Agenda packet — Watsonville City Council, March 8, 2022 (part 4 of 6)

State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/1 9) Page 5

9. PROJECT CATEGORY
WORK TY"PE
NEW

CONSTRUCTION

REPLACE

EXISTING STRUCTURE
, REPAIR-MAINTAIN-OPERATE

EXISTING STRUCTURE
Bank stabilization - bioengineering/recontouring € € €
Bank stabilization - rip-rap/retaining wall/gabion € € € Boat dock/pier € € €
Boat ramp € € €
Bridge € € €
Channel clearing/vegetation management € € €
Culvert € € €
Debris basin € € €
Dam € € €
Filling of wetland, river, stream, or lake a € €
Geotechnical survey € € €
Habitat enhancement - revegetation/mitigation El € €
Levee € € €
Low water crossing € € €
Road/trail € a €
Sediment removal: pond, stream, or marina € € €
flood control € € €
Storm drain outfall structure € € €
Temporary stream crossing € € €
Utility crossing: horizontal directional drilling € € € jack/bore € € €
open trench € € €
Water diversion without facility € € €
Water diversion with facility € € €
Other (specify): € € €
DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 68 of 73

Page 484 of 870 ends

State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/1 9) Page 6

10. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Describe the project in detail. Include photographs of the project location and immediate surrounding area. I - Written description of all project activities with detailed step-by-step description of project implementation. i - lnclude any structures (e.g., rip-rap, culverts) that will be placed or modified in or near the stream, river, or lake, and any channel clearing.
- Specify volume, and dimensions of all materials and features (e.g., rip rap fields) that will be used or installed. - If water will be diverted or draffed, specify the purpose or use and include Attachment C. - Enclose diagrams, drawings, design plans, construction specifications, and maps that provide all of the following:
site specific construction details; dimensions of each structure and/or extent of each activity in the bed, channel, ban3or floodplain; overview of the entire project area (i.e.,"bird's-eye view") showing the location of each structure and/or activity, significant area features, stockpile areas, areas of temporary disturbance, and where the equipment/machinery will access the project area. s A helpful resource to aSSist in the development of quality PDF maps in Google Earth. See Using Gooqle i Earth to Map your Property (PDF). - I
Project Site Plan highlighting the location of the Retaining Wall is included in ATTACHMENT #1 Selected Project Construction Plan Sheets are included as ATTACHMENT #2.

Photos of Project Area are included as ATTACHMENT #3.

Electronic copy of entire plan set attached.

As part of a larger construction project, an approximately 270 ft retaining wall will be built. The total cut and fill for the project, as indicated on Plan Sheet 4.O Grading Plan is:

Cut: 12700 CY
Fill: 9300 CY
Net: 3400 CY Fill
No specific calculations have been performed for the retaining wall or the habitat area to be impacted.

Area where habitat to be impacted is indicated as "Fill" on Plan Sheet C4.0 in ATTACHMET #2.

Steps will consist of: 1 ) Clearing and grubbing land area, including willow removal; 2) grading to lowest common grade; 3) building of retaining wall; 4) fill added and compacted as needed behind retaining wall. No work will be performed within the stream channel, nor will any water diversion occur.

EIContinued on additional page(s)
B. Specify the equipment and machinery that will be used to complete the project.

The following equipment is expected to be used as a part of the project: Pete dump truck, Grader, Compactor, Grader, Loader, Excavator, Paver, Scraper, Backhoe € Continuedon additional page(s)
C. Will water be present during the proposed work period (specified in box 4.D) in the stream, river, or lake (specified in box 8.B). ' € Yes a No (Skip to box ll ) I
D. Will the project require work in the wetted portion of the channel?
€ Yes (Enclose a plan to divert water around work site) [lt'ao
DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 69 of 73

Page 485 of 870 ends

State or California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/1 9) Page 7

11. PROJECT IMPACTS
A. Describe impacts to the bed, channel, and bank of the river, stream, or lake, and the associated riparian habitat.

Specify the dimensions of the modifications in length (linear feet) and area (square feet or acres) and the type and volume of material (cubic yards) that will be moved, displaced, or otherwise disturbed, if applicable.

Retaining wall will remove O.040 acres of Willow Woodland habitat area dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) on hillside above perennial stream. No work will occur within the stream itself. € Continued on additional page(s)
B. Will the project affect any vegetation? I EjYes (Complete the tables below) € No (fncfude aerial photo with date I supportingthisdetermination
Vegetation Type Temporary Impact Permanent Impact
A __ __ _ _ _ _ I A lull _ _ _ _ Linear feet: Linear feet:

Arr070 VVIIIOW Total area: Total area: 0o4
Linear feet: Linear feet:

Total area: Total area:

Tree Species Number of Trees to be Removed Trunk Diameter (range) Quercus agrifolia 1 6 inches (approx)
€ Continuedon additional page(s)
C. Are any special status animal or plant species, or habitat that could support such species, known to be present on or near the project site?
EIYes (List each species and/or describe the habitat below) € No € Unknown Oak woodland - potential nesting habitat for Cooper's hawk (Accipiter coopertii) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) Perennial Stream - potential habitat for California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) and Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) € Continued on additional page(s)
D.ldentify the source(s) of information that supports a "yes" or "no" answer above in Box 11.C.

Biological Report; Biological Resources section of Mitigated Negative Declaration € Continued on additional page(s)
E. Has a biological study been completed for the project site? aYes (Enclose the biological study) € No
Note.' A biological assessment or study may be required to evaluate potential project impacts on biological resources.

DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 70 of 73

Page 486 of 870 ends

State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/1 9) Page 8
F. Has one or more technical studies (e.g., engineering, hydrologic, geological, or geomorphological) been completed for the project or project site? € Yes (Enclose the study(ies)) EI No
Note.' One or more technical studies may be required to evaluate potential project impacts to a take or streambed.

G. Have fish or wildlife resources or waters of the state been mapped or delineated on the project site? EIYes (Enclose the mapped results) € No
Note: Check"yes" if fish and wildlife resources or waters of the state on the project site have been mapped or delineated. "Wildlife' means and includes a// wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, reptiles and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends." (Fish & G. Code, § 89.5.) If"yes" is checked, submit the mapping or delineation. If the mapping or delineation is in digital format (e.g., GIS shape files or KMZ), you must submit the information in this format for CDFW to deem your notification complete. If"no" is checked, or the resolution of the mapping or defineation is insufficient, CDFW may request mapping or delineation (in digital or non-digital format), or higher resolution mapping or delineation for CDFW to deem the notification complete.

12. MEASURES TO PROTECT FISH, WILDIFE, AND PLANT RESOURCES DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 71 of 73

Page 487 of 870 ends

State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/1 9) Page 9

13. PERMITS
List any local, State, and federal permits required for the project and check the corresponding box(es). Enclose a copy of each permit that has been issued. p. CityofWatsonvilleSpecial UsePermit []4ppHe,,1 01ssued B. CityofWatsonville Building/Fire Permit € qppiieo [lissueo C. € Applied € lssued
D. Unknown whether € local, € State,or € federalpermit is needed for the project. (Check each box that applies) € Continuedon additional page(s)

14. ENVIRONMENT AL REVIEW
IA.HasaC leadagencybeendetermined?l EIYes (Complete boxes B, C, D, E, and F) € No (Skip to box 14.G:) 'B.CEQALeadAgencyI
I
, City of Watsonville
C. Contact Person i Justin Meek
'D.PhoneNumber Ii8:31.768.3077
E. Has a draff or final document been prepared for the project pursuant to CEQA and/or NEPA? EIYes (Check the box below for each CEQA or NEPA document that has been prepared and enclose a copy of each.) € No (ChecktheboxbelowforeachCEQAorNEPAdocumentlistedbejowthatwillbeorisbeingprepared.) € Noticeof Exemption a Mitigated Negative Declaration € NEPAdocument (type):

EllnitialStudy € EnvironmentalImpact Report
€aNTeHgPa/tiNvTeMDPeclaration I [I]aMNo,tlgicaetl.oOfnDMetoenrm Planl I
F. State Clearinghouse Number (if applicable) I
201912C)010
G. If the project described in this notification is nct the "whole project" or action pursuant to CEQA, briefly describe the entire project (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14 § 15378).

Full Project Description available in Initial Study (electronic copy attached), Summary Below Construction is anticipated to last about 20 months and start with two weeks of abatement followed by one week of demolition. Site preparation and grading are anticipated to last four months (the grading would be balanced on-site with no import or export of material); the building construction period is anticipated to last 11 months. The project will include a residential substance use disorder treatment facility and an outpatient rehabilitation facility, and a 72-unit affordable housing development. The affordable housing development would provide housing for low, very low, and extremely low-income households. The project facilities include eight buildings that would total approximately 101,256 square feet. Six of the buildings would be used for providing affordable housing and two of the buildings would be used as an inpatient (residential) and outpatient facilities, respectively.
€ Continuedon additional page(s)
DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 72 of 73

Page 488 of 870 ends

State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife

NOTIFICATION OF LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION
FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602
DFW 2023 (REV. 05/28/19) Page 10
H. Has a CEQA fiting fee been paid pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 711.4? € YeJEnctoseproofofpayment) El)Slo(BrieflyexplainbelowthereasonaCEQAfi)ingfeehasnotbeenpa Note: The CEQA fiting fee is in addition to the notification ree. lr a CEQA fiting fee is required, the Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement may not be finalized until paid.

The CEQA filing fee will be paid once final project approval has occurred. The project is expected to be considered by the Watsonville City Council on June 23, 2020.

15. SITE INSPECTION
Check one box only.
€ ln the event CDFW determines that a site inspection is necessary, I hereby authorize a CDFW representative to enter the property where the project described in this notification will take place at any reasonable time, and hereby certify that I am authorized to grant CDFW such entry.

Ejl request CDFW to first contact (insert name) JOeRfgney B( (insertphonenumberoremailaddress) 831.32557540ririgne)/@eCOlOg:CalCOnCernS-Cam toschedulea date and time to enter the property where the project described in this notification will take place. I understand that this may delay CDFW's determination as to whether a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement is required and/or CDFW's issuance of a draft agreement pursuant to this notification.

16. DIGITAL FORMAT
Is any of the information included as part of the notification available in digital format (i.e., CD, DVD, etc.)? aYes (Please enclose the information via digital media with the completed notification form.) € NO

17. SIGNATURE
I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge the information in this notification is true and correct and that I am authorized to sign this notification as, or on behalf of, the applicant. I understand that if any information in this notification is found to be untrue or incorrect, CDFW may suspend processing this notification or suspend or revoke any draft or final Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement issued pursuant to this notification. I understand also that if any information in this notification is found to be untrue or incorrect and the project described in this notification has already begun, I and/or the applicant may be subject to civil or criminal prosecution. I understand that this notification. applies.only to the project(s) described herein and that I and/or the applicant may be subject to civil or criminal prosecution for undertaking any project not described herein unless CDFW has been separately notified of that project in accordance with Fish and Game Code section I 602 or I 61 1. h 1
l 06/10/2020
Signature glApplicant or Applicant's Authorized Representative Date :; :X;i;d;nthal
DocuSign Envelope ID: CDDE2E1F-82CA-478F-B2F9-92270C8D597A Attachment 8
page 73 of 73

Page 489 of 870 ends

View of Building 5 from Miles Lane
Original location Proposed location
Attachment 9
page 1 of 1

Page 490 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263574903\17263574903,,,Resolution - Approving Major Modification(1).docx Page 1 of 5

RESOLUTION NO. _________ (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WATSONVILLE (1) APPROVING A MAJOR MODIFICATION (2021-2663) OF THE MILES LANE PROJECT (PP2019-14) TO ALLOW THE
RELOCATION OF BUILDING 5 TO AVOID OVERHEAD POWER LINES
ACROSS THE PROPERTY AT 139 MILES LANE, WATSONVILLE,
CALIFORNIA (APN 016-491-03), AND (2) MODIFYING THE FINDINGS

APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS FOR THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14-47.130 AND THE STATE DENSITY

BONUS LAW
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2019, Elizabeth Nahas Wilson with MidPen Housing Corporation, applicant, on behalf of Michael C. Marchisio Trust (APNs: 016‐491-01, 016‐ 491-02, and 016‐111‐44) and Namvar & Shireen Dinyari (APN: 016‐491‐03), property owners, applied for a Lot Line Adjustment, Density Bonus, and Special Use Permit/Specific Development Plan with Design Review and Environmental Review (PP2019-14) to allow construction of the Miles Lane Project on a 4.7± acre site located at 139, 141, 161 Miles Lane and 201 Kimberly Lane (APNs 016-491-01, -02, & -03, & 016-111-44); and
WHEREAS, the Miles Lane Project is a joint effort by MidPen Housing Corporation (MidPen) and Encompass Community Services (Encompass). MidPen is a non-profit that develops, owns and manages affordable housing. In the 50 years since it was founded, MidPen has developed over 100 communities and 8,500 homes for low-income families, seniors and special needs individuals throughout Northern California. Encompass is a non-profit organization that provides services in behavioral health, family and social wellbeing, early childhood education, housing, and substance use recovery. Begun in 1973, Encompass has about 40 programs throughout Santa Cruz County; and

Page 491 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263574903\17263574903,,,Resolution - Approving Major Modification(1).docx Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the majority of the project site is designated Residential Medium Density on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and is within the Multiple ResidentialMedium Density (RM-2) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, a small portion of the project site corresponding with the upper reaches of the Watsonville Slough is designated Environmental Management on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and is within the Environmental Management Open Space (EM-OS) Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project, in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, on May 5, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Watsonville conducted a public hearing and adopted Resolution 12-20 (PC), recommending that the City Council approve a Lot Line Adjustment, Density Bonus, Planned Development, Special Use Permit with Design Review and Environmental Review (PP2019-14) to allow the construction of the Miles Lane Project on a 4.7± acre site located at 139, 141, 161 Miles Lane and 201 Kimberly Lane (APNs 016-491-01, -02, & -03, & 016-111-44); and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2020, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Initial Study prepared for the project (PP2019-14), and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration, made certain findings, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act by adoption of Resolution No. 120-20 (CM); and
WHEREAS, also on June 23, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 121-20 (CM), approving a Lot Line Adjustment, Density Bonus, Special Use Permit/Specific

Page 492 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263574903\17263574903,,,Resolution - Approving Major Modification(1).docx Page 3 of 5 Development Plan with Design Review and Environmental Review for Application No.

PP2019-14 to construct the Miles Lane Project on a 4.7± acre site located at 139, 141, 161 Miles Lane and 201 Kimberly Lane, Watsonville (APNs: 016-491-01, -02, & -03, & 016-111-44); and
WHEREAS, on September 1, 2021, a MidPen Housing representative informed staff that the power lines which run across the portion of the overall Miles Lane Project site at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03) are in conflict with the stairs in Building 5. Their architect had made an incorrect assumption about how far the building needed to be from the power lines. Since PG&E would not allow the building’s stairs to be constructed within their easement, MidPen Housing looked into how to resolve this issue by flipping the building and parking layout (i.e., moving Building 5 closer to the retaining wall and placing parking behind the building closer to the overhead power lines); WHEREAS, City staff confirmed that changing the location and orientation of Building 5 would require a Modification request, pursuant to Watsonville Municipal Code section 14-12.1000(b), to the approved plans and, therefore, would have to go back to the final approving body; and
WHEREAS, Special legal counsel for the Housing Division and MidPen Housing representatives have identified a need for amending the language in the findings for the Density Bonus to allow the City and MidPen Housing to enter into the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Regulatory Agreement, in accordance with Condition of Approval No. 10.

Those amendments require modifying the language contained in the City Council’s original approval resolution to correctly reflect the actual affordability mix (100% lower income) planned for the Miles Lane Project; and

Page 493 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263574903\17263574903,,,Resolution - Approving Major Modification(1).docx Page 4 of 5 WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, Elizabeth Nahas Wilson with MidPen Housing, applicant, on behalf of MP Miles Lane Associates LP, property owner, applied for a Major Modification to allow the relocation and reorientation of Building 5 and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03); and
WHEREAS, notice of time and place of the hearing to consider approval of the Major Modification (PP2021-2663) to the approved Miles Lane Project (PP2019-14) was given at the time and in the manner prescribed by Section 14-10.900 of the Watsonville Municipal Code. The matter called for hearing evidence both oral and documentary introduced and received, and the matter submitted for decision; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:

1. Based on the evidence in the Initial Study, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project (Resolution 120-20). The Major Modification would avoid an existing overhead power line. It would not change the number dwelling units or the extent of associated site improvements, such as the location of retaining walls and impervious surface area.

Therefore, based on substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, a subsequent negative declaration is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, as it has been determined that no substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions to the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Major Modification would not result in any new impacts to the environment and no increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects. No new mitigation measures or project revisions are needed to reduce potential impacts to insignificance.

Page 494 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263574903\17263574903,,,Resolution - Approving Major Modification(1).docx Page 5 of 5

2. Good cause appearing, and based upon the Density Bonus and Special Use Permit Findings, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A”, and hereby made by the City Council, the City Council does approve the Major Modification (PP2021- 2663) to the approved Miles Lane Project (PP2019-14), subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B”.
*************************************

Page 495 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 1 of 34

CITY OF WATSONVILLE EXHIBIT A

CITY COUNCIL
Application No: PP2021-2663/PP2019-14
APNs: 016-491-01, -02, & -03, & 016-111-44
Applicant: MidPen
Hearing Date: March 8, 2022
The purpose of the Density Bonus is to allow the development of a 72-unit affordable housing development (owned and operated by MidPen) at a density greater than the maximum allowed in the City’s General Plan for land designated Residential Medium Density. Pursuant to state Density Bonus Law, housing developments may receive a density bonus of up to 80 percent if 100 percent of the total units are for lower income households.

The purpose of the Density Bonus is also for concessions allowed under the state Density Bonus Law, including a concession for providing 7 fewer parking stalls, totaling 102 instead of 109 parking spaces (representing a 6.4 percent parking reduction).

The Major Modification to the approved Miles Lane Project would allow moving one of the buildings (“Building 5”) and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03).

The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines. The changes to the approved plans do not require making any substantive revisions to the findings made in support of the originally approved Density Bonus, and it has been determined that the findings and supporting evidence with minor clarifications are still appropriate and applicable.

DENSITY BONUS FINDINGS (WMC § 14-47.140[b])

1. The application is eligible for a Density Bonus and any concessions, or incentives requested if conforms to all standards included in Chapter 14-47 and includes a financing mechanism for all implementation and monitoring costs.

Supportive Evidence
The project will provide a 100 percent affordable rental housing development, serving low-income households, and therefore is eligible for up to an 80 percent density bonus and three concessions, per state Density Bonus law. GOV § 65915.

2. Any requested incentive or concession will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions based upon appropriate financial analysis and documentation as described in Section 14-47.130 of Chapter 14-47.

Supportive Evidence
In the Density Bonus Housing Plan, the applicant indicates that the parking reduction is critical to developing an affordable housing project with enough units to be financially viable over the lifetime of the buildings. The challenging site

Page 496 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 2 of 34 topography and natural areas minimize the developable portion of the site. Without a parking reduction, the applicant would have to expand the amount of level surfaces necessary for constructing parking stalls, which would require costly site improvements (e.g., retaining walls, soil excavation, offhauling).

The partnership between MidPen and Encompass allows proportioning the purchase price of their division of land, sharing the cost of obtaining entitlements with a single design team, and minimizing the construction costs through shared road and utility infrastructure and site circulation.

The applicant provided a pro form to demonstrate that the requested concessions result in identifiable and actual cost reductions and, thereby, provide evidence that the cost reduction allows the applicant to provide affordable rents.

3. If the Density Bonus is based all or in part on donation of land, the approval body has made the findings included in Section 14-47.070(c) of Chapter 14-

47. Supportive Evidence
Not applicable. The proposed project does not involve a land donation.

4. If the Density Bonus, incentive, or concession is based all or in part on the inclusion of a Day Care Center, the approval body has made the findings required by Section 14-47.080(b) of Chapter 14-47.

Supportive Evidence
Not applicable. The proposed project does not include a Day Care Center.

5. A Density Bonus Housing Agreement in recordable form has been signed by the owner of the Residential Development with terms and conditions reasonably to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 14-47 and the Density Bonus Program Guidelines.

Supportive Evidence
The project will provide a 100 percent affordable rental housing development, serving low-income households. No units will service households earning more than 80 percent of Area Median Income. Regulatory agreements setting forth affordability restrictions shall be recorded when all financing has been secured.

Affordability restrictions shall be in place for at least 55 years. A condition of approval requires the applicable to record a Density Bonus Housing Agreement in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 14-47 and the Density Bonus Program Guidelines prior to issuance of a building permit.

Page 497 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 3 of 34 SPECIAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS (WMC § 14-12.513)
The proposed mix of uses are permitted conditionally in the underlying RM-2 Zoning District. Apartments with 17 or more units are permitted conditionally with issuance of a Special Use Permit. In addition, a residential care facility for seven or more persons is also permitted with issuance of a Special Use Permit.

The purpose of the Special Use Permit is to formally allow a mix of residential and nonresidential uses per the PD Overlay District, consisting of a 72-unit affordable housing development (owned and operated by MidPen) and the replacement of an existing residential substance abuse treatment facility with a new residential substance abuse treatment facility and new outpatient rehabilitation facility (owned and operated by Encompass).

The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines. The changes to the approved plans do not require making any revisions to the findings made in support of the Miles Lane Project and each of the findings identified below has been considered in light of the Major Modification and it has been determined that the findings and supporting evidence are still appropriate and applicable.

1. The proposed use at the specified location is consistent with the policies embodied in the adopted General Plan and the general purpose and intent of the applicable district regulations.

Supportive Evidence
The majority of the project site is designated Residential Medium Density on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and is within the RM-2 (Multiple ResidentialMedium Density) Zoning District. The purpose of the Residential Medium Density designation is to provide living environments through various forms of housing developments, including apartments, at densities between 8 and 13.99 dwelling units per net acre. Per state law, the project is eligible for a density bonus of up to 80 percent greater than the maximum allowed because it is a 100 percent affordable housing project. The project would not result in a residential density that exceeds the maximum allowed per state Density Bonus law and would help accomplish the community's affordable family housing goals in the Housing Element.

A small portion of the project site is designated Environmental Management and is within the EM-OS (Environmental Management Open Space) Zoning District.

This area corresponds with the portion of the upper reaches of the Watsonville Slough that runs through the low-lying portion of the site and has been set aside for the protection and preservation of natural resources, such as wetlands, sloughs, and wildlife habitat. No development is proposed within this area.

Page 498 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 4 of 34 The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures concerning housing, land use compatibility, design, site improvement, and wildlife habitat protection:
 Housing Element Goal 3.0: Housing Production – Provide housing opportunity for Watsonville’s share of the regional housing need for all income groups.
 Housing Element Policy 3.1 – Encourage the production of housing that meets the needs of all economic segments, including lower, moderate, and above moderate-income households, to achieve a balanced community.  Housing Element Policy 3.2 – Provide high quality rental and ownership housing opportunities for current and future residents that are affordable to a diverse range of income levels.
 Housing Element Policy 3.4 – Continue to implement the Affordable Housing Ordinance, Density Bonus Ordinance, and other programs as a means of integrating affordable units within new residential development.  Housing Element Policy 4.2 – Implement and enforce residential design guidelines to ensure that the community’s expectations are met with respect to the quality and style of housing projects.
 Housing Element Program 18: Design Review Process – The City will continue to use the Livable Community Residential Design Guidelines in concert with the City’s General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and other area plans. The City will continue to ensure that projects comply with the City’s design review process and the Design Guidelines.  Goal 4.7 Land Use Suitability – Ensure that the orderly development of land for the needs of the existing and projected population within in the City limit and Sphere of Influence is based on the land’s overall suitability, including: the accessibility of existing and proposed public facilities, services, and utilities, physical and financial constraints; and/or growth inducing impacts.
 Policy 4.G Land Use Suitability – The City shall encourage the development of urban uses on those lands best suited for urban uses and discourage it on lands unsuited for urban uses.
 Goal 4.2: Neighborhoods – Conserve and improve the living environment of existing Watsonville neighborhoods.
 Policy 4.B: Neighborhood Preservation – The City shall plan for the protection of existing neighborhood qualities and the provision of adequate neighborhood facilities in developing areas.
 Implementation Measure 4.B.2: New Neighborhood Facilities – The City shall utilize land use controls, such as, specific plan, LOS standards,

Page 499 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 5 of 34 and zoning development controls, to ensure balanced neighborhood development in a compact pattern, and to avoid premature extension of public facilities and services.
 Implementation Measure 4.A.2: Land Use Compatibility – The City shall monitor housing production to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.
 Goal 5.1 Visual Resources – Preserve and enhance the built and natural visual resources within Watsonville.
 Goal 5.2 Community Appearance – Blend new development and recognized values of community appearance and scenic qualities, and ensure that new development enhances, rather than detracts from its surroundings.
 Goal 5.6 Urban Design – Achieve high standards of street, site and building design that are both efficient, and aesthetically pleasing.  Policy 5.A Project Design Review – The preservation of visual resources shall be accomplished through the design review process.  Policy 5.B Design Consistency – The City shall review new development proposals to encourage high standards of urban design and to ensure that elements of architectural design and site orientation do not degrade or conflict with the appearance of existing structures.
 Implementation Measure 5.A.4: Development Standards – In addition to the Design Review Guidelines, the City shall use the adopted standards for multiple family residential developments to ensure that medium- and highdensity development is designed so as to enhance rather than detract from the urban environment.
 Implementation Measure 5.B.3: Enhancement – The City shall utilize the development standards, zoning ordinance regulations for each district, and the design review guidelines to ensure that new development is an asset to the existing neighborhood and community with regard to parking, landscaping, open space, and project design.
 Goal 9.5 Water Quality – Ensure that surface and groundwater resources are protected.
 Policy 9.D Water Quality – The City shall provide for the protection of water quality to meet all beneficial uses, including domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational, and ecological uses.
 Goal 9.8 Wildlife Habitat – Preserve and protect the remaining areas of wildlife habitat for their scenic and scientific value.

