this time of the public So there are any members of the public who would like to speak to us on item number 23 Which is a 2020 regional early action planning State planning grant application Now it's the time to call in Once you've called in using the numbers on your screen You'll want to press star nine on your phone to raise your hand And once you've been acknowledged, you'll be asked to unmute your phone And you'll have two minutes to speak three on our agenda Please press star nine on your phone to raise your hand And you will have two minutes to speak opportunity for the public to weigh in moving forward as it relates to The expansion of the downtown zone if that's to be appropriate by the community And so with that I'll go ahead and move the item. Um It's on the staff recommendation, which is To move a resolution directing staff to submit an application to the association of monterey bay area government So the state of california regional early action planning grant program To contribute funding towards the project to expand the boundaries of the city's downtown plan I'll just saw your hand up next I'll second that and ask the maker of the motion if he would be willing to include in the direction Uh report back the reason I was asking about timing for hearing about the grant was to try to get a sense of when would be an appropriate time for a progress report from the planning staff and so i'm just uh, you know, thinking that Based on what I heard, um, you know a report back in january of 2021 about planning You know kind of some some more detail around the planning so I guess a progress report on downtown expansion planning efforts and Community input opportunities It by the second meeting in january My understanding is we're voting on a we're voting on the grant directing the grant the grant application today, but Just councilmember, um Brown can you read off? I'm sorry. I didn't it sounded like you're asking It the intent of the um amendment is to sort of get a broader perspective on that area of downtown Is that not alive? Well, the intent is to get a progress report on uh, the Planning it yes the the planning but I'm asking about that because the grant explicitly is about um, you know, it sounds like at least I don't know having not been able to look at the The contents of a proposal, um, but from what I read in the agenda report that the Um, you know the intention is to use these funds For that planning process and so they are linked together in that way Um, so I I just want to I'd like to hear more given that what we have is high level conceptual as um as matt kind of Suggested in his presentation so that we can hear what how this is going Um at the council level and the public can get an update, you know at some point before You know too much time goes by and things start to Um get solidified So it's really just the my most my it would be in addition to um direct staff to return to the council with a progress report on Uh downtown expansion planning efforts I'd like to leave it there, but I can say under the grants You know the grants if you want it to be connected directly there But I just think that just getting a report because work is already clearly happening. It's going to happen So it's a progress report on downtown expansion planning efforts By the second meeting in january seems Reasonable time frame. I guess all um I I'd like to just make sure it kind of understand from the I guess I don't know is uh director media economic development director body let's come and maybe we I'm just I'm just trying to understand sort of their availability to do that work To to provide that that progress plan. Do you mind if I just hear from staff real quick on that? Thanks councilmember brown and councilmember meyers In terms of how much progress we've made by that point in time Given the other you know the objective standards push that we have as well as the start of The preparation for the housing element which Will be happening. You know, we'll be receiving that grant as matt mentioned in the next couple of months. Hopefully I don't know how much progress will be made at that point We can certainly report back to you and and tell you you know our thought process at that point But we will absolutely be back in front of the council before Any decisions are made in fact the council will be the ones making the decisions in terms of uh, hearing the community feedback that we have received and then the recommendation that We would be making in terms of where to Expand the downtown be it Or both And at that point in time, you know, we would we would have more information But we can we can certainly report back and just give you our initial thoughts If if that's what you're if that's what you're thinking I just don't know that we will have at that point Actually engage the community quite yet I guess that's partly my point. Um, is that Often things come to us Once you know kind of after the fact the process has occurred Whatever the process is that staff undertakes and we get a recommendation to move forward on something that We may not necessarily have been tracking and so I just feel like have it again I'm not asking for you to do a whole lot of extra work But just to provide a progress report on where things are at with that planning process in relation to the fund the grant funding It's something we can certainly do it. I I just want to be upfront I I don't know that we'll have actually made a whole lot of progress in terms of actually doing anything But we can certainly articulate our thinking and share, you know the application and the status of that If that's something that the council is interested in And Bonnie, I don't know if there's any perspective I know downtown is both planning But there's economic development as well and some of some of the efforts downtown or if you have any issues with Or time constraints or what have you I'm not sure Bonnie's on today Clicking through to see if she's wondering I see Her she's on yeah Go ahead. I'm sorry, mayor I was remember Matthews raised her hand But if the I don't know if Bonnie's not available if there's somebody else from Economic development who might be able to speak to that if not, maybe we can hear councilor Matthews comment. Yeah, certainly. Thank you there Okay Yeah, my thought was that January report that might be Pretty high expectation given the issues that the planning director mentioned, but but just to improve the motion regular reports back to council on the status of the Process and I think that's what intended is key checking that critical point And I'll just mention. I mean, I I think that What it sounded like to me is just getting processes at because You just want to understand in January, where's the grant for anything, you know, it's super detailed with Key dates and you know, who's big stakeholders are but just understanding where everything is at um, given that it's early October and Hopefully, you know time has gone by that maybe we Are going to receive the grant and there's some planning moving forward, but that's kind of how I'm understanding it as well Yeah, if I can respond. Yeah, I'm happy with maybe we'll just provide a to To try to come back by the second meeting in January just to give I mean, there's there's holidays in there Who knows what's going to happen with covet this winter? I think maybe let's just maybe give them as much time as possible and I'm fine with accepting the amendment. Thank you If I could just say one more thing about it, you know, I I totally understand the concern and I you know and it's also a little bit awkward to kind of Just guess, you know to have shot in the dark Yes, about when a good time would be for report back but I just find that if we don't have some Deadline that sometimes it doesn't happen and it's totally understandable because there's a lot going on But I just feel like when there's a date then we sort of Are better able to track it That's the only reason why if there's a date that would be preferable for Director Butler or I don't know Director what comes here that I'm happy with another date, but I just want to make sure that we get something mayor if I could perhaps just If you're interested in getting an update prior to us engaging the community about Where We may want to expand we could provide an update to you in advance of rolling out that outreach effort And so that way if it's if it's marked when we're doing that we could provide it to you in February or but It it keeps us from coming back and not having a whole lot of Work that's done And interim so if that would be acceptable then I mean that I think would work for us I don't know if Matt had anything else or any other thoughts to add Yeah, no, that sounds good to me too I would support that The seconder would be amenable Can we can we put the potentially put the time frame to To prior to any to the community outreach component I've described Let's just say prior to the community outreach component regarding the downtown planning efforts And that would be a little bit of a we've got a we've got a goal They are sort of we want to hear before that starts is is really the intent the maker is the seconder okay with that Absolutely. Yeah, I think prior to initiating The community outreach component Great I just want to say how excited I am to see this part moving forward. I think this is the The logical next step of what we've been doing And over time I mean I'm going back to the first downtown plan and the earthquake recovery plan and then the downtown Plan revision more recently Our housing blueprint Looking at the expansion of downtown in fact of the downtown boundaries was to some extent envisioned by the Puma project for the Council members remember the consolidation and possible expansion of some of our assessment districts downtown for providing services and unfortunately We all know history intervened and that that project did not move forward But the potential has always been there. We are beginning to see the revised downtown plan come forward and There has been for decades really the desire to Create a more robust connection between our downtown and the beach area And these flats as well and particularly for those who are concerned about affordable housing This needs to present one of the real opportunities. We've seen some of our most significant Affordable housing over the years occurred in our downtown area just off the top of my head Um Sycamore, Nueva Vista Pacific station phases one and two the library master plan riverfront at the north end. I mean and by looking at what's been happened and some of the Let's just call them opportunity sites in a possibly expanded downtown Is just a tremendous forward-looking opportunity and you also talked relatively recently about the future of the warrior in Santa Cruz. It's just another part of it. So I just see it as a A wonderful opportunity to look to our future now and very happy to support the motion Those are comments The motion we have before us is to adopt the staff recommendations The motion was made by vice mayor meyers seconded by council member brown And in addition to the motion To roll call vote on the item Thank you mayor council member buyers I Matthew I Brown I Boulder I What can Vice mayor meyers I And mayor coming 24 public hearing for subdivision and zoning ordinance cleanup amendments Uh, it's aid 20-005 for members of the public who are streaming this meeting If this is an item you would like to comment on now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen You'll need to press star 900 phones to raise your hand And once you've been acknowledged you will be asked to unmute your phone And you'll be given two minutes to comment even for presentation Good afternoon. Um, this is Catherine Donovan with the planning division And I am speaking from my office wearing a mask. I I hope that you can hear me Yep, we can hear you Okay, so, um, this is the cleanup item We do these cleanup items we try to do them annually although we missed last year And the reason that we do them is that there are always a number of Issues with the with our ordinances To keep them updated we we want to keep them consistent with state law We want to make sure that there is internal consistency with the ordinance And we also want to improve and streamline our application processes Clarify the language and concepts In the ordinance and remove any redundancies and then sometimes we just want to improve the ordinance itself as Best practices are developed and as General planning thought and cultural norms Change over time Sometimes there's a need to make changes to the ordinance to be consistent With what's happening in the real world This this cleanup item includes a large number of Relatively minor changes and so I'm not going to go over each and every one of them I'll mention some of the specific items and I'm happy to address Any particular items that you may have questions about The ordinance updates the subdivision ordinance to comply with changes in state law and also to allow that Catherine can you Catherine can you start interrupting can you share your presentation? Are you not seeing it? Or we're not seeing it. No, okay Let's try this again. Thanks. I'm having trouble getting my zoom to open Catherine. Let me know if you want to share it Okay, let me just Okay, can you see it now? Okay, now we get to the nitty gritty um specific amendments include updates to the subdivision ordinance and those are both to Bring the ordinance into compliance with changes in state law and also To allow the city If an if an if there is litigation over a subdivision map and the applicant requests that a stay Um during that litigation that would allow the city to grant that stay for up to five years um, we're also proposing revisions to the design permit findings. We currently have 16 design permit findings which that the generally cities have about five four or five so Having to go through each of those findings for every design permit can slow the process down. Many of those findings are Redundant because they're covered in other sections of either the zoning ordinance or or other City requirements and so we're basically just removing redundant findings from The requirements We the ordinance would also um allow The process for a half bath in an accessory structure without requiring a public hearing And also to remove the design permit requirements for structures or additions that are 120 square feet or less And 15 feet in height or less One of the updates would be to update the home occupation standards Um They would allow one non resident employee We're increasing the number of trips per day that would be allowed And we're clarifying that employees working from home Um Are not they do not have a home occupation unless they are independent contractors But if they are actually employees like when i'm working from home, that's not a home occupation Other changes include Updating our density bonus ordinance. There's a Cause in the state law that says that you can't require reports that the Applicant is not would not already do our Density bonus ordinance requires a pro forma in certain circumstances. And so we've just added pro forma or other Documentation Just to cover us in that case um We're also making some changes to our Latest revision to our adu ordinance um The changes from last year that were approved in january of this year um that went through the state the state changes were uh in Some places were somewhat ambiguous or contradictory and Our we made the best interpretation we could um, but when we sent our approved ordinance To the state housing and community development department hcd They had some differences of opinion Of on how to interpret those code sections So we've worked with hcd to revise our ordinance and those revisions are in this In this cleanup item