Agenda 2022-02-14 CC
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2022
REGULAR MEETING 6:30 PM
VIRTUAL & IN COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1644 OAK STREET, SOLVANG, CA 93463 Charlie Uhrig, Mayor
Mark Infanti, Mayor pro tem Xenia Bradford, City Manager Robert Clarke, Councilmember Dave Fleishman, City Attorney Claudia Orona, Councilmember Annamarie Porter, City Clerk Jim Thomas, Councilmember
Pursuant to California Assembly Bill 361 City Council meetings are permitted to be held via teleconferencing and the City will provide both remote and in-person participation options. Members of the public can observe and address the meeting telephonically or electronically. Those attending in person are required to wear masks and socially distance. Virtual participation is available via Zoom or phone. Join the Zoom meeting by visiting https://zoom.us/j/3066529195 (Meeting ID: 306 652 9195). If you wish to speak, please use the “raised hand” symbol. If you would like to make a comment by phone, please call into conference line at (888) 788-0099 (Meeting ID: 306 652 9195). The phone line will be open starting at 6 p.m. In-person speakers will be invited to make public comments first. Virtual speakers will follow. You may also observe the live stream of the City Council meetings on www.CityofSolvang.com/YouTube.
Distribution to the City Council – You may, but are not required to, submit your comment in advance. Should you wish to do so, please do so via email prior to 5 p.m. on the Friday prior to the Council meeting to the City Clerk at: [email protected]. Your comment will be recorded and distributed appropriately.
AGENDA AND SUPPORTING MATERIALS - Copies
of staff reports and supporting documentation pertaining to each item on this agenda are available for public
viewing and inspection at City Hall, 1644 Oak Street,
Solvang, during regular business hours and on the
City’s website www.cityofsolvang.com. In addition, any
materials related to an agenda item provided to a
majority of the Council after the posting of the agenda, will be identified and available at City Hall and may be posted to the website.
AGENDA POSTING NOTIFICATION - If you would like
to receive notification of the agenda availability, please subscribe to our “Notify Me” list at:
https://www.cityofsolvang.com/List.aspx. You will
receive notification when the agenda is available for
viewing on the website and you may view and/or print a
copy.
DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED FOLLOWING THE
POSTING OF THE AGENDA. Any writings that relate
to an agenda item for an open session that is
distributed to a majority of the Council after the posting of the agenda, will be available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s office, and may be posted to the
website.
PUBLIC COMMENT - The public is encouraged to
address the City Council on any matter posted on the
agenda or on any other matter within its jurisdiction. If you wish to address the City Council on non-agenda
items, you may do so during the PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS section
on the agenda. Each person is allotted three (3)
minutes to speak.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action
may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the
agenda, or unless certain emergency or special
circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff
to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for
consideration at a future City Council meeting.
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT - It is the intention of the City of
Solvang to comply with the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a
participant at this meeting, you need special
assistance beyond what is normally provided, the City
will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable
manner. Please contact the City Clerk at either (805)
688-5575 x206 or [email protected]. 72-
hours’ notice is requested.
1 Agenda 2022-02-14 CC
6:30 PM OPEN SESSION – REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CEREMONIAL ITEMS/COMMENDATIONS
PRESENTATIONS
4th of July Celebration – Rotary Presentation
PROCLAMATIONS
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS – NON- AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS This section is intended to provide members of the public with the opportunity to address the Council on items not on the Agenda and the Consent Agenda. This section is limited to 30 minutes. Each speaker will be afforded three minutes, and may speak only once. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except to briefly respond or to ask Staff to follow up on such items.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORT AND ADVANCE CALENDAR
Informational Report……………………………………………………………………………………................4
3. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
Comments and requests from City Council Members. No action will be taken at this meeting.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Approval of Agenda as Presented.
b. Approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of January 24, 2022 and the Financial Plan Development Workshop of January 27, 2022…………………………………………………….........6. c. Approve Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable for the Month of January 2022……...........12 d. Adopt Resolution No. 22-1156, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Solvang, California Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council………………………………......26 e. Adopt Resolution 22-1157 a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Solvang, California authorizing submittal of application(s) for all CalRecycle grants for which the City of Solvang Is eligible……………………………………………………………………………………………………....31.
f. Receive and file Santa Barbara County Fire Incident report for Quarter 3 and Quarter 4, 2021....38 g. Approve budget adjustment request in the amount of $149,000 for custodial services and $15,000 for restroom supplies for restrooms 2 and 3……………………………………………….....50 h. Approve contact with Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Assn. Inc. dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley for Tourism Business Improvement District Administration for the term of July 1, 2021, - June 30, 2027…………………………………………………………………………………………………………53
PUBLIC HEARINGS – None
REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
5. RECEIVE REPORT ON COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
ALTERNATIVE CHOICES
Receive community input on the General Plan Update Alternatives Choices Report and provide staff with general comment and policy direction .........................................................................................80. i. Approve proposal from Meridian Consultants (Consultant) and from GSI Water Solutions Inc. (Consultant) for review and analysis of settlement proposal regarding River Wells petition with the State of California Water Resources Control Board and authorize City Manager to execute contract regarding the same and make minor amendments if necessary based on written change orders .................................................74... 2 Agenda 2022-02-14 CC
6. RECEIVE TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MARKETING
SERVICES OPERATING STRUCTURE AND SCOPE OF WORK
Receive Tourism Advisory Committee recommendations for marketing services operating structure and scope of work recommendations and provide staff with policy direction…………………………………282
7. APPOINT TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER DUE TO RESIGNATION Tourism Advisory Committee member Barry Prescott has resigned from the Committee resulting in a vacancy for the seat appointed by Councilmember Clarke. Councilmember Clarke may appoint an alternate Committee member or direct staff to open a recruitment………………………………………284
8. AB1234 REPORT OUT AND COUNCIL CLOSING COMMENTS
9. ADJOURNMENT
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Annamarie Porter, City Clerk for the City of Solvang, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing notice was posted at the City of Solvang City Hall bulletin board at 1644 Oak Street, Solvang, CA and on the City of Solvang website not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, per Government Code 54954.2.
Dated this 9th day of February 2022.
3 Meeting Date Agenda Item Agenda Action
12‐Feb
Utility Rate Study (Water & Wastewater) Community
Workshop Community Workshop (Veteran's Hall)
26‐Feb
Fiscal Year 2022‐24 Financial Plan Goal Setting Session Council Workshop Set Goals 28‐Feb
Branding Strategy and Project Scope Approval Business Approve Solvang Park Shade Improvement Alternatives Business Approve Measure A 5‐Year Local Program of Projects Business Approve Copenhagen Drive Closure Preliminary Conceptual
Project Review Business Policy
SB 619 Notice of Intent to Comply Resolution Consent Approve Consideration of Tax Measures or formation of
Business Improvement District Business Approve
Title 11 Ordinance Modifications Public Hearing Approve 7‐Mar
Special Meeting ‐ Solvang Elections District Map Public Hearing #1 to review draft maps Business Public Hearing City Council/Planning Commission Joint Session ‐
General Plan Update Business Approve
14‐Mar
Parking Improvements Business Policy
SB1 RMRA project List Business Approve
Solvang Skytt Mesa LLMD Annual Assessment Public Hearing Approve Transit Operations Contract Award Business Approve
FTA 5311 Grant Agreement Consent Approve
TDA Grant Funding Consent Approve
28‐Mar
Solvang Elections District Map Public Hearing #2 to
review draft maps (intro ordinance) Business Public Hearing Second Street Drainage Improvements Business Approve
Waste Water Treatment Upgrade Phase 3 Conceptual
Review Business Approve
Investment Policy Annual Review Concent Approve
11‐Apr Solvang Elections District Map Adoption Business Adopt HCA Park Improvements Project Report Business Receive
ADVANCE CALENDAR
4 Meeting Date Agenda Item Agenda Action
N/A
Agenda Item Agenda Action
November Stormwater Management Program Annual Report Consent Receive December Appointment of Mayor Pro Tem Business Approve
December
Council selection of representatives to Committees and
Agencies Business Approve
December (every
two years) Appointment to Boards, Commissions, Committees Business Approve January Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Business Approve January Grant Funding Policy Review Business Approve
February Measure A 5‐Year Local Program of Projects Public Hearing Approve February Fiscal Outlook and Financial Policies Business Approve March SB1 RMRA project List Public Hearing Approve
March Investment Policy Annual Review Business Approve
March Solvang Skytt Mesa LLMD Annual Assessment Public Hearing Approve March FTA 5311 Grant Agreement Consent Approve
March TDA Grant Funding Consent Approve
April Council Budget Goal Setting Business Approve
May Preliminary Budget
Oct/Jan/April/July Quarterly Financial Reports Business Approve June
Two‐Year Financial Plan Development or Budget
adoption Business Adopt
June Capital Improvement Program Business Adopt
June/July Amend Appropriation Limit Business Adopt
Council Requested Agenda Items
Annual Reports
5 January 24, 2022
Monday
6:30 p.m.
6:00 p.m. – SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Uhrig called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 1644 Oak Street, Solvang, California.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Charlie Uhrig; Mayor pro tem Mark Infanti; Councilmembers Robert Clarke, Claudia Orona and Jim Thomas
Staff: City Manager Xenia Bradford, City Attorney David Fleishman, City Clerk Annamarie Porter
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Councilmember Clarke
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no public comments on Closed Session and Non-Agenda Items.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
City Council recessed to Closed Session at 6:02 p.m. to consider the item listed in the Closed Session agenda.
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED POTENTIAL LITIGATION – Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) One potential case
RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
City Council reconvened to Open Session at 6:24 p.m.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS
City Attorney Fleishman reported the Mayor did not participate in the Closed Session matter as he recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest and noted there was no reportable action. 6:30 p.m. OPEN SESSION – REGULAR MEETING
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Charlie Uhrig; Mayor pro tem Mark Infanti; Councilmembers Robert Clarke, Claudia Orona and Jim Thomas
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION AND
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
SOLVANG CITY COUNCIL
Agenda Item 4.b
6 Staff: City Manager Xenia Bradford, City Attorney David Fleishman, City Clerk Annamarie Porter
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Councilmember Orona
CEREMONIAL ITEMS/COMMENDATIONS
Employee of the Quarter Award
City Manager Bradford presented the Employee of the Quarter Award to Trevor Holley, Acting Lead Wastewater Operator.
PRESENTATIONS – None
PROCLAMATIONS - None
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS – NON-AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WRITTEN OR VERBAL
Sheriff Lieutenant Greene provided an update on the status of the Sheriff's station; noted it was evacuated due to flooding; reported they are operating from trailers and stated there has been no disruption in service.
There were no other public comments.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORT AND ADVANCE CALENDAR
City Manager Bradford announced an upcoming Financial Planning Community Workshop; discussed FY 2022-24 Financial Plan Development next steps; addressed a Utility Rate Community Workshop and next steps; reported on a recent General Plan Update Community Workshop and next steps; commented on forthcoming special City Council meetings to discuss Solvang Districting for Elections; listed upcoming Commission and Committee meetings and talked about the Copenhagen Drive closure and the Advance Calendar.
3. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
Councilmember Thomas reported that Rancheros Visitadores will be holding a ride and will be presenting information to City Council and discussed upcoming CalCities meetings.
Councilmember Orona reported having been contacted by a local business owner noting the need for additional trash receptacles and restrooms on the parking lot behind the Wine Valley Inn.
Mayor Uhrig discussed a recent SBCAG meeting; provided Caltrans District 5 updates; announced SBCAG and Clean Air Express will be unveiling the first, all-electric commuter bus; spoke about the Santa Ynez Valley Drug Coalition and People Helping People asking for the community's involvement in a recall and recognition survey to address key components of the alcohol and drug prevention efforts in Santa Barbara County and the Santa Ynez Valley; stated People Helping People are distributing free COVID test kits; presented updated statistics regarding food distribution programs in the City and talked about recent actions by the California State Water Board and about Operation Recognition: an educational program for Veterans. Additionally, Mayor Uhrig spoke about the upcoming opening of Peasant's Deli and Marketing second location, a Time Capsule ceremony celebrating 100 years of the Solvang Chamber of Commerce, Restaurant Week, new exhibits at the Elverhøj Museum and a career fair hosted by Solvang High School.
Councilmember Clarke announced the passing of Glenn Jacobsen and asked everyone to keep his family in their 7 thoughts and prayers.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Approval of Agenda as Presented.
b. Approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of January 10, 2022 c. Approve an Agreement with Sunbeam Solar Technologies dba Sunbeam Consulting for engineering design services for the Sewer System Upgrade project PW 176 in the amount of $95,900 for the term January 24, 2022 – December 31, 2022 and authorize the Mayor to execute on behalf of the City, and the City Manager to execute contract amendments within the contingency amount of $4,000 on behalf of the City d. Approve the 2nd Amendment to the Agreement with West Coast Arborists Inc for Street Tree Pruning for the additional amount of $60,000 for the remaining term July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2022; and authorize the City Manager to execute on behalf of the City
Regarding Item No. 4d, Mayor Uhrig confirmed the current contract will go through June 30, 2022 and commented on the list of trees provided with the agenda.
City Manager Bradford requested advancing Item No. 9 (New Item No. 6) immediately after Item No. 5.
Motion by Councilmember Clarke to approve the Consent Agenda, as presented, seconded by Mayor pro tem Infanti, and carried with a roll call vote of 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
5. LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT WITH SANTA BARBARA COUNTY SHERIFF a. Receive a report on proposal by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office Fiscal Year 2022-23 rates; and,
b. Authorize City Manager to submit a written notice of dispute resolution Mayor Uhrig declared a conflict of interest; recused himself from this item and left the chamber.
City Manager Bradford provided a brief background, introduced the item and deferred to Russ Bronson, Consultant for a presentation.
Mr. Bronson narrated a PowerPoint presentation of a cost analysis of law enforcement contracts with Santa Barbara County Sheriffs.
There were no public comments on this item.
Motion by Councilmember Clarke to receive a report on proposal by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office Fiscal Year 2022-23 rates and, authorize City Manager to submit a written notice of dispute resolution, seconded by Mayor pro tem Infanti, and carried with a roll call vote of 4-0, with Mayor Uhrig, absent (recused).
Mayor Uhrig returned to the meeting.
6. SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Approve Sewer Master Plan Update
City Manager Bradford introduced the item and deferred to Utilities Director Jose Acosta for a report.
Utilities Director Acosta introduced attending consultant and narrated a PowerPoint presentation regarding the City of Solvang 2021 Sewer Master Plan.
8 Discussion followed regarding periodic reviewing and updating of the plan, concerns regarding volume and growth areas, the possibility of rating increases in the near future, the City's population, the scope of the plan, and responsibilities for pipe maintenance/replacement.
There were no public comments on this item.
Motion by Mayor pro tem Infanti to approve the Sewer Master Plan Update and include it in the City's CIP, seconded by Mayor Uhrig, and carried with a roll call vote of 5-0.
7. FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 MID YEAR (QTR2) FINANCIAL REPORT Receive the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year report and approve budget adjustments as presented in Attachment A.
City Manager Bradford presented the FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Financial Report.
Discussion followed regarding continually seeking grant opportunities including a Caltrans grant.
There were no public comments on this item.
Motion by Councilmember Orona to receive the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year report and approve budget adjustments as presented in Attachment A, seconded by Councilmember Thomas, and carried with a roll call vote of 5-0.
8. FISCAL FORECASTS AND FINANCIAL POLICIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-24 FINANCIAL PLAN
Approve fiscal forecasts and financial policies for the Fiscal Year 2022-24 Financial Plan development City Manager Bradford narrated a PowerPoint presentation regarding fiscal forecasts and financial policies for the FY 2022-24 Financial Plan.
Discussion followed regarding the possibility of increasing TOT and having staff provide an idea of impacts if TOT is increased to 12.5% or 13%.
City Attorney Fleishman noted increasing TOT would require a vote of the people at a special election.
There were no public comments on this item.
Motion by Councilmember Thomas to approve fiscal forecasts and financial policies for the Fiscal Year 2022-24 Financial Plan development, seconded by Mayor pro tem Infanti, and carried with a roll call vote of 5-0.
9. RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT – “PENSIONS IN SANTA BARBARA COUNTY REQUIRE VIGILANCE”
Approve response to the Grand Jury Report titled “Pensions in Santa Barbara County require vigilance” as presented in Attachment A
City Manager Bradford narrated a PowerPoint presentation regarding the item.
Discussion followed regarding Caltrans rate of returns, responding to Item No. 1A, findings, noting that obligation bonds are risky and the statutory process for responding, under the penal code.
There were no public comments on this item.
9 Motion by Councilmember Thomas to approve response to the Grand Jury Report titled “Pensions in Santa Barbara County require vigilance” as presented in Attachment A, seconded by Mayor pro tem Infanti, and carried with a roll call vote of 5-0.
10. MARKETING CONTRACT TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF
RECOMMENDATIONS
Receive an update on Tourism Advisory Committee recommendations for Marketing Contract and provide staff with policy direction
City Manager Bradford narrated a PowerPoint presentation with an update on Tourism Advisory Committee recommendations for a marketing contract.
Discussion followed regarding the reason for a request for extension of the marketing contract to allow the contractor to create a year-long program, the need for additional time to create an RFP, existing obligations under the current contract, concerns with the lack of City representation for events and permitting events, including website development in the scope of work, considering issuing the RFP as soon as possible, consideration of different organizational structures for the way marketing is provided, having a consistent scope of work, the importance of not having IDK (Cogs & Marvel) participate in the development of an RFP, having the TAC give a presentation to City Council or scheduling a joint workshop.
Discussion continued regarding deliverables, external marketing and digital assets and following design guidelines.
There were no public comments on this item.
City Council concurred to receive an update on Tourism Advisory Committee recommendations for Marketing Contract and direct staff to continue discussions with the TAC and have the TAC Chair present at a future City Council meeting.
11. APPOINT TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER DUE TO RESIGNATION Tourism Advisory Committee member Barry Prescott has resigned from the Committee resulting in a vacancy for the seat appointed by Councilmember Clarke. Councilmember Clarke may appoint an alternate Committee member or direct staff to open a recruitment Councilmember Clarke reported the people he was going to select have conflicts and requested continuing this item to the next City Council meeting.
12. AB1234 REPORT OUT AND COUNCIL CLOSING COMMENTS - None
13. ADJOURNMENT- Mayor Uhrig adjourned the meeting at 9:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Annamarie Porter, City Clerk
10 January 27, 2022
Thursday, 6:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Uhrig called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 1644 Oak Street, Solvang, California.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Charlie Uhrig (via Zoom); Mayor pro tem Mark Infanti; Councilmember Robert Clarke
Absent: Councilmembers Claudia Orona and Jim Thomas
Staff: City Manager Xenia Bradford, City Clerk Annamarie Porter
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Mayor pro tem Infanti.
1. FINANCIAL PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
City Manager Bradford narrated a PowerPoint presentation regarding the City's financial plan.
Discussion followed regarding increasing sales tax versus increasing TOT, formation of a Business Improvement District (BID), assessments on property owners or business owners, results of a recent survey, law enforcement and public safety, medical services, code enforcement, general elections versus special district elections, sales tax from residents versus sales tax from visitors, TAC recommendations and reviewing what other cities charge for sales tax.
Mayor Uhrig opened public comments.
Jim Richardson, President of the Board, Solvang Senior Center, provided a brief history of the Fire Department; thanked City Council for supporting the construction of a new Senior Center and asked that the City fund the new Senior Center as a line item.
Ellen Albertoni, Executive Director, Solvang Senior Center, thanked the City for its support and spoke about continuing to nurture the relationship with the City.
Bonnie Jacobsen, President, Friends of the Library, spoke about funding Library programs; discussed operation of the Library and a requirement to pay $20,000/year to the library operator, City of Goleta, noting the Library does not have the funds and donors want to fund special programs and not operations. She requested that the City of Solvang assume costs for operating the Library, increase its investment in the Library and that it be made part of the financial plan.
There were no other public comments.
2. ADJOURNMENT- Mayor Uhrig adjourned the meeting at 7:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Annamarie Porter, City Clerk
MINUTES
SOLVANG CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL FINANCIAL PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
11 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 1 of 14
Expense Approval Report
City of Solvang By Segment (Select Below)
Payment Dates 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007638 Booster Pump Ran…100-16002 60.45 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007413 City Hall 100-16002 564.33 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 1351329740 Siren 100-16002 42.18 Southern California Gas Compa… 9500 12/21/2021 12/21/2021 Acct# 098 214 9500 0 100-16002 305.20 Jennifer Wanner INV0009741 01/10/2022 Refund- Rental Deposit 100-16002 75.00 Maria Limon INV0009776 01/16/2022 Refund- Rental Deposit 100-16002 230.00 Julie Smith INV0009777 01/24/2022 Refund- Rental Deposit 100-16002 100.00 Alicia Duran INV0009778 01/24/2022 Refund- Rental Deposit 100-16002 250.00 Templeton Floor Company, Inc. INV0009784 01/24/2022 Refund- Overpayment 100-16002 1,547.30 California Building Standards INV0009780 01/24/2022 CBSC Quarterly Payment 100-20020 40.00 Department of Conservation INV0009781 01/24/2022 Quarterly SMIP Fee 100-20024 97.74 SUNRUN INC INV0009783 01/24/2022 Refund of Building Permit Fees … 100-20024 1.51 Division of the State Architect INV0009782 01/24/2022 Quarterly DSA Fee 100-20026 122.00 SUNRUN INC INV0009783 01/24/2022 Refund of Building Permit Fees … 100-20026 1.00 Platinum Plus for Business dba … 3831 01/10/22 12/11/2021 Billing- December 11,21-January…100-20037 6,166.99 Miller Event Management 023972 01/18/2022 Wine Event- Vet's Hall 100-23005 703.00 MNS Engineers, Inc. 78625 09/10/2021 Stormwater Management- 539 …100-23011 187.50 MNS Engineers, Inc. 79308 12/17/2021 Stormwater Management- 1546…100-23011 312.50 10,806.70
Department: 1000 - Council
Santa Maria Times 64601 01/20/2022 Printing & Publishing- Notice of… 100-1000-100-57015 113.57 Maria Shafer 2022-001 SOLV 01/07/2022 Preparation of Minutes- RTAC 100-1000-100-57016 85.00 Valley Fresh Market, LLC 03-341767 12/21/2021 City Hospitality- OTR Staff Meet…100-1000-100-58001 118.39 Valley Fresh Market, LLC 04-385039 12/20/2021 City Hospitality- QTR Staff Meet…100-1000-100-58001 296.91 Petty Cash INV0009785 01/24/2022 Petty Cash- Employee of the QTR 100-1000-100-58001 100.00 Bethania Evangelical Lutheran … INV0009779 01/24/2022 Food Distribution Contribution 100-1000-110-59042 2,500.00 Santa Barbara Co Sheriff Dept 1378 01/07/2022 Contracted Law Enforcement- J… 100-1000-130-56006 179,302.00 S.B.C. Public Health Dept. FY21-22 Q2 01/24/2022 Animal Services- Oct 1,2021-De… 100-1000-130-56011 11,800.00 Department 1000 - Council Total: 194,315.87
Department: 1100 - Administration
Advantage Group, The 137804 01/25/2022 Annual Renewal/Admin Flex Fee…100-1100-105-51005 166.55 Advantage Group, The INV0009788 01/28/2022 Retirement Health 100-1100-105-51005 6,027.99 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1100-120-43021 -17.06 PERS Retirement INV0009709 01/06/2022 2022 Replacement Benefit Char…100-1100-120-51003 275.04 Department of Justice 550287 12/03/2021 Employee Screening- Fuog, Goo…100-1100-120-51010 128.00 WBCP, Inc. 6576 07/01/2021 Recruitment- City Clerk 100-1100-120-51011 16,058.00 WBCP, Inc. 6608 08/25/2021 Recruitment- City Cleark 100-1100-120-51011 8,963.65 WBCP, Inc. 6629b 10/18/2021 Recruitment- CCrown 100-1100-120-51011 15,481.34 WBCP, Inc. 6630 10/21/2021 Recruiting-Public Works Director 100-1100-120-51011 8,900.00 WBCP, Inc. 6650 12/15/2021 Recruitment- CCrown 100-1100-120-51011 13,026.33 WBCP, Inc. 6662 12/21/2021 Recruitment- Utilities Director 100-1100-120-51011 350.00 WBCP, Inc. 6663 12/21/2021 Recruiting Services- Planning M… 100-1100-120-51011 150.00 Broadcast Music, Inc 41839109 01/02/2022 Membership Renewal 100-1100-120-52002 5.52 Scott Reardon's Locksmith Servi…24217 01/10/2022 Supplies- Admin/Keys 100-1100-120-52003 95.95 Staples Advantage 3495518846 12/18/2021 Supplies- Admin 100-1100-120-52003 126.88 Staples Advantage 3496624572 01/01/2022 Supplies-Admin 100-1100-120-52003 63.56 Staples Advantage 3496624574 01/01/2022 Supplies-Admin 100-1100-120-52003 139.97 Staples Advantage 3497633841 01/15/2022 Supplies- Admin 100-1100-120-52003 270.90 RR Donnelley 891452238 12/31/2021 Supplies-Finance(1099/W-2) Fo… 100-1100-120-52003 318.01 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1100-120-52008 200.00 Government Finance Officers A… 10062 01/04/2022 Audit 100-1100-120-56013 460.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1100-120-57011 108.84 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234935 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Administration 100-1100-120-57012 8,460.00 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234938 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Personnel 100-1100-120-57012 382.50 Agenda Item 4.c
12 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 2 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235266 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Administration 100-1100-120-57012 6,678.88 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235269 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Personnel 100-1100-120-57012 765.00 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1100-120-57015 1,191.83 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1100-120-57015 87.42 Van Dermyden Makus Law Cor… 17898 07/26/2021 Legal Services-Public Works 100-1100-120-57016 6,876.17 Van Dermyden Makus Law Cor… 18089 08/16/2021 Legal Services-Public Works 100-1100-120-57016 8,151.90 Van Dermyden Makus Law Cor… 19247 12/24/2021 Legal Services-Public Works 100-1100-120-57016 1,140.87 Central Courier LLC 50251 01/04/2022 Daily Bank Deposit- 1/1/2022-1… 100-1100-120-57016 559.09 Robert Half International, Inc. 59106386 12/28/2021 JNeto-Week Ending 12/24/21 100-1100-120-57052 931.50 Robert Half International, Inc. 59147138 01/04/2022 JNeto-Week Ending 12/31/21 100-1100-120-57052 1,296.00 Robert Half International, Inc. 59188229 01/11/2022 JNeto- Week Ending 01/07/2022 100-1100-120-57052 1,318.72 Robert Half International, Inc. 59239816 01/19/2022 JNeto- Week Ending 01/14/2022 100-1100-120-57052 1,318.72 Infosend, Inc 205849 01/21/2022 Newsletter Insert 100-1100-120-57062 1,059.67 Satcom Global FZE AS01220820 01/01/2022 SIM Card 100-1100-120-60006 42.75 Comcast 0775 01/15/22 01/25/2022 Acct#939750775 100-1100-121-57064 384.54 ECS Imaging, Inc. 16573 12/29/2021 Annual Renewal- LaserFiche 100-1100-121-57064 3,884.26 ZWorld GIS 2021-0414 12/01/2021 GIS System Support 100-1100-121-57064 784.70 ZWorld GIS 2021-0425 01/01/2022 GIS System Support 100-1100-121-57064 784.70 Level 3 Communications, LLC 254877795 12/17/2021 T-1 line 100-1100-121-57064 1,384.56 Level 3 Communications, LLC 276878940 01/25/2022 T-1 line 100-1100-121-57064 842.04 Lanspeed 53407-1 11/30/2021 It Support/Cloud Migration Proj…100-1100-121-57064 4,262.99 Lanspeed 53407-2 12/10/2021 It Support/Professional Services 100-1100-121-57064 1,421.01 Lanspeed 53440 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing - January 100-1100-121-57064 3,735.17 Lanspeed 53525 12/31/2021 IT Support 100-1100-121-57064 1,667.49 Lanspeed 53574 01/06/2022 It Support/Monthly Billing - July 100-1100-121-57064 11.75 Frontier Communications 5575 01/13/2022 01/13/2022 Acc# 805-688-5575-062171-5 100-1100-121-57064 60.98 Comcast 5898 12/28/2021 12/28/2021 Acc# 8155 70 005 0125898 100-1100-121-57064 69.97 Comcast 9241 01/20/2022 01/20/2022 Acct# 8155 70 005 0009241 100-1100-121-57064 26.46 Comcast 9241 12/20/2021 12/20/2021 Acct# 8155 70 0005 0009241 100-1100-121-57064 13.23 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8671 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 7.60 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7116 Maintenance Te… 100-1100-121-57064 5.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 .805-588-4657 Frank Pacheco 100-1100-121-57064 0.48 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4423 Code Enforceme… 100-1100-121-57064 5.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4423 Code Enforceme… 100-1100-121-57064 5.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4423 Code Enforceme… 100-1100-121-57064 1.26 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4423 Code Enforceme… 100-1100-121-57064 1.26 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8432 Maintenance Ipa… 100-1100-121-57064 7.60 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8041 Alex Quiroz 100-1100-121-57064 0.81 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8474 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 7.60 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7116 Maintenance Te… 100-1100-121-57064 5.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-8119 PW & Parks On C…100-1100-121-57064 0.38 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-8119 PW & Parks On C…100-1100-121-57064 0.36 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 .805-588-4657 Frank Pacheco 100-1100-121-57064 0.16 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 .805-588-4657 Frank Pacheco 100-1100-121-57064 0.15 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-2137 Alfredo Trejo 100-1100-121-57064 0.11 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-2137 Alfredo Trejo 100-1100-121-57064 0.08 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4668 Maintence Temp 100-1100-121-57064 0.08 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4668 Maintence Temp 100-1100-121-57064 0.06 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8432 Maintenance Ipa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.50 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-2137 Alfredo Trejo 100-1100-121-57064 0.05 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7122 Maintenance #1 100-1100-121-57064 0.04 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7122 Maintenance #1 100-1100-121-57064 0.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4668 Maintence Temp 100-1100-121-57064 0.03 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7122 Maintenance #1 100-1100-121-57064 0.01 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-8119 PW & Parks On C…100-1100-121-57064 0.36 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8474 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.51 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7122 Maintenance #1 100-1100-121-57064 0.09 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805 697-6579 Jim Thomas 100-1100-121-57064 23.57 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8474 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.50 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-9790 Emergency/#4 100-1100-121-57064 23.57 13 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 3 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-7116 Maintenance Te… 100-1100-121-57064 15.10 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8671 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.51 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4423 Code Enforceme… 100-1100-121-57064 12.58 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8432 Maintenance Ipa… 100-1100-121-57064 11.40 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8671 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.50 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805 697-6583 Claudia Orona 100-1100-121-57064 25.16 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8671 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 11.40 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-9450 Emergency/#3 100-1100-121-57064 23.57 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-5093 Emergency/#5 100-1100-121-57064 23.57 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-9013 Jenny B 100-1100-121-57064 23.57 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8474 Maintenance iPa… 100-1100-121-57064 11.40 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805 697-6584 Charlie Uhrig 100-1100-121-57064 26.31 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-5942 Rec Department … 100-1100-121-57064 25.32 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805 697-6581 Mark Infanti 100-1100-121-57064 25.16 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-245-1860 Robert Clarke 100-1100-121-57064 25.16 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8432 Maintenance Ipa… 100-1100-121-57064 9.51 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-1900 Raymond Cano 100-1100-121-57064 42.87 RingCentral, Inc. CD_000334512 12/15/2021 Phone System Subscription- De… 100-1100-121-57064 1,060.86 RingCentral, Inc. CD_000347379 01/15/2022 Phone System Subscription-Jan… 100-1100-121-57064 1,056.55 Department 1100 - Administration Total: 133,467.21
Department: 1200 - Planning & Building
Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1200-200-52008 25.00 Mintier Harnish, LP SolvangGPU-13 12/31/2021 Solvang General Plan Update 100-1200-200-57007 18,868.68 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1200-200-57011 35.18 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234936 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Community Deve…100-1200-200-57012 9,315.00 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234939 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Code Enforceme…100-1200-200-57012 180.00 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234940 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Mission Drive Pr… 100-1200-200-57012 382.50 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235267 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Community Deve…100-1200-200-57012 1,305.00 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235270 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Code Enforceme…100-1200-200-57012 180.00 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235271 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Mission Drive Pr… 100-1200-200-57012 90.00 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1200-200-57015 132.78 Urban Planning Concepts, Inc. 10291 01/07/2022 Consulting Services-December 1…100-1200-200-57016 8,600.00 Urban Planning Concepts, Inc. 10292 01/07/2022 Consulting Services 100-1200-200-57016 200.00 Robert Half International, Inc. 59091315 12/23/2021 AGaillard- Week Ending 12/17/… 100-1200-200-57016 429.26 Robert Half International, Inc. 59097077 12/27/2021 AGaillard- Week Ending 12/24/… 100-1200-200-57016 210.98 Robert Half International, Inc. 59139942 01/03/2022 AGaillard- Week Ending 12/31/… 100-1200-200-57016 166.53 Eddie Hsueh 10 12/31/2021 Code Enforcement-12/01/21-12…100-1200-201-57063 2,112.50 California Building Standards INV0009780 01/24/2022 CBSC Quarterly Payment 100-1200-210-31036 -4.00 SUNRUN INC INV0009783 01/24/2022 Refund of Building Permit Fees … 100-1200-210-31036 416.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1200-210-52008 25.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1200-210-57011 14.84 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1200-210-57015 56.50 Willdan Engineering 002-25808 01/07/2022 Professional Services- 12/01/20…100-1200-210-57016 6,216.17 Willdan Engineering 00225898 01/19/2022 Professional Services- 12/01/20…100-1200-210-57016 3,412.50 Willdan Engineering 00225899 01/19/2022 Professional Services-12/01/20… 100-1200-210-57016 5,970.00 Department 1200 - Planning & Building Total: 58,340.42
Department: 1300 - Parks and Recreation
Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1300-300-52008 25.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1300-300-57011 46.72 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 100-1300-310-53003 174.99 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 100-1300-320-53003 175.05 Candice Libera INV0009742 01/10/2022 Employee Medical Exam 100-1300-350-51009 50.00 Buellton Medical Center INV0009775 01/11/2022 Employee Screening 100-1300-350-51009 170.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1300-350-52008 50.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1300-350-57011 35.73 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1300-350-57015 189.00 Frederick Paul Lageman INV0009740 01/06/2022 Professional Services- Special E… 100-1300-350-57016 907.50 Christophe Millner INV0009745 01/10/2022 Recreation Program-Kung Fu 100-1300-365-31008 462.35 Christophe Millner INV0009773 01/20/2022 Recreation Program- Kung Fu 100-1300-365-31008 190.40 Valley Fresh Market, LLC 03-342177 12/21/2021 Youth Programs 100-1300-365-52005 55.23 14 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 4 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Christophe Millner INV0009744 01/10/2022 Recreation Program- Tai Chi 100-1300-370-31008 224.00 Christophe Millner INV0009774 01/20/2022 Recreation Program-Tai Chi 100-1300-370-31008 185.50 Valley Fresh Market, LLC 03-338068 01/03/2022 Recreation Programs 100-1300-370-52005 25.54 Department 1300 - Parks and Recreation Total: 2,967.01
Department: 1400 - Tourism
Visit the Santa Ynez Valley INV0009787 01/26/2022 SYVTBID- November (Collected … 100-1400-400-43020 -952.56 Inner Nature 14505 12/31/2021 Village Planter Maintenance- D… 100-1400-400-57029 3,000.00 Rafael Garcia 13 12/29/2021 Landscape Maintenance-Copen… 100-1400-400-59010 500.00 AirSage, Inc. 16593 01/06/2022 Tourism/Marketing Expense 100-1400-400-59010 1,500.00 Frontier Communications 4056 01/11/2022 01/11/2022 Acct# 805-686-4056-091119-5 100-1400-400-59010 132.50 Griffin Publishing 4693 01/01/2022 Advertising SYV Destination Gui…100-1400-400-59010 2,100.00 Visit the Santa Ynez Valley INV0009787 01/26/2022 SYVTBID- November (Collected … 700-1400-400-59016 46,675.44 Visit the Santa Ynez Valley INV0009787 01/26/2022 SYVTBID- November (Collected … 700-1400-400-61003 952.56 Department 1400 - Tourism Total: 53,907.94
Department: 1600 - Public Works/Engineering
Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-300-52015 85.39 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-300-52015 194.89 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-300-52015 162.07 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-239113 10/15/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance 100-1600-300-53008 167.16 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-253003 12/26/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 100-1600-300-53008 4.78 Harrison Hardware 498960 11/30/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- HCA 100-1600-310-53003 14.84 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1600-310-53003 24.32 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007479 Parks Shop (HCA) … 100-1600-310-55001 43.65 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007896 Bar BQ 100-1600-310-55001 17.46 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11056 12/20/2021 Pest Management-HCA 100-1600-310-57057 100.00 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11302 01/12/2022 Pest Management 100-1600-310-57057 100.00 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 147875 12/21/2021 Supplies- RR#2 100-1600-320-52003 490.69 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 147876 12/21/2021 Supplies- RR#2 100-1600-320-52003 250.93 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148037 12/29/2021 Supplies-RR#2 100-1600-320-52003 478.67 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148038 12/29/2021 Supplies- RR#2 100-1600-320-52003 380.34 Mr. Rooter Plumbing of the Cen…15568919 01/14/2022 Repairs & Maintenance- RR#2 100-1600-320-53003 292.00 Todd Pipe & Supply S004041504.001 12/20/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- RR#1/… 100-1600-320-53003 80.36 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007947 City park restroom…100-1600-320-55001 21.91 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 1840991761 1600 Mission Park… 100-1600-320-55001 314.74 The Valley Gardener 31012 12/25/2021 Christmas Tree Maintenance-D… 100-1600-320-57023 300.00 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 147878 12/21/2021 Supplies-SFP 100-1600-330-52003 327.13 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148040 12/29/2021 Supplies- SFP 100-1600-330-52003 204.46 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148040-1 01/05/2022 Supplies- SFP 100-1600-330-52003 204.46 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148041 12/29/2021 Supplies- SFP 100-1600-330-52003 439.12 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148042 12/29/2021 Supplies- SFP 100-1600-330-52003 188.20 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362955 01/03/2022 Supplies- City Hall/Annex/Vets … 100-1600-330-52003 43.06 JV Outdoor Power Equipment 10026 12/12/2021 Repairs & Maintenace-SFP 100-1600-330-53003 86.20 JV Outdoor Power Equipment 10027 12/10/2021 Repairs & Maintenane-SFP 100-1600-330-53003 24.22 JV Outdoor Power Equipment 10200 12/30/2021 Repairs & Maintenance-SFP 100-1600-330-53003 87.96 JV Outdoor Power Equipment 10201 12/30/2021 Repairs & Maintenance-SFP 100-1600-330-53003 97.55 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 6518806365 900 Alamo Pintado…100-1600-330-55001 47.93 S.Y.R.W.C.D. ID #1 0001 12/31/21 12/31/2021 12/23/21-900 Alamo Pintado Rd 100-1600-330-55002 254.01 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11059 12/16/2021 Pest Management-SFP 100-1600-330-57057 100.00 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11060 12/23/2021 Pest Management-SFP 100-1600-330-57057 100.00 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11061 12/29/2021 Pest Management- SFP 100-1600-330-57057 100.00 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11305 01/13/2022 Pest Mangement- SFP 100-1600-330-57057 100.00 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007090 Alisal Cmmn's park…100-1600-340-55001 12.83 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1799 12/13/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1800 12/13/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,344.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1801 12/13/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1804 12/20/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1805 12/20/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,344.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1806 12/20/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1807 12/27/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1808 12/27/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,364.00 15 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 5 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1809 12/27/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1810 12/27/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 3,368.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1811 12/27/2021 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 720.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1854 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1850 100-1600-400-57005 720.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 Janitorial Services-City Restroo… 100-1600-400-57005 704.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 Invoice 1816 100-1600-400-57005 1,344.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1855 100-1600-400-57005 1,344.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1851 100-1600-400-57005 1,364.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1847 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 Invoice 1814 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 Invoice 1813 100-1600-400-57005 2,664.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1848 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 Invoice 1815 100-1600-400-57005 1,200.00 Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service 1813 01/10/2022 1853 100-1600-400-57005 1,440.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1600-600-52008 25.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1600-600-57011 13.74 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1600-600-57015 93.23 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1600-600-57015 14.52 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1600-600-57015 12.13 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 100-1600-600-57015 47.25 Cole Phillips 100 01/12/2022 Engineering Intern-Stipend 100-1600-600-57016 1,122.00 Carrs Boots & Western Wear 12368 12/13/2021 Uniform/Safty Boots- KCote 100-1600-605-51014 48.52 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 100-1600-605-52008 25.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1600-605-57011 25.83 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362955 01/03/2022 Supplies- City Hall/Annex/Vets … 100-1600-610-52003 43.06 SiteOne Landscaping Supply, LLC 115249476-001 12/13/2021 Repairs & Mainteanance- Vets … 100-1600-610-53003 51.86 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 100-1600-610-53003 58.33 Todd Pipe & Supply S003916257.001 CM 08/16/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- Vets Ha…100-1600-610-53003 -12.03 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007128 Memorial Bldg 100-1600-610-55001 440.22 Comcast 8155 01/05/2022 01/05/2022 Acct# 8155 70 005 0228155 100-1600-610-55001 86.06 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11063 12/20/2021 Pest Management-Vets Hall 100-1600-610-57057 100.00 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11309 01/12/2022 Pest Management- Vets Hall 100-1600-610-57057 100.00 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362955 01/03/2022 Supplies- City Hall/Annex/Vets … 100-1600-620-52003 43.06 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1600-620-53003 36.56 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 100-1600-620-53003 174.99 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007413 City Hall 100-1600-620-55001 461.73 Southern California Gas Compa… 9500 12/21/2021 12/21/2021 Acct# 098 214 9500 0 100-1600-620-55001 249.70 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362955 01/03/2022 Supplies- City Hall/Annex/Vets … 100-1600-630-52003 43.06 Valley Shield Termite and Pest … 11053 12/31/2021 Pest Management- Annex 100-1600-630-53003 75.00 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1600-630-53003 67.39 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 7382657678 411 Second St 100-1600-630-55001 340.86 Southern California Gas Compa… 9410 12/21/2021 12/21/2021 Acct# 188 514 9410 6 100-1600-630-55001 312.99 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007667 Conference Vistors 100-1600-650-55001 119.79 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 147874 12/21/2021 Supplies- RR#1 100-1600-670-52003 484.75 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148035 12/29/2021 Supplies- RR#1 100-1600-670-52003 466.64 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148036 12/29/2021 Supplies-RR#1 100-1600-670-52003 114.22 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362950 01/03/2022 Supplies 100-1600-670-52003 261.88 Todd Pipe & Supply S004041504.001 12/20/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- RR#1/… 100-1600-670-53003 80.36 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 2465713408 Alisal Restroom 100-1600-670-55001 415.83 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 147877 12/21/2021 Supplies- RR#3 100-1600-680-52003 496.28 Procare Janitorial Supply, Inc 148039 12/29/2021 Supplies- RR#3 100-1600-680-52003 437.94 Aramark Uniform Service 502000362952 01/03/2022 Supplies- RR#3 100-1600-680-52003 272.16 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1600-680-53003 244.92 Todd Pipe & Supply S004041504.001 12/20/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- RR#1/… 100-1600-680-53003 80.36 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007539 Lot #3 restroom 100-1600-680-55001 393.16 Carrs Boots & Western Wear 12368 12/13/2021 Uniform/Safty Boots- KCote 100-1600-690-51014 72.79 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-690-52015 241.76 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-690-52015 309.63 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 100-1600-690-52015 149.05 16 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 6 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Nielsen Building Material 13319 12/21/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- Roads 100-1600-690-53003 24.48 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 100-1600-690-53003 196.91 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007080 City Sign HWY 246… 100-1600-690-53007 10.09 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0053695143 1250 Mission 100-1600-690-53007 15.80 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 7478349044 Tree Lighting 1663…100-1600-690-55006 61.57 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 8848923416 Tree Lighting 1637…100-1600-690-55006 93.25 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1600-690-57011 52.22 California Concrete Grinding, LLC SOL-1221-01 12/30/2021 Reissue PO 21-0032 100-1600-690-57019 1,500.00 Carrs Boots & Western Wear 12368 12/13/2021 Uniform/Safty Boots- KCote 100-1600-700-51014 24.26 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1600-700-57011 10.99 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 100-1600-710-53003 174.99 Carrs Boots & Western Wear 12368 12/13/2021 Uniform/Safty Boots- KCote 100-1600-720-51014 16.18 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 100-1600-720-57011 18.70 MNS Engineers, Inc. 79256 12/07/2021 Stormwater Management Progr…100-1600-720-57016 7,246.25 MNS Engineers, Inc. 79472 01/10/2022 Stormwater Management Progr…100-1600-720-57016 8,646.25 SP Maintenance Services, Inc 82318 01/01/2022 Street Sweeping 100-1600-720-57022 2,770.40 Underground Service Alert of S… 1220210685 01/01/2022 New Tickets - 17 100-1600-720-57028 21.27 Underground Service Alert of S… dsb20206742 01/01/2022 Dig Safe Board Fee 100-1600-720-57028 2.97 MNS Engineers, Inc. 79257 12/07/2021 SWMP Annual Report 100-1600-720-70937 776.25 Ramsey Asphalt Construction C… 8050 12/28/2021 Lot 4 ADA Access Ramp 300-1600-600-70105 3,990.00 CalPortland Construction 95278240 01/05/2022 S. Alisal Pavement Reconstructi… 300-1600-600-70105 2,423.00 Department 1600 - Public Works/Engineering Total: 74,878.74 Department: 2100 - Gas Tax
