recently had active businesses that vacated prior to sale for development. A sampling of the sites with recent or pending entitlements is noted when each corridor is separately discussed following Table G-9. However, additional development inquiries are regularly received for mixed-use development with upper-floor residential uses, both for sites listed on the 6th Cycle Sites Inventory and for sites that are not listed. The recent development interest, including in situations where existing businesses are leasing sites, shows that existing uses along the corridors are not acting as impediments to redevelopment. The recent development interest is partially due to the rezonings that occurred along those corridors that clarify and advertise the additional development capacity that was already allowed by the sites’ respective General Plan designations.

Table G-9: Corridor Opportunity Sites
Corridors Buildable
Acreage FAR Assumed Density*
Realistic
Capacity
Net Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Mission Street 6.32 1.75 89 80% 48 36 219 303
Ocean Street 2.73 1.75 89 80% 96 32 106 234
Soquel Avenue 3.59 2.75 139 80% 40 32 120 192
Water Street 1.33 2.75 139 80% 12 9 38 59
TOTAL 13.97 Varies 100% 196 109 483 788

22.536
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-24
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Mission Street Corridor
The Mission Street Corridor is the primary arterial corridor on the “West Side.” This corridor supports a high level of traffic as the primary access north up the Pacific Coast (Highway 1), the UCSC campus, and a number of residential neighborhoods. A number of high density residential and mixed-use developments have been proposed along and near Mission Street over the past several years. These include:
 1130 Mission Street: This SB 330 pre-application review consists of the demolition of two existing commercial buildings on two parcels zoned C-C for the construction of 2,627 square feet of commercial space with 59 SROs above. The project would include a request for density bonus waivers to exceed building height, setbacks, and FAR, increasing from a base density of 40 units to a total of 59 units.
 1811 and 1815 Mission Street: The project includes the demolition of two single-family units for the construction of a three-story, 27 SRO development with ground floor commercial on two parcels in the C-C zoning district.

The City has identified 6.32 acres along the Mission Street Corridor with the potential to accommodate 303 new residential units.

22.537
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-25
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-4: Mission Street In-Fill Opportunity Sites

22.538
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-26
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Ocean Street Corridor
Ocean Street is a primary north-south arterial and is the primary access route for visitors arriving from Highway 17, particularly in the summer months. This corridor is characterized by a mix of commercial uses that includes hotels and motels, restaurants, convenience services, and gas stations. The Santa Cruz County Government Center which includes government services and the County courthouse, is located on Ocean Street.

In 2014, the City adopted the Ocean Street Area Plan. The Plan seeks to revitalize the Ocean Street corridor as a vibrant gateway to Santa Cruz and includes policy guidance, development standards and design guidelines to realize this goal.

The Ocean Street Plan has helped stimulate economic and real estate development over the past ten years which is expected to continue into the future. Significant planned projects include:
 350 Ocean Street: This project was recently completed and included the demolition of existing commercial uses and construction of a mixed-use development comprised of ground floor commercial space and 63 affordable housing units. The project received a density bonus to increase the base density from 30 dwelling units per acre to 43.75 dwelling units per acre.
 908 Ocean Street: This pending project proposes the demolition of commercial and residential buildings (12 units), the combination of 20 parcels, and the construction of a mixed-use development with 378 units and 7,430 square feet of commercial space. The project would include a request for a density bonus from a base density of 273 units.  701 Ocean Street: This site is located on a portion of the County of Santa Cruz Government Center. This is based on the County’s Long Range Facilities Plan (2020) which recommends excising 4.5 acres for private development along the Ocean Street frontage as part of a large site redevelopment plan.

The City has identified 2.73 acres along the Ocean Street Corridor with the potential to accommodate 234 new residential units.

22.539
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-27
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-5: Ocean Street In-Fill Opportunity Sites

22.540
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-28
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Soquel Avenue Corridor
The Soquel Avenue Corridor is an important east-west arterial corridor that is predominantly made of up single-story commercial buildings and some multi-story mixed- uses. This corridor has experienced significant redevelopment interest over the past few years. Recent significant project applications include:
 515 Soquel Avenue: This project proposes to demolish the existing structures and construct three new buildings, including a five-story, mixed-use building; a five-story residential building; and a three-story residential building consisting of 43 residential units and 1,166 square feet of commercial space.
 1129 Soquel Avenue: This approved project proposes to construct a 5,420 square feet mixed-use building with two apartment units.
 1800 Soquel Avenue: This project proposes to construct a four-story mixed-use project consisting of 1,497 square feet of ground level commercial space, and 84 residential units.

The City has identified 3.59 acres along the Soquel Avenue Corridor with the potential to accommodate 192 new residential units.

22.541
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-29
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-6: Soquel Avenue In-Fill Opportunity Sites

22.542
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-30
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Water Street Corridor
Water Street is another east-west corridor that extends from Ocean Street to Soquel Avenue.

Predominant land uses include one-story commercial. There are a number of used car lots and some vacant parcels. Recent significant project applications include:
 915 Water Street: This recently approved project proposes the demolition of existing commercial and residential buildings and the construction of a four-story, 74,290 square feet, mixed-use building with 1,079 square feet of commercial space and 105 SROs. The project includes a request for a 50 percent Density Bonus to allow for 50 density bonus units (105 total) and incentives/concessions and waivers to FAR, Height, and Setbacks, in exchange for providing 14 very low-income units.
 831 Water Street: This recently approved SB 35 project consists of a mixed-use building with 140 residential units and 4,336 square feet of ground floor commercial space. Two units will be set aside as Manager Units. Of the remaining 138 units, 50 percent (69 units) will be deed-restricted affordable units with rents formulated to qualify for those earning 80 percent or less of Area Median Income (AMI).

The City has identified 1.33 acres along the Water Street Corridor with the potential to accommodate 59 new residential units.

22.543
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-31
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-7: Water Street In-Fill Opportunity Sites

22.544
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-32
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Downtown and River Street Opportunity Sites
Additional underutilized sites have been identified in the downtown area and on River Street to the north. These sites can be characterized as aging commercial uses where the land value is greater than the improvements and therefore have a greater likelihood of being developed in the near future. Some of these sites are also included due to past development activity, ownership patterns, and expressed owner/developer interest. A number of these parcels could be consolidated to allow for more economically viable residential and mixed-use development projects.

Furthermore, the five downtown sites shown in Table G-3 demonstrate the development interest in downtown, including on sites with existing, active uses. Additional entitlements have been granted downtown that are not shown in Table G-3, and development interest has been shown on properties in downtown and along River Street, including on sites not included in the 6th Cycle Sites Inventory. As of November 2023, a new, formal application for a 100-percent affordable project with 51 housing units on a one-quarter-acre River Street site that was recently occupied by the Outdoor World retailer has also been received. That particular site is shown on the 6th Cycle Sites Inventory. This activity further demonstrates the development interest in this area.

Table G-8 identifies a future capacity on these about 4.46 acres of underutilized parcels as detailed below:
 Downtown Sites: Assumed density of 121, 141 or 202 dwelling units per acre, depending on the site, with a development capacity of 80 percent. The 2020 amended Downtown Plan allows for upper floor residential developments with up to 60 units as principally permitted uses. Development history and interest in the downtown area shows a strong interest in residential development over other uses such as commercial. As such, the development capacity of 80 percent was deemed appropriate.  River Street Sites: Assumed density of 111 dwelling units per acre with a density capacity of 80 percent.

The locations of these sites are shown in Figure G-8 and Figure G-9.

22.545
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-33
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-8: Downtown In-Fill Opportunity Sites

22.546
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-34
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-9: River Street In-fill Opportunity Sites

22.547
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-35
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Church Properties Opportunity Sites
Throughout the State, there has been increased interest in the redevelopment of religious institutions to include affordable housing units, primarily on underutilized open space and uncovered parking lots. Religious institutions in close proximity to single-family neighborhoods have zoning that allows residential uses at lower densities. Recent examples in the City where residential development has occurred on church properties include:
 Calvary Episcopal Church (530 Center Street): Currently under construction (March 2023), the Calvary Episcopal Church is transforming of the surface parking lot adjacent to the Church into a mixed-use development with 65 dwelling units and 3,400 square feet ground-floor retail and leasing space. The project includes 16 very low-income units, 48 low-income units, with one manager’s unit considered to be above moderate.  111 Errett Circle: Identified as a Pipeline project, the project was approved with two alternative designs to subdivide a 1.62 acre property zoned R-1 into either 1) 12 singlefamily lots or 2) ten single-family parcels and six condominium units. The application includes demolition of the existing church. The applicant has submitted a Final Map application that reflects the 12 single-family lot option.  900 High Street: Identified as a Pipeline project, the project proposes to divide the church parcel, currently zoned R-1-10, into two separate lots to construct a 40-unit (4 low- and 5 very low-income units), four-story apartment building. The application includes a Density Bonus request with requested concessions related to building height and number of stories.

As shown in Figure G-10, the City has conservatively identified four church properties with the potential to accommodate 134 units through existing zoning. The income category breakdown of these units is shown in Table G-8. The development capacity is limited to 50 percent of the total property area to account for the existing primary religious and parking uses.

The City recognizes that the exact parcels identified may or may not be developed, but has made a reasonable assumption that, consistent with past trends, over the next 8-year 6th Cycle, some additional church properties will be developed with affordable housing units.

22.548
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-36
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-10: Church Properties Opportunity Sites

22.549
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-37
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Other In-fill Opportunity Sites
In addition to the seven opportunity areas listed above, the City has identified a number of other sites throughout the City with property owner and/or developer interest for residential development. As shown in Table G-10, these sites include 890 River Street and 313 Swift Street.

The locations of these Other In-fill Opportunity Sites are shown on Figure G-11.

Table G-10: Other In-fill Opportunity Sites
Areas Buildable
Acreage
Assumed
Density
Realistic
Capacity
Net Units
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Total
890 River St. 3.87 30 100% 270 30 0 300
313 Swift St. 4.08 5 30% 0 2 8 10
TOTAL 7.95 30/ 5 100%/ 30% 270 32 8 310

22.550
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-38
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-11: Other In-fill Opportunity Sites

22.551
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-39
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update

4. South of Laurel Area
As shown in Figure G-12, the South of Laurel Area (SOLA) includes several sites south of Laurel Street adjacent to Downtown Santa Cruz. For the purposes of the Housing Element, sites have been selected based on existing capacity and development potential.

In addition, a Downtown Plan Expansion Project is currently underway to expand the existing Downtown Plan into this area and that project will include:
 Additional affordable and market-rate housing in the downtown  Public amenities including parks, public plazas, and pedestrian improvements  Improved connection to the San Lorenzo River and Beach area  New economic opportunities for local businesses and employees  Coordination with the Santa Cruz Warriors to construct a new permanent arena The SOLA District currently contains a mix of commercial and residential land uses and is generally underdeveloped. Existing uses include: the temporary Kaiser Permanente Arena, various commercial retail uses including restaurants and bars, multi-family housing, and visitor-serving motels and hotels. The City is partnering with the Santa Cruz Warriors, property owners, and the community in the development of the Plan, which is scheduled for adoption by June of 2024.

As currently envisioned, the Downtown Plan Expansion Project would rezone the SOLA District to allow for the creation of 1,200 new affordable and market-rate units. Additional affordable and market-rate units will be added through density bonuses and the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance, providing a potential of approximately 1,600 total units. City Council direction is to provide 20 percent of the total 1,600 units as affordable.

For the purpose of the Housing Element, only the existing capacities of sites in the South of Laurel Area are accounted for. This existing capacity includes 582 total units with units affordable at all income levels. Once the Downtown Plan Expansion project is finalized and adopted, capacity for residential units will increase. Past performance shows that the City has already had great success in facilitating high density and affordable housing developments in the area; the Downtown Expansion Plan project will continue to further this effort in combination with new commercial resources, employment opportunities, and placemaking for community building.

22.552
Appendix G: Housing Sites Inventory G-40
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Figure G-12: South of Laurel Area

22.553
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
001-133-34 574 High St Mapstead Lars &
Marin A Trustees
0 YES 1.74 5TH R15 L 10 13 13 0 2 11 Moderate Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. - 001-141-03 Alexander Walter F
Jr & Janet K Trustees
Etal
0 YES 0.68 5TH R15 L 10 5 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
002-312-22 625 Meder St 0 YES 1.46 - RS1A VL 1 1 1 0 0 1 Above Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
002-591-28 175 Westview
Ct
Westview Terrace Llc
Etal
1 YES 0.16 - RL LM 27 3 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
002-593-07 190 Westview
Ct
Jacobs William H/W
Etal Jt
0 YES 0.31 5TH RL LM 27 6 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
003-052-08 850 Almar Ave Rittenhouse Louis
Emmet Etal
0 YES 0.16 5TH RL MXMD 27 3 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
003-052-09 Rittenhouse Louis
Emmet Etal
0 YES 0.15 5TH RL MXMD 27 3 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
003-052-10 840 Almar Ave
Meter
Rittenhouse Louis
Emmet Etal
0 YES 0.71 5TH RL MXMD 27 15 15 3 3 9 Lower Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. - 007-023-31 Ocean Pacific Lodge
Inc
0 YES 0.23 5TH RL LM 27 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
001-121-07 206 Mora St Saffarian Shadi
Rosemary
0 YES 0.19 5TH RM M 10 1 1 0 0 1 Above
Moderate
Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. -
002-012-39 422 Meder St Barbic Hildegard G 1 NO 1.99 - R110 L 10 15 14 0 2 12 Moderate Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. - 001-141-07 434 High St Alexander Walter F
Jr & Janet K Trustees
Etal
0 YES 0.92 5TH R15 L 10 7 7 0 1 6 Moderate Vacant Res. Land Vacant parcel. - 001-022-38 850 High St High Street
Community Church
Of Santa Cruz
0 NO 3.13 - R110 L 10 15 15 3 3 9 Lower Infill - Churches High Street Community Church on High St. Parcel was selected due to its
available parking lot, development
trends, and space to develop.

D
009-051-65 637 Pacheco
Ave
Church Of Christ Of
Santa Cruz The
0 NO 1.49 - R15 L 10 7 7 1 1 5 Lower Infill - Churches Church of Christ of Santa Cruz. Parcel was selected due to its available
parking lot, development trends, and
space to develop.

D
011-081-62 440 Frederick
St
Santa Cruz Bible
Church
0 NO 7.42 - RL LM 27 100 100 25 20 55 Lower Infill - Churches Santa Cruz Bible Church along Arana Gulch Open Space Park, church is
interested in redeveloping a portion of
the parcel for low/very low income
housing.

D
009-282-42 411 Roxas St First Baptist Church
Of Santa Cruz
0 NO 2.55 - R15 L 10 12 12 3 2 7 Lower Infill - Churches Santa Cruz Community Church south of Cabrillo Hwy. Parcel was selected
due to its available parking lot,
development trends, and space to
develop.

D
005-052-26 25 River St Comerica Bank Calif 1 NO 0.65 - CBD RVC 152 79 78 19 15 44 Lower Infill - Downtown Older Comerica Bank site, large parking lot and redevelopment
potential for residential. Site is 32%
improved – the existing use could
remain or the whole site redeveloped.

Parking lost through redevelopment
A and B

22.554
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.
005-052-32 75 River St Associates 1 1 NO 1.12 - CBD RVC 152 136 135 33 27 75 Lower Infill - Downtown Santa Cruz County bank site, large parking lot and redevelopment
potential for residential. A developer
has purchased the parcel and is
inquiring about developing a
residential project with ground-floor
commercial.

A and B
005-144-13 121 Maple St Lissner Properties Inc 3 NO 0.56 - CBD RVC 152 68 65 16 13 36 Lower Infill - Downtown Parcel is considered underutilized.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. The parcel is 49% improved;
the whole site could be redeveloped.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

A
005-153-02 523 FRONT ST SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 YES 0.02 - CBD RVC 152 2 2 0 0 2 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City lot 7 B
005-153-03 521 FRONT ST CITY OF SANTA CRUZ 0 YES 0.02 - CBD RVC 152 2 2 0 0 2 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City Lot 7 B
005-153-28 515 FRONT ST SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 YES 0.14 - CBD RVC 152 17 17 0 0 17 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City Lot 7 B
005-153-29 SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 YES 0.20 - CBD RVC 152 24 24 0 0 24 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City Lot 7 B
005-153-05 511 FRONT ST SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 YES 0.08 - CBD RVC 152 9 9 0 0 9 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City Lot 7 B
005-153-17 505 FRONT ST SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 YES 0.10 - CBD RVC 152 11 11 0 0 11 Above Moderate
Infill - Downtown City Lot 7 B
005-048-13,
005-048-11,
005-048-12
224 Church St SANTA CRUZ CITY OF 0 NO 1.36 - PF CF 55 75 75 75 0 0 Lower Infill – Downtown Existing Library Site Includes APNs 005-048-11 and 005-048-12. City
owned site to be redeveloped with
housing after the new library is
completed. Community outreach has
already taken place and it is
conservatively estimated by the City
that 75 LI units will be in the new
project.

E
002-218-14 2222 Mission
St
Magan Bhupen &
Saroj B
1 NO 0.19 - CC CM 71 13 13 0 0 13 Above
Moderate
Infill – Mission St Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of residential
structure on parcel. Shared ownership
with adjacent parcel (APN 002-218-
22), enabling consolidation. Adjacent
to other vacant and underutilized
parcels. The parcel is 9% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A

22.555
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
002-222-10 1912 Mission
St
Williams Larry &
Christine H/W Cp Rs
0 NO 0.13 - CC CM 40 5 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of
commercial structure on site. The
parcel is 45% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
003-041-08 2403 Mission
St
221 Raymond Street
Llc
0 NO 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-09, 003-041-14 and
003-041-17), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

B
003-041-09 2403 Mission
St
221 Raymond Street
Llc
0 NO 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-08, 003-041-14 and
003-041-17), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

B
003-041-10 - CAROLLO JOSEPH &
SHARON
0 YES 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-11, 003-041-12 and
003-041-15), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

B
003-041-11 - CAROLLO JOSEPH &
SHARON
0 YES 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-10, 003-041-12 and
003-041-15), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

B
003-041-12 - CAROLLO JOSEPH &
SHARON
0 YES 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-10, 003-041-11 and
003-041-15), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

B
003-041-14 2403 Mission
St
221 Raymond Street
Llc
0 NO 0.09 - CC CM 40 3 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parking lot. Adjacent to other parking lots and older retail on block. Shared
B

22.556
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 003-041-08, 003-041-09 and
003-041-17), enabling consolidation.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.
003-041-17 2403 Mission
St
221 Raymond Street
Llc
2 NO 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Older retail building. Adjacent to parking lots and other older retail on
block. Shared ownership with
adjacent parcels (APNs 003-041-08,
003-041-09 and 003-041-14), enabling
consolidation. The parcel is 32%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
003-042-28 2311 Mission
St
Wolfsen Lawrence J
& Diane M Trustees
1 NO 0.19 - CC CM 40 7 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Older commercial building on block with parking lots and other older retail
buildings. Shared ownership with
adjacent parcel (APN 003-042-29),
enabling consolidation. The parcel is
89% improved. Redevelopment would
replace the existing use. Parking lost
through redevelopment will not need
to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
004-043-28 1521 Mission
St
Markasky Evelyn &
Albert Edward
2 NO 0.09 4TH CC MXMD 89 6 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Older commercial building. Rezoned to a new mixed-use zone in 2022 and
adjacent to other parcels that were
recently rezoned mixed-use to allow
for residential use. The parcel is 50%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
004-441-22 1612 Mission
St
Dong Ventures Llc
Etal
8 NO 0.76 4TH CC MXMD 89 53 45 11 9 25 Lower Infill - Mission St. Older Palm Center with existing commercial uses. Adjacent to other
parcels that were recently rezoned to
a new mixed-use in 2022. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 004-441-23 and 004-441-25),
enabling consolidation. The parcel is
61% improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-181-88 311 Laurent St Sawaya Joyce
Trustee
0 NO 0.15 - CC CM 40 6 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Older commercial building. Adjacent to other underutilized parcels and
recently rezoned parcels that allow for
A

22.557
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
residential uses. The parcel is 54%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.
006-193-54 1324 Mission
St
Yurich Richard C &
Melinda V Trustees
2 NO 0.16 - CC CM 40 6 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Adjacent to parking lots and other underutilized parcels on block.

Adjacent to parcels that were recently
rezoned mixed-use to allow for
residential uses. The parcel is 51%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-202-08 1008 Mission
St
De Jonge Marten Jr
Trustee
1 NO 0.14 - PA OF 40 5 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of structure
on parcel. Near other parcels with
potential for infill development. The
parcel is 43% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-202-10 1016 Mission
St
Price Adam
Christopher
1 NO 0.14 - PA OF 40 5 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of structure
on parcel. Near other parcels with
potential for infill development. The
parcel is 13% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-221-13 526 Mission St Cleary Mark D S/M 1 NO 0.10 - PA OF 40 4 3 0 0 3 Above Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Underutilized parcel. Near other
parcels with potential for infill
development. The parcel is 53%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-401-02 501 Mission St Marietti Trust Etal 0 NO 0.60 - PA OF 40 24 24 6 4 14 Lower Infill - Mission St. Older commercial building with large parking lot on parcel. Owner
interested in redeveloping parcel for
residential uses. The parcel is 59%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through A

22.558
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.
006-412-14 715 Mission St Stanek Craig J 1 NO 0.16 - PA OF 40 6 5 0 0 5 Above Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of existing
structure on parcel. The parcel is 21%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-481-18 931 Mission St Neuwald George
Peter
0 NO 0.12 - PA OF 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized.

Near other parcels with potential for
infill development. The parcel is 22%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-491-18 1015 Mission
St
Santa Cruz Dental
Building
1 NO 0.52 - PA OF 40 20 19 4 3 12 Lower Infill - Mission St. Older commercial building with large parking lot on parcel. Near other
parcels with potential for infill
development. The parcel is 77%
improved. Redevelopment would
replace the existing use. Parking lost
through redevelopment will not need
to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
006-493-04 1107 Mission
St
Anderson Rozanne
U/W
1 NO 0.16 - PA OF 40 6 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value exceeds value of existing
structure on parcel. Near other
parcels with potential for infill
development. The parcel is 47%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
002-223-31 2012 Mission
St
Todd Todd & Daintry
Marie Trustees
0 NO 0.23 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 16 16 4 3 9 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parking lot for adjacent office building.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

B
002-223-35 2120 Mission
St
Orlando Giovanna
Trustee Etal
1 NO 0.22 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 15 14 3 2 9 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel. Shared
ownership with vacant adjacent lots,
enabling consolidation. Recently
rezoned to a new mixed-use zone in
2022. The parcel is 32% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
A

22.559
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.
002-235-21 1610 Mission
St
Dong Larry Shung &
Catherine Lau CoTrustees
1 NO 0.11 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 7 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. The parcel is 42%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
004-043-30 1242 Bay St Markasky Albert &
Evelyn
0 NO 0.21 - MU-M MXMD 89 14 14 3 2 9 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
0% improved and includes a portion of
a parking lot for a commercial use.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

A
004-441-23 1701 Mission
St
Dong Ventures Llc
Etal
0 NO 0.28 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 19 19 4 3 12 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022.

Redevelopment would require
replacement of the existing
commercial uses. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
004-441-25 1725 Mission
St
Westside Gas Inc 1 NO 0.27 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 19 18 4 3 11 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parking lot adjacent to underutilized parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. Parking lost
through redevelopment will not need
to be replaced given AB 2097.

B
006-181-33 309 Trescony
St
Goodwill Central
Coast
0 YES 0.07 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 4 4 0 0 4 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized.

Office building has multiple APNs.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. The parcel is 0%
improved and includes a portion of a
parking lot for a commercial use.

Parking lost through redevelopment
will not need to be replaced given AB
2097.

A
006-181-89 1500 Mission
St
Goodwill Central
Coast
1 NO 0.09 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 6 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
A

22.560
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
office building on parcel. Office
building has multiple APNs. Recently
rezoned to a new mixed-use zone in
2022. The parcel is 25% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.
006-192-26 1212 Mission
St
Chang Jun Sheng &
King C H/W Etal All Jt
0 NO 0.23 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 16 16 4 3 9 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parking lot for adjacent underutilized commercial structures. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 006-192-14 and 006-192-24),
enabling consolidation. Recently
rezoned to a new mixed-use zone in
2022. The parcel is 5% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

B
006-493-27 1129 Mission
St
Marietti Gary 0 NO 0.31 4TH MU-M MXMD 89 22 22 5 4 13 Lower Infill - Mission St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Shared ownership with adjacent
parcels (APNs 006-192-12 and 006-
192-14), enabling consolidation.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. The parcel is 27%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
005-282-48 333 Soquel Ave Mcphail Ian 11 NO 1.56 4TH CC MXVC 89 110 99 24 19 56 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Owner interested in redeveloping parcel for residential uses. Large
parking lot on site. Adjacent to Ocean
Inn pipeline project, potential for
spillover development. Site increased
in maximum intensity allowed under
SB 330.

A and B
008-322-43 919 Ocean St Panattoni Cheryl E 0 NO 0.72 4TH MU-OH MXMD 89 51 51 12 10 29 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Parking lot. Shared ownership with adjacent parking lot (APN 008-253-
19). Land use is vacant in parcel
dataset. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
23% improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

B

22.561
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
010-051-31 404 Ocean St A Rkms Investments
Llc
0 NO 0.11 4TH MU-OH MXMD 89 7 7 1 1 5 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. The parcel is 35%
improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
010-051-32 410 Ocean St Battey Barry C A &
Jennifer J Trustee
0 NO 0.09 4TH MU-OH MXMD 89 6 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - Ocean St. Owner interest in redeveloping parcel for residential purposes. Parcel is
currently vacant. Recently rezoned to
a new mixed-use zone in 2022.

B
010-051-37 509 Broadway Mclaughlin Quinn M 1 NO 0.12 4TH MU-OH MXMD 89 8 7 1 1 5 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Shared ownership with adjacent
underutilized parcels (APNs 010-022-
22, 010-022-21 and 010-022-28),
enabling consolidation. Recently
rezoned to a new mixed-use zone in
2022. The parcel is 30% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
010-051-38 515 Broadway Lutter Michael 1 NO 0.13 4TH MU-OH MXMD 89 9 8 2 1 5 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
30% improved. Redevelopment could
occur with the existing use or parcelwide. Parking lost through redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
005-282-42 525 Ocean St 0 NO 0.85 - CC MCVC 65 56 56 56 0 0 Lower Infill - Ocean St. Existing motel with interest in redeveloping.

A
010-022-22 807 Soquel Ave Zuckswert Allan
Peter & Ivette
Survivors Trust A
0 NO 0.15 - CC CM 40 6 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel is in East Santa Cruz and located along Soquel Avenue. The
parcel is zoned for Community
Commercial (C-C). Surrounding zones
include Multiple Residence - Low
Density and Public Facilities. The
parcel is currently used as a parking
lot for a car dealership. This parcel is
adjacent to another candidate site and
can be consolidated into one. The
B

22.562
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
owner of this and adjacent parcels are
the same. The parcel is 6% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.
010-022-21 809 Soquel Ave Zuckswert Ivette F 0 NO 0.15 - CC CM 40 6 6 0 0 6 Above Moderate
Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel is in East Santa Cruz and located along Soquel Avenue. The
parcel is zoned for Community
Commercial (C-C). Surrounding zones
include Multiple Residence - Low
Density and Public Facilities. The
parcel is currently used as a parking
lot for a car dealership. This parcel is
adjacent to another candidate site and
can be consolidated into one. The
owner of this and adjacent parcels are
the same. The parcel is 6% improved.

