Vote clears way for Clocktower Center construction – but balcony disagreement could spell trouble

The Clocktower Center, the most talked-about and divisive development project in Santa Cruz County over the past year, can move forward to construction following a unanimous approval from the City of Santa Cruz’s land-use authority. 

However, the vote left the project on a cliffhanger. A disagreement Thursday night over 18 inches of balcony space could spur a lawsuit and potentially delay the project.  

The planning commission granted local developer Workbench the permits to demolish the old Santa Cruz County Bank building and the Rush Inn, and clear the way for its eight-story, 178-unit mixed-use housing project. The project will come with 100 parking spaces, and will sit just behind the town clock at the northern edge of downtown. 

The Clocktower Center has been a flashpoint over the past 14 months, becoming for many a symbol of California’s new era in which state laws incentivizing affordable housing have given developers wide-ranging latitude to build what they want regardless of local political objections. 

Workbench’s original proposal envisioned a 16-story tower — nearly doubling the height of the county’s tallest buildings. The project set off pandemonium that mixed grave concern and excitement over the direction of Santa Cruz’s next chapter of taller, denser development. 

The complaints from local residents Thursday largely echoed those heard since the project was first proposed more than a year ago: The building is too tall and large, doesn’t have enough parking and doesn’t fit in with the surrounding built environment, which includes the city’s town clock. Detractors urged the commission to slow down. Those who supported it pointed to Santa Cruz County’s housing affordability crisis and the need to boost supply. 

On Thursday, Planning Commission Chair Michael Polhamus said although state law has wiped away most local controls, the evolution of the project from tower to eight-story high-rise was thanks to intense public engagement. 

“It’s a great example of what public scrutiny can do to improve a project,” Polhamus said, quickly thanking Workbench for not moving forward with the 16-story version. As Lookout has previously reported, Workbench did not believe it could get funding for a 16-story tower in Santa Cruz as financiers are often conservative, especially in smaller markets, and such a tower was so out of the ordinary.  

Although the planning commission approved the project, the vote — which was temporarily delayed after a medical emergency in the audience required a paramedic response — has left the now-approved Clocktower Center in an uncertain place.

On floors 3 through 8, Workbench’s proposal included balconies that extend 4.5 feet over the property line. The city’s downtown land-use plan allows balconies to extend only 3 feet over the property line. City planning staff recommended commissioners deny the request for a waiver of the balcony limit. Commissioners, who voiced concerns that allowing the oversized balconies could create a slippery slope, rejected Workbench’s request.

Clay Toombs, Workbench’s project manager for the Clocktower Center, said rejecting the balcony extension would amount to the commission significantly altering the project as it would require Workbench’s architects to resize the interior and potentially shrink the liveable space. Toombs argued that state law protects compliant affordable housing projects against significant changes at the commission or city council level. 

According to Commissioner Timerie Gordon, a local architect, the planning commission also received a letter from Workbench’s attorney this week saying that the developer would sue the city if its balcony request was denied. 

The planning commission represented the final vote on the project. However, at the end of the meeting, as the commissioners prepared to reject the balcony proposal, city staff told Workbench that the firm could apply for a separate design variation but that it would require city council approval, essentially leaving the developer with three options: build the project with smaller balconies as approved by the planning commission, attempt to get city council approval for a balcony extension, or move into litigation.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.