Letters to the Editor
Removing trees would leave ‘concrete jungle’
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
February 6, 2021
A recent letter contained several errors.
The planned concrete jungle will increase the “heat island” effect, exacerbating local global warming, and new residents will be frantically seeking shade and solace. It would take more than 40 years for replacement trees to have a comparable canopy size. In the meantime, we urgently need all the possible carbon dioxide absorption to reduce climate disruption as much as possible.
-- Pauline Seales, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
February 6, 2021
A recent letter contained several errors.
- Most of the Lot 4 trees are healthy. The first arborist stated that five trees were worth saving. Our city arborist has said that only one has a major problem and we are not asking for that to be saved.
- The Lot 4 trees are not native but the new project would include only non- native saplings as native trees are not suitable for a city sidewalk environment.
The planned concrete jungle will increase the “heat island” effect, exacerbating local global warming, and new residents will be frantically seeking shade and solace. It would take more than 40 years for replacement trees to have a comparable canopy size. In the meantime, we urgently need all the possible carbon dioxide absorption to reduce climate disruption as much as possible.
-- Pauline Seales, Santa Cruz
Wants city to keep Lot 4 heritage trees
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
February 6, 2021
A Feb. 14 letter concerning the Lot 4 project makes misleading claims about the heritage trees there.
No one is “using trees as a pretext to stop the project.” Rather, I and others are asking the city and its developer to alter the proposed project to incorporate some of the trees.
The city’s arborist reported that certain trees are “worthy of preservation,” including two magnificent liquidambars and a beautiful magnolia — all adjacent to the Cedar Street sidewalk.
The Heritage Tree Resolution allows removal of heritage trees if a project design cannot be altered to accommodate them. But these trees can be accommodated and the project developer has made no effort to follow the law.
Keeping two or three heritage trees would enhance the present design without sacrificing major project objectives, by breaking up its dull streetscape with a library entrance courtyard.
Save some trees; make the project better!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
February 6, 2021
A Feb. 14 letter concerning the Lot 4 project makes misleading claims about the heritage trees there.
No one is “using trees as a pretext to stop the project.” Rather, I and others are asking the city and its developer to alter the proposed project to incorporate some of the trees.
The city’s arborist reported that certain trees are “worthy of preservation,” including two magnificent liquidambars and a beautiful magnolia — all adjacent to the Cedar Street sidewalk.
The Heritage Tree Resolution allows removal of heritage trees if a project design cannot be altered to accommodate them. But these trees can be accommodated and the project developer has made no effort to follow the law.
Keeping two or three heritage trees would enhance the present design without sacrificing major project objectives, by breaking up its dull streetscape with a library entrance courtyard.
Save some trees; make the project better!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Commons Sense
Good Times
Letters to the Editor
Posted on December 15, 2021
https://goodtimes.sc/santa-cruz-news/letter-to-the-editor-commons-sense/
During my lifetime, I’ve lived in Mexico for three years and spent a month traveling in Spain, experiencing the value of a town square, a welcoming public space that brings community together. Like a living room, a central plaza is a place where people pause in their busy lives to relax, share ideas, celebrate special occasions, play and be entertained, together.
It is an established fact that well-designed and cared for public plazas bring life and vibrancy to a town center, providing a democratic meeting space—an outdoor community center. In this uncertain era of Covid and emerging variants, access to a public outdoor gathering space would be of exceptional value, as we are advised to socialize outdoors as much as possible.
The importance of an outdoor venue to bring people together in our downtown was understood by those who reconfigured the MAH, designing a relaxed outdoor gathering space that immediately filled with conversation, music, food—a joy to walk by, but not the large open public space that a downtown commons would provide.
Imagine walking through our downtown streets in the shadow of the slated-to-be-built many-storied concrete apartments, condos, and maybe a behemoth luxury hotel, blocking sun to meet friends or business associates or just sit on a bench in an open tree-lined park-like plaza with children playing. Imagine tourists (and locals!) looking over the town square weekly event calendar for ways to engage during their visit and perhaps finding outdoor movies, concerts and dances, a cultural festival, an antique fair, a farmer’s market or two!
I recall many years ago, walking from my home down Lincoln St, heading downtown on a weekend and encountering—to my great surprise and delight—a large gathering on the farmers market lot with a stage and food booths, music and speakers, all in Spanish—a joyful gathering of our Oaxacan community. A community commons would provide a permanent place to celebrate and know the rich cultures in our community, a place to gather for a rally after a march, a place for youth to speak out about their future.
Yes, we need to retain and restructure our library per our vote for Measure S in 2016, knowing we have the option to build an extension over the adjacent parking lot. Yes, we need bona fide low-income housing built on or over the many downtown city-owned lots. Yes, we must fill our (verified) unfilled parking lots while developing strategies to mitigate our dependence on cars. Yes, we are obliged to do our part to cut carbon emissions in recognition of the catastrophic threat of global warming.
Yes, yes we must create a welcoming, attractive outdoor community space on our one large open area in the heart of our downtown that will meet our human need to gather in community—to create, to celebrate, to advocate, to play—safely—in this uncertain age of climate catastrophe and pandemics.
With vision and wise leadership, we can have it all.
Sheila Carrillo
Letters to the Editor
Posted on December 15, 2021
https://goodtimes.sc/santa-cruz-news/letter-to-the-editor-commons-sense/
During my lifetime, I’ve lived in Mexico for three years and spent a month traveling in Spain, experiencing the value of a town square, a welcoming public space that brings community together. Like a living room, a central plaza is a place where people pause in their busy lives to relax, share ideas, celebrate special occasions, play and be entertained, together.
It is an established fact that well-designed and cared for public plazas bring life and vibrancy to a town center, providing a democratic meeting space—an outdoor community center. In this uncertain era of Covid and emerging variants, access to a public outdoor gathering space would be of exceptional value, as we are advised to socialize outdoors as much as possible.
The importance of an outdoor venue to bring people together in our downtown was understood by those who reconfigured the MAH, designing a relaxed outdoor gathering space that immediately filled with conversation, music, food—a joy to walk by, but not the large open public space that a downtown commons would provide.
Imagine walking through our downtown streets in the shadow of the slated-to-be-built many-storied concrete apartments, condos, and maybe a behemoth luxury hotel, blocking sun to meet friends or business associates or just sit on a bench in an open tree-lined park-like plaza with children playing. Imagine tourists (and locals!) looking over the town square weekly event calendar for ways to engage during their visit and perhaps finding outdoor movies, concerts and dances, a cultural festival, an antique fair, a farmer’s market or two!
I recall many years ago, walking from my home down Lincoln St, heading downtown on a weekend and encountering—to my great surprise and delight—a large gathering on the farmers market lot with a stage and food booths, music and speakers, all in Spanish—a joyful gathering of our Oaxacan community. A community commons would provide a permanent place to celebrate and know the rich cultures in our community, a place to gather for a rally after a march, a place for youth to speak out about their future.
Yes, we need to retain and restructure our library per our vote for Measure S in 2016, knowing we have the option to build an extension over the adjacent parking lot. Yes, we need bona fide low-income housing built on or over the many downtown city-owned lots. Yes, we must fill our (verified) unfilled parking lots while developing strategies to mitigate our dependence on cars. Yes, we are obliged to do our part to cut carbon emissions in recognition of the catastrophic threat of global warming.
Yes, yes we must create a welcoming, attractive outdoor community space on our one large open area in the heart of our downtown that will meet our human need to gather in community—to create, to celebrate, to advocate, to play—safely—in this uncertain age of climate catastrophe and pandemics.
With vision and wise leadership, we can have it all.
Sheila Carrillo
Article Asks the Wrong Question
Good Times
Letters to the Editor
October 20, 2021
https://goodtimes.sc/santa-cruz-news/letter-to-the-editor-article-asks-the-wrong-question/
Jacob Pierce’s article “Embarrassing Development” (GT, 9/29) is a crass distortion of the issues, and falsely conflates opposition to indebting the City over $80 million for an unneeded parking garage to somehow not being serious about affordable housing.
The City of Santa Cruz has committed insignificant funds to affordable housing to date, but wants to incur a debt of $80 million to build a multi-level parking structure that can only accommodate 100 housing units on top (but hasn’t actually secured a commitment from anyone to build those units).
Every two parking spaces (including associated ramp space) is one less residential unit, and yet none of the advocates for building this giant structure have advocated for reducing the number of parking spaces. According to multiple consultants, we have a surplus of parking downtown. Wouldn’t it make more sense to incur some debt to construct more affordable housing, instead of more parking spaces? And why just downtown Santa Cruz? What about the rest of the city?
Why don’t we have a city-supported housing trust in Santa Cruz like other cities around the country?
Why don’t we make it simpler to divide single-family homes into duplexes or triplexes? Why don’t we convert our widest boulevards into standard width with an extra row of small homes?