CalPortland Construction 95278240 01/05/2022 S. Alisal Pavement Reconstructi… 300-2100-801-70105 15,022.63 Department 2100 - Gas Tax Total: 15,022.63
Department: 2500 - Measure A
CalPortland Construction 95278240 01/05/2022 S. Alisal Pavement Reconstructi… 300-2500-803-70105 51,729.11 Department 2500 - Measure A Total: 51,729.11
Department: 2600 - AB 1600 Impact Fees
CalPortland Construction 95278240 01/05/2022 S. Alisal Pavement Reconstructi… 300-2600-805-70105 3,489.13 Department 2600 - AB 1600 Impact Fees Total: 3,489.13
Department: 3500 - Solvang Mesa LLD
MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 205-3500-804-53003 233.32 BrightView Landscape Services 7660742 12/30/2021 SM-LLMD Landscape Maintena… 205-3500-804-53005 6,958.00 BrightView Landscape Services 7681153 12/21/2021 SM-LLMD Landscape Maintena… 205-3500-804-53005 485.35 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 8063 01/12/22 01/18/2022 Acct# 9910298063-0 205-3500-804-55001 83.96 Department 3500 - Solvang Mesa LLD Total: 7,760.63
Department: 5000 - Transit
Roadrunner Management Servi… 6614 01/01/2022 Farebox 502-5000-850-35021 -3,342.72 Roadrunner Management Servi… 6615 01/01/2022 Fuel Reimbursement-December 502-5000-850-52015 8,448.50 Roadrunner Management Servi… 6614 01/01/2022 Comcast 502-5000-850-55003 105.00 City of Lompoc Finance Dept. 7647 12/14/2021 Wine Country Express - Solvang …502-5000-850-56003 1,666.66 City of Lompoc Finance Dept. 7894 01/13/2022 Wine Country Express - Solvang …502-5000-850-56003 1,666.66 Roadrunner Management Servi… 6614 01/01/2022 SYVT Operations Contract 502-5000-850-56010 57,661.21 Moore & Associates, Inc. 22.4761 01/05/2022 SYVT Marketing Services 502-5000-850-57001 956.25 Menveg Properties LLC INV0009746 01/01/2022 January Transit Rent 502-5000-850-57011 545.00 Moore & Associates, Inc. 22.4762 01/05/2022 Postage 502-5000-850-57015 2.80 Moore & Associates, Inc. 22.4762 01/05/2022 SYVT Management Services 502-5000-850-57016 1,725.00 Department 5000 - Transit Total: 69,434.36
Department: 5100 - Water
Advantage Group, The 137804 01/25/2022 Annual Renewal/Admin Flex Fee…500-5100-105-51005 13.16 Advantage Group, The INV0009788 01/28/2022 Retirement Health 500-5100-105-51005 475.68 USA Blue Book 847006 01/14/2022 Safety Gear 500-5100-501-51014 443.07 ReadyRefresh by Nestle 01-L6702214026 12/30/2021 Supplies- Water 500-5100-501-52003 92.95 Staples Advantage 3495518844 12/18/2021 Supplies-Water 500-5100-501-52003 32.49 Staples Advantage 3495518845 12/18/2021 Supplies- Water 500-5100-501-52003 48.45 USA Blue Book 837720 01/06/2022 Supplies- Water 500-5100-501-52003 780.53 D & H Water Systems, Inc I2022-0057 01/17/2022 Supplies- Water 500-5100-501-52003 607.68 17 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 7 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 500-5100-501-52003 354.44 Infosend, Inc 204891 12/31/2021 Utility Bill Printing/Mailing 500-5100-501-52004 273.47 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 500-5100-501-52008 62.50 Infosend, Inc 204891 12/31/2021 Postage 500-5100-501-52008 818.30 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 500-5100-501-52015 473.66 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 500-5100-501-52015 470.52 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 500-5100-501-52015 101.05 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 500-5100-501-52015 133.01 SiteOne Landscaping Supply, LLC 115620440-001 01/20/2022 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 116.19 SiteOne Landscaping Supply, LLC 115627191-001 01/20/2022 Repairs & Maintenance-Water 500-5100-501-53003 29.25 SiteOne Landscaping Supply, LLC 115759570-001 01/19/2022 Repairs & Maintenance-Water 500-5100-501-53003 308.36 Nielsen Building Material 12662 12/28/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 6.15 Nielsen Building Material 14068 12/28/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 42.03 Hanly General Engineering Corp 2174 12/29/2021 Valve Repair 500-5100-501-53003 975.00 Hanly General Engineering Corp 2174 12/29/2021 Hanley emergency valve repair 500-5100-501-53003 5,985.00 USA Blue Book 818019 12/13/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 70.25 USA Blue Book 818278 12/13/2021 Repairs & Maintenance-Water 500-5100-501-53003 442.07 USA Blue Book 827025 12/22/2021 Repairs & Maintenance-Water 500-5100-501-53003 62.93 Santa Maria Famcon Pipe & Su… S100070072.001 01/07/2022 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 766.10 Santa Maria Famcon Pipe & Su… S100070073.001 01/07/2022 Repairs & Maintenance- Water 500-5100-501-53003 646.50 Santa Maria Famcon Pipe & Su… S100070580.001 01/18/2022 New ARV 500-5100-501-53003 3,710.91 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-249403 12/07/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance-…500-5100-501-53008 64.57 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-249846 12/09/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance-…500-5100-501-53008 117.48 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-249848 CM 12/09/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 500-5100-501-53008 -26.73 Alexander Pump Service, Inc. 1606 01/11/2022 pull well3 camera the well 500-5100-501-53011 2,880.00 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 0769 01/11/2022 01/11/2022 ACCT# 4922450769-6 500-5100-501-55005 699.80 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 4776 01/14/22 01/14/2022 ACCT# 8496674776-2 500-5100-501-55005 525.46 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007287 Well #4 500-5100-501-55005 692.35 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007780 Well #3 500-5100-501-55005 3,799.35 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007323 Pump 75 HP/Well … 500-5100-501-55005 446.91 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 6977181775 Booster Station 70…500-5100-501-55005 1,244.92 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007810 Pump (175 Alisal) 500-5100-501-55005 754.11 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007241 Water Well #7 500-5100-501-55005 3,950.35 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007110 Mun Improvement…500-5100-501-55005 14.89 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007364 Valve Old Mill Rd 500-5100-501-55005 11.89 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 4486137289 146 Rancho Alisal 500-5100-501-55005 13.71 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007414 Water Control Val… 500-5100-501-55005 10.07 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007428 Reservoir 500-5100-501-55005 39.21 S.Y.R.W.C.D. ID #1 5001 12/31/21 12/31/2021 12/31/21-1890 Old Mill Rd 500-5100-501-55010 2,828.19 S.Y.R.W.C.D. ID #1 7501 12/31/21 12/31/2021 12/31/21-Alamo Pintado Rd 500-5100-501-55010 1,819.12 S.Y. River Water Conservation INV0009753 01/13/2022 Semi Annual Groundwater Prod…500-5100-501-55013 10,455.34 FGL Environmental, Inc. 113331A 11/04/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 774.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 113631A 10/15/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 113632A 10/15/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 48.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114039A 10/15/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114040A 10/06/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114461A 10/21/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 126.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114462A 10/21/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114463A 10/27/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 110.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114464A 10/13/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 402.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114465A 10/21/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114888A 10/27/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 114889A 10/27/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115316A 11/04/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115317A 11/04/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115319A 11/04/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115686A 11/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 21.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115829A 11/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 115830A 11/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116086A 11/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 18 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 8 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount FGL Environmental, Inc. 116087A 11/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116088A 11/19/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 21.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116409A 11/30/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116410A 11/30/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116746A 12/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116843A 12/02/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116844A 12/02/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 116845A 12/02/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 42.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117043A 12/09/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117045A 12/28/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 30.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117046A 12/09/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117485A 12/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 42.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117488A 12/16/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117886A 12/22/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 117887A 12/22/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 118324A 12/30/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 60.00 FGL Environmental, Inc. 118326A 12/30/2021 Lab fees 500-5100-501-57010 12.00 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 500-5100-501-57011 78.60 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 234937 12/16/2021 Legal Services- Water Rights Ma…500-5100-501-57012 5,360.17 Richards, Watson & Gershon A … 235268 01/19/2022 Legal Services- Water Rights Ma…500-5100-501-57012 21,012.80 Infosend, Inc 205848 01/21/2022 Utility Bill Printing/Mailing 500-5100-501-57015 409.94 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 500-5100-501-57015 255.39 HDR Engineering, Inc. 1200402063 01/10/2022 Water/Wastewater Fee Study 500-5100-501-57024 3,636.73 Claris Strategy, Inc. 26210100-07 12/29/2021 Water - Emergency Response Pl…500-5100-501-57024 10,002.41 Underground Service Alert of S… 1220210685 01/01/2022 New Tickets - 17 500-5100-501-57028 21.27 Underground Service Alert of S… 1220210685 01/01/2022 New Tickets - 17 500-5100-501-57028 21.91 Underground Service Alert of S… dsb20206742 01/01/2022 Dig Safe Board Fee 500-5100-501-57028 2.97 Ferguson Waterworks #1083 9556328 12/01/2021 Meter Box lids 500-5100-501-57030 1,628.00 Ferguson Waterworks #1083 9556328 12/01/2021 9556328 500-5100-501-57030 112.16 Ferguson Waterworks #1083 9556328 12/01/2021 CM025288 500-5100-501-57030 -129.39 Aqua-Metric Sales Company INV0086436 01/19/2022 Water Meter Replacement 500-5100-501-57030 722.38 S.Y. River Water Conservation EMA -2022-01-001 01/10/2022 Groundwater Sustainability Plan…500-5100-501-57055 5,000.00 Tyler Technologies, Inc 025-365272 02/01/2022 Utility Billing- Maintenance 500-5100-501-57064 20.00 Comcast 0775 01/15/22 01/25/2022 Acct#939750775 500-5100-501-57064 47.88 Frontier Communications 1425 01/13/2021 01/13/2022 Acct# 805-686-1425-080105-5 500-5100-501-57064 164.23 ECS Imaging, Inc. 16573 12/29/2021 Annual Renewal- LaserFiche 500-5100-501-57064 483.62 ZWorld GIS 2021-0414 12/01/2021 GIS System Support 500-5100-501-57064 97.70 ZWorld GIS 2021-0425 01/01/2022 GIS System Support 500-5100-501-57064 97.70 Level 3 Communications, LLC 254877795 12/17/2021 T-1 line 500-5100-501-57064 172.39 Level 3 Communications, LLC 276878940 01/25/2022 T-1 line 500-5100-501-57064 104.84 Lanspeed 53407-1 11/30/2021 It Support/Cloud Migration Proj…500-5100-501-57064 532.88 Lanspeed 53407-2 12/10/2021 It Support/Professional Services 500-5100-501-57064 177.62 Lanspeed 53440 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing - January 500-5100-501-57064 465.05 Lanspeed 53525 12/31/2021 IT Support 500-5100-501-57064 207.61 Lanspeed 53574 01/06/2022 It Support/Monthly Billing - July 500-5100-501-57064 1.47 Frontier Communications 5575 01/13/2022 01/13/2022 Acc# 805-688-5575-062171-5 500-5100-501-57064 7.59 Comcast 5898 12/28/2021 12/28/2021 Acc# 8155 70 005 0125898 500-5100-501-57064 14.84 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-5645 Andrew Guynn 500-5100-501-57064 8.43 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 Cody Kephart- 805-325-0486 500-5100-501-57064 6.42 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4424 Mike Mathews 500-5100-501-57064 30.67 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8659 Water iPad #2 500-5100-501-57064 38.01 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8264 Water iPad #3 500-5100-501-57064 38.01 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-245-6580 Water/SCADA Dia…500-5100-501-57064 66.51 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4659 Water On-Call Ph…500-5100-501-57064 0.17 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-6825 Keith Cote 500-5100-501-57064 0.67 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-350-8659 Water iPad #1 500-5100-501-57064 38.01 PC Mechanical Inc. CISOL072 12/29/2021 service pump 3 SPW 500-5100-501-63005 2,553.96 Inductive Automation, LLC 1219938 11/29/2021 TotalCare Support SCADA softw…500-5100-501-70851 1,978.00 AutoSys, LLC INV-0071 10/28/2021 SCADA Upgrades 500-5100-501-70851 300.00 Meridian Consultants LLC 4432 12/31/2021 Meridian R Wells EIR Addendum…500-5100-501-70852 7,005.00 19 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 9 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Christopher Passante INV0009739 01/06/2022 Landscape Rebate Program 500-5100-501-70938 1,500.00 Department 5100 - Water Total: 115,481.31
Department: 5200 - Sanitary Sewer
Advantage Group, The 137804 01/25/2022 Annual Renewal/Admin Flex Fee…501-5200-105-51005 13.04 Advantage Group, The INV0009788 01/28/2022 Retirement Health 501-5200-105-51005 475.68 DellaValle Embroidery 2701 01/06/2022 Application of Logo/Mathew G… 501-5200-502-52003 90.00 Infosend, Inc 204891 12/31/2021 Utility Bill Printing/Mailing 501-5200-502-52004 273.48 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5200-502-52015 104.79 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5200-502-52015 65.79 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-248026 11/30/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 501-5200-502-53008 67.62 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-250852 12/14/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 501-5200-502-53008 8.87 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007719 Sewage lift station… 501-5200-502-55001 160.25 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 501-5200-502-57011 35.18 HDR Engineering, Inc. 1200402063 01/10/2022 Water/Wastewater Fee Study 501-5200-502-57024 4,155.88 Underground Service Alert of S… dsb20206742 01/01/2022 Dig Safe Board Fee 501-5200-502-57028 3.06 Tyler Technologies, Inc 025-365272 02/01/2022 Utility Billing- Maintenance 501-5200-502-57064 20.00 Comcast 0775 01/15/22 01/25/2022 Acct#939750775 501-5200-502-57064 18.13 ECS Imaging, Inc. 16573 12/29/2021 Annual Renewal- LaserFiche 501-5200-502-57064 183.15 ZWorld GIS 2021-0414 12/01/2021 GIS System Support 501-5200-502-57064 37.00 ZWorld GIS 2021-0425 01/01/2022 GIS System Support 501-5200-502-57064 37.00 Level 3 Communications, LLC 254877795 12/17/2021 T-1 line 501-5200-502-57064 65.28 Level 3 Communications, LLC 276878940 01/25/2022 T-1 line 501-5200-502-57064 39.70 Lanspeed 53407-1 11/30/2021 It Support/Cloud Migration Proj…501-5200-502-57064 201.19 Lanspeed 53407-2 12/10/2021 It Support/Professional Services 501-5200-502-57064 67.06 Lanspeed 53440 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing - January 501-5200-502-57064 176.12 Lanspeed 53525 12/31/2021 IT Support 501-5200-502-57064 78.62 Lanspeed 53574 01/06/2022 It Support/Monthly Billing - July 501-5200-502-57064 0.56 Frontier Communications 5575 01/13/2022 01/13/2022 Acc# 805-688-5575-062171-5 501-5200-502-57064 2.88 Comcast 5898 12/28/2021 12/28/2021 Acc# 8155 70 005 0125898 501-5200-502-57064 6.36 Frontier Communications 7459 01/25/2022 01/25/2022 ACCT# 805-688-7459-060995-5 501-5200-502-57064 83.82 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-5943 Jeff Morss 501-5200-502-57064 0.13 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-2137 Paul Matsukas 501-5200-502-57064 0.06 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-2568 Trevor Holly 501-5200-502-57064 0.29 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-9056 -WWTP On Call 501-5200-502-57064 11.55 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-1898 Nick Rivera 501-5200-502-57064 0.61 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8482 WWTP iPad 501-5200-502-57064 18.62 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-245-1207 Sewer iPad 501-5200-502-57064 38.01 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4664 Nathan Giacinto 501-5200-502-57064 4.10 Department 5200 - Sanitary Sewer Total: 6,543.88
Department: 5300 - WasteWater
Advantage Group, The 137804 01/25/2022 Annual Renewal/Admin Flex Fee…501-5300-105-51005 13.25 Advantage Group, The INV0009788 01/28/2022 Retirement Health 501-5300-105-51005 476.42 Hach Company 12796945 12/16/2021 Supplies-WWTP 501-5300-503-52003 346.90 Hach Company 12798290 12/17/2021 Supplies- WWTP 501-5300-503-52003 114.10 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 12/16/21 12/16/2021 Postage 501-5300-503-52008 62.50 Infosend, Inc 204891 12/31/2021 Postage 501-5300-503-52008 818.30 A-OK Power Equipment 633035 01/26/2022 Small Equipment- WWTP 501-5300-503-52009 23.47 Polydyne, Inc 1605511 01/06/2022 Blanket PO for Polymer 21/22 501-5300-503-52010 1,405.17 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5300-503-52011 557.58 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5300-503-52015 64.65 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5300-503-52015 177.11 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5300-503-52015 65.79 Jim's Service Center INV0009751 01/01/2022 Vehicle Fuel-December 501-5300-503-52015 100.00 Cal-Coast Irrigation 2112-629263 12/08/2021 Repairs & Maintenance- WWTP 501-5300-503-53003 21.95 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-249360 12/07/2021 Repairs & Maintenance-WWTP 501-5300-503-53003 127.10 Santa Ynez Valley Hardware INV0009738 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing 501-5300-503-53003 51.65 MEXICO, DAVID INV0009786 12/24/2021 Repairs & Maintenance 501-5300-503-53003 143.33 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-248026 11/30/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 501-5300-503-53008 67.62 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-249809 12/14/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 501-5300-503-53008 65.08 O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc.… 4372-250852 12/14/2021 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance… 501-5300-503-53008 8.88 20 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 10 of 14
Vendor Name Payable Number Post Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 0408007614 Fjord 501-5300-503-55001 1,856.42 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 7582 12/17/2021 12/17/2021 402220705 Waste Str Plant 501-5300-503-55001 9,557.24 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2108062 12/29/2021 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 269.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2108063 12/29/2021 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 224.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2108247 01/06/2022 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 269.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2108419 01/06/2022 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 269.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2108544 01/14/2022 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 269.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2200184 01/14/2022 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 252.00 Oilfield Environmental & Compl…2200185 01/14/2022 Blanket PO for lab Fees 21/22 501-5300-503-57010 284.00 Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. 457008 12/21/2021 WWTP PFAS Support thru 11/3… 501-5300-503-57010 1,536.76 Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. 458199 01/07/2022 WWTP PFAS Support thru 12/3… 501-5300-503-57010 2,142.40 Quadlent Finance USA, Inc. 1265 01/16/2022 01/27/2022 Lease Payments 501-5300-503-57011 73.11 Ray Morgan Company 3589717 01/14/2022 Lease Payment 501-5300-503-57015 255.39 Engel & Gray 1CC00007 12/17/2021 Blanket PO for Sludge Disposal … 501-5300-503-57020 1,794.17 Engel & Gray 1CJ00007 12/19/2021 Blanket PO for Sludge Disposal … 501-5300-503-57020 1,239.49 Engel & Gray 1CQ00007 12/26/2021 Blanket PO for Sludge Disposal … 501-5300-503-57020 2,411.54 Engel & Gray 21200009 01/02/2022 Blanket PO for Sludge Disposal … 501-5300-503-57020 2,399.15 Engel & Gray 21900008 01/09/2022 Blanket PO for Sludge Disposal … 501-5300-503-57020 3,014.61 HDR Engineering, Inc. 1200402063 01/10/2022 Water/Wastewater Fee Study 501-5300-503-57024 1,299.22 Comcast 0775 01/15/22 01/25/2022 Acct#939750775 501-5300-503-57064 39.50 ECS Imaging, Inc. 16573 12/29/2021 Annual Renewal- LaserFiche 501-5300-503-57064 398.97 ZWorld GIS 2021-0414 12/01/2021 GIS System Support 501-5300-503-57064 80.60 ZWorld GIS 2021-0425 01/01/2022 GIS System Support 501-5300-503-57064 80.60 Level 3 Communications, LLC 254877795 12/17/2021 T-1 line 501-5300-503-57064 142.21 Level 3 Communications, LLC 276878940 01/25/2022 T-1 line 501-5300-503-57064 86.49 Lanspeed 53407-1 11/30/2021 It Support/Cloud Migration Proj…501-5300-503-57064 440.44 Lanspeed 53407-2 12/10/2021 It Support/Professional Services 501-5300-503-57064 146.81 Lanspeed 53440 01/01/2022 Monthly Billing - January 501-5300-503-57064 383.66 Lanspeed 53525 12/31/2021 IT Support 501-5300-503-57064 171.28 Lanspeed 53574 01/06/2022 It Support/Monthly Billing - July 501-5300-503-57064 1.22 Frontier Communications 5575 01/13/2022 01/13/2022 Acc# 805-688-5575-062171-5 501-5300-503-57064 6.26 Comcast 5898 12/28/2021 12/28/2021 Acc# 8155 70 005 0125898 501-5300-503-57064 14.84 Frontier Communications 6997 01/19/2022 01/19/2022 ACCT# 805-688-6997-072877-5 501-5300-503-57064 321.61 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-1898 Nick Rivera 501-5300-503-57064 0.06 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-757-2137 Paul Matsukas 501-5300-503-57064 0.11 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-9056 -WWTP On Call 501-5300-503-57064 12.02 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-5943 Jeff Morss 501-5300-503-57064 1.15 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-2568 Trevor Holly 501-5300-503-57064 2.80 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4424 Mike Mathews 501-5300-503-57064 3.41 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-588-4664 Nathan Giacinto 501-5300-503-57064 23.06 Verizon Wireless Services, LLC 9895435111 12/19/2021 805-325-8482 WWTP iPad 501-5300-503-57064 19.39 MNS Engineers, Inc. 79647 01/20/2022 WWTP Aeration Replacement - …804-5300-503-70105 1,078.00 Carollo Engineers, Inc FB18040 12/17/2021 WWTP Water Quality Project - … 804-5300-503-70105 24,000.00 Department 5300 - WasteWater Total: 61,580.84
Grand Total: 859,725.78
21 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 11 of 14
Report Summary
Fund Summary
Fund Payment Amount
100 - GENERAL FUND 474,642.89
205 - SKYTT MESA LLMD 7,760.63
300 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 76,653.87
500 - WATER FUND 115,481.31
501 - WASTEWATER FUND 43,046.72
502 - TRANSIT FUND 69,434.36
700 - SYV - TOURISM BUS IMP DIST 47,628.00
804 - WWTP CAPITAL PROJECTS 25,078.00
Grand Total: 859,725.78
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
100-1000-100-57015 Printing and Publishing 113.57
100-1000-100-57016 Professional Services 85.00
100-1000-100-58001 City Hospitality 515.30
100-1000-110-59042 Bethania Lutheran Church 2,500.00
100-1000-130-56006 Law Enforcement Contract 179,302.00
100-1000-130-56011 Animal Control 11,800.00
100-1100-105-51005 Retiree Medical/Dental/Li… 6,194.54
100-1100-120-43021 Accts Payable Discounts -17.06
100-1100-120-51003 Retirement 275.04
100-1100-120-51010 Employee Screening 128.00
100-1100-120-51011 Recruitment 62,929.32
100-1100-120-52002 Membership Dues 5.52
100-1100-120-52003 Supplies 1,015.27
100-1100-120-52008 Postage 200.00
100-1100-120-56013 Audit 460.00
100-1100-120-57011 Lease Payments 108.84
100-1100-120-57012 Legal Fees 16,286.38
100-1100-120-57015 Printing and Publishing 1,279.25
100-1100-120-57016 Professional Services 16,728.03
100-1100-120-57052 Temporary Agency Servic… 4,864.94
100-1100-120-57062 Public Relations 1,059.67
100-1100-120-60006 EOC Phone 42.75
100-1100-121-57064 IT Expenses 21,906.72
100-1200-200-52008 Postage 25.00
100-1200-200-57007 General Plan 18,868.68
100-1200-200-57011 Lease Payments 35.18
100-1200-200-57012 Legal Fees 11,452.50
100-1200-200-57015 Printing and Publishing 132.78
100-1200-200-57016 Professional Services 9,606.77
100-1200-201-57063 Code Enforcement 2,112.50
100-1200-210-31036 Building Permits 412.00
100-1200-210-52008 Postage 25.00
100-1200-210-57011 Lease Payments 14.84
100-1200-210-57015 Printing and Publishing 56.50
100-1200-210-57016 Professional Services 15,598.67
100-1300-300-52008 Postage 25.00
100-1300-300-57011 Lease Payments 46.72
100-1300-310-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 174.99
100-1300-320-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 175.05
100-1300-350-51009 Employee Medical Exams 220.00
100-1300-350-52008 Postage 50.00
100-1300-350-57011 Lease Payments 35.73
100-1300-350-57015 Printing and Publishing 189.00
100-1300-350-57016 Professional Services 907.50
100-1300-365-31008 Recreation Fees 652.75
22 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 12 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
100-1300-365-52005 Recreation Programs 55.23
100-1300-370-31008 Recreation Fees 409.50
100-1300-370-52005 Recreation Programs 25.54
100-1400-400-43020 TBID - Admin. Reimburse… -952.56
100-1400-400-57029 Village Planter Maint. 3,000.00
100-1400-400-59010 Tourism/Marketing Expen… 4,232.50
100-16002 REIMBURSEABLE A/P PA… 3,174.46
100-1600-300-52015 Vehicle Fuel 442.35
100-1600-300-53008 Vehicle Repairs & Maint. 171.94
100-1600-310-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 39.16
100-1600-310-55001 Utilities 61.11
100-1600-310-57057 Pest Management 200.00
100-1600-320-52003 Supplies 1,600.63
100-1600-320-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 372.36
100-1600-320-55001 Utilities 336.65
100-1600-320-57023 Tree Maintenance 300.00
100-1600-330-52003 Supplies 1,406.43
100-1600-330-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 295.93
100-1600-330-55001 Utilities 47.93
100-1600-330-55002 Water and Sewer Charges 254.01
100-1600-330-57057 Pest Management 400.00
100-1600-340-55001 Utilities 12.83
100-1600-400-57005 Custodial-Restrooms 32,120.00
100-1600-600-52008 Postage 25.00
100-1600-600-57011 Lease Payments 13.74
100-1600-600-57015 Printing and Publishing 167.13
100-1600-600-57016 Professional Services 1,122.00
100-1600-605-51014 Safety Gear 48.52
100-1600-605-52008 Postage 25.00
100-1600-605-57011 Lease Payments 25.83
100-1600-610-52003 Supplies 43.06
100-1600-610-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 98.16
100-1600-610-55001 Utilities 526.28
100-1600-610-57057 Pest Management 200.00
100-1600-620-52003 Supplies 43.06
100-1600-620-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 211.55
100-1600-620-55001 Utilities 711.43
100-1600-630-52003 Supplies 43.06
100-1600-630-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 142.39
100-1600-630-55001 Utilities 653.85
100-1600-650-55001 Utilities 119.79
100-1600-670-52003 Supplies 1,327.49
100-1600-670-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 80.36
100-1600-670-55001 Utilities 415.83
100-1600-680-52003 Supplies 1,206.38
100-1600-680-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 325.28
100-1600-680-55001 Utilities 393.16
100-1600-690-51014 Safety Gear 72.79
100-1600-690-52015 Vehicle Fuel 700.44
100-1600-690-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 221.39
100-1600-690-53007 Highway Entrance Signs 25.89
100-1600-690-55006 Street Light Power 154.82
100-1600-690-57011 Lease Payments 52.22
100-1600-690-57019 Sidewalk Grinding 1,500.00
100-1600-700-51014 Safety Gear 24.26
100-1600-700-57011 Lease Payments 10.99
100-1600-710-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 174.99
100-1600-720-51014 Safety Gear 16.18
23 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 13 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
100-1600-720-57011 Lease Payments 18.70
100-1600-720-57016 Professional Services - S… 15,892.50 100-1600-720-57022 Street Sweeping 2,770.40
100-1600-720-57028 Underground Alert 24.24
100-1600-720-70937 Annual Stormwater Report 776.25
100-20020 Due to CA Bldg Stnds Co… 40.00
100-20024 Due to SMIP 99.25
100-20026 Due to Div St Architect 123.00
100-20037 Business Card Payable 6,166.99
100-23005 Alcohol/Liability Deposit 703.00
100-23011 Public Work Deposits 500.00
205-3500-804-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 233.32
205-3500-804-53005 Open Space/Landscape Mt 7,443.35
205-3500-804-55001 Utilities 83.96
300-1600-600-70105 Projects -GEN FUND 6,413.00
300-2100-801-70105 Projects -GAS TAX-RMRA 15,022.63
300-2500-803-70105 Projects -MEASURE A 51,729.11
300-2600-805-70105 Projects -IMPACT FEES 3,489.13
500-5100-105-51005 Retiree Medical/Dental/Li… 488.84
500-5100-501-51014 Safety Gear 443.07
500-5100-501-52003 Supplies 1,916.54
500-5100-501-52004 Utility Bill Printing/Supplies 273.47 500-5100-501-52008 Postage 880.80
500-5100-501-52015 Vehicle Fuel 1,178.24
500-5100-501-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 13,160.74
500-5100-501-53008 Vehicle Repairs & Maint. 155.32
500-5100-501-53011 Well Repairs and Mainten… 2,880.00
500-5100-501-55005 Power for Pumping 12,203.02
500-5100-501-55010 Purchased Water 4,647.31
500-5100-501-55013 Ground Water Charges 10,455.34
500-5100-501-57010 Lab Fees 2,504.00
500-5100-501-57011 Lease Payments 78.60
500-5100-501-57012 Legal Fees 26,372.97
500-5100-501-57015 Printing and Publishing 665.33
500-5100-501-57024 Studies 13,639.14
500-5100-501-57028 Underground Alert 46.15
500-5100-501-57030 Water Meter Replacement 2,333.15
500-5100-501-57055 Sustainable Groundwater… 5,000.00
500-5100-501-57064 IT Expenses - Water Fund 2,822.32
500-5100-501-63005 Capital Equipment 2,553.96
500-5100-501-70851 SCADA Upgrades 2,278.00
500-5100-501-70852 River Well Development 7,005.00
500-5100-501-70938 Water Conservation Progr… 1,500.00
501-5200-105-51005 Retiree Medical/Dental/Li… 488.72
501-5200-502-52003 Supplies 90.00
501-5200-502-52004 Utility Bill Printing/Supplies 273.48 501-5200-502-52015 Vehicle Fuel 170.58
501-5200-502-53008 Vehicle Repairs & Maint. 76.49
501-5200-502-55001 Utilities 160.25
501-5200-502-57011 Lease Payments 35.18
501-5200-502-57024 Studies 4,155.88
501-5200-502-57028 Underground Alert 3.06
501-5200-502-57064 IT Expenses - Sewer 1,090.24
501-5300-105-51005 Retiree Medical/Dental/Li… 489.67
501-5300-503-52003 Supplies 461.00
501-5300-503-52008 Postage 880.80
501-5300-503-52009 Small Equipment 23.47
501-5300-503-52010 Chemicals 1,405.17
24 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 1/1/2022 - 1/31/2022 2/8/2022 12:05:55 PM Page 14 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
501-5300-503-52011 Fuel for Generator 557.58
501-5300-503-52015 Vehicle Fuel 407.55
501-5300-503-53003 Repairs and Maintenance 344.03
501-5300-503-53008 Vehicle Repairs & Maint. 141.58
501-5300-503-55001 Utilities 11,413.66
501-5300-503-57010 Lab Fees 5,515.16
501-5300-503-57011 Lease Payments 73.11
501-5300-503-57015 Printing and Publishing 255.39
501-5300-503-57020 Sludge Disposal 10,858.96
501-5300-503-57024 Studies 1,299.22
501-5300-503-57064 IT Expenses - WWTP 2,376.49
502-5000-850-35021 Fare Box Revenue -3,342.72
502-5000-850-52015 Vehicle Fuel 8,448.50
502-5000-850-55003 Communications 105.00
502-5000-850-56003 Wine Country Express 3,333.32
502-5000-850-56010 Transit Contract 57,661.21
502-5000-850-57001 Marketing & Advertising 956.25
502-5000-850-57011 Lease Payments 545.00
502-5000-850-57015 Printing and Publishing 2.80
502-5000-850-57016 Professional Services 1,725.00
700-1400-400-59016 SYVTBID Payments 46,675.44
700-1400-400-61003 City Admin Fee 952.56
804-5300-503-70105 Projects -WASTEWATER 25,078.00
Grand Total: 859,725.78
Project Account Summary
Project Account Key Payment Amount
**None** 826,089.10
City 135.61
Dist 33,501.07
Grand Total: 859,725.78
25 Agenda Item Number: 4d
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
MEETING DATE: February 14
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2-1156, A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 2-1156 to allow for continued remote attendance to teleconferenced meetings of the City Council.
SUMMARY:
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which modified the Brown Act to provide that a legislative body subject to the Brown Act may continue to meet under modified teleconferencing rules if the meeting occurred during a proclaimed state of emergency and state or local officials had imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
On September 28, 2021, the Santa Barbara County Health Department recommended that measures be implemented to promote social distancing, as set forth in a document entitled “Health Officials AB 361 Social Distance Recommendation”, attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution.
State or local officials have recommended measures to promote social distancing, including the holding of virtual meetings for legislative bodies within the County of Santa Barbara. Therefore, in reconsideration of the circumstances of the State of Emergency declared by Governor Newsom and findings that the State of Emergency still warrants the option of teleconferencing for City Council meetings, it is in the interest of public health and safety, and in response to the local recommendation for measures to promote social distancing, we find necessity in invoking the provisions of AB 361 related to teleconferencing.
26 A meeting of the City Council was conducted virtually, in part, on October 11, 2021, and therefore, the City Council adoption of the Resolution would be in conformity with AB 361.
Staff would return to the City Council no later than thirty (30) days after the adoption of the Resolution, or at the next meeting of the City Council if later than thirty (30) days after adoption of the Resolution, for the City Council to consider whether to again make the findings required to meet under the modified teleconference procedures of AB 361.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Resolution No. 26
27 RESOLUTION NO. 22-1156
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom issued a Proclamation of State of Emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which Proclamation remains in effect; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29- 20, modifying the teleconferencing rules set forth in the Brown Act, Government Code sections 54950 et seq., subject to compliance with certain requirements; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08- 21, providing that the modifications to the teleconferencing rules under the Brown Act would remain in place through September 30, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which modified the Brown Act to provide that a legislative body subject to the Brown Act may continue to meet under modified teleconferencing rules if the meeting occurs during a proclaimed state of emergency and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and WHEREAS, on September 28, 2021, the Santa Barbara County Health Department recommended that measures be implemented to promote social distancing, as set forth in a document entitled "Health Officials AB 361 Social Distance Recommendation", attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, in the interest of public health and safety, and in response to the local recommendation for measures to promote social distancing, the City Council finds it necessary to invoke the provisions of AB 361 related to teleconferencing.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are adopted as findings in support of this Resolution.
SECTION 2. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency declared by Governor Newsom and finds that the State of Emergency still warrants the option of teleconferencing for City Council meetings.
SECTION 3. State or local officials have recommended measures to promote social distancing, including the holding of virtual meetings for legislative bodies within the County of Santa Barbara.
Reso No. 22-1156
Remote Teleconferencing of CC meetings
ATTACHMENT A
28 SECTION 4. A meeting of the City Council was conducted virtually, in part, on January 11, 2021, and therefore, the City Council adopts this Resolution in conformity with AB 361.
SECTION 5. Staff is directed to return to the City Council no later than thirty (30) days after the adoption of this Resolution, or at the next meeting of the City Council if later than thirty (30) days after adoption of this Resolution, for the City Council to consider whether to again make the findings required to meet under the modified teleconference procedures of AB 361.
SECTION 6. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified copy to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 14
th day of February 2022.
Charlie Uhrig, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
Dave Fleishman, City Attorney Annamarie Porter, City Clerk Reso No. 22-1156
Remote Teleconferencing of CC meetings 2
29 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA )ss
CITY OF SOL VANG )
I, Annamarie Porter, City Clerk of the City of Solvang, California do hereby certify that Resolution No. 22-1156 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Solvang at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 14 th day of
February 2022, and thereafter signed and approved by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, and that said resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Annamarie Porter, City Clerk
Reso No. 21-1156
Remote Teleconferencing of CC meetings 3
30 Agenda Item Number: 4.e
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: David Packard, Assistant to the City Manager MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION 22-1157 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING
SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION(S) FOR ALL CALRECYCLE GRANTS
FOR WHICH THE CITY OF SOLVANG IS ELIGIBLE
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the resolution to allow the City of Solvang to apply for the SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant Program, as well as other CalRecycle grants the City is eligible to receive over the next five years.
DISCUSSION:
In September 2016, Governor Edmund Brown Jr. set methane emissions reduction targets for California (SB 1383 Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) in a statewide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP). The targets must reduce organic waste disposal 50 percent by 2020 and 75 percent by 2025 and rescue for people to eat at least 20 percent of currently disposed surplus food by 2025.
The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) is administering a onetime grant program meant to provide aid in the implementation of regulations adopted by CalRecycle pursuant to Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016 and SB170 Budget Act of 2021. This non-competitive grant program provides $57,000,000 of funding to local jurisdictions to assist with the implementation of regulation requirements associated with SB 1383, including but not limited to:
• Capacity Planning
• Collection
• Edible Food Recovery
• Education and outreach (includes organic waste & edible food recovery) • Enforcement and Inspection
• Program Evaluation/Gap Analysis
• Procurement Requirements
• Record Keeping
31 The City of Solvang is eligible to receive $20,000 in this non-competitive grant program. To complete its application, the City needs to adopt a resolution prior to March 1, 2022 authorizing the application (Attachment A). The City has submitted the preliminary application, which was due February 1, 2022 (Attachment B). Grant funding will support the City’s involvement in the County’s regional food recovery program. Grant funding will fund additional education and outreach efforts to Solvang’s business and residential communities.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council could direct staff to not apply for Cal Recycles Grant funding.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City will receive $20,000 if awarded the SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Resolution
B – Grant Application Certification
32 RESOLUTION NO. 22-1157
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION(S) FOR ALL CALRECYCLE GRANTS FOR WHICH
THE CITY OF SOLVANG IS ELIGIBLE
WHEREAS, Public Resources Code sections 48000 et seq. authorize the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to administer various grant programs (grants) in furtherance of the State of California’s (state) efforts to reduce, recycle and reuse solid waste generated in the state thereby preserving landfill capacity and protecting public health and safety and the environment; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of this authority CalRecycle is required to establish procedures governing the application, awarding, and management of the grants; and WHEREAS, CalRecycle grant application procedures require, among other things, an applicant’s governing body to declare by resolution certain authorizations related to the administration of CalRecycle grants.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Solvang authorizes the submittal of application(s) to CalRecycle for all grants for which City of Solvang is eligible.
SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his/her designee is hereby authorized and empowered to execute in the name of the City of Solvang all grant documents, including but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments and requests for payment, necessary to secure grant funds and implement the approved grant project.
SECTION 3. These authorizations are effective for five (5) years from the date of adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolutionand shall cause a certified copy to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on this 14th day of February, 2022. ______________________________
Charlie Uhrig, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
______________________________ ______________________________ Dave Fleishman, City Attorney Annamarie Porter, City Clerk 33 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA )ss
CITY OF SOLVANG )
I, Annamarie Porter, City Clerk of the City of Solvang, California do hereby certify that Resolution No. 22-1157 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Solvang at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 14th day of February 2022, and thereafter signed and approved by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, and that said resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Annamarie Porter, City Clerk
34 Application Certification
Application Information
Applicant: City of Solvang
Cycle Name: SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant Program Application Due Date: 02/01/2022 Cycle Code: OWR1 Secondary Due Date: 03/01/2022
Grant ID: 25544
Grant Funds Requested: $20,000.00
Matching Funds: $0.00 (if applicable)
Contacts
Name Title Prime Second Auth Cnslt
Prtcpnt.
Auth
David Packard Assistant to the City Manager X
Xenia Bradford City Manager X
Budget
Category Name Amount
Admin Costs $0.00
Collection $0.00
Education $10,000.00
Enforcement $0.00
Equipment $0.00
Indirect Costs $0.00
Marketing/Promotion/Outreach $10,000.00
Materials $0.00
Personnel $0.00
Training $0.00
Upgrade/Expansion $0.00
Documents Document Title Received Date
Required
Application Certification
Required By Secondary Due Date
Resolution - Individual Application
Resolution - Regional Application Lead Participant
Other Supporting Document(s)
Draft Resolution Solvang - Draft Resolution 2/1/2022
Joint Powers Agreement
Letter of Authorization/Resolution
Letter of Designation
Grants Management System (GMS)
https://secure.calrecycle.ca.gov/Grants/Grant/Grant.aspx?GrantID=25544 Date Generated: February 1, 2022 4:06 PM
DocuSign Envelope ID: 12D63AB9-D58C-42F1-BBAB-95E5BB6B9E29 35 Application Certification
Resolution
1383 Local Assistance Grant Program: Check the following, as applicable. See Application Guidelines and Instructions for more information.
X Applicant acknowledges that its approved Resolution must be uploaded no later than the secondary due date.
Program Questions
California Labor Code section 1782 prohibits a charter city from receiving state funding or financial assistance for construction projects if that charter city does not comply with Labor Code sections 1770-1782. If any applicants or participating jurisdictions are charter cities or joint powers authorities that include charter cities, the lead applicant must certify that Labor Code section 1782 does not prohibit any included charter city from receiving state funds for the project described in this application. If it is determined after award that a participating jurisdiction is a charter city prohibited from receiving state funds for this grant project, the grant will be terminated and any disbursed grant funds shall be returned to CalRecycle.
If any applicant or participating jurisdiction is a charter city or a joint powers authority that contains one or more charter cities, does Labor Code section 1782 prohibit those charter cities from receiving state funding for the project described in this grant application? Check the following, as applicable.
X No. Applicant certifies that no charter cities included in this application are prohibited from receiving state funding for the project described in this grant application.
