 You're welcome to everybody to be November 23rd. Just kidding. December 1st. Capitalist City Comprehensive Meeting. May I have a roll call? Yes. Councilmember Bertrand. Councilmember Kaiser. Here. Councilmember Peterson. What is it? Vice Mayor Story. Here. Mayor Brooks. Before carrying on to the rest of tonight's agenda, Chloe, would you like to share a few words? Yes, thank you Mayor Brooks. Welcome to the special Capitalist City Council meeting. In accordance with California Senate Bill 361, this meeting is not physically open to the public. Council and staff are meeting via Zoom and there are several ways for the public to watch and participate. Information on how to join the meeting using Zoom or your landline or mobile phone along with how to submit public comment during the meeting tonight is available on our website cityofcapitola.org and on the published meeting agenda. The public can also live stream the meeting on our website. As always, the meeting is cablecast live on Charter Communications cable TV channel eight and is being recorded to be rebroadcast at a later time. Our technician tonight is Kingston Rivera. Thank you Kingston for being here and thank you Mayor Brooks. That's all. Chloe, thank you Kingston. If you can all please join me in the side of the legion. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under house indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, so we're going to now move on to our next item for additional material. Mayor Brooks, yes, we did receive four public comment emails regarding item 5a, the outdoor dining ordinance, in addition to staff provided items for that same agenda item were received. There was a survey and a usage data report included and distributed earlier this week. Okay, thank you very much and for having any additions and relations. Great. So now moving on to oral communications, this allows time for members of the public to address the council on items not on tonight's agenda. Do you, with anyone from the public, like to speak? Mayor Brooks, I do not see anyone with their hand raised on this item and I don't have any left. Okay, great. We'll now move on to staff and city council comment. We'll go ahead and begin with I'm going to switch it up because I only have one more meeting. I'm going to start with council tonight. I'm just going to go crazy. Council, would you, anyone have any comments? Council Member Bertrand, is that a hand raised or is that a no? That was a comment. Okay, Council Member Bertrand. Yeah, so I had fun this afternoon walking around Capitol and a friend visited me that I used to work with. I hope you don't mind the story because it was kind of great. And he said, you know, why come to buy the Capitol all the time that I don't know anything about it? And I said, okay, why don't I take you around Capitol and the area in general and show you all the areas that you will enjoy to visit. And there's a river walk. I went up to People's Hill. I did the stairs, which we barely made. Went out to the wharf and talked to Peter Lodge and he heard about all the instant out of the main shop and, you know, just had a great time. Of course, on the heels, show them all the neat restaurants. And he says, wow, I'm going to come with my wife next time I come to Capitol. So I thought that was a good idea to do this work. Oh, yeah. Thank you so much. Any other Council comments? Okay, see you then. staff, do you have any comments to give me? Just two items I wanted to briefly mention. First, I want to apologize Council Members, any Members of Public who were on the last meeting. We obviously had a technological meltdown. There's a bit of hardware failure in City Hall that really cut our internet and really blew that meeting out of the water. So I apologize for that. We're on, we've identified the problem and figured out how we can endure best to avoid moving forward. Second, generally, you may notice that this meeting is being like on YouTube. This is part of our transition to our new agenda management software. We're not on the new agenda management software yet, but we're testing it out this meeting just for to get everyone's heads up. Ordinance. The movement action this week has started recommendations regarding the draft outdoor dining ordinance. And either this two options provide direction on the draft ordinance and consider a schedule for first reading and adoption or introduced by title only waiting for the reading of the text and ordinance of the City Council of the City of repealing and replacing the municipal code and amending the municipal code as listed related to outdoor dining in the public right away. Or number two is to consider options to extend, terminate, or modify the temporary outdoor dining program currently scheduled to end on January 3rd. Now go ahead and turn this over for staff or presentation in a second. Council Member Keiser. Thank you. I do have to read to you because it's my employment experience. We show that financial conflict. Thank you. Thanks so much Council Member Keiser. We'll see you in a little bit. And now over to staff. Okay. Thank you Mayor Brooks and Council. Can you see my slide? Okay. We can. Great. This meeting we're going to go over a draft ordinance or two draft ordinances for outdoor dining. My slide's going forward. There we go. This is broken into two items. This evening, as the Mayor introduced, the first is the draft ordinance for permanent outdoor dining program. And then we'll also be asking for a decision from the City Council related to the temporary outdoor dining ordinance, whether or not to emergency order, whether or not to extend it due to expire on January 3rd. But that'll give a brief overview of our outdoor dining today. In the spring of 2020, the Council had an emergency temporary outdoor use permit order. In April of the following year, 2021, the City Council directed staff to develop a permanent outdoor dining program in the village. In June and July, we came to Council first with two servings, one from the public and whether or not there was support for a future outdoor dining program and also the restaurant. And both came back positive in wanting the majority supported a future program for outdoor dining. And then in July, we talked about key program elements. The City Council would like to include in the future ordinance and out there allocated $10,000 for a prototype design. In October, I took the first draft ordinance to the Planning Commission. At that hearing, they gave initial feedback on the ordinance but asked that we notice all residents within the village. So we went kind of beyond what you typically do for a draft ordinance. Notice all those village residents. We also placed staff public notice on every outdoor dining back in the village. And then they continued the hearing to November 4th, on November 4th. It was a good turnout. And the Planning Commission provided input on the draft ordinance but they recommended essentially to delay the adoption of the ordinance until a prototype design was complete. And within that, there were three significant changes that they made within the recommendations. So the first significant change was to remove the sidewalk dining as included in the ordinance. Also to modify the locations of the street dining. And in terms of timing, as I mentioned, to delay the ordinance until a prototype design is in place. The reason for this was they wanted us to ensure that the best design fits the ordinance. And that angled parking, we look at the design for angled parking makes sure that fits the ordinance. And to ensure that on-site bicycle parking requirements can fit within a future design. One other thing the Planning Commission brought us with that hearing with new dining decks throughout the village. They asked the staff at a leader date to really look at the parking that's associated to the residential parking within the village and wholly without parking permit. And whether or not we should be in a lot of time what areas of the village people can park in, residents can park in. So it's not tied directly to the future project. So before you this evening, there are two ordinances. The first ordinance is the Planning Commission Recommendation which modifies the sidewalk. To remove the sidewalk, you can modify locations of street dining. And then the ordinance two, which is the Planning Commission Recommendation, but it has the original City Council direction for the location of sidewalks and street dining. So within the sidewalk dining area, I'll go over the difference between those two ordinances. Ordinance one, the Planning Commission Recommendation removes all sidewalk dining. Ordinance two, allow sidewalk dining to the mixed-use neighborhood, mixed-use village, community commercial, and regional commercial dining district. And then within that mixed-use village, it will be limited to Monterey Avenue and the floor. And then for street dining, within the Planning Commission Recommendation, it's limited to Esplanade and San Jose. And the ordinance two, reflecting the original direction of the council, it's limited to Esplanade, San Jose Avenue, Capitola Avenue, and Monterey Avenue. And the timing is also listed on this slide. The components of the ordinance that are the same between both ordinance one and ordinance two are all listed on this slide. So the number of total parking spaces would be 25. There would be two bicycle parking spaces required for every auto space moved. One thing the Planning Commission added was an option to page within the new program and to identify a feature, a common space for bicycle parking in the village. In regards to sounds, the Planning Commission prohibited and supplied sounds in all music. Originally, it was just a prohibition. They prohibited and those five sounds that they wrote for that are all music. Signed, one distance identification sign, and when many sounds be allowed, we'll cover it to two square feet. They added guidance for acceptable materials and they added a new requirement for activated space. There were concerns walking through the village being many of the spaces not utilized one day from Friday. So this would require a restaurant to be open to the minimum by days per week and when they're and utilizing the space that's just been said when they're open. New requirements were added for stormwater and utilities. Maintenance standards were added related to trash, the upkeep of plants keeping them alive and keeping the area clean. Within the administrative policy, it would now require city councils to authorize any modifications to the admin policy and there originally was an allowance for a conditionally permit to have outdoor dining on prior property. This section was removed. If the council would like us to look at that further, I would suggest that we spend more time on that. We really focused on the outdoor dining decks and if we're going to look at outdoor dining for prior properties, we really need more staff to make sure we have the right review criteria and they're for future ordinance. So early on before bringing this to Planning Commission or to the Coastal Commission and they reviewed our draft ordinance and as of how we have it written now that was Planning Commission, they were in support of the provided edits and the edits that are outlined into the ordinance. Their direction initially was to reduce the overall amount of outdoor dining from the original COVID-19 permit. So we had over 50 permits in the village for an after COVID-19 