Why do we keep on committing precious land area to more roads and parking lots?
Stopping the “Taj Garage” will not harm affordable housing prospects in Santa Cruz—it will actually allow us to direct funds where we will get more bang for the buck. This article just adds to confusion, and contributes nothing to a better vision for our city.
Len Beyea
Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 20, 2021
https://goodtimes.sc/santa-cruz-news/letter-to-the-editor-article-asks-the-wrong-question/
Jacob Pierce’s article “Embarrassing Development” (GT, 9/29) is a crass distortion of the issues, and falsely conflates opposition to indebting the City over $80 million for an unneeded parking garage to somehow not being serious about affordable housing.
The City of Santa Cruz has committed insignificant funds to affordable housing to date, but wants to incur a debt of $80 million to build a multi-level parking structure that can only accommodate 100 housing units on top (but hasn’t actually secured a commitment from anyone to build those units).
Every two parking spaces (including associated ramp space) is one less residential unit, and yet none of the advocates for building this giant structure have advocated for reducing the number of parking spaces. According to multiple consultants, we have a surplus of parking downtown. Wouldn’t it make more sense to incur some debt to construct more affordable housing, instead of more parking spaces? And why just downtown Santa Cruz? What about the rest of the city?
Why don’t we have a city-supported housing trust in Santa Cruz like other cities around the country?
Why don’t we make it simpler to divide single-family homes into duplexes or triplexes? Why don’t we convert our widest boulevards into standard width with an extra row of small homes?
Why do we keep on committing precious land area to more roads and parking lots?
Stopping the “Taj Garage” will not harm affordable housing prospects in Santa Cruz—it will actually allow us to direct funds where we will get more bang for the buck. This article just adds to confusion, and contributes nothing to a better vision for our city.
Len Beyea
Santa Cruz
Wants a renovation of downtown library branch
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
How odd for a librarian to misstate facts and push against freedom of public expression in a newspaper. Perhaps a sign of desperation among people who favor turning a tree-shaded Farmers Market into a 6-7 story monstrosity?
As Group 4 established in their May 2020 “Santa Cruz Downtown Library Mixed-Use Project Cost Assessment,” renovation of the existing library costs slightly less per square foot than the proposed Lot 4 library – each for the same “base” level of finish.
I voted for Measure S and I love libraries. The then-director of Santa Cruz Public Libraries said during the campaign, “The downtown Santa Cruz branch, the flagship of the system, requires a comprehensive renovation.” I want a comprehensive renovation.
Stephen Kessler has used consideration of the Lot 4 project to deepen our understanding of things that matter: city planning, our politics, and our prospects for democratic government in Santa Cruz.
-- John Hall, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
How odd for a librarian to misstate facts and push against freedom of public expression in a newspaper. Perhaps a sign of desperation among people who favor turning a tree-shaded Farmers Market into a 6-7 story monstrosity?
As Group 4 established in their May 2020 “Santa Cruz Downtown Library Mixed-Use Project Cost Assessment,” renovation of the existing library costs slightly less per square foot than the proposed Lot 4 library – each for the same “base” level of finish.
I voted for Measure S and I love libraries. The then-director of Santa Cruz Public Libraries said during the campaign, “The downtown Santa Cruz branch, the flagship of the system, requires a comprehensive renovation.” I want a comprehensive renovation.
Stephen Kessler has used consideration of the Lot 4 project to deepen our understanding of things that matter: city planning, our politics, and our prospects for democratic government in Santa Cruz.
-- John Hall, Santa Cruz
Empty parking lots:
Better to save downtown trees
Better to save downtown trees
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 1, 2021
I was downtown today and was struck by how empty the parking lots were, except for the one next to the Broadway Bridge, which is full of tents and umbrellas. With so much of the off-street parking spaces now converted to outdoor dining areas, one would assume the lots would be packed, given the warning from City Council on our dire need for a new parking structure, particularly one that necessitates cutting down mature shade trees when most cities are working to save trees in their downtown areas.
I guess they’re trying to keep Santa Cruz weird.
— Mary McGranahan, Scotts Valley
Letters to the Editor
October 1, 2021
I was downtown today and was struck by how empty the parking lots were, except for the one next to the Broadway Bridge, which is full of tents and umbrellas. With so much of the off-street parking spaces now converted to outdoor dining areas, one would assume the lots would be packed, given the warning from City Council on our dire need for a new parking structure, particularly one that necessitates cutting down mature shade trees when most cities are working to save trees in their downtown areas.
I guess they’re trying to keep Santa Cruz weird.
— Mary McGranahan, Scotts Valley
Dreading loss of Farmers Market lot for library
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/09/29/letter-dreading-loss-of-farmers-market-lot-for-library/
While welcoming back the return of the monthly downtown Antiques Faire two weeks ago and enjoying the beautiful bounty of the downtown Farmers Market, I couldn’t help dreading the idea that Parking Lot 4, where those events have taken place for years, may be obliterated, the stately shady trees chopped down, and an out-of-scale concrete building erected in that location. What a pity that the City bungled the voter-approved intention of restoring the library by entangling it with the popular Farmers Market. The library and the market provide goods and services that sustain everyone. Their current locations are the optimal ones.
A fifth downtown parking garage does not belong there. Subsidized housing can be created on other City properties, leaving Lot 4 to blossom into a thriving community focal point for residents and visitors alike.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/09/29/letter-dreading-loss-of-farmers-market-lot-for-library/
While welcoming back the return of the monthly downtown Antiques Faire two weeks ago and enjoying the beautiful bounty of the downtown Farmers Market, I couldn’t help dreading the idea that Parking Lot 4, where those events have taken place for years, may be obliterated, the stately shady trees chopped down, and an out-of-scale concrete building erected in that location. What a pity that the City bungled the voter-approved intention of restoring the library by entangling it with the popular Farmers Market. The library and the market provide goods and services that sustain everyone. Their current locations are the optimal ones.
A fifth downtown parking garage does not belong there. Subsidized housing can be created on other City properties, leaving Lot 4 to blossom into a thriving community focal point for residents and visitors alike.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
Let voters decide on multi-use library project
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
July 22, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/22/letter-let-voters-decide-on-multi-use-library-project/
A cabal seems to be forming against the Sentinel’s independent- minded columnist Stephen Kessler. The most recent complainer, a former mayor, is “getting tired” of his columns.
Instead, he should get tired of the dysfunctional city planning process that Kessler laments.
The former mayor doesn’t mention the subjects of Kessler’s columns – saving the Heritage trees on Lot 4, avoiding building a costly and unnecessary parking garage, and the “bait and switch” using Measure S bond funds to build a new library and displace the Farmers’ Market, rather than renovating the existing library as was proposed during the bond campaign.
Instead, he asks how Kessler proposes to get more affordable housing in Santa Cruz. I can think of at least one way: build affordable housing on Lot 7 behind the Del Mar Theater, keep the Farmers’ Market where it is, and renovate the Library at its Civic Center location. Let voters decide!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
July 22, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/22/letter-let-voters-decide-on-multi-use-library-project/
A cabal seems to be forming against the Sentinel’s independent- minded columnist Stephen Kessler. The most recent complainer, a former mayor, is “getting tired” of his columns.
Instead, he should get tired of the dysfunctional city planning process that Kessler laments.
The former mayor doesn’t mention the subjects of Kessler’s columns – saving the Heritage trees on Lot 4, avoiding building a costly and unnecessary parking garage, and the “bait and switch” using Measure S bond funds to build a new library and displace the Farmers’ Market, rather than renovating the existing library as was proposed during the bond campaign.
Instead, he asks how Kessler proposes to get more affordable housing in Santa Cruz. I can think of at least one way: build affordable housing on Lot 7 behind the Del Mar Theater, keep the Farmers’ Market where it is, and renovate the Library at its Civic Center location. Let voters decide!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Yet another bad downtown project in works
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
July 22, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/22/letter-yet-another-bad-downtown-project-in-works/
We often look to Santa Barbara as a model of downtown design and architectural standards. We clearly have failed, the River Street sign being the most egregious example. Then there is the new Cooperhouse which our local and most enduring writer, Bruce Bratton, has aptly called a series of temporary buildings. And the vastly and ghastly out of scale Cinema Nine building that looms 10 stories over my small restaurant.
And still city leaders plow on with a plan to eliminate our one sorely needed event space and build another parking structure to combine with and exploit library funding. When I implored a new council member to stop the project she threw up her hands and said it was all approved…when in truth just some planning money has been approved.
There are plans to mount a referendum against the project which would likely kill it … more time and money for no reason.
— Paul Cocking, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
July 22, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/22/letter-yet-another-bad-downtown-project-in-works/
We often look to Santa Barbara as a model of downtown design and architectural standards. We clearly have failed, the River Street sign being the most egregious example. Then there is the new Cooperhouse which our local and most enduring writer, Bruce Bratton, has aptly called a series of temporary buildings. And the vastly and ghastly out of scale Cinema Nine building that looms 10 stories over my small restaurant.