1383 Local Assistance Grant Program: Will your jurisdiction have an enforceable ordinance(s), or similarly enforceable mechanism pursuant to section 18981.2 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations submitted to CalRecycle by April 1, 2022? X Yes
1383 Local Assistance Grant Program: If you are a Special District, do you provide solid waste collection services? X Not Applicable
Conditions and Certification
Condition of Application Submittal: Acceptance of Grant Agreement Provisions In the event the Applicant is awarded a grant, the submittal of this Application constitutes acceptance of all provisions contained in the Grant Agreement, which may consist of the following:
• Executed Grant Agreement Cover Sheet and any approved amendments • Exhibit A - Terms and Conditions
• Exhibit B - Procedures and Requirements
• Exhibit C - Application with revisions, if any, and any amendments Environmental Justice:
In the event Applicant is awarded a grant, submittal of this Application constitutes acceptance of the following; that in the performance of the Grant Agreement, Applicant/Grantee shall conduct their programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner that ensures the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and income levels, including minority populations and low-income populations of the State. (see Govt. Code §65040.12(e) and Pub. Resources Code §71110(a))
https://secure.calrecycle.ca.gov/Grants/Grant/Grant.aspx?GrantID=25544 Date Generated: February 1, 2022 4:06 PM
DocuSign Envelope ID: 12D63AB9-D58C-42F1-BBAB-95E5BB6B9E29 36 Application Certification
Certification:
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that funds have been allocated for the project(s)/activities identified in the grant application and that sufficient funds are available to complete the project(s)/activities identified in the grant application, that I have read the Application Guidelines and Instructions and that all information submitted for CalRecycle’s consideration for award of grant funds is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and that on behalf of the Applicant I accept the above conditions of submittal.
X
Signature of Signature Authority (as authorized in Resolution or Letter of Commitment) or Authorized Designee (as authorized in Letter of Designation, submitted with this Application)
Date
Print Name Print Title
IMPORTANT! Applicant must print out this document, have the Signature Authority sign it, upload signed document to the application system, and retain the original hard copy document in your cycle file.
https://secure.calrecycle.ca.gov/Grants/Grant/Grant.aspx?GrantID=25544 Date Generated: February 1, 2022 4:06 PM
DocuSign Envelope ID: 12D63AB9-D58C-42F1-BBAB-95E5BB6B9E29 City Manager/City Clerk
2/1/2022
Xenia Bradford
37 Basic Incident Date Original (Fd1.3):
Apparatus:
Incident District/Zone Total Incidents
Apparatus ID: E330
21 1
24 1
31 5
32 3
Total: 10
Apparatus ID: ME30
1 21 1
30 137
31 18
32 31
Total: 188
Total: 198
Report Filters
is between '07/01/2021' and '09/30/2021'
Report Criteria
Is In E30, ME30, E330, E230
Description
Solvang - Incidents by Unit and District
1 of 1 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:17:11 AM
Agenda Item 4.f
38 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
Incident District/Zone: 30
07/04/2021 32 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 07/07/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 07/11/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 07/22/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 07/28/2021 24 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 08/01/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 09/01/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 09/15/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 09/18/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 09/21/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 09/22/2021 31 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 09/24/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency 07/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:00:13
08/18/2021 30 Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
Non-Emergency -0:00:56
08/09/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:01:21
08/04/2021 30 Medical assist, assist EMS crew Non-Emergency -0:01:48 07/07/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:01:59
07/15/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:02:32
07/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:02:40 09/23/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:02:59
09/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:02
09/22/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:12 08/31/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:20
07/12/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:21 07/05/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:21
08/16/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:25
08/13/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:29 09/20/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:29 07/14/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:29 07/10/2021 30 Good intent call, other Emergency -0:03:35 08/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:35
07/22/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:36
08/15/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:37 09/30/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:41
09/03/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency -0:03:49 09/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:51
07/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:03:56 08/06/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with Emergency -0:04:03 1 of 5 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:18:48 AM
39 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
injury
07/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:06 08/28/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:08
09/24/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:08 08/16/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:12 08/22/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:13
07/03/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:13 09/01/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:04:17
07/31/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:18
07/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:24 09/07/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:24 -0:04:26
07/10/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:04:34 09/15/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:35
08/01/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:42 07/23/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:04:44 08/09/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:51
07/07/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:53
09/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:05:03
07/11/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:05:07
09/07/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:08 09/30/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:08
07/06/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:10
08/18/2021 30 Medical assist, assist EMS crew Emergency -0:05:16 09/12/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:05:17 07/13/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:05:17
07/07/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:22
07/12/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:25 07/23/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:25 09/21/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:05:25
08/30/2021 30 Good intent call, other Emergency -0:05:26 07/07/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:26
08/04/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:27
09/03/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:27
08/27/2021 24 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:31
07/22/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:39 07/08/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:05:39 09/24/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:05:47 09/12/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:49
07/10/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:05:50 2 of 5 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:18:48 AM
40 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
09/03/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:55
07/07/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:58
07/22/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:04
07/03/2021 30 No incident found on arrival at dispatch
address
Emergency -0:06:08
07/21/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:06:15 07/28/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:17
09/01/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:20
09/23/2021 30 Dumpster or other outside trash
receptacle fire
Emergency -0:06:26
09/15/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:06:29 08/14/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:06:38 07/04/2021 30 Building fire Emergency -0:06:43
07/11/2021 30 Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
Emergency -0:06:44
07/21/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:06:47 09/12/2021 30 Service call, other Non-Emergency -0:06:47 08/19/2021 31 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:49
08/25/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:06:49
08/05/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:06:49 08/15/2021 30 Smoke detector activation due to
malfunction
Non-Emergency -0:06:50
09/18/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:06:54 08/07/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:06:54 08/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:12
09/22/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:14
09/20/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:15
09/09/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:20
08/16/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:07:20 07/26/2021 30 Good intent call, other Emergency -0:07:22 09/02/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:27
08/30/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:07:31
08/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:32
09/01/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:35
08/10/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:07:36 08/01/2021 31 Motor vehicle accident with injuries Emergency -0:07:37 09/05/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:37
08/09/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:45
08/01/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:50
09/25/2021 30 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Emergency -0:07:57 08/06/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:08:09
09/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:10
08/20/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:14
09/21/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Non-Emergency, Upgraded to -0:08:21 3 of 5 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:18:48 AM
41 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
Basic Incident Date Original (Fd1.3):
Incident District/Zone:
Emergency
07/02/2021 31 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:08:22 09/16/2021 31 Outside rubbish fire, other Emergency -0:08:27 08/19/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:08:30 07/18/2021 30 Water problem, other Non-Emergency -0:08:37 08/27/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:43
08/13/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:08:46
07/15/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:48
08/17/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:09:08
09/26/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:09:14
07/19/2021 30 Good intent call, other Emergency -0:09:16 09/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:09:17
08/19/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:09:25
09/18/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:09:39 07/28/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:09:42
09/04/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:09:49
07/02/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:09:50 07/13/2021 31 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:10:04
07/12/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:10:31
07/07/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:10:31
07/19/2021 32 Smoke scare, odor of smoke Emergency -0:10:48 08/16/2021 32 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:10:48
07/09/2021 32 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:10:58 08/28/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Non-Emergency -0:11:15 09/13/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:11:22
07/03/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:11:38 09/15/2021 30 Water problem, other Non-Emergency -0:12:12 08/30/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:12:25 07/31/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:12:56
09/03/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:12:57
07/09/2021 14 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:13:37
09/22/2021 32 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) Emergency -0:13:52 08/18/2021 30 Water or steam leak Non-Emergency -0:14:56 08/01/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:15:43 08/13/2021 30 Power line down Emergency -0:17:14
Report Filters
is between '07/01/2021' and '09/30/2021'
Report Criteria
Is In 30
Description
Solvang - Response Time Report
4 of 5 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:18:48 AM
42 5 of 5 Printed On: 02/02/2022 10:18:48 AM
43 Basic Incident Date Original (Fd1.3):
Apparatus:
Incident District/Zone Total Incidents
Apparatus ID: E330
30 2
31 1
32 5
38 1
Total: 9
Apparatus ID: ME30
1 24 1
30 160
31 23
32 50
38 9
Total: 244
Total: 253
Report Filters
is between '10/01/2021' and '12/31/2021'
Report Criteria
Is In E30, ME30, E330, E230
Description
Solvang - Incidents by Unit and District
1 of 1 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:40:00 PM
44 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
Incident District/Zone: 30
10/04/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 10/11/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 10/14/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency 10/21/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency 10/31/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 11/17/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 11/18/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 11/20/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 11/30/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 12/05/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 12/07/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency 12/16/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 12/22/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 12/23/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 12/27/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency 11/08/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:00:09
12/18/2021 30 CO detector activation due to malfunction Non-Emergency -0:00:58 10/23/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:01:09
10/20/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:01:12
11/01/2021 30 Special type of incident, other Non-Emergency -0:01:32 10/17/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:02:16
10/25/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:02:37
10/15/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:02:39 10/16/2021 30 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident (MV
Ped)
Emergency -0:02:41
12/12/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:02:56 10/10/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:03:11 10/03/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:13 12/08/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:03:13
11/02/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:14
12/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:16
12/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:17
12/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:26
10/05/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:28 11/13/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:29
11/10/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:34
12/15/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:40
12/11/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:43
1 of 5 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:42:15 PM
45 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
10/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:51
10/04/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:03:57 11/06/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:03:57
10/29/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:01 10/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:05
12/17/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:04:10
11/11/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:13
11/22/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:14
12/12/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:14
10/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:17
10/07/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:18 10/11/2021 30 Public service Non-Emergency -0:04:22
11/13/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:23
11/15/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:28
10/02/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:28
11/20/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:33
12/03/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:34
10/17/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:37
12/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:37
10/16/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:38 12/10/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:38
10/03/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:39 11/02/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:39
12/11/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:47
11/16/2021 30 Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
Emergency -0:04:49
10/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:50
10/22/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:52
12/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:52
10/23/2021 30 System malfunction, other Emergency -0:04:55 10/18/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:56 10/15/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:04:57 11/28/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:04:58
12/03/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:00
12/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:01 11/14/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:03
10/12/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:10 11/11/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with Emergency -0:05:17 2 of 5 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:42:15 PM
46 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
injury
10/02/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:19
11/01/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency -0:05:20 11/28/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:22
10/20/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:25
12/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:25
10/17/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:05:26
10/31/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:05:26 10/10/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:05:27 11/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:29
10/05/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:05:30 11/22/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:05:31 10/23/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:05:34 12/05/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:05:35
12/17/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:44
12/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:05:48
12/14/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:05:54
12/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:00
11/20/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:06:01
11/14/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:06:02 12/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:06:03
11/07/2021 30 Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
Emergency -0:06:04
10/24/2021 30 Assist invalid Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:06:12 12/25/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Non-Emergency, Upgraded to Emergency
-0:06:13
11/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:15
11/20/2021 30 Municipal alarm system, malicious false
alarm
Non-Emergency -0:06:17
10/14/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:06:17 10/30/2021 30 EMS call, party transported by non-fire
agency
Emergency -0:06:18
11/16/2021 30 Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
Emergency -0:06:18
11/30/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:21
12/31/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Non-Emergency -0:06:21 12/05/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:06:23 12/31/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:27
12/18/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:29
11/14/2021 30 Good intent call, other Emergency -0:06:31 10/26/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:06:44
12/08/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:06:48 12/30/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:06:50
3 of 5 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:42:15 PM
47 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
10/26/2021 30 Smoke scare, odor of smoke Emergency -0:06:56 10/24/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Emergency -0:07:01 10/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:04
12/15/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:07:06 10/01/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:08
10/17/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:07:10 11/04/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:12
12/01/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:18
11/27/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:24
12/30/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:07:25
11/01/2021 30 Unauthorized burning Non-Emergency -0:07:33 10/27/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Emergency -0:07:36 11/07/2021 30 Detector activation, no fire - unintentional Non-Emergency -0:07:43 10/01/2021 30 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Emergency -0:07:47 12/04/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:07:48
10/09/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:07:58 11/30/2021 30 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Non-Emergency -0:08:07 12/06/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:10
12/24/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:15
10/01/2021 30 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Emergency -0:08:16 11/06/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:30
12/29/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:33
12/19/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:08:51 10/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:52
12/01/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:57
12/19/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:08:58
11/14/2021 30 Public service assistance, other Non-Emergency -0:08:59 10/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency, Upgraded to
Emergency
-0:09:22
10/07/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency -0:09:24 10/06/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with injuries Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:09:32 11/23/2021 30 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) Emergency -0:09:38 11/04/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:09:42
11/22/2021 30 Smoke detector activation due to
malfunction
Emergency -0:09:53
11/17/2021 30 False alarm or false call, other Emergency -0:09:56 10/09/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:09:56
10/20/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:09:57
12/30/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:10:01
11/29/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:10:18
12/21/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:10:21
12/12/2021 30 Smoke detector activation due to
malfunction
Emergency -0:10:42
11/14/2021 30 Smoke detector activation due to Emergency -0:10:46 4 of 5 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:42:15 PM
48 Incident Date
(FD1.3)
Incident Primary Station
(FD1.4)
Fire Incident Type Response Mode To Scene Response
Time
Basic Incident Date Original (Fd1.3):
Incident District/Zone:
malfunction
12/10/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:10:59
12/16/2021 30 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Non-Emergency -0:11:06 11/07/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:11:12
12/08/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:11:18
11/09/2021 30 Assist invalid Non-Emergency -0:11:30
11/02/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:11:57
10/08/2021 30 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. Emergency -0:11:59 10/01/2021 30 Fire, other Emergency -0:12:17
12/05/2021 32 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:12:44
10/03/2021 30 Emergency medical service, other Emergency, Downgraded to NonEmergency-0:12:48 11/06/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency -0:13:12
11/27/2021 32 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Emergency -0:14:27 11/02/2021 30 Smoke scare, odor of smoke Non-Emergency -0:16:12 10/01/2021 31 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Non-Emergency -0:19:32
12/01/2021 32 Unauthorized burning Non-Emergency -0:26:15 12/17/2021 30 Rescue, EMS incident, other Non-Emergency 0:00:00 11/04/2021 30 Dispatched and cancelled en route Non-Emergency 0:00:00 11/01/2021 30 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury
Emergency 0:00:00
Report Filters
is between '10/01/2021' and '12/31/2021'
Report Criteria
Is In 30
Description
Solvang - Response Time Report
5 of 5 Printed On: 02/01/2022 01:42:15 PM
49 Agenda Item Number: 4g
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Rodger Olds, Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST IN THE AMOUNT OF $149,000 FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES AND $15,000 FOR RESTROOM SUPPLIES FOR RESTROOMS 2 AND 3.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Budget Adjustment Request (Attachment A) in the amount of $164,000 for custodial services and restroom supplies.
DISCUSSION:
During the Covid-19 Pandemic response, the City has doubled the frequency of custodial service to all the public restrooms. Furthermore, the City has realized an increase in visitors in the past several months that has resulted in the need for custodial call-outs and trash collection. This has been primarily in the downtown, which has been over and above the increased frequency.
The City is currently under contract with Rafael Ruiz Janitor Service, who is local to Solvang, to perform scheduled and on-call custodial and trash collection services within the downtown area. Staff anticipates going out for a Request for Proposals (RFP) this spring for custodial services for the following fiscal year.
The original fiscal year 21/22 budget amount for Custodial services is $151,000. Over the first seven (7) months of fiscal year 21/22 the City has expended $173,244, which is $22,244 over the approved budget, and an average of approximately $24,000 per month. Staff anticipates this same rate of expense over the remainder of the fiscal year in order to meet the demand for custodial services throughout the City and trash pick-up in the downtown.
In addition, the budget for restroom supplies for Restroom 2 and Restroom 3 are depleting faster than anticipated due to the increased use of these restrooms by guests. Staff is requesting a budget amendment to add $10,000 to pay for additional supplies for Restroom 2 and $5,000 for Restroom 3.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council may elect not to approve the budget adjustments. This is not recommended as it would result in City Staff to perform the work of cleaning the restrooms and collecting the trash and potentially rationing restroom supplies.
Given the current staffing levels and workloads it would be impossible to maintain the current level of service to the public.
FISCAL IMPACT:
50 The impact of this budget adjustment would result in a potential increase expenditure of $164,000 from the General Fund.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Budget Adjustment Request
51 City of Solvang
Budget Adjustment Request
Agenda
Item MO/YR Number
02/22 22-10
Fund: General Fund
Decrease/
Increase Account/ Project Name Fund Dept Prog. Object Description Current
Budget AMOUNT Revised Budget
Decrease Increase
0 0
0 0
$ - -$ $ - $ -
Total Revenues Increase (Decrease) $ -
Decrease/
Increase Account/ Project Name Fund Dept Prog. Object Description Current
Budget AMOUNT Revised Budget
Decrease Increase
Increase Custodial-Restrooms 100 1600 400 57005 Increased Janitorial Services $ 151,000 $ 149,000 $ 300,000 Increase Supplies 100 1600 320 52003 Increased Restroom Supplies $ 20,000 $ 10,000 $ 30,000 Supplies 100 1600 680 52003 Increased Restroom Supplies $ 10,000 $ 5,000 $ 15,000 $ 181,000 -$ 164,000 $ $ 345,000
Total Expense Increase (Decrease) 164,000 $
2/4/2022
Date
Date:
Date
Revenue Adjustments
Expense Adjustments
EXPLANATION:
Approved FY21/22 Budgeted Amount has been exceeded due to Prepared By: Rodger Olds, Public Works Director Posted by:
greater demand for custodial services and restroom supplies than Rodger Olds Public Works Director anticipated City Manager:
City Council Approved:
Budget Adjustment FY 2122 Last revised: 2/4/2022
Attachment A
52 Agenda Item Number: 4.h
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HOTEL ASSN.
INC. dba VISIT THE SANTA YNEZ VALLEY FOR TOURISM BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION FOR THE TERM JULY
1, 2021 - JUNE 30, 2027
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve contract with Visit SYV for the term of July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2027.
DISCUSSION:
The Santa Ynez Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (SYVTBID) was renewed for a six-year term (July 1, 2021 - June 30, 2027) and approved by all participating jurisdictions (Solvang, Buellton, County of Santa Barbara), per Solvang Resolution No. 21-1141 (Attachment B).
Visit SYV administers the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) on a contractual basis. The contract expired at the end of the last TBID term as of June 30, 2021. The proposed contract (Attachment B) extends the term through the current TBID renewal term of June 30, 2027.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no additional fiscal impact. The City of Solvang collects and distributes the TBID collected funds and charges an administrative fee.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Visit SYV Contract
B. Resolution 21-1141
53 Attachment A
CITY OF SOLVANG
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Professional Services Agreement (“AGREEMENT”) is made upon the date of execution, as set forth below, by and between the City of Solvang (“CITY”), a municipal corporation, and Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Assn. Inc. dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley (“CONTRACTOR”), a California Corporation.
CONTRACTOR is designated in Resolution 21-1141 (“Resolution”) renewing the Santa Ynez Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (“District”) as adopted pursuant to the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, being section 36600 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code (“BID Law”) as the CONTRACTOR to be given responsibility for carrying out the services, activities, and programs of the District to promote tourism which will benefit the District funded by assessments from within the District and by other revenue sources; and CONTRACTOR is willing to provide such services on the terms and conditions set forth in this AGREEMENT and is willing to provide same to CITY.
The parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, hereby agree to the following terms and conditions:
1.01 Term: This AGREEMENT shall commence on July 1, 2021 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2027 unless sooner terminated or amended pursuant to the provisions of this AGREEMENT.
1.02 Services: CONTRACTOR shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
CONTRACTOR shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. To the extent that Exhibit A is a proposal from CONTRACTOR, such proposal is incorporated only for the description of the scope of services and no other terms and conditions from any such proposal shall apply to this AGREEMENT unless specifically agreed to in writing. CONTRACTOR shall determine the method, details and means of performing the above-referenced services.
CONTRACTOR may, at their own expense, employ such assistants and sub-contractors, as CONTRACTOR deems necessary to perform the services required of CONTRACTOR by this AGREEMENT. However, CONTRACTOR may not assign this agreement to any other person or entity in the performance of required project-related services and the CITY may not control, direct or supervise CONTRACTOR’S assistants or employees in the performance of those services.
1.03 Standard of Performance: CONTRACTOR shall at all times faithfully, competently, and to the best of his/her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. CONTRACTOR shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of CONTRACTOR hereunder in meeting its obligations under this AGREEMENT. Whenever the scope of work requires or permits approval by the CITY, it is understood to be approval solely for the purposes of conforming to the requirements of the scope of work and not acceptance of any professional or other responsibility for the 54 work. Such approval does not relieve the CONTRACTOR of responsibility for complying with the standard of performance or laws, regulations, industry standards, or from liability for damages caused by acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of CONTRACTOR. By delivery of completed work, CONTRACTOR certifies that the work conforms to the requirements of this AGREEMENT and all applicable federal, state and local laws. If CONTRACTOR is retained to perform services requiring a license, certification, registration or other similar requirement under California law, CONTRACTOR shall maintain that license, certification, registration or other similar requirement throughout the term of this Contract.
1.04 Compensation: In consideration for the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR, City shall on a quarterly basis transfer to CONTRACTOR all collected District assessments, less the administrative fee and enforcement costs. Payments shall include a total balance of the District Assessment account, less any administrative or enforcement fee pursuant to the Resolution, as set forth in Exhibit B, incorporated herein.
CONTRACTOR shall not be compensated for any services in connection with its performance of this AGREEMENT which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance by the City Manager.
CONTRACTOR shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manger as agreed to by the CONTRACTOR at the time City’s written authorization is given to CONTRACTOR for the performance of said additional services.
2.0 OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTOR
2.01 Contract Management: CITY’s City Manager shall be designated as the City’s contract manager and shall represent CITY in all matters pertaining to the administration of this AGREEMENT and review and approval of all work product submitted by CONTRACTOR, but not including the authority to enlarge the scope of services or change the compensation due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR’s president shall be designated as the CONTRACTOR’s contract manager.
2.02 Avoidance of Conflict of Interest. CONTRACTOR may represent, perform services for, and be employed by additional individuals or entities, in CONTRACTOR’s sole discretion, as long as the performance of these extra-contractual services does not interfere with or present a conflict with City’s business or interfere with the timely performance and completion of CONTRACTOR’s services under this AGREEMENT.
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, the City’s Conflict of Interest Code (on file in the City Clerk’s Office). All officers, employees and/or agents of CONTRACTOR who will be working on behalf of the City pursuant to this AGREEMENT may be required to file Statements of Economic Interest. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the CONTRACTOR or Consulting Firm to notify the City of any staff changes relating to this AGREEMENT.
A. In accomplishing the scope of services of this AGREEMENT, all officers, employees and/or agents of the CONTRACTOR(s) unless as indicated in Subsection B, will be performing a very limited and closely supervised function, and therefore, unlikely to have a conflict of interest arise. No disclosures are required for any officers, employees, and/or agents of CONTRACTOR, except as indicated in Subsection B. _____ (Initials). 55 B. In accomplishing the scope of services of this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR(s) will be performing a specialized or general service for the City, and there is substantial likelihood that the CONTRACTOR’s work product will be presented, either written or orally for the purpose of influencing a governmental decision. As a result, the following CONTRACTOR(s) shall be subject to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code.
_________________________ _______________________
_________________________ _______________________
2.03 Tools and Instrumentalities: CONTRACTOR shall provide all tools and instrumentalities to perform the services under this agreement.
2.04 Independent Contractor
(a) City and CONTRACTOR intend and agree that CONTRACTOR shall have no power to act as agent of the City without the express advance authorization of the City Manager.
(b) City and CONTRACTOR intend and agree that CONTRACTOR is an independent contractor of City and agree that CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR’s employees and agents have no right to Workers’ Compensation and other City-sponsored employee benefits. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide Workers’ Compensation and other employee benefits, where required by law, for CONTRACTOR’s employees and agents. CONTRACTOR agrees to hold harmless and indemnify City for any and all claims arising out of any claim for injury, disability, or death of CONTRACTOR and any of CONTRACTOR’s employees or agents.
2.05 Indemnification
(a) Non-design, non-construction Professional Services: To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, but not limited to California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, and its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents (“City Indemnitees”), from and against any and all causes of action, claims, liabilities, obligations, judgments, or damages, including reasonable legal counsels’ fees and costs of litigation (“claims”), arising out of the CONTRACTOR’S performance or CONTRACTOR’s failure to perform its obligations under this AGREEMENT or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, including the City’s active or passive negligence, except for such loss or damage arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. In the event the City Indemnitees are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from CONTRACTOR’s performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR shall provide a defense to the City Indemnitees or at the City’s option, reimburse the City Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable legal fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
(b) Non-design, construction Professional Services: To the extent the Scope of Services involve a “construction contract” as that phrase is used in Civil Code Section 2783, this paragraph shall apply in place of paragraph (a). To the fullest extent permitted 56 by law (including, but not limited to California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, and its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents (“City Indemnitees”), from and against any and all causes of action, claims, liabilities, obligations, judgments, or damages, including reasonable legal counsels’ fees and costs of litigation (“claims”), arising out of the CONTRACTOR’s performance or CONTRACTOR’s failure to perform its obligations under this AGREEMENT or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, except for such loss or damage arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. In the event the City Indemnitees are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from CONTRACTOR’s performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR shall provide a defense to the City Indemnitees or at the City’s option, reimburse the City Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable legal fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
(c) Design Professional Services: In the event CONTRACTOR is a “design professional”, and the Scope of Services require CONTRACTOR to provide “design professional services” as those phrases are used in Civil Code Section 2782.8, this paragraph shall apply in place of paragraphs (a) or (b). To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, but not limited to California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8) CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City and its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents (“City Indemnitees”), from and against all claims, damages, injuries, losses, and expenses including costs, attorney fees, expert CONTRACTOR and expert witness fees arising out of, pertaining to or relating to, the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of CONTRACTOR, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence, active negligence or willful misconduct of the City.
Negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of any subcontractor employed by CONTRACTOR shall be conclusively deemed to be the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consul CONTRACTOR tant unless adequately corrected by CONTRACTOR. In the event the City Indemnitees are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from CONTRACTOR’s performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR shall provide a defense to the City Indemnitees or at the City’s option, reimburse the City Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable legal fees, incurred in defense of such claims. In no event shall the cost to defend charged to CONTRACTOR under this paragraph exceed CONTRACTOR’s proportionate percentage of fault. However, notwithstanding the previous sentence, in the event one or more defendants is unable to pay its share of defense costs due to bankruptcy or dissolution of the business, CONTRACTOR shall meet and confer with other parties regarding unpaid defense costs.
(d) Payment by City is not a condition precedent to enforcement of the indemnities in paragraph (a), (b), or (c). In the event of any dispute between CONTRACTOR and City, as to whether liability arises from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, or agents, CONTRACTOR will be obligated to pay for City’s defense until such time as a final judgment has been entered adjudicating the City as having been actively negligent, solely negligent or as having engaged in willful misconduct. Except as otherwise required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, CONTRACTOR will not be entitled in the absence of such a determination to any reimbursement of defense costs including but not limited to attorney’s fees, expert fees and costs of litigation. The provisions of this Section 2.05 shall survive completion of CONTRACTOR’s services or the termination of this AGREEMENT. 57 2.06 Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this AGREEMENT insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit C attached to and part of this agreement
3.0 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY
3.01 Cooperation: City agrees to comply with all reasonable requests of CONTRACTOR necessary to the performance of CONTRACTOR’s duties under this agreement. City employees, agents and officers of the City agree to disclose all information relevant to this project to CONTRACTOR.
4.0 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
4.01 Termination Notice: Notwithstanding any other provision of this agreement, any party hereto may terminate this agreement, at any time, without cause, by giving at least 30 (thirty) days’ prior written notice to the other parties to this agreement.
4.02 Termination on Occurrence of Stated Events: This agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the following events:
a. Sale of the business of any party;
b. The end of the 30 (thirty) days as set forth in section 4.01; c. End of the contract to which CONTRACTOR’s services were necessary; or
d. Assignment of this agreement by CONTRACTOR without the consent of City.
e. Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party.
f. Death of any party.
4.03 Termination by any Party for Default: Should any party default in the performance of this agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, the nonbreaching party, at its option, may terminate this agreement, immediately, by giving written notice of termination to the breaching party.
4.04 Termination: This agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2027, unless earlier extended as set forth in this Section. The City, with the agreement of CONTRACTOR, is authorized to extend the term of this agreement beyond the termination date, as needed, under the same terms and conditions as set forth in this agreement. Any such extension shall be in writing and be an amendment to this agreement.
5.0 SPECIAL PROVISIONS
58 5.01 Additional Tasks as May Be Assigned by the City Manager: Prior to initiating any CONTRACTOR work on matters relating to the purposes of this AGREEMENT, but outside the Scope of Services for this AGREEMENT, it shall be the responsibility of CONTRACTOR to obtain written approval of the City Manager, prior to initiation of such tasks.
5.02 Time Schedule: CONTRACTOR is to begin work upon receipt and execution of City contract. It is contemplated that most of the services hereunder, including but not limited to preparation, public and agency review, and submission of the draft, and City Council for certification, will be completed on or before June 30, 2027. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE OF THIS CONTRACT. CONTRACTOR agrees to engage its best efforts to adhere strictly to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, incorporated herein.
5.03 Work Outside Contract Scope: No payment for changed or additional work shall be made unless the changed or additional work has first been approved in writing by the Contract Manager and the parties have agreed upon the appropriate adjustment, if any, to the payment schedule and maximum payment amount for the changed or additional work. The Contract Manger may order changes or additions to the scope of work. Whether a change or addition to the scope of work is proposed by the CONTRACTOR or ordered by the Contract Manager, the parties shall in good faith negotiate an appropriate adjustment, if any, to the payment schedule and maximum payment for the changed or additional work. An approved change or addition, along with the payment adjustment, if any, will be effective upon an amendment to this contract executed by both parties. The amendment shall not render ineffective or invalidate unaffected portions of this contract.
5.04 Confidentiality:
(a) Confidential Nature of Information. CONTRACTOR shall treat all information obtained from the City in the performance of this contract as confidential and proprietary to the City. CONTRACTOR shall treat all records and work product prepared or maintained by CONTRACTOR in the performance of this contract as confidential.
(b) Limitation on use and disclosure. CONTRACTOR agrees that it will not use any information obtained as a consequence of the performance of work for any purpose other than fulfillment of CONTRACTOR’s scope of work. CONTRACTOR will not disclose any information prepared for the City, or obtained from the City or obtained as a consequence of the performance of work to any person other than the City, or its own employees, agents or subcontractors who have a need for the information for the performance of work under this contract unless such disclosure is specifically authorized in writing by the City.
(c) Security plan. If requested by the Contract Manager, CONTRACTOR shall prepare a security plan to assure that information obtained from the City or as a consequence of the performance of work is not used for any unauthorized purpose or disclosed to unauthorized persons. CONTRACTOR shall advise the City of any request for disclosure of information or of any actual or potential disclosure of information.
59 (c) Survival. CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this paragraph shall survive the termination of this contract.
6.0 MISCELLANEOUS
6.01 Notices: Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this agreement or by law to be served on or given to any party to this agreement shall be in writing and delivered or, in lieu of such personal service, when deposited in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid, to the following address for each respective party:
PARTY ADDRESS
TO: CITY OF SOLVANG City of Solvang
1644 Oak Street
Solvang, CA 93463
Attn: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
Copy to: Dave Fleishman, City Attorney
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON
847 Monterey Street, Suite 206
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
TO CONTRACTOR: Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Assn. Inc
Dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley
P.O. Box 633
Solvang, CA 93464
Attn: Shelby Sim, President
6.02 Governing Law: This agreement and all matters relating to this agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California in force at the time, should any need for interpretation of this agreement or any decision or holding concerning this agreement arise.
6.03 Binding Effect: This agreement shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, but nothing in this Section shall be construed as a consent by City to any assignment of this agreement or any interest in the agreement.
6.04 Remedies: The remedies set forth in this agreement shall not be exclusive, but shall be cumulative with, and in addition to, all remedies now or hereafter allowed by law or equity.
6.05 Due Authority: The parties hereby represent that the individuals executing this agreement are expressly authorized to do so on and in behalf of the parties.
6.06 Ownership of Work Product: Upon delivery, the work product, including without limitation, all original reports, writings, recordings, drawings, files, and detailed calculations developed under this contract are the property of the City. CONTRACTOR agrees that all copyrights, which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this contract, shall be vested in the City and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other 60 intellectual property rights in favor of the City. City acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited to the purposes contemplated by the scope of work and that the CONTRACTOR makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work.
6.07. Integration and Modification: This contract represents the entire understanding and agreement of the City and CONTRACTOR as to those matters contained herein.
This agreement correctly sets forth the obligations of the parties hereto to each other as of the date of this agreement. All agreements or representations respecting the subject matter of this agreement not expressly set forth or referred to in this agreement are null and void. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This contract may not be modified, amended, or altered except in writing signed by the City and CONTRACTOR.
6.08. Advice of Counsel: The parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms, and conditions of this contract, and that the decision of whether or not to seek the advice of counsel with respect to this contract is a decision which is the sole responsibility of each of the parties hereto. This contract shall not be construed in favor or against either party by reason of the extent to which each party participated in the drafting of the contract.
6.09. Independent Review: Each party hereto declares and represents that in entering this contract it has relied and is relying solely upon its own judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect and consequence relating thereto. Each party further declares and represents that this contract is being made without reliance upon any statement or representation not contained herein of any other party, or any representative, agent, or attorney of any other party.
6.10. Attorney Fees: In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between the parties hereto, arising out of or relating to this agreement, or the breach hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to other such relief as may be granted, to a reasonable sum as and for attorney fees.
6.11 No waiver: The waiver of any breach by any party of any provision of this agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of this agreement.
6.12. Assignment: This agreement is specifically not assignable by CONTRACTOR to any person or entity. Any assignment or attempt to assign by CONTRACTOR whether it be voluntary or involuntary, by operation of law or otherwise, is void and is a material breach of this agreement, giving rise to a right to terminate as set forth in Section
4.03. 6.13. Time for Performance: Except as otherwise expressly provided for in this agreement, should the performance of any act required by this agreement to be performed by either party be prevented or delayed by reason by any act of God, strike, lockout, labor trouble, inability to secure materials, or any other cause, except financial inability, which is the fault of the party required to perform the act, the time for performance of the act will be extended for a period of time equivalent to the period of delay and performance of the act during the period of delay will be excused: provided, however, that nothing contained in this Section shall exclude the prompt payment by either party as required by 61 this agreement of the performance of any act rendered difficult or impossible solely because of the financial condition of the party required to perform the act.
6.14 Severability: Should any provision of this agreement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction or by a legislative or rulemaking act to be either invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect, unimpaired by the holding, legislation or rule.
6.15. Construction: The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have their counsel review this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. The captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not intended to be construed to define or limit the provision to which they relate.
6.16. Amendments: Amendments to this agreement shall be in writing and shall be made only with the mutual written consent of all the parties to this agreement.
6.17. Signatures: The individuals executing this contract represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this contract on the following date.
CONTRACTOR: Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Assn. Inc
dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley
Date: By:
Shelby Sim, President
CITY OF SOLVANG:
Date: By:
Charlie Uhrig, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Annamarie Porter, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON
:
Date: By:
Dave Fleishman, City Attorney
62 EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
CONTRACTOR shall provide the following services:
1. CONTRACTOR shall cooperate with CITY and CITY staff in the performance of all work hereunder. The CONTRACTOR’s contract administrator shall meet with the CITY manager on a quarterly basis to review the services provided under this agreement. The meeting shall be organized by the CITY Manager.
2. CONTRACTOR will provide and fund projects, programs and activities that benefit lodging establishments within the District. This includes the promotion of Santa Ynez Valley as an overnight tourism destination, the branding of Santa Ynez Valley as a destination, the provision for direct visitor services, and securing the assistance of various partnerships in these endeavors. Assessment funds shall be used exclusively for the foregoing purpose, in accordance with the Management District Plan and annual reports.
3. CONTRACTOR will provide and fund such additional projects, programs and activities to promote tourism in the Santa Ynez Valley as may be made possible through other nonAssessment funding sources. These other funds must be accounted for separately from Assessment funds.
4. CONTRACTOR shall perform responsibilities under the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994 (the “Law”) including but not limited to:
a. Preparation of the Annual Report required by the Law, which shall include any recommended changes to boundaries, the improvements and activities to be provided for that fiscal year, an estimate of cost for providing the improvements and activities, the method and basis of levying the assessment in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his/her business for that fiscal year, the amount of any surplus or deficit revenues to be carried over from a previous fiscal year, and the amount of any contributions to be made from sources other than assessments. b. Seeking and retaining subcontractor(s) to prepare the Annual Report. c. Delivering the Annual Report at least one hundred and twenty (120) days preceding the fiscal year for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the costs of the improvements.
5. CONTRACTOR shall develop and maintain financial records related to receipt and/or expenditure of all funds received from CITY.
6. CONTRACTOR agrees to prepare a quarterly report of actual expenditures and program accomplishments for each calendar quarter and shall deliver the quarterly report to the CITY’s City Manager within a reasonable amount of time.
7. CONTRACTOR may retain subcontractors to deliver the services herein however CONTRACTOR shall remain fully responsible for compliance by its contractors with all the terms of this AGREEMENT, regardless of the terms of any agreement between the CONTRACTOR and its subcontractor.
63 EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
CITY shall transfer to CONTRACTOR all collected assessments, less the administrative fee and enforcement costs, on a quarterly basis. Payments shall include a total balance of the BID Assessment account, less any administrative or enforcement fee pursuant to the Resolution 64 EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, CONTRACTOR will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. CONTRACTOR will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, CONTRACTOR agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City.
CONTRACTOR shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance:
Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office “Commercial General Liability” policy form CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another.
Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $1,000,000 per accident. If CONTRACTOR owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR’s employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, CONTRACTOR shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person.
Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer’s liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease.
Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a “pay on behalf” basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured’s liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another.
Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of CONTRACTOR, sub CONTRACTORs or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the CONTRACTOR and “Covered Professional Services” as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. The policy must “pay on behalf of” the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer’s duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement.
65 Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted carriers in the state of California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A- or better and a minimum financial size VII.
General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by CONTRACTOR.
CONTRACTOR and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by CONTRACTOR:
1. CONTRACTOR agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials, employees and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992. CONTRACTOR also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do likewise.
2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this AGREEMENT shall prohibit CONTRACTOR, or CONTRACTOR’s employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss.CONTRACTOR agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise.
3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by CONTRACTOR and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this AGREEMENT or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage.
4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing.
5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate socalled “third party action over” claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any contractor or subcontractor.
6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. CONTRACTOR shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City’s protection without City’s prior written consent.
7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to CONTRACTOR’s general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this AGREEMENT. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by CONTRACTOR or deducted from sums due CONTRACTOR, at City option.
8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. CONTRACTOR agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will “endeavor” (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 66 9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, non-contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City.
10. CONTRACTOR agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by CONTRACTOR, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. CONTRACTOR agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review.
11. CONTRACTOR agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. If CONTRACTOR’s existing coverage includes a deductible or selfinsured retention, the deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to the City. At that time the City shall review options with the CONTRACTOR, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions.
12. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the CONTRACTOR ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the CONTRACTOR, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City.
13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this AGREEMENT will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this AGREEMENT.
14. CONTRACTOR acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform CONTRACTOR of non-compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard.
15. CONTRACTOR will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason.
Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect.
16. CONTRACTOR shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this AGREEMENT have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from CONTRACTOR’s insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 67 17. The provisions of any workers’ compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of CONTRACTOR under this agreement. CONTRACTOR expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents.
18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive.
19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such.
20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this AGREEMENT to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section.
21. CONTRACTOR agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or CONTRACTOR for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto.
CONTRACTOR agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against CONTRACTOR arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. 68 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3B9B72AD-8E09-44EF-AA97-A565B0B30773 RESOLUTION NO. 2021 -1141
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLVANG
DECLARING RESULTS OF MAJORITY PROTEST PROCEEDINGS AND
RENEWING THE SANTA YNEZ VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (SYVTBID)
WHEREAS, the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994 (Streets and Highways Code §36600 et. seq.) authorizes the City to renew business improvement districts upon petition by a weighted majority of the business owners located within the boundaries of the district; and
WHEREAS, lodging business owners who will pay more than fifty percent (50%) of the proposed assessment, as weighted according to the amount of the assessment to be paid by the petitioner, within the boundaries of the SYVTBID have petitioned the City Council to renew the SYVTBID; and
WHEREAS, the renewed SYVTBID includes lodging businesses in the cities of Buellton and Solvang, and nearby portions of the unincorporated area of Santa Barbara County; and WHEREAS, consent to include lodging businesses in their respective jurisdictions has been received from the cities of Buellton and Solvang, and the County of Santa Barbara; and WHEREAS, included with the petitions was a Management District Plan (Plan) summary that describes the proposed assessment to be levied on lodging businesses within the SYVTBID to pay for sales and marketing programs, and other improvements and activities set forth in the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the assessed lodging businesses within the SYVTBID will receive a specific benefit from the activities and improvements set forth in the Plan; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 2020 at 6:30 PM at Council Chambers, 1644 Oak Street; Solvang, CA 93463, the City Council adopted a Resolution oflntention, Resolution No. 2020-20- 1124; and
WHEREAS, the public meeting and public hearing to consider the renewal of the SYVTBID have been properly noticed in accordance with Streets and Highways Code §36623; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2020 at 6:30 PM at Council Chambers, 1644 Oak Street; Solvang, CA 93463, the City Council held a public meeting regarding the renewal of the SYVTBID, and the City Council heard and received objections and protests, if any, to the renewal of the SYVTBID and the levy of the proposed assessment; and Attachment B
69 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3B9B72AD-8E09-44EF-AA97-A565B0B30773 WHEREAS, on January 11, 2021 at 6:30 PM at Council Chambers: 1644 Oak Street; Solvang, CA 93463, the City Council held a public hearing regarding the renewal of the SYVTBID, and the City Council heard and received all objections and protests, if any, to the renewal of the SYVTBID and the levy of the proposed assessment; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has determined that there was no majority protest. A majority protest is defined as written protests received from owners of businesses in the renewed SYVTBID which would pay fifty percent (50%) or more of the assessments proposed to be levied. Protests are weighted based on the assessment proposed to be levied on each lodging business; and WHEREAS, the City bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that an assessment imposed for a specific benefit or specific government service is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the costs to the City in providing the specific benefit or specific government service, and that the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payor bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the specific benefits or specific government services received by the payor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT:
1. The recitals set forth herein are adopted by the City Council as findings and they are true and correct.
2. The SYVTBID is hereby renewed for a six (6) year term, beginning July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2027.
3. The Plan dated January 6, 2021 is hereby adopted and approved.
4. The activities to be provided to benefit businesses in the SYVTBID will be funded by the levy of the assessment. The revenue from the assessment levy shall not be used: to provide activities that directly benefit businesses outside the SYVTBID; to provide activities or improvements outside the SYVTBID; or for any purpose other than the purposes specified in this Resolution, the Resolution of Intention, and the Plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, improvements and activities that must be provided outside the SYVTBID boundaries to create a specific benefit to the assessed businesses may be provided, but shall be limited to marketing or signage pointing to the SYVTBID.
5. The City Council finds as follows:
a) The activities funded by the assessment will provide a specific benefit to assessed businesses within the SYVTBID that is not provided to those not paying the assessment. b) The assessment is a charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege.
70 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3B9B72AD-8E09-44EF-AA97-A565B0B30773 c) The assessment is a charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product. d) Assessments imposed pursuant to the SYVTBID are levied solely upon the assessed business, and the business owner is solely responsible for payment of the assessment when due. If the owner chooses to collect any portion of the assessment from a transient, that portion shall be specifically called out and identified for the transient in any and all communications from the business owner as the "SYVTBID Assessment" or "Tourism Assessment" as specified in the Plan.
6. The assessments levied for the SYVTBID shall be applied towards sales and marketing programs to market Santa Ynez Valley lodging businesses as tourist, meeting and event destinations, and other improvements and activities as set forth in the Plan.
7. Assessments levied on lodging businesses pursuant to this resolution shall be levied on the basis of benefit. Because the services provided are intended to increase room rentals, an assessment based on room rentals is the best measure of benefit.
8. The assessments for the entire SYVTBID will total approximately $900,000 in year one (1 ).
9. Bonds shall not be issued to fund the SYVTBID.
10. The SYVTBID shall include all lodging businesses located within the cities of Buellton and Solvang (cities), and nearby portions of the unincorporated area of Santa Barbara County (County). A boundary map is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
11. The assessments shall be used for the purposes set forth above and any funds remaining at the end of any year may be used in subsequent years in which the SYVTBID assessment is levied as long as they are used consistent with the requirements set forth herein.