Um, we also currently have something called a hardship exemption For under grounding utilities. There's a requirement that when you do development that you underground utilities However, if there's There's this hardship exemption, but what we've found is that The hardship exemption is so broad that it is um undermining our our The the requirement itself and so what we're proposing is to replace that exemption within and loopy And that would allow that fee would go into a fund and then um, the public works department could use that fund to um underground A whole neighborhood at a time Which which they do um Occasionally do We would we are also proposing to revise the standards for duplexes on corner lots in r1 districts r1 5 districts that this is something that is currently allowed but the um standards we feel are Are don't always make a lot of sense and so we've revised some of those standards And we are also proposing to expand the Cannabis retailer hours They're currently limited to 9 p.m. And to go to 10 p.m. And this is something that we um asked direction from council at last year And this was the current direction council gave and unfortunately with Everything that's happened in the past year. We were not able to bring this to you until this time and also um This was in the ordinance when we took it to the planning commission But we realized that um, it would make sense To make an additional change to allow existing retailers To expand their hours automatically to 10 p.m. Without the need to modify their use permits And we checked carefully to make sure that um, all of those retailer use permits Would currently allow The the retailers to be open at um 9 p.m. So that we wouldn't be Expanding significantly and and that is the case excuse me um When I was reviewing this The ordinance last night getting ready to form for this public hearing. I realized that um There was an internal inconsistency that we had not caught and this has to do with the the parking Ordinance that you just heard earlier today. Um, and that ordinance Proposes some changes some that would require an administrative use permit And the language of the ordinance was that the administrative use permit would be um at an administrative level and not require a public hearing And that was included in one section of the ordinance But there are actually two additional areas of the zoning ordinance that discuss when you need a public hearing for um Use permits and so this The proposed additions would um Make corrections to those additional section one of them is section 24 04090 And we you can see in red what we're proposing to add that it would just um The administrative use permit Would not require a public hearing if it was a temporary use Um for variations to parking design requirements and the number of parking spaces And in half bath it half baths and accessory structures um So that is one of the changes the other is in the section on administrative use permits Where it states that an administrative use permit um Is required to have a public hearing Except again if it's temporary For variations in parking design requirements and the number of spaces and perhaps An accessory structures, and I know I just I just wanted to reiterate to Catherine That those that those changes Were are consistent with the planning commission recommendation Planning commission supported that change in the one section that we presented to them And it was just merely an additional cleanup. That's the the same language needed to be added to these two other sections Oh, so that that's the only change we're really making here Thanks And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer Are there any council members who have questions at this moment in time hearing none? Guess what we can do is we can Turn it over to members of the public So if there are any members of the public who'd like to speak to us On item number 24, which is subdivision and zoning ordinance cleanup amendments 820- 0005 and 820- 0006 Now's the time to call in on your on this item If you can call one of the numbers that you see on your screen once you've dialed in please press Star nine on your phone And you will have up to two minutes to comment on this item I'd like to bring it back to council for action deliberation. Uh, what I just want to thank the staff for You know going I'll go ahead and move the recommendation and want to second your Appreciations of staff. I know one of the most frustrating things to applicants on any grant planning process is where the ordinances are unclear or in context in complex if one another so This may not be a sexy item, but it's I'll motion my counselor Matthews council member Second that motion and echo the cost of appreciation to our staff So the motion by council member Matthews seconded by council member Watkins to move the staff recommendations It does look like there was one member of the public who raised their hand to comment on this item So I'm going to open public comment in case the call vote on this item Thank you mayor council member buyers Matthews Hi Golder Hi Vice mayor Myers Hi And mayor coming Before we begin this item of the public who are streaming this meeting that this is an item you want to comment on Now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen The order will be a presentation of the item by staff We will then take public comment and return to the council for deliberation and action Given the amount of comment that we previously heard on this item, uh, public comment Make sure that you guys can hear me Yep, we can hear you Great, and I'll share my screen here Okay, and you guys can see that Yeah, it looks like it's a presenter of you, but um, but it's oh it's coming through fine, so Okay, I'm not sure I should change that or I'll leave it for now It's fairly just fairly quick if you have Ryan you should change it if you have notes I think just stop share Stop share share screen Yeah Share oh, there we go Is that a little bit better Uh Now Yes Okay, great. Thanks. Um, if you recall, um at the august 25th City council meeting the the council held a public hearing to preliminarily consider a proposed general plan amendment local coastal plan amendment And to let me move this forward here if I can And it looked close to plan and rezone 101 felix to accommodate, um, 80 new apartment units, uh, in an existing 240 unit cypress point apartment complex um, the purpose of the hearing um in august was for the council to Consider the project from a policy perspective Um, specifically whether or not a a general plan amendment and zone change are appropriate at this location In order to give direction to staff And the applicant as to whether they should continue with the process of the application The council considered the information Provided in the staff report listened to testimony from the public And after discussion by each of the council members passed a motion To have staff bring back a resolution denying the general plan amendment and rezoning Pursuant to state local laws council approval of a general plan amendment or rezoning clearly requires planning commission Applying commission recommendation prior to the council action At that time in august Staff believed that the council Could deny a general plan amendment or rezoning without planning commission recommendation Since no change to the general plan or zoning, um, what occur However, following that meeting, um, a municipal code section was identified that requires that all General plan and rezoning requests go to a public hearing before the planning commission Before the city council can take the final action as you can see here in section 2406.0 30 So as a result, um to comply with this municipal code section Staff is recommending that the application be referred to the planning commission For public hearing at the next available hearing Based on noticing requirements um We're looking at november 5th as the plausible planning commission meeting So, um, that's a recommendation and i'm available for any question Wanting to clarify. So this is more of a procedural vote. We're not reopening this can of worms at this time Thank you I just want to get some clarification That was to be come that was an application for a new development That would need to go through sequa and then the application after going through the the sequel process would then go to planning commission And then after it got went through the planning commission it would then come to council For approval of that application. Is that a correct? You're right. Yes Ryan I can weigh in on that Um, no council is not taking action to approve the project Simply referring it to the plan the planning commission is not an action that would trigger trigger a sequel review before you could take an action that actually constitutes A commitment to approve the project then you would have to do a sequel analysis, but not um merely to provide preliminary feedback Or to um refer it to the planning commission for potential future action The action to send it to the planning commission through all the steps and then the sequel approval go to the planning commission for Approval of the application I'm just trying to understand because it seems like What we've done sequence in terms of how a project would normally come before the city council And so now i'm just really confused with Yeah, you know what what we are required to do versus because it seems like what we can do today is just What um has put us in this sort of predicament is that The matter that came before you in august was intended to gauge the council's sentiment and Uh, not necessarily to take a final action. So the council has given direction um that it needs to undo to restore The status quo prior to the last council meeting if the council merely um You know direct staff to proceed with the normal planning process for this project and communicate to the planning commission um the council's current Sentiment as expressed by the minutes of the august I think 27th meeting then you can you can do that by motion I think I might have tony just missed that last point Okay, we were not given a project. We were asked to weigh in on the general plan amendment Which we did Right, but the but the problem was and what we overlooked the last time around Is that before the city council can take action on a general plan amendment It must be referred to planning commission for a recommendation. So the council can't Take action to deny general plan amendment without following that step as specified by your zoning code I'm this is kind of a different question There's been times where maybe it was only on appeal That the council can just bring something to their Agenda Overlook commissions and overlook planning commission and we just want to take it on Could this apply in this case? I mean, I I think there is precedent for Let's say a project applicant to come before the city council To float a concept and to get council feedback before the formal process is completed And and that's essentially what was Uh, it's what should have occurred in this case, right? No, I'm thinking of something that we say we just the council How you do it, I guess the emotion is something made to to skip a code skip the commission's Way and just immediately take it to the council Whatever findings we had to make in order to do that, but I think it was just a move things along and I'm not there's a word for it when We just I'm not not recalling a specific of that although That sounds Like something that that has occurred Well, it just seems that we already respect to The the application that in this phase of the process with respect to a proposed general plan amendment Well, it seems a perfect case That this might work for the But for the fact that your code requires the planning commission to weigh in Well, that's what that that's the point. I'm wondering if we have higher jurisdiction that we could do that, but maybe I'll Maybe you'll oh your code also specifies council member fires that if the planning commission were to make a recommendation and if the council on it on a zoning Uh on a rezoning application or on a general plan amendment and the council Um Is interested in taking a substantially different action than it's required to refer it back to the planning commission Yeah, no that that I understand that as well Yeah, yeah that that that I understand That's all Okay, thank you. I just want to clarify here, uh, because and I have some comments. I'll make later Just want to clarify that um As I understand it the original staff report for august 25th Uh was asking us to um express or express a willingness or a non willingness to um consider the amendments the general plan and zoning amendments that would be required for this project to move forward um, and so I so my understanding is that um What you're asking us to consider today is something a little bit different and that is To go to the planning commission specifically about The project without going through the whole application process that you were trying to Ask us to signal to the developer whether or not it would be worth moving ahead And now what I see is um Uh proposal to move it to the planning commission And it it's likely I I think it's likely that they won't um Here they will not make a decision on this project without seeing Uh the The project application and environmental review. So I'm just having a hard time understanding Why it is that um, we are being asked to do this now when we weren't asked to do this on august 25th I don't believe it. You know, I get the confusion around the resolution, but we were But there was a lot of confusion that evening and so I'm just trying to understand how we and we're we're here now kind of after the council voted to express it um You know, it's unwillingness to consider it We're now being asked to Kick the can down the road it feels and kind of just wait. I'm not sure why we need to Wait, so again, just to help me understand how it is that We can I mean and tony maybe this is a question for you So that was kind of a comment, but here's my question We do that today. Can we just do what? At least I am making the motion intended to do At the time on august 25th. Can we do that today express our? willingness or unwillingness to move ahead Um, I think the council may Uh, take a vote today to refer it to the planning commission with the councils I suppose recommendation for denial So you're saying we we have I don't know you're telling us that legally we have to refer this to the planning commission today because I guess only um You only have to refer it to the planning commission Um, I suppose if you take no action today, then the application would still be in process and the Applicant may continue to pursue the application. So I suppose formal action to refer it back to the planning commission Is not necessary. I just think it makes for a cleaner record given the direction that was Uh provided by the council at the last meeting Maybe if I could jump in, um I think what we were trying to do at the last meeting was um in many respects to address what council member Byers was Commenting on which was you know, if if the council has Really big concerns about the project and isn't going to be supportive of it Then let's hear that sooner rather than later Um, where we made a mistake is we believed that The council had the ability to just outright deny the application and we subsequently Learned that we had to go back to the planning commission In in order for the council to formally deny the application to speak directly, I think to your question council member brown I think that the council has really two options right here The the recommendation was That you have before you is to send it back to the planning commission So that it could then be brought back to you for a formal denial Consideration because the council can't formally deny an application until that planning commission recommendation occurs As uh, the city attorney kandadi Mentioned you aren't compelled to send it back to the planning commission right now You could say you've heard what we said and you can proceed. Should you wish to do so? So that would be another option the the uh, council can just say You heard our vote It's up to you whether or not you now want to proceed with the uh, sequel analysis and Bring a full package back in front of the planning commission at a later date So does that help clarify a little bit? Okay, and and apologies for the the confusion related to this we were we were trying to be helpful in coming earlier and Recognize that we did create A great deal of confusion as a result sitting and commenting on item number 25 on our agenda Unmute your phone Please that's to comment on this item with the exception of brine may unmute your device Hi, thank you My name's elissa barns and I Am a resident of neary street. I live about a block from the cypress street apartment My main point today is just that I feel this whole confusion sends a really wrong message to the public Because we did work very hard to have our voices heard and to a um State that we are not in favor of this project So I would like to ask that you do deny this motion Although I do hear that there's very little that can be done I do feel that this is a case where the big money is bulldozing through their plans And that we've been around the block on this we've argued our points.  