25. They also suggested the program temporary to ensure that the goals were within the Coastal Act are met. So they suggested between one and five years, the current draft is for free and they suggested dedicating funds from outdoor dining to reinvest in coastal access and that is also included in the draft ordinance. And as I mentioned, there's prototypes and designs which are proposed as the administrative permit was in the new ordinance. The Coastal Commission will allow a link at Coastal Development Permit that would be applicable to any restaurant utilizing the prototype design. So it would be administrative approval. The link at Coastal Development Permit, once we have a prototype design, would have to be approved by the Planning Commission and then it would be able to apply to all properties within the coastal zone. There's also an administrative policy that was drafted in the test shoot staff report. The administrative policy provides direction on how the city will lease the right-of-way. It includes the details of how that facility managed the allocations of the water system and terms for the lease. So here's an overview of what is in our administrative policy at this time. A lot of it is repetitive from the ordinance, but the water system is explained within the admin policy. The fees are zero. The current fees will be at zero. We will not provide construction assistance to business, but we'll provide three prototype designs if they should see some. The charge for rent will be $3400 per parking space per year. The encroachment permit terms will be at three years. The maintenance requirements are the same as what we have in the draft ordinance and then safety requirements as well. So we went out and in preparation for the last meeting and kept up surveys to all of the restaurants that currently or previously utilized the temporary outdoor dining. We got results from 16 of the 18 restaurants in the village. I want to let you know that today one of those results changed because of the new variants that happened there. So originally we had heard from the San Mar. They called today and have changed their line and they would like to participate. So these are updated findings from what was sent out earlier in the week. Within the temporary program, currently participating there's 11 that responded and all 11 would like to participate. Originally the San Mar said no, but now they are interested in the extension and continuing to participate. We did not hear from Taco's Morita on this one. For the permanent program, I've updated this as well. Originally the San Mar was in the no category and it can go back to definitely and our interest in the temporary statement on the future. So in total for definitely we got a request. We asked would you participate in a future street dining deck and if so, how many spaces would you like? And for definitely we now have a total of 19 spaces likely. Paradise Grill keeps my heart so likely, but capital of line bar, their response was in between likely and unsure. I moved them over to likely so we would have accurate tools, but know that they're between likely and unsure. So and they said three to five units. So the higher numbers give you the maximum number that may be asked for. So those total we could be up to 14 for likely and then unsure with capital of iron grill, Zeldis and El Toro Bravo. El Toro Bravo didn't list the number spaces. They're really interested in the sidewalk program and then Marguerita said no. And for the sidewalk dining, we asked would you participate in a future sidewalk dining program in that survey. El Toro Bravo said definitely and Reef Dog on Capitola Avenue said definitely and then Castingola, Delhi, St. Library. I just want to note that Reef Dog is located on Capitola Avenue and right now in the draft ordinance we do not include Capitola Avenue sidewalk dining. So if it was the will of the city council that that is one item that would have to be amended to the ordinance. So for next steps, your options tonight are to provide further direction and modify either of the draft ordinances. If the item that you're modifying is not yet considered then we have to go back to planning commission for review and recommendation. So for instance, the Reef Dog, Delhi, if there was a if the city council wanted us to add that to the sidewalk locations that actually was considered by the planning commission during that period would not have to go back to planning commission for further review. But if there was something new that you want to consider that they haven't reviewed it would have to go back to planning commission. Your second option is the city council your original timing. So you could have, I'm sorry I should update the dates on this from the last meeting, but you could hold your first reading this evening, December 1st, and then your second reading will be December 9th. And then we move forward with coastal commission certification in March, by March and then a blanket coastal development permit, hoping by April. And the last option is the planning commission recommendation for timing. We could delay action as well as code of type design in this place and review by the planning commission. And like we have a planning commission recommendation on the ordinance in April, city council adoption in May and then certification this summer with a blanket CBT in place by September. So in that their recommendations continue the outdoor dining and temporary permit process through that adoption process. So this evening I'm not going to reread the recommendation. I do want to let you know that the first item we're looking for direction on this ordinance, followed by a direction on what we should do with the temporary outdoor dining program. And I have this slide available for you if you would like it when talking about the different ordinances and I can type in modifications that you'd like, if you'd like, but does that help? So with that, that concludes my presentation and I'm available. Thanks, Katie. Councilmember Peterson. Thank you. So just to clarify, because I know it gets confusing between temporary and permanent, what we're talking about right now is the ordinance with its permanent outdoor dining program, correct? All right. Great. Okay. So in considering that different businesses have different numbers of basis that they might be interested in using and we would be using a lottery program or a lottery system, how would that work? So if we were to draw a business's name from the lottery and they say, I want five phases. So from there on out, do we let every other business that we draw from that lottery know, okay, now there's only 20 phases left. And so we get down to the last two and then whoever's the last to be drawn, we say, do you want two? Because that's all you get. Is that essentially how that works? Or I'm just trying to determine if we're giving them the option of how many phases that you've been based on a lottery system, eventually the last couple people to be chosen only get what's left. Am I correct in that thinking? You know, I'm going to walk you through an example of the lottery. It's a little bit different than the way you're explaining it. Okay. I'll share my screen again. So in this example, I'm showing that in the first column, the total requested number is 27. I didn't base these numbers on the information we got back from the application of the business. So these are just funny numbers that I put together there, not accurate at all. So the requested number is 27. And if we had a lottery and the maximum number that we could allocate is 25, in the first round, we would allocate up to two phases per business. So everyone in the first round would get up to two phases. But if my time each had only requested one phase, they could get their own one. And then we'd be at 15. Then we'd hold the next round of the lottery in which there's only five businesses that are looking for additional phases at that point. So we would pull, and everyone would get one of those five. And then we, at that point, we're at 20. And there's seven left, or five left. So then we hold the third lottery, essentially. And in this scenario, they each get one more. So in this scenario, where Taco's random tests for six, they only ended up with four. And realistically, they could only ask for five to zero. So that's how it would end up. Every round, we'd add another one. And in this example, we show 33 phases. And there's more than 12 applicants. So in the first round, we'd only give out one per business. And then in the second round, when you get that, you can only give out 11. So only if there's someone rush off to get to a lot of our business. Got it. Thank you. It does. Thank you. I love that you had a client like ready to explain this question there. Perfect. My next question is, how long do we expect construction to take for the prototypes? I know we don't really have everything figured out for those yet, but do we have any kind of baseline assumption of how long we would expect construction of one of those to take? So at this point, we're hoping to start a design process in January. And I think the design process will at least go planning efficient twice. And then we'll have to have the like a CDC. So I think we're looking at a couple months for design process. In terms of construction, I'm hoping that within like a month, they could be constructed if not faster. Okay. Great. Thank you so much. My fair story. Yeah. Thank you, Mayor Brooks. And thank you, Katie. I have three questions. The first one involves the planning commission requests to delay the proposed ordinance until the prototype design are created. And I know you stated the reason and it wasn't quite sure the connection between the ordinance and those prototypes design. Maybe they're explaining how they would ensure one of the reasons they would ensure the best design. And I didn't quite get how that relates to the ordinance. And also the angled part and how that relates to the ordinance and then ensure the practical. So I was wondering if you could expand on that and also confirm we have there's no need to amend the ordinance in a later date. If we felt it was necessary to use the prototype. Sure. So yes, the planning commission really wanted to make sure we get this ordinance right the first time. And they wanted us to, you know, their recommendations really to the state. They were supportive of extending the temporary ordinance or temporary order in order to have a prototype design developed that they could review the ordinance again. So they, one item that was brought up a couple times was the bicycle parking. And when the bicycle parking requirement that for each space utilized, each parking space utilized, the restaurant will have to provide two bicycle parking spaces. The bicycle parking spaces can either be located in the street dining deck design. It could also, they have ample private property. They can put it on their private property or they can opt in to the in-loop program, which if they didn't want it to utilize part of their dining deck area, they could pay future fee as we need to come up with depending on where the community or their dining shared parking for bicycles would be and figure out what that fee is. They could pay into an in-loop fee to actually have it off-site centrally located. So that came up with the second meeting in the option. So it kind of, having that option almost alleviates that issue of whether or not the design will