Watsonville City Council
March 11, 2025

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● An appeal decision requires engagement and deliberation, not passive acceptance of Staff’s conclusions.

The City’s response does not address the core issue—Sencion’s silence deprived the appeal process of a full and fair review. By failing to comment on the legal and procedural issues raised, Sencion contributed to a defective decision-making process that failed to resolve key concerns.

Given these clear failures in due process and proper fact-finding, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to its reliance on incomplete and uncritical review. 86

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

26. Failure of Vanessa Meldahl to comment on the Appeal. a. The lack of comment is evidence of evasion by the Commissioner of responding to and resolving important public policy issues raised in the Appeal that are not addressed in the resolution that was voted on. The Commissioner’s evasion is adequate basis to appeal the decision to the City Council for resolving those issues.

26. City Response: There is no evidence to support the contention that a lack of comment by Commissioner Meldahl is “evasion.” Commissioners are free to ask questions and comment on the project/appeal or not. Regardless, there is no indication that Commissioner Meldahl exhibited impermissible bias at the hearing.

26. Appellant Response:

The City’s response is inadequate and fails to address the core issue—Commissioner Vanessa Meldahl’s complete lack of engagement with the appeal process. The City’s assertion that Commissioners are “free to ask questions and comment” or not ignores the Planning Commission’s responsibility as a quasi-judicial body to actively evaluate the facts and legal arguments presented. By remaining silent, Meldahl failed to fulfill her duty to review, question, and deliberate on the serious procedural and legal concerns raised in the appeal.

The Planning Commission Has an Obligation to Engage With the Appeal Process
● The Planning Commission is not a passive entity; it serves as a fact-finding body tasked with evaluating whether government actions comply with the law.
● Silence is not a neutral position—it is an abdication of the Commissioner’s duty to engage with the evidence, legal concerns, and procedural violations presented in the appeal.
● Meldahl’s failure to ask questions or comment indicates that she 87

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL either did not critically assess the appeal or willfully avoided addressing key public policy issues.

The City’s Argument That Commissioners Are “Free” to Comment or Not Is Legally Insufficient
● A Commissioner’s role in an appeal is to ensure the decision under review was lawfully made, not to remain silent and rubber-stamp Staff’s conclusions.
● The City’s response does not explain how a Commissioner can fulfill their quasi-judicial responsibilities if they refuse to engage with the appeal process.
● If Commissioners were truly free to ignore the issues at hand, there would be no meaningful review process at all.

Meldahl’s Failure to Engage Leaves Key Public Policy Issues Unresolved ● The appeal presented multiple legal and procedural defects, including violations of zoning laws, CPRA violations, and due process concerns.
● By failing to comment, Meldahl effectively ignored these issues, leaving them unresolved and preventing a fair and complete review.
● A Commissioner’s refusal to engage with an appeal does not equate to neutrality—it is a failure of due diligence that undermines the validity of the decision.

The City’s Response Fails to Address Whether Meldahl’s Silence Impacted the Legitimacy of the Decision
● The City’s claim that there is “no evidence” of evasion fails to address the real issue—why would a Commissioner refuse to engage with an active appeal involving serious legal concerns? ● A Planning Commission decision requires active deliberation, not passive acceptance of Staff’s recommendations.
88

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● If a Commissioner does not engage with the appeal process, it raises serious concerns about whether they properly considered the arguments and evidence before voting.

The City’s response does not justify Commissioner Meldahl’s failure to participate in the appeal process. By remaining silent, she failed to critically analyze the legal and procedural issues presented, depriving the Appellant of a fair review.

Given these clear failures in due process and proper fact-finding, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to its reliance on incomplete and uncritical review. 89

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

27. Failure of Jenni Veitch-Olson to appear neutral in her response regarding her conflict of interest with the project.
a. On December 2, 2024, the Appellant sent an email to the Planning Commission requesting the recusal of Jenni Veitch-Olson due to conflicts of interest.
b. Veitch-Olson addressed the Planning Commission and the public on the matter and recused herself. While Veitch-Olson’s response avoids inflammatory language, it did introduce elements that may have biased the Planning Commission by framing the Appellant’s claims as potentially inaccurate without a thorough rebuttal or proof and by emphasizing the risk of litigation over the ethical considerations raised by the Appellant.
[Jenni Veitch Olson Transcript: 5:17] I understand that the City has received a letter from the Appellant, Appellant alleging that I have a conflict of interest in this item. I have worked with the City Attorney's office, and I do not believe that I have a conflict. In fact, many of the allegations in the letter are factually inaccurate.

Specifically, neither my husband nor I have ever received any income from the Applicant, Monterey County, or Westview Presbyterian Church. While my husband has previously been employed by the Presbytery, our family has not received any income from _____ from 2022 and has never received any income from Westview Church. Nonetheless, I do not want my presence to provide any basis for litigation or further appeals for this item. I also understand that I could have personal liability for any determination that the conflict exists and that I can be named in the lawsuit regarding the Commission's decisions. Out of an abundance of caution, for these reasons, and because I want to avoid any indication that I, or the City have acted improperly in these proceedings, I will be recusing from this item. Thank you. 90

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

27. City Response: Commissioner Veitch-Olson complied with the requirements of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 6250, et seq. (PRA), by stating that although no conflict under the PRA existed because neither the applicant, the County of Monterey, or the church, were a source of income to the Commissioner or the Commissioner’s immediate family, she chose to recuse herself to avoid any basis for further appeals or litigation. Commissioner Veitch-Olson made this statement immediately after the agenda was called and prior to the presentation of the staff report to the Planning Commission.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson then left the room and did not participate in the item.

27. Appellant Response:

The City’s response fails to address the fundamental issue—while Commissioner Jenni Veitch-Olson ultimately recused herself, her recusal statement was not neutral and improperly framed the Appellant’s claims as “factually inaccurate” without a thorough rebuttal or proof.

Furthermore, her emphasis on the risk of litigation introduced a prejudicial element into the proceedings, potentially influencing the remaining Commissioners to view the Appellant’s concerns as legally unfounded rather than as legitimate ethical and procedural issues requiring serious scrutiny.

Veitch-Olson’s Statement Was Not a Neutral Recusal—It Preemptively Discredited the Appellant’s Claims
● A neutral recusal should simply state the reason for recusal without commenting on the validity of the allegations.
● By asserting that “many of the allegations in the letter are factually inaccurate” without providing specific evidence, Veitch-Olson introduced bias into the proceedings before removing herself from deliberations.
● Her assertion improperly suggested to the remaining
91

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL Commissioners that the Appellant’s concerns were unfounded, potentially prejudicing their evaluation of the appeal. ● The purpose of a recusal is to remove any perception of bias, yet Veitch-Olson’s statement did the opposite by subtly undermining the credibility of the Appellant’s position before leaving the hearing.

The Emphasis on Litigation Risk Influenced the Commission’s Perception of the Appeal
● Veitch-Olson’s reference to the risk of litigation and personal liability was unnecessary and created the impression that the Appellant’s concerns were legally tenuous or intended to obstruct the process.
● By framing the recusal in terms of avoiding lawsuits rather than upholding ethical integrity, Veitch-Olson improperly shaped the narrative around the Appellant’s request, discouraging other Commissioners from taking the concerns seriously.
● A Commissioner recusing themselves should not frame the discussion in a way that subtly defends their position while discrediting the appeal.

The City’s Response Fails to Address the Improper Framing of the Recusal Statement
● The City states that Veitch-Olson complied with the Political Reform Act (PRA) but does not address the fact that her statement exceeded a simple recusal and ventured into the realm of influencing the remaining decision-makers.
● Whether or not a conflict of interest under the PRA existed is irrelevant to the fact that Veitch-Olson’s statement was inappropriate in tone and substance.
● The City does not explain why Veitch-Olson felt compelled to state that the Appellant’s allegations were inaccurate before 92

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL leaving, nor does it justify her reference to litigation risks, both of which impacted the impartiality of the hearing.

The City’s Response Fails to Address Whether Veitch-Olson’s Statement Impacted the Fairness of the Hearing
● Recusal is intended to ensure fairness and remove any undue influence from the proceedings. However, Veitch-Olson’s statement undermined this purpose by introducing unnecessary commentary that could have prejudiced the other Commissioners. ● A truly neutral approach would have been to simply state that she was recusing out of an abundance of caution, without addressing the substance of the allegations or implying that the Appellant’s claims lacked merit.
● The fact that she felt compelled to defend herself before recusing raises concerns about the impartiality of the overall
decision-making process.

The City’s response does not address the key issue—Veitch-Olson’s recusal statement was not neutral and subtly discredited the Appellant’s claims before leaving the hearing. Her emphasis on litigation risk, rather than ethical considerations, further influenced the remaining Commissioners to view the appeal as legally unfounded rather than as a legitimate challenge to an improper approval process.

Given these clear failures in maintaining neutrality and ensuring due process, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to the improper influence of Veitch-Olson’s comments before her recusal.
93

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

28. Staff improperly failed to include its slides in the Agenda Package uploaded to the City’s website within 24-48 hours.
a. Best practices in transparency suggest posting materials within a 24-48 hour timeline after a public meeting. The Coalition reached out to City Clerk, Irwin Ortiz, to address this issue.
b. An incomplete Slide presentation was provided on December 5, 2024.

28. City Response: The agenda package for the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was posted to the City website on Tuesday, November 26, 2024. The presentation slides were uploaded to the City website on Thursday, December 5, 2024. Regardless, this allegation is not a basis to grant the appeal.

28. Appellant Response:

The City’s response fails to acknowledge that the delayed posting of the presentation slides violated principles of transparency and public accountability. Best practices require that all materials presented at a public meeting be made available to the public in a timely manner, typically within 24-48 hours, to ensure that stakeholders have full access to the information used in decision-making. The City failed to upload the slides until December 5, 2024, two days after the meeting. In addition, the City only did so after the Coalition made a petition to the City Clerk to correct the procedural defect. Even worse, the slides that the City Staff uploaded were incomplete. This is addressed in further detail in Item 31. These procedural defects deprived the public of timely access to crucial information, dumped an adverse logistical burden on the Appellant and undermined the transparency of the Planning Commission’s deliberations.

The Delay in Posting the Slides Violated Transparency Best Practices 94

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● While the City claims that the agenda package was posted on November 26, 2024, it fails to address why the presentation slides—used as part of the Staff’s analysis—were not made available to the public immediately following the hearing. ● Best practices in government transparency dictate that any materials used during a public hearing should be made available within 24-48 hours after the meeting.
● The failure to timely post the slides prevented the public from promptly reviewing the information presented and created unnecessary barriers to public oversight.

The Late Posting of the Slides Obstructed Public Access to Critical Information
● The Planning Commission relied on Staff’s presentation slides in making its decision, yet these materials were not made available to the public until after the fact.
● This failure hindered the ability of the public, including the Appellant, to immediately verify the accuracy of the information presented and respond accordingly.
● By delaying the release of key materials, the City obstructed full public access to the record, which is an essential component of fair and transparent government proceedings.

The City’s Response Does Not Justify the Delay
● The City simply states that the slides were uploaded on December 5, 2024, but provides no explanation for why they were not posted immediately after the hearing.
● A two-day delay may seem minor, but in the context of public decision-making, where appeals and challenges must be
prepared within strict timelines, such delays can significantly impact the ability of stakeholders to respond effectively. ● The failure to provide a timely and complete public record raises 95

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL questions about whether the City is deliberately limiting access to information that could be used to challenge its decisions.

The City’s failure to promptly upload the presentation slides after the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting obstructed public access to key information and created unnecessary barriers to transparency. By delaying the release of these materials and then providing an incomplete version, the City further limited the ability of stakeholders to fully analyze the decision-making process.

Given these clear failures in transparency and public accountability, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to procedural defects and violations of due process. 96

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

29. Staff improperly failed to upload a publicly accessible video recording of the Commission meeting within a proper time frame after the meeting.
a. Best practices in transparency suggest posting materials within a 24-48 hour timeline after a public meeting. The video was not uploaded until Friday, December 6, 2024. The Coalition reached out to City Clerk, Irwin Ortiz, to address this issue.

29. City Response: The video recording of the Planning Commission meeting of December 3, 2024, was published on the City’s website on December 5, 2024. Regardless, this allegation is not a basis to grant the appeal.

29. Appellant Response:

The City’s response fails to address the core issue—Staff did not make the video recording of the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting publicly accessible within the expected 24-48 hour timeframe, thereby obstructing timely public access to an official record of the proceedings. The delayed posting of the video until December 6, 2024, deprived stakeholders of the ability to promptly review the meeting’s content and prepare responses based on the actual record. In addition, this dumped an adverse logistical burden on the Appellant and undermined the transparency of the Planning Commission’s deliberations.

The City did not post the video until December 6, 2024. In addition, the City only did so after the Coalition made petition to the City Clerk to correct the procedural defect.
● Best practices in government transparency dictate that public meeting recordings should be made available within 24-48 hours of the meeting to ensure public access to government
proceedings.
97

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● The failure to upload the video within this timeframe obstructed public review and undermined confidence in the City’s
commitment to open governance.
● Timely access to meeting recordings is especially critical when an appeal is pending, as it allows the public to verify statements made by officials and assess whether due process was followed.

The Delay Obstructed Public Oversight and the Appeal Process ● The appeal process requires stakeholders to analyze the Commission’s discussion, decisions, and justifications. A delayed video release deprives the public of timely access to this information.
● By failing to post the video promptly, the City prevented the Appellant from reviewing and citing specific statements made during the meeting in a timely manner, hindering the ability to challenge procedural errors and Staff misrepresentations. ● This delay benefitted the City and Staff, as it shielded the Commission’s discussions from immediate public scrutiny, thereby limiting the Appellant’s ability to swiftly refute inaccurate or misleading statements.

The City’s Response Fails to Justify the Delay
● The City states that the video was posted on December 5, 2024, but their statement is not factual. The video was not posted until December 6, 2024. In addition, the City did not explain why the video was not posted in timely fashion.
● The City’s response dismisses the issue as inconsequential but fails to acknowledge how delayed access to public records affects the fairness of the appeal process.

The City’s Lack of Timely Posting Raises Questions of Procedural Integrity
98

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● The City has a pattern of delaying or withholding key public records, as evidenced by its failure to timely release the complete slide presentation.
● Delays in public disclosures can indicate an attempt to control the flow of information and limit public scrutiny, which is particularly concerning when an appeal is pending.
● Even if the delay was unintentional, the failure to post the meeting video within 24-48 hours reflects negligence in adhering to best practices for transparency.

The City’s failure to promptly upload the Planning Commission meeting video deprived the public of timely access to a crucial record of the proceedings, obstructing public oversight and limiting the Appellant’s ability to review and respond to statements made at the hearing. By failing to provide a valid justification for this delay, the City has demonstrated a disregard for best practices in transparency and due process.

Given these clear failures in public accessibility and procedural integrity, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to a failure to ensure timely public access to meeting records.
99

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

30. Staff improperly failed to download and integrate the Folio, a large attachment that had multiple links, into the Agenda Package. a. The Folio was emailed to the Planning Commission on December 3, 2024. It is a large attachment. Links to the file were included. Staff did not download this document and integrate it into the Agenda Package in a timely fashion.
b. On December 5, 2024, Communication was initiated with City Clerk, Irwin Ortiz, who indicated that it would be done by end of day. The Folio was integrated into the Agenda Package on December 6, 2024.

30. City Response: The public comment deadline for items going to Planning Commission meetings is 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. The public comment mentioned above was received on December 3, 2024, at 4:02 p.m. The public comment consisted of an email referencing a document titled “A Collection of Data and Documents Highlighting Watsonville’s Improper Zoning Procedures for the Tiny Village.” Because the document file size was too large to include in an email, the email included Google Drive and Dropbox links to the document. Any public comment documents submitted after 3:00 p.m. can be presented at the Planning Commission meeting and will be uploaded at a later date.

However, City staff emailed the documents to the Commissioners at 5:13 p.m. Staff’s email included a PDF with all public comments received, including the 4:02 p.m. email from Marta Bulaich with the links to the 402-page “Folio” (Attachment 19) and an additional email Ms.

Bulaich submitted at 4:52 p.m. that contained a 16-page rebuttal to staff’s analysis in the agenda package. Regardless, this allegation is not a basis to grant the appeal.

30. Appellant Response:

The City response provides a description of the procedure that Staff 100

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL used to email the Folio document file to the Planning Commissioners leading up to the Commission meeting.

Staff’s response did not address the procedural defect identified by the Appellant. That defect pertained to the fact that the Folio was not integrated and made publicly available into the City’s online Agenda Package link on their website in a timely manner. In addition, the City only addressed this defect after the Coalition made petition to the City Clerk for corrective intervention.

The City’s response doesn’t explain why the Folio wasn’t integrated into the online Agenda Package link in a timely manner. The failure to integrate this document in a timely manner prevented the public from fully accessing key evidence after the hearing, impairing the integrity of the appeal process..

The unjustified delay in making the Folio publicly accessible was a clear failure of transparency and due process, which limited the ability to analyze information while the Commission decision was still under review.

Given this failure in public accessibility and procedural integrity, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to the failure to ensure timely public access to all relevant materials in the public record.
101

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

31. Staff improperly failed to include one of the slides Matt Orbach projected during the Planning Commission Meeting in the Agenda Package.
a. The Slides provided by Irwin Ortiz on December 5, 2024 were missing a critical slide addressing the Church’s nonconforming use status. An email was sent to City Clerk, Irwin Ortiz, to address this concerning omission. Ortiz sent an email on December 13, 2024 including the revised presentation and indicated that the Agenda Package will have the updated version shortly.

31. City Response: The PDF of the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting presentation was published on the City website on December 5, 2024. On Thursday, December 12, 2024, Marta Bulaich contacted City Clerk Irwin Ortiz to inform him that the presentation published on the City website was missing one slide that was presented at the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. The discrepancy was due to the fact that there was one “hidden” slide presented at the meeting that had not been included in the PDF published on the City website. Staff printed a new PDF with the missing slide, published it to the website, and shared it with Marta Bulaich on Friday, December 13, 2024. Regardless, this allegation is not a basis to grant the appeal.

31. Appellant Response:

The City’s response regarding the missing slide is a mere statement that they didn’t provide it. Such a response lacks any justification for the omission. In addition, the City only provided the missing slide after the Coalition made petition to the City Clerk to correct the procedural defect.

This omission directly impacted the public’s ability to fully review and 102

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL understand the information presented to the Commission, thereby undermining transparency and due process. The fact that Staff did not acknowledge or correct this omission until December 13, 2024—ten days after the meeting—further demonstrates the City’s failure to ensure an accurate and complete public record.

The City’s Explanation for the Omission is Inadequate and Raises Concerns About Selective Disclosure
● The City claims that the missing slide was “hidden” but does not explain why a slide deemed important enough to be presented at the meeting was excluded from the publicly available
presentation.
● The omission of a slide specifically addressing the Church’s nonconforming use status is highly concerning, as this was a major point of contention in the appeal.
● If a slide was presented at a public meeting, it should have been included in the official record from the beginning. Failing to do so raises concerns about whether certain information was
deliberately withheld from the public.

The City’s Response Ignores the Potential Impact of the Missing Slide on the Appeal
● The City dismisses the issue as irrelevant to the appeal, but the fact remains that a slide critical to the discussion of nonconforming use status was not available to the public in a timely manner.
● The omission of key information from the public record limits the ability of the public and decision-makers to fully evaluate the facts.
● If the missing slide contained inaccurate or misleading information, it would have been impossible to challenge it in real time due to the delayed disclosure.
103

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL The City Has a Pattern of Withholding or Delaying Key Information ● This is not the only instance in which the City delayed or omitted critical documents from public disclosure—similar issues occurred with the posting of the slide presentation, the video recording of the meeting, and the integration of the Folio into the Agenda Package.
● The City’s repeated failure to provide full and timely access to public records raises concerns about whether information is being selectively controlled to limit scrutiny.
● Even if the omission was not intentional, it reflects a pattern of procedural failures that undermine public confidence in the fairness of the appeal process.

The City’s failure to include a critical slide from the December 3, 2024, Planning Commission meeting in the public record deprived the public of full access to the materials presented to decision-makers. The ten-day delay in correcting the omission further obstructed transparency and limited the ability to analyze the information while the decision was still under review.

Given these clear failures in public accessibility and procedural integrity, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to the failure to ensure timely public access to all materials presented at the hearing.
104

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

32. Staff improperly removed the Agenda Package from the City of Watsonville website.
a. On the morning of December 14, 2024, it was noted that the Agenda Package for the December 3, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting had been removed from the City’s website. An email dated December 14, 2024 was sent to the City Clerk to remedy this concerning omission and potential Brown Act violation.

32. City Response: The agenda packet was not removed from the City website. The agenda packet was updated with the latest presentations (including the “Folio” referenced in #30 above) on Thursday, December 5, 2024, and when it was published the PDF version of the document did not sync in eScribe (the City’s agenda creation and publishing software). As a result, the updated agenda package was available to the public in the HTML version only. As soon as City staff was made aware of this issue with the PDF version, it was corrected and republished and both the PDF and HTML versions of the agenda packet were available again on Saturday, December 7, 2024. Regardless, this allegation is not a basis to grant the appeal.

32. Appellant Response:

The City’s response fails to acknowledge the gravity of the issue—whether intentional or not, the removal of the Agenda Package PDF from the City of Watsonville’s website deprived the public of critical access to official documents during a time-sensitive appeal process.

This disappearance of the document is deeply concerning and raises potential Brown Act violations, as it obstructed the public’s right to review and access government records.

The City’s Explanation Fails to Justify the Removal of the Agenda Package
105

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL ● The City claims that the PDF version of the Agenda Package “did not sync” in eScribe, yet it does not explain why this issue was not immediately detected and corrected.
● Even if this were a technical issue, the fact remains that a crucial public document was unavailable for a period of time, which constitutes a failure in government transparency.
● The burden is on the City to ensure uninterrupted public access to records related to governmental decisions. A temporary removal of the Agenda Package, whether due to a technical error or administrative action, obstructs public participation and access to information.

The City’s Failure to Immediately Correct the Issue Obstructed Public Access
● The Agenda Package was missing from the City’s website as of the morning of December 14, 2024, meaning that it had remained inaccessible for a period of time.
● The City did not address or correct the issue until after a complaint was made via email, demonstrating that it was not actively monitoring public access to critical records.
● Public records related to an ongoing appeal should never be removed, altered, or rendered inaccessible, even temporarily, as doing so deprives the public of their right to review government proceedings.

Potential Brown Act Violation Due to the Removal of Public Records ● The Brown Act (Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.) requires that government records related to public meetings be made available to the public in a timely and uninterrupted manner.
● Removing an Agenda Package from a government website—even temporarily—restricts public access to crucial information and may be considered a violation of the Brown Act’s requirements for 106

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL transparency.
● Even if the City argues that the HTML version remained available, the fact remains that the standard PDF format—widely used for document retention and legal reference—was removed, creating unnecessary barriers to access.

The City’s Response Fails to Explain Why This Issue Keeps Occurring ● This is not the first instance where key documents related to this appeal have been missing, delayed, or altered after the fact. ● The City previously failed to include a complete slide presentation, delayed the posting of the meeting video, and took three days to integrate the Folio into the Agenda Package.
● The repeated pattern of missing or delayed records suggests a failure in public recordkeeping that is negligent.

The City’s failure to maintain uninterrupted public access to the Agenda Package—regardless of the reason—obstructed transparency, public participation, and due process. By failing to promptly detect and correct the issue until a complaint was made, the City demonstrated a lack of accountability in ensuring that public records remain available during a critical period of review.

Given these clear failures in maintaining transparency and public access, the appeal must be granted, and the Commission’s decision must be invalidated due to procedural defects and a failure to ensure uninterrupted access to the public record.
107

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

ATTACHMENT A
Emails dated July 11 and July 17, 2024 from Melissa Bartolo to Roxanne Wilson, et al, re the status of the building permit submission to the City of Watsonville
108

CATALINA TORRES RESPONSE TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL 109

CATALINA TORRES ADDENDUM TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL APPELLANT’S ADDENDUM TO

RESPONSE TO WATSONVILLE

CITY STAFF AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL (#PP2024-8380) OF PLANNING
COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF AN APPEAL (#PP2024-7954) OF

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL OF AN

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PERMIT FOR A LOW-BARRIER
NAVIGATION CENTER (#PP2023-6297) LOCATED AT 118 1ST
STREET, 5 CHERRY COURT, AND 120 1ST STREET
REFERENCE: Agenda Item 11.a of the March 11, 2025 Watsonville City Council Meeting
Date: March 11, 2025
Appellant: Catalina Torres, Neighborhood Leader
Coalición del Distrito Uno Oeste para Familias, Seguridad y Justicia Social 121 Second Street, Apartment F
Watsonville, CA 95076
1

CATALINA TORRES ADDENDUM TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL

2. Appellant Addendum Response:

In the first paragraph on Page 11 of the Agenda Report, Staff makes the assertion that SB 4 has logic that allows by-right development of affordable housing. This assertion is correct to the degree that the specific qualifiers are met.