So my request is can we allow the vote to not spot rezone stand? um In in in future things and I know the protocols and everything but just It makes me as a public community person feel that There's no way to make my voice heard without endless, you know, uh laboring and I Just would like the city council to Deny the motion and to keep the spot rezoning Vote as a solid vote. So thank you. Those are my comments Okay, thank you. I'm a resident of cypress point. I Agree 100 with elissa's points And I just feel that It's it should be a moot point. It was already voted down prior And I don't understand like elissa says why this has to continually be brought up and I agree. I think that they the developers are just trying to bulldoze this through I really really really do not want this to occur and if it does It will force me to have to leave And I really like living here I'm a taxpayer just like all of us. So again, I I'd please respectfully ask for this whole project to be And that the previous vote stands Thank you You're being asked to unmute your device Questioned over a week ago to have extra time for the sierra club of santa cruz Is that possible? Um, the only email I received was I think it was yesterday Now I'm emailed it to bonnie and you may are coming Of page letter in two minutes if you like but just tell me yes or no Yeah, I did not receive the request for additional time. I'm looking back to my emails right now and I'm sorry. I didn't receive it How strange? Okay. I've mailed it to bonnie bush and you okay our chapter has 6 000 members Um, we sent you a 12 page letter. It includes a biological assessment Of nary lagoon and in short the sierra club supports High-density intel in appropriately zoned areas However, the rezoning of this parcel would present significant issues Three of them are the location of this parcel is not within or adjacent to the areas where high density infill should be focused According to our general plan second The parcel is located in close proximity to fragile wetlands and a riparian habitat Third spot rezoning should never be used as a development tool We view rezoning one parcel As undermining the careful democratic process of our general plan of our local coastal program And of the open space management plans Given all these conflicts to the guiding principles of the santa cruz general plan We urge you to oppose the proposed rezoning in order to protect nary lagoon and uphold our community's vision and values of truly sustainable development spot rezoning undercuts community planning Resoning one parcel in a neighborhood undermines effective planning It reduces the careful process in which all parties are working together for the benefit of the community Not just the benefit of one particular entity seeking to rezone Proposed zoning designation conflicts with the general plan. There are several points. We've outlined them on there about And how also spot rezoning Quote here spot rezoning has all the hallmark characteristics of institutional mischief And it's often found in cities where the city council and the planning commission are controlled by the real estate board All the natural resources that would be affected And may I just in some on conclusion I heard the lawyer Tony Cattati right there say that you could override the planning commission So I hope that you will actually take that as Catherine Byers sandy brown Asked about and just in Cummings and you override the planning commission. There have been several hearings on this You have heard from the public. We feel heard Please listen to all the people speaking and override the planning commission Deny this project now. Thank you Yeah Hello I'm good afternoon. Hi. I'm sondra ivany and perfect timing to come right after kyrsha and the z era club Every point that she made including the institutional mischief and definitely got our attention. We have definitely Many many people in this neighborhood have learned a lot about how government works and we're very dismayed To see this happen I'm not going to even I'm just going to add a few more things to the sierra club the parking the safety the overcrowding the social justice issues Targeting an already dense neighborhood of renters the bad management the potential flooding Along with the being in the flood zone with the climate change. Okay. I'm going to move on to this piece of it We in neary lagoon were we're very uh in uh saved neary lagoon We're very concerned about what the resolution meant. Was it a vote? Was it uh, um, just a sign-off Was it a majority? What would happen in a tie? We had many questions about this. We're not attorneys I address my questions to um Ryan bain who forward them on to the attorney and Here we got last week. I think it was last thursday I could be mistaken about the date six weeks after that october 20 that august 25th meeting We got the note from uh from we got I got the email directed to me personally Which of course I've shared with everyone since I'm speaking for everyone when I write to the uh To the planning department and or the attorney um, and uh, so the attorney gets back to me saying oops We made a mistake. We left this part out You know, I just really wanted an answer about what a resolution was who votes on it Is it a vote? Is it a sign-off? We already got a majority. We already voted We had a lot of questions about that And then to come back and hear from the attorney the and to hear this this jargon Um planning commissioned and I I'm quoting from what the third point was on this that you already saw on the screen before Can I just read this what the attorney wrote? Which is completely inscrutable. Would that be all right? Go ahead and then I'll thank you. It's you can maybe even put it up on the screen because it was showing before Um, we have no idea what this means You know planning commission quote planning commission denial of any proposed amendment Shall terminate the proceedings in the matter unless an appeal is filed Or the application was initiated by the city council in which case the planning commission action Shall be a recommendation and quote and I was just asking about the Um Finalizing the the vote that we took and then I got that. Thank you very much Or did just our 2294 you're on the line Good afternoon Dear esteemed council members first off. I don't know before for affordable housing And spot rezoning is one of the worst solutions ever. Please uphold and deny the rezoned vote of august 25th um Please maintain the character's character of our neighborhood and uphold the hard work of 40 general plan staff individuals Over eight city commissions and over a dozen consultants These individual people and commissions laid out a plan for the future growth and development of the city Please respect and honor their hard work and stand behind the general plan and keep Santa Cruz Santa Cruz This project not only violates the 2030 general plan, but also wishes to exercise invalid Authority such that a spot zone creates or can An outside developer wishes to dismantle and step on the city of Santa Cruz a general plan You might ask why is spot rezoning so bad? Well It could be an invalid exercise and authority So an outside authority such as east bay developer coming with money and say this is what we want to do And the planning commission sees that's okay. We're going to do it no more general plan no more Santa Cruz It's discriminatory against other home and landowners It is not planned. It's sloppy not well thought out not for looking and primitive It splits communities people from the outside of the community have too much power and alter the feel vibrancy and lifestyle General plan wants to keep Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Usually done when rezoning is at odds with the city's master plan such as an outside influence developer wanting To do something that is not planned for And it may be ruled arbitrary capricious and it makes unjustified exceptions Please make good decisions or use the city's Santa Cruz 2030 general plan and honor and respect the work of many individuals created document to keep Santa Cruz the way it is Just stand by the general plan. Don't let somebody come in and say this is what we want to do This is how we want our city to look Even with even if it's with a dangling care of affordable housing We can't build ourselves out of you know out of the situation we in Just by building more building Thank you. Thank you mayor Cummings. Can you hear me great? Good afternoon. Thank you for the time I'm bryan riff bell from braddock and logan the owner of cypress point apartments. We've owned it since 2005 Just uh, there's a little way here. There's a lot of uh A request for an amendment to the general plan is being mischaracterized. I think that's spot zoning spot zoning singled out a Parcel of land for use that's totally different from the surrounding area Our request is to change the general plan designation from low medium density to medium density Not high density medium density the current low medium designation only allows for 178 apartment homes Versus the 240 apartment homes that exist today So no change from current use and amending the general plan to allow The existing density What is there today is not spot zoning far from it. Uh, this is this amendment really would undo A common practice in the 1980s that lowered densities through general plans Which is one of the root causes of the housing shortage And it's helped perpetuate social inequalities We're not bulldozing anything. I just heard that no tenants will be displaced not removing any existing units The proposed 80 units are in five new residential buildings mostly in parking lots In the pool area far from the lagoon Interestingly enough though, there was a study here on today's agenda. I think it was item number 22 Unrelated to our request that highlights our parking lot as significantly underutilized. This is consistent with what we've Uh, our own parking council was projected what was shown in the traffic impact study Uh, you know, some of the there's been vocal opposition suggesting that we are under parked and creating Overcrowding and parking on the streets It's far from the truth There's been a lot of attention given to this save The lagoon We love the title. We're 100 support of a protecting area lagoon. It's a beautiful city park an amenity for the residents of our project Our proposal will have no material impacts Our proposal won't have any Material uh impacts to the lagoon the the public currently has and will continue to have Access through our property to this beautiful sanctuary There's no limit to the number of people that can access the lagoon through our property So the new 80 studio in one bedroom Apartment homes that we are proposing will not materially change the amount of car or foot traffic to the area The save the lagoon piece is filled with misinformation. I know uh, it's it's it's got 202,900 signatures or 800 signatures. I'm one of them. I you know, I just wanted to see what what's uh, what's all the hooplet's about Uh, you know, I understand the primary authors are from the adjacent community and understand they don't want to see uh development next door and uh more foot traffic coming from our property Through the lagoon to their property, but again The new 80 units doesn't have anything to do that doesn't governor that it doesn't govern that There is a significant amount of people who go through our property. We provide the public access access There's a public ride away that that goes through basically public uh an easement that goes through our property And around the early going all the way to blackburn street right behind the townhomes They're very upset by this. They don't want to see this foot traffic behind their townhomes And that's the whole impetus of all this Uh, these things, you know, it's the the trees. We're not we're not destroying any trees along the lagoon You know, where the trees go and the replacement trees of the trees that we are going to have to knock down Um, what will be remained to be seen and you know, that's not finalized But we'll be replacing two to one every tree that we knocked down is it is either There's nothing that's older than our existing project the original developer planted those trees to say that they're You know a couple hundred year old redwood that that's that's just not the truth. That's that's not there But regardless, you know, we're we're proposing 20 affordable On-site and the only project that i'm aware of that's having the inclusionary truly inclusionary housing So when you fact in no reason this is able to be done is because we own the land When you factor in all the cost to build the land value is effectively zero So there's 24 20 affordable requirement is actually perpetuating. There are no projects that are proposing that but ours And just lastly real quick the design of project that truly has an inclusionary project or inclusionary element like this Included of the units that we're developing versus segregating a hundred percent of market rate a hundred percent Of below market rate and a hundred percent affordable projects You know, it's basically segregating people by household income And I don't think anyone wants to perpetuate that but that in addition to not allowing the higher density or the existing densities today is I mean Oh, that's going to my time. Thank you, mayor. Thank you Hello Honorable city council, thank you for allowing me to speak again at this additional hearing I was present at the august 25th meeting when lee butler stood before The council and all the public attending and said that the purpose of that meeting was to Give the developer a sense of whether or not the city would amend their general plan and and allow rezoning of the one-on-one Felix Street Parkville to make a decision if they wanted to spend more money Sandy brown moved to ask that that vote which was taken to deny a general plan amendment Be finalized put into code. Whatever it is you do to finalize it So I say let's say city staff time energy and money Let's save the developer time energy and money and let them know in no uncertain terms that the city council does not intend To amend their general plan. Let's finish that And set the resolution forward I'm hearing circular things from city