Page 500 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 6 of 34  Policy 9.F Wildlife Habitat Protection – The City shall designate for open space and environmental management those areas rich in wildlife species and fragile in ecological makeup. These habitat zones shall be made part of the greenbelt where appropriate.

The project would provide housing within an existing neighborhood on land designated for residential development. The units would be 100 percent affordable and accommodate people of low-income levels. The 72 units would contribute towards achieving the RHNA figures in the City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element for these income categories. The City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element also identifies the two vacant parcels onsite for development. To allow development of a 72-unit affordable housing development, the applicant has submitted a Density Bonus application in accordance with state Density Bonus law and the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.

The project would also replace the existing residential substance abuse treatment facility at 161 Miles Lane with a new residential substance use disorder treatment facility and an outpatient rehabilitation facility. These facilities provide a valuable service for the community and are complementary with the affordable housing component of the project.

The site abuts existing utilities that can be extended to serve the project. The project is not anticipated to induce population growth other than the residents that would directly inhabit the proposed residential units.

The project is consistent with all development regulations of the RM-2 Zoning District and the City of Watsonville Residential Development Standards for multifamily rental projects with approval of the requested concessions and modifications to development regulations. Additionally, the project is consistent with the City of Watsonville Livable Community Residential Design Guidelines (2001).

The proposed project does not encroach on land designated Environmental Management. Pursuant to WMC Section 6-3-535, the project is required to comply with the City’s post-construction stormwater requirements, which are intended to minimize stormwater pollution and thereby protect receiving waterbodies, such as rivers, creeks and wetlands.

2. The proposed use is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent development and neighborhoods and includes improvements or modifications either on-site or within the public rights-ofway to mitigate development related adverse impacts such as traffic, noise, odors, visual nuisances, or other similar adverse effects to adjacent development and neighborhoods.

Supportive Evidence
The proposed project would provide infill housing within an existing residential neighborhood. Single- and multi-family dwellings comprise nearby residences.

Several apartment buildings are located across the street from the project site at 130, 136, and 154 Miles Lane.

Page 501 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 7 of 34 The proposed project would not generate traffic in such an amount that would overload the street network outside the development. An Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project, which includes a Traffic Impact Study.

Transportation-related impacts were found to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Identified measures that mitigate potential impacts to Auto Center Drive and Marin Street Intersection have been included as conditions of approval.

Nighttime illumination has the potential to change ambient lighting conditions and create a visual nuisance. The proposed lighting provides adequate light to illuminate the site, consistent with light levels in a residential neighborhood. The photometric analysis prepared for the project demonstrate that anticipated light intensities would not result in a visual nuisance. Little to no light would spill over onto adjoining residential properties and into nearby riparian habitat. Any potential spillover light would be further obscured from view by landscape plantings and fencing. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to create a glare nuisance.

The proposed trash enclosures could attract nuisance pest species because of the close proximity of nearby riparian habitat. Unless these enclosures are carefully maintained, they could attract Norway rat, raccoon, opossum and other nuisance pest species that could become dependent on this possible food source, disrupting natural behaviors and creating nuisance conditions. A condition of approval requires the applicant to develop a monitoring program to be implemented by future tenants to ensure trash areas are routinely cleaned and secured at night.

3. The proposed use will not generate pedestrian or vehicular traffic which will be hazardous or conflict with the existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood.

Supportive Evidence
The proposed project would not generate traffic which would be hazardous or conflict with existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood. An Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project, which includes a Traffic Impact Study.

4. The proposed use incorporates roadway improvements, traffic control devices or mechanisms, or access restrictions to control traffic flow or divert traffic as needed to reduce or eliminate development impacts on surrounding neighborhood streets.

Supportive Evidence
Direct access to the project site would occur from new driveways located along Miles Lane. As mentioned previously, mitigation measures to reduce transportation-related impacts to a less than significant level have been included as conditions of approval. No other roadway improvements, traffic control devices or access restrictions to control or divert traffic flow is needed.

Page 502 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 8 of 34

5. The proposed use incorporates features to minimize adverse effects, including visual impacts and noise, of the proposed special use on adjacent properties.

Supportive Evidence
The project involves providing infill housing within an existing residential neighborhood. The project would also avoid areas set aside for the protection and preservation of natural resources, such as the portion of the upper reaches of the Watsonville Slough that traverses the site.

The project is designed in accordance with the City of Watsonville Livable Community Residential Design Guidelines. The project provides buildings that are well-composed, balanced, and appropriately articulated on all sides and have facades with materials and architectural details that are aesthetically pleasing and harmonious. The massing of wall and roof planes are broken up by the use of balconies, dormers, trim, offsets in surfaces, and varying roof heights. Buildings materials are primarily alternative vertical and horizontal cement fiber siding (painted different colors) to provide a smooth lap siding appearance; a belly band divides vertical and horizontal siding. Parking is unobtrusively tucked under buildings 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Surface lots in view of the public right-of-way have landscaping and/or fencing to help screen parking spaces from view and minimize their visual impact. Building 3 steps down from three to two floors near the property boundary shared with the mobile home park.

The project would not create a visual impact on adjoining residential properties or nearby riparian habitat. Little to no light would spill over onto adjoining residential properties and into nearby riparian habitat. Any potential spillover light would be further obscured from view by landscape plantings and fencing. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to create a new source of potential light spillover or glare nuisance.

In addition, the project’s trash enclosures would not attract nuisance pest species, such as Norway rat, raccoon, and opossum, with implementation of the condition of approval requiring regular monitoring of said enclosures to ensure they are routinely cleaned and secured at night.

6. The proposed special use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provisions of this chapter and all other requirements of this title applicable to the proposed special use and uses within the applicable base zoning district.

Supportive Evidence
There are no additional standards applicable to a mix of uses consisting of affordable housing and an inpatient/outpatient substance abuse treatment and rehabilitation facility.

As discussed previously, the project is designed in accordance with the City of Watsonville Livable Community Residential Design Guidelines. A condition of approval requires the installation of street frontage improvements to City standards.

Page 503 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 9 of 34

7. The proposed special use will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience and welfare, and will not result in material damage or prejudice to other property in the vicinity.

Supportive Evidence
The project involves providing infill housing within an existing residential neighborhood and would avoid areas set aside for the protection and preservation of natural resources, such as the portion of the upper reaches of the Watsonville Slough that traverses the site. The project would also replace the existing residential substance abuse treatment facility at 161 Miles Lane with a new residential substance use disorder treatment facility and an outpatient rehabilitation facility. These facilities provide a valuable service for the community and are complementary with the affordable housing component of the project.

Therefore, the project would not materially damage or prejudice other property in the vicinity.

In addition, the project site is within a developed area that is currently served by municipal services, including water, sewer, police and fire, and therefore would not cause a serious public health or safety problem to future residents and substance use disorder patients onsite.

DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS (WMC § 14-12.403)

1. The proposed development is consistent with the goals and policies embodied in the adopted General Plan and the general purpose and intent of the applicable district regulations.

A small portion of the project site is designated Environmental Management and is within the EM-OS (Environmental Management Open Space) Zoning District.

Page 504 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 10 of 34 The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures concerning housing, land use compatibility, design, site improvement, and wildlife habitat protection:
 Housing Element Goal 3.0: Housing Production – Provide housing opportunity for Watsonville’s share of the regional housing need for all income groups.
 Housing Element Policy 3.1 – Encourage the production of housing that meets the needs of all economic segments, including lower, moderate, and above moderate-income households, to achieve a balanced community.  Housing Element Policy 3.2 – Provide high quality rental and ownership housing opportunities for current and future residents that are affordable to a diverse range of income levels.
 Housing Element Policy 3.4 – Continue to implement the Affordable Housing Ordinance, Density Bonus Ordinance, and other programs as a means of integrating affordable units within new residential development.  Housing Element Policy 4.2 – Implement and enforce residential design guidelines to ensure that the community’s expectations are met with respect to the quality and style of housing projects.
 Housing Element Program 18: Design Review Process – The City will continue to use the Livable Community Residential Design Guidelines in concert with the City’s General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and other area plans. The City will continue to ensure that projects comply with the City’s design review process and the Design Guidelines.  Goal 4.7 Land Use Suitability – Ensure that the orderly development of land for the needs of the existing and projected population within in the City limit and Sphere of Influence is based on the land’s overall suitability, including: the accessibility of existing and proposed public facilities, services, and utilities, physical and financial constraints; and/or growth inducing impacts.
 Policy 4.G Land Use Suitability – The City shall encourage the development of urban uses on those lands best suited for urban uses and discourage it on lands unsuited for urban uses.
 Goal 4.2: Neighborhoods – Conserve and improve the living environment of existing Watsonville neighborhoods.
 Policy 4.B: Neighborhood Preservation – The City shall plan for the protection of existing neighborhood qualities and the provision of adequate neighborhood facilities in developing areas.
 Implementation Measure 4.B.2: New Neighborhood Facilities – The City shall utilize land use controls, such as, specific plan, LOS standards,

Page 505 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 11 of 34 and zoning development controls, to ensure balanced neighborhood development in a compact pattern, and to avoid premature extension of public facilities and services.
 Implementation Measure 4.A.2: Land Use Compatibility – The City shall monitor housing production to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.
 Goal 5.1 Visual Resources – Preserve and enhance the built and natural visual resources within Watsonville.
 Goal 5.2 Community Appearance – Blend new development and recognized values of community appearance and scenic qualities, and ensure that new development enhances, rather than detracts from its surroundings.
 Goal 5.6 Urban Design – Achieve high standards of street, site and building design that are both efficient, and aesthetically pleasing.  Policy 5.A Project Design Review – The preservation of visual resources shall be accomplished through the design review process.  Policy 5.B Design Consistency – The City shall review new development proposals to encourage high standards of urban design and to ensure that elements of architectural design and site orientation do not degrade or conflict with the appearance of existing structures.
 Implementation Measure 5.A.4: Development Standards – In addition to the Design Review Guidelines, the City shall use the adopted standards for multiple family residential developments to ensure that medium- and highdensity development is designed so as to enhance rather than detract from the urban environment.
 Implementation Measure 5.B.3: Enhancement – The City shall utilize the development standards, zoning ordinance regulations for each district, and the design review guidelines to ensure that new development is an asset to the existing neighborhood and community with regard to parking, landscaping, open space, and project design.
 Goal 9.5 Water Quality – Ensure that surface and groundwater resources are protected.
 Policy 9.D Water Quality – The City shall provide for the protection of water quality to meet all beneficial uses, including domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational, and ecological uses.
 Goal 9.8 Wildlife Habitat – Preserve and protect the remaining areas of wildlife habitat for their scenic and scientific value.

Page 506 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 12 of 34  Policy 9.F Wildlife Habitat Protection – The City shall designate for open space and environmental management those areas rich in wildlife species and fragile in ecological makeup. These habitat zones shall be made part of the greenbelt where appropriate.

2. The proposed development is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent development and neighborhoods and includes improvements or modifications either on-site or within the public rights-ofway to mitigate development related adverse impacts such as traffic, noise, odors, visual nuisances, or other similar adverse effects to adjacent development and neighborhoods.

Supportive Evidence
The proposed project would provide infill housing within an existing residential neighborhood. Single- and multi-family dwellings comprise nearby residences.

Several apartment buildings are located across the street from the project site at 130, 136, and 154 Miles Lane.

Page 507 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 13 of 34 The proposed project would not generate traffic in such an amount that would overload the street network outside the development. An Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project, which includes a Traffic Impact Study.

3. The proposed development will not generate pedestrian or vehicular traffic which will be hazardous or conflict with the existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood.

4. The proposed development incorporates roadway improvements, traffic control devices or mechanisms, or access restrictions to control traffic flow or divert traffic as needed to reduce or eliminate development impacts on surrounding neighborhood streets.

Page 508 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 14 of 34

5. The proposed development incorporates features to minimize adverse effects including visual impacts of the proposed development on adjacent properties:
a) Harmony and proportion of the overall design and the appropriate use of materials;
b) The suitability of the architectural style for the project; provided, however, it is not the intent of this section to establish any particular architectural style;
c) The sitting of the structure on the property, as compared to the sitting of other structures in the immediate neighborhood;
d) The size, location, design, color, number, and lighting; and e) The bulk, height, and color of the project structure as compared to the bulk, height, and color of other structures in the immediate neighborhood.

In addition, the project’s trash enclosures would not attract nuisance pest species, such as Norway rat, raccoon, and opossum, with implementation of the condition

Page 509 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 15 of 34 of approval requiring regular monitoring of said enclosures to ensure they are routinely cleaned and secured at night.

6. The proposed development complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provisions of this chapter, any City of Watsonville architectural guidelines, development and public improvement standards, and all other requirements of this title applicable to the proposed development.

Supportive Evidence
There are no additional standards applicable to the development of affordable housing and an inpatient/outpatient substance abuse treatment and rehabilitation facility.

7. The proposed development will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience and welfare or result in material damage or prejudice to other property in the vicinity.

Therefore, the project would not materially damage or prejudice other property in the vicinity.

Page 510 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 16 of 34

CITY OF WATSONVILLE EXHIBIT B

CITY COUNCIL
Application No: PP2021-2663/PP2019-14
APNs: 016-491-01, -02, & -03, & 016-111-44
Applicant: MidPen
Hearing Date: March 8, 2022

SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN/SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH DESIGN REVIEW &

LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
General Conditions:

1. Approval. This approval applies to the Plan Set identified as “Miles Lane Housing” located at 139, 141, 161 Miles Lane and 201 Kimberly Lane, Watsonville, CA 95076, dated and received by the Community Development Department on February 28, 2020, and filed by Elizabeth Nahas Wilson with MidPen Housing, applicant, on behalf of Michael C. Marchisio Trust (APNs 016‐491-01, 016‐491-02, and 016‐111‐44) and Namvar & Shireen Dinyari (APN 016‐491‐03), property owners. The modified Plan Set for Building 5 is identified as “Miles Lane Housing” 141-155 & 161 Miles Lane, Watsonville, CA, prepared by LPMD Architects, dated October 18, 2021, received by the Community Development Department on November 9, 2021, and filed by Elizabeth Nahas Wilson with MidPen Housing, applicant, on behalf of MP Miles Lane Associates LP, property owner. (CDD-P)

2. Conditional Approval Timeframe. This Special Use Permit shall be null and void if not acted upon within 24 months from the effective date of the approval thereof.

Time extensions may be considered upon receipt of written request submitted no less than forty-five (45) days prior to expiration and in accordance with the provisions of Section 14-10.1201 of the Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC). (CDD-P)

3. Modifications. Modifications to the project or conditions imposed may be considered in accordance with WMC Sections 14-12.1000 and 14-10.1305. All revisions shall be submitted prior to field changes and are to be clouded on the plans. (CDD-P)

4. Substantial Compliance. Project development shall be accomplished in substantial accordance with the approved Plan Set. Any required revisions to the Plan Set shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee. (CDD-P)

5. Grounds for Review. The project shall be in compliance with the conditions of approval, all local codes and ordinances, appropriate development standards, and current City policies. Any deviation will be grounds for review by the City and may possibly result in revocation of the Special Use Permit or Design Review Permit, pursuant to Part 13 of WMC Chapter 14-10, or other code enforcement actions, pursuant to WMC Chapter 14-14. (CDD-P)

Page 511 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 17 of 34

6. Appeal Period/Effective Date. This Special Use Permit with Design Review shall not be effective until 14 days after approval by the decision-making body or following final action on any appeal. (CDD-P)

7. Necessary Revisions. The applicant shall make and note all revisions necessary to comply with all conditions of approval. The applicant shall certify in writing below the list(s) of conditions that the building plans comply with the conditions of approval. (CDD-P)

8. Conditions of Approval. A copy of the final conditions of approval must be printed on the first or second sheet of plans submitted for future permits. Plans without the conditions of approval printed directly on the first or second page will not be accepted at the plan check phase. (CDD-P)

9. Required Statement. The applicant and contractor who obtains a building permit for the project shall be required to sign the following statement, which will become conditions of the building permit:
“I understand that the subject permit involves construction of a building (project) with an approved Special Use Permit with Design Review. I intend to perform or supervise the performance of the work allowed by this permit in a manner which results in a finished building with the same level of detail, articulation, and dimensionality shown in the plans submitted for building permits. I hereby acknowledge that failure to construct the building as represented in the building permit plans, may result in delay of the inspections process and/or the mandatory reconstruction or alteration of any portion of the building that is not in substantial conformance with the approved plans, prior to continuation of inspections or the building final.”
Signature of Building Contractor Date
Affordable Housing Condition:

10. Density Bonus (Affordable) Housing Agreement. The applicant shall record a Density Bonus Housing Agreement prior to issuance of a building permit. The Council, by Resolution, shall process, review, and consider the Density Bonus Housing Agreement in the same manner it considers Affordable Housing Agreements pursuant to WMC Section 14-46.110. (CDD-P-H, CA) Building and Fire-related Conditions:

11. Required Permits. The applicant shall obtain all required building permits (Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Grading, etc.) for this project. (CDDB-E)

12. Building Code. Project construction shall comply with the California Building Code as adopted by the City. (CDD-B)

Page 512 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 18 of 34

13. Fire Code. Project construction shall comply with California Fire Code as adopted by the City. (WFD)

14. Energy Efficiency. The project design shall conform with energy conservation measures articulated in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and will address measures to reduce energy consumption such as low-flow shower heads, flow restrictors for toilets, low consumption lighting fixtures, and insulation and shall use drought tolerant landscaping. (CDD-B)

15. Floodplain Development Permit. The applicant shall obtain a Floodplain Development Permit prior to issuance of a building permit, in accordance with WMC Section 9-2.400. (CDD-E, PW)
Prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a Building Permit, the following requirements shall be met:

16. Engineering Comments/Corrections. The applicant shall revised the project plants in accordance with the comments/corrections provided by David Caneer, Principal Engineer, dated March 27, 2020. (CDD-E)

17. Colors & Materials. Plans submitted for building permit shall indicate that all final colors and materials shall be consistent with the colors and materials approved by this permit. (CDD-P)

18. Landscaping & Irrigation Plan. The applicant shall submit three copies of the final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan for review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The Landscaping Plan shall provide drought-tolerant plants suitable for the Central Coast region. The Irrigation Plan shall provide an automatic water system (e.g., drip system) to irrigate all landscape areas. (CDD-B-E-P)
a. LANDSCAPING – The Landscape Plan shall indicate the types, quantities, locations and sizes of all plant material, including any existing major vegetation designated to remain and method of protecting planting areas from vehicular traffic. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale, and plant types shall be clearly located and labeled. The plant list shall give the botanical name, common name, gallon sizes to be planted, and quantity of each planting. A minimum of 25 percent of all shrub material shall have a minimum 5-gallon container size. (CDD-E-P)
b. IRRIGATION SYSTEM – Automatic, low-flow irrigation system(s) shall be installed in all landscaped areas. Irrigation shall be programmed for night or early morning hours in order to minimize evaporation. (CDD-P) c. WATER CONSERVATION – The project shall utilize water conservation, water recycling, and xeriscaping to the maximum extent possible. Irrigation systems shall be designed and maintained to avoid run-off, over-spray, or other similar conditions where water flows to waste. (CDD-B-E-P)

Page 513 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 19 of 34 d. NEW TREES – As proposed in the preliminary landscape plans, the project shall provide a minimum of 101 trees.
e. LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION INSTALLATION – All landscaping and irrigation shall be approved and installed prior to occupancy of the project. (CDD-P)
f. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE – The applicant shall submit a landscape documentation package and demonstrate compliance with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, pursuant to WMC Section 6-3.801. (CDD-P, -E)

19. Lighting. Plans submitted for building permit issuance shall show the locations and details of any exterior lighting fixtures. All lighting shall be downward facing and/or shielded and shall not spillover onto adjacent property, public roadways, and/or riparian habitat. (CDD-P)

20. Trash Enclosure. The trash enclosure shall conform with City of Watsonville Public Improvement Standard No. S-602, and is subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (CDD-P-E, PW)

21. Street Frontage Improvements. The applicant shall install street improvements (i.e., driveways, sidewalk, curb & gutter) where absent along the project street frontage (e.g., along Santa Clara Street and Kimberly Lane). The applicant shall also replace any and all existing street improvements that do not meeting City standards and/or are in need of repair. (CDD-E)

22. Utility Connection. The project shall connect to City utilities. (CDD-E)

23. On/Off Site Permit. Separate On/Off Site Permits are required for work in the public right-of-way and on the project site. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for all off-site work. (CDD-E)

24. Mechanical Equipment Screening. All new mechanical equipment and appurtenances, including gas and water meters, electrical boxes, roof vents, air conditioners, antennas, etc. visible from the public way and from adjacent properties, shall be screened with material compatible with the materials of the building and shall be subject to the approval of the Zoning Administrator. (CDD-P)

25. Post Construction Stormwater Ordinance. The project is subject to the WMC Section 6-3.535 (Post Construction Requirements). The applicant shall prepare a stormwater control plan (SWCP) that demonstrates compliance with the ordinance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to issuance of a building permit. (CDD-E)

26. Address Assignment. Prior to building permit issuance, complete and submit an application for address assignment. (CDD-E)

27. Nesting Bird Avoidance or Conduct Preconstruction Surveys (Mitigation Measure BIO-1). If construction, grading, or other project-related improvements

Page 514 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 20 of 34 are scheduled during the nesting season of protected raptors and migratory birds, a focused survey for active nests of such birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within seven (7) days prior to the beginning of project-related activities.

The results of the survey shall be sent to the City of Watsonville prior to the start of project activities. The minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be the following: i) 250 feet for passerines; ii) 500 feet for other small raptors such as accipiters; iii) 1,000 feet for larger raptors such as buteos. Nesting seasons are typically defined as follows: i) March 15 to August 30 for smaller bird species such as passerines; ii) February 15 to August 30 for raptors.

The following measures shall be taken to avoid potential inadvertent destruction or disturbance of nesting birds on and near the project site as a result of constructionrelated vegetation removal and site disturbance  To avoid impacts to nesting birds, all construction-related activities (including but not limited to mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading) shall occur outside the avian nesting season (generally prior to February 1 or after August 31). Active nesting is present if a bird is sitting in a nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are observed carrying food to the nest.
 If construction-related activities are scheduled to occur during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment and preconstruction nesting survey for nesting bird species no more than seven (7) days prior to initiation of work. A qualified wildlife biologist is an individual who possesses, at a minimum, a bachelor’s or advanced degree, from an accredited university, with a major in biology, zoology, wildlife biology, natural resources science, or a closely related scientific discipline, at least two years of field experience in the biology and natural history of local plant, fish, and wildlife resources present at the development site, and knowledge of state and federal laws regarding the protection of sensitive and endangered species. The qualified biologist conducting the surveys shall be familiar with the breeding behaviors and nest structures of birds known to nest in the project site. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day during periods of peak activity (i.e., early morning or dusk) and shall be of sufficient duration to observe movement patterns. Surveys shall be conducted within the Project area and 250 feet of the construction limits for nesting non-raptors and 1,000 feet for nesting raptors, as feasible. If the survey area is found to be absent of nesting birds, no further mitigation would be required. However, if project activities are delayed by more than seven (7) days, an additional nesting bird survey shall be performed.  If pre-construction nesting bird surveys result in the location of active nests, no site disturbance (including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading), shall take place within the buffer zone established under BIO-2. Monitoring, by a qualified biologist, shall be required to ensure compliance with the relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements.

Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented. Active nests found inside the limits of the buffer zones or nests within the vicinity of the project site

Page 515 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 21 of 34 showing signs of distress from Project activity, as determined by the qualified biologist, shall be monitored daily during the duration of the Project for changes in breeding behavior. If changes in behavior are observed (e.g., distress, disruptions), the buffer shall be immediately adjusted by the qualified biologist until no further interruptions to breeding behavior are detected. The nest protection buffers may be reduced if the qualified biologist determines in compliance with CDFW permit requirements (if any) that construction activities would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. If buffers are reduced, twice weekly monitoring may need to be conducted to confirm that construction activity is not resulting in detectable adverse effects on nesting birds or their young. The qualified biologist may implement an alternative monitoring schedule depending on the construction activity, season, and species potentially subject to impact, subject to compliance with CDFW permits (if any).

Construction shall not commence within the prescribed buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the nest site is otherwise no longer in use. A report of the findings will be prepared by a qualified biologist and submitted to the City prior to the initiation of constructionrelated activities that have the potential to disturb any active nests during the nesting season.
 City staff will not issue permits for ground disturbing activities until after the site has been surveyed by a qualified biologist to ensure that no active nest disturbance or destruction will occur as a result of the project. If necessary, nest protection buffers will be fenced off and active nest monitoring will be initiated prior to permit issuance. (CDD-P-E, PW)

28. Active Nest Buffer (Mitigation Measure BIO-2). The applicant shall designate active nests as “Ecologically Sensitive Areas” (ESA) and protect the nest (while occupied) during project activities with the establishment of a fence barrier surrounding the nest site.
 Buffer distances for bird nests should be site specific and an appropriate distance, as determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer distances should be specified to protect the bird’s normal behavior to prevent nesting failure or abandonment.
 The qualified biologist shall have authority to order the cessation of all nearby project activities if the nesting birds exhibit abnormal behavior which may cause reproductive failure (nest abandonment and loss of eggs and/or young) until an appropriate buffer is established.
 Typical protective buffers between each identified nest site and construction site are as follows: 1) 300 feet for hawks, owls and eagles; 2) 50 feet for passerines.
 The qualified biologist shall monitor the behavior of the birds (e.g., adults and young, when present) at the nest site to ensure that they are not disturbed by project activities.
 Nest monitoring shall continue during project work until the young have completely left the nest site; as determined by the qualified biologist.

