 This meeting is open to the public with both in-person attendance at the City of Capitola Council chambers, a 420 Capitola Avenue, and remote attendance possible. Planning Commission and staff are attending in-person and remotely via Zoom. There are several ways for the public to watch and participate. Information on how to join the meeting via Zoom and make public comments about for the public to watch and participate. Information on how to join the meeting via Zoom and make public comment during the meeting is available on our website cityofcapitola.org on the meeting agenda. The public can also live stream the meeting on the city's website or on YouTube. As always, this meeting is Cablecast Live on Spectrum Communications, CableTV Channel 8, and AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and is being recorded to be re-broadcast on the following Mondays and Fridays 1 p.m. on Spectrum Channel 71 and Spectrum Channel 25. Excuse me. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the city's website after the meeting. Our technician tonight is Walter, and as a reminder please turn off your cell phones during the meeting. And so, moving on, we need the roll call and the Pledge of Allegiance. All right. Commissioner Westman. Commissioner Wilk. Vice-Chair Jensen. Excuse me. And Chair Christensen. Commissioner S.D. is absent. Moving on to item two, additions and deletions to the agenda. There are no additions or deletions to the agenda. However, we are going to ask that we reorder the topics tonight to begin with topic number four. Okay. And item three is oral communications. Oral communications allows time for members of the public to address the Planning Commission on any consent item on tonight's agenda or on any topic within the jurisdiction of the city that is not on the public hearing section of the agenda. Members of the public may speak up for three minutes, for up to three minutes unless other one is specified by the chair. Individuals may not speak more than once during oral communications. All speakers must address the entire legislative body and will not be permitted to engage in dialogue. A maximum of 30 minutes is set aside for oral communications. Does anybody wish to speak? If you could put your name on that. Hi. My name is Goran Klobic. I live here locally in Santa Cruz County. What I'm about to tell today is that there is a certain police corruption here in the county going on. I'm not sure. I cannot approve it yet, but I'm talking about drug trafficking and prostitution. I talked about that to a captain here in Capitola. And I didn't hear back from her. I'm not sure how to go on from here. I'm having problems with other deputies because I've been talking about certain issues here, not the CPD, but other deputies from other counties who are harassing me. So I'm not sure about that either, but I can do. Thank you very much for listening. God bless you all. Take care. Thank you very much. Anybody else like to speak? Is there anybody on Zoom? Do we take number four? Item four is Planning Commission and Staff Comments. We're replacing number four, removing something. Oh, I'm sorry. So topic four within the regular section 6A. So no changes for this number four. So Planning Commission and Staff Comments. Staff has no comments this evening. Actually, I have two comments. City Council, next week, they will also be discussing the housing element update in the request for the 75 feet at the mall. And they will also be discussing the strategic plan. There were questions that came up at our last Planning Commission on that. So I would encourage you all to tune in. The staff report will be published tomorrow with more information on the strategic plan. And it sounds like it's going to be a very, a lot of stakeholder outreach. The Planning Commissioners will all be involved in the process. But Chloe is the project manager on that, our assistant to the city manager, and she'll be giving an overview on that. So I would suggest that you all tune in and also that the zero emission passenger rail and trail, there'll be a presentation on that to the City Council next week. So a lot of planning discussions that I would stay tuned. So I just want to say thanks for this workshop, because I think some of my comments last meeting were perhaps a little bit controversial. I didn't mean to when I'm talking about landscaping and some of these things that didn't mean to undermine staff or the direction they gave to the applicant. Obviously, that's their job in terms of code and give a good direction, which they did. And it's because I have trouble understanding some of the rules in the gray areas. And I need a workshop doesn't mean that staff isn't telling the applicant what they need to hear. So I apologize for any confusion there. Anything else? Moving on to the consent calendar. All matters listed under the consent calendar are considered by the Planning Commission to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There'll be no separate discussion on these items prior to the time of planning commission votes on the actions unless Planning Commission requests specific items to be discussed for separate review. Items pulled for separate discussion will be considered in the order listed on the agenda. Item A, approval of December 7th, 2023 Planning Commission meeting minutes. I move approval of the meeting minutes for 12, 7, 2023, and 118, 2024. You have a first and a second. Roll call. Commissioner Wilk. Hi. Vice Chair Jensen. I'm Chair Christensen. Hi. Moving on to items or item six, public hearing. Public hearings are intended to provide an opportunity for public discussion of each item listed as a public hearing. The following procedure is as follows. One, first is staff presentation, second is Planning Commission questions, third public comment, fourth Planning Commission deliberation and fifth decisions. Excuse me. Item A, we have the Citywide Zoning Code update. The project description is for future amendments to the Capital and Municipal Code Title 17 zoning. The future zoning code ordinance amendments will impact the development standards and regulation for properties citywide. The zoning code is part of the city's local coastal program and amendments require certification by the California Coastal Commission prior to taking effect in the coastal zone. Recommended action provide feedback to staff on zoning discussion items and direct staff to prepare and ordinance to amend Capital and Municipal Code Title 17 zoning. Thank you, Chair Christensen. I'm going to jump into the work session. So tonight we're having a work session on just a few planning documents and roles. And we're going to we're planning to go into the zoning code update topics and just items that the Planning Commission had identified at our last meeting that they'd like to talk about. And then broader planning discussion items. We're going to switch around the schedule here and start off with the zoning code update topics. At least the first topic of the mall. And then after that, I'll look to the Planning Commission to see if I think we should play at that point start at the beginning of the presentation. I am wondering if do we have Ben Noble on the line? We do. Okay, so Ben Noble is joining us from Ben Noble planning. He has historically helped us with updates to the planning code whenever zoning code. So is Ben an active panelist at this point? Yes. Okay. So if at any time you see Ben raise his hand or however we want to he might jump into the conversation as well as he knows capital very well. So more redevelopment incentives. I actually I added this to our agenda after hearing the items that the Planning Commission wanted to discuss because it's kind of a pressing item under our housing element currently with the last letter that we received from the state. And we have identified within our housing element update a commitment to updating the section of code, which is for incentives for community benefits. Currently, this section includes it establishes which incentives are allowed in exchange for community benefits. Mall redevelopment is has its own section within this code and mall redevelopment qualifies as a community benefit. The current incentives are an increased height from 40 feet within the regional commercial up to 50 feet as the incentive. And the floor area ratio can increase from 1.5 to 2.0. So within the housing element, we have identified 645 housing units on the Merlone Geyer properties within the mall. There's more on the mall as a whole but 645 within the Merlone Geyer portion. And it's important to know that within the Merlone Geyer property, they have long term leases on portions of that land. So when we look at the overall score footage that Merlone Geyer owns in this next housing cycle, they're not able to develop on top of the coals. They're not able to develop on the parking next to the target target parking lot. They're also not able to redevelop by the entryway of Macy's that is on the interior of the mall. So when you do the math, when you back it out, it's a much smaller land area than what you see when you look at their total number for the property. So of the 645 units that are identified in the housing element, 419 of those units are for affordable units. We worked with our housing consultant. We looked at the smaller size of the lot based on the long term leases. And we found the consultant found that it is feasible within the 50 feet to build 645 units. However, when you look at the economics of the site, it is it may not be economically feasible to develop with 419 affordable units. So additional development is likely necessary to make this project economically feasible. So there has we've received several letters throughout the housing element update with a request from the mall owner to look at increasing the height up to 75 feet. And also when we did our the math of increasing the height to 75 feet, this would result in somewhere between 1000 to 1300 units based on whether or not the floor first floor commercial and utilizing an equation that's provided by the state HCD for we have no density on that property. So the mall is also within their letters. They've asked for an exception within the floor area ratio to not count the parking garages. And right now as things are continue to change at the state level regarding parking and being next to a high frequency transit area, it's most likely that parking in the long run will not be required at the mall by the state. As are as the frequencies of our transit increase. So this exception request could be a great incentive for the mall to produce more parking than is required in the future. And then the other thought to keep in mind is that the the visual impacts of height and parking garages, they can be mitigated through our objective design standards. I think that's maybe something we also need to just fine tune thinking about going to greater height. So I have a series of slides that I got out to you early. So I know you've seen these. I don't want to spend too much time going over the projects, but 50 fell filter streets. It's 63 feet high, five stories and 35 units. This is 130 center street. It's 74 feet in height. So this is similar to the request by the mall. It's six stories tall. There's 233 units. These are all single room occupancy units. And they do have commercial on the ground floor. Here's a side view of note is when you're when you're building to 75 feet or these taller structures with retail on the ground floor typically like a minimum of 15 feet is what you would see on that ground floor level when it's commercial. And sometimes you would see upwards of over 20 feet on the ground level like 18 to 20. This is 324 front street cruise hotel 75 feet tall. So again, it's the equivalent of what's being asked for at the mall 75 feet tall six stories 232 rooms. And again, you can see that ground floor commercial and they've actually parked it under the underneath. Yeah, the red line is the grade on that one. Next, I've included a slide for the Capitol them all. This is from the 2019 conceptual review and this view is at 75 feet where you're seeing the top of the roof. Six stories with one story of commercial. And within the Capitol them all the overall project was 637 units. And then this is just another angle of the Capitol them all here. It's 75 feet seven stories on this side is this was the street that was the extension of 38th Avenue that would go through the residential portion not showing the commercial. To the left you can see a garage door on the left bottom corner. This for that building in this previous slide also there's parking wrapped by this building. So you can't see the parking garage and it's wrapped with residential and commercial. 820 Pacific Avenue. This one goes up to 80 feet seven stories in height and 85 units again has a ground floor. I think the first two floors of this are commercial and office space. And here again you're seeing those a 16 foot height on the first story and then 12 feet for the office and then going up with 10 foot heights. 100 Laurel Street this measures at 82 feet. Seven stories tall with 205 units again ground floor commercial. And here's the they also have underground parking. And then 530 front Street goes up to 89 feet 8 stories. 276 units as well as about 7000 units of commercial. Here 15 foot ground floor commercial this building. So the second part of the request was for the floor FAR sorry FAR exception for the parking garages. Just going to walk you through the previous mall design where you see the two cars is where the garages are. The top garage that was closer to target one wall of that was not wrapped. And on the lower garage building already showed you the building it wasn't entirely wrapped for around their garage. So these are just showing the differences the comparisons of a wrapped building versus one that you can see is visible. On the lower slide you can actually see this two story target parking garage that's that red line. It's the second story of the target garage and then the unwrapped. So I think in moving forward with this request we would want to think about if we're to make an exception to it just let it be integrated into the design of the building so that just the context of it is that what's shown on the top is achieved. So the Planning Commission discussion tonight is for the increased incentives to the mall site with a request of maximum building height to 75 feet floor ratio exception tonight. I'm not looking for a vote. There's not an ordinance in front of you. There's not a housing element update in front of you. This is a work session item. I just in preparation of where we go next with our housing element this feedback will help direct that of what we come back for options. But at this point for the housing element we're working on drafts in the state HCD is really asking us to commit to a number in our housing element and we'll only do that with the support of my Planning Commission and City Council. So that's why I'm bringing this to you tonight and I welcome the discussion and again there's no vote and this is there. My name is Dave Geiser. I'm the Managing Director of Design and Construction from Long Island Partner. I've been with the firm for over 25 years. I was a participant with Kathy and others bringing the original proposal forward back in 2019 I think was last time we met. We have been participating or wanting to participate in the housing element process. That's why we've been presenting letters to what we change as we think need to be made in order for us to process the kind of number of units that we're talking about. In fact, these are even greater numbers than we were proposing originally. So we thought there need to be changes made to the zoning to allow for such development. I would honestly candidly say that the proposal we had in 2019 to keep in mind, that's not the proposal today that we're bringing forward. We don't have an application today. And so we're, I would say that we would likely, especially given some of the comments we received at the end of 2019, about integration of other amenities to the site and other design issues, that we would probably go back not totally to the drawing board, but we would re-envision the site with the zoning that was if it's changed, what that says and what that allows us to do today, and also the different economic conditions today. Retail's changed a little bit, office changed greatly. The retail landscape in general has changed quite a bit, and our economic situation's changed a little bit with our interest rates and where we're going with the economy. Things have changed. The landscape has changed for development. So I just say keep that in mind that we're not asking you, we're asking for zoning flexibility or increase in zoning, not necessarily zoning to fit the project that was presented in 2019. We would revisit that. So we're anxious to be a part of the process. We were invited here tonight. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have, but we're here to listen to and provide the feedback that you need from us. Thank you. We're going to suggest that we do the floor area exception first, because I think I did want to let you know that Commissioner Esti reached out. He sent a note to both the chair and I saying that he'd reviewed the staff report, and he's done some analysis on his own that he shared with me in the past on the economics of the mall. And he's in support in general of the direction requested by the mall and understands that economically he feels it's necessary. So just wanted to let you know those comments as we go into this. I'll start on the floor area. For me, that's a no brainer. You know, I think it makes absolute sense because what's happening is that people are providing less than less parking. The state's requiring less than less. And I think for the mall to be successful because of what it is and what it's going to become, they're going to need to have some parking. And I think not having parking parking garage included in the floor area ratio might even make other projects that weren't going to do parking originally because of Boston size that they needed to have their building to do. So I think it's a brilliant idea to take the parking garage out of the floor. I agree. But I think I could just make some general comments about the whole project. Because I was on the planning commission in 2019 when when they came before us originally. And and also was there in the city council and generally there was it was I wouldn't say it was hostile, but it was very critical of the design at that point, mainly because of economic issues of the city. In other words, it was a it was a wash in terms of whether or not we would get any funds from this, the increase in public works outweigh the increase in sales revenue. So basically the the outcome from planning commission as well as city council was you got to put a hotel in there in order in order to get some revenue. However, that was before we had this housing element requirement and and the requirement to increase our population. At that time, we we had a general plan that said keep keep the population of capital 10,000 and we don't want a 25% increase. Now that is mandated. That changes, at least my approach to Merlin guy are 180 degrees. And I just want to say thank you for providing this additional housing. And I am okay with the additional area ratio. I am also okay with the additional height requirements. And and feel that this in fact is is a great opportunity for us to get our housing home and approved if we can get we can get something going with Merlin guyer. And and I I'm not going to be one to stand in the way of their project was also I was it was also always a beautiful project. I mean, and they were very cooperative with community outreach and and you know, comments that we all brought for bicycles, you name it, bicycle pathways and bus routing and they were very receptive. So I'm sure that that good relationship will continue. And we should be as cooperative as we can be with the new reality. One question. What this is have to interaction with these suggestions and stuff Katie, with what the city council is also doing with the outreach of like, I think they're looking at it, I don't know what the track terminology is, but wasn't there a lot of money that they have hired a consultant to work to make the project more advantageous to come