*New traffic light at Trout Gulch Road and Soquel Drive
*Relocating existing SCMTD bus turnout on /Soquel Drive (currently between Bayview Hotel and Aptos Station Center) to the area of Soquel Drl opposite Aptos Street BBQ, which will require excavation toward railroad tracks and a new retaining wall.
*Replace 100’+ railroad track, new railroad crossing, new control box and crossing arms,
*streetlights
*cement curb, gutter and sidewalk at intersection
*ADA ramps at Trout Gulch and Aptos Street, as well as adjacent to Trout Gulch Crossing Center (by JetSet Bohemian)
*road widening on Soquel Drive for dedicated turn lane to Bay Federal and Starbucks
*new paving on Soquel Drive, Trout Gulch Road, Aptos Street and Valencia Street
*relocating fire hydrant
*new wooden fence along railroad tracks from Trout Gulch roughly to existinig bus stop area, to separate parking areas from railroad tracks
The County engineer’s estimate was $1,299,558.00
Graniterock Company was the only bidder at $2,176,947.75
Personally, I do not understand why Santa Cruz County taxpayers are being expected to bear the burden of these improvements, such as the bus stop relocation, that will exclusively serve the Aptos Village Project’s need to create the new Parade Street connector to Soquel Drive for the subdivision. Where will the people who catch the bus park? Along Aptos Street, which is already overly congested because none of the businesses on Aptos Street have off-street parking? And by the way, why did the County restrict parking along Soquel Drive to 2-hour limited parking last January? (No one at the County has answered my letters regarding that issue.)
Under AB 1600 Mitigation Fee Act, the Count has the power to exact development impact fees to protect the public health, safety and welfare and that includes traffic impact.  The Aptos Village LLC developers (Barry Swenson Builder, Aptos Ventures Joe Appenrodt & Pete Testorff) need to pay for the cost of relocating the bus stop, not you and me. Aptos Village LLC did pay some Transportation Improvement Assessment fees (TIA) but it looks to me, in researching the information from a Public Records Act request, that there may have been some concessions made.
You may also have some thoughts about the need to improve the railroad tracks but not install a bicycle path adjacent.
CALL AND WRITE THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BY TUESDAY, IF POSSIBLE, BUT BY FRIDAY AT THE LATEST. COPY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR JOHN PRESLEIGH. A LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE LOCAL PAPERS WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL.
Board of Supervisors 831-454-2200
Zach Friend <zach.friend@santacruzcounty.us>, John Leopold <john.leopold@santacruzcounty.us>,
Greg Caput <greg.caput@santacruzcounty.us>, Bruce McPherson <bruce.mcpherson@santacruzcounty.us>, Ryan Coonerty <ryan.coonerty@santacruzcounty.us>, John Presleigh <john.presleigh@santacruzcounty.us>
Santacruzsentinel.com (“opinion”)
Erik Chalhoub <echalhoub@register-pajaronian.com>
goodtimes.sc (letters)
You might also contact the Aptos Times editor, Noel Smith, and verify the recent claim in the September 1 issue that the county will pay for the new streets within the Aptos Village Project (Aptos Village Way and Parade Street) as reported. I have contacted Mr. Smith, but received no response.
*************************************************************************************
OTHER IMPORTANT MEETINGS THIS WEEK:
1) Wednesday, Sept. 14Â Â Alliance of Concerned Citizens (aka Alliance of Citizens for Common Sense)
7pm
Louden Nelson Center, Santa Cruz
This Alliance of citizens from communities throughout Santa Cruz County is building steam to act as a strong and effective citizen’s group to take action that will address local government policies regarding growth-related issues: water, transportation, historic preservation, and protecting neighborhood character and quality of life. The group will regularly meet the second Wednesday of each month at 7pm, at the Louden Nelson Center.
2)Â Thursday, September 15Â Â Â MId-County Groundwater Agency
7pm
Capitola City Council Chambers (in Capitola Village)
This consortium of water agencies is developing policy to address critical groundwater overdraft in our area. There are three representatives for private well owners, along with County, Santa Cruz City, Soquel Creek Water District and Central Water District reps. The group just adopted an annual budget of $1.2 million and had the Community Foundation hire the manager whose salary is $140,000/year. The Community Foundation will also be managing the budget…..
The agenda includes a discussion about the progress of the groundwater model that will hopefully provide information about the rate of sea water advancing inland due to years of aquifer overdraft.
