Roadway Improvements
17. R14: Road Diet (Reduce travel lanes from 4 to 3 and add a two way left-turn and bike lanes). In addition to increasing bicycle safety, these bike lanes can improve the safety of on-street parking. Projects that only require new lane markings and minor signalization modifications will have relatively low cost and can be very effective and can be considered on a systematic approach. Often road diet projects need a sealcoat placed on the roadway to fully remove the old striping. Resurfacing projects should be considered as an opportunity to lower speeds by modifying striping (lane width, edge line, etc.).
Priority Safety Projects
Using the crash severity scoring and the City’s previously identified priority locations, a total of 17 intersections were identified for some level of review to recommend applicable countermeasures. Three tiers of projects were identified: Level A being those scoring highest in crash severity and most likely to have feasible improvements that would benefit from some preliminary engineering design; Level B being those that scored high in crash severity or City-identified priorities and would benefit from a concept level idea of countermeasures; and Level C which had notable scores in crash severity and will be addressed through future construction related to the planned Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) L Line (Gold) Eastside Extension Phase 2 on Washington Boulevard. Figure 3: Priority Safety Projects Map illustrates the intersection locations within the City of Montebello. Level A and Level B priority locations are documented in Appendix G.
Review of the intersection geometrics, operations, and crash data was completed for each location to determine historical crash trends and potential countermeasures that address those as well as incorporate proactive safety measures. Tables detailing individual crash occurrences and locations at priority locations during the study period are included in Appendix H. For Level A and B locations, a field review was performed to observe traffic patterns and physical characteristics that further refined the appropriate countermeasure recommendations. Countermeasures have been identified (Appendix I) and planning-level concept plans were prepared (Appendix J) to aid in preparation of cost estimates (Appendix K). These resources were applied to calculate HSIP Benefit Cost Ratios at Priority A and B locations (Appendix L). The engineering concept development is provided to the City to position for future grant funding pursuits.
Countermeasures have been identified at the following locations by category:
A. Level A projects: Provision of 30% engineering concept plans and countermeasures:
1. Beverly Boulevard/Garfield Avenue
2. Maple Avenue/Whittier Boulevard
3. Beverly Boulevard/Bradshawe Street
4. Wilcox Avenue/Via Campo
5. Beverly Boulevard/Maple Avenue
B. Level B projects: Provision of high-level concept plans and countermeasures:
1. Beverly Boulevard/21
st Street
2. Montebello Boulevard/Avenida de la Merced
3. Northbound I-5 Freeway Off-Ramp/Telegraph Road
4. Bluff Road/Whittier Boulevard
5. Lincoln Avenue/Howard Avenue
6. Eula Drive/Poplar Avenue
C. Level C projects: Provision of list of recommended countermeasures
1. Greenwood Avenue/Washington Boulevard
2. Montebello Boulevard/Washington Boulevard
3. Maple Avenue/Washington Boulevard
4. Vail Avenue/Washington Boulevard
5. 4th Street/Washington Boulevard
6. 5th Street/Washington Boulevard
Figure 3: Priority Safety Projects Map
Level A Projects
A1 Beverly Boulevard and Garfield Avenue
Beverly Boulevard and Garfield Avenue is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial land uses.
This priority Level A location has an ACSS of 85.76, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 83.8.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including traffic signal modifications, raised center medians, median curbs, continental crosswalks with limit lines, and improvement to southeast curb turn radii.
Concept A1 is anticipated to
Cost $365,000
1 Save $8,349,6112 Provide BCR of 22.883
Table 4 Countermeasure List for Priority Location A1 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Protected Left Turn Phase S07 30%
Install Raised Median on Approaches S12 25%
Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
1 Includes environmental cost (25% of construction items not including PS&E), and construction engineering cost (10% of subtotal). Modifications may be made to maximize project funding for the City. 2 Project savings is achieved by reducing potential future crashes due to the application of safety countermeasures. Total benefit savings account for the life of the safety improvement and historical crash data at the project site.
3 Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is an indicator of the relationship between project costs and project benefits. BCR is determined by total benefits and total project cost.
A2 Maple Avenue and Whittier Boulevard
Maple Avenue and Whittier Boulevard is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial land uses and Montebello Intermediate School on the Northwest corner. This priority Level A location has an ACSS of 47.16, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 87.2.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including traffic signal modifications, reconstruction of an existing raised median, upgrades to curb ramps for ADA-accessibility, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Concept A2 is anticipated to
Cost $318,300
1 S ave $2,026,7382 Provide BCR of 6.373
Table 5 Countermeasure List for Priority Location A2 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
A3 Beverly Boulevard and Bradshawe Street
Beverly Boulevard and Bradshawe Street is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial land uses. This priority Level A location has an ACSS of 42.48, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 83.8.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including a new traffic signal with upgrades from the pre-existing, curb extensions/bulb-outs with high visibility treatments and ADA-accessible curb ramps, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Concept A3 is anticipated to
Cost $738,700
1 S ave $6,870,2232 Provide BCR of 9.303
Table 6 Countermeasure List for Priority Location A3 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
A4 Wilcox Avenue and Via Campo
Wilcox Avenue and Via Campo is a signalized intersection, surrounded by commercial land uses on the southerly corners and California Highway 60 with landscaped buffer zone on the northerly corners. This priority Level A location has an ACSS of 53.90, is located within a DAC, and borders two census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores of 89.5 and 80.0.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including traffic signal modifications, leading pedestrian intervals, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Concept A4 is anticipated to
Cost $266,600
1 S ave $1,606,9312 Produce BCR of 6.033
Table 7 Countermeasure List for Priority Location A4 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Add Intersection Lighting S01 40%
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
A5 Beverly Boulevard and Maple Avenue
Beverly Boulevard and Maple Avenue is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial land uses and residential land uses on the northwest corner. This priority Level A location has an ACSS of 46.73, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 83.6.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including new traffic signals and poles, traffic signal modifications, loop detector replacement, leading pedestrian intervals, continental crosswalks with limit lines, and shortening concrete center medians to provide extra space for crosswalks.
Concept A5 is anticipated to:
Cost $274,200
1 S ave $6,621,9002 Produce BCR of 24.153
Table 8 Countermeasure List for Priority Location A5 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Provide Protected Left-Turn Phases S07 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
Level B Projects
B1 Beverly Boulevard and 21st Street
Beverly Boulevard and 21st Street is a two-way stop-controlled intersection surrounded primarily by commercial land uses and one residential land use on the southeast corner. This priority Level B location has an ACSS of 49.21, is located within a DAC, and borders two census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores of 87.2 and 83.6.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including four continental crosswalks with limit lines, installation of pedestrian barricades, and removal of a pedestrian crosswalk across Beverly Boulevard, to redirect pedestrian traffic to the existing High-Intensity Activated crosswalk beacon (HAWK) at the Beverly Boulevard and 20 th Street intersection less than 400-feet East. This location was not included in the HSIP BCR Analysis due to the recent installation of a HAWK Signal. Concept B1 is anticipated to provide a BCR of 497.05.
Table 9 Countermeasure List for Priority Location B1 | Top countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Upgrade Intersection Pavement Markings NS7 25%
Install/ Upgrade Pedestrian Crossing NS21PB 35%
B2 Montebello Boulevard and Avenida de la Merced
Montebello Boulevard and Avenida de la Merced is a signalized intersection surrounded primarily by residential land uses and Taylor Ranch Park on the southwest corner. This priority Level B location has an ACSS of 34.87, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with a CalEnviroScreen score of 80.0.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including new signal hardware, signal modifications and upgrades, warning sign relocation and upgrades, leading pedestrian intervals, curb extensions, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Concept B2 is anticipated to:
Cost $469,300
1 S ave $4,604,8032 Produce BCR of 9.813
Table 10 Countermeasure List for Priority Location B2 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Provide Protected Left Turn Phase S07 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
B3 Northbound I-5 Freeway Off-Ramp and Telegraph Road
Northbound I-5 Freeway Off-Ramp and Telegraph Road is a one-way stop-controlled T-intersection bordered by commercial land uses to the East and Interstate 5 to the West. This priority level B location has an ACSS of 46.17, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with a CalEnviroScreen score of 99.1.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including raised medians within the center turn lane to organize vehicle flow, and conversion of the intersection from one-way stop to a signalized intersection. Coordination with Caltrans is required to determine applicable countermeasures for the location.
Concept B3-A in its entirety is anticipated to
Cost $675,900
1 S ave $14,580,4222 Produce BCR of 21.573
Table 11 Countermeasure List for Priority Location B3 | Top countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Install Signals NS03 30%
Install Raised Median on Approaches NS14 25%
Install Left-Turn Lane NS18 35%
B4 Bluff Road and Whittier Boulevard
Bluff Road and Whittier Boulevard is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial uses with one vacant lot on the southeast corner. This priority Level B location has an ACSS of 47.11, intersection is located within a DAC, and borders two census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores of 88.8 and 94.6.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including new signal hardware, signal modifications, loop detector replacement, new flashing beacon, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Concept B4 is anticipated to
Cost $358,600
1 S ave $1,935,9642 Produce BCR of 5.403
Table 12 Countermeasure List for Priority Location B4 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Add Intersection Lighting S01 40%
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
B5 Lincoln Avenue and Howard Avenue
Lincoln Avenue and Howard Avenue is a signalized intersection surrounded by residential land uses.
This priority Level B location has an ACSS of 9.13, is located within a DAC, and borders two census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores of 80.0 and 83.6.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including new signal hardware, signal modifications and upgrades, and continental crosswalks with limit lines. Reconfigured roadway striping on Lincoln Avenue has also been identified to address corridor collisions, such as unsafe speed, improper turning, and pedestrian right of way. Roadway reconfiguration will provide buffered bicycle lanes and reduce vehicle speeds.
Concept B5 is anticipated to
Cost $502,500
41 S ave $5,095,8792 Produce BCR of 10.143
Table 13 Countermeasure List for Priority Location B5 | Top 3 countermeasures shown in bold text.
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Provide Protected Left Turn Phase S07 30%
Road Diet R14 30%
Install Separated Bike Lanes R33PB 45%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
B6 Eula Drive and Poplar Avenue
Eula Drive and Poplar Drive is a one-way stop-controlled T-intersection, with an uncontrolled mid-block crossing, surrounded by residential land uses to the West and La Merced Elementary School to the West. This priority Level B location has an ACSS of 38.05, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 77.4.
In 2015, a head-on collision caused by a driver under the influence occurred at Eula and Poplar Drive, in proximity to La Merced Elementary School. The collision involved five individuals, three were youths ages 15 to 18. Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance improvements to pedestrian visibility and safety, especially on-foot school-related traffic, such as sidewalk extension, curb extension, RRFB with signage, ADA ramps, and a realigned crosswalk with shorter crossing distance. Improvements also include student loading zones for passenger vehicles and district school buses. Additional countermeasures to reduce alcohol/ drug related injuries and fatalities, referenced in Emphasis Area 5 of the report, include targeted enforcement in the presence of youths and educational programs about transportation risk behaviors.
4 Cost of striping is revised to $6,000 for the intersection. Assumed cost of striping for the entire corridor is $30,000.
Level C Projects
Recommendations for Level C locations were less tailored to the specifics of the intersection knowing that there are upcoming changes to Washington Boulevard, which is planned to for future construction related to the planned Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) L Line (Gold) Eastside Extension Phase 2. To efficiently dedicate resources to the City, recommended countermeasures were focused on pedestrian and bicycle improvements with the anticipation of increased activity to get to and from the new transit facilities. Vehicle operation recommendations were also included at certain locations based on crash data history or identified potential crash risks of the existing geometry or equipment. Each of the countermeasure recommendations should be considered in the redesign of Washington Boulevard and incorporated where feasible.
C1 Greenwood Avenue and Washington Boulevard
Greenwood Avenue and Washington Boulevard is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial retail uses. This priority Level C location has an ACSS of 68.56, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 90.2.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including improved signal hardware, high-visibility crosswalks, leading pedestrian intervals, and pedestrian scale lighting.
Table 14 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C1
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
C2 Montebello Boulevard and Washington Boulevard
Montebello Boulevard and Washington Boulevard is a signalized intersection surrounded by commercial land uses. This priority Level C location has an ACSS of 58.13, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 90.2.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including pedestrian support facilities, traffic signal modifications, advanced warning flashing beacons, and advanced stop bars.
