Santa Cruz City Planning 07/23/2026

All right, can folks hear me? I am Susie O'Hara and I'm your district uh five council member and this is your vice mayor Shebre Kalantari-Johnson. And um we we thought we would take a couple minutes while we're waiting for our last commission member to get here to talk a little bit about why we are here, why we asked for this process to move forward, and what we're hoping to achieve tonight, which um thanks to the effort of the planning staff um and our commissioners, thank you for hosting this community meeting. Um we are very optimistic that we're going to have a conversation around design guidelines and quite frankly the character that we're trying to move forward um with all this new multi-family development in a way that's inclusive and accessible and a way that is iterative. So, I don't know um I actually didn't read through the planning commission staff report. So, um hopefully it laid out that over the last year or so or at least since I was elected um I have been Oh, here he is. Um I have been very focused on questions of design. Um as many of you have experienced, there's so many buildings going up. I have strong reaction to those buildings. There's some of them that I have very strong negative reactions to and there's some that I feel like are very well um incorporated into our community and I want to have a conversation that is broader than just um our meetings at council where we are talking about specific projects about what is the character of Santa Cruz. So, that process that is unfolding started with a design professionals round table and they set some themes out that is part of this process. Then um we did a walking tour and I know staff is going to talk a little bit about the walking tour as well downtown. This is the third step um have holding this planning commission community meeting to really weigh in on those themes. And then we're going to have a community-wide survey. So we really appreciate you all being here and I'm going to pass it over to Shebra as well. >> Yeah, thank you Suzy. Shebra Kalantari Johnson, also a representative for District 3. I think Suzy laid it out really well. I would just add that as I think everyone in this room knows, there are state law constraints and we felt strongly that we as a community can set some guidelines and have a conversation that is fueled by community members and informed by community members when we have buildings going up. So this is a way that we want to engage moving forward when developers want to develop in our community. We understand the state law um uh challenges. Well, I don't know if challenges is the word. The constraints, thank you. We understand the state law constraints, but how can we design for our community, have a dialogue with who's those who want to build in our community, and provide some incentives to incentivize those who want to build in our community. And I think with that I will pass it to Lee Akana. Okay. Oh. >> Are we going to do roll call and all that? >> Yes. >> Okay. And thank you for your patience. And thank you to the planning commission for hosting this. >> First, apologize. I apologize for being late today. It's uh not my normal schedule and uh sorry to keep you waiting. Um So do we have roll call roll call first? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Commissioner Gordon Kennedy >> Here. >> Kelley Holmes and >> Here. >> O'Hamus Hammer >> Here. >> Vice Chairman Kelley >> Here. >> [sighs and gasps] >> So, forgive me. I've got to look at my notes here. >> [snorts] >> I think we have a staff presentation. Is that correct on this item? >> That is correct. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, everyone. Thank you so much for being here and spending your Thursday night with us. We're really excited to kick off this community engagement on design guidelines. And I want to thank the Planning Commission for hosting us through this special meeting. My name is Akana Jayawardena and I'm a senior planner at the Community Development Department here at the city. I'm joined by Lee Butler, Community Development Director. Clara Stanga, Acting Principal Planner. Vince Young in the back there, amazing summer intern. And I also want to thank Vice Mayor Collintary Johnson, Council Member O'Herron, Council Member Triguero for being here tonight. As you heard previously, Council Member O'Herron and Vice Mayor Collintary Johnson are part of the Housing Ad Hoc Committee along with Council Member Newsom who is unable to join us due to some family commitments, but he sends his regards. So, I just want to say thanks for being here and joining in this conversation. So, the primary goal of the meeting tonight is to hear from the community and from the Planning Commission. I'm just going to take a few minutes to provide a little bit of context and background and explain while while we're here. I also want to provide a little bit of context about the format for this meeting. After my presentation, I'm going to hand it over to the planning commission to provide their overarching perspectives on the design guidelines project in general, and provide their perspective on the feedback we received from the design professionals. Then we're going to break out into a facilitated community discussion. That's going to happen outside of chambers, and I'll provide more detail about that um towards the end of my presentation. After that discussion, we will come back into chambers where each facilitator from the discussion will report out about what they heard in their specific groups. Um After that, the community will have an opportunity to provide public comment focusing on anything that was not captured by that facilitator report out. Lastly, the planning commission will provide some final thoughts and wrap up the conversation tonight. So, with that, I'll jump into a little bit of project context. Some of you may be wondering why we're here, and why are we developing design guidelines? The city already has design standards, which we adopted in 2022, and later updated in 2025. And in fact, state law dictates that local jurisdictions can only apply objective standards during the review of housing development projects. But when talking about objective standards, a critical component to consider is the state density bonus law. The state density bonus law grants incentives or concessions and waivers to developments that offer affordable housing. Developers can use these concessions and incentives and waivers to deviate from local development standards. Most housing development projects in Santa Cruz utilize the state density bonus, and as a result, they deviate from many of our objective design standards. And what that means in practice is that housing development projects can deviate from height limits, they can deviate from setback requirements, they can deviate from floor area ratio requirements, and they can deviate from architectural design requirements. So, that brings us back to why we're here. We're here because we care about design, and we want to see high-quality buildings in our community. In response to this deviation from design standards through the use of the state density bonus, some jurisdictions have been developing objective Sorry, have been developing voluntary design guidelines. These are non-binding principles and recommendations that supplement objective standards and communicate design values and development goals. These guidelines would be readily accessible to the development and design community, as well as to the public. And they would be available at the very earliest stages of project development, when it could be easiest for these recommendations to be implemented. While these guidelines cannot be required, we are encouraged by the precedent set by progressive jurisdictions to adopt such guidelines, and the opportunity that they could provide to communicate the city's design values and priorities. So, staff took this approach to council in March this year and received direction to proceed with developing design guidelines for multi-family housing along with input from design professionals, the community, and the city's architectural review committee. Additionally, the council established a new housing ad hoc committee to serve as a council liaison to this effort and to receive updates and to guide the development of recommendations related to design guidelines and priorities. As I mentioned, Vice Mayor Callentary Johnson and