12. The assessments to fund the activities and improvements for the SYVTBID will be collected by the cities and County on a monthly basis, and in accordance with Streets and Highways Code §36631.
13. The City Council, through adoption of this Resolution and the Plan, has the right pursuant to Streets and Highways Code §36651, to identify the body that shall implement the proposed program, which shall be the Owners' Association of the SYVTBID as defined in Streets and Highways Code §36612. The City Council has determined that Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Association dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley shall be the SYVTBID Owners' Association.
14. Santa Ynez Valley Hotel Association dba Visit the Santa Ynez Valley, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code §36650, shall cause to be prepared a report for each fiscal year, except the first year, for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the costs of the 71 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3B9B72AD-8E09-44EF-AA97-A565B0B30773 improvement and activities described in the report. The first report shall be due after the first year of operation of the SYVTBID.
15. The SYVTBID established pursuant to this resolution will be subject to any amendments to the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994 (California Streets and Highways Code §36600 et. seq.).
16. The City Clerk, or his or her designee, is directed to take all necessary actions to complete the establishment of the SYVTBID and to levy the assessments.
17. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution of Formation was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 11th day of January, 2021 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Attest
City Clerk
CLARKE, INFANTI, ORONA, THOMAS, UHRIG
None
None
None
Charlie Uhrig, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Interim City Attorney
72 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3B9B72AD-8E09-44EF-AA97-A565B0B30773 Boundary Map
lsanta Y · ez Va
Oivos CbP
c:J .oonllar:IE-S
ey TB I ol
I
I'
C .
...........
• Ii,
C Vi
73 Agenda Item Number: 4.i
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
Chelsea O’Sullivan, Assistant City Attorney
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE PROPOSAL FROM MERIDIAN CONSULTANTS (CONSULTANT) AND FROM GSI WATER SOLUTIONS INC. (CONSULTANT) FOR REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
OF SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL REGARDING RIVER WELLS PETITION WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND AUTHORIZE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT REGARDING THE SAME AND MAKE MINOR
AMENDMENTS IF NECESSARY BASED ON WRITTEN CHANGE ORDERS
RECOMMENDATION:
a. Proposal Approval
1. Approve Meridian Consultants’ Proposal to Provide Review of Settlement Proposal, included as Attachment A.
2. Approve GSI, Water Solutions Inc.’s Scope of Work and Fee Estimate regarding Technical Review of Proposal Settlement Terms -- City of Solvang River Wells, included as Attachment B.
b. City Manager Authorization
1. Authorize City Manager to execute (i) contract with Meridian Consultants not to exceed $5,055 consistent with proposal in Attachment A and (ii) contract with GSI, Water Solutions, Inc. not to exceed $10,000 consistent proposal in Attachment B.
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into amendments based on written change orders to the above referenced contracts in amounts not to exceed $15,000.00 total for each contract.
c. Budget Amendment
1. Approve budget amendment in the amount of $45,055 from Water Fund balance to cover the costs.
SUMMARY:
The City received a joint settlement proposal from California Trout (CalTrout), National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The City needs the technical assistance of the City’s consultants on the River Wells matter, Meridian Consultants and GSI Water Solutions, Inc., to fully evaluate the proposed settlement terms. The Meridian and GSI 74 proposals included as Attachments A and B to this report outline the respective work each consultant will perform to help the City evaluate the proposed terms.
DISCUSSION:
The Meridian and GSI proposals included as Attachments A and B to this report are in connection with the City’s Petition to the SWRCB to amend the River Wells Permit to shift the reach of diversion and add new River Wells downstream so as to avoid conflict with Alisal Ranch and ID#1.
The City’s original Petition to SWRCB was submitted in May 2015. Four parties protested the City’s Petition: Alisal Ranch, ID#1, CalTrout, and NMFS. The CDFW has also submitted comments and has engaged in the administrative proceedings on the City’s petition. Since 2015, extensive negotiations have occurred to try and resolve the protests and move forward with the City’s Petition before SWRCB.
The City entered into a protest dismissal agreement with Alisal Ranch and ID#1 in fall of 2021.
Recently the City received a joint settlement proposal from CalTrout, NMFS and CDFW. The City needs the technical assistance of the City’s consultants on the River Wells matter, Meridian Consultants and GSI Water Solutions, Inc. to fully evaluate the proposed settlement terms. The proposed settlement is confidential at this time, and both Meridian and GSI have committed to maintain the confidentiality of the settlement terms while reviewing the technical aspects of the settlement. The enclosed Meridian and GSI proposals outline the respective work each consultant will perform with respect to the proposed settlement terms. Staff recommends Council approve these proposals and authorize the City Manager to execute contracts with Meridian and GSI consistent with the enclosed proposals.
Staff also recommends Council authorize the City Manager to enter into amendments to these contracts in amounts not to exceed $15,000.00 total for each contract. This will allow work to timely move forward without returning to Council for task authorization if there are additional tasks required related to analyzing this settlement proposal. However, staff recommends this authorization only extend to amendments that are based on written change orders so that all costs to the City will be clear before any related work is performed.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council can elect to decline to approve either or both of the proposals, adjust the scope of authorization provided to the City Manager and/or provide further direction to staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approve budget amendment in the amount of $45,055 from the Water Fund balance to cover costs.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Meridian Consultants Proposal to Provide Review of Settlement Proposal B. GSI Water Solutions, Inc Scope of Work and Fee Estimate regarding Technical Review of Proposal Settlement Terms -- City of Solvang River Wells 75 February 8, 2022
City of Solvang
411 Second Street
Solvang, CA 93463
Attn: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
Re: Proposal to Provide Review of Settlement Proposal
City’s River Wells Project
Dear Ms. Bradford,
On behalf of Meridian Consultants, I am pleased to submit this proposal to assist the City of Solvang (City) with review of the settlement proposal for the City’s River Wells project (Project).
Based on the information received on the settlement proposal provided by the City, the Scope of Work and Cost Proposal for Services below defines and describes the services Meridian Consultants will provide.
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1 – Review of Settlement Proposal
Meridian Consultants will review the settlement proposal and compare against the mitigation measures in the Certified FEIR and implemented in the Addendum to the Certified FEIR. Meridian Consultants will prepare a brief written analysis in the form of bullet points or annotated notes on the settlement document for submittal to the City.
Task 2 – Meetings & Coordination
Meridian Consultants will participate in up to two (2) one-hour conference calls with the City and Legal Counsel to discuss Meridian’s brief written analysis. Meridian Consultants Principal and Senior Project Manager will manage this work effort including the coordination, support, and follow up for the City and Legal Counsel up to ten (10) total hours as needed.
COST PROPOSAL
Below is a detailed cost proposal and staffing plan by task for the review of the settlement proposal for the Project. The total cost for the services to complete the review is $5,055.
Attachment A
76 City of Solvang
River Wells Project
Review of Settlement Proposal
Cost Proposal
Meridian Consultants
February 8, 2022
Principal
$225
Project
Manager
$150
Document
Production
$90
TOTAL
TASK 1: REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL
Review Settlement Proposal and Compare to Mitigation Measures in FEIR 8 8 2 $3,180 SUBTOTAL $1,800 $1,200 $180 $3,180
TASK 2: MEETINGS & COORDINATION
Meetings with Legal Counsel 2 2
Coordination on Settlement Proposal 5 5 $1,875
SUBTOTAL $1,125 $750 $0 $1,875
TOTAL MERIDIAN CONSULTANTS LABOR COSTS $5,055
77 Please feel free to contact me at (408) 460-4694 with any questions related to this proposal. We appreciate this opportunity to provide services on the River Wells project to the City.
Sincerely,
Meridian Consultants
Leanna Williams
78 Scope of Work and Fee Estimate
To: Chelsea O’Sullivan, RWG Law / City of Solvang
From: Tim Nicely and Andy Lapostol, GSI Water Solutions, Inc.
Date: February 9, 2022
RE: Technical Review of Proposal Settlement Terms – City of Solvang River Wells Scope of Work
GSI Water Solutions, Inc. (GSI) is pleased to present the following proposal and scope of work to review the proposed settlement framework that the City of Solvang (City) has recently received related to the operation of the City’s River Wells. The objective of this work is to evaluate the operating criteria presented in the settlement terms and determine how these terms would influence the City’s ability to sufficiently operate the River Wells.
To accomplish this work, GSI will:
Revise and update the Excel spreadsheet model of the Santa Ynez River developed in November 2021 to responds to Items No. 2, 3, and 4 of the settlement framework. The results of this analysis will be used to quantitatively estimate the impact to the City’s water supply should the terms be accepted. Evaluate Items No. 5 and 6 of the settlement framework for consistency with industry standards. Summarize our analysis and findings in a brief email. GSI will also be available for a conference call to discuss the results and answer any questions.
Fee Estimate
Our team’s proposed fee to complete the tasks on a time-and-materials basis is $10,000. This budget will not be exceeded without prior approval.
We value our partnership with the City and appreciate this opportunity to continue to do business with you.
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding our proposal.
Sincerely,
GSI Water Solutions, Inc.
Tim Nicely, PG, CHg Andy Lapostol
Supervising Hydrogeologist Consulting Hydrogeologist
Attachment B
79 Agenda Item Number: 5
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: RECEIVE REPORT ON COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE ALTERNATIVE CHOICES
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive community input on the General Plan Update Alternative Choices Report and provide staff with general comment and policy direction.
DISCUSSION:
The General Plan Update is a pivotal opportunity to shape the future of Solvang. Through the Update process, the City and its consultants (General Plan Team), with input from the public and stakeholders, will consider pertinent topics, such as a design element, economic development, housing and resiliency to ensure Solvang is positioned to achieve its vision for the future.
A General Plan is a broad planning guideline to a city’s future development goals that provides policy statements to achieve those goals. A General Plan typically sets a vision for the foreseeable horizon of 20 to 25 years. Every jurisdiction in California must have a General Plan, which is the local government’s long-term framework or “constitution” for the future. The General Plan represents the community’s vision of its future and expresses the community’s goals. The General Plan contains the goals and policies upon which the City Council and Planning Commission will base their land use and resource decisions.
The City of Solvang adopted its current General Plan in piecemeal fashion over the last 33 years. The City has initiated the update to refine the current General Plan, address emerging trends and recent State laws, consider new challenges, and create forward-thinking implementation measures. This effort is intended to be a comprehensive overhaul of the document. This planning effort will also allow the General Plan Team to implement best practices in planning to ensure Solvang is resilient to future risks while also improving overall quality of life.
The General Plan Update Team has been collecting community input and has held three workshops to date. We are currently in stage 3 of the planning process as shown in the diagram below. The purpose Workshop #3, held on January 13, 2022, was to receive input on Alternative Choices. The diagram below shows the different steps of the Update process.
80 A dedicated website has been established where community members can view all General Plan Update documents and sign-up for notifications (www.PlanSolvang.com). As part of the General Plan Update process, a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) consisting of 15 volunteer community members was formed. The purpose of the GPAC is to represent the voice of the Solvang community and to advise the City Council. GPAC has been instrumental in developing the Vision & Guiding Principles presented to the City Council and Planning Commission. The City Council adopted 12 Guiding Principles which can be viewed on the website. The Guiding Principles summary is also shown in attachment A. The Guiding Principles are:
1. Heritage and Identify
2. The Village
3. Economic Vitality
4. Neighborhoods
5. Cultural Resources
6. Natural Environment
7. Mobility and Access
8. Regional Cooperation
9. Infrastructure and Amenities
10.Resident Services
11.Jobs and Housing
12.Good Governance
The Alternative Choices Report is presented in Attachment B. The land use Alternative Choices Report is the focus of today’s discussion.
Community input has been collected from the Workshop #3 on Alternative Choices and an online survey. The community input is summarized in Attachment C.
Staff seeks general preliminary Council input on the Alternative Choices and preferences for land use choices for the City of Solvang. The community input and Council preliminary input will be presented to the GPAC on February 22, 2022. The GPAC recommendations will be presented to the City Council and the Planning Commission at a joint session tentatively scheduled for March 7, 2022. 81 Based on the Guiding Principles and the approved land use preferred alternative, the General Plan Update team will work with the GPAC to develop each element of the General Plan. The City will also hold another workshop specifically focusing on the Housing Element update. The Elements of the proposed General Plan are:
• Land Use Element
• Community Design Element
• Economic Development Element
• Mobility Element
• Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element • Environment and Sustainability Element
• Safety Element
• Housing Element
The draft of the General Plan will be presented for public review/comment and will subsequently be presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council for initial comment and then approval.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council has full discretion to provide staff with alternate direction for process or steps forward.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The scope of work is funded within existing approved budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Guiding Principles
B – Alternative Choices Report
C – Community Input
82 On August 23, 2021, at a Joint Study Session, the City Council and Planning Commission adopted a set of General Plan Guiding Principles for the Solvang General Plan Update. The Guiding Principles express the key values and aspirations for Solvang's future and serve as guideposts for the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. All General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs will need to be consistent with Guiding Principles.
During the Joint Study Session, the City Council and Planning Commission decided unanimously to postpone the creation of a General Plan Vision Statement until the conclusion of the Alternatives Phase, when a preferred land use map direction is adopted.
▪ Heritage and Identity
We welcome visitors while maintaining our small-town character and honoring our multi-cultural heritage. Although originally established as a Danish community, we honor the positive traditions and values modeled by those who preceded our founders and their successors. ▪ The Village
The Village is a small charming, safe, and walkable environment modeled on an Old-World Danish village that attracts visitors while supporting the social interaction, community events, and commerce of residents.
▪ Economic Vitality
Our resilient, diverse, and sustainable economy supports both existing and new locally-owned businesses, including community-supported tourism. Residents and visitors continue to enjoy the benefits of a healthy business environment.
▪ Neighborhoods
Our diverse residential neighborhoods are safe and quiet, buffered from the impacts of traffic, overflow visitor parking, and events. Residents enjoy the quality of life and social interaction provided by our multi-generational neighborhoods.
▪ Cultural Resources
Residents and visitors value the unique character of our historic and cultural assets. The Danish Village, library, museums, art venues, theaters, and historic structures provide social, educational, and emotional richness.
Attachment A
83 ▪ Natural Environment
Our entire community values and champions the natural beauty of the Santa Ynez Valley and its agricultural traditions. The Santa Ynez River is recognized as a life-sustaining resource to be valued and protected. Our tree-lined streets, open spaces, parks, and landscaping continue to connect us to the natural environment and provide healthy living spaces and recreational opportunities despite the challenge of a changing climate.
▪ Mobility and Access
Safe and accessible streets, multi-purpose trails, and sustainable multimodal transportation options conveniently connect people and places throughout town and to surrounding destinations in the broader Santa Ynez Valley while reducing the impacts of traffic on the community. ▪ Regional Cooperation
Our community continues to avail itself of opportunities provided by regional planning and partnership to support the quality of life and safety of residents, and the experience of visitors. ▪ Infrastructure and Amenities
Solvang maintains sustainable, efficient, equitable, site-appropriate, and resilient infrastructure and public amenities. We prioritize conserving all natural resources. ▪ Resident Services
We provide a range of public services that support a diverse and multigenerational community. ▪ Jobs and Housing
A wide range of housing options and living wage jobs provide a high quality of life. Solvang is committed to providing a variety of obtainable amenity-rich housing and sustainable neighborhoods for its residents.
▪ Good Governance
Our government is transparent, supportive, and collaborative. It responds to the needs of all segments of the population with fair and equal protection. 84 2040
GENERAL PLAN
ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Public Review Draft
January 2022
CITY OF SOLVANG
Attachment B
85 2
This page is intentionally left blank.
86 3
Public Review Draft | January 2022
Contents
Introduction............................................................................................................ 7 What is a General Plan? ................................................................................... 7 The General Plan Process.................................................................................... 8 Alternatives Report........................................................................................... 10 How Did We Get to This Point? ......................................................................... 10 Terminology ..................................................................................................... 12 Population, Employment, and Household Projection Scenarios................................ 17 Employment Trends........................................................................................... 17 Projected Employment Growth .......................................................................... 19 Population and Household Projections............................................................... 26 Existing Land Use Designations ............................................................................. 29 Land Use Designation Descriptions .................................................................... 30 Focus Area........................................................................................................... 35 What is the Focus Area? ................................................................................... 35 Vacant and Underutilized Parcels .......................................................................... 39 Land Available for Development........................................................................ 39 Citywide Land Use Alternatives ............................................................................. 43 How were the Alternatives Developed? ............................................................. 43 Citywide Alternative A...................................................................................... 46 Citywide Alternative B ...................................................................................... 48 Citywide Alternative C ...................................................................................... 50 0Table of Contents
87 4
| General Plan Alternatives Report
This page is intentionally left blank.
88 5
Public Review Draft | January 2022
Mobility Options................................................................................................... 53 Evaluation of Citywide Alternatives ....................................................................... 61 Summary of Evaluation .................................................................................... 62 Range of Housing............................................................................................. 64 Land Use Efficiency........................................................................................... 65 Nonresidential Development and Employment Capacity ..................................... 65 Housing Affordability ....................................................................................... 66 Fiscal Heath ..................................................................................................... 67 Trip Generation Analysis................................................................................... 68 Citywide Land Use Map ........................................................................................ 73 Appendix............................................................................................................. 75 Development Capacity Methodology ................................................................. 75 Appendix............................................................................................................. 85 Tourism and Retail Market Analysis and Fiscal Impacts of Land Use .................... 85 Retail Market Analysis ...................................................................................... 89 Fiscal Analysis.................................................................................................. 97 89 6
| General Plan Alternatives Report
90 7
Public Review Draft | January 2022
1Introduction
What is a General Plan?
A general plan serves as a city’s “constitution” or
“blueprint” for future decisions concerning a variety of issues including land use, housing, mobility, health,
safety, and resource conservation. A general plan
represents the community’s aspiration for its future and expresses the community’s development and resource
management goals. The general plan contains the
goals and policies on which the City Council and
Planning Commission will base their land use and natural resources decisions. A general plan has four defining
features: • General. Provides general policy guidelines for future land use, transportation, environmental, and
natural resource decisions.
• Comprehensive. Addresses a range of
topics, including land use, housing, economic
development, infrastructure, public safety,
recreation, and natural resources.
• Long-Range. Provides guidance for achieving a
future envisioned 20 or more years into the future.
• Integrated and Coherent. Provides assumptions and
projections to assess future demands for housing,
employment, and public services. Provides policies
and implementation programs that enable citizens
to understand the vision of the city and how policies
will be implemented.
About the General Plan
The General Plan is a foundational City document that sets the course for Solvang’s land use decisions. The process to develop the General Plan will integrate input from community members and address an extensive array of issues (i.e., traffic, sustainability, health, and fiscal stability).
7 91
8 | General Plan Alternatives Report
The General Plan Process
In 2020, the City of Solvang initiated a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan. This is the first time since the City’s incorporation in 1985 that the General Plan is being comprehensively updated in a single process. The General Plan Update for Solvang will serve as the next iteration for Solvang to define itself in the future. The General Plan is intended to build upon the success of the community as a national and international destination as the Danish Capital of America and provide guidance and policy direction to bolster sustainable economic development. It is the intent of the General Plan Update to refine the community vision and update policies and programs to reflect current statutory requirements. The cornerstone of this effort is to foster participatory community engagement, leading to a truly community-driven plan that reflects the goals, desires, and expectations of the residents and business owners. The General Plan Update for Solvang is divided into six phases, each with a unique aspect, that collectively will create a fully updated General Plan. The current phase of the Update is Phase 3, Alternative Choices.
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
P
Project Initiation
• Kick-off Meeting and City Tour
• Stakeholder Interviews
• Community Study Session
• Newsletter #1
Existing Conditions and Trends
• Existing Conditions Workbook
• Newsletter #2
• Community Workshop #2
• General Plan Audit
• Vision and Guiding Principles
92 9
Public Review Draft | January 2022
PHASE 3
we are here
PHASE 4
PHASE 5 PHASE 6
Alternative Choices
• Community Workshop #3
• Alternatives Report
• Parking Analysis
• Citywide Fiscal Impact Model
Preparing the Plan
• Administrative Draft General Plan
• Newsletter #3
• Planning Commission Study Session
• City Council Study Session
• Public Review Draft General Plan
Environmental Review
• Notice of Preparation
• EIR Scoping Meeting
• Admin Draft Program EIR
• Draft Program EIR
Adoption
• Final EIR
• Planning Commission Hearing
• City Council Hearing
• Final General Plan Adoption Hearing
93 10
| General Plan Alternatives Report
Alternatives Report
This report analyzes three land use alternatives. These alternatives do not propose to change the assigned
land use designation of any parcel in the city. Instead, each alternative includes adjustments to allow increased density and intensity within certain residential and
commercial land use designations. The report then
presents a comparative analysis of the anticipated
changes to jobs and housing capacity, and the built
environment under each alternative.
This Alternatives Report evaluates land use alternatives using indicators to help community members and
decision-makers understand the implications of each
alternative. Decisions about future land uses will influence how many people will live in the city and what kind of
jobs and businesses will locate and thrive in the city.
The Alternatives Report also highlights potential mobility options that could improve circulation for not only
vehicular traffic, but also pedestrians and bicyclists.
The mobility options presented in this report are not
tied to a specific land use alternative, but represent a range of choices to be included with a preferred land
use alternative once it is selected by the City Council and Planning Commission. The selected mobility options
will form the basis for new policies and potential
implementation programs.
Decision-makers will weigh the costs and benefits of each alternative presented in this report and select a “preferred land use alternative.” The preferred land use alternative may be one of the three alternatives or a combination
of features from each alternative. The preferred land use alternative, along with community input and the City
Guiding Principles (prepared during Phase 2), will then guide the preparation of General Plan goals, policies,
and implementation programs.
How Did We Get to This
Point?
Community Engagement
The General Plan effort has included a series of
community engagement events that align with the City
Council’s goal to foster a participatory process for the community. This effort included stakeholder interviews, a Community Study Session (Community Workshop #1),
Community Workshop #2, and online engagement. In
total, over 200 community members participated in these outreach events. These community engagement efforts
allowed members of the community to provide hundreds
of comments, suggestions, and opinions for Solvang’s
future over the next 20 years. All community feedback
collected through these outreach events are included
in the 2021 Community Engagement Summary on the
General Plan website (PlanSolvang.com). The feedback
was reviewed, synthesized, and discussed as part of the overall direction for the land use and mobility options analyzed as part of this report.
94 11
Public Review Draft | January 2022
General Plan Update Advisory
Committee (GPAC)
To help guide the update to the General Plan, the City
formed a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC)
composed of the 15 individuals from the community. Of
the 15 members, two are City Council members, two
are Planning Commissioners, two are Design Review
Committee Members, and the remaining nine are
residents.
The GPAC serves as a sounding board for the discussion
of issues, opportunities, and the General Plan. Currently (2021) the GPAC has held four meetings, listening to
community input and contributing to the preparation
of the Vision and Guiding Principles, and Land Use
Alternatives. The GPAC will review the results of this
alternatives process and provide a recommendation to
the Planning Commission on a direction for Solvang.
Following the alternatives Phase, the GPAC will meet
several more times to review the Policy Document.
95 12
| General Plan Alternatives Report
Terminology
Planning Boundaries
The Solvang General Plan uses the following terms to describe the city and its planning boundaries. These planning boundaries are illustrated on Figure 1-1. For Solvang, the Sphere of Influence (SOI) and the Planning Area cover the same geographic area.
Sphere of Influence
A sphere of influence (SOI) is the probable ultimate
boundary and service area of the city, as adopted
by a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
An SOI typically includes both incorporated and
unincorporated areas within which the City will
have primary responsibility for the provision of
public facilities and services.
Planning Area
A General Plan, pursuant to State law, must address
all areas within a jurisdiction’s Planning Area. The
Planning Area encompasses all incorporated and
unincorporated territory that bears a relationship to
the long-term physical planning of the city.
Urban Growth Boundary
Cities use urban growth boundaries (UGBs) to
establish where they intend to encourage and
discourage land development through publicinfrastructure investments, land-use regulations, land acquisitions, and other actions. Solvang adopted its
UGB in June 2020. The UGB is the same boundary
as the Solvang city boundary.
City Boundary
The city boundary is the jurisdictional limits of the
city (incorporated area). The city boundary includes
the area over which the City exercises land use
authority and provides public services. State law
requires jurisdictions to adopt a General Plan that,
at a minimum, addresses physical development
within this boundary.
96 13
Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
Alamo Pintado Rd
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Vib org Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dov e Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Je nnils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
Carriage Dr
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt M esa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
Hig h Meado w Rd
Viborg Rd
Ves ter Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College Ca nyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
First Pl
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Legend
City Boundary/Urban Growth Boundary
Sphere of Influence/Planning Area
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 5, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-1
Boundaries
FIGURE 1-1: PLANNING BOUNDARIES
97 14
| General Plan Alternatives Report
1 UNIT PER ACRE
What is Redevelopment?
Redevelopment describes the construction of new buildings in an urban area, typically after substantial alterations/ remodel or demolition of existing buildings. Ideally, redevelopment aims for better use of the property that provides an economic return to the community. For example, a property may be redeveloped to a mixed-use development that combines residential and commercial uses.
What is Residential Density?
In the context of planning, density describes the amount of residential development within a given area. Standards of density for residential uses are typically stated as the allowable range (i.e., minimum and maximum) of dwelling units per gross acre (du/ac).
Density = Dwelling Units per Acre
6 UNITS PER ACRE
18 UNITS PER ACRE
98 15
Public Review Draft | January 2022
What is Floor Area Ratio?
Standards of density for residential uses are stated as the allowable range (i.e., minimum and maximum) of dwelling units per gross acre (du/ac). Standards of building intensity for nonresidential uses such as office, commercial, industrial, and institutional development are stated as floor area ratios (FARs). FAR is an indicator of how much building space can be constructed on a given site. In the case of mixed-use developments that include residential uses, density standards are applied to the residential component while FAR standards are applied to the nonresidential component.
A site includes all contiguous parcels that will share parking or access.
While FAR provides for overall development intensity, it does not specify the form or character of the building. Different interpretations of the same FAR can result in buildings of different character. To encourage similar interpretations of allowed FARs, other City regulations such as zoning height limits, building setbacks, lot coverage, or open space requirements guide the form of buildings with a given FAR.
In Solvang, the existing General Plan uses a maximum square footage per acre requirement for nonresidential uses.
This method of showing intensity is not as common as delineating a FAR. For the purposes of this Alternatives Report, nonresidential uses will show both the current practice of square footage per acre as well as the equivalent FAR.
FAR = Ratio of Floor Area to Lot Area
1 story
(100% lot coverage)
2 stories
(50% lot coverage)
4 stories
(25% lot coverage)
FAR = 1.0
2 story
(100% lot coverage)
4 stories
(50% lot coverage)
8 stories
(25% lot coverage)
FAR = 2.0
99 16
| General Plan Alternatives Report
100
17 Public Review Draft | January 2022
2Population, Employment,
and Household Projection
Scenarios
Employment Trends
The historical growth pattern for Solvang has varied
significantly. This is because peak in jobs occurred
prior to 2009, with over 3,500 jobs in 2004. After
dropping to about 3,000 jobs in 2009 during the
Great Recession, the job totals in Solvang steadily
grew to over 3,400 jobs in 2019. The decade
from 2009 to 2019 shows a compounded average
growth rate (CAGR) of 1.3 percent.
During the 2009 to 2019 period, the largest
job growth occurred in the accommodation and
food services category, with over 600 jobs and
a 6.5 percent CAGR. Unfortunately, much of this
employment gain was eliminated during 2020.
During the same period, the largest job loss occurred
in retail trade, with a job loss of over 100 positions.
Most of the professional services categories also lost
jobs during this time. Healthcare (medical services)
is a substantial source of well-paying employment in
Solvang, with 524 jobs in 2019.
Table 2-2 shows the recent trends by land use
category. Generally, most of the job growth during
the decade between 2009 and 2019 occurred
in the commercial categories, while office jobs
accounted for the largest job losses. Most of the
other categories showed virtually no net change,
although some variances exist within these land use
categories. For example, in the institutional category, both the educational services and health care/social
assistance sectors showed job growth. However,
this was almost entirely offset by job losses in public administration.
17 101
18 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Industry NAICS 2004 2009 2014 2019
2009 TO
2019
Historical
Growth
Historical
CAGR*
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting 11 31 50 46 57 7 1.3%
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas 21 25 18 19 16 -2 -1.3% Utilities 22 2 3 1 0 -3 -100.0%
Construction 23 150 91 67 74 -17 -2.0%
Manufacturing 31 212 117 163 152 35 2.6%
Wholesale Trade 42 42 60 42 56 -4 -0.8%
Retail Trade 44 556 601 509 489 -112 -2.0%
Transportation and Warehousing 48 41 36 45 26 -10 -3.2% Information 51 49 13 11 0 -13 -63.3%
Finance and Insurance 52 169 150 86 92 -58 -4.7%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 53 77 79 87 58 -21 -3.1% Professional, Scientific, and
Technical Services 54 158 124 157 157 33 2.3%
Management of Companies and
Enterprises 55 10 29 31 38 9 2.6%
Administrative and Support and
Waste Management 56 612 120 53 64 -56 -6.1%
Educational Services 61 75 73 92 96 23 2.8%
Health Care and Social Assistance 62 366 456 462 524 68 1.4% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 30 2 6 18 16 25.2% Accommodation and Food Services 72 723 723 1,058 1,359 636 6.5% Other Services (except Public
Administration) 81 99 94 74 67 -27 -3.4%
Public Administration 92 114 174 140 84 -90 -7.0%
Unclassified 99 0 4 3 0 -4 -100.0%
Total - All Industries - 3,541 3,019 3,154 3,425 406 1.3% Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
* CAGR = Compound annual growth rate
Table 2-1: Solvang Employment Trends by Sector, 2004 to 2019 102
19 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Projected Employment Growth
SBCAG Employment Projections
The Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) provides growth projections for Solvang. The projections were done in 2019, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows a base employment total of 4,050 jobs in 2017 with a projected job total of 4,210 for 2020. The longterm job growth between 2020 and 2040 shows a total job growth of about 650 jobs, with a CAGR of 0.7 percent (Table 2-3). The employment base estimated by SBCAG is considerably higher than the employment estimate used by JobsEQ, as indicated in Table 2-1.
Industry 2004 2009 2014 2019
2009 TO
2019
Historical
Growth
Historical
CAGR*
Industrial 448 307 319 307 0 0.0%
Office 1,076 517 425 408 -108 -2.3%
Commercial 1,408 1,421 1,648 1,933 512 3.1%
Institutional 554 702 694 704 1 0.0%
Other 56 72 68 73 1 0.1%
Total 3,541 3,019 3,154 3,425 406 1.3%
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
The industrial land use category includes utilities, construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, and transportation/warehousing.
The office land use category includes information, finance and insurance, real estate, professional services, management, and administrative and support services and waste management.
Commercial uses include retail, arts/entertainment/recreation, accommodations and food service, and other services.
Institutional uses include educational services, health care/social assistance, and public administration.
Other uses include agriculture, mining/quarrying/gas, and unclassified uses. * CAGR = Compound annual growth rate
Table 2-2: Solvang Employment Trends by Land Use, 2004 to 2019 SBCAG Projection 2017 2020 2040 2020 to 2040
CAGR
City of Solvang 4,050 4,210 4,860 0.7%
Source: SBCAG
* CAGR = Compound annual growth rate
Table 2-3 SBCAG Projected Employment Total, 2017 to 2040 103
20 | General Plan Alternatives Report
JobsEQ shows that the COVID-19 pandemic reduced the
employment in Solvang to about 3,200 jobs by 2020
Quarter 3, and the projected employment growth shows
a low growth of 0.4 percent through 2030. Over the
next decade, the projected net job growth is expected
to total about 100 jobs (Table 2-5). The largest expected growth occurs in the health care and social assistance
sector, with nearly 100 jobs. Retail trade is expected to show a net job loss.
As shown in Table 2-4, the projected employment by
land use shows most of the job gains projected for the
institutional land use categories, with minimal growth in most of the other categories through 2030 Quarter 3.
The City’s consultant team prepared alternate job growth projections in order to update the employment base for
the pandemic recession and also to provide more detail
in terms of land use demand. The alternate projections
produce a low and high range of possible job growth in
Solvang, with the gain in jobs between 2020 and 2040
ranging from 254 to 834. The SBCAG projection of
650 jobs falls within this range.
The lower end of the range reflects a growth forecast
from Chmura JobsEQ, a national data vendor who
supplies the detailed employment estimates in Table
2-1. The JobsEQ projection is based on their 10-year
forecast, which uses a market-based national model to
allocate projected growth to the state and county levels.
This growth is then allocated down to the city level by their modeling.
Industry 2020
Q3
2030
Q3
Projected
2020 to
2030
Growth
Projected
CAGR*
Industrial 291 287 -4 -0.1%
Office 586 604 18 0.3%
Commercial 1,599 1,599 0 0.0%
Institutional 683 780 97 1.3%
Other 69 73 4 0.6%
Total 3,227 3,343 116 0.4%
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
The industrial land use category includes utilities, construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, and transportation/warehousing.
The office land use category includes information, finance and insurance, real estate, professional services, management, administrative and support services, and waste management.
Commercial uses include retail, arts/entertainment/recreation, accommodations and food service, and other services.
Institutional uses include educational services, health care/social assistance, and public administration.
Other uses include agriculture, mining/quarrying/gas, and unclassified uses. * CAGR = Compound annual growth rate
Table 2-4 Solvang Projected Employment by Land Use, 2020 Q3 to 2030 Q3 (JobsEQ Projection) 104
21 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Industry NAICS 2020
Q3
2030
Q3
Projected
2020 to
2030
Growth
Projected
CAGR*
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 11 56 59 3 0.5% Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas 21 13 14 1 0.7%
Utilities 22 0 0 0 n/a
Construction 23 72 73 1 0.1%
Manufacturing 31 141 140 -1 -0.1%
Wholesale Trade 42 53 51 -2 -0.4%
Retail Trade 44 453 428 -25 -0.6%
Transportation and Warehousing 48 25 23 -2 -0.8%
Information 51 0 0 0 n/a
Finance and Insurance 52 91 91 0 0.0%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 53 57 56 -1 -0.2%
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 54 159 180 21 1.2% Management of Companies and Enterprises 55 38 39 1 0.3% Administrative and Support and Waste Management 56 241 238 -3 -0.1% Educational Services 61 94 95 1 0.1%
Health Care and Social Assistance 62 505 600 95 1.7%
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 14 16 2 1.3%
Accommodation and Food Services 72 1,076 1,098 22 0.2%
Other Services (except Public Administration) 81 56 57 1 0.2% Public Administration 92 84 85 1 0.1%
Unclassified 99 0 0 0 n/a
Total - All Industries - 3,227 3,343 116 0.4%
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
* CAGR = Compound annual growth rate
Table 2-5: Solvang Projected Employment by Sector, 2020 Q3 to 2030 Q3 (JobsEQ Projection) 105
22 | General Plan Alternatives Report
20-Year Employment Growth Projections (2040)
Table 2-6 shows the JobsEQ projection extended out to 2040. The growth calculations were done individually by sector. With this timeline, the expected job growth will total around 250 jobs by 2040. The largest employment gains are expected to occur in health care/social assistance, while the largest job losses are projected in retail trade.
Industry NAICS 2020
Q3
2040 Q3
(JobsEQ rates)
2020 to 2040
Growth
(JobsEQ rates)
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 11 56 62 6
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas 21 13 15 2
Utilities 22 0 0 0
Construction 23 72 74 2
Manufacturing 31 141 139 -2
Wholesale Trade 42 53 49 -4
Retail Trade 44 453 404 -49
Transportation and Warehousing 48 25 21 -4
Information 51 0 0 0
Finance and Insurance 52 91 91 0
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 53 57 55 -2
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 54 159 204 45 Management of Companies and Enterprises 55 38 40 2
Administrative and Support and Waste
Management 56 241 235 -6
Educational Services 61 94 96 2
Health Care and Social Assistance 62 505 713 208
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 14 18 4
Accommodation and Food Services 72 1,076 1,120 44
Other Services (except Public Administration) 81 56 58 2 Public Administration 92 84 86 2
Unclassified 99 0 0 0
Total - All Industries - 3,227 3,481 254
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
Table 2-6: Projected Solvang Employment by Sector, 2020 Q3 Through 2040 Q3 (JobsEQ Projected Growth Rates)
106
23 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Table 2-7 shows the 2040 projection by land use category. Using these classifications, most of the projected job growth using the JobsEQ growth rates is expected to occur in the institutional land uses, with nearly all of those jobs in health care and social assistance. Most institutional land uses occupy specialized office space. Other office uses expect to show modest net growth, with minimal change for industrial and commercial land uses. For the commercial land use categories, the slow growth results from projected growth in accommodation and food services offset by losses in retail sectors.
Table 2-8 shows the job projection using the historical growth rates (2009 to 2019). The high growth rates for arts/entertainment/recreation and accommodation/food services during this period reflect the fact that the economy was recovering from the Great Recession in 2009 and many of the “new” jobs were simply those being recovered from the losses during the recession. Now, we have been in a new recession which has hit the tourism and retail sectors particularly hard. In order to avoid over-projecting demand for new commercial and visitor-serving space, the City’s consultant team moderated the growth rates for the tourism sector by using the JobsEQ projected growth rate for the arts/entertainment sector and the combined commercial growth rate for accommodation/food services. Using these growth rates, the projected job growth totals just over 830 jobs through 2040.
While the 3.1 percent growth rate for accommodations and food services produces over 900 jobs, it remains significantly below the growth rate of 6.5 percent for that category between 2009 and 2019.
Table 2-9 shows the 2040 projection by land use using the historical growth rates. Using these growth rates, the projected office uses show a net loss of over 100 jobs, while commercial and institutional uses each expect to show a new gain of over 700 jobs.
Industry 2020 Q3 2040 Q3
(JobsEQ rates)
2020 TO
2040 Growth
(JobsEQ rates)
Industrial 291 283 -8
Office 586 625 39
Commercial 1,599 1,601 2
Institutional 683 895 212
Other 69 77 8
Total 3,227 3,481 254
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
Table 2-7 Projected Solvang Employment by Land Use, 2020 Q3 to 2040 Q3 (JobsEQ Projected Growth Rates)
107
24 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Industry NAICS 2020
Q3
2040 Q3
(historical
rates)
2020 to 2040
(historical
rates)
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 11 56 73 17
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas 21 13 10 -3
Utilities 22 0 0 0
Construction 23 72 48 -24
Manufacturing 31 141 237 96
Wholesale Trade 42 53 45 -8
Retail Trade 44 453 300 -153
Transportation and Warehousing 48 25 13 -12
Information 51 0 0 0
Finance and Insurance 52 91 34 -57
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 53 57 30 -27
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 54 159 252 93 Management of Companies and Enterprises 55 38 64 26
Administrative and Support and Waste
Management 56 241 68 -173
Educational Services 61 94 164 70
Health Care and Social Assistance 62 505 666 161
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 14 18 4
Accommodation and Food Services 72 1,076 1,990 914
Other Services (except Public Administration) 81 56 28 -28 Public Administration 92 84 20 -64
Total - All Industries 3,227 4,061 834
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
Notes: The growth estimate is based on the historical growth rates by sector from 2009 through 2019. For the accommodation and food services category, the overall historical growth rate was used. For arts, entertainment, and recreation, the JobsEQ 10-year projected employment growth rate for that category was used.
Table 2-8: Projected Solvang Employment by Sector, 2020 Q3 Through 2040 Q3 (JobsEQ Projected Growth Rates)
Industry 2020 Q3 2040 Q3 (historical rates) 2020 TO 2040 Growth (historical rates)
Industrial 291 343 52
Office 586 448 -138
Commercial 1,599 2,337 738
Institutional 683 849 166
Other 69 83 14
Total 3,227 4,061 834
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ
Table 2-9 Projected Solvang Employment by Land Use, 2020 Q3 to 2040 Q3 (Historical Growth Rates) 108
25 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Potential Square Footage Demand
Even though the two growth scenarios produced similar numbers of jobs, the distribution of the jobs differed significantly. The JobsEQ projection is based on their 10-year forecast, which uses a marketbased national model to allocate projected growth to the state and county levels. This growth is then allocated to the city level by their modeling. The growth based on historical growth rates assumes that the jobs will continue to increase at a rate similar to the pattern shown between 2009 and 2019.
The two approaches produce significantly different findings.
The projected demand based on historical trends is much higher, as shown in Table 2-10. The marketbased projection shows demand for nearly 71,000 square feet of institutional uses, along with about 13,000 square feet of other office space demand, with virtually no net change for commercial uses and a slight loss of demand for industrial uses.
When looking at the historical rates, the square footage demand for most of the individual categories is higher than for the market-based projection with a net overall demand of over 278,000 square feet. This is predominantly driven by demand for commercial space. However, the historical growth pattern also shows declines in office jobs, which drive down the overall demand when looking at the historical patterns.
Medical services account for nearly all the growth in the Institutional land use category. The City has received an application for a 32,000 sq. ft. medical building and it may also be expected that the hospital will expand on its site. Therefore, the higher projections of 70,984 sq. ft. may be more likely for this category.
Industry
2020 to
2040 Growth
(JobsEQ rates)
2020 to
2040 Growth
(historical
rates
Square Feet
per Job
2020 to
2040 Square
Footage
(JobsEQ
Rates)
2020 to
2040 Square
Footage
(historical
rates)
Industrial -8 52 620 -4,801 32,442
Office 39 -138 335 13,016 -46,152
Commercial 2 738 320 683 236,193
Institutional 212 166 335 70,984 55,707
Total - - - 79,882 278,190
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from JobsEQ and IFMA
Notes: The square footage calculations do not include the “other” land uses category.
Table 2-10 Projected Solvang Square Footage Demand by Land Use, 2020 Q3 to 2040 Q3
109
26 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Population and Household Projections
According to the 2020 Decennial Census, the 2020 population in Solvang was 6,126. The count of households has not yet been released so we have estimated 2020 households at 2,512 based on the 2019 household size from the 2014-2019 ACS. The growth trend between 2010 and 2020 shows a CAGR of about 1.6 percent for population and slightly lower for households. Applying the historical trends to the 2020 households and population shows that by 2040, the population will increase to more than 8,300 residents with nearly 3,360 households (Table 2-11).
These growth projections are substantially higher that the growth previously projected by SBCAG, which in 2017 estimated a population growth rate of 0.4 percent, and a 0.6 percent household growth rate. It should be noted that these rates were very similar to data estimated by the California Department of Finance, which is the state’s official agency for demographic projections. Using the SBCAG projected growth rates, Solvang would have a population of 6,730 in 2040 with a household count of 2,850.
2010 2020
2040
(projected
on historical
growth rates)
2040
(projected
based on
SBCAG growth
rates)
CAGR
(historical
trend)
CAGR (SBCAG
projection)
Population 5,245 6,126 8,357 6,730 1.6% 0.4%
Households 2,173 2,512 3,357 2,850 1.5% 0.6%
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from US Bureau of the Census and SBCAG Table 2-11 SBCAG Projected Employment Total, 2020 to 2040 110
27 Public Review Draft | January 2022
This page is intentionally left blank.
111
28 | General Plan Alternatives Report
112
29 Public Review Draft | January 2022
3Existing Land Use
Designations
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
dR odatniP omalA
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Viborg Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dove Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Jennils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
rD egairraC
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt Mesa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd V al Verde
High Mead ow Rd
Viborg Rd
Vester Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College C anyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
lP tsriF
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 4, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-5
Existing General Plan Land Uses
Legend
Land Use Designations
Guest Ranch
Estate Residential
Low Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mobile Home Park
Light Industry
Open Space/Recreation
Agriculture
Tourist Commercial
Retail Commercial
General Commercial
Public/Institutional
Professional/Office
City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
State planning law requires general plans
to establish “standards of population
density and building intensity,” as well
as allowed uses for the various land
use designations in the plan (General
Code Section 65302(a)). As part of the
General Plan Update process, residents,
business owners, and interested parties
are given the opportunity to evaluate
and weigh in on the appropriate land
use types, densities, and intensities for
different areas of the community, as
well as on the form and design of new
development.
To support the description of each
alternative, this section is prepared as
a guide for understanding the range
of land use designations evaluated in
the alternatives. This section includes a
short description of each existing land
use designation, followed by a land
use diagram, and a table outlining the
development standards and allowable
uses for each designation.