Table 15 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C2
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
C3 Maple Avenue and Washington Boulevard
Maple Avenue and Washington Boulevard is a signalized intersection bordered by commercial land uses. This priority Level C location has an ACSS of 56.41, is located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 90.2.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including traffic signal modifications, continental crosswalks with limit lines, leading pedestrian intervals, and corridor level speed management.
Table 16 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C3
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
C4 Vail Avenue and Washington Boulevard
Vail Avenue and Washington Boulevard is a signalized intersection surrounded primarily by industrial warehouses. This Level C location has an ACSS 48.07, is located within a DAC, and borders two census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores of 90.2 and 96.6.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including pedestrian scale lighting, signal timing modifications, advanced stop bars, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Table 17 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C4
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Improve Signal Hardware S02 15%
Improve Signal Timing S03 15%
Convert Signal to Mast Arm S08 30%
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Pedestrian Countdown Signal Heads S17PB 25%
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install Leading Pedestrian Intervals S21PB 60%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
C5 4
th Street and Washington Boulevard
4th Street and Washington Boulevard is a one-way stop-controlled T-intersection surrounded by commercial and residential land uses. The priority Level C location has an ACSS of 48.68, is not located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 69.0.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including directional curb ramps with truncated domes, raised medians on approaches, and continental crosswalks with limit lines.
Table 18 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C5
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
C6 5th Street and Washington Boulevard
5th Street and Washington Boulevard is a two-way stop-controlled intersection, with uncontrolled pedestrian crossings, surrounded by commercial land uses. The priority Level C location has an ACSS
39.46, is not located within a DAC, and a census tract with CalEnviroScreen score of 69.0.
Review of crash history and existing roadway geometry have identified countermeasures to enhance safety at the intersection including advanced warning signage, continental crosswalks with limit lines, directional curb ramps with truncated domes, and corridor level speed management.
Table 19 Countermeasure List for Priority Location C6
Countermeasure (CM) CM Code CRF
Install Flashing Beacons as Advance Warning S10 30%
Install Advanced Stop Bar S20PB 15%
Install High-Visibility Crosswalks NS21PB 35%
Emphasis Area Strategies
The trends in City of Montebello’s 5-year crash data analysis were compared to statewide crash patterns documented in the California Safe Roads: 2020-2024 California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to identify key areas for focused improvements. Out of 16 challenge areas outlined in the SHSP, three were found to be statistically significant, including Intersections, Pedestrians, and Aging Drivers. One change area, Commercial Vehicles, was notable though not statistically significant.
The four challenge areas confirmed by the Stakeholder Working Group (SWG), following presentation of Crash Analysis results, were identified in the LRSP as Emphasis Areas. The SWG also identified Bicyclists and Improving Incident Response as additional Emphasis Areas for the City of Montebello to investigate. The following section of this Safe Travel Plan outlines a total of six emphasis areas, goals, strategies, and partner agencies involved in increasing safety on the City of Montebello’s local roads.
Emphasis Area 1: Intersections
Intersection crashes—crashes that occur within 250 feet of the intersection in the City of Montebello— were identified as a statistically significant challenge area compared to statewide trends in the SHSP.
Crashes at intersections throughout Montebello generally had higher crash severity scores compared to roadway segments. Unsignalized intersections have a higher cost for fatal and severe crashes because fatal and severe crashes at these locations tend to result in more severely injured persons on average.
The crash analysis identified priority intersections using the annualized crash severity score, and from this data, the top scoring intersections were reviewed to determine priority locations. Establishing natural break points in the crash severity score, the top 20 intersections were identified.
Goals for Emphasis Area 1:
⋅ Reduce annual intersection-related fatalities from 1.6 per year to 0.8 per year or fewer per year by 2030 (50% reduction).
⋅ Reduce annual intersection-related injuries from 249 per year to 187 or fewer per year in 2030 (25% reduction).
Strategies for Emphasis Area 1:
Strategy 1.1 D
evelop a system to track and evaluate countermeasure effectiveness at high-crash intersections: The SSAR-portion of this Safe Travel Plan identifies countermeasure improvements at 17 intersections on the local roadway network. As the City of Montebello proceeds to implement the proposed strategies, City staff will implement a system to cross-compare the rate of both crashes and injury severity occurring pre- and post-treatment installation. This strategy will help to inform effectiveness of treatment types within the context of City of Montebello and provide guidance on best practices for Citywide roadway and intersection improvements. Brief descriptions of three evaluation methods are included below:
1. Observational B/A Studies: In observational B/A studies, traffic analysts gather and analyze data for the two periods before and after the implementation of a project. May or may not include linear or nonlinear traffic volume correction.
2. Experimental B/A Studies: In ex perimental studies, comparable sites of similar traffic volume and geometric features are randomly assigned to a treatment or a non-treatment group. The treatment is then implemented at the sites in the treatment group, and crash and traffic volume data are obtained before and after implementing the treatment.
3. Economic Effectiveness Evaluation: Utilization of Benefit/Cost (B/C) analysis, in which the expected change in crash frequency is converted to a monetary value, summed, and then compared to the countermeasure cost. Alternatively, in Cost- effectiveness evaluation, the observed change in crash frequency is compared directly to the actual construction cost.
Strategy 1.2 C
reate intersection safety checklists for existing conditions and new design: The City will develop an intersection safety checklist to identify and prioritize projects for improvements based on the intersection’s current conditions. The checklist will be developed based on existing conditions at intersections with low-volume crash per traffic volumes and can evolve to provide greater citywide coverage and inclusion of identified emerging technologies and findings from Strategy 1.1. An example item for the checklist includes review of the flashing “don’t walk” time provided for pedestrians at traffic signals. Brief descriptions of resources the City can reference are listed below:
1. S
afety Performance for Intersection Control Evaluation (SPICE) Tool: The SPICE Tool is a macro-based, Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, to assess the safety performance of a variety of intersection geometry and control scenarios in terms of predicted crash frequency and severity.
2. Capacity Analysis for Planning of Junctions (CAP-X
) Tool: The CAP-X Tool is a
macro-based, Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, to assess the operational performance of a variety of intersection geometry and control scenarios in terms of volume to capacity ratio and multimodal accommodations.
3. FHWA’s Systemic Safety Project Selection Tool: T
he Systemic Tool provides a
step-by-step process for conducting systemic safety analysis; considerations for determining a reasonable distribution between the implementation of spot safety improvements and systemic safety improvements; and a mechanism for quantifying the benefits of safety improvements implemented through a systemic approach.
Strategy 1.3 Increa se public awareness about the emergency notification system sign at rail grade crossings to alert the public on what to do in an emergency at the crossing: Four at- grade rail crossings exist in the City at Vail Avenue, Maple Avenue, Greenwood Avenue, and Montebello Boulevard. Between one and three crashes per year occurred within 250 feet of an at-grade rail crossing. While several crashes were reported close to rail crossings, only one fatal crash at Montebello Boulevard involved a train. This single collision occurred in 2016 and involved a pedestrian and a freight train. The collision was not included in the SWTIRS data; instead, information was gathered from news reports at the time of the crash. Stakeholder Working Group Members identified a need to address at-grade rail crossings during working group meetings. Strategy 1.3 aligns with the Stakeholder interest and California’s SHSP Intersections Challenge Area Initiative 4.
Strategy 1.4 Ex
pand the use of retroreflective backplates: Retroreflective backplates are added to traffic signal heads to improve visibility in both daytime and nighttime conditions. The treatment increases operational safety of signalized intersections and has the added benefit of increasing road user awareness of an upcoming intersection during power outages. Caltrans announced in 2021 plans to install the treatment at over 5,500 signalized intersections throughout the state and implementing the treatment at City- managed intersections will promote consistency of treatments throughout Montebello.
Strategy 1.5 M
onitor and evaluate crashes and potential improvements around transit stops: Access to transit and other forms of public transportation is a valuable mobility service within the community; however, due to stop proximity to intersections and crosswalks, transit stops can impact passenger vehicle and pedestrian travel patterns creating conflict zones between vehicles and pedestrians. During the five-year study period (2015-2019), 92 crashes involved a bus (18% identified as “school bus” and 82% identified as general “bus”). The City can initiate a system to monitor and evaluate transit stops through a study that will assist in identifying improvements to benefit drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. Areas of focus for monitoring and evaluation include, but are not limited to, accessibility of transit stops, crosswalk safety near stops, and the impact of stops on other transportation modes. The City, along with SWG, will identify locations of study, areas of improvement, and work with police department to identify and recommend GIS- based collision data software.
Emphasis Area 2: Pedestrians and Bicyclists
Pedestrian-involved crashes in the City of Montebello were identified as a statistically significant challenge area compared to statewide trends in the SHSP. Across the five study years (2015-2019), there were a total of 142 pedestrian-involved crashes, and it was found that pedestrian crashes are 5 times more likely to result in a fatal/severe injury than total reported crashes.
Stakeholder Working Group Members identified a need to address bicycle-involved collisions during working group meetings. Across the five study years (2015-2019), there were a total of 119 bicycle- involved crashes, and it was found that bicycle crashes are 3 times more likely to result in a fatal/severe injury than total reported crashes.
In both pedestrian- and bicycle-involved crashes, the most common age group reported includes ages 18 and under (27%). In bicycle-involved crashes, the age group 25-44 was equally as common (27%).
Compared to drivers, pedestrians aged 45 and over are overrepresented, while bicyclists aged 18 to 24 years old are overrepresented in the data. Locations of all pedestrian-involved and bicycle-involved crashes are shown in Figure 4: Pedestrian- and Bicycle-Involved Collisions, 2015-2019.
Goals for Emphasis Area 2:
⋅ Reduce annual pedestrian-involved collisions from 28 per year to fewer than 14 per year in 2030 (50% reduction).
⋅ Reduce annual bicyclist-involved collisions from 24 per year to fewer than 12 per year in 2030 (50% reduction).
Strategies for Emphasis Area 2:
Strategy 2.1 C
onduct public education and outreach to motorists to raise their awareness of pedestrian and bicycle safety needs: The City will initiate a public awareness campaign to increase driver awareness of pedestrian and bicycle safety laws and the importance of safety, due to vulnerabilities, while driving near pedestrians and bicyclists. Specific messaging within the campaign will be determined in a collaborative process by the stakeholder working group representatives.
Strategy 2.2 C
onduct periodic roadway safety assessments of locations with growing traffic and pedestrian volumes and locations: Potential assessment locations include locations with documented pedestrian and bicycle safety issues, upcoming roadway or transit station improvement projects, and location identified by local feedback. Assessments will involve site reconnaissance to observe existing conditions and potential impromptu discussions with passerby and local business owners. Challenges for walking and bicycling identified in the assessments will be catalogued and further reviewed for potential infrastructure and non-infrastructure solutions.
Strategy 2.3 Identify opportunities for grant funding: Through roadway safety assessments in Strategy
2.2, the City will identify infrastructure improvement opportunities throughout the local roadway network. Regional, State and Federal grants are available to local agencies to implement improvements, such as the Metro Call for Projects, Highway Safety Improvement Program, Active Transportation Program, Senate Bill 1 Programs, Green California, Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A), and the Federal Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act (IIJA), among others.
S
trategy 2.4 Adopt Citywide Complete Streets Policy: The City will develop and adopt a Complete Streets Policy to guide design on future roadway projects and developments ensuring high-quality mobility and access for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and other modes for people of all ages and abilities.
Figure 4: Pedestrian- and Bicycle-Involved Collisions, 2015-2019
Emphasis Area 3: Aging Drivers
The volume of crashes involving Aging Drivers in the City of Montebello was identified as statistically significant compared to statewide trends in the SHSP. The Aging Drivers Challenge Area includes instances where the driver of a motor vehicle is 65 years or older, and across the five study years (2015- 2019), there were a total of 358 crashes involving a driver of the age of 65 resulting in 192 injuries and 1 fatality. Locations involving a driver aged 65 and over are shown in Figure 5: Crashes Involving an Aging Driver 2015-2019.
In an article by BMJ Publishing Group’s Injury Prevention Journal (2002), drivers over the age of 75 were found to have a fatality rate of 3.7 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (MVMT), a much higher rate than the nationwide average of 1.44 fatalities per 100 MVMT.
Goals for Emphasis Area 3:
⋅ Reduce annual fatalities involving aging drivers 65 years or older from 0.2 per year to 0 (zero) per year in 2030.
⋅ Reduce annual injuries involving aging drivers 65 years or older from 38 per year to fewer than 29 per year in 2030 (25% reduction).