And still city leaders plow on with a plan to eliminate our one sorely needed event space and build another parking structure to combine with and exploit library funding. When I implored a new council member to stop the project she threw up her hands and said it was all approved…when in truth just some planning money has been approved.
There are plans to mount a referendum against the project which would likely kill it … more time and money for no reason.
— Paul Cocking, Santa Cruz
Downtown commons area worth fighting for
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
July 21, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/21/letter-downtown-commons-area-worth-fighting-for/
Mike Rotkin’s letter Tuesday complains that Stephen Kessler has become a broken record. Perhaps a broken record is necessary until our city leaders get it. Building multiple high rises with a small percentage of affordable housing will not solve the problem, and the current plan threatens the last chance of a downtown commons green area (Lot 4). We can get much more affordable housing by relaxing the restrictions, permit costs and red-tape around adding ADUs.
We used to live in Singapore, and there the government solved the house-less problem by building multiple high rises that are 100% affordable housing but each high rise is surrounded by large green spaces and common areas that increase rather than take away the beauty of the area. (That solution could work for California if funded in the state budget.) Creating a downtown commons area is worth fighting for.
— Doug and Anna Huskey, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
July 21, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/07/21/letter-downtown-commons-area-worth-fighting-for/
Mike Rotkin’s letter Tuesday complains that Stephen Kessler has become a broken record. Perhaps a broken record is necessary until our city leaders get it. Building multiple high rises with a small percentage of affordable housing will not solve the problem, and the current plan threatens the last chance of a downtown commons green area (Lot 4). We can get much more affordable housing by relaxing the restrictions, permit costs and red-tape around adding ADUs.
We used to live in Singapore, and there the government solved the house-less problem by building multiple high rises that are 100% affordable housing but each high rise is surrounded by large green spaces and common areas that increase rather than take away the beauty of the area. (That solution could work for California if funded in the state budget.) Creating a downtown commons area is worth fighting for.
— Doug and Anna Huskey, Santa Cruz
Value what we have and don’t add development
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
July 1, 2021
Stephen Kessler’s Commentary (June 26) cuts to the heart of the garage-library-housing issue: How much do we value that which sustains us? People flock to Santa Cruz because where they live lacks something innately pleasurable and peaceful. Somehow, sterile monolithic housing blocks, and pollution- belching traffic do not substitute for trees, trails, streams, blue skies, birds and beaches. Here in Santa Cruz, we have fragments of these environmental amenities struggling to survive; yet it seems that state, city and county planners, hand-in-hand with developers, continue oblivious to the health effects of their projects on people and on other living things.
More and bigger is definitely not better.
— Catherine Webb, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
July 1, 2021
Stephen Kessler’s Commentary (June 26) cuts to the heart of the garage-library-housing issue: How much do we value that which sustains us? People flock to Santa Cruz because where they live lacks something innately pleasurable and peaceful. Somehow, sterile monolithic housing blocks, and pollution- belching traffic do not substitute for trees, trails, streams, blue skies, birds and beaches. Here in Santa Cruz, we have fragments of these environmental amenities struggling to survive; yet it seems that state, city and county planners, hand-in-hand with developers, continue oblivious to the health effects of their projects on people and on other living things.
More and bigger is definitely not better.
— Catherine Webb, Santa Cruz
Preserve farmers market space for downtown park
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
June 29, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/06/29/letter-preserve-farmers-market-space-for-downtown-park/
Thank you Stephen Kessler in your June 26 column, for your untiring adherence to what is needed in our downtown. We now see the few remaining empty spaces being vertically developed. Yes, we need housing for those who will and are employed downtown. All who live downtown in small apartments and tired shoppers would like a place to sit outside in pleasant surroundings. This space is the last ample space with heritage trees. If you are undecided about this issue I encourage you to go sit on Cathcart Street at the sidewalk cafes and look across at the empty space which has trees that have taken years to mature. The loss of this green space would be a loss for Santa Cruz.
— Anna Haulenbeek Huskey, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
June 29, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/06/29/letter-preserve-farmers-market-space-for-downtown-park/
Thank you Stephen Kessler in your June 26 column, for your untiring adherence to what is needed in our downtown. We now see the few remaining empty spaces being vertically developed. Yes, we need housing for those who will and are employed downtown. All who live downtown in small apartments and tired shoppers would like a place to sit outside in pleasant surroundings. This space is the last ample space with heritage trees. If you are undecided about this issue I encourage you to go sit on Cathcart Street at the sidewalk cafes and look across at the empty space which has trees that have taken years to mature. The loss of this green space would be a loss for Santa Cruz.
— Anna Haulenbeek Huskey, Santa Cruz
SC Library/garage plan feels like a scam
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
Thank you Stephen Kessler for continuing to keep the library /garage issue in front of us. We, who abhor the proposed combination of a huge concrete parking garage with our public library, (with the come-on of “affordable housing” as the “spoonful of sugar”) are grateful for your insistence that the matter is NOT a done deal.
Thank heavens. When Andrew Carnegie set about ensuring the citizens of even small towns a fine building to house the public library, he made sure the architects were first rate and the edifices were a pride of community. The present library is not up to speed as all agree.
We need affordable housing, yes. But why aren’t present parking lots the sites for higher density usage? Could it be that Measure S funds we voted for libraries would not be at the city’s disposal? It certainly feels like a scam to many of us.
— Susan Stuart, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
June 3, 2021
Thank you Stephen Kessler for continuing to keep the library /garage issue in front of us. We, who abhor the proposed combination of a huge concrete parking garage with our public library, (with the come-on of “affordable housing” as the “spoonful of sugar”) are grateful for your insistence that the matter is NOT a done deal.
Thank heavens. When Andrew Carnegie set about ensuring the citizens of even small towns a fine building to house the public library, he made sure the architects were first rate and the edifices were a pride of community. The present library is not up to speed as all agree.
We need affordable housing, yes. But why aren’t present parking lots the sites for higher density usage? Could it be that Measure S funds we voted for libraries would not be at the city’s disposal? It certainly feels like a scam to many of us.
— Susan Stuart, Santa Cruz
Give Santa Cruz chance to vote on library project
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
June 1, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/06/01/letter-give-santa-cruz-chance-to-vote-on-library-project/
I was so glad to see Stephen Kessler’s column in Saturday’s Sentinel. It is urgent that we focus attention on the disastrous library/parking lot project before it goes any further. We have never had an opportunity to vote on this monstrous idea that would take down trees, displace the weekly Farmers Market, and give center stage to a parking garage. We could instead have a lovely plaza in the heart of downtown, thus preserving the character of our town, its trees and weekly Farmers Market.
Who stands to benefit from the parking garage fiasco? Not the general public, but perhaps a property owner. Give us a chance to vote on this expensive, permanent structure that would negatively change the character of our downtown. Don’t let this happen.
— Myra Morris, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
June 1, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/06/01/letter-give-santa-cruz-chance-to-vote-on-library-project/
I was so glad to see Stephen Kessler’s column in Saturday’s Sentinel. It is urgent that we focus attention on the disastrous library/parking lot project before it goes any further. We have never had an opportunity to vote on this monstrous idea that would take down trees, displace the weekly Farmers Market, and give center stage to a parking garage. We could instead have a lovely plaza in the heart of downtown, thus preserving the character of our town, its trees and weekly Farmers Market.
Who stands to benefit from the parking garage fiasco? Not the general public, but perhaps a property owner. Give us a chance to vote on this expensive, permanent structure that would negatively change the character of our downtown. Don’t let this happen.
— Myra Morris, Santa Cruz
A better vision for public space than Abbott Square
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
May 7, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/05/07/letter-a-better-vision-for-public-space-than-abbott-square/
Reading a letter writer’s fond assessment (May 6) of Abbott Square’s function as a “public space” made me pause. Abbott Square is designed for customers eating and drinking at pricey adjacent eateries and bars; tall buildings surround its treeless, hardscape courtyard, keeping it in shadow in the morning and after 2 p.m. and creating wind vectors swirling every which way. Sitting at aluminum tables on aluminum chairs one has clear views of busy Cooper street, and in between parked-cars the curious can spy patrons entering the sex shop directly across whose website encourages store visitors to “embrace sensuality where seediness is nonexistent,” a laudable public good.
My idea of public space differs. I imagine a green park where everyone gathers for all kinds of events and performances for free. Shining in sunlight throughout the day, shaded by heritage trees, every evening sunset bathes our commons in the warm glow of camaraderie.