Page 516 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 22 of 34  No habitat removal or modification shall occur within the ESA-fenced nest zone until the young have fully fledged and will no longer be adversely affected by the project. (CDD-P-E, PW)

29. California Red-Legged Frog and Western Pond Turtle Avoidance (Mitigation Measure BIO-3). Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to CRLF and WPT to less-than-significant:
 Silt fencing and orange construction fencing shall be erected along the project boundary, running parallel north to south along the perennial stream and around the seep wetland. The northern and southern ends of the silt and orange construction fencing shall extend at least 50 feet beyond the project site boundary to close off the work area. The bottom 4-6 inches of the fencing shall be buried to prevent wildlife from burrowing under the fence, allowing frogs or turtles entry to the work areas.
 Once the fences are erected and within 48 hours of initiating project construction, a qualified wildlife biologist (as defined under Mitigation Measure BIO-1 shall conduct a preconstruction survey of the project site in the vicinity of the fences to ensure that no frogs or turtles are trapped inside the project construction zone. During this preconstruction survey the biologist shall also inspect the fence to make sure it is installed correctly. The project lead (i.e. foreman) should alert the biologist if the exclusion fence is damaged and/or otherwise non-functioning and initiate repairs as soon as possible. In consultation with the qualified biologist, the project lead may also initiate a second survey to relocate any CRLF or WPT within the project fencing to outside the work area.
 Finally, a qualified biologist shall provide project contractors and construction crews with a worker-awareness program and oversee the placement of CRLF or WPT exclusion fencing before any work within aquatic habitats or adjacent upland habitats where CRLF or WPT have potential to occur. This program shall include a description of the species and its habitats, legal status and required protection, and all applicable mitigation measures. (CDD-P-E, PW)

30. Wetland Avoidance and BMP Implementation (Mitigation Measure BIO-4).

Prior to grading, sturdy construction fencing shall be placed along the development boundaries and no construction activities shall be allowed outside of those boundaries. A qualified biologist shall confirm the extent to which jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the project. The biologist shall provide a written report, including photos, to the City of Watsonville, and, to the extent required by project permits, to the Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife no more than 30 days after this visit. (CDD-E, PW)

31. Develop and Implement a Habitat Restoration Plan (Mitigation Measure BIO5). The applicant shall develop and implement a Habitat Restoration Plan to be submitted and approved by the City of Watsonville prior to the issuance of final grading plans to mitigate for direct impacts to the willow woodland. The plan will address the following:

Page 517 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 23 of 34  In order to mitigate for 0.040 acres removal of willow riparian habitat the Habitat Restoration Plan shall provide a minimum of 0.120 acres (a 3:1 ratio) of habitat restoration and enhancement the site.
 The plan shall include performance criteria against which to measure the project’s success, a minimum of five years of maintenance and monitoring shall be included in order to demonstrate attainment of the performance criteria, and yearly status reports to be submitted to the City of Watsonville, and, to the extent required by project permits, to the Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife no later than December 31 of the year that monitoring occurred.

32. Conduct Archaeological Sensitivity Training for Construction Personnel (Mitigation Measure CUL-1). The Applicant shall retain a qualified professional archaeologist who meets U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards to conduct an archaeological sensitivity training for construction personnel prior to commencement of excavation activities. The training session shall be carried out by a cultural resource professional with expertise in archaeology, who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards. The Applicant and/or qualified professional archaeologist shall propose a date for scheduling the training at the pre-construction meeting with City staff. The Applicant shall notify the City at least 48 hours before holding the training and keep a log of all attendees. The training session shall include a handout and shall focus on how to identify archaeological resources that may be encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures to be followed in such an event, the duties of archaeological monitors, and the general steps a qualified professional archaeologist would follow in conducting a salvage investigation, if one is necessary. (CDD-P,-E, PW)

33. Cease Ground‐Disturbing Activities and Implement Treatment Plan if Archaeological Resources Are Encountered (Mitigation Measure CUL-2). In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during ground‐disturbing activities, ground‐disturbing activities shall be halted or diverted away from the vicinity of the find so that the find can be evaluated. A buffer area of at least 50 feet shall be established around the find where construction activities will not be allowed to continue until a qualified archaeologist has examined the newly discovered artifact(s) and has evaluated the area of the find. Monitored work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist, who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards. In the event that the newly discovered artifacts are determined to be prehistoric, Native American Tribes/Individuals shall be contacted and consulted, and Native American construction monitoring shall be initiated. The Applicant and City shall coordinate with the archaeologist to develop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources. The plan may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to address treatment of the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. (CDDP,-E, PW)

34. Conduct Archeological Resource Spot Check during Grading and Earth‐ moving Activities in Younger Alluvial Sediments (Mitigation Measure CULPage 518 of 870 C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 24 of 34 3). The Applicant shall retain an archaeologist, who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards (qualified archaeologist) to conduct an archaeological spot check after excavation has reached two feet below ground surface. The check shall determine if excavations have exposed archaeological resources, or if there is significant potential remaining for discovery.

Additional spot checks may be required at the discretion of the monitoring archaeologist. If archaeological resources are discovered during a spot check, a qualified archaeological monitor shall be required to monitor all subsequent ground moving activity. Multiple earth‐moving construction activities may require multiple archaeological monitors, as deemed appropriate by the qualified archaeologist. (CDD-P,-E, PW)

35. Prepare Report Upon Completion of Monitoring Services (Mitigation Measure CUL-4). The archaeological monitor, under the direction of a qualified professional archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards, shall prepare a final report at the conclusion of archaeological monitoring (if required). The report shall be submitted to the Applicant, the NWIC, the City, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the project and required mitigation measures. The report shall include a description of resources unearthed, if any, evaluation of the resources with respect to the California Register and CEQA. (CDD-P,-E, PW)

36. Cease Ground-Disturbing Activities and Notify County Coroner If Human Remains Are Encountered (Mitigation Measure CUL-5). If human remains are unearthed during implementation of the proposed project, the County of Santa Cruz and the Applicant shall comply with State Health and Safety Code Section 6050.5. The County of Santa Cruz and the Applicant shall immediately notify the County Coroner and no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). After the MLD has inspected the remains and the site, they have 48 hours to recommend to the landowner the treatment and/or disposal, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated funerary objects. Upon the reburial of the human remains, the MLD shall file a record of the reburial with the NAHC and the project archaeologist shall file a record of the reburial with the CHRIS-NWIC. If the NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD identified fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner rejects the recommendation of the MLD and the mediation provided for in Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with Native American human remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance. (CDD-P,-E, PW)

37. California Building Code (Mitigation Measure GEO-1). All construction activities shall meet the California Building Code regulations for seismic safety. Construction plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City prior to the issuance of a

Page 519 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 25 of 34 building permit. All work shall be subject to inspection by the City and must conform to all applicable code requirements and approved improvement plans prior to final inspection approval or the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall be responsible for notifying construction contractors about California Building Code regulations for seismic safety. (CDD-B)

38. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan or Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Mitigation Measure GEO-2). The Applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan or Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan prepared by a registered professional engineer or qualified stormwater pollution prevention plan developer as an integral part of the grading plan. The Plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Plan shall include all erosion control measures to be used during construction, including run-on control, sediment control, and pollution control measures for the entire site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the drainage system. The Plan shall include the following measures as applicable:
 Throughout the construction process, ground disturbance shall be minimized, and existing vegetation shall be retained to the extent possible to reduce soil erosion. All construction and grading activities, including short-term needs (equipment staging areas, storage areas and field office locations) shall minimize the amount of land area disturbed. Whenever possible, existing disturbed areas shall be used for such purposes.
 All drainage ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall be protected from silt and sediment in storm runoff using appropriate BMPs such as silt fences, diversion berms and check dams. Fill slopes shall be stabilized and covered when appropriate. All exposed surface areas shall be mulched and reseeded.

All cut and fill slopes shall be protected with hay mulch and/or erosion control blankets, as appropriate.
 All erosion control measures shall be installed according to the approved plans prior to the onset of the rainy season but no later than October 15th. Erosion control measures shall remain in place until the end of the rainy season but may not be removed before April 15th. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying construction contractors about erosion control requirement.  Example design standards for erosion and sediment control include, but are not limited to, the following: avoiding disturbance in especially erodible areas; minimizing disturbance on slopes exceeding 30 percent; using berms, swales, ditches, vegetative filter strips, and catchbasins to prevent the escape of sediment from the site; conducting development in increments; and planting bare soils to restore vegetative cover.
 The applicant will also develop an inspection program to evaluate if there is any significant on-site erosion as a result of the rainfall. If there were problem areas at the site, recommendations will be made to improve methods to manage onsite erosion. (CDD-E, PW)

Page 520 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 26 of 34

39. Conduct Paleontological Sensitivity Training for Construction Personnel (Mitigation Measure GEO-3). The Applicant shall retain a professional paleontologist, who meets the qualifications set forth by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology and shall conduct a paleontological sensitivity training for construction personnel prior to commencement of excavation activities. The Applicant and/or qualified professional paleontologist shall propose a date for scheduling the training at the pre-construction meeting with City staff. The Applicant shall notify the City at least 48 hours before holding the training and keep a log of all attendees. The training will include a handout and will focus on how to identify paleontological resources that may be encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures to be followed in such an event, the duties of paleontological monitors, notification and other procedures to follow upon discovery of resources, and the general steps a qualified professional paleontologist would follow in conducting a salvage investigation if one is necessary. (CDD-P-E, PW)

40. Cease Ground-Disturbing Activities and Implement Treatment Plan if Paleontological Resources Are Encountered (Mitigation Measure GEO-4). If paleontological resources and or unique geological features are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, ground-disturbing activities shall be halted or diverted away from the vicinity of the find so that the find can be evaluated. A buffer area of at least 50 feet shall be established around the find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue until appropriate paleontological treatment plan has been approved by the Applicant and the City. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. The Applicant and City shall coordinate with a professional paleontologist, who meets the qualifications set forth by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, to develop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources. Treatment may include implementation of paleontological salvage excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis or preservation in place. At the paleontologist’s discretion and to reduce construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock samples for initial processing. (CDD-P-E, PW)

41. Asbestos Containing Materials (Mitigation Measure HAZ-1). Per recommendations in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) performed for the project site, prior to any redevelopment or demolition activities the Applicant shall: (1) survey the existing on-site structures for the presence of asbestos containing materials (to be conducted by an OSHA-certified inspector); and (2) if building elements containing any amount of asbestos are present, prepare a written Asbestos Abatement Plan describing activities and procedures for removal, handling, and disposal of these building elements using EPA- and/or OSHAapproved procedures, work practices, and engineering controls. (CDD-E, PW)

42. Lead-based Paints (Mitigation Measure HAZ-2). The Applicant shall test the existing on-site structures for lead-based paint. If present, the lead-based paint shall be removed and disposed of following lead abatement performance standards included in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Guidelines for Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint program, in compliance with Title 8 California Code of Regulations (including Section 1532.1). (CDD-E, PW)

Page 521 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 27 of 34

43. Existing Plus Project Impacts on the Auto Center Drive & Marin Street Intersection (Mitigation Measure TRANS-1). To improve driving conditions at the Auto Center Drive & Marin Street intersection, the City shall require the following improvements. (CDD-E, PW)
Auto Center Drive South of Marin Street
 Provide approximately 280 feet of Striping Detail 22 (Centerline).  Provide approximately 350 feet of Striping Detail 27B (Right Edgeline) and create a painted bulb-out for vehicles entering from Auto Center Drive. Within the painted bulb-out, add 6” diagonal white striping with 15’ spacing. The right edgeline striping would move the center of the road away from the curb allowing for better visibility.
 Provide “Intersection Ahead” signage (W1-10e) with “Speed Sign” (W13-1P) with 20 mph speed and a custom “Limited Sight Distance” sign. Place at point of curvature for Northbound approach according to MUCTD Table 2C-4. This sign would warn drivers of the approaching intersection to be aware of cross traffic and to reduce speed.

Marin Street
 Move the 12-inch stop bar closer to the curb line along with new “STOP” markings. This will allow drivers to pull up further into the new 8-foot parking lane to increase visibility along Auto Center Drive.
 Provide approximately 75 feet of Striping Detail 22 (Centerline) to shift the westbound intersection approach to the north. This would allow for more visibility on the Auto Center Drive northbound approach.  Extend red curb on the south curb approximately 85 feet. This red curb would remove approximately three on-street parking spaces. This would prevent drivers from parking in the painted bulb-out.
 Extend red curb on the north curb approximately 30 feet. This red curb would remove approximately one on-street parking space to allow more space for drivers to approach the intersection.

Auto Center Drive North of Marin Street
 Extend red curb approximately 120 feet on the east curb and provide “No Parking Anytime” signage. This would remove approximately five (5) on-street parking spaces. Red curb would make parking illegal along the eastern curb allowing southbound sight distance to be unobstructed.
 Provide “Intersection Ahead” signage (W1-10e) with “Speed Sign” (W13-1P) with 20 mph speed and a custom “Limited Sight Distance” sign. Place at point of curvature for southbound approach according to MUCTD Table 2C-4. This sign would warn drivers of the approaching intersection to be aware of cross traffic and to reduce speed.
 Provide speed feedback sign similar to existing signage on east side of Auto Center Drive. Place at point of curvature for southbound approach according to MUCTD Table 2C-4.
 Provide approximately 200 feet of Striping Detail 22 (Centerline) and Striping Detail 27B (Right Edgeline) for the Northbound approach. Right edgeline striping would be 8-feet from the curb. This striping would reduce confusion for vehicles traveling northbound.

Page 522 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 28 of 34  Provide approximately 490 feet of Striping Detail 27B (Right Edgeline) for the Southbound approach. This striping would move the center of the road away from the curb allowing for better visibility.

44. Construction Period Transportation Impacts (Mitigation Measure TRANS-2).

The applicant shall submit a Construction Period Traffic Control Plan to the City for review and approval. The plan shall include traffic safety guidelines compatible with section 12 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications (“Construction Area Traffic Control Devices”) to be followed during construction. The plan shall also specify provision of adequate signing and other precautions for public safety to be provided during project construction. In particular, the plan shall include a discussion of bicycle and pedestrian safety needs due to project construction and later, project operation. In addition, the plan shall address emergency vehicle access during construction. The applicant or their general contractor for the project shall notify the Public Works & Utilities Department and local emergency services (i.e., the Police and Fire Departments) prior to construction to inform them of the proposed construction schedule and that traffic delays may occur.

Prior to approval of a grading permit, the City shall review and approve the project Construction Period Traffic Control Plan. During construction, the City shall periodically verify that traffic control plan provisions are being implemented. (CDDE, PW)

45. Structural Review of Wall Design. The retaining wall system involves a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall design. The relocation of Building 5 to within a few feet of the MSE wall may create an additional load or surcharge that needs to be accounted for to ensure the stability of the retaining wall system. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall provide a MSE wall design, geotechnical/soil report and structural calculations for review and approval by the City Engineer or designee. This review shall be conducted concurrently with the review of the building foundation design and structural calculations to ensure the MSE wall can bear the load of Building 5. (CDD-E, PW)

46. Review of Floodwater against the Retaining Wall. With the perennial creek and seep wetland nearby, there is potential for a portion of the wall to be submerged, as well as the potential for scour at the wall toe, and saturation of soils supporting the leveling pad/wall toe. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit a report or other requested information for review and approval by the City Engineer or designee that demonstrates the retaining wall system takes into account the potential impact of floodwater against the wall. (CDD-E, PW)

47. Retaining Wall Geogrid Conflict with Building Foundation. The retaining wall design states that the 10-foot high wall assumed for Building 5 should have a geogrid layer 8.67 feet from the bottom of wall or 16" from the top of wall. This is in conflict with the building foundation drawings, which indicate the slab is 18" thick with a minimum of 24" of cover to bottom of slab. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the applicant shall revise the plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or designee. (CDD-E, PW)

48. Consideration for Stairs and Stair Foundation. The geotechnical report for the project indicates that the assumed building footprints and pavement will be located

Page 523 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 29 of 34 at least 5 feet and 3 feet, respectively, from the top front face of the MSE wall.

Detail C/C4.0 indicates that the building is approximately 8 feet from the retaining wall. However, the stairs, foundation, and walkway indicated on the plan view sheets are in some cases only 12 inches from the MSE wall. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall address this potential conflict and revise the plans, as necessary, to be consistent with the assumptions and recommendations of the geotechnical report. (CDD-E, PW)

49. Seismic Considerations. The geotechnical report indicates that the MSE wall may need repairs made after a major earthquake (which is typical for all structures). The report further notes that the potential impact of the movement of the MSE wall(s) and the local failure(s) of the retained backfill on adjacent improvements during a major earthquake event is low provided that the improvements have a sufficient setback from the wall(s). Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall revise, as necessary, demonstrating that all improvements would be installed in accordance with the recommended minimum setbacks in the geotechnical report. (CDD-E, PW)

50. Seismic Repair Considerations. The geotechnical report indicates that the impact of seismic forces occurs under building foundations. Engineering staff are concerned about (a) the geogrid under the building(s) foundation shifting and stretching during a seismic event and (b) how repairs would be accomplished under the building(s) without undermining their foundation. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall have the structural engineer address these concerns and confirm whether they believe a different type of wall would be better for the building foundation. (CDD-E, PW)

51. Trail Design Considerations. The MSE retaining wall next to the trail easement shall be designed to allow development of said trail by the City at a future date.

Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall provide a written description, typical construction details, structural calculations and soils information that demonstrate that the trail can be developed and maintained without destabilizing the proposed retaining wall. (CDD-E, PW)

52. Grading Plan Revisions (sheet C5.0). Revise grading plan and other Civil sheets as needed, to show proposed retaining wall construction. Provide construction details, structural calculations and geotechnical report. (CDD-E, PW)

53. Drainage Concerns. Please clarify if the change in the Drainage Management Area (DMA) results in the need to change/revise calculations or change in Stormwater Control Measure sizing, location, or design. Please include limits and setbacks from riparian corridor, wetland, and perennial stream as described above.

Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit a stormwater report that addresses whether the change in the overall imperious area and DMA for Building 5 will increase or decrease the needed size of control measures. (CDD-E, PW)
Prior to permit issuance, the following conditions shall be addressed:

Page 524 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 30 of 34

54. Preconstruction Meeting. Prior to issuance of a building permit or the commencement of any site work, the project applicant and the general contractor shall attend a pre-construction meeting with the Building Official and City staff to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters. The general contractor shall acknowledge that he/she has read and understands the project conditions of approval, particularly those pertaining to construction practices and site safety, and will make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them prior to commencing work and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on site at all times during construction. (CDD-P-B-E)

55. MMRP Implementation. The applicant shall prepare a list identifying the individuals responsible for implementing the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The applicant shall provide upon request by the City a compliance log demonstrating all Mitigation Measures have been implemented. (CDD-P)

56. Solid Waste Service Plan. Solid waste generated during the construction shall be serviced by the City of Watsonville Solid Waste Division. Applicant shall submit a Solid Waste Service Plan on the City form for review and approval. (CDD-E) During construction, the following conditions shall be adhered to:

57. Superintendent. Applicant shall have onsite at all times, a superintendent that shall act as the applicant’s representative and as a point of contact for the City’s Public Works Inspector. The superintendent shall be authorized by the Owner to direct the work of all contractors doing work on public and private improvements. (CDD-E, PW)

58. Best Management Practices (BMPs). Provide BMPs during construction to prevent sediment, debris and contaminants from draining offsite. BMPs shall comply with the City of Watsonville Erosion Control Standards and the Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Region, latest edition. All erosion control shall be installed prior to October 15 and be maintained in place until April 15. Provide a note on the improvement plans stating that construction should take place between April 15 and October 15. The applicant shall ensure that all contractors are aware of all erosion control standards and BMPs. (CDD-E, PW)

59. BMPs for Controlling Construction Emissions (Monterey Bay Air Resources District Recommendation). The project applicant shall implement the following Best Management Practices to limit the potential fugitive dust, construction emissions, and odors generated by the project:
 Water all exposed surfaces (e.g., staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) at least two times per day during construction and adequately wet demolition surfaces to limit visible dust emissions.  Cover all haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose materials off the project site.

Page 525 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 31 of 34  Use wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day to remove all visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads (dry power sweeping is prohibited) during construction of the proposed project.  Vehicle speeds on unpaved roads/areas shall not exceed 15 miles per hour.  Complete all areas to be paved as soon as possible and lay building pads as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Minimize idling time of diesel-powered construction equipment to five minutes and post signs reminding workers of this idling restriction at access points and equipment staging areas during construction of the proposed project.
 Maintain and properly tune all construction equipment in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and have a CARB-certified visible emissions evaluator check equipment prior to use at the site.

Post a publicly visible sign with the name and telephone number of the construction contractor and City staff person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The publicly visible sign shall also include the contact phone number for the Monterey Bay Air Resources Management District to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. (CDD-E, PW, MBARD)

60. Complimentary Dust Control Measures. To minimize dust/grading impacts during construction the applicant shall:
a. Spray water on all exposed earth surfaces during clearing, grading, earth moving and other site preparation activities throughout the day to minimize dust.
b. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers on all stockpiled earth material and on all haul trucks to minimize dust.
c. Sweep the adjacent street frontages at least once a day or as needed to remove silt and other dirt which is evident from construction activities. d. Ensure that construction vehicles are cleaned prior to leaving the construction site to prevent dust and dirt from being tracked off-site. e. The City shall have the authority to stop all grading operations, if in opinion of City staff, inadequate dust control or excessive wind conditions contribute to fugitive dust emissions. (CDD-E)

61. Unanticipated Discovery of Contaminated Soils. In the unlikely event that contaminated soils are discovered during the earth-moving activities, all development activities shall cease immediately and remain stopped until an assessment has been completed by a geotechnical firm approved by the City. If remediation is necessary, the applicant shall enter into a Remedial Action Agreement with the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Service Agency. (CDD-P-E)

62. Solid Waste Disposal. All solid waste generated inside City limits must be hauled from the site of generation by the City of Watsonville Solid Waste Division, pursuant to Chapter 3 (City Utilities) of Title 6 (Sanitation and Health) of the Watsonville Municipal Code. This includes all wastes generated at construction sites, excavation projects, land clearing, demolition, earthwork projects, remodels, grading, and tenant improvement projects as well as ongoing business/residential

Page 526 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 32 of 34 use on the premises. Applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements for removal and disposal of hazardous materials. (PW)

63. Work Hours. No work for which a building permit is required shall be performed within the hours of 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., Monday through Friday, nor prior to 8 a.m. or after 5 p.m. on Saturday. No Work shall occur on Sundays or holidays. A sign shall be posted at a conspicuous location near the main entry to the site, prominently displaying these hour restrictions and identifying the phone # of the Job superintendent. (CDD-B)
Construction notes to be included with the Improvement Plans:

64. Damaged Public Facilities. Existing public facilities damaged during the course of construction or in an existing state of disrepair shall be repaired by the applicant, at the applicant's expense, to the satisfaction of the City. (CDD-E)

65. Inspection Notice. Contractor shall provide a minimum of 48 hours notice in advance of any required inspection. Any temporary suspension of work or returning to work for any reason shall be cause for the developer or contractor to telephone the Public Works Inspector at 831-768-3100. (CDD-E)

66. Underground Utilities. Prior to excavation, contractor shall locate all existing underground utilities. Call Underground Service Alert (U.S.A.) at 1-800-642-2444 to have utilities located and marked in the field. (CDD-E) Prior to Final Inspection or Certificate of Occupancy, the following conditions shall be met:

67. Statements of Compliance. All project designer professionals who prepared plans for the project (e.g., civil, structural, and geotechnical engineers) shall provide statements of compliance attesting that they have reviewed the completed project and that it was constructed in conformance with their recommendations and plans. Where special inspections and testing were involved, the letters of compliance shall be accompanied by inspection logs, testing and analysis that support the engineer’s conclusions. (CDD-B-E)

68. Landscaping Installation. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed and approved by Community Development Department staff. (CDD-P-E)

69. Trash Removal. All trash and construction debris shall be removed from the site. (CDD-B, PW)
Ongoing Conditions:

70. Post Construction Stormwater Ordinance – Inspection, Maintenance and Annual Reporting. Applicant shall perform inspections, maintenance to the postconstruction stormwater management facilities and report to the City each year on these activities. (CDD-E, PW)

Page 527 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 33 of 34

71. Solid Waste Service. All trash, recycling and greenwaste materials generated onsite shall be disposed of at a City-approved landfill or recycling center. The applicant shall contact the Solid Waste Division of the City Public Works Department to coordinate disposal of all trash, recycling and greenwaste materials. (PW)

72. Trash Enclosure Maintenance. Trash and recycling enclosure shall be maintained to the satisfaction of Watsonville Municipal Services. (PW)

73. Lighting and Landscape Maintenance. Lighting, landscaping and all other site improvements shall be maintained in perpetuity. Landscaping shall be maintained in good growing condition by a professional landscape maintenance company; and such maintenance shall include, where appropriate, weeding, mowing, pruning, cleaning, fertilizing and regular watering. All dead, dying and diseased vegetation shall be immediately replaced in kind. (CDD-P)

74. Ongoing Maintenance. Common (patio) areas, landscaping, street trees, driveways, parking spaces, walks, fences and walls shall be maintained on an ongoing basis by the property owner(s) for the entire development area. (CDD-P)

75. Potential Attractive Pest Nuisance Avoidance. To ensure trash enclosures do not attract nuisance pest species, such as Norway rat, raccoon, and opossum, the applicant shall develop a monitoring program to ensure trash areas are routinely cleaned and secured at night. (PW)
Future Sign Permit:

76. Sign Permit. Any new or proposed changes in the exterior signage for the premises shall require Sign and Building Permits through the Community Development Department. (CDD-P-B)
Indemnity Provision:

77. Indemnity Provision. The applicant shall sign a defense and indemnity contract agreeing to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Watsonville, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, and agents arising out Special Use Permit with Design Review and Environmental Review (PP2019-14), including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City of Watsonville Planning Commission or City Council. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning this permit and the applicant and City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right to select counsel in the defense of the matter. (CA)
Key to Department Responsibility
CDD-B – Community Development Department (Building)
CDD-P – Community Development Department (Planning)
CDD-E – Community Development Department (Engineering)
CDD-H – Community Development Department (Housing)

Page 528 of 870 ends

C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\17263534465\17263534465,,,Exhibits A and B to Resolution(1).docx page 34 of 34 PW – Public Works Department
WFD – Watsonville Fire Department
WPD – Watsonville Police Department
MBARD – Monterey Bay Air Resources District
CAT – City Attorney

Page 529 of 870 ends

2/23/22, 12:15 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1725583710359454153&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A172… 1/3 Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Miles Lane Project
belinda carder <[email protected]> Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 11:34 AM To: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Thank you again for your speedy response. Just note that a six foot tall wood fence is less than what we currently have which is a metal fence covered by ivy. Next time you come by property line, note that the way land is contoured, i am down hill and this might allow full view into our yards.