Strategies for Emphasis Area 3:
Strategy 3.1 D
evelop effective methods to identify at-risk older drivers: Visual processing impairment increases crash risk among older drivers. Many older drivers meet the legal requirements for licensing despite having vision impairments that elevate crash risk. In a 2003 study of aging drivers, participants who had received educational content on vision impairment were more likely to acknowledge that the quality of their eyesight was less than excellent, compared to the control group that received no educational content. The City of Montebello, through the Senior Citizen Center, will develop methods to identify at-risk older drivers through distribution of educational content and providing additional resources for maintaining mobility among the aging population.
Strategy 3.2 D
evelop enhanced training for emergency service personnel on the proper assessment and triage of older persons at crash scenes: Higher death rates per miles travelled among older drivers is not correlated to unsafe driving but rather a higher vulnerability to injuries that are potentially life-threatening. Triage systems are one of the key principles of accident management, in which patients are prioritized to provide them with proper services and treatments. The City of Montebello will coordinate with ambulance contractors to develop protocols prioritizing treatment and response for older populations involved in vehicle collisions.
Strategy 3.3 I
ncorporate the FHWA Older Driver and Pedestrian Guidelines into the local design guidelines:
The Handbook for Designing Roadways for the Aging Population provides practitioners guidelines in the areas of roadway geometry, operations, and traffic control devices. The Handbook is available online at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/older_users/#training.
Figure 5: Crashes Involving an Aging Driver 2015-2019
Emphasis Area 4: Commercial Vehicles
The volume of crashes involving a commercial vehicle, while not statistically significant, were notable within the City’s crash history. The commercial vehicles challenge area includes instances where the collision involves a truck, truck tractor, school bus, or other bus. Montebello is a leading City in the trucking industry, with one of the nation’s largest concentrations of railroad yards and freight handling equipment within miles of its boundaries, and higher concentrations of commercial vehicles on Montebello‘s roadway network introduces increased opportunities for vehicle-to-vehicle conflict.
Within the study period (2015-2019), a total of 101 collisions involved a commercial vehicle. Locations of collisions involving a commercial vehicle are shown in Figure 6: Crashes Involving a Commercial Vehicle, 2015-2019.
Goals for Emphasis Area 4:
⋅ Reduce citywide crash shares from 20 per year to less than 10 per year in 2030 (50% reduction)
Strategies for Emphasis Area 4:
Strategy 4.1 O
peration Safe Driver Week: Operation Safe Driver Week is a campaign initiative occurring annually in July to increase safety on the roadway for both commercial vehicles and passenger vehicles. During this enforcement effort, officers throughout North America engage in heightened traffic, safety enforcement, and education aimed at combatting risky driving behaviors in both commercial motor vehicle drivers and passenger vehicle drivers. Key focuses of the 2021 campaign included following to close, speeding, and failure to obey traffic control devices. The initiative is designed to promote safe driving all year round, within a week-long focused effort by enforcement officers.
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) provides useful resources and training materials for distribution to the many businesses operating commercial vehicles on the local roadway network.
Strategy 4.2 B
rake Safety Week: CVSA’s Brake Safety Month and Brake Safety Week occur annually in the fall and is a campaign to encourage commercial vehicle drivers to thoroughly check all vehicle brake components. During this campaign, commercial motor vehicle inspectors conduct brake system inspections on large trucks and buses throughout North America to identify brake-system violations. System inspections help to ensure all commercial vehicles on the local roadway network are operating according to government regulations and can reduce collisions involving commercial vehicles.
Strategy 4.3 One- d
ay brake safety enforcement initiative: This unannounced event can be held at any time during the year and involves inspectors checking brakes to identify brake violations.
Inspections are conducted by enforcement officers during traffic stops to ensure brake safety compliance by commercial vehicles throughout the calendar year.
Figure 6: Crashes Involving a Commercial Vehicle, 2015-2019
Emphasis Area 5: Driving Under the Influence
Reducing rates of intoxicated driving is supported by creating cultural changes in perspectives around driving under the influence and through use of enforcement. During the study period (2015-2019), a total of 458 collisions occurred where a driver was under the influence of drug or alcohol resulting in 182 injuries and 5 fatalities. The City will increase enforcement efforts to reduce driving under the influence in the community and implement educational campaigns for cultural shifts toward traffic safety. Locations of collisions caused by driving under the influence are shown in Figure 7: Crashes Involving a Driver Under the Influence of Drug or Alcohol, 2015-2019.
Goals for Emphasis Area 5:
⋅ Reduce annual alcohol/drug-related fatalities from 1.0 per year to less than 0.5 per year in 2030 (50% reduction).
⋅ Reduce annual alcohol/drug-related injuries from 36 per year to less than 27 per year in 2030 (25% reduction).
Strategies for Emphasis Area 5:
Strategy 5.1 Inc
rease the number and effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints and targeted enforcement:
A sobriety checkpoint is a roadblock set up by law enforcement officers to detect and deter intoxicated driving in locations where there is a high incidence of crashes and fatalities. The City Police Department will focus enforcement efforts on Holidays and typical timeframes of intoxicated driving, which include typical holidays such as Saint Patrick’s Day, Cinco de Mayo, Fourth of July, and fall-winter holidays. The City may also examine opportunities in unannounced sobriety checkpoints in historically high DUI areas.
Strategy 5.2 D evelop educational programs targeting specific audiences, such as middle-high school students, or the 18-to-34-year-old age group: Impaired driving can involve youths in cars, either as a passenger with the offender or as teen drivers. Students will learn about the consequences of underage drinking and driving and transportation risk behaviors.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reported 16% of 15- to 18- year-old drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2019 had been drinking. Educational materials for adults will center around driver’s responsibilities, hazardous road conditions, and the effects of alcohol and drugs.
Strategy 5.3 C reate effective media campaigns in both visual and print media: December is National Impaired Driving Prevention Month with it being the deadliest for fatalities involving DUIs. The City will provide outreach to the community using messaging that upholds values around protecting neighbors, alternative options to driving under the influence, and the individual person/ financial risks of intoxicated driving. The City Police Department will identify areas of high DUI arrests to post visual signage. Campaigns can center around ridesharing or appointing a designated driver, and other forms of messaging within the campaign will be determined in a collaborative process by the stakeholder working group representatives.
Figure 7: Crashes Involving a Driver Under the Influence of Drug or Alcohol, 2015-2019
Emphasis Area 6: Improve Incident Response
Based on feedback from stakeholder meetings, there is interest in consistency and streamlined coordination among emergency responders in the City of Montebello. The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) cites communication failures as a significant contributor to the loss of life in a roadway accident. Technological areas for improvement include alerting platforms, geographical information systems, and street-level cameras that can continue to address communications issues for emergencies. Traffic incident handling restores the flow of traffic as safely and quickly as possible following a roadway incident. Through the efficient coordination of emergency services, the process to respond to a traffic incident can reduce the duration of traffic impacts and decrease the possibility of a secondary traffic crash.
A quantity of 66 crashes involving emergency responder services (EMS) vehicles was observed over the 5- year study period, indicating improvements to minimize the quantity of crashes between motorists and emergency responders is needed. Crash data includes motorists’ crashing into parked EMS vehicles, and data does not discern if the responders were traveling to an incident with sirens and lights engaged (Code 3). The number of crashes involving emergency vehicles may indicate that there are right-of-way conflicts during emergency response. Adding pre-emption technology to traffic signals or discussing with emergency responders as to why these crashes are occurring may be informational to prevent future crashes involving emergency vehicles.
Goals for Emphasis Area 6:
⋅ Reduce crashes with emergency responder services vehicles from an average of 11 per year to 5 per year by 2030 (55% reduction).
⋅ Reduce crashes caused by construction as a roadway condition from 2.2 per year to 1.1 per year by 2030 (50% reduction).
⋅ Increase average incident clearance time by 25% by year 2030.
Strategies for Emphasis Area 6:
Strategy 6.1 Impl
ement Traffic Signal Pre-Emption System: Traffic signal pre-emption can change the traffic signal to red light illumination for conflicting traffic and provide green light illumination for approaching emergency responder services (EMS) staff when traveling rapidly to respond to a crash or incident. It is recommended the City pursue funding to implement technology to equip the traffic signals and EMS vehicles for emergency vehicle pre-emption. The implementation can be phased with prioritization along major corridors and within proximity to key facilities such as police and fire stations, and medical facilities providing emergency care.
Strategy 6.2 Participate in Crash Responder Safety Week annually in November: Crash Responder Safety Week is an initiative to commit passenger vehicles to safer driving practices for a safer work environment around emergency responders reporting to crash incidents on highways and local roads. Throughout the week, involved agencies will draw attention to the important work of first responders at the scene of roadway incidents, and the campaign celebrates the work of first responders while honoring those who have fallen in the line of duty. The City will support dissemination of the Traffic Incident Management (TIM) training to emergency response teams, which would be made available by the Federal Highway Administration. The City and involved agencies will disseminate daily campaign messaging throughout the week using social media, newsletters, and other outreach channels. Daily campaign messaging includes Slow Down - Move Over, Honoring Veterans, and Traffic Incident Awareness, among others.
Strategy 6.3 Inco
rporate guidance from the Framework for Improving Cross-Sector Coordination for Emergency Preparedness and Response (Framework): Prepared by the Public Health and Law Enforcement Emergency Preparedness Workgroup (Workgroup), the Framework makes recommendations for action items that are intended to make cross-sectoral collaboration more feasible and productive without duplicating the many existing initiatives designed to streamline emergency preparedness and response. The Framework includes recommendations for improving data and resource sharing, as well as guidance for establishing Citywide guidelines and protocols between emergency responders. Involved agencies will review the Framework and identify opportunities to adopt applicable recommendations.
Strategy 6.4: A
dopt the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook (WATCH): First adopted by the Colorado Department of Transportation, WATCH details policies and standards guidelines for common temporary traffic control zones in a work area. Deploying traffic control devices consistent with WATCH guidelines is effective in reducing crashes, expediting traffic flow, and improving public relations. WATCH outlines signage and detour considerations for first responders, pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists as well as standards for road detour quality. Traffic control noted in WATCH ensures the safety of all parties, and the City and involved partners will deploy traffic control devices consistent with WATCH guidance.
Next Steps
The City of Montebello Public Works Department will coordinate among departments, local agencies, and organizations as needed to apply or co-apply for funding resources or grant opportunities. The City will advance strategies and continue partnership with stakeholders to implement the education, enforcement, engineering, and emerging technology strategies as needed to assist in implementing the vision and goals of this Safe Travel Plan.
Engineering improvements to local roads are implemented according to a typical schedule involving multiple phases, including but not limited to planning, environmental analysis, design, and construction.
Funding must be acquired by the City to proceed with each phase of implementation which will influence the schedule. For example, the HSIP receives project applications only on even years. The strategies identified in this Safe Travel Plan will follow the typical schedule and any additional phases as needed to meet state and federal requirements.
This Safe Travel Plan will be a living document and will be updated as needed by the City of Montebello Public Works Department with input from the SWG representatives; these representatives will attend an annual meeting to confirm the LSRP’s direction, process, and progress. Moreover, an annual SWG meeting will occur annually and a representative from each SWG organization will be invited to attend providing attendees with an opportunity to review status and weigh in upon upcoming year priorities.
The LRSP’s goals will be evaluated as needed (at minimum, every 5 years) to measure success and progress toward the identified goals, to evaluate collision statistics, and to identify any new applicable goals that should be worked toward or arising collision trends.
Typical Schedule
Planning
City staff will develop short-term, medium-term, and long-term plans for implementation. The timeline for planning may be affected by available funding, environmental impacts, adoption in local, regional, and state planning documents, and may last 1-12 months.
Environmental Analysis
Environmental assessment or environmental impact statement is required for projects not qualifying for a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The timeline for environmental analysis is affected by the scope and complexity of the project.
Design
Design includes preliminary design, final design, right of way acquisition, and may last 1-36 months.
Construction
Construction schedules vary depending on inclement weather, availability of materials, and unforeseen discoveries. The phase may range from 1 to over 36 months.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
Sustainable Communities Grants
(State–SB 1)
Restricted Grant Agreement
This Restricted Grant Agreement (RGA), between State of California acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as CALTRANS, and City of Montebello, hereinafter referred to as AGENCY, will commence on (Start Date), or upon approval by CALTRANS, whichever occurs later. This RGA is of no effect unless approved by CALTRANS. AGENCY shall not receive payment for work performed prior to approval of the RGA and before receipt by AGENCY of Notice to Proceed by CALTRANS Contract Manager. This RGA shall expire on (Add Date).