Redevelopment could occur with the
existing use or parcel-wide. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

B
010-022-28 738 N
Branciforte
Ave
Zuckswert Ivette F 1 NO 0.14 - CC CM 40 5 4 0 0 4 Above Moderate
Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel is in East Santa Cruz and located along N Branciforte Avenue.

The parcel is zoned for Community
Commercial (C-C). Surrounding zones
include Multiple Residence - Low
Density and Public Facilities. The
parcel is currently used as an auto
body shop. This parcel is adjacent to
another candidate site and can be
consolidated into one. The owner of
this and adjacent parcels are the
same. The parcel is 78% improved.

Redevelopment would likely replace
the existing use. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

B
011-025-01 147 S
Morrissey Ave
Oka Betsy Haruye
Trustee Etal
0 NO 0.71 4TH CC MXHD 139 78 78 19 15 44 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel is in East Santa Cruz and located along Soquel Avenue. The
parcel is zoned Mixed Used High
Density. Surrounding zones include
Community Commercial and Multiple
Residence - Medium Density. The
current parcel is used for a variety of
commercial stores and a parking lot.

Site increased in maximum intensity
allowed under SB 330. The owner
expressed interest to include this
parcel as a candidate site.

A

22.563
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
009-233-17 114 Stanford
Ave
Green Valley Corp 0 YES 0.11 - CC CM 40 4 4 0 0 4 Above Moderate
Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel is currently used as a parking lot for an auto repair shop.

The parcel is zoned for community
commercial. Surrounding zones
include Public Facilities and Mixed Use
High Density. The owner expressed
interest to include this parcel as a
candidate site. Shared ownership with
adjacent parcels (APNs 009-233-14,
009-233-15, 009-233-16, and 009-233-
17), enabling consolidation.

B
009-381-73 1815 Soquel
Ave
Santa Cruz Barrios
Unidos Inc
0 NO 1.07 - R15 L 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. This parcel was included because the owner expressed interest. The parcel
is currently used for commercial
purposes.

A
005-541-05 111 Dakota
Ave Cmn
Owners Of Ca Of Pm
38-7
0 NO 0.25 4TH MU-VH MXVC 139 27 27 6 5 16 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing commercial
use. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

A
010-012-07 613 Soquel Ave Rittenhouse Building
And Investment Ass
0 YES 0.17 4TH /
5TH
MU-H MXHD 71 12 12 3 2 7 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parking lot. Shared ownership with adjacent parking lot (APN 008-253-
17). Land use is vacant in parcel
dataset. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022.

B
010-022-23 725 Soquel Ave Zuckswert Ivette F 0 NO 0.36 4TH MU-H MXHD 71 25 25 6 5 14 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Recently rezoned to a new mixed-use
zone in 2022. The parcel is 35%
improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
010-062-10 712 Soquel Ave Ghielmetti Franca M
Trustee
2 NO 0.12 4TH MU-H MXHD 71 8 6 1 1 4 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
35% improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
010-062-17 710 Soquel Ave Boumis Spilios &
Vicki
0 YES 0.15 4TH /
5TH
MU-H MXHD 71 10 10 2 2 6 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
A

22.564
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022.

Redevelopment would likely replace
the existing use. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.
010-081-31 1130 Soquel
Ave
Dunton Dan 0 NO 0.21 4TH MU-H MXHD 71 14 14 3 2 9 Lower Infill - Soquel Ave. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
38% improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
009-233-15 1009 Water St Green Valley Corp 0 YES 0.17 - CC CM 40 6 6 0 0 6 Above Moderate
Infill - Water St. This parcel is currently used as a
parking lot for an auto repair shop.

The parcel is zoned for community
commercial. Surrounding zones
include Public Facilities and Mixed Use
High Density. Shared ownership with
adjacent parcels (APNs 009-233-14,
009-233-15, 009-233-16, and 009-233-
17), enabling consolidation.

B
009-233-16 110 Stanford
Ave
Green Valley Corp 1 NO 0.10 - CC CM 40 4 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Infill - Water St. There is existing retail building on this parcel. Shared ownership with
adjacent parcels (APNs 009-233-14,
009-233-15, 009-233-16, and 009-233-
17), enabling consolidation. Parcel is
considered underutilized; land value
of parcel exceeds value of commercial
structure on parcel. The parcel is 36%
improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
009-242-26 1215 Water St Canepa Bruce S/M 0 NO 0.74 - CC CM 40 29 29 7 5 17 Lower Infill - Water St. The parcel is currently used for automotive uses. The owner
expressed interest to include this
parcel to be part of the candidate
sites. The parcel is considered
underutilized, land value of parcel
exceeds value of commercial structure
on parcel.

A
009-253-10 1305 Water St Gibson Jeannine
Marie Trustee
1 NO 0.32 4TH MU-H MXHD 71 22 21 5 4 12 Lower Infill - Water St. Parcel is considered underutilized; land value of parcel exceeds value of
commercial structure on parcel.

A

22.565
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.

Adjacent to other underutilized
parcels. Recently rezoned to a new
mixed-use zone in 2022. The parcel is
47% improved. Redevelopment would
likely replace the existing use. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.
008-311-14 218 River St Qi Mike Yun & Jenny
Mazhenlu
1 NO 0.10 - CT CM 40 3 2 0 0 2 Above
Moderate
Infill - River St. This parcel has an existing multiple family residential unit. The parcel is
zoned Thoroughfare Commercial.

Surrounding zones include Community
Commercial, Multiple Residence -
Medium Density, Public Facility, Single
Family Residence, and Central
Business District. The residential unit
was built in 1910 and is in need of
major rehabilitation. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 008-311-14, 008-311-15, and
008-311-29), enabling consolidation.

The parcel is considered underutilized,
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel.

Improvement value is 13% and
redevelopment would likely replace
the existing structure.

C
008-311-15 222 River St Qi Mike Yun & Jenny
Mazhenlu
1 NO 0.14 - CT CM 40 4 3 0 0 3 Above
Moderate
Infill - River St. This parcel has an existing multiple family residential unit. The parcel is
zoned Thoroughfare Commercial.

Surrounding zones include Community
Commercial, Multiple Residence -
Medium Density, Public Facility, Single
Family Residence, and Central
Business District. The residential unit
was built in 1900 and is in need of
major rehabilitation. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 008-311-14, 008-311-15, and
008-311-29), enabling consolidation.

The parcel is considered underutilized,
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel.

Improvement value is 24% and
redevelopment would likely replace
the existing structure.

C
008-311-29 228 River St Qi Mike Yun & Jenny
Mazhenlu
0 NO 0.21 - CT CM 40 6 6 0 0 6 Above
Moderate
Infill - River St. This parcel has an existing multiple family residential unit. The parcel is
zoned Thoroughfare Commercial.

Surrounding zones include Community
Commercial, Multiple Residence -
C

22.566
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.

Medium Density, Public Facility, Single
Family Residence, and Central
Business District. The residential unit
was built in 1900 and is in need of
major rehabilitation. Shared
ownership with adjacent parcels
(APNs 008-311-14, 008-311-15, and
008-311-29), enabling consolidation.

The parcel is considered underutilized,
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel.

Improvement value is 4% and
redevelopment would likely replace
the existing structure.
008-311-07 136 River St Thomas Bobby
James & Elizabeth
June Trustees
0 NO 0.18 - CC CM 40 5 5 0 0 5 Above
Moderate
Infill - River St. Outdoor World Site. The interested
developer owns adjacent affordable
housing project. The City has loaned
money to the developer to facilitate
land purchase for future housing
development. They have submitted
plans but have not yet paid for the
Design Permit.

A
008-311-06 Thomas Bobby
James & Elizabeth
June Trustees
0 NO 0.06 - CC CM 40 1 1 0 0 1 Lower Infill - River St. Outdoor World Site. The interested developer owns adjacent affordable
housing project. The City has loaned
money to the developer to facilitate
land purchase for future housing
development. They have submitted
plans but have not yet paid for the
Design Permit.

A
008-661-11 890 River St Santa Cruz City Of
Etal
0 NO 3.87 - IG IND 30 300 300 270 30 0 Lower Infill - Other Sites Other associated parcels: 008-172-18, 008-163-07, 008-163-06, 008-172-08,
008-172-16, 008-172-19, 007-422-09.

Existing industrially-zoned parcel with
development interest. Zoned for
industrial but allows for residential
development at 30 dwelling units per
acre. City owns part of the property
and the Economic Development has
had discussions with Caltrans on
developing the site, all affordable. A
conservative estimate for the number
of units on the site is 300 with an
overall average of 60% AMI so we can
use a breakdown of 90% Lower (270)
and 10% Mod (30) for the 300 units.

A
003-161-32 313 Swift St Santa Cruz City
School District
0 YES 4.08 - PF CF 5 10 10 0 2 8 Moderate Infill - Other Sites Parcel owned by the Santa Cruz City School District. School district is
interested in redeveloping the existing
building on-site to support housing.

E

22.567
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
007-031-04 201 Front St 421 E 18 Street
Property Partnership
0 NO 1.20 - CBD RVC 141 169 169 42 33 94 Lower South of Laurel Area
This parcel is listed as Opportunity Site
A in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. There is developer interest
in the site and the City has been in
coordination with the property owner.

Existing capacity shown.

A
007-032-01 220 Front St Santa Cruz Seaside
Company
0 NO 0.45 - RH H 55 24 24 6 4 14 Lower South of Laurel
Area
This parcel is listed as Opportunity Site
B in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. There is developer interest
in the site and the City has been in
coordination with the property owner.

Existing capacity shown.

A
007-032-27 140 Center St Prolo Stanley E &
Muriel M Trustee et
al.
0 NO 0.78 - RM M 30 23 23 5 4 14 Lower South of Laurel
Area
Included as Opportunity Site H in the
draft Downtown Plan Expansion.

Property owner interest in inclusion of
site in plan as a development
opportunity.

A
007-033-01 140 Front St Santa Cruz Seaside
Company
0 NO 1.15 - RH H 141 162 162 40 32 90 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APN 007-033-

01. This parcel is listed as Opportunity
Site D in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. Site of existing Santa Cruz
Warriors Arena which will be moved
to make this site a development
opportunity. City has been in
coordination with property owner
through the expansion process.

Existing capacity shown.

E
007-033-02 203 Laurel St Santa Cruz Seaside
Company
0 NO 0.13 - RH H 141 17 17 4 3 10 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APN 007-033-

02. This parcel is listed as Opportunity
Site D in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. Site of existing Santa Cruz
Warriors Arena which will be moved
to make this site a development
opportunity. City has been in
coordination with property owner
through the expansion process.

Existing capacity shown.

E
007-023-18 415 Pacific Ave Victorino Ronald J &
Patricia M CoTrustees et al.
0 NO 0.11 - RTC RVC 141 16 16 4 3 9 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APN 007-023-

19. This parcel is listed as Opportunity
Site I in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. Site is developed with a
single story, 10-unit residential
building. Parcel is considered
underutilized; land value of parcel
exceeds value of residential structure
on parcel and improvement value is
34%. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

C

22.568
Table B-11: Santa Cruz 6th Cycle Sites Inventory
APN Street Address Property Owner Existing
Units Vacancy Acreage
5 th /
4 th
Cycles
Zoning GPLU Expected
Density
Gross
Potential
Units
Net
Potential
Units
Net Units by Income
Category Assumed
Income
Category
Category Existing Use and Additional
Information
Development
Class
Low Mod. Above
Mod.
007-023-19 407 Pacific Ave Victorino Ronald J &
Patricia M CoTrustees et al.
10 NO 0.50 - RTC RVC 141 70 60 15 12 33 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APN 007-023-

18. This parcel is listed as Opportunity
Site I in the draft Downtown Plan
Expansion. Site is developed with a
single story, 10-unit residential
building. Parcel is considered
underutilized; land value of parcel
exceeds value of residential structure
on parcel and improvement value is
54%. Parking lost through
redevelopment will not need to be
replaced given AB 2097.

C
007-023-21 325 Pacific Ave Rupesh Enterprises
Inc
0 NO 0.29 - RTC RVC 141 40 40 10 8 22 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APNs 007-023-
22 and 007-023-23. This parcel is
listed as Opportunity Site J in the draft
Downtown Plan Expansion. Site is
developed with a single story motel.

Parcel is considered underutilized;
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel and
improvement value is 61%. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
007-023-22 311 Pacific Ave Rupesh Enterprises
Inc
0 NO 0.08 - RTC RVC 141 10 10 2 2 6 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APNs 007-023-
21 and 007-023-23. This parcel is
listed as Opportunity Site J in the draft
Downtown Plan Expansion. Site is
developed with a single story motel.

Parcel is considered underutilized;
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel and
improvement value is 51%. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A
007-023-23 311 Pacific Ave Rupesh Enterprises
Inc
0 NO 0.36 - RTC RVC 141 51 51 13 10 28 Lower South of Laurel Area
Shared ownership with APNs 007-023-
21 and 007-023-22. This parcel is
listed as Opportunity Site J in the draft
Downtown Plan Expansion. Site is
developed with a single story motel.

Parcel is considered underutilized;
land value of parcel exceeds value of
residential structure on parcel and
improvement value is 57%. Parking
lost through redevelopment will not
need to be replaced given AB 2097.

A

22.569
Glossary
Appendix H

22.570
Appendix H: Glossary H-2
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Glossary
Above Moderate-Income Household. A household with an annual income greater than 120 percent of the area median income adjusted by household size, as determined by a survey of incomes conducted by a city or a county, or in the absence of such a survey, based on the latest available eligibility limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Section 8 housing program.

Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). An accessory dwelling unit(ADU) is a dwelling unit that is accessory to one or more primary residences that has complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. A “conversion accessory dwelling unit” is any accessory dwelling unit created primarily by the conversion of any permitted or legal nonconforming structure, or portion of such a structure. On property developed with multifamily structures, only areas that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, areeligible to become conversion accessory dwelling units. Consistent with zoning standards, conversion accessory dwelling units are permitted to expand the existing footprint of the structure by up to one hundred fifty square feet, and the existing height by up to two feet, and must be in conformance with all requirements of Section 24.16.142 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code. A “new construction accessory dwelling unit” is any accessory dwelling unit that includes new construction and which does not meet the definition and requirements for a conversion accessory dwelling unit.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) is a legal requirement that federal agencies and federal grantees further the purposes of the Fair Housing Act. AFFH means "taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws” (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements).

Area Median Income (AMI). Area median income for Santa Cruz County as published by the State of California pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Section 6932, or successor provision.

Commonly abbreviated as AMI. Area median income is the median or average income of a specific area and is based on household size.

Assisted Housing. Generally multi-family rental housing, but sometimes single-family ownership units, whose construction, financing, sales prices, or rents have been subsidized by federal, state, or local housing programs including, but not limited to Federal Section 8 (new construction, substantial rehabilitation, and loan management set-asides), Federal Sections 213, 236, and 202, Federal Sections 221 (d) (3) (belowmarket interest rate program), Federal Sections 101 (rent supplement assistance), CDBG, FHA Sections 515, multi-family mortgage revenue bond programs, local redevelopment and in lieu fee programs, and units developed pursuant to local inclusionary housing and density bonus programs.

22.571
Appendix H: Glossary H-3
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Below-Market-Rate Housing (BMR). Any housing unit specifically priced to be sold or rented to low- or moderate-income households for an amount less than the fair-market value of the unit. Both the State of California and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development set standards for determining which households qualify as “low income” or “moderate income.” The financing of housing at less than prevailing interest rates.

Community Care Facility. Any facility, place, or building which is maintained and operated to provide nonmedical residential care, daycare (other than family daycare homes), or home-finding agency services for children, adults or children and adults, including, but not limited to, the physically handicapped, mentally impaired, or incompetent persons. All community care facilities shall be appropriately licensed or registered pursuant to state law, unless exempted therefrom by state law. This definition and all other definitions relating to community care facilities shall be interpreted so as to be consistent with definitions found in state law or state administrative regulations.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). A grant program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on a formula basis for entitled communities and administered by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for non-entitled jurisdictions. This grant allots money to cities and counties for housing rehabilitation and community development, including public facilities and economic development.

Condominium. A multi-family building where the units are individually owned, and the common space is owned collectively by condominium unit owners. A condominium structure may have two or more units.

Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). A term used to describe restrictive limitations that may be placed on property and its use, and which usually are made a condition of holding title or lease.

Deed. A legal document which affects the transfer of ownership of real estate from the seller to the buyer.

Density Bonus. The allocation of development rights that allow a parcel to accommodate additional square footage or additional residential units beyond the maximum for which the parcel is zoned, usually in exchange for the provision or preservation of an amenity such as affordable rent for lower income residents at the same site or at another location.

Density, Residential. The number of permanent residential dwelling units per acre of land. Densities specified in the General Plan may be expressed in units per gross acre or per net developable acre.

Discretionary Action. An action or approval which requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation when the City decides to approve or disapprove a project.

Down Payment. Money paid by a buyer from his own funds, as opposed to that portion of the purchase price which is financed.

Duplex. A building on a single lot containing two dwelling units, each of which is totally separated from the other by a shared wall that extends from the foundation to the roof.

22.572
Appendix H: Glossary H-4
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Dwelling Unit (DU). A dwelling unit is a building or portion of a building including one or more rooms which is/are designed or used as a residence by one family or housekeeping unit, with facilities for living, sleeping, eating, sanitation, and food preparation. A dwelling unit shall have only one domestic food preparation facility, except that a single-family dwelling may also include one area meeting the standards of a junior accessory dwelling unit complying with Section 24.16.170 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code. A dwelling unit shall have interior access between all habitable spaces, except that a junior accessory dwelling unit containing all facilities necessary for living, sleeping, eating, food preparation and sanitation need not maintain interior access to the remainder of the dwelling unit.

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

Emergency Shelter. Housing with minimal supportive services that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter in any facility because of an inability to pay. Emergency shelter operators are not obligated to accept individuals if the shelter is at capacity.

Extremely Low-Income Household. A household with an annual income that is less than 30 percent of the area median family income adjusted by household size, as determined by a survey of incomes conducted by a city or a county, or in the absence of such a survey, based on the latest available eligibility limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Section 8 housing program.

Fair Market Rent. The rent, including utility allowances, determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for purposed of administering the Section 8 Program.

Family. An individual, or two or more persons living together and occupying a dwelling which is not a rooming house, lodging house, or residential institutional use.

General Plan. A comprehensive, long-term plan mandated by State Planning Law for the physical development of a city or county and any land outside its boundaries which, in its judgment, bears relation to its planning. The plan shall consist of seven required elements: land use, circulation, open space, conservation, housing, safety, and noise. The plan must include a statement of development policies and a diagram or diagrams illustrating the policies.

Goal. A general, overall, and ultimate purpose, aim, or end toward which the City will direct effort.

Historic Preservation. The preservation of historically significant structures and neighborhoods until such time as, and in order to facilitate, restoration and rehabilitation of the building(s) to a former condition.

Historic Property. A historic property is a structure or site that has significant historic, architectural, or cultural value.

22.573
Appendix H: Glossary H-5
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME). A grant program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on a formula basis for states and localities. HOME is the largest federal block grant to state and local governments designed exclusively to create affordable housing for low-income households. HOME funds are awarded annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions (PJs). This grant allots money for building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income people.

Household. All those persons—related or unrelated—who occupy a single housing unit. (See “Family.”) Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). The State agency that has principal responsibility for assessing, planning for, and assisting communities to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households.

Housing Element. One of the seven State-mandated elements of a local general plan, it assesses the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community, identifies potential sites adequate to provide the amount and kind of housing needed, and contains adopted goals, policies, and implementation programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. Under State law, Housing Elements must be updated every five years.

Housing Payment. For ownership housing, this is defined as the mortgage payment, property taxes, insurance, and utilities. For rental housing, this is defined as rent and utilities.

Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of (HUD). A cabinet-level department of the federal government that administers housing and community development programs.

Implementing Policies. The City’s statements of its commitments to consistent actions.

Implementation. Actions, procedures, programs, or techniques that carry out policies.

Infill Development. The development of new housing or other buildings on properties in a built-up area or on new building parcels created by permitted lot splits.

Integration. A condition in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic region.

Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU). A unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family residence. A junior accessory dwelling unit may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure.

Labor Supply Camp. An area or place containing living quarters including dwellings, tents, bunkhouses, trailer coaches, or other housing accommodations, and any accessory dining, sanitary or recreational facilities, maintained by a labor contractor for the housing of farm laborers, for hire for work off the site.

Land Use Classification. A system for classifying and designating the appropriate use of properties.

22.574
Appendix H: Glossary H-6
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Live-Work Units. Buildings or spaces within buildings that are used jointly for commercial and residential purposes where the residential use of the space is secondary or accessory to the primary use as a place of work.

Lot Coverage. The maximum lot area which may be covered with buildings and structures. Buildings and structures include all land covered by Principal Buildings, garages and carports, Accessory Structures, covered decks and gazebos, and other enclosed and covered areas, but not including standard roof overhangs, cornices, eaves, uncovered decks, swimming pools, paved areas such as walkways, driveways, patios, uncovered parking areas or roads. All areas of coverage are computed in terms of net lot area at ground level.

Low-Income Household. A household with an annual income usually between 51 and 80 percent of the area median income adjusted by household size, as determined by a survey of incomes conducted by a city or a county, or in the absence of such a survey, based on the latest available eligibility limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Section 8 housing program.

Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). Tax reductions provided by the federal and State governments for investors in housing for low-income households.

Manufactured Housing. Residential structures that are constructed entirely in the factory, and which since June 15, 1976, have been regulated by the federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 under the administration of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Ministerial Action. A non-discretionary action or approval where the City merely has to determine whether a project conforms with applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations.

Mixed-Use. Properties on which various uses such as office, commercial, institutional, and residential, are combined in a single building or on a single site in an integrated development project with significant functional interrelationships and a coherent physical design. A “single site” may include contiguous properties.

Mobile Home. A structure that was constructed prior to June 15, 1976, transportable in one or more sections, which, in a travel mode, is eight feet or more in width, or forty feet in length, or, when erected on site, is three hundred twenty square feet or more, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a single-family dwelling with or without a foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein. “Mobile home” includes any structure that meets all the requirements of this section and complies with the state standards for mobile homes in effect at the time of construction. “Mobile home” does not include a commercial modular, as defined in Section 18001.8, factory-built housing, as defined in Section 19971, a manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007, a multifamily manufactured home, as defined in Section 18008.7, or a recreational vehicle, as defined in Section 18010, of the California Health and Safety Code.

Mobile Home/Manufactured Home Park. Any parcel of land or portion thereof which is used or offered for use as a location for two or more mobile homes.

22.575
Appendix H: Glossary H-7
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Moderate-Income Household. A household with an annual income usually between 81 and 120 percent of the area median income adjusted by household size, as determined by a survey of incomes conducted by a city or a county, or in the absence of such a survey, based on the latest available eligibility limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Section 8 housing program.

Monthly Housing Expense. Total principal, interest, taxes, and insurance paid by the borrower on a monthly basis for an ownership unit or total rent, utilities, and renters’ insurance paid by a tenant on a monthly basis. Used with gross income to determine affordability.

Multi-Family Dwelling. A multifamily dwelling is a building which is designed or used exclusively as a residence that includes three or more separate dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types Ordinance. A law or regulation set forth and adopted by a governmental authority, usually a city or county.

Overcrowded Housing Unit. A housing unit in which the members of the household or group are prevented from the enjoyment of privacy because of small room size and housing size. The U.S. Bureau of Census defines an overcrowded housing unit as one which is occupied by more than one person per room.

Parcel. A lot or tract of land.

Disability. A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual; a record of such an impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment.

Policy. A specific statement of principle or of guiding action that implies clear commitment but is not mandatory. A general direction that a governmental agency sets to follow, in order to meet its objectives before undertaking an action program. (See “Program.”)
Poverty Level. As used by the U.S. Census, families and unrelated individuals are classified as being above or below the poverty level based on a poverty index that provides a range of income cutoffs or “poverty thresholds” varying by size of family, number of children, and age of householder. The income cutoffs are updated each year to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index.

Program. An action, activity, or strategy carried out in response to adopted policy to achieve a specific goal or objective. Policies and programs establish the “who,” “how” and “when” for carrying out the “what” and “where” of goals and objectives.

Redevelop. To demolish existing buildings; or to increase the overall floor area existing on a property; or both; irrespective of whether a change occurs in land use.

Regional. Pertaining to activities or economies at a scale greater than that of a single jurisdiction and affecting a broad geographic area.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation. A quantification by the local council of governments of existing and projected housing need, by household income group, for all localities within a region.

22.576
Appendix H: Glossary H-8
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
Rehabilitation. The repair, preservation, and/or improvement of substandard housing.

Residential. Land designated in the General Plan and zoning ordinance for building consisting of dwelling units. May be improved, vacant, or unimproved. (See “Dwelling Unit.”) Retirement Home or Center. Multiple dwelling units containing not less than four dwelling units which are designated and intended to provide suitable living quarters and specialized services to elderly, or retired, ambulatory persons. These units are designed to serve elderly persons, and may include such special facilities and services as, but not limited to, communal cooking and eating areas, special dietary programs, wheelchair ramps, hallway handrails, and other special features and programs intended to serve the needs of elderly, retired persons.

Retrofit. To add materials and/or devices to an existing building or system to improve its operation, safety, or efficiency. Buildings have been retrofitted to use solar energy and to strengthen their ability to withstand earthquakes, for example.

Rezoning. An amendment to the zoningmap to effect a change in the nature, density, or intensity of uses allowed in a zoning district and/or on a designated parcel or land area; a change in the zoning designation.

Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV). A federal (HUD) rent-subsidy program that is one of the main sources of federal housing assistance for low-income households, operates by providing “housing assistance payments” to owners, developers, and public housing agencies to make up the difference between the “Fair Market Rent” of a unit (set by HUD) and the household’s contribution toward the rent, which is calculated at 30 percent of the household’s adjusted gross monthly income (GMI). “Section 8” includes programs for new construction, existing housing, and substantial or moderate housing rehabilitation.

Segregation. A condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or type of disability in a particular geographic areas when compared to a broader geographic area.

Single-Family Dwelling. A single-family dwelling is a building which is designed or used exclusively as a residence, including only one dwelling unit, and may also contain one area meeting the standards of a junior accessory dwelling unit.

Single-Room Occupancy Units (SRO). A cluster of residential units of a smaller size than normally found in multiple dwellings within a residential hotel, motel, or facility providing sleeping or living facilities in which sanitary facilities may be provided within the unit and/or shared, and kitchen or cooking facilities may be provided within the unit or shared within the housing project.

Special Housing Needs. Special housing needs are those associated with specific demographic or occupational groups that call for specific Housing Element program responses. State law specifically requires Housing Element analysis of the special housing needs of people who are elderly or disabled (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, and people experiencing homelessness. These special-needs groups often spend a disproportionate amount of their

22.577
Appendix H: Glossary H-9
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
income to secure safe and decent housing and are sometimes subject to discrimination based on their specific needs or circumstances.

Special Needs Populations. Disabled Households, agricultural workers, single-parent households, victims or survivors of domestic or physical abuse, households enrolled in Welfare-to-Work programs, homeless persons or persons at risk of becoming homeless, chronically ill persons including those with HIV and mental illness, displaced dependent parents (or expectant dependent parents), emancipated foster youth, individuals exiting from institutional settings, chronic substance abusers, or other specific groups with unique housing needs as determined by the Housing and Community Development Department. “Special Needs Populations” do not include seniors or the frail elderly unless they otherwise qualify as a Special Needs Population.