council and the planning department here about Why this has to go back to the planning commission? I certainly Am just I would advise doing nothing. I think that message needs to be sent to the developer That the and what we're so this I'm asking the city council to recommend to the planning commission to deny The the project so that the planning commission can remit recommend back to the city Council to deny. So that is what I'm asking for um, I I I understand how desperately the City staff wish to see this project come forward and I do not understand that This delay seems to be designed to Delay now brian got to talk more than this for a minute. I'm gonna I'm gonna finish my thought And there's only one there's a new city council seated I will say that while only the developer has only requested ad units Currently re-zoning that parcel would allow 265 additional units plus 35 percent more or 93 additional bonus density units Which brings it up to 307 which is now in high density So you've effectively doubled the amount of people who can live there. Thank you Hey, look. Hi there. My name is Oh Thank you, mayor My name is alex nearson. My partner and I are residents of and homeowners in the laurel neary neighborhood just north of the project site And I would urge you today to deny this motion and eventually dismiss permanently the proposed development at 101 Felix My main concern about this project is that in an effort to shoehorn as many replacement trees Onto their property as possible developers are resorting to unsafe locations above a gas transmission pipeline Here's what I know a PG&E gas line crosses 101 Felix along its northern boundary It's buried underground and 21 foot wide easement And as a transmission pipeline, it's larger and operates at a higher pressure than common distribution lines, which enter our own Property owners are responsible for keeping the area above transmission lines readily accessible so that PG&E can inspect Test and patrol the lines Nevertheless developers want to plant 10 new trees within or right on the boundary of that pipeline Even at maturity even more of them 15 trees are likely to have root zones that significantly encroached into the easement And this is a problem because tree roots damage the protective coating of pipelines, which can lead to corrosion and leaks Tree prevent crews from performing important maintenance work and trees threaten safety because they block firefighters access during emergencies Now PG&E already struggles to maintain safe gas pipelines without added obstacles from property owners For example, PG&E was convicted of six felonies connected to the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion, which killed eight people And then they continued to false pipeline records for years after that explosion PG&E pipe inspectors have also been historically understaffed KQED reported that in situ inspections of 1950s era transmission lines in Santa Cruz Were only completed in 2015 and only as a direct response to the San Bruno disaster Please let's not make their job any harder Protect rural nearing neighbors and dismiss this project. Thank you Thank you in terms of the public who would like to speak to us on this item who have not spoken already Um, we have time for one more comment. So if you would please fresh. Hi, thank you for letting me speak I urge you to deny this Project now the vote that was made on august 25th should hold And I believe that this there's there's found a loophole in this procedure That seems to be an opportunity to kick the can back and forth back and forth and to keep giving this developer Hope that this project will will happen and it's wasting everyone's time Since the procedure went out of order The vote on the city council should still stand as the vote to deny this project and I don't really understand all this procedural stuff But if it has to go to the planning commission to have it completely finished then recommend Denying it and then let the vote that you've already had hold We've already been through. I've been to all the public hearing I've been to the planning commission hearing. I'm I'm ready for this to be Complete and you guys voted to deny this project We should not have to go through another vote and keep rehashing this project This this area does not need more density. I don't care if you call it moving it to medium density It is high density already There are four or five people living in each of those apartments because they can't afford a single apartment by themselves And most of them have cars And I beg to differ about the parking situation. There is never any parking when those apartments are full. There is never any parking There is not a lot of walk foot traffic around here because they don't have complete sidewalks But i'm going to go back to what I really want you to do which is to deny this project today It has already been voted by the council to do so Please stop kicking this back and forth back and forth because of a procedural loophole I as a public field Uh a little Dismayed thank you. Thank you Hi, uh, this is Judy Grunstra. I do not live in that area, but I have been following it. It's just I just aghast at the incompetence that this is Reflects of the planning director or planning staff. It's unbelievable.  It's ridiculous. So please Your numbers have spoken Everybody's spoken. You shouldn't have to waste your time on more deliberation on this. Thank you And I have a couple questions and then council member brown is here hands raised. So I'll acknowledge you but I just had a couple questions for clarification for the city attorney I think that Number of members of the public and none of the comments we heard was that members of the public ask will we dismiss Permanently and we'd permanently deny the application but by within a year permanently Well, the question is whether or not It can be reapplied for within a year or whether or not it has to A year has to pass by before a reapplication has occurred and I'm gonna ask the Planning director to help me out, but I believe if it's denied without prejudice, then if they can reapply Or if it's denied with prejudice, they still could reapply but I don't have to wait a year That was something that we talked through at the last meeting. Um, and the denial with prejudice is applicable to the Development applications themselves not to the general plan amendment and rezoning So, um, they could apply for they could reapply You know, if it's denied they could reapply the next day Yeah, that wouldn't necessarily be a smart move on their part because they they know the outcome, but There's nothing that would preclude them from doing that Great. I just wanted to be clear for the members of the public that you know, we don't have any control over permanently denying applications for Development in the city. So I just wanted that to be clear to go before the planning I think it's also go through the actual process and part of that it sounds like earlier Sequa The application would have to go to the planning commission They then have to make a recommendation then the application would come to the city council and then at that point We could deny or approve the application to be clear. Um We looked at the state law regarding general plan amendments, which which appears to say That a planning commission hearing is required before you approve an amendment and so that's what the the miscommunication that the last meeting was based upon but our code clearly states that a public hearing Shall be held by the planning commission on all proposed amendments Um at the last meeting in august There was an opportunity for the public to weigh in and for the council to gauge public sentiment about the project But uh, in addition to Hearing from members of the public Our processes have to be followed in a way that's fair to all parties concerned And that's called due process and and that's why while it would be tempting to To to take final action based on the discussion at the last council meeting We simply can't do that in a manner that's consistent with our due process requirements Previous council action on august 17th. I can't make a motion, but I'm happy to share that language Yeah, I I was I have some comments and then I I was prepared to make a motion If we want you want us to work off of yours. Mayor Cummings that's fine with me. Um, I did send it to Bonnie. Um, so The motion that I am hoping to make in just a moment is um one that I wish I had made six weeks ago I wish I had um taken uh the time to get some outside council on this about how to proceed So that we didn't end up in this kind of situation Um, but I kind of trusted that staff was giving me the um, you know information on the best way to go here. Um And so as I understand it once again, uh, the staff brought to us to give the developer a sense of whether It was worth their time and energy to pursue all of the steps necessary to Um, get an out and get a project approved this this particular project or one like it And that includes the general plan and zoning changes and we could quibble about whether or not this is spot zoning or not You know, it's based on our different understandings But regardless, it's a it's a proposal to zone outside of a regular process for general plan amendments. So to me that single single spot zoning a spot general plan amendment and so While I I get it that we did not deny Uh, the project today I believe we do continue to have the right to express our intentions and And I just want to you know, I'm not going to go into the substance of reasons why I haven't talked about it last time I think members of the public Provided a lot of good points here that I would I would echo but I won't And for the sake of time. So it really does feel like You know to me as well as members of the public who have spoken that it is before us again Do a procedural loophole that's really intended to get a different outcome than the one That that we voted on on august 25th And countless people have weighed in I don't think it's appropriate to keep them hanging to keep them in limbo If and again with the understanding that we cannot make any final decisions today I um, I do have a motion and um, you know, mayor coming I don't know if you've sent it to bonnie or how you want to do this But if you want to put it up, I'm I'm prepared to make a motion right now and I will I'd like it to be up so that we can be clear about what it is before We have Just more discussion Okay, so, um So this is pretty close to the motion that I had intended to make. Um, I also wanted to include though Um that we um not send this to the planning commission at the application to the planning commission at this time um I so because so if we could include So in the motion, um That the council not refer Uh the um application cp19 dash 0176 for the property at 101 felix street Uh to the planning commission at this time And I guess so in terms of the order, that's fine. I had that first but um That's fine. So my motion would be then to that the council express its sentiment Uh, that it's not in favor of the projects based on concerns regarding, uh, uh I guess I would say since we may end up quibbling over the definition of spot zoning, uh regarding uh general plan and zoning amendments outside of the regular I think outside of the regular procedure procedure Regular procedures Yeah, and they so the integrity of the general plan is implicit there, but it's you know, I also works for me And so the importance of projecting quality of life in the surrounding neighborhood As reflected in the previous action. Yeah Um, so that's my motion You're muted also I was trying to change it to the other view where I could raise my hand with the button. Um So I just had a question and maybe someone from planning can answer this regarding we've been talking about, um spot zoning or rezoning outside the general plan amendment period, um Is this something that happens? Often or not often like how rare is this request that the developer is bringing just out of curiosity If anyone can answer that sure. So thank you council member golder. Um, you know, we get requests, um Less frequently I would say than other cities um for general plan amendments Um and rezonings. However, it is a it is a normal process. Um, you know, I In with respect to the motion itself, um, I would You know, I would word Smith the first clause um, because um, you know the regular procedures. This this is a regular procedure that um Can happen that is provided for in the Uh general plan. Sorry in the zoning ordinance and as part of the general plan um So, you know, we've we've had, um General plan amendments and rezoning approved by the council and uh, or at least one that I can recall In the time that I've been with the city for, you know, the past three years It is less frequent than what we see in other cities and sometimes You know, the the general plan looks at the city as a whole and so, you know, sometimes the the general plan um, isn't necessarily looking at at individual properties, but um Uh upon closer inspection, um, you know, I change one way or another. Um, maybe deemed uh, acceptable by the council and and there's a process to do that And that's what we're uh in the midst of right now is is going through that process So does that answer the question? Yeah, thank you. I just was curious. Is this something that's completely, you know Yeah, I appreciate it so the answer is it and I know I had to leave it really from the august 25th meeting and And heard some of the testimony before I left and also since then have had the opportunity to um to tour the location And to um speak to the developer and I still have concerns about this project. So I'm comfortable with not with with um Not necessarily refer I'm comfortable with the potential options I just been trying to understand what this means as compared to referring it to um The planning commissioners. I don't know if Tony or Lee you want to kind of specify the specifics on what Take this exact action this afternoon Well, I I can take a crack at that. Um, I think uh, what this Essentially does is it reflects The council's viewpoint on the project but does not take Does not reflect any action that the count that the council is taking With respect to the application. So I I guess my only concern about it is is that it suggests I mean essentially gets my concern about it is that the The statement that the council not refer the application to the planning commission at this time Is essentially can amount to saying that the council take no action at this time um And and so I I I guess I I think that's a little bit Confusing, but I I don't think it has any particular legal significance And I would say as far as next steps with this motion um, I think it would if This motion moves forward it would send a clear message to the developer Here's where the council stands and They would have the option do they want to at their own risk proceed with spending money on the additional sequel analyses that are necessary to to move the project forward and Should they choose to do so, you know, they'd be doing so at their own risk the sensitive to the you know the Questions around wording and director Butler you raised about the regular procedure So I'm um, I'm gonna ask If we could if my other second to the motion would consider Taking out the motion that the council expressed its sentiment that it's not in favor of this project based on its concerns Regarding the integrity of the current general plan so just take out that piece before the integrity So yeah So because I think that the integrity of the current general plan it kind of gets at that point So if that would work for you mayor Cummings, I would just propose that change before we vote Yeah, I was actually going to ask for a similar change because I think that if there's