Attachments:
The following attachments are incorporated into and are made a part of this RGA by this reference and attachment.
I.AGENCY Resolution
ll. Scope of Work and Project Cost and Schedule
III. Grant Application Guide
Recitals
1. Under this RGA, CALTRANS intends to convey State restricted grant funds to AGENCY, pursuant to Budget Act Line Item 2660-102-3290, who will conduct transportation studies and planning within the regional area under the jurisdiction of AGENCY under the terms, covenants, and conditions of this RGA.
2.CALTRANS and AGENCY intend that only funds that are authorized as restricted grants will be subject to this RGA, and that no funds that should be the subject of a Joint Powers Agreement, Interagency Agreement, or other non-grant agreement shall be subject to this RGA.
Now, Therefore, based upon the terms, covenants, and conditions, the parties agree as follows:
Section I
AGENCY Responsibility:
To timely and satisfactorily complete all Project Work described in Attachment II within the project budget and in accordance with the items of this RGA.
Section ll
CALTRANS Responsibility:
That when conducting an audit of the costs claimed by AGENCY under the provisions of this RGA, to conduct the audit in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Section lII
Parties’ Mutual Responsibilities:
1.Under this RGA, CALTRANS will convey State grant restricted funds to AGENCY, pursuant to Budget Act Line Item 2660-102-3290, and AGENCY will conduct transportation studies and planning within the project area described in Attachment II. The funds subject to this RGA must be (a) identified as available for a restricted grant in CALTRANS’ budget and (b) for the purpose
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
of conducting transportation studies or planning and (c) to a public entity that is responsible for conducting transportation studies or planning.
2.Details of the Grant Program, Funds, Project, and Program Guidelines and the governing State and Federal law are fully described in Attachment III which is attached to and made a part of this RGA.
3.Under this restricted grant, funds may be only used for the purpose set forth in this RGA, Resolution (Attachment I), Scope of Work and Project Cost and Schedule (Attachment II), and the applicable Grant Application Guide (Attachment III), and funds may only be used for costs and expenses that are directly related to such purpose.
4. AGENCY shall perform all the duties and obligations described in (enter project title here), hereinafter “Project”, subject to the terms and conditions of this RGA and the Approved Project Grant Application (Scope of Work and Project Cost and Schedule), which are attached hereto as Attachment II.
5.The resolution authorizing AGENCY to execute this RGA pertaining to the above described Project is attached hereto as Attachment I.
6.All services performed by AGENCY pursuant to this RGA shall be performed in accordance with California Senate Bill No. 1 (SB-1) (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017), also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, including, but not limited to, Government Code Section 14460(a)(1), as well as all applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and ordinances, all applicable CALTRANS policies and procedures, and all applicable CALTRANS published manuals, including, but not limited to, the applicable Grant Application Guide (Attachment III).
California Government Code Section 14460(a)(1) provides: “The department [CALTRANS], and external entities that receive State and Federal transportation funds from the department, are spending those funds efficiently, effectively, economically, and in compliance with applicable State and Federal requirements. Those external entities include, but are not limited to, private for profit and nonprofit organizations, local transportation agencies, and other local agencies that receive transportation funds either through a contract with the department or through an agreement or grant administered by the department.”
In case of conflict between any applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and ordinances, and/or any applicable policies, procedures, or published manuals of either CALTRANS or AGENCY, the order of precedence of the applicability of same to this RGA shall be established in this order: 1) Federal laws and regulations; 2) California laws and regulations; 3) CALTRANS policies, procedures, and published manuals; 4) Local ordinances; and 5) AGENCY policies, procedures, and published manuals. This RGA may not include any Federal funds.
7.Project funding is as follows:
Fund Source:
STATE Fund Source: AGENCY
Road
Maintenance
and
Rehabilitation
Account
(RMRA) State
(SB 1) Grant
Funds
Local Match
(Cash)
Local Match
(In-Kind)
Total Local
Match
% Local
Match
Total Project
Cost
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
No in-kind contributions may be made unless the amount and type of the contribution is identified above.
8.This RGA is exempt from legal review and approval by the Department of General Services (DGS), pursuant to applicable law.
9. Notification of Parties
a.AGENCY’s Project Manager for Project is (NAME AND PHONE NUMBER). b.AGENCY’s Financial Manager for the Project is (Project Representative name) (Name, Email and Phone Number).
c.CALTRANS’ Contract Manager is (Contract Manager’s Name) (Name, Email and Phone Number). “Contract Manager” as used herein includes his/her designee. d. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and received by the parties at their respective addresses:
(AGENCY Name)
Attention: (Project Manager Name), (Project Manager Title) Phone Number: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Email:
Address
City, State Zip
California Department of Transportation
(District/Division)
Attention: (Contract Manager), (Contract Manager Title) Phone Number: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Email:
Address
City, State Zip
10. Period of Performance
a. Reimbursable work under this RGA shall begin no earlier than on (Insert start date), following the written approval of CALTRANS and AGENCY’s receipt of the Notice to Proceed letter of this RGA by the CALTRANS Contract Manager, and will expire on (Insert end date). b.AGENCY will attend a kickoff meeting with CALTRANS to be scheduled within one (1) week from receipt of Notice to Proceed letter by CALTRANS Contract Manager.
11. Changes in Terms/Amendments
This Agreement may only be amended or modified during the period of performance by mutual written agreement of the parties. Any proposed modification to this agreement that requires a formal amendment must be submitted by AGENY to CALTRANS no less than 90 days prior to the expiration of this RGA.
12. Cost Limitation
$X,XXX.XX $X,XXX.XX $X,XXX.XX $X,XXX.XX XX.XX% $X,XXX.XX
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
a. The maximum total amount granted and reimbursable to AGENCY pursuant to this RGA by CALTRANS shall not exceed $X,XXX.XX.
b. It is agreed and understood that this RGA fund limit is an estimate and that CALTRANS will only reimburse the cost of services actually rendered in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and as authorized by CALTRANS Contract Manager at or below that fund limitation established herein.
13. Termination
a. If the applicable law and the Grant Program guidelines provide for such termination, CALTRANS reserves the right to terminate this RGA for any or no reason upon written notice to AGENCY at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of such termination in the event CALTRANS determines (at its sole discretion) that AGENCY failed to proceed with PROJECT work in accordance with the terms of this RGA. In the event of termination for convenience, CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable, authorized, and non-cancelled costs up to the date of termination.
b. This RGA may be terminated by either party for any or no reason by giving written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of such termination. In the event of termination for convenience, CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable, authorized, and non-cancelled costs up to the date of termination. c.AGENCY has 60 days after the Termination Date to submit accurate invoices to CALTRANS to make final allowable payments for PROJECT costs in accordance to the terms of this RGA.
Failure to submit accurate invoices within this period of time shall result in a waiver by AGENCY of its right to reimbursement of expended costs.
14. Budget Contingency Clause
a. It is mutually agreed that if the US Congress or the State Legislature fail to appropriate or allocate funds during the current year and/or any subsequent years covered under this RGA and do not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this RGA shall be of no further force and effect. In this event, CALTRANS shall have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to AGENCY or to furnish any other considerations under this RGA and AGENCY shall not be obligated to perform any provisions of this RGA.
b. If funding for any fiscal year is reduced or deleted by US Congress or State Legislature for purposes of this program, CALTRANS shall have the option to either terminate this RGA with no liability occurring to CALTRANS or offer an RGA Amendment to AGENCY to reflect reduced amount.
15. Payment and Invoicing
AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and sub-recipients shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred Project costs and matching funds by line. The accounting system of AGENCY, its contractors, all subcontractors, and sub-recipients shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices.
a. The method of payment for this RGA will be based on the actual allowable costs that are incurred in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and in the performance of the Project Work. CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for expended actual allowable direct costs, and,
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
including, but not limited to, labor costs, travel, and contracted consultant services costs incurred by AGENCY in performance of the Project Work. Indirect costs are reimbursable only if the AGENCY has identified the estimated indirect cost rate in Attachment II and an approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan or an Indirect Cost Rate Proposal as set forth in Section III–Cost Principles, Paragraph 17d. The total cost shall not exceed the cost reimbursement limitation set forth in Section III–Cost Limitations, Paragraph 12a. Actual costs shall not exceed the estimated wage rates, labor costs, travel, and other estimated costs and fees set forth in Attachment II without an amendment to this RGA, as agreed between CALTRANS and AGENCY.
b. Reimbursement of AGENCY expenditures will be authorized only for those allowable costs actually incurred by AGENCY in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and in the performance of Project Work. AGENCY must not only have incurred the expenditures on or after the start date and the issuance of the Notice to Proceed letter for this RGA and before the Expiration Date but must have also paid for those costs to claim any reimbursement. c. Travel expenses and per diem rates are not to exceed the rate specified by the State of California Department of Human Resources for similar employees (i.e. non-represented employees) unless written verification is supplied that government hotel rates were not then commercially available to AGENCY, its subrecipients, contractors, and/or subcontractors, at the time and location required as specified in the California Department of Transportation's Travel Guide Exception Process at the following link: https://travelpocketguide.dot.ca.gov/.
Also see website for summary of travel reimbursement rules. d.AGENCY shall submit invoices to CALTRANS at least quarterly, but no more frequently than monthly, in arrears for completion of milestones in accordance with the Project Cost and Schedule in Attachment II to the satisfaction of the CALTRANS Contract Manager. Invoices shall reference this RGA Number and shall be signed and submitted to the CALTRANS Contract Manager at the following address, as stated in Section III–Notification of Parties, Item 9c. One-time lump sum invoices for the grant amount is not allowed. e. Invoices shall include the following information:
1) Names of the AGENCY personnel performing work
2) Dates and times of Project Work
3) Locations of Project Work
4) Itemized costs as set forth in Attachment II, including identification of each employee, contractor, or subcontractor staff who provided services during the period of the invoice, the number of hours and hourly rates for each employee, contractor, sub-recipient, or subcontractor staff member, authorized travel expenses with receipts, receipts for authorized materials or supplies, and contractor, sub-recipient, and subcontractor invoices.
f. Incomplete or inaccurate invoices shall be returned to the AGENCY unapproved for correction. Failure to submit invoices on a timely basis may be grounds for termination of this RGA for material breach per Section III–Termination, Paragraph 13. g.CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable Project costs at least quarterly, but no more frequently than monthly, in arrears as promptly as CALTRANS fiscal procedures permit upon receipt of an itemized signed invoice.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
h. The RGA Expiration Date refers to the last date for AGENCY to incur valid Project costs or credits and is the date the RGA expires. AGENCY has 60 days after that Expiration Date to make final allowable payments to Project contractors or vendors and submit the Project’s Final Product(s) as defined in Attachment II and a final accurate invoice to CALTRANS for reimbursement for allowable Project costs. Any unexpended Project funds not invoiced by the 60th day will be reverted and will no longer be accessible to reimburse late Project invoices.
16. Local Match Funds
a.AGENCY shall contribute not less than its specified local match amount toward the services described herein by the grant expiration date identified in Paragraph 1 of this RGA. AGENCY can provide less than their percentage local match contribution in each invoice submittal, but AGENCY must fully satisfy the local cash and in-kind match amount and percentage identified in Section III, Paragraph 7, with the final invoice.
b. If Agency fails to provide the contractual local match identified in Section III, Paragraph 7, it is grounds for contract termination as identified in Section III, Paragraph 13.
17. Quarterly Progress Reporting
AGENCY shall submit written progress reports to CALTRANS Contract Manager to determine if AGENCY is performing to expectations, is on schedule, is within funding cost limitations, to communicate interim findings, and to afford occasions for airing difficulties respecting special problems encountered so that remedies can be developed.
18. Cost Principles
a.AGENCY agrees to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
b.AGENCY agrees, and will assure that its contractors, sub-recipients, and subcontractors will be obligated to agree, that (a) Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of individual Project costs and (b) all parties shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Every sub- recipient receiving Project funds as a sub-recipient, contractor, or subcontractor under this RGA shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards to the extent applicable.
c. Prior to AGENCY seeking reimbursement of indirect costs, AGENCY must have identified the estimated indirect cost rate in Attachment II, prepare and submit annually to CALTRANS for review and approval an indirect cost rate proposal and a central service cost allocation plan (if any) in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards and Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual which may be accessed at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot- media/programs/local-assistance/documents/lapm/ch05.pdf. d.AGENCY agrees and shall require that all its agreements with consultants and sub-recipients contain provisions requiring adherence to this section in its entirety.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
19. Repayment of Unallowable Costs
Any Project costs for which AGENCY has received payment or credit that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 200, and/or Part 48, Chapter 1, Part 31, are subject to repayment by AGENCY to CALTRANS. Should AGENCY fail to reimburse moneys due CALTRANS within 30 days of discovery or demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the parties hereto, CALTRANS is authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due AGENCY from CALTRANS or any third-party source, including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer, the State Controller or any other fund source.