Subsidize. To assist by payment of a sum of money or by the granting to terms or favors that reduces the need for monetary expenditures. Housing subsidies may take the forms of mortgage interest deductions or tax credits from federal and/or state income taxes, sale, or lease at less than market value of land to be used for the construction of housing, payments to supplement a minimum affordable rent, and the like.

Substandard Housing. Residential dwellings that, because of their physical condition, do not provide safe and sanitary housing.

Supportive Housing. Housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population as defined by State Housing Element Law, and that is linked to on-site or off-site services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

Target Areas. Specifically, designated sections of the community where loans and grants are made to bring about a specific outcome, such as the rehabilitation of housing affordable by very low- and low-income households.

Target Population. Target population refers to people with low incomes who have one or more disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other chronic health condition, or individuals eligible for services provided pursuant to the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Division

4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated minors, families with children, elderly people, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting from institutional settings, veterans, and people experiencing homelessness.

Tenure. Tenure refers to whether a dwelling unit is owner-occupied or renter-occupied. A housing unit is owner-occupied if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit, even if it is mortgaged or not fully paid for. A cooperative or condominium unit is owner-occupied only if the owner or co-owner lives in it. All other occupied units are classified as renter-occupied including units rented for cash rent and those occupied without payment of cash rent.

Transitional Housing. Transitional housing is intended to move individuals needing temporary assistance with their housing needs and consist of buildings configured as rental housing developments but operated

22.578
Appendix H: Glossary H-10
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of the assistance.

Undevelopable. Specific areas where topographic, geologic, and/or superficial soil conditions indicate a significant danger to future occupants and a liability to the City should the site be developed.

Acronyms Used
AB: Assembly Bill
ACS: American Community Survey
ADU: Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFC: Association of Faith Communities
AFFH: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AFH: Assessment of Fair Housing
AI: Analysis of Impediments
AMBAG: Association of Monterey Bay Area
Governments
AMFI: Area Median Family Income
AMI: Area Median Income
BMR: Below Market Rate
CAR: California Association of Realtors
CBDO: Community Based Development
Organization
CDBG: Community Development Block Grant
CDDS: California Department of Developmental
Services
CERT: Community Emergency Response Team
CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act
CHAS: Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy
CoC: Continuum of Care
CPUC: California Public Utilities Commission
DFEH: California Department of Fair
Employment and Housing
DU/AC: Dwelling Units Per Acre
DU: Dwelling Unit
EDD: California Employment Development
Department
ELI: Extremely Low-Income
EMS: Emergency Medical Services
FAR: Floor Area Ratio
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHA: Federal Housing Administration
FHAA: Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act
FHEO: Office of Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity
FIT: Families in Transition
FMR: Fair Market Rate
HAMI: HUD Area Median Income
HAMFI: HUD Area Median Family Income
HCD: California Department of Housing and
Community Development
HCVP: Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
Program
HH: Household(s)
HMDA: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
HOA: Homeowners Association
HOME: HOME Investment Partnership Program
HOPES: Homeless Outreach, Proactive
Engagement Services
HPHP: Homeless Persons Health Project
HUD: Department of Housing and Urban
Development
ICC: International Code Council
JADU: Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
LCP: Local Coastal Program
LI: Low-Income
LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit
MFI: Median Family Income
MHMH: My House My Home Program
MSA/MD: Metropolitan Statistical
Area/Metropolitan Division
NFIP: National Flood Insurance Program
NPT: Neighborhood Policing Team
NRSA: Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy
Area
OEHHA: California Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment
PG&E: Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PLL: Paul Lee Loft
PSCH: Page Smith Community House
R/ECAP: Racially and Ethnically Concentrated
Areas of Poverty

22.579
Appendix H: Glossary H-11
Santa Cruz Housing Element Update
RCAA: Racially and Ethnically Concentrated
Areas of Affluence
RCC: Recuperative Care Center
RFS: Rebele Family Shelter
RHNA: Regional Housing Needs Allocation
RHND: Regional Housing Needs Determination
ROI: Regional Opportunity Index
SB: Senate Bill
SCMU: Santa Cruz Municipal Utilities
SCPD: Santa Cruz Police Department
SRO: Single-Room Occupancy Unit
SSVF: Supportive Services for Veterans Families
TCAC/HCD: California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee/HCD
TOD: Transit-Oriented Development
VASH: HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing
Program
VLI: Very Low-Income

22.580
Appendix H: Glossary H-12 22.581
CAL FIRE Hazard Severity Zones
Source: CAL Fire. Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map Viewer, accessed October 2023.

22.582
Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Hazard Areas
Source: City of Santa Cruz. 2018-2023 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

22.583

22.584

22.585

22.586
FEMA Flood Hazard Zones.

Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Flood Layer - Santa Cruz.

22.587

22.588

22.589

22.590
Dam Inundation Zones
Source: California Department of Water Resources. California Dam Breach Inundation GIS Data (July 2023).

Tsunami Hazard Zones.

22.591
Source: California Department of Conservation. California Tsunami Maps - Santa Cruz County GIS Data (2022).

22.592
C H A P T E R 8

HAZARDS, SAFETY, AND NOISE
This chapter focuses on reducing human injury, loss of life, property damage, and the economic and social dislocation caused by natural and human-made hazards. The chapter covers emergency preparedness (including fire emergency), air quality, noise, hazardous materials, light pollution, and natural hazards (including geologic, seismic, and flooding).

This chapter is divided into two sections:
• Hazards, safety, and noise background examines the various hazards and safety issues in Santa Cruz, their characteristics, and how the City has responded as of 20082023. • Goals, Policies, and Actions provides City bodies with guidance in making long-term decisions in response to hazards and threats to public safety and in implementing the actions recommended in this chapter.

The City's 2018-2023 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on April 8, 2018 and adopted by the City Council on October 9, 2018, is also adopted into this Safety Element by this reference.

Hazards, safety, and noise background
One of the Principles adopted to guide development of the City’s General Plan relates directly to community safety and emergency preparedness:

Community facilities and services. We will offer excellent social services and will improve and maintain our infrastructure, community safety, and emergency preparedness.

EMERGENCY AND DISASTER READINESS
Every general plan in California must have a “safety element” that addresses natural and human-made hazards and dangers.

A range of hazards has the potential to affect Santa Cruz residents and workers. Some hazards are natural (e.g., earthquakes); some are created by human activity (e.g., hazardous wastes); and others are naturally present, but are exacerbated by the use of land, such as development within floodplains or near wild lands with high fuel loads.

The city has been affected at various times over the past century by flooding, earthquakes, and cliff retreat. Until 1989, flooding on the San Lorenzo River had caused the most severe damage. The Loma Prieta earthquake changed that; it certainly won’t be the city’s last major temblor.

Emergency preparedness. It is difficult to anticipate the scope or location of a disaster and the problems that will be encountered. That is why emergency preparedness —ensuring that personnel are well-trained and adequate supplies are on hand to respond to a disaster—is essential to reducing injuries, loss of life, and property damage. To facilitate well-coordinated and expedient action during an emergency, the City adopted an Emergency Operations Plan describing the role and operation of City

22.593
departments and personnel during major emergencies from floods, storms, earthquakes, tsunamis, hazardous materials incidents, and other disasters. The City has also identified “critical facilities,” major transportation routes, and utilities that may be affected in a disaster, and has devised strategies to protect them against damage and assure their usability.
“Critical facilities” include emergency operation centers, government buildings, hospitals, fire and police stations, schools, and emergency shelters. The survival of critical facilities (and the utilities serving them) during a disaster is of prime importance to an emergency response. These facilities are used to coordinate emergency relief operations and to give medical care and shelter to people directly affected by the emergency. Critical facilities and the utilities serving them are evaluated periodically to determine their ability to withstand damage during a disaster and to ensure that adequate facilities will exist to respond to emergencies.

Evacuations and the mobility of emergency personnel rely on passable and safe roads. Maintaining the usability of major transportation routes—including the San Lorenzo River bridges—will be essential.

Nonetheless, alternative routes must be designated in the event that bridges fail.

Water, sewage, energy, and phone services also are vital in an emergency. While these services cannot be designed to withstand all disasters, maintaining them in good condition and ensuring availability of equipment necessary to make repairs during emergencies can help guarantee their availability when needed.

The City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018) has four primary mitigation goals:

1. Avoid or reduce the potential for life loss, injury and economic damage to Santa Cruz residents from hazard events;

2. Increase the ability of city government to serve the community during and after hazard events;

3. Protect the unique character, scenic beauty and values in the natural and built environment from being compromised by hazard events;

4. Encourage mitigation activities to increase the disaster resilience of institutions, private companies and systems essential to a functioning City of Santa Cruz.

To support these four goals, there are nine objectives followed by a series of prioritized mitigation actions. There are fourteen Very High Priority Actions, twelve High Priority Actions, and nine Important Actions. As noted in the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, these mitigation actions have proven effective in reducing or eliminating hazard risk.

Fire protection services. The City Fire Department provides fire protection services for all areas within the city limits and works with the County fire districts, UCSC, and the California Department of Forestry (CDF) and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) (CDF) to provide fire protection to surrounding areas. The City Fire Department also sponsors education and prevention programs.

The City Fire Department provides the following emergency services:
 Structure Fire Suppression
 Wildland Fire Suppression
 Emergency Medical Services (Paramedic)
 Hazardous Materials Incident Response
 Marine Rescue Services
 Technical Service

22.594
Growing residential and tourist populations have increased the demands on fire services. Maintaining well-trained firefighting staff and adequate equipment, response times, and fire flow (the ability to deliver a specific amount of water in a specific time) are essential for adequate fire protection and prevention.

The risk of structural fires within the city is minimal. Fire-fighting resources meet Cal OSHA minimum requirements. Development continues to comply with applicable building codes. Structures are relatively new and in good condition; and the fire department implements a building-inspection program.

Emergency access is good in all areas.

Evacuation Routes. As described in the City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP, 2018), evacuation plans and policies have been identified in case of emergencies due to hazards such as natural flooding, tsunami inundation, seiches or dam failure. The LHMP includes figures illustrating the extent of affect from these hazards and key transportation routes to and within the City. The LHMP also includes various mitigation strategies to address emergency preparedness including the installation of evacuation route signage in areas prone to flooding and maintaining an early warning system for evacuation of areas susceptible to these hazards and coordination among various City departments and local, state, and Federal agencies.

Wildfires and Urban Fires. Wildfires are large-scale brush and grass fires in undeveloped areas of the city.

Wildfires are usually caused by human activities such as equipment use and smoking, and can result in loss of valuable wildlife habitat, soil erosion, and damage to life and property. Santa Cruz is surrounded by thousands of acres of undeveloped hillsides designated as open space. These areas pose potential fire hazards to adjacent development. The level of wildland fire risk is determined by a number of factors, including:
 •Frequency of critical fire weather;
 •Percentage of slope;
 •Existing fuel (vegetation, ground cover, building materials);  •Adequacy of access to fire suppression services; and  •Water supply and water pressure.

According to United States Geological Survey (USGS), wildfires can significantly alter the hydrologic response of a watershed to the extent that even modest rainstorms can produce dangerous flash floods and debris flow, and water quality within and downstream from a burn area may be significantly impacted.

To help predict and manage potential impacts burns may have, USGS has map tools, such as the Intterra National Fire Situation Map and the California Wildland fire Perimeters Map, available to the public.

CAL FIRE also has maps available to the public that illustrate relative wildfire risk. Adopted in 2007 and updated in 2023, the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Maps are based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by CAL FIRE as a major cause of wildfire spread. The FHSZ maps classify areas as Moderate, High, or Very High fire hazard based on the average hazard across the area in the zone. The FHSZ maps further separate the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) into Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs) and State Responsibility Areas (SRAs). Areas within a VHFHSZ for both LRAs and SRAs have a significant risk of disaster and loss during a fire hazard. Residential housing located within VHFHSZs typically have higher risk and are recommended to conform to the latest fire safe standards.

As shown in the CAL FIRE Hazard Severity Zones figure at the end of this chapter, all areas within Santa Cruz are within an LRA and do not have VHFHSZs. While the City does not have any areas within VHFHSZs, the 2018-2023 City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) identifies wildland-urban interface

22.595
(WUI) fire hazard areas within city boundaries. The City defines WUI areas as open space areas within the City that are adjacent to residential homes - the urban interface. These WUI areas are shown in the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Hazard Areas figure at the end of this chapter. Areas such as Wilder Ranch State Park and Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park are areas in proximity to the City that feature vegetation, slopes, and terrain that could lead to potential fire hazard for Santa Cruz residents. Changes in landscaping techniques, vegetation choices, defensible space initiatives, home hardening, and longterm maintenance can help reduce losses during wildland fire events. The City adopted the 2022 California Building Code, in which Chapter 7A establishes minimum standards to protect life and property located in wildland-urban interface fire areas by increasing its ability to resist the intrusion of flames or burning embers. The City also features a WUI Map Viewer on the city website for residents to check if a building is in a WUI zone.

The fire department aims to reduce fire risk through its weed-abatement program, which covers all wildland areas within the Ccity’s jurisdiction. The department also works with the County, which has a State and locally approved fire management plan that coordinates among a number of State, regional, and county agencies. The City also lists up-to-date WUI building construction and vegetation and fuel management requirements on the City website under Fire Prevention and Life Safety.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) has mapped the relative wildfire risk in areas of significant population by intersecting residential housing density with proximate fire threat. The CDF map shows four risk levels: Moderate, High, Very High, and Extreme. While no part of the Planning Area faces an “extreme” threat, the resource maps show that much of the city is classified in a “very high” fire danger zone, principally because the wildland fire zones include a 1.5 mile buffer.

THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AIMS TO REDUCE FIRE RISK THROUGH ITS WEEDABATEMENT PROGRAM, WHICH COVERS ALL WILDLAND AREAS WITHIN THE CITY’S JURISDICTION. THE DEPARTMENT ALSO WORKS WITH THE COUNTY, WHICH HAS A

STATE AND LOCALLY APPROVED FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT COORDINATES AMONG A NUMBER OF STATE, REGIONAL, AND COUNTY AGENCIES.

CREATED HAZARDS
Air quality. Atmospheric pollution is determined by the amount of pollutant emitted and the atmosphere’s ability to transport and dilute it. In Santa Cruz County, coastal mountains exert strong influence on atmospheric circulation, creating a breezy coastal environment with generally good ambient air quality, except in some small inland valley areas.

Nevertheless, localized sources can cause odors or create dust or other air quality problems. Fuels and solvents used for vehicles, space and water heating, industrial processes, and commercial uses; and incineration processes, fires, and pesticides are typical pollutant sources. Autos are the largest source of pollutants.

Air Quality Management Plans are developed for regions throughout the state to meet the air quality requirements and standards for specific pollutants, including ozone, nitrogen oxide and dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and suspended particles, as outlined in the federal and State Clean Air Acts.

The North Central Coast Air Basin (Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito counties) has been designated as a moderate, transitional non-attainment area because it exceeds air quality standards for ozone and inhaled particulate matter. The region’s Air Quality Management Plan prescribes methods for attaining ozone and particulate matter standards and for maintaining air quality in the region.

Attainment of air quality standards is achieved through measures to control emissions from stationary sources (factories, commercial activities, etc.) and mobile sources (cars and trucks).

Transportation control measures (TCMs) and land use programs also contribute to improving air quality.

22.596
In addition to attaining air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter, the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, the County, and regional and local agencies are concerned with reducing stratospheric ozone depletion and regulating the emission of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), carbon dioxide, and other “greenhouse gases” (GHGs).

Noise. Noise is unwanted sound. Excessive noise can cause hearing loss and interfere with human activity.

It can disrupt communication and affect a person’s performance. Unlike many other environmental factors, noise is a subjective experience and difficult to quantify. Its effects often depend on the source, its loudness, and duration. Which sounds are considered noise varies from person to person and with the time of day and setting.

Higher noise levels have become increasingly common in everyday city life. Greater concentrations of people, increased mechanization, and greater numbers of motor vehicles produce noise levels with the potential to degrade quality of life. Noise associated with a pleasant experience (ocean waves or roller coaster) does not elicit the same reactions as does noise associated with a less pleasant experience (traffic or freight trains).

Loudness is measured in decibels (dB) and is typically expressed in dBA, which approximates human hearing. The human ear can generally perceive noise from 0 to 140 decibels. Sounds as faint as 0 decibels are barely audible, and then only when there are no other sounds. Ordinary conversation is about 60 dB.

People can tolerate some noise, but brief exposure to intense sounds of 120 to 140 dB can threaten physical or psychological well-being.

An increase of 3 decibels is normally not detectable; an increase of 5 dB is noticeable; and an increase of 10 dB is perceived as a doubling of sound. In addition to loudness, noise is often characterized by time.

L10 represents a noise level that is exceeded 10 percent of the time. L50 represents a median noise level, and L90 describes daytime background noise. Ldn describes average day/night noise and includes an adjustment for nighttime noise which is normally perceived to be louder because of the quieter conditions.

Because sensitivity to noise increases in the evening and at night and excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep, 24-hour descriptors were developed to add artificial noise penalties to quiet-time noise events. State law requires general plans to use the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or Ldn to describe the community noise environment and its effects on the population. (The two are essentially the same.) General Plan 2030 uses Ldn. Standards included in Figure 2 (p. 90) have been established correlating noise and different land uses in terms of acceptable levels.

Hazardous materials. Hazardous materials include toxic metals, chemicals and gases, flammable and/or explosive liquids and solids, corrosive materials, infectious substances, and radioactive materials. They pose a variety of dangers to public health and welfare, and their transport, distribution, and storage is a concern for residents and workers. The City’s Hazardous Materials Ordinance regulates and enforces the proper storage and handling of hazardous materials. The fire department works in conjunction with County Environmental Health in responding to hazardous materials spills and accidents and enforcing hazardous materials regulations.

Light pollution. Even when properly directed, night lighting can spill both upward and away from its intended target, and onto adjoining properties. The City expects to study the impacts of light pollution and develop actions to reduce its effects on urban and open space lands. A number of local jurisdictions have adopted “dark sky ordinances” aimed at reducing light spillage.

NATURAL HAZARDS
Geologic hazards are generally divided into two categories: seismically induced hazards and non22.597 seismically induced. The former includes ground shaking, surface rupture, ground failure, settlement, landslides, and water waves. Non-seismically induced hazards include slope instability, cliff retreat, and non-seismic settlement and landslides.

Unstable ground. Soils, slopes, and cliffs are subject to erosion, weathering, groundwater withdrawal, and seismic processes that cause instability. The instability can damage buildings, threaten lives, and degrade environmental quality. The potential for instability and retreat are determined by soil composition, underlying geology, and existing vegetation.

Cliff retreat is the result of hillside or coastal headland erosion from weathering, physical disturbance and, in the case of ocean cliffs, the continuous and forceful actions of waves and tides. In the city, cliff retreat is prevalent along North Pacific Avenue, Chestnut Street, and ocean cliffs at West Cliff Drive and Seabright Beach. Surveys and past aerial photos indicate that ocean cliff retreat in the city varies from minimal to three or more inches per year. There also are occasional collapses of large portions of cliffs. Variations in cliff retreat are due to wave action and geologic formation.

Dam failure. Dam failure can occur as a result of earthquakes, seiches, structural instability, or intense rain in excess of the structure’s design capacity. The closest dam that would affect the City of Santa Cruz in the event of dam failure is the City's Newell Creek Dam, located north of the City at the Loch Lomond Reservoir. The California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) approves inundation maps, which show flooding that could result from a hypothetical failure of a dam failure or its critical appurtenant structure. The latest approved inundation data for Santa Cruz County was last updated inis from July 2023. According to the DSOD, the closest dam that would affect the City of Santa Cruz in the event of dam failure is the Newell Dam, located north of the City at the Loch Lomond Reservoir.

As shown in the Dam Inundation Zones figure asat the end of this chapter, if dam failure were to occur at Newell Creek Dam, the central regions of the City arewould be most at-risk. The risk of failure of the Newell Creek Dam is unlikely, except in the event of earthquakes or seiches. The reservoir is monitored monthly for hydrology deviation, and semi-annually for bending, twisting, and uplifting, in accordance with California Division of Safety of Dams DSOD requirements.

Tsunamis. Tsunamis are a secondary effect of earthquakes. They strike quickly and can leave an aftermath of extensive damage, injury, and death. Large, successional oceanic waves are generated by seismic events and travel at speeds up to 450 mph. The tsunami wave, barely perceptible at sea, increases in height as it moves into shallow water.

Tsunamis cannot be prevented and can cause massive destruction. Santa Cruz is susceptible to tsunami inundation primarily in coastal areas and along coastal watercourses at lower elevations. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operates a tsunami warning system that gives several hours noticehours’ notice to allow evacuation of threatened areas. As shown in the Tsunami Inundation Zone figure at the end of this chapter, tsunami hazard areas are identified where residents must evacuate by foot immediately to a green "outside hazard" zone. Areas within the City that are in tsunami hazard zones are downtown Santa Cruz and neighborhoods surrounding waterbodies, such as San Lorenzo River, Santa Cruz Harbor, Younger Lagoon, Schwan Lake, and Natural Bridges State Beach. These areas are typically susceptible to tsunami inundation due to proximity to the coast and watercourses at lower elevations.

Landslides. Landslides are the rapid downward movement of rock, earth, or artificial fill on a slope. Factors causing landsliding include the rock strength and orientation of elements on the slope, erosion, weathering, high rainfall, steepness of slopes, and human activities such as the removal of vegetation and inappropriate grading. Although the city is not as susceptible to landslides as are the more hilly areas of

22.598
the county, landslide deposits and soil creep are not uncommon on slopes near Moore Creek Preserve and the upper portions of Arana Gulch and DeLaveaga Park.

Earthquakes. Santa Cruz was one of the hardest hit communities in the 7.1 Richter magnitude Loma Prieta earthquake, October 17, 1989. Its epicenter was approximately 10 miles east of the city on the San Andreas fault. Although there were few fatalities, the city suffered substantial damage, especially in the downtown area. Thirty-four commercial buildings were demolished; many more were damaged; 206 businesses were dislocated; and 1,400 jobs were lost. Hundreds of residential units suffered chimney and other structural damage.

Although the Loma Prieta earthquake destroyed many of the city’s seismically hazardous buildings, seismic events will recur and continue to pose a hazard to buildings, residents, and workers. While there are no formally recognized faults in Santa Cruz, the city lies within 15 miles of at least six major seismic faults and fault systems, placing it in an area of high seismic risk. Nearby faults include the San Andreas, Zayante, Ben Lomond, San Gregorio, Butano, and the Monterey Bay Fault Zone.

Liquefaction. Liquefaction is the transformation of loose water-saturated sand or silt from a solid into a liquid state. Liquefaction commonly, but not always, leads to ground failure. Within these areas, sitespecific analysis is needed to accurately determine liquefaction potential. For example, detailed geologic investigation of the Neary Lagoon area, designated as having high liquefaction potential, indicates a number of sites with moderate or low liquefaction potential.

Flooding. Flooding can result from intense rainfall, localized drainage problems, tsunamis and seiches, or failure of flood control or water supply structures such as levees, dams, or reservoirs. Floodwaters can carry large objects downstream with a force that can destroy stationary structures, cause drowning, break utility lines, and sufficiently saturate materials and earth to lead to structural instability, collapse, and damage. Flooding along the coast of Santa Cruz may occur with the occurrence of large waves and storm swells during the winter. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines "flood hazard zone" as an area subject to flooding that is delineated as either a special hazard area or an area of moderate or minimal hazard on an official Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) issued by FEMA. The identification of a flood hazard zone does not imply that areas outside the flood hazard zones or uses permitted within flood hazard zones will be free from flooding or flood damage. A figure illustrating the FEMA Flood Zone is included at the end of this chapter.

Areas subject to natural flooding hazards are designated by the U.S. Corp of Army Engineers using 100-year floodplain boundaries. A 100-year flood has a 1 percent probability of occurring in any year and is considered to be a severe flood, but one with a reasonable possibility of occurrence for purposes of land use planning, property protection, and human safety.

Flooding in Santa Cruz has occurred primarily along the San Lorenzo River. The most damaging flood, in 1955, resulted in construction of levees, a floodwall, and channel work along the river and the Branciforte Creek tributary. After construction of the flood control project, aggradation of silt in the channel occurred more quickly than predicted. By the early 1970s, a large buildup of sediment threatened the area’s flood protection.

Following heavy storms in the winter of 1981-82, the City improved flood protection, safety, appearance and environmental conditions, and the recreational value of the river by adopting River Design and Enhancement plans and conducting extensive hydrologic studies and work. During the 1982 floods, a portion of the Soquel Avenue Bridge collapsed.

The City, in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers, worked to improve the flood capacity of the San Lorenzo River. Major construction was completed on the levees and bridges along the river. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recognized the increased flood protection by granting

22.599
an A-99 flood zone designation for most of the floodplain in the city. Flood insurance premiums in the A99 flood zone are up to 50 percent lower than under the previous designation. New buildings and improvements to structures in the A-99 zone do not need to meet FEMA flood elevation construction requirements unless the property owner wishes to do so.

From January through March in 2023, Santa Cruz was affected by a series of atmospheric-river storms that delivered unusually large amounts of rain. Areas throughout the City, such as the San Lorenzo River, Twin Lakes State Beach, and West Cliff Drive were particularly affected. Portions of West Cliff Drive collapsed due to the heavy flooding and wave action, and many roadways, including Highway 17, were closed due to landslides.

Flooding is also a hazard on the lower reaches of Moore Creek, the lower portion of Arana Gulch north of the Santa Cruz Yacht Harbor, and along portions of Branciforte and Carbonera creeks.

Development in these floodplains is strictly limited to reduce potential hazards to people or property.

Goals, policies, and actions
GOAL HZ1 Emergency and disaster readiness
HZ1.1 Ensure emergency preparedness.

HZ1.1.1 Annually update the Emergency Operations Plan.

HZ1.1.2 Train City staff in emergency preparedness.

HZ1.1.3 Ensure that new development design, circulation, and access allows for maintaining minimum emergency response times. Cf. M3.2.3, HZ1.2.4, HZ1.2.8.

HZ1.1.4 Ensure the completeness and availability of emergency supplies and equipment in cooperation with other agencies.

HZ1.1.5 Promote the development of a new countywide Emergency Operations Center facility.

Cf. CC2.1.1.

HZ1.1.6 Ensure preparation for delivery of a safe, reliable water supply in an emergency.

HZ1.1.7 Maintain the physical and structural integrity of all existing emergency use facilities.

HZ1.1.8 Evaluate the geographic distribution of critical facilities and their ability to survive flood and seismic hazards.

HZ1.1.9 Ensure that water, gas, and sewage utilities serving critical facilities are in good condition and are engineered to withstand damage from disasters.

HZ1.1.10 Encourage utility and building retrofits as technologies improve.

HZ1.1.11 Continue to strengthen and maintain bridges to withstand flood and earthquake.

HZ1.1.12 Maintain, implement, and update the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and Climate Adaptation Plan (CAdP) on the required schedule to, among other things, reduce the likelihood of displacement associated with flooding, sea level rise, and wildfire.

HZ1.2 Respond to emergencies rapidly. Cf. CC7.1.6 and HZ4.3.