Many thanks for your consideration.

Belinda Sue Carder
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2022 10:39:43 AM
To: belinda carder <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Miles Lane Project
Hello Belinda,
Attached is a PDF document showing the approved landscape plan (sheet L-1.0) and fencing plan (sheet L-2.2) for the portion of the project next to 10 Crespi Way in the Portola Heights Mobile Home Park.

As shown on these plans, a privacy hedge and 6-foot tall fence would be installed along the shared property line. No changes are proposed.

Regards,
Justin
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 9:17 AM belinda carder <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you for your quick response. Can you tell me if fencing or trees will be added in along the property line with me and my neighbors on Crespi Way to protect our privacy and block noise? Again, thank you.

Belinda Sue Carder
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2022 9:06:50 AM

Page 530 of 870 ends

2/23/22, 12:15 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1725583710359454153&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A172… 2/3 To: Belinda Carder <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Miles Lane Project
Good morning Ms. Carder,
The item has been postponed to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting of March 8th. I have added you to the interested parties list so that you will receive any and all future notifications concerning this matter.

The modification request involves moving one of the buildings (“Building 5”) and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03). The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines, which is allowed by PG&E.

The location, orientation, and height of all other buildings would remain unchanged, such as the buildings on the parcel at 155/161 Miles Lane. This request would also not change the overall density or number of dwelling units for the Miles Lane Project.

If you have any further questions about the modification request, feel free to contact me via email or by telephone.

Regards,
Justin
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 7:22 PM Belinda Carder <[email protected]> wrote:

Mr. Meek,
This evening I went to the City of Watsonville Public Hearing and saw that the agenda item concerning the relocation of building 5 of the Miles Lane project had been postponed. I am interested in when this will be rescheduled so I can attend. I am interested in how this change will impact my mobile home park and any insight you can share would be appreciated.

It appears from what I can see that I will have a three story building looking directly into my previously private back yard.

I am seeing more attention paid to birds and plant life than humans impacted by this project. As you can imagine, I am worried about the negative impact on my resale value and loss of privacy.

Thank you very much,
Belinda Sue Carder
10 Crespi Way
Watsonville, CA 95076

Page 531 of 870 ends

Page 532 of 870 ends

2/23/22, 10:39 AM City of Watsonville Mail - Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1725522560622881141&simpl=msg-f%3A1725522560… 1/3 Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Miles Lane Project
4 messages
Belinda Carder <[email protected]> Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 7:22 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Mr. Meek,
This evening I went to the City of Watsonville Public Hearing and saw that the agenda item concerning the relocation of building 5 of the Miles Lane project had been postponed. I am interested in when this will be rescheduled so I can attend.

I am interested in how this change will impact my mobile home park and any insight you can share would be appreciated.

I reside at 10 Crespi Way which shares a fence with 155/161 Miles Lane. I have not read nor heard what type of buffer or fence will be between my home and this project to mitigate the noise and privacy issues that will impact me. It appears from what I can see that I will have a three story building looking directly into my previously private back yard.

I am seeing more attention paid to birds and plant life than humans impacted by this project. As you can imagine, I am worried about the negative impact on my resale value and loss of privacy.

Thank you very much,
Belinda Sue Carder
10 Crespi Way
Watsonville, CA 95076
775 338-7299
Sent from Mail for Windows
Justin Meek <[email protected]> Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 9:06 AM To: Belinda Carder <[email protected]>
Good morning Ms. Carder,
The item has been postponed to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting of March 8th. I have added you to the interested parties list so that you will receive any and all future notifications concerning this matter.

Page 533 of 870 ends

2/23/22, 10:39 AM City of Watsonville Mail - Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1725522560622881141&simpl=msg-f%3A1725522560… 2/3 would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines, which is allowed by PG&E.

If you have any further questions about the modification request, feel free to contact me via email or by telephone.

Regards,
Justin
[Quoted text hidden]
belinda carder <[email protected]> Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 9:17 AM To: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Thank you for your quick response. Can you tell me if fencing or trees will be added in along the property line with me and my neighbors on Crespi Way to protect our privacy and block noise? Again, thank you.

Belinda Sue Carder
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2022 9:06:50 AM
To: Belinda Carder <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Miles Lane Project
[Quoted text hidden]
Justin Meek <[email protected]> Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 10:39 AM To: belinda carder <[email protected]>
Hello Belinda,
Attached is a PDF document showing the approved landscape plan (sheet L-1.0) and fencing plan (sheet L-2.2) for the portion of the project next to 10 Crespi Way in the Portola Heights Mobile Home Park.

As shown on these plans, a privacy hedge and 6-foot tall fence would be installed along the shared property line. No changes are proposed.

Regards,
Justin

Page 534 of 870 ends

Page 535 of 870 ends

9 10
6 3
1 4
8 EX. WILLOWS TO REMAIM

MIDPEN HOUSING

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA
MILES LANE CHECK DATE DRAWN SCALE JC/MA MA1" = 20' - 0" REVISIONS L-1.0 3370 Samuel Pl. Santa Cruz, CA 95062 831.462.4988 [email protected] www.arnonelandscape.com (Exp 7/31/20) MICHAEL A. ARNONE No. 3347 L
A
S
T
TA
E
OF CA
NECI L
A
DES
L
N
D
S
C
A
IF
I ORN

ITECT H
PE
ARC SHEET 1 OF 6 JOB NO. SHEET 201840 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 0 40 feet 1" = 20' 20 60 80

N O R T H COMMUNITY GARDEN PLAY STRUCTURE LAWN LAWN COURTYARD STREET TREES STREET TREES NATIVE TREES TO REMAIN STREET TREES ACTIVITY PANEL EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN 1 6.10.19
1 1
© Michael Arnone Landscape Architect - 2020 2.28.2020
©
Attachment 2
page 37 of 45
Per Resolution No. 121-20 (CM) Page 536 of 870
9 10 6 3 1 4 8 5 EX. WILLOWS TO REMAIM FENCE STYLE LEGEND SYMBOL DESCRIPTION 6' WOOD FENCE 42" WROUGHT IRON FENCE 18" WROUGHT IRON FENCE ON 24" CONCRETE BASE 4 x 4" post overlapping 6" wide fence boards 2 x 4" top and bottom stringers 7'-2" o.c. 6'-0" 2" SQUARE METAL POSTS 1" SQUARE PICKETS 1/2" x 2" METAL STRINGERS 42" 7'-0" o.c. 4" o.c. 4" o.c. 42" 7'-0" o.c. 4" o.c. 2" SQUARE METAL POSTS 1" SQUARE PICKETS 1/2" x 2" METAL STRINGERS 6" WIDE CONCRETE WALL 24"

MIDPEN HOUSING

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA
MILES LANE CHECK DATE DRAWN SCALE JC/MA MAas noted REVISIONS L-2.2 CONCEPTUAL 3370 Samuel Pl. Santa Cruz, CA 95062 831.462.4988 [email protected] www.arnonelandscape.com (Exp 7/31/20) MICHAEL A. ARNONE No. 3347L A S T TA E OF CA NECI L A DES L NDSC A IF I ORN ITECT H PE ARC SHEET 6 OF 6 JOB NO. SHEET 201840 FENCE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS N O R T H 6' REDWOOD BOARD ON BOARD FENCE SCALE 1/2" = 1' - 0" 42" METAL FENCE SCALE 1/2" = 1' - 0" METAL FENCE w/ CONCRETE BASE SCALE 1/2" = 1' - 0" ALL METAL TO BE BLACK POWDER COAT FINISH ALL METAL TO BE BLACK POWDER COAT FINISH 6' wood fence (typical) 6' wood fence (typical) 42" wrought iron fence (typical) NATIVE TREES TO REMAIN 1 6.10.19 1 © Michael Arnone Landscape Architect - 2020 2.28.2020 © 0 60 feet 1" = 30' 30 90 120 6' wood fence (typical) 18" wrought iron fence on 24" concrete base (typical) Attachment 2
page 42 of 45
Per Resolution No. 121-20 (CM) Page 537 of 870
2/24/22, 2:09 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1725676527548487323&simpl=msg-f%3A1725676527… 1/2 Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8
2 messages
Jennifer Alaniz <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 12:09 PM To: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Hi Justin,
Just wondering if this has anything to do with bringing building 5 closer to us at Portola heights? Do you have a schematic of the proposal?
Thanks
Jennifer
1 Crespi way.

Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Deborah Muniz <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Interested Parties:

Re: March 8, 2022 City Council meeting
139 Miles Lane project
A Public Hearing to consider approval of a major modification of the Miles Lane Project (139 Miles Lane). was previously scheduled to be held before the Watsonville City Council on Tuesday, February 22, 2022. However, the item was postponed to March 8, 2022 at the 6:30 p.m. session in the Civic Plaza Council Chambers, 275 Main Street, Watsonville, CA. Please refer to the attached public hearing notices (English & Spanish) for additional details.

Any questions, contact Principal Planner Justin Meek at 831-768-3077. --
Deborah Muniz, Executive Assistant
City of Watsonville/Community Development Dept.
250 Main St., Watsonville, CA 95076
Phone: 831-768-3079/ FAX: 831-728-6154
E-mail: [email protected]
3 attachments
Revised Miles Lane Mod PH notice.docx
26K
Revised Miles Lane Mod PH notice Spanish.docx
32K
1 Site Vicinity Map.pdf
857K
Justin Meek <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 2:09 PM To: Jennifer Alaniz <[email protected]>

Page 538 of 870 ends

2/24/22, 2:09 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1725676527548487323&simpl=msg-f%3A1725676527… 2/2 Hi Jennifer,
The modification request involves moving one of the buildings (“Building 5”) and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03). The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines, which is allowed by PG&E.

The attached PDF document shows the location of Building 5, as approved in 2020, and the proposed new location and orientation, as requested by the applicant to avoid PG&E's power lines. As shown on these plans, the location of the building pad remains the same. The nearest point to Portola Heights Mobile Home Park is approximately 96 feet away.

The location, orientation, and height of all other buildings would remain unchanged. This request would also not change the overall density or number of dwelling units for the Miles Lane Project.

If you have any further questions about the modification request, feel free to contact me via email or by telephone.

Regards,
Justin
[Quoted text hidden]
Approved Site Plan and Proposed Modification.pdf
2563K

Page 539 of 870 ends

MILES LANE

SANTA CLARA ST KIMBERLY
LANE
62 93
1 28 37 38 48 49 54 83 74 105 109 129 120
TRASH

ENCLOSURE
TRASH

ENCLOSURE COMMUNITY GARDEN UP UP

UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP
48'-0" UP
UP UP

MAIL BOXES

MAIL BOXES
MAINTENANCE RM. COURTYARD

OBSERVATION
DECK SEEP WETLAND AREA PLAYGROUND AREA 6'-0" WOOD FENCE 108 73 113

ENCOMPASS OUTPATIENT PROGRAM
BLDG. 10 13 14 23 24
16'-7"
55 70 EM-OS ZONE PER CITY <E> FH FH
(N) CONCRETE

APPROACH PER

CITY STANDARDS
(N) CONCRETE

APPROACH

PER CITY

STANDARDS
(N) CONCRETE

APPROACH PER

CITY STANDARDS
(N) SIDEWALK @
STREET
(N) CONCRETE

APPROACH

PER CITY

STANDARDS
(N) SIDEWALK @
STREET
(N) SIDEWALK @ STREET 27 6'-0" WOOD FENCE UP

ENCOMPASS RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM
BLDG. 9
9'-0"
TYP.8'-0"
TYP.
18'-0" TYP.
9'-0"
TYP.
18'-0" TYP.
24'-0"
24'-0" TYP.
18'-0" TYP.
18'-0" TYP.
9'-0" MIN.
9'-0" MIN.
18'-0" TYP.
34'-0"
18'-0" TYP.
9'-0"
TYP.
9'-0"
MIN.
24'-0"
18'-0"
32'-0"
52'-4"
32'-0"
32'-2"
32'-2"
49'-10"
82'-2"
99'-11"
99'-11"
23'-6"
10'-0" SEWER

EASEMENT
18'-0" TYP.
9'-0" MIN.

BLDG. 8
6'-0" EASEMENT
137'-9"
BLDG. 3
42'-10"
30'-0"
BLDG. 1
104'-0"
54'-6"
4'-10"
24'-0"
49'-10"
99'-11"
6'-0" EASEMENT
12'-0" TRAIL EASEMENT
30'-0"

CITY BUFFER
30'-0"

CITY BUFFER
65'-0"
9'-0" TYP
24'-0"
24'-0"
18'-0"
TYP
24'-0"
111'-6"
74'-0"
99'-6"
16'-0" TYP.
10'-4"
11'-8"
6'-0"
BLDG. 5
8'-0"
TYP.
9'-0" MIN.
21'-2"
BLDG. 4
BLDG. 6
9'-0"
19'-3" 6'-0" W.I. FENCE 3'-6" W.I. FENCE
24'-0" TYP.
50'-7" 6'-0" WD FENCE (TYP.)
30'-0"
16'-4"
7'-8"
7'-9"
TRASH

ENCLOSURE

LAUNDRY

BIKE STORAGE
34'-0" UP
30'-0"
138'-10"
99'-11"
63 71 84
94 104 114 119
5 6
24'-0" TYP. 6'-0" WOOD FENCE 6'-0" WOOD FENCE 6'-0" W.I. FENCE 6'-0" W.I. FENCE6'-0" W.I. FENCE 12'-0" TRAIL EASEMENT ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A10017148 - A100 MG ATH SHEET NAME SET ISSUED: JOB NO. 2340 GARDEN ROAD, SUITE 100 MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 93940 PHONE: 831.649.4642 FAX: 831.649.3530 WWW.WRDARCH.COM SHEET NO. FILE NAME: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: THE USE OF THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IS RESTRICTED TO THE ORIGINAL SITE FOR WHICH THEY WERE PREPARED, AND PUBLICATION THEREOF IS EXPRESSLY LIMITED TO SUCH USE. REUSE, REPRODUCTION OR PUBLICATION BY ANY METHOD IN WHOLE OR IN PART IS PROHIBITED. TITLE TO THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REMAINS WITH THE ARCHITECT, AND VISUAL CONTACT WITH THEM CONSTITUTES PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THESE RESTRICTIONS. PLOT DATE: PRINT DATE: 06.12.2019 17148.1 MILES LANE

HOUSING
MidPen Housing Corp.
139/141 Miles Lane & 201 Kimberly Lane
Watsonville, California 95076 APNs: 016-491-01, 02 & 03, 016-111-44 PLANNING 1 COMMENTS 06.10.2019 2 RESUBMIT 02.28.2020 SCALE: ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN 1"=30'-0" PLAN
NORTH
Attachment 2
page 12 of 45
BUILDING 5 Approved Site Plan per Resolution 121-20 (CM) Page 540 of 870 VAN
EV VAN
BUILDING 5

COMMUNITY

BUILDING
BUILDING 3
BUILDING 2
BUILDING 4
BUILDING 1 Architects 1288 Kifer Road, Unit 206, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Telephone : 408-992-0280 Fax : 408-992-0281 Attachment 3
page 3 of 20
BUILDING 5
Proposed Modification
Rotate and Relocate Building 5 Page 541 of 870
2/24/22, 3:16 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1725687296535816054&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A172… 1/2 Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8
Jennifer Alaniz <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 3:00 PM To: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Oh wow that sucks… what a weird spot for a bike trail? so for the time being will it just be open land like now? Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2022, at 2:51 PM, Justin Meek <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Jennifer,
I think you are referring to the 12-foot-wide trail easement that was granted to the City as part of the project approval, in 2020. This easement would allow the City at a future date to construct a portion of the Upper Watsonville Trail (Segment

9.4) called for in the City’s Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (2012).

Regards,
Justin
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jennifer Alaniz <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks. The area that looks like a driveway, that comes down toward our fence line, near your distance 96’ marker is that a driveway/walkway?
Thanks
Jennifer
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2022, at 2:09 PM, Justin Meek <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Jennifer,
The modification request involves moving one of the buildings (“Building 5”) and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03). The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines, which is allowed by PG&E.

The location, orientation, and height of all other buildings would remain unchanged. This request would also not change the overall density or number of dwelling units for the Miles Lane Project. Page 542 of 870 2/24/22, 3:16 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Re: Public Hearing for 139 Miles Ln - March 8 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1725687296535816054&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A172… 2/2 If you have any further questions about the modification request, feel free to contact me via email or by telephone.

Regards,
Justin
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 12:09 PM Jennifer Alaniz <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Justin,
Just wondering if this has anything to do with bringing building 5 closer to us at Portola heights? Do you have a schematic of the proposal?
Thanks
Jennifer
1 Crespi way.

Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Deborah Muniz <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Interested Parties:

Page 543 of 870 ends

3/1/22, 5:55 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Major Modification of the Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1726128963096896753&simpl=msg-f%3A1726128963… 1/2 Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Major Modification of the Miles Lane Project
3 messages
Dorothy Glaum <[email protected]> Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:00 PM To: [email protected]
Dear Mr.Meek,
I see that on the Site Map the circle of the project looks like it goes across Freedom Blvd. taking in some of our property. My family owns 1028 and 1034 on Freedom Blvd.

We were wondering if and how this project affects our property. We would appreciate hearing from you on these questions.

Thank you very much,
Dorothy Glaum & Family
3100 Valencia Road
Aptos, CA 95003-9636
(831) 688-3898
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Justin Meek <[email protected]> Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 5:11 PM To: Dorothy Glaum <[email protected]>
Dear Dorothy Glaum,
Thank you for your email. I believe you are referring to the Site and Vicinity Map that you received in the mail along with a notification about the upcoming public hearing on modifying the Miles Lane Project. The purpose of this map is to show the location of the project site and nearby properties. The dark gray shaded area shows the project site and the thick black line shows the properties within 300 feet of the project site that received the notification.

The project would not take your or any of the other properties within the thick black line.

The modification request involves moving one of the previously approved buildings (“Building 5”) and associated parking lot and driveway access to avoid an overhead power line running across the property at 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491- 03). The building would be rotated 180 degrees and placed on the opposite side of the building pad. This would allow surface parking (instead of a portion of Building 5) to be placed under the power lines, which is allowed by PG&E.

In summary, the proposed modification to the approved plans would avoid an existing overhead power line. It would not change the number of dwelling units or the extent of associated site improvements, such as the location of retaining walls and impervious surface area.

If you have any further questions about the modification request, feel free to contact me via email or by telephone.

Regards,
Justin

Page 544 of 870 ends

3/1/22, 5:55 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Major Modification of the Miles Lane Project https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=02e6e883e0&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1726128963096896753&simpl=msg-f%3A1726128963… 2/2 [Quoted text hidden]
1 Site Vicinity Map.pdf
861K
Dorothy Glaum <[email protected]> Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 5:37 PM To: Justin Meek <[email protected]>
Justin , Thank you so much for getting right back to me on my questions. You explained everything, very clearly, about the project and how it doesn't affect our properties.

Again, thank you,
Dorothy
[Quoted text hidden]

Page 545 of 870 ends

15 19
25 29
418
414
20 1202
1010
11 16
135
161
553
535
525
1115
202
20 2
6 10
21 2
4 1
2 6
20 217
215
211
209
205
5 6
2 2
87 81-85
73-79
89 93
730
141
1006
12 26
43-49
23-31
51-71
95 11
21 33
34 35
41 40
39 38
37 53
52 54
59 99
13 9
855
11850
2 1
2 1
8 4
555
550
919
905
22 23
30 32
29 42
139
934 ABCD
1205
499
56-58
50-52
44-46
38-40
33-41
1203
1201A
S
1119
UITES1-4
1185
32 30
40 67
66 68
62 63
64 65
55 56
57 58
61 60
49 50
15 17
21 10
854
1 846
21 12
1 0
13 112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
5551/2
133
128
10 1
5 09
39 35
2 4
18 14
10 926
922
918
910
908
906
904
13 1
7 4
1 1
4 1
5 4
1 9
5 1
3 57
140
132
152
148
144
160
156
12 1
5 2
1 9
33 133
140
14 1
0 4
1 4
48 12
1 4
2 1
8 3
1 2
36 11
1 2
1 1
6 20
10 1
0 0
1 4
08 84
88 92
72 76
80 133
85 89
129
137
145
141
14 1
9 5
1 3
57 161
A
140
13 1
2 36
156
152
148
144
160
133
129
137
149
145
141
161
157
153
21 25
29 19
15 11 225
20 2
1 0
2 3
0 2
5 09
21 2
1 1
2 5
1 2
7 21
156
152
150
144
142
138
136
13 1
0 32
124
122
118
116
112
110
106
104 66
18 18
3 5
153
151
12 10
18 16
193
20 25
23 19
17 145
143
139
137
133
131
12 12
3 5
119
117
113
111
109
107
103
101
10 1
1 1
3 B
96 A 92
1381
1375
10 B
E
C
14-16
32-34
26-28
20-22
50 98
136
130
146
140
150
162
158
154
145
141
155
153
149
12 1
7 2
11 1
7 11
1 3
11 109
1170
1318
16 1314
12 1
8 2
12 4
0 A
A
112
116
607
117
121
1114
110
1 2
106
1050
1034
1042
1038
1205
1213
1209
1024
1020
120
12 1
03 1117
1121
1113
1109
23 3
2 1
7 1041
1047
1051
1055
1103
1107
1039
1037
1021
1122
110
116 112
1118
1114
1106
1110
3 3
4 2
0 2
6 1
0 6
23 27
31 19
11 15
1200
8 1212
1210
1 1202 204
28 12
125
734
726
722
718
710
714
706
702
211
200
1028
1026
1024A
2 1
1 9
426
424
422
A
1025
1033
1029
415
41 4
9 21
34 60
1017
1009
1007
1003
941
943
933
925
923
921
7 7
7 5
76 7
7 4
2 7
7 8
8 9
8 0
8 1
8 2
3 8
8 7
8 6
8 5
4 89
91 90
88 95
96 92
93 94
9 9
7 8
101
100
3 1
2 4
5 6
7 10
8 51
48 47
46 45
44 43
71 70
69 12
15 14
17 18
19 20
36 201
24 25
26 27
28 1031
A-D
A
136
A
1044
1300
715
719
711
609
1326
1180
10 1
1 30 13 2
10 2
A
0 -D
12 18
16 19
17 128
129
124
71 12
938
8 24
937
939
930
423
80 84
1046
15 15
7 9
171
136
A
101
105 109 111 115
AB C D
E
120
12 4
06/A
102
104
1208/A
121
12 0
12 123
122 124
A
A
A
B
81A
932
1025 A-B
A
B
408
406

MARIN ST

MILES LN

FREEDOM
BL

SANTA CLARA ST

PROSPECT ST

MADERA ST

PORTOLA CI

STANFORD ST

KIMBERLY LN

ERIK LN

WEST HIGH ST

LINCOLN ST
Site and Vicinity Map
PROJECT: PP2021-2663/PP2019-14
APPLICANT: Elizabeth Nahas Wilson with MidPen Housing
APN#s: 016-111-44, 016-491-01; -02, -03
LOCATION OF PROJECT: 139-161 Miles Ln, 201 Kimberly Ln
Prepared by Watsonville GIS Center 1/22/2019 (CODD1904).

This Document is a graphic representation only of best available sources.