work with the bicycle in the prototype design because they could always opt in to the in-loop parking idea. But the planning mission was concerned of how would bicycles fit with that requirement two bicycle parking spaces per space. So there were three parking spaces they could require. It should provide six bicycle parking spaces. So it was concerned with that with meeting up the space for the outdoor dining. And then the in-gold parking is unique for Capitola. There's not many areas that are filled with in-gold parking and outdoor dining. And it does, it changes the layout and they just wanted to make sure that the ordinance aligns with that. We really don't have any standards in the ordinance to say that all dining decks have to be at a 90-degree angle or a 45-degree angle to the sidewalk. So there's nothing getting in the way of a future prototype design being angled or a 90-degree angle. So I don't really think that really is what a future prototype design could be. But they will be the same size first to make sure that it was the best design for the village practice to move the bicycles. Yeah. And that's, that's it. And just to follow up with that, Katie, our ordinance that I'll call that ordinance number two, which was the original ordinance, that, well, and it's currently in its decimation provides for, provides for the parking, it provides for both possible options of being built into the prototype or the in-loop program. And so we would have both of those sort of available to us once the ordinance, once we agreed the ordinance. There's actually three options for them. They can build them into the dining deck, they can utilize the in-loop, or if they have type of property that's available, they can also put it within their own site or property. Good, thanks. I also wanted to think of this, a general question about the current temporary park list. And whether we, do we have insurance requirements and indemnity agreements with addition to this finally? So could you repeat that? Yeah. I was asking whether we currently have insurance requirements and indemnity provisions in our temporary park list program. Yes. So as part of the temporary park list program, prior to issuing a temporary COVID-19 permit, we required each restaurant to provide us with their insurance documentation identifying the city up to a million dollars, I believe. So that was done for every, every outdoor dining buses was activated. That requirement was in place for even the temporary COVID-19 permit. Yeah. And my last question, Katie, is about the parking permit for a village resident and for village business employees, you know, in our two large parking lots behind two walls. Do we have on the books that currently we have provided for any kind of reduced or eliminated parking fee for village residents and village employees? I do need assistance from my coworkers. Thank you. Good evening. I can answer that. Yes, we do. We do have a Employee Permit Parking Program that I believe is under $10 a month and I think it's $60. But a lot of this you've purchased it permit with a business. That is being a place there. And then what they do is they get that permit and they can park it in the lower lot. And it's just, it's like $6 a month. Chief Galliam, does that program take into consideration the fact that this part of the little ground will be used for there's a number of parking spaces in the village? Well, the program that we currently have is like a place prior to that. And it's really to just offset any, we're just trying to really offset any employees that are parking down there to create more parking for new visitors or other stuff like that. We offer a similar program with the Junior Garden Parents Club where they get parking as well during the summer. Does that program apply to a village resident? It does not. So they have a, we have a separate village parking, the Resident Parking Permit Program. That's another one that's depending on how county offsuit parking places that they have. And there's a lot of cattle. But that's separate. Okay. Yeah. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay. Can I have one more follow-up from Mark? Sorry, you had asked about the ability to amend the ordinance in the future. And yes, we can always bring back the amended ordinance if there were any issues to the prototype design and the ordinance was drafted. Excellent. Thank you, David. I found about this for a quick second. Do keep in mind that the ordinance requires coastal commission certification so the process to amend the ordinance is more complicated than other ordinance amendments. Do recall those. There's also policy attached to this that sort of implements the ordinance and the policy can be changed without coastal commission review. So in the future, the easiest thing to change is to make would be a thing that are contained in the policy and consistent with the ordinance. We can't change the ordinance. It's just not a another streamlined process as amending all of you. Thanks for that clarification. A member for track. Thank you. I like the discussion about residential parking. This issue is brought up a couple emails that I think we've all received. It's not personal conversation. So people live in my house. As a matter of fact, about the ability to get parking spaces that they were promised in the time and they are residents down there. So the conversation is almost difficult for parking spots. And as Sam just brought up, maybe, you know, our programs in the lower parking lots could be, you know, advertising who lives better or those that make it easier for them to notice other options other than just write on yes and on parking areas. The issue of responding to the design and having a business jumped into implementing that design and, you know, hiring people stuff like that. That's a concern to me because this is not the normal thing that a business takes on. Some might be better than others like Delta. This does a lot of remodeling, for instance. It sounds like a member returned if I may. I just want to, we're still in questions, and I just want to make sure you get your questions. Yeah, I have a question, and I'm just trying to meet up. Yes, thank you, Mary. So my issue is that timeline. So can city provide some options for them in terms of any contractors that we know or some development along that line? And a little bit longer than a month, it might take them longer to figure out who would do the implementation of a design that they like. That's my first question. And my second question is, these design guidelines, are they meant to be built exactly as designed or are they sort of like guidelines that sort of provides an envelope for how something would be built within the guidelines? That's my second question. Sure. So your first question was who would do implementation of what the restaurant would like? And within the ordinance, we have it set up two ways. You can get an administrative permit for the prototype design, and or you could create a custom design that goes to planning commission for approval. Within the prototype design, I think this will answer your second question. That design will have an overall looking deal that's standard, but there may be differences in like shade structure, the design of planter boxes. We had a good example that I actually, I don't think I have a slide on it. Up in Los Gatos, they did three prototype designs that were very closely related, but the lighting system was a little bit different, the decking was a little bit different, and the shade structures were different. So we can add some varieties there, but really we were trying to create a, have a design that people know what to expect. So not too much added variety into the prototype design so that we're not surprised that we're going to build. Okay, I appreciate the idea of uniformity and the concept that you see when you come to the Capitol, but I'd also like to see something that gives the ability of a business to give someone originality, something that's unique to shepherd distance. So is that possible, and how do we decide if some of those suggestions that a certain business might want to follow would be acceptable? Yeah, when we get, when we start working through prototype designs, we can keep that in mind and make sure that that's a possibility, but also they'll have some flexibility, they'll each be allowed to sign, they'll have the ability to have a different furniture, they want to have umbrellas, they can really, between like, and their own specific planting type, they can make their space easy to move all those outcomes that come into play with an outdoor environment. Another question, a little bit of preparation for my question there. So one of the things I'm familiar with is that some of the businesses don't take up a lot of the outlets that they have right now, they may not have a lot of customers, maybe they're not open as many hours as we would wish. Just to put this out there, do you think there's a possibility we could consider a shared partner so that two businesses are next to each other, they can share the resources, recognizing what I just brought up. And maybe you don't have an answer for this, but this might be a possibility for some restaurants. That is a new suggestion. There's, you know, there's areas on San Jose in which they share a grant to a designated area, but really will be, they'll have to go through the lottery system and if there were two restaurants that would want to partner with them to look at the specifics of that and make sure there's no issues with the, you know, the Department of Alcohol and Average Control at UNC, and we would just really have to look at it, make sure there's no issues tied to that concept. That's a good idea. If someone were proposing that, would that really take a look? Yeah, I just wanted to put it out there. It might make a possibility for businesses that are here for wouldn't be able to do it for whatever reason. That's all. Thank you. Okay, I have just a few questions. When you surveyed the businesses, were they aware that the question was revolving around the permanent, the permitted option and that they would actually have to pay for it? Yes. So in the survey, we outlined the parameter of the program that's being looked at. So we made it very clear that the ocean ordinance and the program explained what the cost would be per space. And I think, and they were appreciative of that of all. I think they've all been keeping track of what's been going on on the planning commission and city council. So we did, we outlined exactly what was going to be required of this new ordinance and those responses reflect that information. And was there any discussion during the planning commission, and I'm thinking more specifically around the espionage, if the businesses, let's say that in between two of the other businesses does choose not to participate. How does that functionally work with parking? You know, how, what, just tell me a little bit about that. Yeah. So in the ordinance right now, it's just that you have, you do limited to those spaces that are directly in front of your restaurant. There is some flexibility in the ordinance for staff to live in a unique situation and have some flexibility. We have a little bit of flexibility to change the ordinance for that. But overall, I think that's where it's going to, you know, there may be gaps between parking areas, but we'll have to figure that out absolutely. Okay. And was there any