— Bob Morgan, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
May 7, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/05/07/letter-a-better-vision-for-public-space-than-abbott-square/
Reading a letter writer’s fond assessment (May 6) of Abbott Square’s function as a “public space” made me pause. Abbott Square is designed for customers eating and drinking at pricey adjacent eateries and bars; tall buildings surround its treeless, hardscape courtyard, keeping it in shadow in the morning and after 2 p.m. and creating wind vectors swirling every which way. Sitting at aluminum tables on aluminum chairs one has clear views of busy Cooper street, and in between parked-cars the curious can spy patrons entering the sex shop directly across whose website encourages store visitors to “embrace sensuality where seediness is nonexistent,” a laudable public good.
My idea of public space differs. I imagine a green park where everyone gathers for all kinds of events and performances for free. Shining in sunlight throughout the day, shaded by heritage trees, every evening sunset bathes our commons in the warm glow of camaraderie.
— Bob Morgan, Santa Cruz
Library plan:
Remember Santa Cruz’s desal vote
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
April 30, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/04/30/letter-library-plan-remember-santa-cruzs-desal-vote/
The recent article about Lighthouse Field and the grassroots effort that saved that precious community space reminded me that local history remains one of our greatest and most informative teachers. Many will remember that some years ago a desal plant being steamrollered by the City Council and the Water Department seemed all but certain to be built. Yet a small group of concerned citizens united to place a measure on the ballot securing the right of the people to decide whether such a project should go forward. That measure was passed resoundingly and desal as a water supply alternative was abandoned.
I reference this to remind those who think the library monolith approved by Council is similarly certain to go forward. Never forget that the power to determine the future of our public facilities still rests with the people of Santa Cruz. History remembers. Will we?
— Steve Pleich, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
April 30, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/04/30/letter-library-plan-remember-santa-cruzs-desal-vote/
The recent article about Lighthouse Field and the grassroots effort that saved that precious community space reminded me that local history remains one of our greatest and most informative teachers. Many will remember that some years ago a desal plant being steamrollered by the City Council and the Water Department seemed all but certain to be built. Yet a small group of concerned citizens united to place a measure on the ballot securing the right of the people to decide whether such a project should go forward. That measure was passed resoundingly and desal as a water supply alternative was abandoned.
I reference this to remind those who think the library monolith approved by Council is similarly certain to go forward. Never forget that the power to determine the future of our public facilities still rests with the people of Santa Cruz. History remembers. Will we?
— Steve Pleich, Santa Cruz
Relocation of downtown library not a done deal
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
April 27, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/04/27/letter-relocation-of-downtown-library-not-a-done-deal/
There are some unfortunate omissions and misrepresentations in Sunday’s article, “Santa Cruz to seek community input on old library site.” Chief among these is the repeated use of the word “will” to describe the relocation of the Downtown Library. Although it’s true that this relocation is the city’s plan, it is far from a done deal. There is a strong and increasing opposition in the community to the destruction of the farmers market site, with its concomitant construction of a multi-level garage and library project in its place. It is misleading to report on the plan as if it were reality, and to leave out any mention of the high level of dissent in the community about this plan – dissent in plain view at the City Council meeting last October when the city’s library plan was discussed.
— Michael Levy, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
April 27, 2021
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/04/27/letter-relocation-of-downtown-library-not-a-done-deal/
There are some unfortunate omissions and misrepresentations in Sunday’s article, “Santa Cruz to seek community input on old library site.” Chief among these is the repeated use of the word “will” to describe the relocation of the Downtown Library. Although it’s true that this relocation is the city’s plan, it is far from a done deal. There is a strong and increasing opposition in the community to the destruction of the farmers market site, with its concomitant construction of a multi-level garage and library project in its place. It is misleading to report on the plan as if it were reality, and to leave out any mention of the high level of dissent in the community about this plan – dissent in plain view at the City Council meeting last October when the city’s library plan was discussed.
— Michael Levy, Santa Cruz
Creating Neanderthal Era architectural behemoth
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
December 26, 2020
Peoples Park - that site the Downtown Merchants Association schemes to use to construct a Neanderthal Era architectural behemoth memorializing last century’s internal combustion transportation machines, requires the destruction of the site’s proud magnolia trees.
What fun it will be to behold, as the crowds collect to watch our most defiant tree huggers and sitters of all ages defying the empowered, much as took place when UCSC wanted to plant a Science Building in place of redwood trees.
Day and night, a carnival, reflecting on the City Council members’ dispassion.
— Bill Patterson, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
December 26, 2020
Peoples Park - that site the Downtown Merchants Association schemes to use to construct a Neanderthal Era architectural behemoth memorializing last century’s internal combustion transportation machines, requires the destruction of the site’s proud magnolia trees.
What fun it will be to behold, as the crowds collect to watch our most defiant tree huggers and sitters of all ages defying the empowered, much as took place when UCSC wanted to plant a Science Building in place of redwood trees.
Day and night, a carnival, reflecting on the City Council members’ dispassion.
— Bill Patterson, Santa Cruz
Agrees with Call for Advisory Vote on Library
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
December 11, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/11/letter-agrees-with-call-for-advisory-vote-on-library/
Let’s get rid of one canard about library bond funding (Editorial, Dec. 6).
Some say building a new downtown library was a possibility included in a 2013 Library Facilities report. Therefore, displacing the farmers market on Lot 4 rather than renovating the existing Downtown Library is not a “bait and switch.”
But 2016 Measure S campaign materials, news reports, and editorials exclusively discussed renovation of the Downtown Library.
American philosopher John Dewey once argued, “No government by experts in which the masses do not have the chance to inform the experts as to their needs can be anything but an oligarchy managed in the interests of the few.”
So yes, let’s have an advisory ballot, the sooner the better, before the city wastes more money on the ill-begotten mixed-use plan. We can renovate/rebuild the library and build affordable housing on Lot 7. We don’t need a parking garage.
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
December 11, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/11/letter-agrees-with-call-for-advisory-vote-on-library/
Let’s get rid of one canard about library bond funding (Editorial, Dec. 6).
Some say building a new downtown library was a possibility included in a 2013 Library Facilities report. Therefore, displacing the farmers market on Lot 4 rather than renovating the existing Downtown Library is not a “bait and switch.”
But 2016 Measure S campaign materials, news reports, and editorials exclusively discussed renovation of the Downtown Library.
American philosopher John Dewey once argued, “No government by experts in which the masses do not have the chance to inform the experts as to their needs can be anything but an oligarchy managed in the interests of the few.”
So yes, let’s have an advisory ballot, the sooner the better, before the city wastes more money on the ill-begotten mixed-use plan. We can renovate/rebuild the library and build affordable housing on Lot 7. We don’t need a parking garage.
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Editorial correct on library, transportation measures
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
December 9, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/10/letter-editorial-correct-on-library-transportation-measures/
Thanks so much for your excellent editorial proposing a vote on the library renovation and on a train in the rail corridor. You were exactly correct in clarifying that neither Measure S nor Measure D actually support the proposals for a library/ garage/housing project downtown or a train on the rail corridor, both of which have created much controversy. It does indeed seem that folks have gotten caught up in these ambitious projects growing out of a lack of understanding of what these two measures actually do. A vote by the citizens of the city and county would clarify whether there was genuine support (and possibly funding) for these projects and remove a source of much division in Santa Cruz, not to mention a waste of taxpayer funds.
— Nadene Thorne, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
December 9, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/10/letter-editorial-correct-on-library-transportation-measures/
Thanks so much for your excellent editorial proposing a vote on the library renovation and on a train in the rail corridor. You were exactly correct in clarifying that neither Measure S nor Measure D actually support the proposals for a library/ garage/housing project downtown or a train on the rail corridor, both of which have created much controversy. It does indeed seem that folks have gotten caught up in these ambitious projects growing out of a lack of understanding of what these two measures actually do. A vote by the citizens of the city and county would clarify whether there was genuine support (and possibly funding) for these projects and remove a source of much division in Santa Cruz, not to mention a waste of taxpayer funds.
— Nadene Thorne, Santa Cruz
Understanding why project is divisive
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
December 8, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/08/letter-editorial-understanding-why-project-is-divisive/
Residents who value the expansive farmers market on Lot 4 understand why the proposed six (perhaps seven) story multi-use structure to be dumped on our last downtown public space divides our community (Editorial Dec. 6). Why repeat mistakes? The monstrosity that replaced the Cooper House, and its faux marble counterpart, the Rittenhouse building, not only destroy the unique character of downtown Santa Cruz, but cover us in steel and concrete. Will Lot 4 suffer the same fate?
The City Council’s 2019 Health in all Policies Ordinance, championed by Council member Martine Watkins, recognizes the benefit well-designed city planning brings residents. The “social conditions of health and well-being” they write, means “Accessible built environments that promote health and safety, mitigate emissions, improve parks and green space …” We deserve a reimagined, green public commons on Lot 4, our shared emerald. Would you rather sit under a heritage magnolia, or park in a garage?