Staff then asserts that such by-right authority makes a conditional use, such as a church, to be exempt from any local zoning code obligation to obtain a conditional use permit approval as a predicating step for developing qualified affordable housing. This assertion is incorrect. SB 4 does no such thing. There is no language in SB 4 to substantiate such an assertion.

Staff then asserts that their logic is likewise applicable to by-right development of an LBNC in accordance with Government Section 65600, et seq. Staff’s assertion is incorrect. Just like SB 4 does for affordable housing, Section 65600, et seq., does bestow by-right privileges for an LBNC. However, just like SB 4, Section 6500, et seq., does not pre-empt local zoning code authority over conditional uses. This was explained in detail on pages 4 and 5 of the December 16, 2024 Appeal by Catalina Torres to the City Council.

In that same paragraph, Staff asserts that the “ LBNC is a project submitted by the County of Monterey, not the existing church.”
Staff’s assertion is false. On the relevant Zoning Clearance Application, PP 2023-6297, the Westview Presbyterian Church is identified as the Applicant and the Reverend Dan Hoffman is the one who signed and dated the application.

In addition, reference is made to the Memorandum (dated September 4, 2024) from Sonia De La Rosa to the City, which was part of the referenced Zoning Clearing Application. In the first paragraph of that document, it is stated that the Tiny Village is to 2

CATALINA TORRES ADDENDUM TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL be developed by Dignity Moves, the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, and the Westview Presbyterian Church, as a partnership collectively referred to as the Village Partners.

Even on paragraph 1, of page 5 of the Agenda Report, the Proposed Project is described as follows:

The proposed project involves construction of a 34-bed low-barrier navigation center to be developed by Dignity Moves and the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, in partnership with the site property owner, Westview Presbyterian Church.

The remarkable significance of this fact is that the City Staff are contradicting themselves in their Agenda Report on this issue.

The preceding information is conclusive evidence that verifies that the Church is part and parcel of the submitting entity for the project.

Moreover, this line misrepresents the actual application process. The County of Monterey did not submit the application independently—it did so in partnership with the church. That makes the church part of the process, not just a passive property owner.

5. Appellant Addendum Response:

In the paragraph of Item 5 of page 11 of the Staff Report, Staff makes the assertion that the fact that a new church use is considered a conditional use in the Downtown Core zoning district is not relevant to the Zoning Administrator’s decision. City Staff has confused the issue here. In the Downtown Core zoning district, both new and existing churches are conditional uses.

In the case of an existing church use on the property where an LBNC is being proposed, the church use is required to obtain approval of a conditional use permit as a 3

CATALINA TORRES ADDENDUM TO CITY STAFF - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL necessary predicating step for establishing the LBNC on the site. On the other hand, consider the case where there isn’t an existing church use on the site, but there is an existing LBNC. If a new church use was proposed for such a site, it would be required to obtain approval of a conditional use permit that would have to accommodate the existing LBNC through its design, use permit conditions of approval, and go through a discretionary approval process.

In both cases, the conditional use status of the church activates the requirement for zoning administration to address the conditional use issue. 4

From: Rosemary Anderson
To: City Council; cityclerk; citymanager
Cc: [email protected]; Alicia Martinez; Nick Calubaquib; Rosemary Anderson Subject: Solutions not Obstacles Please
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 12:55:20 PM
To the City Council, City Manager
I apologize for not writing my letter of support sooner regarding Item 11a. on the City Council Agenda this evening. I am not able to attend the meeting but want to voice my support for the proposed Recurso de Fuerza.

I am a participant on the City of Watsonville Task force on Homelessness and I have been serving the homeless and vulnerable populations of Santa Cruz County for three decades and know the heartbreak and challenges of those served and those who are looking for better ways of helping.

With the increased criminalization of homelessness and the continued sweeps of homeless encampments, we only succeed in moving the problem from one place to another without any lasting or meaningful resolutions.

Recurso de Fuerza is a solution oriented project, moving the City of Watsonville one step closer to being a partner in solutions for homelessness and a model for others. Without the consent, the project stands to lose the funding and the City losing potential future State funding if we do not demonstrate data driven solutions in response to State mandates. Maria Elena communicates the mission and solution based project beautifully in this article.
https://lookout.co/recurso-de-fuerza-watsonville-council-should-vote-yes-on-tinyhomes-project/ This article highlights the City of San Francisco landlords evicting tenants and adding to the homeless population, putting already vulnerable people on the street with no shelter or support. We do not want to see our City or our County acting in a similar manner.
.
https://patch.com/california/across-ca/they-tried-pay-their-overdue-rent-theirlandlord-wouldnt-accept-it?utm_source=sharelink&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=share Thank you for your consideration and for voting to move this critical project forward.

Respectfully,

Rosemary Anderson
District 7

From: [email protected]
To: City Council; cityclerk
Subject: Public Comment: Agenda Item 11.a of March 11, 2025 Watsonville City Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 3:39:10 PM
Members of the Council,
I am the operator of a stone fabrication shop near the Westview Presbyterian Church property where the homeless shelter is being planned. There are some issues that I would like the Council Members to be aware of before they vote on the Appeal request.

The area near the Church is close to the Pajaro River, which is always attracting homeless campsites, which adversely affect the neighborhood. Establishing more and more homeless support services in this area seems to attract more and more homeless people to concentrate around here. I have followed neighborhood news about the efforts of Catalina Torres, the Appellant, to address the City Council on behalf of our neighborhood, and I am in support of her efforts.

She has presented information that shows that the Church needs to get a use permit for their operations before the homeless shelter can be given permit clearance. I believe that is correct and I request the City Council uphold the Appeal.

Kind Regards,
Mark DeBolske
Riva Marble & Granite
149 Grove Street | Watsonville, CA 95076 | 831-722-2241 www.rivamarble.com

From: City Council
To: Eduardo Montesino; Vanessa Quiroz; Maria Orozco; Kristal Salcido; Casey Clark; Jimmy Dutra; Ari Parker; cityclerk
Subject: FW: Item #PP2024-8380 Tiny Homes Project Appeal Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 4:50:47 PM
From: Richard Gallo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 4:50:17 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Item #PP2024-8380 Tiny Homes Project Appeal
Dear City Council members,
I am a volunteer Residents United Network (RUN) member. I am a person with lived experienced and a former Advocate in helping seniors, veterans, domestic violence survivors, families, and people with disabilities out of homelessness.

I am emailing in support of Navigation Tiny Houses be allow to serve the unhoused community.

Part of the problem is the City failure to build affordable housing in our communities especially low and very low income housing.

You cannot discriminate against the unhoused all because of neighbors fear of what the Church is trying to do.

As long as the Church set ground rules and invite partner organizations that serves the unhoused community in helping them get out of homelessness. Most of them are workers who can't afford to live in their communities because of being priced out on low income wages. Others are people with disabilities on disability benefits.

You have roughly 673 unhoused individuals in City according to your 2024 report.

Kudos to Church for recognizing the need and the City needs to support this on behalf of unhoused community in your community.

You have the moral responsibility to do so on behalf of your unhoused community.

They got to go somewhere and the Tiny Village is one place out of homelessness to housing from there.

Residents United Network (RUN) is a Statewide coalition in supporting all types of affordable housing in our communities throughrout California.

Mental Wellness is possible
With regards,
Richard Gallo
(Pronouns: He/His/Him)
Mental Health Advocacy
Consulting and Training
Peer Voices of Sacramento
Home - Peer Voices of Sacramento
Self-Advocate Speakers Bureau (SASB)
Disability Voices United
Self-Advocate Speakers | Disability Voices United
Story Stitch Facilitator
Green Card Voices
Home - Green Card Voices
NAMI Smarts Teacher
NAMI Smarts Advocacy
NAMI California
Adult-Mental Health First Aid USA (MHFA)

National Council for Mental Well Being
Certification October 13, 2023-Octobet 13, 2026
Youth-Mental Health First Aid USA (MHFA)
National Council for Mental Well Being
Certification January 29, 2025-January 29, 2028
Certified California MediCal Peer Support Specialist
CalMESA #MPSS-VSYKTZ
State Ambassador/Bay Area Region Ambassador
ACCESS California, a program of CAL VOICES
ACCESS California | Mental Health Advocacy | Home
Secretary of the California Association of Peer
Professionals (CAPP):

Peer Support | California Association of Peer
Professionals | California
Board member
Cal Voices
Cal Voices | Peer Support | California
RUN member/Ally (Volunteer)
Residents United Network (RUN)
Housing California
Residents United Network - Housing California
Miracle Friend (Volunteer)
Miracle Messages
https://www.miraclemessages.org/

3/6/2025 6:40:55 PM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\18405282487\18405282487,,,WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Ordinance - Zoning Code Text Amendment.docx 0 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: Tuesday, March 11, 2025
TO: CITY COUNCIL
WRITTEN BY: INTERIM ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ORBACH RECOMMENDED BY: INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MEEK APPROVED BY: TAMARA VIDES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-FOOT

RESIDENTIAL SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT), NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISIT
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council introduce, for first reading only, waiving fully reading of the text, an ordinance amending Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code to remove the 150-foot residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts.

BACKGROUND:

On September 12, 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1095-00 (CM) adding Chapter 14-41 DriveThrough Facility Restrictions to the Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC). The intent of the ordinance was to develop location and design criteria that the City could use to help design drive through facilities that were more compatible with the surrounding uses and would not prohibit drive through facilities but require limitations to specific commercial zoning districts and preclude new drive through facilities in the downtown area (Attachment 2). “Drive-Through Facility” means any commercial use that conducts business in whole or part with a person or persons who enters a commercial property in a motor vehicle and transacts business from said motor vehicle from any location on such property that is not a designated parking space. WMC Section 14-18.279. Drive-Through Facilities are only allowed on property located in commercial zones subject to a number of criteria including:

1 “No drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.” WMC Section 14-

41.100(a)(1).

A Special Use Permit is required for drive-through facilities located in the CT, CNS, CN, and CV zoning districts.

WMC Section 14-41.101.

On October 22, 2024, City staff presented an overview of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facilities Restrictions to the City Council for review and discussion. City Council directed staff to return to Council with an analysis of options that would allow for more drive-through facility development within the City to review (Attachment 3).

On January 14, 2025, City staff presented options for modification of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction. City Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-

41.100(a)(1) to Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council (Attachment 4).

On February 10, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 02-25 (PC) (Attachment 7) recommending to City Council adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code to remove the 150-foot residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts (Attachments 5 & 6).

STANDARD OF REVIEW:

The decision regarding whether to recommend approval of a Zoning Code text amendment to the City Council is legislative and requires environmental review. For more information on standard of review and process, see the Standard of Review and Process Overview on the City website.

PROCESS:

Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.801, the text of the adopted Zoning Code may be amended in a manner identical to WMC Section 14-12.701, which outlines the process for General Plan amendments. Any proposed zoning code text amendment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing for recommendation to the City Council. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission shall adopt a resolution, recommending approval or denial of the proposed amendment, by the affirmative vote of the majority of the Commission members, subject to findings required by WMC Section 14-12.708.

Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.805, review and decision by the City Council shall be in a manner identical to Section 14-12.706, subject to findings in Section 14-12.708, with the exception that any decision taken shall be by adoption of an ordinance. The City Council shall review the Planning Commission recommendation and all other pertinent materials and information at a properly noticed public hearing in order to make a final determination in the matter. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council may choose to adopt an ordinance approving the Zoning Code Text Amendment subject to findings or deny the proposed amendment.

2 DISCUSSION:

Development of drive-through facilities within the City of Watsonville is regulated by WMC Chapter 14-41 DriveThrough Facility Restrictions. The purpose of Chapter 14-41 is to regulate the design and location of Drive-Through Facilities in the City. In order to regulate drive-through development, Chapter 14-41 does the following:
 Only permits drive-through facility development in the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts (WMC § 14-41.101(a));
 Requires a Special Use Permit (SUP) for drive-through facilities (WMC § 14-41.101(a));  Requires that no drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential uses (WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1));
 Requires that no more than one Drive-Through Facility shall be located within two hundred (200') feet of the nearest point of a signalized intersection (except for the “gateway” intersections described in the following bullet point) (WMC § 14-41.100(a)(2));
 Requires that no Drive-Through Facility be located within three hundred feet (300’) of certain ‘gateway’ intersections (WMC § 14-41.100(a)(3)); and
 Includes design standards for drive-through facilities (WMC § 14-41.102).

The proposed zoning code text amendment would exempt the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement identified in WMC Section 14-41.100(a)(1). With this amendment, only drive-through development in the CN zoning district would be subject to the 150-foot setback. The amended text of WMC Section 14-41.100(a)(1) is below with the modifications in underline and strikethrough.

WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) – In the CN zoning district, noNo drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150’) feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.

By only specifying the CN zoning district, the other three commercial zoning districts (CT, CNS, and CV) would be exempted from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential purposes.

The zoning code text amendments are included in Exhibit B to the ordinance.

The current City of Watsonville Zoning Map is included as Attachment 1.

Zoning Code Text Amendment Findings
Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.807, the Planning Commission and the City Council shall, in approving a text amendment to the zoning code, make the findings in WMC Section 14-12.708. Those findings with staff analysis are below.

A. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies in the General Plan.

Staff Analysis

3 The proposed zoning code text amendment is consistent with the following goals and policies in the 2005 General Plan:
 Land Use Element 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.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drivethrough development.  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 land unsuited for urban uses.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drivethrough development.  Land Use Element Goal 4.3 Commercial Land Use: Revitalize the central business district and provide adequate neighborhood commercial services.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services.
 Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.C.2 Neighborhood Commercial Land Use: The City shall designate an appropriate amount of land for neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations of 5,000 to 7,000 persons.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations.
 Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.I.2 Zoning Code Review: The City shall annually review and update the Zoning Code for consistency with the General Plan and Land Use

4 Diagram. In addition, the review shall evaluate whether the Zoning Code can be improved to better address the long-term land use objectives.

Supportive Evidence: WMC Chapter 14-41 has not been updated since 2000. After evaluating Chapter 14-41 in October 2024, the City Council directed Staff to bring forward options for modifying the chapter to allow the development of additional drive-through facilities within the city. On January 14, 2025, Council recommended exempting the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential uses in order to better address the City’s long-term land use objectives related to economic development.

B. That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties.

Supportive Evidence
Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, with locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts lend themselves to auto-oriented development.

The 2005 General Plan General Commercial land use classification includes general categories of allowed uses, such as: retail sales; personal, professional, financial, business and medical offices and services; entertainment; lodging; restaurants; and automobile sales. These uses are intended to serve the needs of the community and the surrounding region. The proposed amendment is compatible with the general planned uses because auto-oriented uses are identified as allowed uses within the General Commercial land use classification.

The proposed amendment is compatible with the existing uses of the adjacent commercial properties along East Lake Avenue because they are either developed with auto-oriented uses or vacant. In addition, to ensure that future development is compatible with existing adjacent residential uses, future development projects will be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Through this process, any potentially significant environmental impacts will be identified and any necessary mitigation measures will be developed and included as conditions of approval on the project.

These findings are located in Exhibit A to the Ordinance.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION:

Adoption of an ordinance amending the text of Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the common sense exemption in CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.) Section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed zoning text amendment will have a significant effect on the environment.

5 STRATEGIC PLAN:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment supports the City Council’s 2023-2025 Strategic Plan Priority 1: Economic Development.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment has no fiscal impact.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council may decide not to make Zoning Code Text Amendments to WMC Chapter 14-41 – Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.

REFERENCES:

None.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. City of Watsonville Zoning Map

2. August 8, 2000 – City Council Staff Report and Ordinance

3. October 22, 2024 – City Council Meeting Minutes

4. January 14, 2025 – City Council Meeting Minutes

5. February 10, 2025 – Planning Commission Staff Report

6. February 10, 2025 – DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes

7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 02-25 (PC)

C l i ff o rd Av e
N u e v a Vi s t a Av e
W H i g h St
A i r p o rt R d
B e c k St
M a n f re R d
S u d d e n St
S a n t a Cat a l i n a Av e
B re n t w o o d D r
M a rc h a n t St
B l a c k b u r n St
B re w i n g t o n Av e
Ro a c h e R d
Altamont Dr
Wa s h i n g t o n St
S a l i n a s R d
Co l l e g e R d
E a s t e r n D r
Ca l a b a s a s R d
Pro s p e c t St
D o l o re s Av e
Lo n g v iew Dr
K i n g s t o n
D r
H i l l Av e
Pa c ka rd L n
N at a l i e L n
Oregon St
Al i s
a
Cir
S
u
n
s
e
t
Vi s
t
a
D
r
H y d e St
D
el
Ri
o
Ct
L a ke n
C t
L a ke v i e w R d
B u e n a Vi s t a D r
Green
M
e
a d
ow
D
r
R
o
g
e
r
s
A
v
e
M o n t e Vi s t a Av e
C
l
i
ff
ord
Ave
S an
Lui s Ave
A t k i n s o n L n
Bafp Dr
J e h l Av e
M a rc e l a D r
L
i
g
h
t
h
o
u
s
e
Dr
Compton Ter
Wi
l
lo
w
c
r
e
e
k
S
t
7 t h
St
B e r m a n L n
A n n a St
Terr y
L oop
1 s t St
M e l w o o d
C t
A u t o Ce n t e r D r
Ja s m i n e L n
Lark in Val ley Rd
Sou
h
t
e
rn
Cir
Sh e rwood
Ct
M c Ke n z i e Av e
F lore
n
c
e
A
v
e
O a
k
r
i
d
g
e
S
t
M a d i s o n St
Fra n i c h D r
Fi
re tho rn Way
L
u
c
erne
Av
e
B r i d g e St
Bent
Tree
Ct
Pa r ke r D r
We s t e r n D r
C re
D
s twood
r
Pa
ra
i so
Ct
L a H a c i e n d a St
G o
n
z
a
l
e
s
St
E L a ke Av e
Ca m b r i d g e D r
9 t h St
N e v a d a St
S a n t a C l a ra St
H
e
r
m
a
n
Ct
H u s h b e c k Av e
S u n b i rd D r
H o p e D r
A rt h u r R d
B ra d f o rd R d
B l a n c a L n
Vi c Ru g h L n
W Front
St
Dre w
L
a
k
e
R
d
B ro n s o n St
Ro s s Av e
Pa r k
Wa y
H a n g a r Wa y
Pa l m Av e
W 5 t h St
6 t h St
B ro n t e Av e
Vi a S e r ra St
Alto n
Way
Magn
o
l
i
a
D
r
Fo rd
St
Vi l l a St
B re n n a n St
H o l l y D r
L a ke Vi l l a g e D r
Ce d a r D r
Rodri gue z
St
M u n ks C t
W i l l o w Wa y
W i n c h e s t e r D r
D e l t a Wa y
Pa j a ro
Vi s t a
C t
B
r
i
g
h
t
V
i
e
w
L
n
We s l e y
C t
E 5 t h St
M a r i g o l d Av e
G re e n Va l l e y R d
J oy ce Dr
B ro o k h a v e n L n
W i n
d
i
n
g
Way
S
a
n
To
m
a
s
W
a
y
Vi v i e n n e D r
Q u i n t a Vi s t a St
M e l w o o d St
Santa
Vi c toria Ave
Loma Vi s ta Dr
Vi s t a St
Ca re y Av e
Fuchs ia
Dr
S a n J u a n R d
M a d i s o n St
Heron
Ct
Pe n n y L n
J e ff e r s o n St
Porta
Vi s ta
Ct
L a J o l l a St
A
ri
s ta
L
n
K
i
ngfi sher Dr
S
u
n
ri s
e
Way
M i l l e r Av e
J ea n e tt e Wa y
L
a
s
Pa lm
a
s
H o l m R d
N u g e n t
Av e
Austin
Ct
Vi l lage Way
Broad
v
i
e
w
D
r
C
ri s
s
a
r
a
D
r
H e r m a n Av e
M o h o v e
St
E at o n Av e
L
a
w
r
e
n
c
e
A
v
e
L a ke n D r
Tu tt l e Av e
Pro g re s s D r
M i l l e r
P l
Eg ret Ln
P
a
r
k
w
o
o
d
D
r
Ro o s e v e l t St
Pe
l
i
c
a
n
D
r
K ra l j D r
G e n e v a
Wa y
Zu r i c h Av e
Cres t v iew Dr
C a s cade
Ln
La Pa
C
z
t
H o l o h a n R d
Mata
Way
M a rt i n e l l i St
A l t a Vi s t a Av e
B i s h o p St
Ac
o
rn
Wa
y
A l v a ra d o St
C re s c e n t D r
Wa g n e r Av e
Ca r m e l St
St a n f o rd St
Peppertree
Ln
E L a ke Av e
Vi s t a D el
M ar D r
M a r i l y n St
H o n ey suc k le
Dr
B o w ke r R d
Magnol ia
Ct
E l s a St
Cy n t h i a
C t
Pl um Hi l l
Dr
S o n o m a St
Ce n t e r St
G l e m a r St
Pip
pin
L
n
Lo c a r n o
Wa y
Pa l o m a Wa y
Atri
Ct
G i n o s C t
Cutte
r
Cv
Broo k
C t
I r i s D r
C u tt e r D r
Ca r l e n e
C t
In
e
z
St
Carita Ct
Pi n e St
Ca r r St
M o n t e b e l l o D r
E Fro n t St
Ve r n o n C t
E H i g h St
W B ea c h R d
M a n a n a L n
Pe c k St
8 t h St
Ei le
e
n
St
D a w s o n St
2 n d St
M a r i n St
Bonita Ter
K
e
n
t
s
C
t
Paj
a
r
o
L
n
M o n u m e n t Av e
D i z o n C t
M a ra n at h a D r
Carnation Dr
A i r p o rt
B l v d
M o n t e c i t o
Av e
Pa s e o D r
Ca l i f o r n i a
St
A l m o n d D r
El Capit a n
Ct
We e ks
D r
An
de
r s
o
n
r D
B a ro n St
Ce n t e r St G o n d a St
L a n d i s Av e
Fait h D r
D a v i s Av e
Rid
g
e
v i
ew
D
r
Sy d n e y Av e
M i l e s L n
J St
K i m b e r l y L n
L a s F l o re s St
C
e
r
rito
Ter
Alexander St
Lo u g h ea d St
Vi
s
t
a
M
o
n
t
a
n
a
D
r
Ranport Rd
G ro v e St
Lo g a n St
Cy n t h i a D r
H a m m e r D r
M a r i p o s a Av e
E s t e r
W a y
D e
l
a
w
a
r
e
St
A l m a St
Pa u l i n e D r
D o g w o o d D r
C l a re m o n t Av e
Ro g g e St
E B ea c h St
A s s o c i at e d L n
M e re d i t h Wa y
E l R i o St
Suncres t Way
Wat s o n St
M a n z a n a St
Cutter
L n
Cloudv iew D r
W h i t n e y D r
St Fra n c i s D r
Ka d d e r l y L n
Sierra
St
H
e
a
t
h
e
r
D
r
C i r v e l o St
L a S a l l e St
Rai lroad Ave
B ro a d i s St
Sy c a m o re St
L a u re l St
Melrose Ave
Ce re z e St
M a d e ra St
E 5 t h St
O rc h a rd St
M at i a s e v i c h L n
We s t g at e D r
Ve r m o n t St
Vi rg i n i a St
W h i t e St
N o rt h D r
Co tt a g e D r
Pi m a St
E m m e L n
St e n d e r Av e
M a n a b e O w R d
Meadow Ter
S a n B e n i t o St
K i n g s Wa y
Ev e l y n Av e
N a p a St
P
e
a
r
t
r
e
e
D
r
S e c o y a St
Ke n y o n Av e
Q u i n n Av e
Coff ey
Ln
Vi s ta Pointe Dr
Co o l i d g e Av e
M a p l e Av e
B o c k i u s St
C h a p p e l l R d
S u s a n St
R i c h a rd s o n Av e
Si l ver
Leaf
D
r
Ca l i f o r n i a St
Va l d e z L n
Tra ft o n St
S h a d y O a ks D r
Al l s ton Way
Lo c u s t St
B u rc h e l l Av e
St e w a rt Av e
Rosew oodDr
Fre m o n t St
Cherr y Blos som
Dr
M e n ke r St
K i l b u r n St
R
i
a
lto
D r
S o u t h D r
S a kat a L n
A rc e St
W i l k i e Av e
B
ol
s s
o
m Dr
Ro b l e St
C
r
e
s t v iew Ct
Wat e r s L n
A r l e n e D r
J o n at h a n St
C i p re s St
C re e k D r
Lower
Cutter
Dr
A s p e n Wa y
M e m o r i a l Av e
Cayetano
St
Lo n e Pi n e Av e
N o
n
a
Ave
Th a r p Av e
Pea c e D r
E l m St
G a rd n e r Av e
G ra n t Av e
H a r v e s t D r
Vi
s t
a
V
e
rd
e
Cir
Porter
Dr
S h a s t a St
Monterey Vi sta Dr
B ro o k l y n St
W i l l i a m Av e
A r b o l D r
Spruc e Cir
Niel son St
Argos Cir
M a r i n o v i c h Av e
Ford St
M a n o r Av e
Beverl y Dr
Co n d i t L n
W
e
s
t
r
i
d
g
e
D
r
Eu
ca
l yp
t
u
s
D
r
G r i m m e r R d
Te c h n o l o g y D r
L a n d e n L n
I n g ra m C t
Co tt a g e R d
Kea r n e y St
I n d u s t r i a l R d
A l l i s o n R d
J u d d R d
Le e R d
Fre e d o m B l v d
Freedom
Bl
vd
W R i v e r s i d e D r
Pe n n s y l v a n i a D r
W B ea c h St
E L a ke Av e
Har kins Slough Rd
Ro d r i g u e z St
Ri ver s ide
Dr
A i r p o rt B l v d
Airpo
rt
Bl v
d
S G re e n Va l l e y R d
U n i o n St
L incoln
St
Fo rd St
E B ea c h St
Lo m a Pr i e t a Av e
O h l o n e P k w y
M a i n St
Ri ver s ide Rd
G re e n Va l l e y R d
W L a ke Av e
Wa l ke r St
Po rt e r D r
Le e R d
152
129
CN
CN
CN
CN
CN
CV
CV
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CO
CO
CO
CO
CNS
CNS
CNS
CNS
DWSP
DWSP
DWSP
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
EM-OS
IG
IG
IG
IG
IG
IG
IG
1 1
1 IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
Union
U n i o n Pa c i fi c
Pac ifi c
U n i o n Pa c i fi c
Union Pacifi c
Union Pac ifi c
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-3
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
RM-2
R-1P
R-1P
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
CZ-A
CZ-B
CZ-C
CZ-D
Brow n
s
Val ley
Rd
S a n A n d rea s R d
Buena Vi s ta Dr
Un ion Pa c ifi c
CZ-E
G re e n Va l l e y R d
Ames ti Rd
D e v o n C t
D o e r i n g L n
Co w l e s St
Pi n t o R d
M e l l o Vi e w L n
Tre m b l e y L n
Pa u l s e n R d
L i t a L n
Pa ra i s o D r
Ce l i a D r
H a s t i n g s L n
M i n t o R d
Di c k Phelps
Rd
L o s Robles Ct
D e v o n L n
B e h l e r R d
B e n c i c h L n
Vi s t a De l L ago C i r
EM-OS
PF
H a m e s R d
C
o
r
r
a
l
i
t
o
s
R
d
Eureka
Canyon
Rd
B ro w n s Va l l e y R d
Am
e
s
t
i
Rd
W B ea c h R d
EM-OS
CZ-D
129
152
1 Project: 23-009 Zoning Wall Map - Restored from backup | Layout: 2023 Zoning Wall Map DWSP | Date Exported: 1/9/2024 3:17 PM 1 2
3 4
5 October 2023 (Ord. 1458-23)
Chapter 14-08
Watsonville Municipal Code
Zoning Map
Designed by the City of Watsonville GIS Team
Watsonville City Limit
Boundary
Residential Zones
R-1P: Planned Single Family
Residential
R-1: Single Family
Residential-Low Density
RM-2: Multiple ResidentialMedium Density
RM-3: Multiple ResidentialHigh Density
Commercial Zones
CN: Neighborhood
Commercial
CNS: Neighborhood
Shopping Center
CV: Visitor Commercial
CT: Thoroughfare
Commercial
CO: Office
Industrial Zones
IG: General Industrial
IP: Industrial Park
Coastal Zones
CZ-A: Coastal Zone-A
CZ-B: Coastal Zone-B
CZ-C: Coastal Zone-C
CZ-D: Coastal Zone-D
CZ-E: Landfill
Public Use Zones
PF: Public Facilities
N: Institutional
EM-OS: Env. Mgmt. Open
Space-Private Land
Specific Plans
DWSP: Downtown
Watsonville Specific Plan
Overlay Districts
Planned Development
Residential Mobile Home
Park
Utility Prohibition
Primary map and numbered insets
are shown at the same scale.
1 2
3 4
5 Pinto Lake
City Landfill
Browns Valley Inlet (Grizzly Flats)
Corralitos Filter Plant
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Basemaps Sources: Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA
miles
0 1
miles
0 2
M o n t e r e y
C o u n t y
S
a
n t a
C r u
z
C
o
u
n t y
Santa Clara
County
Santa Cruz County
Monterey County
Santa Cruz Coun yt
Monterey County
San at Cruz o C nu yt