discussion at planning commission or concerns about that on the espionage, or anywhere else, that there would be all those two spots, basically, two spots, you know, that weren't being utilized and there any discussion about that? You know, during the hearing, there was not discussion on that, but I will tell you during the contemporary outdoor dining program, I've heard from a lot of the restaurants that when the first time we removed some spots, they, the restaurants actually really liked that because there's more opportunity for people to pull up, pick up food to go and then leave. So there was, and also filling out the survey, the stand bar who changed their input, they provided some feedback to me on that as well, is that they were kind of influx or undecided at first because they also think there's some great value to their customer skills to try out in front. So I think it, I think the system can work. I've seen it in a lot of different jurisdictions where you can pull up in between, parallel parks in between, and you get the Pacific Grove has angled parking and they have just random decks along the street, they're not all connected, but it's really easy to park next to them as well. We would have to think about one, one item that was brought up actually a planning commission is that like opening your door and designing to make sure that you can open the door if you park in the state directly next to your parking. So that will have to come and just lay us in the design. Okay, so just for clarity, if those types of conversations occur during the prototype process, creating that prototype process, and then should something occur, is that it doesn't sound like that is going to work, we need to amend our ordinance system, have to go back to coastal commission, is that how that process will work? Well, right now there's nothing in the ordinance that would prevent us from making sure that the prototype design is one foot off of a located or foot back from the parking space next to it. So there's nothing like token ordinance that we need to be in this and other that scenario, and there's also nothing in this prototype design that would limit whether or not we have a 90 degree angle or an angled parking spot. Okay, and then lastly, we're serving current restaurants and with just how businesses are and we see that this is open and closed and shutter. Do we have anything written in our ordinance about change of ownership and, you know, should they not want to participate or if they have some sort of outdoor dining that they want to dissolve? Do we have anything around that? So that will be in the administrative policy, but how it would continue, you know, the auction would continue to the next owner, but if they wanted to no longer participate, that would be in the lease. So these are all of my questions for now. All right, let's move to our attendee. I have one question. Oh, I forgot who brought up the issues with interviews with Parklitz, but you know, I did a couple of inspections and I noticed there was one Parklitz where obviously a car hit the edge. And so there could be that issue too. I didn't think about the opening of car doors if it was a, you know, you know, the surrounding parking space, but that's another issue. I don't know about any practice case and all that sort of stuff. So we'll build in safety features to the prototype design and we'll also review to make sure that Parklitz is safe within a custom design. Okay, so let's go ahead and resist the public comment. If you'd like to make a comment now, you can raise your hand by clicking on reactions below or if you've fallen to any of us, start nine or start six depending on if you have a cell phone or a landline or you can email us directly. Mayor Brooks, we have a couple of attendees wishing to speak. The first one is part of the five mispronounced you're working your last name, Randy Zonscheff. Okay, you have three minutes to speak. You can go ahead and unmute yourself. Okay. Hi, I'm a long time visitor to Capitola over several decades and I really like Capitola for the beach. And I understand the COVID thing going on, but what you've done, what you're proposing is to dramatically reduce the square footage allowed to the public in the village, which is really anti-COVID measures because you're squeezing everybody together. But what I really understand about this is I like the way Capitola was before and you're trying to make these changes permanent. We don't always call this a permanent and I occasionally rent from beach house rentals and we like it to be quiet at night. If there's people sitting on the sidewalk dining into all hours, that's going to increase the noise also. So most of the downsides, I'd like to keep Capitola the way it was. I'd like to make plans just to be a temporary thing and make plans to return to what worked before. Thank you for your time. Thank you. We have Linda Smith. Okay, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak once again. I did spend quite a narrative that I had planned to speak on the 23rd and I trust that you have had a chance to read it, so I'm not going to read it to you tonight. I am including some of the points and some things that I noted from Katie's presentation November 23rd is that what we're calling permanent is really a three-year trial. It's not permanent. It has an exit strategy and what we have now is really working. It includes both sidewalk and street dining areas that are bringing vitality to the city and a chance to recover for our businesses and people are going to continue to prefer to dine outdoors when possible, especially in the good time. I frequent the village and I eat at the restaurants with my husband two to four times a week. I'm down there a lot and the survey is a good survey but it would not have captured most of my visits to the village and I think between 1130 and 2 every day, especially on Monterey Avenue, you've got a lot of people that are down there eating out. So I just want you to know that I think those numbers are probably on the low side. The other thing that I've recently noted is bicycle parking. We have some centralized bicycle parking areas and they're rarely full. So scattering them out through the village area would probably really add some clutter. So the in lieu parking fee that has been suggested in the ordinance was a really great idea. It might want to just replace that requirement. The ordinance should refine the existing program and provide an expected strategy, which I think it does. Direct ordinance number two. I would really like to see you guys go forward with that worst take to extend the temporary all the way to the end when so get them through the next season. But if you move forward it looks like the timeline might allow them to actually react and have a higher quality parklet structure down there in time for the next season. So I guess I'm asking for you guys to really move forward and direct the planning commission to go work on the prototypes and thank you for considering my comments. Thank you. Larry? I do not see any other attendees with their hands raised to speak on this item and we do not have any email. Okay. So I'll bring this back to council for further deliberation and comments. Who would like to begin? Councilmember Peterson. Thank you. So I first want to say thank you to the planning commission and for everyone who has emailed us and provided public comment tonight. Lots of time and effort have gone into the consideration as well as staff. Thank you so much Katie and everyone else who worked on this. A lot of time and effort has gone into consideration of this permanent program or as mentioned in public comment a program that would have a one to five year trial period. From what I've heard so far I'm prepared to support ordinance two. I don't think it's appropriate for city council to or for the city in general to suggest a contractor for the prototype for the businesses to use. And just to clarify now's not the time to make comments related to the temporary program correct? This is just for the permanent one. Okay. Just for the permanent one I'm prepared to to move forward and supporting ordinance number two. Katie would you mind clicking through to the next slide just to make sure that I'm seeing everything that ordinance two includes. I think there was like a couple after this to have this thing three. I mean what what you were showing but there was like three slides of what you were showing right? Sorry I didn't mean to make things more complicated and they already are with this item. Well for the sake of discussion while we're getting getting the slides pulled up I guess I'll just start by saying I'm willing to make a motion to support ordinance number two. And I'll read the number for now. For now. All right. Council member return. Council member you are muted. I'm sorry about that. Yeah I'm willing to support this motion and I do have a question on Kristen. So to get to the permit are you willing to accept the temporary until we get the prototype? Well we're not there yet so I have comments on the temporary program but that's why I asked if I should discuss the temporary program for now but I think if we're only discussing the ordinance related to the outdoor program or excuse me the permanent program then for now my only comments are that I support ordinance number two and that the permanent program technically be a three-year trial. Okay thanks Katie for putting up the slide. Yeah especially I worry initially even though I talk to people in the city I can make comments now I believe right there. So I was worried that they were going to cut out Capitol Avenue so I see that's in there. I do like to thank city planning I think it's notable that they've gone down and talked to all the businesses and done multiple surveys. I talked to business owners who were quite happy that Katie and staff came down there and got their comments so I think that's exemplary. I think it's very much educated that we have a dedicated staff and thank you very much. When this first came up originally I guess there was a lot of names there but you know we talked about it so much and city staff has been so involved in talking with residents and businesses that these comments have sort of been modified and people are beginning to understand you know after they've seen it how successful it's been and to characterize what Linda's sister said what behind this working and what better confirmation do you have when you see people enjoying themselves coming to the visit Capitola and you know just making this a place that is very inviting and I do understand that it's not quite like what Capitola was but it's a new Capitola. It's a Capitola that many people are now enjoying and you know businesses are finding it a little bit easier to stay open which is really I think a great benefit so I'm glad to support this motion. Thank you. My fair story. Yes thank you Mayor Burrock and thank you to the motion as I understand that in order to allow Title IX on Capitol Avenue we would have to include that in the ordinance since we have a current business that has a Title IX little table and I just want to confirm whether or not that it is safe and whether Councilwoman Peterson would be willing to add that to our motion if it's necessary. Can you clarify Vice Mayor's story? I'm looking at ordinance 2 and it says that Capitol Avenue is already included. Oh wait I'm sorry I was looking at 3-side dining for sidewalk dining. Yes yes I'd