Councilmembers O'Hara and Newsom make up the subcommittee and are here tonight in a listening capacity. So, with that time um with that background, here's an anticipated project timeline. Um since we received a go-ahead from council in March this year, we have engaged several times with the ad hoc committee to solicit that input. We've also conducted a design professional round table just last month. And this community meeting is designed to really engage the public in an interactive dialogue and to understand what the community values are around design for multi-family housing. Following this meeting, we will develop a public input survey that is informed by the discussion tonight. And then we will draft um design guidelines that incorporate input from the public, from design professionals, as well as the planning commission before taking those um to the architecture review committee for their formal feedback. After we refine the guidelines um in November and October, we will come back to the planning commission and then city council later this year. As mentioned, we facilitated a design professional round table in June and this was a really robust conversation with representation from architecture, development, um project, and construction management backgrounds. Another component that really informed our thinking here was a downtown walking tour that we took with ad hoc subcommittee members and um community development staff. We were also joined by architect and planning commissioner Matthew Thompson. And through all these conversations, we've distilled six key design themes for discussion tonight. These six themes are how buildings and sidewalks meet, how intentionally designed commercial spaces impact experience. Integrated public art, gradual transitions to neighborhoods, high quality building faces in terms of material and color, and high quality building faces in terms of form and articulation. And I want to emphasize here that these are really just a first blush synthesized from what we heard during the design professional round table and the downtown walking tour. Tonight we really welcome other ideas and design priorities that you all would like to bring forward. So these are by no means set six set categories. They're really just a starting point from which to begin having a conversation. And the breakout activity is going to be structured around these six topics as well. So we heard that how buildings and the sidewalk meet has a big impact. Transparent and active facades along with human scaled awnings, landscaping, and public seating can positively impact the pedestrian experience while blank facades, low quality materials, and the lack of awnings or landscaping can really detract from the pedestrian experience. We heard that intentionally designed commercial spaces are a critical component of multi-family housing though they can be difficult to make financially feasible. Commercial spaces must be appropriately sized for the kinds of tenants that the city hopes to attract. We heard that commercial spaces have the potential to reflect and also enhance the character of the city and they can add vibrancy to mixed-use neighborhoods by serving and attracting both visitors and residents. We heard that public art should be integrated at the very beginning of the design process and not simply applied at the end of it. Integrated art can provide character and identity, and we also heard that high-quality and creative architecture too can be art in and of itself. We heard that gradual transitions from larger scale multi-family housing to smaller scale residential neighborhoods is really important, but that meeting the city's objective standard for neighborhood transition plans can be economically infeasible. This challenge is especially pronounced in the city's commercial corridors where shallow lots and zoning constraints are a challenge. We heard that high-quality materials like brick, stone, and board-formed concrete can provide texture and depth and visual interest on their own, and that requiring facade articulation by default can often lead to added cost and busyness without really providing any improved building design. Color, this objective, has a really large impact on the overall perception of development, and so should be incorporated with care. We heard that the overall shape of the building in terms of the horizontal and vertical shifts in plane, the variations in roof line, impact how a building is perceived and how it feels. We also heard that articulation in terms of window details or balcony design, how screens and louvers are affixed to buildings, can help break down bulky massing and help larger buildings feel less monolithic. So, small design changes here can have a large impact. Another topic that came up during the design professional round table were incentives for projects that comply with design guidelines. [clears throat and snorts] Staff also noted initially in our presentation to council in March that incentives could help encourage projects to adopt guidelines and priorities, especially since local jurisdictions cannot require compliance with standards or guidelines um with the use of state density bonus. We're not, however, here to talk about incentives tonight. We're still really early in this process and we're here to focus on key design priorities. And once we establish what those are, we can consider if it would be worthwhile to pursue incentives. So, with that said, just sharing some of the things we heard from design professionals, which were that ministerial reviews are project recognition program for well-designed projects and other financial incentives could encourage the adoption of design guidelines. Before I hand it over to the um Planning Commission, I'll give you a really quick overview of the community discussion. Um as I mentioned, we have six theme-based poster boards set up, or they will be set up outside, um and one writing station for new ideas. This activity is going to be facilitated by planning commissioners as well as city staff. Um so, make sure you visit each station, engage in dialogue with the facilitator and your community members, and um yeah, I'm really looking forward to having this conversation with you all. And with that, I will hand it over to the Planning Commission for discussion. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. That was really well done and I think I don't want to take up any of the time except to offer the opportunity to the commissioners to ask any questions they might have at this point before we get started. >> None for me. >> No, I guess um a lot of what what we will Sorry. Um uh as the uh kind of what we hear from the community when we start engaging in the discussion portion. >> Commissioner Hammer, did >> I do have questions. So, can you just reiterate, are we talking about um discretionary versus mandatory? We're only talking about discretionary. >> Yes, voluntary. >> Voluntary. >> Design guidelines. Okay, so there's going to be no talk about mandatory. And um and is these are objective standards, correct? >> Guidelines. Design guidelines. They're not guidelines, but not subjective. >> Subjective. >> Oh, they can be subjective. >> These ones are subjective. >> Okay, got it. >> They can be subjective. >> Okay, they can be subjective. Okay, great. Okay. Um and you say multi-family, like what is the range? What is the density that you're thinking about here? >> It's We define multi-family as two plus units, and so that's the scope of this project. So far, we can discuss that and >> Okay. I was also wondering if um I mean, this I'm wondering when you talk about quality, are you talking about like the longevity of the building materials used? >> That's a component of quality. I think quality can encompass many characteristics and sustainability or you know, longevity, that kind of thing. >> Okay. >> How it looks and feels. Um >> So, I'm just wondering like if we if we move in the direction of sustainability and longevity of the building materials, which sounds great. I I just wonder if that's not design or if you know, if we need to broaden formally broaden the this idea beyond design into yeah, quality, longevity, sustainability, like otherwise we're being a little sloppy with our language or I you know, I just want to be clear about the scope of what we're think we're we should be thinking about, you know? And then, um next um for two plus units in the city of Santa Cruz I