113
30 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Land Use Designation Descriptions
The General Plan, and the accompanying Land Use Map (see Figure 3-1), assign each parcel in the city a specific land use designation. These land use designations establish broad standards that guide future development. Land use designations identify the types of development allowed (i.e., residential, commercial, industrial), the density for residential uses (how many units are permitted per acre), and the intensity for nonresidential designations (the maximum allowed building square footage and parcel coverage, or FAR) that is allowed on each parcel.
The existing 2008 General Plan includes 15 land use designations. These designations are described below and summarized on Table 3-1.
Guest Ranch
This designation is established to recognize the
approximately 30 acres of the Alisal Ranch located
within the city. Allowed uses include guest lodging,
employee housing, restaurants, and recreation and
entertainment.
Density/Intensity
15,000 square feet per acre (0.34 FAR)
Estate Residential
This designation allows for low-density, largelot single-family residential development. This designation is characterized by estate ranchettes
with detached single-family residences.
Density/Intensity
Up to 1 dwelling unit per 3 acres
Low Density Residential
This designation allows for single-family residential
development. This designation is characterized by
detached single-family residences with detached
secondary residences on large parcels.
Density/Intensity
•Up to 1 dwelling unit per acre
Low Medium Density Residential
This designation allows for single-family residential
development. This designation is characterized by
detached single-family residences with detached
secondary residences on large parcels.
Density/Intensity
Up to 2 dwelling units per acre
Medium Density Residential
This designation allows for single- and multifamily residential development. This designation is characterized by detached single-family and
medium-density, multi-family residences on smaller
parcels.
Density/Intensity
3 to 7 dwelling units per acre
High Density Residential
This designation allows for single- and multifamily residential development. This designation is characterized by single-family homes, duplexes,
triplexes, row houses, and condominiums.
Density/Intensity
8 to 20 dwelling units per acre
Mobile Home Park
This designation allows for the development of
mobile home parks.
Density/Intensity
Up to 8 dwelling units per acre
Retail Commercial
This designation allows for commercial
establishments intended to serve the everyday
needs of Solvang residents. This designation is
characterized by specialty shops, grocery stores,
and personal service establishments.
Density/Intensity
10,000 square feet per acre (0.23 FAR)
114
31 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Public/Institutional
This designation allows for a variety of public and quasipublic uses, and is characterized by schools, places of assembly, hospitals, and public utility facilities.
Density/Intensity
10,000 square feet per acre (0.23 FAR)
Open Space/Recreation
This designation allows for public parks, indoor and outdoor recreation and entertainment uses, and open space.
Density/Intensity
N/A
Agriculture
This designation reserves land for agriculture related
land use. Development in this designation is limited to agriculture related uses and support facilities.
Density/Intensity
N/A
Tourist Commercial
This designation allows for a range of visitor-serving
commercial establishments and limited residential mixeduse development. This designation is characterized by hotels, restaurants, specialty shops, and recreation and entertainment uses.
Density/Intensity
22,000 square feet per acre (0.5 FAR)
General Commercial
This designation allows for large scale commercial
establishments and is characterized by wholesale and
heavy commercial uses.
Density/Intensity
10,000 square feet per acre (0.23 FAR)
Professional Office
This designation allows for a range of office uses and is characterized by medical centers and general office uses.
Density/Intensity
15,000 square feet per acre (0.34 FAR)
Light Industry
This designation allows for a range of light industrial land uses. This designation is characterized by light
manufacturing, research and development facilities,
warehouses, and processing facilities.
Density/Intensity
10,000 square feet per acre (0.23 FAR)
115
32 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Land Use Designation Density/Intensity Allowed Uses Acres Percent of Total
GR Guest Ranch 15,000 square feet per
acre (0.34 FAR)
Recreation and entertainment,
retail, employee housing
30.8 2.2%
ER Estate Residential Up to 1dwelling unit per
3 acres
Single-family residential 15.8 1.1%
LDR Low Density Residential Up to 1 dwelling unit per
acre
Single-family residential 255.1 20.2%
LMDR Low Medium Density
Residential
Up to 2 dwelling unit per
acre
Single-family residential 218.2 15.8%
MDR Medium Density
Residential
3-7 dwelling units per
acre
Single-family and multi-family
residential
248.1 18.0%
HDR High Density
Residential
8-20 dwelling units per
acre
Single-family and multi-family
residential
117.6 8.5%
MHP Mobile Home Park Up to 8 dwelling units
per acre
Mobile and manufactured
housing
51.2 3.7%
RC Retail Commercial 10,000 square feet per
acre (0.23 FAR)
Retail and services 14.0 1.0%
TC Tourist Commercial 22,000 square feet per
acre (0.50 FAR)
Retail and services 59.7 4.3%
GC General Commercial 10,000 square feet per
acre (0.23 FAR)
Service-oriented commercial 1.0 0.1%
PO Professional Office 15,000 square feet per
acre (0.34 FAR)
Professional and medical offices 9.1 0.7%
LI Light Industry 10,000 square feet per
acre (0.23 FAR)
Light manufacturing, research
and development, warehousing
9.7 0.7%
PI Public/Institutional 10,000 square feet per
acre (0.23 FAR)
Public and quasi-public uses 41.2 3.0%
OS Open Space N/A Open space and recreational
uses
213.7 15.5%
AG Agriculture N/A Agriculture 69.7 5.1%
1,355(1) 100.0%
(1) The total acreage does not include public rights-of-way.
Table 3-1: Land Use Designations Summary
116
33 Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
dR odatniP omalA
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Viborg Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dove Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Jennils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
rD egairraC
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt Mesa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
High Mead ow Rd
Viborg Rd
Vester Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College C anyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
lP tsriF
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 4, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-5
Existing General Plan Land Uses
Legend
Land Use Designations
Guest Ranch
Estate Residential
Low Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mobile Home Park
Light Industry
Open Space/Recreation
Agriculture
Tourist Commercial
Retail Commercial
General Commercial
Public/Institutional
Professional/Office
City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
FIGURE 3-1: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS 117
34 | General Plan Alternatives Report
118
35 Public Review Draft | January 2022
4Focus Area
What is the Focus
Area?
Purpose of the Focus Area
Since the Solvang General Plan Update process
began in 2020, the City’s consultant team has
been listening carefully to community members, key
stakeholders, the General Plan Advisory Committee
(GPAC), as well as staff. Many opportunities
have been provided to receive feedback from the
community and key stakeholders during this process
as outlined in the 2021 Community Engagement
Summary. These opportunities include stakeholder
interviews, two community workshops that included
activities and discussions, and an opportunity for
online engagement through the General Plan website
(PlanSolvang.com). These opportunities provided
the community the ability to express their vision for
the future of Solvang and to highlight key issues and
opportunities that exist within the community. The
City has taken all the feedback received so far into
consideration and will incorporate concepts and
ideas into the General Plan.
As outlined in the introduction of this report, a
key step in the General Plan Update process is to
analyze various alternatives that will eventually lead
What is the Focus Area
Most of Solvang is not expected to change much between now and 2040. The focus area shown on the following page is the area of Solvang where development and change is most likely to occur. The land use alternatives process allows the community to express opinions about the type of development that should be planned for this area.
35 119
36 | General Plan Alternatives Report
for additional housing, unless the existing densities in single-family residential areas were increased. The
increasing of density in single-family neighborhoods
was not considered as part of the alternatives analysis.
It is assumed there will be no changes made to the
existing zoning in these neighborhoods but will be made consistent with State Law to allow for ADU’s, JADU’s, and SB 9 eligible projects.
Extended Boundaries/ “Fingers”
In addition, its core, the focus area includes some
unique aspects. As identified in Figure 4-1, there are
“fingers” that extend from the core of the focus area.
These extensions are a direct response to GPAC direction that these extended boundaries be incorporated to
highlight primary entry points or gateways into Solvang.
While these areas are not expected to experience
significant land use changes, the gateways may
incorporate key goals that will be supported by policy
in the update. Potential goals and policies could focus on mobility options to improve circulation for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, preserve land that is not suitable for development as open space, and incorporate
wayfinding techniques to improve circulation. The final goals and policies will be derived from the preferred
land use alternative that will be selected and approved by the City Council and Planning Commission.
to the selection of a “preferred land use alternative.” This alternative will later be used to guide the preparation of the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs. A key step in creating the various alternatives is identifying areas in the community that are likely
to change based on the needs and expectations of
the community. In an alternatives process, this area is referred to as the “focus area.” Having a focus area is important as it narrows down where change will likely
occur in the community and provides the City a starting point to develop policies to support the change.
Why the Unique Boundaries?
The Focus Area
The focus area for the Solvang General Plan Update, is
the same for all three alternatives, as identified in Figure 4-1. Based on community feedback, the area that has
the most opportunity for change to meet the needs of
the community is concentrated in the central core of the city. This is where most of the retail commercial, higher density residential, and the tourist commercial uses are located. This area is where Solvang has the greatest
potential to accommodate new residential growth, since
the existing infrastructure already supports more intense uses in the community.
Residential
The General Plan land use designations of High
Density Residential (HDR)and Tourist Commercial
(TC), which are found within the focus area, are the
only two designations under consideration for density
and intensity changes. For example, the current TC
designation does not specifically allow residential uses even though housing existed in the core prior to the
incorporation of the city. The designation is proposed
to now specifically allow residential uses as part of a mixed-use project. Unlike the core of Solvang, areas
outside of the focus area are predominantly single-family residential. The likelihood of substantive change in these areas is low and is primarily focused on the limited
amounts of vacant and underutilized land. Areas outside the focus area boundary provide limited opportunities
FOCUS
AREA
120
37 Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
dR odatniP omalA
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Viborg Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dove Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Jennils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
rD egairraC
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt Mesa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
High Mead ow Rd
Viborg Rd
Vester Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College C anyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
lP tsriF
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 4, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-5
Existing General Plan Land Uses
Legend
Land Use Designations
Guest Ranch
Estate Residential
Low Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mobile Home Park
Light Industry
Open Space/Recreation
Agriculture
Tourist Commercial
Retail Commercial
General Commercial
Public/Institutional
Professional/Office
City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
FIGURE 4-1: FOCUS AREA BOUNDARY
121
38 | General Plan Alternatives Report
122
39 Public Review Draft | January 2022
5Vacant and Underutilized
Parcels
Land Available for Development
Vacant Land
As part of the General Plan Update, the City of Solvang identified vacant and underutilized parcels available for development within the city. The vacant parcels inventoried in the process are summarized by the following:
• Solvang has nearly 28 acres of vacant land available for development within the City Boundary (Figure 5-1 and Table 5-1). This estimate is based on vacant parcel data from the County Assessor and ground-truthed by City staff.
• Most vacant land in Solvang is designated for residential development (24.49 acres). • The remaining 3.05 acres of vacant land is designated for nonresidential uses.
Underutilized Sites
The Alternatives Report used parcel improvement value data from the Santa Barbara County Assessor to identify underutilized parcels. Underutilized sites are classified as parcels where the improvement value was less than half the land value, which suggests that the parcels are underutilized to a degree that would make them more likely to redevelop within the planning period (2040). Figure 5-2 shows underutilized sites in Solvang. Underutilized and vacant parcels are considered opportunity sites for future development or redevelopment.
Land Use Designation
Classification
Acres
Residential Nonresidential
LDR Low Density Residential X 8.21
LMDR Low Medium Density Residential X 14.82
MDR Medium Density Residential X 1.47
OS Open Space X 0.25
PO Professional/Office X 1.9
PI Public/Institutional X 0.9
Source: City of Solvang 2021, Santa Barbara County Assessor, 2021 27.53(1) (1) The totals may not add due to rounding.
Table 5-1: Vacant Land by Land Use
123
40 | General Plan Alternatives Report
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
Alamo Pintado Rd
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Vib org Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dov e Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Je nnils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
Carriage Dr
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt M esa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
Hig h Meado w Rd
Viborg Rd
Ves ter Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College Ca nyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
First Pl
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
¯ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Underutilized Sites
Parcels- Vacant (31)
Sphere of Influence
City Boundary
Highway
Rivers and Creeks
Street
FIGURE 5-1: VACANT PARCELS
124
41 Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
Alamo Pintado Rd
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Vib org Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dov e Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Je nnils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
Carriage Dr
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt M esa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
Hig h Meado w Rd
Viborg Rd
Ves ter Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College Ca nyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
First Pl
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
¯ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Underutilized Sites
Parcels-Underutilized (44)
Sphere of Influence
City Boundary
Highway
Rivers and Creeks
Street
FIGURE 5-2: UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS
Note:
Alternatives B and C assume all parcels designated TC are underutilized since the maximum FAR is being increased from the existing FAR in the General Plan.
125
42 | General Plan Alternatives Report
126
43 Public Review Draft | January 2022
6Citywide Land Use Alternatives
How were the
Alternatives Developed?
This report analyzes three land use alternative concepts designed to accommodate future growth in Solvang.
As part of the General Plan Update, residents, business owners, and interested parties have the opportunity
to consider and weigh in on the appropriate land use
types, densities, and intensities for different areas of the community. The land use alternatives presented in this
section are a result of input received from community
members, the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC),
the Planning Commission, and the City Council.
This section provides detailed descriptions of the three alternative concepts for the General Plan Update. This
section includes a diagram of each alternative depicting density and intensity ranges and a summary of the
population, dwelling units, and employment that each
alternative would support (i.e., the development capacity).
See Table 6-1 for a comparison of alternatives.
Details on the methodology used to calculate the estimated dwelling units and population for each land use alternative is provided in Appendix A.
43 127
44 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Category Existing Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Residents 6,126(1) 7,027 7,500 7,830
Jobs 3,227(2) 3,292(2) 3,380(2) 3,433(2)
Dwelling Units 2,566(1) 2,928(3) 3,125(3) 3,263(3)
Net New Dwelling Units _ 274 471 609
(1) Based on 2020 Census projections.
(2)Based on data from JobsEQ
(3)Alternative totals include 88 dwelling units assumed to be created by pending and approved projects.
Table 6-1: Alternative Buildout Summary
Through the multitude of community engagement efforts to date, the Solvang community expressed the desire for smart growth and economic vitality without compromising the city’s small-town feel. Coupled with the city’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), which was adopted in June 2020, each alternative accommodates future growth by increasing density and intensity ranges of existing land use designations. Through this approach, each alternative could accommodate future growth without changing the land use designation of any parcel in the city.
Notes on Methodology
The only differences between each alternative are the allowed residential density and nonresidential intensity within the following land use designations:
• High Density Residential (HDR)
• Tourist Commercial (TC)
The alternatives in this report do not include the annexation of any land into the city. Besides the High Density Residential (HDR) and Tourist Commercial (TC) land use designations (see Figure 6-1), there are no assumed density or intensity changes to any of the remaining designations. This approach results in an increase of residential uses in HDR and TC land use designations and an increase in nonresidential square footage and employment in TC. For the TC designated parcels, this analysis assumes no net loss of existing commercial square footage and assumes the addition of residential square footage to the site. That is, if a commercial site is redeveloped with a mix of commercial and residential, the amount of commercial square footage would remain unchanged, except in Alternative B and Alternative C where the FAR is increased to accommodate potential residential. The increase in FAR for Alternative C would increase the maximum height in the TC from 35 feet to 45 feet. The additional 10 feet in allowable height would allow for additional on site residential capacity. Because the alternative concepts do not include changes to assigned land use designations, the land use map remains the same for each alternative.
Capacity at Buildout by Alternative
128
45 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Focus Area
Boundary
Tourist
Commercial
High Density
Residential
FIGURE 6-1: HDR AND TC LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
129
46 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Citywide Alternative A
Alternative A is a baseline scenario consistent with the existing 2008 General Plan. This alternative is a “business as usual” scenario in which there is no proposed density/intensity changes to any of the existing land use designations. Development and zoning standards would also remain unchanged. This alternative is important to analyze as a point of comparison to the other alternatives as it represents what the city could look and feel like if the existing General Plan land uses were carried forward to the year 2040. Alternative A assumes that all currently vacant and underutilized parcels (see Figures 5-1 and 5-2) in the city are to be developed/redeveloped at the average density/intensity of all other parcels in that land use designation. For example, if the average density of all Medium Density Residential in the city is five dwelling units per acre, this analysis assumes that all vacant and underutilized parcels would also be developed/redeveloped at five dwelling units per acre. The population, employment, and dwelling unit projections below include the total net new, existing, and pending and approved projects. See Figure 6-2 for Alternative A.
A
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multi-family
RESIDENTS
7,027
JOBS
3,292
MF UNITS
884
SF UNITS
2,044
130
47 Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
dR odatniP omalA
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Viborg Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dove Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Jennils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
rD egairraC
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt Mesa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
High Mead ow Rd
Viborg Rd
Vester Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College C anyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
lP tsriF
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 4, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-5
Existing General Plan Land Uses
Legend
Land Use Designations
Guest Ranch
Estate Residential
Low Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mobile Home Park
Light Industry
Open Space/Recreation
Agriculture
Tourist Commercial
Retail Commercial
General Commercial
Public/Institutional
Professional/Office
City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
Focus Area
Boundary
FIGURE 6-2: ALTERNATIVE A
131
48 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Citywide Alternative B
Alternative B is a medium density, infill-oriented alternative. This alternative proposes a modest increase to the maximum density for the High Density Residential designation from 20 dwellings units per acre, to 24 dwelling units per acre. This alternative also proposes allowing multi-family residential development in the Tourist Commercial designation at a maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre. As a general note, the existing Tourist Commercial designation does not currently allow residential uses. This change would modify the Tourist Commercial designation to a mixed-use designation that allows for both commercial and residential uses. This alternative also increases the maximum FAR in the TC from 0.5 to 0.65, with an increased maximum allowable height of 35 feet. Besides the proposed changes to the High Density Residential and Tourist Commercial designations, there are no other proposed density/intensity changes to the remaining land use designations. The population, employment, and dwelling unit projections below include the total net new, existing, and pending and approved projects. See Figure 6-3 for Alternative B.
B
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multi-family
RESIDENTS
7,500
JOBS
3,380
MF UNITS
1,081
SF UNITS
2,044
132
49 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Focus Area
Boundary
FIGURE 6-3: ALTERNATIVE B
133
50 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Citywide Alternative C
Alternative C is a high density, infill-oriented alternative. Similar to Alternative B, this alternative includes a modest increase to the maximum density for the High Density Residential designation from 20 dwelling units per acre, to 32 dwelling units per acre. This alternative also allows multi-family residential development in the Tourist Commercial designation at a maximum density of 32 dwelling units per acre. As a general note, the existing Tourist Commercial designation does not currently allow residential uses. This alternative would modify the Tourist Commercial designation to a mixed-use designation that allows for both commercial and residential uses. This alternative also increases the maximum FAR in the TC from 0.5 to 1.00, with an increased maximum allowable height of 45 feet. Besides the proposed changes to the High Density Residential and Tourist Commercial designations, there are no other proposed density/intensity changes to the remaining land use designations. The population, employment, and dwelling unit projections below include the total net new, existing, and pending and approved projects. See Figure 6-4 for Alternative C.
C
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multi-family
RESIDENTS
7,830
JOBS
3,433
MF UNITS
1,219
SF UNITS
2,044
134
51 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Focus Area
Boundary
FIGURE 6-4: ALTERNATIVE C
135
52 | General Plan Alternatives Report
136
53 Public Review Draft | January 2022
7Mobility Options
In addition to land use changes, the determination of future mobility and circulation changes and impacts is important to consider in the overall General Plan Update. As part of the Alternatives Report, a series of mobility options are provided to further clarify different approaches to handling overall circulation within Solvang. Several of the concepts focus on a more comprehensive and holistic approach to viewing a circulation system beyond that of traditional vehicle use. This section includes several different mobility options meant to spur discussion and will not necessarily reflect changes to land uses within each of three land use alternatives.
It is important to note that all mobility options provided in this section can be incorporated into the General Plan based on community feedback and preference. Such topical areas discussed in this section include alternative forms of transportation including more pedestrian and bicycle-friendly networks, pedestrian-only streets, parking, and the State Route 246 Bypass. Future implementation of community preferred mobility options will be incorporated as new goals, policies, and implementation programs in the Mobility Element of the General Plan. 137
54 | General Plan Alternatives Report
The SYBMP found that there are only two roadways with
Class II bicycle facilities (bike lanes with striping and signage) and only one Class I bike facility (an exclusive, separate bicycle/pedestrian shared use path) which is
along State Route (SR) 246, from the eastern boundary
of Solvang to approximately 1.5 miles to Santa Ynez
High School.
One major area identified in the SYBMP as lacking in
safe facilities is routes to and from schools and residential areas. These are areas of focus since school age
children are typically bicycle riders with less experience than adult riders. This points out that a comprehensive strategy must address different groups of riders – those that are experienced at riding in mixed flow traffic and the vast majority of users who are not.
Solvang, as a primary tourism destination, should have
easily accessible and understandable bicycle network
maps, visitor bicycle routes, and signage, and markings and wayfinding for occasional bicycle facility users.
The SYBMP proposed several new bicycle facilities for
the next 10 years (through 2029). The top proposals
affecting Solvang include:
1. The Santa Ynez River Trail project, a Class I facility, completely dedicated to bicycles and pedestrians
running between Buellton and Solvang along the
Santa Ynez River.
2. The Sunny Fields Spur Class I facility is a proposed route approximately one-quarter to one-half miles
long, connecting the eastern end of the existing
Class I bicycle facility along SR 246 to Alamo
Pintado Road. This connection would help bicyclists
bypass and avoid unsafe conditions riding in mixed
flow traffic along SR 246.
Active Transportation –
Pedestrian and Bicycle System
The Santa Ynez Bicycle Master Plan (SYBMP), which
includes the city of Solvang, was completed in 2019.
This plan sets forth a comprehensive vision for both
recreational and utilitarian bicyclists and lays out five goals:
1. Safety – To establish a secure bicycle network
that addresses key areas of concern including
highways, intersections, and routes to school.
2. Infrastructure – To install, improve, and maintain
bicycle infrastructure throughout the Santa Ynez
Valley region.
3. Connectivity – to have a well-planned and
coordinated network to connect users with their
origins and destinations including schools,
residential areas, community centers, transit stops,
park-and-ride, and neighboring cities.
4. Equity – to provide equitable access for users of all ages, ability, income levels, location, and use.
5. Economic Development – To recognize the
economic importance of bicycling in the region
as it relates to tourism and stimulates the local
economy.
138
55 Public Review Draft | January 2022
4. Wider sidewalks should be considered along
Mission Drive to accommodate shoppers and allow
for limited placement of shop kiosks, tables, and
seating;
5. Improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities with
pavement markings and placing soft and/or
hard barriers between bicyclists/pedestrians and
vehicular traffic in key locations (i.e., buffered Class II or Class IV facilities); and
6. Creating a system of bicycle routes, trails, tourist routes, and other signed, striped, and/or separated
facilities. These routes should provide attractive
alternative parallel routes to Mission Drive for eastwest bicycle travel in Solvang.
Given Solvang’s visitor destination attractiveness and its existing local residents ranging from school children to retired persons, improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities need to consider the range of users. In the
denser activity areas along Mission Drive, Class I, Class II, or Class IV facilities (completely separate facilities, separated facilities with markings/lanes, separated by
soft or hardscape barrier) should be the predominant
type of facility. This is appropriate where the lesser
experienced riders will be riding, as well as visitors who are familiar with Solvang.
Bicycle circulation along roadways with low traffic
volumes could be addressed simply with signage and
clearly marked intersection crossings. The City should
also consider designation of curb use for parking and
some sections of curb for striped bicycle lanes. Parking needs to be integrated with plans for bicycles and
pedestrians.
Walking and Bicycling Options
Walking and bicycling are ideal modes of transportation for the city of Solvang for many reasons:
• Solvang is mostly flat terrain with low or no hills
to climb which allows for ease in use of human
powered travel modes.
• Solvang is an attractive weekend destination and
can provide access to many parts of the city in
addition to activities and businesses along SR 246.
• Improved and safe routes for bicycles and
pedestrians can offset the impact of automobile
traffic circulating through the city for local trips and alleviate multiple short trips and parking searches.
The 2008 General Plan Circulation Element noted
that the key issues affecting circulation in Solvang is the dependence on SR 246 for many uses, sometimes
resulting in conflicting movement and less safe conditions.
Travel along Mission Drive includes both through trips by autos and trucks, with higher speeds and fewer stops,
combined with street parking (backing and turning),
and adjacent to pedestrians accessing local businesses.
This creates a speed differential that can lead to unsafe circumstances and potential accidents.
Solvang is not unique in circumstance of having a higher speed throughput-facility that is also used as access to local businesses and residential areas. There are several key alternatives for reducing speeds to address some of these safety concerns:
1. Infrastructure treatments that slow speeds of auto
and truck traffic in densely commercial sections
including (intersection control, bulb-outs, high visible pedestrian crossings);
2. Visual treatments that improve the awareness of
auto and truck drivers to locations where pedestrian
and bicyclists typically ride and walk;
3. Addressing specific crosswalk issues with pavement
markings, signage, and signals;
139
56 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Typical rules for wayfinding signage include limiting
placement on expressways and location separated
enough from other safety signage and of a distinct color and design so as to be distinctively for use as information purposes only. Solvang could implement signage to
direct drivers to parking and limit the amount of time
required to search for available parking.
Parking
Parking to access all of Solvang’s destinations along SR 246 can become limited during weekends and other
peak visitation periods. There are currently three public parking surface-lots in Solvang: Copenhagen Drive,
Alisal Road, and Oak Street. The City completed the
Downtown Solvang Parking Study in 2020, outlining
a few alternatives to accommodate growth in demand
for parking. The study showed that there was over 90
percent occupancy of parking spaces during peak times
on weekend days.
Recommendations of the Parking Study concluded that
the City should implement a 3- hour time limit in the most congested parking areas to increase the turnover rate.
The study also recommended that Solvang implement
paid parking to help fund parking infrastructure
improvements in the future and also to provide a
mechanism to manage parking space use. Additionally,
it was recommended that parking use be increased
Parking, Wayfinding, and
Smartphone Guidance Assistance
Wayfinding
Wayfinding is important to travel by making it easier
for residents, commuters, and tourists to find Solvang’s destinations and attractions. Wayfinding aims to
integrate a range of navigation and communication
tools for traversing commercial areas, such as signage, brochures, kiosks, and smart-phone applications.
Wayfinding explores ways to navigate from one place
to another and focuses on highlighting the experience
of the path and eventual arrival of the wayfinding user.
A wayfinding system will underscore Solvang’s unique
and eclectic beauty, as well as improve movement for
pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.
The figure below shows examples of wayfinding signage
that was proposed in a Mission Drive Improvement
Planing Study. The design in the example reinforces
Solvang’s community brand and provides clear direction
while 1) Entering the City, 2) Finding a place to park, and 3) Arriving at your destination. Having a clear and direct wayfinding plan enhances both the pedestrian and vehicular circulation experience. In many cases, having good wayfinding signage increases repeat visits by as
much as 30% to primary and secondary destinations.
140
57 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Pedestrian-Only Streets and Corridors
Pedestrian-only streets can accomplish many objectives
including enhancing safety for pedestrians, providing
a pollution reduced and noise reduced area to browse
shops and restaurants, and allowing shops to place
merchandise outdoors and restaurants to place seating
areas outside.
Pedestrian-only streets can also enhance access to
commercial areas, encouraging visitors to walk from
shop to shop rather than needing to move their vehicle.
This also reduced circling for parking and can increase the reach of some shops to customers. Instead of driving past shops and restaurants, pedestrians can access
more activities along a pedestrian-only mall. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the City closed Copenhagen
Drive to auto traffic to allow shops to continue to
accommodate patronage with minimum separation
requirements.
Pedestrian Scramble
Given the strong pedestrian desire lines that span cornerto-corner along Mission Drive in the downtown core, pedestrian scramble phases should be considered.
Pedestrian scramble phases improve safety by reducing
the number of pedestrian crossings/conflicts by serving all the pedestrian movements at once. This in turn
reduces the total pedestrian crossing phase times at
intersections which allow more green time for vehicles.
The figure below illustrates a 6-way pedestrian crossing, also called a “pedestrian scramble” phase. This traffic signal phase is pedestrian only – all vehicles are
at Veterans Memorial Hall, and that the City could
investigate public-private partnerships to finance future parking facilities.
Valet parking could also enhance visitor ability to
quickly access tourist destinations, avoiding the search for parking for a small fee. It is important to integrate parking locations with availability of bicycle rentals
and other micro-mobility services. Smartphone apps
can also help users quickly access parking, indicating
where spaces are available. Some Smartphone apps
use crowd-sourced data directly from users, but in some instances, Solvang could investigate the use of Advance Parking Guidance Systems (APGS) with installation of
parking sensors and indicators in the most highly used
parking spaces.
Parking and Wayfinding Options
The following are options for the City to accommodate
growth in parking demand:
1. Addition of parking structures with close access to
the center of Solvang and ancillary micro-mobility,
e-bike, and bicycle rentals and paths;
2. Implementation of Advance Parking Guidance
System in the most used parking lots;
3. Management of parking with paid parking, limited
times, and enforcement;
4. Valet service; and
5. Crowd sourced guidance systems provided by
Smartphone app developers.
141
58 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Fjord Drive Extension Alternative
An extension to Fjord Drive has been in previous plans
around the southern part of Solvang with the purpose
of alleviating traffic concerns along Mission Drive. As described in the July 27, 2021, City Council meeting,
the bypass would be to “extend Fjord Drive west from
its existing terminus westerly across Adobe Creek and
then north up to the intersection of Mission Drive and
Skytt Mesa Drive.” This facility would then intersect
with Alisal Road, where current Fjord Drive terminates
today. In effect, this is not a complete bypass of Mission Drive throughout Solvang, but would provide additional
connectivity to Mission Drive from the southern areas of Solvang. This extended roadway connection will likely
require a new signal at Mission Drive and Fjord Drive/
Skytt Mesa Drive and at Fjord Drive and Alisal Road.
These would be the first City owned and maintained
traffic signals.
Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 provide the daily traffic
volume on Mission Drive in the city of Solvang and the
estimated percentage of those trips that are through
traffic respectively. Based on these data and modeling, on a daily basis approximately 8,000 vehicles (33
percent of total daily trips) pass through the Solvang
on Mission Drive (SR 246). These trips neither start nor stop in the city. As stated previously, if constructed the Fjord Extension will not offer the requisite travel time savings to function as a true bypass of Mission Drive
through downtown Solvang for thru-motorists and goods
movement. However, it will provide greater access to
destinations in the southern areas of the city which will serve to reduce some local trips on portions of Mission Drive and north-south collector roads that currently
provide access to these areas.
stopped during this phase. No vehicles are entering the intersection at the same time as pedestrians, thereby
being safer with no conflicting movements between
pedestrians and vehicles. The scramble also has the
added benefit that pedestrians will be required to cross the intersection once instead of having to make two
crossings during two separate signal phases, each
with potential conflicting movements with right turning vehicles.
Pedestrian-only Options
Some pedestrian-only street alternatives could include:
1. Consider planning permanent pedestrian-only
sections within the central Solvang commercial area
as visitation and overnight lodging stays indicate
growth. This includes planning for pedestrian only
facilities which allow for additional designated
shopping areas and a more pleasant experience.
Pedestrian only areas could include amenities such
as street benches, lighting, pathways, surface
treatment, pet areas, and landscaping.
2. Sections of roadways adjacent and near to Mission
Drive could be considered for closure if commercial
activity along those parallel facilities increases, such as extension along Copenhagen Drive.
142
59 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Route County Post Mile Location Pk Hour Back Pk Mon AADT Back AADT Back Pk Hour Ahead
Pk Mon
AADT
Ahead
AADT
Ahead
246 SB 26.286
Buellton,
JCT.
RTE. 101
1,700 19,500 19,000 2,600 30,000 25,800
246 SB 29.233
Solvang,
Fifth
Street
2,400 25,500 24,700 1,900 20,300 19,800
246 SB 30.280
Alamo
Pintado
Road
2,000 21,200 20,700 2,000 21,500 21,000
Mission Drive in City of Solvang Trip End Outside Solvang Trip End Inside Solvang Trip End Outside Solvang 33% 25%
Trip End Inside Solvang 29% 13%
Table 7-1: 2019 Traffic Volumes (CalTrans)
Table 7-2: SBCAG RTDM Select Link Results (Baseline Model Run) 143
60 | General Plan Alternatives Report
144
61 Public Review Draft | January 2022
8Evaluation of Citywide
Alternatives
The goal of the land use alternatives process is for the community to express a preference and the City Council to adopt a preferred land use alternative that is the basis for the 2040 General Plan Land Use Diagram. To provide the community and decision-makers with information on which to base their preferences and decisions, this report includes an evaluation of each citywide alternative using a variety of criteria.
This section starts with an “at-a-glance” summary, a snapshot of the results of the evaluation of the three citywide alternatives. A more in-depth discussion follows, and a detailed description of the methodology used in each of the evaluation criteria can be found in Appendix A. A detailed Fiscal and Tourism Analysis is also included in this report in Appendix B.
145
62 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Summary of Evaluation
Range of Housing Types
Percentage of single-family (SF)
and multi-family (MF) dwelling units
Employment Capacity
Number of new jobs that can be
accommodated
Land Use Efficiency
Average residential density and
employment intensity of new
development
Population
Total population, factoring
redevelopment projections through
2040 for HDR and TC
Net New Dwellings
Total net new dwelling units
calculated from vacant and
underutilized land
$$$ $$$ $$$
$ $ $ $$$$ $ $$$$ $ $ $$$$
70% SF
30% MF
65% SF
35% MF
63% SF
37% MF
3,292 3,380 3,433
2.9 7.9 3.3 8.0 3.5 8.2
Units per Acre: Housing Jobs Housing Jobs Housing Jobs
A B C
7,027 7,500 7,830
274 471 609
146
63 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Housing Affordability
Relative housing affordability, ranked
from least affordable ($$$) to most
affordable ($)
$ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $
$$ $$
Fiscal Health
The net fiscal benefit to the City
(total revenue minus cost to provide
services)
$125,000 $130,000
A B C
$$$
-$143,675 -$316,632 -$326,714
147
64 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Range of Housing
Single-family homes are the predominant
housing type in Solvang. In 2019, the
American Community Survey (ACS)
estimated that there were approximately
2,566 dwelling units in the city, of which
80 percent were single-family (including
mobile homes) and 20 percent were multifamily. All three of the citywide alternatives provide capacity for increased multi-family
dwelling compared to the current housing
stock. This is largely because of the
inclusion of residential in the form of mixeduse in the TC land use designation, as well as increasing the allowable density for the
HDR designation.
Figure 8-1 shows that Alternative C
provides capacity for the greatest amount
and variety of housing. A buildout,
assuming a redevelopment percentage of
10 percent for HDR and five percent for
TC by 2040, this would result in a total
of about 3,263 dwelling units, of which
about 63 percent would be single-family,
and 37 percent multi-family.
FIGURE 8-1: Dwelling Unit Capacity by Unit Type
A B C
3,500
2,928
2,044
3,125
1,081
2,044
3,263
1,219
2,044
Multi-Family Units Single-Family Units
Total Dwelling Units
884
2,500
1,500
500
0 What is considered single-family?
55%
Sin g l e - f am i l y d e t ac h e d
6%
Si n gl e - f am i l y a t t ac h e d
13%
2 to 4 a t t ac h e d
19%
M u l t i f am i l y
55%
Sin g l e - f am i l y d e t ac h e d
6%
Si n gl e - f am i l y a t t ac h e d
13%
2 to 4 a t t ac h e d
19%
M u l t i f am i l y
( i n cl ud e s c ond o s )
7%
M obile H o m e s
55%
Sin g l e - f am i l y d e t ac h e d
6%
Si n gl e - f am i l y a t t ac h e d
13%
2 to 4 a t t ac h e d
19%
M u l t i f am i l y
( i n cl ud e s c ond o s )
7%
M obile H o m e s
What is considered multi-family?
55%
Sin g l e - f am i l y d e t ac h e d
6%
Si n gl e - f am i l y a t t ac h e d
13%
2 to 4 a t t ac h e d
19%
M u l t i f am i l y
( i n cl ud e s c ond o s )
7%
148
65 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Land Use Efficiency
Land use efficiency is a measure of the average number of dwelling units and jobs per acre of land developed land. Based on the development capacity, Alternative C averages 3.3 housing units per acre, higher than Alternative A and Alternative B. This is due to the increase in allowable density in both the HDR and TC designations. Alternative B is similar since it too increases the allowability in both designations. Alternative A has the lowest average residential density since it assumes no changes to any existing residential land use designation. The average jobs per acre increases slightly from Alternative A to Alternative C, based on the incremental increase of the FAR in the TC to accommodate onsite residential and an increased maximum allowed building height. See Table 8-1 for housing and jobs per acre projections.
Table 8-1: Housing and Jobs Per Acre
Alternative Average Housing Units/Acre Average Jobs/Acre Alternative A 2.9 7.9
Alternative B 3.3 8.1
Alternative C 3.5 8.2
Nonresidential Development and Employment
Capacity
This criteria measures the projected number of new jobs that each alternative can accommodate, assuming the buildout and redevelopment of all land designated for employment. Alternative A results in a projected net new employment of 65 jobs, primarily because the alternative does not include any changes/increase to the maximum FAR. Alternative B and Alternative C result in a higher net increase of jobs since both alternatives increase the maximum allowed FAR. Alternative B increases the FAR to
0.75 and Alternative C increases the FAR to 1.00. The increase in allowable densities to Alternative C can accommodate the increase of allowable density and would result in a maximum building height of 45 feet, which is an increase in 10 feet compared to existing development standards. It is important to note that the projected net new employment for each alternative are included in the totals below. The reasoning behind the low employment numbers compared to the projections is based on the lack of vacant developable land and the projected low redevelopment, specifically the TC at five percent.
Employment Capacity Per Alternative
A 3,292 B 3,395 C3,433
149
66 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Housing Affordability
The City has received a Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA) for the 2023-2031 time frame as
shown in Table 8-2. The RHNA uses the 2020 County
median income of $87,800 to define the various
affordability levels shown in the table. For comparison, the Solvang median income in 2019 was $83,431.
All of the alternatives support development of more
than 191 dwelling units, although Alternative A may
result in difficulties in meeting the allocations for lower income levels. As discussed in the Existing Conditions
Workbook, the median price of single-family homes
in Solvang was about $879,000 in 2020, and has
jumped up to as much s $925,000 as of June 2021.
In contrast, the upper price range to meet even the
Moderate-Income level for a family of four is about
$668,800. The alternatives estimate that most future
households will have 2.4 persons, meaning that the
maximum allowable home price will be $535,200
to $602,000 for 2-3 person households. Therefore,
it is likely Solvang will meet its Very Low to Moderate Income housing target with multi-family housing rather
than single-family units.
The Above Moderate Category, which includes 75
dwelling units, is more easily accommodated in singlefamily housing. Alternative A includes an increase of over 90 multi-family units, about 75 percent of the Very In terms of nonresidential development, the alternatives anticipate growth between 22,490 - 67,940 square feet of retail and office development, supporting 65-206 new jobs. The projections of job growth (see Section 2) show demand between 2020 and 2040 for 254-834 jobs and about 80,000 square feet to 278,200 square feet of nonresidential building growth. The alternatives do not anticipate this level of nonresidential development and would only support about 80 percent of the low end of job growth in the projections.
This in part is because the employment estimates included in the alternatives analysis are based on land availability and development capacity, compared to the employment projections based on market demand. If the community wants to accommodate job growth based on the SBCAG and JobsEQ projections, then further consideration of changes to nonresidential land use designations should occur, including, for example:
• Increased existing commercial building space use efficiency • Increased building height and FAR
• Redesignating residential areas for nonresidential use, or • Expanding the UGB
Income Level (Based on County
median income: $87,800)
Allocation (dwelling
units)
Very Low (<50% - $59,500) 55
Low (50-80% - $95,300) 39
Moderate (80-120% - $105,350) 22
Above Moderate (120%+) 75
Total 191
Table 8-2: Solvang RHNA Allocation by Income Level
Low to Moderate Income RHNA target of 116 dwelling
units. Moreover, the General Plan time horizon is 2040, while the RHNA goal is for 2031. Alternative B
and Alternative C support more multi-family housing
development and could accommodate all categories of
RHNA affordable housing goals.
150
67 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Fiscal Heath
One important consideration for future land use is the
impact on the City budget and the City’s ability to fund municipal services. The City’s consultant team have
prepared a detailed analysis of the impact of major land uses on the City’s tax base and demand for services
(see Appendix B). The analysis documents the fact
that tourism and local serving retail businesses have a significant beneficial impact for City revenues and help support the services funded not only in the downtown
but in the residential neighborhoods as well. In contrast, most residential uses require more in services than they generate in local taxes.
The Solvang General Plan Alternatives are primarily
focused on new housing development. As such, they
would be expected to generate a fiscal deficit, as shown in Figure 8-2. The graph shows the annual net deficit
combined from the incremental growth of all land uses
in each alternative at full buildout. The nonresidential land uses have a small positive fiscal impact of about
$13,400 per year in Alternative A to $108,200
in Alternative C. However, the single-family dwelling
units have a negative impact of $152,000 per year.
The remaining variation in fiscal impact among the
alternatives is due to the varying amounts of multi-family housing, which generally has a negative fiscal impact of about $839 to $1,123 per dwelling unit, depending on
proportion of affordable housing in each alternative.
On a per unit basis, these amounts are not substantial
and overall, the deficit in Alternative C represents
about 4.3 percent of General Fund Revenues in FY
2019. In that fiscal year, the City’s General Fund
had a surplus of $458,617, more than the deficit in
Alternative C. The City has the fiscal capacity to
absorb additional housing in the future but must plan
carefully to ensure that adequate revenues are available to fund increasing demand for services.
FIGURE 8-2: Net Annual Fiscal Impact of Land Use
Alternatives, Solvang General Fund
A B C
-$200,000
-$244,197
Fiscal impact
-$150,000
-$100,000
-$50,000
0 -$250,000
-$300,000
-$350,000
-$400,000
-$380,579 -$398,167
151
68 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Trip Generation Analysis
Trip Generation
Average daily weekday trip generation for the three land use alternatives was based on the land use assumptions
summarized in Table 8-3 and Table 8-4. Trip generation
was calculated using average weekday daily rates
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation web application. Representative ITE land use classifications were selected to represent each land use growth category. Pass-by trip reduction percentages were applied to the growth trip ends to estimate the number of new trips that would potentially traverse SR 246. The trip generation calculations are summarized in Table 3.
Traffic Assignment
The resulting new trips were assigned onto SR-246 to
characterize the potential future traffic volumes. The new trips were added to the SR 246 average daily traffic
volume published by Caltrans in 2019. The 2019 bidirectional volumes from the Santa Ynez Valley Traffic Circulation and Safety Study is 21,390 on SR 246 at
the western city limit. The directional east-west percent split on SR 246 based on the SBCAG 2010 baseline
travel demand model daily assignment at this location is approximately 50-50.
The 2040 SBCAG scenario shows minimal growth on
SR 246 at this location (2 percent). It is assumed that most traffic growth will result from the general plan land use alternatives.
Based on the total number of new trips projected, it is assumed that 80 percent of these new vehicle trips will be I-X X-I trips (per select link analysis) and will need to access SR 246. The remaining 20 percent is assumed to
not require access to SR 246. Based on these simplifying assumptions, the land use alternatives are projected to result in increased daily traffic on SR 246 from between 42,000 and 47,000 ADT (approximately 120 to 145
percent compared to the 2019 AADT figures (see Table
4). Alternative C will result in the most vehicle activity followed by Alternative B and then Alternative A.