be willing to include that. Right well thank you for that amendment and hopefully the seconder will accept that. And so yeah I would certainly support that option. Mayor may I make some general comments about that. Thank you so much and I also want to start by saying how much I appreciate the work that the climate commission has done and the fact it's done on this you know very complicated and significant transition to our village businesses but I want to tell the climate commission that I respect their work and for the most part you know I think our motion is in alignment with their recommendation except for the issues about which streets are eliminating certain streets and eliminating sidewalk dining and in those in general I just think I don't know that we should categorically eliminate the F-Lenon and I'll start that I mean Monterey and Capitol Avenue. Some of our death, heartless activities have been on those streets and as well with the sidewalk dining they have you know worked and functioned well. Obviously we need to have the city need to make sure that they are accessible that they continue to be accessible. But you know El Salvador Bravo I think has done a very good job in their sidewalk programs and you know they are limited in doing that move out into the streets. And looking at El Salvador Bravo specifically I think that if in order to improve that design you know the the trash can that's in front of their business and the bench that is in front of their business could be moved that would accommodate more space for them and for the pedestrians. And also you know the use of the barrel in front of El Salvador Bravo I think also unnecessarily takes up sidewalk space there. But overall I support you know Capitol moving outside and I think in general we need to do that from a public health standpoint and I think that you know obviously the city has a financial interest in doing sure that the businesses in the village are maintain their viability and thrive. I think the consumers moving forward and especially that we're still in the midst of the pandemic. But I think even afterwards the consuming public is going to want to have more also a dining option and in order to continue to attract visitors to Capitol we need to provide them options in order to stay viable. And there's also the interest here because I think well you know over the 40 years that I've been a resident here we have attempted and strive to have people move their parking into a parking lot. And I think this is now a meaningful way to be able to attempt to do that. And and as part of that I would like to see us look at providing incentives for the residents and believe to be able to have permits to park behind the ball. And then at a much reduced cost since their parking options are now going to be less than what they once were. And my well I guess my other comments are about the timing and the temporary program and I believe that's going to be a separate procession and motion to all of us in the program. Thank you. Thank you. Nice mastering. Thanks for playing by the rules everyone. I know it's hard not to intervene all of the two items. You know my my comments in regards to outdoor dining is I support this because in order for us to really see the vision comes through really to see it transpire to something beautiful and sustainable and great for our community we have to move forward with this ornament. I've been really disappointed in in the way it's been looking out on the eggplant and I really hope that with all of these these with this ordinance in place and let's see the prototype and with the support of the city that we can really make it look beautiful and if it doesn't like we've all talked about that there's an ouch there's a way that we could say well then you can't do this and that's what makes me feel good about supporting this today. So I appreciate everyone's time and effort on this and really look forward to seeing what will become of it. So with that councilmember Peterson for formalities sake we're looking at looking at the language on item on the item 8b and I think that is our formal the format formal way of introducing or to approving this and I'm going to ask them out to our city attorney to review that language with me and it was clear to me that we would just approve ordinance 2 as presented by staff and that was the motion on the table with the amendment from councilmember or to the vice mayor's story so if you need more from us please let me know. Katie did you want to say something? I just want to let you know I have the one modification that I believe was requested and I'd like to pull that up on the screen to make sure I got that correct. Okay. I don't want to hear it. Bear with me in my mouth. So what I heard from the amendment was to add capitol avenue to the location where sidewalks that could occur within the next June village. And that was to ensure race deli would be included as mentioned in your staff report earlier. Does that cover it? Is that what you need? That would cover it, yes. Okay. So I believe that is what the motion is on the table to accept ordinance 2 as presented by staff with that amendment to the sidewalks that need sections b1b to include capitol avenue. Samantha do you need to read the item 8b or is that okay? I'll just confirm it to make sure that we have the text regarding waiver for the waiting for the reading in the record. So I think that councilmember Peters' motion was to introduce by title only waiting for the reading of the text and ordinance of the city council for appealing and replacing municipal code sections 17.96.170 and amending municipal code section 17.120.030 related to outward dining and public right-of-way with the amendment just articulated by director Hurley. Did I get that right, councilmember Peterson? You took the word right out of my mouth. Yeah, that's exactly what I was trying to say. Okay, so we have 8 first and a second on the two-hole Chloe, you can have a roll call, please. Councilmember Bertrand? I agree. Councilmember Peterson? Aye. Vice mayor Story? Aye. Mayor Brooks? Okay, thank you. Okay, now we're going to move on to the second portion of this item this evening regarding the temporary outward dining that currently scheduled to end on January 3rd. Chloe, I'll show this back over to you if you have some slides to share with us. No, I don't have any additional slides, so tonight we're just looking for direction on the current emergency order is due to expire on January 3rd 2022 and looking for direction on whether or not to extend. Can you pull that slide up again in your presentation? You didn't have a timeline that said that one's due for us. And while Chloe is doing that, Samantha, do I need to go up to questions to the public and back again or does this just continue? No, with the mayor's impression, but the items, you've already got asked public comments on the items and you certainly do not need to do it again on this section of the items that you're doing on the slide. Okay. Council members, I will go back to public for this item just in case someone forgot to mention anything, but while Katie's looking at that, actually I'm going to wait for that to come up before I go to public comments. So this slide shows how the ordinance will play out with the city council's timing that most likely will have coastal commission certification in March, blanket coastal development permit in April, and hopefully at that point we can move forward with permit. So just for clarification, since we've waived the second, or excuse me, yes, we're going to have the second reading on December 9th. Yeah. And then it'll go to coastal commission for March 2022 and then hopefully all good by April. Any questions from Council about this? Council member Peterson. Thank you mayor. I just want to confirm I always want to make sure that I'm understanding correctly before I make any motion or decision. So if we were to theoretically extend the temporary program through April, then that would mean that at the end of April or at some point in April, those who are temporary, we have to pull down their temporary outdoor dining, those who have gotten permit would be able to begin construction on their permanent three-year outdoor dining program. So there essentially would be that month of April in which the temporary stuff goes away, the permanent stuff could begin building, correct? That theoretically we should have a blanket CDC approved by the planning commission in April and be able to open up our watery. Great. Thank you. And then temporary would have to go away in order to build the permanent. Okay. Great. Thank you. Council member Bresham. You're muted. Council member, you're muted. I pushed it three times. I thought that worked. Okay. So once it goes into the lottery, so this starts at clock. So how long will that extend and is this enough time? I just want to make sure that businesses have enough time. And that's why I mentioned a couple things earlier in terms of trying to help them out, trying to get it to qualify contractors. Because this is not their normal thing. I'm interested in how much time this would give the businesses that win the lottery, et cetera, to get everything together. If we have the coastal development hand and equal, that will be the permit to do with the year free. So we won't be holding them up at that point. They just need to apply and show where it will be. And the review process there will be very quick turnaround. It is a prototype design because they're the wind department who have already moved to this. So the turnaround there is, I would expect probably construction in like the later half of May for early June based on this timeline. The only thing that would slow this down is that the coastal portion certification, if they ask for an extension beyond the 60 working days that they're allowed to review the ordinance before it goes to sharing. So if they do have the ability to ask for more time, then it could be up to a year. But where they review the ordinance prior to planning completion, I don't foresee that happening to capital, but it's just maybe that is the one hangout that could occur between now and then. Okay. Do I want to extend too long because it extends into our busy tourism businesses? You know, they would like to get this done sooner than later for the summer ground. Thanks for your start. Yeah, thank you once again, Mayor. Maybe just I want you to try to better understand the transition from the temporary to the prototype design. And once the prototype served through and the lottery garden, we're just having a hundred regrets on of one one. How long will they have to build the prototype and abandon the temporary? So abandoning the temporary will be dependent on your decision tonight. So it's the city council only if the city council extends the temporary program through the last day in March, then on April 1st, all of the temporary outdoor dining has to be out of the street on that last day. And according to this timing, most likely our blanket coastal development permit will go to planning commission in April. Our first meeting is the first Thursday of April, when that was out of planning commission. And then there's an appeal period for a disability that may have to be an appeal period for the coastal permit that would likely take effect. So I think the planning the city council extending it either through March or late April would be a fair extension that wouldn't get in the way of