HZ1.2.1 Annually review data on calls for service, response times, and changing risk probabilities.

HZ1.2.2 Make continuous operational improvements in an effort to arrive on emergency scenes within an average time of 4 minutes or less and within 5 minutes or less 90 percent of the time.

HZ1.2.3 Maintain a system of pre-fire surveys for selected buildings that will make critical information immediately available to emergency personnel responding.

22.600
HZ1.2.4 Ensure citywide access for emergency vehicles.

Cf. M3.2.3, HZ1.1.3.

HZ1.2.5 Continue to ensure that new development design and circulation allow for adequate emergency access.

HZ1.2.6 Prohibit the placement of speed bumps on fire department primary response routes.

HZ1.2.7 Coordinate emergency planning efforts with the Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services.

HZ1.2.8 Assure cellular telephone services to critical facilities. Cf. CC11.4, HZ1.1.3.

HZ1.3 Provide public education about what to do in an emergency.

HZ1.3.1 Maintain and publicize a system of emergency and evacuation routes serving all areas of the city.

Cf. HZ6.6.3.

HZ1.3.2 Educate the public regarding seismic, geologic, flood, fire, and other potential hazards.

HZ1.3.3 Publish and maintain an emergency resources page on the City's website.

HZ1.3.4 Use a variety of means such as social media, text messages, targeted reverse 911, City and other websites, press releases, and email lists to provide emergency information quickly.

HZ1.4 Continue to meet fire safety and firefighting needs.

HZ1.4.1 Ensure department readiness through ongoing equipment maintenance and personnel training.

HZ1.4.2 Continue to promote the installation, inspection, and testing of built-in fire extinguishing and early warning fire alarm systems.

HZ1.4.3 Ensure that water systems serving a new use or change in use are designed to meet fire flow requirements. Cf. CC3.4.1.

HZ1.4.4 Continue mutual fire protection services with participating agencies.

HZ1.4.5 Operate cooperative fire protection services with UCSC, the County fire districts, and the California Department of Forestry.

HZ1.5 Reduce potential fire hazards.

HZ1.5.1 Reduce wildfire hazards.

HZ1.5.2 Regulate development in and adjacent to areas with steep canyons, arroyos and fireprone vegetation.

HZ1.5.3 Where preservation of fire-prone vegetation in undeveloped areas is desirable and appropriate, require development setbacks as determined by the fire department on a project-by-project basis.

HZ1.5.4 Require new development in areas susceptible to wildfires to be responsible for fire prevention activities (e.g., visible house numbering and use of fire-resistant and fireretardant building and landscape materials) and to also provide a defensible zone to inhibit the spread of wildfires.

HZ1.5.5 Maintain all access roads and driveways so as to ensure the fire department safe and expedient passage at all times.

HZ1.5.6 Abate hazardous buildings and conditions.

Cf. HZ2.2.3, Goal HZ4, CC6.1.8, NRC3.2.

HZ1.5.7 Discourage locating public structures and utilities in high or extreme fire hazard areas.

HZ1.5.8 Promote fire safety and prevention programs for high occupancy uses.

22.601
HZ1.5.9 Evaluate feasibility of relocating essential public facilities located within VHFHSZs to areas outside of this hazard zone. If relocation isn't possible, prioritize retrofitting and hardening of structures.

HZ1.5.10 Maintain a weed abatement program to ensure clearing of dry brush areas.

HZ1.6 Encourage the regular review of existing codes as they relate to life safety.

HZ1.6.1 Periodically update existing codes to address life safety issues.

HZ1.6.2 Minimize urban and wildland fire exposure for residents, business owners, and visitors by incorporating up-to-date fire safe design per the latest fire and building codes into existing and new developments.

GOAL HZ2 Clean air
HZ2.1 Strive to achieve State and federal air quality standards for the region.

HZ2.1.1 Support and implement local actions and County, State and federal legislation promoting the reduced emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

HZ2.1.2 Investigate methods for developing a carbon dioxide budget for the City that limits carbon dioxide emissions.

HZ2.1.3 Implement chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) recycling and elimination regulations.

HZ2.1.4 Strive to eliminate the use of polystyrene foam (PSF) packaging products throughout the city.

HZ2.2 Address localized air quality issues, including indoor air quality.

HZ2.2.1 Require future development projects to implement applicable Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) control measure and/or air quality mitigations in the design of new projects as set forth in the District’s “CEQA Guidelines.” Cf. M3.3.4.

HZ2.2.2 Permit major indirect sources of air pollution only if they provide transportation measures to reduce their impacts to a less-than-significant level, consistent with applicable MBUAPCD recommended mitigation and control measures as set forth in the District’s “CEQA Guidelines.” Cf. LU1.2.

HZ2.2.3 Locate air pollution-sensitive land uses away from major sources of air pollution or require mitigation measures to protect residential and sensitive land uses from freeways, arterials, point source polluters, and hazardous material locations. Cf. LU1.2, HZ1.5.6, Goal HZ4, CC6.1.8, NRC3.2.

HZ2.2.4 Encourage public education programs promoting reduced emissions from transportation-generated pollutants and area-wide sources.

HZ2.2.5 Implement and enforce the Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance.

HZ2.2.6 Support MBUAPCD air pollution control strategies, air quality monitoring and enforcement activities.

HZ2.2.7 Encourage building design and construction techniques, such as operable windows and use of alternative energy sources rather than natural gas, as a means to improve indoor air quality.

GOAL HZ3 Noise levels compatible with occupancy and use HZ3.1 Maintain or reduce existing noise levels and control excessive noise.

HZ3.1.1 Require land uses to operate at noise levels that do not significantly increase surrounding ambient noise.

22.602
HZ3.1.2 Use site planning and design approaches to minimize noise impacts from new development on surrounding land uses.

HZ3.1.3 Ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses.

HZ3.1.4 Minimize the impacts of intermittent urban noise on residents.

HZ3.1.5 Develop a system to monitor construction noise impacts on surrounding land uses.

HZ3.1.6 Require evaluation of noise mitigation measures for projects that would substantially increase noise.

HZ3.1.7 Protect residential areas from excessive noise from traffic and from road projects. Cf.

M3.3.4, M3.3.6.

HZ3.1.8 Require environmental review and mitigation of roadway projects that may significantly increase the average day/night noise levels.

HZ3.1.9 Limit truck traffic in residential and commercial areas to designated truck routes.

HZ3.1.10 Where noise reduction would be beneficial, consider installing quiet pavement surfaces as part of repaving projects.

HZ3.1.11 Require soundwalls, earth berms, setbacks, and other noise reduction techniques for new development, when appropriate and necessary, as conditions of approval.

HZ3.2 Ensure that noise standards are met in the siting of noise-sensitive uses. Cf. LU3.2.7.

HZ3.2.1 Apply noise and land use compatibility table and standards to all new residential, commercial, and mixed-use proposals, including condominium conversions in accordance with standards set forth in the Land Use-Noise Compatibility Standards Figure 2.

HZ3.2.2 Establish Ldn noise level targets of 65 dBA for outdoor activity areas in new multifamily residential developments.

HZ3.2.3 Require that interior noise in all new multifamily housing not exceed an Ldn of 45 dBA with the windows and doors closed (State of California Noise Insulation Standards) and extend the requirement to single-family homes.

GOAL HZ4 Reduced danger and impacts from hazardous materials Cf. HZ1.5.6, HZ2.2.3, CC6.1.8, NRC3.2.

HZ4.1 Regulate hazardous wastes with respect to potential leakage, explosions, fires, escape of harmful gases, or formation of new hazardous substances.

HZ4.1.1 Work with the County’s Environmental Health Services, the County, and other groups in adopting, implementing, and updating a countywide Hazardous Waste Management Plan and Joint County Hazardous Materials Ocean Response Plan.

HZ4.1.2 Establish guidelines for hours, methods, routes, and amounts of hazardous waste being transported through the city.

HZ4.1.3 Monitor the City-County agreement for administering and enforcing hazardous materials regulations, and recommend any needed changes.

HZ4.1.4 Reduce the use of toxic materials in the community and prevent their disposal into the air, water, or soil.

HZ4.1.5 Require Building Maintenance and other City staff to use nontoxic materials whenever possible.

HZ4.1.6 Emphasize the city’s role as an organic agricultural center and work with appropriate agencies to develop demonstration projects on non-chemical pest control and soil

22.603
management practices. Cf. CC6.1.8, NRC3.2.

HZ4.1.7 Work with the County’s Environmental Health Services department and other agencies to establish an educational outreach program for businesses and residents regarding the safe use, recycling, and disposal of toxic materials; reducing the use of hazardous household wastes; and acceptable substitutes for toxic substances.

HZ4.2 Ensure proper handling and disposal of hazardous waste.

HZ4.2.1 Maintain the Hazardous Household Wastes facility for Santa Cruz residents to dispose hazardous materials safely and legally.

HZ4.2.2 Continue to offer a program for households and businesses to turn in unwanted Hazardous Household Wastes.

HZ4.2.3 Prevent illegal dumping of hazardous waste at the Resource Recovery Facility.

HZ4.2.4 Work with local pharmacies to provide citizens with safe and legal drop-off opportunities for unwanted and unused medications and sharps.

HZ4.3 Ensure that resources are available for quick and proper response to hazardous-waste emergencies. Cf. CC7.1.6 and HZ1.2.

HZ4.3.1 Train personnel and ensure that resources are available to quickly respond to hazardous-waste emergencies.

HZ4.4 Reduce the risk of exposure to hazardous materials from sites being developed or redeveloped.

HZ4.4.1 Regulate the siting and permitting of businesses that handle hazardous materials, and assure that safe handling and use information from those businesses is provided to fire protection and other safety agencies.

HZ4.4.2 Periodically review and update procedures for land uses that handle, store, or transport lead, mercury, vinyl chloride, benzene, asbestos, beryllium, or other hazardous materials.

HZ4.5 Maintain Santa Cruz as a nuclear free zone.

GOAL HZ5 Minimal light pollution
HZ5.1 Reduce light pollution. Cf. CD3.6, M1.6.1, M3.2.10, NRC7.1.2.

HZ5.1.1 Investigate the merits of a “dark sky ordinance” and the standards and enforcement efforts required.

HZ5.1.2 Develop lighting design guidelines that reduce light spillage both upward and onto adjoining properties.

HZ5.1.3 Consider appropriateness of lighting when reviewing proposed development or renovation of parks and recreation facilities.

GOAL HZ6 Protection from natural hazards
HZ6.1 Reduce erosion hazards.

HZ6.1.1 Minimize hazards posed by coastal cliff retreat.

HZ6.1.2 For development adjacent to cliffs, require setbacks for buildings equal to 50 years of anticipated cliff retreat.

HZ6.2 Discourage development on unstable slopes.

HZ6.2.1 Require engineering geology reports when, in the opinion of the City’s planning director, excavation and grading have the potential for exposure to slope instability or the potential to create unstable slope or soil conditions.

22.604
HZ6.3 Reduce the potential for life loss, injury, and property and economic damage from earthquakes, liquefaction, and other seismic hazards.

HZ6.3.1 Adopt new State-approved California Building Codes (CBC) and require that all new construction conform with the latest edition of the CBC.

HZ6.3.2 Complete seismic retrofit of unreinforced masonry buildings within the city in accordance with the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.

HZ6.3.3 Require earthquake retrofit in connection with repair or alterations, and use the City’s Rehabilitation Program, where appropriate, to manage the work.

HZ6.3.4 When feasible, upgrade sewer, water, and other piping to withstand seismic shaking and differential settlement.

HZ6.3.5 Consider an automatic gas shutoff ordinance for buildings within the city to reduce fire hazards related to seismic shaking.

HZ6.3.6 Require site specific geologic investigation(s) by qualified professionals for proposed development in potential liquefaction areas shown on the Liquefaction Hazard Map to assess potential liquefaction hazards, and require developments to incorporate the design and other mitigation measures recommended by the investigation(s).

HZ6.4 Avoid or reduce the potential for life loss, injury, and property and economic damage from flooding.

HZ6.4.1 Address the effects of global warming through changes in land use and building codes for low-lying areas that may be flooded by increases in sea levels and storm violence.

HZ6.4.2 Increase public awareness of flood hazards.

HZ6.4.3 Ensure that flood information is made available to property owners, potential buyers, and residents living in floodplains and coastal inundation areas, and encourage them to participate in the Federal Flood Insurance Program.

HZ6.4.4 Work with creek side property owners to reduce and mitigate flood hazards.

HZ6.4.5 Continue to reduce flooding hazards in areas with flood potential.

HZ6.4.6 Regulate and provide guidelines for construction and development in floodplains.

HZ6.4.7 Restrict or prohibit uses in undeveloped flood areas, and maintain floodplain and floodway regulations in developed flood areas.

HZ6.4.8 Minimize the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers that accommodate or channel floodwaters.

HZ6.4.9 Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development that may increase flood potential.

HZ6.4.10 Limit the amount of impervious surface in flood-prone areas.

HZ6.4.11 Identify and annually review areas subject to floods.

HZ6.4.12 Evaluate all development proposals located in areas that are subject to flooding to minimize the exposure of life and property to potential flood risks.

HZ6.4.13 Promote low impact development and green infrastructure that can help convey stormwater and reduce impacts from flooding.

HZ6.4.14 Establish cooperative working relationships among public agencies with responsibility for flood protection.

HZ6.4.15 Encourage new development to maintain and enhance existing natural streams, as feasible.

HZ6.5 Minimize dredging pursuant to appropriate management plans.

22.605
HZ6.6 Avoid or reduce the potential for life loss, injury, and property and economic damage to the city from tsunamis and dam failure.

HZ6.6.1 Continue to enhance emergency management systems and develop patrol activities to ensure early warning for evacuation of areas susceptible to natural flooding, tsunami inundation, seiches, or dam failure.

HZ6.6.2 Institute a flood warning system for developed areas in floodplains, tsunami inundation areas, and areas affected by Newell Creek dam failure.

HZ6.6.3 Periodically review evacuation plans for flooding, potential dam failures, and tsunami inundation areas. Cf. HZ1.3.1.

22.606
On June 14, 2022, the City Council directed staff to analyze and consider ten policies or actions for inclusion in the 6th Cycle Housing Element update. The policies and actions are listed below in italics followed by information on how those policies and actions are being addressed in the draft Housing Element update.
1) Develop policies and action items that support Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing by seeking to combat housing discrimination, undo historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access in order to foster a more inclusive community and help achieve racial equity and fair housing choice.

Policy directions can include: prioritizing rezoning in higher resource, historically exclusionary neighborhoods; housing replacement programs/tenant protections for redevelopment of rental housing projects; homeownership opportunities for historically excluded groups. Consider citywide tools and outreach strategies, including engagement of underserved communities, to help address disproportionate housing needs as well as direct and indirect displacement risks.

One of the seven goals of the Housing Element Update is to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH).

The goal states: “The City shall seek to combat housing discrimination, undo historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access to foster a more inclusive community and help achieve racial equity and fair housing choice.”
Under the AFFH goal, there are four policies as listed below.

Policy 6.1: Seek to mitigate displacement risks and remove barriers to housing choice vouchers.

Policy 6.2: Support affordable housing and the siting of new housing that furthers fair housing.

Policy 6.3: Support the development and marketing of accessible housing, senior housing, and tenant services.

Policy 6.4: Consider displacement risks due to new development, economic trends, and the environment, and provide community investments to support fair housing.

These policies each have multiple objectives for the City to achieve in the coming Housing Element cycle.

Several objectives are listed below that specifically meet the policy options listed in the Council direction.

6.2b. Continue to implement the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance to create mixed-income developments throughout the City. Facilitate the development of a minimum of 250 affordable units through the Inclusionary Ordinance.

6.2c. Revise ADU regulations to provide additional units in single-family zoning by such methods as removing owner occupancy requirements, allowing additional ADUs under certain circumstances, or similar measures.

6.2d. Adopt an ordinance that expands housing opportunities in single-family zones by amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow the conversion of larger homes to multiple units when doing so would currently exceed limitations on types of housing allowed and would currently exceed density limits.

22.607

6.3a. Work with landlords, the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz, and the regional center for developmental services to create a list of properties suitable and available for persons with disabilities and seniors.

6.3b. Continue to fund bi-lingual tenant legal counseling services, and continue to update and provide understandable, bi-lingual information about most readily used housing/tenant laws, such as the City’s Large Rent Increase Ordinance, Relocation Assistance Ordinance, or State rental application law.

6.4a. Apply for at least one grant per year focused on improving community assets such as recreational facilities and programs, social service programs, parks, streets, active transportation, and infrastructure in areas identified as those in highest need.

6.4b. Amend the City’s Relocation Ordinance to include Right of First Refusal requirements for existing, low-income households who are vacated from their housing situation due to redevelopment.

6.4c. Maintain, implement, and update the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and Climate Adaptation Plan (CAdP) on the required schedule to, among other things, reduce the likelihood of displacement associated with flooding, sea level rise, and wildfire.

There are many other objectives throughout the draft Housing Element policy chapter that overlap with AFFH goals. These objectives are highlighted with an “(AFFH)” tag listed after an objective’s relevant policies. Additional information for AFFH items includes their corresponding AFFH category or categories, their geographic target, and their metric information.

The following two direction items were considered together in the responses below them. 2) Explore creative approaches to incentivizing higher density residential development and/or smaller units, within the same or slightly larger building volume, such as expanding locations that allow Flexible Density Units or creating a citywide average unit size density ordinance like that of the City of Santa Barbara.
3) Evaluate possible locations where additional residential capacity, development height, and/or density maximums could potentially be increased, including but not limited to exploring the use of SB 10 legislation that allows the City to change the General Plan and Zoning of properties to accommodate up to 10 units, regardless of property size, and without triggering California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, so long as the property is located in a transit-rich area or is an urban infill site as defined by the State of California (Government Code: 65913.5). Include Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing objectives in the event that residential capacity increases are being evaluated.

The Draft Housing Element Update includes objectives that support Council direction items #2 and #3.

There is some overlap as these objectives were combined to meeting multiple policies. These objectives are listed under the AFFH section because they meet those policies as well. Single-family zoning has a history of exclusion so policies and objectives seeking to densify or provide a greater variety of housing options in single family zoning satisfy AFFH objectives.

22.608

1.3e. Adopt code changes that utilize SB 10 allowances to increase residential density in transit rich areas, including evaluation of how deed-restricted affordable housing can be added.

6.2c. Revise ADU regulations to provide additional units in single-family zoning by such methods as removing owner occupancy requirements, allowing additional ADUs under certain circumstances, or similar measures.

6.2d. Adopt an ordinance that expands housing opportunities in single-family zones by amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow the conversion of larger homes to multiple units when doing so would currently exceed limitations on types of housing allowed and would currently exceed density limits.

6.2d. Expand the use of Flexible Density Units into more zoning districts in conjunction with an SB 10 overlay district to provide opportunities for more small units in the City, particularly in higher resource areas.
4) Consider evaluation of site inventory capacities that exceed the RHNA amount. A small excess capacity could serve as a buffer that allows the Housing Element to still be certified, even if HCD does not approve of certain site capacities identified in the update. Such additional capacity could also give the City a greater chance of meeting its RHNA targets during the Housing Element Cycle.

The sites inventory in this draft Housing Element Update includes capacities that exceed the RHNA amount by a considerable margin. The sites inventory exceeds the Very Low and Low-income category by 25%, the Moderate-income category by 25%, and the Above Moderate-income category by 74%. HCD recommends a 15-30% buffer, so these buffers meet or exceed this recommendation. 5) Consider allowing 100% affordable residential development to be considered a “by-right” use that only requires ministerial Planning approval and Building Permits to be constructed.

Two objectives listed below satisfy this Council direction.

2.2g. Adopt an ordinance that allows 100 percent affordable residential development that conforms to applicable objective standards, not including density bonus waivers and concessions/incentives, to be considered a “by-right” use that only requires ministerial Planning approval and Building Permits to be constructed in residential and mixed-use zones.

3.4c. Continue to facilitate 100 percent affordable supportive housing projects that comply with Government Code Section 65651 (AB 2162) and permit this use without discretionary review, and on a project-by-project basis, go beyond state law and establish qualifying projects above 50 units as by-right development.
6) Evaluate whether alternative inclusionary approaches may produce more affordable housing or deeper levels of affordability. Options to consider could include alternative inclusionary percentages

22.609
based on differing levels of affordability or incentivizing land dedication versus provision of units on-site.

Following this evaluation, consider whether changes to the inclusionary regulations should be proposed.

Objective 2.1a satisfies this direction:

2.1a. Maintain and implement the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance. Review the Inclusionary Ordinance to determine if amendments are needed to ensure that the inclusionary requirements provide the maximum number of affordable units or deeper levels of affordability without being a barrier to housing development, while considering implications for how developers will use density bonus and how the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance interfaces with density bonus proposals. Analysis will evaluate affordability levels to incentivize deeper levels of affordable housing, such as extremely low income units, or more moderate income units depending on needs.
7) Consider policy changes, such as updates to square footage or development standards, which can incentivize and promote Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) production, including creative approaches that go beyond minimum state requirements, and evaluate implications of whether the maximum allowable square footage for an ADU could be allocated to multiple ADUs rather than one single ADU. Consider mid-cycle adjustment if ADU permitting activity is lower than estimated in the housing element.

Several objectives in the draft Housing Element Update satisfy this direction.

1.5a. Maintain an inventory of ADU applications, location, affordability, etc. to ensure adequate ADU development is occurring to meet the 6th cycle RHNA. Annually review ADU development progress as part of the HCD Annual Progress Report and if necessary, adopt amendments to the ADU development regulations within 18 months of the annual review to further facilitate ADU production.

1.5b. Continue to implement the City’s ADU program and communicate with ADU applicants to identify ways to modify the program in a manner that facilitates the production of ADUs, including continuation of the allowance for conversion of non-habitable space in multi-family projects to ADUs to be constructed simultaneously with new development projects. Continue public awareness campaigns regarding the construction of ADUs and available incentives through diverse forms of media and outreach distribution.

1.5c. Provide streamlined processing and reduced plan check costs for ADU building plans that have been approved at another site within the City, while recognizing that various items, such as setbacks, utility connections, soil conditions, archeological resources, and other issues, will require applicants to submit site-specific information that will require the City’s review and associated fees.

1.5e. Present to Council amendments to the City’s ADU regulations regarding owner occupancy to provide greater flexibility to existing and future ADU developments.

1.5f. Annually survey ADU owners to receive information on types of rental and affordability levels to help ensure accurate Annual Progress Report accounting.

22.610

6.2b. Adopt an ordinance that expands housing opportunities in single-family zones by amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow the conversion of larger homes to multiple units when doing so would currently exceed limitations on types of housing allowed and would currently exceed density limits.
8) Consider reducing other barriers to development such as: reduction of parking minimums; reduction of impact fees; delaying the collection of impact fees until the issuance of the certificate of occupancy to reduce financial impacts on new housing and make the units cheaper by not asking the developer to carry impact fee charges or debt throughout the construction phase.

1.3c. Adopt code changes that reduce parking requirements, increase shared parking allowances, and increase off-site parking allowances to further facilitate housing, with the ultimate goal to eliminate parking minimums citywide by January 2028.

1.3d. Conduct a fee review to determine if the current fee structure covers applicable City costs for projects of varying sizes and scopes.
9) In the event that rezoning for additional housing capacity is required as part of the Housing Element process, only consider residential use in industrial land if it is ancillary to industrial land’s full employment capacity being achieved in an economically viable manner.

No rezoning is proposed as part of the Housing Element update process. The preservation of industrial lands is still supported in the City’s 2030 General Plan and is reflected in the draft Housing Element objective below (with some additional consideration given to the Coral Street Vision Plan):

1.2e. Support a balance of jobs and housing land uses by only considering residential use in industrial land if it is ancillary to industrial land’s full employment capacity being achieved in an economically viable manner and if it does not negatively impact existing or future industrial uses in the area, except in the vicinity of Coral Street on properties where homeless services or affordable housing are identified in the properties’ respective General Plan Land Use Designations as an allowable use. Adopt a Coral Street Overlay that builds off existing services and resources to provide homeless services and related residential use standards for that specific, immediate area.
10) Expeditiously perform any necessary rezoning after Housing Element certification.

No rezonings are proposed in the Draft Housing Element Sites Inventory. Rezonings are currently being considered as part of the Downtown Plan Expansion project but not included in the sites inventory because they are not approved yet, and it is simpler to keep the Housing Element from being tied to specific rezoning actions. Additional housing capacity in the Downtown Plan Expansion area would further the City’s ability to meet its housing production targets set by the State for this upcoming Housing Element cycle and for future ones.

22.611
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Housing Element Update Survey Report
On September 29, 2022, the City launched an online community survey to gather input on housing needs and policy programs. The survey was available through November 14, 2022, and it gathered a total of 421 responses. This report details the input received and respondent demographics.

1. Housing Type Needs
The survey asked participants to select the housing types that they think are needed in Santa Cruz. Overall, the data shows a need for Affordable Housing and Multi-Family Housing over other housing types.

Participants also highly favored For-Rent Apartments over For-Sale Condos. Participants least favored Townhomes and Multi-Generational Housing. Table 1 includes additional recommendations provided under the Other category.

2. Priority Housing Types
Participants were asked to select three housing types from the previous survey question to prioritize in future developments in Santa Cruz. Overall, the data shows that participants favored Affordable Housing, Multi-Family Housing, and For-Rent Apartments.
302
228
163
366
212
146
278
227
249
192
196
243
69 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Multi-Family Housing
ADUs
Townhomes
Affordable Housing
Duplexes/Triplexes
For-Sale Condos
For-Rent Apartments
Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Mixed-Income Housing
Multi-Generational Housing
Senior Housing
Supportive or Transitional Housing
Other

22.612
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update

3. Housing Types in Existing Single-Family Neighborhoods To assess other housing opportunities, the survey asked participants what housing types they could see being added in existing single-family neighborhoods. Overall, most participants reported ADUs. In second and third, participants preferred Duplexes/Triplexes and 1-3 Story Apartments. The results show that participants were least interested in adding denser and taller developments and preferred to see a continuity in development types.
181
68 38
286
63 36
160
54 96
41 50
96 40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Multi-Family Housing
ADUs
Townhomes
Affordable Housing
Duplexes/Triplexes
For-Sale Condos
For-Rent Apartments
Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Mixed-Income Housing
Multi-Generational Housing
Senior Housing
Supportive or Transitional Housing
Other
272
163
249
149
232
124
35 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
ADUs
Townhomes
Duplexes/Triplexes
Mixed-Use Development
1-3 Story Apartment Condos
Apartments/Condos 4 Stories or highers
Other

22.613
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update

4. Areas for Housing Development
The survey asked participants if there were any areas where they think future housing should be developed. The responses highly favored the Downtown area, followed by the West Side, Lower West Side, and transit corridor. Participants generally showed interest in developing housing city-wide. Areas around High Street, Lower East, Bay Street, the Golf Course were recommended to be left as-is. All survey responses are shown in Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development.

5. For-Sale or For-Rent Housing
Needs
The survey asked participants what type of housing is
more needed in Santa Cruz between for-sale and forrent housing. The responses show a lack of both, but with an emphasis on for-rent. Few participants
believed that there is a lack of just for-sale housing in the City.

6. Programs
Community Assistance
To gain feedback and perspective on potential community assistance programs, participants were asked to rate different issues based on importance (1 being the most important and 5 being the least important).

Overall, participants favored housing information and rental assistance. Property maintenance received the most 3-rating responses – indicating a general interest but not of heavy importance.