The City of Watsonville assumes no responsibility for any errors. 15 19
25 29
418
414
20 1202
1010
11 16
135
161
553
535
525
1115
202
20 2
6 10
21 2
4 1
2 6
20 217
215
211
209
205
5 6
2 2
87 81-85
73-79
89 93
730
141
1006
12 26
43-49
23-31
51-71
95 11
21 33
34 35
41 40
39 38
37 53
52 54
59 99
13 9
855
11850
2 1
2 1
8 4
555
550
919
905
22 23
30 32
29 42
139
934 ABCD
1205
499
56-58
50-52
44-46
38-40
33-41
1203
1201A
S
1119
UITES1-4
1185
32 30
40 67
66 68
62 63
64 65
55 56
57 58
61 60
49 50
15 17
21 10
854
1 846
21 12
1 0
13 112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
5551/2
133
128
10 1
5 09
39 35
2 4
18 14
10 926
922
918
910
908
906
904
13 1
7 4
1 1
4 1
5 4
1 9
5 1
3 57
140
132
152
148
144
160
156
12 1
5 2
1 9
33 133
140
14 1
0 4
1 4
48 12
1 4
2 1
8 3
1 2
36 11
1 2
1 1
6 20
10 1
0 0
1 4
08 84
88 92
72 76
80 133
85 89
129
137
145
141
14 1
9 5
1 3
57 161
A
140
13 1
2 36
156
152
148
144
160
133
129
137
149
145
141
161
157
153
21 25
29 19
15 11 225
20 2
1 0
2 3
0 2
5 09
21 2
1 1
2 5
1 2
7 21
156
152
150
144
142
138
136
13 1
0 32
124
122
118
116
112
110
106
104 66
18 18
3 5
153
151
12 10
18 16
193
20 25
23 19
17 145
143
139
137
133
131
12 12
3 5
119
117
113
111
109
107
103
101
10 1
1 1
3 B
96 A 92
1381
1375
10 B
E
C
14-16
32-34
26-28
20-22
50 98
136
130
146
140
150
162
158
154
145
141
155
153
149
12 1
7 2
11 1
7 11
1 3
11 109
1170
1318
16 1314
12 1
8 2
12 4
0 A
A
112
116
607
117
121
1114
110
1 2
106
1050
1034
1042
1038
1205
1213
1209
1024
1020
120
12 1
03 1117
1121
1113
1109
23 3
2 1
7 1041
1047
1051
1055
1103
1107
1039
1037
1021
1122
110
116 112
1118
1114
1106
1110
3 3
4 2
0 2
6 1
0 6
23 27
31 19
11 15
1200
8 1212
1210
1 1202 204
28 12
125
734
726
722
718
710
714
706
702
211
200
1028
1026
1024A
2 1
1 9
426
424
422
A
1025
1033
1029
415
41 4
9 21
34 60
1017
1009
1007
1003
941
943
933
925
923
921
7 7
7 5
76 7
7 4
2 7
7 8
8 9
8 0
8 1
8 2
3 8
8 7
8 6
8 5
4 89
91 90
88 95
96 92
93 94
9 9
7 8
101
100
3 1
2 4
5 6
7 10
8 51
48 47
46 45
44 43
71 70
69 12
15 14
17 18
19 20
36 201
24 25
26 27
28 1031
A-D
A
136
A
1044
1300
715
719
711
609
1326
1180
10 1
1 30 13 2
10 2
A
0 -D
12 18
16 19
17 128
129
124
71 12
938
8 24
937
939
930
423
80 84
1046
15 15
7 9
171
136
A
101
105 109 111 115
AB C D
E
120
12 4
06/A
102
104
1208/A
121
12 0
12 123
122 124
A
A
A
B
81A
932
1025 A-B
A
B
408
406

MARIN ST

MILES LN

FREEDOM
BL

SANTA CLARA ST

PROSPECT ST

MADERA ST

PORTOLA CI

STANFORD ST

KIMBERLY LN

ERIK LN

WEST HIGH ST

LINCOLN ST
©
Legend
Street
Watsonville City Limit
Parcel
Project Site
300' Buffer Zone
Attachment 1

Page 1 of 1 ends

Project Site
300' bufffer for notification
purposes only

Page 546 of 870 ends

Miles Lane Project
Major Modification Request:

Rotate & Relocate Building 5
CITY COUNCIL | March 8, 2022

Page 547 of 870 ends

Overview
● Project location
● Approved project
● Proposed modification
● Findings
● Recommendation

Page 548 of 870 ends

Project Location
Address & APN:
● 139 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-03)
● 141 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-02)
● 161 Miles Lane (APN 016-491-01)
● 201 Kimberly Lane (APN 016-111-44)

Page 549 of 870 ends

Overall Approved Project
Approved Site Plan
per Resolution 121-20 (CM) Page 550 of 870
Approved Project
● MidPen Housing component:
○ 5 affordable housing buildings
○ 72 units
■ Studio – 16
■ 1 bedroom – 19
■ 2 bedroom – 18
■ 3 bedroom - 19
○ 1 community building
■ Community room and kitchen
■ Computer lab
■ Learning Center for afterschool programming
■ Laundry room
■ Property manager and service manager offices

Page 551 of 870 ends

Site Plan
Building 5
PG&E power lines

Page 552 of 870 ends

Proposed Modification
● Avoid overhead power lines by:
○ Rotate Building 5 and relocate on other side
○ Place parking partially under power lines
PG&E power lines

Page 553 of 870 ends

Proposed Modification
● Request does not involve:
○ Increasing the number of dwelling units
○ Increasing the height of Building 5
○ Increasing impervious surface area
○ Changing the overall location & height of retaining walls ○ Changing the number of parking spaces
○ Changing the building’s architecture

Page 554 of 870 ends

New Conditions
● Nine (9) new conditions (nos. 45 – 53)
● Address concerns raised by Public Works and Engineering staff ● Applicant shall respond to detailed questions regarding:
o Retaining wall and slope stability considerations
o Drainage and flooding implications
o Trail location and construction issues

Page 555 of 870 ends

Modified Density Bonus Findings
● Amended language address special legal counsel’s concerns o Municipal Code Section 14-47.130
o State Density Bonus Law
● Allows the City and MidPen Housing to enter into the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Regulatory Agreement (per Condition of Approval #10)

Page 556 of 870 ends

Required Findings
● Changes to the approved plans do not require making any substantive revisions to the findings made in support of the originally approved Density Bonus or Special Use Permit with Design Review

Page 557 of 870 ends

Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution:

1. Approving a Major Modification (PP2021-2663) of the approved Miles Mlane Project (PP2019-14) to allow the relocation of Building 5 to avoid overhead power lines across the property at 139 Miles Lane, Watsonville, California (APNs 016-491-03), and

2. Modifying the findings approving a Density Bonus for the project pursuant to Municipal Code Section 14-47.130 and State Density Bonus Law

Page 558 of 870 ends

Page 1 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Agenda Report
MEETING DATE: Tuesday, March 8, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MERRIAM

PRINCIPAL PLANNER MATT ORBACH
ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, INC.

SUBJECT: ANALYSIS OF THE WATSONVILLE PLANNED GROWTH AND

FARMLAND PROTECTION INITIATIVE
STATEMENT OF ISSUES:

The Watsonville Planned Growth & Farmland Protection Initiative (“Initiative”) Petition obtained the required 2,411 (10% of registered voters) valid signatures to qualify for adoption or be placed on the ballot. On February 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-22 (CM), accepting the City Clerk’s certification of the results of the examination of the signatures on the petition and ordering a report analyzing the impacts of the proposed measure on the City, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9212, to be submitted to the Council on March 8, 2022. The report is contained herein.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report regarding the analysis of the Initiative. No action required.

BACKGROUND
On March 14, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 69-00 (CM), approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the City of Watsonville Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendment 1-99, which authorized the development of Pájaro Valley High School but ensured that there would be no additional urban development to the west of the current western boundary of the City of Watsonville. Under the MOU, the City of Watsonville reserved the right to annex only one additional parcel in that area, identified as “Green Farm” (APN 052-271-04), also known as the Redman House parcel. The full text of the MOU can be found in Attachment 1.

On November 5, 2002, the Watsonville Urban Limit Line and Development Timing Initiative (Measure U) was approved by a majority of the registered voters of the City of Watsonville.

The Community Development Director, under Resolution No. 304-02 (CM), was subsequently authorized and directed to make the changes included in Amendment No. 16 upon the Watsonville 2005 General Plan and to designate the effective date and number of

Page 559 of 870 ends

Page 2 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx the resolution authorizing the change. The full text of Measure U can be found in Attachment

1. On June 3, 2021, Amy Newell, Betty Bobeda, and Peter Navarro filed a Notice of Intent to Circulate a Petition to amend the City of Watsonville General Plan, primarily to the City’s Urban Limit Line (ULL), set by Measure U and approved by Watsonville voters in 2002.

The initiative as proposed would prevent changes to the ULL, as established by the former Measure U, through the year 2040. The full text of the ULL Initiative can be found in Attachment 3.

On June 18, 2021, the City provided Petitioners with the City Attorney’s Title and Summary, as required by California Elections Code Section 9203. The Petitioners published the Notice of Intent and the Title and Summary on July 2, 2021, and filed the Certificate of Publication with the City Clerk’s Office on July 9, 2021.

As of February 17, 2021, there were 21,699 registered voters in the City, as indicated in the last report filed with the Secretary of State. The Petitioners returned the petitions with signatures to the City Clerk’s Office on December 13, 2021. After determining that the number of “primafacie” or gross signatures for the Watsonville Urban Limit Line 2040 Extension petition was 3,176, which is in excess of the required minimum number of 2,170 (10%), the City Clerk accepted the petition for examination of signatures. In order to meet the deadline for examination of signatures, the Santa Cruz County Clerk was contracted to conduct the examination of the signatures.

On January 19, 2022, Santa Cruz County Clerk, Tricia Webber, confirmed the sufficiency of the petition, certifying the petition was sufficient with 2,411(10%) valid signatures.

On February 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-22 (CM), accepting the City Clerk’s certification of the results of the examination of the signatures on the petition and ordering a report analyzing the impacts of the proposed measure on the City, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9212, to be submitted to the Council on March 8, 2022.

DISCUSSION:

Economic and Planning Systems Analysis
The City of Watsonville engaged Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to assist with a Cityled process to evaluate the impact of a renewal of the Urban Limit Line (ULL) established under Measure U in 2002. As part of the EPS effort, the firm coordinated with City staff from the City Manager’s Office and the Community Development Department and interviewed leadership within the Police Department, Fire Department, and Public Works Department.

EPS provided a memorandum offering a summary of key findings from the study of the ULL measure (Attachment 4) and a briefing document (Attachment 5), including background context concerning the ULL, description of observed outcomes from the past 20 years, a summary of research and analysis efforts to evaluate a potential renewal of the ULL, and commentary related to fiscal and economic impacts.

Page 560 of 870 ends

Page 3 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Overview of Measure U
Measure U was the product of a yearlong community visioning process undertaken by Action Pajaro Valley (APV), a nonprofit that brought together government leaders, farming companies, environmentalists, and business owners to create a long-term plan of how Watsonville could grow and meet the challenges facing the City at the time. The purpose of the Watsonville Urban Limit Line and Development Timing Initiative (“Measure U”) is below.

The purpose of this Initiative is to define a new Urban Limit Line (“ULL”) for the City of Watsonville and to direct the phasing of development within the ULL to promote continued economic development and efficient urban growth while sustaining and enhancing the agricultural economy in the City of Watsonville and the surrounding region.

Measure U included seven findings supporting this purpose and describing how the initiative would promote the health, safety, welfare, and quality of life of the residents of Watsonville.

The findings focused on several common themes:

1. Promoting stability in long-term planning;

2. Balancing economic development with protection of agricultural, open space, and other natural resource uses;

3. Encouraging growth in specific limited areas within or adjacent to existing developed areas;

4. Encouraging infill development; and

5. Encouraging affordable housing.

Measure U did not provide any specific or measurable economic or residential development targets. However, given the stated purpose, the themes found in the findings, specific plans and general plans created since the adoption of Measure U, and available data related to how growth has occurred over the last 20 years, staff identified three areas in which the outcomes of Measure U could be measured:

1. Protection of Farmland;

2. Housing (“urban growth”); and

3. Jobs (“economic development”).

The following sections will analyze the outcomes of Measure U in these areas. The full text of Measure U can be found in Attachment 1.

1. Protection of Farmland
Farmlands west of Highway 1 have been protected under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) related to the City of Watsonville Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendment 1-99 since it was signed by the City of Watsonville, the County of Santa Cruz, and the California Coastal Commission in September 2000. The memorandum specifically identifies the Coastal Act requirements directing the Coastal Commission to maximize and protect agricultural land adjacent to urban uses and protect environmentally sensitive habitats and wetlands. The memorandum may only be amended by agreement of all parties.

Page 561 of 870 ends

Page 4 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Measure U added an additional backstop to the MOU, stating: “should the MOU terminate for any reason, the Westerly ULL, nonetheless, may not be amended until on or after November 1, 2027 except by a vote of the people or as provided in Implementation Measure

3.C.3 or for public facilities described in the MOU.” This provision has never been implemented because the MOU remains in effect.

Under Measure U, the only farmlands that were developed were in Area B – Atkinson Lane, Area E – “Villages,” Area F – Manabe/Burgstrom. No other farmland in the County of Santa Cruz adjacent to the ULL has been annexed or developed.

2. Providing Housing
The APV community visioning process occurred during the 3rd Cycle of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City of Watsonville, which at the time required the City to plan for an additional 2,283 housing units in the 2000-2007 time period. Citing the need for more housing, and specifically more affordable housing, Measure U identified how housing development could be permitted in specific areas both inside and outside the ULL. Those areas included:

1. Area A – Buena Vista
a. Located within the ULL.
b. Development in this area permitted in three phases following completion of a specific plan calling for primarily residential uses, with some neighborhood commercial, light industrial, schools, open space, and parks.

2. Area B – Atkinson Lane
a. This area is located within the ULL.
b. Development in this area permitted following completion of a specific plan. c. Uses in this area restricted to residential with a requirement that at least fifty percent of the number of units be deed restricted affordable workforce housing with an emphasis on the housing of agricultural workers.

3. Area C – The area south of Corralitos Creek
a. This area lies outside of the ULL.
b. Not available for planning or processing for development until on or after November 1, 2027.

4. Area D – The area east of East Lake Avenue
a. This area lies outside of the ULL.
b. Not available for planning or processing for development until on or after November 1, 2022.

5. Area E – The Villages
a. This area is located within the ULL.
b. May be planned and processed for residential development as soon as possible.
c. Development limited to senior housing.

6. Area F – The Manabe/Burgstrom area.
a. This area lies within the ULL.
b. May be planned and processed for development as soon as possible.

Page 562 of 870 ends

Page 5 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx c. Uses in this area restricted to industrial and other job-generating uses.

7. Area G – The area west of the Westerly ULL.
a. Subject to MOU between the City of Watsonville, the County of Santa Cruz, and the California Coastal Commission.
b. Should the MOU terminate for any reason, the area will not be subject to planning or processing for development until on or after November 1, 2027.

These development planning areas are illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Measure U - Development Planning Areas & Urban Limit Line Measure U did not provide specific numerical targets for housing development or job creation in these areas. Instead, it required specific plans for development in key development areas, through which feasible housing development and job creation estimates could be produced.

Accordingly, specific housing development and job creation targets were identified in the draft 2030 General Plan Update, the draft Atkinson Lane Specific Plan, and the Manabe-Ow Business Park Specific Plan, as illustrated in the table below.

Page 563 of 870 ends

Page 6 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Table 1: Projected Housing Units and Jobs in Measure U Growth Areas Projected Housing Units and Jobs in Measure U Growth Areas Projected Housing Units Projected Jobs
Area A – Buena Vista 1,300 200
Area B – Atkinson Lane 450 90
Area E – The “Villages” 74 0
Area G –
Manabe/Bugstrom 100 2,100
Total 1,850 2,390
Housing Approved/Developed
The following table illustrates the housing development that has occurred since the approval of Measure U in Area A, B, E, and G:

Table 2: Housing Units Created in Measure U Growth Areas Housing Units Created in Measure U Growth Areas
Projected Housing
Units
Units
Developed
Total Units
Approved/Developed
% of
Projected
Area A – Buena Vista

1,300 0 0 0%
Area B – Atkinson
Lane

450 46 46 10%
Area E – The “Villages” N/A 74 74 N/A
Area G – Manabe Ow
Specific Plan

100 0 87 87%
Housing Total

1,850 46 207 11%
As illustrated in the table above, only 207 (11%) of the 1,850 projected housing units in the Measure U growth areas have been approved/developed in the 20 years since Measure U was adopted. The failure to meet projections is due to complications in the planning and development of two of the three main growth areas: Area A (Buena Vista) and Area B (Atkinson Lane).

The Action Pajaro Valley compromise identified the Buena Vista area (Area A) as having the potential to provide a large majority of the housing development needed to meet the City’s housing targets under projected growth and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) planning requirements from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). In the original 2030 General Plan Update (2006), the area was identified as being able to produce up to 2,250 housing units. However, after reductions in developable area related to topographic constraints (steep slopes) and airport safety zones, the 2030 General Plan Update (2012) identified the area as being able to produce only 1,300 housing units. The configuration of the remaining developable land, cost of extending

Page 564 of 870 ends

Page 7 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx infrastructure, and potential for additional future legal challenges related to development in this area have made Area A infeasible for any future development.

In 2009, the City developed the Atkinson Lane Specific Plan in collaboration with the County of Santa Cruz’s effort to rezone properties for affordable housing in the same area. The Specific Plan identified the potential for up to 450 housing units in Area B. However, the City and County plans were challenged in court. As a result, the original planning area effectively split into two sections: (1) the County Entitlements Area on which development was allowed and (2) the City Specific Plan Area for which development requires another specific plan and CEQA review. In 2018, LAFCO approved the annexation of a small portion of the County Entitlements Area, on which the 46-unit affordable housing development Pippin Orchards is built. In December 2021, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors approved a development proposal for an adjacent parcel in the County Entitlements Area, which includes construction of an 80-unit multifamily development (“Pippin II”). At this time, there are no additional future developments proposed for this area.

3. Jobs Created
The following table illustrates the job creation that has occurred since the approval of Measure U in Area A, B, and G:

Table 3: Jobs Created in Measure U Growth Areas
Jobs Created in Measure U Growth Areas
Projected Jobs Jobs Created
Pending Project
Job Total % of Target
Area A – Buena Vista 200 0 0 0%
Area B – Atkinson Lane 90 0 0 0%
Area G – Manabe Ow
Specific Plan 2,100 ~200 ~400 19%
Total Jobs 2,390 ~200 ~400 17%
As illustrated in the table above, only ~400 (17%) of the 2,390 projected jobs in the Measure U growth areas have been approved/created in the 20 years since Measure U was adopted.

The failure to meet projections is due to the lack of development in Area A and Area B and the type of development that has occurred in Area G.

The Action Pajaro Valley compromise identified the Area G – Manabe/Burgstrom (now Manabe Ow) annexation area as having the greatest potential to provide future job creation.

In 2010, the City approved the Manabe-Ow Business Park Specific Plan, which identified the area as being able to produce 2,100 jobs and up to 100 units of workforce housing. The business park was described as “the primary new employment and economic development area in the City of Watsonville over the next 25 years,” and envisioned a business park setting with varying building sizes and architectural styles supporting “the needs of existing and future local and regional businesses, from corporate headquarters to small light industrial and manufacturing start-ups.”

Page 565 of 870 ends

Page 8 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx In 2015, the first development within the specific plan area, a 194,151-square-foot FedEx distribution facility, was approved. The facility covered the entirety of the North Business Park Planning Area and the project included construction of Manabe Ow Road and the roundabout at Manabe Ow Road and Ohlone Parkway. The facility, however, only provided approximately 200 jobs. There are currently two more active applications, one for a 156,961- square-foot distribution facility and another for a 175,328-square-foot distribution facility, that would cover the entire West Business Park Planning Area and provide approximately 200 additional jobs. The East Business Park Planning Area has expansive soils that may render the area undevelopable without significant surcharging, and there are no active development applications for that area. However, even with potential future development of the East Business Park Planning Area, Area G will fall well short of the job creation levels envisioned under Measure U and the specific plan.

Watsonville Planned Growth and Farmland Protection Initiative (2021) The purpose of the Watsonville Planned Growth and Farmland Protection Initiative (“Initiative”) is stated below.

The purpose of the Watsonville Planned Growth and Farmland Protection Initiative (“Initiative”) is to promote stability in long-term planning for the City of Watsonville by extending key features of the Watsonville Urban Limit Line and Development Timing Initiative, otherwise known as the Watsonville Orderly Growth and Agricultural Protection Initiative or Measure U, which added cornerstone policies within the General Plan that establish geographic limits for long-term development while allowing sufficient flexibility within those limits to respond to the City’s changing needs over time.

Measure U vs. ULL Initiative
The ULL Initiative would make four significant changes to Chapter 3, Growth and Conservation Strategy, compared to what was established under Measure U. The ULL Initiative would:

1. Rename the three Urban Limit Line sections as follows:
a. 20-Year ULL becomes Segment 1
b. 25-Year ULL becomes Segment 2
c. Westerly ULL becomes Segment 3

2. Extend the expiration of all three ULL segments to November 3, 2040, and add additional language specifying that the ULL segments, Policies 3.B and 3.C, and Implementation Measures 3.C.1 through 3.C.3 “retain their full force and effect until the City Council amends the General Plan in accordance with state law without a vote of the people.”

3. Remove phasing and specific plan requirements for Area A – Buena Vista and Area B – Atkinson Lane; and

4. Allow the City Council to amend the location of the ULL, Policies 3.B and 3.C, or Implementation Measures 3.C.1 through 3.C.3 if the City determines that doing so is necessary to comply with state or federal law regarding the provision of housing, as long as the City Council makes the following three findings based on substantial

Page 566 of 870 ends

Page 9 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx evidence: (i) A specific provision of state or federal law requires the City to accommodate the housing that will be permitted by the amendment, (ii) The amendment permits no greater density than that necessary to accommodate the required housing, and (iii) An alternative site within the ULL is not available to satisfy the specific state or federal housing law.

ULL Initiative Findings
The Initiative includes ten findings, which are listed below with staff analysis.

Findings:

1. In November 2002, City of Watsonville voters approved the Watsonville Urban Limit Line and Development Timing Initiative, otherwise known as the Watsonville Orderly Growth and Agricultural Protection Initiative or Measure U.

Measure U defined a new Urban Limit Line for the City and directed the phasing of development within the Urban Limit Line to promote continued economic development and efficient urban growth while sustaining and enhancing the agricultural economy in the City and surrounding region.

Analysis: See analysis of Measure U outcomes related to the three main focus areas:
(1) protection of farmland, (2) housing production, (3) job production. Given the infeasibility of development in several of the identified residential growth areas and the build-out of economic growth areas falling well short of job creation projections, the ability of the Initiative to “promote continued economic development and efficient urban growth” without identifying additional areas available for residential and economic growth is unclear. Infill residential development and economic growth will continue with or without the Initiative.

2. Measure U has succeeded in managing the City's growth in a manner that fosters and protects the unique character of Watsonville by allowing appropriate economic development and residential growth, while protecting and promoting important agricultural, open space, and other natural resource uses.

Analysis: In terms of growth, the EPS analysis (Attachment 4) found that “the limited number of vacant sites and viable annexation areas allowed under the ULL measure provide land supply for an estimated 876 new dwelling units, which is insufficient to accommodate projected growth in five out of eight demand forecasts.” In terms of policy goals for housing, the upcoming 6th RHNA Cycle will require the City to plan for approximately 2,100 additional housing units, and there will be two more RHNA cycles before 2040. The EPS analysis found that a renewal of the ULL “could create a significant barrier to meeting policy goals for housing, with estimates of unmet need for housing ranging from roughly 2,300 to 2,900 dwelling units by 2040.”

Page 567 of 870 ends

Page 10 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx In terms of economic development, the only area identified for economic development under the existing ULL, the Manabe-Ow Business Park Specific Plan area, will be almost entirely built out in the near future, having provided only a small percentage of the projected economic development and jobs. According to the EPS analysis, visitorserving uses on the only additional parcel identified in the MOU for potential City annexation in Area G (West of Highway 1), the Redman House parcel, “likely would have a strong positive impact on the City’s General Fund, generating new transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax for the City.” However, this parcel would be not be available for annexation or development under an extension of the ULL.

The finding does not provide or reference any substantial evidence demonstrating that “Measure U has succeeded in managing the City’s growth in a manner that fosters and protects the unique character of Watsonville by allowing appropriate economic development and residential growth, while protecting and promoting important agricultural, open space, and other natural resource uses.”

3. Likewise, Measure U has encouraged efficient growth patterns and protected quality of life in Watsonville by concentrating future development largely within or adjacent to existing developed areas where adequate infrastructure and services can be provided.

Analysis: While there has been a small amount of residential development in Measure U-identified Area E – “Villages” (74 units) and Area B – Atkinson Lane (46 built, 80 approved in the County in December 2021), the primary growth area identified in Measure U is Area A – Buena Vista, which was projected to provide up to 1,300 housing units. This area is located to the northwest of the Watsonville Municipal Airport and is separated from existing City infrastructure and services by both the airport and several residential areas in the County of Santa Cruz with substandard infrastructure that the City would need to take over to provide utilities to Area A. The combination of infrastructure costs, airport safety zones, topographical constraints such as steep slopes, and threat of litigation from adjacent residential areas significantly reduce the probability of any future development in Area A.

The finding does not provide or reference any substantial evidence demonstrating that “Measure U has encouraged efficient growth patterns and protected quality of life in Watsonville by concentrating future development largely within or adjacent to existing developed areas where adequate infrastructure and services can be provided.”

4. This Initiative will build on Measure U's success, and will continue to promote stability in long-term planning for the City of Watsonville by designating appropriate geographical areas for urban development over the next 18 years.