20. Americans with Disabilities Act
By signing this Agreement, LOCAL AGENCY assures CALTRANS that in the course of performing Project Work, it will fully comply with the applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA (42 USC Section 12101 et seq.).
21. Iran Contracting Act
The proposed Contractor must complete and submit to CALTRANS the Iran Contracting Act Certification certifying that it is not on the most current DGS list of Entities Prohibited from Contracting with Public Entities in California per the Iran Contracting Act, 2010, https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Page-Content/Procurement-Division-Resources-List- Folder/List-of-Ineligible-Businesses, before the contract has been executed, unless Contractor is exempted from the certification requirement by Public Contract Code Section 2205(c) or (d). If claiming an exemption, the proposed Contractor shall provide written evidence that supports an exemption under Public Contract Code Section 2203(c) or (d) before execution of the contract.
22. Indemnification
Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by AGENCY, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, subrecipients, or subcontractors, under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon AGENCY under this RGA. It is understood and agreed that AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless, CALTRANS and all of CALTRANS’ officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, including, but not limited to, tortuous, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by AGENCY, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, subrecipients, or subcontractors under this RGA.
23. Nondiscrimination Clause (2 CCR 11105 Clause b)
a. During the performance of this RGA, the AGENCY, contractors, subrecipients, and subcontractors shall not deny the contract's benefits to any person on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status, nor shall they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
orientation, or military and veteran status. AGENCY shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination. b.AGENCY shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Sections 12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 2, Sections 11000 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Gov. Code Sections 11135-11139.5), and the regulations or standards adopted by CALTRANS to implement such article.
c.AGENCY shall permit access by representatives of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and CALTRANS upon reasonable notice at any time during the normal business hours, but in no case less than 24 hours' notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, and all other sources of information and its facilities as said Department or CALTRANS shall require to ascertain compliance with this clause.
d.AGENCY and contractors, sub-recipients, and subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement.
e.AGENCY shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all agreements with its sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors, and shall include a requirement in all agreements with all of same that each of them in turn include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts they enter into to perform work under the RGA.
24. Retention of Records/Audits
a.AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and sub-recipients, agree to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
b. All accounting records and other supporting papers of AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and sub-recipients connected with Project performance under this RGA shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of final payment to AGENCY and shall be held open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of CALTRANS, the California State Auditor, and auditors representing the Federal government. Copies thereof will be furnished by AGENCY, its contractors, its subcontractors, and sub-recipients upon receipt of any request made by CALTRANS or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs and match credits claimed under this RGA, CALTRANS will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of AGENCY pursuant to the provisions of State and AGENCY law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by AGENCY’s external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by CALTRANS when planning and conducting additional audits. c. For the purpose of determining compliance with applicable State and AGENCY law in connection with the performance of AGENCY’s contracts with third parties pursuant to Government Code Section 8546.7, AGENCY, AGENCY’s sub-recipients, contractors, subcontractors, and CALTRANS, shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various contracts. All the above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the entire Project period and for three (3) years from the date of final payment to AGENCY under this RGA. CALTRANS, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of CALTRANS or the United
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
States Department of Transportation, shall each have access to any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a Project for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and AGENCY shall furnish copies thereof if requested. d.AGENCY, its sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors will permit access to all records of employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by CALTRANS, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this RGA. e. Additionally, all grants may be subject to a pre-award audit prior to execution of the RGA to ensure AGENCY has an adequate financial management system in place to accumulate and segregate reasonable, allowable, and allocable costs.
f. Any contract with a contractor, subcontractor, or sub-recipient entered into as a result of this RGA shall contain all the provisions of this article.
25. Adjudication of Facts in Disputes
a. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this RGA that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the CALTRANS Contract Officer, who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by AGENCY. The CALTRANS Contract Officer shall issue a written decision within 30 days of receipt of the dispute. If AGENCY rejects the decision of the CALTRANS Contract Officer, AGENCY can pursue any and all remedies authorized by law.
Neither party waives any rights to pursue remedies authorized by law. b. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by CALTRANS Contract Officer will excuse AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of the RGA. c. Voluntary Resolution: Reference to Other Means of Resolution. In recognition of the government-to-government relationship of the AGENCY and CALTRANS, the parties shall make their best efforts to resolve disputes that occur under this RGA by good faith negotiations whenever possible. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of either party to seek injunctive relief against the other when circumstances are deemed to require immediate relief, the parties hereby establish a threshold requirement that disputes between the AGENCY and CALTRANS first be subjected to a process of meeting and conferring in good faith in order to foster a spirit of cooperation and efficiency in the administration and monitoring of performance and compliance by each other with the terms, provisions, and conditions of this RGA, as follows:
1) Either party shall give the other, as soon as possible after the event giving rise to the concern, a written notice setting forth, with specificity, the issues to be resolved. 2) The parties shall meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the dispute through negotiation not later than 10 days after receipt of the notice, unless both parties agree in writing to an extension of time.
3) If the dispute is not resolved to the satisfaction of the parties within 30 working days after the first meeting, then either party may seek to have the dispute resolved by alternative dispute resolution methods, including, but not limited to, non-binding arbitration, mediation, or the use of a technical advisor.
4) Disagreements that are not otherwise resolved by mutually acceptable means as provided herein may be resolved in the Superior Court of the State of California located within the same county where a Project is located. The disputes to be submitted to the court include
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
claims of breach or violation of this RGA. This RGA shall be interpreted under the laws of the State of California without regard to any conflict of laws’ provisions. In no event may AGENCY be precluded from pursuing any arbitration or judicial award or remedy against CALTRANS on the grounds that AGENCY has failed to exhaust its state administrative remedies. The parties agree that, except in the case of imminent threat to public health or safety, reasonable efforts will be made to explore alternative dispute resolution avenues prior to initiating judicial proceedings.
26. Third-Party Contracts
a. All State-government-funded procurements must be conducted using a fair and competitive procurement process. AGENCY may use its own procurement procedures as long as the procedures comply with the local AGENCY’s laws, rules, and ordinances governing procurement and all applicable provisions of State law, including, without limitation, the requirement that the AGENCY endeavor to obtain at least three (3) competitive bids for solicitation of goods, services, and consulting services.
Resources for Third Party Contracts, which are not inconsistent with this Paragraph 25, Third Party Contracts:
1) Part 2, Chapter 2, Articles 3 and 4 of the Public Contract Code) 2) State Contracting Manual (SCM), Chapter 5
3) Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM)Chapter 10
b. Any contract entered into as a result of this RGA shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this RGA to be applicable to AGENCY’s subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors.
Copies of all agreements with subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors must be submitted to the CALTRANS Contract Manager.
c.CALTRANS does not have a contractual relationship with the AGENCY’s subrecipients, contractors, or subcontractors and the AGENCY shall be fully responsible for all work performed by its subrecipients, contractors, or subcontractors. d. Prior authorization in writing by the CALTRANS Contract Manager shall be required before AGENCY enters into any non-budgeted purchase order or sub-agreement for supplies, or consultant services. AGENCY shall provide an evaluation of the necessity or desirability of incurring such costs. AGENCY shall retain all receipts for such purchases or services and shall submit them with invoices per Section III–Payment and Invoicing, Paragraph 15(e)(4), above.
e. Any contract entered into by AGENCY as a result of this RGA shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third-party contract reimbursements to subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors will be allowable as PROJECT costs only after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors. Travel expenses and per diem rates for subcontractors shall be reimbursed pursuant to Section III– Payment and Invoicing, Paragraph 15c, above.
27. Drug-Free Workplace Certification
By signing this RGA, AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of California that AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Gov. Code Sections 8350 et seq.) and will provide a Drug-Free workplace by doing all the following:
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
A. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a)(1).
B. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(a)(2) to inform employees about all the following:
1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
2) The person's or organization's policy of maintaining a Drug-Free workplace; 3) Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and 4) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
C. Provide, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a)(3), that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant:
1) Will receive a copy of the company's Drug-Free Policy Statement; and 2) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant.
D. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this RGA or termination of this RGA or both, and AGENCY may be ineligible for the award of any future State contracts if CALTRANS determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) AGENCY has made a false certification or, (2) AGENCY violates the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above.
28. Relationship of Parties
It is expressly understood that this agreement is executed by and between two (2) independent governmental entities and is not intended to, and shall not be construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture or association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of an independent party.
29. State-Owned Data
a.AGENCY agrees to comply with the following requirements to ensure the preservation, security, and integrity of State-owned data on portable computing devices and portable electronic storage media:
1) Encrypt all State-owned data stored on portable computing devices and portable electronic storage media using government-certified Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) cipher algorithm with a 256-bit or 128-bit encryption key to protect CALTRANS data stored on every sector of a hard drive, including temp files, cached data, hibernation files, and even unused disk space.
2) Data encryption shall use cryptographic technology that has been tested and approved against exacting standards, such as FIPS 140-2 Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules.
3) Encrypt, as described above, all State-owned data transmitted from one computing device or storage medium to another.
4) Maintain confidentiality of all State-owned data by limiting data sharing to those individuals contracted to provide services on behalf of the State, and limit use of State information assets for State purposes only.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
5) Install and maintain current anti-virus software, security patches, and upgrades on all computing devices used during the course of the Agreement. 6) Notify CALTRANS Contract Manager immediately of any actual or attempted violations of security of State-owned data, including lost or stolen computing devices, files, or portable electronic storage media containing State-owned data. 7) Advise the owner of the State-owned data, the AGENCY Information Security Officer, and the AGENCY Chief Information Officer of vulnerabilities that may present a threat to the security of State-owned data and of specific means of protecting that State-owned data.
b.AGENCY agrees to use the State-owned data only for State purposes under this Agreement. c.AGENCY agrees to not transfer State-owned data to any computing system, mobile device, or desktop computer without first establishing the specifications for information integrity and security as established for the original data file(s) (State Administrative Manual (SAM) Section 5335.1).
30. Assumption of Risk and Indemnification Regarding Exposure to Environmental Health Hazards
In addition to, and not a limitation of, Contractor’s indemnification obligations contained elsewhere in this RGA, Contractor hereby assumes all risks of the consequences of exposure of Contractor’s employees, agents, subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors, subcontractors’ employees, and any other person, firm, or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, to any and all environmental health hazards, local and otherwise, in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Such hazards include, but are not limited to, bodily injury and/or death resulting in whole or in part from exposure to infectious agents and/or pathogens of any type, kind or origin. Contractor also agrees to take all appropriate safety precautions to prevent any such exposure to Contractor’s employees, agents, subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors, subcontractors’ employees, and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Contractor also agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Caltrans, the State of California, and each and all their officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims and/or losses accruing or resulting from such exposure. Except as provided by law, Contractor also agrees that the provisions of this paragraph shall apply regardless of the existence or degree of negligence or fault on the part of Caltrans, the State of California, and/or any of their officers, agents and/or employees.
31. Mandatory Organic Waste Recycling
It is understood and agreed that pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 42649.8 et seq., if Contractor generates two (2) cubic yards or more of organic waste or commercial solid waste per week, Contractor shall arrange for organic waste or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste for organic waste recycling. Contractor shall provide proof of compliance, i.e. organic waste recycling services or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste recycling, upon request from Caltrans Contract Manager.
32. ADA Compliance
All entities that provide electronic or information technology or related services that will be posted online by Caltrans must be in compliance with Government Code Sections 7405 and 11135 and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 or subsequent version, published by the Web
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium at a minimum Level AA success. All entities will respond to and resolve any complaints/deficiencies regarding accessibility brought to their attention.
33. Project Close Out/Final Product
a.AGENCY will provide an electronic version, preferable ADA accessible, of the Final Product(s) to the CALTRANS Contract Manager.
b.CALTRANS reserves the right to withhold final payment to AGENCY pending receipt of Final Product(s) to the CALTRANS Contract Manager.