WATSONVILLE

PA JARO

FREEDOM

CORRALITOS

WATSONVILLE

PA JARO

FREEDOM

CORRALITOS

>I
CITY COUNCIL# ~. 'f {a_ J
E ·d :.:-:"'fr r !'1 rc s"' rt~."o n
to tl 1e City Council
,. MEMORANDUM ~ S-f lq
DATE: August 8, 2000
TO: Carlos J. Palacios, City Manager
FROM: ~hn Doughty, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider ordinance amendment to chapter 14-40 developed to clarify permit requirements for new drive through uses in specific commercial zoning districts that also establish design and location criteria.

AGENDA ITEM: August 22, 2000 City Council

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the attached Ordinance and not introduce it for publication .

BASIC PROJECT DATA
APPLICATION NO. TA-2-00
LOCATION: City wide commercial/industrial districts APN: City Wide PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ordinance developed to clarify permit requirements for new drive through uses in specific commercial zoning districts that also establishes design and location criteria.

GENERAL PLAN: Various commercial designations
ZONING: Various commercial designations.

EXISTING USE:

ADJACENT USES:

Commercial properties requesting Drive Through Uses
N/A
ADJACENT GENERAL PLAN/ZONING: N/A
CEQA REVIEW: A Categorical exemption was prepared for this project per Section 1 5300.4 of the CEQA guidelines.

PROPERTY OWNER: Various APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: City of Watsonville

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
On July 10, 2000, the Watsonville Planning Commission first considered the draft text of the Drive Through Facilities Limitation Ordinance at a public hearing. The Planning Commission was concerned that the proposed ordinance would discourage prospective fast food businesses from P:\CCPAKET\CCPKT-00\08-22-00\DRIVETI-IR.wpd August IOPage 1073 of 1242 , 2000 (IO:!Oam) lab Attachment 2: Page 1 of 151 requesting permits. Due to the limited amount of Commissioners present (including Commissioners Castillo, Brunetti, G. Gonzalez, and Nacua) and the importance of the issue, the Commission chose to continue their deliberation until the August 7 th meeting.

At the August 7, 2000, Planning Commission meeting, the same four members were in attendance. They were still concerned about not having full representation of the membership, but followed Staff's recommendation to forward an action to the City Council. There was a general consensus that the proposed drive through ordinance was too restrictive for potential businesses. Commissioner G. Gonzalez indicated he would prefer an ordinance limiting drive through uses in a more specific area, such as the downtown. There was a general consensus among the members that fast food uses and their related drive through components were not proliferating, and that the proposed regulations would be too restrictive for future businesses that may want to move into the City of Watsonville. The Planning Commission recommended, by a 4-0 vote, that the City Council not pursue the proposed drive through ordinance.

PLANNING ANALYSIS
A copy of the original Planning Commission Staff Report is included for your information. The proposed ordinance was drafted at the direction of the City Council with the intent to develop location and design criteria that the City could use to help design drive through facilities that were more compatible with the surrounding uses. The regulations do not prohibit drive through facilities but require limitations to specific commercial zoning districts, which preclude new drive through facilities in the Downtown area.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
As proposed, the ordinance would limit drive through facilities in the following commercial zoning districts if a Special Use Permit is obtained:
1 . CT, (Thorough Fare Commercial)

2. CNS ( Neighborhood Shopping Center)

3. CN (Neighborhood Commercial)

4. CV (Visitor Commercial)
Within these districts the following location criteria are recommended:
1 . Drive through facilities must be located 1 50 feet from residentially zoned property

2. No more than one drive through use may be located within 200 feet of a signalized intersection.

3. Drive through facilities shall not be located within 300 feet of designated gateway intersections.

The GIS department prepared a color map (see attachment 1) identifying where additional drive through facilities could be placed. Additionally, the ordinance recommends 12 specific design standards that must be followed when preparing a plan for new drive through facilities. Finally, the ordinance recognizes the City's existing drive through facilities by not classifying them as non-conforming uses.

P:\CCPAKET\CCPKT-00\08-22-00\DRIVETHR.wpd August I 0, Page 1074 of 1242 2000 (I 0: I Oam) lab Attachment 2: Page 2 of 152

FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Adoption of the proposed ordinance will not have specific financial impacts to the City of Watsonville. Adoption of the ordinance will limit the location of new drive through facilities but not eliminate them. The ordinance is drafted to allow businesses to find locations that are suitable for new drive through development.

ALTERNATIVES
1 . Follow the Planning Commission recommendation and table the ordinance for no further action, which will effectively deny implementation of the ordinance.

2. Introduce the ordinance for publication subject to findings listed in the Staff Report, as recommended by Staff to the Planning Commission.

SUMMARY /RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the proposed ordinance.

Staff has included a draft ordinance and findings should the Council choose to introduce the ordinance for publication and adoption.

ATTACHMENT($)

1. Drive Thru Business Location Criteria Map.

2. August 7, 2000, Planning Commission Staff Report without resolution

3. July 1 o th and August 7, 2000, Planning Commission Minutes

4. Findings for denial and adoption
cc : City Attorney
P:\CCPAKET\CCPKT-00\08-22-00\DRIVETHR.wpd August 10Page 1075 of 1242 , 2000 (10: IOam) lab Attachment 2: Page 3 of 153 ..

I

CITY OF WATSONVILLE
City Council
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT FINDINGS:

Zoning Text Amendment: TA-02-00
APN: City Wide
Applicant: City of Watsonville
Hearing Date: August 22, 2000
Effective Date: October 12, 2000
1 . A public necessity and the general community welfare w arrant the adoption of the proposed amendment.

Supportive Evidence
The proposed drive through facilities restriction ordinance supports the City' s General Plan policy 4 .B.1 to help protect existing neighborhood quality by establishing design and location criteria for drive through facilities that help limit traffic, noise, odor, and aesthetic impacts to surrounding uses by establishing reasonable criteria.

2. The proposed amendment represents good zoning practices.

Supportive Evidence
The location and design criteria represent good zoning practices by establishing reasonable distances to existing signalized and gateway intersections to limit traffic conflicts at these critical intersections.

Additionally, the design criteria also establishes appropriate limits relating to design that ensure that the drive through use is:
a. adequately spaced from residential properties;
b. provides adequate screening from commercial streets; c . includes criteria to limit light glare and noise by proper spacing and screening; d . establishes adequate stacking area to limit internal circulation impacts; e. limits access to the drive through lane to internal areas to prevent circulation impacts with public streets.

ATTACHMENT_ Lf __
Page \ _ of _ __..d' '"'-'..-_
P:\CCPAKET\CCPKT-00\08-22-00\DRIVETHR. wpd August I 0, Page 1076 of 1242 2000 (I 0: I Oam) lab Attachment 2: Page 4 of 15 ;) ~ ••

CITY OF WATSONVILLE
City Council
Zoning Text Amendment: TA-02-00
APN: City Wide
Applicant: City of Watsonville
Hearing Date: August 22, 2000
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT DENIAL FINDINGS:
1 . A public necessity and the general community welfare do not warrant the adoption of the proposed amendment.

Supportive Evidence
The concentration of fast food restaurants appears to occur along Freedom Boulevard where fast food uses are appropriate. There is not a proliferation of drive thru facilities in the remainder of town and the ordinance would create restrictions that w ould be discouraging to new businesses.

2. The proposed amendment does not represent good zoning practices.

Supportive Evidence
The location and design criteria do not represent good zoning practices because the proposed location criteria are too restrictive and will be too limiting on the development of new businesses in the City of Watsonville.

ATTACHMENT ~ Pag ~- of__...li:l. --
P:\CCPAKET\CCPKT -00\08-22-00\DRIVETHR. wpd August I 0Page 1077 of 1242 , 2000 (I 0: I Oam) lab Attachment 2: Page 5 of 15 ~ q ORDINANCE NO. -~1~0~95~-~o~o_ (CM)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WATSONVILLE AMENDING TITLE 14 (ZONING) OF THE
WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING DRIVETHROUGH FACILITIES

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. ENACTMENT.

Title 14 (Zoning) of the Watsonville Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows :

Chapter 14-16. District Regulations
DLU 581 of Subsection (b) of Section 14-16.503 (Conditional uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"DLU 581 Restaurants and coffee shops (drive-through
facilities not allowed)"
DLU 5813 Section 14-16. 603 (Conditional uses) is hereby amended to read as follows :
"DLU 5813 Eating and drinking places, on-sale liquor licenses (drive-through facilities not allowed)"
Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM)
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet09 12.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1:11pm9/13/00

GLU 58 of Section 14-16.1001 (Principal Permitted Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows :
"GLU 58 Eating places only, no on-site liquor
Exclusions:
5811 Drive-through facilities
582 Drinking places
GLU 581 of Section 14-16.1102 (Principal Permitted Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 581 Eating place only, no on-sale liquor (drive-through facilities not allowed"
GLU 58 of Section 14-16.1104 (Conditional Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 58 Eating and drinking places offering live entertainment or dancing, on-sale liquor license (drive-through facilities not allowed"
GLU 581 of Section 14-16.1201 (Principal Permitted Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 581 Eating no liquor
Exclusion: All eating and drinking places offering live entertainment or dancing, 582 uses, and drive-through
facilities"
Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 2
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0912.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/13/00

GLU of Section 14-16.1203 (Conditional Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 581 Eating places offering live entertainment and dance, on-sale liquor license or drive through facilities"
GLU 581 of Section 14-16.1301 (Principal Permitted Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 581 Eating places, no on sale liquor or drive-through facilities" GLU 581 of Section 14-16.1303 (Conditional Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 581 Eating places, beer and w ine on-sale license or drivethrough facilities 581 Restaurants, on-sale liquor license or drive-through facilities"
GLU 58 Exclusions of Section 14-16.1401 (Principal permitted uses) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"GLU 58 Exclusions: 582
Drive through facilities"
Subsection (c) of Section 14-16.1403( (Conditional Uses) is hereby amended by adding DLU 581 to read as follows:
"DLU 581 Eating and drinking places with drive-through facilities - not allowed"
Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 3
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0912.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/13/00

Chapter 14-18. Definitions
Chapter 18 (Definitions) of Title 14 (Zoning) is hereby amended by adding Section 14-18.279 (Drive-Through Facility) to read as follows:
"Sec. 14-18.279. Drive-Through Facility.
"Drive-Through Facility" shall mean any commercial use that conducts business in whole or part with a person or persons who enters a commercial property in a motor vehicle and transacts business from said motor vehicle from any location on such property that is not a designated parking space. Drive-Through Facility does not, however, include Service Stations as defined in Sec. 14-18.682 of this Code." Section 14-40.020 (General Provisions) of Chapter 40 (General Provisions, Exceptions, and Modifications) of Title 14 (Zoning) is hereby amended by adding Subsection (n) to read as follows:
"(n) Drive-Through Facility"
Title 14 (Zoning) is hereby amended by adding Chapter 41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions).
"Chapter 14-41
Drive-Through Facility Restrictions
Sec. 14-41 .100. Purpose of Chapter.

Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 4
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet09 12.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 : 11 pm 9/13/00

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the design and location of DriveThrough Facilities in the City of Watsonville. Not withstanding any other provision in this Code, Drive-Through Facilities shall be permitted only on property located in commercial zones that also meet the following conditions:
(a) Location.
( 1) No drive-through lane, speakers , menu boards and or take out windows shall be located within one hundred-fifty ( 150) feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes. (2) No more than one (1) Drive-Through Facility shall be located within two-hundred (200) feet of the nearest point of a signalized intersection except as set forth in (3) below.
(3) No Drive-Through Facility shall be located within threehundred (300) feet of any of the following "gateway" intersections:
(i) Main Street at Front Street
(ii) Main Street at Freedom Boulevard
(iii) Main Street at Green Valley Road
(iv) Riverside Drive at Rodriguez Street
(v) Riverside Drive at Blackburn Street
(vi) Freedom Boulevard at Airport Boulevard
(vii) East Lake Avenue at Martinelli Street
Ord . No. 1095-00 (CM) 5
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet09 1 2.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/13/00

Sec. 14-41.101. Use Permit Required.
(a) No drive-through facility shall be allow ed in the following commercial districts, without a special use permit issued by t he Planning Commission:
( 1) CT, Thoroughfare Commercial
(2) CNS, Neighborhood Shopping Center
(3) CN, Neighborhood Commercial
(4) CV, Visitor Commercial
Sec. 14.41 .102. Design Standards.

Drive Through Facilities shall be designed and situated in such a manner so that:
(a) Trash facilities are located to accommodate patrons using the drive through facilities in an area away from residential uses; (b) Lighting, noise, fumes, rodents, pests and odors can either be eliminated, mitigated or reduced so as to not adversely affect neighboring properties or uses;
(c) The impact on neighboring properties or uses due to activities associated with the proposed facility and its hours of operation do not unreasonably interfere with adjoining residential uses;
(d) Traffic generated by the Drive-Through Facility can be reasonably accommodated by the property and neighborhood streets, without creating a Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 6
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet09 12.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/ 13/00

materially adverse traffic impact, or a material traffic or safety hazard to vehicles or pedestrians;
(e) On-site pedestrian walkways shall not intersect the drive-through vehicle lanes, except visibility is clear, and the pedestrian walkway is emphasized by enriched paving and striping;
(f) Drive-through lanes include a minimum 14-foot width on curves and a minimum 11-foot width on straight sections;
(g) Drive-through lanes provide sufficient vehicle stacking area behind the menu board to accommodate a minimum of four cars;
(h) No drive-through lanes shall exit directly onto a public right-ofway; (i) Landscaping shall screen drive-through and drive-in lanes from the public right-of-way and shall minimize the visual impact of the menu board and directional signs;
(j) Drive-through lanes shall be constructed with (PCC) concrete; (k) Drive-through lanes shall be set back from the face of the curb of any street frontage a minimum of 20 feet;
(I) Only one menu board may be permitted and shall be a maximum of 30 square feet in the area of the sign face, with a maximum height of seven feet and shall face away from the street.

Sec. 14-41. 104. Non Conforming Uses.

Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 7
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0912.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/13/00

No Drive-Through Facility, which otherwise complies with this Code, shall hereafter be considered non-conforming except as provided herein. If an existing Drive-Through Facility requests a zoning change or modification to is use permit, it shall comply with this Chapter."
SECTION 2. PUBLICATION.

This ordinance shall be published in the Watsonville Register-Pajaronian in compliance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Watsonville.

SECTION 3. CERTIFICATION.

This ordinance shall be transmitted to the California Coastal Commission to obtain approval and certification.

SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This ordinance shall be in force and take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption.
*********************
Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM) 8
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0912.00\WMC Drive·through.ord
1 :11 pm 9/ 13/00

. .

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Watsonville, held on the -~2=2~nd~- day of __ A~u_g=us~t~_, 2000, by Council Member -~Ph~ar~e~s __ , who moved its introduction and passage to print, which motion being duly seconded by Council Member Bobeda , was upon roll call carried and ordered printed and published by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST:

Ord. No. (CM) 9
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0822.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
11 :29 am 9/11 /00
Bobeda, Doering-Nielsen,
Gomez, Lopez, Phares, Carter,
Rios
None
None
a_y_o_r __ _

ORDINANCE NO. _ __,1-=0=-95=---=o=-o- (CM}
The foregoing ordinance, having been printed and published as required by the Charter of the City of Watsonville, and coming on for final consideration at the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Watsonville, held on the __ 1~2=--th __ day of September , 2000, by Council Member -~Bo=-b=-e"""'d ..... a..___, who moved its final adoption, which motion being duly seconded by Council Member Phares , was upon roll call carried and the ordinance finally adopted by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST:
of~~ .

EFFECTIVE
CityClerk
DATE:
~
October 12, 2000
Ord. No. 1095-00 (CM} 10
L:\COUNCIL\2000\Meet0912.00\WMC Drive-through.ord
11 :28 am 9/15/00
Bobeda, Gomez, Phares, Carter,
Rios
None
Doering-Nielsen, Lopez

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
217

MINUTES

REGULAR JOINT CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY, &

SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING
October 22, 2024 City of Watsonville
Council Chambers
275 Main Street, Top Floor
4:31 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino (arrived at 6 pm), Parker, and Salcido were present.

1.a. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER(S) (If Any) MOTION: It was moved by Member Dutra, seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco and carried by the following vote to excuse Member Montesino’s absence:

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Montesino

2. REPORTS TO COUNCIL – No Action Required

2.a. REPORT ON PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT SUMMER PROGRAM

HIGHLIGHTS BY RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT NEGRETE
Member Dutra thanked Parks & Community Services staff for their efforts to improve and expand services, programs, and facilities.

In answering Member Dutra, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib stated staff was exploring alternative locations for hosting various community events due to future renovations at the Plaza.

Member Parker and Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco thanked Parks & Community Services staff for their efforts to provide services and programs.

In answering Member Salcido, Parks Superintendent Negrete provided details regarding the Junior Lifeguard Program.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter thanked Parks & Community Services staff for providing programs for youth and seniors. She thanked voters for approving Measure R.

2.b. REPORT ON PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN BY PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES

DIRECTOR LINDBERG & RANDALL BLISS, HARRIS & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEER In answering Member Clark, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about continuing to explore comprehensive street and sidewalk repairs and the potential to modify the Pavement Management Plan based on available funding.

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
218
Member Clark requested exploration of similar management plans for the City’s sewer and water systems.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg stated street striping efforts would continue. She spoke about addressing resident requests for striping and traffic calming measures.

Engineer Bliss stated that the City’s webpage on the Pavement Management Plan was a helpful tool to educate the public regarding prioritizing maintenance.

In answering Member Dutra, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about streets requiring major repairs.

City Manager Vides, in answering Member Dutra, spoke about funding dedicated to road and street repairs and maintenance. She stated she would provide Council with an update on funding opportunities and allocations.

Member Dutra requested attention to detail when painting signage on roads.

In answering Member Parker, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg stated Council would have additional time to provide input on the Pavement Management Plan. She spoke about opportunities for grant funding and equity in maintenance and repairs.

Member Parker requested exploring simplifying the City website for easier user navigation. 5:30 p.m.

3. CLOSED SESSION CORRESPONDENCE (None)

4. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed the meeting to discuss the items that follow at 5:30 p.m.

4.a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Government Code 54956.9(d))
One potential case
City Council Resumed at 6:36 p.m.

5. ROLL CALL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, and Salcido were present.

Staff members present were City Manager Vides, City Attorney Zutler, City Clerk Ortiz, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg, Fire Chief Lopez, Administrative Services Director Duran, Interim Community Development Director Meek, IT Director Gill, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib, Library Director Martinez, Airport Director Williams, Deputy City Manager Manning, Principal Planner Orbach, Assistant Police Chief Rodriguez, Police Captain Radich,

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
219
Police Sergeant Wildey, Associate Planner Carmona, Permit Technician Manansala, Housing Manager Landaverry, Deputy City Clerk Pacheco, and Interpreter Jauregui.

6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

7. INFORMATION ITEMS

7.a. REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS

7.b. MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS REPORT

7. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

8.a. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
City Manager Vides stated it was Flood Preparedness Week and informed the public that sandbag stations were open. She spoke about emergency preparedness and encouraged the public to visit the City’s website for additional information.

8.b. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COUNCIL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter spoke about her attendance at various events over the past weeks. She stated she attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo and requested a video be played regarding Watsonville receiving the Helen Putnam Award for Excellence for Community Services and Economic Development.