I don't see why that would be a problem outside of the looking against the increase in density It was a confusion came in and through they can do that but they have to go through Sequel analysis the application the planning commission before it comes to council and it seems like That they go through the application and then get approval from the planning commissioner What have you developers would go through and even go through the sequel process that they can come to council Get approval on that on developments and then you know have an understanding that there's not a risk at that So I think that we don't want to set a bad precedent with this Yeah, I just want to um Just thank uh well Just sort of chime in here. Um, I did do a tour with the neighborhood last weekend. It's very helpful I'll be supporting the motion. Um It this has been incredibly uh confusing process and so um I do think that um We have created um quite a complex situation with People feeling like there was a decision made And in just overall I think um, you know Having predictable development proposal actions and deliberations is something that our community is really Really uh holds high and I think we just have to recognize and hopefully Provide a little more guidance in terms of how we we do this kind of These you know this kind of potential step. Um, if it ever comes up again But um, I will be supporting the motion and just want to thank the neighbors As a neighborhood for providing me an opportunity to visit with them last weekend. So thank you Thank you There are comments by council members at this point in time application cp 19 that thank you mayor council member buyers Hi Matthews is disqualified um brown Hi colder I'm gonna say I but I also just want to say that I um I I don't think that I mean, there's parts of this that I don't agree with I don't know how I can Express that Hi councilmember Watkins Nice mayor meyers Hi And mayor coming Um dinner break is member Watkins to join us for members of the public who are streaming this meeting If this is an item you want to comment on now is a good time to call in Using the instructions on your screen The order will be a presentation We will then take public comment and return to the council for action and deliberation And with that, I'd like to to the regulations of beekeeping on residential and non-residential property Our planning interns Ethan ablar. Hello again council members and mayor members of the public We're happy to be here this afternoon early evening to discuss the city's regulations for beekeeping and And our proposed amendments to those so this is an item that was brought to our attention um a little over a year ago by some beekeepers that the existing ordinance adopted some point in the 80s um was really quite burdensome and um and problematic for beekeepers and you know Understanding how important pollinators are in all parts of the environment including the urban environment um planning staff really wanted to um Have the opportunity pardon me had the wonderful opportunity to have a summer intern help us out with this work this as you can imagine with Some of the other staffing issues the city has going on It's unlikely we would have been able to get to this particular amendment as much as we wanted to So we're really grateful that Ethan um was able to be here with us this summer and do a lot of the background research Work with the um group of focus group of beekeepers that helped us with this process We're so glad he's able to join us again to do the presentation from the east coast so um a little bit of background the current um Requirements for beekeeping require an administrative use permit which has an associated fee um in excess of $2,000 Also um hives are limited to no more than two only allowed on single family properties And they require a step back of 20 feet from any property line as you can imagine that might eliminate that eliminates a lot of property from uh potentially being eligible as um for beekeeping and then the administrative burden on beekeepers is um Significant, I mean that's a large fee for essentially a hobby activity So we had some goals for this amendment. We wanted to promote safe beekeeping practices We wanted to reduce that financial burden on beekeepers. We want to support healthy beehives We know that that's really important both for um domestically kept beehives as well as their Wild counterparts, and then we wanted this ordinance to really just establish some best practices for folks if they may be new to the hobby if they may be um neighbors not familiar with um You know what might be a best practice if their neighbors are starting to keep these We wanted um the community to rest assured that the standards that are in the city code are really going to protect all interests And so with that, Ethan will take you through the highlight the high points of the ordinance Thank you sir, and good evening council members. They're coming um Had mentioned in an uh effort to lessen the financial burden for beekeepers as well as for the city Uh staff is recommending an elimination of the permit requirement for beekeeping in the city of San Diego um in addition to that staff is also recommending an expansion of beekeeping uses beyond a single family zone to be accommodated by commercial multi-family um and public key swaps With the addition that for beekeeping uses on these lots staff is recommending a new consent practice through which beekeepers are required to obtain the written consent of the property owner Uh on which the bees are kept and part of that process also involves supplying uh explicitly written notice to neighbors within certain radius The hives In addition staff is recommending that on these lots uh the hive owners themselves stencil their names and contact information on the hive boxes In addition staff has Recommended a series of best practices the goals of which are to regulate hive placement in such a way to encourage bees To disperse on the properties On which they're being kept before potentially encountering members of the public In the first in the series of best practice recommendations Is that of a constant on-site source of water to increase the likelihood that bees will only seek out water on the properties that they're being kept and not neighboring properties um Next uh staff is recommending a 10-foot setback from pedestrian rights of ways as well as front property lines The goal of which is to create a volume of space through which bees can disperse before leaving their hives Um staff also believes that a six foot barrier can be a proper accommodation to substitute to this 10-foot setback With the understanding that a six foot barrier is not possible to construct Given the standard pieces building load on front property lines so That six foot option is not An alternative for front property lines. However, for the rest of the property it is Staff is also recommending for other mitigation strategies that being elevating hives Attempts at setback from property lines The aforementioned six foot barrier or orienting hive entrances away from neighboring properties and towards the properties itself Because of geographical variation in the city staff Seals it's only practical to recommend two out of four of these mitigation strategies, which we still believe to provide A safe barrier for the bees to disperse in addition for community housing projects And equivalent properties such as townhounds and condos There are additional setting requirements, which are essentially setbacks from other properties Which brings us to front yard setbacks, which is really the area that staff It's the one area of this ordinance, but staff was not able to reach a full consensus with With the beekeepers that we were so happy to consult with in the development of this ordinance And in addition the planning commission Recommended a three foot setback For hives on front yards However, in trying to accommodate this into the ordinance itself staff was unable to Unable to find a way to Conform this three foot setback to what we consider to be best practices For bee dispersion before encountering members of the public For example, a three foot setback Does not do enough to prevent bees from being exposed to noise disturbances or physical disturbances on the street Um, this can potentially agitate bees and increase the likelihood that they will encounter members of the public In a more agitated as opposed to adult health state Um, as I mentioned before a six foot fence, uh, is not allowed to be constructed on front property lines And therefore the volume of space that staff is recommending elsewhere on the property cannot be met through a Shorter three foot setback to some property lines um And lastly, uh in developing this ordinance staff consulted with a beekeeping expert Uh, uh, UC Davis who stressed to us the importance In successful urban beekeeping, uh to have positive relationships between beekeepers and neighbors and while it is of staff full Bullies an expectation that almost every beekeeper in the city of Santa Cruz cares deeply about not only the health of their hives, but also the health and perceived safety of their neighbors Uh, staff still wants to take a somewhat cautious approach to establish a sort of minimum, uh Setback from which if there was a more inexperienced beekeeper who is keeping bees closer to the front of their properties um Did any potential fall out from that as far as uh neighbors Pursued safety and neighborhood relationships with beekeepers that that could be avoided with a longer setback Which is as I mentioned before a 10 foot setback from front guards um so Staff is formally recommending to the city council, uh to introduce some publications and ordinance amendment To the Santa Cruz Municipal code section 24 12 650 as recommended by staff. Um, thank you so much and now We'd be happy to take any questions for that presentation Um, I'll turn it over to uh, vice mayor meyers who has their hand raised questions Yeah, I just have a couple of questions. Um so with the so the restriction or sort of the I guess, um It looked like the planning commission had offered the three foot setback Sorry, my dog is going to bark and I have a bee in my office. So that's pretty great. Um Uh, so I mean if I do this it's because there's a bee in my office. Um I'm just trying to understand a little bit more about Um, how we ended up with the 10 foot and it was is it primarily because of other existing code on the books um And I guess my other question is um in speaking with some of the local beekeepers as well as others other bee folks um So many times the hives are So dependent on the conditions on the property. So moisture, you know wind exposures, you know The warmth of a particular location. Um I'm just curious how many of those sort of environmental factors maybe came into the discussion either with local beekeepers Um, just trying to understand a little bit more how we got to the 10 feet rather than the three I'm just looking for a little more clarification on that. Thank you Sure. Yeah, I'm happy to um dive into that. So, um We so 10 feet actually comes from a document that Ethan found from the University of Oregon um, and it identifies 10 feet as the As Ethan was mentioning sort of this volume of space that like as these leave their leave their hives from a Point they move out in all directions, right? And so when you get to a point of 10 feet distance from the hive entrance um The determination from University of Oregon was that you've sort of reached this point where the bees are dispersed to a level That's similar to what you would find almost anywhere, you know, you know, I walk through my garden I see bees here and there to my knowledge. I don't have a hive on my property So I'm not seeing a big concentration of bees and so that's kind of that's where that 10 feet comes from But that um in the one source we were able to find Um now what happened with the planning commission recommendation and the beekeeper's recommendation two things number one Uh staff made a little bit of a mistake. Um, and I will just own that. Um We were talking about this 10 foot setback Beekeepers had some concerns about that and wanted something smaller And so we tried to come up with something sort of on the fly We said maybe three feet you wouldn't no one would bump into that from the street As we thought about it more after the we ended up taking that I'm sorry We ended up taking that to the planning commission and sort of recommend, you know, presenting it to them as an acceptable option um As we were preparing the city council report We were looking for more backup for that point of view to sort of support it because three feet is really quite a small setback if you can imagine someone who might be less comfortable with bees three feet might Seem a little intimidating. So we were looking for sort of support for that We were really unable to find it and then sort of the last piece that really sort of solidified the recommendation for me was our conversation with Professor Niño from UC Davis Um, she is a bee expert. She is one of the you know references that was provided to us by the beekeepers And that was um included with the packet as at the end of the planning commission report Bees in the neighborhood And she really just has a more conservative approach And that is more protective of the public and of the hives So It seems we want to come up with something that's reasonable We do want to provide an accommodation for these beekeepers So that they can perform this hobby in the community perform this environmental service And we have to be considerate of All the users of our city streets You know front setbacks get a lot more activity than side yard setbacks typically you can't go to six foot barrier there to have bees go up and over In terms of like Could we just consider every parcel like a the unique case? I mean that's a that's a permit process, right? That's kind of what we had before we didn't really have lots of criteria that we would consider but Anytime you want to talk about considering something on a case by case basis that's creating a permit process And we're trying to really avoid that and just set standards say like here meet these standards You don't need a permit from the city Your neighbors can feel safe and secure that you're doing the right thing You can feel safe and secure that no one's going to come and tell you to remove or move your hives So that was really you know a core piece of the goal is to move away from a case by case consideration Thank you. No, thank you for that question and for the response. I maybe have a question more for Tony, I don't know as if for example, we have these parameters in place and Somebody who's highly allergic to bees in a multi residential area or in close proximity to a neighbor Who has um, you know, it's keeping bees. Is there a legal liability associated with this type of policy? I don't look at it as a as a legal liability for the city because The city is only oblique there is only liable for a dangerous condition of public property But it might create a situation where there's liability Of the property owner or of the or of the person who's maintaining the hive um the fact that I mean these ordinances are are fairly typical or some cities don't regulate beekeeping at all and You know the fact that a person who's sensitive to To bee stings might encounter a bee that's maintained up by a hive would not create liability for the city Council member Watkins Yeah, no, I I I think so. I I guess it would just be then if If there is beekeeping happening that isn't necessarily adhering to the parameters set within the ordinance um, how will that Be upheld or sort of how will there be compliance sort of checks or how are we'll just be sort of Or maybe that that doesn't matter if it's