forward. Is that in your lap with this is that override is this one of the items that are in that you elaborate on yes, so you'll recall that we've we've we kicked off a study of a land use study on how do different different types of land use strategies that could be implemented to help with the redevelopment of them all. That study is happening now. Cosmon is working on that. This very much aligns with their findings of what they're researching. I did reach out to them at the end of last week to let them know about the well, I brought them up to date as soon as we got the letter back from HCD. And one of the ideas that they have been working on is looking at adjusting our heights is probably one of the more viable options that's really easy to do rather than they're looking at ideas of like specific plans and other types of land use products. But this is this is an alignment with the study that they're doing. But at this time, they're not in a position to move forward with the giving the results of that the study of this is definitely one of the tools that they will be suggesting. I just want to make sure it was conflicting with where they're going. And that at the same time, are we are they going to be altering their focus of that study? If this is something that has a lot of support at planning level, would this be something that be that they hired a consultant? Would this be like if that was one of their big recommendations when they be focused on looking at other things that are going to be making a unique and advantageous for the applicant to and other creative ways of working through this? Yeah, I mean, they're continuing to put together the menu of options for us. So that will still be included in the study. And just question when we talk about the height maximum and some of those photos running their other buildings stuff. Would that be like? Ruffalo and then like someone had decks on the top. So it when we talk about the height of the on the building, would that be height and then it'd be accessible? Or are we looking at just plate height or how are we really looking at from that standpoint? So I think for the purposes of tonight, set to say if we were to figure out if 6575 seems adequate to get into the general plan, we would get into the specificity of that during the zoning code update. So if the general plan says 75 feet, I don't think we would get that specific to say, and an extra five feet for mechanical equipment or any of that, we can fine tune that when we get to the planning commission for the zoning code update. Typically, though, it would be 75 feet to the roof. And then you typically do have exceptions for mechanical and elevator shafts and other necessary components of a building that aren't really used for a habitable space. And if the planning commission wanted to allow roof decks, that could also be included in that allowance beyond 75 feet, but we wouldn't need to get that specific this evening. Thank you. Sounds like we're going to talk about both of them together, not just the floor area ratio. So, you know, I'm, I'm actually pretty comfortable with raising my hope is that when the mall does look at their design, they'll try and put the highest part of the project closest to the center of the site as they can. And I know there's some restrictions on where it could go. I think from, you know, listening to our community and what happened in 2019, I think there would still be some resistance, for example, having 75 feet right on Capitol Avenue. But if it was, you know, the third story going up to 75 feet, or there was commercial on the bottom that, you know, created a more pedestrian kind of feel. And I think those are, you know, ways that we can work and provide the needed housing and provide the economics that the mall developer is going to need to make this project work. And as Commissioner Wilk said, you know, times have changed. Certainly, when that mall was first built, you know, in the 80s, it was the Katz Meow and retail was a completely different game than it is now. And so I think we all have to be open minded and willing to, you know, see what creative ideas they can come up with to make that property be in the mic. Sorry, it makes that property work for them as well as the community. And just having that amount of housing on it's going to make it, you know, completely different site than it is now. So I think everyone's anxious to see something happen there. I think people are more flexible now than they were before. And, you know, hopefully something can come of all of this where we have a project that financially works for the mall and design wise works for the city. Question about the 75 feet. So this would be just for that site? Or would we extend that like all along the 41st Street corridor? So the if you wanted to discuss it going beyond the mall site, we could tonight, I was just asking specifically to the mall site, and that being everything within the Claire Street loop. Capitola Road and 41st Avenue. So not including like Trader Joe's and Browns Ranch, but really inside the interior mall site. It just occurred to me because I spent a lot of time in redwood city and along El Camino Real, there's been a lot of development with these types of, you know, residential over retail, five, six stories. And to me, it doesn't seem overbearing or well, it just seems to be this is the way the world's going. So to have just one, just one site approved for that seems to me like, we might as well just reestablish that, you know, create a zone more more of a whole zone as opposed to just one site, where we would, where we would allow that, you know, like here is our high density area. Obviously we would spill over into the jewel box or anything, but, but perhaps just, you know, on Capitola Road just north of 41st Street and along 41st Street itself, perhaps even only on one side, but I think it would be worthwhile to, you know, expand the thought beyond just this one in an indication. The other thing I noticed was that I got to mention earlier was the open versus wrapped parking. Obviously the wrapped parking looks better, but isn't an open parking like the target existing parking lot? Isn't that an issue of like, like safety and, and just, you know, auto exhaust fuel, you know, getting in decent air and, and getting, you know, a nice open space where there's lots of natural light, maybe it, you know, reduces crime or there might be issues other than just aesthetics where you'd want open parking or unwrapped parking. You know, I, I don't have the answer to that, Peter. So that's something we can look at. We can ask questions about just for clarification on your question regarding the zone within the housing element, we, one of our to do one of the items on our to do list is to look at the boundary of the incentivize zone and possibly expand it down 41st Avenue to include more of the retail and commercial area. So that that is one step and we could talk about within that discussion like how far this incentive, the additional height where that should carry. We can definitely have that conversation during the zoning code update. I don't think we want to commit to too much. Typically, you would never put a height limit and a general plan document, but because we're being asked to by the state in order to get certification, we're here today. But so I think that is a great discussion. I think we should bring it up though when we get to that point that where we've got a zoning code in front of you with the modifications. As far as the parking garages is, I guess, this is the question I have for, yeah, for Roland Grier, Grier, excuse me, that a lot of the in the presentation, there's a lot of sub training parking. Is there is there any consideration for that? If there was an exception, the FAR exception? Or is it going to be mainly wrapped and elevated? Typically, sub training parking is never included in the FAR. It's only above ground structures. Anyway, so we wouldn't look for that to be included anyway. So it wouldn't really be part of the exception. It's just that if we count, we have an FAR cap. We don't have to count the parking structures. We get to build more housing. Yeah, that's what it comes down to. So by not having to include them, it's actually changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions, you don't count parking structure in the FAR. Others, others you do. And so it's just that, as we're looking to build more housing, if we don't have to, and in order to achieve what we're going, what we want to do here, it's all surface parking today, and none of it's included in the FAR. As we have to take that parking that's not included in the FAR and go vertical with it, we don't want to be penalized against building more housing. That's really what's behind driving this. But subterranean parking, typically, we wouldn't do subterranean parking here. It just doesn't, unless we had to push a level down, one level down, maybe for a residential building, we typically wouldn't build subterranean parking. The question on the parking, the openness that retail parking likes to be open, so people feel safe and it's bright and not there that long. Apartments or residential buildings, they like the security. So it's a controlled environment and they're parking their car there for overnight or for longer periods of time, so they like the security. So they're less, and you can handle ventilation with mechanical ventilations, but some amount of ventilation is nice. It's all about how you address the exterior. You try to aesthetically address the exterior of the exposed structure, which you can do and you can do it nicely, which we try to do too. And I would expect that if it is exposed, that we would have to do something with the sod. That's your question. Yes, and one more actually, before you go sit down. I remember back in 2019, there was a lot of concern about how tall the buildings were as they were up against the sidewalk in the street. With the exception for the parking and the maximum height, is that going to be taken into account even with all these different changes? I don't remember the way the code was written. I thought there was already a step back required in height from the street. I didn't think we could actually push the buildings to the street. In fact, so I think our proposed project actually did try to step back the buildings from the street, at least at Capitola, we were getting closer. We were pretty far away, but we would not object if there was some kind of a step back. Some cities will actually do where you end up with three or four stories on the street, and then you draw a 45-degree line back against it. We're just looking for it to have 75 feet within the product where the housing gets built, and we would tend to push it towards the middle as well, the most we can, but we would expect some kind of a step back requirement from the street, but we wouldn't be opposed to that. Okay. Thank you. For me, I think the model is one of the most important sites in Capitola, and I think it's one that the community would very much like to see developed. And I think the community is willing to make a lot of exceptions and concessions to have that site developed. So for me, I would stick right now with the 75 height limit for the mall project, because I don't think we want to create a situation where we get a big community uprising, because we're going to do 75 feet everywhere, and then the mall suffers from that. So for me, I would limit it right now to that one site, and then in the future, once we have that, look at expanding it to other places. I agree. Yeah, I agree with that too. It kind of falls back to a question that I know Katie, you guys were kind of doing some rendering drawings of a potential project and what it might look like at different sites. So this might be something that maybe we might want to look at if that was going to be a discussion with the maybe that would be added on to to see what that would also look like if we pick the site at 75 feet down 41st in the future if that was when we looked at. I think that would be something interesting to study. At the mall, when we talk about stepping it back, I think it's a little bit different because there's so much space, but on a smaller confined lot, it'd probably look a lot different. Maybe that was connected in the future. Like having these aspects being contextually applied to each project is really helpful. So coming with, you know, having the context of your past application and and then the changes coming with the code, understanding where it's going to go really helps shape the project from our perspective and I think the community's input. Do you have anything else? Well, that that's extremely helpful. Yeah, thank you very much. So with that, I can, should we go back to the policy and role discussion? I'll try to keep that really brief. It's quarter of seven and then I think if we try to be back on and there'll be a really in-depth discussion on Arkans site that's included in there and then maybe if our goal is to be, I'm looking at quarter of seven and try to be back on zoning code topics within 15 to 20 minutes. Is that sound reasonable? So I'll keep my presentation really short because I know you've looked through the presentation ahead of time. So we discussed what our work session is about. Our recommended action tonight is to provide feedback on discussion items, direct staff to prepare ordinance amendments. I have a homework assignment for you for our next work session. You had asked some, I think it was actually commissioner Estie asked for examples of what is good and bad massing and I would love for those to come from the planning commissioners and I'll put them into a slide deck and we can, you don't have to identify if it's good or bad. I'll pull up the picture and we can discuss it because I don't want that to just come from me or from staff. It seems more appropriate to all, since it's a work session, I'd love to see your examples of good and bad. And they don't have to be in capitol. So the background, we've, really quick, the zoning code update, we went through a process. I think it from start to finish was about six years by the time we got it certified by the coastal commission in 2021. We did updates in late 2022 and that was certified by coastal commission earlier in 2023. We're now into our six cycle housing element and we just discuss that portion. So moving on. So the first topic tonight was just let's take a step back and really look at the big picture of planning and what we do here. What's the purpose and effect of the zoning code, the relationship between the general plan, the local coastal program and the zoning ordinance. So the zoning code, which is the rules of the road that we follow every day in these meetings, the purpose of that is to implement the general plan, which is our long range planning document. It's our blueprint for the future of capitol and also implement the local coastal program land use plan, which is the long range planning document tied to the coastal act and our land use program and to protect the public health, safety and welfare. So the general plan element, the general plan within it, there's eight elements. One is the land use element and within the land use element we designate what can be done in different parts of the city regarding residential, commercial, industrial, open space, public facilities, mixed use and getting more specific within those zones, or those areas, it guides development regulations for each of those land uses and our overall land use policy. This next slide lists the goals in our housing element. I want to try to move this. There, I won't read the slide to you, but I've put in bold some of the key terms that are repeated throughout the general plan the land use, the LCP and within our zoning code and you're going to see the sense of place, the historic and cultural resources, sustainability, transportation alternatives, the special character of our residential neighborhoods, new residential and making sure it respects scale, density and character, the village as the heart of Capitola, high quality and distinctive design, the transformation of the Capitola Mall. So those are some of the first nine goals within our again, high quality development along 41st Avenue, active and inviting, thinking about thriving destinations and Bay Avenue, the utilization of City Hall and the parking lots as a benefit to the community, our public facilities that enhance the quality of life, quality of life is something that comes up throughout our general plan and our zoning code and again, high quality public parks, recreational programs, high quality of life. So just there's, and when the general plan was rewritten and adopted in 2013, there was a committee that, I don't, I, Susan I'm guessing you might have participated in that, Peter, Jerry did either, Courtney, but there was, there was a group I want to say, was it 22 citizens that, and Noble was involved, yeah, so it was a several-year project, it really, there was a lot of public outreach to the community, lots of engagement and so that document and those words are something that it, it was a big undertaking over many years by the city. Within the, our LCP, our low coastal program and the long-range planning document, that's really about how we bring in our, the kind of the guidance within our general plan, but this are, our land use plan is much, it's actually older than the general plan and it's really tied to coastal access and programs, but when you go into that document, it is on our website under our long-range planning, there's a lot of those words about like the village being the heart and historic preservation and keeping access to our, our coast line and what a special place Capitola is and should be preserved, so those are a lot of the same terms and then as you get into our zoning code, under the purpose statements of the zoning code, again, I won't read these off to you, but quality of life, charm, range of housing choices and coastal access, preservation, balance your transportation, so again just reiterating the, there are just themes throughout for Capitola that is kind of our guidance documents for implementation, so that's the overview of how those three items work together and then zoning of course gets much more specific with all the rules to tie back to those purpose statements and goals. The second topic was the administrative responsibility and staff's role in the application and review process and so within the zoning code it is, well actually if you go back to like the state government code, it's very specific that the city council planning commission and community development director, we function as the planning agency for the city of Capitola, which is required under state code, that we have a, a planning agency and then the, the next page I'm going to show you the table which shows the review and decision-making authority, so this is from table 17.108 and it just gives you different, on the left-hand side different types of applications that come in front of the planning commission. I'm going to go to sign permits and design permits as examples and the community development director that makes up of myself and our, and Brian and Sean, the planners, we provide the recommendations on sign permits and design permits for, as an example, the planning commission is the review board who makes a decision on those applications and then city council ultimately is the appeal board if, if the decision needs to go there and our, we are tasked with under those examples for a design permit that staff makes a recommendation to the planning commission. So we go through the zoning code, we look at what, what is in the zoning code and what is our, whether or not a project complies and then that's what we bring to the planning commission in terms of making that recommendation and planning commission makes the final decision. The third topic is administrative responsibility design review process and the committee makeup. So for the purpose of design review, the current process, which we changed in the 2021 update, was prior we had an architectural and site review process. The new process was put in place to kind of streamline the process because of the timing it took between the two meetings to get to a planning commission and just streamline it with more oversight on larger projects for multifamily and commercial. So