Fair Housing
Additional programs relating to fair housing assistance were also provided to provide examples and gain insight into the community’s sentiments on the topic. As with community assistance, participants were asked to rate the different issues based on importance (1 being the most important and 5 being the least important). Overall, most participants were in support of all four fair housing programs. Supportive housing and the promotion of fair housing both collected the most support through “1” and “2” ratings. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Housing rental assistance (Identify funding
assistance for renters - rental assistance and aging in place)
Property maintenance (Programs to provide funding
for home maintenance, rehabilitation, and upkeep)
Housing information (Information on affordable
housing opportunities and funding available to the
public)
1 2 3 4 5
162
16 242
Rent
Sale
Both

22.614
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Programs to assist persons with disabilities and seniors collected the most “3” ratings – indicating an interest but not an urgency in addressing.

7. Special Housing Needs Groups
Jurisdictions are required to address the various housing needs of special needs groups. The survey asked participants which HCD-defined special housing needs groups were most in need of housing and/or related services in Santa Cruz. Overall, participants believed that persons experiencing homelessness were most in need of housing and/or related services. Students, persons with disabilities, and seniors over 65 years of age also received higher scores. This indicates a need to specifically address the needs of these four groups and consider additional programs for each. As part of the Housing Element outreach, the City held stakeholder meetings with students/renters, homeless and disability service providers, and seniors. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Promote fair housing (Provide programs and policies
to address fair housing issues)
Senior Housing Programs (Encourage the
development of housing that is accessible and
supportive for senior citizens)
Persons with disabilities (Encourage the
development of housing accessible to persons with
disabilities)
Supportive Housing (Provide for emergency short
and long-term housing needs)
1 2 3 4 5
139
66 144
308
91 82
187
50 38
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Seniors (65+ years)
Large households
Persons with disabilities
Persons experiencing homelessness
Female-headed households
Farmworkers
Students
Veterans
Other

22.615
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update

8. Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz
The survey below asked participants to describe their
vision for the future of housing in Santa Cruz in 20 words or less. In total, 421 responses were received. Out of all of the responses, residents of Santa Cruz envisioned a
future with affordable housing, housing variety, greater bikability and walkability, an increased in mixed-uses, and higher density near Downtown and transit corridors.

All survey responses are shown in Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz.

9. Demographics
The survey concluded with questions on demographics
to understand who was reached and who provided
feedback. This was aimed at ensuring equity in
engagement.

The questions collected information about whether
participants live or work in Santa Cruz, which
neighborhood or area they live in, whether they are a
renter or homeowner, and their age.

At 56 percent, over half of participants live and work in the city. Another 22 percent live in Santa Cruz and seven percent work in the city. Students represented four
percent of respondents. Eight percent selected “other.” Of those who noted they live in Santa Cruz, 41 percent
are renters and 51 percent are homeowners. In addition, 46 percent live on the west side of the city, 41 percent live on the east side, and 13 percent live downtown. This shows a fair split between the two sides of Santa Cruz
where the majority of housing and neighborhoods are
located.

Lastly, the age breakdown of participants also remained fairly even. A total of 20 percent were 65 years or older, 20 percent were 50-64 years, and 31 percent were
between 35-49 years. Young adults between 18 and 34
represented 29 percent of respondents.
93 31
234
10 18
33 I live in Santa
Cruz
I work in Santa
Cruz
Both - I live and
work in Santa
Cruz
I own property in
Santa Cruz that I
rent to others
I am a student
Other
6%
20%
20%
6%
26%
10%
13%
Upper West
Side
Lower West
Side
West Side
Upper East Side
East Side
Seabright
Downtown
121
129
84 84
Less than 18
years
18-34 years
35-49 years
50-64 years
65 years or
older

22.616
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 1: Other “Housing Types” Recommendations
SROs very low income senior housing/assisted living for seniors living on Social Security only;
Very dense housing Housing for childcare providers
Student housing Mental Health Supportive Housing and Tiny Homes Housing no higher than 4 stories including
affordable house & Density bonus
High density housing near centers of work, the
university, and main transit routes. E.g 10+ story
apartments
Price-Restricted Housing With Resale
Restrictions
Co-living
Affordable mobile home parks on City
properties
Housing opportunities for individuals experiencing
homelessness who may have barriers to low-income
housing. Also, meaningful housing opportunities for
individuals with mental illness.;
On campus housing for UCSC students and
staff
Small Entry Level units needed greatly, ex: micro
apartments & micro flats. Alongside mixed-use
buildings.;
Single income housing Social/Public Housing
housing for Developmentally Disabled Section 8 specific - people willing to accept vouchers and incentive for those people
There is nothing avail for adults with
disabilities. we are struggling
Housing for homeless youth
Single-family housing Free nightly private pods for anyone who asks. Junkie, student, traveler, mendicant monk, anyone
Tiny homes as transitional housing for those
experiencing homelessness
Missing Middle Housing
Dense high rise apartment buildings Low cost/subsidized RV park for those who can document a long term Santa Cruz residency;
Mixed-use developments very low income senior housing/assisted living for seniors living on Social Security only;
Workforce housing Housing for childcare providers
housing specifically for public servants
(police officers, teachers, firefighters) and a
separate neighborhood for ultra-dense UCSC
housing
Mental Health Supportive Housing and Tiny Homes
Tiny home villages; including cooperative
living resources and community
High density housing near centers of work, the
university, and main transit routes. E.g 10+ story
apartments
manufactured homes (aka mobile homes Co-living
tiny homes Housing opportunities for individuals experiencing homelessness who may have barriers to low-income
housing. Also, meaningful housing opportunities for
individuals with mental illness.;
trailer courts with low cost mobile homes Immediate transitional housing such as safe parking spaces for RVs, supportive camps for those most at
risk of becoming "on the streets" homeless

22.617
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Multi-family in areas with high median income to increase equity and diversity.

West side
downtown, busy streets throughout town
Lower west side needs more mixed use development to be more walkable to amenities. Grocery store with apartments on top on the lower west side would be fab.

NOT on the corner of Branciforte and Water st.

Everywhere, no one can get housing.

Corridors should be prioritized for the most dense development (4+ stories), increase density in single family adjacent to corridors stepping it down as you get further from the major corridors, increase the housing types in single family neighborhoods to increase density and better utilize available land, we need to encourage as much infill redevelopment as possible Near base of the UCSC campus and along major commuter routes to campus. All throughout the west side.

Downtown & lower West side near campus
downtown area and lower west side
Downtown; west side. Density near transit, services, schools, etc. downtown and lower west side
Areas with access to everyday needs, like bus, shopping, recreation, grocery stores, etc. corridors, downtown, harvey west? (unsure), lower ocean, beach flats, close to university (maybe along highstreet)
I think downtown and the upper west side near the base of the UCSC campus would be best as they are closest to transit leading to UCSC and downtown. Another area for more housing would be along the Mission Street corridor where there are more shops and transit as well. downtown and base of UCSC campus
Downtown and the west side on the hill
The downtown core should absolutely be densified, with the mixed use library project and the Church parking lot project excellent examples. Single family zoning citywide should be abolished completely; at a minimum, it should be legal and simple to convert pretty much any existing SFH to a duplex to fourplex. Hundreds if not thousands of students and workers are renting existing single family homes at exorbitant rents because of the housing shortage. I live with six other students in a house built for one family on the upper west side, and I am considered lucky among my peers. It is absolutely the university's responsibility to build more housing on its campus but the Upper West Side and Lower West Side in particular need more units available to rent; it will massively ease UCSC students' housing burden (we are the most food and housing insecure student body in the UC system in no small part to the city's failure to build housing) and benefit existing residents and their children, who would otherwise never be able to live in this city.

Everywhere, but especially the areas of "highest resource" such as the upper and lower westside, de la viega, and seabright neighborhoods.

Upper westside on the large lot near Western Dr. Deleware Ave near Natural Bridges Dr. UCSC for student housing.

By westside Parrish/Safeway where Shebrah puts her giant signs Convert San Lorenzo park
Upper Westside, close to the University

22.618
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Every single area of the City needs to have more housing. Downtown can be a focus, but we need to prioritize building housing near the main transit corridors, again in all areas of the City.

All over. Density is the answer.

Apartments/condos & duplex/triplexes in the Westside, as well as apartments/condos in the lower downtown area.

Multi-Unit apartments/condos should be developed with commercial below along Soquel Avenue, Ocean Street, Front, Pacific, Mission Street, etc. The major transit corridors for Metro with access to services close by.

High density housing that is subsidized in one form or another should be located near commercial and transit corridors. ADUs and duplexes are appropriate in neighborhoods with single family homes.

Santa Cruz has already added many units in high rise buildings. It isn't appropriate or necessary to continue to build beyond where commute and services can be provided. If we want to maintain a good quality of life, there are limits to be considered. We needn't house everyone that wants to live here, it isn't possible.

Restricting or eliminating short term rental properties could free up housing for year-round tenants.

My neighborhood used to have many homes that rented to students and young professionals. Those properties were sold and converted to Airbnbs. The city enjoys the tax revenue but has removed hundreds of units of housing.

No
I think housing needs to be developed everywhere in Santa Cruz, with an emphasis on higher densities along transportation corridors.
1) All curches in SCC that benefit from tax breaks should be REQUIRED to house homeless families/teens in their parking lots (this program can/should be expanded before entering any more neighborhoods). Perhaps the more they take on, the more of a tax break they rcv. 2) No more housing of homeless/trailors in Prospect Heights due to risk and people entering park hiking trails (we're doing our fair share w/the Armory, and their still creating fies/encampments in and adjacent to DeLa park.

So best to try another neighborhood as part of this/large motor home test before finalizing and growing at the Armory.

Downtown - good transit connections, high density mixed used Mission - major corridor, good transit, mixed use
Soquel corridor - same reasons
Harvey West seems like a great place to build larger apartment buildings, but only if proper walking/biking and busing infrastructure could be put in place to encourage non-car transportation.

UCSC should also be allowed to build more housing for students on campus, so off-campus rentals can free up for residents. Please, no more hotels.

Watsonville
East side, downtown
Opportunities to the optimize & intensify housing availability and densities should be considered everywhere, including in SFD neighborhoods
Downtown. Going into neighborhoods with 6+ story hideous buildings is outrageous, insulting to our entire City and cowardly on the side of City Government. What is happening with that giant complex that is supposed to be built on Ocean Street? That has been on the books for years but nothing is happening there. Stay out of the residential neighborhoods!!!

22.619
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
West end industrial, midtown, and downtown. Each has walkable grocery and services already in place. The infrastructure should also be more robust than Seabright or Live Oak. The roadways are already constrained making no need to expand public transport or marking and signaling. There’s probably points to bank against California climate goals as well.

North side of Delaware along the trail
West side industrial area. Watsonville.

East side especially along Soquel Ave., there are bus stops, stores, and restaurants making it a good area to develop
Anywhere and everywhere there is space.

Everywhere, but downtown is highest priority, then exurban/urban core.

Harvey west and surrounding area such as Golf Club Drive….close to employment centers.

Soquel, Water, Ocean St, Mission St… transportation corridors downtown, East side, near campus, along Bay St.
downtown along the river south of Laurel and along river street to highway one I’d love to see more 4+ story buildings on the west side to help address the UCSC housing crisis.

All of the above.
along the main corridors of ocean, mission, soquel and water, and downtown Anywhere there is an already-developed area with a surface parking lot. Westside, midtown, by Ocean Ave, near the boardwalk.

I thought the corridor idea the city was working on a few years ago was ideal. I attended a meeting to try to say so, but I was shouted down. Build along transit corridors, group near grocery stores, and, of course, concentrate downtown.

Seabright, downtown, Mission Street corridor.

Increase housing density downtown to take advantage of the shops/services, walkable neighborhood, and transit. Also maximize extra space on the west side by incentivizing homeowners to build ADUs and/or expand their homes for multi-family housing. Develop in desirable and walkable neighborhoods like Seabright and Live Oak too. Everywhere, really. We need more housing to meet demand and we need density to reduce car dependency (thereby improving air quality, noise, and GHG).

Everywhere especially West side near bus line yo UCSC, lots of infill opportunities also rezoning of unused industrially zoned space along Delaware and just below Route 1 Delaware & natural bridges drive area. Along train tracks on west side. Former homeless garden area.

Delaware Avenue; along the train tracks; open space near Toadal Fitness west side; Antonelli Pond area.

Re-zone unused or vacant industrial land. For example along the bike path/Delaware for multifamily housing.

Site of former sushi restaurant on Soquel -same side as Ristorante Italiano. Seems to be a large lot.

Housing along Ocean St, with continuous bus route along its length. Develop housing at the Emeline complex. Maybe the large field on Meder, for UCSC apartments. However, concerns about limited water supply and storage capacity must be considered realistically before adding more housing. And traffic impacts, of course.

East and west side. Downtown and midtown. UCSC campus
housing should be spread along the corridor streets at current zoning heights and densities; most of the corridors consist of open land (parking) or one story buildings, so lots more housing can be

22.620
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
provided by just going to 2 to 3 stories; the exception would be the upper part of Ocean Street which is more devoted to tourist and commercial uses and very busy -- not the most desirable street to live on.

Anywhere.

Westside: Develop that commercial space next off Delaware near Santa Cruz Nutritionals.

Downtown: Already in the works
Eastside: Plenty of old commercial buildings along Water Street can be demolished and new housing complexes can go there.

Downtown -- hub for transportation e.g., on/off hwy 17 & 1 as well as central bus depot.

Downtown -- less need to travel for groceries, food, entertainment, and outdoor public spaces Downtown -- the ability to go above the height restriction (which we definitely should go above the height restriction)
Mission St., Ocean St., Water St. - Plenty of room for dense, in-fill and mixed-use development Westside
UCSC needs to be able to house at least all of the Freshman class plus more ON CAMPUS Everywhere, especially our areas of high opportunity such as DeLa, Westside, and Seabright. downtown-converting office building interiors to affordable housing. river district-housing could be built in underutilized space near Costco. east side neighborhoods with large lot sizes are good candidates for duplex/triplex or ADUs Downtown - High density, near public transit, continue to revitalize the Downtown business environment, makes the area safer for everyone with more residents out & about. Westside area around Harvey West Park - higher density near Hwy 1/17/9 highway transportation nexus, make the area safer with more residents around. Along major road corridors with public transit-- Mission/Water, Soquel, and Westside around Swift St-Mission-Delaware.

Any and all areas situated more than 30 feet above the presnet mean sea level.

Upper Westside for students. Corridors such as Water, Soquel and Mission Streets for young professional commuters. Downtown for families.

Downtown should not be a commuter zone. We want people downtown who will enliven the city with their presence - familles. If we dedicate Downtown to students and young professional commuters downtown will remain an area devoid of a community feeling because the residents will always be gone (at work/school) and are a transient population. We need a community of long term dedicated residents who will bring vitality and a sense of 'ownership' to the city's core.

Upper and Lower westside for University students and faculty Downtown, upper and lower Westside
Build through the city low attractive housing. The industrial area on the west side would be a great area for a few high density buildings. Don’t cram everything into south downtown. The project in Live Oak is great.

Downtown--Mixed Use
Lower East and West. Let downtown be downtown.

Westside on Mission. Eastside Soquel Ave. Downtown. UCSC - mandate on site housing for all students,
No more on Water street, it is being maxed out with upcoming developments. WE do not need more smog/emissions.

22.621
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Prioritize dense development near transit with the purpose of reducing car-dependency and creating walkable neighborhoods.

All
East side for professionals who work on the west side
Everywhere
Seems like lots of pressure on Mid Town lately.

What about traffic/safety/infrastructure? With all the kickbacks or tax incentives for development, where is the planning and support for substantial extra need? If we as a community are asked to absorb the demand, the city and state and all stakeholders of the push need to be supportive and effective in securing ongoing safety and infrastructure demands.

Does the west side truly bear it's fair share (of both state mandates and of ever expanding UCSC housing needs?)
What about all the land on the west side around Swift and the old Wrigley building areas? Kind of unfair to have mid town neighborhoods bear the brunt on state-mandated growth so disproportionately.

Upper/Lower West Side, downtown
I don't think that there should be these massive, Las Vegas style apartment buildings here. There is no such thing as "affordable housing" here. If a townhome costs $400,000, it is considered affordable but it is not. I think that the use of "affordable Housing" as a descriptive is used to allow developers to build huge ugly buildings. There is no way to accommodate every single human that wants to live here "affordably". If someone wants affordability they are looking at the wrong place to live. Its just an unfortunate fact.
anywhere we have vacant land which is not a lot
Downtown and upper west side
I can't think of any area of the city where housing is not needed. For the Developmentally Disabled it is best to be bear service providers and public transit for the service providers.

Anyplace near a Metro route or shopping area. Near Cabrillo College (I know that's not the City of Santa Cruz, but it makes sense). NOT higher than 3 stories along the river or coastline. West side for student housing.

As all as it’s in a safe community, it doesn’t matter where it’s located. all areas
All around
Dont know and i am not an expert as to what housing or where. Others are more knowledgeable ... I do know that ALL housing for special needs adults is at 100% capacity. There is a massive unmet need here. We are not unique as this exists almost everywhere. It has become nearly impossible to afford to buy a 2nd home for an adult special needs person and staff it (staffing is short and terrible also) as fixer uppers start at about 800,000 dollars or more.

I think we are putting in way too many low income units already. This city cannot sustain the amount of building that is already in progress.

Downtown, east side
Anywhere within the Santa Cruz area. There is no affordable housing for those with disabilities, thus we are still waiting for a voucher for my son.

22.622
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
East side
Support focusing higher-density development on main transit corridors: Soquel, Water, Ocean, Mission, Swift, Bay, Delaware, Natural Bridges.
far westside - delaware, shaffer, mission st ext, downtown - mixed use and affordable housing In all neighborhoods
Downtown, but more housing needs to be mandated in Live Oak and in the County. The requirement for so much housing in the City needs to be reevaluated on many levels.

Lower east side
Live Oak and Westside
all- there ae possibilities everywhere and it should be spread out throughout the community Downtown, including possible expanded dt zone. Best location for affordable housing close to transit, jobs and services
Live oak, Westside industrial area
Corner of market street and water street
Old adolfs
Along the corridors. Water street between Morrissey and n Branciforte ,Soquel avenue between ocean and Morrissey
3 story limits so as to not take light and sun away from adjacent buildings Also downtown and not totally familiar with west side
Along the Raul trail!!!!
Downtown and major transit corridors like mission and the mission extension/delete areas, soquel ave, water street and ocean street and the beach flats. These are already denser areas on transit corridors with easy access to commercial areas.

Along transit corridors, eastside, downtown, westside
Transport corridors
Along transit lines. There should be no automobile parking and instead transit passes provided to residents.

Housing should be along major public transportation corridors Along transportation corridors with appropriate height limitations.

Lower West side is underdeveloped with mostly single family housing. It is a huge waste of space.

Downtown
Westside, especially in relation to the University students Along the main streets and transit corridors
As climate change continues we should recreate our past wetlands and floodplains. We should develop new downtowns in the upper and lower parts of both the Westside and the Eastside.

Development should take place on higher ground and let much of our current downtown return to its natural environment as a wetland. We must completely eliminate parking minimums and allow at least 4 story buildings on every lot in the city if we are serious about tackling our housing shortage.

East side , SoQuel , live oak, pleasure point Santa Cruz mid town Along busy thoroughfares such as Ocean St, Soquel Ave, Mission St., Delaware Ave, Seabright Ave, etc.

Upper westside, mostly. some on lower westside without destroying the beachy feel of the neighborhood. The eastside has been bearing the brunt of housing development. the unique charm of downtown is is danger of destruction by proposed high rises. keep the neighborhoods walkable!

22.623
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Both great parts of westside Mission and eastside Soquel could use and handle development of mixed use with heights greater than 3 stories with commercial on ground, they are both on transit, much better than “walling off” downtown with 7 story monoliths. Whose bone head idea was that? I avoid living downtown because of how often people are yelling there. I have had guys yell at, loudly insult, jump at me, and follow me there. It has also scared my dog to the point I can't take him with me there anymore. I would think building housing more densely there would make the most sense, except I understand other people feeling the same way about not wanting to be harassed so much.

I wonder about developing more housing up in the area of Thurber Ln and Branciforte and certainly around the UCSC campus and up past the Hilltop Apartments.

As a 37-year-old who doesn't want to live with roommates or be married, with a dog, I prefer ADUs.

It would be nice to have more homes to buy, but I think it still seems like a pipedream that houses would be built to the point they would become "affordable." I think it is just the case that more houses would exist that cost the same. The actual apartment buildings in the area seem to be extremely unaffordable.

Downtown
No options should be eliminated, it will also speed up things, without a selection process, all options are options.

No one area should have to take the brunt of extra housing and where’s the water coming from? The City is being ruined by over-development, with no thought about water, traffic, beach access and other quality of life issues. We don not want to become San Jose by the sea! Lower westside
On major corridors ie soquel and water . Ocean. mission street. Find something up the coast a little bit
Downtown needs revival. Westside adu’s for students to be integrated into the community.

Prioritize downtown for general single or elderly renters to create community oriented residential areas and Upper West Side for student renters
Other neighborhoods need multi-generational housing with a mix of unit sizes Most areas of the city could support some future housing but NOT until there is a comprehensive plan for moving people to jobs, recreation, etc. This means separate or separated routes for cars, bicycles and pedestrians. With bicycles going 25 mph or more they cannot be mixed with pedestrians and since everyone eventually walks, that must be given a high priority. Priory must also be given to adding housing in a way that is complimentary to the existing neighborhoods and that means few if any high rise development (over 4-5 stores generally) and setbacks from transportation routes.

Further the city must use citizen oversight committees as done with the water plans and lessen the influence of city planners and the money they waste on plans that go nowhere and always will==wharf plan, east and west side corridor plans, etc. all of which were not desired by the residents of the city.

I’d like to see housing clustered in walkable parts of neighborhoods like midtown and live oak. We need more on Westside around Almar too but traffic on Mission is a problem.

Stop creating market rate housing all over the city! This is just bringing more commuters to Santa Cruz, clogging our roadways and making us an even greater bedroom community for Silicon Valley.

We need low income housing for people who live and work in Santa Cruz County! There should be a height limit on all new development. We pay a lot of money to live in Santa Cruz because we like the small town vibe. We do not want Santa Cruz to become another Silicon Valley mess of urban sprawl

22.624
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
lacking any charm. The city leaders need to consider this with all new developments. They should be six stories or less. They should be created with a visual theme such as Victorian so that our town continues to have charm. Look to downtown Santa Barbara for inspiration. This town required that development follow a theme and the town is quite lovely. Our short-sightedness to not consider the visual appeal of new development is resulting in a loss of charm for our city. This will also result by starting to create skyscraper developments that do not belong in a small beach town.

The Westside just past 711 on Mission. This area is just empty space for 50 miles for the most part downtown but not in environmentally sensitive areas
The city needs to preserve the charm of Santa Cruz. If you turn it into San Jose you will be sacrificing assets for short period of gain. Look to LA and how Victorian neighborhoods, such as along Olympic Blvd, were sacrificed to multistory apartments -and now the whole location is unsavory. Growth is not always the best. You should thwart growth by developers and instead put the power in individual home owners, not corporations. People will build ADUs, if you make that process less complex, and even support it. The story is the city makes it super difficult.

Build multistory student dormitory complex with gondolas to campus somewhere to the East of campus.

Downtown
As close to UCSC as possible, tall and dense housing for students. Also, infill downtown and beach flats with tons of dense cheap housing near bus lines.

UCSC campus
Upper west side, upper east side, and areas close to the ocean could use some low-income housing to bring a more varied demographic to these areas of privilege Downtown and near transit. Rental units should be prioritized near UCSC and Cabrillo.

Soquel corridor; downtown; lower Westside; upper Westside; east side downtown should build up, multi story mixed use, large buildings, it can become a real city Areas w/ single family homes on larger lots close to public transportation and/or grocery stores, etc.

I think they should be in every area. Not just clustered into one area. city owned lots, motels/hotels with little use - allow converson to housing, industrial buildings with little to no use - allow conversion to housing, commercial buildings with little to no use - allow conversion to housing. Where underutilized lots abut existing low-rise or single story housing, insure any new housing development on those lots are limited in height with step backs on 2nd story and above facing existing housing, such that no solar blocking/noise/traffic impacts upon, and no looming building masses impact upon, existing bordering housing.

Westside, off Delaware
Downtown, and major corridors for 3 story apartments.

Asus in residential areas, giving major tax and permit cost breaks. Also, back off on ridiculously restrictive building codes.

Everywhere where transit and mobility options exist.

West side, end of Deleware near Marine Lab. There is empty space there that could accomodate multiple units.

Downtown and the east side corridor
The "outer" areas of the west side (as Mission Street heads towards Western Drive), upper east side, upper west side are all potential areas for housing development, and I am sure there are more.

22.625
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
However, I believe we need to be very careful about "over developing" in the historic downtown area.

Years ago, a lot of community effort went in to envisioning what we wanted our downtown to be like, and I fear that infill housing development of large, multi-story buildings is really not at all the vision that we worked so hard to make a reality. (The same goes for large, multi-story hotels!) There are main bus lines that connect to many areas in our city that are suitable for housing development, and many grocery stores and services are in walking or biking distance as well. The rail/trail also provides quicker walking routes to stores and services on the west side. I do not believe that the downtown area should be our main focus for large, infill development. There are plenty of other appropriate and accessible areas within the city limits.

There should be a lot of opportunity to densify along arterials and in existing mixed-use areas (Bay, Mission on the westside, the area around the UCSC entrance, downtown and south of downtown, along Soquel and Water, Seabright).

Lower west side (south of King and area between Swanton and Fair), lower east side. These areas have some vacant areas, older homes which are most likely not to current codes, and some existing multi family/apartment structures. I realize this may require the accommodation of some zoning law changes
Please plan, design, and build communities and neighbourhoods not just housing. Have a vision. Ask yourself would I want to live here, would I want my parents or children to live here? What will this look like in, 3, 5, 10, 20 years from now. What are the demands on the infrastructure? Stop the development; make what we already have truly affordable….. not Silicon Valley prices. Us local renters are being pushed out.

Downtown- taller buildings already fit in. More walkable and won’t affect traffic as bad Upper Westside- to alleviate already over impacted east side I don't understand this question. Santa Cruz needs more housing, period. Santa Cruz neighbors do everything to slow down construction, so any area is fine. The priority should be housing, the area does not matter, I think.

East side of Santa Cruz but in a controlled manner ..

Downtown
Wherever there is space to build.

Downtown (within reasonable walking distance to public transit and shopping for folks without cars.

Also need major improvements to existing public transportation) Golf course (some folks love it, and I hate to take that away, but it’s a water-waster, and the land could be better used for housing, imo)
Possibly west and north, like towards the Dimeo dump but maybe that’s too sprawl-ly. Also out at the end of Delaware, like by the homeless garden?🤷
west side
Housing development out toward Schaefer Road
Central to down town & public transportation
Downtown, lower west side, empty lots on Soquel Ave or Water Street such as old Ginza restaurant, not being used and is an eye sore.

Harvey west
Single family houses in downtown should be converted into at least multiplexes, preferably apartments.

Upper west side (particularly around Nobel) should be upzoned to allow for dense multiuse development to create a student district near UCSC

22.626
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Areas to be developed should be served by public transit so that commuting to work & shop is feasible
The Greenbelt initiative that was passed in the 70s worked for issues and circumstances 50 years ago but needs to be revisited. Residential neighborhood Development should be considered in the gray whale ranch and more creek preserve, Arana Gulch And pogonip properties.