the new the new debt being built. What is this comparable from a staff stand one for us to set a hard state from one of the temporary must be terminated and then come back and revisit that if we get delayed or could we extend the temporary until the prototype circuit and then give businesses 30 days after they've been allowed in this slide to build their permit on other types of dining. Do you think what I'm trying to get to? Yeah, I think it would be easier to extend it to a date certain and not tied to the future permit just in case something were to happen with the permitting process. But it is very easy as you know, we've extended the order several times, it's a very easy process to extend it. So I think that would be staff preference and I think that director Jesper has the standards and he may have some input on the matter. Okay, so I just wanted to point out that the policy that's included in the packet, the administrative policy and how we're going to administrate this, once we have the ordinances in place and the prototype approved, if we have to do a lottery, we have a 45 day period where we'll set applications to the lottery. That can be amended later on as we've approved that policy, but that's what's in there now. And as far as construction, they are given six months on the time their issue of permit to finish construction of their debt. Again, that's commendable, but that's what's been the policy of the time. So thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, any other questions? Let's go ahead and go to public comment though, then in regards to the extension of our temporary outdoor dining ordinance for those watching, we've moved on to that item. Mayor Brooks, we do have, we have some one attendee wishing to speak on this item and I think we have at least one email as well. Okay. Here's Linda Smith. So thank you once again Mayor Brooks for the opportunity to speak and I first want to tell you that I really appreciate the amount of deliberation and very thoughtful questions and things that you, as council members, have brought up this evening and I really, really, we have off to all of you. Thank you very much for your consideration. Memorial Day is in May at the end of May and that's a pretty active time down in the village. And what I think I'm hearing is that there's going to be a period of time where there will be no temporary dining available during the construction of the guys that win the lottery. So with the April date of having a prototype, my thought is just that I have had recent trouble getting to, you know, contractors to work because of the amount of business due to the ceasefire activity and they're all just super super busy. So until the restaurant owners know that they have spaces that they've won the lottery if you will, it's going to be very hard for them to contact and line up somebody to build the right size parklet for them. So I would ask that maybe you lean toward letting the temporary extend a little bit farther into when you think you might have something so that they're not down during those active weekends, you know, when we get a lot of people in the village over Memorial Day, for example, in May. And when I look at the timeline that you're discussing, that's what comes to my mind. So thank you very much. Thank you, Larry. Because we have an email, I'm going to share my screen and try to read a lot of things. That's okay. Good evening, Madam Mayor and council members. Having previously weighed in on this temporary outdoor dining program, I do not intend to repeat myself other than to point out this program was introduced to the Capitola community as a temporary measure in support of our business community. Residents and our visitors have given over valuable parking to business in the Capitola village as a temporary measure in support of business. It is now time for business to return the favor and reopen this valuable parking to the residents and visitors of our beach community. I therefore urge the Capitola city council to terminate this temporary emergency measure in favor of all members of our community, not just for the use of private business. With all due respect, signs are Eric Bossett, 40 year Capitola resident and home owner. We do not have any other attendees wishing to speak on this item and we do not have any e-mails. Thank you, Larry. To bring this back to council for further discussion, any motion? Council Member Peterson? Thank you. First, I just want to clarify, unless I'm mistaken, staff can let me know if I am, of course. But I believe that the city council approved a parklet program, a temporary or not temporary, a pilot parklet program back in 2016 or 2016 and it just turned out that no one ended up moving forward with it. So while this COVID related outdoor dining program is meant to be temporary, in general, the city has planned to put some kind of outdoor dining parklet program together several years ago. I think like right before I got elected in 2016. So this is an unheard of for our city. So I just wanted to clarify that based on what we've heard from some of the public comments. Initially, my thought was to extend our temporary program to April with the idea that if we were going to be getting our permanent program ready by then, then that would be kind of a good time for us to get rid of the temporary outdoor dining and give a couple months of kind of I almost want to call it breathing room for the businesses to start developing their permanent parklet. I'm interested in hearing from other council members on their thoughts about whether it should extend to April or further out based on the fact that, you know, we'll have that 45 day lottery and then six months from permit to construction. I think that six months isn't really our responsibility. If the businesses have six months to build, if they finish it in 30 days, fantastic. If it takes them six months, we shouldn't need to extend a temporary program for them while they're doing that six months of construction. So that's my thought on that. But I am interested in hearing what the rest of the council thinks about potentially extending the temporary program and how long they like to. I was originally thinking of April, but I'm curious as to other thoughts on if it should go longer. Thank you. What's the matter for Chance? I wasn't prepared for Kristin's questions, but I did have a question. So I know there was a design that Kristin talked about, we approved an earlier effort, and there was a design brought forward. Can that design be brought forth out as a potential design? I think it was submitted for the Crucio wine bar area. So that's my question of key. I don't know if that design is still available. And then I'll make some comments for Kristin's questions. So Kristin, XOA, there you go. Okay. Currently, we have $10,000 to go out for a prototype design that's been a lot of through the city council. There was a previous application on 10 of the avenue, as you mentioned, the capital wine bar, and then they pulled back their application. There was a recent public comment from the wine bar suggesting that there's a possibility of utilizing that design, and that's something we could look into further. I don't know if it would cost money or, you know, we could look into it. But really, we do have the $10,000 to move forward with prototype design. And we have, at this point, we showed to a couple different designers when they were architects, and we have one proposal that we're thinking of moving ahead with. So that's where we stand today, but I could do some work. I could ask. Yeah, I appreciate you asking, because the design's already been done, and it didn't cost the city anything, and it might be a great way to start this program. So I am concerned that businesses won't be able to respond very fast, and as the public comment alluded to, it's difficult to get contractors right now. So I never did, maybe I just wasn't phrasing it correctly, try to suggest that the city identify preferred contractors, but I'm thinking that it might help the businesses if they had some options to choose from, you know, some suggested options. Because I've had two businesses before in San Francisco, believe me, if I got thrown the opportunity to design a parkway or whatever you want to call it, and I was just visually running my business all day long, which was the case, I don't think I have much energy, and so any kind of help. And I think the comment that Memorial Day is the kickoff for a lot of businesses down in the Esmenon, you know, sort of points to the fact that it's going to be a very short timeline. And I think Kristen did mention that if they have to take down everything before they start building, because they're not ready to launch, oh, that's a consideration. I'd like to see other members of the city council speak to it as well. Thank you. Thanks very much. Thanks again, Amber. And then I guess I wanted to first start off by saying that, you know, what we're doing for this trial period with the COVID-19 5.5, it's not just for the purpose benefit of the private business. The city has a state, both from a public health standpoint, and in front of financial standpoint, to make sure that we continue to thrive as a tourist community. That's the lifeblood of capital. It's always happening. And the COVID was not, it's not going to be a one-off event. As we've seen, it has continued to circulate and perpetuate. And as we've seen again with the new variant and being found in capital, not capital, but in California, I think it's in confidence upon us to continue this outdoor dining program. And the question is, for what period of duration and time, and frankly, it seems to me that we should continue it with all the information that is before at this point until after Memorial Day, in other words, to June 1. And I think that, I mean, ideally at that point, we'll have the prototype. Hopefully, we'll have the monitor and we know which response and how to participate. And I think that they should be given after that 30 days to complete their prototype construction. And if they haven't, they can test it this month if they like, but then the temporary workloads would go away after 30 days. And they'll be given that a lot of time to do the construction. And so in terms of timing, I guess that's my thought about it. I think we're going to continue the temporary workload until May 31. And then assuming that everything else is in place, that they only, you know, they'd be given an additional 30 days and the prototype's not up, then the temporary goes away. So that's my thought, and I'll make that in a moment. Okay, we have a first to it on the table from Vice Mayor's story to extend the temporary outdoor ordinance to May 31. And before, I just want to make a quick comment to address what the question was from Council Member Peterson. And, you know, honestly, all of these dates are so hypothetical at this point, you know, a lot can happen. We're writing on, we're waiting, we're going to have to wait for Coastal Commission, we're going to have to wait for a lot of stuff. And so I don't see that we need to really get too worried about this date. We know how easy it is to come back, you know, how, you know, we can continue these conversations about it and aligning the right timeline for, for, for when we get there. So I don't have a problem with May 31 at all. I just want us to, I just want to acknowledge the fact that the dates presented today, my staff were really just