so similar to other regulations that the council adopts on a large variety of broad Our large variety of topics this Circumstance came into came to the attention of city staff that there was a Beekeeping operation or an apiary that is is not Maintaining in accordance with the requirements of the ordinance then That would be a code enforcement process that would be initiated in order to rectify that Initially outreach and an attempt to gain Voluntary compliance and if that didn't work then more formal Enforcement measures could be taken council members um, I wanted to ask I'll tell you early Sometimes ordinances have some statement of legislative intent in the beginning Not all but many do and I wondered about just putting something Just a statement here along those lines, which is kind of reflected in the staff report Along the lines of the purpose of this ordinance is to encourage environmentally beneficial holiday beekeeping ensuring the use of best practices with a focus on the safety of neighbors beekeepers and healthy bee colonies Intended to minimize conflicts between neighbors And the I mean something like that What's the legislative intent? What any any thoughts on that? We can do that I think that I think that's some fun Okay, and the reason I mentioned that is that There there has been some discussion which we'll get into I think when When people call in and we have our discussion about Which restrictions are? You know make sense or required how many of those In combinations you need That basically no one cares more about the health of the bee colony than the beekeepers probably And um Want to allow some flexibility with the idea that of course I just ask that question we can Hear people's commentary and then come back to it the council members who had questions Because they kind of want to do their thing and just as much as you want to be yours But you know again like safety around people getting stung by bees. I think is an important piece with this, but Um, there's no other comments from for public comment So if you're a member of the public who would like to comment on item number six 26 Which is an amendment to regulations of beekeeping time to call in using the numbers on your screen Once you've called in please press start you're being asked to unmute your phone. Thank you This is Donna Gardner and I've been working closely with sarah and it's so nice to see you today My husband and I were local beekeepers and we're the ones who started getting this put into motion And I want to first express so much appreciation to the council and the planning commission sarah Ethan everyone who's been so diligent and conscientious to update this outdated amendment our policy that we've had I want to first quote directly from doctor Alina El Nino's Look or her publication bees in the neighborhood best practices for urban beekeepers She does not specify an exact setback She does say placing up highs is an important consideration for responsible beekeeping Especially in urban or suburban areas where people live in very close proximity To avoid unnecessary colony disturbance Hives should be placed in a quiet area of the lot Alternatively high can be placed eight feet above the ground on rooftops Hives are best placed as far away from neighboring properties as possible as well as from roads sidewalks trails and other pedestrian right of way Hive entrances should face in a direction so that bees leaving the hive fly across your property If necessary, you may redirect flight flaps up and away from neighboring properties by using barriers such as Shrubs fabric or fencing She doesn't specify 10 feet for a reason and it was What has already been addressed which is that lots don't conform to this in our community and It's really using best practices I was I was also hoping to address the allergies to bees to a levy sorry, unfortunately We only have two minutes for public comment. I just want to be mindful Any other members of the public who'd like to address the council on this item? Please call in And once you've called in please step star nine on your phone And you'll be given two minutes to speak to us on this item Okay, I'm not seeing any other members of the public who wish to address this on this item And so with that I'll bring it back to council for action and deliberation Council to present council members who have any questions or without them in commotion On this item refer to the comments by some air markers Thank you mayor. Uh, yeah, I I have to say I'm still not convinced about the 10 foot setback from the With in with regards to the front yard setback I the front property line I I do worry with some of the non conforming lots we have in town. I just feel like this might be I it just seems like a it just concerned about How this is interpreted and how it goes forward? And I think I think to the extent that that our local beekeepers Have been up and doing The good work of providing pollinators in our neighborhoods And really really not really understanding and not really receiving really any complaints. I think the You know the ability to encourage people and not intimidate them And and most importantly provide the the ability for The property owner to place the bees in the most successful area that they can for for the bees I I feel like Item F is a little bit repetitive found through the intent in g and h with regards to Especially g where it's specific to A pedestrian right of way including a sidewalk public trail or street where no sidewalk has been constructed that there's very specific Intent there to to achieve that that setback there From the pedestrian right of way. I'm not of course is is the 10 foot there So I have a motion. I'd like to just make to see if we can Potentially make make the intent of the ordinance a little bit less cumbersome from a property owner And I believe bonnie. I sent this to you a little while ago as I was looking through this um, so I'd like to make a motion to Make the following change changes to Ordinance of the city council the city of santa cruz amending apiary regulations in chapter 24 point one two of the municipal code to strike item f From the ordinance and make the following change to item h which will of course become the new item g If item f f is struck Uh, and that change would be that in the first line all apiary shall be maintained in place in a manner That encourages beasts to disperse rather than concentrate before potentially encountering neighbors Aunt or other members of the public And that this requirement may be achieved I'm going to strike by any combination of two or more of the following strategies and again just try to Try to lessen the complexity um, I would make a change that that that line would say this requirement They may be achieved by any of the following strategies recognizing best practices um regarding with with the four listed there That is my motion I'll make a second Seconded by council member golden can can we leave the motion up? I just want to have it for reference so speed over And then uh, I would just like to recognize council member mafias and council member walk-ins alive You are alive. We can hear you I would like to add a statement of legislative intent the per and I'll email this body The purpose of this ordinance is to encourage the environmentally beneficial practice of beekeeping in santa By ensuring the use of best practices with the focus on the safety of neighbors beekeepers and honeybees The ordinance includes guidance to minimize conflicts between neighbors and the general public while supporting healthy bee colonies By the straightforward legislative intent by the Make an emotion second of emotion What do you think? I'm sorry. Yes, we're naming that acceptable. Yeah. Yeah, sorry. Yes on the same page um, these proposed amendments would mean that A beehive could be placed right on the property line and could face into the neighboring yard I just want to be sure we're taking that into consideration Would be right along could be along a sidewalk someone could bump into it There's potential noise And safety impacts as I believe that situation Can you describe to me then with regards to how does So I'm having trouble with the way that f and g work together um so My understanding of what g is trying to accomplish is is to To provide that 10 foot setback from from any pedestrian access But that's not what So I guess I'm confused. Um in the order, um on the intent here Yes, um understandable Um, I bonnie if you could stop sure I could share my screen and could walk through it Okay, so I'm sharing this strikeout version of the ordinance. So, um, we're talking here. Um, Vice mayor meyers is referring to subsection s and subsection g so, um Perhaps like going back in time. We'll make this a little more clear We started off with subsection g and we said Adjacent to a pedestrian right of way. We need some kind of a barrier or protection between pedestrians unsuspecting inattentive Texting pedestrians and behind okay, so no one wraps their dog around it. You know, there's no So no one crashes their bicycles stuff like that So that could be achieved by a setback or it could be achieved by being behind a fence This was something that the um beekeepers pointed out to us initially We were just proposing a setback and they were like, well, what if it's behind a fence? I mean then the bees are going to have to fly up and over before they encounter anybody and that Would essentially achieve your the same ain't absolutely a good point. They're absolutely correct. Um typically, uh, the You know What we read in the literature about positioning hives is that if you really want them to like fly over a barrier It has to be like actually kind of close to it So that's actually that we took that out so forget I said that but anyway So you can either have next to a pedestrian right away a six foot fence You could have that on a side property line So a side or rear property line that has a pedestrian access can have a six foot fence our code prohibits it our code limits Fences walls structures that are in that front yard setback to 42 inches in height So there's no way to provide that same level of protection to pedestrians crossing in front of a front yard setback So that's why there's two separate sections um The wooden the front yard setback sara typically be Do we have front yards that are typically not bordering streets sidewalks or even areas where there are no sidewalks? I'm just trying to I I still believe that s is going to dissuade people from potentially becoming interested in this because some people That may not be Doable or you know on smaller lots or substandard lots there may be may not be that room. So I'm just trying to I'm trying to rectify Trying to imagine a lot that does not We're a lot that's faced a front yard lot a front yard Area that is not facing sort of that The pedestrian condition that we're trying to solve. I guess that's what I'm trying to Trying to understand sure So there are plenty of properties that don't have an existing pedestrian right of way They don't currently have a sidewalk, right?  They do walk along streets even where there's no sidewalk And that and that is different than being a pedestrian right of way So a pedestrian right of way Could pass any property line a pedestrian right of way could be at a rear property line if you're adjacent to For example the trail along brand supporting creek. That's a pedestrian right of way Because it's a rear property line, you could have a six foot fence between your hives And the and the trail, right? So Because there are conditions for pedestrian rights of way could be on any property line And we know pedestrians will always interact with a front property line We felt the need to have two separate standards Because you can't have a six foot fence as a mitigation on a front property line So the only option is a ten foot setback if you're going to you know, just be choosing between those two Placement conditions I'll also just add That the staff recommended amendments do provide A great deal more flexibility for high placement on a residential lot than than most cities that we looked at For this language And in if there is a case where a property can't make a high placement work based on these conditions We've still allowed for creative language in the amendment to allow for High placement on public property with with consent from the city as well as the commercial properties as well So there there are options for peaks per set aren't able to place a hide On their lot even with these very flexible requirements Okay, um, I'm still I guess I'm still not convinced. I feel um, I feel like we're uh unnecessarily sort of Making this complicated for folks. Um I think I'm gonna just keep my keep my motion live And and let's see if if we we can if there's agreement with the council if not then at least we tried Unless there's any other council members that have have thoughts on how to How to I I Yeah, I'm just Just worried that we're we're needlessly restricting kind of this these um The ability for folks to try to try to do these things in their yards and Um, just stop there Some other walk-ins wants to facilitate more of these types of opportunities I do feel a little bit of a hesitation With not having the setback. Um Because one I'm I'm personally really allergic to these and two I also recommend recognize that there's constraints in terms of what could be You know in place, but I I also don't really understand how many um, like maybe just how many Folks really fall into that category and if there is an exception to make it easy for them to um To have a creative solution Um, that we can possibly compromise to integrate that exception into the ordinance. I don't know I mean, I'm just not sure like is it 20 is it 50 or is it five? I just don't really I don't really know that Um, the level of people that really fall into that category where this wouldn't work personally. Um, Maybe staff has more insight into that but I fully understand and the interest in wanting to facilitate more of this happening and um, want to help do that as well without kind of putting any kind of um Loose regulations that could harm neighbors and pedestrians walking by potentially I don't know staff if you want to clarify that in terms of your Suggestion in the ordinance has kind of a creative solution option for the folks that might not fit This is sorry. Um, your question was about um A solution about this front yard area Yes and specific to what um, vice mayor mires would suggest was suggesting um changing in the ordinance I don't know how many people would fall into the category where that would be An impediment for them to be able to move forward with beekeeping and if so, could we identify in the ordinance? uh non bureaucratic Way to get solutions, you know established for those for those folks or neighbors Oh, I mean, maybe maybe that would be I don't you know, that's a great question. I don't know how many Folks are in this Venn diagram intersection being on like a highly constrained lot being really interested in wanting to keep bees You know really not having any other alternative site in a side or rear yard My my sense is it's probably not a ton of folks um And there probably are a few you know out out there because we certainly do have some lots that are constrained and You know front yards would be the only one that might not be shaded by a building right because the front yard setback A front yard property line. There's not going to be another building adjacent to it I think I think we're on coming from is it's it's not just the setbacks It's the actual climatic conditions on someone's lot as well as you know exposure to wind. I mean, it's Bees don't I mean they you know, I mean how and where you placed your hive Hopefully to be successful from what I understand is You