Member Dutra spoke about his attendance at League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo and congratulated the City for receiving the Helan Putnam Award for Excellence. He thanked former Community Development Director Merriam for her dedication to the City. He stated he would participate in a fundraiser for local non-profit organizations. He wished the public a happy Halloween and encouraged everyone to vote on Election Day.

Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco spoke about various meetings and events she attended over the past weeks, including the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo. She congratulated staff on their efforts with the Opportunity to Work Program.

Member Clark spoke about various events he attended over the past weeks. He invited the public to attend a District 5 meeting in December to discuss roadways and intersections. He encouraged the public to attend and provide input.

8.c. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Zutler stated a Closed Session was held on the item listed on the agenda and no reportable action was taken.

8.d. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING FRUITION BREWING

8.e. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CLAUDIO FRANÇA BRAZILIAN JIU-JITSU & ITS OWNERS CLAUDIO FRANÇA & THOMAS RUMSEY

8.f. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CLASSIC CALAVERA TATTOO & ITS OWNER PEPE NUÑEZ – Postponed

8.g. PRESENTATION BY FRANCISCO ESTRADA REGARDING FRIENDS OF WATSONVILLE PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES “BUY A BRICK” CAMPAIGN (5 Minutes)

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
220
Friends of Watsonville Parks & Community Services Board Member Tony Camargo was also present.

In answering Member Parker, Board Member Camargo spoke about options for the public interested in purchasing bricks.

Mr. Estrada answered Member Parker’s questions regarding character limitations and cost of bricks.

In answering Member Montesino, Mr. Estrada spoke about efforts to accommodate residents’ requests for the location of their bricks at Ramsay Park.

8.h. UPDATE ON CARE ACT IMPLEMENTATION BY NICOLE COBURN, ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (15 Minutes)
County of Santa Cruz Principal Administrative Analyst Sven Stafford, Santa Cruz County Public Defender’s Office Director of Holistic Defense Caitlin Becker, and Santa Cruz County Counsel staff Megan Maravich were also present.

In answering Member Salcido, Director of Holistic Defense Becker spoke about the Public Defender Office’s role in representing a CARE Act participant and potential diversion opportunities.

Director of Holistic Defense Becker and County Counsel staff Maravich, in answering Member Salcido, spoke about the CARE Act being a civil matter, separate from criminal proceedings.

Director of Holistic Defense Becker, in answering Member Clark, spoke about the process for filing a petition in cases where supporting medical documentation is not available.

In answering Member Clark, Principal Administrative Analyst Stafford spoke about the potential number of people that could be assisted by the CARE program.

8. CONSENT AGENDA

PUBLIC INPUT
Recreation Supervisor Merolla and Young Adult Librarian Carrillo spoke about Item 9.l.

The following Teen Action Council members introduced themselves:

Camila – Secretary
Alexandra – Treasurer
Isabella – Parks & Recreation Commission Youth Representative Cristina Nolasco – Marketing Chair
Naia – Community Development
Anahi Jacobo – Activities Chair
Joseph Magaña – Jóvenes Sanos Ambassador
MOTION: It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Dutra to approve the Consent Agenda, excluding Item 9.l. which was removed.

Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco stated she was related to one of the appointees on Item 9.l. and would recuse herself from voting on that item. She requested the item be removed from the Consent Agenda.

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
221
MOTION: The above motion carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None

9.a. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 5 & 8, 2024

9.b. ORDINANCE NO. 1469-24 (CM)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AMENDING SECTIONS 4-11.09 (GATE FEES) AND 4-11.15 (RESPONSE TIME) AND REPEALING SECTION 4-11.30 (SERVICE FEES) OF CHAPTER 11 (VEHICLE TOWING SERVICES) OF TITLE 4 (PUBLIC SAFETY) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO

VEHICLE TOWING SERVICES

9.c. RESOLUTION NO. 214-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND CALLING FOR BIDS FOR THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT FUEL DISPENSER CONTAINMENT, PROJECT NO. AIRPORT 910- 7855-14900

9.d. RESOLUTION NO. 215-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

THIRD AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE AND IRWIN IVAN ORTIZ FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY CLERK

9.e. RESOLUTION NO. 216-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND SWT ENGINEERING, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE LANDFILL PHASE IV MODULE 1 GROUNDWATER PROTECTION SYSTEM AND PHASE III FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, NO. SW-23- 14969, AMENDING THE SCOPE OF WORK, ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $142,399; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.f. RESOLUTION NO. 217-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT WITH SENSUS METERING SYSTEMS, INC., DBA SENSUS USA, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF WATER METER

READING RADIO SUPPORT TOWER AND EQUIPMENT AT THE CORRALITOS FILTER PLANT AND PAJARO DUNES; ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $15,000; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

SAME (FUNDED FROM WATER FUND)

9.g. RESOLUTION NO. 218-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE FROM DURAMAX HOLDINGS LLC DBA OTTO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, FOR RESIDENTIAL REFUSE AND RECYCLING ROLLOUT CARTS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $163,260; AND AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME (FUNDED FROM SOLID WASTE

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
222

ENTERPRISE FUND)

9.h. RESOLUTION NO. 219-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AWARDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO URBAN FUTURES, INC. FOR MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000; AND

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.i. RESOLUTION NO. 220-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE ACCEPTING $1,129,518 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (SCCRTC) FOR THE OHLONE PARKWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ALL AGREEMENTS AND ANY AMENDMENTS NECESSARY; AND APPROPRIATING SUCH FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND [0206]

9.j. RESOLUTION NO. 221-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDING OF $500,000

THROUGH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CANNABIS EQUITY GRANT TO SUPPORT

CANNABIS EQUITY BUSINESSES IN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, AND IF AWARDED,

APPROPRIATING SUCH FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND, TO EXECUTE AND

SUBMIT ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO APPLICATIONS,

AGREEMENTS, AND PAYMENT REQUESTS, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY

9.k. RESOLUTION NO. 222-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

MEMBER TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

9.l. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

DANIELA HERNANDEZ AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LIBRARY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES AND ISABELLA ALVARADO AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION – Removed. See Item 10.

10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION: It was moved by Member Clark, seconded by Member Parker and carried by the following vote to approve Item 9.l. listed below.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: Orozco

9.l. RESOLUTION NO. 223-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

DANIELA HERNANDEZ AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LIBRARY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES AND ISABELLA ALVARADO AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE

PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
223

11. REPORTS TO COUNCIL (Continued) – No Action Required

11.a. WATSONVILLE CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY ROOFTOP ADDITION PROJECT UPDATE BY

MATTHEW EVANS, ARCHITECT AT THE KPA GROUP
Library Director Martinez was also present.

In answering Member Dutra, Architect Evans spoke about modifications to address potential safety concerns.

Library Director Martinez, in answering Member Dutra, stated the rooftop addition would have the same hours as the Library and spoke about potential partnerships to host events.

City Manager Vides added that there was a possibility of exploring allowing rentals for outside events.

Member Salcido spoke in support of exploring rental of the rooftop addition for events.

Library Director Martinez stated that ingress and egress points would be explored and spoke about partnering with Friends of the Watsonville Public Library to allow them use of the space.

In answering Member Parker, Library Director Martinez spoke about opportunities to offer Library programs in the rooftop addition.

Architect Evans, in answering Member Parker, stated options for rain protection had not been explored yet.

In answering Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Architect Evans provided an estimated project completion date.

11.b. REPORT BY PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES DIRECTOR LINDBERG ON CITYWIDE LIGHTING ASSESSMENT – Postponed.

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS, ORDINANCES, & APPEALS

12.a. TEXT AMENDMENTS TO WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5-49 (CANNABIS EQUITY PROGRAM) & CHAPTER 14-53 (CANNABIS FACILITIES)
1) Staff Report by Associate Planner Carmona. Principal Planner Orbach was also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
Member Salcido expressed concerns with the recommendation to strikeout the following language from the eligibility criteria: “at least 50% female owned businesses.” In answering Member Parker, Associate Planner Carmona spoke about the reasons for the staff recommendation. He spoke about feedback received by the State at the time the City applied for grant funding.

City Manager Vides further spoke about suggestions from the State regarding amendments to the Cannabis Equity Program eligibility criteria.

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
224
City Attorney Zutler read a portion of the State’s cannabis equity grant funding guidelines as related to allowable eligibility criteria.

Member Parker expressed concerns with the recommendation to remove the 50% female owned businesses eligibility criteria.

In answering Member Dutra, Associate Planner Carmona spoke about potential effects on businesses should the City not receive cannabis equity grant funding and provided details regarding allocation of currently available funding.

Member Dutra spoke about exploring ways to incentivize diversity among cannabis business owners and expressed concerns with constraints on small business owners.

In answering Member Salcido, Associate Planner Carmona stated there were currently no cannabis businesses that were at least 50% woman owned.

City Manager Vides spoke about the City’s role in assisting local cannabis business owners through State awarded grant funding.
3) Public Comments
James Cunningham, Fog City Farms, thanked staff for working on the Cannabis Equity Program. He expressed concerns with oversaturation of the cannabis market and spoke about using funding from the program to grow his business.

Jonathan Kolodinski, Crème de Canna Collective, thanked staff and Council for supporting the cannabis industry and spoke about inclusivity efforts. He spoke about challenges faced and in support of the staff recommendation.

MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Member Clark to introduce the ordinances listed under Item 12.a.6. and 12.a.7. below. 4) City Council Deliberation on Motion
Member Salcido expressed concerns with removing the language regarding 50% female owned businesses from the eligibility criteria and stated she would not support the motion.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter expressed concerns with removing the 50% female owned businesses from the eligibility criteria. She stated she would support the motion taking in to consideration the already existing cannabis business that needed assistance.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: Parker, Salcido
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) By Motion, Introduce for First Reading, by Title Only, Waiving the Full Reading of the Text, an Ordinance Amending Certain Sections of Chapter 49 (Cannabis Equity Program) of Title 5 (Public Welfare, Morals, & Conduct) of the Watsonville Municipal Code Regarding the Cannabis Equity Program
6) By Motion, Introduce for First Reading, by Title Only, Waiving the Full Reading of the Text, an Ordinance Amending Certain Sections of Chapter 53 (Cannabis

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
225
Facilities) of Title 14 (Zoning) of the Watsonville Municipal Code Regarding the Cannabis Equity Program

12.b. DENSITY BONUS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, & TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 13- LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) 1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Project Architect Bill Kempf and Habitat for Humanity Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Catherine Stihler were also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about available parking spaces for each unit and challenges with emerging housing laws.

Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Member Clark, stated all units would be for sale. 3) Public Comments
Mr. Kempf, spoke in support of the project and spoke about other projects in the area that he had been involved with.

CEO Stihler spoke in support of the project and about volunteer opportunities to help build the homes.

Council clarifying & technical questions continued.

In answering Member Dutra, Housing Manager Landaverry spoke about low-income requirements and provided details regarding determining sale price of the units.

CEO Stihler, in answering Member Dutra, spoke about the volunteer hour requirement for families purchasing the units and stated homes could be sold back to Habitat for Humanity and remain affordable. She spoke about the application process for interested families.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, CEO Stihler spoke about the potential for making changes to their process for selecting the families that purchase the units. 4) MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore, seconded by Mayor Quiroz-Carter to approve the resolutions listed under Item 12.a.6. and 12.a.7. below.

In answering Member Salcido, CEO Stihler spoke about the mortgage application process for families purchasing a unit.
? male, provided further details regarding financing of the homes and Habitat for Humanity providing mortgage payment assistance if necessary.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
226
6) RESOLUTION NO. 224-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS (PP2023-6034) FOR A 13-UNIT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL

EXEMPTION)
7) RESOLUTION NO. 225-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION, AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR EVAN CIRCLE, TRACT 1518, PHASE III (PP2023-6034) FOR A 13-UNIT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL EXEMPTION)

12.c. DENSITY BONUS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, & TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 5- LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 &49) 1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Project Architect Bill Kempf was also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Clark, Mr. Kempf spoke about the tentative map for the project and potential of for sale units.
3) Public Comments – None
4) MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Member Dutra and carried by the following vote to approve the resolutions listed under Item 12.c.6. and

12.c.7. below.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None
6) RESOLUTION NO. 226-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS (PP2024-6731) FOR A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 & 49) AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL

EXEMPTION)
7) RESOLUTION NO. 227-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR EVAN CIRCLE – PHASE II FOR

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
227
A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 & 49) AND

FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL EXEMPTION)

13. NEW BUSINESS

13.a. STUDY SESSION ON WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 14-41 – DRIVE –

THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS
1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Interim Community Development Director Meek was also present. 2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Salcido, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about the zoning of areas where drive-through projects had been rejected and the possibility of rezoning.

Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Mayor Quiroz-Carter, spoke about current restrictions regarding car queuing to prevent lines from extending into adjacent highways.

He provided details regarding vacant commercial parcels that could potentially be used for drive-through projects.

In answering Member Dutra, Principal Planner Orbach stated drive-through projects that had been rejected did not comply with the current City ordinance and spoke about distance requirements surrounding cities had regarding drive-through projects and residential areas.

City Manager Vides spoke about the potential uses of available commercial parcels.

Member Dutra spoke about challenges due to the urban limit line. He requested information regarding how other cities were addressing drive-through projects.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter requested a more comprehensive staff report prior to Council providing recommendations.

In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach listed various types of zoning districts and common uses.

Member Parker spoke about potential mitigation measures for residential areas surrounding drive-through projects.

In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about the reasons he provided examples of controversies surrounding drive-through projects throughout the State.

City Manager Vides, in answering Member Clark, requested direction from Council on potential changes to the drive-through ordinance for staff to explore.

Member Montesino requested information regarding how other similar communities were addressing drive-through projects.

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
228
Member Salcido requested exploring rezoning to allow drive-through projects in three zones that had were identified in the staff presentation.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter requested additional information regarding potential impacts of amending the ordinance.

Member Parker and Member Dutra expressed support for Member Salcido’s request. 3) Public Input
Martha Victoria Vega thanked staff for their report. She spoke about potential lost revenue due to current drive-through facility restrictions and stated many young adults were in favor of having more businesses in the City. She asked Council to support growth.

Raeid Farhat, District 7, stated there were several vacant lots on East Lake Avenue. He spoke in support of updating the drive-through ordinance. ? male spoke about the possibility of amending the ordinance to allow Council more ability to make decisions regarding drive-through projects.

Bill Hansen spoke about East Lake Avenue being underserved and stated challenges with two potential drive-through projects he was working on. He asked Council for assistance with moving the projects forward.

Marta Bulaich, District 1, stated various restaurants utilized technology to improve traffic issues. She spoke about the importance of drive-through businesses in the community and stated potential negative impacts of not allowing drive-through projects.

Council clarifying & technical questions continued.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter spoke about health concerns being taken into consideration when the drive-through ordinance was first adopted.

Member Dutra stated concerns with negative impacts of restrictions on potential projects.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, City Manager Vides provided a potential timeline for the item being taken back to Council.

City Manager Vides and Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Member Clark, spoke about the process for projects to be granted variances to be allowed to move forward.

Member Salcido requested exploring potential variances, additional information on zoning, and allowing drive-through locations in certain areas in the City.

Member Parker requested a draft ordinance be considered by Council prior to taking it to Planning Commission.
4) 1st MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Mayor QuirozCarter to direct staff based on Council feedback received during the meeting to prepare a draft ordinance to take to Planning Commission for recommendation to Council for amendments to the ordinance.

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
229
In answering Member Dutra, City Attorney Zutler spoke about the procedure should Council make changes to the draft ordinance during the first reading. 1 st MOTION: The above motion failed by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Orozco, Quiroz-Carter
NOES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Salcido ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
2nd MOTION: It was moved by Member Salcido, seconded by Member Parker and carried by the following vote to direct staff based on Council feedback received during the meeting to prepare a draft ordinance to bring to Council for additional feedback.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido NOES: MEMBERS: Quiroz-Carter
ABSENT: MEMBERS:
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None

14. EMERGENCY ITEMS ADDED TO AGENDA – None

15. REQUESTS & SCHEDULING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Member Clark requested all relevant documents for agenda items be included in the agenda packet.

Member Parker agreed with Member Clark’s request.

16. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. ________________________________ Vanessa Quiroz-Carter, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________ _______
Irwin I. Ortiz, City Clerk

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
230
This page was left intentionally blank.

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
257

MINUTES

REGULAR JOINT CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY, &

SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING
January 14, 2025 City of Watsonville
Council Chambers
275 Main Street, Top Floor
NOTE: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(b), Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido participated in the meeting via teleconferencing from: 65 Peppertree Lane, Watsonville, CA 95076
4:31 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Orozco, Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido, and Council Members Clark, Dutra (arrived at 4:38 p.m.), Montesino, Parker and Quiroz-Carter were present.

1.a. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES & RECOGNITION OF RETIREES

2. CLOSED SESSION CORRESPONDENCE - None

3. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed the meeting to discuss the items that follow at 4:34 p.m.

3.a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9(d))
[1 potential case]

3.b. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
(Government Code 54957.6)
Agency negotiator: Nathalie Manning, Marissa Duran and Mark Wilson, Burke Williams and Sorensen
Employee organizations: Confidential, Executive Team, Fire Management, International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local 1272, Management, United Public Employees of California (LiUNA), Local 792, Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 (OE3), Police Officers Association, Police Management, Public Safety Mid-Management, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 521 Clerical Technical City Council Resumed at 6:30 p.m.

4. ROLL CALL
Mayor Orozco, Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker and Quiroz-Carter were present.

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
258
Staff members present were City Manager Vides, City Attorney Zutler, City Clerk Ortiz, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg, Police Chief Zamora, Fire Chief Lopez, Administrative Services Director Duran, Interim Community Development Director Meek, IT Director Gill, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib, Library Director Martinez, Deputy City Manager Manning, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach, Administrative Analyst Mata, Deputy City Clerk Pacheco, and Interpreter Landaverry.

4.a. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER(S) (If any) – None

5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.a. REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS

6.b MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS REPORT

7. NEW BUSINESS

7.a. OATHS OF OFFICE TO REELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER 1) OATH OF OFFICE ADMINISTERED BY CITY CLERK ORTIZ TO REELECTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBER VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER (DISTRICT 2)
2) COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER
Member Quiroz-Carter stated the reason she was unable to attend the December Council meeting. She stated she was happy to be back and ready for work.

8. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

8.a. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Zutler stated Council held a Closed Session on the items on the agenda and no reportable action was taken.

8.b. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC (2 MINUTES) – None

8.c. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COUNCIL (2 MINUTES)
Member Dutra wished everyone a happy new year. He expressed solidarity with those affected by the fires in the Los Angeles area and spoke about the effects of climate change.

He stated he recently met various Council members from surrounding jurisdictions.

Member Montesino wished everyone a happy new year. He stated Santa Cruz County Supervisor Hernandez was elected Board Chair at a recent meeting and mentioned Fabian Leonor was appointed by the Board of Supervisors to serve on the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board of Directors. He spoke about his appointment as Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Chair.

Mayor Orozco spoke about events she participated in over the past month. She provided additional updates regarding her new Mayor Orozco on the Move initiative, an upcoming district-based survey, and about funding obtained for parks and recreation improvements.

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
259

8.d. 2024 PINK PATCH PROJECT PRESENTATION BY WATSONVILLE POLICE

DEPARTMENT
Staff presentation by Administrative Analyst Mata, Oncology Certified Nurse Renee Aispuro Gonzalez, and Dominican Hospital Chief Philanthropy Officer Anthony Pagliaro. Katz Cancer Resource Center representatives were also present.

8.e. PRESENTATION OF CHECK TO CITY BY FRIENDS OF WATSONVILLE PARKS &

COMMUNITY SERVICES VICE PRESIDENT ANA HURTADO
Friends of Watsonville Parks & Community Services Board President Daryl Wise, Vice President Ana Hurtado, and Board Member Tony Camargo were present.

8.f. PRESENTATION BY PAJARO VALLEY PREVENTION & STUDENT ASSISTANCE CHIEF

EXECUTIVE OFFICER JASMINE NAJERA
Member Parker spoke about the positive impact of Pajaro Valley Prevention & Student Assistance (PVPSA) on students and thanked them for their work.

8.g. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING PASILLAS TIRE SERVICE

8.h. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING HABITAT FOR HUMANITY MONTEREY BAY

8.i. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING BEER MULE BOTTLE SHOP + POUR HOUSE

8.j. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING HONEYLUX COFFEE – Unable to attend meeting.

9. CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC INPUT – None
MOTION: It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Quiroz-Carter to approve the Consent Agenda.

In answering Member Clark, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about the project listed under Item 9.b., the cooperative agreement listed under Item 9.e., and about efforts to move the Harkins Slough Pedestrian Bridge project forward.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Quiroz-Carter, Salcido, Orozco NOES: MEMBERS: Dutra (Item 9.r. only)
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None

9.a. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 10, 2024

9.b. RESOLUTION NO. 1-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE REJECTING

ALL BIDS FOR THE HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD OVERPASS SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN (SSFM) RELOCATION PROJECT NO. ST-23-14859SS

9.c. RESOLUTION NO. 2-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 3 TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
260
AND ROBERT A BOTHMAN, INC., DBA ROBERT A BOTHMAN CONSTRUCTION, FOR THE RAMSAY PARK RENAISSANCE PROJECT, NO. PK-22-01, INCREASING THE CONTRACT COMPENSATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $587,708.10, FOR A REVISED TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $25,248,613.38, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE SAME

9.d. RESOLUTION NO. 3-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

THIRD AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PREPARATION SERVICES FOR THE HIGHWAY 1 AND

HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT; AMENDING THE CONTRACT COMPENSATION AND ADDING $30,000; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE SAME

9.e. RESOLUTION NO. 4-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 1 (AGREEMENT 05-0386A1) BETWEEN

THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR PREPARATION OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND A CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FOR THE NEW PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND

UPGRADED BICYCLE FACILITIES AT THE HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD CROSSING OF STATE ROUTE 1;ADDING $321,000 AND INCREASING THE TOTAL AGREEMENT AMOUNT TO $3,468,000; AND AUTHORIZING A BUDGET APPROPRIATION OF $321,000 FROM THE EAST HIGHWAY 1 AREA IMPACT FEES FUND [0344]; AND AUTHORIZING

AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.f. RESOLUTION NO. 5-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND MNS ENGINEERS, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR DESIGN SERVICES THROUGH

CONSTRUCTION FOR THE WWTF ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAZARDMITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, NO WW-22-14797, AMENDING THE SCOPE OF WORK, ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $175,534 AND EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT FROM JANUARY 31, 2025 TO DECEMBER 31, 2027; AND

DIRECTING CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.g. RESOLUTION NO. 6-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND KOSMONT AND ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA KOSMONT COMPANIES EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT TO DECEMBER 31, 2025,

TO CONTINUE PROVIDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING SERVICES AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXCUTE SAME

9.h. RESOLUTION NO. 7-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AWARDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO CSG CONSULTANTS, INC., A

CORPORATION, FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE GREEN VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – CAREY AVE TO THICKET LN, NO. ST-24-

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
261
14523, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $193,140; AND AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.i. RESOLUTION NO. 8-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE ACCEPTING

NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION CLIMATE RESILIENCE REGIONAL CHALLENGE GRANT SUB-AWARD, IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,000 AND

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE, EXECUTE

SAME, AND APPRORIATE FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND

9.j. RESOLUTION NO. 9-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE UNITED

STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, FOR THE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,759, TO FUND CRIME ANALYSIS SOFTWARE, TO EXECUTE A STANDARD AGREEMENT AND ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS; AND APPROPRIATING SUCH FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND (0260)

9.k. RESOLUTION NO. 10-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A $250,000 GRANT FROM CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY NECESSARY GRANT DOCUMENTS; AND APPROPRIATING SUCH

FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND

9.l. RESOLUTION NO. 11-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE REVIEWING

AND ACCEPTING ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING ON JUNE 30, 2024, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66006

9.m. RESOLUTION NO. 1-25 (SA)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, ACTING AS

THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, PURSUANT TO HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 34171(j) AND SECTIONS 34173, APPROVING A RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PERIOD COMMENCING JULY 1, 2025 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2026, AS REQUIRED BY HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 34177(l)(1)

9.n. RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING MEMBERS TO COMMITTEES FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2025

9.o. RESOLUTION NO. 13-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

COUNCIL MEMBER JIMMY DUTRA TO THE SANTA CRUZ METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR TERM COMMENCING ON JANUARY 1, 2025, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2028

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
262

9.p. RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBER PARKER AND MAYOR OROZCO AS ALTERNATE TO THE PÁJARO

REGIONAL FLOOD MANAGEMENT AGENCY JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

9.q. RESOLUTION NO. 15-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

JORGE ZAMORA, POLICE CHIEF, TO THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY HOUSING FOR

HEALTH PARTNERSHIP POLICY BOARD

9.r. RESOLUTION NO. 16-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

LOWELL HURST TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

9.s. RESOLUTION NO. 17-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

LUCY ROJAS TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

9.t. RESOLUTION NO. 18-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

NOE IBARRA TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION

COMMISSION

9.u. RESOLUTION NO. 19-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

PEDRO REYNOSO TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE LIBRARY COMMISSION

10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA

11. REPORTS TO COUNCIL – No Action Required

11.a. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE REPORT

12. NEW BUSINESS (Continued)

12.a. CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL HEALTHCARE BENEFITS 1) Staff Report by Deputy City Manager Manning and Administrative Services Director Duran
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Dutra, Deputy City Manager Manning spoke about the cost of the healthcare plan for employees and rate increases over the years.