the current process is that city staff and city contracted design professionals provide preliminary recommendations to the applicant on the design permit prior to a planning commission review and then through the review process the staff and the contracted design professionals, we work with the applicants to produce the best possible project design consistent with the city policies and regulations prior to the hearing by planning commission. We do not take action, we make recommendations and then once it gets to planning commission, the planning commission takes action on all applications. The participants for the majority of the applications that you see of single family that's made up of city staff involving planning, public works and the building department. We also at times contract landscape architects, architects and architectural historians for those larger for significant or sensitive projects which I can require that we integrate others because they're sensitive or significant but a city contracted architect is required for design review process for all new proposed multifamily and non-residential construction projects so you often see with our multifamily that we we always we hire our design and they give a breakdown as well as on commercial projects that require a design permit. So with that I've got the three topics there and we can maybe start with topic number one if there's any questions or any clarification that anyone wants to hit upon for topic one. I have just two general questions before you go on. When you say like a commercial project you said goes to RM does the review and they're contracted obviously by the city and then the applicant pays those fees. Yes. And they're selected through a process like RM selected by the who was an RFP that went out. Yeah we actually put out an RFQ or request for qualifications and they were the we had a couple applicants some backed out and they were we utilized RM through that process. Just so I know just context-wise how long have they been are they just ongoing? Yeah you have to renew but they've been ongoing for since we started the new process. And then one other question how does that when the city is looking at doing a strategic plan what how's that going to overlay on some of these I mean not exactly the zoning code but with the strategic plan how does that affect each one any of these or do you know how that envision how that's going to work? So for the strategic plan I think that that will affect it'll have an impact when we redo some of these documents but at this point they would have no effect on it would have no effect on this because it's more of a kind of the the city operations in a strategic plan of how like decision making is made within the city so if I'm really not sure how to answer that yet to be honest because it's being presented to city council next week of exactly what it is but if at the end of the day I can give you one example of a strategic plan that I participated in at another city the city came up with within their strategic plan for levers that every application should be measured against so one was like small town history um maybe affordable housing was in there and I can't quite remember all four but anytime we when we would write staff reports we would actually put those levers into the staff report and how a project would or would not align with kind of the levers of the city so that's one way it's been implemented in the past but at this point I'm not exactly sure how the strategic plan if it's going to be tied more towards how the city makes decisions around the budget or land use programs or everything so I'm just and so that's like an important part like as we start to go through this is this strategic plan starts to and it looks like it's pretty fast-tracked and so it's going to set like a new vision or a new outline for the city come November you know I was just trying to see how that was going to I was confused on and the interaction between that to all these different things that we'll be talking about and don't potential changes and stuff like that I think if you bring it closer and won't change the general plan or the local coastal plan or the zoning ordinance those will all still be as they are now it seems like the strategic plan might say that one of our goals would be to you know update the general plan or change certain things but the plan itself won't actually implement any of those and and I think you know having been involved in it before not only in Capitola but in other cities like you know changing the general plan is a long long process so maybe it'll set out some you know guidelines in there but it within itself doesn't change those documents which I think we all sort of forget even I forget how much state law sort of regulates how zoning and general plans work thank you my comment on the three documents involves subjectivity versus objectivity right so this state has come down as we go through the housing element but not saying well you need to have objective right and so when we just have statements like small town field and coastal village charm we may have a sense of what that is but we somehow really need to create objective requirements and I think we have to a certain extent in the zoning code with you know setbacks and roof lines and we you know we've gone in and and try to put objective requirements in there but I do feel that we we need to be vigilant about that and and try not to let aesthetics and personal opinions creep into these decisions too much you know and oh I don't I don't think that's you know the European feel of the village or I don't like Spanish style roofs or you know whatever whatever it is I mean there's you can use the term small town field and coastal village charm is as a loophole to to have all kinds of requests right so I think in general my concern or my desire is to continue to work on objective criteria and minimize the subjective criteria so that's on that point I I know that when we when you want some the you know an applicant or you know future development to have certain attributes we can incentivize you know for example I'm trying to try to articulate this in past applications there's been issues with flat roofs flat roofs in town in the village and there's nothing that I that I've seen that we could if the city wanted pitch troops say or some type of gable roof we having those types of standards in the code would be helpful you know saying that if you know you're incentivizing a pitched roof by measuring the height differently saying you know from a from the mid span of the rafter and I've seen that another municipal code where if they wanted a gable roof you could say okay it's a 30 foot height limit from mid span if it's a gate if it's a you know certain pitch and that we have that 25 feet and a rough flat roof and then we do that we do that in the village we have the incentive where you can have a higher height if you do you know a roof rather than doing a flat roof I think that's all in the village design guidelines I don't think it's applies to like the R1 zoning district in those areas but yeah it doesn't apply right across the street here but it does apply just within the mixed use village not mixed use neighborhood okay I mean just stuff like that I feel like that would be how to kind of clarify the objective standard making it making it pretty direct as to what we want and if you want us if you want to propose something else that's fine but you have you know the curated standards describe it in a different way as you know something that it's not necessarily not allowed but it's not preferred kind of thing is that I mean I don't I guess I don't understand because I think I don't know if we're agreeing or disagreeing because things like like flat roofs you could say well that's not desirable because you could maybe have a daylight plane yeah wireman that says you know the the houses on on on capitol around here are just two big blocks and and you know if you're on river view and you look you suddenly you have no sunshine in the morning and so you could have daylight plane requirements in there and I and we do have some so so the you know I think the notion of small town feeling coastal village sherm you can you can just continue to look at the kinds of requirements we already do have and say well all right it meets all of those and if we want to be go further and say you know maybe we don't you know maybe we don't like Spanish towel roofs or some crazy thing we should actually put that in the code and and again quantify it so I love Spanish towel roofs but so one comment I will make you know I've been involved in planning for a lot of years and I do think that in some ways particularly in a document like a general plan which stays around you know for 10 15 sometimes 20 years it's nice to have some language in there that's not absolutely defined because times change and things change you know we've seen a huge change in Capitola village over the last 10 15 years and not because the city has really done anything differently but the impact of people coming from Silicon Valley or more people more population and so I know some of those terms are vague but I think it gives the community some flexibility to make some discussion and and different opinions as they go I mean I'll be honest probably 20 years ago I wouldn't have voted for a project that I voted for at the last planning commission meeting because at that time the community was you know pretty hard and fast with the direction they wanted to go in so I think I think people's opinions change and not everything can be black or white and measured you have a design review process for that reason you can't have everything written down and say you know if the building's this height if it's this wide if it does 14 windows and they're you know this then it's automatically approved it really it's it's not a it's not as black and white as an awful lot of people would want it to be but being sort of gray allows it to evolve over time uh as well I guess I don't have an objection and I agree that the general plan should be general and have general guidelines but like this statement about the small town community is in zoning code that's you know what we're supposed to be following and and I just think that the opportunity for you know the fashion police to jump in it's it's just too tempting and so we should try to resist that um thank you for those comments on that and I think there is a balance between objective standards and guidelines and all of that so I think uh we'll keep that in mind and thinking about the different parts within the general plan 41st avenue and what we just had the discussion on the mall side is very different from uh the discussion of future heights in deep ohill or in so it I think kind of outlining where those envelopes is important and what can be done inside them but we'll move on to topic number two administrative responsibility staff's role in the application and review process pretty clear okay um and topic three administrative responsibility the design review process and committee makeup is this where we're going to talk about arcon site site review we all call it arcon site still it's like we development and design review committee well I I would like to see I know that the city abandoned the old arcon site committee that was in place before and there were the reasons for that had a lot to do with it was difficult to get an architect who would follow or a building designer to donate their time to you know is paid $75 for the meeting was not really you know paying them for their time so it was difficult to get people it was difficult to get a landscape architect it became you know cumbersome like Katie mentioned you know they would cancel meetings and then the applicant couldn't go to the arcon site committee so then they couldn't get to the planning commission and you know months would go on so it got changed to where basically that committee was abolished and what we do now is that we hire a firm to look at the arcon site aspects of multi-use multi-family bigger larger commercial projects and for the single family homeowner they now don't really have the opportunity to get all of that feedback very early on in the process and we all know it's best for people to get that kind of feedback early because it's easy to change your plans in the very beginning or you know sometimes people give you ideas that you hadn't thought of I mean it seemed to work for both applicants and you know the committee and by the time something got to the planning commission they'd really worked out an awful lot of the issues that were going on so I don't I don't know how how we go back but I would like to see something that does take place you know early on and maybe has some sort of professional designer or you know architect therapy part of that group so you know there's there's early feedback on the on the design and how it's going to work so that's my comment I think one thing I should clarify about this the process that's in place right now is we first we get the application then we tend to we've got 30 days to say whether or not it's complete and the applicant will get feedback on just what's missing from your application so that they can resubmit and that that goes around to public works building and planning so the incomplete letter goes out and then once we have a complete application it goes to arc and site in which planning building and public works are in a meeting with applicant it's a they can be in person or on zoom and we sit down we go through their application and if they need to tweak the storm water plan or if we notice they have a second story deck that you need something some changes that's when we go through that is that that arc and site meeting so we have I don't I just want to point out that in the last I would say since about October we've done things a little bit differently and I'm hoping you're seeing that in the staff report in that we've been sitting down as a team before the arc and site meeting and going through every design criteria within our code and identifying if we have any concerns and bringing those up that was kind of the old what the architect used to that was their task within that meeting and bringing them up hopefully early enough so that you know with the idea of those suggestions being implemented or or at least discuss before planning commission hearings so it's relatively before so it's a little more formal within our department but just so you know where we're at today because things have we have changed a little bit due to comments that we've heard from the planning commission over their last six months about the design reviews so I just want to that that's the process of there is one meeting with the applicants and all of staff but no architect i'm not sure i i see the value of of having an architect they hire an architect usually great plans so now a sudden you need a committee to approve approve your house i'm thinking mostly about r1 so i can understand where like a multi multi family or a commercial building where we where we might want that input someone who understands the general plan and some of our goals but it comes to r1 individual homes i'm not sure the value of a second architect's opinion as long as we have competent staff that can go through the code and say here are all the requirements you meet those requirements you only have one more hurdle to go through and that's the planning commission um so i'll just say from a personal experience um i guess about 11 years ago um our project that we took through we had the planning um architectural review board i thought it was extremely beneficial um there are some challenges about our pacific lot and i found a very valuable thing that time it was derrick was derrick i think it was derrick and i think he were frank i think it's derrick and there are some challenges that we had some you know as an applicant um and had an architect on how we kind of thought and it was valuable because we shared i remember doing some sketches at that back table about another way of trying to achieve what we wanted to as an applicant and another point of view from an architect and so i thought it was extremely beneficial um and so i i thought the process was great um the people i know a couple other people that went through and it was it was very positive um but i have heard other stories you know that it it delayed their project and stuff so i think to figure out a way to streamline that but at the same time to ensure that um that process happens i think as a planning commissioner to know and be able to read that report back of the review and what went on and that it was like a working session um was very valuable um and i think it'd be valuable um again um with that at the same time i i'm just thinking so key for an applicant before they get too far down into a structural engineer and then it comes at our level and we're talking let's just say it's a window it can be it might just be a window to us as making a decision but it can be a structural modification that could cost a lot of money from a structural standpoint from structural engineering something um and so try to work through those things early and um at that level i i thought it would be a huge benefit to have it come back so i i'd like to pull the string on that a little bit because it sounds like you and i had different experiences as we went through this process yeah so when you went through it and you had the Derek or whoever it was the issues that you were talking about were oh i don't know how do i get this driveway to fit here or how do i meet the permeability here can you suggest some materials for this or this because i don't know i didn't know about this requirement what do you suggest i can see that being very helpful as opposed to um you know again just some aesthetic requirement that says you know you should have you know shiplap siding instead of you know shingles or something you say well okay well if that's what the community wants i'll put in shiplap instead of just think shingles and you know and i'll send the planning commission says the opposite you know you know it's two different experiences and if it's if it was a if it was a dynamic um give and take where you were actually learning and getting understanding on how to meet requirements i can see how that would be very helpful and if that that was your experience that's exactly what my experience was um on that it was a working session and we worked through some challenges and i think a lot of lots around here you know are unique and they have challenges and be able to work those through and you know we had one like on river you that came up and you know with the lot line how could the you know like the driveway and turning radiuses and stuff and they come to us at that level on you know how you know what is the turning radius for a car and that lots tight i mean those are all things i think maybe another architect's perspective other than um i don't say has a mediator but to drive shed light to another professional that might be you know my architect was with me at that time but to share another point of view on something to try to work through some things so i i just think it's a it's a community benefit you know that uh for an applicant to go through it um i i'd be sensitive to you know if that delayed their project for any you know reason we all know carrying costs are extremely expensive for an applicant but how can that be streamlined and to ensure that that process is fast um but in the long run that it was beneficial for them to go through that i think you kind of hit the nail on the head if it's just fast or efficient i want to say consistent where they get one set of comments from all the parties they have one you know resolution everything is consistent all the way through planning commission it you know this if you have the staff report that it comes to all of these different conclusions making the recommendation for approval i think is really helpful for the applicant and you know all of those different design um issues have you know are addressed there and then there's a proposed resolution and the applicant can either adhere to those resolutions or think of something another argument to bring or some type of variance or whatever but um i just think get making it as efficient as possible for them is