— Valerie Girsh, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
December 8, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/08/letter-editorial-understanding-why-project-is-divisive/
Residents who value the expansive farmers market on Lot 4 understand why the proposed six (perhaps seven) story multi-use structure to be dumped on our last downtown public space divides our community (Editorial Dec. 6). Why repeat mistakes? The monstrosity that replaced the Cooper House, and its faux marble counterpart, the Rittenhouse building, not only destroy the unique character of downtown Santa Cruz, but cover us in steel and concrete. Will Lot 4 suffer the same fate?
The City Council’s 2019 Health in all Policies Ordinance, championed by Council member Martine Watkins, recognizes the benefit well-designed city planning brings residents. The “social conditions of health and well-being” they write, means “Accessible built environments that promote health and safety, mitigate emissions, improve parks and green space …” We deserve a reimagined, green public commons on Lot 4, our shared emerald. Would you rather sit under a heritage magnolia, or park in a garage?
— Valerie Girsh, Santa Cruz
Preserving ‘village’ qualities of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
December 1, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/01/letter-preserving-village-qualities-of-santa-cruz/
Thank you to the recent letter writer who expressed a beautiful vision of a Cedar Street corridor that preserves the village qualities that have made Santa Cruz so attractive.
Let's create an attractive village square where the current farmers market is, keeping those lovely magnolia trees that frame the area, renovate the library, and get rid of the taj garage idea all together. Yes, we need low cost housing but we can build it elsewhere in the city.
— David Robinette, Capitola
Letters to the Editor
December 1, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/12/01/letter-preserving-village-qualities-of-santa-cruz/
Thank you to the recent letter writer who expressed a beautiful vision of a Cedar Street corridor that preserves the village qualities that have made Santa Cruz so attractive.
Let's create an attractive village square where the current farmers market is, keeping those lovely magnolia trees that frame the area, renovate the library, and get rid of the taj garage idea all together. Yes, we need low cost housing but we can build it elsewhere in the city.
— David Robinette, Capitola
Fresh vision needed rather than a mega structure
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
November 26, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/11/26/letter-fresh-vision-needed-rather-than-a-mega-structure/
What’s clear from Matt Farrell’s (11/24) Op-Ed was his 20th century preparation to be a past parking czar for Santa Cruz, his vision shaped by parking garages to promote an urban auto infrastructure that has congested our cities and roads, accelerated global warming and turned downtowns into concrete deserts. Feed the beast, even when the beast consumes us. Instead, let’s create a fresh vision: urban planning for people, not cars, a re-imagined public space on Lot 4, sustainable 21st-century electrified transit and ecological design aligned with the 2017 amended Downtown Plan “to preserve and enhance the informal ‘village’ qualities of the Cedar Street Corridor.”
A six-story mega structure spanning Lot 4 isn’t downtown planning, it’s grotesque. Let’s renovate our current library with bells and whistles, enhancing our Civic Center, and then create a green oasis on Lot 4, anchored by the farmers market, a lively public commons for everyone.
— Robert Morgan, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
November 26, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/11/26/letter-fresh-vision-needed-rather-than-a-mega-structure/
What’s clear from Matt Farrell’s (11/24) Op-Ed was his 20th century preparation to be a past parking czar for Santa Cruz, his vision shaped by parking garages to promote an urban auto infrastructure that has congested our cities and roads, accelerated global warming and turned downtowns into concrete deserts. Feed the beast, even when the beast consumes us. Instead, let’s create a fresh vision: urban planning for people, not cars, a re-imagined public space on Lot 4, sustainable 21st-century electrified transit and ecological design aligned with the 2017 amended Downtown Plan “to preserve and enhance the informal ‘village’ qualities of the Cedar Street Corridor.”
A six-story mega structure spanning Lot 4 isn’t downtown planning, it’s grotesque. Let’s renovate our current library with bells and whistles, enhancing our Civic Center, and then create a green oasis on Lot 4, anchored by the farmers market, a lively public commons for everyone.
— Robert Morgan, Santa Cruz
Put library multi-use project to community vote
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
November 6, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/11/06/letter-put-library-multi-use-project-to-community-vote/
I agree with the main points in a recent column by Mayor Justin Cummings, who states, “… we believe our democratic principles call on us to protect the right to debate, disagree and make our opinions known.” Those who opposed the garage/library/housing project have made their voices known, by an overwhelming margin.
Mayor Cummings says: “One of the most effective ways to have our voices heard is through our informed vote, and at the local level, voting is key to having your voice heard on issues that directly affect our community.”
I absolutely agree. Let it be decided at the ballot box, not by a City Council cobbled together after a contentious recall and that’s clearly not in agreement this project would be good for Santa Cruz.
If a community vote supports the garage/housing/library project displacing the farmers market, killing any chance for a Downtown Park, I would duly shut up. That’s democracy.
— Curt Simmons, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
November 6, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/11/06/letter-put-library-multi-use-project-to-community-vote/
I agree with the main points in a recent column by Mayor Justin Cummings, who states, “… we believe our democratic principles call on us to protect the right to debate, disagree and make our opinions known.” Those who opposed the garage/library/housing project have made their voices known, by an overwhelming margin.
Mayor Cummings says: “One of the most effective ways to have our voices heard is through our informed vote, and at the local level, voting is key to having your voice heard on issues that directly affect our community.”
I absolutely agree. Let it be decided at the ballot box, not by a City Council cobbled together after a contentious recall and that’s clearly not in agreement this project would be good for Santa Cruz.
If a community vote supports the garage/housing/library project displacing the farmers market, killing any chance for a Downtown Park, I would duly shut up. That’s democracy.
— Curt Simmons, Santa Cruz
Appalled at City Council actions on library plan
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 18, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/28/letter-appalled-at-city-council-actions-on-library-plan/
I’m appalled that the Santa Cruz City Council would consider a contract for the buried library and 50 + housing units and unneeded 400 car parking lot to literally waste $240,000 on a consultant in the middle of a pandemic prior to an election just moments away, that might (hopefully) unseat some of them and still consider refusing to rebuild the current library when 1.) that’s what the people want, and, 2.) there is no money for this project in spite of what the out of touch over paid staff keep saying. The public money set aside for refurbishing the current library needs to be spent before it expires, not three years from now. Don’t bury this library, don’t build an idiotic parking lot. Save the farmers market. Build the housing units on the river.
— Deborah Hencke, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 18, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/28/letter-appalled-at-city-council-actions-on-library-plan/
I’m appalled that the Santa Cruz City Council would consider a contract for the buried library and 50 + housing units and unneeded 400 car parking lot to literally waste $240,000 on a consultant in the middle of a pandemic prior to an election just moments away, that might (hopefully) unseat some of them and still consider refusing to rebuild the current library when 1.) that’s what the people want, and, 2.) there is no money for this project in spite of what the out of touch over paid staff keep saying. The public money set aside for refurbishing the current library needs to be spent before it expires, not three years from now. Don’t bury this library, don’t build an idiotic parking lot. Save the farmers market. Build the housing units on the river.
— Deborah Hencke, Santa Cruz
Op-ed on library project was propaganda
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 18, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/18/letter-op-ed-on-library-project-was-propaganda/
The Santa Cruz Economic Development Director, Bonnie Lipscomb, is a civil servant, not a political office holder.
I was therefore surprised by her op-ed (Oct. 13th) promoting the mixed-use project on the city-owned Parking Lot 4, where the Farmers Market is held.
Lipscomb claims the project is “fiscally responsible,” failing to mention that with only $25.5 million of Measure S funds left for the Downtown Library, that component is $5 - $6 million short of funding.
The parking garage component gets no mention, for good reason: it is unnecessary. For affordable housing, two state grant applications are “in the pipeline,” but award notices were expected last August.
Civil servants should not waste time writing propaganda when city staff failed to meet the council’s deadline that they provide financial information about the mixed-use project by Sept. 23. If Lipscomb wants to engage in politics, she should resign and run for office.
— Robert Morgan, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 18, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/18/letter-op-ed-on-library-project-was-propaganda/
The Santa Cruz Economic Development Director, Bonnie Lipscomb, is a civil servant, not a political office holder.
I was therefore surprised by her op-ed (Oct. 13th) promoting the mixed-use project on the city-owned Parking Lot 4, where the Farmers Market is held.
Lipscomb claims the project is “fiscally responsible,” failing to mention that with only $25.5 million of Measure S funds left for the Downtown Library, that component is $5 - $6 million short of funding.
The parking garage component gets no mention, for good reason: it is unnecessary. For affordable housing, two state grant applications are “in the pipeline,” but award notices were expected last August.
Civil servants should not waste time writing propaganda when city staff failed to meet the council’s deadline that they provide financial information about the mixed-use project by Sept. 23. If Lipscomb wants to engage in politics, she should resign and run for office.