Note: Soquel Creek Water District is planning a Community Workshop on Saturday,October 1 (location TBA) to discuss options to address the “Critical Overdraft” status of the area.  Ms. Flock, the District’s Conservation Specialist, recently conceded that there are no projects currently available (to be paid for by developers’ Water Demand Offset fees collected) that will have a substantial effect on stopping sea water intrusion.
www.soquelcreekwater.org
***********************************************************************************************
NOW FOR NEWS REGARDING THE APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT FINAL MAP LAWSUIT STATUS:
We Are Aptos, represented by Mr. Bill Parkin of Wittwer Parkin LLP, sued Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors and the Aptos Village LLC (Barry Swenson Builder and Aptos Ventures) over an illegal Final Map for the subdivision. The points argued were:
1) There are two “Remainder Parcels” on the Final Map…making about 50% of the subdivision essentially a blank check for future developers to do something different than what was approved in 2012 on the tentative map.
2) The two lots next to the Bayview Hotel were also blank, with no notation of common use (free public) parking and exact building footprints.
3)Â The Park Parcel was not noted on the Final Map nor was it offered for dedication to the County.
The case (16CV00502) was heard August 25 by Judge Paul Burdick as a Callifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) case. At that hearing, Judge Burdick admitted he had not had time to read the documents submitted for the case, but the arguments by counsels centered on whether the “Remainder Parcels” violated the Subdivision Map Act and whether the Final Map for the Aptos Village Project was in conformance with the tentaive map. Judge Burdick ordered that the case would be decided one week later, on September 1.
In the interim, Judge Burdick’s research attorney contacted both counsels and asked for a letter from each to address the possibility of a conditional denial of our case if the County and Aptos Village LLC would agree to uphold the requirements set forth in the Subdivision Development Permit. This was “unusual, odd, and unique” as Bill Parkin’s assistant stated, in that the Judge seemed to agree that the We Are Aptos claims were valid, but was unwilling to declare them the winner. She speculated that Judge Burdick perhaps did not want to be responsible for issuing a decision that would stop the Aptos Village Project.
On September 1, Judge Burdick had many questions for Aptos Village LLC counsel that seemed to make them very flustered. The Judge, as well as Aptos Village LLC counsel, agreed that the “Remainder Parcels” indeed violate the Subdivision Map Act and are not legally Remainder Parcels because those areas were not specified as Remainder Parcels on the tentative map. So the Final Map is perhaps substantially different (non-conforming) than the tentative map, and should not have been aproved by the Board of Supervisors last December.
The issue of the blank lots (owned by Aptos Ventures Joe Appenrodt and Pete Testorff) next to the Bayview Hotel was discussed at length because the rental apartments on the second story of the two proposed buildings would require dedicated parking for the tenants, therefore removing a considerable amount of parking from the free public common use parking (which was not even noted on the Final Map). That is another possibly substantial non-conformance in the Final Map and violates the Subdivision Development Permit conditions of approval of the Final Map.
“It seem there is a clear violation by the County to uphold its own requirements in this document” Judge Burdick said, holding up the Subdivision Development Permit.  He asked to hear from County Counsel. Ms. Brooke Miller, County Counsel, said the Planning Department had assured the County Surveyor, who certified the Final Map’s legality, that all conditions of approval had been met. Further, when the tentative map expires in 2018, (and the developers will be able to get a Certificate of Compliance from the Planning Department to build pretty much whatever they want) “the County will PROBABLY uphold the conditions stated in the Development Permit agreement.”  ( PROBABLY?!!) She went on to say repeatedly that the County must be able to have broad interpretation of its requirements to allow the developer flexibility to make the Project feasible. (i.e., the developers want to make all the money they possibly can on this deal).
I honestly thought that Judge Burdick was going to side with the We Are Aptos claims.
Then, he pullled out a paper and read the decision, denying all claims put forth in the case, and dismissed the court.
Then, he asked that the court re-convene, “Bring Mr. Appenrodt back in, please” he said. Once everyone was again seated and he had established that he was back on record, Judge Burdick disclosed that he is a 30-year friend and past neighbor of Joe Appenrodt, the Aptos Village LLC developer who owns the lots next to the Bayview Hotel.
**************WHY DIDN’T JUDGE BURDICK EXCUSE HIMSELF FROM THE CASE? ***************
If you have thoughts on all this, I would love to hear them. We are considering various options. And I have not even discussed the whole issue of the widespread soil contamination and egregious disregard for proper legal handling of the 5,000 gallon diesel tank mess from March 1. 2016. I will send out information on that in the near future.
Take care …. and write those letters.