34. Ownership of Proprietary Property
a. Definitions
1) Work: The work to be directly or indirectly produced by AGENCY under this RGA. 2) Work Product: All deliverables created or produced from Work under this RGA, including but not limited to, all Work and Deliverables conceived or made, or made hereafter conceived or made, either solely or jointly with others during the term of this RGA and during a period of six (6) months after the termination thereof, which relates to the Work commissioned or performed under this RGA. “Work Product” includes all deliverables, inventions, innovations, improvements, or other works of authorship AGENCY, its subrecipients, a third-party contractor or subcontractor may conceive of or develop in the course of this RGA, whether or not they are eligible for patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, or other legal protection.
3) Inventions: Any idea, methodologies, design, concept, technique, invention, discovery, improvement, or development regardless of patentability made solely by AGENCY or jointly with the AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and/or subrecipient, and/or the AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and/or subrecipient’s employees with one (1) or more employees of CALTRANS, during the term of this RGA and in performance of any Work under this RGA, provided that either the conception or reduction to practice thereof occurs during the term of this RGA and in performance of Work issued under this RGA. b. Ownership of Work Product and Rights
1) Copyright Ownership of Work Product: Except in regard to Pre-existing Works, all Work Product derived by the Work performed by the AGENCY, its employees, or by any of the AGENCY’s contractor’s, subcontractor’s, and/or subrecipient’s employees under this RGA, shall be owned by CALTRANS and AGENCY and shall be considered to be works made for hire by the AGENCY and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and/or subrecipient for CALTRANS and AGENCY. CALTRANS and AGENCY shall own all United States and international copyrights in the Work Product.
As such, all Work Product shall contain, in a conspicuous place, a copyright designation consisting of a “c” in a circle followed by the four-digit year in which the Work Product was produced, followed by the words “California Department of Transportation and AGENCY.
All Rights Reserved.” For example, a Work Product created in the year 2012 would contain the copyright designation © 2012 California Department of Transportation and AGENCY. All Rights Reserved.
2) Vesting of Copyright Ownership: AGENCY, its employees, and all of AGENCY’s contractor’s, subcontractor’s, and subrecipient’s employees, agrees to perpetually assign,
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
and upon creation of each Work Product automatically assigns, to CALTRANS and AGENCY, its successors, and assigns, ownership of all United States and international copyrights in each and every Work Product, insofar as any such Work Product, by operation of law, may not be considered work made for hire by the AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and/or subrecipient from CALTRANS. From time to time, CALTRANS and the AGENCY shall require its contractors, subcontractors, and/or subrecipients and their respective employees to confirm such assignments by execution and delivery of such assignments, confirmations, or assignment, or other written instruments as CALTRANS and the AGENCY may request. CALTRANS and the AGENCY, its successors, and assigns, shall have the right to obtain and hold in its or their own name(s) all copyright registrations and other evidence of rights that may be available for Work Product.
AGENCY shall require contractors, including subcontractors, to waive all moral rights relating to identification of authorship restriction or limitation on use, or subsequent modifications of the Work.
c. Inventions
1) Vesting of Patent Ownership: AGENCY agrees to require subrecipients, contractors, subcontractors, and their respective employees, to assign to CALTRANS and AGENCY, its successors, and assigns, all Inventions, together with the right to seek protection by obtaining patent ownership rights and the right to claim all rights or priority there under, and the same shall become and remain CALTRANS’ property regardless of whether such protection is sought. The AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and subrecipient shall promptly make a complete written disclosure to CALTRANS of each Invention not otherwise clearly disclosed to CALTRANS in the pertinent Work Product, specifically pointing out features or concepts that the AGENCY, its employees, and/or AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and/or subrecipient believes to be new or different. The AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and subrecipient shall, upon CALTRANS and AGENCY’s request and at CALTRANS and AGENCY’s expense, cause patent applications to be filed thereon, through solicitors designated by CALTRANS and AGENCY, and shall sign all such applications over to CALTRANS and AGENCY, its successors, and assigns. The AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and subrecipient shall give CALTRANS and AGENCY and its solicitors all reasonable assistance in connection with the preparation and prosecution of any such patent applications and shall cause to be executed all such assignments or other instruments or documents as CALTRANS and AGENCY may consider necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent on this RGA.
2) Agency: In the event that CALTRANS and AGENCY are unable for any reason whatsoever to secure the AGENCY’s, its employees’, and/or AGENCY’s contractor’s, subcontractor’s, and/or subrecipient’s, signature to any lawful or necessary document required or desirable to apply for or prosecute any United States application (including renewals or divisions thereof), AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and subrecipient hereby irrevocably designates and appoints CALTRANS and AGENCY and its duly authorized officers and agents, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and on AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor’s, subcontractor’s, and subrecipient’s behalf and stead, to execute and file such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the prosecution and issuance of any copyrights, trademarks, or patents thereon with the same legal force and effect as if executed by AGENCY, its employees, and AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor, and subrecipient.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
CALTRANS and AGENCY shall have no obligations to file any copyright, trademark, or patent applications.
d. Additional Provisions
1)Avoidance of infringement: In performing services under this RGA, AGENCY and its employees agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one (1) or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If AGENCY or its employees becomes aware of any such possible infringement in the course of performing any Work under this RGA, AGENCY or its employees shall immediately notify CALTRANS in writing.
2)Pre-existing Works and License: AGENCY agrees to require contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients to acknowledge that all Work Product shall be the sole and exclusive property of CALTRANS and AGENCY, except that any Pre-existing Works created by AGENCY and third parties outside of the RGA but utilized in connection with the RGA (the “Pre-existing Works”) shall continue to be owned by AGENCY or such parties. AGENCY agrees to notify CALTRANS in writing of any Pre-existing Works used in connection with any Work Product produced under this RGA and hereby grants to CALTRANS a non-exclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free license to utilize the Pre-existing Works in connection with the Work Product. 3)Contractors, Subcontractors, and Subrecipients: Through contract with its subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors, AGENCY shall affirmatively bind by contract all of its contractors, subcontractors, subrecipients, and service vendors (hereinafter “AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient”) providing services under this RGA to conform to the provisions of this Exhibit. In performing services under this RGA, AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient shall agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one (1) or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient becomes aware of any such possible infringement in the course of performing any Work under this RGA, AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient shall immediately notify the AGENCY in writing, and AGENCY will then immediately notify the Department in writing. e. Ownership of Data
1) Upon completion of all Work under this RGA, all intellectual property rights, ownership, and title to all reports, documents, plans, specifications, and estimates, produced as part of this RGA will automatically be vested in CALTRANS and AGENCY and no further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership to CALTRANS and AGENCY. The AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients, shall furnish CALTRANS all necessary copies of data needed to complete the review and approval process. 2) It is understood and agreed that all calculations, drawings, and specifications, whether in hard copy or machine-readable form, are intended for one-time use in the Project for which this RGA has been entered into.
3)AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients, are not liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with, the modification or misuse by CALTRANS of the machine-readable information and data provided by AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients, under this RGA; further, AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients, are not liable for claims, liabilities, or losses arising out of, or connected with, any use by CALTRANS of the Project
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
documentation on other projects, for additions to this Project, or for the completion of this project by others, excepting only such use as may be authorized, in writing, by AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and subrecipients.
4) Any sub-agreement in excess of $25,000.00 entered into as a result of this RGA shall contain all of the provisions of this clause.
35. Electronic Signatures
Each party agrees that the electronic signatures, whether digital or encrypted, of the parties included in this Agreement are intended to authenticate this writing and to have the same force and effect as manual signatures for this Agreement. Documents that are referenced by this Agreement may still require manual signatures.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Montebello
Agreement Number XXAXXXX
Section IV
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this RGA on the day and year first herein above written:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AGENCY NAME
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By: By:
Printed Name: Printed Name:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
By:
Printed Name:
Title:
Date:
By:
Printed Name:
Title:
Date:
ITEM # 12
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Raul Alvarez, City Manager
BY: Fernando Pelaez, Fire Chief
Angelica Palmeros, Deputy Director
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR THE
CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (CAL OES) FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 STATE AND LOCAL CYBERSECURITY GRANT
PROGRAM
DATE: August 28, 2024
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve the submission of a grant application for the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Fiscal Year 2024-25 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program; and,
2. Take such additional, related action that may be desirable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Cal OES Fiscal Year 2024-25 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program currently has a funding opportunity to submit a competitive grant application for cybersecurity projects. If a grant is awarded and once the amount is determined, staff will return to the City Council with a request to appropriate the funds and approve receipt of the grant award.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On July 31, 2024, Cal OES, the Governor's Office of Emergency Services, released the Fiscal Year 2024-25 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant – Local and Tribal Competitive Funding Opportunity. A total of $19,085,028 is available for this grant funding program, and applicants can apply for amounts up to $250,000 for the 25-month grant performance
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2024
period. This grant can fund items identified under FEMA's allowable planning, organization, and equipment costs categories. It should be noted that there are limitations and prohibited projects, so staff will need to identify which project(s) will be the most beneficial to the City.
The City is interested in leveraging this grant opportunity to invest in a cybersecurity project that can benefit the organization's cybersecurity needs and, in turn, protect services provided to the community.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
Cybersecurity continues to be a significant issue in our evolving digital environment. The City of Montebello faces various cybersecurity threats, including phishing attacks, ransomware, data breaches, and other forms of cybercrime. These threats jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of critical data, systems and infrastructure.
The City of Montebello is seeking to submit a grant proposal to fund the completion of a project that will improve the City’s cybersecurity. The additional funding would provide much-needed financial resources to potentially safeguard many of the City’s technological assets as well as limit exposure to potential threats.
SUMMARY:
Staff is requesting that the City Council approve the submission of a grant proposal application for the Cal OES Fiscal Year 2024-25 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program. Should the City be successful in receiving the grant, subsequent City Council action will be presented to appropriate the grant funds and formally accept the grant award.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Attachment A - Cal OES Fiscal Year 2024-25 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant - Local and Tribal Competitive Funding Opportunity Guidelines
GAVIN NEWSOM
GOVERNOR
NANCY WARD
DIRECTOR
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
STATE & LOCAL CYBERSECURITY GRANT – LOCAL & TRIBAL (SL)
COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
Release Date: July 31, 2024
The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), Homeland Security & Emergency Management (HSEM) Branch, has a Competitive Funding Opportunity (CFO) for the (SL) Program.
This CFO provides programmatic information and the requirements necessary to prepare and submit a proposal for Cal OES grant funds. The provisions of this CFO supersede previous RFPs. If any language in this CFO conflicts with the terms and conditions of the applicable grant program guidance (e.g., federal Notice of Funding Opportunity, California State Supplement, etc.), the grant program guidance document(s) prevail. Applicants are strongly encouraged to review the applicable Notices of Funding Opportunity and California State Supplement, which outline the requirements that apply to Cal OES HSEM Branch Grant Subawards.
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT NOTICE
Proposals are subject to the Public Records Act, Government Code Section 7920.000, et seq. Do not put any personally identifiable information or private information on this proposal. If you believe that any of the information you are putting on this proposal is exempt from the Public Records Act, please indicate what portions of the proposal and the basis for the exemption. Your statement that the information is not subject to the Public Records Act will not guarantee that the information will not be disclosed.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Questions concerning this CFO or the proposal process must be submitted by email to:
State & Local Projects Unit
[email protected]
Cal OES staff cannot assist the Applicant with the actual preparation of their proposal. Cal OES can only respond to technical questions about the CFO during the period between the publication date and completion of the CFO process.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PA
GE 2 OF 18
A. ELIGIBILITY
1. Eligibility to Compete for Funding
For a proposal to be eligible to compete for funding (i.e., read and rated) all the following conditions must be met:
• Applicants must meet the federal definition of Local Government in 6 U.S.C. §101(13) or Tribal Government in 6 U.S.C. §665(g)(a)(7) and be located in California.
• T he proposal must be emailed to
[email protected] a nd received no later than 11:59 PM (PDT) on Friday, September 27, 2024. Proposals must be attached as PDF documents and contain the form(s) outlined E. Proposal Requirements. The proposal PDF file name should include “FY2024 SL Program CFO” and the Applicant entity name.
Cal OES cannot access proposals through cloud-based storage services (e.g., Google Drive, Dropbox, etc.). Emails should identify the name of the CFO in the Subject line. If you have not received a confirmation that your proposal was received within two business days of the date it was submitted, please send an email to [email protected] .