know we have BMR standards, below market rate requirements. Um I don't know our municipal code well well enough such that like when there is a multi-family project that must require follow our below market rate affordable unit mandates, do they automatically um become eligible for density bonus? Is that the way our municipal code is written? >> Um I believe that most do. And Clara can speak to that. >> Is my mic on? Yes, it is. Um any um any project that has five or more units um can be eligible for a density bonus if it provides a certain percentage of below market rate units. Our inclusionary ordinance would require um would require 20% of the units to be below market rate. So, for any of those projects that are at least five units in size, the inclusionary imposing the inclusionary requirement on those would meet the threshold for >> for the density bonus. >> Okay. Um And can you just also confirm in terms of our um compliance with the housing element right now? From what I recall, you know, a while ago, we were doing great in terms of performance and meeting our standards for number of affordable units. But we weren't doing so great in our market rate unit goals, meeting our market rate unit. >> In in terms of our um requirements from the state or arena regional housing needs allocation, we are exceeding or we're we're more than on track to meet our 8-year housing requirement and we're a little over 2 years into that cycle. For lower income units, we are not on track. Uh but I want do want to back up for a second and just plug that we do need a lot more lower income units than what the state requires. [clears throat] Um for moderate income units and market rate, we are behind. >> Okay. Okay. Um is I I'm just thinking about again like I want to make sure our scope is or my my scope of inquiry is appropriate for this. I'm wondering um if something to think about should is or I I I want again like is this appropriate? This idea that um could we create uh an option under our affordable housing mandates in our city code to exempt some projects for multi-family housing from the affordability requirements if they comply with mandatory design standards. So, because design guidelines are sometimes like really expensive and create the project like are we willing to say, "Wow, you know, we can if if you meet all of these requirements, then then our affordable housing ordinance does not apply to you." That also would mean that then they don't aren't eligible for a density bonus, which means that then um they don't they aren't eligible for those waivers. And and then we would increase our supply of housing element compliance for market rate housing. And again, is that beyond the scope? >> That's something we could explore. Um it's not within the scope of what we're talking about tonight because tonight we're just looking at what priorities we want in terms of design. Um later down the road, if and when we start thinking about how to incentivize those priorities, then that is something we could potentially look at and see, you know, look at feasibility of something like that. >> Okay. Um >> Interesting. >> I think that's it for now. Thanks so much. >> I just want to go back to something that was said earlier. This we're always going to be crafting rules. We're always crafting rules, it seems. But I think this opportunity tonight is a chance to hear what the community values and what they what we would like to see as a community happen with our buildings, these high-impact projects that are larger in scale and higher in density. I think they bring a lot of positives to the town to our community in terms of activating downtown, populating downtown, especially making it so that buildings that are we're creating gravity for, you know, new businesses to emerge and opportunities for people to actually live where they work. So I'm kind of seeing this entire process tonight as something where we're we're all listening to each other and finding out what we value. So I'd like to bring the focus back to that. We're going to get plenty of opportunities to make rules, so. >> I I think it would be helpful for me to just have a better understanding of the the how much question because ultimately um that is a part of what is um uh s- s- It to be um a more discretionary sort of thing. But it seems as if in our current evolution as a state and as a community, um there's a certain amount of it that just comes down to math. That is to say, um a site of a certain size and a certain location is allowed to have X amount of square footage and X amount of number of units. And so, um I think it would be helpful for me as we are talking about the the things that are really on the agenda tonight, to understand to what extent the trade-offs of decisions on design and um mix of of different options um actually influences the how much question. Or is it the how is the how much question kind of already fixed and then we're working within um that that those parameters. I'm thinking about number of dwellings, but also square footage, the uh or height, the the the the things that in the olden days were the um the the real hot buttons for deciding whether a project was going to get approved. You give us some direction there. >> Go ahead. >> Hello, Planning Commissioners. I'm Leo Velasquez, the Community Development Director. And thanks for that question, Commissioner Thompson. That is a really interesting one, and I think that's one of the things that Commissioner Hammer was sort of getting at as well with respect to the um uh the comments about um density bonus and our inclusionary and and how you know, our inclusionary levels are so deep that um or so high I should say that that projects generally choose to move into the density bonus realm even if they're not always qualified expressly by complying with our inclusionary ordinance. And certainly that density bonus project, if it's adding units, which most large projects do, is also going to increase the size and scale and massing as you're referencing there, Commissioner Thompson. Um it gets me back to thinking about the question Commissioner Hammer had about, you know, what does this apply to? Uh Akana indicated that yes, multi-family, we define multi-family as as two or more units. Um however, really I think that while that is the technical definition, what we've been focused on in large part as part of this project is what has really captured more attention in the community as Commissioner Thompson was referring to, the larger buildings. And those are made substantially larger as a result of the the density bonus. And and I think for purposes of this conversation, it's important to recognize that that we are going to continue to see larger buildings as our sites redevelop over the course of the decades. Additional redevelopment is going to result in larger buildings. It's it's going to be very rare to see redevelopment at two stories or three stories or even four stories. There are some levers that we could push like removing our affordable housing requirements that could encourage developers to not pursue that density bonus and and have smaller scale buildings. Under the current regulatory environment with our inclusionary, that's just not what we're seeing. That's not to say that we we couldn't and um I think for purposes of the discussion tonight, we do need to think about um the the larger scale buildings, how those look and feel, um what type of character we want those to have, and some of those same concepts are going to relate back to smaller scale. When I say smaller scale, I'm thinking, you know, four-story buildings, for example. Let's say they did not use a density bonus and they're coming in at a four-story building, for example. Some of those same principles of the interaction with the street, how the pedestrian feels, the high-quality materials, transitions to the neighborhoods, even with a four-story building transitioning down into the neighborhoods, all of those are going to remain true. So, I think your point to your question is a good one. What's type what type of scale and size should we be thinking about? And I think in general, we should be thinking about larger buildings because that's what we're seeing right now. There are some of the levers that we may be able to pursue and contemplate in the future as it relates to having smaller buildings, but uh right now, our our policy framework is such that we're seeing projects pursue 100% density bonus