i think the overreaching theme moving through your application oh you you mentioned that in sort of like october you started this new process um and um from from your perspective uh does it seem to be working well i mean i think so i think um we're working through more of the design issues up front with the applicant i'm actually going to lean on Sean a little bit on this one because you you've been implementing this we've been having our meetings earlier and what are your applicants i think it's been from my perspective when i get to a staff report review i know the project well i know what feedback has been given to the applicant i know whether or not the changes have been implemented after the development and design review and i i think it's been helpful because you're seeing our recommendations in the staff report too so we're trying to be a little more transparent on what we're asking or from the applicant and also tied into the report why so what what are those design standards that we're the reason why we're requesting additional information so any comments i guess i'm i'm wondering if there's sort of a hybrid model to this because um having seen the architectural and psych committee over a number of years there have been good years and there have been bad years because um you know it's like a planning commission there are different people on it at different times and um i do have some sensitivity for uh commissioner wilk's comment because there was a period when there was one architect on on the committee who i i think was more interested in having people design things the way he thought they should be designed rather than um you know it being helpful to the applicant to try and solve the problem so i'm wondering if it's possible to have like the committee that you have that you're working on but if a project comes in um where there's difficulty figuring out how to fit the structure on the lot there's you know there's definite design problems and as staff because it does happen you look at them and you go oh this is this is just never going to get approved it's never going to work it's you know these people have good intentions but it's it's not going to happen uh if it's we could have something where you have the flexibility of bringing in uh you know design professional or an architect or something to help on on those single family homes early in the process um and sometimes you get people who say well i'm just not going to listen to staff i just want to go to the planning commission because i don't think staff knows what they're talking about and you know the reality is they normally do know what they're talking about and know what will be approved or or not approved in the community and um so maybe something in between i don't know i'd like to air on the side of bringing it back maybe listen to the experiences that weren't the positive ones that we had before and not leave so subjective that then what project does go and then doesn't go and did that one should have went and um you know i mean so i thought you know maybe we modified the way it seems like there's you know comments about how it was ran before and that was before you know so maybe how do we bring it back now and don't call it the same title you know and but um that there is a new process um that's brought in so that there's a little more involvement and clearing of um perceptions and ideas at a lower level so that it's organized when it comes into planning with some feedback that we could see a report that was cohesive with other input you know we could bring back we'll bring back options for a future discussion because all of this needs to go in the form of a zoning code update if we're if we're going to modify it so i think we've we've definitely heard the different perspectives and we'll bring back some options and um within that update okay um okay it's now almost 7 30 is there a time that you want to go to tonight i just want to be i want to eight o'clock stop i want to we'll we'll let's reconnect at eight o'clock and see where we're at okay um fun one upper floor decks all right yeah upper floor deck so this is one of our most recent updates and when we were doing the cleanup from the 2021 this was something that was added to the code i think one item that we definitely need to talk about is um the privacy screen under d but just quickly upper floor decks in excess of 150 square feet is included in the floor area ratio we would like confirmation the way it's worded in our code under the floor area exception it doesn't say if it's um her deck can be up to 150 feet or 150 feet or is it the is it all of the decks so if there are three decks and they add up to um each deck is less than 150 feet individually but they add up to 400 square feet do we what we've been doing is saying we take 400 feet and we subtract the 150 exception and we say the rest counts towards your floor area ratio but we we want to clean that up in the code and that's we're looking for your perspective on that if it should be 150 feet exception per deck or the into all the decks combined um and it's only for second story is not first and that's where it is that's where you um that's how we've been administrating it but i'd like to reword that yeah i mean i feel like that's the way that it's always been done but i have i have an opinion there's a um the one the one thing that i having a having living space exterior living space is really important especially um i feel like down towards the village area there's a high uh base um uh floodline there's a the base flood elevation you have to build above so considering you know the base flood elevation could be between you know from a foot to three feet to six feet depending on how close you are you know how low you're sitting all of that exterior um living space on the second story is now um limited greatly so i i have i really i like that we've preserved the 150 square feet it just makes it so first there's no there's not a lot of exterior space living upstairs um and second it you're taking if you have a deck that just happens to be you know 200 250 square feet upstairs or that you wanted to strategically put it into um your second level you're now taking space away from bedrooms bathrooms kitchen living dining anything else any of the other massing in the in the house so i just um i just wanted to state that it's um exterior living space is really important and and making that as available as possible with consideration to your neighbors and you know sight lines and everything else is also important but just not not restricting people to the nth degree of um trying to utilize that type of space so um this section here doesn't apply to the central village doesn't um is it not i don't think i don't think it applies there's there's separate guidelines for the village um this section is talking about i mean well multi because the village is different than this section of capitol right but you do it across the street there's i mean there's a high base flood elevation i mean just on capitol avenue in the m u n right so it definitely applies right across the street it's interesting these standards are kind of out of place they should probably be in our um other the other section they're listed in our r1 but other zones do point to this section because right across the street the mixed use neighborhood i believe is subject to the second story dex in the r1 so standard okay so the far applies everywhere that's the difference but in the in the mixed use village the far is a 2.0 so it wouldn't really have an impact across the street the far is a 1.0 so it has an impact but thank you Sean just clarified that that first standard is also in our far and that's why it applies uh throughout capitol it seems like it might make some sense to look at this because i do think there's a difference between the you know sort of r1 neighborhoods you know particularly the um you know smaller ones like jewelbox or riverview terrace um and um you know maybe we need to get a little more neighborhood specific um about um second floor deck regulations just considering the context of each i i don't disagree with how we have it stated i just in designing homes in the village or in the adjacent areas in the different sections well the village is different but it sounds like the adjacent areas to the village is not different yes so what i'm hearing is it's more tied to the size of the lot yeah right so cliffwood heights where you're going to have a larger far it makes we don't think it like this is fine how it is today but on these smaller lots where every square inch matters when you have a really small lot and therefore your far is lower your floor area is lower than it really makes a difference when with this so maybe something similar to our driveway standards on small lots having some type of exception or not driveway sorry garage standards on small lots maybe having exception for decks on very small lot flip side of that is they'll be closer to property lines and right we're finished in riverview terrace where they're really small you know then you get into a lot of impact and privacy issues so that's why i go back to my point i think maybe you need to look at almost by neighborhood by neighborhood i mean it is very contextual i just i just come up in my imagination i'm thinking of like okay well we have to build above habitable space above the blight base flat elevation and now that's you know second level pretty much and now we can't have exterior space beyond 150 square feet and it just makes it so limiting you can't have it beyond 150 square feet it just that it counts into your floor area and then your Katie said in the village that number is higher so it's not a constant you don't have the consequences there that you have like across the street sure yeah so one suggestion there is um i think when we first were looking at drafting this we were talking about like social neighborhoods and having more front like second story decks on the front of the home where it doesn't have such an impact on the neighbors and maybe including another exception for front decks on the front of the home yeah we're because then you're not so worried about that and then there are downside of that i mean if we're worried about our small town coastal charm uh we're actually allowing larger and larger buildings right because now we're not going to count deck space and so we're getting we're we're allowing outside living but we're creating massing problems but how is that a massing problem because i don't that's that's kind of my how how is it created if you're creating a larger house with additional exterior space um there's a i mean you you're gonna have to maximize every square inch of that of that allowable far to really utilize your parcel in parcels this size i mean is that i kind of want more description of how the massing is an issue so okay so i guess if it's a zero sum game i agree with i agree with peter if you're if you're not going to count it in the floor area ratio um you know and you've got a small lot then you're going to end up with a bigger building on on that lot um but i also agree with katie you know maybe there are some some ways that you can do that because you know the deck on the front of a structure it's it's going to be fairly open you know that's not that's not really adding to me to the massing of the structure so you do it i mean i think a while ago we were talking about how the the next on the front or the second level exterior space on the front of the homes adds to the interaction of the street and how you know that creates more of a small town feel and a charming sense of you know interaction of people on the street people in the homes and i i if we could allow for an exception in that regard i think that would be really productive all the way around so there's there's a common design that you see out there we've got a 15 foot setback on the first story and then a 20 foot setback on the second story we have a requirement the second story deck also has to meet that 20 foot setback one thing we could do to is allow the second story deck to be at the 15 feet where the first story begins and then just so people could take advantage of that five feet area kind of a social hopefully sunny spot and then maybe not count that five feet area on the front you know within that setback area towards your floor area ratio just to give more opportunity for outdoor something along those lines i think that would be really good for this entire and then it assists with the small town charm if you're not like your neighbor is charming all size of this trying to be devil's advocate i like the idea of that reducing it you know and so i mean it's not going to be any more pronounced than the first story i mean it'll just be at that late at that wall so on a side note of that i mean you have a slide in here saying that that that second floor deck if it's over living space that's called a roof deck and so that's not allowed no it's over a roof roof decks are okay roof decks are that's something we need to it was just we have a cleanup item in our zoning code cleanup list yeah that we want to um clarify that the rooftop is really the rooftop and and couldn't be interpreted as the way it's worded as funny in the code so that's just a cleanup item yeah that's a cleanup item yeah so i don't think there have been any issues with b may not face an interior side parcel line budding a lot within a single family so you can't orient your deck towards your neighbor correct that one's fine must comply with the screen what question about the privacy screen so we just had this discussion at the last meeting right about the privacy screen and five foot versus six feet versus four feet whatever to me so we already have a setback on this on the side yard right that's more than just than the normal five feet whatever we've got a second story setback 10 feet so so to me that that's already provides privacy that setback so you don't need privacy screen or opaque glass on top of that i agree with you i agree i agree yeah right i mean it's like it's a case by case basis just like windows in the side of the house that's going to look into the neighbor's yard where they are windows you're doing an infill kind of project and how's it going to work i mean i think there are cases where you know having a privacy screen like on this was just on the side of the deck as the deck was facing toward the street you know it makes some sense to to have a privacy screen there yeah you know we we could switch that from a shell to a may and it we can just reference that the planning commission may require a privacy screen that's productive because then it gives the the neighbors some recourse if they do have an issue with it would that be right and what one of my issues has always been i don't think our decision should be based on the current neighbor because we're talking about trying to design structures that are going to fit in our community and work well as good neighbors for the next you know 50 years and all of those neighbors are going to change so some of our things like you know having a privacy screen could be because you know it's things are going to change and so i i i'll get myself in trouble i don't put too much credence in what one neighbor says right now what we want to do is good planning for for the future and that's why you know i think it's important sometimes to have opaque windows in certain places so the property doesn't look down completely in the backyard of the house next door that's already there is they can't change things they're already there even if the neighbor says well i don't really care what they do it's not about what that neighbor cares about it's what's good planning practice for the future i agreed i just like just for example the last application that we had come up with the big wall i think that some advice i think that designer had a bit of misunderstanding of what the screen was because it was a complete you know over i don't think it was appropriate to have a wall there and to have a screen if she just were to put up you know either a vegetation screen or an opaque piece of opaque glass or something that but that have that actually be listed and really clear so it's not just like oh well now we have to put a wall on that side of our deck and it's just i think that would be poor planning because it's it seems to be such a misjudgment a misplaced right i don't think it needs to be a wall i think it needs to be some sort of privacy screen of course i just think that that should be very clear of what a privacy screen is so these future designers don't misinterpret that and start building walls on the did have words of that effect you know i had to cut it out because uh just to fit in here but it does say example opaque screen we could we can elaborate on that to say vegetative screen opaque screen i mean is it portable is it portable yeah i mean i'm just saying like if it's a vegetation i mean that could be a planter and then will i try just gonna clarify the code does express it it needs to be permanent i'm saying for clarifying and we're gonna give out recommendations what if it needs to be clear if it's on the second story and it's a planter of vegetation you know how is that really secure you know i mean you know i'd say oh it's a planter and you stick it up there and say well it's full of dirt it doesn't move but you know i mean i think cleaning that up a little bit if that's where we go i'll be in a minority here and just say that i don't think that opaque windows and privacy screens are really necessary i think setbacks are probably adequate what privacy you can grow a hedge in your yard or close your grapes there's exceptions obviously you don't want to be looming over someone neighbor's yard and you you knock your beer off your railing and it knocks your neighbor on the head or something but but for the most part i think we're i think we're too aggressive in terms of taking people's privacies just my opinion um i yeah what i'm hearing is provide more examples uh let's look at it let's remove that this is a requirement but that it's a may the planning commission may require a privacy screen and giving examples of what that is and we're not going to add a specific height is there any discussion on that it's just it's a maybe and the planning commission can decide case by case basis and it should really be integrated into the architecture so that if we are requiring it it stays right i think it gets back to um when we say privacy screen not allowed but obviously code you have to have a rally at 42 inches and so when you know i think what we did at the last meeting was we just left at 42 inches as and that was going to be the privacy part of it um because that was the intent of the code at 42 inches and it wasn't brought up into a five or six foot tall that's correct yep and the way it's written now it's a standard so um that will give us more flexibility that if if you think there should should be at a certain height because the neighbors is at a certain height or something like that well so that begs the question so that hoppe came up the architect said well i don't know what's the privacy screen is the five foot is the six foot is the four foot and then john did his best to try to come up with a number that would we thought would work and you and we ended up not agreeing or not settled settling on a standard so i think that'll that'll come up again and until we you know as long as we leave it vague it architects are going to be continually frustrated we could say may require up to a six foot screen this would be a item that would be addressed at the review stage like if the state status quo or if there's art it's like review these are things that will be worked through and address on at that level right yes like on the last one i mean i think that one just kind of ran away but i think those are the things that i was using for example that could be worked through so they get here that it's a win-win for everybody at the same time okay um i didn't hear i think the undersea the setbacks work except we'll make that change to the front to align with the 15 feet um we just talked about the privacy screen e is for second-story deck or balcony which may not project further than six feet from the exterior building wall to which it is attached um that seems to have been working we got some comments from