Please Note: proposals that do not meet the above requirements will be disqualified (i.e., ineligible) and not read and rated.
2. Eligibility for Funding Consideration
Only one proposal per Applicant will be eligible to receive funding. If an Applicant submits more than one proposal, only the highest scoring proposal, meeting the criteria above, will be considered for funding.
3. Prerequisites to Receive Funding
If selected, all the following must be completed within 60 days of receiving the Intent to Fund notification to be eligible to receive funding, Applicants must:
• Hav e a Unique Entity Identifier (Unique Entity ID) registered in the federal System for Award Management (SAM). Applicants who do not currently have a Unique Entity ID will need to register at
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 3 OF 18
SAM.gov to obtain one. Applicants should start this process immediately to ensure they are able to comply with the
requirement to have this completed within the 60-days.
• Not
have an exclusion record in the SAM by the beginning of the Grant Subaward performance period. An exclusion record in the SAM indicates that a contractor (agency) is listed in the (federal) government-wide system for debarment and suspension. An agency that is debarred or suspended is excluded from activities involving federal financial and nonfinancial assistance and benefits. Check SAM status.
B. FUNDING INFORMATION
There is $19,085,028 available for the Program for the Grant Subaward performance period of December 1, 2024 – December 31, 2026.
1. Funding Amount
Applicants may apply for up to $250,000 for the 25-month Grant Subaward performance period.
Please see the chart below for a sample breakdown of the fund sources (by Cal OES fund source code) and match based on the maximum request amount.
2022
SLCG
2022 SLCG
MATCH
(WAIVED)
2023
SLCG
2023
SLCG
MATCH
(WAIVED)
TOTAL PROJECT
COST
$82,500 $0 $167,500 $0 $250,000
2. Funding Source(s)
Guidance on policies and procedures for managing HSEM Branch Grant Subawards funded through federal fund sources can be found in the FEMA Preparedness Grants Manual. Applicants are strongly encouraged to review and retain a copy of this document to familiarize themselves with program-specific information as well as overall guidance on the rules and regulations for all fund sources that support this Program.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 4 OF 18
The Program is supported through the following fund:
State & Local Cybersecurity Grant Program (SLCG)
•
Provides state/territorial, local, and tribal (SLT) governments with resources to address cybersecurity risks and threats to information systems, improve the security of critical infrastructure and resilience of the services provided by those entities. • Supports efforts to implement cyber governance and planning, assess and evaluate systems and capabilities, mitigate prioritized issues, and build a cybersecurity workforce.
• Requires the State Administrative Agency (SAA), as the Recipient of the federal grant, to pass through at least 25% of the amount of the total federal award to rural areas. Per the Homeland Security Act of 2002, a rural area is defined in
49 U.S.C. §5302(17) a
s an area encompassing a population of
less than 50,000 people.
• R equires Recipients and Subrecipients to participate in the federal Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Cyber Hygiene Service – Vulnerability Scanning and participate in the Nationwide Cybersecurity Review (NCSR) as described in the federal Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).
• For FY 2022 and FY 2023 SLCGP funding, the match requirement has been waived for all Subrecipients. Applicants are referred to Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 200, § 200.306 for additional information.
• Cal OES’s fund source code for this federal fund is SLCG.
FEMA has identified the allowable categories of cost under the SLCGP Program as follows:
• Planning – Planning costs are allowable under this Program.
SLCGP funds may be used for a range of planning activities, such as those associated with the development, review, and revision of holistic, entity-wide cybersecurity plans and other
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 5 OF 18
planning activities that support the Program goals and
objectives.
• Organization – Organizational costs are allowable under this Program. SLCGP funds may be used for cybersecurity program management, development of whole community partnerships that support cybersecurity program governance, structures and mechanisms for information sharing between the public and private sector, and operational support, including ensuring continuity of operations for essential functions.
Personnel hiring, overtime, and backfill expenses are permitted under this Program to perform allowable SLCGP planning, organization, training, exercise, and equipment activities.
Personnel expenses may include, but are not limited to, training and exercise coordinators, program managers and planners, and cybersecurity navigators. The Subrecipient must
demonstrate that the personnel will be sustainable.
• Equipment – Equipment costs are allowable under this Program.
Unless otherwise stated, equipment must meet all applicable statutory, regulatory, and/or DHS-adopted standards to be eligible for purchase using SLCGP funds. Subrecipients will be responsible for obtaining and maintaining all necessary certifications and licenses for the requested equipment.
Investments in emergency communications systems and
equipment must meet applicable SAFECOM Guidance
recommendations; such investments must be coordinated with the Statewide Interoperability Coordinator and the State Interoperability Governing Body to ensure interoperability and long-term capability.
SLCGP funds may be used to purchase maintenance contracts or agreements, warranty coverage, licenses, and user fees in support of a system or equipment. Applicants should reference the FY 2022 and FY 2023 SLCGP NOFO, Section D, 12 – Funding Restrictions and Allowable Costs, e. Other Direct Costs, III.
Equipment, for additional requirements and restrictions on allowable equipment costs, when building their Budget Detail table for their NOI.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 6 OF 18
• Training – Training costs are allowable under this Program.
Allowable training-related costs under SLCGP include the establishment, support, conduct, and attendance of training and/or in conjunction with training by other federal agencies.
Training conducted using SLCGP funds should align with the California SLCGP Cybersecurity Plan and address a performance gap identified through cybersecurity assessments and contribute to building a capability that will be evaluated through a formal exercise.
Subrecipients are encouraged to use existing training, such as FEMA’s National Preparedness Course Catalog
, rather than
developing new courses.
All training courses must receive a Training Feedback Number from Cal OES Training & Exercise prior to the start of the course.
To request a Training Feedback Number, please download and complete the
Training Feedback Form and forward the
completed request via email to [email protected] . • Exercise – Exercise costs are allowable under this Program.
Exercises conducted with SLCGP funding should be managed and conducted consistent with
Homeland Security Exercise and
Evaluation Program (HSEEP) guidance documents.
Subrecipients are required to submit an After Action
Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) to the SLCGP Grants Analyst and FEMA at
[email protected] no later than 90 days after
completion of any exercise(s) conducted using SLCGP funds. • Management and Administration (M&A) – M&A costs are
allowable under this Program. M&A activities are defined as directly relating to the management and administration of SLCGP subaward funds, such as financial management,
reporting, and program and financial monitoring. See the FEMA Preparedness Grants Manual for examples of some M&A costs.
Subrecipients are allowed a maximum of five (5) percent of the Grant Subaward amount for the FY 2024 SLCGP.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 7 OF 18
• Indirect Costs – Indirect costs are allowable under SLCGP; see the Indirect Costs section of the FY 2024 SLCGP State
Supplement for additional guidance on including indirect costs in the budget for SLCGP-funded projects.
Applicants should complete the appropriate budget categories for the costs included in their project proposal on the Notice of Interest form; see E. Programmatic Narrative, below.
In addition, the following costs are unallowable under the SLCGP:
• Supplantation of state or local funds.
This shall not be construed to prohibit the use of funds under this Program for otherwise permissible uses on the basis that the Subrecipient has previously used state, local, and/or tribal government funds to support the same or similar uses.
• Any Subrecipient cost-sharing contribution, when required. • To pay a ransom from cyberattacks.
• Spyware.
• Recreational or social purposes, or for any purpose that does not address cybersecurity risks or cybersecurity threats on information systems owned or operated by, or on behalf of, the Subrecipient entity.
• Suing the federal government or any other government entity. • Lobbying or intervention in federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings.
• Acquiring land or constructing, remodeling, or altering buildings or other physical facilities.
• Cybersecurity insurance premiums.
Please refer to Title 2, C.F.R., Part 200, Subpart E – Cost Provisions , for
additional guidance on allowable and unallowable costs.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 8 OF 18
C. PROGRAMMATIC INFORMATION
1. Program Overview & Objectives
The purpose of the FY 2024 SLCGP Local & Tribal Program is to assist local units of government, as defined in 6 U.S.C. §101(13), and federally recognized tribes address cybersecurity risks and threats to information systems, improve security of critical infrastructure and resilience of the services these entities provide to their communities.
Through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021 ,
Congress established the State and Local Cybersecurity Improvement Act, which created the State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program and appropriated funds to be awarded to eligible state and territorial administrative agencies over a period of four federal fiscal years.
Each year, beginning with federal fiscal year 2022 through federal fiscal year 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announces a NOFO for the SLCGP. The funds provided by this Program assist SLT governments to manage and reduce systemic cyber risks, including through the establishment of a strong foundation to build a sustainable cybersecurity program. Grant funds are intended to supplement existing fiscal resources and are not guaranteed long-term sustainability solutions. Projects funded under this Program are expected to be reasonably sustained after the end of the performance period without the expectation to receive future grant funds.
As the SAA for this Program, Cal OES established a subcommittee of the California Cybersecurity Task Force, called the Cybersecurity Investment Planning Subcommittee (CCTF-CIPS), in order to meet specified requirements under the IIJA and SLCGP NOFO, including the development and submission of a statewide cybersecurity plan, which was submitted by Cal OES and approved by CISA on September 29, 2023. The CCTF-CIPS serves as California’s cybersecurity planning committee for the purposes of the SLCGP and participates in Program activities such as updating the cybersecurity plan and developing strategies for allocating funds available through the SLCGP to projects that align with the approved cybersecurity plan.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 9 OF 18
SLCGP provides funding to implement projects that address one or more of the following objectives established by CISA to accomplish the overarching goal of the Program:
Objective 1 – Governance and Planning – Develop and establish appropriate governance structures, as well as plans, to improve capabilities to respond to cybersecurity incidents and ensure continuity of operations.
Objective 2 – Assessment and Evaluation – Identify areas for improvement in SLT cybersecurity posture based on continuous testing, evaluation, and structured assessments.
Objective 3 – Mitigation – Implement security protections commensurate with risk (outcomes of Objectives 1 and 2), using the best practices as described in element 5 of the required 16 elements of the cybersecurity plans listed in the IIJA and those further listed on page 14 of the NOFO.
Objective 4 – Workforce Development – Ensure organization personnel are appropriately trained in cybersecurity, commensurate with their responsibilities as suggested in the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education.
2. Program Priorities & Requirements
All proposed projects must support activities that effectively contribute to the local or tribal government’s capability to prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from cyber threats against information systems owned and/or operated by the unit of government, align with the objectives, priorities, and cybersecurity plan elements described in the California SLCGP Cybersecurity Plan , and
meet the criteria listed in the FY 2022 and FY 2023 SLCGP NOFOs. a. SLCGP National Priorities
In developing projects for the FY 2024 SLCGP Local & Tribal Program, Applicants should describe projects that address areas for improvement identified by the local or tribal government using the whole community approach as they relate to cybersecurity capabilities and especially projects that address implementation
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 10 OF 18
of one or more of the key Cybersecurity Best Practices, as appropriate to their organization:
• Implement multi-factor authentication.
• Implement enhanced logging.
• Data encryption for data at rest and in transit.
• End use of unsupported/end of life software and hardware that are accessible from the internet.
• Prohibit use of known/fixed/default passwords and
credentials.
• Ensure ability to reconstitute systems (backups).
• Actively engage in bidirectional sharing between CISA and SLT entities in cyber relevant time frames to drive down cyber risk.
• Migration to the .gov internet domain.
Educational institution Subrecipients (e.g., school districts) using the .edu Internet domain are exempted from transitioning to the .gov Internet domain. All other Subrecipients of SLCGP funding are highly encouraged to transition to a .gov Internet domain over time. Additional information on migrating to the .gov Internet domain can be found on the DotGov Program website
.
DHS/FEMA does not prescribe a minimum funding amount for these priorities. However, all SLCGP Applicants are encouraged to consider how FY 2024 SLCGP Local & Tribal Program funding can be used to support these priority areas as they apply to the local or tribal government’s specific needs and the needs of the whole community. Subrecipients of funding through SLCGP are strongly encouraged to eventually adopt and use all eight of the Cybersecurity Best Practices listed above.