Administrative Services Director Duran, in answering Member Parker, provided an explanation regarding the options and requirements for participating in the City’s health care plan.

City Manager Vides stated that Council was being asked whether they would like to create an Elected Coverage Group to be eligible to participate in the City’s healthcare plan.

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
263
Administrative Services Director Duran gave additional details regarding the creation of the Elected Coverage Group.

In answering Member Parker, City Manager Vides stated an Elected Coverage Group could be created by Council in the future if they opted not to do so at this time.

City Attorney Zutler, in answering Member Dutra, stated the reasons Council could not negotiate for a lower cost than what City employees paid for healthcare coverage.

In answering Member Parker, City Attorney Zutler stated the procedure for creating the Elected Coverage Group would remain the same unless the City switched to a different healthcare plan.
3) Public Input – None
4) MOTION: It was moved by Member Parker, seconded by Member Clark, not to create the Elected Coverage Group.
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion
In answering Member Montesino, Administrative Services Director Duran stated that the City did not participate in the same health coverage plan as Pajaro Valley Unified School District.

City Manager Vides, in answering Member Clark, stated the City had a program administrator for its health coverage plan.

In answering Member Parker, City Manager Vides spoke about what forming an Elected Coverage Group would mean and options for individual Council members to opt out of the City’s healthcare coverage.

MOTION: The above motion carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Parker, Orozco
NOES: MEMBERS: Montesino, Quiroz-Carter
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Salcido
6) RESOLUTION NO. 20-25 (CM) (FAILED)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE FORMING

AN ELECTED COVERAGE GROUP TO ALLOW CURRENT AND FUTURE CITY

COUNCIL MEMBERS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE HEALTH

CARE PLAN AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO

TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE SUCH PARTICIPATION

12.b. REAFFIRMING COMMITMENT TO MAINTAIN TRUST & SAFETY FOR LOCAL

IMMIGRANTS
1) Staff Report by Police Chief Zamora.

Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County (CAB) Immigration Project Program Director Kate Hinnenkamp was also available for questions.

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
264
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Dutra, CAB Immigration Project Program Director Hinnenkamp spoke about efforts to inform people of their rights, should they encounter Immigration and Customs Enforcement or Customs and Border Protection agents.

Police Chief Zamora, in answering Member Clark, spoke about probable cause in relation to law enforcement’s ability to detain a person.

CAB Immigration Project Program Director Hinnenkamp further spoke about a person’s right to remain silent if detained by any law enforcement officer and education provided to people regarding exercising their rights.
3) Public Input
Rebecca Garcia, District 5, stated she had spoken to City Manager Vides regarding the possibility of reaffirming the City’s sanctuary city ordinance after the November Election.

She spoke about her work with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA) residents.

She requested Council include language in the proposed resolution specifically affirming support for them.

Pam Sexton, District 4, thanked Council for considering the item and spoke about her work educating immigrants regarding their rights and asked Council to support them as much as possible.
? male spoke about enforcing the law, including immigration laws.

Oscar Rios spoke in support of the proposed resolution. 4) MOTION: It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Dutra to approve the resolution listed under Item 12.b.6. below and add language referencing DACA recipients.
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion
Mayor Orozco expressed her support for Watsonville’s status as a sanctuary city and the importance of supporting immigrants. She thanked CAB and other community organizations for their efforts.

City Attorney Zutler recommended the following language regarding DACA recipients be added as requested by the maker of the motion to the proposed resolution:

Whereas, the City Council specifically states its support for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) residents.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Quiroz-Carter, Orozco NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Salcido
6) RESOLUTION NO. 21-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
265

WATSONVILLE TO REAFFIRM COMMITMENT TO MAINTAIN TRUST AND SAFETY

FOR LOCAL IMMIGRANTS

12.c. CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS FOR DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS 1) Oral Report by Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach 2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Montesino, City Manager Vides stated that impacts of the potential closure of the Airport’s crosswind runway on drive-through facility restrictions were not yet known.

Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach, in answering Member Dutra, spoke about setback limits in surrounding cities.

In answering Member Parker, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach provided details regarding the various options for modifying the drive-through facility restrictions that were currently in place. He spoke about existing locations of drive-through facilities.
3) Public Input
Bryan Martinez, District 7, requested the setback requirements remain in place and cited noise and pollution concerns.

Leann, District 7, requested Council keep the drive-through ordinance as is and spoke about why it was originally adopted. She expressed concerns with a proposed car wash project and reasons she was not in support of the drive-through ordinance being modified.

Steve McGee, District 7, stated he was not opposed to drive-throughs but was against noisy businesses being allowed in residential areas. He urged Council to keep the drivethrough ordinance intact and listed the reasons for his request.

Joan Garrett, District 7, spoke against a proposed car wash project and listed concerns with noise, traffic, and pedestrian safety.

William Hansen stressed the importance of tax revenue generated by businesses. He spoke about challenges with property lines and setback requirements in the current ordinance. He provided reasons why his proposed car wash project would not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood and asked that Council consider modifying setback requirements for drive-throughs.

In answering Member Montesino, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach provided a summary of the options for making changes to the drive-through ordinance.
4) 1
st MOTION: It was moved by Member Quiroz-Carter, seconded by Mayor Orozco, to exempt the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) zoning district from the 150-foot setback requirement.
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
266
Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach, in answering Member Parker, spoke about the special use permitting process, including appeal procedures and the timeline for completing the process. He stated only the Thoroughfare Commercial zoning district would be exempt from the 150-foot setback per the staff recommendation and spoke about exploring additional options for exemptions. 2 nd MOTION; It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Clark, to exempt the following commercial zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement: CT (Thoroughfare Commercial), CNS (Neighborhood Shopping Center), and CV (Visitor Commercial).

City Manager Vides stated that property owners could apply for rezoning of their properties. She answered Member Dutra’s question regarding what zoning districts would be exempt from the setback requirement based on Council’s direction.

City Attorney Zutler stated that staff would draft an ordinance based on Council’s recommendation to be taken to the Planning Commission before being taken back to Council for consideration.

Member Dutra expressed concerns with restrictions of the urban limit line on growth opportunities.

Member Clark stated concerns with placing too many restrictions on businesses that could potentially generate tax revenue for the City.

Member Parker requested additional information regarding options for setback requirements be provided to the Planning Commission and Council when the item is taken for consideration.

City Manager Vides spoke about the extensive staff time that would be required to provide the additional information requested by Member Parker.

In answering Member Parker, City Manager Vides and Interim Community Development Director Orbach spoke about mitigation measures and conditions of approval for proposed projects.
2 nd MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Orozco
NOES: MEMBERS: Quiroz-Carter
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Salcido
1 st MOTION: The first motion failed by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: Quiroz-Carter, Orozco
NOES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Salcido
City Clerk Ortiz clarified for Council that staff would be drafting an ordinance to exempt the following commercial zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement: CT (Thoroughfare Commercial), CNS (Neighborhood Shopping Center), and CV (Visitor

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
267
Commercial). He explained to the public that there was confusion with the vote, but staff understood staff direction.

12.d. CONSIDERATION OF COMMISSION VACANCY APPLICATION PROCESS 1) Staff Report by City Clerk Ortiz
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Clark, City Clerk Ortiz stated Council could choose to remove a commissioner in the event they provide false information regarding their place of residence. City Clerk Ortiz provided additional options for obtaining proof of residence.

City Attorney Zutler, in answering Member Parker, stated it would be the decision of the district attorney whether to prosecute someone who falsely signed an affidavit regarding their place of residence.

In answering Member Parker, City Clerk Ortiz stated that Council could choose any combination of address verification methods for commission applicants. He spoke about potential delays in appointing commissioners if there were extensive requirements put in place.

City Manager Vides provided further clarification regarding the possible documentation that could be required to verify the addresses of applicants.

Mayor Orozco stated Measure V was intended to increase civic engagement and stated she was in favor of requiring a signed affidavit of residency on commission applications without having to provide proof of residency.
3) Public Input – None
4) MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Orozco, seconded by Member Dutra to only require a signed affidavit of residency on commission applications for verification of address for commission applicants.
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion
In answering Member Parker, City Clerk Ortiz stated the reasons for listing various examples of documents that could be used to verify an applicant's address in the proposed resolution.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Dutra, Montesino, Quiroz-Carter, Orozco
NOES: MEMBERS: Clark, Parker
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Salcido
6) RESOLUTION NO. 22-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

ESTABLISHING PROCEDURE FOR VERIFICATION OF ADDRESS FOR COMMISSION

APPLICANTS

13. EMERGENCY ITEMS ADDED TO AGENDA – None

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
268

14. REQUESTS & SCHEDULING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Member Quiroz-Carter requested a presentation from Ecology Action regarding a trip to the Netherlands that she had participated in with officials from other jurisdictions. She requested the findings of the traffic study conducted at Lincoln and East Fifth Streets be presented.

Member Montesino requested an item regarding striping on Beach Road and Walker Street.

15. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:23 p.m.
______________________________
Maria Orozco, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Irwin I. Ortiz, City Clerk

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
Agenda Report
MEETING DATE: Monday, February 10, 2025
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MEEK

INTERIM ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
ORBACH
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS)
OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-

FOOT RESIDENTIAL SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE

THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT), NEIGHBORHOOD

SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL (CV)

ZONING DISTRICTS

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending the City Council adopt a zoning code text amendment to Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC) to remove the 150-foot residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts.

BACKGROUND
On August 7, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending denial of a proposed drive-through ordinance because there was consensus among four Planning Commissioners that fast food uses and their related drive through components were not proliferating, and that the proposed regulations would be too restrictive for future businesses that may want to move into the City of Watsonville (Attachment 2).

On September 12, 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1095-00 (CM) adding Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions to the Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC). The intent of the ordinance was to develop location and design criteria that the City could use to help design drive through facilities that were more compatible with the surrounding uses and would not prohibit drive through facilities but require limitations to specific commercial zoning districts and preclude new drive through facilities in the downtown area (Attachment 3). - part with a person or persons who enters a commercial property in a motor vehicle and

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
transacts business from said motor vehicle from any location on such property that is not a designated parking space. WMC Section 14-18.279. Drive-Through Facilities are only allowed on property located in commercial zones subject to a number of criteria including:
-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for -41.100(a)(1).

A Special Use Permit is required for drive-through facilities located in the CT, CNS, CN, and CV zoning districts. WMC Section 14-41.101.

On October 22, 2024, City staff presented an overview of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facilities Restrictions to the City Council for review and discussion. City Council directed staff to return to Council with an analysis of options that would allow for more drive-through facility development within the City to review (Attachment 4).

On January 14, 2025, City staff presented options for modification of Chapter 14-41 DriveThrough Facility Restrictions to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction. City Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-

41.100(a)(1) to Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council (Attachment 5).

PROCESS
Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.801, the text of the adopted Zoning Code may be amended in a manner identical to WMC Section 14-12.701, which outlines the process for General Plan amendments. Any proposed zoning code text amendment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing for recommendation to the City Council.

At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission shall adopt a resolution, recommending approval or denial of the proposed amendment, by the affirmative vote of the majority of the Commission members, subject to findings required by WMC Section 14-

12.708. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The decision regarding whether to recommend approval of a Zoning Code text amendment to the City Council is legislative and requires environmental review. For more information on standard of review and process, see the Standard of Review and Process Overview on the City website.

DISCUSSION
Development of drive-through facilities within the City of Watsonville is regulated by WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions. The purpose of Chapter 14-41 is to regulate the design and location of Drive-Through Facilities in the City. In order to regulate drive-through development, Chapter 14-41 does the following:

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
Only permits drive-through facility development in the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts (WMC § 14-41.101(a)); Requires a Special Use Permit (SUP) for drive-through facilities (WMC § 14-

41.101(a));
Requires that no drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential uses (WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1)); Requires that no more than one Drive-Through Facility shall be located within two hundred (200') feet of the nearest point of a signalized intersection (WMC § 14-

41.100(a)(2));
Requires that no Driveof WMC § 14-41.100(a)(3)); and
Includes design standards for drive-through facilities (WMC § 14-41.102).

The proposed zoning code text amendment would exempt the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement identified in WMC Section 14-41.100(a)(1).

With this amendment, only drive-through development in the CN zoning district would be subject to the 150-foot setback. The amended text of WMC Section 14-41.100(a)(1) is below with the modifications in underline and strikethrough.

WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) In the CN zoning district, noNo drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred purposes.

By only specifying the CN zoning district, the other three commercial zoning districts (CT, CNS, and CV) would be exempted from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential purposes.

The zoning code text amendments are included in Exhibit B to the resolution.

The current City of Watsonville Zoning Map is included as Attachment 1.

City Council Direction
On January 14, 2025, the City Council reviewed multiple options for modification of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions that would allow for additional drive-through priority of economic development. Following the discussion, Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) to Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council.

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
Zoning Code Text Amendment Findings
Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.807, the Planning Commission and the City Council shall, in approving a text amendment to the zoning code, make the findings in WMC Section 14-

12.708. Those findings with staff analysis are below.

A. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies in the General Plan. Staff Analysis
The proposed zoning code text amendment is consistent with the following goals and policies in the 2005 General Plan:

Land Use Element 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.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.

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 land unsuited for urban uses.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.

Land Use Element Goal 4.3 Commercial Land Use: Revitalize the central business district and provide adequate neighborhood commercial services.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services.

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.C.2 Neighborhood Commercial Land Use: The City shall designate an appropriate amount of land for neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations of 5,000 to 7,000 persons.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations.

Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.I.2 Zoning Code Review: The City shall annually review and update the Zoning Code for consistency with the General Plan and Land Use Diagram. In addition, the review shall evaluate whether the Zoning Code can be improved to better address the long-term land use objectives.

Supportive Evidence: WMC Chapter 14-41 has not been updated since 2000. After evaluating Chapter 14-41 in October 2024, the City Council directed Staff to bring forward options for modifying the chapter to allow the development of additional drive-through facilities within the city. On January 14, 2025, Council recommended exempting the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for -term land use
objectives related to economic development.

B. That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties.

Supportive Evidence
Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, with locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts lend themselves to auto-oriented development.

The 2005 General Plan General Commercial land use classification includes general categories of allowed uses, such as: retail sales; personal, professional, financial, business and medical offices and services; entertainment; lodging; restaurants; and automobile sales. These uses are intended to serve the needs of the community and the surrounding region. The proposed amendment is compatible with the general planned uses because auto-oriented uses are identified as allowed uses within the General Commercial land use classification.

The proposed amendment is compatible with the existing uses of the adjacent commercial properties along East Lake Avenue because they are either developed with auto-oriented uses or vacant. In addition, to ensure that future development is

2/7/2025 11:52:05 AM
C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\1152214699\1152214699,,,Zoning Code Text Amendment to WMC Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions.docx
compatible with existing adjacent residential uses, future development projects will be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Through this process, any potentially significant environmental impacts will be identified and any necessary mitigation measures will be developed and included as conditions of approval on the project.

These findings are located in Exhibit A to the resolution.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Adoption of a Resolution recommending that the City Council amend Chapters 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the common sense exemption in CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.) Section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed zoning text amendment will have a significant effect on the environment.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The Planning Commission could recommend the City Council not adopt a zoning code text amendment to Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC) to remove the 150-foot residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts. The Planning Commission would need to provide staff with evidence for the findings that would support the negative recommendation.

ATTACHMENTS

1. City of Watsonville Zoning Map

2. July 21, 2000 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes

3. August 8, 2000 City Council Staff Report and Ordinance

4. October 22, 2024 City Council Meeting Minutes

5. January 14, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

1 M I N U T E S

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE
February 10, 2025 6:09 PM
In accordance with City policy, all Planning Commission meetings are recorded on audio and video in their entirety and are available for review in the Community Development Department (CDD). These minutes are a summary of the action taken.

1. ROLL CALL
Chair Ed Acosta, Vice-Chair Peter Radin, and Commissioners Daniel Dodge, Lowell Hurst, Lucy Rojas, and Jennifer Veitch-Olson were present. Commissioner Brando Sencion was absent.

A. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT PLANNING COMMISSIONERS (IF ANY) MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hurst, seconded by Commissioner Veitch-Olson, and carried by the following vote to excuse Commissioner Sencion:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Hurst, Veitch-Olson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sencion
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Radin, Rojas
Staff members present were Interim Community Development Director Justin Meek, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Matt Orbach, Assistant City Attorney Denise Bazzano, Administrative Analyst Elena Ortiz, Permit Technician Rob Manansala, and City Interpreter Carlos Landaverry.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Dodge led the Pledge of Allegiance.

3. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
City Clerk Irwin Ortiz shared that an ethics training will be taking place at the next City Council meeting on February 25, 2025. City Clerk added the City Charter has been revised and is accepting applications for different boards and commissions.

B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COMMISSION
Commissioner Hurst introduced himself to the Commissioners and public.

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

2 Commissioner Dodge welcomed Hurst and shared a supporting comment regarding Watsonville being a Sanctuary City.

4. CONSENT AGENDA
A. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 2024, REGULAR MEETING

PUBLIC INPUT
None
MOTION: It was moved by Vice-Chair Radin, seconded by Commissioner Rojas, and carried by the following vote to approve the Consent Agenda:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Dodge, Hurst, Radin, Rojas, Veitch-Olson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sencion

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 14- 41 (DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-FOOT RESIDENTIAL SETBACK

REQUIREMENT FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT),

NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL (CV) ZONING DISTRICTS
1) Staff Report
Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach gave the presentation.
2) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions Commissioner Hurst asked for a relative example of what 150-foot-distance looks like. In answering, the Interim Community Development Director Meek explained it’s the depth of a standard residential lot and simplified it to fifty yards.

Commissioner Dodge inquired where the 150-foot setback mark starts. In answering, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach clarified it starts at the boundary of the adjacent residentially zoned parcel.

Commissioner Dodge inquired how the recommendation fit into the City’s General Plan Update. In answering, Interim Community Development Director Meek shared the different zoning districts and explained the corridors this recommendation will apply to for further infill and growth.

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

3 Commissioner Dodge further inquired if the recommendation has any effect on the Caltrans projects. In answering, Interim Assistant Community Development Director explained that the Caltrans projects such as auto-oriented uses, arterials and commercial thoroughfares, and other uses have been taken into consideration.

Commissioner Rojas asked for if there is another Municipal Code that indicates an existing minimum range of setback around residential areas. In answering, Interim Assistant Community Development Director explained there are setback requirements for development of structures on property. The difference is the current setback holds restrictions on drive-through lane, menu board, and pickup windows.

Commissioner Rojas asked for clarification on the outcome of the Commission's decision. In answering, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach explained the Planning Commission is making a recommendation to Council to make the change for a consideration of a first and a second reading.

Interim Community Development Director Meek added further information regarding setback requirements.

Commissioner Dodge shared an example of streets with no setbacks and inquired if the zoning regulations would allow structures to be developed in the same way. In answer to Commissioner Dodge’s inquiry, Interim Community Development Director Meek shared the setbacks requirements for new development, with a minimum setback of 15 feet.

Commissioner Hurst shared a comment regarding the 150-foot setback and asked to reference what the findings were that established the length of setback as part of the Chapter. Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach explained the analysis in the staff report identified the desire to reduce negative impacts of automobile use around residential areas that create nuisance complaints.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson shared a comment referencing a project that requested and exemption for a drive-through setback and was considered by the Planning Commission. She reminded Commissioners that there has been existing public input that do not support more drive-throughs.

Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach shared all Interested Parties were informed via Public Hearing Notice of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.

Vice Chair Radin shared a comment regarding the order of events that involve Planning Commission and City Council decisions pertaining to this item and asked if he was correct. Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach clarified there are two tracks and further explained the timeline of events.

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

4 Vice Chair Radin inquired if the current Ordinance had been adopted since 2001, and Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach clarified it was adopted in year 2000. Vice Chair Radin further shared a comment regarding the nature of the town changing.

Commissioner Rojas asked for clarification regarding a related project to this item that was pulled from the meeting. Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach answered this is the first time the Drive-through Ordinance is being presented to the Planning Commission. The project being inquired will be the following item in the Agenda, item 5.B.

Commissioner Dodge further explained that the current item is deciding on the 150-foot setback.

Commissioner Rojas shared a comment explaining the current Drive-Through Ordinance is relative to the project that had been presented. In clarifying, Assistant City Attorney Bazzano confirmed this is a legislative action and it is a separate track distinct from the project that Planning Commission previously considered.

In further answering Commissioner Rojas, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach shared the Zoning Map that described the zones related to the removal of the setback requirements.

Commissioner Hurst inquired if Pharmacy’s are considered drive-throughs, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach confirmed that is correct.
3) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta opened the public hearing.

William Hansen shared a comment regarding Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Zoning recommendation, and Drive-Through Ordinance recommendations.

Hearing no further comments, Chair Acosta closed the public hearing. 4) Appropriate Motion(s)
MAIN MOTION: It was moved by Vice Chair Radin, seconded by Commissioner Dodge, and carried by the following vote to approve the following recommendation:

RESOLUTION NO. 02-25 (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

5 CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-FOOT RESIDENTIAL SETBACK

REQUIREMENT FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT),

NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL (CV) ZONING DISTRICTS
5) Deliberation
Commissioner Dodge shared a comment in support of the project.

Commissioner Hurst shared a comment regarding the drive-throughs and expressed his concern regarding the removal of 150-feet setback buffer.

Vice Chair Radin shared a comment in support of the item and acknowledged the involvement of the community.
6) Chair Calls for a Vote on Motion(s)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas, Acosta
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Hurst, Veitch-Olson
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sencion
B. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (PP2025-8346) CHANGING THE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION

FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER TO THOROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL FOR A 1.18± ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321-02), FILED BY VANCE SHANNON, APPLICANT, ON

BEHALF OF BILL HANSEN, PROPERTY OWNER
1) Staff Report
Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach gave the presentation.
2) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions Commissioner Dodge inquired if the project is consistent with the existing land use. Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach confirmed that is correct.

Commissioner Hurst asked if Caltrans has been consulted in the state highway network. In answering, Assistant Community Development Director Meek clarified Caltrans will be consulted for development projects concerning the state highway system, but not for Zoning changes.
3) Applicant Presentation
William Hansen with Pacific Coast Development gave the presentation. 4) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

6 None
5) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta opened the public hearing.

Hearing no comments, Chair Acosta closed the public hearing. 6) Appropriate Motion(s)
MAIN MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hurst, seconded by Commissioner Radin, and carried by the following vote to approve the following recommendation:

RESOLUTION NO. 03-25 (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL

APPROVAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321-02) FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS) TO THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT), FILED BY VANCE

SHANNON, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF BILL HANSEN, PROPERTY
OWNER; AND FINDING THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT EXEMPT FROM

REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES § 15061(B)(3)
7) Deliberation
None
8) Chair Calls for a Vote on Motion(s)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Hurst, Radin, Rojas, Veitch-Olson, Acosta
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sencion
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano read the appeal language.

6. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY
Interim Community Development Director Meek shared that the City will provide a joint ethics training on February 25, 2025. Interim Director Meek also reported that the Notice of Preparation for the General Plan EIR went out for a second time to Commissioners and Interested Parties and a second Scoping Meeting will happen on February 18, at 1:00 PM, via zoom meeting.

7. ADJOURNMENT

UNADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

7 Chairperson Acosta adjourned the meeting at 7:21 PM. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for March 4, 2025, at 6:00 PM. ________________________ ________________________________ Justin Meek, Secretary Ed Acosta, Chair
Planning Commission Planning Commission

RESOLUTION NO. _02-25__ (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-FOOT RESIDENTIAL

SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL
(CT), NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR

COMMERCIAL (CV) ZONING DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC) Chapter 14-41 regulates the design and location of drive-through facilities in the City; and WHEREAS, WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) prohibits drive-through lanes, speakers, menu boards, and/or take out windows within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2024, City staff presented an overview of Chapter 14- 41 Drive-Through Facilities Restrictions to the City Council for review and discussion.