Analysis: Over the last 20 years, the “appropriate geographical areas for urban development” identified by Measure U have only yielded 207 of the 1,850 housing units identified in the 2006 version of the 2030 General Plan, the 2009 Atkinson Lane Specific Plan, the 2010 Manabe-Ow Business Park Specific Plan, and in the

Page 568 of 870 ends

Page 11 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx “Villages.” The EPS analysis found that “the limited number of vacant sites and viable annexation areas allowed under the ULL measure provide land supply for an estimated 876 new dwelling units, which is insufficient to accommodate projected growth in five out of eight demand forecasts,” and that, even if certain portions of Area C were to become available for development, “anticipated policy goals for housing supply far outstrip vacant land capacity.”
The finding does not provide or reference any substantial evidence illustrating how “the Initiative will build on Measure U's success,” or how it “will continue to promote stability in long-term planning for the City of Watsonville by designating appropriate geographical areas for urban development over the next 18 years.”

5. Specifically, this Initiative amends the General Plan to extend the voter approval requirement for amendments to the City's existing Urban Limit Line, related diagrams (Land Use Diagram and Development Planning Areas & Urban Limit Line map), Policies 3.B and 3.C, and Implementation Measures 3.C.1 through

3.C.3 through November 3, 2040. The diagrams, with amendments, are shown in Exhibit A (General Plan Land Use Diagram) and Exhibit B (Development Planning Areas & Urban Limit Line map). The text of Policy 3.B and Implementation Measures 3.C.1 and 3.C.3, with amendments, are provided in Sections 2 and 3 below. Policy 3.C and Implementation Measure 3.C.2 are not amended by this Initiative but are provided for reference in Exhibit C.

Analysis: No comments.

6. Land use in the area west of the City is controlled by a Memorandum of Understanding among the City, the County of Santa Cruz, and the California Coastal Commission ("MOU"), provided for reference in Exhibit D. Measure U provided that the MOU's provisions "govern the City's planning and development policies" in that area. Measure U also provided that in the event the MOU terminated for any reason, the "Westerly ULL" could not be amended except by a vote of the people or pursuant to another exception until November 1, 2027. This Initiative extends the voter approval requirement to November 3, 2040 and renames the Westerly ULL as ULL Segment 3 but otherwise does not substantively change this provision.

Analysis: Farmlands and wetlands west of Highway 1 have been protected under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) related to the City of Watsonville Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendment 1-99 since it was signed by the City of Watsonville, the County of Santa Cruz, and the California Coastal Commission in September 2000 (Attachment 1). Additionally, the Coastal Act requires the Coastal Commission to maximize and protect agricultural land adjacent to urban uses and protect environmentally sensitive habitats and wetlands. The memorandum may only be amended by agreement of all parties.

Page 569 of 870 ends

Page 12 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Measure U added an additional backstop to the MOU, stating that “should that MOU terminate for any reason, the Westerly ULL, nonetheless, may not be amended until on or after November 1, 2027 except by a vote of the people or as provided in Implementation Measure 3.C.3 or for public facilities described in the MOU.” This provision has never been implemented because the MOU remains in effect.

The finding does not provide or reference any substantial evidence demonstrating that the MOU is under any threat of termination.

7. Measure U required development in the Buena Vista and Atkinson Lane areas to proceed on a phased schedule. However, these phasing requirements expired in 2010 (Atkinson Lane) and 2016 (Buena Vista), and are therefore obsolete. This Initiative removes these obsolete requirements from the General Plan.

Analysis: As the dates after which maps could be approved in Area A – Buena Vista and Area B – Atkinson Lane have already passed, there are no issues with removing those sections of Measure U.

There are no findings related to the removal of the specific plan requirements for Area A – Buena Vista and Area B – Atkinson Lane or how the removal of those requirements would allow the ULL Initiative to achieve its stated purpose and goals.

8. Measure U imposed use restrictions on certain areas in the City, and provided that these restrictions could not be amended without a vote of the people until November 1, 2022, or November 1, 2027, depending on the area. This Initiative leaves Measure U's use restrictions in place and does not extend or otherwise alter the dates after which these use restrictions may be amended by the City Council without voter approval. For clarity, the voter approval requirements for the use restrictions found in amended Implementation Measures 3.G.1 and 3.G.2 are now provided in a new Implementation Measure 3.G.4.

Analysis: Implementation Measure 3.G.4(b) enables the City Council to amend the restrictions related to Area A – Buena Vista, Area E – “Villages”, or Area F – ManabeOw without a vote of the people any time on or after November 1, 2022.

Implementation Measure 3.G.4(c) enables the City Council to amend the restrictions related to Area B – Atkinson Lane without a vote of the people any time on or after November 1, 2027.

However, Implementation Measure 3.G.4(d) of the Initiative allows the City Council to amend Policy 3.G or Implementation Measures 3.G.1 and 3.G.2 without a vote of the people “if the City Council determines that doing so is necessary to comply with state or federal law regarding the provision of housing.” This section requires the City Council to make three findings (which are the same ones required under 3.C.3(e)): (i) A specific provision of state or federal law requires the City to accommodate the

Page 570 of 870 ends

Page 13 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx housing that will be permitted by the amendment, (ii) The amendment permits no greater density than that necessary to accommodate the required housing, and (iii) An alternative site within the ULL is not available to satisfy the specific state or federal housing law.

9. To the extent this Initiative does not amend or readopt text or exhibits adopted by Measure U, such text and exhibits may be further amended in accordance with state law.

Analysis: No comments.

10.As the General Plan's Housing Element shows, the land within the Urban Limit Line provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the City's regional housing needs allocation and to meet state housing law goals. This Initiative allows the City to continue to meet housing needs for all economic segments of the population by directing the development of housing into areas where services and infrastructure can be provided more economically. It also includes exceptions to the voter approval requirement for amendments that are necessary to implement state or federal housing law.

Analysis: The City of Watsonville 2015-2023 Housing Element demonstrates the availability of sufficiently zoned land in the City of Watsonville to provide the City’s share of the region’s future housing need for the 2014 to 2023 planning period (5th RHNA cycle), which was 700 units. The total number of permits issued during the 5th cycle so far is 302, as opposed to 644 in the County of Santa Cruz and 867 in the City of Santa Cruz. However, the City of Watsonville’s share of the 6th RHNA cycle has been identified at over 2,000 additional units, and there will be two more RHNA cycles before 2040. The EPS analysis found that a renewal of the ULL “could create a significant barrier to meeting policy goals for housing, with estimates of unmet need for housing ranging from roughly 2,300 to 2,900 dwelling units by 2040.” The EPS analysis also included an in-depth review of vacant parcels within the existing ULL. Staff worked with the IT department to update the existing GIS vacant parcel layer, which identified 147 vacant parcels within the ULL. Staff then conducted a parcel-by-parcel review of the 147 vacant parcels to verify the current zoning, airport safety zones, zoning of adjacent parcels, existing uses, and any other potential impediments to residential development. The analysis identified that 107 of the original 147 vacant parcels had some characteristic, such as airport safety zones, existing entitlements, and proximity wetlands, that prohibited residential development.

Of the remaining 40 parcels, 30 would require additional analysis and/or changes in zoning to allow residential development. The remaining ten parcels could currently be developed with residential units. The results of the analysis are included in Table 4 and illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Page 571 of 870 ends

Page 14 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx Table 4: Residential Infill Potential of Existing Vacant Lots Residential Infill Potential of Existing Vacant Lots
Undevelopable Parcels 107
Potentially Developable Parcels 30
Developable Parcels 10
Total 147
Figure 2: Residential Infill Potential of Existing Vacant Lots

Page 572 of 870 ends

Page 15 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx The developable and potentially developable parcels combined are approximately

17.55 acres. Assuming a density of 16 dwelling units per acre (du/acre), which is typical for recent, medium-density, residential development projects within the City of Watsonville, this area could accommodate approximately 281 residential dwelling units.

Strategic Growth Areas at the Urban Edge
Staff worked with EPS to identify whether there were any strategic growth areas outside of the existing and proposed Urban Limit Lines that would be feasible for residential or economic development under a scenario where the urban limits lines established under Measure U expired. All of Area D – East of East Lake Avenue, which would become available if the 20- Year ULL expired in November 2022, is located in the 100-year FEMA floodplain. In addition, the land outside the southeastern 20-Year ULL/Segment 1 is either in agricultural production or adjacent to industrial areas that would not be compatible with residential development.

Based on the analysis by EPS and staff, two farmland areas outside of the existing ULL were identified for potential residential or economic development if Measure U were to expire: a small portion of Area C (77 acres) that could be utilized for residential development and the Redman House parcel (13.6 acres) that could be utilized for economic development. Those two strategic growth areas are analyzed below.

Area C (77 Acres) – Potential Residential Development
The majority of Area C – West of East Lake/South of Corralitos Creek is within the 100- and 500-year FEMA floodplain. However, there are 77 acres of Area C that are outside of the floodplain, adjacent to existing residential areas, and could potentially provide residential development, needed connectivity between Freedom Boulevard and East Lake Avenue/CA152, and park land in an area with a very low number of parks per capita.

If the ULL Initiative were to be adopted, this parcel would be outside of the ULL and unavailable for annexation without an adjustment to the ULL. Under the ULL Initiative, this could either approved by the City Council through the exception to comply with state or federal law regarding the provision of housing allowed under Implementation Measure

3.C.3(e) or with an adjustment to the ULL approved by a vote of the people.

Redman House Parcel (13.6 Acres) – Potential Economic Growth Area There are very few economic growth areas outside of the existing ULL. However, the Redman House parcel near the intersection of West Riverside Drive/CA-129 and Highway 1 is surrounded by the City of Watsonville on three sides and has the potential to provide visitorserving uses that the EPS study found “likely would have a strong positive impact on the City’s General Fund by generating new transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax revenue for the City.”
If the ULL Initiative were to be adopted, this parcel would be unavailable for annexation without an adjustment to the ULL approved by a vote of the people.

Page 573 of 870 ends

Page 16 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx EPS Analysis
The EPS analysis of the ULL Initiative made the following key findings:

1. While the existing ULL has restricted development of prime farmland and environmentally sensitive open space, minimal new development has occurred in growth areas defined by the measure.

2. A range of public- and private-sector housing demand projections as well as policy goals for new housing reveal significant variation in potential future residential development in Watsonville, and renewal of the ULL likely will cause a land supply constraint, with insufficient developable area to accommodate projected growth in more than half (four of seven) of the demand projections considered.

3. Allowing development in currently restricted, new strategic growth areas creates new land supply to meet housing demand projections, but even if new strategic growth areas are opened for development, land supply constraints will continue to affect the City’s ability to meet policy goals for housing development.

4. New development in Watsonville, whether infill within the City limits or development of new strategic areas at the City’s edge, will have one-time infrastructure improvement requirements.

5. Interviews with Police, Fire, and Public Works departments confirm that population growth increases service burdens and department costs under any growth pattern scenario, with the Police department indicating that providing service to new neighborhoods on the urban edge will be more expensive than serving infill development.

6. Creating strategic growth areas at the urban edge could support new economic development opportunities, including a potential visitor-serving development at the intersection of Highway 1 and State Route 129.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Extending the Urban Limit Line established by Measure U would affect available land for development and expansion, ultimately affecting each Strategic Plan Goal: 1-Housing, 2-Fiscal Health, 3-Infrastructure & Environment, 4-Economic Development, 5-Community Engagement & Well-Being, 6-Public Safety, 7-Efficient and High Performing Government.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The Economics & Planning Systems (EPS) memorandum identified several potential financial impacts related to the Initiative:
(1) New development in Watsonville, whether infill within City limits or development of new strategic areas at the City’s edge, will have one-time infrastructure improvement costs;
(2) Interviews with Police, Fire, and Public Works departments confirm that population growth increases service burdens and department costs under any growth pattern scenario; and
(3) Creating strategic growth areas at the urban edge could support new economic development opportunities, including a potential visitor-serving development at the intersection of Highway 1 and State Route 129 that likely would have a strong positive

Page 574 of 870 ends

Page 17 of 17 ends

3/3/2022 10:55:26 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\22552475458\22552475458,,,Planned Growth and Farmland Protections Initiative Analysis - Report.docx impact on the City’s General Fund by generating new transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax revenue for the City.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

None.

ATTACHMENTS AND/OR REFERENCES (If any):

Attachment 1 - Measure U with MOU Attachment
Attachment 2 - ULL Initiative – City Attorney Title & Summary Attachment 3 - ULL Initiative
Attachment 4 - EPS - Memorandum – Summary of Findings
Attachment 5 - EPS - Watsonville ULL Ballot Initiative Impact Assessment Briefing Document Attachment 6 - Measure U vs ULL Initiative Comparison Table

Page 575 of 870 ends

Attachment 1

Page 1 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 2 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 3 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 4 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 5 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 6 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 7 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 8 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 9 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 10 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 11 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 12 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 13 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 14 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 15 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 16 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 17 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 18 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 19 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 20 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 21 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 22 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 23 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 24 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 25 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 26 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 27 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 28 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 29 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 30 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 31 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 32 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 33 of 34 ends

Attachment 1

Page 34 of 34 ends

TITLE
WATSONVILLE URBAN LIMIT LINE 2040 EXTENSION INITIATIVE
SUMMARY:

This Initiative amends portions of the City of Watsonville General Plan, primarily the City's Urban Limit Line ("ULL"), which was set by voters in Measure U in 2002. The General Plan is the City's long-range plan for physical urban development. The ULL is that part of the General Plan that sets a boundary beyond which residential, industrial or commercial development is prohibited.

This Initiative proposes to keep the present ULL, set by Measure U in 2002, unchanged through 2040.

This Initiative requires voter approval to change the ULL except that the City Council may change the ULL: (1) if the change moves the ULL closer to the City boundary, (2) is necessary to comply with state or federal housing law, or (3) is required to prevent an unlawful taking of property. The Initiative will not otherwise allow the City Council to change the location of the ULL before 2040.

Measure U phased urban development within the ULL from 2002 through 2022 or 2027, depending on the area. These phasing provisions expired in either 2010 (Atkinson Lane) or 2016 (Buena Vista). This Initiative proposes to amend the General Plan to delete phasing.

Measure U imposed land-use restrictions in the Buena Vista, Atkinson Lane, Villages, and Ow (formerly known as Manabe-Burgstrom) areas. Changes to restrictions required voter approval until 2022 or 2027, depending on the area. The Initiative proposes to reorganize and amend land-use restriction language in the General Plan but does not change dates for the voter approval requirement. The Initiative does not otherwise materially change land-use restrictions or permitted uses for each area (though some edits are proposed.)
Title and Summary Submitted by City Attorney Alan Smith on 6/18/2021 ·,.

Alan. J. Smith ) ..... ,. .....
·-~ ...... ,.,,,.__ , • .,,.,,~-_,,,,,-/;r".Y
Dated: June 18, 2021
Attachment 2

Page 1 of 1 ends

Attachment 3

Page 1 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 2 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 3 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 4 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 5 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 6 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 7 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 8 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 9 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 10 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 11 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 12 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 13 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 14 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 15 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 16 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 17 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 18 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 19 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 20 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 21 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 22 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 23 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 24 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 25 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 26 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 27 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 28 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 29 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 30 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 31 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 32 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 33 of 34 ends

Attachment 3

Page 34 of 34 ends

M EMORANDUM
To: Matt Orbach, Principal Planner
From: Benjamin C. Sigman and Ryan Martinez
Subject: Summary of Findings from ULL Research and Analysis Date: March 1, 2022
The City of Watsonville is evaluating the potential ramifications of a ballot initiative to renew the City’s Urban Limit Line (ULL) through 2040.

Voters passed the existing Watsonville ULL measure, Measure U, in 2002 and some of the original provisions are set to expire in 2022. A local campaign to reauthorize the ULL collected the necessary voter signatures to qualify the ULL renewal measure for the voter ballot in 2022.

The City engaged Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to assist with a City-led process to evaluate the impact of Measure U renewal. EPS’s technical analysis and advisory services were delivered to the City on an as-needed basis. EPS has advised the City on study design, housing demand analysis, land supply analysis, and economic and fiscal impact considerations. As part of the EPS effort, the firm coordinated with City staff from the City Manager’s Office and the Planning Division of the Community Development Department, and interviewed leadership within the Police Department, Fire Department, and Public Works Department.

This memorandum offers a summary of key findings from the study of the ULL measure. EPS’s supporting research and analysis are documented in the Watsonville Urban Limit Line Ballot Initiative Impact Assessment (Briefing Document, March 2022). A forthcoming City staff report also will provide perspective and commentary on the proposed extension of the City’s ULL. The following key findings provide background context concerning the ULL, describe observed outcomes from the past 20 years, summarize research and analysis efforts to evaluate measure renewal, and offer commentary related to potential fiscal and economic impacts. This memorandum only offers a brief digest of the study and is intended as a supplement to the briefing document and staff report.

Attachment 4

Page 1 of 4 ends

Memorandum February 23, 2022
Summary of Findings – Watsonville ULL Renewal Page 2
Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211109_Wat sonville_U LL\Delive rables\U LL_Impact_Assessment_Briefing_2022. 03.01.docx Background Context
The Measure U Urban Limit Line (ULL) codified a compromise between stakeholders seeking to balance the protection of farmland and wetlands with urban growth. In 1998, a diverse group of Watsonville stakeholders (residents, business, agricultural, environmental, and government agency representatives) organized to form Action Pajaro Valley, a collaborative growth management effort that yielded Measure U. Measure U sought to foster growth in housing and employment while protecting farmland and wetlands and preventing urban sprawl. Watsonville voters passed Measure U in November 2002, amending the City’s 2005 General Plan. Measure U identifies three “new growth areas” for future annexation:
• Buena Vista Planned Development Area;
• Atkinson Lane; and
• Manabe-Ow (formerly Manabe-Burgstrom).

Measure U allows and directs development within the Buena Vista and Atkinson Lane areas with the condition that the City adopt a Specific Plan and develop the areas in prescribed phases, and also limits the Manabe-Ow area to commercial land uses. Measure U further establishes three distinct urban limit lines beyond which development is prohibited or only conditionally permitted after 20 to 25 years.

Observed Outcomes
While the ULL has added restrictions to development on prime farmland and environmentally sensitive open space, minimal new development has occurred in growth areas defined by the measure. The City has annexed the Manabe-Ow area (2006) as well as a portion of the original Atkinson Lane Specific Plan Area (2018). The City has not annexed the Buena Vista area and has ceased planning efforts for the area. The lack of annexations and paucity of development within ULL growth areas is primarily due to litigation and infrastructure development challenges. Over the last twenty years, development under Measure U has yielded just 207 housing units, a stark contrast to the 2,700 units envisioned in the 2006 version of the 2030 General Plan and the 2009 Atkinson Lane Specific Plan.

Furthermore, since the annexation of Manabe-Ow, only approximately 194,000 square feet of commercial development has occurred, compared to the 1.0 million square feet proposed in the area’s Specific Plan.

Research and Analysis
A range of public- and private-sector housing demand projections as well as policy goals for new housing reveal significant variation in potential future residential development in Watsonville. Forecasts of population and household growth from the California Department of Finance (DOF), the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. (W&P) suggest that demand for housing from 2022 to 2040 to range from 428 to 1,730 additional units, yielding a 3 percent to 12 percent increase in the City’s existing housing stock. The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) regional growth forecast estimates 1,269 additional housing units by 2040, a 9% increase in the City’s existing housing stock. By comparison, an extrapolation of anticipated policy goals for new housing in Watsonville based on the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) ranges from 3,187 units to Attachment 4

Page 2 of 4 ends

Memorandum February 23, 2022
Summary of Findings – Watsonville ULL Renewal Page 3
Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211109_Wat sonville_U LL\Delive rables\U LL_Impact_Assessment_Briefing_2022. 03.01.docx 3,732 units by 2040.1 Future RHNA policy goals could seek to increase the City’s existing housing stock by 22 percent to 26 percent.

Analysis reveals that renewal of the ULL likely will cause a land supply constraint. The limited number of vacant sites and viable annexation areas allowed under the ULL measure provide land supply for an estimated 876 new dwelling units, which is insufficient to accommodate projected growth in over half (four of seven) of the demand forecasts considered.2 The land supply estimate includes land for 281 units on vacant sites within the City now, plus 595 additional units that might be developed within the Atkinson Lane area. In housing demand scenarios based on DOF (high demand scenario), W&P, and AMBAG projections, land supply for housing within the ULL falls short of demand, resulting in unmet demand for between 150 units and 850 units by 2040. The analysis also shows that the ULL could create a significant barrier to meeting policy goals for housing, with estimates of unmet need for housing ranging from roughly 2,300 to 2,900 dwelling units by 2040 if the ULL is renewed. Absent the additional land supply in areas restricted by the ULL, achieving policy goals for housing will require increased housing density within the City limits.

Allowing development in currently restricted, new strategic growth areas creates new land supply to help meet housing demand forecasts. Areas beyond the ULL are constrained for new development by flood risk, airport safety zones, soil conditions, and other factors. Considering such constraints, the City has identified a 77-acre portion of “Area C” (Wagner Property) as a potential strategic location for new housing in the future. A site yield analysis that excludes floodplain areas indicates Area C might support new development of an estimated 864 dwelling units. The analysis finds that opening Area C for growth would nearly double the vacant land available to meet local housing demand and forward progress toward housing policy goals. Area C is the only residential development area outside the urban limit line identified by the City, but it alone could have a meaningful impact on housing development. If the ULL expires and Area C is developable, the analysis identifies sufficient land supply to meet the demand forecasts considered.

Even if new strategic growth areas are opened for development, land supply constraints will continue to affect the City’s ability to meet policy goals for housing development. Watsonville’s preliminary 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, at approximately 2,100 units, is larger than its last two RHNA allocations combined. In recent HCD housing cycles, market-rate and non-profit housing developers have not produced enough new homes in Watsonville to meet RHNA goals. Looking forward, anticipated policy goals for housing supply far outstrip vacant land capacity, even if the ULL sunsets and Area C becomes available for development. The analysis reveals that in addition to increasing vacant land available for 1 HCD goals to address housing need seek to address provision of fair housing, affordability, environmental quality, and jobs-housing balance. RHNA objectives do not incorporate market demand or development feasibility factors.
2 EPS estimated future demand for housing units in Watsonville from 2022 to 2040 based on forecasting from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments, California Department of Finance, California Department of Transportation, and Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. The forecasts and EPS’s methodology are detailed in the Watsonville Urban Limit Line Ballot Initiative Impact Assessment (Briefing Document, March 2022). Attachment 4

Page 3 of 4 ends

Memorandum February 23, 2022
Summary of Findings – Watsonville ULL Renewal Page 4
Z:\Shared\Projects\Oakland\211000s\211109_Wat sonville_U LL\Delive rables\U LL_Impact_Assessment_Briefing_2022. 03.01.docx development, the City also will need to continue efforts to promote infill redevelopment to increase housing supply.

Fiscal and Economic Impact Considerations
New development in Watsonville, whether infill within the City limits or development of new strategic areas at the City’s edge, will have one-time infrastructure improvement requirements. In greenfield areas (i.e., previously undeveloped), new development requires backbone infrastructure, including streets and utilities. Interviews with Public Works Department representatives confirm that new development within the City boundaries also would require one-time infrastructure improvements, including water capacity upgrades and street improvements. For example, existing underground utilities in Watsonville are 80 to 90 years old and would require upsizing to accommodate growth. In some cases, roadways do not meet current City standards and would require investment to accommodate meaningful future growth. Accordingly, upfront infrastructure investments will be necessary to support growth and will affect the feasibility of any major development project in Watsonville.

The age of City networks and systems will create capital improvement cost burdens for developers and the City government, which reduce and possibly eliminate perceived cost advantages associated with existing infrastructure serving infill areas in Watsonville.

Interviews with Police, Fire, and Public Works departments confirm that population growth increases service burdens and department costs under any growth pattern scenario, with the Police department indicating that providing service to new neighborhoods on the urban edge will be more expensive than serving infill development. As cities increase in population, City services expand to meet demand. With growth comes additional tax revenue from property assessment, retail sales, and other sources.

Regardless of whether the ULL is renewed or not, any significant growth in Watsonville will spur demand for City services and will be accompanied by tax revenue growth. However, while the Fire Department already serves unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County beyond the ULL and is well-positioned to expand its City service area, the Police Department indicates that growth at the urban edge likely comes at a cost premium relative to infill development. The cost premium is attributed to a need for additional patrol zones (police beats) in new growth areas. In addition to staffing the new patrol zones, additional equipment would be required for emergency services and traffic and parking enforcement.

Creating strategic growth areas at the urban edge could support new economic development opportunities, including a potential visitor-serving development at the intersection of Highway 1 and State Route 129. While Measure U designates the ManabeOw site as a Growth Area for commercial uses, that area is anticipated to be fully built out in the near future. A 194,000-square-foot FedEx distribution center was built there in 2016, and the City’s planning division currently is processing two applications for distribution centers totaling 332,000 square feet. Beyond these projects, additional development of Manabe-Ow is not likely due to soil and wetland constraints. In the absence of the ULL, City staff has identified a strategic economic development growth area at the intersection of Highway 1 and State Route 129 (320 Lee Road). As an illustrative example of development potential, this roughly 17-acre site might accommodate a 100-room limited-service hotel and 275,000 square feet of retail development, creating roughly 500 new jobs in Watsonville. The visitor-serving uses likely would have a strong positive impact on the City’s General fund, generating new transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax for the City.