152
69 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Land Use Designation Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3
Population (person per household of 2.4 and
2020 census population of 6,126) 7,027 7,500 7,830
Estimated Existing Dwelling Units (2019) 2,566 2,566 2,566 Projected Dwelling Units
Total = 2,928 Total = 3,125 Total = 3,263
SF: 2,041 SF: 2,041 SF: 2,041
MF: 799 MF: 996 MF: 1,134
Pending/App SF: 3 Pending/App SF: 3 Pending/App SF: 3
Pending/App MF: 85 Pending/App MF: 85 Pending/App MF: 85 Single Family (ITE Code 210) growth 2044 2044 2044
Multi Family (ITE Code 220) growth 884 1081 1219
Total residential growth (dwelling units) 2928 3125 3263 Table 8-3: Growth in Residential Units by Alternative
Source: Mintier Harnish and DKS Associates, 2021
Source: Mintier Harnish and DKS Associates, 2021
Table 8-4: Non-Residential Land Use Growth by Alternative (Square Feet) Alternative
Tourist Oriented Professional Office
Public/
Institutional Retail Service Retail Service Total Growth Alt A 2,640 3,720 14,890 580 21,830
Alt B 23,350 6,330 3,720 14,890 580 48,870
Alt C 39,000 9,750 3,720 14,890 580 67,940
153
70 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
ITE Code Rate Unit
Trip
Reduction
Factor
Quantity Trips Daily Trips Daily New Quantity Trips Daily Trips Daily New Quantity Trips Daily Trips Daily New Residential
Single Family
Residential
210 - Single
Family Detached
Housing
9.43 DUper 1 2,044 19,275 19,275 2,044 19,275 19,275 2,044 19,275 19,275 Residential
Multi Family 220 Multifamily Housing (Low
Rise)
6.74 DUper 1 884 5,958 5,958 1,081 7,286 7,286 1,219 8,216 8,216 SUBTOTAL 2,928 25,233 25,233 3,125 26,561 26,561 3,263 27,491 27,491 Non Residential
Tourist Retail
822 Strip Retail
Plaza (<40k) 54.5 KSF per 0.5 2.64 144 72 23.35 1,271 636 39 2,124 1,062 876 Apparel Store 66.4 KSF per 0.5 2.64 175 88 23.35 1,550 775 39 2,590 1,295 Service
Tourist
970 Wine Tasting
Room 46 KSF per 0.65 0.66 30 20 6.33 291 189 9.75 448 291 Turnover
932 HighRestaurant (Sit
Down)
107 KSF per 0.65 0.66 71 46 6.33 679 441 9.75 1,045 679 Retail 821 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) 94.5 KSF per 0.5 3.72 352 176 3.72 352 176 3.72 352 176 Office Office Bldg. 710 General 10.8 KSF per 0.65 14.89 161 105 14.89 161 105 14.89 161 105 Institutional 528 School District Office 14.4 KSF per 1 0.58 8 8 0.58 8 8 0.58 8 8 SUBTOTAL 941 514 4,312 2,330 6,728 3,616
TOTAL 26,174 25,747 30,873 28,891 34,219 31,107
Source: ITE Trip Generation 11th Edition, DKS AssociatesTable 8-5: Trip Generation 154
71 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Table 8-6: Daily Traffic Growth on SR 246 at Atterdag Road GROWTH SCENARIO SR 246 2019 AADT NEW TRIPS NEW TRIPS ON SR 246 SR 246 GROWTH ALTERNATIVE A 21,390 25,747 20,598 41,988
ALTERNATIVE B 21,390 28,890 23,112 44,502
ALTERNATIVE C 21,390 31,107 24,886 46,276
Source: Mintier Harnish and DKS Associates, 2021
Figure 8-3: New Daily Trips Figure 8-4: New SR246 Trips 155
72 | General Plan Alternatives Report
156
73 Public Review Draft | January 2022
¬«246
¬«246
S Alisal Rd
dR odatniP omalA
N Alisal Rd
Chalk Hill Rd
Viborg Rd
Ballar d Canyon Rd
Atterdag Rd Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Ladan Dr
Rancho Alisal Dr
Fjord Dr
N Alisal Rd
Janin Wy
Fifth St
First St
Oak St
Laurel Av
Pine St
Third St
Elm Av
Quail Valley Rd
Fredensborg Canyon Rd
Rebild Dr
Hill Haven
Kolding Av
Maple Av
Lark Hill
Cooper Dr
Dove Meadow Rd
Fa ir way Dr
A arhus Dr
Holly Ln
Skagen Dr
Old Mill Rd
Hillside Dr
Willow Dr
Dermanak Dr
Ranc h Rd
Jennils a Ln
Old Mission Dr
Vikin g Wy
Odin Wy
Alta Vista
Meadow Ranch Rd
Pistache Av
Roble Blan c o Rd
Coyote Creek Rd
Fredensborg W y
rD egairraC
Cre ekside Dr
Elsinore Dr
Molle Wy
Via D inero
Quail Ridge Rd
Old Ranch R d
Juniper Av
Olesen Dr
Holsted Rd
Valley Oak Rd
Sunrise Wy
Deer Hill Dr
Sawleaf Ln
A lisal Mesa Rd
Birch Dr
Park Wy
Ribe Rd
Manzanita Dr
Riley Rd
Mesa Dr
Skytt Mesa Dr
Valhall a Dr
Rincon Dr
Elverhoy Wy
Elk Gro ve Rd
Freya Dr
Hans Park Pl
Greenfield Rd
V al Verde
High Mead ow Rd
Viborg Rd
Vester Sted
Del Prado Rd
Mesa Vista Ln
K ara L n
Ivy L n
Krill Rd
Fourth Pl
College C anyon Rd
Fairway Pl
Ringsted Dr
Copenhagen Dr
Ac orn Wy
Village Ln
Alamo Pintado Rd
Kronen Wy
Eucalyptus Dr
Hill Haven R d
Park View Tr
Aebeltoft Wy
Deer Hill Ln
Esrom Dr
Via Reposa
Kanin Hoj
Stadium Pl
Myrtle Ct
Bowl Pl
Mountain View Dr
lP tsriF
First Ct
Deer Hill Dr Fourth Pl
Alisal Creek
Santa Ynez River
Santa Ynez River
Source: City of Solvang, 2021
Date: February 4, 2021
¯ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
Figure 4-5
Existing General Plan Land Uses
Legend
Land Use Designations
Guest Ranch
Estate Residential
Low Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mobile Home Park
Light Industry
Open Space/Recreation
Agriculture
Tourist Commercial
Retail Commercial
General Commercial
Public/Institutional
Professional/Office
City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Highway
Street
Rivers and Creeks
9 Citywide Land Use Map
FIGURE 9-1: CITYWIDE LAND USE MAP
157
74 | General Plan Alternatives Report
158
75 Public Review Draft | January 2022
AAppendix
This appendix describes the methodology used to determine total dwelling units, population, and employment for each land use alternative, then describes the methodology used in the fiscal analysis.
Development Capacity Methodology
This section describes the methodology used to determine total housing, population, and employment capacity for each of the land use alternatives. The methodology supports a “development capacity” analysis for each of the three alternatives. Development capacity, as used in this report, is an estimate of the total housing units, population, employment, and nonresidential building square footage calculated based on development assumptions. It is important to note that a development capacity analysis reflects a theoretical buildout of vacant land and parcels with redevelopment potential through 2040.
Three land use alternatives were analyzed:
The following provides an overview of the steps involved in preparing the development capacity analysis.
B
C
A= Existing General Plan
= Medium Density, Infill Development
= High Density, Infill Development
159
76 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Step 1: Scope of Analysis
The land use alternatives included in this evaluation were developed based on direction from community members, the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), the Planning Commission, and the City Council. Following these recommendations, the Consultants identified two land use designations that could have potential for future development and should be evaluated in this analysis.
Out of the 15 total land use designations, the development capacity analysis focused on development in these two designations:
• High Density Residential (HDR)
• Tourist Commercial (TC)
The analysis included no density/intensity changes to the remaining 13 land use designations beyond what is currently established in the existing General Plan.
To better determine development potential, the development capacity analysis considered development/redevelopment of existing vacant and underutilized parcels in the city. See Steps 2 and 3 for further information regarding how vacant and underutilized parcels were identified.
Step 2: Vacant and Underutilized Land
To determine the development capacity more accurately for the three alternatives considered in this report, the analysis evaluated the potential development and redevelopment of both vacant and underutilized land (see Figures 5-1 and 5-2). Vacant and underutilized parcels in the city were identified using the following methodology:
Vacant Land
To identify vacant parcels in the city, parcel data from the Santa Barbara County Assessor’s Office was used. Using the geographic information system (GIS) data provided by the Assessor, parcels with a tax use code of “Vacant” were identified. These sites were then visually reviewed (ground-truthed) against aerial photography to confirm the sites vacancy status. Once verified, the attributes of the vacant land GIS data were exported into an Excel spreadsheet for the analysis.
Underutilized Land
The Alternatives Report used parcel improvement value data from the County Assessor (Santa Barbara County) to identify underutilized parcels. Underutilized sites were classified as parcels where the improvement value was less than half the land value, which suggested that the parcels were underutilized to a degree that would make them more likely to redevelop within the planning period (2040). Underutilized and vacant parcels are considered opportunity sites for future development or redevelopment.
For Alternative A, this analysis assumes that all currently vacant and underutilized parcels in the city will develop/redevelop at the average density/intensity of all other parcels in that land use designation. For example, if the average density of all Medium Density Residential in the city is five dwelling units per acre, this analysis would assume that all vacant and underutilized parcels would also be developed/redeveloped at five dwelling units per acre. 160
77 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Alternative B and Alternative C include density and intensity increases in the HDR and TC designations. To analyze these proposed changes, a redevelopment percentage and assumed density range was applied to all parcels, within the HDR and TC designations (see Steps 3 and 4 below). All remaining vacant and underutilized parcels not within the HDR or TC designations are assumed to be developed/redeveloped at the average density/intensity consistent with Alternative A.
Step 3: Redevelopment
The analysis also evaluated the potential for existing developed areas to redevelop (i.e., remove an existing home and replace it with more units, such as a duplex or triplex), or increase the use of a parcel (i.e., adding additional units on a parcel with an existing home). This potential, expressed as a percentage of the total area evaluated, was applied to all parcels within the HDR and TC designations as a part of Alternative B and Alternative C. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were not considered in this analysis, as the State does not include ADUs in dwelling unit totals.
Step 4: Development Assumptions
All HDR and TC designated parcels in Alternative B and Alternative C, including vacant and underutilized, were assigned baseline development assumptions. These assumptions include:
Redevelopment Percentage
The total area under each land use designation is assumed to be redeveloped within the 2040 planning period. For this analysis, a 10 percent redevelopment percentage was applied to HDRdesignated parcels, and a five percent redevelopment percentage was applied to TC-desiganted parcels. That is, by 2040, it is assumed that 10 percent of all HDR parcels and five percent of all TC parcels will be redeveloped at the proposed density/intensity increases in Alternative B and Alternative C (see Table A-1).
Land Use Designation Existing Acres Redevelopment
Percentage
Acres to be
Redeveloped
High Density Residential 117.6 10 11.7
Tourist Commercial 59.7 5 2.9
14.6 Table A-1 Redevelopment Acreage by Designation
161
78 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Land Use
Designation
Typical Density = 75% of
Maximum
Maximum Density
(dwelling units per acre)
Typical Density
(dwelling units per acre)
Alternative B Alternative C Alternative B Alternative C High Density
Residential 24 DU/AC 32 DU/AC 18 DU/AC 24 DU/AC
Tourist
Commercial 20 DU/AC 32 DU/AC 15 DU/AC 24 DU/AC
Table A-2 Typical Density Assumption
Typical Density
Step 5: Dwelling Unit Potential
After applying the development assumptions to Alternative B and Alternative C, the potential number of new dwelling units and population were calculated. The number of new dwelling units in each alternative was calculated by multiplying the typical density by the number of acres of each parcel being analyzed. For example, if a parcel was one acre in size and the typical density was 12 DU/AC, then the total potential dwelling units would be 12 dwelling units.
When calculating the population, the average number of persons per household for Solvang is 2.4, according to the averages from the American Community Survey (2019) and Department of Finance (2019). This ratio was multiplied by the number of net new dwelling units projected. The following is a summary of the net new dwelling units and population for each alternative (see Table A-3).
Alternative
Net New
Dwelling Units Population
Alternative A 274 658
Alternative B 471 1,130
Alternative C 609 1,462
Table A-3 Dwelling Unit and Population Potential by Alternative For development, on average, maximum density/intensity is not usually achieved. For the analysis, a “typical” density of 75 percent of the maximum allowed density for the land use designation was assumed (see Table A-2).
162
79 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Step 6: Pending and Approved Projects
In addition to the net new housing units and population figures (from Step 5), new housing units and population based on pending and approved City projects were also added to the total potential.
Currently there are no pending and approved nonresidential projects. City staff provided the Consultants a list of pending and approved projects earlier in 2021 to inform this process. There are currently 88 pending and approved dwelling units (85 multi-family, three single-family), which would accommodate a population increase of 211 residents. Calculating new population for pending and approved projects used the same process for calculating the net new population.
Step 7: Projected Employment
The assumption for this analysis is that there is no net loss of commercial square footage assumed. The only gain in employment and nonresidential square footage is tied to the increase of the maximum TC FAR in Alternative B and Alternative C and development of vacant and underutilized parcels in all three alternatives according to data from the Santa Barbara County Assessor.
The following terms are used in the development assumption pertaining to employment capacity:
1. Employment Acreage. This is the percentage of the vacant/underutilized acreage within each nonresidential land use designation that is expected to develop with employment uses.
2. Floor Area Ratio (FAR). FAR is the building intensity measurement for nonresidential uses and refers to the ratio of total building floor area to the square footage of the parcel.
3. Percent of Acreage by Employment Type. These assumptions are applied to calculate the expected job types for each nonresidential designation analyzed in this report. The following are the employment types used in the analysis: Retail, Service, Agriculture, Manufacturing, and Wholesale.
The following tables show the employment assumptions applicable to the three alternatives.
Nonresidential Land Use
Designation Alternative Vacant Acres Underutilized Acres Tourist Commercial
A 0 8.09
B 0 59.7
C 0 59.7
Professional/Office
A 1.9 0
B 1.9 0
C 1.9 0
Public/Institutional
A 0.9 0
B 0.9 0
C 0.9 0
Table A-4 Vacant and Underutilized Acres
163
80 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Land Use Designation Alternative Min FAR Max FAR Percent of Max FAR Assumed FAR Redevelopment Percentage
Tourist Commercial
A 0.0 0.5 0.75 0.38 5%
B 0.0 0.65 0.75 0.49 5%
C 0.0 1.0 0.75 0.75 5%
Professional/Office
A 0.0 0.3 0.75 0.23 10%
B 0.0 0.3 0.75 0.23 10%
C 0.0 0.3 0.75 0.23 10%
Public/Institutional
A 0.0 0.20 0.75 0.15 10%
B 0.0 0.20 0.75 0.15 10%
C 0.0 0.20 0.75 0.15 10%
Table A-5 Assumed Development Standards
Land Use Designation Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Tourist Commercial(1) 40% 10% 0% 0% 0%
Professional/Office 20% 80% 0% 0% 0%
Public/Institutional 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
(1) TC includes 50 percent distributed use for multi-family development.
Table A-6 Assumed Distribution of Uses (applicable to all three alternatives) Land Use Designation Alternative Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Tourist Commercial
A(1) 2,640 660 0 0 0
B(2) 23,350 6,330 0 0 0
C(2) 39,000 9,750 0 0 0
Professional/Office
A 3,720 14,890 0 0 0
B 3,720 14,890 0 0 0
C 3,720 14,890 0 0 0
Public/Institutional
A 0 580 0 0 0
B 0 580 0 0 0
C 0 580 0 0 0
Total
A 22,490
B 48,870
C 67,940
(1) Assumes an existing General Plan FAR of 0.5. This FAR is applied to 8.09 acres deemed underutilized. (2) Assumes a FAR of 0.75 for Alt B and 1.00 for Alt C. These new FAR assumptions are applied to all 59.7 acres of TC since all acreage would be deemed underutilized with an increase in FAR.
Table A-7 Projected Nonresidential Square Footage
164
81 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Land Use Designation Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Tourist Commercial 320 335 0 0 0
Professional/Office 320 335 0 0 0
Public/Institutional 0 335 0 0 0
Table A-8 Assumed Square Footage Per Employee (applicable to all three alternatives) Land Use Designation Alternative Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Tourist Commercial
A(1) 8 1 0 0 0
B(2) 79 18 0 0 0
C(2) 121 29 0 0 0
Professional/Office
A 11 44 0 0 0
B 11 44 0 0 0
C 11 44 0 0 0
Public/Institutional
A 0 1 0 0 0
B 0 1 0 0 0
C 0 1 0 0 0
Total
A 65
B 153
C 206
(1) Projected employment is based on 8.09 acres of TC deemed underutilized. (2) Projected emplyoment is based on 59.7 acres of TC deemed underutilized.
Table A-9 Projected Employment by Land Use Designation
Land Use Designation Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Employment from vacant
and underutilized land 65 153 206
Existing Employment 3,227 3,227 3,227
Total 3,292 3,395 3,433
Table A-10 Employment Projection Total
165
82 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Step 8: Results
Total new dwellings per alternative includes net new dwellings, pending and approved projects, and existing dwelling units. This total provides a snapshot of the potential development capacity, assuming only a portion of the HDR and TC designations will redevelop by 2040. Total population is calculated by applying 2.4 persons per household to the total new dwelling units. Total new employment is calculated based on the employment development assumptions for vacant and underutilized nonresidential land use designations (see Step 7).
Category Existing Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Residents 6,126(1) 7,027(1) 7,600(1) 7,830(1)
Jobs 3,227(2) 3,292 (2) 3,380(2) 3,433(2)
Dwelling Units 2,566 2,928(3) 3,167(3) 3,263(3)
(1) Based on 2020 Census.
(2)Based on data from JobsEQ
(3)Alternative totals include 88 dwelling units assumed to be created by pending and approved projects.
Table A-11 Projected Development Capacity by Alternative 166
83 Public Review Draft | January 2022
This page is intentionally left blank.
167
84 | General Plan Alternatives Report
168
85 Public Review Draft | January 2022
All of these analyses are generally benchmarked to
2019, rather than 2020 or 2021. This is because
the General Plan is a long term document and we are
concerned with evaluating “normal” economic and fiscal
relationships in the City that should be more characteristic of the long term trends after the recovery for the
COVID-19 pandemic is complete. Part of the alternatives evaluation includes consideration of the deviations that occurred during COVID and the need to create more
resiliency in the local economy. However, in the present document it is important to establish a baseline from
which to discuss those considerations. Table B-1 shows
the distribution of jobs by industry in Solvang for 2019. (The Existing Conditions Workbook showed industry of
employment for workers living in Solvang, but this table shows the jobs actually located in the City.) These job numbers are used in the tourism and fiscal analyses
below.
Tourism Analysis
Tourism is the largest sector in Solvang’s economy,
accounting for one third of jobs and nearly two thirds
of City General Fund revenue. AirSage estimates that
Solvang received more than 1.5 million visitors in 2019, about 8.2 percent of the County total of 18.8 million.
Dean Runyan Associates estimates that visitors spent
about $1.98 billion in Santa Barbara County in 2019.
ADE estimates that visitors spent about $132.7 million in Solvang that year (Table B-2).
Introduction
In preparation for the General Plan Update
Alternatives Analysis, Applied Development
Economics (ADE) has prepared an analysis of the
fiscal contribution of the tourism and retail sectors in Solvang. In part, this analysis also updates a portion
of the information presented in the Existing Conditions Workbook published in May 2021. The first section
presents data on visitor counts and characteristics
obtained from Airsage, Inc. In addition to providing
new market data for Solvang, ADE is able to use this
information to refine estimates of visitor spending.
The second section of this report outlines a
comprehensive analysis of retail demand and supply
in Solvang, incorporating the new visitor spending
estimates, along with projections of household retail
purchasing power and business to business and
commuter spending.
The final section of the report estimates the sales
tax generation of the retail spending, along with
estimates of property tax and other revenues and
costs to portray the fiscal impact of not only retail and tourism but also residential and other non-residential
land uses in Solvang. This fiscal model has also been
used to evaluate General Plan land use alternatives
in the separate Alternatives Report.
B Appendix
Tourism and Retail Market Analysis and
Fiscal Impacts of Land Use
169
86 | General Plan Alternatives Report
INDUSTRY NAICS JOBS 10 YEAR %
CHANGE IN JOBS
10 YEAR CHANGE
IN JOBS
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 11 57 13.9% 7 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas
Extraction 21 16 -12.0% -2
Utilities 22 0 n/a n/a
Construction 23 74 -18.7% -17
Manufacturing 31 152 29.8% 35
Wholesale Trade 42 56 -7.5% -5
Retail Trade 44 489 -18.6% -112
Transportation and Warehousing 48 26 -28.0% -10
Information 51 0 -100.0% -13
Finance and Insurance 52 92 -38.5% -58
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 53 58 -27.2% -22
Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services 54 157 25.8% 32
Management of Companies and
Enterprises 55 38 29.8% 9
Administrative and Support and Waste
Management and Remediation Services 56 64 -46.9% -56
Educational Services 61 96 32.0% 23
Health Care and Social Assistance 62 524 14.8% 68
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 18 843.9% 16
Accommodation and Food Services 72 1,359 87.8% 635
Other Services (except Public
Administration) 81 67 -29.0% -27
Public Administration 92 84 -51.6% -89
Total - All Industries - 3,425 13.4% 406
Source: Chmura JobsEQ.
Table B-1: Jobs by Industry and 10 Year Change in Solvang, 2019 170
87 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Based on the AirSage data, Solvang, Buellton, and Santa Ynez attract similar shares of visitors to the Santa Ynez Valley (Table B-3). While Solvang has a more extensive downtown village to attract visitors, Buellton benefits from its visibility on SR 101 and Santa Ynez features the Chumash Resort Casino. Los Olivos has 1.6 percent of County visitors, at 303,500. Solvang attracted a higher share of County visitors during COVID (2/20-2/21), with 10.0 percent of the County total (1.4 million visitors). However, only 9 percent of these visitors spent the night, compared to 23 percent preCOVID.
SPENDING CATEGORY COUNTY SOLVANG PERCENT OF COUNTY
Accommodation $522,700,000 $37,841,667 7.2%
Food Service $560,900,000 $45,993,800 8.2%
Food Stores $59,100,000 $4,846,200 8.2%
Local Tran & Gas $229,600,000 $16,702,464 7.3%
Arts, Ent. & Rec. $231,700,000 $891,916 0.4%
Retail Sales $321,900,000 $26,395,800 8.2%
Visitor Air Tran. $50,800,000 $0 0.0%
Total $1,976,700,000 $132,671,847 6.7%
Source: County data from Dean Runyan Assc., City data estimated by ADE.
Table B-2: Visitor Spending by Category, Santa Barbara County and Solvang, 2019 JURISDICTION 2019 3/19-2.20 3/20-2/21
PERCENT
DECLINE
2020 TO
2021
Santa Barbara
County 18,800,000 100.0% 19,000,000 100.0% 14,000,000 100.0% 26.3% Solvang 1,540,000 8.2% 1,600,000 8.4% 1,400,000 10.0% 12.5% Santa Ynez 1,455,700 7.7% 1,516,000 8.0% 1,211,700 8.7% 20.1% Buellton 1,698,300 9.0% 1,717,500 9.0% 1,346,600 9.6% 21.6% Los Olivos 303,500 1.6% 312,800 1.6% 230,700 1.6% 26.2% Source: ADE, Inc., based on AirSage data.
Table B-3: Visitor Counts for Solvang and Other Santa Ynez Valley Locations, January 2019 to February 2021
171
88 | General Plan Alternatives Report
In 2019, AirSage estimates that 20 percent of visitors to Solvang stayed overnight and that the length of stay for all visitors was 1.75 days. The City reports that during fiscal year 2018-19, 215,301 room nights were sold. During that 12 months, AirSage logged 290,208 overnight visitors, suggesting that the average party size for overnight visitors to Solvang is 1.35 persons.
About 85 percent of visitors come from California locations, with New York, Arizona, Washington, and Texas rounding out the top five origins for Solvang visitors. For visitors from California, in addition to the 20 percent staying overnight, 24 percent stayed 2- 4 hours and 56 percent less than 2 hours.
In terms of the age distribution of visitors, 41 percent are between 30 and 59 years old, while 40 percent are younger than 30. About 19 percent are 60 years or older. While these figures are for all visitors, they are very similar to the California state average age distribution.
The income distribution of visitors skews toward the middle income segments, compared to state averages. About 34 percent of visitors are in the $100,000 or greater household income bracket, compared to 40.5 percent statewide and 29 percent of visitors have between $50,000 and $100,000 in household income, compared to 27.8 percent for the state as a whole. Again, the Solvang visitor data includes 15 percent from out of state. About 69 percent of visitors are White, 12 percent Asian, and 5 percent Black.
Figure B-1 shows the monthly distribution of visitors from January 2019 through June 2021. Based on the 2019 pattern, the peak visitor month is July and Solvang also gets a bump in visitors around the Christmas holidays. In 2020, visitor counts cratered in March and April when the stay at home orders became effective, but then rebounded close to 2019 levels by August. However, there was no Christmas boost in 2020. Visitor levels peaked again in the spring of 2021, but June appears lower than the 2019 levels.
FIGURE B-1: Monthly Visitors for Solvang and Other Santa Ynez Valley Locations, 2019-2021 172
89 Public Review Draft | January 2022
income goes below $70,000, the percentage of income
going towards retail purchases increases.
Local household spending represents the single largest
component that supports any community’s retail
commercial sectors. The primary factors that affect the demand for retail goods and services include the number of households living in the local market area, and the
average income and its distribution across different
income groups. Retail demand for Solvang households
was calculated by estimating household spending across
multiple store categories. The spending estimates include separate calculations for each income grouping in order to capture the distinct spending patterns that evolve as income increases. It is important to do this in order to avoid overestimating the retail spending by high income households.
Retail Market Analysis
Retail establishments serve multiple roles for a
community. They typically act as places of commerce,
while simultaneously adding to the quality of life by
providing goods and services to local residents, visitors, commuting workers, and other businesses. For Solvang,
its uniqueness as a community and attraction as a
visitor destination are defined by its retail businesses.
In addition to meeting spending demand, retail stores
also generate sales tax revenue that helps support public services and local government operations.
In general, Solvang has a relatively small population
with high household income. The community also has a
sizable base of retail stores that is supported by the high volume of visitors that pass through Solvang.
Household Income
According to data from the American Community Survey,
Solvang had an average (median) household income of
about $83,431 in 2019, with an aggregate household
income of over $290.5 million (Table 4). Compared
to Santa Barbara County ($74,624) and California
($75,235), Solvang has a slightly higher median income
with a total of about 2,300 households.
The distribution of income shows a broad cross-section of different households. About 40 percent of households in Solvang earn at least $100,000 annually, while about
25 percent of households earn less than $50,000.
The calculated mean household income of Solvang is
$124,380.
It should be noted that even though discretionary
income for retail spending increases as households earn more, the relationship between retail spending and
income is not entirely linear. Especially in the highest income groups, the percentage of income that goes
to retail purchases decreases noticeably. For example,
households earning between $70,000 and $200,000
annually will typically spend about 25 to 27 percent of their income on retail goods, while households earning
above $200,000 will typically spend around 18
percent of their income on retail items. As household
173
90 | General Plan Alternatives Report
by about 0.4 percent annually over the next 10 years
through 2031. This results in a net increase of about
100 households during this period to just over 2,400
total households (The growth projections will be revisited and possibly revised during the Alternatives Analysis).
As shown in Table 5, this household growth results in a net increase of about $1.6 million in household retail
spending. About half of this spending growth will occur in the food and automotive categories.
Using a very conservative benchmark of $250 per
square foot, this would equate to potential spending
support for about 6,350 square feet overall. It should
be noted that existing store vacancies and expansion of existing businesses can potentially absorb a portion of this additional demand.
In addition, the influence of e-commerce will likely
continue to erode the proportion of retail purchases that go towards physical stores. Unless a community expands
its retail support by attracting new shoppers, adding
new residents, or increasing the household income in the community, the shift towards e-commerce will have the
net effect of reducing the spending support for local retail stores.
INCOME RANGE HOUSEHOLDS TOTAL INCOME AVERAGE INCOME
Under $15,000 194 $1,995,772 $10,261
$15,000 to $29,999 154 $3,534,331 $22,972
$30,000 to $39,999 130 $4,277,000 $32,985
$40,000 to $49,999 107 $5,097,081 $47,455
$50,000 to $69,999 356 $22,128,475 $62,199
$70,000 to $99,999 423 $35,107,848 $82,961
$100,000 to $149,999 398 $50,765,184 $127,646
$150,000 to $199,999 235 $41,149,191 $175,000
$200,000 and Over 306 $122,393,049 $400,270
Total 2,303 $286,447,931 $124,380
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from American Community Survey (Five-Year Sample, 2013-2019) and California Department of Finance (January 2021 Estimate).
Table B-4: Solvang Household Income Distribution
Solvang Retail Spending
Household Spending
As shown in Table B-5, the household spending for
Solvang households totals $63.0 million. It should be
noted that this reflects household retail spending power, and does not necessarily represent the actual spending
that takes place in Solvang. Because of Solvang’s
alignment with visitor-serving retail stores, a portion of the retail spending by Solvang residents will likely continue to leave the community.
Using an analytical model that accounts for the
distribution of household income in Solvang, ADE
estimated the total retail spending by local households.
The largest demand comes from grocery stores ($9.3
million), restaurants/eating places ($11.3 million),
general merchandise stores ($11.0 million), car
dealerships ($10.8 million), and gas stations ($7.4
million).
Projected 2031 Household Spending
Using the 2019 growth forecast from the Santa Barbara
County Association of Governments (SBCAG), the
number of households Solvang is only expected to grow
174
91 Public Review Draft | January 2022
RETAIL GROUP 2021 HOUSEHOLD
SPENDING
2031 PROJECTED
SPENDING
2019 TO 2029
SPENDING GROWTH
Apparel Store Group $3,325,209 $3,404,572 $79,363
Women's Apparel $653,089 $669,293 $16,204
Men's Apparel $112,406 $115,008 $2,602
Family Clothing $1,864,830 $1,909,437 $44,608
Shoe Stores $694,884 $710,834 $15,950
General Merchandise Group $11,038,366 $11,324,928 $286,563 Specialty Retail Group $3,022,573 $3,100,858 $78,285
Gifts & Novelties $145,516 $149,276 $3,760
Sporting Goods $496,354 $507,505 $11,152
Florists $28,599 $29,335 $736
Records & Music $23,596 $24,283 $687
Books & Stationery $268,397 $275,588 $7,191
Office Supplies/Computer Equipment $116,763 $119,894 $3,131 Jewelry $156,987 $161,566 $4,579
Misc. Specialty Retail $1,786,362 $1,833,412 $47,050
Food, Eating and Drinking Group $21,380,459 $21,943,095 $562,636 Grocery Stores $9,308,610 $9,560,742 $252,132
Specialty Food Stores $303,171 $311,444 $8,274
Liquor Stores $472,313 $484,387 $12,074
Eating Places $11,296,365 $11,586,522 $290,157
Building Materials and Home Furnishings Group $4,189,844 $4,298,956 $109,112 Furniture & Home Furnishings $1,105,778 $1,134,125 $28,348 Household Appliances & Electronics $1,068,944 $1,097,222 $28,277 Used Merchandise $42,759 $43,902 $1,143
Nurseries & Garden Supply Stores $340,021 $348,821 $8,800 Lumber & Other Building Materials $1,632,341 $1,674,886 $42,544 Automotive Group $20,008,076 $20,479,928 $471,851
New Cars & RVs $10,803,284 $11,041,865 $238,581
Used Car Dealers $1,172,494 $1,198,218 $25,724
Gasoline Service Stations $7,395,489 $7,587,057 $191,568 Mobile Homes & Trailers $4,586 $4,711 $125
Auto Parts & Accessories $371,688 $381,487 $9,800
Other Vehicles $260,536 $266,589 $6,053
Total $62,964,526 $64,552,337 $1,587,811
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from American Community Survey (Five-Year Sample, 2015-2019), California Department of Finance (2021 Estimate), Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, and U.S. Economic Census.
Table B-5: Solvang Household Income Distribution
175
92 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Table B-6 shows the potential household spending
shift towards e-commerce by 2031. This is based
on pre-pandemic spending patterns. Even though the
unadjusted household spending growth estimates an
overall growth of $1.6 million between 2021 and
2031, nearly $1 million in household spending will shift towards e-commerce during this period. This reduces
the household spending growth to $610,493 when
balancing the household growth against the e-commerce
market shift.
The growth in e-commerce demand varies considerably
by retail store type. For example, food-related and
automotive businesses will still have a net growth in
household demand after accounting for e-commerce.
Spending for apparel stores, specialty retail stores, and building materials/home furnishings stores will see net reductions in household spending.
Visitor Spending
While Solvang households make a significant spending
base for local businesses, the majority of local spending demand comes from visitors. According to AirSage,
Solvang attracts for about 8.2 percent of the total
visitors to Santa Barbara County. This is consistent with the accommodations spending data which shows that
Solvang collects about 7.2 percent of the total room
revenues (and 9.2 percent of transient occupancy
taxes) in Santa Barbara County. Applying the visitor
counts to the Santa Barbara County tourism spending
estimates from Dean Runyan Associates, Solvang visitors annually generate about $93.9 million in retail spending demand. It should be noted that not all of this spending will occur in Solvang.
As shown in Table B-7, restaurants and other food and
drink service establishments in Solvang account for about half of the total visitor spending.
Potential Shifts to E-Commerce
For decades, the retail market has seen a gradual shift in consumer spending towards remote retailing. Prior to the rising commercialization of the world wide web, remote
retailing consisted of mail order catalog sales, phone
ordering, and other point-of-sale transactions that resulted in retail goods delivery straight to a shopper’s home.
The more recent shift towards e-commerce represents
a continuation of this long-term trend. The COVID-19
pandemic has dramatically accelerated these trends.
As retail businesses reopen, it is not yet known to what extent consumers will return to pre-pandemic shopping
patterns, or if the accelerated shift to e-commerce will be permanent.
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce,
e-commerce accounted for about 11.4 percent of total
retail transactions at the end of 2019. This represents a significant increase from less than one percent in 2000 when the agency began tracking transactions originating on the internet. According to the Economic Census,
non-store retailing, which includes the types of mail order shopping occurring before the internet, accounted for
3.8 percent of all retail sales in 1997. By 2017, this
had grown to 10.8 percent of total retail sales, which is consistent with the e-commerce data.
While e-commerce has generally grown at a steady
pace at just over twice the growth rate of the overall
retail sector, the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically
accelerated the growth of e-commerce for retail sales.
By the end of the 2nd quarter of 2020, the e-commerce
share of overall retail sales increased from 11.4 percent at the start of the year to 16.1 percent. According to
Moody’s Analytics, this represents “approximately ten
years of evolutionary change within three to four months.” E-commerce will likely continue to influence the retail market by shifting away from physical stores and more
towards web-based ordering. While physical stores
can be involved in the fulfillment and delivery of retail products, the majority of this shift results in long-term reductions in the number of shoppers going to retail
stores.
176
93 Public Review Draft | January 2022
RETAIL GROUP 2021 SOLVANG
HOUSEHOLD SPENDING
2031 PROJECTED
SPENDING
(E-COMMERCE
ADJUSTED)
2021 TO 2031
SPENDING GROWTH
(E-COMMERCE
ADJUSTED)
Apparel Store Group $3,325,209 $3,296,059 ($29,150)
General Merchandise Group $11,038,366 $11,122,537 $84,172 Specialty Retail Group $3,022,573 $2,780,639 ($241,934) Food, Eating and Drinking Group $21,380,459 $21,917,806 $537,347 Grocery Stores $9,308,610 $9,535,452 $226,842
Specialty Food Stores $303,171 $311,444 $8,274
Liquor Stores $472,313 $484,387 $12,074
Eating Places $11,296,365 $11,586,522 $290,157
Building Materials and Home
furnishings Group $4,189,844 $4,097,964 ($91,880)
Furniture & Home Furnishings $1,105,778 $1,066,420 ($39,358) Household Appliances &
Electronics $1,068,944 $964,582 ($104,363)
Used Merchandise $42,759 $43,902 $1,143
Nurseries & Garden Supply Stores $340,021 $348,821 $8,800 Lumber & Other Building Materials $1,632,341 $1,674,239 $41,898 Automotive Group $20,008,076 $20,360,015 $351,938
New Cars & RVs $10,803,284 $10,921,953 $118,668
Used Car Dealers $1,172,494 $1,198,218 $25,724
Gasoline Service Stations $7,395,489 $7,587,057 $191,568 Mobile Homes & Trailers $4,586 $4,711 $125
Auto Parts & Accessories $371,688 $381,487 $9,800
Other Vehicles $260,536 $266,589 $6,053
Total $62,964,526 $63,575,019 $610,493
Source: ADE, Inc.; data from American Community Survey (Five-Year Sample, 2013-2017), California Department of Finance (2019 Estimate), U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, and U.S. Economic Census.
Table B-6: Potential Effect of E-Commerce on future Household Spending Growth 177
94 | General Plan Alternatives Report
Retail Sales
Solvang had a retail sales total of $141.2 million in
2019, as shown in Table B-8. The sales total comes
from multiple data sources, including the City records, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) sales tax allocation records and the InfoUSA/
Salesgenie business database. The categorical retail
sales includes an adjustment that estimates the sales from non-taxable items. In store categories where the sales
were not disclosed due to confidentiality restrictions, the analysis substituted data from third-party sources.
In Solvang, over half of the retail sales come from food stores and restaurants/drinking places. Building materials stores, general merchandise stores, and specialty retail stores each generated over $15 million in sales.
Retail Leakage/Net Capture of
Sales
Retail leakage represents an existing shortfall, where a community’s retail establishments generate insufficient sales to meet the household demand. This leakage also
Commuter Spending
According to the U.S. Census Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics data, Solvang’s commute patterns yield a net in-commute of about 250 workers on a
daily basis. This means that more workers commute into
jobs located in Solvang than local residents that leave Solvang for jobs outside the city. As shown in Table B-7, this pattern adds another $964,197 to the total local
retail spending potential for the Solvang market. The
largest portion of spending occurs with restaurants and food service establishments.
Business-to-Business Spending
Local businesses make up another component of
demand for retail businesses in Solvang. Using data
from the JobsEQ input-output model and Solvang’s
proportion of employment in Santa Barbara County
by sector, the estimated retail demand by Solvang
businesses totals about $4.8 million annually, as shown in Table B-7. The majority of this demand occurs with
restaurants and food service establishments.
RETAIL GROUP HOUSEHOLD
SPENDING
VISITOR
SPENDING
COMMUTER
SPENDING
BUSINESSTO-BUSINESS
SPENDING
TOTAL LOCAL
SPENDING
Building Material and Garden
Equipment Dealers $1,972,363 $0 $42,731 $228,674 $2,283,555 Clothing and Clothing
Accessories Stores $3,325,209 $4,592,343 $102,947 $287,527 $8,369,615 Food and Beverage Stores $10,084,093 $4,846,200 $117,949 $25,009 $15,284,279 Food Services and Drinking
Places $11,296,365 $45,993,800 $263,387 $3,495,525 $61,273,975 Automotive $20,008,076 $16,702,464 $131,003 $210,696 $37,418,490 General Merchandise Stores $11,038,366 $11,038,886 $140,473 $64,863 $22,504,662 Home Furnishings and
Appliance Stores $2,217,481 $0 $8,807 $197,519 $2,468,572 Other Retail Group $3,022,573 $10,764,571 $156,900 $295,871 $14,300,585 Total - All Retail Categories $62,964,526 $93,938,264 $964,197 $4,805,685 $163,903,734 Source: ADE, Inc.; data from American Community Survey (Five-Year Sample, 2015-2019), California Department of Finance (2021 Estimate), Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey, U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, U.S. Economic Census, ICSC-UW Extension, JobsEQ input-output model, AirSage, and Dean Runyan Associates.
Table B-7: Components of Retail Spending in Solvang
178
95 Public Review Draft | January 2022
to-business transactions. Because the sales exceed the
demand, Solvang businesses in this category likely attract spending from outside of the city.
Clothing Stores
Clothing stores consist of stores specializing in clothing, accessories, bags/luggage, and shoes. Stores in
Solvang generated a total of $6.4 million in sales.
When compared to the total demand of $8.5 million,
these stores generate a leakage. Over half of the
demand comes from visitor spending. This could indicate that the stores in this category cater more towards visitor spending, while spending by local households more
disproportionately leaves Solvang for other areas with a larger concentration of clothing stores.
Other Retail Group
This category includes specialty retail stores that focus on particular product groups, and as a group they
encompass wide variety of different product offerings
and store types.
represents an opportunity, because existing retailers can expand or upgrade, or new retailers can locate into
Solvang to potentially meet that demand.
A comparison of Solvang’s retail sales against the
$163.9 million in total local spending, the community
has an overall retail leakage of around $22.7 million.
Because the sales tax data provided for the analysis was more aggregated than those used for the household retail spending estimates, the findings for retail sales and sales leakage/net capture are presented in Table 8 by major
store grouping.
Building Materials and Home Furnishing Group
The building materials group generally includes
hardware stores and home improvement businesses such
as home centers, lumber dealers, nurseries, and paint
stores. The category will also sometimes include point-ofsale transactions from contractors and similar businesses that have storefront operations. Solvang businesses
show a net capture of $16.9 million. With the home
improvement categories in particular, a significant portion of their sales come from contractors and other businessRETAIL GROUP TOTAL LOCAL DEMAND SOLVANG RETAIL SALES
RETAIL LEAKAGE (NET
CAPTURE)
Building Material and Garden
Equipment Dealers $2,283,555 $19,198,800 ($16,915,245)
Clothing and Clothing Accessories
Stores $8,369,615 $6,421,900 $1,947,715
Food and Beverage Stores $15,284,279 $33,331,279 ($18,047,000) Food Services and Drinking Places $61,273,975 $43,443,500 $17,830,475 Automotive $37,418,490 $4,348,500 $33,069,990
General Merchandise Stores $22,504,662 $15,436,700 $7,067,962 Home Furnishings and Appliance
Stores $2,468,572 $3,956,800 ($1,488,228)
Other Retail Group $14,300,585 $15,053,100 ($752,515)
Total - All Retail Categories $163,903,734 $141,190,579 $22,713,155 Source: ADE, Inc.; data from US Census American Community Survey, Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Economic Census, California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), and InfoUSA/Salesgenie.
Notes: Due to confidentiality restrictions, the automotive and general merchandise categories use sales data from third-party data sources. was combined with the other retail group. Sales totals include an estimate of non-taxable goods sold at retail stores, such as groceries and prescription medications.
Table B-8: Retail Leakage in Solvang by Business Category 179
96 | General Plan Alternatives Report
For this combined category, the stores generated $15.1
million in sales, with a slight net capture of about
$752,515. This indicates that much of the existing
consumer demand in this category is in balance with the retail stores operating in Solvang.
General Merchandise Stores
General merchandise stores include a cross-section of
stores that carry broad merchandise lines in multiple
product categories. These include traditional department stores, discount department stores, warehouse clubs,
variety/dollar stores, and drug stores. Solvang has a
retail sales of about $15.4 million in this category. Most of Solvang’s business activity in general merchandise
comes from drug stores. Because the community lacks
other large format stores such as warehouse clubs and
supercenters, a lot of the spending in this category from local households likely leaves Solvang. In addition, local drug stores can at least partially meet the demand that would normally go towards larger stores because they
also carry a broad merchandise lineup.
Food Stores and Restaurants
Food-oriented retail stores and restaurants generated a combined $76.8 million in retail sales in 2019, and
have about $76.4 million in total spending demand.
Food stores generated about $18.1 million in net
sales capture, while restaurants and food service
establishments had a leakage of about $17.8 million.
This would indicate that Solvang is a destination for
grocery shopping. With restaurants, about 76 percent
of the demand comes from visitors. The sales leakage
would indicate that visitors to Solvang are also dining out in other areas during their visits. More likely residents are eating elsewhere, plus groceries are selling prepared foods.
Automotive
The automotive retail group includes motor vehicle
dealerships, parts stores, and gasoline service stations.
Because Solvang does not have many establishments
in this category, with no automobile dealerships, the
automotive category generate a large sales leakage of
$33.1 million.