in in many instances, and those are resulting in six, seven, eight-story buildings, whether it's in our downtown or along our corridors. And we're we're happy to hear from the community on um thoughts that they have on all different scales. I I think those large-scale buildings are the ones that I've been kind of the flashpoints, and that will probably be the focus of some of our conversation, but it doesn't have to be all of it. Also, you'll see that we're asking about different areas of the city. So, would you think about these issues differently in the downtown? What about on the corridors? Are there others are other areas of the city where we should be thinking about these design characteristics differently? >> Okay. I I think that that that helps. Um it [clears throat] is um uh somebody starts out with a a potential building site. Um and I think often times the starting point is to just do the math. Um to just say, "So, how much can I get on this site?" And um uh that strikes me as being kind of the first um barrier to good design is that the only subject matter at the beginning is the how much question. And it's um uh it sounds as if, if I'm understanding how you've described this, that that really is just a math problem. Uh if you choose to use the state um facilitated uh rules that allow you to get bonuses and exceptions for for height and and parking and any number of different things. Um Am I getting this wrong? Does it really just start out as a math problem? And um and if that's the case, um that kind of changes um at least my way of thinking about um what's left after the how how much question is answered? >> Yeah. So, it's a great question. And um what I would say to that is yes, you are right. I would expect that developers start with that question. That is the first question that they are asking and how can they maximize the number of units out there? What is What is that What is that maximum? And um to your point, I think that's why um as we proceed, we may need to be thinking about certain types of incentives, whether they're procedural incentives um or whether they are um changes to the uh affordable housing requirements. The commission will recall and the community will recall this was a strategy that we used with the downtown plan expansion. We have our own uh downtown density bonus that incentivize with the the big carrot there is alternative alternative affordable housing requirements. And so there's still affordable housing requirements, but they can apply those in alternative manners and that is how we encouraged those we can't require those buildings to stay at 85 feet, but we've got some pretty strong incentives in terms of the affordable housing approaches that buildings can take if they maintain that 85 foot height limit. And so there is the possibility that we could look at similar strategies through this process. So I don't want you or the community to be constrained by thinking it's going to have to be these types of boxes because there are some levers that we could pull similar to what we did with the downtown plan expansion and that'll have to that'll have to play out as we figure out you know what types of design characteristics are we looking to really encourage and depending on what those design characteristics are then we would have to assess okay, well, what would make it worthwhile for a developer to do that? Is that going to take a really big incentive or small incentive or would they just do that because that's a great way to design the building and it's not going to hit their bottom line substantially. So I'd encourage you to think about it from both of those perspectives. Yes, we're still going to have large buildings and there may be opportunities to mold those buildings differently. >> I think that's really the nub of it for me is are there things that we can uh do to manipulate the choices that actually have an impact on what buildings look like. Um because uh absent that it really is just a math problem. And so, what are the things that we can offer as a community that make uh make the buildings uh uh res- responsive to community values other than just the math. >> Right. Yes, that that will be a future conversation that we will have to have. I think tonight we want to focus on, you know, what are those design characteristics that we want to see, and then based on what we're hearing in that feedback from the commission and from the community, we can then at a later point assess, okay, how would we make that happen? >> Right. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. Thank you. Good questions. >> B- before you go ahead and Commissioner Kennedy, a little bit in response. Thanks, uh Chair. It's so interesting like I've just been up here for many years and um hearing that math thing, that's really a an interesting way to look at it, like what's left after the Excel sheet, you know, I call it. But um I'm also heartened in look at the list of six things, like these are things our community demands, you know, and we can get them if we're specific about them. The project we saw recently down by Ace Hardware, I forget the name of it, uh was perfect example of that. They moved the entire building out 2 ft and shifted a city right-of-way cuz we said we want a bike lane here. So, it just uh you all have negotiated more than me, but there's the tone of the negotiation, and as a green building professional, when I go into Palo Alto with some plans, it feels a hell of a lot different than Gilroy, you know, in terms of the feedback I'm going to get, the professionalism of staff. And so, I just have hope that we can fill the box in the Excel sheet and say we need nice sidewalks. >> Again, I apologize for my tardiness, but I would like in the interest of time to move into the discussion as quickly as we can. Is that Can we just get a a five two minute description of how we'd like to proceed with that? >> Yep. Um thank you. So, we're going to head out of chambers. Um I explained this a little bit, but there's seven boards outside, six based on the themes I covered during my presentation, and one write-in board. Um there's going to be a commissioner or a city staff at each one of those, so make sure you visit each station. Um on your way out, please make sure to grab a worksheet that Mariana will hand out. Um this will facilitate um you as you visit each poster, and will then ask you to do this little activity where you have to allocate resources to the design topics that are most important to you. So, this will just help us collect some feedback about priorities. So, once you come back into chambers after the activity, hand these back to Mariana. She's going to be entering them into a spreadsheet so that we can kind of see in real time how this conversation is evolving. Um and here's a breakdown of uh who is going to be where. So, hopefully this will help the commissioners and staff and and you all um as you head out to to decide which board you want to start with. Um but again, I really encourage you to visit all the boards and um engage with the commissioners and each other. Just out here. Yeah. And uh grab some sticky dots and post-it notes that Mariana and Vince are going to hand out, and you can use those to to vote on things that you like, and um provide additional comments. And we'll have about 45 minutes to do that, so plan accordingly, and we'll try to uh help you move around as well. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Evening everyone. I want to try to reconvene for our continued discussion. I first want to thank everyone for coming. I have heard some really great feedback and comments today. Um a little bit more about dog effluvia than I had anticipated, but um anyone that expects me to stop talking it's a bad bet. So, I'd like to um Is there any formal thing that if it's formal step that we want to take to as far as a discussion goes or >> We're going to have the report out now. So, each facilitator >> facilitator? >> And we can start with you all and then staff can come up to the >> Great. >> Staff can come up to the podium to >> Anyone? >> I'll go first. >> All right. Go ahead, Kennedy. >> Yeah, that was interesting. So, I was at the intentionally designed commercial spaces uh station and got some good feedback. A lot of support for kind of free parking. Um understanding some trade-offs there depending what part of town that you're in. Uh concern that the city really actively solicit businesses, which is not so much about the design, but the the relationship of economic development and businesses. Uh a comment from Rafa regarding exploring accessory commercial units, which would be more than just offices in single-family neighborhoods. Never heard of this. Thought it was slightly interesting. Um Yeah, concerns about the cost of groceries and kind of provide several people wanted bigger grocery stores, you know, the big bigger plates like Grocery Outlet or Safeway. Understanding that it's hard to cram those into downtown. And then yes, support and talk of kind of making downtown more accessible more accessible to businesses that have lower rents like out in the west side of Maker's Studio, that kind of stuff. I feel that's kind of optimistic, but there's good support for those small businesses. We had good discussion about um kind of generated by me about residents on the ground floor, like is that appropriate in any spaces or not? Where would that be appropriate? And then that led into some discussion of like live-work units, which is kind of our current weird code way of kind of almost letting people live on the ground floor. Um Yeah, those were the highlights. >> Commissioner Hammer or Thompson? >> Sure. Um I think that uh it was interesting um that uh color had um a an impact on on people's response. That is to say the the buildings that were lighter in color and um if you will just a little more cheerful um got better responses than the the uh the dark um windows or uh dark woods um uh just were more off-putting. They got uh they were usually just ignored. Um and then also the scale of the elements that made up the facades. The ones that had smaller um elements of um And I think uh they would have been because these were residential buildings, just seemed more residential in scale. The ones that looked uh like they could be housing or could be um corporate office buildings uh got fewer comments and less interest. Um and then um balconies uh were um a vote getters. People People liked uh even when they weren't particularly good balconies, um they they liked this um notion that um because these were um residential that there was um that there was a some kind of access to the outside from the individual portions of the building. So, those were kind of the big big items that came to my mind. >> Sure. Yeah, I um was listening to comments related to public art. And there was some um like in a a scale of 0 to 10, you know, in terms of how enthusiastic people were about public art, I would say it was maybe like a six or a seven. You know, people were like, "Okay." But and then um they got more engaged as they were actually thinking about what public art was, what they enjoyed, and it really was so diverse in terms of what people enjoyed, but I do think they liked having art on the actual building as opposed to next to it. But But that's not I don't even know if that was the majority. And so, in fact, many many individuals suggested other aspects of art that were not um given examples of. And so, So, thought that was really beautiful that they were coming up with how they think of, you know, landscape as art and um just some beautiful ideas which were written on posted notes that the staff will be able to review. Um so, it was a it was a a beautiful conversation um and it was interesting to think about the fact that like right now Santa Cru- Santa Cruz seems to have a lot of murals. Um and people seemed fine with that. They were not okay with um the idea Well, some individuals like the idea of temporary art, whereas others were like, "No, once the art's on, I don't want to see it taken down." And are upset once, you know, when when that happens. So, so yeah, a a big diversity. And it makes me think about like, "Well, what are our values as a city as it relates to public art?" And I think that's a really important question to think about. And I I I believe I could say that, you know, based on the discussion, it does seem to appear that the community values art to some degree. I'm just not sure um I'm not Yeah, so I think it's there. Um but there's a diversity there, which makes sense because, you know, we all react to to art so differently. >> I love doing this. Um I wish we did it a lot more. Um just hearing what everyone has to say. It's amazing that I heard people say we need more parking and other people saying we need no parking. Um I the the comment about, you know, dog waste was not random. There were several people that mentioned it. Um but I think one of the overarching things that I mean, several people said this unprompted is that commercial spaces and development in general, they need to support diversity of use of tenant, you know, uh the the business tenants. I realize that we have very limited control over that, but I thought it was really interesting that it was a consistent theme with quite a few people. Um one person said Santa Cruz is like a scorpion. That uh it's you know, all kind of hypnotizing and then strikes you with venom. So, I thought that was really pretty pungent. Um setbacks, uh the one of the one of the um one of the post-its was literally setback, setbacks, setbacks, step back, step. It was like a Dr. Seuss rhyme, really, but absolutely right on. Um I think overall the the there were kind of balanced stickers on on the different kind of ideas that were presented on the board, which I thought was great, but in general, I think that this idea of having your frontages, especially downtown, but I think also even in neighborhoods where these multi-unit uh projects can now be built, um the idea that you're going to put people out on the street and and I I don't mean the way that the way it sounds, but you're going to have people animating the street was a theme that pretty much that was pretty much uniform for everyone, and I'm I'm very heartened by that because that's really important to me. And I think overall the the blue dots just completely filled up the very important uh rectangle at the top. There was one in somewhat important, but everything all the others were in very important. So, I'm I'm glad to hear that. There there many other comments that we can summarize and report out in the the report on the meeting, but I I think this is a great exercise. I really appreciate everyone coming. >> Clara Stenger >> Good evening. Hi, everyone. Clara Stenger. Um I was on the neighborhood trend transitions board. Um and we got a lot of votes for it being very important. We got people voting multiple times saying it was very important. So, it's very very important to some people. Um we had a few votes saying it was a little important or not important. Um and then in terms of where it's important, the extreme vast majority said that this is a topic that's important on the corridors. We got one, maybe two votes for the downtown. Um and then in terms of the pictures on the bottom, like what kind of things would people want to see in terms of neighborhood transitions? We got a lot of votes for step massing on a single building. Um we got a lot of votes. I was a little bit surprised. We got a lot of votes for angled massing. So, that's like a building that almost looks like a triangle. Um people commented that they liked it as kind of a form of art. Um and they also mentioned that it's different, like Santa Cruz is different. Um and then we got a lot of votes for pocket parks and comments that like greenery and nature for design is a very Santa Cruz type of thing. Um I also heard some examples from people of um buildings that they thought made good transitions like the project on Water Street near Stanford has done townhomes on the neighborhood side of that project to transition into the neighborhood. There's a project at 2021 Shannon Clear Avenue in the county that had a design that was thoughtful to the nearby neighborhood for example in the placement of their trash enclosure. What else? We had an example from Barcelona. They have a lot of four-story buildings. That's kind of the norm there, but then they would have parklets, but something that's like bigger than a pocket park more like a community space where people would gather. And so that falls into that nature greenery category again. And then we had a sticky note that was like a big paper that showed different massings that could be used to achieve the same density for example a much taller building that would then have more open space around it or have like a bigger courtyard in the middle. And that's