— Robert Morgan, Santa Cruz
Community doesn’t want library/garage project
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 15, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/15/letter-community-doesnt-want-library-garage-project/
Economic. Development. Director Bonnie Lipscomb is clearly leading the political charge on a staff-driven project that has little support in the community. It has become crystal clear over the past two years that support is lacking for the idea of placing the downtown library below five stories of concrete. Ms. Lipscomb has done no poll, or even walked neighborhoods like so many of us, to discern what the will of the people actually is. No voter I have spoken to during this campaign season wants this parking structure. City staff wants it, but the people do not. So, what do they do? Throw some “affordable” housing into the mix because everyone wants affordable housing. True, but not on this site. The farmers market is on this site. The city owns at least three other downtown parcels, all quite suitable for housing. The council is deeply divided on this project and must direct City Manager Bernal and Ms. Lipscomb to please stop this charade.
— Chris Krohn, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 15, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/15/letter-community-doesnt-want-library-garage-project/
Economic. Development. Director Bonnie Lipscomb is clearly leading the political charge on a staff-driven project that has little support in the community. It has become crystal clear over the past two years that support is lacking for the idea of placing the downtown library below five stories of concrete. Ms. Lipscomb has done no poll, or even walked neighborhoods like so many of us, to discern what the will of the people actually is. No voter I have spoken to during this campaign season wants this parking structure. City staff wants it, but the people do not. So, what do they do? Throw some “affordable” housing into the mix because everyone wants affordable housing. True, but not on this site. The farmers market is on this site. The city owns at least three other downtown parcels, all quite suitable for housing. The council is deeply divided on this project and must direct City Manager Bernal and Ms. Lipscomb to please stop this charade.
— Chris Krohn, Santa Cruz
Double talk in library project commentary
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 15, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/15/letter-double-talk-in-library-project-commentary/
In her article proselytizing the garage/library/housing triad, the City’s Economic Development Director makes three shaky points. First, she flaunts that 1,300 affordable housing units have been built in the past 30 years. That is an average of only 43 units per year.
With such a meager record, I would not go around advertising it. And the few affordable units to be built with the new garage merely continue this dismal record.
Secondly, she contends that a modern library is “unable to be achieved in a renovation of the existing site.” This is a highly contested opinion that does not square with the facts.
Thirdly, she claims that the triad concoction will provide “consolidated and shared parking that encourages pedestrian travel throughout downtown.”
In other words, all the new traffic that will pour into the new garage is going to stimulate pedestrians. What double talk!
— Aldo Giacchino, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 15, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/15/letter-double-talk-in-library-project-commentary/
In her article proselytizing the garage/library/housing triad, the City’s Economic Development Director makes three shaky points. First, she flaunts that 1,300 affordable housing units have been built in the past 30 years. That is an average of only 43 units per year.
With such a meager record, I would not go around advertising it. And the few affordable units to be built with the new garage merely continue this dismal record.
Secondly, she contends that a modern library is “unable to be achieved in a renovation of the existing site.” This is a highly contested opinion that does not square with the facts.
Thirdly, she claims that the triad concoction will provide “consolidated and shared parking that encourages pedestrian travel throughout downtown.”
In other words, all the new traffic that will pour into the new garage is going to stimulate pedestrians. What double talk!
— Aldo Giacchino, Santa Cruz
A new library in mixed-use plan not larger
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 8, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/08/letter-a-new-library-in-mixed-use-plan-not-larger/
Letter writer Jane Heyse is misinformed in stating that the library in the mixed use project is a larger redesign, compared to the existing library, which is 44,000 square feet.
The proposed mixed-use plan will not result in a larger library. Current available financing only provides for a 30,000 square foot bare-bones library, whether it is built in the 5 - 6 story structure proposed for Lot 4 or rebuilt at the Civic Center, using the existing library building. She wrote of easy parking access. The renovation/rebuild plan shows a convenient entry from an existing surface lot right next door to the library. One shouldn’t assume there will be free parking in the very costly planned garage, or whether it will be more accessible than a surface lot.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 8, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/08/letter-a-new-library-in-mixed-use-plan-not-larger/
Letter writer Jane Heyse is misinformed in stating that the library in the mixed use project is a larger redesign, compared to the existing library, which is 44,000 square feet.
The proposed mixed-use plan will not result in a larger library. Current available financing only provides for a 30,000 square foot bare-bones library, whether it is built in the 5 - 6 story structure proposed for Lot 4 or rebuilt at the Civic Center, using the existing library building. She wrote of easy parking access. The renovation/rebuild plan shows a convenient entry from an existing surface lot right next door to the library. One shouldn’t assume there will be free parking in the very costly planned garage, or whether it will be more accessible than a surface lot.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
Library plans ignore climate change effects
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/04/letter-6/
As an evacuee from the CZU fire, the effects of climate change have never been more real to me. What California is experiencing, like Australia’s wildfires earlier this year, should alarm us all. Our resource consumption is unsustainable, and is driving worsening environmental collapse.
So I’m surprised and troubled to see the Santa Cruz City Council pressing ahead with plans to displace the farmers market, destroy its beautiful magnolia trees, and build a 400 space parking garage adjacent to a new library on Lot 4, despite strong public opposition. This project commits the city to more car-centric planning, is financially shaky, and ignores the city’s Climate Action Plan. It also fails residents, both city and county, who voted for Measure S with the expectation that the current library would be renovated, not discarded.
— Kristen Sandel, Ben Lomond
Letters to the Editor
October 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/04/letter-6/
As an evacuee from the CZU fire, the effects of climate change have never been more real to me. What California is experiencing, like Australia’s wildfires earlier this year, should alarm us all. Our resource consumption is unsustainable, and is driving worsening environmental collapse.
So I’m surprised and troubled to see the Santa Cruz City Council pressing ahead with plans to displace the farmers market, destroy its beautiful magnolia trees, and build a 400 space parking garage adjacent to a new library on Lot 4, despite strong public opposition. This project commits the city to more car-centric planning, is financially shaky, and ignores the city’s Climate Action Plan. It also fails residents, both city and county, who voted for Measure S with the expectation that the current library would be renovated, not discarded.
— Kristen Sandel, Ben Lomond
Cummings’ welcome change of heart on garage
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
October 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/03/letter-cummings-welcome-change-of-heart-on-garage/
Stephen Kessler’s column was right on the mark: The Taj Garage is a boondoggle, and council members are supposed to tell the staff what to do, not the opposite.
Here is a third point: Mayor Justin Cummings was the key vote in favor on June 23 – but with certain conditions. The mayor wants to advance affordable housing, but rather than believing the bureaucrats when they told him it would work out, Cummings insisted on getting the report that the bureaucrats then didn’t produce.
When they didn’t, the mayor properly questioned the proposed contract.
Cummings got some very bad advice when he voted for the project. It was the wrong vote, but it looks like he is not willing to cede to the bureaucrats the right to spend $240,000 of public funds without having to demonstrate that this turkey of a project can fly. Good for him.
— Gary A. Patton, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
October 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/03/letter-cummings-welcome-change-of-heart-on-garage/
Stephen Kessler’s column was right on the mark: The Taj Garage is a boondoggle, and council members are supposed to tell the staff what to do, not the opposite.
Here is a third point: Mayor Justin Cummings was the key vote in favor on June 23 – but with certain conditions. The mayor wants to advance affordable housing, but rather than believing the bureaucrats when they told him it would work out, Cummings insisted on getting the report that the bureaucrats then didn’t produce.
When they didn’t, the mayor properly questioned the proposed contract.
Cummings got some very bad advice when he voted for the project. It was the wrong vote, but it looks like he is not willing to cede to the bureaucrats the right to spend $240,000 of public funds without having to demonstrate that this turkey of a project can fly. Good for him.
— Gary A. Patton, Santa Cruz
Let’s unmix the mixed-use project
Santa Cruz Sentinel
Letters to the Editor
September 30, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/01/letter-lets-unmix-the-mixed-use-project/
There is strong public support for affordable housing and strong public opposition to cutting down 10 Heritage trees on Lot 4 and moving the farmers market from there to Lot 7. How about an entirely different solution that meets the same mixeduse goals with the money we have, without wasting millions of dollars on an unneeded parking garage?
Build 200 affordable-housing units on Lot 7.
Keep the 10 Heritage trees on Lot 4 in a Downtown Commons with a permanent pavilion for the farmers market.
Renovate the Downtown Library at the Civic Center – what voters were told we were approving when we supported libraries by voting for Measure S bond funds.
Vote for the City Council candidates most likely to pursue this cost-effective solution for a more welcoming Santa Cruz: Sandy Brown, Kelsey Hill, and Kayla Kumar.