City Council provided direction to staff to bring back an analysis of modification options to Council for review; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2025, City staff presented options for modification of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction. City Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) to Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council; and
WHEREAS, making the following modifications to WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) will exempt the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and

Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement; and WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) In the CN zoning district, no No drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located parcel zoned for residential purposes.

WHEREAS, City Staff reviewed the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and determined that the project qualifies for a common sense exemption under California Code of Regulations Title 14, §15061(b)(3) because the proposed zoning text amendment does not have the potential for causing a significant impact on the environment and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendment may have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, notice of time and place of the hearing to consider the zoning code text amendment was given as required by law and a public hearing was held according to Part 9: Public Hearing Notice Provisions of Chapter 14-10: Administration and Procedure of the WMC; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all evidence received, both oral and documentary, and the matter was submitted for recommendation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Watsonville, California, as follows:

Good cause appearing, the Planning Commission of the City of Watsonville does hereby find the project exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the common sense exemption in California Code of Regulations Title 14, §15061(b)(3).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby makes the findings required by Watsonville Municipal Code §14-12.807, attached hereto and marked , dopt by ordinance the zoning code text
amendment attached hereto and ma
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Watsonville, California, held on the 10th day of February 2025, by Commissioner Radin, who moved its adoption, which motion being duly seconded by Commissioner Rojas, was upon roll call, carried and the resolution adopted by the following vote:

Ayes: Commissioners: Acosta, Dodge, Radin, Rojas
Noes: Commissioners: Hurst, Veitch-Olson

Absent: Commissioners: Sencion
Justin Meek, Secretary Ed Acosta, Chairperson
Planning Commission Planning Commission

CITY OF WATSONVILLE A

PLANNING COMMISSION
Zoning Code Text Amendment Findings (WMC § 14-12.807)
A. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies in the General Plan.

The proposed zoning code amendment is consistent with the following goals, policies, and implementation measures of the 2005 General Plan:

Land Use Element Goal 4.7 Land Use Suitability: Ensure that the orderly development of land for the needs of the existing and projected population suitability, including; the accessibility of existing and proposed public facilities, services, and utilities; physical and financial constraints; and/or growth inducing impacts.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.

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 land unsuited for urban uses.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.

Land Use Element Goal 4.3 Commercial Land Use: Revitalize the central business district and provide adequate neighborhood commercial services.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood

commercial services.

Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.C.2 Neighborhood Commercial Land Use: The City shall designate an appropriate amount of land for neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations of 5,000 to 7,000 persons.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations.

Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.I.2 Zoning Code Review:

The City shall annually review and update the Zoning Code for consistency with the General Plan and Land Use Diagram. In addition, the review shall evaluate whether the Zoning Code can be improved to better address the long-term land use objectives.

Supportive Evidence: WMC Chapter 14-41 has not been updated since 2000. After evaluating Chapter 14-41 in October 2024, the City Council directed Staff to bring forward options for modifying the chapter to allow the development of additional drive-through facilities within the city. On January 14, 2025, Council recommended exempting the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential uses in -term land use objectives related to
economic development.

B. That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, with locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts lend themselves to autooriented development.

The 2005 General Plan General Commercial land use classification includes general categories of allowed uses, such as: retail sales; personal, professional, financial, business and medical offices and services; entertainment; lodging; restaurants; and automobile sales. These uses are intended to serve the needs of the community and the surrounding region. The proposed amendment is compatible with the general planned uses because auto-oriented uses are identified as allowed uses within the General Commercial land use classification.

The proposed amendment is compatible with the existing uses of the adjacent

commercial properties along East Lake Avenue because they are either developed with auto-oriented uses or vacant. In addition, to ensure that future development is compatible with existing adjacent residential uses, future development projects will be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Through this process, any potentially significant environmental impacts will be identified and any necessary mitigation measures will be developed and included as conditions of approval on the project.

CITY OF WATSONVILLE B
PLANNING COMMISSION Chapter 14-41

DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS
Sections:
14-41.100 Purpose of chapter.
14-41.101 Use permit required.
14-41.102 Design standards.
14-41.104 Non-conforming uses.
14-41.100 Purpose of chapter.

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the design and location of Drive-Through Facilities in the City. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Code, Drive-Through Facilities shall be permitted only on property located in commercial zones that also meet the following conditions:
(a) Location.
(1) In the CN zoning district, noNo drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.
(2) No more than one Drive-Through Facility shall be located within two hundred (200') feet of the nearest point of a signalized intersection except as set forth in (3) below.
(3) No Drive-Through Facility shall be located within three hundred (300') feet (i) Main Street at Front Street
(ii) Main Street at Freedom Boulevard
(iii) Main Street at Green Valley Road
(iv) Riverside Drive at Rodriguez Street
(v) Riverside Drive at Blackburn Street
(vi) Freedom Boulevard at Airport Boulevard
(vii) East Lake Avenue at Martinelli Street
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)
14-41.101 Use permit required.
(a) No drive-through facility shall be allowed in the following commercial districts, without a special use permit issued by the Planning Commission:
(1) CT, Thoroughfare Commercial
(2) CNS, Neighborhood Shopping Center
(3) CN, Neighborhood Commercial
(4) CV, Visitor Commercial
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)

14-41.102 Design standards.

Drive-Through Facilities shall be designed and situated in such a manner so that:
(a) Trash facilities are located to accommodate patrons using the drive-through facilities in an areas away from residential uses;
(b) Lighting, noise, fumes, rodents, pests and odors can either be eliminated, mitigate or reduced so as not to adversely affect neighboring properties or uses; (c) The impact on neighboring properties or uses due to activities associated with the proposed facility and its hours of operation do not unreasonably interfere with adjoining residential uses;
(d) Traffic generated by the Drive-Through Facility can be reasonably accommodated by the property and neighborhood streets, without creating a materially adverse traffic impact, or a material or safety hazard to vehicles or pedestrians;
(e) On-site pedestrian walkways shall not intersect the drive-through vehicle lanes, except visibility is clear, and the pedestrian walkway is emphasizes by enriched paving and striping;
(f) Drive-through lanes include a minimum fourteen (14') foot width on curves and a minimum eleven (11') foot width on straight sections;
(g) Drive-through lanes provide sufficient vehicle stacking area behind the menu board to accommodate a minimum of four (4) cars;
(h) No drive-through lanes shall exit directly onto a public right-of-way; (i) Landscaping shall screen drive-through and drive-in lanes from the public rightof-way and shall minimize the visual impact of the menu board and directional signs;
(j) Drive-through lanes shall be constructed with (PCC) concrete; (k) Drive-through lanes shall be set back from the face of the curb of any street frontage a minimum of twenty (20') feet;
(1) Only one menu board may be permitted and shall be a maximum of thirty (30) square feet in the area of the sign face, with a maximum height of seven (7') feet and shall face away from the street.
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)
14-41.104 Non-conforming uses.

No Drive-Through Facility, which otherwise complies with this Code, shall hereafter be considered non-conforming except as provided herein. If an existing Drive-Through Facility requests a zoning change or modification to its use permit, it shall comply with this chapter.
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)

1 Ord No. ______ (CM)
Reference: Ordinance No. 1095-00 (Amend)
Meeting Date: 031125 SWZ ______ TV ______ CDD ______

ORDINANCE NO. Introduction (CM)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WATSONVILLE AMENDING CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVE-THROUGH

FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-FOOT RESIDENTIAL SETBACK REQUIREMENT

FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT), NEIGHBORHOOD

SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL (CV) ZONING

DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, Watsonville Municipal Code (WMC) Chapter 14-41 regulates the design and location of drive-through facilities in the City; and WHEREAS, WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) prohibits drive-through lanes, speakers, menu boards, and/or take out windows within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2024, City staff presented an overview of Chapter 14- 41 Drive-Through Facilities Restrictions to the City Council for review and discussion.

City Council provided direction to staff to bring back an analysis of modification options to Council for review; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2025, City staff presented options for modification of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction. City Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council; and
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 02-25 (PC) recommending to City Council adoption of an ordinance amending

2 Ord. No. ______ (CM)
Reference: Ordinance No. 1095-00 (Amend)
Meeting Date: 031125
Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code to remove the 150-foot residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, making the following modifications to WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) will exempt the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement; and WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) – In the CN zoning district, no No drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150’) feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.

WHEREAS, City Staff reviewed the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and determined that the project qualifies for a common sense exemption under California Code of Regulations Title 14, §15061(b)(3) because the proposed zoning text amendment does not have the potential for causing a significant impact on the environment and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendment may have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, notice of time and place of the hearing to consider the zoning code text amendment was given as required by law and a public hearing was held according to Part 9: Public Hearing Notice Provisions of Chapter 14-10: Administration and Procedure of the WMC; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all evidence received, both oral and documentary, and the matter was submitted for recommendation.

3 Ord. No. ______ (CM)
Reference: Ordinance No. 1095-00 (Amend)
Meeting Date: 031125

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: RECITALS.

The foregoing recitals are adopted herein as true and correct and as the basis for this ordinance.

SECTION 2: ENACTMENT.

1. That the City Council of the City of Watsonville does hereby make the findings required by Watsonville Municipal Code §14-12.807, attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A,” and adopt by ordinance the zoning code text amendment attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B.”

2. That the City Clerk of the City of Watsonville is hereby authorized and directed to make the zoning code text amendment, attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit B”, and to designate the effective date and number of the ordinance authorizing the change.

SECTION 3: CEQA.

Adoption of an ordinance amending the text of Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the common sense exemption in CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.) Section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed zoning text amendment will have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 4: PUBLICATION.

4 Ord. No. ______ (CM)
Reference: Ordinance No. 1095-00 (Amend)
Meeting Date: 031125
This ordinance shall be published in the Watsonville Register-Pajaronian and/or Santa Cruz Sentinel in compliance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Watsonville.

SECTION 5: EFFECTIVE DATE.

This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption. ***************************************

1 CITY OF WATSONVILLE EXHIBIT “A”

PLANNING COMMISSION
Zoning Code Text Amendment Findings (WMC § 14-12.807)
A. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies in the General Plan.

The proposed zoning code amendment is consistent with the following goals, policies, and implementation measures of the 2005 General Plan:
 Land Use Element Goal 4.7 Land Use Suitability: Ensure that the orderly development of land for the needs of the existing and projected population within 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.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.
 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 land unsuited for urban uses.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, based on the location restrictions and conditionally and principally permitted uses, each of these zoning districts has been designed to accommodate auto-oriented uses. With locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts are suitable for drive-through development.
 Land Use Element Goal 4.3 Commercial Land Use: Revitalize the central business district and provide adequate neighborhood commercial services.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City,

2 providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services.
 Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.C.2 Neighborhood Commercial Land Use: The City shall designate an appropriate amount of land for neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations of 5,000 to 7,000 persons.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed modifications to Chapter 14-41 would allow the development of more drive-through facilities within the City, providing more opportunities for the establishment of new neighborhood commercial services to meet the daily shopping needs of surrounding residential populations.
 Land Use Element Implementation Measure 4.I.2 Zoning Code Review:

The City shall annually review and update the Zoning Code for consistency with the General Plan and Land Use Diagram. In addition, the review shall evaluate whether the Zoning Code can be improved to better address the long-term land use objectives.

Supportive Evidence: WMC Chapter 14-41 has not been updated since 2000. After evaluating Chapter 14-41 in October 2024, the City Council directed Staff to bring forward options for modifying the chapter to allow the development of additional drive-through facilities within the city. On January 14, 2025, Council recommended exempting the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts from the 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential uses in order to better address the City’s long-term land use objectives related to economic development.

B. That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties.

Supportive Evidence: Land located within the CT, CNS, and CV zoning districts is zoned for commercial uses. In addition, with locations along thoroughfare locations, near major streets and arterials, or in other areas catering to tourists and visitors, many parcels in these zoning districts lend themselves to autooriented development.

The 2005 General Plan General Commercial land use classification includes general categories of allowed uses, such as: retail sales; personal, professional, financial, business and medical offices and services; entertainment; lodging; restaurants; and automobile sales. These uses are intended to serve the needs of the community and the surrounding region. The proposed amendment is compatible with the general planned uses because auto-oriented uses are identified as allowed uses within the General Commercial land use classification.

The proposed amendment is compatible with the existing uses of the adjacent commercial properties along East Lake Avenue because they are either

3 developed with auto-oriented uses or vacant. In addition, to ensure that future development is compatible with existing adjacent residential uses, future development projects will be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Through this process, any potentially significant environmental impacts will be identified and any necessary mitigation measures will be developed and included as conditions of approval on the project.

1 of 2
CITY OF WATSONVILLE EXHIBIT “B”

PLANNING COMMISSION
Chapter 14-41

DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS
Sections:
14-41.100 Purpose of chapter.
14-41.101 Use permit required.
14-41.102 Design standards.
14-41.104 Non-conforming uses.
14-41.100 Purpose of chapter.

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the design and location of Drive-Through Facilities in the City. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Code, Drive-Through Facilities shall be permitted only on property located in commercial zones that also meet the following conditions:
(a) Location.
(1) In the CN zoning district, noNo drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150') feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.
(2) No more than one Drive-Through Facility shall be located within two hundred (200') feet of the nearest point of a signalized intersection except as set forth in (3) below.
(3) No Drive-Through Facility shall be located within three hundred (300') feet of any of the following “gateway” intersections:
(i) Main Street at Front Street
(ii) Main Street at Freedom Boulevard
(iii) Main Street at Green Valley Road
(iv) Riverside Drive at Rodriguez Street
(v) Riverside Drive at Blackburn Street
(vi) Freedom Boulevard at Airport Boulevard
(vii) East Lake Avenue at Martinelli Street
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)
14-41.101 Use permit required.
(a) No drive-through facility shall be allowed in the following commercial districts, without a special use permit issued by the Planning Commission:
(1) CT, Thoroughfare Commercial
(2) CNS, Neighborhood Shopping Center
(3) CN, Neighborhood Commercial
(4) CV, Visitor Commercial
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)
14-41.102 Design standards.

Drive-Through Facilities shall be designed and situated in such a manner so that:

2 of 2
(a) Trash facilities are located to accommodate patrons using the drive-through facilities in an areas away from residential uses;
(b) Lighting, noise, fumes, rodents, pests and odors can either be eliminated, mitigate or reduced so as not to adversely affect neighboring properties or uses; (c) The impact on neighboring properties or uses due to activities associated with the proposed facility and its hours of operation do not unreasonably interfere with adjoining residential uses;
(d) Traffic generated by the Drive-Through Facility can be reasonably accommodated by the property and neighborhood streets, without creating a materially adverse traffic impact, or a material or safety hazard to vehicles or pedestrians;
(e) On-site pedestrian walkways shall not intersect the drive-through vehicle lanes, except visibility is clear, and the pedestrian walkway is emphasizes by enriched paving and striping;
(f) Drive-through lanes include a minimum fourteen (14') foot width on curves and a minimum eleven (11') foot width on straight sections;
(g) Drive-through lanes provide sufficient vehicle stacking area behind the menu board to accommodate a minimum of four (4) cars;
(h) No drive-through lanes shall exit directly onto a public right-of-way; (i) Landscaping shall screen drive-through and drive-in lanes from the public rightof-way and shall minimize the visual impact of the menu board and directional signs;
(j) Drive-through lanes shall be constructed with (PCC) concrete; (k) Drive-through lanes shall be set back from the face of the curb of any street frontage a minimum of twenty (20') feet;
(1) Only one menu board may be permitted and shall be a maximum of thirty (30) square feet in the area of the sign face, with a maximum height of seven (7') feet and shall face away from the street.
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)
14-41.104 Non-conforming uses.

No Drive-Through Facility, which otherwise complies with this Code, shall hereafter be considered non-conforming except as provided herein. If an existing Drive-Through Facility requests a zoning change or modification to its use permit, it shall comply with this chapter.
(§ 1, Ord. 1095-00 C-M, eff. October 12, 2000)

WMC CHAPTER 14-41

DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY

RESTRICTIONS

CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 14-41 DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS OF
THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE THE 150-

FOOT RESIDENTIAL SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE

THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT), NEIGHBORHOOD

SHOPPING CENTER (CNS), AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL (CV)

ZONING DISTRICTS

BACKGROUND
OCTOBER 22, 2024, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
• STAFF PRESENTED OVERVIEW OF WMC
CHAPTER 14-41
• CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSED THE IMPACTS OF

THE ORDINANCE ON DEVELOPMENT WITHIN

THE CITY AND HOW THE ORDINANCE COULD

BE UPDATED
• CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO IDENTIFY

SEVERAL OPTIONS FOR MODIFYING WMC
CHAPTER 14-41 TO ALLOW MORE DRIVETHROUGH DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY

BACKGROUND
JANUARY 14, 2025, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
• CITY STAFF PRESENTED OPTIONS FOR
MODIFYING CHAPTER 14-41 DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS

MODIFICATION OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION

1. Exempt the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) zoning district from the 150-foot setback requirement (Staff Recommendation)

2. Exempt multiple commercial zoning districts (CT, CNS, CN, CV) from the 150-foot setback requirement

3. Repeal Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions

4. Maintain Chapter 14-41 As-Is

PROPOSED MODIFICATION FOR PLANNING COMMISSION

CONSIDERATION
Exempt the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood
Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV)
zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement.

BACKGROUND
FEBRUARY 10, 2025, PLANNING COMMISSION

MEETING
• CITY STAFF PRESENTED PROPOSED
MODIFICATION OF CHAPTER 14-41 DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS • PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY

COUNCIL APPROVE PROPOSED

MODIFICATION

DEFINITION OF DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY
“Drive-Through Facility” shall mean
any commercial use that conducts
business in whole or part with a
person or persons who enters a
commercial property in a motor
vehicle and transacts business from
said motor vehicle from any location
on such property that is not a
designated parking space. (WMC §
14-18.279)

DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS
WMC CHAPTER 14-41
• Only allows drive-through facilities in certain commercial zoning districts (CT, CN, CNS, CV)
• Requires a Special Use Permit for drive through facilities • Requires 150-foot setback from parcels zoned for residential uses • Requires setbacks from signalized intersections
• Requires setbacks from certain ‘gateway’ intersections • Includes design standards for drive-through facilities

ZONING DISTRICT OVERVIEW
• Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) - Intended for retail, commercial, service, amusement, and transient-residential uses which are appropriate to thoroughfare locations and dependent upon thoroughfare travel; located only in the immediate vicinity of major streets and arterials; and providing convenient vehicular access and parking for the public. • Neighborhood Commercial (CN) - Intended for limited centers for convenience shopping in the residential communities and neighborhoods of the City; providing a limited amount of retail and service uses adequate to supply the day-to-day needs of the surrounding area; but not to intended for the development of a commercial center that would attract substantial volumes of traffic from outside the neighborhood.
• Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) - Intended for commercial shopping center complexes located outside the central business district of the City; providing predominantly commercial retail with limited service and amusement uses on a common parcel with common access for the public; to be located on major streets and arterials.
• Visitor Commercial (CV) - Intended for commercial areas catering primarily to tourists and visitors; for areas of attraction and special interest to persons residing both within and outside of the community; and providing business, service, lodging, amusement, and entertainment facilities which will enhance such areas and meet the needs of the visiting public.

STAFF ANALYSIS

EXISTING
DRIVETHROUGH

LOCATIONS

RECENTLY APPROVED DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITIES

RECENTLY APPROVED DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITIES

STAFF ANALYSIS

STAFF

ANALYSIS -

SETBACKS

STAFF ANALYSIS – SETBACKS

OTHER JURISDICTIONS
City of Santa Cruz - No drive-through uses shall be located adjacent to a residential district
County of Santa Cruz - 150-foot setback from existing residential uses City of Capitola - 100-foot setback from a residential district or residential use
City of Scotts Valley – No specific drive-through facility setbacks

PROPOSED MODIFICATION
WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1)
In the CN zoning district, noNo drive-through lane, speakers, menu boards and/or take out windows shall be located within one hundred fifty (150’) feet from any property boundary line of a parcel zoned for residential purposes.

REQUIRED FINDINGS
WMC § 14-12.708
A. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies in the General Plan.

B. That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Adoption of an ordinance amending the text of Chapter 14-41 (DriveThrough Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the common sense exemption in CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.) Section 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed zoning text amendment will have a significant effect on the environment.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council approve, for first reading only, waiving fully reading of the text, an ordinance amending Chapter 14-41 (Drive-Through Facility Restrictions) of the Watsonville Municipal Code to remove the 150-foot
residential setback requirement from the Thoroughfare
Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts.

THANK YOU!

From: City Council
To: Eduardo Montesino; Vanessa Quiroz; Maria Orozco; Kristal Salcido; Casey Clark; Jimmy Dutra; Ari Parker; cityclerk
Subject: FW: Public Comment - City Council Meeting March 11, 2025 Date: Monday, March 10, 2025 5:04:04 PM
From: Steven Penrose <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 5:03:48 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment - City Council Meeting March 11, 2025 RE: Item No. 11.b
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 14-41 (DRIVETHROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REMOVING THE 150-FT. RESIDENTIAL SETBACK

REQUIREMENT FROM THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING

CENTER, & VISITOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
and
Item No. 11.c

ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CHANGING THE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION FROM

NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER TO THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL FOR A 1.18-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE Dear City Council Members,
I am writing on behalf of my client Tomas R. Fuentes. Mr. Fuentes is the trustee of a family trust that owns Tuttle San Carlos, LP, which in turn owns the apartment building located at 610 Tuttle Avenue in Watsonville. I understand that denial of the Quick Quack application to build and operate a car wash at 632 East Lake Ave. was recommended at the Planning Commission meeting held November 19, 2024, but that the property owner pulled his application prior to a second consideration scheduled for January 7, 2025. I understand that at its meeting tomorrow the City Council is reviewing proposals to change the zoning map designation from Neighborhood Shopping Center to Thoroughfare Commercial, and to modify Watsonville Municipal Code Chapter 14-41 regarding Drive-Through Facility Restrictions. My client objects to modifications that would change the zoning so as to eliminate the 150-foot setback requirement from residential properties in order to allow this car wash to be built and operated so close to his family’s apartment buildng.

My client agrees with the denial of this project. He opposes this use of the parcel adjoining 610 Tuttle due to the noise and traffic that it will cause, and the impact of that noise and traffic on occupants of the 610 Tuttle apartments. My client believes that his tenants will be very unhappy with the noise and traffic, that their quiet enjoyment of their apartments will be disrupted as a result, that vacancies will also result, and that the vacancies will be difficult to

fill if the car wash use is approved for 632 East Lake Ave, resulting in a substantial loss of rental income.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my client’s objection.

Please notify me about the action on these applications.

Steven D. Penrose
Certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization as a Specialist in Estate Planning, Probate and Trust Law
Penrose Chun & Gorman LLP
1200 Pacific Avenue, Suite 260
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
tel: 831-515-3344ext. 202
fax: 831-515-3308
www.pcg-llp.com
[email protected]
The information in this e-mail (including attachments, if any) is considered confidential and is intended only for the recipient(s) listed above. Any review, use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited except by or on behalf of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify me (831-515-3344 ext. 202) immediately by reply email, delete this email, and do not disclose its contents to anyone. Thank you.

1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: Tuesday, March 11, 2025
TO: CITY COUNCIL
WRITTEN BY: INTERIM ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ORBACH RECOMMENDED BY: INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MEEK APPROVED BY: TAMARA VIDES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (PP2025-8346) CHANGING THE ZONING

MAP DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER TO THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL FOR A 1.18-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321-02), FILED BY VANCE SHANNON, AP
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends City Council:
1) Introduce, for first reading only, waiving full reading of the text, an Ordinance approving a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) for a 1.18-acre site located at 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02); and finding the Zoning Map Amendment exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3).

BACKGROUND:

According to the Santa Cruz County Assessor’s Office, the subject vacant parcel was established via the Esther Rodgers Trust via map 3314 O.R. 05. In 1870, a single-family residence known as the Rodgers House was constructed. The singlefamily residence remained on the property until 1998 when the historic residence was relocated to the Santa Cruz County Fairgrounds.