it for me. Thank you. >> Hi everyone. Vince Young. I'm an intern with Vance Planning. Thank you everyone for a great conversation and I regret that this summary can't capture the richness of the conversations that we've had this evening, but I'll give it a try. There's several buckets. I think first um with design principles I've heard multiple people comment on architectural design and how it interfaces with the neighborhood. So potentially some some preferred compatibility and kind of mimicking what's around while others um, preferred kind of an eclectic style. And the next another thing that I heard multiple times in conversation, um, is very Santa Cruz and that's to protect trees, especially large heritage trees when possible. Another point that I heard, uh, multiple in multiple contextes was parking uh, with one person sharing that it believe that the lack of parking minimums causes problems that are further exacerbated then by the lack of parking enforcement in the city. I also heard that um, there might be a need for developers to provide more private open spaces for tenants as an amenity. Um, another bucket would be just incentives for incentives for design guideline for following design guidelines. So, for example, as Clark mentioned, um, someone said increasing height uh, restrictions in in exchange for stepped massing or, you know, other ways to to reach the same to reach the same FAR but in a way that is more responsive to the neighborhood context. Um, we've also heard concerns about uh, commercial developments. So, uh, perhaps incentive around waving commercial uh, commercial on the ground floor in return for meeting some of those design guidelines and another community member also mentioned, um, perhaps having incentives around preserving existing local businesses or rather, um, well-beloved cultural institutions, um, as new buildings open. And there's another interesting kind of suggestion when it comes to procedural ways to improve design. So, someone had mentioned perhaps having a city list of approved architects who understand Santa Cruz's design guidelines, design kind of like goals. Um and having having that approved list be it made available for developers to consult in order to kind of shape new development in the city in the way that we believe fits Santa Cruz's context. So, yeah. Thank you very Thank you everyone. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I facilitated the material and color board and um a main topic was that I heard from multiple people was that there's not one style or one material or one color that is uniquely Santa Cruz. It is a pretty eclectic city with an eclectic um urban fabric. Um but also that different neighborhoods do have specific character. Maybe that's not in the style of the building or the color, but there is like a different character that that came up. [clears throat] Um even though buildings are eclectic, I heard that uh buildings need to work together. They need to speak to each other and there needs to be a cohesion. Um somebody gave the example of Amsterdam and talked about how Amsterdam has a lot of different kinds of buildings, yet somehow it feels kind of like a unified place and that's an interesting idea. Like what creates that cohesion? I think that's a good question to noodle on. Um there were preferences for some materials like wood or um stucco. Some people wanted more gloss, some people wanted less. People were um essentially drawn to more natural materials that reflect the character of the city, the natural character of the city. Some people felt that offering incentives for material and color was too much, that we we should really think about um what we want to offer for something like material and color. Maybe that's not the the thing that we want to incentivize, while other people felt that a material and color do lead to high quality architecture and so it should be incentivized by allowing more density or taller buildings. So, kind of a differing opinion on on incentives on that front. That's I think that's all I have here in my notes, but thank you so much for the comments and it's a really great conversation at least at my board and it's been great to hear feedback from you all, too. >> I think it's been very well organized. Thank you. Um any other uh facilitators have comments? Okay. Uh I think it comes back to the commission now. Is that correct? >> We have public comment. >> Oh, awesome. All right. Great. So, can we invite people up to make comments on what they've seen and heard and how much time do people have? Oh. I'm going to give How many people want to speak? Yeah. >> According to the agenda, it does say that the public comments have a focus on any topics not addressed by facilitators during the report out and I'm I'm sharing these particular comments because in a casual conversation >> Excuse me, he hasn't opened the comment yet. Could you hold on for a moment? We're still determining >> We're just trying to determine >> Oh, the timeline. >> One moment. >> I won't take long. >> being kind. Just give us a second. >> So, >> [clears throat] >> uh are there others that would like to speak tonight besides the people in line? I'm I'm going to say 3 minutes. Thank you. Please. >> Okay, thank you. >> Yeah. >> And this was a casual conversation um with a city council member who encouraged me to make these comments to get them on the public record. so that's one of the reasons I was sharing this. Um the design guidelines handbook, toolkit, pamphlet, whatever ends up being collected here will will result in um basically some many subjective um a collection of subjective um I guess you'd call them standards, uh ideas, wish list, aspirations. And it occurs to to us that uh those ultimately if if used um and offered some incentive to developers to use these will um then if if if there's an incentive to for example have a uh ministerial approval process that those would then get implemented without really coming back to the light of uh planning commissioners or city council. And so then the these um basically subjective um guidelines would be acted upon um solely within city hall by planning staff. Um so the idea being that the ultimate color choice of red or green for a building would be done at at the planning staff level and not be then coming back to commissioners or city council or the basically the elected representatives of people. And so the public wouldn't have input on that. So that kind of is an interesting spin on you've got a subjective process going on that's then going to be kind of a closed process and not open um for any further public input. So uh a council member thought it was important that I make that statement in the public record. Thank you. >> Thank you for taking the time to be here. Next. You can state your name if you like. >> For sure. >> Uh my name is Ryan Meckel. Thanks for the opportunity to talk with you all. Uh this was a great. I hope we do more of these meetings. Love talking with you and staff and community members. It was great. Um, I I think just the through line for me this whole evening with looking at the different categories and thinking about what Santa Cruz means to me is that Santa Cruz is just a variety of things kind of in all aspects. Like if I think about going through downtown or Water Street or Soquel or any of the major corridors or even the neighborhoods, everything's a little bit different. There's not we don't have like everything looking exactly the same. And I would love if what came out of this process was responsive to that and kind of giving some architectural freedom and pizzazz and creativity to people who want to build in our town. Um, obviously the incentives conversation comes after that. Um, but I just hope we'll keep that in mind and I would love a eclectic Santa Cruz like it may have once been. Thank you. >> Thanks very much. >> Hi, I'm Ellen Murtha. Thank you so much for offering us this opportunity to participate um in got developing design guidelines. I look forward to the future input meetings. But I've actually been asked to um read uh comments from someone who couldn't be here and so missed this participation but wanted this recorded. This is from Amy Chen Mills. Thank you for hosting this design meeting. As I've been walking neighborhoods, I've heard over and over again that people are very unhappy with the design of new buildings going up in town. Of course they're unhappy with so many major projects happening at once, but many people would feel better if about them if they had more elements of architectural design including an appreciation for architectural beauty and community value and community building. In my mind, the architecture of buildings is a massive part of the feel of our overall public space and our appreciation of shared and common spaces. I strongly encourage a revised set of objective design standards that include very specific references to certain architectural styles and related features that could be mandated. I encourage consultation with excellent architects in this regard. A building is forever and it is a dereliction of duty to the public to not build the most beautiful or or welcoming projects possible to fill our public spaces. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good evening. >> Good evening. Um, my name is Kathy Haber. I've lived here for many, many years and I really love this town. Um, my comments are not really specifically about the design, but it is about design. I live in a three-bedroom, two-bath house, which I've owned for many, many years. I would like to move to a smaller space. And I would make my home available to a family. I live there by myself. What is the point? The point is there's nothing for me to buy that suits my age and my life situation. There were a couple of buildings that when they first talked about them, they were going to be condominium buildings. And many people, either at the starting of their home ownership or at the ending of their home ownership, would like to live in a two-bedroom, one-bath condo with an elevator in the building. This is design, right? You're designing for the community. It's not aesthetic design, which is what you're talking about tonight, and I apologize for being off topic. But, those buildings changed somewhere in the process of their being proposed and of their being constructed, they became rental only. None of these new buildings that are being built have for sale units in them. I would buy one of those units and sell my my townhouse, which is too large for me. If I had something to buy, but there's nothing being offered, there's nothing being built. So, that is my comment to the planning commission because I don't know all your meetings, I don't know where my comment fits in, and thank you very much for listening to me. Good night. >> Thanks so much. I think that brings the discussion back to the commission. >> Correct. >> Can I solicit comments from commissioners, questions? Commissioner Hammer? >> I'm really um learned a lot from the discussions today and listening. And um it made me think about my own values. Um so, I'm just going to name them in terms of what I think of as beautiful architecture. Um I do think um even though I'm not an expert in transportation, I think about the the the interface between the corridor and the building and how to beautify that through landscaping, I think is something that matters to me. The quality of the materials, like the longevity of the materials, matter. And also, environmental like [snorts] I'm wondering if again, trying to identify common values to us all, I wonder if we could land on um healthy environmental sustainable buildings that are I mean, carbon neutral or or in that realm. I'm wondering if that's something we could agree on as a as a value. Um So, I think I think that's I guess that's my my only comment except to just um uh appreciate the community that's that's here tonight. >> Commissioner Thompson. >> Um actually going to >> Mr. Chair, the thoughts I had before the meeting tonight um that um the there were kind of two aspects of the new buildings downtown that I found um lacking. And uh they're kind of old-fashioned ideas, but it struck me when I took the uh the walk with the planning staff um uh and we we walked essentially by all of the new buildings. Um that there was uh something missing in two different categories. And one was what um I've always called the dooryard, which is um a door on a public building on a or a uh an urban building on a public sidewalk um needs to have a space between, if you will, the sidewalk and where the door is. That the door needs to be recessed. And uh this is really an old-fashioned idea uh back in the 1920s um in New York City, they actually discovered that if you set [snorts] the door back [clears throat] even a little bit people wanted to walk in. It invited people in. And um and this has actually been established um uh over and over again since then for 100 years that if you set the door back it beckons people to walk in. And my favorite example in Santa Cruz is Bookshop Santa Cruz, which has a dooryard on Pacific Avenue and has a dooryard on Front Street and it really works. People walking down the sidewalk get to the dooryard and they slow down and they look and see that there's a door and oh my goodness there's some place to walk in. Um the the dooryard at uh Dell Williams is just you can't resist slowing down and looking in it. But right across the street from Bookshop Santa Cruz is a Williams-Weeks building, I believe. I believe that just has columns in front, which means that large columns, that means that the door is set back about three or four feet and you slow down and uh >> [snorts] >> right at the door and look in the windows and look at what kind of shop it is and it just sucks you right in. Um uh so I I really do think that it would be useful for us to make this a pattern that we encourage new buildings to have. And when we took when I took a walk with a staff, it was striking to me that there wasn't a single dooryard in any of the new buildings. Not once. Um and I think it is part of what contributes to them not being particularly lovely on the streetscape. Um and then the other one is just in the opposite end of the building. It's up at the top. I was really struck at how bad the top of the buildings were for all the new new They had a a little a little flashing up at the top that was about the size of your fist and there was there were no good examples. They were all bad. And again, it's the roof edge actually has a name. It's a cornice. But there there wasn't a lovely cornice on a on any of the new buildings and I think we could do ourselves a favor by again providing a pattern language of here's what a cornice can do for you. It's not an expensive thing and it doesn't actually need to be very big. But again, buildings after the earthquake that were the new buildings downtown whether the Saint George or University Town Center all have that in common is that there's some kind of cornice at the top. And it strikes me that we would do ourselves a favor by just making that an expectation. That buildings have a courtyard where you expect to have people come in and you can walk down Pacific Avenue and and check out all the buildings that have courtyards and they're they're lovely. And likewise, looking up at how the the building meets the sky, if it has a cornice, you like it. It's just it's just pleasant. It puts a smile on your face and we could do that by just making a suggestion that an appropriate building has a place and a sidewalk that allows you to slow down and notice the door Um, and I'll up at the sky and see something other than a straight line as we as our buildings meet the sky. These are old-fashioned ideas, but and they can certainly be interpreted in contemporary terms. But there are two elements of cityscape that we could do pretty easily. >> Mr. Kennedy. Those are interesting thoughts. Well, I'm not coming up with anything. Do you want to speak first or give me a few more minutes? >> I'd love to talk. Um, one of the comments earlier struck me in terms of the subjectiveness of the things that people come up with in a meeting like this. I think that's absolutely true and it's one of the things that the state laws have tried to kind of squelch a bit and I think it's a it imparts a lot of richness to the conversations that people can have about their the physical form of their communities. Um, but I don't think that people should be that concerned about I mean, you know, my hairbrained scheme at one point will be put through the cooling saucer of the planning department and various other eyeballs that that get put onto it and then of course end up anything that would be proposed would end up in front of the city council and I feel like we have a great team both in the professional departments and in the various bodies that really pay attention, try to do