the last applicant that it's a really small deck but the last step so her 45 square foot deck right is that what she was complaining i think that was a pretty good example of the issue that we were just talking about of she was taking actually no i'm stopping i think she misunderstood honestly because she she wasn't taking advantage of her full credit is that me is that right i'm not sure but i don't think she had did she have a was there a deck on the front of the home i don't so so she wasn't taking yeah she didn't utilize the whole 150 square feet it was a little difficult to make a larger deck in that area work especially on the side and there wasn't really a space for it on the back because of how they had their their great hall kitchen area in the back so there wasn't really anywhere to attach it in the rear by putting it towards the side if they wanted to make it bigger they were somewhat limited by the fact that they had a 10 foot side set back and by extending it further back towards the rear of the property would have made it predominantly facing side yard meaning we wouldn't have allowed it for that reason so they were effectively by trying to get a deck there limited to more or less what they proposed so why is it six feet where did that requirement come from what problem are we solving why can't it just be the setback whatever it is i think it was well one thing is originally originally there was no floor area right it wasn't tied to floor area the second story decks until we amended them so we were trying to kind of resolve a couple issues at the same time so but the six feet was really to make sure that they're not a place that it's not like a big party deck or anything like that that too much you know it was we were limiting it in size so that the impacts of that deck on the neighbors isn't if you're going to have an outdoor event happening it happens on the ground floor where you're not looking over because over onto your neighbors lots i think the idea was to by the six feet was really to limit how much happens on a second story deck if you have a terms of social you have a second story setback so you've got an additional five feet plus the six feet right if your second story is set back from your first story whatever that is 10 feet number is so that's now 16 foot deck 16 foot deck so you're speaking on the back of the home i'm just looking at this requirement it says okay the x they have six feet from the external i'm assuming that's the ground floor so it overhangs six feet beyond the ground floor now you have if that's a second story deck your second story is recessed setback the additional x number of feet i don't know what the number is 10 feet now you do have a party deck it's 10 feet because that's a setback plus the six foot overhang so off the back of the home if you're on a 40 foot wide lot you're required to have two 10 foot setbacks from the side right so you could have an area of your home that's 20 feet long on the second story but the deck comes out six feet so that might so it doesn't you don't have to bump in your house if you if you were to inset the second story you're still limited to a six foot what um from the second store depth from the second story wall oh yeah so from the exterior wall on the second story you're only allowed to go out six feet so but if theoretically then if you're you can only protrude six feet but then you could also build into the house over the first story another 20 feet if you have the far allowance um yeah right so you could have a 26 but deep deck if you really put effort into it if it were over yeah because it says from the exterior building wall to which it is attached right so it seems to me that i you could have some big sliding doors but you can't but the it is measured from like the wall to which it's attached so you couldn't i'm sorry i was picturing in uh Courtney's scenario of the second story being a lot smaller and that you could include like your deck could include the area over the first story as well as a six foot deck and i don't think that's what this says i think on the second story your deck would be it's six feet from the wall of which it's um of of the exterior building to which it's attached so if if on your second story it's a lot smaller and you couldn't walk out onto your rooftop you could only walk out onto six feet of that rooftop i think that should be strange to the six six feet from the first floor so you could have a larger deck due to the setback second story i i think we need to have some drawings yeah some examples and things to look at rather than trying to visualize things that we we can't we can't just off sound like we're Italian it's there to make the leave accordion but what i'm hearing it sounds like folks would be okay with having a larger deck as long as it's on top of your house or no i'm not sure okay we'll we'll come back with drawings and we'll talk about it um six feet let's see roof decks are prohibited in the r1 zoning district i haven't heard any discussion to change from that and you can't just have a freestanding deck that's above 30 it's on your okay i'm sure just go back um what about uh a green roughs a green rough you know um on the second i'll have to bring that back to you i think we have some standards in place for green roofs and required vegetation yeah i think connects in there with um what is that right we've had a few green roofs approved um okay next topic was the vision for the village massing aesthetics height and roof decks and here i just wanted to bring it back to the um our general plan and the goal of ensure a high quality and distinctive design environment in the village um we talk about new development design should really enhance the unique character of the village um maintain our scenic resources looking at our parking and transportation alternatives talks with the hotel and then but specifically we had an action item about village design guidelines and to update the village design guidelines to reflect current conditions and encourage new development that enhances the unique qualities of the village um so we did this and before we had a little handout for the village design guidelines that were very they were outdated um and we actually took these guidelines and put them more as objective standards into our zoning code so on this slide i show a couple i've got three slides that show some of these new standards the first for the building orientation at the primary building entrances need to be um oriented towards the front sidewalk second is the location of parking should be behind storefronts the trans required transparency maximum blank walls of 10 feet are allowed and then also um differentiating the storefront design every 25 feet is a requirement this is where that height exception comes into place so we allow additional height within the village for gabled and hip roofs as long as it has a minimum 512 roof pitch and a maximum plate height of 26 feet and we show how that works yeah and then we say that exterior doors and decks above the 26 foot height are prohibited so that that's really we've got a roof deck prohibition and the um in the village and those are the standards so i think i'm not sure if i hit upon exactly where um i think commissioner jensen asked for this item and i'm not sure if i hit it quite right but i just wanted to show that we do have some design standards from the village and i'm not sure if the concern goes beyond the village and i'll leave it to you yeah i was just looking at uh you know we hear comments about like the village and aesthetics and everything so i was just trying to understand you know um when we see a project come forward you know it was it matches the neighbors and then it's that's two and then it goes to four and so as that starts to change that massing starts to build and like you lay out if i understood that correctly you know every 25 feet there has to be a change but if it's per project you know it just could be continuously growing and so i was that's what i was concerned about and i wanted to understand the massing and aesthetics as projects is if they continue to build the same way pretty soon that the whole aesthetics and the massing would really change throughout the village and it gets to i think the comment earlier you know what is the quaintness or exact terminology with the village and so i think you know i i think it'd be important to establish with the vision of the villages without locking things down but you know when we look at projects one by one um they do start to build when you put them all together as a total so that's where i was that was my comment when i like to open up for some discussion and see what other commissioners thought about doesn't this doesn't this figure address that the storefront widths well you can't have the same thing over and over and over again well that for that applicant right no this would be three different buildings right so if you have the if you have the one say the one in the middle was was the one that was pre-existing then the ones on either side would have to be not the same they would have to be you know this one's gabled and that one's lower yeah that's why i brought i brought a first question because i want to be educated about the overall vision and massing of how the village is going to go yeah my comment on that is i think village should extend all the way up capitol road same requirements but i'm not going to get boundaries all the way to bay avenue yeah i mean to me those are the same buildings the same it's all part of me that's pretty much part of the village as you're coming in i don't expect i'm going to get boundaries changed so just a comment i think the the rift deck thing was just trying to get a better understanding of the project that we looked at across the street just you know when does third floor roof decks come into play and just just going through that exercise is all i was looking for the village is interesting and it's difficult because it's it's such a mixture and you know when you when you go back and you look at like the local coastal plan that's really old there's a whole area down in the village that's designated for residential only and my recollection is that came about when the philosophy was sorted to have a village you had to have residential you had to have you know a mix of commercial uses and that's what gave it its charm having people who actually live there and we've seen that completely changed with the vacation rental business because now you know very few of those residential units in the residential designated area are occupied by residents anymore and you know there's always the discussion about you know how many more bars can can be down in the village you know what kind of uses could be there and I don't you know I don't have a real good answer for it but I do think somehow you know the city has to sort of maintain a mix down there if it's going to be a village and not just become a food court um had a question about the vacation rental issue that Susan's touching on um why the county has the county's code for vacation rentals are distributed county I mean through different jurisdictions but they're based on a percentage of the frequency of which per block basically is my understanding and um based on a certain number per jurisdiction I think like live oak um the pleasure point area has like 200 something I can't remember the number exactly and if there's anything left then they take a next person off the waitlist and it's distributed evenly over the region so it's not just all concentrated in one area and then we have a problem where it's you know generally vacant because it's just transient people coming in and out um what was the reasoning of of the vacation rental ordinance being that you have a grandfathered license just by virtue of living in the village in that one zone and then it not being allowed anywhere else besides that zone um I mean the reasoning behind it is a little lost on me because it seems that it it creates this issue where there's just nobody living in the village and it kind of takes away the overall charm and you know quality I think the prevention is so that that doesn't leak into our single family neighborhoods or our depot hill um because um having lived in a tourist tourism industry oriented places my entire career and seeing in my my last city hitting a tipping point of almost 50 percent of the homes becoming second homes it really that impact of second homes on a neighborhood and that neighborhood small town feel but I can see both perspectives but I think that was the uh the reason for concentrating at one area and I think Susan probably knows the answer better than I am was involved in that so there was there was a huge outcry from most of the residential neighborhoods that they did not want vacation rentals in those neighborhoods partly because they felt it takes away from being a neighborhood because you never know who's there coming or going and um so as um almost more of a compromise to everyone agreed well we will have them down in the central village area probably the mistake that was made was not limiting the number of the residences in the central village that could be converted to vacation rentals but then you know I will have to say on the city's side they like the vacation rentals because they like the tot tax and the revenue so you know you're always sort of battling that but uh for me personally I think it's worked really well in capitola to keep them out of you know the adjacent residential neighborhoods um you know a lot of the neighborhoods are pretty small lots and you know um I've rented vacation rentals a number of time myself and I know when I go there with my family and you know kids and extended family we're on vacation and we're there to party and have fun and so it's a little different um vibe that you get um in a normal residential neighborhood but the the city the residents came out really strongly against having them in the neighborhoods I think you see a huge influx of 80 you've added real quick oh yeah I mean because that would be the vacation rent they're de-drestricted you can't I mean they well I'm saying if you expanded the um vacation rental oh no I yeah I think my my thought in saying that is that it it seems to distribute the effect over a larger area so it's not so you know that's such a stark contrast between here and just across the street kind of thing it just it it seems like it would if there was one or two vacation rentals on every block it wouldn't seem as noticeable as a large exodus of tourists every winter you know and and it being empty you know in the village area but it's just a just a question of what the reasoning was why aren't we more similar to other municipal codes in that regard and personally I think you're going to find even more of a backlash against vacation rentals I mean it's even starting on a lot of people objecting to second home buyers because this housing gets tighter and tighter you're going to see more and more restrictions and I think we're you're seeing it in places like in the Tahoe area where they're really cutting back on the number of vacation rentals that that are being allowed so I think capitol has a good balance with what it has right now of allowing them in the village but not in other areas so going back to my comment on this one can I just I didn't hear a lot of discussion regarding the vision of massing or aesthetics or heights in the villages so is that just everybody's fine with where we are today has there ever been any movement on this whole hotel situation yeah you know we've definitely have been very active in reaching out to the hotel and trying to talk them into coming back in and let's let's study like let's look at a circulation study and talk about your parking garage that is proposed some of the items that came up during the conceptual review but at this time we are not a priority for the hotel so a parking lot is what we have yeah yeah and one of the big things that's changed is there was a lot of talk at one point about having a parking structure and now you know because the parking structure was going to allow the hotel to develop because and they they could use the parking in the parking excess parking in the parking structure so you know it seems like once that went away the viability of the hotel developer sort of evaporated as well they still had claim on 50 spots and no they think we have or a lot I think we have kind of an over when the lower pat cove was developed into a parking lot there's about 50 parking spaces that are ready I think there's about 60 actually that are associated just for a hotel in the village with their redevelopment so that that does exist I think you know right now I'm working on the the city hall study and right now that we're doing all the fact finding and there have been surveys with staff and hoping to bring that to our city council in either March or April to kind of give it an idea of like what is city hall today and then what are our projections for the future projections of population within the city overall and then asking the city council do you want us to take this to the next step of looking at options for the future of city hall and how that would play out but we're really doing our fact finding now we're looking at projections now but I'm hoping March or April and that's when if if the city council tells us well now that we know what it is and that we will probably need to grow in the future then to tell our it's called group for architecture that's working on it till the consultant right let's take this to the next step and come up with a couple different scenarios that could happen at city hall but we're that we would need budgeting for and we have committed to let's do our fact finding first before getting into the scenario build out of city hall so that back to Susan's point if we go into scenarios I could see that conversation coming back up of I did pay the lower parking lots only temporary yeah it's going to be a park it's going to be a park open it up to the creek yep okay are we doing okay 810 okay water efficient landscape design and installation so right now within our zoning code we reference the water districts both Santa Cruz water as well as soak out creek water district whenever an applicant comes in with an application they also have to comply with the standards I thought I could just go to the district site show you a paragraph of what their requirements are for landscaping their landscaping standards are much more strict or much more in depth than what we require in our application so sorry so I first I should go I thought I skipped a slide there so the applicability whenever we have a new single family home a landscaping plan is required also if the existing landscape is disturbed or a new landscape is added as part of the application then we also within a single this is specific to single families we require a landscape plan that landscape plan is required within the hatched areas that you see on the image so always in the front yard and then if you're on a corner lot it's you have to landscape the exterior side we don't require the landscaping plan for the rear yard or the interior side yard and then how that ties in is they also have to comply with the district water district standards and and then what is required in a landscape plan it's pretty much like the site boundary and the placement of buildings as is with in the application but then showing the existing landscaping and trees that will be preserved any new landscaping that's proposed as part of the development the irrigation plan if they're proposing one the grading and then I can always ask for more things if we think you're not quite in compliance with the code just to before we bring it to planning commission to ensure that they're in compliance so those are the code requirements and with that any discussion on landscape plan so right off the bat it says under landscape 177040 it says this purpose is to enhance the aesthetic appearance and I don't think those words should be in there I think this landscape plan should not be a plan but a checklist so there are requirements that you know the public works has obviously the so-called creek water district has there are practical reasons where you would have you know you want permeable surfaces so that we retain our groundwater you're gonna have trees that