City staff briefed the Capitola City Council on engineering, environmental and funding issues tied to a potential replacement of the Stockton Avenue Bridge and the council responded by directing staff to proceed with a more detailed internal inspection and expanded community outreach rather than immediately funding full design or construction.

Jessica (staff presenter) said the project is long‑term: “The purpose of this item is an initial step to ensure the vehicular path of travel over the Creek is maintained for future generations and to reduce flooding risk.” She described the bridge as a 1934 concrete box‑girder structure inspected by Caltrans; the 2024 inspection assigned a sufficiency rating of 60.6, a category that can make a bridge eligible for federal replacement funding. Staff’s earlier feasibility work assessed debris‑diversion options and concluded replacement is the most effective long‑term solution, but it is costly and requires many environmental and permitting steps.

Staff outlined existing funding and next steps: the city has previously allocated $350,000 from general funds and separately received $500,000 in a state grant secured through State Senator John Laird for ‘‘debris mitigation at the Stockton Bridge’’; together that is $850,000 available for planning and preliminary work. Staff said a full consultant amendment to reach roughly 35% design would be needed to pursue large state or federal construction grants; estimated overall construction costs in materials presented during the meeting ranged into the tens of millions.

Public comment was extensive and split. Several speakers urged caution and highlighted the bridge’s historic value and municipal code requirements; one public commenter cited local ordinances identified in the 1999 historic designation process (ordinance references were raised publicly) and asked that planning commission review and any required conditional‑use proceedings be completed before significant design work. Others warned that debris jams and storm damage have repeatedly affected the creek and said proactive planning is prudent.

After extended deliberation, Councilmember Morgan moved — and the council seconded — a motion to allocate grant funds toward an internal inspection of the bridge’s interior (manhole access) and to expand public outreach and historical‑preservation research before proceeding further. Councilmembers voted by roll call: Jensen — aye; Morgan — aye; Orbach — aye; Vice Mayor Peterson — aye; Mayor Clark — aye. The motion removed a specific dollar cap in the council amendment; staff said the internal inspection typically costs about $30,000 and is included within the scope of the consultant amendment under discussion.

Council members and many public speakers asked staff to ensure clear community engagement and to return with findings from the internal inspection, historical assessments, and a recommended phased approach to any future contract amendment. Staff said the state grant’s current scope runs through the end of the next calendar year and that extensions could be requested if necessary.

No final decision was made to commission a full 35% design or to begin construction; the council’s action instead advanced preliminary technical work and outreach and kept future funding and design steps conditional on further analysis and community process.