Attachment 4

Page 4 of 4 ends

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450  Oakland, CA 94612
510.841.9190  www.epsys.com

WATSONVILLE

URBAN LIMIT LINE

BALLOT INITIATIVE
Impact Assessment
Briefing Document
March 2022
Attachment 5

Page 1 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 1

STUDY CONTENTS

1. Summary of Findings

2. History and Study Context

3. Analysis of the Supply and Demand
for Housing In Watsonville

4. Economic and Fiscal Factors
Attachment 5

Page 2 of 41 ends

Page 650 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 2

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Background
 The Measure U Urban Limit Line (ULL) codified a compromise between stakeholders seeking to balance the protection of farmland and wetlands with urban growth.

Observed Outcomes
 While the ULL has restricted development of prime farmland and environmentally sensitive open space, minimal new development has occurred in growth areas defined by the measure.

Research & Analysis
 A range of public- and private-sector housing demand projections as well as policy goals for new housing reveal significant variation in potential future residential development in Watsonville.
 Analysis reveals that renewal of the ULL likely will cause a land supply constraint, with insufficient developable area to accommodate projected growth in more than half (four of seven) of the demand projections considered. Attachment 5

Page 3 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 3

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Research & Analysis (Continued)
 Allowing development in currently restricted, new strategic growth areas creates new land supply to meet housing demand projections.  Even if new strategic growth areas are opened for development, land supply constraints will continue to affect the City’s ability to meet policy goals for housing development.

Fiscal and Economic Impact Considerations
 New development in Watsonville, whether infill within the City limits or development of new strategic areas at the City’s edge, will have one-time infrastructure improvement requirements.
 Interviews with Police, Fire, and Public Works departments confirm that population growth increases service burdens and department costs under any growth pattern scenario, with the Police department indicating that providing service to new neighborhoods on the urban edge will be more expensive than serving infill development.
 Creating strategic growth areas at the urban edge could support new economic development opportunities, including a potential visitor-serving development at the intersection of Highway 1 and State Route 129.

Attachment 5

Page 4 of 41 ends

Page 652 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 4

HISTORY OF MEASURE U
 Measure U resulted from a growth management initiative among public stakeholders led by the group Action Pajaro Valley.  Action Pajaro Valley established the main goals of Measure U as:
1) Farmland and Wetland Protection
2) Housing Production
3) Job Creation
 Measure U identified three “new growth areas” on the perimeter of Watsonville for future annexation while restricting growth in other areas for 20 to 25 years.
 The three new growth areas became known as:
1) Area A: Buena Vista Planned Development Area
2) Area B: Atkinson Lane
3) Area F: Manabe-Ow (formerly Manabe-Bergstrom)
Attachment 5

Page 5 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 5

HISTORY OF MEASURE U
 Measure U established three distinct urban limit lines:
1) 20-Year Urban Limit Line
2) 25-Year Urban Limit Line
3) Westerly Urban Limit Line.
 Voters approved Measure U in November 2002, amending the 2005 General Plan.
 Growth in areas such as Buena Vista and Manabe-Ow has been limited by litigation and physical constraints such as soil quality.

Attachment 5

Page 6 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 6

EFFORT TO EXTEND MEASURE U
 The 20-Year Urban Limit Line will expire in November of 2022.  The Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection, a group of environmentalists and farmers, organized an effort to extend all Measure U restrictions to 2040. Their stated intent and goals for extending Measure U include:
1) Protect prime farmland
2) Promote planned growth in Watsonville
3) Protect wetlands and the environment
 On Monday, December 13, 2021, the organizers submitted about 3,000 signatures to the City for the extension of Measure U to go before voters in 2022.
 If the Watsonville City Clerk verifies the signatures and the measure is not adopted by City Council, then an extension of Measure U will be on the local ballot for the November 2022 election.

Attachment 5

Page 7 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 7
WHAT HAS MEASURE U ACHIEVED?
Evaluating Measure U Through the Lens of its Three Main Goals:
 Farmland and Wetland Protection
– The Urban Limit Line has added restrictions to development on farmland and wetlands.
 Housing Production
– Atkinson Lane: 46 units as of January 2022 / 450 units proposed in Atkinson Lane Specific Plan (2009)
– Buena Vista: 0 units as of January 2022 / 2,250 units proposed in 2030 General Plan (2006) and 1,300 units proposed in modified 2030 General Plan (2012) – Manabe-Ow: 87 units under construction as of January 2022 / 100 units projected*
– The “Villages”: 74 units as of January 2022 / fully built out Job Creation
– Atkinson Lane: 0 jobs as of January 2022 / 90 jobs considered in modified 2030 General Plan (2012)
– Buena Vista: 0 jobs as of January 2022 / 200 jobs considered in modified 2030 General Plan (2012)
– Manabe-Ow: Approx. 200 jobs as of January 2022 / approx. 400 jobs associated with pending projects* / 2,100 jobs proposed in 2030 General Plan (2006) *Supplementary data provided by the Planning
Division of the City’s Community Development
Department
Attachment 5

Page 656 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 8

STUDY CONTEXT
 This City-led study is a
collaborative effort between staff
and EPS.
 The crux of the issue is whether
Measure U extension for 20+
years creates a binding constraint
on land supply.
 The California Department of
Housing and Community
Development (HCD) establishes
Regional Housing Need (RHNA)
Allocations.
 RHNA targets coupled with
Watsonville’s lengthy effort to
update its General Plan heighten
the significance of the ULL.
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3rd
Cycle
'02-'07
4th
Cycle
'08-'13
5th
Cycle*
'15-'23
6th
Cycle**
'23-'31
Housing Units
RHNA and Permitting In
Watsonville by Housing
Element Cycle
RHNA Allocation
Permitting Over Same Period Sources: CA Dept. of Housing and Community Development; U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development; City of Watsonville; Analysis by
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
*Housing permits through 2020
**Preliminary as of January 2022
Attachment 5

Page 9 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 9

TIMELINE
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
20-Year Measure U Line
25-Year Measure U Line
ULL Extension
RHNA 6
RHNA 7
2002 2022 2027
2032
Attachment 5

Page 10 of 41 ends

LAND SUPPLY ANALYSIS
Attachment 5

Page 11 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 11

URBAN LIMIT LINE AREAS
Attachment 5

Page 12 of 41 ends

Page 660 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 12
AREA A: BUENA VISTA (OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS)
 Growth in the area was planned to be
phased in over 20 years but now is
known to be largely undevelopable.
 Phase 1
– 226.35 gross estimated acreage
– A significant portion of this area is
in an airport protection zone and
will remain undeveloped.
 Phase 2
– 142.17 gross estimated acreage
– It contains the least amount of
developable land due to
environmental constraints,
including steep slopes.
 Phase 3
– 97 Gross Estimated Acreage
 Litigation and the resulting
fragmentation of available development
areas, along with infrastructure
development challenges have
prevented new development from
occurring.

Measure U Area A
Attachment 5

Page 13 of 41 ends

Page 661 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 13
AREA A: BUENA VISTA (OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS)
 Acknowledging density guidelines in
airport safety zones, the City removed
the most restrictive zone, Safety Zone
3, from the northwestern section of the
airport’s crosswind runway.
 The City adopted its 2030 General Plan
in 2005, which authorized 2,250
dwelling units for Buena Vista and
implemented the change to Safety
Zone 3.
 In 2008, the Santa Cruz County
Superior Court ruled in favor of the
Watsonville Pilot’s Association and
determined the removal of Safety Zone
3 unlawful. Watsonville rescinded the
2030 General Plan and reverted to its
2005 General Plan.
 In 2013, the Watsonville Pilot’s
Association successfully contested the
adoption of the City’s modified 2030
General Plan. The City has yet to adopt
an updated General Plan with a policy
for Buena Vista.

Airport Safety Zones (ca. 2003)
 In 2003, Watsonville hoped to assign
most of its 2002-2007 RHNA
allocation to Buena Vista (about
2,100 units). However, much of Phase
I lies in the airport safety zones of the
Watsonville Municipal Airport.

Attachment 5

Page 14 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 14
AREA B: ATKINSON LANE: (PARTIALLY ANNEXED)
 Measure U allows for housing within
Atkinson Lane areas after 2010
provided:
– The City adopts a specific plan
and successfully annexes the
planning area
– At least 50% of units are made to
be affordable workforce housing
 The County of Santa Cruz 2002-2007
Housing Element targeted Countyowned sites in the planning area for housing development.
 In an MOU between the City and the
County, the County agreed to support
negotiations with LAFCO for
Watsonville’s phased annexation of the
entire planning area.
 Shortly after the adoption of the
Atkinson Lane Specific Plan in 2009,
the Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau
successfully challenged the
certification of the project’s EIR.

Atkinson Lane Project Areas (2009)
Atkinson Lane Project Boundaries (2009)
Attachment 5

Page 15 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 15
AREA B: ATKINSON LANE: (PARTIALLY ANNEXED)
 As a result, the original Planning Area
effectively split into two sections:
1) the County Entitlements Area on
which development is allowed
2) the City Specific Plan Area for
which development required
another specific plan and CEQA
review
 In 2018, LAFCO approved the
annexation of a small portion of the
County Entitlements Area, on which
the 46-unit affordable housing
development, Pippin Orchards, is built.
 As of late 2021, the County’s Planning
Department is reviewing a
development proposal for an adjacent
parcel in the County Entitlements Area,
which includes constructing an 80-unit
multifamily development (“Pippin 2”).

Pippin Orchards at 56 Atkinson Ln (2018)
Pippin Orchards: Parcel Annexed in 2018 (2020)
Attachment 5

Page 16 of 41 ends

Page 664 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 16

AREA C (OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS)
 Area C, also known as the Wagner
Area, is located beyond the 25-Year
Urban Limit Line, with the potential for
development after November 2027
absent an extension of Measure U.
 A significant portion of Area C is
situated within a 500-year flood plain,
reducing its gross developable area
from over 200 acres to 77 acres.
 Accounting for public right-of-way, the
developable area further reduces to 54
acres, which City staff estimates to
yield about 860 units at 16 units to the
acre.
 If developed, Area C likely would
include a modest amount of
neighborhood commercial (retail) on a
portion of the site.
 Area C is potentially more economically
viable than Buena Vista given
proximity to existing infrastructure and
City service boundaries.

Approximate Area C Boundary (2021)
Area C Outside 500-Year Flood Plain (2022)*
*Note: Development in strategic areas made possible by
Measure U expiration would seek to avoid impacts to wetlands.

Attachment 5

Page 17 of 41 ends

Page 665 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 17
AREA F: MANABE-OW (INSIDE CITY LIMITS)
 The Manabe-Ow property is a 95-acre
growth area identified by Measure U
and annexed by the City in 2006.
 Initial aspirations for the site included
over 2,000 jobs in retail, flexible and
light industrial, and professional
services.
 A FedEx Ground distribution center was
built in 2016 and remains the only
active establishment on the site as of
early 2022.
 The balance of the site is mainly
undevelopable due to flood plain and
peat soil constraints.
 The city is reviewing applications for
two more distribution centers, most
likely to be located on the western end
of the site near FedEx Ground.

Approximate Manabe-Ow Boundary (2021)
Soil Types of Manabe-Ow (2010)
Attachment 5

Page 18 of 41 ends

Page 666 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 18

OTHER URBAN LIMIT LINE AREAS
 Area D: East of East Lake
– Measure U restricts development in this area until 2022.

However, the entirety of the area is in a 100-year flood plain.  Area E: “Villages”
– This area, annexed in 2002, is fully developed and consists primarily of senior housing.
 Area G: West of Highway 1
– Area G will remain undevelopable as agreed upon by the City of Watsonville, the County of Santa Cruz, and the California Coastal Commission.

Attachment 5

Page 19 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 19

INFILL POTENTIAL
Attachment 5

Page 20 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 20

OVERALL ESTIMATED SUPPLY CAPACITY
Development Potential # of Parcels Sq. Ft. Acres
Existing Developable Area within City Limits 11 115,494 2.65 Potentially Dev. Area within City Limits 29 649,044 14.9 Total Developable Area within City Limits 40 764,538 17.55 Gross Developable Area within Area C* 5 3,361,912 77.18 Net Developable Area within Area C (-30% Public ROW) 2,353,338 54.03 Gross Developable Area within Area B 4 2,314,430 53.13
Net Developable Area within Area B (-30% Public ROW) 1,620,101 37.19 Development Potential Units
Total Units Possible within City @ 16 du/acre 281
Total Units Possible in Area C @16 du/acre 864
Total Units Possible in Area B @16 du/acre 595
Total Possible Units Under Measure U Extension 876
Total Possible Units if Measure U Expires** 1,740
**Development in strategic areas made
possible by Measure U expiration would
seek to avoid impacts to wetlands. In
addition, all wetlands in potentially
developable areas are protected under the
EM/OS zoning district.
*The gross developable area within Area c
accounts for 100- and 500-year floodplain.

Area D is excluded because it is entirely
within 100-year floodplain
Attachment 5

Page 21 of 41 ends

DEMAND- AND NEED-BASED ANALYSIS
Attachment 5

Page 22 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 22

HOUSING DEMAND/NEED METHODOLOGY
 Using fair-share estimates of households and housing permits, EPS estimated the demand for housing units in Watsonville from 2022 to 2040, the period the Measure U extension would span if passed by voters. All demand estimates leverage county-level housing and demographic forecasts from the California Department of Finance (DOF); the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. (W&P). Also included is a city-level housing unit forecast produced by the Association of Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) in October 2020.  The housing unit forecasts are juxtaposed against an estimated range of Watsonville’s combined sixth and seventh cycle RHNA allocations. The City’s sixth cycle allocation is available from AMBAG but is preliminary as of January 2022. For the 7th Cycle, EPS estimated the housing need for AMBAG as a whole. In one scenario, EPS scaled AMBAG’s housing need by the magnitude of adjustments (factor) applied by HCD in the 6th Cycle. In another scenario, EPS based AMBAG’s housing need on the projected population growth of the entire AMBAG region over the 6th and 7th RHNA cycles.
 The sixth RHNA cycle (planning period) spans 2023 to 2031, while the seventh RHNA cycle will likely span 2032 to 2040.

Attachment 5

Page 23 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 23

HOUSING DEMAND AND NEED FORECAST
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Caltrans
Low
Caltrans
High
DOF
Low
DOF
High
W&P
Low
W&P
High

AMBAG RHNA
Low
RHNA
High
Housing Units
Housing Demand and Need in Watsonville
(2022 – 2040)
Attachment 5

Page 24 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 24

POPULATION GROWTH SCENARIOS
250,000
260,000
270,000
280,000
290,000
300,000
Persons
Forecasts of Population in Santa Cruz County
(2022 – 2040)
Actual (DOF) DOF Caltrans AMBAG Woods & Poole
Attachment 5

Page 25 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 25

POPULATION GROWTH SCENARIOS
42,500
44,500
46,500
48,500
50,500
52,500
54,500
56,500
58,500
Persons
Forecasts of Population in Watsonville
(2022 – 2040)
Actual (DOF) DOF Caltrans AMBAG Woods & Poole
Note: All forecasts except for AMBAG leverage a county-level “fair share” methodology.

Attachment 5

Page 26 of 41 ends

Page 674 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 26
DEMAND/NEED VS. SUPPLY (ULL EXTENDED)
-448
-152 -140
+368
+148
+854
+393
+2,311
+2,856
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Caltrans
Low
Caltrans
High
DOF
Low
DOF
High
W&P
Low
W&P
High

AMBAG RHNA
Low
RHNA
High
Housing Units
Housing Demand, Need, and Supply in Watsonville
(2022 – 2040)
Supply Capacity Under
Measure U Extension:
876 Units
Attachment 5

Page 675 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 27
DEMAND/NEED VS. SUPPLY (ULL EXPIRES)
-1,312
-1,017 -1,004
-497
-717
-10
-472
+1,447
+1,992
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Caltrans
Low
Caltrans
High
DOF
Low
DOF
High
W&P
Low
W&P
High

AMBAG RHNA
Low
RHNA
High
Housing Units
Housing Demand, Need, and Supply in Watsonville
(2022 – 2040)
Supply Capacity Under
Measure U Expiration:
1,740 Units
Attachment 5

Page 28 of 41 ends

ECONOMIC AND FISCAL FACTORS
Attachment 5

Page 29 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 29

FISCAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICES
Current General Fund Budget (FY21-22) = $51M
Capital Projects
9%
City
Clerk
2%
Community
Development
6%
Finance
3%
Fire
16%
General
Government
5%
Library
1%
Non
Departmental
5%
Parks & Community Services
10%
Police
40%
Public Works
3%
Attachment 5

Page 678 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 30

FISCAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICES
General Fund Expenditures Cost Per Capita (Service Population) Expenditure Category Cost per Capita
Capital Projects $72
City Clerk $20
Community Development $48
Finance $28
Fire $131
General Government $40
Library $10
Non Departmental $45
Parks & Community Services $86
Police $334
Public Works $27
Total $842
1 Per capita calculated based on service population. Service population is calculated as the sum of City residents and 1/3rd of workers. The 1/3rd weight reflects lower service demand generated by jobs in the City.
– Current cost of about $840
per capita service population
– For most departments, per
capita service costs will
increase with population
– Costs increase proportionally
with population within City
departments that provide
service directly to residents
and workers without
meaningful cost recovery
– Most significant service costs
are associated with Police and
Fire services
– Capital Projects and Public
Works also are critical to
Attachment 5 supporting population growth

Page 31 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 31

FISCAL IMPACT ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
In any growth scenario, population growth creates increased demand for service and requires additional Police staffing requirements:
 Population growth will require sworn officers and non-sworn staff to provide emergency service, and to address traffic and parking.
 Regardless of the future growth pattern, the Police department’s current station is crowded and in need of replacement.

The Watsonville Police Department provides services to areas within the City boundary and Urban Limit Line:
 A sprawling growth pattern including new growth beyond the Urban Limit Line could affect Police response times.
 To provide adequate service to outlying areas the Police Department will need a new patrol zone (police beat).
 Increasing staff and equipment to accommodate a new beat requires additional budget funds.
 City resources needed to provide services in areas beyond the Urban Limit Line create a cost premium associated with growth due to demand for new patrol zones.

EPS Interview with Police Department representative conducted Jan. 18, 2022 Attachment 5

Page 32 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 32

FISCAL IMPACT ON FIRE DEPARTMENT
In any population growth scenario (infill or greenfield beyond the ULL), Fire Department services will require new facilities and staffing:
 Irrespective of where growth occurs, Fire Department investments will be needed to sustain service levels.
 A possible third fire station in the City would require an additional engine company (a minimum of 9 firefighters).
 Even without a new station, staffing and operational capacity improvements will be needed to accommodate higher calls for service.

The Watsonville Fire Department already provides services to areas outside the City limit, past the Urban Limit Line:
 Services provided to unincorporated areas by contract  Pajaro Valley Fire Protection District (PVFPD) contracts for service in the Interlaken CDP (outside City limits, north of Area C).

EPS Interview with Fire Department representative conducted Dec . 16, 2021 Attachment 5

Page 33 of 41 ends

Page 681 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 33

FISCAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC WORKS
Existing City infrastructure requires upgrades for deferred improvement and to accommodate growth, while expansion into new greenfield areas requires new supporting infrastructure:
 Underground utilities in some parts of Watsonville date back to the 1930s (e.g., water flows insufficient).
 Some City roadways were originally in unincorporated County areas and are built to a lesser standard and have drainage issues.  Funding sources currently are insufficient to bring existing infrastructure up to an adequate service level, but improvements are occurring over time.
 Similarly, there are significant costs associated with developing new infrastructure within greenfield areas beyond the ULL.
 New roadway network in Wagner Area could have transportation benefits Regardless of the growth scenario, the Public Work departments will have to hire more staff to meet demand from new households.

EPS Interview with Public Works representatives conducted Dec . 14, 2021 Attachment 5

Page 34 of 41 ends

Page 682 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 34

ECONOMIC IMPACT
Manabe-Ow is the only growth area restricted to commercial uses under Measure U.
 Manabe-Ow is anticipated to be fully built out in the near future.  Current projects totaling roughly 332,000 square feet will deliver warehouse/logistics facilities that complete build out of the plan area.

Additional strategic commercial growth areas beyond the Urban Limit Line could be developable in the future:
 Approximately 13.6 acres of vacant land at the intersection of HWY 1 and SR 129 might be zoned for General Commercial, creating a wide range of non-residential development opportunities.
 Development of a 100-room hotel and 275,000 square feet of retail uses on the site might generate upwards of 500 new jobs.
 In addition to job creation, hotel and retail uses also likely would have a positive net impact on the City General Fund, owing to TOT and sales tax revenues coupled with minimal service burden.

Attachment 5

Page 35 of 41 ends

HOUSING DEMAND AND NEED FORECAST CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX
Attachment 5

Page 36 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 36
DEMAND ESTIMATES: CALTRANS
Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Households in Santa Cruz County Caltrans projections 2,867 Households in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of households 407 Housing Units in Watsonville Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 428 Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Households in Santa Cruz County Caltrans projections 2,867 Housing Units in Santa Cruz County Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 3,018 Housing Units in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of housing permits 724 Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “Caltrans Low” (2040) Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “Caltrans High” (2040) Attachment 5

Page 37 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 37
DEMAND ESTIMATES: DOF
Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Population in Santa Cruz County DOF projections 13,819
Household Population in Santa Cruz County Long-run share of population in households 13,132 Households in Santa Cruz County Long-run persons per household 4,926 Households in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of households 699 Housing Units in Watsonville Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 736 Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Population in Santa Cruz County DOF projections 13,819
Household Population in Santa Cruz County Long-run share of population in households 13,132 Households in Santa Cruz County Long-run persons per household 4,926 Housing Units in Santa Cruz County Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 5,185 Housing Units in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of housing permits 1,244 Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “DOF Low” (2040) Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “DOF High” (2040) Attachment 5

Page 38 of 41 ends

Page 686 of 870 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 38
DEMAND ESTIMATES: WOODS & POOLE
Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Households in Santa Cruz County W&P projections 6,853
Households in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of households 972 Housing Units in Watsonville Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 1,024 Metric Assumption
Change
(2022 –
2040)
Households in Santa Cruz County W&P projections 6,853
Housing Units in Santa Cruz County Structural Vacancy Rate (5%) 7,214 Housing Units in Watsonville Fair-share estimate of housing permits 1,730 Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “W&P Low” (2040) Housing Units Demanded in Watsonville: “W&P High” (2040) Attachment 5

Page 39 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 39
NEED ESTIMATES: RHNA LOW SCENARIO
Metric Assumption Count
Change in Population of AMBAG Region
(2023 – 2031) DOF projections 24,985
Change in Population of AMBAG Region
(2032 – 2040) DOF projections 13,408
6th Cycle RHNA of the AMBAG Region HCD calculation 33,274 7th Cycle RHNA of the AMBAG Region Ratio of 2032/2040 population change to 2023/2031 population change 17,856
7th Cycle Housing Need in Watsonville Long-run share of AMBAG RHNA 1,120 Total RHNA (6th + 7th Cycles) 3,187
Housing Need in Watsonville: “RHNA Low” (2032 - 2040)
Attachment 5

Page 40 of 41 ends

Economic & Planning Systems EPS PPT Presentation | 40
NEED ESTIMATES: RHNA HIGH SCENARIO
Metric Assumption Count
Population of AMBAG Region in 2040 DOF projection 767,108 Household Population (Ages 15 and Over) Share of persons 15+ in households, 2019 581,670 Households of AMBAG Region in 2040 Weighted average headship rate of AMBAG Region 250,061
Increase in Households from 2032 to 2040 DOF/HCD 6th cycle calculations 10,000 Adjustment to Housing Need Adjustment factor from 6th Cycle (2.654) 26,544 7th Cycle Housing Need in Watsonville Long-run share of AMBAG RHNA 1,665 Total RHNA (6th + 7th Cycles) 3,732
Housing Need in Watsonville: “RHNA High” (2032 - 2040)
Attachment 5

Page 41 of 41 ends

Measure U vs. ULL Initiative Comparison Table
Measure U ULL Initiative
Summary of Key Differences
Expiration Date(s) 2022 & 2027 2040 + In effect until General Plan Amendment Specific Plans & Phasing Required Not Required
Exceptions to Modify ULL
w/out Vote of the People
None Exception for Provision of Housing
Side-by-Side Comparison
Urban Limit Line
Urban Limit Line Sections
– Implementation
Measure 3.C.1
 Twenty Year ULL
 Twenty-Five Year ULL
 Westerly ULL
 ULL Segment 1
 ULL Segment 2
 ULL Segment 3
Growth Areas
Implementation Measure 3.G.1/3.G.2
Area A - Buena Vista  Specific plan required
 Development to occur in 3 phases
 No specific plan required
 No phasing requirements
Area B - Atkinson Lane  Specific plan required Uses limited to residential with 50% affordable units
 No specific plan required
 Uses limited to residential with 50% affordable units Area C - South of
Corralitos Creek
 Not available until after November 1, 2027  Not available until after November 3, 2040 Area D - East of E. Lake
Avenue
 Not available until after November 1, 2022  Not available until after November 3, 2040 Area E - Villages  May be planned for ASAP
 Limited to senior housing
 May be planned for ASAP
 Limited to senior housing
Area F -
Manabe/Burgstrom
 May be planned for ASAP
 Limited to industrial and job-generating uses
 May be planned for ASAP
 Limited to industrial and job-generating uses
Area G - West of
Westerly ULL
 Subject to MOU
 Backstop of voter approval should MOU
terminate
 Subject to MOU
 Backstop of voter approval should MOU terminate
Attachment 6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Development Phasing Policy
Development Phasing -
Implementation Measure

3.G.1/3.G.2
 Specific Plan Approval required for Buena Vista
I, II, & III and Atkinson Lane
 Three-phase development for Buena Vista
 No tentative map approval for Atkinson Lane
prior to 2010
 No specific plans required
 No phasing requirements
Permitted Uses by Area
Implementation Measure 3.G.1/3.G.2
Area A - Buena Vista  Primarily residential uses, with some neighborhood commercial, light industrial,
schools, open space, and parks
 Primarily residential uses, with some neighborhood
commercial, light industrial, open space, and parks
Area B - Atkinson Lane  Residential with a requirement that at least fifty percent of the number of units be deed
restricted affordable workforce housing with an
emphasis on housing of agricultural workers.
 Residential with a requirement that at least fifty percent of the number of units be deed restricted affordable workforce housing with an emphasis on housing of agricultural workers.