don't block intersections so you have sight lines you're gonna have roots that get into sewer lines and disturb foundations of your neighbors and there's there's a you could create a checklist of things that that say here's here's what your landscape must meet but to go in and say like I'm sorry I brought this up in front of the the last applicant but I uh I felt for the guy who was using every last penny to create his design and he said well wait what I've got to have a landscape plan I wasn't even thinking about my landscape yet I don't know I'll put in something that meets code I don't know do I have well you know all right I guess I'll hire a landscape architect and I just said oh man he shouldn't have to have gone through that and so like I said well how would you avoid that well if there was a checklist it says okay here's here's what you have to do you know you hear the plants you can't you can plant these you can't plant those and rather than having to either hire a landscape architect or think that oh well gosh I I'm gonna try to become my own landscape architect and memorize and learn what all these existing plants are look up there at you know their Latin names and you know like how am I gonna how am I gonna do this all I guess I gotta hire an expert whereas if there was a checklist say follow you know there you go you you meet you meet these requirements are you required to hire a landscape architect or can you do your own plan you can do your own plan we updated that based on your your input previously and it's in our application as the landscape plan is required but you don't have to hire a landscape architect for it you can submit right and so but I think that that was the misunderstanding of calling it a plan is like calling it that's a document you got to create you have to create it out of your imagination you got as opposed to here are the set of requirements you must meet which is a lot easier that's just another okay there's another list of municipal code things I have to meet right now you've got to meet my set back I have to meet my high requirement I have to do this okay and here are the landscape requirements I gotta meet this this this this this done and then you don't need the plan and you can worry about that you know are you suggesting that we add the list that we have here these are the required these are the requirements to we could have a handout with a checklist for the landscape requirement say here is the landscape plan fill this out check check check check okay I won't do this I'll do this here I think that's what she's this is pretty much the checklist one through nine and honestly like the most complicated part about this I think because I've done and seen many landscape plans I feel like there's really not a complex list here except for maybe the irrigation plan and that needs to be completed just to provide that you're not going to be hosing your property down I'm assuming like you're not going to over use water and that would be part of the Wellow document yes and the requirements for an irrigation plan are much stricter when they go through the Soquel Creek Water District of exactly like what the tie-ins and everything is for you know yeah it's just saying you have to have your irrigation plan but once you go through the Soquel Creek Water it's much more specific what so what is on here that isn't already on the drawing you already have the this is what we require what what so it's the existing landscaping right so I'm looking at site boundaries that's already on the drawing so you don't need a separate plan for that I think maybe what would to aid in what you're giving giving a checklist like this and then possibly giving a pretty literal example of what other people have submitted because they're really not complicated it's I mean it's like a bubble of showing like bird of paradise and that you don't have to really call out their Latin name I don't think you should have to pick out your plants well but but at the same time you're fair to your to your neighbors too because if maybe you you decided just to put ground cover all over it's just I don't know does it wrong with that I mean wrong with weeds it it's natural but you're advocating for the neighborhoods too I understand that you don't want people to do a landscape plan you don't like landscape plans but for me I think the way it's set up now where you only have to do it for your front yard for most cases certainly on a corner lot you have to do the side yard that you can do your own landscape plan which is not complicated at all to do is is a reasonable requirement to have and I think it you know I also think it eliminates confusion at the end when what needs to be done for the whole building site to be signed off and finaled and certainly they can go back in later and they can move plants around and they can change them they can add more they can delete more but I'm comfortable with requiring you know this kind of landscape plan and there is that flexibility built into that that I can amend I can accept amendments to the landscape plan and we do that frequently well I guess my concern is I was wondering then how did this applicant get confused so if it's just the simple thing like okay I've got here's my landscape plan let me get a 8 half by 11 sheet of paper I'm gonna plant these plants here boom boom there it is they seem to be confused about a lot of issues they am confused about a lot of issues and that's why I'm so thankful not you I meant the applicant they seem to be a little strangely advised I think if I remember that they were going to try to keep their existing landscape intact during the project wasn't it and so I think that's where maybe more of the concern was that that's probably not really could be there's no possible way yeah that's not probably not gonna happen and I also like when you guys do your final sign off without a plan in place to at least know like conceptually where things we're going to go other than just to check off listening shrubs or you know certain type of shrubs I mean the layout and what you know kind of as you walk around the house and you look at are the windows in the right spot the doors in the right spot kind of a thing and then you look at the landscape isn't it a tool that you guys use as staff to plan to be easier than just a check off sheet yeah we like to see a plan and exactly what where the trees are supposed to be and where the plants are supposed to be will be like I said we can be flexible but really just showing we do review that when it comes in to make sure it's a substantial landscape plan and not just mulch in the front yard so I think it's also good for I think it was Courtney saying with the neighbors you know as they look at what the house is going to look like also have an understanding to like you know what's the overall project going to look like when it is complete you know we just got we we have we have had applicants that have you know harvested their plants put them to the side during construction and really utilize their plants that that happens but really when we did the when we did the update to the code this first section we really did rework in terms of just if you're really going to disturb the whole site we need to see what you're going to bring back and that that applicant could have shown us that they were going to replant the plants they had in the front yard but once we started looking at what's there and we noticed just this huge stump and just different things that were happening it was like well we need to see a landscape plan because there's no way they're going to do this construct that it's pretty much a teardown rebuild with a few walls staying that that whole front yard was going to have to be re-landscaped so they coordinate that back to like what Soquel water requires which is very excessive you know that really is going to help them I think understand with as they design their house too you know what the landscaping or what they're going to be able to do and you know from a landscaping planning that at the same time they're working on their house so I think what I'm getting out of this is I think we as staff can put together a guidance document on landscaping and what's expected we've been working on guidance documents like I said from new businesses and that's just something we can offer at our front counter and online I think that would be helpful again I just I'm just trying to put myself in the shoes of these applicants who who are coming in for the first time and they don't know this process and you know you're getting hit with all these requirements and here's another expense there's another expense and yeah the most best we can do to help them out you know the landscaping plan can be just a straightforward easy thing I think we should we should try to help them I think the comments will probably come back a lot more when they look at landscaping after you're done going to Soquel Creek because the requirements that they put in place and what they have to do probably comes back to landscape and then it looks like from a city requirement standpoint when it's really the impact from Soquel is pretty excessive I can't I can't dictate what Soquel Creek does but no but I think that maybe and just connecting the comments around if we talk to an applicant we did a survey and we said what's your number one complaint and they came back around landscaping it might be more that the requirements around the willow and what's required from the water company that then reflects on to the city-required landscape plan I would say that our requirements are probably the most simple out of most cities even the county is I mean it's a multifaceted document that just goes on forever I think this is so simplified that well that's good reference so the next layer of landscaping is storm water and within storm water this is state regulated it's within our code we have a section of code 13.16 this is actually reviewed by our public works department and it's really the philosophy of when rain comes onto your property you really need to slow it down try to contain it on your property and then minimal amount of water should go into the storm drain so and also just prevention pollution prevention so we have it's by code that we and we have to meet certain standards within our region it's broken up by region and essentially there are design standards and design measures that are adopted by the city as well as low impact development design standards and we're talking about those it's like water collection and just different ways in which an applicant can keep contain their water on their property and get it back into the groundwater rather than getting it out into the storm drain when an application comes in one of the first steps we take is we walk down we walk the application down the hall to public works they review our the storm water application which talks about how much of new and replaced impervious areas on the lot and then we from those numbers depending on how much area it either becomes a tier one tier two tier three tier four project tier one projects you see all the time in our single family homes and that's really where we just ask them to do low impact improvements to keep the storm water on you know gutters drainage but trying to contain the storm water on site tier three we've seen on our larger projects so an example of a tier three project would be the olive garden out at the mall and really having they've got a lot of parking area a building and really had to create these large retention basins for all their storm water so that they're keeping it on site and like re-utilizing the water as efficiently as possible so when you get into a tier three it's pretty expensive there's on our website under public works there's a post construction requirement page if you want to go deeper into this but it basically this this also just breaks down within the different tiers what are our requirements so really just the more the higher the tier goes the more requirements you're going to have to meet and when you get into a high when you're in a tier two tier three tier four project those are shipped out to an engineering company that looks at the their plans and looks at flows and make sure it complies with our state regulations so something that we do we have got a consultant that looks at that and it can it's a pretty major component to all subdivision applications now because we look at all subdivisions as a whole and so this is just another layer of what we require of applicants but we really have we we don't really have any flexibility in this whatsoever because it's a state regulation do we have any flexibility in terms of looking at the subdivision as a whole because I mean like give that given the Howard's project up the street that was a you know they split that giant parcel into three and that was a crazy drainage system that they had to implement in the expense for two single family homes and an apartment building just seemed pretty cumbersome for I mean those two brothers to to circumvent so I know I think that they had to try to do a tier three if they're my memory starts to be but it was and it took up a huge part of their land if there's I know that we don't have a ton of flexibility but in terms of our consideration of future subdivisions especially with all the SB9 I mean how does that apply not that you have to go into too much depth yeah I as far as I know I don't know of exceptions to SB9 regarding stormwater but this is it is really expensive it almost killed the Olive Garden project to be honest it was because of their site required because of the site the other part of this is we always require this to come in and be compliant before it gets to planning commission we did learn I think with Olive Garden at that point we were conditioning applications and they'd gone through this whole process and then they went to stormwater and then they realized how expensive it was going to be and it was a nightmare that so that that is why we make the application applicant go through this first so because it can really influence the design of a project so the city has no recourse basically they were just doing what the state said we do exactly what the state says and where the Santa Cruz region I believe has the strictest standards in the state which and I suggest for all of us if you haven't gone and looked at at the project that Courtney is referring to is the one that got built up here on Capitol Avenue with the apartments and the two residential it's worth going up there and looking particularly on the side I think where the two residential units are how much of the site is taken up with stormwater retention areas on that site it's it's worth checking out because it's extensive it really impacts the front yard just the engineering alone was close to like $70,000 I think it was it was a lot of money for just just the implementation construction preparations I mean all of it I just I don't know how to change it on the state level or how if that really what the reasoning behind it was or is on that higher level it's sort of like our new housing element it's like let's make everything cheaper but we've got all these requirements so there's no way to make it cheaper but thank you so the topic nine is the massing I'd like to hold off on this one I really think Paul actually asked for this item and I would love for photos of or any you can just take Google Earth pictures whatever or send me addresses but I think it would be a fun exercise to go through some of what you think is good and bad massing and we can talk about why and then just tying it back you'll be looking at floor area ratio and heights to really control massing and setbacks but that's those are the tools we have and some of our objective standards of like when a mass having steps in buildings and that type of thing but the next topic is opaque windows on second stories and right now the only criteria we have is our design review criteria and privacy and it we talk about the orientation and location of buildings entrances windows doors and decks and other building features minimize privacy impacts on adjacent properties and provide adequate privacy for project occupants so with that we would like to start with opaque windows your comment about you have to design not just for the existing neighbors but all future neighbors you never know what a neighbor is going to build a house that's going to be across a window so that means all second story windows should be opaque because you never know when the next type of neighbor is going to build a house that has a that has a site line into your bathroom or whatever I I think the notion of the opaque windows is is is similar to the second story decks and privacy issue there may be there may be there may be many instances in fact where you would need you'd need opaque windows but the most part I don't think they should be required should be a rare exception I I agree I think if we were to do anything if we were to make any suggestions I think that our solution to the screening discussion with saying instead of using the words shall as the operative I may be using may just to give some to give you know the commission neighbors the applicant recourse to make it a further discussion of privacy you know I think one of the important components and it is the original design you know the beginning design of the new building that's going to be built because what we're talking about is you know an infill building going in so the neighbors next door they're already there their windows are fixed they're they're there so you know having one of the components that gets looked at in the original design you know when it comes into the city is how is it going to impact you know to have a window that looks directly into a neighbor's window those things can easily be moved in the beginning of the the design process so I think it's something that's important for staff to look at when you're talking to an applicant and you know figuring out how you can design this building so it can go in and you don't need to have opaque windows it seems like where they often come up is in bathroom windows because you know somebody wants to have them there and for me I don't I don't have any difficulty with them going into bathroom windows I think people usually sort of you know screen the bottom part of their windows and in their bathroom anyway with some curtains or or something like that so I think it's all part of the design review process that you know in certain instances I think where we've had some discussion about it it's been with ADUs because they don't go through the same process and so and we also allow them to be closer to the setback lines so suddenly we're having ADUs that we're being built with a second story you know three feet away from the backyard of the neighbor looking into it and I think in those kinds of cases you know it's important to have you know some some privacy considerations and you know opaque windows seem to be an easy way to solve that problem if you know that's the case so I don't think it's a you know opaque windows everywhere and again it seems that we need to have it a little more fine detailed about are we talking about ADUs that are going to be a couple feet from the parking lot are we talking about a residential unit that's going to be 10 feet away I mean those are different scenarios so I don't think it's a black and white issue yeah yeah just add on to that would be like the word May and what the overall design is and if that's done early in the project you know just right now how's the process you guys handle when the project comes into evaluate the opaque windows yeah it's case by case there's no requirement in the code except for the ADUs because those are administrative review but it's case by case so recent applications in which there's a two-story really close to a property line in which the other house is really close or if it's in these tighter neighborhoods will typically recommend that opaque windows but we you know we can look at that a little bit differently and say in our staff report like we mentioned to the applicant that the planning commission may require opaque windows but if you know I'll just I'll give the example of across the street where the other home was along Riverview is really close to the 417 419 Cup Ave in that scenario we not along the stair