On December 8, 2023, Vance Shannon with Quick Quack Car Wash, on behalf of property owner, Bill Hansen, submitted an application for a Special Use Permit, Design Review and Environmental Review and a Zoning Map Amendment (PP2023-6377) for the construction of a new 7,670-square-foot drive-through car wash facility on a 1.18± acre site located at 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02).

2 On October 22, 2024, City staff presented an overview of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facilities Restrictions to the City Council for review and discussion. City Council provided direction to staff to bring back an analysis of modification options to Council for review (Attachment 2).

On November 19, 2024, Staff presented application #PP2023-6377 to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of denial based on the fact that the proposed project did not meet the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC Section 14-41.100(a)(1). During deliberations, the four members of the Planning Commission present at the meeting discussed the item and made a motion to continue the item to a date uncertain, with direction to City staff to try to identify a date before the end of 2024 to bring the item back for discussion with a full Planning Commission in attendance. Staff identified several potential meeting dates meeting this criteria and polled Planning Commissioners on their availability, but a quorum was not available on any of the dates identified. As such, the project was scheduled for the next available public hearing on January 7, 2025, to continue Planning Commission deliberation of this item (Attachment 3).

On January 7, 2025, the property owner pulled application #PP2023-6377 from the Planning Commission meeting agenda.

On January 14, 2025, City staff presented options for modification of Chapter 14-41 Drive-Through Facility Restrictions to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction. City Council directed staff to bring an ordinance modifying Chapter 14-41 to exclude the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT), Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS), and Visitor Commercial (CV) zoning districts from the 150-foot setback requirement in WMC § 14-41.100(a)(1) to Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to City Council (Attachment 4).

On January 16, 2025, the property owner submitted application #PP2025-8346 for a Zoning Map Amendment, changing the zoning map designation from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) for a 1.18± acre parcel located at 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02).

On February 10, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to City Council approval of a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) for a 1.18± acre site located at 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02); and finding the Zoning Map Amendment exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3).

STANDARD OF REVIEW:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment is a legislative decision as it involves amending the Zoning Map. This legislative decision requires the decision making body to make certain findings, as set forth in WMC Section 14-12.708. Per WMC Section 14.12.803, any proposed Zoning Map Amendment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission in a manner identical to WMC Section 14-12.703, and is subject to the findings in WMC Section 14-12.708. Per WMC Section 14-

12.703, any proposed amendment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission, at a public hearing noticed in accordance with Part 9 of Chapter 14-10 and conducted in accordance with Part 10 of Chapter 14-10, for recommendation to the City Council. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission shall adopt a resolution, recommending approval or denial of the proposed amendment, by the affirmative vote of the majority of the Commission members, subject to findings required by WMC Section 14-12.708.

3 PROCESS:

Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.802, the adopted Zoning Map may be amended in a manner identical to WMC Section 14-12.702, which outlines the process for General Plan Land Use Diagram amendments. Any proposed zoning map amendment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing for recommendation to the City Council. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission shall adopt a resolution, recommending approval or denial of the proposed amendment, by the affirmative vote of the majority of the Commission members, subject to findings required by WMC Section 14-12.708.

Pursuant to WMC Section 14-12.805, review and decision by the City Council shall be in a manner identical to Section 14-12.706, subject to findings in Section 14-12.708, with the exception that any decision taken shall be by adoption of an ordinance. The City Council shall review the Planning Commission recommendation and all other pertinent materials and information at a properly noticed public hearing in order to make a final determination in the matter. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council may choose to adopt an ordinance approving the Zoning Map Amendment or a resolution denying the proposed amendment subject to findings.

For more information, see the Standard of Review and Process Overview on the City website.

DISCUSSION:

Existing Site
The subject site is vacant, has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial and is within the CNS Zoning District. The project site is located along Highway 152 (SR-152) on the east side of East Lake Avenue between Eaton Avenue and Tuttle Avenue. The land uses directly surrounding the project site are commercial to the north, commercial vacant land to the south, and residential development to the east and west. East Lake Avenue is the northeastern gateway into the city.

4 FIGURE 1 Subject site and surrounding uses
Source: Google Aerial (2024)
Proposed Project
The proposed project involves a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation of a vacant parcel located at 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02) from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Commercial Thoroughfare (CT), in order to permit additional uses on the parcel.

Zoning Map Amendment
The project site, 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02), has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial and is within the Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) Zoning District. WMC § 14-16.1401 and WMC § 14-16.1403 permit the establishment of certain principally and conditionally permitted uses within the CNS Zoning District.

The Zoning Ordinance implements the General Plan, regulates the future growth of the city, and promotes orderly community development. It includes the Zoning Map, which sets forth the designations, locations and boundaries of zoning districts.

The applicant is requesting a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation of the subject site from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) in order to permit the establishment of different uses on the parcel that reflect the parcel’s thoroughfare location along SR-152 and align with their development goals for the parcel.

Staff analysis related to the General Plan and zoning code consistency is included in the Zoning Map Amendment Findings Analysis section below.

Project Site

5 General Plan Land Use Designation & Zoning
Uses allowed in the General Plan General Commercial land use designation include: retail sales; personal, professional, financial, business, and medical offices and services; entertainment; lodging; and restaurants and automobile sales intended to serve the needs of the community and the surrounding region.

FIGURE 2 Subject site and surrounding General Plan land use designations Source: City of Watsonville General Plan Land Use Diagram (2023) The purpose of the Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) Zoning District is to establish regulatory controls on commercial shopping center complexes located outside the central business district of the City, and to provide predominantly commercial retail with limited service and amusement uses on a common parcel, or a combination of adjacent parcels with common access for the public to be located on major streets and arterials (WMC § 14-16.1400).

The purpose of the Thoroughfare Commercial (CT) Zoning District is to provide for retail, commercial, service, amusement, and transient-residential uses which are appropriate to thoroughfare location and dependent upon thoroughfare travel; to be located only in the immediate vicinity of major streets and arterials or on the service drives thereof; and to provide convenient vehicular access and parking for the public (WMC § 14-16.1200). 632 East Lake Avenue
General
Commercial
Low Density
Residential
Medium
Density
Residential
High Density
Residential

6 FIGURE 3 Subject site and surrounding zoning districts Source: City of Watsonville Zoning Map (2024)
Zoning Map Amendment Findings Analysis
Staff reviewed the application for the proposed Zoning Map Amendment for consistency with the required findings in WMC § 14-12.708. The findings, with staff analysis, are below. a) That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies embodied in the General Plan; Staff Analysis: The subject parcel at 632 East Lake Avenue has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial. The Zoning Map Amendment would change the zoning district from CNS to CT. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:
 Land Use Element Goal 4.2: Neighborhoods – Conserve and improve the living environment of Watsonville neighborhoods.

Supportive Evidence: The proposed rezoning would permit additional uses on the parcel that are consistent with the permitted uses of the adjacent parcel located at 952 East Lake Avenue, which has a zoning designation of CT. The rezoning would provide additional development potential on the parcel, increasing the chance that development will occur. The improvement of the vacant lot would improve the living environment of Watsonville neighborhoods.
632 East Lake Avenue

7  Land Use Element 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.

Supportive Evidence: The parcel located at 632 East Lake Avenue is located within the CNS Zoning District, in which some common business types are not principally or conditionally permitted. Rezoning the parcel from CNS to CT, where a larger variety of uses are principally and conditionally permitted would permit uses that are complementary to the existing uses at the adjacent parcel at 952 East Lake Avenue, which is zoned CT. The proposed zoning would also allow for the establishment of certain uses that are not readily available within a few miles of the subject parcel.  Land Use Element 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.

Supportive Evidence: The subject parcel located at 632 East Lake Avenue is located along one of the City’s main commercial thoroughfares (East Lake Avenue/SR-152), provides convenient vehicular access and parking for the public, has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial, and is bordered by parcels in the CT and CNS zoning districts. The rezoning of the parcel from the CNS to the CT zoning district will encourage the development of urban uses on lands well suited for urban uses. b) That the proposed amendment is compatible to the extent possible with the actual and general planned use of the adjacent properties;
Staff Analysis: The parcel at 632 East Lake Avenue and the adjacent commercial parcels have a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment would change the zoning district from CNS to CT. The parcel is located adjacent to 952 East Lake Avenue, which has a zoning designation of CT, so changing the zoning designation of 632 East Lake Avenue to CT would be compatible and consistent with the zoning of the adjacent parcels. In addition, the project site is located along a major thoroughfare within the City of Watsonville (East Lake Avenue/SR-152) and provides convenient vehicular access and parking for the public, which is consistent with the purpose of the CT zoning district.

Based on staff analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the required Zoning Map Amendment findings.

The findings are located in Exhibit A to the ordinance.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DETERMINATION:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment is exempt from environmental review under the “common sense” exemption in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this action may have a significant effect on the environment.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment supports the City Council’s 2023-2025 Strategic Plan Priority 1: Economic Development.

8 FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The proposed Zoning Map Amendment has no fiscal impact.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council may decide to deny the proposed Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning designation of the parcel from Neighborhood Shopping Center (CNS) to Thoroughfare Commercial (CT). If the City Council chooses to deny the proposed Zoning Map Amendment, Council will need to give direction to staff to return with a resolution supporting that determination and provide staff with evidence that would support the findings for denial.

REFERENCES:

None.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Proposed Zoning Map

2. October 22, 2024 - City Council Meeting Minutes

3. November 19, 2024 - Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

4. January 14, 2025 - City Council Meeting Minutes

5. February 10, 2025 – Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-25

Proposed Zoning Map Amendment – 632 East Lake Avenue (APN: 017-321-02) Current Zoning Districts
Proposed Zoning Districts

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
217

MINUTES

REGULAR JOINT CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY, &

SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING
October 22, 2024 City of Watsonville
Council Chambers
275 Main Street, Top Floor
4:31 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino (arrived at 6 pm), Parker, and Salcido were present.

1.a. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER(S) (If Any) MOTION: It was moved by Member Dutra, seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco and carried by the following vote to excuse Member Montesino’s absence:

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Montesino

2. REPORTS TO COUNCIL – No Action Required

2.a. REPORT ON PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT SUMMER PROGRAM

HIGHLIGHTS BY RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT NEGRETE
Member Dutra thanked Parks & Community Services staff for their efforts to improve and expand services, programs, and facilities.

In answering Member Dutra, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib stated staff was exploring alternative locations for hosting various community events due to future renovations at the Plaza.

Member Parker and Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco thanked Parks & Community Services staff for their efforts to provide services and programs.

In answering Member Salcido, Parks Superintendent Negrete provided details regarding the Junior Lifeguard Program.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter thanked Parks & Community Services staff for providing programs for youth and seniors. She thanked voters for approving Measure R.

2.b. REPORT ON PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN BY PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES

DIRECTOR LINDBERG & RANDALL BLISS, HARRIS & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEER In answering Member Clark, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about continuing to explore comprehensive street and sidewalk repairs and the potential to modify the Pavement Management Plan based on available funding.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
218
Member Clark requested exploration of similar management plans for the City’s sewer and water systems.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg stated street striping efforts would continue. She spoke about addressing resident requests for striping and traffic calming measures.

Engineer Bliss stated that the City’s webpage on the Pavement Management Plan was a helpful tool to educate the public regarding prioritizing maintenance.

In answering Member Dutra, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about streets requiring major repairs.

City Manager Vides, in answering Member Dutra, spoke about funding dedicated to road and street repairs and maintenance. She stated she would provide Council with an update on funding opportunities and allocations.

Member Dutra requested attention to detail when painting signage on roads.

In answering Member Parker, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg stated Council would have additional time to provide input on the Pavement Management Plan. She spoke about opportunities for grant funding and equity in maintenance and repairs.

Member Parker requested exploring simplifying the City website for easier user navigation. 5:30 p.m.

3. CLOSED SESSION CORRESPONDENCE (None)

4. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed the meeting to discuss the items that follow at 5:30 p.m.

4.a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Government Code 54956.9(d))
One potential case
City Council Resumed at 6:36 p.m.

5. ROLL CALL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, and Salcido were present.

Staff members present were City Manager Vides, City Attorney Zutler, City Clerk Ortiz, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg, Fire Chief Lopez, Administrative Services Director Duran, Interim Community Development Director Meek, IT Director Gill, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib, Library Director Martinez, Airport Director Williams, Deputy City Manager Manning, Principal Planner Orbach, Assistant Police Chief Rodriguez, Police Captain Radich, Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
219
Police Sergeant Wildey, Associate Planner Carmona, Permit Technician Manansala, Housing Manager Landaverry, Deputy City Clerk Pacheco, and Interpreter Jauregui.

6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

7. INFORMATION ITEMS

7.a. REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS

7.b. MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS REPORT

7. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

8.a. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
City Manager Vides stated it was Flood Preparedness Week and informed the public that sandbag stations were open. She spoke about emergency preparedness and encouraged the public to visit the City’s website for additional information.

8.b. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COUNCIL
Mayor Quiroz-Carter spoke about her attendance at various events over the past weeks. She stated she attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo and requested a video be played regarding Watsonville receiving the Helen Putnam Award for Excellence for Community Services and Economic Development.

Member Dutra spoke about his attendance at League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo and congratulated the City for receiving the Helan Putnam Award for Excellence. He thanked former Community Development Director Merriam for her dedication to the City. He stated he would participate in a fundraiser for local non-profit organizations. He wished the public a happy Halloween and encouraged everyone to vote on Election Day.

Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco spoke about various meetings and events she attended over the past weeks, including the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo. She congratulated staff on their efforts with the Opportunity to Work Program.

Member Clark spoke about various events he attended over the past weeks. He invited the public to attend a District 5 meeting in December to discuss roadways and intersections. He encouraged the public to attend and provide input.

8.c. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Zutler stated a Closed Session was held on the item listed on the agenda and no reportable action was taken.

8.d. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING FRUITION BREWING

8.e. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CLAUDIO FRANÇA BRAZILIAN JIU-JITSU & ITS OWNERS CLAUDIO FRANÇA & THOMAS RUMSEY

8.f. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CLASSIC CALAVERA TATTOO & ITS OWNER PEPE NUÑEZ – Postponed

8.g. PRESENTATION BY FRANCISCO ESTRADA REGARDING FRIENDS OF WATSONVILLE PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES “BUY A BRICK” CAMPAIGN (5 Minutes) Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
220
Friends of Watsonville Parks & Community Services Board Member Tony Camargo was also present.

In answering Member Parker, Board Member Camargo spoke about options for the public interested in purchasing bricks.

Mr. Estrada answered Member Parker’s questions regarding character limitations and cost of bricks.

In answering Member Montesino, Mr. Estrada spoke about efforts to accommodate residents’ requests for the location of their bricks at Ramsay Park.

8.h. UPDATE ON CARE ACT IMPLEMENTATION BY NICOLE COBURN, ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (15 Minutes)
County of Santa Cruz Principal Administrative Analyst Sven Stafford, Santa Cruz County Public Defender’s Office Director of Holistic Defense Caitlin Becker, and Santa Cruz County Counsel staff Megan Maravich were also present.

In answering Member Salcido, Director of Holistic Defense Becker spoke about the Public Defender Office’s role in representing a CARE Act participant and potential diversion opportunities.

Director of Holistic Defense Becker and County Counsel staff Maravich, in answering Member Salcido, spoke about the CARE Act being a civil matter, separate from criminal proceedings.

Director of Holistic Defense Becker, in answering Member Clark, spoke about the process for filing a petition in cases where supporting medical documentation is not available.

In answering Member Clark, Principal Administrative Analyst Stafford spoke about the potential number of people that could be assisted by the CARE program.

8. CONSENT AGENDA

PUBLIC INPUT
Recreation Supervisor Merolla and Young Adult Librarian Carrillo spoke about Item 9.l.

The following Teen Action Council members introduced themselves:

Camila – Secretary
Alexandra – Treasurer
Isabella – Parks & Recreation Commission Youth Representative Cristina Nolasco – Marketing Chair
Naia – Community Development
Anahi Jacobo – Activities Chair
Joseph Magaña – Jóvenes Sanos Ambassador
MOTION: It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Dutra to approve the Consent Agenda, excluding Item 9.l. which was removed.

Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco stated she was related to one of the appointees on Item 9.l. and would recuse herself from voting on that item. She requested the item be removed from the Consent Agenda.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
221
MOTION: The above motion carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None

9.a. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 5 & 8, 2024

9.b. ORDINANCE NO. 1469-24 (CM)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AMENDING SECTIONS 4-11.09 (GATE FEES) AND 4-11.15 (RESPONSE TIME) AND REPEALING SECTION 4-11.30 (SERVICE FEES) OF CHAPTER 11 (VEHICLE TOWING SERVICES) OF TITLE 4 (PUBLIC SAFETY) OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO

VEHICLE TOWING SERVICES

9.c. RESOLUTION NO. 214-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND CALLING FOR BIDS FOR THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT FUEL DISPENSER CONTAINMENT, PROJECT NO. AIRPORT 910- 7855-14900

9.d. RESOLUTION NO. 215-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

THIRD AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE AND IRWIN IVAN ORTIZ FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY CLERK

9.e. RESOLUTION NO. 216-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND SWT ENGINEERING, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE LANDFILL PHASE IV MODULE 1 GROUNDWATER PROTECTION SYSTEM AND PHASE III FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, NO. SW-23- 14969, AMENDING THE SCOPE OF WORK, ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $142,399; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.f. RESOLUTION NO. 217-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT WITH SENSUS METERING SYSTEMS, INC., DBA SENSUS USA, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF WATER METER

READING RADIO SUPPORT TOWER AND EQUIPMENT AT THE CORRALITOS FILTER PLANT AND PAJARO DUNES; ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $15,000; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

SAME (FUNDED FROM WATER FUND)

9.g. RESOLUTION NO. 218-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE FROM DURAMAX HOLDINGS LLC DBA OTTO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, FOR RESIDENTIAL REFUSE AND RECYCLING ROLLOUT CARTS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $163,260; AND AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME (FUNDED FROM SOLID WASTE Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
222

ENTERPRISE FUND)

9.h. RESOLUTION NO. 219-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AWARDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO URBAN FUTURES, INC. FOR MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000; AND

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.i. RESOLUTION NO. 220-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE ACCEPTING $1,129,518 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (SCCRTC) FOR THE OHLONE PARKWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ALL AGREEMENTS AND ANY AMENDMENTS NECESSARY; AND APPROPRIATING SUCH FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND [0206]

9.j. RESOLUTION NO. 221-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDING OF $500,000

THROUGH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CANNABIS EQUITY GRANT TO SUPPORT

CANNABIS EQUITY BUSINESSES IN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, AND IF AWARDED,

APPROPRIATING SUCH FUNDS TO THE SPECIAL GRANTS FUND, TO EXECUTE AND

SUBMIT ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO APPLICATIONS,

AGREEMENTS, AND PAYMENT REQUESTS, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY

9.k. RESOLUTION NO. 222-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

MEMBER TO THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

9.l. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

DANIELA HERNANDEZ AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LIBRARY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES AND ISABELLA ALVARADO AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION – Removed. See Item 10.

10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION: It was moved by Member Clark, seconded by Member Parker and carried by the following vote to approve Item 9.l. listed below.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: Orozco

9.l. RESOLUTION NO. 223-24 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPOINTING

DANIELA HERNANDEZ AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LIBRARY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES AND ISABELLA ALVARADO AS THE YOUTH REPRESENTATIVE TO THE

PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
223

11. REPORTS TO COUNCIL (Continued) – No Action Required

11.a. WATSONVILLE CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY ROOFTOP ADDITION PROJECT UPDATE BY

MATTHEW EVANS, ARCHITECT AT THE KPA GROUP
Library Director Martinez was also present.

In answering Member Dutra, Architect Evans spoke about modifications to address potential safety concerns.

Library Director Martinez, in answering Member Dutra, stated the rooftop addition would have the same hours as the Library and spoke about potential partnerships to host events.

City Manager Vides added that there was a possibility of exploring allowing rentals for outside events.

Member Salcido spoke in support of exploring rental of the rooftop addition for events.

Library Director Martinez stated that ingress and egress points would be explored and spoke about partnering with Friends of the Watsonville Public Library to allow them use of the space.

In answering Member Parker, Library Director Martinez spoke about opportunities to offer Library programs in the rooftop addition.

Architect Evans, in answering Member Parker, stated options for rain protection had not been explored yet.

In answering Mayor Quiroz-Carter, Architect Evans provided an estimated project completion date.

11.b. REPORT BY PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES DIRECTOR LINDBERG ON CITYWIDE LIGHTING ASSESSMENT – Postponed.

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS, ORDINANCES, & APPEALS

12.a. TEXT AMENDMENTS TO WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5-49 (CANNABIS EQUITY PROGRAM) & CHAPTER 14-53 (CANNABIS FACILITIES)
1) Staff Report by Associate Planner Carmona. Principal Planner Orbach was also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
Member Salcido expressed concerns with the recommendation to strikeout the following language from the eligibility criteria: “at least 50% female owned businesses.” In answering Member Parker, Associate Planner Carmona spoke about the reasons for the staff recommendation. He spoke about feedback received by the State at the time the City applied for grant funding.

City Manager Vides further spoke about suggestions from the State regarding amendments to the Cannabis Equity Program eligibility criteria.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
224
City Attorney Zutler read a portion of the State’s cannabis equity grant funding guidelines as related to allowable eligibility criteria.

Member Parker expressed concerns with the recommendation to remove the 50% female owned businesses eligibility criteria.

In answering Member Dutra, Associate Planner Carmona spoke about potential effects on businesses should the City not receive cannabis equity grant funding and provided details regarding allocation of currently available funding.

Member Dutra spoke about exploring ways to incentivize diversity among cannabis business owners and expressed concerns with constraints on small business owners.

In answering Member Salcido, Associate Planner Carmona stated there were currently no cannabis businesses that were at least 50% woman owned.

City Manager Vides spoke about the City’s role in assisting local cannabis business owners through State awarded grant funding.
3) Public Comments
James Cunningham, Fog City Farms, thanked staff for working on the Cannabis Equity Program. He expressed concerns with oversaturation of the cannabis market and spoke about using funding from the program to grow his business.

Jonathan Kolodinski, Crème de Canna Collective, thanked staff and Council for supporting the cannabis industry and spoke about inclusivity efforts. He spoke about challenges faced and in support of the staff recommendation.

MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Member Clark to introduce the ordinances listed under Item 12.a.6. and 12.a.7. below. 4) City Council Deliberation on Motion
Member Salcido expressed concerns with removing the language regarding 50% female owned businesses from the eligibility criteria and stated she would not support the motion.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter expressed concerns with removing the 50% female owned businesses from the eligibility criteria. She stated she would support the motion taking in to consideration the already existing cannabis business that needed assistance.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: Parker, Salcido
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) By Motion, Introduce for First Reading, by Title Only, Waiving the Full Reading of the Text, an Ordinance Amending Certain Sections of Chapter 49 (Cannabis Equity Program) of Title 5 (Public Welfare, Morals, & Conduct) of the Watsonville Municipal Code Regarding the Cannabis Equity Program
6) By Motion, Introduce for First Reading, by Title Only, Waiving the Full Reading of the Text, an Ordinance Amending Certain Sections of Chapter 53 (Cannabis Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
225
Facilities) of Title 14 (Zoning) of the Watsonville Municipal Code Regarding the Cannabis Equity Program

12.b. DENSITY BONUS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, & TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 13- LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) 1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Project Architect Bill Kempf and Habitat for Humanity Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Catherine Stihler were also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about available parking spaces for each unit and challenges with emerging housing laws.

Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Member Clark, stated all units would be for sale. 3) Public Comments
Mr. Kempf, spoke in support of the project and spoke about other projects in the area that he had been involved with.

CEO Stihler spoke in support of the project and about volunteer opportunities to help build the homes.

Council clarifying & technical questions continued.

In answering Member Dutra, Housing Manager Landaverry spoke about low-income requirements and provided details regarding determining sale price of the units.

CEO Stihler, in answering Member Dutra, spoke about the volunteer hour requirement for families purchasing the units and stated homes could be sold back to Habitat for Humanity and remain affordable. She spoke about the application process for interested families.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, CEO Stihler spoke about the potential for making changes to their process for selecting the families that purchase the units. 4) MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore, seconded by Mayor Quiroz-Carter to approve the resolutions listed under Item 12.a.6. and 12.a.7. below.

In answering Member Salcido, CEO Stihler spoke about the mortgage application process for families purchasing a unit.
? male, provided further details regarding financing of the homes and Habitat for Humanity providing mortgage payment assistance if necessary.