BUDGET CATEGORY FISCAL YEAR
2018-2019
Revenues
Property Tax Current $847,818
Property Tax in lieu of VLF $527,486
Property Tax Prior $26,319
Sales and Use Tax $1,507,745
Transient Occupancy Tax $4,540,786
Property Transfer Tax $77,639
Intergovernmental $5,000
Fees for Service $542,474
Rental/Lease Income $41,969
Events $15,135
Miscellaneous/Donations $114,902
Overhead/Reimbursements/
Transfers $702,280
Interest $289,298
Total Revenues $9,238,851
Expenditures
City Council $303,710
Special Agency $192,200
Administrative Services $1,689,371
Parks and Recreation $910,076
Planning and Building $776,336
Marketing/Tourism $943,198
Public Safety/Law
Enforcement $1,814,230
Library $174,501
Public Works $1,976,612
Total Expenditures $8,780,234
Total Net $458,617
Source: City of Solvang Adopted Budget, FY 2018-19
Table B-9: City of Solvang General Fund, Fiscal
Year 2018-2019
Home Furnishings and Appliances
This retail group includes furniture, home furnishings, appliance, and electronics stores. This market generally relies more on local household demand, and generally
does not attract much spending from visitors. Solvang
businesses in this category generate a net capture of
about $1.5 million.
180
97 Public Review Draft | January 2022
Fiscal Analysis
Introduction
The fiscal analysis calculates the City revenues and
costs generated by various land uses in Solvang. It is
benchmarked to the fiscal year 2018-19 City General
Fund Budget (Table B-9) for reasons discussed in the
Introduction to this document. In addition to the City
budget, ADE has analyzed property value data to
distribute the property taxes to various land uses.
The analysis also integrates the previous tourism and
retail studies to allocate sales taxes by land use. The cost analysis is based on a per capita average cost
methodology.
Land Use Inventory
Based on State Department of Finance records, Solvang
had 2,696 housing units and a population of 5,577 at
the beginning of 2019 (Table 10). As shown in Table 1
above, the City also had 3,425 jobs, distributed among
land uses as shown in Table B-10. In addition to the
1,375 jobs in the hospitality sector, the fiscal analysis also includes impacts from the visitor population. This is discussed in more detail in the methodology section at
the end of the paper.
RESIDENTIAL
LAND USE
DWELLING
UNITS POPULATION
Residential Land Use
Single Family 1,570 3,393
Multi-Family 1,126 2,184
Total 2,696 5,577
Nonresidential Land Use
Commercial - 556
Industrial - 324
Office - 409
Agriculture/
Vacant - 57
Hospitality - 1,375
Public/
Institutional - 704
Total Jobs - 3,425
Source: ADE, Inc., based on CA Department of Finance E-5 Report, January 1, 2020 and Chmura JobsEQ 2019 Employment.`
Table B-10: 2019 City of Solvang Land Use Inventory
Fiscal Analysis Results
Table B-11 shows the outcome of the fiscal analysis in
terms of revenues and costs generated by each major
land use type. The hospitality sector dominates the
budget picture, generating an estimated $5.99 million
annually in City revenue against $3.03 million in costs.
The $2.96 million in net revenue from hospitality more
than covers the estimated $2.57 deficit from combined
residential uses. It should be noted that the residential property tax is based on existing average assessed
value, which is lower than current market prices for new housing units. The average assessed value for single
family homes in the analysis is $545,250 and for multifamily housing it is $99,200. Single family homes sold in the past two years were priced 29 percent above the
citywide average assessed value for similar units and
condominiums were double the City average for existing
condominiums. Therefore, in the Alternatives Analysis,
new residential units will likely show a better fiscal
outcome. But in terms of the City’s existing tax base, the analysis underscores the importance of tourism and other non-residential sectors to maintain the City’s fiscal health.
The Methodology section below discusses the details
of how these numbers are calculated. At this point it is important to note that the allocation of the sales tax by land use, in particular, understates the true importance of retail businesses in the City. Retail and restaurants produce about 75 percent of the sales tax the City
receives. However, in Table B-11, the taxable purchases by City residents are allocated to the residential land uses and purchases by visitors are allocated to the
hospitality sector. The sales tax amount shown for the
commercial sector is the residual above these local
spending sources and essentially reflects the capture of sales from shoppers living outside the City.
181
98 | General Plan Alternatives Report
BUDGET CATEGORY TOTAL FAMILY SINGLE- FAMILY MULTI- COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL OFFICE AGRICULTURE/ VACANT HOSPITALITY PUBLIC/ INSTITUTIONAL Property TaxRevenues
$847,818 $562,523 $73,392 $64,864 $2,243 $24,639 $3,996 $83,939 $32,223 of VLF
Property Tax in lieu $527,486 $349,984 $45,662 $40,356 $1,395 $15,330 $2,486 $52,224 $20,048 Sales Tax $1,507,745 $300,545 $193,427 $109,572 $159,731 $31,209 $0 $713,261 $0 Tax
Transient Occupancy $4,540,786 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,540,786 $0 Property Transfer Tax $77,639 $51,513 $6,721 $5,940 $205 $2,256 $366 $7,687 $2,951 Intergovernmental $5,000 $3,042 $1,958 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fees for Service $542,353 $197,310 $126,986 $16,166 $9,420 $11,892 $1,657 $158,453 $20,469 Rental/Lease Income $41,960 $15,265 $9,824 $1,251 $729 $920 $128 $12,259 $1,584 Donations
Miscellaneous/ $114,876 $41,792 $26,897 $3,424 $1,995 $2,519 $351 $33,562 $4,336 TransfersReimbursements/
Overhead/
$702,124 $255,435 $164,395 $20,928 $12,195 $15,395 $2,145 $205,132 $26,499 Interest $287,948 $57,455 $20,988 $8,485 $6,074 $3,367 $360 $187,723 $3,495 General Government $2,184,938 $769,097 $494,982 $45,098 $26,280 $33,175 Expenditures Total Revenues $9,195,735 $1,834,864 $670,250 $270,986 $193,989 $107,526 $11,490 $5,995,027 $111,603 $4,623 $754,580 $57,103
Parks and Recreation $910,061 $553,704 $356,358 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Planning and Building $776,163 $282,371 $181,731 $23,135 $13,481 $17,018 $2,372 $226,763 $29,293 Marketing/Tourism $943,198 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,198 $0 Enforcement
Public Safety/Law $1,813,826 $659,875 $424,689 $54,064 $31,505 $39,770 $5,543 $529,926 $68,455 Library $174,498 $106,169 $68,329 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Public Works $1,976,172 $718,937 $462,700 $58,903 $34,325 $43,330 $6,039 $577,357 $74,582 SurplusBudget (deficit)/
General Fund Net
Total Expenditures $8,778,856 $3,090,153 $1,988,789 $181,199 $105,591 $133,292 $18,576 $3,031,824 $229,432 $416,879 ($1,255,289) ($1,318,539) $89,787 $88,398 ($25,766) ($7,086) $2,963,203 ($117,829) Source: ADE, Inc.
Table B-11: Fiscal Impact of Existing Land Uses in Solvang: Fiscal Year 2018-2019 182
99 Public Review Draft | January 2022
residents’ expenditures are allocated to the residential land uses; however, it is important to recognize that
Solvang only gets those taxes if the purchases are made locally, mainly in retail and restaurant establishments. At the top of the table, there is a category for Net Pools and Administrative Adjustments. The County pool is
mainly derived from the Santa Barbara County share of
taxes paid on internet sales. In the fiscal analysis, these revenues have been proportionally distributed across all land uses.
Business to business sales taxes are allocated to the
non-residential land use categories. From Table B-13,
Business Services and Leasing have been allocated
to the Office land use. Food Processing equipment,
Wholesale Building Materials, and all other Business
to Business sales categories have been allocated to
industrial land uses. The $109,572 in sales taxes
allocated to commercial land uses are the residual of
total sales not otherwise allocated to other land uses.
However, in reality, 75 percent of all taxable sales in Solvang are made in retail stores and restaurants.
Methodology
This section describes the data sources and approach
used in the analysis in more detail. The first sections describe the major revenues and the final section
discusses the per capita methodology.
Property Tax
ADE accessed property data from Corelogic Listsource
to estimate the assessed value by land use for Solvang
(Table B-12). The available data was for fiscal year
2019-20, and ADE scaled the values to the 2018-19
fiscal year based on the change in property tax between those years as shown in the City budgets.
Single family homes, which include PUDs based on the
Assessor’s land use coding, represent two-thirds of the City property tax base. The hospitality sector includes both lodging and restaurants, to the extent the latter are identified separately. It is likely additional restaurants exist in some of the larger commercial buildings. The
institutional sector is mainly medical offices and facilities but also includes some churches and community
organizations.
Comparing the assessed values to the City base property tax revenues, Solvang receives about 6.6 percent of
the ad valorem one percent property tax that property
owners pay. The balance of property tax revenues go to
schools, Santa Barbra County and other taxing agencies.
The City also receives property tax in lieu of vehicle
licenses fees. This revenue is distributed by the state based on annual increases in the City assessed value
and for fiscal year 2018-19 increases City property tax revenues by more than 62 percent.
Sales Tax
The retail market analysis above details the purchasing power by market segment (households, visitors, B2B,
etc.). About 79 percent of household retail expenditures are taxable and the City receives one percent of taxable value in sales tax from the point of sale businesses in the City. Table B-13 shows all the business types in Solvang that collected sales tax for the year ending in the third quarter of 2019. In the fiscal analysis, the sales tax from
LAND USE ASSESSED VALUE
Residential
Single Family $856,045,691
Multi-Family $111,687,120
Total Residential $967,732,811
Nonresidential
Commercial 98,709,923
Industrial 3,413,013
Office 37,495,514
Agriculture/ Vacant 6,081,444
Hospitality 127,738,046
Institutional $49,037,162
Total Non-Residential $322,475,103
Total $1,290,207,914
Source: ADE, Inc., based on data from CoreLogic Listsource.
Table B-12: Estimated Assessed Value by Land
Use in Solvang, Fiscal Year 2018-2109
183
100
| General Plan Alternatives Report
also supports the Santa Ynez Valley Tourism Business
Improvement District Fund in the amount of $464,985 in
fiscal year 2018-19. This is funded by an additional tax of $3.00 per bed.
Per Capita Methodology
Most of the other revenues and costs in the preliminary fiscal analysis are calculated using a per capita
methodology. The per capita methodology is based on
analysis of the service population for the City. The service population includes the City residents, the businesses
in town as represented by the jobs they support, and
the visitors to the City. Each of these segments have
different level of service demand. Residents require the highest level of service, while employees are generally recognized to exert half the service demand of full time residents.
The annual visitor counts are converted to daily
equivalents by dividing them by 365 days. The
290,208 overnight visitors in 2018-19 are equivalent
to 1,391 daily visitors. For this analysis, overnight
visitors have been assigned the same service weight
as residents for most services, although we assume
that visitors do not use City recreation services or the library. The 1,451,040 day visitors are equivalent to
3,975 daily visitors. Their service demand is treated
similar to the daytime employee population (one-half of residential demand), but is further reduced to account
for the average amount of time spent in the City from the AirSage data. As discussed in the tourism section above, 70 percent of the day visitors spend less than two hours in the City and 30 percent spend up to four hours on
average (while the employee population is assumed to
work in 8 hours shifts). Thus, the service demand from
day visitors is 16.3% of residential demand compared to 50% for employees. These calculations result in a service population of 9,327, as shown in Table B-14.
The resulting per capita revenue and cost factors are
shown in Table B-15. In addition to the proportional
service impacts, we assume residents are 100 percent
responsible for any intergovernmental revenues the City receives and also consume 100 percent of recreation
and library services. Also, 100 percent of marketing
and tourism expenditures are assigned to the visitor
population.
CATEGORY YE 2019 Q3
Total Receipts 1,481,272
Net Pools/Admin/Adj 195,699
Local Businesses 1,285,573
General Retail 320,305
Apparel 64,219
Department Stores 1,317
Furniture/Appliance 39,568
Drug Stores 45,867
Recreation Products 5,246
Florist/Nursery 9,802
Misc. 154,285
Food Products 578,618
Restaurants 434,435
Food Markets 79,633
Liquor Stores 14,160
Food Processing Equipment 50,390
Transportation 89,074
Construction 233,818
Bldg. Matls - Whsle 57,797
Bldg. Matls - Retail 176,022
Business to Business 57,455
Office Equipment 7
Business Services 26,560
Chemical Products 1,679
Heavy Industry 24,412
Light Industry 1,916
Leasing 50
Source: City of Solvang.
Table B-13: Detailed Sales Tax Distribution by
Business Type
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
The TOT is the single largest revenue source for the
City and generates about half of the General Fund
revenue in normal economic times. The tax rate is 12
percent of room revenues. In fiscal year 2018-19, the
City reinvested $943,198 of these funds into marketing
and various maintenance activities to support the tourism market. Separate from the General Fund, the City
184
101
Public Review Draft | January 2022
General Government Costs
The City Council, Special Agency budget allocation, and the Administrative Services Department are assigned to a General Government category in Table B-11. The combined budget for these functions are $2.18 million and represent 25 percent the General Fund expenditure budget. These costs are assigned proportionally to each land use in Table B-11 based on the total of other service costs each land use requires.
POPULATION SEGMENT FULL TIME
EQUIVALENTS
SERVICE
WEIGHT
SERVICE
POPULATIONS PROPORTION
Population 5,577 100.0% 5,577 59.8%
Overnight Visitors 1,391 100.0% 1,391 14.9%
Day Visitors 3,975 16.3% 646 6.9%
Employees 3,425 50.0% 1,713 18.4%
Total 14,369 - 9,327 100.0%
Table B-14: Visitors and Service Demand
Revenues
RESIDENTIAL
POPULATION
OVERNIGHT
VISITORS DAY VISITORS BUSINESS-JOBS
ProPortionPer
Capita
ProPortionPer
Capita
ProPortionPer
Capita
ProPortionPer
Capita
Intergovernmental 100% $0.90 0% $0.00 0% $0.00 0% $0.00 Fees for Service 59.8% $58.15 14.9% $58.15 6.9% $9.45 18.4% $29.07 Rental/Lease Income 59.8% $4.50 14.9% $4.50 6.9% $0.73 18.4% $2.25 Miscellaneous/Donations 59.8% $12.32 14.9% $12.32 6.9% $2.00 18.4% $6.16 Overhead/Reimb./Tfrs 59.8% $75.28 14.9% $75.28 6.9% $12.23 18.4% $37.64 Service Costs
Parks and Recreation 100% $163.18 0.0% $0.00 0.0% $0.00 0% $0.00 Planning and Building 59.8% $83.22 14.9% $83.22 6.9% $13.52 18.4% $41.61 Marketing/Tourism 0% $0.00 68.3% $462.94 31.7% $75.23 0% $0.00 Public Safety/Law
Enforcement 59.8% $194.47 14.9% $194.47 6.9% $31.60 18.4% $97.24 Library 100% $31.29 0.0% $0.00 0.0% $0.00 0% $0.00
Public Works 59.8% $211.88 14.9% $211.88 6.9% $34.43 18.4% $105.94 Source: City of Solvang.
Table B-15: Per Capita Cost and Revenue Factors
185
186
This document provides a summary of Community Workshop #3 Survey results which was available from January 13th to February 4th, 2022. The survey was created in conjunction with the Land Use Alternatives Report and complimented the third Community Workshop held virtually on January 13, 2022. The survey was designed to encourage residents to participate even if they were unable to attend the workshop. The intent of the survey was to gauge the preference of the three land use alternatives, as outlined in the Alternatives Report. In addition, the survey allowed the City and Consultant team to ask a series of questions related to mobility options. Questions provided as part of the survey were in a multiple-choice format with the opportunity to provide written responses and comments on applicable questions. Feedback solicited from the community will be used throughout the process to select and narrow sites for potential housing and support the creation of goals, policies, and programs in the General Plan. The feedback provided on following pages are presented as written, without editing, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the City. Any comments that contained profanities were removed.
There is no ranking or order to these ideas.
Topic: Land Use Alternatives
Location: Online via plansolvang.com
Responses Received: 183 community participants
Attachment C
187
Question 1 – What is your relationship to the Solvang Community? (Select all that apply) 188
Question 2 – Have you visited the project website (plansolvang.com)? 189
Question 3 – If you live in Solvang, for how long?
190
Question 4 – Do you live and/or work in Solvang?
191
Question 5 – Did you attend the Virtual Community Workshop held on January 13, 2022? 192
Question 6 – What type of development do you feel that Solvang needs more or less of? 193
Question 7 – What is the most important concern you have about future growth in Solvang? 194
Question 7 [continued]: What is the most important concern you have about future growth in Solvang? The responses below are answers to those who responded “Other (please specify).”
Responses
All of the above!
Solvang is a destination for so many tourists that love the quaint feel that we valley people feel. To increase the density whether residential or commercial will not bring in enough want d revenue, and it will increase an already terrible traffic congestion issues. The city should relook at their budget and see where we are leaking revenue or spending. Also, homeowners pay a lot in property taxes; why isn’t Solvang able to receive their fair share. Creating a denser area, will create many long-term problems, for near term fiscal policies.
Most of the above
what's the rationale to increase size of Solvang with non-English speaking people?? There is not enough water available to support more housing or growth Lack of long-term plan for traffic congestion and affordable housing.
Urban Growth Boundary is vital- Residents MUST have control over growth. IF the City should increase it's boundaries, the STATE OF CALIFORNIA WILL MANDATE how our town will look WITHOUT ANY LOCAL CONTROL(s).
Need non tourist business to service local community.
Traffic through and alternate routes around town.
That it is done tastefully with allowances for parks, green spaces, bike paths and recreational easements.
Solvang is special and not many places are left like it, but kids and teens need more to do.
Tourists have enough to draw them here.
What's here needs to be maintained better. Electrical cords on sidewalks, potholes, long restroom lines on weekends and holidays, etc.
Staying relevant with the higher end tourist market and hence bringing higher tourism $$ That it would be poorly planned for, resulting in unsolvable traffic and/or infrastructure problems My biggest concern is traffic. Mission/246 is already a mess. more diverse ways of generating tax revenue - not just tourism That we don't have sufficient water or infrastructure for it.
Not enough infrastructure. Traffic already bad as well
Effectively all of the above, but my main concern is traffic, overcrowding, and loss of open spaces. It's beginning to feel alienating to locals
Impact of the casino growth and related traffic passing through Solvang Quality of life for residents (who are the voters) needs to be better addressed 195
Question 8 – Based on the image below and the two land use designations identified in the focus area:
• High Density Residential (identified in blue)
• Tourist Commercial (identified in pink)
Are there any additional areas or land use designations within the focus area that you feel we should consider?
196
197
Question 8 [continued] – Based on the image above and the two land use designations identified in the focus area:
• High Density Residential (identified in blue)
• Tourist Commercial (identified in pink)
Are there any additional areas or land use designations within the focus area that you feel we should consider?
198
Question 9: If you answered YES in question 8, please identify what areas you feel should be included in the focus area.
Responses
How about between Buellton and Lompoc!
No area no expansion
We don't need more people in this valley. We don't have roads, water, sewer capacity to handle more people - visitors or residence. Visitors could care less less about our water and sewer issues so the residents of Solvang are asked to cut back.
I think they should be left as is. Not only for the charm of Solvang, but the road infrastructure is not able to sustain increase in traffic that would come with the increase residential and commercial growth. Also, what business are planned for the comm’l areas - small businesses or big box stores, and who would fill them esp. in this inflationary time. And, the proposed residential- is this low income, high density housing that would impact the area infrastructure including water usage and crime increase.
Traffic
CA housing legislation changes residential density potential citywide. Should consider including southern notch in map down to Elverhoj St. as part of focus area. Need to add SOI Industrial area on western boarder. UGB expressly allows development of that area.
Perhaps consider adding all ages mobile home park with updated, family friendly, affordable units Light industry, general commercial
All areas because there are no areas showing, so the plan wouldn't be correct.
HIGH density should be along the Fjord / proposed 246/ River area.
We need some activities for young people.
The area to the East of the TRC; south of the 246/Mission I don’t agree with the areas identified but you did not give me the option to say that.
Instead of cramming more housing into the city, use the edges. There are beautiful locations behind Nyborg Estates or by the river. These have lovely views too Yes, I think you should consider Fjord as a bypass for Mission/246. The upper residential areas of Solvang (Skytt Mesa, Chalk Hill, Viborg, Laurel, etc) are being inundated with traffic and it's not fair. It should be dispersed throughout the city.
Nothing included. Do not make a less dense area now a dense area. It should stay as is.
Open space/recreation
I don't feel that high density residential fits at all in Solvang, period. We need quality, lower income, housing for sure. The property that was a lumber yard and is now a proposed hotel should be housing. We don't need another hotel, especially a high end one, and the idea of adding those tiny employee housing units on the site is insane. Solvang's charm is that it's an old fashioned SMALL town. Let the housing be developed in Buelton and Lompoc and improve bus transport. 188 Acres coming to town from Buellton flats, RV park for tot to the City of Solvang General fund. A tax increase for the community.
199
Question 9: If you answered YES in question 8, please identify what areas you feel should be included in the focus area.
Responses
Parks and playgrounds. Youth center.
Open area south of the mission
Public/Institutional (if that includes schools, parks, library, Senior Center, etc.) We need to take these areas in consideration when planning growth.
unused city lots, lots designated as recreational
Public service areas are not broken out. Some of the "open space/recreation" that is used to calculate the percentage of open space is not public land. People cannot walk on the Alisal Golf course, or on land adjacent to the road, which is privately owned! WHY is it included in open space? 200
Question 10 – Based on the image below and the two land use designations identified in the focus area:
• High Density Residential (identified in blue)
• Tourist Commercial (identified in pink)
Are there any additional areas identified within the focus area that you feel should NOT be considered?
201
202
Question 10 [continued] – Based on the image above and the two land use designations identified in the focus area:
• High Density Residential (identified in blue)
• Tourist Commercial (identified in pink)
Are there any additional areas identified within the focus area that you feel should NOT be considered?
203
Question 11: If you answered YES in question 10, please identify what areas you feel should be removed from the alternatives.
Responses
Along Alamo Pintado Corridor
All of the above.
All opposed to any of this
All. Stop the insane growth.
All of it. Easy money that will destroy our community will have long lasting ill effects on our community. I am not opposed to growth, but this seems excessive. I wonder who is being told how we will benefit, and what their true desire is?? Is it to denigrate small American towns that have a sense of community? What are the true benefits of these plans? Who is benefitting from this? Follow the money.
The largest area to the north far from commercial area
This map is too dense. It’ll be too congested for our city.
High density residential
I understand idea of fingers to be sure gateways are considered. Question of including Mission Oaks because much of it is single family residential not multi-family. There is land presently probably preserved as greenbelt by its HOA near Viborg and a parcel within single family homes that is undeveloped. But that should be considered as part of look at where there is undeveloped land available. Also, does it make sense to include Atterdag Village in the focus area. It, at most, might add a few more residential units. Need to address question of continuing to keep Quail Valley and Janin Acres in SOI. County places them in SY township and thus in areas that could be served for water by ID#1 and for wastewater treatment by SY Community Services District. Taking in existing housing might well increase deficit. In case of Janin Acres, no sewer system but a water system needing work.
Too much to explain!!!!!
All of the high density residential. We do not have the water to support more families living here. Also the issue of traffic should be addressed before housing. There needs to be a bypass route to go around the downtown section of Solvang. A idea would be a 4 way light at 246 and Skytt Mesa Drive.
Connect Skytt Mesa Drive to Fjord Drive. Then connect Fjord Drive to Alamo Pintado Drive.
Open space/recreation
Once again your survey isn't showing an image.
High density residential along Mission (246)
high density residential. There is too much already
Alamo Pintado close to Mission...there is enough commerce and congestion and medical offices...keep the open space or make it a park
As previously stated, Mission Oaks does not lend itself to high density development due to the size of the lots and the hillside it’s sits upon
Again I don’t agree with the designated areas.
high density residential along hwy 246
204
Question 11: If you answered YES in question 10, please identify what areas you feel should be removed from the alternatives.
Responses
High density residential
I'm not in favor of high-density residential development The large open area along Viborg.
The area west of Fifth St.
All of it. NO MORE GROWTH
Blue area
Light industry
Pink
same as #8/9 but I don't see a difference in the maps!
blue do not touch the Blue area for more housing water and sewer The area that is the corner of Viborg and Alamo Pintado. I live on Chalk Hill Rd across from the cemetery and we are already a huge cut through for traffic. If you add more housing there I think people will cut through Viborg and Fredensborg Canyon and then Chalk Hill Rd to Skytt Mesa. I can not have MORE cars speeding by my house putting my animals and children at risk.
I'm not sure Mission Oaks is correctly characterized - pls check.
The downtown area SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED. There are tons of existing apartment complexes, some very small and outdated (I lived at Alisal Oaks when I first moved here) they should be optimized and revitalized to allow renters. There should not be more people living upstairs in our restaurants....
Keep Agriculture and Open Space As is: We are already very dense.
North east area of mapping for housing would cause major traffic issues High density along alamo pintado is not good
The center section (near Alisal and Eucalyptus) is already very densely built-up. I also think it would be a shame to lose the beautiful open green spaces in the other areas.
Bottom of 5th
Mission Oaks is not high density
I answered yes because your map does not expand and I cannot really see these areas that are designated as high density.
205
Question 12 – What types of multi-unit housing are appropriate for Solvang? You may select more than one choice below.
*Please note, this question refers to the housing type(s) ONLY and does not reflect the anticipated architectural style or design.
206
Question 12 [continued] – What types of multi-unit housing are appropriate for Solvang? You may select more than one choice below.
*Please note, this question refers to the housing type(s) ONLY and does not reflect the anticipated architectural style or design.
207
Question 13: State law is requiring all California communities to plan for more housing by right. This includes a range of housing, including multi-unit housing (condominiums, apartments, etc.). What are the best locations for multi-unit housing in Solvang?
Responses
Solvang infrastructure can support the residence now. We have a water shortage, sewer capacity issues and traffic issues and you want to add and invite more people! No where. Stop the growth. Can't get around town now so we want more congestion? California law may state this, but we can fight this too. Tides are turning, and many of these insane “rights” will be considered unlawful. Again, who is/will be benefiting from this plan? Closer to tourist/commercial area
Mixed use, including mixed affordability levels within same development. Might consider small versions of townhomes, condos, apartments. ADUs can be important part of mix (a version of small cottages). Will probably see some 4-plexes as a result of state legislation.
Cottages or duplexes
Alamo Pintado Rd
In appropriately zoned infill sites and at hillside development sites near sites featuring transportation and commercial uses, which would be normally cost-prohibitive for single family development.
High Density Housing
Along Alamo Pintado Road across from Nielsen’s Center.
There is not enough water! Pay the fine for not meeting the mandate. What good is housing if you can not meet the demands of a essential need such as water. Keep thinking of tax revenues that the city wants. Think of the people that live here and the quality of life.
Tourist commercial areas, Alamo Pintado area, corner of Alamo Pintado and Mission Mixed use
DR-20 parcels and guest houses on existing lots.
Near sunny fields, alamo pintado.
Wherever there ia s large plot of land, and we need to use some of these buildings for the homeless.
Or make rent cheaper for the people that can't afford all the million dollar homes and have to go stand in line for food every week.
above commercial units and offices with existing parking Anywhere there is space of commercial buildings not being used, or commercial buildings that owners wish to sell for a reasonable rate.
Alamo Pintado vacant lots, Old lumber yard, property behind Copenhagen House and across the street, old outlet building
We should push back. Do not change the character of Solvang. There are plenty of surrounding areas for multi unit housing.
Fjord / SY River corridor
208
Question 13: State law is requiring all California communities to plan for more housing by right. This includes a range of housing, including multi-unit housing (condominiums, apartments, etc.). What are the best locations for multi-unit housing in Solvang?
Responses
off Avenue Pintato
As identified in high density residential (blue)
The area south of 246, before Alamo Pintado and the Montecito Bank and Trust Center. Also the north east corner of Alamo Pintado and Village Lane, and the land below Mission Oaks above Mission Drive and west of Alamo Pintado.
The old lumber yard or outlet malls on Alisal, commercial buildings that are vacant in town now can convert to residential urban units
close to existing high density. Along 246
Close to the town center- It is already set up for traffic and congestion.
Lompoc
TRC
Outside of the city area so as not to impact the traffic and parking problems of the city. areas that will not impact traffic.
Everywhere. Let’s move on and make comfortable life not only for business owners who work in tourists industry. We need to drive smoothly to the post office, eat well at the places without waiting long line, find a parking spot when we stop shopping. Let’s be expended.
People move here because they like space and don’t want to be crowded like sardines in big cities I prefer mixed use within the current "downtown" Solvang area. We have many commercial buildings in complete disrepair that could be mixed use.
In the areas designated as "high-density" development
as indicated and in the city but provide parking
in the downtown area to create a walkable and vibrant community. hard to tell on this map Buellton�����, off Alamo Pintado Rd., by the Quarry/ agriculture area off 246.
On the edges of the city and where the lumbar yard used to be Where they won’t block light and views for others.
For mixed-use, in the Tourist-Commercial District. For others, locations that would facilitate the best access and traffic flow through town for the residents, so as mot to make the traffic worse.
Fir Avenue, Alisal Road
Near Alamo Pintado, the downtown east of Fifth and up Alisal.
Fight the law. NO MORE PEOPLE
Depends on the size of the complex. Don't go too many stories.
It depends on size and appropriateness for surrounding neighborhood. These can be done in a way that meets needs of moderate/middle level housing. Not McMansion-sized condos next to 209
Question 13: State law is requiring all California communities to plan for more housing by right. This includes a range of housing, including multi-unit housing (condominiums, apartments, etc.). What are the best locations for multi-unit housing in Solvang?
Responses
a small house.
I don’t think we can do that and maintain Solvang. State law should rethink this.
NONE!
NOT in the entrances to Solvang. If possible, near Nielsen's Building Materials; near Sunnyfields park if available.
Nowhere.
East Solvang
Along Alamo Pintado between Hwy. 246 and Sunny Fields Park.
I agree with the housing location on your maps.
Locations I D’d on map
Downtown... can convert some SFR to multi family or convert commercial property on the west end of 246/Solvang to multifamily housing
Alamo Pintado & 246 east
Condominiums townhouses
Between town and the river. Between Alisal and the neighborhood down by the river and mobile home park. How about a mixed use industrial and loft apartments along Fjord Rd on the river side? Make it a great walking area where tourist can shop and people can live with beautiful views of the mountains. Face all the buildings towards the river bed make it an industrial art/open air market feel.
Something NOT DANISH old and dusty. Kinda like industrial ways art area. Solvang needs some edge. I feel like all my friends who visit here and are from SB think of Solvang as old people dusty doll shops and pastries. Can we make a cool river walk and utilize that beauty? Like open air art studios with living above. Downtown Solvang can cater to the Danish Vibe and stay the same as its been for 50 years. Look at Ashville NC Open Art Studios along the river or Bend OR has a great funky area near the river with shopping and living. My 2 cents. haha
In the focus areas. There is very little vacant land available and suitable for housing. In #14 below, I'm unable to check no for Triplex. Your survey won't allow more than one No response.
As long as the entrance/exit to housing is NOT off of Mission, I think I'm ok with whatever goes up Across from Nielsen's plaza
lot 72
Near the hospital, Alamo Pintado area, there is some open space there that could have apartments added without adding too much downtown traffic.
Lumber yard Old bank bldg corner
Out of sight from downtown area and not blocking light and views from existing residential 210
Question 13: State law is requiring all California communities to plan for more housing by right. This includes a range of housing, including multi-unit housing (condominiums, apartments, etc.). What are the best locations for multi-unit housing in Solvang?
Responses
units if possible.
Alisal Mesa Road or the buildings currently where the motorcycle museum are. Keeps congestion off the highway and open space for housing/multi purpose growth not retail. in the proposed high density zones
Commercial areas and open land areas
Along 236 heading West.
I realize that we need to move forward with more development, but it makes me sad to know that we will be losing open spaces to cars and multi-story buildings. I think the southern area toward the river would be the least intrusive. : (
Multi-unit housing should be close to things like shopping, transportation, schools, and other services.
The areas closest to the Tourist Commercial area that are close to services and walkability is good.
Near city services (walkable), shopping, and transportation.
Mixed commercial
In Buellton.
I don't know
I would encourage Solvang to stand strong against Calif. State overreach....and refuse to comply with their big government tactics. Contact other communities and band together to say NO.....stay out of our communities.
Away from the central district unless it matches a Danish architecture. south of Mission on Windmill lane between Alisal and Glen Way north of Fjord dr 211
Question 14 –Do you support the inclusion of duplex/triplex/fourplex units in existing neighborhoods if designed for compatibility with existing homes? 212
Question 15 –What is the highest density you feel could work in Solvang? 213
Question 15 [continued]: What is the highest density you feel could work in Solvang? The responses below are answers to those who responded “Other (please specify).”
Responses
2 per acre
None
No more growth. Stop the insanity!
None of the above
2 -4 units per acre
This is awful
None seem acceptable
Maybe raising from 20 to 30. Hard to visualize changes in density.
No more growth!!!!
4 units per acre
Depends on location
Consistent with current. The construction on old mission will be a blight on our community 8 units per acre
Less building of any sort
5 units per acre
enough to generate affordable housing options for low to moderate income folks and set asides for seniors
12 ZERO
unsure of what each of these actually looks like. There's a sweet cottage courtyard of homes on Eucalyptus near Alisal. More of that is needed.
None
4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
The way it is right now
Too dense
20, assuming they are multi-family structures, i.e., apartments.
Probably no more than 10 dwelling units per acre due to the lack off infrastructure capability 8 dwelling units per acre
definitely no more than 6-10 units per acre
214
Question 16 – On a scale below, what is the maximum building height you feel could work in Solvang? (current allowable height is 35 feet)
*Note: Building height per the City of Solvang Municipal Code is defined as: “The vertical distance from the lowest finished grade level to the highest peak or highest roof structure.” 215
Question 17 – Do you prefer any of the land use alternatives presented in the images below and outlined in the Alternatives Report?
216
217
218
219
Question 18 – Why did you choose Alternative A, B, or C in Question #17? If you chose “None of the Above”, please skip and proceed to question #19?
Question 18: Why did you choose Alternative A, B, or C in question #17? If you chose “None of the Above”, please skip and proceed to question #19.
Responses
The city needs as much affordable housing to diversify the population of Solvang. Adding affordable housing would allow people who work here to afford to live here Keeping open space
B allows for growth that will not destroy the Solvang that I love Any other alternate plans would create a traffic nightmare and uses of natural resources unintended consequences!
Middle ground, Santa Barbara and many cities do well with mixed use in city centers. Many options for residents and businesses, not only for tourists.
B allows for some increase in density, which could be done without destroying village feel. Need to know what actual height of existing buildings with height greater than 35 feet is to determine what impact of 45' maximum would look like. I think 45' in some locations would destroy current feel of Solvang.
Not as high density
Because housing is a desperate need in our community. We don't have workers because housing is so expensive. Only rich people can afford to live here. Good, talented, helpful people are leaving or being destroyed by having to work so much just to have a decent quality of life.
Steps need to be taken to increase the availability of affordable housing while preserving Solvang's architecture, heritage and small-town charm. Increasing the density of affordable housing stock is manageable and Alternative B seems to have the best approach.
Solvang desperately needs more reasonable housing for Solvang employees.
I’m a moderate. We can’t just do nothing (A). Compromise is where no one gets what they want. Pick the middle option(B). And, Option C would change Solvang too much.
Solvang does need more housing.
It seemed like my the most reasonable # to start with for our small town. Obviously, there's room to move the # up or down.
The need for more multi-family units in Solvang is exceedingly necessary at this time.
Best solution
Important to increase the number of affordable housing options.
Alternative A is appropriate for our community. We should stay rural.
Seems like the best solution for positive change
It would help people get into homes and find housing. The most economic as well. The city can afford a slight loss for the gain of the people.
220
Question 18: Why did you choose Alternative A, B, or C in question #17? If you chose “None of the Above”, please skip and proceed to question #19.
Responses
I want more housing but want to ensure traffic and roadways and services can support more people.
Existing growth patterns can be supported by infrastructure/circulation Goldilocks choice.
Housings is a huge need in our valley. Not only have prices risen drastically above income, but the effects of expensive housing go beyond people affording rent, to ability to afford food and healthcare.
Alternative C offers the best response to the housing crisis in our community.
We need more housing units and high density in TRC seems like a good place.
Keep Solvang Solvang.
Our City INFRASTRUCTURE / Roads / SEWER/ and WATER can NOT handle more population than the current number.... Duh....?
It’s moderate.
Balanced approach
Because it is allowing more growth and "infill", but not too much.
What we have is not working and a Mx may be a rational option Just trying to keep the charm that Solvang has. So A is the least change Solvang is great the way it is now.
The best place to start is developing vacant or underused parcels.
There’s already too many people and traffic sucks
Meets State requirement. Achievable.
Until the by pass road around Solvang is created, I don’t think we should approve a development plan that increases the traffic problems.
too much traffic already.
People like open space
We need some more housing but should go with a moderate plan that provides more housing while maintaining a balance within the community.
We don't need more traffic or tourists; Solvang is already at capacity with both. Let's keep our unique small town the way it is!
good middle of the road choice
High density should not be within the tourist area.
We need more housing and commercial space but not at the expense of what makes Solvang so appealing
Already too dense for area
Allows the State guidelines to be met without over density resulting.
We can't be completely NIMBY so I selected a modest increase to density.
There would still be a shortage of roads for a larger population and visitors. If there is too much density, there will not be enough parking for all the residents and visitors. 221
Question 18: Why did you choose Alternative A, B, or C in question #17? If you chose “None of the Above”, please skip and proceed to question #19.
Responses
No growth!!!
Solvang is already getting too crowded. Infrastructure cannot handle tourist plus local traffic, especially on weekends.
I want to see more mixed use in the TRC. I feel mixed use communities create strong communities. I want more live/work communities and neighborhoods
TO PRESERVE THE UNIQUE VILLAGE CHARACTER OF SOLVANG. PUT MULTI-UNIT HOUSING IN LA AND SF AND GET THE HMELESS OFF THE INTERCHANGES!
As it is necessary to add dwellings, B offers the least disruption in my opinion.
Change is going to occur no matter what. This represents an acceptable level of development consistent with the nature of the city.
A and B both seem to me to be adequate for the projected growth, but B seems a bit more flexible.
Meets SYV goals
I would prefer things to remain as they are but, if that can't happen, Alternative B is the lesser of all evils. Alternative C should not even be considered for Solvang.
Slow growth seems better
Because we are currently short of water for the current population and don't think we will have the resources or infrastructure to support the other Alternatives' population growth.
I believe the town could use more housing. Many young people who work in Solvang do not live here because housing is so expensive.
Solvang is small and not a "high density" type of community given configuration and available use of existing spaces / land.
High density will ruin Solvang. It already isn’t like it was when we moved 40 years ago. fewest units
The neighbor behind me got a permit from the City Council (yes you before everyone was ousted) and built an ADU with a special permit from the City Council that waived the 5 foot boundary from our land. He built the tallest building he could legally build (35 feet) 2.5 feet from our property, and it is now a towering wall that covers 6 property's back yards. I can reach out and touch it. If this is allowed for every single property, we will be closed in and nobody will be able to see anything out their windows. LIKE ME. This is a small town, it was not designed to be anything but a small town. Allowing people like my neighbor to build fortresses in their front yard where no building was ever supposed to be that deteriorates our own land and reduces our home value and completely obliterates our view of our town is what will happen if more and more are allowed to build. We should go at the slowest rate possible because humanity are going to be around until we are extinct, people will still be moving here 100 years from now.
Smallest footprint effect
Feel Solvang is big enough now.
222
Question 18: Why did you choose Alternative A, B, or C in question #17? If you chose “None of the Above”, please skip and proceed to question #19.
Responses
relatively minor increase to density. I prefer lowest density increase as possible as I feel we are already crammed in too close, both residential and businesses.
I feel the traffic, water usage and general infrastructure can only support this kind of growth It addresses housing needs while keeping some space between folks. best housing to job ratio and more favorable to existing residents/families. the infrastructure of Solvang is not physically capable of supporting increased population in larger numbers. There should be more multiple family dwellings but at numbers that fit the city's ability to provide services. I realize this is a factor of the EIR analysis but needs to be realized.
Preserve character of Solvang
Solvang needs more housing. I think there should be housing in the tourist area.
Parks in better locations.
I'm so conflicted! I understand that we need to provide more housing but I am deeply opposed to anything but minimal, very carefully-controlled growth.
Impact on schools, water usage, parking, traffic.
Based on all of the current growth projections I have seen for the Santa Ynez Valley and Solvang, alternative B seems appropriate and sufficient.
It will meet the needs of current projections for the next 20 years.
Adequate since low or no growth is expected in SOLVANG over the next 20 years It meets the needs of the projected growth of Solvang in the next 20+ years.
Modest increase without dell high density
Leave as is.
change is needed, but it needs to be done in a more gradual way and also, really don't want higher rise buildings...that will change the look and feel more than many other things would More busyness and traffic has lowered the quality of life in town after town....and the reason people moved here in the first place. Please don't let it happen to us.
Although I like Alternative A, I picked B because we probably need to be able to grow.
Allows for affordable housing increases, but keeps density at a reasonable level.
I picked A not because Solvang does not need to address housing issues but because this report's designation of open space is skewed and inaccurate.
223
Question 19 – If you selected “None of the Above” in question #17, wha would you recommend changing in any of these three alternatives?
Question 19: If you selected “None of the Above” in question #17, what would you recommend changing in any of the three alternatives? Responses
Pump the breaks! We don't need more water restrictions and more traffic.
Stop the insane growth!
Na
You politicians are simple unbelievable.
You need to address the problems we have now before expanding growth. Right now traffic through town is very congested. But the number 1 problem the city has is it cannot meet the needs of water for the existing population with out having to go into extreme water conservation every year. Fix these problems then think about if more housing is really what we want to see. Also bringing in more will effect the quality of life we have here now. Once you expand it and change that it can never go back. If we wanted to live in a big city , we would have moved there. I personally choose Solvang cause I liked the small town vibe. This is also why we get so many tourists from LA. They want to get away from the big city mess and relax in a quite, peaceful town.
More affordable single family dwellings. Not so many tightly packed apartments.
I haven’t learned specific details
Focus area seems too large
It’s too much.
Why change anything? Let a small and beautiful town be the way it is.
Leave area towards river alone. Mobile home area is quiet and sacred Alternative C but no multi-unit residential unless part of mixed-use development I do not support the programs with in survey at this time again, we don’t have the infrastructure for more housing One of the worst things to happen could be allowing taller buildngs and more cut off views. The reason people move to Solvang is to be able to see the mountains, be in the country, be able to look out their window and see a quant town. If you want to turn it into Goleta then you need to reassess what you are doing in Solvang. This is the country. This is a small town. We are country folk. There is a reason we live here.
Unknown
No changes to Solvang at all. It is, or was, a small community I have lived in for over 10 years and in the Santa Ynez Valley over 30 years. Watching it grow to what developers want will make further changes that to me, and many others, is not acceptable.
Alternative B would be my choice if the TRC remained unchanged 224
Question 20 – On a scale of 1-10, how much of an impact does traffic along Highway 246/Mission Drive have on Solvang?
225
Question 21 – On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate traffic in the neighborhoods of Solvang? 226
Question 22 – What are specific areas in Solvang that you feel experience higher levels of traffic and congestion?
Question 22: What are specific areas in Solvang that you feel experience higher levels of traffic and congestion?
Responses
For starters: Mission, Oak, Alisal
There is no parking now this will be a big problem for our city Well - Mission, Alisal, Oak Street.
Mission Dr, Eucalytpus, Laurel, Atterdag Rd., Alisal Rd. I avoid going into Downtown Solvang because it is so busy. It is difficult to pakr at the post office. A lot of people drive fast through the side streets and neighborhoods as well as park outside of the downtown areas.
Alamo Pintado, 246, all streets in downtown Solvang. If higher density goes through all major roads will bw impacted. What will happen to air quality? Lights at night ? Alisal and 246
Mission
Depends on neighborhood. Laurel, 5th and other streets below it serve as byways from 246 traffic by locals, impacting those neighborhoods. Viborg is another byway Downtown
Alisal Rd, Highway 246, Copenhagen, Oak St, Neighborhoods close to town definitely 246/mission drive.
Mission, Oak, Second, Fifth, Atterdag, and Alisal.
246 coming from the casino!
Alisal Road and Alamo Pintado Road
Oak Street and other streets used to circumvent 246, and Atterdag Rd.
Highway 246, Chalk Hill Rd. Skytt Mesa RD, Fifth St, Oak ST, Viborg Canyon, Fredensborg canyon Rd., Atterdag RD.