Corridors Water, Broadway, Downtown, Soquel
Everywhere!
UCSC
Downtown. And any large empty lots where neighbors will not be impacted by loss of sunlight exposure.

West side is convenient for UCSC campus access, but I think if buses were improved that connected the East side to campus then that would also be feasible. wherever there is lower density. it needs to be near transportation and commercial areas and also where there are nearby schools and parks.

I support more mixed-use development downtown. I think the city would benefit from replacing parking with housing and investing more in transit. Curbing sprawl and increasing walkability / transitfriendliness is not only the only environmentally-friendly path forward, it's also beneficial for forming good communities!
Upper west side and the lower west side are good targets for development. That will be attractive for folks associated with the university and boost density
All of them! Put housing everywhere
Downtown, lower Westside
west side needs to take some of the burden of housing development. All seems slated for downtown and eastside so far.

Downtown
Downtown. That area has traditionally multi story apartment buildings. It concentrates those buildings in one area rather than impacting residential neighborhoods with massive high-rise development which is being pushed into the residential neighborhoods because of the "affordable" units that can be added to circumvent restrictions on the height of the buildings. The City of Santa Cruz needs to grow a spine and not be cowed by whiny for-profit developers who claim that the project would otherwise not work for them financially, We MUST see those financial projections - they are never disclosed. We have a right to see those financials as it involves public funding/allowances. You and I both know that we are being brainwashed by these "affordable" housing developers.

Downtown, and upper west side.

West side more density SRO housing along transit throughways close to campus.

Eastside on Soquel Avenue where the car dealerships are. I live here. We can handle affordable apartments here if the buildings aren't massive. Also, Fred Keeley has been researching the lot on Market and Water right behind his house. That project should go forward. Until we have about 2,000 affordable rental units, I don't believe any other for-profit developers should be allowed to build luxury apartments. The county should also finalize its tiny home ordinance updates so people can move forward with tiny home villages on rural properties. There are tons of empty parking lots on the westside where people could be allowed to temporarily park RVs while they rebuild homes destroyed by fire. The city could pay a manager to live there in one.

Housing needs to be developed throughout the city, not one area. As well as the county as a whole!

22.627
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
No over 10 story buildings downtown. It would dramatically change the skyline and take away the feel of low key Santa Cruz. We shouldn't have to change the town under pressure of the Warriors and Tech Companies of downtown. The Westside has several empty areas. UCSC should take some of the brunt of meeting the new housing required by the state. Interspersed through the corridors, mainly Soquel because of the school on Water/B-40.

Lower westside. Along major and medium corridors and near commercial area No.

I would say everywhere but only because I’m not well informed enough to know if any areas need it more.

Vacant lots should be developed first. All parts of the city are feasible.

Lower west side by natural bridges
Areas along existing and future transit routes and bikeways Downtown can certainly be redeveloped to feature taller mixed-purpose buildings (i.e. businesses on the ground floor and affordable apartments on all other floors). I support the in-process construction of apartments that is currently happening on Laurel and Pacific/Front St, and hope to see more buildings like this in the future.

High density SRO at UCSC/Westside - that's where the demand is growing.

Everywhere. Everywhere needs new housing.

Everywhere
Beach flats, towers downtown, charge tourists for the view on the top.

All of them. Build baby build!
everywhere
Throughout the entire county since this current lack of housing impacts all areas of the county.

Downtown, transit corridors, anywhere you see empty parking lots and strip malls, near campus.

I believe it's important to keep parks, existing homes (that are lived in), and small businesses in their place, and not repurpose them into homes.
1/2 mile from all active transportation and transit routes tall apartments should be legalized All neighborhoods should be building more housing. Zoning should be changed so larger buildings can go into SFH neighborhoods. We also need to abolish parking minimums throughout the city - this will also help in building more housing.

Centralized around the main public transit lines and the biggest employment areas to minimize traffic - so downtown/westside for the city and UCSC, Aptos for Cabrillo, the neighborhoods around Dominican Hospital. Also increasing funding and improving public transit should be part of this project.

Upper west side needs more student apartments. Lower east side needs help Because of the severity of the housing shortage anywhere with available lots should be considered.

Because UCSC is at the mercy of statewide housing policy for students, housing along bus routes between the campus and downtown would ease the strain county-wide. (To this effect, if it is possible to revisit the land use agreement for the campus to build more on-site housing, even better) Additionally, affordable units near downtown would be ideal due to the number of service-sector jobs that support our bustling tourism industry! Service staff should be able to live near their jobs, especially since those jobs often don't pay well enough to purchase a reliable vehicle.

Along that same line, denser housing options should be available along public transportation routes, such as the Soquel Ave/Water St. arteries, extending to Trevethan/city limits.

22.628
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
East side of Santa Cruz on the north side of Soquel Ave.

DOWNTOWN! Also around River street between San Lorenzo Lumber and the Tannery (maybe even upstream of there). These are great places that can support much larger buildings and mixed-use.

Everywhere
All areas could use further development. Housing prices are insane, and more housing that supports multiple families and apartments is desperately needed
Downtown should have more high rises. Harvey west seems like it has a lot of potential. Any where there is a surface parking lot should be developed.

The far west side along Delaware Avenue seems to have a lot of open space and it is close to key roads, public transportation and other necessities. There is a stretch along water Street between brands of 40 and Seabright where there Seems to be space, again along a major corridor near public transportation and other necessities.

More commercial based areas, such as downtown and areas around town where there are businesses for dense housing
downtown, upper and lower west side, upper and lower east-side Downtown - it's the most pedestrian area and well served by metro Busy roads- Mission St, Water St, Broadway, Front, Laurel, get UCSC to build housing for more students on or near campus
The artichoke farm for sale in westside could be another multifamily neighbourhood.

All the 1 story businesses on mission or delaware are taking massive space and could be 3-4 story mixed use buildings.
downtown and midtown, anywhere along public transportion routes/hubs west side toward Davenport, San Lorenzo, anywhere there's a camp really Mid town / lower east side along bus lines Soquel and water streets To begin with- downtown, no questions asked. Mixed use development surrounding a dense walkable downtown core would make santa cruz a wonderful place to live. And now, controversially- the west side is an excellent candidate for medium and high density housing in my opinion. So much of the land within it is used by small, low quality single family homes built in the 1970s. Tearing them down and replacing them with mixed use or purely residential developments would be an absolute boon for residents. Imagine living above a coffee shop, or walking directly to a laundromat without having to deal with mission street! Speaking of, mission street should also be considered as a candidate for tall buildings- frankly, there's no 'character' left to 'ruin.' Any changes to it would almost certainly be an improvement.

Skyscrapers providing affordable housing for workers downtown. Mixed-use developments and ADUs in Live Oak and Upper Westside because there is plenty of space for greater development in these areas.

Downtown where there are transit options. The business district could use it too! Rental apartments in upper west side for students. Apartments and mixed-use development at all commerce/employment hubs.

Seabright/East side has a lot of single family homes and sprawling business development that tends to have a lot of vacancies. Business buildings that are vacant may be better used as affordable housing If zoning would permit. It’s also perceived to be a higher income area where more people have summer beach homes that aren’t actually occupied year round and Airbnb’s. the corridors should be dense, dense, dense. they should have active commercial frontages and nodes of gathering spaces/hubs where people can gather to eat/shop/hang out/work.

22.629
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
a) expand downtown, b) build up on corridors, c) build way more dense housing on the far west side Downtown could be utilized so much more, allow mixed use zoning same on the westside. No more urban sprawl build sense and tall affordable housing.

Everywhere
Seabright/midtown & westside along mission
Lower west side has plenty of open space; hotels have been developed there, why not permanent housing. Housing should be spaced evenly around the city, perhaps according to the old transit corridor housing development plan which was shamefully scrapped. Other than that, most neighborhoods could take multiple duplexes, four-plexes. One per block would have a modest impact, and more than that would probably not affect neighborhood life much.

On ucsc’s campus
Mixed use and apartments/condos downtown, 1-3 story apartments/condos lower west side Lower west side - vacant lots off Swift Street. Infill of vacant lots within single family neighborhoods with multiplexes and multi-story housing.

Areas where the majority of workforce are located ie near UCSC, downtown, Live oak Anywhere we have open land!
West side, upper and lower.

Everywhere. We are desperately in need of housing so all areas need to be looked at.

Close to job centers, transit, social/community gathering spaces, and stores. Walkable communities (not super far west in food deserts)
Downtown and Westside. Downtown can probably take higher density and west side has too many single family homes.

Lower west side on Delaware Ave between Almar and Natural Bridges. There are huge vacant lots and it is perfectly placed between all 3 UCSC campuses (CSC, WRP, Residential Campus) and close to restaurants, shops, and bus lines.

Lower west side on mission street. Mission street is poorly planned and needs a major overhaul but if the street becomes safer, increased housing should be placed there.

Seabright along Soquel ave
Delaware Ave., downtown, Mission St., various empty lots in neighborhoods Anywhere
All areas
Downtown. It's close to everything.

Yes, all of the above.

Downtown, Above Downtown near Costco could use heavy upzoning (up to 10 stories), to prevent urban sprawl and be close to public transport & walkable. And any lot where there’s currently a strip mall should be upzoned to mixed-use urban development, lots of potential space.

Downtown and live oak
What about building in the Swanton Road area?
Everywhere
Lower west side.

Upper/Lower Westside, lot of open land use for housing development especially for low income workers in the City.

22.630
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
The circles on the west side
Down town, then expand east and west. New affordable housing needs transportation connections.

I am a Euro who has lived in Asia, Europe, and Australia. I never owned a car till I moved to Santa Cruz. I got my first car at age 30 in Santa Cruz because I could not get to work via public transportation. My first purchase in CA was a bicycle and then the realization set in.

Within .5 miles of transit corridors
Westside should be upzoned
Lower Westside near Delaware, continued in live oak, Davenport (within reason and with respect to coastal preservation)
Both. We need housing for people everywhere in Santa Cruz.

Downtown and along public transportation lines
Downtown, midtown areas
Upper west side.

Busy areas. Front St, River St, Water St, Mission St, Soquel Ave (Drive?), Laural St, Broadway UCSC could do with building some as well
downtown, west side, build in parking lots and convert existing buildings to housing. rezone to allow for housing converted to mixed use/multifamily. focus on sustainable measures (ie. retrofit vs. new shells)
Between Ocean Street and the levee
Downtown
Downtown, soquel/water/midtown
Make sure exclusive neighborhoods are made accessible to everyone by building multi family housing—upper and lower Westside, not just downtown. The entire neighborhood north of High would be very walkable for ucsc students. Make sure to include mixed used in all neighborhoods, so people don’t have to drive to go to the corner store
I think we should build in areas that are unlikely to flood.

Downtown and lower east side. We need more housing, not more traffic. Combine with more transit and protected bike lanes and everyone wins.

Everywhere. Seriously. Build new housing absolutely everywhere. Build it in my backyard (Carbonera).

Especially Downtown given transit options, but I think Westside, Lower East Side and Downtown provide best options given transit and walkability, but you could still build a ton of smaller apartments in the upper east side, bananna belt, some larger townhomes in Carbonera. never going to hit the goals if you don't build everywhere.

UCSC staff and students— to unburden the shortage ripples that occur in the rest of the community.

Next should be new affordable units in Aptos and Capitola. Create new housing in areas near Cabrillo/surrounding and anticipate it will lower commute times for other people needing to commute to/from outer county areas.

Capitols or Scotts valley
Downtown, SoLa, NOLO. Build dense housing because close to transit. 1000s of new residents will revitalize downtown businesses and we can have local-serving business.

Also: give tax breaks to downtown property owners who rent to local businesses.

Close to public transit--downtown/midtown.

Everywhere

22.631
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Base of campus, lower westside
Downtown.
near kaiser arena - that area would be perfect for a large 10+ story development Literally anywhere
Any empty lot. Theres not many opportunities so all need to be maximized.

Lower Westside (my neighborhood) with additional bus service.

Everywhere
Downtown, lower east side, lower west side. All have opportunities to re zone some lots, expand others, and build ADUs.

Downtown, lower west side (near Wrigley, Toadal Fitness), along corridors I think there are opportunities to add more housing on both sides of town. The east side needs some renovation which could include more apartments, and duplexes. We need to provide affordable housing for our workforce.

All parts, but especially re-zoning any single-family plots.

Downtown near transportation hubs and the west side near the University Lower west of the west side (mixed use near the west end), definitely downtown, definitely just east of the river, definitely large mixed use near Capitola mall UCSC for students
Everywhere, but especially close to transit.

Lower westside. I currently live there and feel that the area is ideal for development as it safe and out of the way.
everywhere! The most demand for renting is definitely on westside and not being met (1) UCSC on-campus housing. Because they have the land and it would minimize traffic to/from UCSC.
(2) Downtown. Because it has a bus transit hub and portions offer good redevelopment opportunities.
multi-family/duplex allowed on any lot over 60x100
Heavily downtown and near the rail line. Moderately elsewhere. - As close to UCSC as possible. Students need housing close to campus - midtown
Aptos watsonville santa cruz capitola
Everywhere. We have a large RHNA allocation so it's best to build as much as we can, everywhere we can.

Along major corridors like Soquel, Water, Mission, and downtown, as well as adjacent to UCSC.

Vacant lots, vacant parcels, vacant UC campus land...inventory vacant locations and evaluate for feasability and appropriate housing development
Downtown and west side. Some close to the downtown for convenience of markets (and places of work) and close to UCSC for the students who want housing.

West side
Everywhere and anywhere EXCEPT down town. What we build down town will not survive the sea level rising. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE take climate change seriously, and build for the future, not just the next twenty or thirty years. If that.

I think every neighborhood should have more housing/development

22.632
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Upper/lower east and west sides.

With wise urban design that focusses on walkable communities and access to public transit (5-15 minute walk from BUS lines AND future RAIL), we should be building all along these corridors. We also need to build mix use so that people do not need to drive to get their basics like groceries, a nice meal in a small restaurant, etc. We need to change zoning so that we are building dense little villages near transit so people have easy access to shift away from cars for local needs. downtown, lower westside along Mission, Eastside along corridors: larger parcel sizes will allow greater density.

Dependence on construction of ADUs will not provide the units needed because that would require property owners to subsidize construction on lots where such units can feasibly be built. A neighbor built an ADU in my neighborhood with the hope that she could charge an affordable rent, but the construction costs were so high that she found that she had to charge market rate rent to cover her loans! To me, this means that ADUs will not address affordability issues in this area.

This should be a holistic approach and all areas of the city should be looked at. That way we all fulfill the need and not just specific areas. Looking at things as a whole would net more available space instead of picking certain neighborhoods. We could also look at empty retail spaces that have sat empty for a long time and see what could be done with it.

Both West side and east side. Lots of single family homes, not enough rentals.

Next to public transit and other public services including markets...

Near transit or future transit & cycling corridors (Rail trail, Soquel Ave, Broadway, Bay St), West side (industrial/commercial areas), densifying the UCSC/Bay St area, East Side lower west side, downtown, ocean st area
Transportation corridors
ADU’s everywhere but the City would need to quit requiring ridiculous, arbitrary deterrents like builder must replace the city owned alley, or be restricted to 10’ setbacks if the front door is on the the side but only 5’ if it’s on an alley, etc.

West side Delaware project that seems to have been abandoned.

Housing development should be infill. Rezoning should happen for previously disturbed blocks (like industrial area on Westside) to build high density affordable housing. We don’t need luxury housing built by private developers. We need social, public housing.

We don’t need to build housing on open space that has high ecological value, like UCSC plans to do.

All development should be infill at this point. There is enough space for nature and buildings. The choice between nature and housing is a false dichotomy.

Every time you entertain the idea of a new hotel (Laurel & Front comes to mind) think about how much better affordable housing would be for our town.

Everywhere, but particularly in the downzoned wealthy neighborhoods, because this will help break our anti-density culture.

Everyywhere
More student housing near the campus and throughout the Westside.

Mission St/Hwy 1 Corridor on the West side. I'm a west side resident and am tired of the Nimbyism on the East side. I think starting infill development on this transit corridor, supported by interconnected active transportation routes would be a great addition to the west side and would provide a great example of the benefits on a well thought out, integrated sustainable/smart growth/compact development as called for by the general plan.

22.633
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 2: Recommended Areas for Residential Development
Corridors everywhere!

22.634
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz More transit, more transit oriented development, increased density with taller buildings for housing and a mix of all housing types.

Housing environment where sale and rental prices are achievable to a wider spectrum of people.

Corridors. Downtown
Santa Cruz could become a walkable paradise that is truly welcoming to all incomes. anything that is NOT on the corner of Branceforte and Water St.

Current and future residents of Santa Cruz will have access to a wide range of safe, affordable, and secure housing.

Abundant choices for residents of all backgrounds and income levels High density housing since we have little land available.

Please do a downtown wide EIR and specific plan EIRs for smaller areas and then create a matrix of non-subjective practical design standards that then allow for projects to be approved at a staff level.

Commit to having projects approved in 6 months from the date of a preliminary submittal.

A range of housing types available to households across all incomes and ages.

With such high demand the quickest solution is to provide multi-family housing.

We can't go out into our natural areas, so we must go up with taller buildings so people have homes. dense, walkable, transit-oriented development located close to amenities, jobs, and institutions (i.e.

UCSC, downtown, boardwalk).

Hopefully it's better for the UCSC students for the future I envision mixed high density development that is centered around reliable public transport like the train and buses.
more housing in general. more incentives for developers to develop. more accessibility for housing for students
Single family neighborhoods rezoned for duplexes/triplexes. Downtown parking-lots rezoned for affordable apartments and condos. Rent caps in low income neighborhoods Dense, walkable urban core; abolish SFH; mixed use neighborhoods; no more unhoused; apartments for UCSC students; children of locals can afford to buy a home Housing should be easily accessible and affordable at ALL income levels. Housing should be offered with a good mix of 9-month and 12-month leases to support students while also not pushing out the working class.

More housing for people of all income levels, with denser multi-family housing in every neighborhood; with no required parking for more walkable, bikeable neighborhoods.

Make sure UCSC builds housing to house all 19,000 + students. Build 100% affordable housing rentals for low and very low income with state & federal dollars. The city staff should spend their time applying for grants to contribute to projects so no project will be over 4 stories high. Improve the bus system.

My vision would be safe places for people to live (the streets/cars are not safe) Small scale additional housing units located in existing residential neighborhoods (specifically including the upper Westside) making use of ADU/SB 9. NO mixed use high rises.

Every area of the City should be upzoned to promote new diverse housing types.

Denser multi-use developments in which people need not drive.

A more welcoming downtown with community open/green space and greater residential density.

22.635
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz You have to make it easier for people to build without permitting and developments costs making affordability nearly impossible. Many of the fees charged are barriers to development. The endless litigation when someone does want to do a project is also problematic.

This survey would have been FAR more useful if data were provided on the demographics of those in need of housing. If you don't have that data, it should be generated. It is unfair to ask residents to prioritize assistance to certain groups (seniors, unhoused etc) without the relevant data.

Furthermore, there are existing zoning regulations that would make some development far more feasible than others. It is a complex issue and warrants a more thoughtful approach.

We need housing development of all types and we need it yesterday. A critical component of housing development is the development of protected bike lanes on our key corridors so that short local trips can be done safely by bike. The Class II painted bike lanes are not enough to keep people safe and encourage bicycling.
1) Adhere to parking study, 2) little new housing/parking downtown (tourists don't want to see), and 3) MORE HOUSING ALONG ENTIRE PLANNED (LIGHT) RAIL LINE.

I see a Santa Cruz where the people who work here can afford to live here. I see a place where property crimes are not tolerated as they are now so that people can better enjoy their homes. I see motels and hotels being converted to housing, putting the needs of residents ahead of visitors and moneymaking.

Mixed-use, medium-high density, affordable, with minimal concessions to parking and regressive land use
I think it's important for new housing and development in Santa Cruz to thoroughly look at the city's and its residents water and electricity needs. As Santa Cruz moves to green light more developments, there needs to be an emphasis on using new and emerging technologies so that our growing population uses water and electricity in the most efficient ways possible. Gray water systems, solar panels, and battery storage should be mandatory. The city also needs to fully take into account where housing will be the most effective to keep people out of their cars, as the city's transportation infrastructure is already at capacity.

Affordable, well-maintained, attainable, purchaseable by individuals, not dense A place where those who want safe homes can find them
Greater housing stock citywide for every income bracket (including intensified housing within SFD areas with ADUs & townhome opps)
Stay out of residential neighborhoods with your high-rise atrocities! Plenty of room along Ocean Street and Mission St commercial zones.

Modest housing to support retail, education, service workers, and government employees. Lowered UC consumption. Density. Honesty.

Get the homeless off the streets and out of parks. We pay so much to live here but the city is a landfill from these people.

We need to address the housing situation using all available means including zoning changes and rent control. We need to work with neighbors to avoid battles about viable project - suggest including neighbors EARLY in the design process
I believe that developers and city leaders are the ones most benefiting from all new housing projects proposed and in process of development. It is a lose lose situation for people that cannot afford homes over $1 mil. People with up to $200k a year income cant get ahead and the housing problem will only exponentially progress without making it worthwhile for those who can’t afford this housing market. We need housing that can be beneficial to lower income owners. A person buying a $1.6 mil home will be investing in that property with nothing to lose as the property holds precious value.

22.636
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Lower income individuals need access to investment in property value which does not happen in rental situations or with ridiculous HOA or so called low income housing buying assistance that actually makes buyers stuck unable to sell and unable to make any profit from their sale.

Mixed-use housing near transit stops to allow for folks to not need cars and easily access their needs.

Affordable for all people, focusing on lower income, not the wealthy.

Density where it can exist. Missing middle elsewhere.

More of it! For decades Our community viewed housing as a plague and an environmental blight. This needs to change!
Housing is desperately needed
Every household, regardless of income, has access to choices about what type of housing and what neighborhood they live in.
dense and diverse
More small rentals
Dense, mixed-use development along transit corridors - more housing at all levels.

Mixed types of housing in all neighborhoods. Green and visually suited to the neighborhood they are in.
abundant, dense multi-family housing for people at all income levels that is accessible to public transportation
Transit-oriented development, mixed zoning, multi-family, no one unhoused.

A town where people can run their errands on foot or by bicycle, and cars no longer take up half the space in the town. A town with a lively, thriving downtown and interesting neighborhoods. A town served by regular train service.

Please just build more units and don't let established homeowners continue their nitpicking, NIMBYism, and perpetual gridlock.

Walkable neighborhoods with dense housing for mixed income levels (a solid portion low income).

Pedestrian paths, bike lanes, and public transit throughout to provide accessible transportation to community services and shops.

Multifamily housing both market rate and affordable allowed on infill sites and on large single family lots, rezone unused industrially zoned land especially on west side to allow multifamily Convert under utilized commercial space to housing
Allows our kids to live in Santa Cruz by growing the housing stock.

I would like to see supportive housing that goes away over time. Should be hand up not lifelong I'd like SC to have a variety of housing available that helps teachers, restaurant workers, city employees etc. live close to where they work without having to spend all their income on rent.

Stop cramming people in. Incremental development at human scale. Community-led design. Retain neighborhood integrity. Push back against RHNA numbers! A lot denser housing environment with protected bikeways throughout the city. healthy, sanitary, airy, garden-like, with open space, human-scale More equitable. Build enough affordable housing so that the property values decrease and the middle class will be able to purchase homes again.

Land trusts. 50% of housing off the speculative market. Free to move (unlike rent control). Affordable.

Imaginative. Different.

Sufficient rentals at a variety of prices. Dense mixed-use development Downtown and along commercial thoroughfares. Entry points for homebuyers.

22.637
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz AFFORDABLE, FAIR, ACCESSIBLE HOUSING FOR CITY RESIDENTS MUST BE A PRIORITY. MAKING "SENIOR" 55+ NOT 65+
More affordable with less focus on single-family homes. students have affordable housing and less homeless
Reduce barriers to constructing housing. More housing means lower prices for everyone.

Housing for families who live and work in Santa Cruz should be a priority. I don’t like seeing all these multi story buildings with SROs that will be rented to UCSC students. The university needs to figure out their housing problems and not expect the city to house such a large percentage of their student population.

Need more affordable housing in the city core, or next to transit centers. More mixed-uses to include all types of housing.

A mix of all levels - no more than 20% of housing should be for ultra-low income. Single family homes still have a place in society.

Dense, abundant, affordable housing for all income levels in bikeable and walkable 15 minute communities
A place where students aren’t paying extreme prices and aren’t homeless or living in cars.

I believe co-op housing will be the future.
higher density along transit corridors and a variety of housing types available in neighborhoods to promote diversity of residents
High density housing Downtown, more housing along major road corridors, bike paths and trains.

Affordable housing prioritizing racial equity and Housing-First approaches to homelessness.

More for less
Most, if not all, new dwelling units should be in multifamily, multi-story rental housing projects. As many as possible should be public housing projects and non-profit Housing developments.

Infill development and density increases in residential neighborhoods, Soquel/Water/Mission corridors. Modest development downtown. Prioritize safe commuting by bike and by foot. Decrease vehicle speeds.

Housing where my children who were born here can come back and raise a family. Multi-generational housing in the low density zones, and apartments along the transit corridors. 15 minute neighborhoods. Limit short term rentals.

Higher population density without adequate infrastructure and natural resources.

No buildings above seven stories. Attractive buildings like the Calypso (better architecture) less density and more building on west side industrial area.

Affordable housing for those struggling with homelessness and mental illness, which would benefit our local economy and EVERYTHING ELSE.

All new housing is guaranteed for EXISTING SC residents. Mandate UCSC to house all students admitted. Allocate housing for working residents in need who support economy - house cleaners, food industry workers, retail/food sale cashiers/workers, public workers. Beautiful multi story buildings with shops/restaurants/bars downtown. Limit tall developments in existing neighborhoods to 2 story, so none is negatively impacted. Remove housing from parks and open spaces, no camping, no shelters. Build an actual shelter for mentally ill, rehab for drug addicts and low level security for law breakers, include homeless shelter in plan.

Dense, multifamily developments along transit corridors to reduce car-dependency and promote walkable neighborhoods.

22.638
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz The ideal - Intermixed single and multi-family living spaces with shared common areas, village like.

Also, areas of apartments with open spaces and retail establishments.

Affordable, functional housing available for sale for citizens who have no generational wealth Not very good. The affordable component (O) for privately funded projects has killed all insensitive to build any affordable middle income housing!
Respectful development protecting how special Santa Cruz is(was). No special advantage to outside developers.

Pull the reigns back on building. I know Lee Butler is all in on build baby build but it's still not that easy to build an ADU here. The Planning Dept spent big bucks to develop build ready plans in the beginning but look at them! Have a dozen sets of plans available that are build ready, so people don't have to deal with the disfunction of the now plan check process at the City. Have a staff person down there that is familiar with water and fire requirements pertaining to water pressure and fire sprinklers to let a homeowner know what exactly they can build pertaining to an ADU. more public low-income housing to hold back the gentrification of bay area money A community that cares for its own, including the developmentally disabled and elderly.

More Section 8, and affordable housing available near Metro lines and schools. Fewer luxury or Swift/Curry developments. Few buildings over 3 stories tall. Don't turn SC into SJC.

I hope that there’s more homes for people.

More affordable housing for all disadvantage groups of people who have been experiencing financial and medical challenges.