open-ended. And I see Katie nodding her head. And you know, these were all kinds of sketches on how that would transpire. So that was my thought. Council Member Peterson. Great, thank you. Yeah, I agree. I am willing to second Vice Mayor's Story's motion, but I also have a quick question. I'm hoping Katie can clarify. So we're going to extend the temporary program to May 31. And we are expecting people to build within the first 30 days, but we hope, you know, they can take the six months that they want. Do they start paying the cost for their parkway when they're paying construction, since they're already taking up those parking spaces? Or do they not start paying their, essentially their rent on the spaces until the park was open? I'm not 100% sure if we have that outlined in the administrative policy at this point. Including the lease. And the lease, they would begin to need to begin paying when they take the desh of the property, which would include construction. Okay, good. That's what I was hoping, because I'm willing to second the motion to extend out to May 31. But I think if someone's going to take six months to build a parkway, then they should be paying for the loss revenue in that six months that we don't have those parking spaces. Yeah, okay. So I will second the motion. Council Member, I'm sure. Thank you, Mayor, for pointing out, probably what was the honest is these dates are quite changeable. I also have another question for Jeannie in that vein. Is there a chance that this whole process to be foreshadowed? Well, since design comes up ahead of time, where post submission is really fast, because they love you so much, who knows. So we could go a little bit faster. Is that a possibility? There's so much that possibility. I think right now, with the rate of development applications, we've been seeing locally here in Capitola, I think, and I've heard from the other directors in the region, everyone's extremely busy right now with lots of planning applications. So I can't imagine that the coastal commission will expedite this process. And there's a lot of new ordinances regarding housing that will be going through the coastal commission, as well, because of the legislation. So there's always that chance that I don't think it's either way, like, to be raised out. Thank you. Okay, so we have a first and a second to extend the outdoor dining, excuse me, model to extend the temporary outdoor dining program, currently scheduled to end on January 3, 2022, to May 31, 2022. May I have a roll call, please? Council Member Bertrand. My room. Council Member Peterson. Aye. Vice Mayor Story. Aye. Mayor Brooks. Aye. This item passes moving forward. Thank you, Katie. Unless you're staying on for the next item? No, okay. We get a nice break. All right, we're going to turn this over to Larry Run Item Demandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reception Ordinance. Okay, more fun. Let me share my screen. And just for the record, we are welcoming back Council Member Kaiser. Nice to meet you. I want to share a sound. Okay. Can you see my screen? Okay. Great. Before you, there is an ordinance to maybe address some changes in state law. In 2016, the State of California passed SC-1383. We have discussed this a couple times with our Waste Disposal Agreement last year as well as our updated franchise agreement that the SC-1383 is driving a lot of changes in the industry. One of the big pieces of it is established as methane reduction targets for jurisdictions as well as the state. And part of the requirement is local jurisdictions are required to adopt a mandatory organic reduction ordinance by January 1st, 2022. So enacting Chapter 804 of the municipal code solid waste ahead of food recovery will allow the city to meet this requirement. The ordinance will require that source separation in collection of food waste and scraps takes place. We will need to develop a program for monitoring compliance. We will do this in conjunction with green waste as well as the monitoring regional waste management system. Development of a food edible food recovery program. This is going to be a county-wide program. You know, there's a lot of great partners and that's for the county's second hardest food bank. They're doing quite a bit and we're going to leverage that to make sure that we include every place that's required. In addition, we're going to need to conduct outreach and education. We're going to be working the green waste recovery on this. In fact, they should be getting out communications to all customers either by the end of this week or very beginning next week. And another part of this is we need to procure and track purchases of recycled paper, which we already do. We have a environmental purchasing policy, but we also need to add some things about purchasing recycled organic waste products. We are going to be bringing an updated policy to council on probably in January at some point to address the changes for this, but this is not part of the ordinance. Kind of overall how this program is on a big picture is going to work. The food scraps will be included in everyone's green carts. Right now, the green carts are designed for kind of garden treatments. The processing at Monterey Regional will include certain types of food scraps and I'll go into that. This is going to be collected by green waste as part of the regular collection process. It's included in new franchise agreements and included in that franchise agreement are the costs associated with that and they were approved as part of the approved collection rates. Kind of overall what is going to be accepted at this point. Make sure we understand that this is going to be changing over time. This is what currently could be accepted. We all hope that other things will be added as we go along, but this is what's going to start. What they call all unpacked is food scraps. Food scraps is a term the state uses quite a bit and this will be fruits and vegetables, cooked meats, cheese and dairy. The good part is they're not liquid. This is maybe cottage cheese and things like that, but no metal here are those sort of products. And I'll compare the food. Plotters and plants can go in as well as coffee grounds. One type of paper they can process are coffee filters and teabags. The list of not accepted right now is pretty large, but we want to make sure that as part of this, as we talked about monitoring, they're going to have to be very strict on what can go here and as they find things that don't belong or they're going to have to go back to make sure the customers understand why. Other than the coffee filters and teabags, no food packaging. The process system cannot handle that at this point. Compostable plastics, I use the term in quotes because over the years we've found out that term isn't a hard target. People have changed what that means, but for right now they cannot go in the green bit. They're going to continue to go in the trash, you know, the green bit. Plastic bags, liquids as we talked about, no raw meats, other paper products cannot go in. Petch waste, then the scheduler cannot go in, and of course, recycling trash cannot be included. So in front of you right now, let's do the recommended actions to introduce the first read by title only and waiving the reading of the text and ordinance repealing the current capital of municipal code chapter 804, the beat dot zero four, which is garbage, and enacting chapter beat dot zero four solid waste and edible food recovered. And I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you so much, Larry. Council members, any questions? Council member Bushcraft. Yeah, question, Larry. Does this mean that processing is going to be different now for greenways? I've done various tours, I've done certain educational things in terms of recycling, and so is this going to be processed any differently, especially since you have me in there and such? I mean, their processing is going to handle all this. So yes, I mean, you know, I can't give you the exact how it's being processed, but it is being collected, and it'll be processed at Monterey Regional. And so whatever they're using to include this, yes, it'll end up being processed differently. From the end user, it's going to be included with the utterance. Okay. So another question, I read the ordinance carefully, and it seems like home composting is allowed and there's no issues with that. I know there's several people that do that. And another question was, there was something about burying stuff in odd places, so there was a whole list of that. What was that all about? You know, the model ordinance from the state included a lot of things we don't see, but it was one of the things that our city attorney firm, people helped us with this included keeping that. We don't want people digging a hole in their yard like compost in a, you know, a not correct manner. But that goes with any of the yard. This is the trash place. You know, we don't want people burying their own trash in their yard. Well, anaerobic recycling is one way to do it, but it's not trash. Organics. Yeah, organics and anaerobic in organics are a problem. That's when the methane comes in. So I can stop doing that? Sorry, I'm just saying. It's really bad if you live in a department. That's when they really get noticed. Okay. Any other questions? Strange to young. I want to know who's the similar in logo. Okay, we're going to now move to a public comment. Now is the time to raise your hands down below under reaction or you called in jar nine or star six, depending on your your on a cell phone or phone cell phone or landline or you can email us directly from public comment. It works like do not see the attendees with their hands raised on this item and I do not have any email. Okay, so we're bringing this back to council for deliberation that he votes as a member of return. Well, I know that we approve the first reading of this ordinance. Is that the correct way to do it? Sure, so have a motion to approve the recommended action switch to introduce the first reading by title only waiting for the reading of the text and the ordinance for filling capital of municipal code chapter 8.04 garbage and enacting chapter 8.04 solid waste and the edible food recovery. So we have a first. Okay. And we have a second for vice mayor story. There's no other comments. Can I have a roll call, please? Council member Bertrand? I approve. Council member Kaiser? Council member Peterson? Aye. Vice mayor Story? Aye. Mayor Brooks? Aye. This item passes with unanimous please. Now move on to item C, the new state of California housing legislation and community development department housing work plan. And tonight we're just going to listen to staff presentation on recent housing legislation and the community development department work plan. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Brooks and Council. First, I'd like to take a minute to say thank you to Sam and her team. This presentation was actually put together by Lila Laila on Sam's team and she's going to be presenting tomorrow night to our planning commission a more in depth presentation on the legislative update. I wanted to bring this to you tonight so you can understand what's been happening at the state level and why in the new year I'm coming forward with RFP is for housing element update and several other new funding ordinances. So with that I'll jump in. This is going to be a high level discussion. I don't know all of the new laws inside and out so I'll keep it high level and we'll be bringing you more updates as we proceed as we get into the detail of the work next year. So 31 new housing will be filled pass-through, like California legislation. This evening I'm going to give you a quick overview of SE 9, the sterile project approval. There have been two changes within SE 8 and SE 10 towards streamlining of permit reviews and then changes early updates the housing element that will affect our timing of review for our six psychologists do in two years. So over our two trends the legislature was there some the legislation was very friendly towards multi-family residential and this trend is expected to increase in the future affordability and increase inventory and also equity and housing. So SE 9, I'm sure you've all seen the headlines in these papers talking about SE 9. This is a ministerial approval and it's applicable in our single-family zoning register. Within SE 9 a property owner may create two lots with up to two units on each lot. So our single-family zoning as we know it probably needs a new name under the change because every lot can be divided into two lots and have two units on each lot. There are our development standards will have to permit new units that have setbacks of up to four feet from the rear-side property lines up to one parking space per unit. Zero is in close proximity to transit. It must require that rentals be longer than 30 days. So utilizing this new methodology in this vacation home and we can set standards for a minimum or a it has to allow children. So in the new year how would we treat a new single-family home and the R1 zone that requires a sign permit for T3. We could only apply the objective development standards so what would be a height setback for area of a show and parking. When the planning commission reviews a new home this is not an addition. The additions still have the same review. They've had a new home most of our city's design permit criteria is discretionary and cannot be reviewed such as protecting privacy and compatibility with the neighborhood looking field. Those standards could not be applied so just the objective standards that are measurable. For next steps we are prepared to report an update to our zoning code and municipal code to update not only the single-family zoning district but also our subdivision regulation. We'll outline the application review process and develop objective development standards which at a minimum could include a maximum four-footers of 800 square feet, four-foot staff acts and we can get specific materials and more. So that's that's what we've got coming to you in the new year. SBA is another bill that passed in the event that housing rights is act of SB 330 which is all about streamlining of affordable housing projects. So it was due to expire and now it's been extended to January 1st, 2030 and I won't give us too much detail here but in the future there's no municipal code changes that need to take place but we are going to increase our tracking of any affordable housing projects to make sure we're in compliance with the streamlining that is required under SB 8. And then AB 1398 this has been updated to our requirements for the housing element and as you all know the terms of rena numbers come from the often currently we have we're required to build 100 and let's say 43 units under our rena numbers. The numbers uh as we've been getting um the numbers originally came out for our rena accounts to be somewhere around 700 more recently in a draft they published we're seeing the number getting even higher close to a little over a thousand per rena. So this is going to be a big undertaking in the next two years of identifying sites for future affordable housing units. And if we don't have enough sites available to accommodate rena numbers our housing element has to specify specific areas for rezoning and the rezoning under the new law will be required to happen within three years. So we'll have to identify those sites as we don't have enough and then rezone those sites within three years for increased density. And then if we fail to get our housing element adopted on time because we are not certified then that timing that the three years is allowed for the rezoning dropped down and it's reduced to one year. So um and also the rezoned sites must allow for housing development 20 percent low rate of housing that's a permanent abuse. Yeah there's no secor review and also it would be just limited to objective design standards. So we need to start working on our housing update our housing element update immediately and make sure that we um have it certified in time to get out of our time frame so things that need to occur. So next step is our draft housing element update. The HVD certification has to be a significant number of 2023 and then once they've given a comment the city council will have to adopt with 120 days of the HVD certification. So our work plan we're looking at currently we've been working with bendable planning um on the SB2 grant money that we received for our draft ordinance for objective standards for all time families. Our housing element I'd like to launch this in January of 2022 and put out a request for proposals and then for SB9 the draft ordinance is single family objective standards. That's something that um SAMS teams prepare to start helping us with as a sponsor of the new year and uh have a draft in early 2022. So here's the timeline of one of the use of the multi-family objective standards. It typically takes any ordinance from the first time we bring it to planning systems with time to get certified by the COOMSL permission about six months for that entire process. So what we're looking at for multi-family objective standards and the single-family objective standards likely have been adopted by the end of summer early fall quarter the third quarter of 2022 and then for the housing element update that's going to take up to two years. So I think we're going to have our work cut out there in terms of finding space for all the new media requirements. So I just wanted to bring this forth to you so you have an idea of when you see me in January and I would ask you when we're starting to move ahead I think it's never going to bring you in the loop and also be able to respond to community concerns because that SB9 has been talked about frequently. And with that that concludes my presentation this evening and I appreciate your time and give me questions. I'm happy to answer. Thank you. Thank you so much Katie. Council members any questions for Katie tonight? Okay seeing none. Oh council member for chair. So since this was the wall right now I guess our current housing element is completing the update. No right now we're in the fifth cycle of our housing element and it will we need to adopt the next housing element. We need to submit it to each SB by December of 2023. So we're in compliance currently and to stay in compliance we'll need to make sure it meets the timeline for 2023. Well there are eight year cycles. Do you have the element? No but I mean yeah we have an eight year cycle on housing elements but it seems like it's where I mean because of these law changes my question basically is it seems that certain elements in the housing elements probably are not in compliance with the current law. So right now our out there zoning code is not up to date with the new laws but we're not out of compliance. If an application comes in we'll have to follow state law but there's within SB 9 there's no requirements and we have an updated ordinance by a state certain or any updated ordinance. There's no requirement. That was different with the secondary dwelling minutes a couple years back we did have to but there was a we did need to bring our zoning code into compliance so. Okay I got it. Okay let's just go ahead and think through to the public real quick to see if anyone has any comments on this item before we adjourn. I do not see any entries on this item and we don't have any emails. Okay so we'll bring this back to council member for chance. Yeah um Steve is that you with the state law room logo just trying to understand. That's a picture yeah. That's way cool Steve. Yeah that is really cool. I wouldn't have known I'd suffer my daughter she had to tell me she'd be accusing. Council member Peter. Thank you. I just want to say thank you to Katie for and you mentioned that Sam's team had brought this forward as well so thank you to both of you. These issues are are why the last couple meetings had kind of made a point of bringing up that and I've worked on arena numbers and these things are happening even when I was running for reelection last year. I remember someone said they they weren't going to vote for me because you know I was I was supporting this idea of destroying single family zoning when really you can just see it coming ahead of time that was happening in the state legislature that there wasn't anything that we could do about this that it was in his way and so I appreciate that you're bringing this forward and I will continue to mention it as well throughout I'm sure my next couple years on council because I'm pretty much calling it now that the first time someone wants to build a duplex in a place that there used to be a single family home people are going to call out of the woodworks and say that we're destroying their single family neighborhoods and so I'm just going to keep you know mentioning it as often as possible that this is happening. There's not a lot that we can do about it. It is important that we address the housing crisis but at the same time it's going to be really difficult and the way that these things are happening are not necessarily within our control although we do have opportunities to get feedback and I think we should as often as possible so again just thank you so much Katie and our city attorney Sam thank you so much for the the work that you're doing to bring this to our attention and to continue to address these issues as they come forward. Okay. Got one more question there. Oh, thanks. Yeah, yeah, I'm reviewing this. I wrote this down and I forgot to ask Katie so I think on 48 we have multi-unit housing right now that's sort of been you know we're supposed to get rid of it but according to these rules you can't tear multi-unit housing down. Yeah, there are protections of not down-zoning properties that have existing residential densities. So we will have to change our zoning laws for those guys because there was supposed to be a limit and we're supposed to deal with a bunch of things that time went on fine limits but now that should be taken off of them. Yes, you know you've brought up a good point and you do have standards in our non-conforming section of our zoning code that we're not that it was one section that was not updated in the zoning code updates you to needing to work through sea level rise challenges but there are standards types of R1 for bringing multi-family into compliance. We do not enforce that section on our code because that's not in compliance with state law. Okay, thank you very much. Okay, well that brings us to item 6 on the agenda this evening which is adjournment. Katie, staff, department heads, council members, thank you so much for joining us this evening. Have a wonderful night and we'll see you on December 9th which is going to be a fun day. See you then. Oh, I might be in the other room. Okay, Taylor, thank you very much. Wonderful day. Goodbye.