Highway 246/Mission approaching Alamo Pintado Rd and in downtown Solvang.
Mission between Alisal and 5th
Mission Drive from 5th Street through Atterdag can easily take 10 minutes to drive through.
We have far too many tourists.
1) by Hans Christien Anderson Park
2) Alamo Pintado Road and
3) Mission Drive
Between the high school and downtown.
Just Mission/246. Locals know how to navigate around congestion just fine. 5th Street, chalk hill road, fredensborg cyn, Viborg, Atterdag Skytt mesa gets tons of people cutting through going too fast when 246 is backed up 227
Question 22: What are specific areas in Solvang that you feel experience higher levels of traffic and congestion?
Responses
Light at Alamo Pintado and 246, continuing to Alisal which pushes traffic into neighborhood to the north at Pine Street.
The center
Depends on time of day 246
On Mission Drive. This has gotten worse with the closure of Copenhagen Drive.
Everywhere in the downtown area, always on Mission. Weekends are impossible.
Alisal road is a problem with tourists just crossing when and where they want. Parking is an issue? Can you rent the bank parking lot at Alisal and 246...the old bank? Maybe offer paid parking there?
5th Street has become a thoroughfare to avoid Mission Drive traffic both ways. Heading towards Atterdag, the traffic speeds by and speed bumps need to be increased and tickets given. No sidewalks so pedestrians are taking their life in their hands if walking and 5th street serves as overflow parking most weekends. Not acceptable!!!
Chalk Hill Rd., Skytt Mesa, Laurel, Alisal.
All of the side streets off 246
246 after school hours
Fifth St. between Oak St. and Mission Dr. and Oak St. at Alisal Rd. It can be difficult driving and walking in those areas on the weekend as traffic backs up.
Hwy 246 FRI-SUN
Locals use 5th-to-Laurel and Oak streets to bypass 246 traffic but do not obey speed limits or stop signs.
Solvang is the middle of the hourglass between Buellton and SY. We get the traffic bottleneck of folks going between the two. Locals use 5th/Laurel and Oak to bypass 246 but do not obey speed limits and stop signs.
Pine Street and then down Maple etc.... 5th street/Laurel especially with locals. Very unfair to the residents in those areas. I drive them slowly but I see too many locals speeding through those areas. 246…Buellton to Santa Ynez
obviously 246 but also the shortcuts around it such as Alisal Rd. Viborg/Fredensborg, etc.
Skytt Mesa, Chalk Hill, Fredensborg and Viborg, Alisal too. People are looking for a short cut through town and then go through the neighborhoods quickly. We need a bypass rd.
All streets parallel to Mission and other Mission by-pass roads such as Viborg. The traffic makes our neighborhoods unsafe and causes excessive noise. Congestion eliminates parking in our own neighborhoods too.
Any and all areas off of Mission Drive are impacted by traffic. I avoid it during the weekends and only use it during the week. When I purchased our home in 2018, I made sure the realtor understood that we needed a home that we could get in and out of using side roads (in order to avoid Mission). 228
Question 22: What are specific areas in Solvang that you feel experience higher levels of traffic and congestion?
Responses
The worst area is of course the entire length of Mission Drive, but downtown is impacted, too. I wish we had more public transportation and more separated, Class IV bike lanes.
Near school, thru town.
229
Question 23 – Should the Fjord Drive extension be considered as an alternative to alleviate local and regional traffic within the next 20 years?
230
Question 24 – Do you believe paid parking or time-limited parking can ease parking congestion in the downtown area?
231
Question 25 – If you answered “No” to question #24, please explain why?
Question 25: If you answered “No” to question #24, please explain why? Responses
That will just force tourists to park in other residential neighbors that have no meters.
Are you going to install parking meters all over Solvang? If you do, this will just force visitors to park in unmetered neighbor hoods and impact our quality of living here.
There is nit enough parking in the downtown area. People would just park in the neighborhoods and walk. The city is only 1 mile across.
Too much like a BIG city!!!
How would this alleviate traffic. Tourist would either pay to park or park in residential areas, and locals would pay the price or inconvenience
It’s just another tax. It will discourage locals from patronizing downtown.
Limited time, but not paid
People will park further into the neighborhoods and with greater frequency than they already do. I like your wayfaring idea. Directional signage is needed.
Many tourists are already used to paying for parking elsewhere. For them, paying for parking will just be seen as part of the cost for visiting Solvang. Those who don’t want to pay will park on residential streets, such as Oak, Elverhoy and First. When you drive hours to get here, you’re not going to leave early because you want to save a couple of bucks on parking by leaving early.
If you have paid parking the people looking for parking will just park on the residential streets and walk to town so they don't have to worry about feeding the meter. Which would just make it worse for the residents. Are you really concerned about the quality of life here or just looking for was to make more money for the city? Everything on this survey seems to be tied to how can the city make more money?
First hr should be free!
How about getting rid of the massive trucks instead.
Unnecessary
No, because then the topic comes up if the restaurants and hotels have to provide complimentary free parking, and if people want to stay they will stay. Are you going to hire police security to go around and check cars?
Who is going to monitor it. Nobody does any parking monitoring now.
I wouldn't mind time limited, but I think paid parking isn't necessary I purposely avoid Santa Barbara because of paid parking. I think some might do that here. If I have to pay for parking I won't shop in town.
I think the majority of tourists are day trippers so it may just lead to shorter stays to leave when their parking is up
232
Question 25: If you answered “No” to question #24, please explain why? Responses
Locals need that parking too. Plenty of tourists will pay for parking and it won't decrease parking congestion. The only people that will suffer from this are valley residents.
Would discourage people from staying in town.
The City NEEDS PAID PARKING to supplement the GENERAL FUND! Every tourist town in California charges for parking... WHY aren't we....?
It would keep tourist away
There's just not enough parking.
The volume will be the same regardless of payment.
If visitors cannot park free close to downtown, they will start parking in the residential areas more than they currently already do.
We want tourists and locals in the downtown area. Parking alternatives, ie perimeter lots and streets, provide sufficient space.
If you have timed parking, people will just have to move their cars and create more congestion It would be a negative impact to tourist. Would be more like other cities Parking meters are ugly and I think they don't bring in the revenue they cost. Some nice parking lots with picnic space or promote bikes- electric bike kiosk..park outside of the tourist area Because it takes away some charm
Paid Parking and Meters will take the charm away from our quaint town People needing parking are going to park whether or not they pay or not. Plus paid parking will encourage people to park in the residential areas.
I don't think that will cause locals to ride their bikes to town to save a few $ They will park at schools parkings
Big city gadgets
I also have a home in Pismo Beach. They have paid parking and limited time parking. It has not eased congestion and in fact, people are circling all the time looking for parking. More parking is needed perhaps through parking structures rather than limited parking time or paid parking. People want to get away from the "city" look of paid parking. It is one of the reasons they come to Solvang.
If you limit parking, then you have people moving their cars around, looking for another parking space = more traffic. Paid parking is annoying for visitors and creates more foot traffic to and from parking lots. We need more parking alternatives.
Hard to know what impact this would have. Of course, people would start searching in neighborhoods for free parking exacerbating the traffic and parking issues already at play in neighborhoods. What about paid underground parking structure? I'm thinking about what they did at Millennial Park in Chicago--took surface parking and put underground paid and build a beautiful green community space on top. Let's get creative!
It would ruin the flavor of the Village and frustrate visitors. 233
Question 25: If you answered “No” to question #24, please explain why? Responses
People will simply look for free parking a little further away so will impact more streets Because it would disrupt the visits of visitors without adding any parking resources.
I think one of the things that makes Solvang charming is that we don't charge for parking. I don't think charging or limiting time will ease congestion.
So many people come into town and there are only so many parking spaces so parking spills onto all the residential streets.
The meters never pay for themselves. Cost, installation, maintenance (money and equipment repair or replacement)
Might harm retail business
It just annoys the tourists, but they will still park there. It feels like a money grab but not a solution.
I don't like going to cities and having to deal with paid parking and meters. It's not relaxing or welcoming. I don't want people to come here and have that same feeling. We need to have better signage of where parking is available - Solvang School lot, Outlet Mall, and the city lots that are under utilized.
People will pay. It happens everywhere especially when you’re promoting a town.
Do you want locals coming into Solvang? If no, add paid parking.
There have been studies over the years trying analyze this issue and I have sat in on many discussions about this subject. The conclusion has been always to not impose fees for parking and I agree with this.
No! It would distract significantly from the tourist experience to have to worry about parking meters and time limits.
Tourists will pay for parking and residents will be annoyed and not shop in downtown Solvang In general yes, but I do not believe the City would implement the necessary enforcement to make it viable option
We do not have enough parking spaces for employees and tourism plus residents coming into town. over 500 parking spaces for day trip guest. the hotels should have over 300 parking spaces for the guests in their lots
I think timed parking is a pain, and people would not want to stay and buy stuff if they had to worry about their cars. It's to big city to have timed parking But please include free parking passes for residents in paid parking areas.
Yes, if it is possible to extend all the way to Alamo Pintado (not via Alisal). Otherwise, it will not help to alleviate traffic and only ruin the community for no possible gain.
It will keep from parking and locals from going downtown.
Because it would also affect locals. I buy much of my food, spices, cheeses, drinks and items from small shops downtown, in addition to going to the post office nearly every day because I work from home now. Deterring me (a local) to shop at these places by making me pay for parking would prove 234
Question 25: If you answered “No” to question #24, please explain why? Responses
that the town only cares about tourism and making a quick buck. 25 cents is not going to make a tourist stay less time. They will pay whatever they have to pay to stay in a spot for as long as they want. If you do this it is just a money grab and a big slap in the face for the locals.
Paid parking would limit the time people enjoy Solvang which would lower the tax that is collected.
People will leave sooner.
It will push people to park in neighborhoods near by, especially around Solvang Elementary, which does not need more traffic in the area for safety reasons.
Won't ease parking
It would only somewhat help the parking situation. Really need more dedicated off street parking facilities
Too complicated
I don't think it would affect visitors, who will be annoyed at being charged but won't stop driving around and parking in Solvang. It MIGHT encourage locals to walk or ride bikes into town, but I doubt it.
There sems to be enough turnover of spaces.
People are going to park when and where they need to. It could help the town financially, though.
You have to park somewhere. Paying for it or time limits just degrades the quality of the experience/cost of life. You will park anyway.
we need more parking space. restricting parking will not improve the situation and it will increase the parking issues for residents on 1st and 2nd streets
We just don't have enough parking, whether it's paid or free. Projects approved in the last year or so have been given waivers (I reference the building at First and Molle Way) which are inexplicable given their plans for activities.
235
Question 26 – Alternative forms of parking such as parking structures in the center of Solvang were highlighted as potential options to address parking demand. Do you feel parking structures should be considered as a viable option for part of the General Plan? 236
Question 27 – If you answered “No” to question #26, please explain why? Question 27: If you answered “No” to question #26, please explain why? Responses
Would have to know what area would be committed to additional parking.
What's next, high rise condominiums for the snowbirds?
Are you guys serious! This is not downtown LA. What's next, a high rise? It’s Solvang not a big city!!
Stupid!! How can anyone see how a parking structure would fit in architecturally to complicate the quaintness of our community
Ugly snd unnecessary
Ugly and cumbersome. Unless you did a parking structure at Vets on the existing parking lot that is the same early Calif architecture and made it beautiful Would like to see photos of SLO parking garages mentioned in presentation on the 13th. Should't we consider parking garages on east and west entrances to Solvang as alternative (National Parks solution) with public transportation in and out of village area? Too unsightly
Not within the keeping o the Solvang image
I don’t want Solvang to look like a mall or the Chumash Casino.
Parking garages are for big cities- or the casino. It's also where a lot of crime occurs. Do avoid.
We should stay charming and rural. A concrete parking structure would be an eye sore for our pretty town and we do not need more tourists. We have more than our streets can handle.
I think there is enough parking available
If you have a parking structure then the same reason, you have to have some kind of security! More costs and it could only be up to 2 stories tall. Waste of money.
We are a small community. Parking structures are ugly
I live right by Solvang School and there is alway plenty of parking available for people who want to walk a few blocks. We are a small town that can be navigated pretty easily and parking is not that substantial of an issue to necessitate a parking structure.
PAID PARKING
It would impact traffic
They’re unsightly
Unless the parking structures are underground, with mixed-use or “city square” public space placed above, parking structures do not fit with the visual “village” character of Solvang.
Ugly- will be vacant and crime centers 9 months of the year...will be used on weekends, holidays and summer. Bad idea
Seems like you're trying to make this little town into a big city 237
Question 27: If you answered “No” to question #26, please explain why? Responses
Parking structures would take way from the feel of our small quaint town but if they have to be considered I would build up the existing public parking lots I said yes with the understanding that a level of underground parking is included and not exceeding 2 levels above ground.
Not unless they could be underground or not very visible.
Only if underground or retail on first floor and only if good design. I am really against parking structures except underground as they are eyesores and take up limited development options They would be unsightly - maybe down by Nielsen’s with a trolley? I honestly don't feel that parking is that bad in Solvang.
EYE SORE. The lots are too small for a structure.
Unless they are discrete and hidden like the one in the back of the Landsby or can be located between Alisal and the Mission (bus parking behind Tower Pizza and Post Office).
The Landsby has a good example of multi-level parking that is unobtrusive. Lived here for years before I realized there was parking underneath. So if we can do that, then yes to a structure, or requiring new builds to have "hidden" parking. And let's encourage people to walk and bike once they are here - more pedestrian friendly and more e-bike rental availability.
This was a small town. You’re trying to make Solvang into something it’s never been.
As stated in a previous question, we still want Solvang to look like Solvang.
Why in the world would we need it?
Parking structures are not part of the scene in Danish villages. I can't see one in the town that would not detract from the tourist experience.
parking lots are compatible with Solvang. Parking garages do not belong in small towns I like the small town feel when you come into Solvang. If parking structures were to be built, traffic would increase and look out of place
Too big city
It doesn’t fit Solvang
we don't need 2-5 story structures. they are ugly.
ARE YOU KIDDING A FREAKING PARKING GARAGE IN DOWNTOWN SOLVANG?!?!?!?!?!? Put structures at edge of town with shuttle
Only if they're underground or made with aesthetics in mind and heavily planted with native trees and shrubs.
On one hand, parking at certain times of year is a nightmare, so a structure could be helpful.
However, it will have a huge negative effect on the small town charm of Solvang.
Structures, yes. In center of Solvang, no.
Is a total antithesis of the whole idea of a quaint little town that is charming. Parking structures? Seriously??? Tourists will stop coming as the ''quaint village'' atmosphere 238
Question 27: If you answered “No” to question #26, please explain why? Responses
disappears. A parking structure will be a BIG degradation in the ''village'' feel.
It will ruin the look of the community
I am afraid it would keep to the architectural style of Solvang.
If a parking structure could be mostly underground, that would be good, but I frankly don't trust the city to come up with a parking structure that would not be hideous and way too tall. 239
Question 28 – Do you believe the City should consider additional pedestrian-oriented or pedestrianfriendly environments in the community (i.e., city center plaza, expanded sidewalks, pedestrianonly streets)? If yes, please provide examples. 240
Question 29 – If you answered “Yes” to question #28, please provide examples.
Question 29: If you answered “Yes” to question #28, please provide examples.
Responses
No keep it small town!!!
Plazas and pedestrian only streets are great for Solvang. Sidewalks are needed on Alisal - between Maple and Laurel.
All of the above sound great.
We like Copenhagen to remain pedestrian friendly!
Open patios/sidewalk table space, walking only zones for businesses and visitors & tourists. European models
Definitely Copenhagen. Need to creatively look at this question, particularly expansion of Solvang Park, along with parking garages. Could Solvang School and City consider two levels of parking on Lower School lot with solar panels?
More designated walking/bike trails
I love what's happened with Copenhagen, especially if more housing is developed, there will be options for open spaces. if Fjord drive is extended it seems like more streets would be open, like the area near theaterfest.
Anything that separates pedestrians from motor vehicle areas is a good thing and enhances safety, especially when pedestrians can own the space. Since people are drawn to where other people are congregating, it can be developed intentionally and can be a plus to local businesses. There are lots of examples of this from around the country.
Keeping Copenhagen makes visiting that more special and comfortable. The overall feel of the Copenhagen area right now is way better than it was in the past when cars were there. It is a lot more relaxed without everyone jammed on the sidewalk trying to get around each other. city center plaza, expanded sidewalks, pedestrian-only streets expanded/more sidewalks
Copenhagen Drive can be a gem. People like it but it looks cheap. Make it permanent and develop it for walking
High density parking structure along with pedestrian only, park like plazas would be desirable.
I like having Copenhagen Street closed to through traffic but it needs to have a more permanent look Bike paths along the river between 154 and Buellton.
Expanded sidewalks, center plaza
Keep Copenhagen as is. Pedestrian only. Prohibit bikes on sidewalks and Copenhagen (pedestrian areas). Add crosswalk at the Mission entrance on Mission Drive.
Copenhagen should remain closed to motorized traffic.
Find another way for both pedestrians and autos to travel on the streets. Maybe some one way 241
Question 29: If you answered “Yes” to question #28, please provide examples.
Responses
roads
I like the closed street.
Parking lot between Mission and Copenhagen just behind Solvang Park (Solvang Visitor Center area) should be considered for city center plaza, with subterranean parking garage.
Copenhagen should remain closed, and improved for walking, between Alisal and Second Streets or Atterdag Road. Also sidewalks should be constructed on Fredensborg Canyon Road between Atterdag Road and Viborg Roads, and added to on Viborg Road between Frdensborg and Alamo Pintado Roads.
Enjoyed no traffic on Copenhagen and Solvang is a walking town and that should be encouraged Sidewalks are needed on at least one side of every residential street for children walking to Solvang School! Higher density residences mean more cars parked on the street, and some street are barely wide enough for a car on each side; where are the kids going to go?? Having Copenhagen closed is good for tourism. Maybe some planter boxes in the center would make Copenhagen more of an attraction
Look at Europe! All walkable downtowns. People want to be outside I like the closure of Copenhagen but I would provide and expanded are on those sections and have permanent and uniform structures that extend into the center of the street All of the above as part of a Master Plan.
Copenhagen remain closed to traffic. Also better planned crosswalks on 246 and Alisal.
Pedestrian streets are perfect for the Solvang vibe - very European.
Bridge over 246 for foot traffic
All of your suggestions sound great
St George's lumberyard with some retail?
Research around the world demonstrates that residents and visitors alike want a walking pedestrian experience. We need more green space, expanded sidewalks throughout town, bike paths and ped only streetscapes throughout town
Entire Village area should be pedestrian only. Sidewalks should be widened and repaired (many hazards to pedestrians now).
Copenhagen is thriving with activity and the new area behind McLain cellars is packed. This is what we need more of to bring more tourist revenue. Higher end experiences Keeping Copenhagen closed and developing it into a city center plaza The Mission-Alisal-Copenhagen—2nd Street blocks could benefit from better pedestrian access and flow.
Yes, keeping Copenhagen closed is a good start!
Expanded sidewalks on Copenhagen with a center lane available for the trolley, parades or entertainment.
Keep Copenhagen closed to traffic
242
Question 29: If you answered “Yes” to question #28, please provide examples.
Responses
Close all of Copenhagen from Atterdag to Alisal. The closed section was amazing during the Pandemic.
Farmers Market is more pleasant, Christmas was really beautiful and gave the area a European village feel. Tourists weren't all jammed up on the sidewalks on the weekends making Copenhagen a more relaxed family atmosphere.
Studies show pedestrian-oriented areas are safer for all ages, better for businesses as people are "hanging around" longer, create vibrant neighborhoods. Studies also show people don't like change.
But once they see the positive benefit they will like it. Keep Copenhagen closed. Move Solvang towards a real European feel. COVID is not going away - outdoor areas are going to continue to be important. It is also just more relaxed and calmer without the cars, noise and exhaust.
These add to the European feel and allow for comfortable walking and shopping.
It is very European to have walking plaza's and area's without traffic. A well designed plaza downtown I believe is beneficial for the town and it's residence.
I support the closure of Copenhagen Drive. And more sidewalks are needed in the neighborhood north of Hwy. 246.
Copenhagen works!
The Copenhagen closure is nice because it limits the traffic through the streets and reduces overcrowded sidewalks
Like pedestrian only streets like Copenhagen is now. Would like sidewalks on Chalk Hill by the cemetery so I don't feel like I will get hit by a fast car bringing out the trash If the circulation problems caused by closed streets could be satisfactorily solved, then perhaps I'd answer yes. But the expense to the city will be significant.
Parking structures below ground with pedestrian areas and commercial activities above yes, sidewalks are too narrow in downtown when Solvang is busy Wider sidewalks and additional lighting for crosswalks are needed. A bicycle path would be nice. And most important a sidewalk or official path is needed from Nyborg Estates area down the hill to Buellton. I've seen way too many people walking down that hill almost get hit by cars. There is no reason why a very nice sidewalk even a bike path could not be added on the downhill side of the road.
Pedestrian only streets have worked very well for others cities we have visited. More foot traffic, more outdoor seating for restaurants.
Bike lanes
The streets closed for the last few years have made the city much more fun to walk in! City must provide safe walking and pedestrian areas throughout the city not just the commercial zone. very unsafe now with a high rate of pedestrian use on main roads and neighborhood streets.
Residential use of streets must be as much a priority as tourist use.
1. City friendly plaza
2.integrated parking and outdoor business with restructuring the 243
Question 29: If you answered “Yes” to question #28, please provide examples.
Responses
Sidewalks.
3.stamped concrete with landscaping of large trees, lighting etc. for walkways that are integrated outdoor wine and restaurants services. Removal of sidewalks next to businesses Why don't we just make Solvang a car-free, pedestrian-friendly town? We could have parking outside of town and free shuttles, rickshaws, or other means of transportation to and around. I know, unlikely. But why not?
Pedestrian only streets tend to concentrate visitors to areas where traffic is not a consideration.
Things like de la Guerra plaza in SB
I like the idea of the main street being pedestrian only as it has been in COVID times....if that is commercially workable.
Sidewalks in the neighborhoods because a lot of people walk daily.
Please do keep Copenhagen drive as pedestrian only, and improve it visually 244
Question 30 – Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
We feel that the one thing that draws paying tourists to this area is the the still unique Danish theme and the beauty of the area. High density should be considered in other big city environments. Some places should not be considered for high density. Don’t change it.
Stop the madness!
I think all of this is dumb. I have lived in many places, and the denser the population the problems the community has. We live here for the quiet and peaceful community. We are close to busier and denser areas (SM & SB) and look at the problems they have. SM is no longer a community. It is a big box haven. SB is so dense if there is an accident the gridlock is horrible. Why are you pushing this on our wonderful community? Instead push back on the state/county and say NO. Do what your constituents want.
Create more public parks and preserved open space around town - keep higher density residential close to main commercial areas
Whatever you do, please make it beautiful and don’t let any money hungry schisters win the contracts who will cut corners and do a crummy job. Solvang is too special to put in the hands of land grabbers like the guy who thought it was a great idea to destroy our Veteran’s Building so he could make a buck.
Keep Solvang quaint and charming. Do not make it Disneyland!
1.Through traffic seems like an unsolvable problem on 246. Could pedestrian overpasses be used?
2.Develop the passive park between Mission and Village Collection, maybe using theme of Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tales.
3. Could pedestrian scrambles be used in places like Alisal and Copenhagen? Where 1st and 2nd cross Copenhagen? Would prefer overpasses on
246 to scrambles, but scrambles are my 2nd choice.
4. Important to consider how to encourage development of experience-based business as a more important element in the mix of tourist serving businesses.
5. Vacant/underutilized parcels seem to include the land at entrance to Village Collection now landscaped with some trails but evidently under jurisdiction of its HOA. Needs investigation with HOA to determine if only or best use is a park like area, whether it should be extension of land reserved for city passive park north of development.
6. Strip across Alisal, now public land with part used for city utilities. Should lower part be developed for some kind of housing?
7. Fjord extension. Need to be able to offer Fjord
245
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
residents, who bitterly oppose even bike lanes on street, some irresistible tradeoffs like elimination of dust from sand and gravel, etc. in current industrial area by rethinking as part of SOI annexation process how to use that land in ways that eliminate mobile home park and other residents' dust problems.
We have to do something about the cost of living, and that means first and foremost, housing.
Increase affordable housing opportunities, separate pedestrians from motor vehicle areas to the greatest extent possible, create pedestrian and bike-friendly areas, and address the traffic congestion on the streets mentioned earlier. Good luck to you, and great work so far! Politics beginning with leveling of Atterdag College continues to flourish in Solvang!!!! I own property in Solvang and have lived in the area for over 40 years. I, personally, think there are adequate tourist hotels/motels in the Valley. It's time to consider the employees and young local families.
Quit thinking about how to generate more money for the city. Take care of the problems we have right now. #1 meeting the water needs for the community as it sits right now. #2 Traffic, Make a bypass around the city. Connect Fjord to 246 and Alamo Pinatado. This would stop lot of the large truck traffic through the center of town. Also, the commuter traffic that is just trying to get through town. Solvang is a destination city. People come here because they planned to. They didn't just stumble on it while out for a ride in the country. Make and keep that quite country feel that we all love and appreciate. This is what attracts tourists! Since you seem so into making money this is the way you should go about it. This is what you should be working on to improve. Vacations are to relax and wind down. If you build more, it will change that forever, and you will never get that back. People love seeing and enjoying open space. Leave what we have alone! Just make it affordable! Not everybody makes 100k a year working in a little town. Single parents, retired folks, and lower income people have the right to continue living in Solvang too.
Bikes. Make it safer. You can go anywhere in town on a bike. But the cars on Mission are aggressive and dangerous.
We are a unique town and should remain that way. It has served us well to have pretty architecture set in a beautiful landscape. We need to limit tourism and stop trying to cram as many people in as possible; it isn't safe or pleasant. There is ample affordable housing 25 minutes away in Lompoc; we don't need to add more in Solvang. Our landscape is too beautiful and unique to ruin it by building huge, tall buildings.
Keep the homeless in mind, food insecurity, wages of what people can afford and by implementing some projects be aware of the outside costs to keep them going.
I have lived here for over 80 years. The changes I ah e seen are disappointing. We are loosing our small neighborhood community.
Let's find a way to mitigate all the damage and problems caused by the Casino. 246
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
I beg of you to take this into consideration. With the housing that I'm sure will be added to our city, the cost of housing/rent needs to be taken into consideration. People who work in this town, but don't own property or businesses, cannot afford to live here. Dual-income families are being forced from homes they rent and they can't find anything similar. Additionally, we have multiple families living in single apartments. These are folks who make our businesses and tourism run. We need to take care of them. Low-income housing needs to be part of this plan, and we need to figure something out so that housing, whether rent or ownership, does not simply become something for wealthy people or those who are inheriting property from family who paid affordable rates a long time ago. We need to make sure our housing takes care of the diverse people who take care of our town and our businesses. Please make this a priority in the General Plan Tourist parking, more housing especially pet friendly and alternative routes for cars and bikes are our main concerns
Don’t let woke government change the character of Solvang.
We do NOT have the infrastructure for residential growth. The City cannot currently keep up with the maintenance of roads, sidewalks, sewer system and drinking water requirements... WHAT is going to change? Is there a "Danish Magic Fairy" who has a fiscal and water wand she can wave....? We need more activities & restaurant options for locals. Roller-skating, bowling, etc. would be good for teens & tourists.
The city needs to address the traffic in Solvang before even thinking about increasing population housing
Keep the present city borders as they are. Fill in the available spaces within the present city boundaries. Consider underground parking structures with open parks above.
Pedestrian safety is eroding and all you have to do is walk through town to see examples, especially in the weekend when tourists are at the height. Incorporate empty existing buildings or run down spaces into lower cost housing
Just recently moved to Solvang. Love it here. Please don't change it much.
Survey the residents on the high traffic streets I mentioned above about parking and traffic issues.
Also, the bypass along Fjord was in the books for years. Start planning for it now with the possibility of getting help from infrastructure money, Chumash, neighboring Valley cities.
Move the post office to the less intense place. Open a movie theater. Let local rent their rooms or houses. Control the prices: locals could pay % less
The State mandate for housing is undesirable for small towns Please don't destroy what we have here by overbuilding. Re parking structures: I vote yes, but only if they can be underground or otherwise disguised. Thanks. 247
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
As much as I like the walking Copenhagen street, it is ugly and has no theme or decent parklets? If made as charming as other walking streets with flowers and nice seating and better parking a block or tow away?
Solvang is a charming "village". Don't ruin the charm of the main tourist area. Instead, double down on beautifying what is there and making it tourist- friendly; i.e.: better sidewalks, bathrooms, entertainment. Enhance the outlying areas (Alamo Pintado Rd., Quarry area, Agriculture area off 246.
The Fjord Extension could be a valuable resource for emergency vehicle access and be rendered palatable for affected residents by being limited to monitored local resident use only via gates and/or license plate recognition or other similar technology.
It would be nice to have more safe walking trails that are separated from the highway.
Does the California law mentioned above cover cities and towns of all sizes? We may fall under it if there is a population number or density value.
Round-abouts?? Studies show they work. Again, people will figure them out. More bicycle friendly roads. Speed bumps or dips right at the intersections to slow traffic and make people actually STOP at the stop signs. People speed down our street, maybe slow for the speed humps then blow through the stop signs and I live RIGHT BY THE SCHOOL. Sidewalk extension on 5th street between Laurel and Elm. There isn't sidewalk on either side of the street and it is dangerous to walk in the street (tourists and locals) and children/families use the route to school and to the park. This project in Lompoc is intriguing- dense but a sense of community too: https://www.brisaencina.com/about Bicycle friendly roads and paths.
We should be protecting our town from the onslaught that has ruined the rest of California Though I live in SY, I am a landlord in Solvang so have a serious interest.
Leave fjord alone please
I believe there is an opportunity to create a beautiful downtown plaza for all to enjoy and be proud of well into the future. It has to be well designed and done with quality and in the European tradition with seating and defined area's for food etc. Expanded growth oriented zone changes I do not feel would be beneficial for the town, people who visit and live here enjoy the small town feel and ambiance, we have one of the most beautiful towns and settings in this state and we must work hard to retain it and prevent any over development.
As the reputation of Solvang as a fun place to visit is critical for the economic future of the town, only changes that will enhance that experience should be made.
Do not develop lot 72
I moved here to get away from traffic and the density of cities, and to live in a small town with small town values. I've never been happier and I know that the children of residents who move back to Solvang have left cities for the same reason! don't make Solvang a place that we want to move away from
248
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
I would as the planning dept to look at full development plans before hotels are concerned in the future. parking must come with each hotel room.
letting current residents add guest dwellings for visitors I like that Solvang is small and quaint and I don't want to see it have big structures and giant parking and meters and things that make it difficult to get around and make it like a city. I love our parks and public restrooms, visitors center. i think the traffic through town is my biggest issue. A bypass would be great to alleviate traffic zooming through the residential areas and allow people a way around the tourist.
You really need to consider protection of scenic views, which are important to both residents and tourists. You also need to understand the expense of some of your proposals. Your land use alternatives really don't result in the rural, small town community valued so much by Solvang's residents.
I haven't seen much movement on some of these projects since I've moved here:
https://lompocrecord.com/news/local/long-stalled-projects-getting-underway-insolvang/ article_44922d50-bbf8-5c3e-a730-50ea6590aa8b.html
Any changes in Solvang planning should be coordinated across the entire Santa Ynez Valley rather than in a microcosm.
sports fields are needed for current residents- there are currently not enough already. Let's not forget to take care of our CURRENT residents before thinking about adding more housing for more people to move in.
As I said those of us who live here and own properties should be most important, not the tourists.
Parking structures would kill this place. Building buildings higher would kill this place. This is not why I or any of us came to live here. We want to live in a SMALL town, quiet, secret, away from the masses.
We don't want to live in Goleta. This is a slice of paradise in an otherwise bustling city. My neighbor was given special permission to build a fortress 2.5 feet from my house and it has absolutely sucked the happiness from me. I used to watch sunsets over the mountains and now I look at a white wall as far as the eye can see. If you start building more buildings, bigger buildings, that is going against everything this town is supposed to be about. There are areas near Alamo Pintado that can handle higher residential and larger buildings, but ruining downtown will be the death of this town. You cannot even fill the current offices that exist now, how many empty offices are there?? Perhaps convert some of the offices on Alisal into apartments but don’t plan enormous multifamily buildings.
We are all lucky to live here, we live in the country. We are country folk. Please don't ruin our town.
Add some nice walkways, bike paths, ways for people to get here besides with their cars. A LOT of people want to walk from here to Buellton, add a nice sidewalk down there, so many people would park somewhere and walk or have a bike day. Please for the love of god do not build a parking garage.
That enrages me to no end. Everyone's talking about this like young people who don't even 249
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
understand who we are and why we live here. If you speed up construction and opening up now, then its just going to have to keep getting more sped up in the future forever. Build the Clydesdale shelter like we voted for AGES ago, add some bike paths and walking paths from Alamo Pintado up and from Buellton up to Nyborg Estates, convert some of the crappy unused offices downtown in to apartments and build a complex near Alamo Pintado. Some of these hotels in town are not used half the year! We cannot fill up our offices and commercial areas already, we don't need to add more.
Solvang’s tourism, whether it be for the quaint Danish atmosphere or the wineries is going to be the driving force of our economy in the future. That said, making it easier for tourists to enjoy our community should be of high concern. People who move here and visit here are usually looking to get out of the “city” atmosphere. Encouraging too much growth would be detrimental to both.
Please maintain a surrounding rural atmosphere as a major priority for Solvang I fully understand the general plan concepts. But the alternative C as written is a stretch based on the basic size, congestion, physical area, and budgetary capabilities of the city. Alternative C should be reworked somewhat to factor down the density levels.
It is necessary to have another artery for traffic ASAP. Mission is a major problem for traffic. Alisal is a problem too. I think the alleys in Solvang should become one way street options.
The push for more tourism is driving up costs and taking away from our community that cannot handle the capacities brought in. We need to have a community that can withstand reductions in tourism and become more self sustaining with other industries within town (office space, commercial, industrial, etc.) retail and hospitality industry should not be all we exist for. It's driving the cost of housing to skyrocket and turning rentals into VRBOs and under the table weekend rentals.
Need for pedestrian overpasses on Mission Dr.
Please keep Solvang as the sweet and charming city that it is. It's why people come here.
None
Any change in traffic on mission which pushes cars And trucks into neighborhoods is unacceptable for families with children and pets.
Expansion/building/increased density simply degrades the quality of life for the residents, and the loss of a ''quaint village'' feel will eventually kill off business for the retailers. And even if they made MORE money...what good is ''more and more money'' if it doesn't buy quality of life??? Residents are being given a back-seat, as it were, to the demands of developers. It is wrong for this community and the whole valley.
Our library is too small for the usage it gets. I would hope that consideration of an enlarged library would be part of the land use plan.
it is important to understand the services (water, waste water, streets, etc.) that are required for any change in the city. This should be down before the pan is submitted for EIR or we will have to redo the plan
250
Question 30: Provide any other thoughts you would like to pass on for consideration in the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives.
Responses
Possible one-way streets in narrow areas of residential areas.
Any plan that allows for more dense housing but does not consider the needs for increased public/institutional space (prime example is a larger library facility) is not going to improve our city. 251
Solvang General
Plan Update
City Council Presentation
February 14, 2022
252
Meeting Purpose
General Plan Process and Timeline
The Alternatives Process
Overview of Community Feedback Received
Council Feedback and Direction to GPAC
Next Steps
253
2 General Plan
Process and
Timeline
254
3 August 2021 – March 2022
Late Spring 2023
December 2020 Summer 2022 – Early 2023
January 2021 – July 2021 February 2022 – Summer 2022
Project
Initiation
1 Existing
Conditions
and Trends
2 Alternative
Choices
3 Preparing
the
Plan
4 Environmental
Review
5 Adoption
6 General Plan Update Process
GPAC Involvement
Community Engagement
Housing Element
255
The Alternatives
Process
256
5 Purpose of the Alternatives Report
257
6 Scope of Analysis
The land use alternatives focus on expanded housing and commercial for the future.
The Alternatives Report analyzes three different land use alternatives. 7 Medium-density infilloriented scenario. The
density and non-residential
intensity in the HDR and TC
land use designations
increase from Alternative A.
High-density infill-oriented
scenario. The density and
non-residential intensity in
the HDR and TC land use
designations increase from
Alternative B.
258
Focus Area
Most of Solvang is not expected to
change much between now and 2040.
The focus area is the area of Solvang
where development and change is most
likely to occur.
The General Plan Advisory Committee
(GPAC), in collaboration with City staff
and the consultant team, identified
modifications to the Focus Area to
capture areas with the most opportunity
for change.
8 Key Factors For
Focus Area Potential
Location
Existing Infrastructure or Access
to Infrastructure
Existing Roadway Capacity
Compatibility with Adjacent Uses
259
Scope of Analysis
9 High Density Residential and
Tourist Commercial
The General Plan land use
designations of High Density
Residential (HDR )and Tourist
Commercial (TC), which are found
within the focus area, are the only
two designations under
consideration for density and
intensity changes.
260
Scope of Analysis
1. Within the Focus Area, two existing land
use designations were identified that
could support potential future
residential and non-residential
development.
2. Parcels outside the Focus Area were
analyzed using the existing land use
designation for residential and nonresidential development. 261
10 Overview of
Community
Feedback
Received
262
11 Community Workshop #3 Survey Responses
Topic: Land Use
Alternatives
Location: Online via
plansolvang.com
Responses Received: 183
community participants
263
12 Concerns Relating to Growth
264
13 Identified Areas within the Focus Area
265
14 Identified Areas within the Focus Area
15 *Greatest concern was the increase of High Density Residential and questions on future utility capacity.
266
Multi-Unit Housing Types
267
16 Multi-Unit Housing Types
268
17 Support for Duplex/Triplex/Fourplex
269
18 Preferred Density
270
19 Maximum Building Height
271
20 Alternative Preference
272
21 Alternative Preference
22 Support for A: Just trying to keep the charm that Solvang has. So, A is the least change.
Support for B: Steps need to be taken to increase the availability of affordable housing while preserving Solvang's architecture, heritage and small-town charm.
Increasing the density of affordable housing stock is manageable and Alternative B seems to have the best approach.
273
Alternative Preference
23 Support for none of the Alternatives: No changes to Solvang at all. It is, or was, a small community I have lived in for over 10 years and in the Santa Ynez Valley over 30 years. Watching it grow to what developers want will make further changes that to me, and many others, is not acceptable.
274
Fjord Drive Extension
275
24 Parking Management
25 *If you have paid parking the people looking for parking will just park on the residential streets and walk to town so they don't have to worry about feeding the meter. Which would just make it worse for the residents. 276
Pedestrian-Only Environments
26 *Keeping Copenhagen makes visiting that more special and comfortable. The overall feel of the Copenhagen area right now is way better than it was in the past when cars were there. It is a lot more relaxed without everyone jammed on the sidewalk trying to get around each other.
277
Council Feedback
and Direction to
GPAC
278
27 Next Steps
279
28 Next Steps
GPAC Meeting on Preferred Alternative Recommendation | February 22, 2022
Joint Study Session and Selection of Land Use Diagram | March 7, 2022
Preparation of the General Plan Elements
280
29 Thank You
281
30 Agenda Item Number: 6
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: RECEIVE TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MARKETING SERVICES
OPERATING STRUCTURE AND SCOPE OF WORK
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive Tourism Advisory Committee recommendations for marketing services operating structure and scope of work recommendations and provide staff with policy direction.
DISCUSSION:
On January 24, 2022, the City Council directed staff to work with the Tourism Advisory Committee (TAC) to further refine recommendations for marketing services post the current contract extension with consultant through July 31, 2022, and to return to City Council at the next Council meeting.
The TAC met on February 3 and discussed marketing services operating structure and marketing scope of work for the benefit of the City of Solvang and prepared recommendations for City Council consideration. The TAC motion has been reflected as the following in the draft minutes subject to TAC approval at the next meeting.
“Motion by Committee Member Beard, to recommend that City Council explore reinstating the SCVB and form an Ad Hoc Committee of Committee Member Beard and Chair Shallanberger to work on the development of a marketing services RFP, seconded by Committee Member Grenier, and carried, unanimously, by 6-0.”
The City Council may direct staff to work with the TAC to continue to develop the scope of work for an RFP. The City Council may also direct staff to provide the City Council with recommendations and legal status of the SCVB as a non-profit organization.
Organizationally, the City has two structural options for marketing services operations. One, the City can outsource the services fully to be administered by a marketing contractor. The contactor can be a private or a non-profit organization. In this scenario it is strongly recommended that the City follow its purchasing policy and competitively bid the services through a request for proposals (RFP) process. Secondly, the City can bring the administration of marketing services in-house by establishing a marketing manager position. Depending on the City’s focus areas and direction, certain aspects of marketing such as social media, market 282
development, etc. could be sub-contracted directly by the City, with oversight of the overall program being maintained internally.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council has full discretion to provide staff with any alternative policy direction. The City Council also has full discretion over funding allocations toward marketing of Solvang as a tourism destination.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There may be some legal fees associated with any legal research the City Attorney may need to engage in if the City Council directs further research or action regarding SCVB legal standing and possibility of re-instatement.
ATTACHMENTS:
N/A
283
Agenda Item Number: 7
Solvang City Council STAFF REPORT
PREPARED BY: Xenia Bradford, City Manager
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2022
SUBJECT: APPOINT TOURISM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER DUE TO
RESIGNATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Tourism Advisory Committee (TAC) member Barry Prescott had resigned from the Committee resulting in a vacancy for the seat appointed by Councilmember Clarke. Councilmember Clarke may appoint an alternate Committee member or direct staff to open a recruitment.
DISCUSSION:
TAC Member Barry Prescott has resigned from the Committee. Member Prescott was originally appointed by Councilmember Clarke. Per the City Code, each Councilmember appoints one member and the Committee can appoint up to two additional members by majority vote. Thus, Councilmember Clarke may consider appointing another Committee member. Councilmember Clarke may also request staff to advertise the position to seek qualified candidates.
The TAC membership is established by the City of Solvang Municipal Code section cited below.
2-5-2 Membership.
A. Appointment. Each city council member shall appoint one (1) tourism advisory committee member selected from the qualified individuals who apply to the city council, which shall include incumbents. The city council by majority vote may appoint up to two (2) additional members selected from the qualified individuals who apply to the city council, which shall include incumbents. The tourism advisory committee shall be comprised of no more than seven (7) members. The city council may appoint an alternate member from a participating organization to serve as a voting member during the absence of the first appointee.
B. Qualification. The tourism advisory committee shall represent a cross section of the community as it relates to tourism and represent as many of the following categories as possible: large hotel, small hotel, large retailer, small retailer, shopping center, restaurant, cultural-visual and/or performing arts, real estate, local attraction or a profession within the marketing community. Each tourism 284
advisory committee member shall be a legal resident within the boundaries of one (1) of the following zip codes at the time of the member’s appointment and during the member’s tenure in office: 93463, 93464, 93427, 93460, 93440 (Solvang, Buellton, Santa Ynez and Los Alamos).
C. Term and Vacancies. 1. The term of office for tourism advisory committee members shall be two (2) years. The term of all members shall expire on December 31 of each even year. Each tourism advisory committee member may be reappointed from term to term in the same manner as set forth in subsection A of this section. 2. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term in the same manner as set forth in subsection A and in the same manner as the original appointment.
D. Removal—Termination Due to Nonattendance. 1. Committee members may be removed at any time by affirmative vote of three (3) members of the city council. Removal shall create a vacancy under subsection C of this section. 2. A tourism advisory committee member shall be permitted two (2) unexcused absences per calendar year and a third unexcused absence shall be deemed removed from membership without further action of the committee or city council, unless excused for cause by the chairperson, or if the chairperson, by a majority of the tourism advisory committee. The tourism advisory committee shall notify the city council immediately of any such removal due to nonattendance. Such removal shall create a vacancy under subsection C of this section.
E. Compensation and Expenses. 1. Any compensation of the tourism advisory committee members shall be fixed by resolution of the city council. 2. Tourism advisory committee members may be reimbursed for their necessary and actual expenses incurred on official city business in accordance with city policy. (Ord. 21-0351 § 1)
ALTERNATIVES:
Councilmember Clarke may continue the item to a future date.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
N/A
285