know, it's really kind of dependent on uh, and I understand the concerns certainly about protecting the public but When you when you take the 10 feet plus you potentially look at the actual layout of your lot exposure to wind moisture Um, maybe a tree that you have, you know, it just continues to constrain I think the success of potentially a home beekeeper trying to have you know, a couple of hives and so um, just trying to kind of look at the big bigger picture around successful kind of You know, some some jurisdictions as as Mr. Kundadi mentioned they don't have any restrictions, you know, some cities really just sort of Let people sort of sort of do this. I think that the people who are interested in bees are a group who really understand also The the potential dangers of bees, you know, and they you know, they're trained to handle these animals You know, they're trained to really understand how the bee bees are behaving Many of them do plan Even vegetation and where they place them so that the bees are moving up You know, so I guess For me, it's really about, you know, how does someone properly do this in in the sense that they have success On their lot and I think when we start drawing lines to sort of Kind of try to and I think in my opinion, it seems like our intent where we have some protections for pedestrians As well as best practices around Around how you should really cite something on your property. It feels pretty thorough to me between g and h um, and that was really my interest in f was um It may be a small amount of properties that are experiencing that but when you do draw 10 feet Um, and depending on how your lot works and your exposure and different climatic things, you know It could you could prevent someone kind of someone someone could throw up their hands, you know And it's just it's just trying to kind of look at the objective of Again trying to provide success for folks who might want to get into this Reading I want you things to point out. Um, we have a very old ordinance on the book That has actually never been used but has been widely disregarded There are many many many many many and, um Maybe one complaint that we know of over over time um And I think that just speaks to the state are locating the hives in a way that Worked for the bees and it's not a public nuisance. Um, I'm aware of the allergies I just my next door neighbor kid did the er when he went into Shock with a bee thing. He happened to get it riding his bike across town Our school bees all the time. So we live with bees and um by large If people have biologies, they know that and they're prepared for it But by large they're a really necessary part of our environment as we know increasingly so I think for the first reading I'd like to give this a shot And I again I want to appreciate all the work that staff put into it and Ethan and Beekeepers, I think it is true that many cities don't regulate it at all And that was partly my interest in putting in the legislative intent is both that we protect Community safety to be keeping a change of language from hobby to practice No, I just wanted to say I appreciate the context of the The optimal space for it to thrive as opposed to sort of the parameters around Safety because I think that's kind of a different mindset to approach it Um, but then I just wanted to see if Lee had anything to say I saw that you kind of popped on here in terms of You know the ordinance language and what's the most appropriate kind of And the thing that I was looking at that I was Trying to digest as I was seeing the revised motion is that relationship between f and g And you know what I'll do I will go ahead and Share my screen here quickly. So we've all got the language in front of us So in f they're saying uh, no hives shall be maintained less than 10 feet from the front property line in g It's specified and that's the uh section that counts member Myers was proposing to delete and then in g It was uh specifying that there's a setback of a minimum of 10 feet from the pedestrian right of way And that includes a street where no sidewalk has been constructed and given that You know, this I see I do see this as somewhat of a compromise sort of a middle ground because The property line oftentimes is set back from the sidewalk and so that Creates a larger burden on a property owner If you know, they're setting back from the curb for example, the property line could be five feet or so towards the inside of that property and Really what we're trying to address is a separation between the pedestrian and the The hives So I do think that you know, this Can meet that intent of providing that separation and it's not pegged to the property line that that could you know Create if we just had this and there was a setback from the sidewalk or the street You know, it could be 15 feet setback from you know, the curb So I just wanted to point that out as far as something that that I realized as as we were coming through this conversation and and thought it may be helpful for the council to consider Further questions and comments from council members at this time Hearing none. We have a motion by vice mayor meyers seconded by council member golder To adopt the To introduce to introduce The ordinance for the city council, the city of San Cruz amending aviary regulations and chapter 24.1 through the municipal code um deleting item f um and then deleting item Yeah, I'm sorry, bonnie that Yeah, that strike through can can go away Which one? Uh in in h2 Sorry, I that was in the original language, but I I believe that That probably should stay in because now we've changed it to Any of the following strategies uh along with the friendly amendment by councilman matthews and A legislative attempt to the order to see that also feel like Any g that I think we'll probably get to the Um safeguards that we're hoping to have in place regarding them Be hot to be too close to sidewalks. So if there's no further Um questions or comments, I'll turn it over to the clerk to please call the roll Council member byers aye Matthews boulder aye vice mayor meyers aye and mayor coming Aye That passes unanimously and we've got about a 10 minute break until Uh But um, yeah, we'll be back here at around 5 30 everyone be happy All right, so what's that uh good evening and welcome to our 5 30 pm session of the october 13 2020 meeting of the city council I'd like to ask the clerk to please call the roll Thank you mayor council member byers Looks like she just stepped away um Matthews here boulder here Watkins here vice mayor byers Council member byers is back as well oral communications For members of the public court stream in this meeting if you'd like to call in To comment on something item that is not on the city council agenda now at the time It's calling using the instructions on your screen oral communications isn't uh, sorry And if you're interested in addressing the council, please press star 9 on your phone to raise your hand Once you have been acknowledged and asked to unmute your phone. You will be given two minutes Can you hear me? Sorry about the car accident? I hope that It's easy. Um, my name's surge tag. No, uh stepping up Santa Cruz I'm a consultant for homeless services Helping with the county with design and policies in your shelter I'm also on the county's mental health advisory board I've been heartened this year that through every new adversity through the pandemics through the fires through the chaos of federal Direction and misdirection that we faced each new challenge with compassion funding and long hours We've all worked harder than ever before to take care of each other except in one way It disheartened me listening to the discussion the grand jury reported at the last city council meeting There was no acceptance of responsibility in the city It was all blamed on the county the county's responsible for services the county's responsible for homelessness the county the county It disheartened me listening to speeches from friday's homeless encampment tour Again, it's the county and the other jurisdictions that should take our homeless Those who live here those who families are here those whose friends are here Those who get services here like there's something that is worth less than everybody else who lives in the city of Santa Cruz The city of Santa Cruz should take responsibility for the lack of compassion with which we treat the homeless The Santa Cruz police enforce ordinances at the direction of the city council Constantly forcing people to move whose crime is being so poor and living in such chaos that they cannot afford a home When we admit that the way that the Santa Cruz police department the rangers in the city treat those without houses Is why they do not want to be a part of the system of the county services Then we can move forward to help them We need to take responsibility that the debt that they rack up from the unpayable tickets of blocking a sidewalk or sleeping in a Place where someone complains makes them unhousable housing navigators try to house House people using section eight or people try to get jobs and get into a program that can help them with a deposit But when the landlord checks does a credit check and they owe ten thousand dollars They're denied and we continue having that person on our streets It goes well It never goes well to disenfranchise a part of our population whether it's color sexual identity or orientation socio-economic status mental health diagnosis or substance use diagnosis We should get on the right side of history compassion to solve the problems and we do have problems can help us move forward I'm sorry that it's only that the activists yell and demand a judge I'm sorry that others honk throw things judge and demand that the homeless leave Santa Cruz There is a middle ground As burns with everything the new shelters are low barrier keeping rules for safety and being flexible to solve people's needs I believe they are safer and have less calls for service because of that Working together is more efficient blaming and ticketing throwing more and more ordinances and judgment does not work anywhere Thank you You have two minutes. Hi, this is Garrett again I would like to clarify that there is no free speech right that involves vandalizing littering proclaiming or taking possession Of the historic clock tower as a sacred altar to anybody It contains historic artifacts and was dedicated already to the bicentennial has many recycled uses as public property and deserves that respect And protection from communist sda or anarchist or other inspired BLM sympathizer appropriation If their goal is to provoke the police by inappropriately claiming possession and vandalizing this public property They should have perhaps that confrontation If the city has a problem with protecting any property we need new leadership The definition that police or the united states itself is systemically racist to essentially hunt black people Or that there is no justice in the united states is a monstrous lie Destroying america with violence and lies is not justice But is is dysfunctional revolution and is the chaos of anarchy It's time for the guilt brainwash to stop supporting the BLM by throwing the i'm virtuous two 30 dollar BLM yard signs and clock tower propaganda in the trash Then vote the progressives out in november or submit to anarchy This election is not a referendum on trump's personality But a referendum on the longtime far leftist radicalization of the democratic party by decades of very unamerican lies Told by media press educational systems socialist anarchists and communists If biden wins he will be steamrolled by the far left and if he is even allowed to serve out his term The supreme court will be packed and converted into another far left political branch And two grand democratic states added to reclaim the senate permanently installing the far left into power And the 240 year experiment and a free people will be over and the united states will become and everyone is equally Poor socialist has been country. It will be big government little people I personally am voting no on all the propositions because raising taxes has always seemed to result in a bigger more costly no more effective government Lastly, I'd mentioned the purpose of the city is to provide public services available to everyone not left to special interests There's zero justification for partisan social justice warring on the city council And limiting your function to providing those services at value respecting the trust according to you by the people In light of the fact it operates as a monopoly of force and function is appropriate thanks We'd like to address this during oral communications If so now it's the time to call in on your phone. Once you've called in, please press star nine To raise your hand And you will be given two minutes members of the public who would like to address this on this item we're going to Go ahead and break until 6 p.m. For our last item on our agenda, which is the park's master plan 2030 environmental impact report councilmember walk-ins, but um Maybe while we're waiting I can just read a few make a few announcements So for members of the public who are joining us We're about to begin our final item of the evening, which is our park's master plan 2030 in our environmental impact report For members of the public who are streaming this meeting This is an item you would like to comment on now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen The order will be a presentation of the item by staff Um followed by questions from council And we will then take public comment and return to the council For action and deliberation on this item The presenters this evening are going to be Noah Downing parks planner Travis Beck Park superintendent and tony elliott director of parks and rep creation And with that, I think I'll go ahead and turn it over to our Parks department for the presentation this evening Okay, good evening, uh, mayor Cummings Vice mayor mires members of the council. I am Travis Beck Superintendant of parks Well, I think we can all agree that 2020 has been a trying year for all of us For those of us in parks and recreation. It has also been an invigorating year Because we have seen how much our community depends on the parks that we steward And on the services that we provide Even during the strictest weeks of the lockdown people flooded into our open spaces and beaches Even when we closed our parks and amenities within them people continued to use them And this validates what we have always felt Which is that it is critical that we maintain our parks well And then we continue to invest in them And that is why we are so energized to be before you this evening To discuss the parks master plan 2030 and the associated environmental impact report Now many of you know very well that this process has taken a long time And since the master plan was last before the council We have an entirely new leadership team within the parks and recreation department But as we on this new team have gotten to know this document, which we to some degree inherited We've really been impressed with the quality of it With the thoughtfulness behind it and with the thoroughness of the public process that underlies it And we feel very strongly that this document will give us the guidance that we need to continue To invest in our park system So that we can better serve our community through this pandemic and in the years beyond So i'd like to turn that over next to our park planner Noah Downing who has been with this process from the very beginning To bring everyone up to speed on how we got to where we are today Some of the key content of the plan and what we're looking for its next steps Noah Thank you Travis. Good afternoon mayor vice mayor city council members members of the public I'm very pleased