Unmix the mixed-use project!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Letters to the Editor
September 30, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/10/01/letter-lets-unmix-the-mixed-use-project/
There is strong public support for affordable housing and strong public opposition to cutting down 10 Heritage trees on Lot 4 and moving the farmers market from there to Lot 7. How about an entirely different solution that meets the same mixeduse goals with the money we have, without wasting millions of dollars on an unneeded parking garage?
Build 200 affordable-housing units on Lot 7.
Keep the 10 Heritage trees on Lot 4 in a Downtown Commons with a permanent pavilion for the farmers market.
Renovate the Downtown Library at the Civic Center – what voters were told we were approving when we supported libraries by voting for Measure S bond funds.
Vote for the City Council candidates most likely to pursue this cost-effective solution for a more welcoming Santa Cruz: Sandy Brown, Kelsey Hill, and Kayla Kumar.
Unmix the mixed-use project!
— John Hall, Santa Cruz
Downtown Visions
Good Times
July 22 - 28
https://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&pubid=3a8c527a-e69f-42ef-8e2e-019544fa164b
The great debate over the library and parking is about to be over with two very different visions of our downtown. On one side are groups like Downtown Forward with lots of real estate development money that see a version of pre-Amazon Santana Row with massive parking structures feeding bustling boutiques, bars and, yes, restaurants. The other side led by groups like Downtown Commons see models like Davis or Healdsburg with a central square with shops and restaurants around it and also a place for events like our Farmers Market and events we don’t have much of like music and art and public theater.
Then there is the question of urban design. Imagine Santa Barbara allowing a building like Cinema 9 to be built with its hideous out-of-scale architecture, or the Cooper House, which Bruce Bratton aptly calls a series of temporary buildings.
Then there is the question of money.
We have the departments of Public Works, Transportation, Parking, Economic Development, Building, Planning and who knows what else, all with layers of six-figure managers, all of whom want to build things and see this library bond money (passed by voters who had no vision of a parking structure) as a free pot with no need for tedious budget negotiations—and never mind the pension bomb descending on the city with six-figure payouts and health benefits for life.
Then there is the question of need. In nearly 32 downtown I have had a handful of people complain they had to walk two blocks! What we do need is public housing (an affordable housing lipstick has been added to this pig of a project—who can say no to affordable housing? Who knows what that even means?) and we need mental health services now done by our police and fire agencies. And we need mental health and drug treatment facilities. And we need events (I once asked a council member why we no longer have events like art festivals or First Night, like other coastal towns, and he said that our highly paid folks at Economic Development or Parks and Recreation think they are too much trouble).
Do we need a 60,000-foot library in the age of the internet? Did we not spend a lot of money on an attractive plan at the current site? PAUL COCKING | SANTA CRUZ
July 22 - 28
https://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&pubid=3a8c527a-e69f-42ef-8e2e-019544fa164b
The great debate over the library and parking is about to be over with two very different visions of our downtown. On one side are groups like Downtown Forward with lots of real estate development money that see a version of pre-Amazon Santana Row with massive parking structures feeding bustling boutiques, bars and, yes, restaurants. The other side led by groups like Downtown Commons see models like Davis or Healdsburg with a central square with shops and restaurants around it and also a place for events like our Farmers Market and events we don’t have much of like music and art and public theater.
Then there is the question of urban design. Imagine Santa Barbara allowing a building like Cinema 9 to be built with its hideous out-of-scale architecture, or the Cooper House, which Bruce Bratton aptly calls a series of temporary buildings.
Then there is the question of money.
We have the departments of Public Works, Transportation, Parking, Economic Development, Building, Planning and who knows what else, all with layers of six-figure managers, all of whom want to build things and see this library bond money (passed by voters who had no vision of a parking structure) as a free pot with no need for tedious budget negotiations—and never mind the pension bomb descending on the city with six-figure payouts and health benefits for life.
Then there is the question of need. In nearly 32 downtown I have had a handful of people complain they had to walk two blocks! What we do need is public housing (an affordable housing lipstick has been added to this pig of a project—who can say no to affordable housing? Who knows what that even means?) and we need mental health services now done by our police and fire agencies. And we need mental health and drug treatment facilities. And we need events (I once asked a council member why we no longer have events like art festivals or First Night, like other coastal towns, and he said that our highly paid folks at Economic Development or Parks and Recreation think they are too much trouble).
Do we need a 60,000-foot library in the age of the internet? Did we not spend a lot of money on an attractive plan at the current site? PAUL COCKING | SANTA CRUZ
Virus creates need to re-imagine public spaces
Santa Cruz Sentinel | As You See It
July 19, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/07/19/letter-virus-creates-need-to-re-imagine-public-spaces/
So far in the pandemic, Santa Cruz has closed only parts of a couple of streets to make room for pedestrians and allow restaurants to claim more sidewalk space. It’s becoming clear that this type of action will need to be permanent and much more extensive. Outdoor space will need to be deployed more and more to substitute for indoor space— hosting retail, personal services, performances, and many types of personal and public uses; not new garages. There’s a new need to re-imagine public spaces and new ways to utilize the urban landscape to maximize the natural advantage of open space, versus enclosed spaces, in minimizing the spread of viruses. New ways to utilize the urban landscape over the long term require more than just sidewalk dining in a few spots here and there. As a first step, let’s abandon the garage-library plan and keep the farmers’ market space open.
— Aldo Giacchino, Santa Cruz
July 19, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/07/19/letter-virus-creates-need-to-re-imagine-public-spaces/
So far in the pandemic, Santa Cruz has closed only parts of a couple of streets to make room for pedestrians and allow restaurants to claim more sidewalk space. It’s becoming clear that this type of action will need to be permanent and much more extensive. Outdoor space will need to be deployed more and more to substitute for indoor space— hosting retail, personal services, performances, and many types of personal and public uses; not new garages. There’s a new need to re-imagine public spaces and new ways to utilize the urban landscape to maximize the natural advantage of open space, versus enclosed spaces, in minimizing the spread of viruses. New ways to utilize the urban landscape over the long term require more than just sidewalk dining in a few spots here and there. As a first step, let’s abandon the garage-library plan and keep the farmers’ market space open.
— Aldo Giacchino, Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Doesn't need a Concrete Monstrosity
Santa Cruz Sentinel | As You See It
June 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/06/04/letter-santa-cruz-doesnt-need-a-concrete-monstrosity/
As Jean Brocklebank (May 12) and Curt Simmons (April 28) pointed out in separate Sentinel commentaries, city plans for a multipurpose garage /library/apartment structure is not looking inviting. Now Craig Wilson (May 30) has also stepped up. I applaud all three! I mostly frequent Live Oak library, but I go to Central branch almost always when I’m downtown. I’ve been hoping that the city council would recognize that the entire county is affected by the decisions they make on this. I asked Cynthia Mathews several years ago why she was adamant about the destruction of public open space being considered. She said, “We need more parking.” I drive downtown often and always find parking in short time. Public libraries, in my lifetime of use, are almost sacred places, restful oases of quiet, calm, limitless browsing, reading. The thought of a concrete monstrosity in the heart of our small urban center feels just wrong.
— Susan Stuart, Santa Cruz
June 4, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/06/04/letter-santa-cruz-doesnt-need-a-concrete-monstrosity/
As Jean Brocklebank (May 12) and Curt Simmons (April 28) pointed out in separate Sentinel commentaries, city plans for a multipurpose garage /library/apartment structure is not looking inviting. Now Craig Wilson (May 30) has also stepped up. I applaud all three! I mostly frequent Live Oak library, but I go to Central branch almost always when I’m downtown. I’ve been hoping that the city council would recognize that the entire county is affected by the decisions they make on this. I asked Cynthia Mathews several years ago why she was adamant about the destruction of public open space being considered. She said, “We need more parking.” I drive downtown often and always find parking in short time. Public libraries, in my lifetime of use, are almost sacred places, restful oases of quiet, calm, limitless browsing, reading. The thought of a concrete monstrosity in the heart of our small urban center feels just wrong.
— Susan Stuart, Santa Cruz
City should respond to specific library issues
Santa Cruz Sentinel | Letters to the Editor
May 20, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/05/20/letter-city-should-respond-to-specific-library-issues/
Thank you Rick Longinotti for so clearly laying out the specific issues and report citations for NOT building a new garage downtown.
If the City staff and Council can respond to each specific issue you cite, stating why you or the consultants they hired are incorrect, that would help build trust in their contention that we do need a new garage. But I have seen nothing like that coming from the City so far. Why not?
Especially now, Santa Cruz needs community-building.
I want our leaders to show foresight and visionary leadership. Building trust is essential.
— Coleen Douglas, Santa Cruz
May 20, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/05/20/letter-city-should-respond-to-specific-library-issues/
Thank you Rick Longinotti for so clearly laying out the specific issues and report citations for NOT building a new garage downtown.
If the City staff and Council can respond to each specific issue you cite, stating why you or the consultants they hired are incorrect, that would help build trust in their contention that we do need a new garage. But I have seen nothing like that coming from the City so far. Why not?