Area C - South of
Corralitos Creek
 Outside of ULL
 No restrictions
 Outside of ULL
 No restrictions
Area D - East of E. Lake
Avenue
 Outside of ULL
 No restrictions
 Outside of ULL
 No restrictions
Area E - Villages  Primarily senior housing  Primarily senior housing Area F -
Manabe/Burgstrom
 Industrial and other job-generating uses  Industrial and other job-generating uses Area G - West of
Westerly ULL
 Subject to MOU
 Exceptions for water service, waste water
service, leachate lines, or other public facilities
 Subject to MOU
 Public facilities described in the MOU
Unbuildable Land  Greenbelt and/or designated environmental management
 Greenbelt and/or designated environmental management
Amendments
Amendment to ULL and
Related Policies –
Implementation Measure

3.C.3
 By the voters of Watsonville, with exceptions:
 3.C.3(a) – City Council may reorganize,
renumber, or reorder the ULL Maps and Policies
in the course of regular updates to the General
 By the voters of Watsonville, with exceptions:
 3.C.3(a) – City Council may reorganize, renumber, or reorder the ULL Maps and Policies in the course of regular updates to Attachment 6

Page 2 of 4 ends

Plan provided that these policies and
implementation measures remain in the
General Plan
 3.C.3(d) – City Council may amend the location
of the ULL, provided that the amended
boundary is inside the limits of the ULL as
established by the Measure U
 3.C.3(e) – On or after November 1, 2027, the
City Council may amend the 25-year ULL. On or
after November 1, 2022, the City Council may
amend the 20-year ULL. Should the MOU
terminate for any reason, on or after November
1, 2027, the City Council may amend the
Westerly ULL.
 3.C.3(f) – Exception related to LAFCO
amendment of Watsonville Sphere of Influence.
 3.C.3(g) – Exception related to LAFCO approving
annexation for land within the ULL.
the General Plan provided that these policies and
implementation measures remain in the General Plan
 3.C.3(b) – City Council may amend the location of the ULL, provided that the amended boundary is inside the limits of the ULL as established by the ULL Initiative
 3.C.3(c) – On or after November 3, 2040, the City Council may amend ULL Segments 1 and 2. Should the MOU terminate for any reason, on or after November 3, 2040, the City Council may amend ULL Segment 3.
 3.C.3(d) – The ULL shall remain in place and the policies and implementation measures shall retain their full force and effect until the City Council amends the General Plan in accordance with state law without a vote of the people.
 3.C.3(e) – The City Council may amend the location of the ULL, Policies 3.B and 3.C, or Implementation Measures 3.C.1 through

3.C.3 if the City Council determines that doing so is necessary to comply with state or federal law regarding the provision of housing. The City Council may do so only if it first makes each of the following findings based on substantial evidence: (i) A specific provision of state or federal law requires the City to accommodate the housing that will be permitted by the
amendment; (ii) The amendment permits no greater density than that necessary to accommodate the required housing; and (iii) An alternative site within the ULL is not available to satisfy the specific state or federal housing law.

Amendment to Permitted
Uses – Implementation
Measure 3.G.4
 Not included  By the voters of Watsonville, with exceptions:
 3.G.4(a) – City Council may reorganize, renumber, or reorder Policy 3.G and Implementation Measures 3.G.1 and 3.G.2 in the course of regular updates to the General Plan provided that these policies and implementation measures remain in the General Plan
 3.G.4(b) – On or after November 1, 2022, the City Council may amend Implementation Measure 3.G.1 in accordance with state law without a vote of the people. Unless and until the City Attachment 6

Page 3 of 4 ends

Council makes any such amendment, Implementation Measure

3.G.1 shall retain its full force and effect.
 3.G.4(c) – On or after November 1, 2027, the City Council may amend Policy 3.G and Implementation Measure 3.G.2 in
accordance with state law and without a vote of the people.

Unless and until the City Council makes any such amendment, Implementation Measure 3.G.2 shall retain its full force and effect.
 3.G.4(d) – The City Council may amend Policy 3.G or
Implementation Measures 3.G.1 and 3.G.2 if the City Council determines that doing so is necessary to comply with state or federal law regarding the provision of housing. The City Council may do so only if it first makes each of the following findings based on substantial evidence: (i) A specific provision of state or federal law requires the City to accommodate the housing that will be permitted by the amendment; (ii) The amendment
permits no greater density than that necessary to
accommodate the required housing; and (iii) An alternative site within the ULL is not available to satisfy the specific state or federal housing law.

Expiration Date
Expiration  Expires at set dates for each of the three ULL areas identified in Implementation Measures

3.C.1 and 3.C.3
 No statement that the limitations shall remain
in effect after those dates without City Council
action
 3.C.3(d) – After November 3, 2040, the ULL shall remain in place and Policies 3.B and 3.C and Implementation Measures 3.C.1 through 3.C.3 shall retain their full force and effect until the City Council amends the General Plan in accordance with state law and without a vote of the people.

Attachment 6

Page 4 of 4 ends

3/7/22, 12:40 PM City of Watsonville Mail - Materials from the Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=f3a85c1b77&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1726674346180928030%7Cmsg-f%3A1726674346180… 1/1 Beatriz Flores <[email protected]>
Materials from the Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection 1 message
Sam Earnshaw <[email protected]> Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 12:28 PM To: Beatriz Flores <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected], Jimmy Dutra <[email protected]>, Sara Clark <[email protected]>, Peter Navarro <[email protected]>, Amy Newell <[email protected]>, Betty Bobeda <[email protected]>, Jess Brown <[email protected]>, Adam Scow <[email protected]> Hi Beatriz,
Please find attached, materials for tomorrow night’s City Council meeting. 1) Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection’s Impact Report 2) A list of Errors and Omissions in the City’s 9212 report 3) Document from Greenbelt Alliance about Urban Growth Boundaries and Sprawl 4) Research paper on the Hidden Costs of Sprawl
5) A Farm Bureau letter sent to Rebecca Garcia, explaining the Farm Bureau’s work with farmworker housing.

Please call me if you have any questions.

Sam Earnshaw
831 722-5556
5 attachments
Comttee for Planned Growth Impact Rpt 3-7-22.pdf
756K
Errors and Omissions by City 9212 Report.pdf
110K
Planning-Our-Future-The-Value-of-UGBs.pdf
558K
Thompson-Hidden Costs of Sprawl.pdf
1660K
FB Position FW Housing 12_19.pdf
146K

Page 694 of 870 ends

Report to Evaluate the Impact of Passage of a Ballot
Measure to Renew the Watsonville Urban Limit Line
and the Provisions of Ballot Measure U Until 2040
Prepared by
The Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection 447 Cloudview Drive, Watsonville, CA 95076
March 7, 2022

Page 695 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 2 ends

Table of Contents
Section I: Introduction Page 3
Section II: Our Preliminary Assessment of the CityPrepared 9212 ReportPage 4 Section III: Fiscal Impact Page 7
Section IV: Effects on Internal Consistency of General
Plan, Specific Plans and Zoning

Page 10 ends

Section V: Effects on the Use of Land and Meeting
Regional Housing Needs

Page 14 ends

Section VI: Impact on Funding for Infrastructure Page 17 Section VII: Impact on the Community's Ability to
Attract and Retain Business and Employment

Page 20 ends

Section VIII: Impact on Vacant Parcels of Land Page 24
Section IX: Impact on Agricultural Lands, Open Space
and Traffic Congestion

Page 27 ends

Section X: Summary Page 30

Page 696 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 3 ends

I. Introduction
This report has been prepared by the Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection to discuss the effects of the newly qualified ballot Measure using the impact areas identified in California Elections Code Section 9212. The Committee gathered enough valid signatures from registered Watsonville voters to place a new Measure on either the June 2022 or November 2022 ballot. The Measure asks City of Watsonville voters to decide if the existing Urban Limit Line (ULL) for the City, approved by popular vote through Measure U in 2002, should be extended until the year 2040. Most provisions of approved Measure U expire in 2022. Section 9212 permits the local governing body to prepare a report that assesses potential impacts of ballot Measures (if they are approved) according to seven suggested categories. The City of Watsonville has prepared a “9212 Report” which will be presented to the Watsonville City Council on March 8, 2022.

While 9212 Reports are expected to be prepared by local government staffs, the law does not prevent other entities or organizations from preparing companion reports if so desired. The Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection created a similar report that evaluates the continuation of the ULL according to the seven criteria specified by Section 9212 in the following sections. Each section focuses on each individual criterion item in the same sequence as stated in Section 9212.

Before evaluating the continuation of the ULL in separate sections, the report commences with Section II that evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the City-prepared 9212 Report.

Our evaluation concludes that renewing the existing ULL for an additional 18 years will not only preserve important farmland and open space lands surrounding Watsonville ULL but will also provide more carbon sequestration to fight climate change and encourage more innovative land use planning and “smart growth” development than has occurred previously in the City. This conclusion is summarized in “Section X: Summary” of this report. The other sections of the report explain why there is ample land and associated resources within the ULL to provide an adequate number of new dwelling units and new commercial uses to serve a growing population and to provide additional employment opportunities for City residents.

Page 697 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 4 ends

II. Our Preliminary Assessment of the City-Prepared 9212 Report
Background
The City has hired an Oakland based consulting firm to help prepare a report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212. Their report is titled, “Watsonville Urban Limit Line Ballot Initiative Impact Assessment” (City Report).
1 The City Report was first made available to the
public in the afternoon of March 3, 2022. This section summarizes the results of our preliminary review of the City Report. In this case, we stress the word “preliminary” as the March 3 report release date has limited our review of the City Report to a four-day period before our report must be submitted to the City Clerk by the March 7, 2022 deadline for its inclusion with City Council agenda materials for the Council’s meeting of March 8, 2022. We believe it is important for Council members to also have a copy of our report as part of their consideration of potential impacts of renewing Measure U and the Urban Limit Line (ULL). Comments from a more thorough review of the City Report may be prepared at a later date. However, at present, we are providing the following comments.

We agree with the conclusion on page 5 of the City Report that “providing service to new neighborhoods on the urban edge will be more expensive than serving infill development.” This echoes one of the conclusions made in Section VI of our report. Other conclusions of the City Report are at sharp contrast to those resulting from our analysis. We believe this disparity is due to several errors, omissions and biases in the City Report which are summarized in the remainder of this Section.

Errors and Omissions of the City Report
• Fails to Address All Criterion of Elections Code Section 9212: Unlike our report, the City Report does not include an assessment of all seven topical items listed for Section 9212. Rather, it discusses just a few of the topics. A glaring omission is the City Report’s lack of discussion on impacts on surrounding agricultural lands, which is specified in item #7 of Section 9212. This is particularly alarming since the protection of agricultural land from urbanization is one of the main stated objectives of renewing the City ULL. • Number of Infill Parcels Available for New Development is Understated: The City Report understates the infill lots available for new development and the number of dwelling units they could support. It also completely ignores the potential for existing housing stock to be developed with additional units, as anticipated and allowed by state laws like SB 9 and Government Code 65852.2. With over 13,000 existing units, Watsonville could meet the highest anticipated housing stock need by 2040 by simply adding a unit or ADU to roughly one-fifth of the City’s existing units.2It also uses the 1 Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. “Watsonville Urban Limit Line Ballot Initiative Impact Assessment - Briefing Document”, March 2022
2 The City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element states that the City currently had 13,528 units as of 2010. The City Report states that 2,856 additional units may be needed by 2040.

Page 698 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 5 ends

highest forecasts of units needed by 2040 to fulfill housing needs. As such, the City Report uses skewed data to conclude renewing the ULL will not allow enough of the needed additional housing to be constructed.

There is no mention of the potential for new dwelling units within the Manfre Road area or the unnamed area that borders both Green Valley Road and Freedom Blvd. These two areas are both beyond the city limits but within the ULL and shown with orange and green colorings on the page 7 map of the City Report. Pages 12--16 discuss housing potentials in other areas inside the ULL but outside of the city limits; but the Manfre and Green Valley Road areas are not acknowledged nor discussed in the remainder of the report.
• Many Housing Units Now Being Built are Omitted: Several of the dwelling units currently being constructed have been omitted from the City Report data analysis pertaining to Watsonville meeting its regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). For example, the townhouses currently being constructed at 221 Airport Blvd and the 72 projected housing units on Miles Lane are not included. • Certain Information is not Factual: The map and text on page 17 of the City Report shows that, other than the FedEx facility, the 95-acre Manabe-Ow area “...is mainly undevelopable due to flood plain and peat soil constraints.” This statement is contrary to the fact that City Planning staff has accepted permit applications in 2021 and 2022 for two large commercial projects on flood plain properties near FedEx. The applications propose to elevate 1-foot above flood level as required by FEMA. In addition, the 87 dwelling units now being constructed by the Sunshine Gardens project and within the Manabe-Ow area are not within a flood plain.

The map on page 19 of the City Report identifies the Hillcrest Estates site as “undevelopable parcel” (red coloring). This is false. The City has approved this site for a 147-unit subdivision. While there are soil contamination issues on this site, this problem can be remediated. The project applicant is currently working on a soil remediation plan for this project.
• Other Information Shows the Report is Biased: The listing on page 7 of the City Report titled “What has Measure U Achieved” is presented as Measure U being responsible for “0” housing units and “0” jobs being created in the Buena Vista area. This rationale is false. The reason why no dwellings or jobs have been provided in the Buena Vista area near the airport is the City’s faulty preparation of Watsonville Vista 2030 General Plan which resulted in a successful civil suit against the City. The court ruling required de-certification (nullification) of the new General Plan and the City decided to take no further planning action, and as a result, there has been no development to date in the Buena Vista area. However, this situation could be remedied to plan for and allow housing in at least some of this area.

Similarly, another entry under “What has Measure U Achieved” on page 7 shows a comparison of the 200 existing jobs (FedEx) within the Manabe-Ow area with the “2,100

Page 699 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 6 ends

jobs proposed in 2030 General Plan”. This comparison is repeated on page 8. Again, the reason there is currently a lower than expected jobs number is not the result of Measure U or the ULL. Rather, the City has not followed the guidelines of the Manabe-Own Specific Plan to attract a mixture of retail and office commercial to this area. Instead, the City has accepted project applications for warehouse-type commercial uses which have substantially lower jobs/floor area ratios than other commercial uses.

In a separate instance, pages 8, 39 and 40 of the City Report uses RHNAs for both Cycles 6 and 7 that have not been finalized and are significantly and suspiciously higher than any of the other estimates they quote on page 24 of the same report. The report fails to provide a single mention of the new housing potential provided by the future Downtown Specific Plan currently under preparation by City staff.

The economic impact summary on page 34 of the City Report only identifies a single site (the 13.6-acre parcel at Hwys. 1 and 129) as a “strategic commercial growth area beyond the Urban Limit Line (that) could be developable in the future”. This site, the Redman House site,” is controversial and is not part of any analysis of the impacts of this Initiative. The City Report fails to identify any other site within or outside of the ULL for commercial growth. Conversely, our report correctly identifies the Downtown Specific Plan area, which includes vacant and under-utilized parcels, as one realistic area for future commercial growth combined with new housing. We also suggest additional areas where commercial revitalization could occur by adopting other Specific Plans promoting mixed-use. By being so selective in identifying one site for future commercial growth, the City Report gives an impression that it has been prepared to promote annexation of the 13.6-acre site for a specific project rather than to assess the effects of the pending ballot Measure.

Conclusion
The City Report addresses only selected items of Code Section 9212. Further, its analysis is both incomplete and contains skewed data and factual errors. The lack of complete information and inclusion of non-factual data, including that related to housing, results in all of the data projections for housing potential with a renewal of Measure U being substantially understated and incorrect. These problems make the report inadmissible to accurately assess the impacts of passage of the ballot Measure to renew the ULL. Our following report provides a more comprehensive and factual analysis.

Page 700 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 7 ends

III. Fiscal Impact
California Elections Code Section 9212, Item 1
Determination
Continuation of the adopted ULL language in City plans will protect the business economy of the City and reduce public service and infrastructure costs as explained in the following bullet points.

Background
• Watsonville’s major revenue sources are similar to most other cities. They include:
o Property taxes: City staff expects this revenue to grow in the next two fiscal years o Sales tax: Staff anticipates a 3.6% increase in this revenue in the 2021/22 fiscal year compared to the previous year.
o Hotel room tax: anticipated to be about the same as in 2018/19 (pre-pandemic) fiscal year. In other words, an increase from the previous two fiscal years. o Utility use charges: Customer charges for City provided services of water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer
o Utility use tax: Surcharges on cable, telephone, gas, electricity and City provided services
o Medical cannabis: Staff anticipates $550,000 in the 2021/22 fiscal year with an increase to $605,00 in the 2022/23 fiscal year.
o Various other smaller revenue sources, including a special 0.25 cent sales tax approved by the voters.3
• The 2022-23 State budget proposed by the governor in January 2022 has been named the “California Blueprint”. Among other things, it includes funds to provide new housing, reduce homelessness and fight climate change. Statewide there is $2 billion in new grants and tax credits for communities that submit successful proposals. Half of this amount ($1 billion) is earmarked for new “infill” housing within developed areas, and for the “Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities” program, which funds “land-use, housing, transportation and land preservation projects.” • As discussed in Sections IV, V, VIII and X of this report, the existing Urban Limit Line (ULL) will encourage more infill development and mixed-use projects within the ULL.

Analysis and Supportive Evidence
• If adopted as expected, the California Blueprint will provide a unique opportunity for communities to obtain grants to build affordable housing and fund climate clean transit (e.g. electric buses, etc.). The City will be able to apply for and receive funding for 3 City of Watsonville website; www.cityofwatsonville.org/DocumentCenter/View/17125/Final-Budget-2021--2023, pp. 23--24.

Page 701 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 8 ends

projects that meet the California Blueprint criteria. Much of this criterion encourages urban infill housing projects.
• Increased infill construction will produce cost benefits to local construction, building supply businesses, and increased sales tax to the City. • While construction for urban sprawl projects can provide similar revenues to those cited in the previous bullet point, much of these revenues are off-set by new costs associated with long-term maintenance of miles of new infrastructure (e.g. streets, sidewalks, water lines, sewer, etc.) and new costs of providing services throughout a wider spatial area (e.g. police and fire protection). This issue is discussed further in Section VI of this report.
• New development that focuses on enhancing Watsonville city-centered activities, new or revitalized restaurants and tourist-based venues will bring more customers and revenue to existing local businesses as well as to newly created businesses, and generate increased sales tax to the City.
• Retaining the ULL will retain agricultural jobs as well as employment in agricultural support business. Farmworker unemployment and agricultural support business downsizing will be prevented. Maintaining financially healthy agricultural support businesses inside the city limits will enable these businesses to generate strong sales tax revenues to the City. Of the leading 13 employers in the City, 4 are directly related to local agriculture. (Lakeside Organic Farms, Martinelli’s, Driscoll’s Berries and Del Mar Foods).4
• Because the expiration of the existing Measure U would trigger new annexation proposals for adjacent farmland, there is a need to balance impacts of the upcoming ballot Measure with impacts without the Measure. These include:
o Certain opponents to extending Measure U maintain it will restrict growth and will land-lock the City. This position necessitates the annexation of adjacent farmland to create new housing opportunities. Outward development on previously agricultural or open space lands is the definition of urban sprawl. o A major fiscal impact of future sprawl to the City would be substantial staff time for preparation of annexation documents and new Sphere of Influence applications to LAFCO along with the expense of funding consulting firms to prepare Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) for the proposed annexations. 4 City of Watsonville website; www.cityofwatsonville.org/DocumentCenter/View/17125/Final-Budget-2021--2023, p. 16.

Page 702 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 9 ends

Additional City staff time for all related meetings and public hearings would also be required.
o The fiscal impacts of sprawl to municipalities are well-documented. Developer impact fees cover some new infrastructure hard costs (roads, water and sewer, parks, public facilities) but not all of them, including capital costs for new fire and police sub-stations and long-term maintenance of expanded water systems, streets, sidewalks, domestic sewer, storm sewer and solid waste collection.5 This issue is discussed in more detail in Section VI.

Conclusion
The existing ULL has been instrumental in preserving productive agricultural land surrounding the ULL by preventing urban sprawl into those lands. During the same time period, the City government has operated with moderately increasing revenues. Agriculture continues to be a major employment provider for City residents. Agricultural support businesses are also an important source of employment for residents and tax funds to City government. These beneficial impacts are expected to continue if the ULL is renewed until 2040. By retaining new development within the ULL, the City has avoided the expenses required to maintain new infrastructure that extend into new geographic areas with urban sprawl. 5 J. Carruthers and G. Ulfarsson, “Urban Sprawl and the Cost of Public Services”. Environment and Planning B:

Planning and Design 2003, volume 30, pages 503-- 522

Page 703 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 10 ends

IV. Effects on Internal Consistency of General Plan, Specific Plans and Zoning
California Elections Code Section 9212, Item 2
(2) Its effect on the internal consistency of the City's general and specific plans, including the housing element, the consistency between planning and zoning, and the limitations on City actions under Section 65008 of the Government Code* and Chapters 4.2 (commencing with Section 65913) and 4.3 (commencing with Section 65915) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code* .
*California Gov’t Code Section 65000 makes it unlawful for any City or county to deny any individual or group of individuals the enjoyment of residence, landownership, tenancy, or any other land use in this state based on age, income, method of financing or proposed multi-family housing when consistent with the zoning and General Plan. *California Gov’t Code Section 65915 requires local governments to provide for the expeditious processing of a density bonus applications.

Determination
Continuation of the adopted ULL language in City plans will not affect the internal consistency of those plans as explained in following bullet points.

Background
• Watsonville’s 2005 General Plan, adopted in 1969 and updated in 1994, is the current General Plan that guides planning and land use throughout the City. In 2012 the City prepared a new General Plan named “Watsonville Vista 2030” but adoption of that document was overturned by the courts. Therefore, the 2005 General Plan remains the legal document to guide land use planning and development. • The Housing Element of the Watsonville 2005 General Plan was updated in 2015. It guides housing policy through the year 2023. State law requires this element be updated more frequently than other elements of a General Plan.
• Watsonville has one Specific Plan, the Manabe-Own Business Park Specific Plan, which was adopted in 2010. It provides a more detailed set of policies to guide planning and development of the area surrounded by the Seaview Ranch and Las Brisas subdivisions, the railroad corridor and Highway 1. Currently, the City is formulating a second Specific Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan, but it has not been adopted. • Title 14 of the Watsonville Municipal Code contains the City Zoning Ordinance. Zoning designations and regulations in any municipality are supposed to be consistent with the land use designations and policies of the General Plan. However, zoning regulations

Page 704 of 870 ends

Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection
Report on Impacts of Renewing Watsonville’s ULL

Page 11 ends

provide more specificity and detail. Chapter 14-04 of Code Title 14 (Zoning) establishes various zoning designations, including four residential zoning districts, seven commercial zoning designations and two industrial zoning designations. Chapter 14-08 provides a location map of the various zoning designations. Chapter 14-16 establishes regulations for each zoning district. The locations of the City’s zoning districts are generally consistent with land use designations of the General Plan. Regulations for these zoning districts are silent regarding the provisions of Measure U.

Analysis and Supportive Evidence
• The 2005 General Plan and the Manabe-Ow Specific Plan incorporate voluminous language from Measure U which was approved by the voters in 2002. Measure U mandated the existing Urban Limit Line (ULL) for Watsonville. The Housing Element acknowledges the adoption of Measure U language in other elements of the General Plan.

Development within the City has proceeded with such language without creating consistency issues within or among these official plans. Examples to support this conclusion are provided below.
• For example, the 2005 General Plan includes these polices that were adopted as a result of the passage of Measure U, including language taken directly from text of Measure U. o Policy 3.A.3: “The City shall fully utilize its powers of utility extension and annexation to support its polices of City centered development and maintaining agriculture and open space surrounding the Urban Limit Line.” o Policy 3.B-Annexation: “The City shall pursue annexation of undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels between the City limit boundary and the Urban Limit Line (ULL) in phases within existing urban areas before development of lands in outlying areas.”
o Policy 3.C.1 - Urban Limit Line Location: The text of this policy provides a detailed 2-1/2-page description of the location of the ULL as specified in the language of Measure U.
o Policy 3.F.1 - Urban Limit Line: “In order to preserve agricultural uses outside the urbanized area, the City shall not support annexation or increased urbanization by the City or the County outside of the Urban Limit Line as identified in the Watsonville 2005 Land Use Diagram.”
o Several other policies in the General Plan support the ULL and the concept of Measure U. For the sake of brevity, they are not all listed above. • Where needed, the General Plan language would be updated to accommodate the changes proposed by the Initiative.
• For example, the General Plan’s Housing Element includes polices that are harmonious with the language and vision of Measure U and/or corresponding policies of other elements in the General Plan:

Page 705 of 870 ends

Watsonville City CouncilMarch 8, 2022

Watsonville City Council
March 8, 2022