I think the staircases we didn't require the opaque but just where the bedrooms were like overlooking someone's backyard requested opaque so I feel like there's not a lot of combative applicants that I mean if you suggest something saying you know maybe this would be a good idea that they seem to I mean given the option maybe they wouldn't make it opaque but if it means their applications going to go through seamlessly I don't feel like there's been too many applicants that have had a problem with it I think we had two that we erased it yeah removed that as a can you say just last year so I think we've discussed it so many not a ton of times but I just know two of them I think there are only two that came forward that is written in staff comments and then we have the discussion and then we remove it and I'm trying to streamline the process so you know I think one thing I I try to work very closely to understand is the recommendation comes from staff and they're following guidelines and then comes to a discussion here and then it's overturned and it's it's not a negative comment to staff they're doing a great job and trying to you know follow a certain process and then we are but not arbitrarily that we maybe we haven't even gone out to the project to look at exactly and you know applicants says I don't want it and then we're overruling so just I'm just trying to I think with my standpoint I was trying to have a baseline of consistency across the board as as a starting point and so that it's not an item discussing an opaque window onto this project yeah we really try to look at the neighbor's windows the end really what's going on around it before we would go to the recommend it wouldn't be just we think you should have an opaque because they've got a backyard what was the deal we had one of your alone where they had they wanted to have an ocean view even and the neighbor who was even had a set that weren't the one at escalone I think yeah and and they nevertheless somehow they ended up with this opaque window that they felt that I thought was it in the kitchen wasn't it was in the kitchen or in their breakfast nook or something yeah and so and I don't think we should use the like one exact product you know to try to set it but I think those just things I try to look at and we can streamline or understand that there was and maybe it seemed maybe something for you guys bring back and say maybe there was something that we missed in what the staff's recommendation was behind that on why that was I think if I remember correctly it's about they were going to be looking down into the neighbor's front yard I forget do you remember yeah well as I I thought it already was the neighbor two doors away was complaining yeah I I remember one opaque window with the code enforcement of they had installed like an illegal I think that was on on Saxon that was Saxon I think that was that one but the other one was on Escalona but anyway it's so so that's your point I guess is that is that we just need to make sure that we don't we're not over enthusiastic about these things but so there are cases where you know again if you've got a two houses butting each other and there's a you know it's an opportunity to place a window here or five feet over yeah move it or or make opaque glass I mean that that's pretty reasonable but some some you know the Escalona example is like well how do we get into that recommendation that's kind of over the top so so again somehow specifying exactly when opaque windows are required or always have more of an agreement because this don't notion of saying well we may overturn it boy it's like now of a sudden we're putting a lot of burden on staff to try to guess whether or not we're going to overturn this or I hate to put that on you we do have it in the ad use and for me that's an important one because that doesn't go to any administrative body to review I mean that's just basically it's an over-the-counter permit if you you know meet certain requirements so you know in that case I think the instances of requiring opaque windows in certain situations the wording should be in there that they're required and again because they're closer to the property line and usually you know the ad use being built in someone's backyard closer to to the neighbor when it comes to you know single family residential projects that are going to come to the planning commission then I think it's fine to change the language in there and go to May instead of shall and then that way they can be evaluated on an individual basis looking at you know what the circumstances is on that particular application so how that how that would work would be if it is now staff would say well here is here is a topic that might be contentious you may put in an opaque windows or you may choose not to but it may come up in the planning commission is that how you do that so how it would be done because we don't have a standard for it's only for ad use so what where it falls is under that privacy standard so during our development and design review meeting we would say to the applicant if if their window was at the three foot setback but aligned with the next window next door at the three foot setbacks they're looking right into each other it's like well we've got a concern with this window we have seen situations in which that the planning commission will require an opaque window we do usually say if it's a bathroom that we think it should be opaque or at least covered halfway and but we could take a different approach of just highlighting it as a concern within this standard and say to the applicant we're going to bring this up in the report that there is another window six feet away and they they line up and then the planning commission during their meeting might require it to be opaque that's not a having an opaque window is not a big deal compared to having to move a window like cost wise I'm thinking it if that change occurs that's pretty simple and but what I what I think I'm hearing from the planning commission is you'd prefer the flexibility of it and to kind of you know we'll warn them and then they can decide if they want to address the privacy concern or the planning commission may require it I think across the board providing that door for discussion for those types of issues like the guy up on Depot Hill that the neighbor didn't want him to have his chimney so close to the property line for you and he was happy to admit that he with the chimney on the interior side I think it was or something he had he came up with a different solution I just feel like having those types of points embedded in their standards that will open the conversation allow for deliberation and then bring the points up that might be contentious as you know application progress was kind of that seems scary okay so no real changes there just the delivery okay um we've made it much further than I thought we were trying to make it tonight so thank you so Paul's not here no Peter's losing his voice Peter's losing his voice all right so this one I think we captured but I'm not 100% sure in our village discussion but aesthetic guidelines regarding character of Capitola I think a few people made comments about wanting to talk about aesthetics and I wasn't sure if it was just towards the village or if this is a separate discussion but what it really comes down to is you know is is just the guide the design guidelines and us looking at the design guidelines looking at the surroundings because a lot of the guidelines have to do with their surrounding neighborhood and how the design fits I often think of within our neighborhoods you're really looking at like the braille of the community and if a building like thinking about how the structure fits within the neighborhood and how it relates to a sidewalk and overall height and the massing and the scale relative to the you know within the block are things that we really try to look at when we talk about aesthetics I think aesthetics is a pretty general term so I could see like but really looking at like local vernacular and that type of so that's where that's headed we have our design criteria I want to say over about 20 different criteria so it's really all encompassing in there but that's what we really look at is like what's surrounding and how does it fit I think it came you know it seems like every time a project comes in that maybe is it pushes the envelope right then the first comment that community makes is doesn't aesthetically fit into the surrounding area and so I know it's not something I think we could this group or anybody's gonna be able to come to agreement on what is aesthetic guidelines but it seems like like my example earlier you know just and not just using the example across the street you know that the report comes back after it says and the project fits in because the next your neighbor's house you know it's designed about the same way and then the next time that next door and the next house comes in you know in last two houses you know I'm having and so that the aesthetics can change real fast you know as project could improve so um I just wanted to bring up just because I hear so much and that's like the buzzword you know the aesthetic character of the of the village everything and then you know what is that I mean I mean I don't I don't know what that is but I mean um it's just it's concerning as things can change and or maybe and maybe there are and that's good and that's and it's a common thing so you know certainly architecturally there's all sorts of different architectural styles down in the village has more to do with the massing and the size and the scale and the setbacks and so I think it's a it's a problem because it ends on planning commissioners we have a different set of planning commissioners they're going to have a completely different set of ideas of what aesthetics mean so if we can do something like you know specify the kinds of words that you you all just said and here's what aesthetics means and not again style I don't like modern I don't like this I don't like craftsmen I don't you know that's what aesthetics to me that's what aesthetics is but and so that's very subjective but the kind of words you're using are a little bit more objective and so that that's more comforting or that's more that's that's easier to deal with than saying oh my gosh I don't know what kind of planning commissioners I've got this year but roll a dice but I think that's the nature cities and politics and you know they they change continually and you know yeah I think that you know is the community's opinions change different people get elected they appoint different people you know that's part of the evolving process and just as there's groups that would like to you know write regulations where absolutely nothing can ever change you know those people aren't successful in doing it that way just as the people aren't successful in saying oh I'm worried it's going to change because I'm not here that's that's sort of the the nature of planning and growth and evolution and how cities evolve and become what they are like you know I look at the project that I don't know the exact address but you know the Pete's My Heart project you know the four different one building of four you know I thought our group did a great job in giving some feedback I thought that applicant did a great job becoming back to you know at first the first one looked like they were all kind of the same move I thought we were pretty clear with wanting definition between and I don't know you go down there now you're like to me I'm like you know that was a huge improvement it fit in and it's a huge improvement and there's some changes but but then again we change the aesthetics because you know you go back and look at some of the old pictures right um it doesn't really look like that but we did and then you know with the new patio coverings or wherever you know little man start covering that it stands down in front of you know where is that the my tie or whatever but um you know it looks great and so um but the that is sex changed so guys think that was too a positive so I think the difference is in that case you just get you gave them or we gave them broader guidelines it was like we want differentiated storefronts we didn't go into details of this is the material or this is the size of the overhang or I prefer brackets instead of you know the kinds of things that that are also aesthetic requirements and so I guess to your point it kind of depends on the planning commissioners unfortunately you guys are pretty good I think it's but again I just think it's really important to have that open door for discussion so depending on that I mean if we had a different set of planning commissioners it would have been a completely different conversation but I feel like having that having the conversation is the important part so then as the people cycle through in and out of the you know of the um the group you can pull from you know well they did this last year they did this like 10 years ago and you know seems like yeah I think the hardest thing is that I I do think basically all property owners and all applicants need to be treated equally and fairly and what you don't want to see happen is that they're just because of who somebody is or whatever that they get special treatment and special privilege it really needs to be a system where everybody you know is treated fairly and you want to have enough rules that sort of ensure that they are treated equally and fairly but you know things change I mean I said the other night you know the project that got built up here on Capitola Avenue where there's the sort of modern apartment buildings for me they work in that particular location they're completely different from everything that's in the neighborhood but they're well designed and and it works and some of it has to do with you know design and taste and you're never you're never going to completely eliminate that when you talk about planning and design review and I've never seen it eliminated in any community the state seems to want to do that right they came in and said let's let's have get rid of the subjective requirements because that's an opportunity to deny a project so make your planning codes objective right isn't that isn't that our charter so and next you'll see communities go away well I think like it just seems it's a shame that you would that it depends on when you know you have a project you'd you'd hope you'd go to staff and say okay staff gives you all the requirements I met all the requirements is what I like and then and then you and then you just it's a crap you you're going from the planning commission you don't know what you're you don't know what you're in for just you don't want to be you want to you want your expectation set you don't want to have you don't want to be surprised after you've just spent a fortune on a on a on a drawing set I think I think I just want or maybe some else brought this up but I just wanted to have the conversation about that as a planning commission we talked about the aesthetics and we talked about the village not to change anything but just that we looked at things and things evolve and you know maybe every couple years we just touch on the topic of looking at how many more things have changed and are we getting away from aesthetic guidelines but going back to you know make sure it's treated fairly and everything you know and the same is extremely important you know and that there's not different treatment for different people I think that's just where I was coming from to just open up to it as people use that you know and the aesthetics of the village are changing and you know we don't like flat top roughs or we don't like I think you were saying Spanish tile Peter but I mean those yeah but I mean I think it's just key to talk about these things and make sure that we all and sink that we don't think though it is changing to a severe degree let's wait oh there's a hotel project oh my god oh here I hope I hope there is a hotel project I think a lot of people do the two places in which we could have aesthetic guidelines that are really prescriptive are Lawnway because Lawnway has a very defined architecture in it and as well as the Venetian court I think just as things change there just to have guidance because there are historic districts they're protected because they're historic districts for blood purposes and being rebuilt but that that's one area where like the materials really are you know just to have to have really clear guidelines on what you can and can't do in terms of windows stucco or that's a place where it really swirls in it it it really matters but it's a historic district though that's different that's a district but that that is a place where aesthetic like very clear guidelines we could go a lot a Lawnway for anyone that owns a property there to know what they can do with their property in the future just to okay one more I think yeah okay this is the last item of our zoning topics variances in California government code section so this when you read the government code section which I have on this slide it's almost verbatim in it pretty much is verbatim within our variance section so we're required by state law when we look at a variance that they can only be granted when there's because of special circumstances applicable to the property including size shape topography and it goes on and on and on you've heard those words you've seen them in a million staff reports that comes right out of state law also when granting a variance it shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated so this is direct out of state law we did add three other criteria to our variance standards to be a little bit more specific in ensuring that it I think complies with the coastal act or coastal and then probably our general plan and zoning I'm not quite sure what the other two are but we go a little more in depth which we're allowed to do but these standards have to be in our code by law and that's why they're there and the other thing is the variance can never be used for a land use so you could never say we're gonna allow a Wendy's in our residential neighborhood just because everyone in that neighborhood really loves Wendy's and wants to drive through in their neighborhood but we could never allow a variance for that because it's prohibited by code to allow a variance for a land use and that just brings in predictability for someone when they buy a property and knowing what is allowed and with that I think Susan you requested this item and I don't know if it was just so everyone's aware or if there was more to it that you wanted to discuss yeah mainly I think it's for everyone to be aware I mean I think people want to grant variances because they like a project or they want someone to do it and you know legally to grant the variance it really does have to do with the lot itself it's not that the neighbor next door got to do something or 14 houses in those two block areas got to do something or something that was done before it's it's I think we get a little lax with following what is the law because people say oh I want to I like their design they're such nice people I want to let them you know do this I think in those situations we need to look at amending our zoning ordinance if you know we want to want to change how we do things but we really do need to follow the state law when it comes to granting variance I mean we have we used to keep us online I know yeah I got like when he was on here just like why and he and he is right and you know it's been a while since the city's been sued but we'll be we'll be sued again over those kinds of things okay our broader topics I think we can hit on a few of these because the first one I think is more of an update from me on zoom and oral communication so our city clerk reached out to a lot of different cities got information on who is and who is not using zoom and it's still the trend that most people have cut zoom communication in terms of public comment out of we're not utilizing it because of all the zoom bombing that was happening the thought here is that Julia is reaching out to the same communities again and this recently went to city council in January and they wanted to see come back in a couple months so I think in April she's due to come back and see where people are at in terms of zoom and