the best job they can and I I put great trust in them. Um, Santa Cruz is indeed very vibrant and varied. The fact that it's varied is what I think creates that and it I've only been here since the '70s, but uh it's always been that way and I think, you know, there are a lot of things that I miss about the downtown from before the earthquake cuz um who doesn't miss the United Cigar Company? But um I I think that again going back to what I heard a lot of in in conversations that I had in the courtyard earlier, it our our town needs to provide spaces for the actual community members that are here to be and to act and to live and I think that's that's the highest calling that you can really have as in planning terms is you're providing a stage for all these great things to happen. Um I hear a lot of people being unhappy with the designs and the ideas that are being expressed in a lot of the large-scale developments here, but I feel like this is speaking of unpopular opinions, I think that um we have such a need to provide places for people to simply be and live in a in a way that is humane and convivial and all those great things that our community can offer. Um I I think that not everything is per- perfect, not every process is perfect, but uh I think that the path that we're pursuing right now is just exactly where we should be in terms of creating new space for people to be and to live in. Um I couldn't agree any more with the sentiment that, uh, we need to build opportunities for move-down housing, for starter homes, for people that, you know, that they can actually own instead of rent. That's a That's just the hardest thing to do, but it's really the the the best thing that we can aim for. Um I think I'm going to end there. Um I I can't thank you enough for putting this together. It's been, I think, a great format, and I really hope that we do it on broader topics and and find and more focused ones as well, but I think it's a it's a great process for people to get involved in and be more saying what we we would like instead of I hate that. So, I'll just vote for that. Thank you for everyone for coming. I really appreciate it. Oh, now he's going to speak. >> this time to take some notes and organize my thoughts. >> Commissioner Kennedy. >> I always think of the history of this, you know, 1989, the mall falling down, and the work that was done there, and, you know, these two downtown plans we've had culminating in the in the in the, uh, downtown expansion plan that we recently put in and had a good result of that one building, in my opinion. The struggle with all of those is like eclectic Santa Cruz versus prescriptive standards that can be easily understand stood, and there's just that continuing tension there. So, it's really cool to see it evolving. Boy, there's some great stuff in the in the the downtown the original downtown recovery plan, like mandating wood windows and things like that that really get the spirit of Santa Cruz, but are hard to do these days. Um so, I just wanted to highlight that tension, and that that's something that's changing. We're always adjusting, and I just am impressed by each plan gets better, and how we see the results out there. Um, Monica mentioned, you know, zero carbon as a unifying community goal. This is my field of work. There's operational carbon, you know, like the ongoing power bill of the building, and embodied carbon, and I just want to reassure you that the building mandatory building code is really strong in nearly all of these areas. So, we can talk more, and it gets really detailed really quickly. I spent years up here incentivizing above and beyond green building things, like more EV parking. You get a LEED certification, you get out of XYZ. And in my professional opinion, like code has maxed all that out, you know, to the point where the state has said, "You can't develop the energy code anymore, cuz it's cost-prohibitive." So, I think um, it's really technical and weird, but just so that everybody hears that these new buildings are all electric, extremely efficient, and extremely expensive as a result. And so, I don't know if that helps or not, but um, I do think there's And so, the trick with making this menu is then 6 years pass, and now solar panels are mandatory, and beats me the law that says you have to have solar panels on the roof. So, I thought a little bit about um, embodied carbon, you know, mass timber buildings, which I know the city supports and is encouraging already, you know, through sustainability, but I wonder if a little more thought about some really above and beyond um, sustainability strategies might be worth thinking about that a little bit more. Um, mass timber building's a big building with a wood frame instead of a metal frame. So, there's much less embodied energy in that building. Um, I uh, you referred to the process and supporting staff, and I've been in some of those closed rooms in the corridor plan and other plans and I think that's the preferred format to get people to lay it out on the table rather than a big public forum. So I want to reassure reassure the public that it's not secret, you know, it's an even though the public's not invited to those meetings, that is a process that we bring back and report to you all on. And so even though it feels weird, I just reassure you that you know, I have in the past I had comments from council about that and the idea is to get a developer and other experts to really open up and have a constructive process and um I'm pretty excited about that last building, but that seemed like a good example where they took some of the comments from the architectural review committee. That's very hard to do in public. So just throwing that out there. I think the staff approach of those reviews in between the public meetings is really working well and should be encouraged. Um one developer said, you know, this is years ago. Who was it? I can't remember, but they said well, you know, Pete, there's only one real building material at the end of the day and it's called money. And you know, so I just thought of that as we talk about fine materials and durable things. Um >> I can almost guess who said that. >> Yeah, I think you know him probably. Um yeah, so back to commercial spaces like where we eat, where we drink, the dooryard, the cornice, fantastic things that for hundreds or thousands of years have been a part of our cities. Um I think of Mark Primack who said, you know, the only building that ever meets code is the one that just opened yesterday. And it's like all the places I go are terribly non-code compliant. The Crate place, I'm just running through them, you know, coffee shops, they're all crammed in. And so I want to just come back to the idea that our main job is to provide a variety of spaces as best possible in all these areas and then we you step back and the you know, capitalism goes and we can't control that, and we can't pick what tenant goes where. Um but I look at the new buildings, and there's commercial spaces vacant right now in many different sizes and configurations, with even more interesting ones to come. So, I think we've really succeeded in downtown. And in my opinion, you know, having been uh part of the Corridor process, which we got a lot of feedback on, like I think a small version of that at each node, you know, then we're doing a great job if we can allow for that. Um oh, last one is the condo thing. Uh that's so hard. I totally agree. I understand there's some state laws coming. I haven't read about them, but um I've heard that a lot up here for years and years, so we'll keep trying to make those affordable to build and sell, which is just a huge challenge. Um yeah, those are my comments. Uh thanks, everybody. It's a really interesting and rich process, and staff did a great job. I particularly salute the walking tour. I mean, I'm visual. I talk with my hands, so I'm so glad uh some of us went and did that. And uh that's just a really cool thing for staff to enable. It's a little different than reserving this room for the night. Thanks. >> Are we ready to adjourn? I want to thank everyone again. It's This is how the sausage gets made. And frankly, it's a it's a necessary process, and I think I I just like the format of it being just a free exchange. The meetings we've had recently that have been just exchange of ideas have been really gratifying to me, so. Thank you, everyone for joining us. We are adjourned. Thank you. >> Thank you.