to bring forth this item today The city hasn't had a city-wide parks master plan since its first one in 1973 There's been various efforts and initiatives throughout the years, but in terms of a city-wide Master planning effort it's it's been quite a long time Um, so it's part of this process The goals of the project were you know one to implement the general plan There is an action to create a parks master plan To conduct a comprehensive outreach effort to identify needs and desires of community and park users To identify and assess existing assets To create a feasible vision and goals to prioritize community needs to generate policies and actions to support goals And to create a resource document for the general public There was a lot of community outreach But thought this was a great opportunity to check in. Um, we did both quantitative and qualitative Outreach there was a community survey done by god be research Which was statistically valid in 2015 and really that was just trying to get a baseline of user preferences later on in the process We actually did a similar survey and um on more specific topics and Specific park assets that kind of arose through the process. There was also qualitative outreach We did community open house meetings We passed out questionnaires community events community facilities went out on the weekends Just trying to get an idea of who's using the parks and and you know what what they would like to see in them We had an online present presence with questionnaires and emailed comments We posted signs and all of our parks for numerous months with links To that there were joint study sessions with parks and rec commission and city council There was a parks master plan subcommittee that was formed with numerous meetings that were held on specific topics We held a parks and recreation department wide staff meeting to collect feedback from our staff that are in the in the field, you know, sometimes for You know, I've been working here in decades and just hear day in day out from different park users and you know After spending so much time have ideas of their own. So we really wanted to incorporate their feedback into the process We had city staff meetings with other departments and shared assets I had specific stakeholder interviews and then Really brought in feedback from other meetings on park related projects just to make sure that The planning effort was current From all that we created a master plan vision And that is to create a quality park system that connects the surrounding green belts to the pacific ocean Preserves and protects our natural heritage Enhances cultural and recreational environments and provides a diversity of experiences We really brought in the outreach and the needs assessment and emerging trends Analyzed it and really saw some overall themes that we're developing and then created goals policies and actions That were grouped within those themes In terms of the draft parks master plan which released in february 2017 What went into it was public input and analysis of existing plans guidance documents demographic Data existing conditions benchmarking of comparable communities. We evaluated specific site characteristics and limitations or opportunities We had to identify our facilities and site furnishing Conditions and and evaluated, you know, whether or not repairs were necessary. Looked at statewide recreational trends Had discussions with supervisors who managed the assets Really brought in direction received from other planning processes as well as feedback received from decision makers And then in terms of the overall themes that emerged Good governance design excellence play community health and interaction stewardship and sustainability and accessible and connected community and and just formulating partners partnerships In just some examples There's a there's a goal and a policy that design renovate and maintain parks to be attractive and functional Prease longer-term use optimized space and enhance the unique identity for each park um You know just trying to look at parks over time sometimes Parks are become outdated and are piecemeal and just trying to make sure that the end result is creating a sense of identity For the for the neighborhoods or surrounding areas. They serve To renovate maintain playgrounds create more unique and interesting play experiences. We've received ideas You know universally designed playgrounds and members of all ages and abilities can Play on the same playgrounds together or using more natural features to create more interesting playgrounds So, you know, a lot of a lot of great ideas and examples that we currently don't have in our park system There was one to protect maintain and enhance habitat features that are important to native wildlife and plant communities ideas that are incorporated in the plan You know to to consider even our urban parks taking out unusable turf area and creating more of the pollinator parks and and Trying to create more wildlife areas or habitat When the draft was released we um Wanted to ensure that there were other opportunities to vet the ideas There was a joint study session with the parks and recreation commission and city council We held five additional meetings with the parks and recreation commission discuss specific recommendations of the plan We formed a technical advisory group to improve the conservation and stewardship section And then on uh, september 25th 2017 the plan was unanimously accepted or recommended For acceptance from the parks and recreation commission pending environmental review and then back in october of 2017 The city council unanimously accept accepted the draft pending environmental review So we we started the the CEQA process um There was an initial study mitigated negative declaration and circulated we didn't Identify any significant impacts, which couldn't be mitigated. We received some comments We revised and recirculated that document. We received some additional comments In city staff at that point in time determined that an eir would be prepared for a full public disclosure of potential impacts and mitigation measures um Despite that there weren't any uh impacts that that we found that could not be mitigated to a less insignificant level We circulated a draft eir We received the comments and the final eir, which is part of this item includes changes made to the draft eir To address comments as well as responses to comments It was prepared in accordance with CEQA as a program eir And then all elements of the master plan have been evaluated in the eir In terms of some of the potentially significant impacts, which were identified impacts potential impacts of nesting birds soil and erosion impacts and water quality impacts the mitigation includes conducting pre nesting surveys prohibiting uh Drones course in sensitive habitat areas Implementing site design and erosion control measures as part of projects and limiting trail use or implementing trail closures during the rainy season to address impacts It's part of an eir process um We evaluate uh different alternatives There was a no projects alternative with us the parks and recreation department city moving forward with no master plan We evaluated a reduced project alternative where there would be no exploration of a drone course No exploration of new trails and daylight being a park and poignant open space beyond what is already specified in their respective existing master plans And then there was a modified project alternative where the city would clarify A clarifying language to further ensure new development avoids impacting nesting birds that any drone course would avoid Since the habitat areas and wildlife and a site design and erosion control measures to ensure new development avoids impacts and uh an erosion hazards and Are located just adjacent to wetlands or streams So in august on august 3rd that we Brought an item to the parks and recreation commission. There was a split vote At the meeting the commissioners discussed various ways to try to find a compromise to bring The item forward one idea was just to create an ordinance to ban all drone use another was to prioritize Meattenance of trails instead of evaluating new trails when the trail study moves forward at a future point in time And then another idea was to remove all policies and actions regarding off-leash dog use the drone's course or trails Due to the split vote the parks and recreation bylaws require the item to be continued It was heard again on september 14th And there was another split vote It the bylaws then With another split vote the item failed for the bylaws In terms of the item tonight as part of the secret process requirements In adopting the parks master plan that city also needs to certify the final eir And then adopt the finance effect and mitigation monitoring and reporting program And I just wanted to kind of provide an overview of some of the benefits of the plan I mean the first one is it implements the general plan That is a specific action It provides a guided framework and is intended to be updated over time to remain relevant It identifies community needs and provides goals policies and actions to meet them It helps the city prioritize projects and allocate funding staff time It facilitates community engagement and transparency as projects move forward Maintaining a plan is actually required to meet the professional standard from the commission for accreditation of parks and recreation Agencies so presently we're not meeting the minimum standard And it helps the city pursue grant funding So at this point i'm going to turn it over to director tony elia All right. Thank you. Noah and thanks to travis. Thanks to a mayor and city council As well, I just wanted to touch on a few of those points in a little bit more detail And i'll send it back to know here in just a moment to summarize our staff recommendations for the city council this evening, but To start I just wanted to mention In the context of the city's budget crunch that we're going through Right now the master plan really serves as our as our north star so despite the challenges financially The the modifications that we're having to make within the department or our services and so forth As a result of of tight budgets. This is really the document is giving us that That guidance that overall sort of north star for the department and in a way the north star for For the community as well. So we've tried to be very transparent very clear And this is a really high level document. It's not we don't have a lot of specifics at this point, but it's a very high level Sort of living document That can help guide us into the future Especially during some some tumultuous financial times There are opportunities, especially with the parks master plan. Noah mentioned And opportunities regarding grant funding and at this moment in time there are Likely more grant opportunities for parks and recreation than ever before We have prop 68 funds available through the state of california The land and water conservation fund was passed By the congress Earlier this year and that is an appropriation of 900 million dollars per year for parks and rec So there are grant opportunities that are out there, but having the master plan in place Number one Primarily opens that door for us to apply for those grants. It puts us in a position To be able to apply to be eligible and to be as competitive as we can be For these grant funds that we will we will need moving into the future Noah also mentioned capra accreditation Our national trade organization the national recreation and parks association Accredits agencies parks and recreation agencies all over the country And it's a best practice To have a parks and recreation master plan in place Again as a guiding document for who we are and what we do and how we develop and evolve the park system over time And and then also You know as it relates to our operations and as we talk about fiscal sustainability The services that we provide to some degree through Programming active recreation and passive recreation Opportunities that helps guide us on all of that. So through our national trade organization and In our pursuit of becoming a nationally accredited agency. It is a best practice To have a master plan in place So just wanted to add a little detail to those And finally as superintendent back mentioned at the beginning of the presentation This has been a long process and this I just wanted to I wanted to thank The mayor and city council and as well as previous Mayors and city councils who've been a part of this I also wanted to thank the parks and recreation commission And the community as well the feedback that we've received through The mitigated negative declaration process through the eir process that helped Make this plan better to get that feedback from the community. So I wanted to appreciate that feedback And then here on the call as well is Our consultant from dudek, uh, stephanie streelo city attorney, tony kandadi and darcy pruitt And just wanted to acknowledge their work and support on this as well It's been a team effort over a number of years. I just wanted to appreciate Everybody's efforts that have gone into this and with that i'll send it back over to know it Summarize the staff recommendation that we have for the council this evening My apologies With that staff recommends the city council adopt the following resolution a resolution Certifying the final environmental impact report a resolution including findings of fact and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program And a resolution approving the parks master plan 2030 staffs available for questions presentation and Again, thank you all in the community for all the hard work that went into What is an extremely extensive document that I think it's going to be as our parks director said it's going to be a Good document to help guide us as we're moving into the future Um with that, I'd like to turn it over to Any council members to see if there's any questions for our staff council member buyers? You're muted as well Thank you park staff for the presentation. My question goes and I think one of the It mentioned drones. Whatever. Can you go back to that one? Sure. I think was the commission was the title or something Uh, okay, that's it and band drones in the city. I understand that okay prior to the maintenance of trails Instead of evaluating new trails when the trail study moves forward Of course, I'm asking the question because at one time there's a lot of buzz and a lot up and down about More mountain bike trails So would you update me where the commission is or where the staff is on that? Yeah, so there's an action in the plan which, um Discusses conducting a trail assessment and it would you know evaluate existing trail conditions and maintenance needs as well as Um a potential to evaluate new opportunities So that's the way of So interpret that your priority is to Um provide maintenance on the existing trails The the study would um be done in such a way where we would try to evaluate in the end product would hopefully have some better Newer design standards associated with it. Um, have an idea of where some of these use conflicts are occurring Look at some of the signage needs that need to be updated in there And really just thinking of it as a as a comprehensive look at our trails Because you know the the major one in Pogonip, which doesn't allow bikes Consistently There's a bike or two on there. Okay. So when when is that all happening looking at the trail plan? You called them.  Um, just to kind of help facilitate Discussion is you know, when we move forward with these projects, uh, we're going to be you know working with the parks and rec commission Um, as well as the city council to help identify, you know, what Uh, the overall scope of these proj