MOTION: The above motion was carried by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None
Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
226
6) RESOLUTION NO. 224-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS (PP2023-6034) FOR A 13-UNIT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL

EXEMPTION)
7) RESOLUTION NO. 225-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION, AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR EVAN CIRCLE, TRACT 1518, PHASE III (PP2023-6034) FOR A 13-UNIT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 36 AIRPORT ROAD (APN: 015-391-20 &19) AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL EXEMPTION)

12.c. DENSITY BONUS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, & TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 5- LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 &49) 1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Project Architect Bill Kempf was also present.
2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Clark, Mr. Kempf spoke about the tentative map for the project and potential of for sale units.
3) Public Comments – None
4) MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Member Dutra and carried by the following vote to approve the resolutions listed under Item 12.c.6. and

12.c.7. below.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido, Quiroz-Carter NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None
6) RESOLUTION NO. 226-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS (PP2024-6731) FOR A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 & 49) AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL

EXEMPTION)
7) RESOLUTION NO. 227-24 (CM)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR EVAN CIRCLE – PHASE II FOR Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
227
A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT EVAN CIRCLE (APN: 015-391-43 & 49) AND

FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (IN-FILL EXEMPTION)

13. NEW BUSINESS

13.a. STUDY SESSION ON WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 14-41 – DRIVE –

THROUGH FACILITY RESTRICTIONS
1) Staff Report by Principal Planner Orbach
Interim Community Development Director Meek was also present. 2) City Council Clarifying & Technical Questions
In answering Member Salcido, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about the zoning of areas where drive-through projects had been rejected and the possibility of rezoning.

Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Mayor Quiroz-Carter, spoke about current restrictions regarding car queuing to prevent lines from extending into adjacent highways.

He provided details regarding vacant commercial parcels that could potentially be used for drive-through projects.

In answering Member Dutra, Principal Planner Orbach stated drive-through projects that had been rejected did not comply with the current City ordinance and spoke about distance requirements surrounding cities had regarding drive-through projects and residential areas.

City Manager Vides spoke about the potential uses of available commercial parcels.

Member Dutra spoke about challenges due to the urban limit line. He requested information regarding how other cities were addressing drive-through projects.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter requested a more comprehensive staff report prior to Council providing recommendations.

In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach listed various types of zoning districts and common uses.

Member Parker spoke about potential mitigation measures for residential areas surrounding drive-through projects.

In answering Member Parker, Principal Planner Orbach spoke about the reasons he provided examples of controversies surrounding drive-through projects throughout the State.

City Manager Vides, in answering Member Clark, requested direction from Council on potential changes to the drive-through ordinance for staff to explore.

Member Montesino requested information regarding how other similar communities were addressing drive-through projects.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
228
Member Salcido requested exploring rezoning to allow drive-through projects in three zones that had were identified in the staff presentation.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter requested additional information regarding potential impacts of amending the ordinance.

Member Parker and Member Dutra expressed support for Member Salcido’s request. 3) Public Input
Martha Victoria Vega thanked staff for their report. She spoke about potential lost revenue due to current drive-through facility restrictions and stated many young adults were in favor of having more businesses in the City. She asked Council to support growth.

Raeid Farhat, District 7, stated there were several vacant lots on East Lake Avenue. He spoke in support of updating the drive-through ordinance. ? male spoke about the possibility of amending the ordinance to allow Council more ability to make decisions regarding drive-through projects.

Bill Hansen spoke about East Lake Avenue being underserved and stated challenges with two potential drive-through projects he was working on. He asked Council for assistance with moving the projects forward.

Marta Bulaich, District 1, stated various restaurants utilized technology to improve traffic issues. She spoke about the importance of drive-through businesses in the community and stated potential negative impacts of not allowing drive-through projects.

Council clarifying & technical questions continued.

Mayor Quiroz-Carter spoke about health concerns being taken into consideration when the drive-through ordinance was first adopted.

Member Dutra stated concerns with negative impacts of restrictions on potential projects.

In answering Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, City Manager Vides provided a potential timeline for the item being taken back to Council.

City Manager Vides and Principal Planner Orbach, in answering Member Clark, spoke about the process for projects to be granted variances to be allowed to move forward.

Member Salcido requested exploring potential variances, additional information on zoning, and allowing drive-through locations in certain areas in the City.

Member Parker requested a draft ordinance be considered by Council prior to taking it to Planning Commission.
4) 1st MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tempore Orozco, seconded by Mayor QuirozCarter to direct staff based on Council feedback received during the meeting to prepare a draft ordinance to take to Planning Commission for recommendation to Council for amendments to the ordinance.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
229
In answering Member Dutra, City Attorney Zutler spoke about the procedure should Council make changes to the draft ordinance during the first reading. 1st MOTION: The above motion failed by the following vote.

AYES: MEMBERS: Orozco, Quiroz-Carter
NOES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Salcido ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
2nd MOTION: It was moved by Member Salcido, seconded by Member Parker and carried by the following vote to direct staff based on Council feedback received during the meeting to prepare a draft ordinance to bring to Council for additional feedback.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Orozco, Parker, Salcido NOES: MEMBERS: Quiroz-Carter
ABSENT: MEMBERS:
5) City Council Deliberation on Motion – None

14. EMERGENCY ITEMS ADDED TO AGENDA – None

15. REQUESTS & SCHEDULING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Member Clark requested all relevant documents for agenda items be included in the agenda packet.

Member Parker agreed with Member Clark’s request.

16. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m.
________________________________
Vanessa Quiroz-Carter, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________ _______
Irwin I. Ortiz, City Clerk
Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

Vol 65 Min-CC102224
230
This page was left intentionally blank.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4EB1B1CB-D5A2-487F-8B8B-7284BAC15A99 Attachment 2:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

1 M I N U T E S

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE
November 19, 2024 6:07 PM
In accordance with City policy, all Planning Commission meetings are recorded on audio and video in their entirety and are available for review in the Community Development Department (CDD). These minutes are a summary of the action taken.

1. ROLL CALL
Chair Ed Acosta and Commissioners Brando Sención, Vanessa Meldahl, and Jenni Veitch-Olson were present.

Vice-Chair Peter Radin, Commissioners Daniel Dodge, and Lucy Rojas were absent.

A. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT PLANNING COMMISSIONERS (IF ANY) MOTION: It was moved by Sención, seconded by Commissioner Meldahl, and carried by the following vote to excuse Vice-Chair Radin, Commissioners Dodge and Rojas:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Sención, Meldahl, Veitch-Olson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas
Staff members present were Interim Community Development Director Justin Meek, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Matt Orbach, Assistant City Attorney Denise Bazzano, Associate Planner Ivan Carmona, Administrative Analyst Elena Ortiz, Executive Assistant Celia Castro, Permit Technician Rob Manansala, and City Interpreter Carlos Landaverry.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Acosta led the Pledge of Allegiance.

3. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COMMISSION
None
Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

2 4. CONSENT AGENDA
A. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 3, 2024, REGULAR MEETING

PUBLIC INPUT
None
MOTION: It was moved by Chair Acosta, seconded by Commissioner Sencion, and carried by the following vote to approve the Consent Agenda:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Sención, Veitch-Olson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Meldahl

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (PP2024-7477) TO ALLOW A NEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY LOCATED AT 1200 MENASCO DRIVE (APN: 017-551-10); AND FINDING PROJECT
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES 15303
1) Staff Report
Associate Planner Ivan Carmona gave the presentation.
2) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions Commissioner Veitch-Olson inquired what impact will the new cell tower have on the existing baseball field. In answering, Associate Planner Carmona explained there will be no hazardous impacts, but it will allow the league to stream games.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson further inquired if the light pole will continue to provide light. Associate Planner Carmona confirmed that is correct the light pole will remain.

Commissioner Sencion inquired if the cell towers will only be for T-mobile, will other providers be able to use the cell tower. Associate Planner Carmona explained that if the new cell towers were approved other providers would use the existing cell towers.
3) Applicant Presentation
T-Mobile Representative Samantha Alba gave the presentation. 4) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

3 None
5) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta opened the public hearing.

Hearing no comments, Chair Acosta closed the public hearing. 6) Appropriate Motion(s)
MAIN MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Sencion, seconded by Commissioner Veitch-Olson, and carried by the following vote to approve the following recommendation:

RESOLUTION NO. 13-24 (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (PP2024-7477) TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION

OF A NEW TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY FOR T-MOBILE LOCATED AT 1200 MENASCO DRIVE, WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA (APN: 017-551-10);

AND FINDING PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM REVIEW

UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3-NEW

CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES)
7) Deliberation
Commissioner Veitch-Olson acknowledged the public comments received and thanked all for reaching out. She further shared her support for the item. 8) Chair Calls for a Vote on Motion(s)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Sención, Meldahl, Veitch-Olson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas
Assistant City Attorney read the appeal language for both items that have a Special Use Permit pursuant to Watsonville Municipal Code.

B. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 7, CHAPTER 13 (PUBLIC TREES) AND ADDITION OF A NEW CHAPTER 55 (PRESERVATION OF TREES AND TREE CANOPY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY) TO TITLE 14 OF THE WATSONVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE
1) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta opened the public hearing.

Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

4 Hearing no comments, Chair Acosta closed the public hearing. 2) Appropriate Motion(s)
MAIN MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Sencion, seconded by Chair Acosta, and carried by the following vote to continue the item to December 3, 2024:
3) Chair Calls for a Vote on Motion(s)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Sención, Meldahl, Veitch-Olson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas
C. DENIAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (PP2023-6377) AND RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR A NEW 7,670- SQUARE-FOOT DRIVE-THROUGH CAR WASH FACILITY ON A 1.18± ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321-02), FILED BY

VANCE SHANNON WITH QUICK QUACK CAR WASH, APPLICANT, ON

BEHALF OF BILL HANSEN, PROPERTY OWNER
1) Staff Report
Associate Planner Ivan Carmona gave the presentation.
2) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions None.
3) Applicant Presentation
Quick Quack Carwash Representative Vans Shannon gave a Presentation.

Meeting Break called by Chair to address audio difficulties. Break time started at 6:52pm, meeting resumed at 6:54pm.

William Hansen gave a presentation.
4) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions None.
5) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta opened the public hearing.

Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

5 Resident Leean Jones spoke in favor of the decision to deny the project, commenting that the project would be detrimental to public health, safety, convenience and welfare. She further shared examples of noise-generating businesses, including car washes, that create noise impacts for nearby residents.

Local business owner Raeid Farhat raised concerns regarding the consistency of approval and denial of projects. He referenced a gas station project at 676 East Lake Avenue that was allowed to convert the former handwash facility into an automated car wash facility.

Resident Steven McGee spoke in favor of the decision to deny the project. He commented on the potential impacts of noise to residents’ ability to sleep and rest.

Resident Martha Vega spoke against the decision to deny the proposed project.

She referenced previous approved projects and supported businesses wanting to develop within the city. She encouraged Commissioners to also think of the youth that will get to vote and live in the city.

Resident Joan Garrett spoke in favor of the decision to deny the project. She shared her concerns about noise and children walking in areas with high traffic volumes.

Hearing no further comment, Chair Acosta closed the public hearing.

In response to an inquiry on making a motion, Assistant City Attorney Bazzano noted that in the absence of a motion at this time the Planning Commission could consider and discuss the item to see if the Planning Commission could get to an appropriate motion.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson requested to reopen the Planning Commission clarifying and technical questions. Chair Acosta accepted the request. Assistant City Attorney Bazzano also clarified that to ask questions of staff or the applicant, the Planning Commission could do so without having to reopen the Public Hearing.
2) Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions Chair Acosta reopened the Planning Commission Clarifying & Technical Questions as a request by Commissioner Veitch-Olson.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson inquired about the project’s timing and noted there was a study session in October to receive direction from the City Council on whether or not to amend the Drive-Through Facility Restrictions Ordinance. In answering, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach clarified that the project was brought before the Planning Commission tonight at the request of the applicant and property owner. He explained that the project was deemed complete in September and this was the first meeting date that the item could be brought for review by the Planning Commission.

Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

6 Chair Acosta commented on the time Commissioners had to review the agenda packet. The Chair also shared comments regarding his support for business and the proposed project.

In response to Chair Acosta’s question concerning making a motion to approve or deny the appeal, Assistant City Attorney Bazzano clarified the two recommendations and potential actions by the Planning Commission.

Commissioner Veitch-Olson inquired whether the Planning Commission could table the item to a future date to allow Council an opportunity to consider making changes to the Drive-Through Facility Restrictions Ordinance before the item returned to the Commission. She shared her concerns that approval of the project would set a precedent of not applying the 150-foot-setback requirement in the Ordinance.

Chair Acosta commented that the Planning Commission conducts their review on a project-by-project basis, questioned the application of the setback requirement, and noted his approval of the project.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano clarified that in order to approve the project, the Commission would need to find that it meets standards, including the 150-footsetback requirement set forth in the WMC section 14-41.100(a)(1).

In response to Chair Acosta’s question about whether the Commission could or could not make a motion to approve the project, Assistant City Attorney Bazzano confirmed that it could not because the project does not meet all drive-through facility standards.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano further clarified that if the Planning Commission could provide evidence in support of making the required findings, then City staff could bring back the item with an alternative resolution to approve the project. 5) Public Hearing
Chair Acosta reopened the Public Hearing at the request of property owner Bill Hansen.

Property owner Bill Hansen commented on the short timeframe and amount of material for review in the agenda packet by the Planning Commission. Mr.

Hansen noted that he has been working on this project for two and a half years and described the sequence of events regarding project design and entitlements to bring it for consideration by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hansen commented on other developments he has worked on and expressed frustration with this project.

Chair Acosta thanked the applicant and closed the public hearing without inquiring about whether any additional members of the public wished to speak.

Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

7 Requests were made by multiple members of the public to speak. In response, Chair Acosta reopened the public hearing.

Resident Steven McGee addressed Chair Acosta and shared concerns regarding living near a carwash. He further added that he supports businesses and addressed concerns regarding the noise surrounding the residents.

Resident Leeann Jones spoke in support of local businesses and asked the Commission to consider if this business is needed. Resident Jones also shared concerns that the community was not involved in the project and requested for residents to be involved in decisions of new development. She stated she took the time to read and understand the packet.

Resident Ilia Buliach shared he is neither in opposition or in support of the project, but shared concerns regarding procedures. Resident Buliach commented on the short amount of time available for reviewing the agenda packet and making decisions.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano requested to be able to respond regarding comments to the agenda notice. Chair Acosta postponed the comment.

Chair Acosta thanked the community for being involved and speaking. Chair Acosta further shared concerns regarding the timing of when the agenda was received and the amount of time available to read all the material.

Chair Acosta asked other Planning Commissioners whether they read all the material in the packet. In response, the other Commissioners present confirmed they had read the agenda packet materials.

Chair Acosta shared concerning comments towards City Staff.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano responded to the comments regarding the noticing of the agenda. Attorney Bazzano clarified that there are two types of meetings under the Brown Act: regular meetings and special meetings. A special meeting requires the agenda to be published 24 hours ahead of the meeting.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano noted for the record that the agenda for this meeting was published at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Assistant City Attorney Bazzano also shared that the Planning Commission can decide to continue the item to a future regular meeting date or a date uncertain.

Chair Acosta inquired about the different possible dates to move the item to since it would also require availability from the Commissioners. Assistant City Attorney Bazzano suggested moving the item to a date uncertain.

In addition, Interim Community Development Director Meek stated that, if the Planning Commission decides to move the item to a date uncertain, the Department will make its best efforts to schedule a Special Meeting where everyone is available.

Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

8 Chair Acosta confirmed that there will be a regular meeting on December 3, 2024, and requested Staff send out an email to Commissioners to decide on a Special Meeting date in December.
6) Appropriate Motion(s)
MAIN MOTION: It was moved by Chair Acosta, seconded by Commissioner Veitch-Olson, and carried by the following vote to continue the item to a date uncertain with direction to staff to coordinate a Special Meeting in December:

RESOLUTION NO. xx-24 (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (PP2023-6377) FOR A NEW 7,670-SQUARE-FOOT DRIVE-THROUGH CAR WASH FACILITY ON A

1.18± ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321- 02), FILED BY VANCE SHANNON WITH QUICK QUACK CAR WASH,

APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF BILL HANSEN, PROPERTY OWNER
RESOLUTION NO. xx-24 (PC)

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL

DENIAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL LOCATED AT 632 EAST LAKE AVENUE (APN: 017-321-02) FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER (CNS) TO THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL (CT) TO ALLOW

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DRIVE-THROUGH CAR WASH FACILITY,

FILED BY VANCE SHANNON WITH QUICK QUACK CAR WASH,

APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF BILL HANSEN, PROPERTY OWNER
7) Deliberation
None
8) Chair Calls for a Vote on Motion(s)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Acosta, Sencion, Meldahl, Veitch-Olson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Dodge, Radin, Rojas

6. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY
No report at this time from Secretary Meek.

7. ADJOURNMENT
Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

ADOPTED MINUTES 4.A.

9 Chairperson Acosta adjourned the meeting at 7:49 PM. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for December 3, 2024, at 6:00 PM. ________________________ ________________________________ Justin Meek, Secretary Ed Acosta, Chair
Planning Commission Planning Commission
Docusign Envelope ID: A24B0123-2E93-48AB-B921-D6741D0804B6 Attachment 3:

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
257

MINUTES

REGULAR JOINT CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY, &

SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING
January 14, 2025 City of Watsonville
Council Chambers
275 Main Street, Top Floor
NOTE: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(b), Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido participated in the meeting via teleconferencing from: 65 Peppertree Lane, Watsonville, CA 95076
4:31 p.m.

1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Orozco, Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido, and Council Members Clark, Dutra (arrived at 4:38 p.m.), Montesino, Parker and Quiroz-Carter were present.

1.a. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES & RECOGNITION OF RETIREES

2. CLOSED SESSION CORRESPONDENCE - None

3. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed the meeting to discuss the items that follow at 4:34 p.m.

3.a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9(d))
[1 potential case]

3.b. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
(Government Code 54957.6)
Agency negotiator: Nathalie Manning, Marissa Duran and Mark Wilson, Burke Williams and Sorensen
Employee organizations: Confidential, Executive Team, Fire Management, International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local 1272, Management, United Public Employees of California (LiUNA), Local 792, Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 (OE3), Police Officers Association, Police Management, Public Safety Mid-Management, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 521 Clerical Technical City Council Resumed at 6:30 p.m.

4. ROLL CALL
Mayor Orozco, Mayor Pro Tempore Salcido, and Council Members Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker and Quiroz-Carter were present.

Attachment 4
1 of 12

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
258
Staff members present were City Manager Vides, City Attorney Zutler, City Clerk Ortiz, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg, Police Chief Zamora, Fire Chief Lopez, Administrative Services Director Duran, Interim Community Development Director Meek, IT Director Gill, Parks & Community Services Director Calubaquib, Library Director Martinez, Deputy City Manager Manning, Interim Assistant Community Development Director Orbach, Administrative Analyst Mata, Deputy City Clerk Pacheco, and Interpreter Landaverry.

4.a. MOTION TO EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER(S) (If any) – None

5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.a. REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS

6.b MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS REPORT

7. NEW BUSINESS

7.a. OATHS OF OFFICE TO REELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER 1) OATH OF OFFICE ADMINISTERED BY CITY CLERK ORTIZ TO REELECTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBER VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER (DISTRICT 2)
2) COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER VANESSA QUIROZ-CARTER
Member Quiroz-Carter stated the reason she was unable to attend the December Council meeting. She stated she was happy to be back and ready for work.

8. PRESENTATIONS & ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

8.a. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Zutler stated Council held a Closed Session on the items on the agenda and no reportable action was taken.

8.b. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC (2 MINUTES) – None

8.c. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE COUNCIL (2 MINUTES)
Member Dutra wished everyone a happy new year. He expressed solidarity with those affected by the fires in the Los Angeles area and spoke about the effects of climate change.

He stated he recently met various Council members from surrounding jurisdictions.

Member Montesino wished everyone a happy new year. He stated Santa Cruz County Supervisor Hernandez was elected Board Chair at a recent meeting and mentioned Fabian Leonor was appointed by the Board of Supervisors to serve on the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board of Directors. He spoke about his appointment as Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Chair.

Mayor Orozco spoke about events she participated in over the past month. She provided additional updates regarding her new Mayor Orozco on the Move initiative, an upcoming district-based survey, and about funding obtained for parks and recreation improvements.

Attachment 4
2 of 12

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
259

8.d. 2024 PINK PATCH PROJECT PRESENTATION BY WATSONVILLE POLICE

DEPARTMENT
Staff presentation by Administrative Analyst Mata, Oncology Certified Nurse Renee Aispuro Gonzalez, and Dominican Hospital Chief Philanthropy Officer Anthony Pagliaro. Katz Cancer Resource Center representatives were also present.

8.e. PRESENTATION OF CHECK TO CITY BY FRIENDS OF WATSONVILLE PARKS &

COMMUNITY SERVICES VICE PRESIDENT ANA HURTADO
Friends of Watsonville Parks & Community Services Board President Daryl Wise, Vice President Ana Hurtado, and Board Member Tony Camargo were present.

8.f. PRESENTATION BY PAJARO VALLEY PREVENTION & STUDENT ASSISTANCE CHIEF

EXECUTIVE OFFICER JASMINE NAJERA
Member Parker spoke about the positive impact of Pajaro Valley Prevention & Student Assistance (PVPSA) on students and thanked them for their work.

8.g. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING PASILLAS TIRE SERVICE

8.h. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING HABITAT FOR HUMANITY MONTEREY BAY

8.i. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING BEER MULE BOTTLE SHOP + POUR HOUSE

8.j. MAYOR’S PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING HONEYLUX COFFEE – Unable to attend meeting.

9. CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC INPUT – None
MOTION: It was moved by Member Montesino, seconded by Member Quiroz-Carter to approve the Consent Agenda.

In answering Member Clark, Public Works & Utilities Director Lindberg spoke about the project listed under Item 9.b., the cooperative agreement listed under Item 9.e., and about efforts to move the Harkins Slough Pedestrian Bridge project forward.

AYES: MEMBERS: Clark, Dutra, Montesino, Parker, Quiroz-Carter, Salcido, Orozco NOES: MEMBERS: Dutra (Item 9.r. only)
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None

9.a. MOTION APPROVING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 10, 2024

9.b. RESOLUTION NO. 1-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE REJECTING

ALL BIDS FOR THE HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD OVERPASS SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN (SSFM) RELOCATION PROJECT NO. ST-23-14859SS

9.c. RESOLUTION NO. 2-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 3 TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE Attachment 4
3 of 12

Vol 66 Min-CC011425
260
AND ROBERT A BOTHMAN, INC., DBA ROBERT A BOTHMAN CONSTRUCTION, FOR THE RAMSAY PARK RENAISSANCE PROJECT, NO. PK-22-01, INCREASING THE CONTRACT COMPENSATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $587,708.10, FOR A REVISED TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $25,248,613.38, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE SAME

9.d. RESOLUTION NO. 3-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

THIRD AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PREPARATION SERVICES FOR THE HIGHWAY 1 AND

HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT; AMENDING THE CONTRACT COMPENSATION AND ADDING $30,000; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE SAME

9.e. RESOLUTION NO. 4-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 1 (AGREEMENT 05-0386A1) BETWEEN

THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR PREPARATION OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND A CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FOR THE NEW PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND

UPGRADED BICYCLE FACILITIES AT THE HARKINS SLOUGH ROAD CROSSING OF STATE ROUTE 1;ADDING $321,000 AND INCREASING THE TOTAL AGREEMENT AMOUNT TO $3,468,000; AND AUTHORIZING A BUDGET APPROPRIATION OF $321,000 FROM THE EAST HIGHWAY 1 AREA IMPACT FEES FUND [0344]; AND AUTHORIZING

AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.f. RESOLUTION NO. 5-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND MNS ENGINEERS, INC., A CORPORATION, FOR DESIGN SERVICES THROUGH

CONSTRUCTION FOR THE WWTF ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAZARDMITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, NO WW-22-14797, AMENDING THE SCOPE OF WORK, ADDING TO THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY $175,534 AND EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT FROM JANUARY 31, 2025 TO DECEMBER 31, 2027; AND

DIRECTING CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAME

9.g. RESOLUTION NO. 6-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AND KOSMONT AND ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA KOSMONT COMPANIES EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT TO DECEMBER 31, 2025,

TO CONTINUE PROVIDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING SERVICES AND

DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXCUTE SAME

9.h. RESOLUTION NO. 7-25 (CM)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE AWARDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO CSG CONSULTANTS, INC., A

CORPORATION, FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE GREEN VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – CAREY AVE TO THICKET LN, NO. ST-24- Attachment 4
4 of 12