Especially now, Santa Cruz needs community-building.
I want our leaders to show foresight and visionary leadership. Building trust is essential.
— Coleen Douglas, Santa Cruz
Killing garage plan will save city money
Santa Cruz Sentinel | As You See It
April 30, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/04/30/letter-killing-garage-plan-will-save-city-money/
In the very near future, the main concern of the Santa Cruz city council will be how to cut the budgets of upcoming years, and avoid bankruptcy.
The financial losses from the COVID-19 shutdown and the legacy of pension and healthcare commitments will burden the city for years to come.
Curt Simmons (Sentinel April 28) has laid out a pretty painless step for saving $87 million: kill the parking garage/ library plan. Moves like this might keep more cops on the beat, more teachers in the classroom, more firefighters on the job. What’s wrong with that?
— Mark Chetkovich, Santa Cruz
April 30, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/04/30/letter-killing-garage-plan-will-save-city-money/
In the very near future, the main concern of the Santa Cruz city council will be how to cut the budgets of upcoming years, and avoid bankruptcy.
The financial losses from the COVID-19 shutdown and the legacy of pension and healthcare commitments will burden the city for years to come.
Curt Simmons (Sentinel April 28) has laid out a pretty painless step for saving $87 million: kill the parking garage/ library plan. Moves like this might keep more cops on the beat, more teachers in the classroom, more firefighters on the job. What’s wrong with that?
— Mark Chetkovich, Santa Cruz
Paving over farmers market site is wrong
Santa Cruz Sentinel | As You See It
April 19, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/04/19/letter-paving-over-farmers-market-site-is-wrong/
As weeks of isolation stretch out and shopping for groceries requires new strategies and tactics, many of us look forward to the downtown Farmers Market each Wednesday. Its continued presence amidst the beautiful magnolia trees creates a semblance of “normalcy.”
Shopping at the market at that location holds out the promise that in the future we will once again take pleasure in interacting with our fellow shoppers, farmers and other merchants, as the bounty of summer crops is displayed before us.
Let us see the value of the market at that particular downtown crossroads, and imagine the market as a focal point of a downtown oasis, a Town Commons. Paving it over for a massive parking structure/mixed use project seems especially wrong-headed at this time.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
April 19, 2020
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2020/04/19/letter-paving-over-farmers-market-site-is-wrong/
As weeks of isolation stretch out and shopping for groceries requires new strategies and tactics, many of us look forward to the downtown Farmers Market each Wednesday. Its continued presence amidst the beautiful magnolia trees creates a semblance of “normalcy.”
Shopping at the market at that location holds out the promise that in the future we will once again take pleasure in interacting with our fellow shoppers, farmers and other merchants, as the bounty of summer crops is displayed before us.
Let us see the value of the market at that particular downtown crossroads, and imagine the market as a focal point of a downtown oasis, a Town Commons. Paving it over for a massive parking structure/mixed use project seems especially wrong-headed at this time.
— Judi Grunstra, Santa Cruz
The economics of a garage project are an important consideration these days.
Renovate library, keep farmers market location
Letter | Santa Cruz Sentinel
March 7, 2020
Our community is fragile. Jessica York’s balanced article on residents’ efforts to qualify a ballot initiative allowing Santa Cruz voters a say on multi-level garages in our city captures the complexity of the issue, yet doesn’t include the economic vulnerability of Santa Cruz voters. The coronavirus demonstrates that our economy is fragile. A six-story garage atop a library at a cost of $87 million puts residents at economic risk. In a recession, or hiccup, who will be accountable for the yearly $2.9 million debt for this project? Santa Cruz residents. Not county residents who voted for Measure S, nor those who advocate for a hybrid garage/library project. From where will the Council draw to meet loan demands in an economic downturn? Renovate the current library, keep the current farmers market location, and heed experts’ advice — don’t build an unnecessary $87 million concrete garage. — Bob Morgan, Santa Cruz
March 7, 2020
Our community is fragile. Jessica York’s balanced article on residents’ efforts to qualify a ballot initiative allowing Santa Cruz voters a say on multi-level garages in our city captures the complexity of the issue, yet doesn’t include the economic vulnerability of Santa Cruz voters. The coronavirus demonstrates that our economy is fragile. A six-story garage atop a library at a cost of $87 million puts residents at economic risk. In a recession, or hiccup, who will be accountable for the yearly $2.9 million debt for this project? Santa Cruz residents. Not county residents who voted for Measure S, nor those who advocate for a hybrid garage/library project. From where will the Council draw to meet loan demands in an economic downturn? Renovate the current library, keep the current farmers market location, and heed experts’ advice — don’t build an unnecessary $87 million concrete garage. — Bob Morgan, Santa Cruz
An important letter to the Santa Cruz Sentinel from Santa Cruz architect William Fisher!
Preservation of library building is best
Letter | Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 8, 2020
Steven Kessler’s review of Jayson Architecture’s analysis of the existing Library was spot on. Preservation of this building is the best solution. The thought of a completely new building is enticing; however, a completely remodeled library will be fine, and for a lot less money. Jayson’s concept design is sound, and we especially like the indoor-outdoor spaces. — William Fisher, Santa Cruz
Steven Kessler’s review of Jayson Architecture’s analysis of the existing Library was spot on. Preservation of this building is the best solution. The thought of a completely new building is enticing; however, a completely remodeled library will be fine, and for a lot less money. Jayson’s concept design is sound, and we especially like the indoor-outdoor spaces. — William Fisher, Santa Cruz
Satya Orion has a terrific Letter to the Editor!
Preserving library is in alignment with core values
Letter | Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 7, 2020
Thank you Stephen Kessler for your great column in support of renovating the downtown library at its current location. Preserving the library’s inclusion in Santa Cruz’s civic center, saving beautiful heritage magnolia trees, and revitalizing a structurally sound building feels in alignment with the core values of our community. A huge concrete parking structure, mixed use or not, feels exactly the opposite. It’s hard for me to imagine why we are even considering this. Jayson Architecture has presented plans for a lovely library, at its current location, that will meet all of our needs. So far we have not seen any actual plans, drawings or costs for the proposed parking garage/library. Let’s all be fans for conservation and renovation, for saving trees, for fewer cars, and for a lovely civic center with a beautiful revitalized library. — Satya Orion, Felton
Thank you Stephen Kessler for your great column in support of renovating the downtown library at its current location. Preserving the library’s inclusion in Santa Cruz’s civic center, saving beautiful heritage magnolia trees, and revitalizing a structurally sound building feels in alignment with the core values of our community. A huge concrete parking structure, mixed use or not, feels exactly the opposite. It’s hard for me to imagine why we are even considering this. Jayson Architecture has presented plans for a lovely library, at its current location, that will meet all of our needs. So far we have not seen any actual plans, drawings or costs for the proposed parking garage/library. Let’s all be fans for conservation and renovation, for saving trees, for fewer cars, and for a lovely civic center with a beautiful revitalized library. — Satya Orion, Felton
Valerie Girsh puts it all together!
Renovated library would help with civic core
Letter | Santa Cruz Sentinel
December 22, 2019
Renovated library would help with civic core A letter writer recently cited, “bizarre assertions” from critics speaking out against a 600 car parking garage enveloping a library. Indeed, it’s bizarre for residents to incur a debt of $87 million over 30 years to construct a garage for which the just released Nelson/Nygaard Parking Study for Downtown states, “Implementation may detract from downtown objectives/ goals.” Surely, they’re referring to its six-story mass, spanning the length and breadth of the surface lot serving the Farmers Market, not only displacing our beloved market, but unnecessarily adding parking inventory, at enormous expense, that belies future parking trends — both millennials and baby boomers will not share our current driving habits, they write. Much better, as Jayson Architects’ have stated, to create a civic core, bounded by the renovated library, Civic Center and City Hall, a space inviting community activities, talking and mingling. Now, that’s a goal we can all get behind.
— Valerie Girsh, Santa Cruz
December 22, 2019
Renovated library would help with civic core A letter writer recently cited, “bizarre assertions” from critics speaking out against a 600 car parking garage enveloping a library. Indeed, it’s bizarre for residents to incur a debt of $87 million over 30 years to construct a garage for which the just released Nelson/Nygaard Parking Study for Downtown states, “Implementation may detract from downtown objectives/ goals.” Surely, they’re referring to its six-story mass, spanning the length and breadth of the surface lot serving the Farmers Market, not only displacing our beloved market, but unnecessarily adding parking inventory, at enormous expense, that belies future parking trends — both millennials and baby boomers will not share our current driving habits, they write. Much better, as Jayson Architects’ have stated, to create a civic core, bounded by the renovated library, Civic Center and City Hall, a space inviting community activities, talking and mingling. Now, that’s a goal we can all get behind.
— Valerie Girsh, Santa Cruz