Farm workers
Unaffordable forcing many to move away. I don’t see help for special needs people I would like to see more support for residence who own property. Put in place laws that support landlords as much renters. Our city cannot support these huge developments being put in downtown.

Landlords would be more willing to rent out their properties if we felt that we would not lose control of our property. You would have more rentals on the market. I am afraid to rent to anyone other than family.

Decreased permitting costs, reduced setbacks and downtown housing density.

In the future, individuals with disabilities who are unable to have a regular income, would have access to housing supported by a program which would allow for in home support, while enabling the individual to choose where to live. In other words, ample housing choices with Section 8 being prioritized to those with physical and developmental disabilities. We have to wait years and are still waiting to receive Section 8 for my son.

More accessible information regarding upcoming housing developments Provide affordable housing for low income homeless and disabled Sufficient housing: affordable, aspirational, and neighborhood integrity.

I would like my city to be a place where dense walkable neighborhoods filled with mixed types of housing is the norm and applauded. I believe the housing nexus is crucial to a vibrant community, a more climate friendly community and a place with ALL types of housing.

Affordable, green, inclusive
Building is excessive for our City. Petition Sacramento lawmakers to reevaluate our housing quotas.

A glorious mix of housing. Particularly lots of apartment buildings along Soquel in inner Santa Cruz Don't punish homeowners (ie empty home tax). Encourage homeowners with inexpensive options to provide ADUs or convert a big home to multi-use.

22.639
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Infill with tiny homes, studios, and such, esp on large homes with larger properties.

Cooperative housing.

Scale needed and wanted developments to a neighborhood, unlike 831. Developers working WITH neighborhoods to identify infill possibilities.

To maintain community there needs to be housing for all income levels Decent, affordable housing for all, in safe, family friendly neighborhoods I don’t think people should get to live here just because they want to - would rather focus on people with jobs and families in town, to keep them employed and supported.

Provide more affordable and very affordable housing to help those in need and to give them a chance Multi-story density in areas near transit corridors and more adu and duplex/triplex I’m residential neighborhoods.

Mixed use dense development along transportation corridors, ADUs, duplexes and triplexes in neighborhoods
Dense high-rise growth along transport corridors.
walkable neighborhoods. fewer automobiles. car free side streets. on street parking replaced by protected bike lanes and wider sidewalks.

Build more multifamily housing at the urban center
Maximize the available opportunities for various segments of the community so that spirit and culture of Santa Cruz is enhanced.

Low rise with unit based rent control and just cause eviction.

More housing development similar to Pacific Station South, North, and the Library Affordable Housing project. More for sale opportunities/less rentals for low income earners with priority to BIPOC who have been left out of generational opportunities for home ownership and building equity.

Publicly owned and managed, rent controlled, abundant social housing. No parking minimums.

Walkable.

Affordable!!!!
Abundant housing for a variety of income groups and household sizes.

Walkable, low rise village model of neighborhoods containing variety of housing mixed with locally owned commercial spaces for shopping and dining.

Housing solutions should not all be solved downtown. Westside and eastside have areas that could benefit from mixed use developments. Townhouses, condos, work well out in the neighborhoods can be more affordable than houses. Stronger leadership must be made with UC to take responsibility for housing students, staff and instructors.

Developing more affordable housing. I have the great benefit of living in affordable housing--it is what enables me to continue to live in Santa Cruz and contribute to benefit of my community.

For me personally, I don't want to have to be so anxious trying to find housing as a single adult with a dog. I received a 60 day notice on the house where I rent and the situation is such that I don't know if I will be able to continue to live and work in Santa Cruz. I have been living in Santa Cruz for over 8 years and used to work for the county. It seems rent has come close to doubling since I moved here. It would be nice to be able to buy a house in this county eventually, but a more immediate and urgent goal is being able to afford a rental that will allow a dog. I am suspect of wealth in real estate being concentrated with individuals and companies purchasing many houses and selling them for more or charging high rent so people whose jobs are needed in the community can't afford to live here.

Many inland folks want to live by the coast. Housing here will always be expensive.

22.640
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Sustainable, affordable, equal housing, of all kinds. Community maintenance and support in all areas.

Complete update of municipal utilities also.

No high rise housing! No housing the can’t be supported by our limited water supplies.

Santa Cruz is over-crowded, and growth should not be encouraged. No to SJ by the sea! Easier ADU rules
Do not build any more housing until you’ve secured infrastructure needs. The roads are still impacted after years of waiting for relief, the train will do very little if anything to solve this problem and our water supply is limited. It’s a no brainer. You wouldn’t run a household like the city has been running our community. Stuffing huge largely unaffordable apartments for the majority of our population (50% are renters according to survey) into a small downtown area. There are few high paying jobs in this community forcing many more to commute over the hill to afford our outrageous prices for rentals and purchasing. Finally give up the money the state sends us. Does Carmel stuff dense housing into their community?
Not everyone can live here and we should stop trying to house people from other places that came here to live off our services on the street. get the temporary shelter and beds so everyone is off the street. If you offer it they cant sleep on the street or park or my yard. UCSC needs to house most of their students
Housing should be a balance of high density on traffic corridors and in the downtown area with adu’s integrating renters into westside neighborhoods. By supporting more adu’s, homeowners can afford their homes and supervise and maintain their rental adu’s on their own property.

Streamlined systems and processes to spend housing-related money wisely Protect the quality of life in Santa Cruz. Slow growth and allow the current residents of the city to guide development, not city planners or developers
Clustered multilevel affordable housing available to buy and rent spread throughout Santa Cruz neighborhoods. I’m NOT interested in market rate housing at this time. We want working families to stay and put down roots.

Developing low income housing for those who live and work in Santa Cruz County that is six stories or less and has a visual thematic appeal to our beach town vibe. Please stop selling out our charming community to the profiteering of developers.

A housing market where every person can find reasonable priced housing and have an opportunity to have a place to live.
more lower income and special needs, slow overall growth, environmentally sensitive, improve traffic The city needs to take control from the developers. We need to preserve Santa Cruz's assets, one if which is the Victorian architecture. It would be wise for the city to require all structures over 3 floors to fit into a stylized format, much like Santa Barbara. A mission style or Victorian style would make new development at least blend into the community, and with luck, might even create new building treasures that will be admired 100 years into the future. The development at 154 W Cliff Dr next to the Three Sisters Inn is in my mind one of the best examples of excellent building. That structure will be admired, painted, and thought of something to be photographed by future visitors -and it is just a housing structure. Why not require these mega-developers to meet similar requirements? At least make our city continue to look nice, if you are required by law to over develop it. That's also my perspective, we are overdeveloping, not everyone can live wherever they wish, or almost all of the US would move to Hawaii.

Multi-use with affordable housing development encouraged near the river on both sides.

ADU additions on single family lots

22.641
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Make Pacific Ave look like Santana Row. For a start, all council members and planning department personnel should visit Santa Row. It is only a short drive away.

Solve the rental problem by building an off campus multistory dormitory complex for UCSC students perhaps with gondolas to campus.

Building no more than 3 stories with plenty of open space for light and air circulation. No large concrete blocks.

Keep single family neighborhoods and increase density downtown.

Ensure that college students have plenty of options of live in buildings and neighborhoods with other students and not mixed in with families and seniors, ensure families can easily bring in pre-built ADUs or have ADUs built to house extended family as needed, and seek out opportunities to tear down single-family houses in bad shape on big lots/in rows together to build more affordable townhouses for teachers, firefighters, and police officers right in the City.

Solve the infrastructure Problem first, adequate water and traffic issues cannot support 3700+ new units!
If I wanted to live in San Jose I would move there.

The whole state needs to provide asylum and treatment for drug addicts and mentally unhealthy people so they aren't living outside. Homeless people camping in public places who are unwilling to take advantage of offered help should not be tolerated. Young people, especially those with families and those who grew up here, need affordable homes. The permit process and codes for new buildings need to be made cheaper and easier and more rational.

Vibrant, bikeable, walkable and dense downtown with public squares and space. A usable riverfront. function, affordable, beauty but were will we get the water? Accessibility for mid to low income residents
Downtown becomes an actual city. High rise mixed use housing/retail, fill in all the blank and low developed spots. Parking underground. Water cistern storage on every property.

Affordable, accessible, community-facing/enhancing housing, flexible to meet need (e.g., readily adapted to meet needs of residents, e.g., smaller units that can be linked to accommodate larger family/co-housing group)
To see younger families actually be able to live in Santa Cruz and not get overwhelmed with debt and anxiety when trying to find a place to live.

Build 90% extremely low, very low, and low income housing units, 10% market rate units. Flip the formula.
off-street parking, smaller functional homes/apartments I would like to see tiny homes approved on land/property in city and county.

Stronger tenants rights laws that balance the power of landholders and renters Santa Cruz is a tourist and service oriented town. It cannot survive without room for the working class. Second residence homes, airbnbs, should be illegal or discouraged by tax policy. UCSC should be compelled and supported to create on campus housing to free up in city units for service workers. robust housing in the downtown area; robust housing for UCSC both students and employees; robust housing adjacent transit.
low cost multifamily housing units.

More rental along the transportation corridors
A community where people who work here can afford to live here, the housing needs of low income families are met, and UCSC provides much more on-campus housing.

22.642
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz More density, more walkable, more mixed-use.

Dense affordable housing in defined areas, with emphasis on helping seniors/working families, as opposed to throwing more $ at homelessness
Commensurate with income and providing quality of life settings. Again, building communities and thriving neighborhoods not just housing.

See prior comment
Well planned development in very urban areas and preserved neighborhoods and there character More housing. There is a ton of space in Santa Cruz, it's just not used or used poorly. More people will bring in more money, more kids and some new dynamic to an aging city dominated by UCSC.

Controlled growth with mixed family and senior housing. Preserving green space.

Clearly two groups should take priority:

1. Low and medium employed persons working in Santa Cruz

2. A segment of the homeless population that would qualify (disabled, drug-free, and/or simply poor) i live in a trailer court which i bought under rent control . the city gave our homes to a developer barry swenson who did not like rent control. when the lease expires in my 80s i will be homeless in a tent. i am so crippled now that to get out of a chair will be a struggle. Santa Cruz will be roofs for the rich and very rich tents for the rest. my friend just got a $400 rent raise. she, husband and child moved to Florida. Friend’s grown kids in Texas and Idaho.

Affordable housing for UCSC staff. I recently had to move away while still working at UCSC for a cheaper housing. For the same price of a single room in a 6 bedroom house (with modified bedrooms for more space. 3 rooms were actual bedrooms) I am renting a 2 bedroom apartment in Santa Clara.

Abundant housing to accommodate all, especially service workers who support our major industry (tourism). Make UCSC do it’s share to accommodate its students.

Larger multi-story transitional/supportive space for unhoused persons; condos/apartments for students.

This topic has been tossed around for at least two decades. Talked about and talked about with little to no action. Forming committees does not build or create housing. The situation with students, the University should render this one of their main priorities,...stop admitting more students than they can house, for starters.

Sustainable housing for the community designed to lower carbon footprint & close access to public amenities
Higher density downtown but with 3-6 stories instead of high rises. More housing such as live/work spaces on lower west side, also with up to 6 story buildings. More housing on corridors as businesses change, mixed use with retail on ground floor, 3-4 stories. More low income senior housing with some services (transportation, meals, etc), more people able to transition from homelessness into permanent housing.

Provide some safe affordable housing for workers and a manageable finite number of homeless build massive amounts of housing as quickly as possible, especially downtown and near UCSC Sufficient and diverse housing options to meet demand for residents of all ages, incomes & circumstances
We need to build all categories of housing. Especially residential neighborhoods.

Planning department waiving all permitting fees, affordable housing means affordable building for homeowners too-lessen restrictive measures that hinder building homeowners to build multi-family and ADU's.

More mixed use housing… with apartments over commercial space.

22.643
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Help for the unhoused in a humane fashion, off City sidewalks and streets Build 100% affordable housing without changing the character of Santa Cruz.

More affordable housing
housing that fits the city's income spectrum. more low income housing for families, seniors. more coops Building for higher density, walkability, transit-friendliness. More affordable housing. Accountability for abusive landlords.

Dense enough to support car-free lifestyles and allow folks to stay long term.

Fewer landlords with more than a couple of properties, more protection for tenants, and no empty houses.

Enough units to provide a housing-first solution to homelessness. Green construction to minimize new units' dependence on fossil fuels. Rent-controlled units available for students.

A city that is affordable/accessible to multiracial low and middle income residents, seniors and disabled folks.

Housing that is TRULY affordable for all people who work/have worked in Santa Cruz (including tourist industry workers, transitional housing for homeless, seniors).

Affordable housing only with LEED certified buildings that meet the values and aesthetic of Santa Cruz.

More rentals at affordable rates are needed (perhaps bring back conversation around rent control).

Early educators who do not make a living wage, and do make it so our local economy flows, need affordable housing.

Property developed for people to live in who are employed and working in Santa Cruz.

Deed restricted or otherwise controlled
Housing priority is given to Santa Cruz residents and people who work in Santa Cruz. There is an ample supply of affordable rentals and housing to own. Low interest loans are available to people working in public service in Santa Cruz.

More available affordable housing, rental and owned, for young families with good access to employment, schools and transit.

People off the streets. Affordable housing for all and landlords held responsible for keeping their units clean and habitable.

Housing for the unhoused. Homeless communities are not all "drug addicts" and just need of a safe place to live.

Expand downtown and underused commercial space. Leave single family neighborhoods alone.

Get the unhorsed off the street
Santa Cruz should try to maintain the ambiance of a small downtown but infill areas surrounding with housing for low wage earners. This has the benefit of allowing workers to live near jobs, reducing traffic on the roads as people have to commute in from less expensive areas. Don't create opportunities for more high income renters to move to Santa Cruz which creates more imbalance of who can afford to live here.

We need to house the people who work here. Salaries are never going to keep up with rent if real estate investors are allowed to profit from rents. That's old fashioned thinking.

Affordable for all ages, combination of housing types, use of green technology, connect to public transit, accommodate ev powered bikes/cars.

Not overdeveloped with too much packed-in housing. Make building fit the character of Santa Cruz.

Preserve our small town culture. We are not Silicon Valley.

22.644
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Diverse housing options everywhere to foster a diverse and inclusive community.

Continue with reasonable development of townhomes and ease the ability to built ADUs. Do not change the character of the town by building large apartment complexes, especially in single family neighborhoods.

More multi story housings units and apartment complexes, most big complexes I’ve seen near UCSC campus are one story which hardly makes sense. Build up! Multi-story multi-use (shops/offices below, housing above) in areas like downtown. Townhomes or ADUs in places like East side and West side.

Affordable
Provide abundant, well maintained social housing by buying existing apartment complexes and building new ones
I envision a city where there are more than enough affordable units to meet the needs of the community.

No one without a home.

Dense and crowded is not QOL. Denser is not cheaper. Ask SF.

There just needs to be MORE housing in general. Let the university build more dorms and apartments for students, have more multistory apartment buildings. Type of housing matters less than quantity To own property in the town I was born in...

Let's be real, it's unachievable.

Moderately dense city with minimal single family housing. Duplexes, triplexes, condos, townhouses, and mixed-use development line the streets. There are minimal to no setbacks so as to stop wasting valuable land.

A place where everyone is welcomed and homed. A place where I feel secure to invest my future inheritance from the coming housing crash. A place that has a unique and weird character.

Build more housing period. The logjam of a project having to meet very narrow, and often economically unfeasible, criteria prevents us from moving forward.

Build up not out. Subsidize landlords so rent goes down.

It’s time we build some legitimately tall buildings.

Get rid of zoning, build dense, walkable, mixed use developments with public transit Enough supply to support long-term residents, students, and tourist rentals. Apartment/condo buildings that aesthetically fit into our communities.
create affordable housing so those of us who work in Santa Cruz stop getting priced out of living in Santa Cruz
More density, allow more mixed development in SFH areas, act with urgency that matches the scale of the crisis.

Prioritizing permanent or long standing members of the community who have families, ties, and live and work here.

Abundant and accessible. Transit oriented
It is incredibly hard to build in Santa Cruz. The zoning needs to be simplified and things like parking minimums should be abolished to make it faster and cheaper to build. We also need community involvement. We need supportive shelters for the unhoused and more student housing on campus.

We also need PUBLIC housing so it’s not just a few landlords and developers profiting off our public lands. When thinking about building in neighborhoods like south of Laurel, the existing low income neighbors need to be guaranteed housing during and after construction. We can’t just give away land to developers for stadiums and luxury hotels, we need this to go into the people that already live

22.645
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz here. If Kaiser/the Warriors want a stadium they should be stepping up to provide affordable housing at the same time.

Affordable housing for the service workers this area relies on.

Build up. Provide student housing closer to the college. Fix the flats It being feasible for those who work in Santa Cruz to live in the city.

Equitable opportunity for all income brackets and greater public transportation options which reduces congestion and pollution.

Plentiful, variety of prices, for sale and for rent, allow students to live in reasonable housing and not forced to share bedrooms
Higher density housing near places of work, the university, and main transit routes.

Much denser in the "urban" cores where there's significant commercial activity. Also, make it a lot easier for UCSC to build on-campus. A big part of our housing crunch is a constantly growing student population, and it's not their fault that the university keeps getting sued whenever they want to build.

More of it
Walkable, accessible, multifamily multi-unit housing and support programs that build community and support everyone.

More affordable housing options to support lower incomes More high rises, no height limits especially downtown. Removal of zoning restrictions, allowing denser development. More mixed use.

Having a Range of housing stock that is well integrated into the existing community in terms of better utilizing space near services.

Dense mixed use housing
densify housing opportunities where transportation infrastructure is already in place. create more rental space to accommodate students. add multifamily units in single family neighborhoods Walkable/bikeable neighborhoods with green space. Development concentrated to already developed areas to preserve undeveloped lands for wildlife and environment Increased density in all neighborhoods, I'm ok with taller buildings downtown.

Affordable units mixed in with market rate units is very important Reduce the use of ADUs that only increase the price of housing further.

Rent control is vital.

Need more mixed income apartments and small single family homes without HOA or age restrictions.

Prioritize those who work in Santa Cruz over those over the hill. more affordable high-density housing downtown, more UCSC-designated housing close to campus, and not developing neighborhoods that can't handle increased traffic. building along bus routes, aka high-density housing downtown and along mission
end the nimby stranglehold. provide housing so we don't have to be unsafe walking to jury duty, tbh.

Criminals should live in jail. Then it will be easier to help the rest of the homeless population High density, mixed use, tall buildings. In my back yard. Infill development now! Far more transitional housing, and urban development of affordable housing. I hope to be able to live downtown on a teacher’s salary.

Enough housing to place people immediately in decent housing who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.

All people who work here can afford to live within walking distance of their job.

22.646
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Landlords held accountable for price gauging, harassment of tenants and property neglect, less racism in housing opportunity, broader section 8 acceptance and more housing options for those with disabilities
A community that prioritizes housing our neighbors by building for students, seniors and families at all income levels.

Santa Cruz is growing in size and I think the idea of it being this cute, little beach community is going to have to change. the town is growing into a city and has easily become a major part of the bay area. increase public transport, build up with shopping on the ground level. make many small areas of concentration, scattered throughout the community. if people's needs are met within a short distance, downstairs or across the street, that is going to create less auto traffic and increase jobs for that micro community.

Every building is owned by the people who live in it or by the state Make more big housing units
catch up on 40 years of preventing housing supply, significantly exceed the minimum RHNA targets for development at all income levels
Santa Cruz is a college town and no longer a bedroom town like it was in 1960 before the UC was built, accept your role.

More housing, less development restrictions
Thoughtful density around commercial and transit corridors in order to a lively walkable/bike-friendly city
Evenly-distributed higher-density housing, not concentrations of it in one or two neighborhoods.

Affordability of home buying for locals, educators and single moms to own a home!! More construction of affordable apartments/condos and ADUs Remove exclusionary zoning and parking requirements that prevent high density housing from being built. We need much more housing.
rent control, more low-income housing, low barrier transitional housing for the houseless, fewer restrictions for adus, UCSC expanding housing
over priced
More housing options, fair rental practices. Restricting landlord abuse.

Lots of affordable options for renters and buyers young and old.

Affordable/priority housing for locals.

Smaller lots & units.

Like now but more dense, with a tram line along the greenway.

High-density multi-use housing in the downtown area, westside, and eastside. Less single-family housing and less car-centric infrastructure.

Rent control, more affordable housing for rent and for sale, transitional housing including tiny homes for individuals experiencing homelessness
Clean, safe, affordable
Allow more building
Government should get out of the way
Housing abundance can mitigate housing scarcity
Housing is affordable, tenant’s rights are protected, and housing opportunities are expanded for very low income people.

Affordable housing. Not expensive. Cheap and easy to find. Inclusive.

22.647
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Dense and cheap mixed-use housing for single people and families along transit corridors “For Sale.” *Entry-Level.* Microapartments, Mixed-Use commercial/residential, upzoned (6–10 stories), local architecture, walkable, close downtown & public transit.

More options for people being priced out of their neighborhoods. Preventive measures to prohibit landlords from drastically raising rents or seasonally evicting residents yo boost summer rentals.

I would like to see more apartment buildings and affordable condos.

Housing for all income levels in mixed use developments more people in each building (including the ones sitting empty as vacation rentals) Anyone who wants to live here can live here without incomprehensible financial stress. Housing is sustainable and developers are ethical. Less homes are empty year round. Vacation home owners pay empty house taxes.

Adding more affordable housing for local and working class residents.

A place where millennials and genz can invest in their collective future and generations to come Build up. I have lived around the planet and Santa Cruz is startling by the lack of high density accommodation. High density here is 3 storey duplexes, that is not high density building. And the high density requires public transportation and adequate water supply so we don't need more parking.

Increased capacity. Decreased barriers to maintaining/enhancing current stock (reduced setbacks, cheaper permits). Student housing by UCSC. Supportive housing away from downtown.

Santa Cruz should become the mini-Sf it's already started to become except without all the single family housing
Houses and apartments everywhere. Fuck NIMBYs.

More ADU and well built density condos/apts more incentive to accept vouchers in existing places.

If it keep escalating, we’ll have no community left.

Fair housing is needed. I want to see homelessness decrease. Big families deserve help. Farm workers deserve the best living conditions there is to offer. I want to see ACTUAL change. Actions not words.

Affordable housing for all.

Affordable options for the middle class community members - educators, healthcare workers, city workers, etc.

Multi use areas expanded
Affordable, accessible housing for the working families of Santa Cruz. No skyscrapers, no luxury apartments for wealthy transplants.

Median rent that is 1/3 or less of median income.

Some nice looking small houses that are affordable
Mixed income housing that takes advantage of urban infill and existing buildings to build net zero carbon buildings and to set an example in our region.

Integrated market rate and low cost housing throughout the city (rent & buy). Ability for my kids to buy here.

The internet implodes and all the tech millionaires go away. We have drum circles and community gardens. Take naps and make love
Highrises downtown
Denser housing and denser mixed-use communities
Tall dense mixed income and mixed use buildings in walkable neighborhoods with low speed traffic, high frequency transit, and safe bicycle facilities

22.648
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz I feel very bad about this towns future
Affordable housing for all with equitable access to public transit.

More robust mixed use downtown core with mid rise buildings and improved transit.

Every major thoroughfare requiring MINIMUM heights of 4 stories to build anything new so that we maximize our use of space. Use new state laws to bypass parking requirements. Build all kinds of housing, everywhere.

Options for students and aging in place inside the community. Housing units for teachers, police, fire members. Less out of state/out of country investors/landlords.

Everybody housed in nothing less than micro tiny homes without sacrificed liberty freedom or dignity It should be hard to own a vacation home in Santa Cruz. Hotels and motels should be encouraged, and houses converted to short-term rentals and offices discouraged by fees, policies, and taxes.

Young people and seniors living downtown in rental apartments will revitalize Santa Cruz and provide the economic engine to support diverse businesses.

Small (the units themselves, not the amount of units), affordable, within already developed areas, ecological.

More housing, period.

Medium/high density affordable housing spread throughout the city, with access to open space and public transit, walkable, and aesthetically designed
High density downtown.

Affordable based on cost of labor, in the hands of humans not corporations.

Seems a solar powered desalination plant needed to support more population Rent control, landlord oversight, affordable new home buyer programs. Tax breaks to low income homeowners.

Mixed use main street style communities - long term rentals above, shops, services, and jobs below We need more supply and I'm unbothered by how we get it We need more entry level ownership homes.

Higher density being ok
One that allows residents from all walks of life to find the housing they need.

Mixed use along corridors. Multi-story mixed income housing in the outer westside and downtown.

Duplex/triplex incentives in single-family home neighborhoods but limited in height based on neighborhood aesthetic (i.e. 1-3 stories).

Most of our workforce cannot afford to buy or rent here resulting in long commutes, job burnout and clogged highways. We need to develop workforce housing for all income levels.

Easier, cheaper and quicker process to go from proposal to stage t actual construction. Local interest groups should have less power to stall the process. More focus on walkability and transit, less on prioritizing traffic flow.

Santa Cruz desperately needs more housing of all types, concentrated along transportation corridors, as well as housing for people who use Section 8 benefits Mixed use, high density to preserve green spaces and avoid needing to drive everywhere.

Lots of student housing near USCS to lessen the strain on non students renting More multi-family housing, especially apartments and townhomes.

Equitable opportunities for diverse community, without massive high rise development.

Rural/suburban mix, not urban development.

22.649
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz My vision is to increase the availability for affordable housing, as well as increase the opportunities for homeless shelters
For it not to be in the top 5 most expensive places to live Denser housing on UCSC campus and near transit lines. Gradual transitions from tall buildings to single family houses.

Allow multi-family dwellings in traditional R1 zones, go vertical in more denser areas like downtown.

More of every type within the city's existing footprint. Where possible, neighborhoods should be mixed-use and less car-centric.

Teachers can afford, enough for UCSC students, no longer most expensive place to live Build more affordable housing for low income .

Housing everywhere, for everyone. Walkable neighborhoods with easy access to amenities and multimodal transit options.

Affordable for a single full time income with child
Where people can live where they work. Where people who make minimum wage can afford rent with one job.

High density multifamily housing around public spaces in walkable neighborhoods with regular buses, and bike paths and EV stations everywhere.

Accessibility and availability for all. Innovative design and construction to be used and shared as a solution to housing crisis.

Transformative housing abundance -- people aren't stressed about lack of supply but focused on building productive *NEW* Santa Cruz.

More apartments and condos across the city, with a focus on housing students off campus to lower housing costs for all.

Density would be increased throughout Santa Cruz except in areas affected by sea rise and located near public transportation.
focus on extremely-low, very-low and low-income housing of various sizes (1, 2, 3 bdrm), very little market-rate, to reflect community needs
Everyone is housed or comfortably located outside with proper partnering with housed communities Mixed-use, multi-family affordable workforce housing near transit and out of the floodplain. i will not have a future of housing in Santa Cruz if the city continues to support the gentrification and high rent prices.

Well designed dense infill community interactive walkable downtown 5-minute walk to urban community spaces, shopping, transit and dense mixed-use housing 'villages' from north to south along transit lines. Reduce sprawl, prioritize public transit centered communities on BUS and future RAIL line.

Social housing on all city owned lots.
multi-unit, multi-story affordable & supportive housing in mixed use developments: close to transit & services/retail/walkable.

That housing would be viewed as a basic human need or right instead of a commodity. That we can control the market and make things more affordable for everyone.