for the planning commission we'll just follow suit of what our city council does so if they decide to reopen zoom for public comment we would too unless if the planning commission we could discuss that but that that's originally what we had agreed to when we cut off the meetings is we'll just follow suit of city council the other item and I actually incorporated this into our agenda this evening is that the city council adopted a 30 minute maximum in terms of oral communications made by the public at the very beginning of the meeting during oral communications it says now a maximum of 30 minutes is set aside for oral communications sure you've seen or heard some of the trends there was a really late meeting that occurred at the city of Santa Cruz recently till 4am I think that was on it was definitely on a specific item during communications but this is just to if we were to have a lot of people come in and want to discuss things during oral communications that would go beyond a half hour we could take a raise of hands see how many people are here for oral communications this evening and if we see 60 we could or 30 we could say okay you each have one minute to speak on your item just to make it more efficient and so that was the first item would that be like by project I mean or topic so by project we have the three-minute maximum so by topic been a couple of cases where people have come in in oral communication on a specific project and personally I think that's a little disingenuous to all the other we're here to do business because nothing can take place it's sort of like the zoom bomb so what I've seen is cities limited to you know 30 minutes for oral communications in the beginning they often say we'll continue this at the end of the meeting so you know everybody can have an opportunity to speak but that way it gives you a chance to go ahead and start your meeting and do the business that needs to be done that evening rather than have the meeting taken over by something unexpected and I think that's why the council did it they've done it as well well I like the idea of of having continuing it to the end of the meetings because I can see maybe there are some serious issues that you know maybe there's like four different issues and there's a lot of people wanting to talk on all four of them and 30 minutes is gonna they're gonna you know it might not be enough so I'd say well okay well you know we we've we've given you 30 minutes if you want to wait till the end of the meeting we'll throw another 30 minutes at it or hour or whatever I think that may I think that makes sense and I think we only let somebody speak once for three minutes regardless of how much they how many issues they want to talk about next is upcoming projects and how we communicate that sorry upcoming projects and how we communicate that to the planning commission I try to do that during develop uh the directors report tonight I actually have got like during the directors report I have an update for the next two planning commission meetings what we're seeing but I think Jerry this was one of your items and if how we could better accommodate I was just like as projects come in or discussions come in you know so that as planning commission we could see maybe trends or things that are way far down the line I think you know my sense of one just talking about I think you know the alcohol licenses and stuff like that and you know so that one we saw on December whatever was you know for me who's talk was to know and I think you brought maybe a concern like how many do we have is to know that the city might be talking to potential 10 other applicants that might be bringing them in over the next year and they're looking at different leasing spaces have the understanding of a trend or where things are going would be helpful so and as projects come in do we see lately a whole bunch of people are checking in with the city and talking about AD use from a trend or has it been a rush on developers coming in and talking with planning about you know potential low income housing or you know and so just trying to understand trends more so than of looking forward so I guess trying to be more involved as planning looking forward you know over the next 12 months and maybe not understanding that maybe you don't have a lot of people coming in but you know is there trends or other projects that are coming up that are that people are inquiring about or certain properties or something like that to better understand that so that can be shared or it can be in our background might as we're looking at projects or how things might be changing or what the future looks like so that's where my comment was around regarding that I can try to incorporate that more into my director's report with trends and copying us on a lot of the high points of city council I know that a while back we had that the big panel where it was us and the council member that appointed us if it feels I know that we're always forwarded the agendas and everything but having the high points summarized is really helpful because it gives you context and application you know like like the Bulb Avenue project it's interesting to talk with council about that stuff because there's there's a history to it and then there's you know all different kinds of detail yeah yeah yeah so the Friday update I'll start sending out weekly yeah the other is because it always has a summary of what the council took action on in it do you do you all get that the newsletter the capitol yeah yeah because that yeah yeah I think it's just it's nice to have a really succinct summary of the high points of decision making on that level and even just like upcoming stuff of what what just staff is looking at just not even so we can be prepared to make decisions but just to give overall context of where the city is going and what to anticipate and how to kind of keep up with it you know how to curate our decision making basically you know like what Jerry was saying maybe with hypothetically speaking just the alcohol on them in the bars and stuff like that just understanding what the intentions of the city is and being able to make a decision based on that is helpful okay like my my example I use it that's me you know you read in the paper that there's they're gonna start serving alcohol out of the mercantile you know at that where little key hose bites or something was you know knowing that if that was in you know like it's already advertised in the newspaper or an article written about it and no one could control that but knowing like was that project discussed earlier in October about that space maybe coming up and maybe that was could have skewed the the conversation around when now we're gonna get me hose one we got one coming in here like just understanding that the flow of projects are coming I guess that's where it's coming from next is historic districts relationship to FEMA and interest in preservation and just so you're all aware within a historic district when you have a historic district which we have I believe four within Capitola at one point Depot Hill was looked at but then didn't become a historic district the there are leniencies within FEMA for properties within historic districts so by having our historic districts and keeping them intact we have protections on those homes that they can be rebuilt within the flood plain so where in other places it's not a guarantee so that was one point I think just to make the point that there's a true it's not just historic preservation but there's also a tie in for it's a real community benefit and that we can keep our historic district around because of the relationship to FEMA and then interest in preservation and I think this is Susan wanted to discuss yeah I brought that up because and I think that's we see in a lot of the documents it talks about you know preserving Capitola history and you know how people feel about that because I do think I agree with Katie I think keeping the historic districts is important you know the six sisters are one and one way is one and if those buildings got destroyed the only thing that could be rebuilt are buildings that are elevated about 12 to 13 feet above the ground and by preserving our historical districts we preserve the right to you know if they want to they can rebuild the way they they are so I think it's important we sort of sometimes people poo poo historical preservation but it does have its place and its benefits here in Capitola and I will say of our historic districts the one that's most at risk right now of remaining a historic district is the Riverview historic district because of just how many changes have been made and infill matters in historic districts what you build in between the historic buildings and how they relate to the historic you never want them to mimic or copy a historic building but they should fit within the mass and the setting so we are at one point I think Leslie Dill was out when we walked the neighborhood and she voiced to me her concern of you know this is we're kind of getting closer so that talk about possible design guidelines in the future something something to protect these historic districts is probably within our once we get through some of the implementation that we need to do for the housing I want it should be it's probably it's it's definitely on my list of items of things we should be considering in the near future with that I'm not prepared to give you a presentation on builders remedy that was something that Paul had asked for and by the time I got to slide 65 and sent it out to you all ahead I said I so not ready for the builders remedy the one the quick in the short of it is that Veronica Tam we rely on heavily a lot of cities have had a lot of inquiries about builders remedy we have not had as as many inquiries and it's really we do allow housing in all of our zoning districts except for industrial and we also require a 15 percent inclusionary where builders remedy requires a 20 percent inclusionary so the standard is higher so there's not much of an advantage to going forward with the builders remedy project in Capitola as there is another places where they don't allow housing in commercial areas so but I'm happy to gather more information on builders remedy but I'm not prepared tonight so with that we made it through all our items I thank you all for your for bringing these forward and the conversation tonight very helpful just one question with the builders remedy what's your estimated time until you think that the housing on that goes back in like how long we in builders remedy do you think great question so housing element our next step is that we'd like to move forward with red lines to give to the state for asking for a conditional approval in which they would red line the document back and tell us exactly what needs to be modified rather than these back and forth letters and then we would take that red line version to the city council we've met with them um recently Veronica Tam and her team have been working on the modifications I told them I do not feel comfortable putting a 75 foot height in until I've taken this to planning commission and city council so that's really we're having these two meetings so after that I think we're going to proceed with we'll post it on our website but also submit it to hcd because if we were to go through the adoption process there's a six-week period and we just I think we're better served that's the big question was the height better serve to get that back to the state in terms of not wasting too much time and get it certified sooner so that's that is the plan so crystal ball crystal ball oh for we'll once we get our red lines we definitely have to go through the noticing periods which takes about three weeks in advance before a planning commission meeting and then another two weeks in advance before a city council meeting so once it goes 60 days sorry 60 days hcd review red lines comment back and then it's beginning to end probably a two-month period for adoption because of noticing requirements you're hoping sometime this summer yeah yeah 120 days from the time we get it in so that's after the next city council meeting so with that that concludes my presentation I do have some director report items for you I think it was very helpful and it was actually kind of like comforting to understand where you're all coming from and to get a better perspective and some history and yeah I feel I feel really good about this conversation so some of those items will be like agendizing bring those back that we had further questions on yes so what will happen next is when I bring them back they'll be in the form of an ordinance and we'll have to notice that for public hearing so we'll draft work on the draft I do want to have one more work session meeting with the planning commission because we have a long list of actually the list got longer then looked at the housing element and went through again he said okay I found a few more items to add to your list so we've got housing element items and then we also have a list of staff changes that we think need further clarification so we'd like to do one more work session on that and I'm thinking a special meeting only because it looks like our next two public hearings will be will be plenty of applications so one I think collection is that we put in the zoning ordinance requirement that you see I'll have to check so there was one more that I thought of recently as well for flat work in front yards is that another one that of when a permit is required we have we oftentimes get calls that people are like paving their front yard and there's no requirement for a flat work permit and but we have all these storm water requirements we've got landscaping requirements but there's no permit so looking at that is just like an admin check a box so I do think it would prevent a lot of the headaches of when we run out to them and say whoa what are you doing okay any other items for code related stuff no okay one thing I think I had a lot of conversation with Brian about in the past was like on demo projects and making sure there's J number issuance and stuff like that I think you guys have handled that more so for administrative level should that be a little bit more defined for applicants when they come in about receiving a J number for hazardous waste and stuff we did update our information for what's required for a building permit submittal and put that in there so that's online now okay shall we move on to the director's report yes sorry okay okay I've got a list of items so first I'd like the city clerk reminded me today at our staff meeting that to please complete your form 700 you should have gotten a specific email I think it populates what you put in last year so it's pretty easy and if you haven't had any changes please do that as soon as possible I asked her if she could resend the emails to anyone that still has them out there so that you don't have to go through I know I get plenty of emails on my personal email so I had a request mine the one I filled out last year so she just sent mine and went to spam but I just got it yesterday I think so I'll have mine taken care of this one let me know if you haven't gotten it because we can get that for you and the one she's talking about it's me have you done it it's Jerry and I was not here okay so I was brainstorming a special meeting date for the next work session I was wondering if we could look at calendars for that and I've got the availability here I'm thinking February 15th maybe too soon that is an open Thursday but there's our next meeting is is March 7th the 22nd we have a city council meeting maybe the 19th looks like it's open for that's a Monday the 19th Monday the 19th isn't it oh yeah that's not a good it's a holiday city halls closed that day would the 15th work for folks if Ben and I can get it all together before then I think it would be kind of informal like this we're not going to draft anything for it but just bring the let you know what the issue is and what we need to get down and get some 15th of February would that work I can make it work Courtney does that look for you yeah okay let's tentatively place it for the 15th we will also be probably putting together a special meeting for the 1098 38th Avenue project which is the affordable housing project and we were tentatively looking at April 18th so if you could let me know if that doesn't work and then we can look for other dates otherwise if you could put that hold that in your calendar April 18th I probably will not be able to make that my daughter's expecting that day where are your priorities will there be more discussion about that project no I think that would be the first time that it would make it to planning commission there's quite a few studies being done we can look at other dates though if it doesn't work so it sounds like well I'll put out an email because it's that far out in advance okay strategic plan I had told you there will be a presentation to City Council next week the zero emission passenger rail and trail next week on February 8th one update is that the cliff drive resiliency project has begun where they're looking at long-term solutions to preventing further erosion on the bluff and cliff drive so we're expecting I believe we're looking at future community meetings possibly the last week of February so I think Jessica's working with the consultant right now to figure out a schedule but there'll be a community meeting and trying to get public input on just the issues and possible solutions for a cliff drive so you can look forward to that the week of the 25th of February and then upcoming applications that we've received at the March 7th meeting I'm going to give an update on our housing program and just kind of the overall housing element what we saw for development in the last year because our numbers of due to the state and then what we what our program is for the upcoming year in order to get items accomplished that are required under the new housing element we have an application right across the street on our favorite block of redevelopment 413 Capitola Avenue it's the single family white it was Richard Amy's office it's actually not a single family right now it's supposed to be an office converting that to a single family home with the living on the second story and outside the flood plain that will be coming before you 203 Fan Mar well there's an addition second story addition and then also the Capitola Wharf design modification and the modification to the CDP so that'll be coming back to you then looking ahead to April 4th the mercantile we've received an application for a tasting room for beer tasting as well as they want to utilize another suite so that people can buy their goods to go so and then 700 Hill this is the hotel site they in looking for financing they need to split that lot so that they're they can be sold individually in the future having a hard time getting financing without the lot split so most likely a lot split will be on the agenda for April 4th and then 210 Fan Mar which is also proposing an addition so a lot going on in the Fan Mar neighborhood and then that that's all I've got and I really appreciate all your input tonight thank you question Kate can you hear anything more about the rumor mill of the from central fire or about fire station locations so I did I understand that the the produce market I don't think it's that site I think the produce market was given the opportunity to buy that site so they're actually like re-investing into their I ran into the sister of the previous owner the other day and so she said there the owner there is re-investing in that site so from what I can tell I think I have not heard from central fire direct but I directly but I think it would be the possibly the bank site but I'm not sure bank the bank bank possibly if it's at that corner um there's some community surveying going on about fire station locations I will I'll call and ask about that I now Sean is there any interest from in and out on that we haven't received any increase from in and out or even a fast food we've received some increase about that site but none none for a fast food chain coffee coffee was one and it sounds like that might be out is that it for the director's report that is okay so I think we're adjourned until March March 7th 2024 yes thank you thank you thank you you can't