More affordable housing opportunities, both rental and homeownership, for extremely low to medium-income residents
Everyone is sheltered in a place where they can not only be safe, but happy. Every single person, no matter.

Supporting affordable housing and legalizing camping/rvs for houseless folks.

22.650
City of Santa Cruz
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Table 3: Vision for the Future of Housing in Santa Cruz Affordable housing
Thoughtful, well-designed, responsive, supportive, and inclusive housing for ALL, even and especially the poor. More support and demand for
non-profit and affordable housing (not luxury housing).

Priority on low and very low income housing; affordable deed restricted housing; limits on additional market rate housing.

Denser urban development, multi use buildings in urban areas Genuinely promote solar & alternative energy, and ADU’s by actually eliminating all regulations that aren’t valid health or safety protections,
Housing for people that work here.

Workers can afford to live here. Housing is guaranteed, not a commodity. Renters have bargaining power, landlords kept in check.

Public housing for all, decriminalizing vehicle homelessness and giving people vehicles in the interim Dense, walkable, abundant.

Our housing policy aims to provide an abundance of housing such that anyone who wants a home can have one.

We must provide much more housing — prioritizing those most in need — with infill, repurposing, missing middle, and green spaces included.

Pedestrian centered, mixed-use infill development along transit corridors and downtown which contain a minimum of 20% affordable housing.
affordable
Affordable, diverse, friendly, medium density, bike and public transit based, art, culture and ecotourism hub, the anti-Carmel.

22.651
1 PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 9, 2023
AGENDA OF: November 16, 2023
SUBJECT: General Plan 2030 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and Update to the Safety Element of the 2030 General Plan. Location: Citywide.

Applicant: City of Santa Cruz. Environmental Review: Exempt per Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Reuse of the 2030 General Plan
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

RECOMMENDATION: Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the 2023-2031 6th Cycle Housing Element and associated updates to the Safety Element of the General Plan, finding that the changes are exempt from CEQA under Section 15061(b)(3) and that the changes are covered under CEQA through a reuse of the 2030 General Plan EIR.

BACKGROUND: The Housing Element is a critical tool for the City of Santa Cruz to plan for and accommodate current and future housing growth and services over the next eight years. The Housing Element is one of the seven State-mandated elements included in the Santa Cruz General Plan and is required to be updated in eight-year planning “cycles.” Santa Cruz is currently in the final year of its 5th Cycle, so this update is for the 6th Cycle Housing Element covering December 31, 2023 to December 31, 2031. The final draft of the 6th Cycle Housing Element is attached. The purpose of the Housing Element is to identify and plan for the City’s existing and projected housing needs. It contains a detailed outline of the City’s goals, policies, and objectives for the protection, improvement, and production of housing for a sustainable future. The Housing Element Update is adopted by City Council and then certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for compliance with State Housing Element law. The HCD deadline for certification is December 15, 2023.

California Government Code Section 65580 lists six Housing Element goals to help ensure that every resident has access to housing and a suitable living environment.

1. The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.

2. The early attainment of this goal requires the cooperative participation of government and the private sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities and accommodate the housing needs of Californians of all economic levels.

22.652

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 2
2 3. The provision of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households requires the cooperation of all levels of the government.

4. Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.

5. The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local government also has the responsibility to consider economic, environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to cooperate with other local governments and the State in addressing regional housing needs.

6. Designating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels is essential to achieving the State’s housing goals and the purposes of this article.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation
A central part of the Housing Element is detailing how the City can facilitate the construction of housing units at various affordability levels to the amounts prescribed in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA target for this Housing Element cycle was developed by HCD and then refined by the Association of Monterrey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG). It provides each jurisdiction a specified target number of housing units in four different affordability levels (as shown in Table G-1 below from the Housing Element).

Table G-1: City of Santa Cruz 6th Cycle RHNA by Income Category Income Category Percent of Area Median Income (AMI) RHNA Very Low-Income 0-50% AMI 859
Low-Income 51-80% AMI 562
Moderate-Income 81-120% AMI 709
Above Moderate-Income >120% AMI 1,606
TOTAL RHNA 3,736
*The Santa Cruz County AMI is $119,300 for a family of four, according to 2022 HCD Income Limits.

The total number of units the City needs to plan for is 3,736. To put this number in perspective, the total RHNA units for Santa Cruz in the current 5th Cycle is 747. The increase in this housing target is the State recognizing the underproduction of housing statewide for some time. The City of Santa Cruz is doing its part to help achieve housing production goals by producing more than double the total number of units (1,715) in the City’s 5th Cycle RHNA targets, with approximately 53% of those units being below market rate in their affordability. The City exceeded the required number of units in each income category, making it one of only about 6% of all jurisdictions in the State have met RHNA targets in all income categories. Additionally, the City is one of only 30 jurisdictions in California to receive the State’s Prohousing Designation, which recognizes jurisdictions that have policies and programs in place to better facilitate housing at all income levels. Despite these accomplishments, the City will need to make even greater strides to reach the significantly increased 6th Cycle RHNA targets. One specific consequence of not meeting RHNA targets is that, per State law, it triggers an increase in availability for projects to use SB35 legislation to bypass much of local control in the housing

22.653

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 3
3 entitlement process, including streamlined review and no California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements.

The consequence of not having a certified Housing Element on time is even greater. After the City’s December 15, 2023 certification deadline and until the Housing Element is certified, this scenario triggers the “builder’s remedy,” which requires that virtually any housing development be approved so long as it designates at least 20% of its units as low income. All City Zoning and General Plan standards are not enforceable on those projects during that time. Given the City’s 20% low-income inclusionary requirement, this means that all proposed projects of any height and density would have to be approved. Additionally, the City would be ineligible for many grants until certification is achieved. Therefore, it is important that this Housing Element receive a recommendation from the Planning Commission and be adopted by the City Council in a timely manner.

Housing Element Contents
The Housing Element Update includes two chapters, an Introduction Chapter and a Policy Plan Chapter. These chapters are followed by eight appendices: Community Engagement, Review of Past Performance, Housing Needs Assessment, Fair Housing Assessment, Housing Constraints, Housing Resources, Housing Sites Inventory, and a Glossary. Additional amendments to the General Plan’s Safety Element are also included in this package to conform to new hazard mitigation requirements. Together, this update provides a comprehensive view of the City’s past, present, and future actions as they relate to supporting programs and housing for all needs and all affordability levels.

In order to support meeting the RHNA targets and drive housing decisions for the next eight years, the Housing Element Update does two key things: 1) it provides goals, policies, and objectives to address housing needs and support future housing growth for all income levels, and 2) it identifies an inventory of sites to show that the City has capacity to accommodate its RHNA housing unit targets. Aside from these two sections, much of the Housing Element focuses on providing existing conditions analysis and local context to inform and further support the policy and site inventory decisions.

New to the 6th Cycle Housing Element Updates statewide is the inclusion of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) requirements. Beginning on January 1, 2019, Assembly Bill (AB) 686 established new requirements for all California jurisdictions to ensure that local laws, programs, and activities affirmatively further fair housing and that all Housing Elements due after January 1, 2021 contain an assessment of fair housing. Under State law, affirmatively furthering fair housing means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free of barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics (such as race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability).” The State requires Santa Cruz to show how its housing decisions are furthering fair housing, and HCD assigns special focus on this new portion of the document in its certification review.

Summary and analysis of AFFH can be found in the Fair Housing appendix, and numerous

22.654

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 4
4 AFFH policies are designated in the Policy section to provide actions/objectives to meet the noted State aims.

On June 14, 2022, City Council also provided direction on contents of the Housing Element to staff in the form of a resolution. The attached Response Letter to the June 14, 2022 City Council Housing Element Direction details how the Draft Housing Element Update is meeting the formal directions provided by City Council. Council also formed a Housing Element Subcommittee (Subcommittee) consisting of Mayor Keeley, Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, and Councilmember Newsome. Over the past year, staff met regularly with the Subcommittee to vet housing goals, policies, objectives, and sites.

Community Outreach
Community workshops were held virtually in English and Spanish on September 29, 2022 and April 4, 2023. Between them, a community survey was available online from September 29 to November 10, 2022, and the survey results are attached. The first meeting and survey results fed into the development of the Housing Element Update, while the second meeting presented the first draft of the Housing Element Update to seek public comments and feedback to further refine the document.

A first draft of the Housing Element Update was available to the public for review and feedback for 30 days beginning on March 24, 2023. The first draft of the document was also presented to Planning Commission on April 20, 2023 and to City Council on April 25, 2023 for additional input from decision-makers and the public. After the 30-day public review period, each future revision to the document triggers a minimum public review period of seven days prior to submittal to HCD. All comments received during this public review time and at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings were considered, with many resulting in substantial improvements to the document prior to formally submitting the first draft of the Housing Element Update to HCD on May 10, 2023.

Four subsequent document revisions, public review cycles, and submissions to HCD were performed throughout the summer and fall to arrive at the document before the Commission.

Revisions were made based on feedback from HCD, the Subcommittee, and the public. The latest formal response letter from HCD had only one comment remaining. Following the latest submission to HCD (expected to take place on November 13, 2023), should HCD have no further comments, they will deem the Housing Element Certifiable following adoption. With only one comment remaining, staff is hopeful that this will occur ahead of the Housing Element Update being presented to Council on December 12, 2023, thus officially meeting the December 15, 2023 deadline.

A website for the Housing Element – www.cityofsantacruz.com/housingelement –has been maintained throughout the process. Each draft Housing Element Update circulated for public comment, as well as each draft submitted to HCD (with edits in redline), is included on the website. Information on the Housing Element, RHNA, the update process, community outreach efforts, and AFFH is provided to help inform the community about this important update effort.

Community members can also sign up to receive email updates about important steps in the process, like public meetings and draft documents available for public comment. To date, nearly

22.655

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 5
5 2,900 people have signed up for the email alerts about the Housing Element Update and around 350 comments have been submitted and responded to by staff since April 2023. This reflects the broad engagement effort that the City has undertaken throughout the update process. The Community Engagement appendix provides more details on the robust engagement efforts conducted and responses to community comments.

DISCUSSION: This section will focus on the key changes made to the document since the first Public Review draft was presented to the Planning Commission and City Council in April 2023.

Policy Plan Chapter
The Policy Plan Chapter details the community’s goals, policies, and objectives relative to housing production, rehabilitation, protection, and assistance for all residents in Santa Cruz. The seven goals of the Policy Plan chapter are listed below to provide the reader with a general overview of policy priorities. More detail on the goals, as well as the policies and objectives within them, are in the attached Housing Element document.

Goal 1: Housing Production. Facilitate housing production that meets the present and future housing needs of Santa Cruz residents.

Goal 2: Affordable Housing. Provide an increased and protected supply of housing affordable to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income households.

Goal 3: Special Needs Housing and Homelessness. Provide accessible housing and supportive services that provide equal housing opportunities for special needs populations, including the unhoused and those at risk of homelessness.

Goal 4: Housing Assistance. Provide increased opportunities for low- and moderateincome residents to rent or purchase homes.

Goal 5: Neighborhood Vitality. Improve housing and neighborhoods throughout Santa Cruz and in designated target areas while protecting residents from displacement.

Goal 6: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. Combat housing discrimination, undo historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access to foster a more inclusive community and help achieve racial equity and fair housing choice.

Goal 7: Resource Conservation and Environmental Stewardship. Fulfill the City’s housing needs while promoting an environmentally sustainable, compact community with clearly defined urban boundaries that takes into consideration the existing and potential impacts of sea level rise and climate change, particularly on underserved communities.

Over the summer and fall of 2023, nearly all policies and objective saw edits and further refinement based on staff review and feedback from HCD, the Subcommittee, and the public.

Several entirely new policies were added such as: 1.3g on aligning development standards, 1.3h on agenda requirements for conforming projects, 2.1i on supporting development on faith-based

22.656

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 6
6 sites, 3.1d updating community care licensing requirements, and 3.7c off-peak seasonal housing coordination. Many of these were to satisfy HCD requirements but not all. For example, Objective 1.3h was added based on public feedback.

Another example of policy changes based on public feedback is the addition of Extremely Low Income Housing as an affordability category to support, which was added based on public comment at the April 25, 2023 City Council meeting. Yet another example is increasing the metric of Objective 4.1a regarding tenant assistance, with the goal to provide renter assistance to 50 households increased to 100 households assisted based on public feedback.

Most of the policy plan revisions stemmed from HCD direction to make policies and objectives be as concrete and measurable as possible. In some places, this meant adding quantifiable metrics such as for policies related to housing rehabilitation, HCD wanted specific numbers, so coordination was done with the Code Enforcement Division to estimate the number of units in need of rehabilitation citywide. In many other places, this meant removing non-committal language like “Explore…” or “Consider…,” instead providing specific commitments, timelines, and quantifiable metrics. HCD granted flexibility for some policies where it was needed, but in the end, around 100 policies were revised in some way during the summer and fall. Efficient and timely coordination with the Subcommittee and other staff made this task possible.

HCD also requested further detail on policies related to AFFH. In addition to timelines and metrics, AFFH topic areas and geographic targets were provided for all objectives that HCD deemed to be directly related to meeting AFFH goals. AFFH topic areas include:

1. Enhancing housing mobility strategies;

2. Encouraging development of new affordable housing in high resource areas;

3. Improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization, including preservation of existing affordable housing; and

4. Protecting existing residents from displacement.

Each AFFH objective states which topic area(s) it falls into. One way of affirmatively furthering fair housing is to support housing development in “high resource” areas (as determined by HCD and the Tax Credit Allocation Committee). High resource areas are shown by research to be most strongly associated with positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families, which are typically areas of higher incomes, high-performing schools, and fewer environmental hazards. HCD required more information showing how AFFH objectives have geographic targets in the City, in part to allow for more housing opportunities in higher resource areas.

Housing Constraints
One section that was added to the Housing Constraints appendix is regarding growth management and growth control measures. HCD is aware of the Housing for People ballot initiative and tracking it, as HCD views the measure as a possible constraint to housing. Because the measure has not been voted on yet, a section was added speaking more broadly about how initiatives requiring a vote of the people for legislative actions (increasing height or size of a project) or raising the inclusionary rate without more study can be constraints to housing.

22.657

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 7
7 Sites Inventory
The Sites Inventory is broken down into two sections: Pipeline Projects and Projected Housing.

Pipeline projects include projects that have been proposed or entitled but have not yet been counted in a previous Annual Progress Report on housing for HCD (which is how RHNA numbers are tracked, with timing of building permit being the determining factor for these purposes). Projected Housing details sites throughout the city that have the potential develop with housing in the coming eight years. Based on April 25, 2023 Council direction, HCD feedback, or further staff review, some pipeline projects and projected development sites were removed or revised and some new ones were added. Below is the Sites Inventory summary table from the first submittal to HCD, followed by the summary table of the current Sites Inventory on page G-2 of Appendix G Sites Inventory.

First HCD Submittal May 8, 2023:

Current Sites Inventory Summary as of November 16, 2023:

Table G-2: 6th Cycle RHNA Sites Inventory Analysis
Table G-2: 6th Cycle RHNA Sites Inventory Analysis
Strategies
Very
Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
TOTAL
6 th Cycle RHNA 859 562 709 1,606 3,736
City of Santa Cruz 691 174 1,865 2,730
UC Santa Cruz 868 217 0 1,085

1. Pipeline
Projects
Total 1,559 391 1,865 3,815
ADUs 349 175 59 583
Vacant Residential
Land 5 11 138 154
Mission Street
Corridor 93 71 705 869
Ocean Street
Corridor 51 40 176 267
Soquel Avenue
Corridor 80 62 353 495
Water Street Corridor 28 23 172 223
River Street Corridor 12 9 201 222
Church 55 25 28 108
Downtown 26 21 312 359
Downtown
Expansion Plan Area 115 115 916 1,145
Other 0 3 29 32

2. Projected
Housing
Total 814 555 3,089 4,457

TOTAL UNIT
POTENTIAL 2,373 946 4,954 8,272 3. Buffer
Buffer Over RHNA 67% 33% 208% 121%

22.658

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 8
8 Strategies
Very
Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
TOTAL
6 th Cycle RHNA 859 562 709 1,606 3,736
City of Santa Cruz 702 70 1,560 2,332
UC Santa Cruz 0 242 0 242

1. Pipeline
Projects
Total 702 312 1,560 2,574
ADUs 292 234 58 584
Vacant Residential
Land 3 8 63 74
Mission Street
Corridor 48 36 219 303
Ocean Street
Corridor 96 32 106 234
Soquel Avenue
Corridor 40 32 120 192
Water Street
Corridor 12 9 38 59
River Street
Corridor 0 0 17 17
Downtown 139 52 210 401
South of Laurel
Area 141 111 320 572
Church Properties 32 26 76 134
Other In-Fill 270 32 8 310

2. Projected
Housing
Total 1,073 572 1,235 2,880

TOTAL UNIT
POTENTIAL 1,775 884 2,795 5,454 3. Buffer
Buffer Over
RHNA 25% 25% 74% 46%
Aside from pipeline projects with known affordability amounts, HCD prescribes set percentages of affordability (and only if the parcel is at least a half-acre in size or more). It must be reiterated that the affordability breakdown in the Sites Inventory is not necessarily correlated with what will get built or a projection of the City’s housing priorities but rather an output on paper based on HCD’s algorithms all jurisdictions must use. The unit counts by affordability are not allowed to consider the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance or the use of Density Bonus. While the percentage of Above Moderate Income units is higher than Very Low, Low, and Moderate, the affordable units created by the Above Moderate development through the Inclusionary Ordinance are not taken into account. These projections set by HCD also do not directly consider 100% affordable development that is often facilitated through the work of the City staff and non-profit partners, even though that work was successful in the Fifth Cycle Housing Element. For instance, during the Fifth Cycle Housing Element, out of the approximately 1,715 units counted towards RHNA, 910 (53%) were affordable. Thus, with the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance and with 100% affordable projects, more affordable units are expected than what is included in the table.

22.659

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 9
9 It is a noted State Prohousing Designation best practice that the Sites Inventory include units over the RHNA target to help ensure that RHNA targets can be met should some sites not develop. HCD recommends that the Sites Inventory includes a 15-30% buffer. The Lower Income Moderate Income Categories both have a 25% buffer over the RHNA target while Above Moderate has a buffer of 74%. These buffers are lower than the initial submittal, but they are still on the higher end of HCD’s recommended range.

There were several reasons for this decrease of units counted in the Sites Inventory during the review process. Some of it had to do with removing parcels that were no longer deemed suitable and removing pipeline projects that began construction or withdrew applications. However, the main two reasons were changes to how units were counted in the Downtown Plan Expansion area and on the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC) campus. The first draft of the Housing Element included the Downtown Plan Expansion area as a whole planning area rather than individual properties. Given uncertainty around the ultimate residential capacities associated with any rezoning of this area and the desire to not include any rezonings in the Housing Element, staff opted to take a more conservative approach and use the base densities of qualifying larger sites in this area for Sites Inventory calculations. This meant including 572 units as the South of Laurel Area, rather than the Council-supported total of 1,600 units as part of the anticipated rezoning or even the 1,047 units that represents the current base density for the whole area. Staff believe that this is a conservative estimate and that development in this area above this number of units will play an important role in meeting RHNA targets, both for the upcoming cycle and future ones.

Another area of reduced units was the UCSC campus. UCSC has two large new housing projects that will be developed during this Housing Element’s planning period. However, the Census Bureau deems dorms and student housing to be group housing, and group housing does not count towards units under Housing Element law. Housing on campus can only count towards RHNA if it is available to non-students, such as faculty apartments or couples’ units for graduate students.

The initial version of the Sites Inventory included more proposed campus housing, but further review by HCD determined that some units would not count. The City does want more student housing units to count as part of RHNA, so the Policy Chapter includes Objective 1.4c:

Communicate with HCD and State representatives to encourage the State to recognize nontraditional types of housing units for RHNA purposes.

HCD requires strong justification for inclusion of a site in the inventory and had several comments about the methodological aspects of the Sites Inventory that were also addressed through revisions. Just having the General Plan and Zoning in place to support redevelopment is insufficient for HCD to include the site on the inventory as one which is likely to redevelop in the next eight years. One comment was to provide a more detailed explanation of how sites were chosen based on suitability. This was described in greater detail on page G-21. Another comment was to further describe how the document arrived at its realistic housing capacity assumptions.

On page G-22, the document describes how the City uses Floor Area Ratios (FAR) found in the General Plan to control building size rather than density. There is no density requirement to determine the potential number of units on a given site, so it required staff to develop a density for those sites using the average size of a unit divided by the floor area allowed. This unit size was determined based on a 2021 study as part of the project to create objective standards for

22.660

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 10
10 multifamily development. Once a maximum was reached, staff removed one floor of units from the amount in consideration of potential ground floor commercial and parking. Additional explanation of these methodologies satisfied HCD.

Only one comment remains from HCD, which was received on October 27, 2023. It asked the City to provide additional analysis and local context as it relates to the development potential of non-vacant properties. Essentially, HCD wanted to better understand the local development trends that allow the City to assume housing development will happen, including on non-vacant sites. Several paragraphs of narrative and edits to tables in the Sites Inventory were made (see pages G-6 to G-9, G-22 to G-24, and G-32). Staff believes these additions satisfy HCD’s comment on the matter.

HCD requires strong justification for inclusion of a site in the inventory. Working with HCD, considering community feedback, and evaluating development trends allowed for significant refinement of the sites inventory over the past year. Sites in the inventory are expected to develop with housing in the near term. Undoubtedly, however, some sites listed on the inventory will not develop in the next eight years, and other sites that are not listed on the inventory will develop with housing over the next eight years. The latest version represents a more accurate inventory of sites with realistic and demonstrated development potential over the next eight years.

Safety Element Amendments
The Safety Element is another mandatory element of the General Plan. Recent state laws (SB 379, SB 1035, and SB 99) now require cities to address climate adaptation and resiliency in their Safety Elements through a vulnerability assessment or Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. These updates are triggered by a Housing Element Update. The goal of this work is to help identify any new information relating to flood and fire hazards, climate adaptation and resiliency strategies.

The Safety Element Amendments attachment includes the proposed amendments to the Safety Element in accordance with the provisions as part of the Housing Element update process.

Next steps
Should HCD’s remaining comment be satisfied, they will deem the Housing Element certifiable.

Following that, the document does not become officially certified until City Council adopts it.

Following the Planning Commission’s recommendation on the Housing Element & Safety Element updates on November 16, 2023, staff will seek City Council adoption on December 12, 2023. There is no further flexibility in the schedule given a certified Housing Element must be adopted by December 15, 2023.

Health in All Policies
The goal of Health in All Policies (HiAP) is to ensure that decision-makers are informed about the impacts on the three HiAP pillars of health, equity, and sustainability when reviewing projects and policy options. The Housing Element Update’s key purpose is to support housing options throughout the City for all needs and all affordability levels. It supports health by promoting housing, services, and efficient land use patterns that encourage sustainable living situations, active transportation, and healthy lifestyles. The AFFH component of the Housing Element provides many

22.661

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 11
11 policies and objectives focused on improving equity in housing and access to resources and assistance programs. The resource conservation and environmental stewardship goal in the Housing Element Policy Plan also provides a variety of policies and objectives to address sustainability.

Therefore, the Housing Element Update meets each of the HiAP pillars.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Housing Element is exempt from further CEQA review per Section 15061(b)(3), given this project consists of activities covered by the “common sense exemption” that CEQA allows when a project would not cause a significant effect on the environment.

As proposed, the Housing Element would not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. The Housing Element is a policy document and does not provide entitlements to any specific land use projects. It does not make any changes to the 2030 General Plan land use map and does not modify any land use designations, allowed densities, or land use intensities currently established in the 2030 General Plan. It neither entitles, proposes, or otherwise requires the construction of new development or rehabilitation of existing development, nor does it change the rate or location of new development.

Rather, the goals, policies, and programs established by the Housing Element only facilitate the development, preservation, and rehabilitation of housing consistent with existing and planned uses, as identified in the 2030 General Plan and as mandated under State law. As such, the impacts of the proposed 6th Cycle Housing Element and the associated changes to the Safety Element of the General Plan are also covered by the Environmental Impact Report that was certified by the City Council for the 2030 General Plan. The proposed modifications to the Housing Element and Safety Element do not create any impacts on the environment that were not previously evaluated as part of the 2030 General Plan.

All future proposed housing development projects submitted to the City will be reviewed pursuant to CEQA, when required, concurrent with other permitting and regulatory requirements.

Similarly, any future policy changes will be evaluated for CEQA compliance prior to adoption of any such changes.

22.662

AGENDA REPORT
PC Meeting of 11/16/23
SUBJECT: General Plan Housing Element & Safety Element Updates PAGE 12
12 Submitted by:

Matt VanHua
Principal Planner
Approved by:

Lee Butler
Director of Planning and Community
Development
ATTACHMENTS:

Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
- Chapter 1 – Introduction
- Chapter 2 – Policy Plan
- Appendix A – Community Engagement
- Appendix B – Review of Past Performance
- Appendix C – Housing Needs Assessment
- Appendix D – Fair Housing Assessment
- Appendix E – Housing Constraints
- Appendix F – Housing Resources
- Appendix G – Housing Sites Inventory
- Appendix H – Glossary
Safety Element Figures Amendment
Safety Element Text Amendment
Response Letter to the June 14, 2022 City Council Housing Element Direction Community Survey Summary
Also see www.cityofsantacruz.com/housingelement for additional information on community feedback, HCD comment letters, prior drafts, and other information.

22.663

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

PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting

ACTION SUMMARY
November 16, 2023
7:00 P.M. GENERAL BUSINESS AND MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST, COUNCIL

CHAMBERS
Call to Order-The meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m.

Roll Call-Commissioners Conway, Dawson, Gordon, McKelvey, Polhamus, and Kennedy were present. Commissioner Maxwell was absent with notification.

Statements of Disqualification-None.

Oral Communications-None.

Approval of Minutes

1. Approval of the Minutes of May 18, 2023.

2. Approval of the Minutes of June 15, 2023.

3. Approve the Minutes of August 17, 2023.

By consensus, the minutes of August 17, 2023, were continued to the next regular meeting in December.

4. Approve the Minutes of September 21, 2023.

22.664

5. Approval of the Minutes of October 19, 2023.

MOTION: Motion made by Commissioner Polhamus, seconded by Commissioner Dawson, to approve the minutes of May 18, 2023; June 15, 2023; September 21, 2023; and October 19, 2023.

ACTION: The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Conway, Dawson, Gordon, McKelvey, Polhamus, and Kennedy NOES: None
ABSENT: Maxwell
Public Hearings

6. General Plan 2030 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and Update to the Safety Element of the 2030 General Plan. Location: Citywide. Applicant: City of Santa Cruz. Environmental Review: Exempt per Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Reuse of the 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Principal Planner Matt VanHua and Ines Galmiche, Kimley-Horn and Associates (Consultant) presented the item to the Commission.

Planning and Community Development Director Lee Butler and Housing and Community Development Manager Jessica DeWit also addressed the Commission.

The public hearing was opened.

The following members of the public addressed the Commission: None.

MOTION: Motion made by Commissioner Dawson, seconded by Commissioner McKelvey, to recommend that the City Council adopt the 2023-2031 6th Cycle Housing Element and associated updates to the Safety Element of the General Plan, finding that the changes are exempt from CEQA under Section 15061(b)(3) and that the changes are covered under CEQA through a reuse of the 2030 General Plan EIR, with the following modifications (modifications noted in strike-through/underline):