Additional information about these cybersecurity best practices can be found in the FY 2022 and FY 2023 SLCGP NOFOs, Section A, 10, c.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 11 OF 18
b. SLCGP Statewide Priorities
The CCTF-CIPS, in its SLCGP Cybersecurity Plan, described an intention to focus on the following initiatives, with the corresponding cybersecurity plan element from the IIJA noted in parentheses, to strengthen cybersecurity across California using the FY 2022-23 SLCGP funds:
• Enhance the preparation, response, and resiliency of
information systems, applications, and user accounts
(Element 3);
• Implement a process of continuous cybersecurity risk factors and threat mitigation practices prioritized by degree of risk (Element 4);
• Develop and coordinate strategies to address cybersecurity risks and threats (Element 14);
• Identify and mitigate any gaps in the cybersecurity
workforce, enhance recruitment and retention efforts, and bolster the knowledge, skills, and abilities of personnel with reference to the National Initiative for Cybersecurity
Education – Workforce Framework for Cybersecurity (Element 8);
• Assess and mitigate Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources risks and threats impacting local jurisdictions (Element 10); • Ensure continuity of operations including by conducting exercises (Element 7); and
• Ensure rural communities have adequate access to, and participation in, plan activities (Element 15).
SLCGP Applicants are strongly encouraged to incorporate one or more of these statewide priorities in their project description for the project(s) proposed using Program funds. Additional information about the cybersecurity plan elements is available in the FY 2022 SLCGP NOFO, Appendix C: Cybersecurity Plan, Required Elements.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 12 OF 18
c. Participation in Required Cybersecurity Services
Subrecipients are required to participate in free Cyber Hygiene Services – V ulnerability Scanning, provided by CISA. For these required services, please note that participation is not required to submit a proposal under this CFO but is a post-award requirement for all projects selected to receive SLCGP funding.
Additional information on this and other, optional but encouraged c
ybersecurity services, memberships, and resources can be found on the CISA - SLCGP website ( scroll down to the Tools and Resources section).
d. Na tionwide Cybersecurity Review (NCSR)
The NCSR is a free, anonymous, annual self-assessment designed to measure gaps and capabilities of a SLT’s cybersecurity programs. It is based on the National Institute of Standards and Technology Cybersecurity Framework and is sponsored by DHS and the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center.
SLCGP Subrecipients are required to complete the NCSR during the first year of the Grant Subaward performance period and annually thereafter until closeout. The open assessment period is usually October through February; Subrecipients may contact their assigned SLCGP Grants Analyst for additional information and technical support.
D. PROGRAM REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Performance and implementation reports serve as a record for the implementation of the Grant Subaward. Statistics for performance and implementation reports should be collected on a quarterly basis, even when reporting occurs less frequently. The following reports are required:
a. FE
MA Reports
T
here is one FEMA report Subrecipients will need to complete:
Annual Performance Progress Reports (PPR)
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 13 OF 18
Subrecipients must submit PPR to Cal OES annually until all grant activities are completed and the Grant Subaward is formally closed out. PPR are due within 30 days after the end of the reporting period.
Annual PPR must include progress made on approved activities and any other project-specific information required by Cal OES. PPR are cumulative and each annual report will include information provided by the Subrecipient in previous reporting periods.
In order to ensure that mandated performance metrics and other data required by the Grant Subaward are reported accurately, SLCGP PPR must first be submitted via email to the Cal OES SLCGP Grants Analyst for review. Electronic reports should be submitted to Cal OES for review at least seven (7) calendar days before the due date. Submission of the final, signed electronic report should only occur after the Subrecipient is instructed by the Grants Analyst to do so.
There are two annual PPR required for the Program. Failure to submit a PPR could result in Grant Subaward reduction, suspension, or termination. See the chart below for report periods and due dates.
Report Report Period Due Date
1st Report December 1, 2024 – November 30, 2025 December 31, 2025 Final
Report December 1, 2025 – December 31, 2026 January 31, 2027 *Exact dates will be provided by your Grants Analyst at the end of each quarter.
E. PROGRAMMATIC NARRATIVE
Applicants must use the forms provided on the Cal OES website. Applicants may not alter the formatting of any forms, including the Notice of Interest (NOI). If a space or character limitation is specified under each NOI question, strict adherence to the space limitation is required. Information included beyond the space limitation and/or unrequested attachments will not be considered in the rating process.
Applicants must respond to each question in the NOI form. The Applicant’s response to each question will be evaluated as part of the rating process.
Applicants should develop a thorough project proposal that takes into consideration planning and implementation of the entire process for the
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 14 OF 18
proposed project from conception to completion of all activities using the requested funding.
Proposals must be aligned to one or more of the SLCGP Objectives and at least one of the 16 Cybersecurity Plan Elements. This alignment is based on how many and to what degree the associated elements are adopted, especially the eight best practices listed above (see California Cybersecurity Plan, Appendix B: Project Summary Worksheet, Relat ed Required Element # column).
Applicants should also consider the Program priorities and requirements ref
erenced above in C, Programmatic Information, as well as the SLCGP FY 2022 NOFO, FY 2023 NOFO a nd the SLCGP California State Supplement, when developing their project proposals.
In addition to t heir responses on the NOI form, Applicants must complete an online Cybersecurity Maturity Survey (not scored). Upon completion of the survey, Applicants must download a copy of their survey responses and attach as a PDF file to submit with their proposal; proposals submitted without completing the survey may not be considered for funding.
F. SELECTION OF PROPOSAL FOR FUNDING
1. P
roposal Rating
Eligible proposals submitted via email as specified in A. Eligibility, above, by the due date are generally evaluated by a three-member team. Each question is assigned a point value and the Applicant’s response to each question is evaluated on the following criteria:
ABSENT: The response does not address the specific question, or a response was not provided.
UNSATISFACTORY: The response does not completely address the question. The information presented does not provide a good understanding of Applicant’s intent, does not give the detailed information requested by the CFO, and/or does not adequately support the proposal or the intent of the Program.
SATISFACTORY: The response addresses the question and provides a good understanding of the Applicant’s intent. The response adequately supports the proposal and the intent of the Program.
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 15 OF 18
ABOVE AVERAGE: The response is above average and provides a clear and detailed understanding of the Applicant’s intent. The response presents a persuasive argument that supports the proposal and the intent of the Program.
EXCELLENT: The response is outstanding, with clear, detailed, and relevant information. The response presents a compelling argument that supports the proposal and the intent of the Program.
In addition to evaluating and assigning a point value to the Applicant’s responses to the Programmatic Narrative Questions, the budget table and milestones submitted on the NOI form will be evaluated and assigned a point value.
The rater scores are averaged and ranked numerically. Proposals are only evaluated numerically; no notes are taken during the evaluation.
Applicants that meet the definition of a rural area as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 5302 will be scored and ranked against proposals from other Applicants in this category until the 25% federally-mandated rural pass-through threshold is met; at which time, remaining Applicants in this category will be scored and ranked against all other proposals.
Project proposals that do not clearly and directly address the required program objectives/investment justifications or cannot be completed within the performance period will be disqualified.
2. Funding Decision
Final funding decisions are made by the Director of Cal OES. Funding decisions are based on the following:
• The ranked score of the proposal.
• Consideration of priorities or geographical distribution specific to this CFO; e.g., whether the Applicant meets the definition of a rural area as defined in 49 U.S.C. §5302.
• Prior negative administrative and programmatic performance, if applicable.
Applicants previously funded by Cal OES will be reviewed for poor past compliance, including fiscal management, progress and annual
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 16 OF 18
reports, audit reports, and other relevant documentation or information. This review may result in one or more of the following actions:
• The Applicant may not be selected for funding.
• The amount of funding may be reduced.
• Grant Subaward Conditions may be added to the Grant
Subaward.
3. Notification Process
All Applicants will be notified in writing, via electronic communication, the results of the rating process. The notification will be sent to the Authorized Agent and the Primary Point of Contact identified on the NOI submitted with the proposal.
Applicants will receive one of the following notifications:
• Intent to Fund if selected for funding.
• Denial if not selected for funding, including the Applicant’s scores and information regarding the appeal process.
• Ineligibility:
o If the proposal did not meet Eligibility to Compete for Funding including information regarding the appeal process; or
o If the proposal scored less than the required 50% of points possible, including the Applicant’s scores and information regarding the appeal process.
Cal OES can only respond to technical questions about the CFO during the period between the publication date and completion of the CFO process. Requests for records must be made through a Public Records Act request.
G. FINALIZING THE GRANT SUBAWARD
1. Grant Subaward Application
Once selected for funding, Subrecipients must complete and submit their Grant Subaward Application through the online
Cal OES Grants
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 17 OF 18
Central System (GCS). Cal OES may require revisions and/or additional documentation to finalize the submission of the Grant Subaward Application in the GCS. The Grants Analyst identified in the Subrecipient’s Intent to Fund notification can provide technical assistance in completing these components.
For more information on the GCS, please see the FY 2024 SLCGP California State Supplement to the NOFO.
2. Grant Subaward Approval
The Grant Subaward will be available in the Cal OES GCS. The Subrecipient is not authorized to incur costs against the Grant Subaward until the application is approved. Once the Grant Subaward is approved, a request for payment may be submitted. a. Grant Subaward Conditions
Cal OES may add conditions to execute the Grant Subaward. If conditions are added, these will be discussed with the
Subrecipient and will become part of the Grant Subaward.
Grant Subaward Conditions may include holds on funding
amounts included in the budget for items of cost that require prior approval from Cal OES and/or DHS/FEMA, including but not limited to, training, and meals/beverages for training and exercise events.
b. Grant Subaward Amounts
When the amount of funds available is limited, Cal OES may reduce the amount of the Grant Subaward from the amount requested by the Subrecipient. In addition, Cal OES reserves the right to negotiate budgetary changes with the Subrecipient prior to executing the Grant Subaward. If either of these actions is required, Cal OES will notify the Subrecipient prior to executing the Grant Subaward.
3. Standard Grant Subaward Funding Authority
Allocation of funds is contingent on the enactment of the State Budget.
Cal OES does not have the authority to disburse funds until the State
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
SL COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
PAGE 18 OF 18
Budget is passed, and the Grant Subaward is fully executed.
Expenditures incurred prior to authorization are made at the Subrecipient’s own risk and may be disallowed. Cal OES employees are not able to authorize a Subrecipient to incur expenses or financial obligations prior to the execution of a Grant Subaward. However, once the Grant Subaward is finalized the Subrecipient may claim reimbursement for expenses incurred on, or after, the start of the Grant Subaward performance period.
If, during the Grant Subaward performance period, the state and/or federal funds appropriated for the purposes of the Grant Subaward are reduced or eliminated by the California Legislature or the United States Government, or in the event revenues are not collected at the level appropriated, Cal OES may immediately terminate or reduce the Grant Subaward by written notice to the Subrecipient.
Cal OES Grant Subawards are subject to applicable restrictions, limitations, or conditions enacted by the California Legislature and/or the United States Government, after, the execution of the Grant Subaward.
ITEM # 13
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Raul Alvarez, City Manager
BY: Ramon Figueroa, Director of Human Resources
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-72 APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE
SUCCESSOR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
CITY OF MONTEBELLO AND THE MONTEBELLO POLICE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION AND RESOLUTION NO. 24-73 APPROVING THE CITY
OF MONTEBELLO COMPENSATION PLAN, TABLE OF
ORGANIZATION, AND JOB CLASSIFICATIONS
DATE: August 28, 2024
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 24-72 approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Montebello and the Montebello Police Officers Association (MPOA) regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment; and,
2. Adopt Resolution No. 24-73 approving the City of Montebello compensation plan, table of organization, and job classifications; and,
3. Take such additional, related action that may be desirable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The tentatively agreed to successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the Montebello Police Officers' Association (MPOA) includes annual cost-of- living adjustments (COLA) to base salary pay, adjustments and increases to education/POST certification pay, expansion of special assignment pay, introduction of collateral pay and night/swing shift differential pay, and increases to the City’s health insurance contribution. These items are individually costed and include the impact the increases to base pay and “PERS-able” incentives will have on salary and benefits expenses during the term of the MOU.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2024
The proposed MOU (Attachment A) covers a three (3) year term (July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2027) with costing estimates completed for this period. The MOU includes a 14.5% increase to base pay over three years (7.0%, 5.0% and 2.5%), expansion of the 3.0% "special assignment pay" for additional assignments, addition of a $100/ pay period "collateral pay" for MPOA members assigned to certain duties (e.g., Range Master, Honor Guard, etc.), a $100/pay period "night/swing shift differential" pay, and changes to education/certification pay.
The total increase in base salary and related costs over the three (3) year term is approximately $3.074 million. This amount represents an increase to the projected base salary pay and incentive expenses for MPOA represented positions for the next three (3) years beginning with Fiscal Year 2024-25. The estimated total cost of the proposed MOU for FY 2024-25 is $659,000. Given the timing of negotiations and budget adoption, Staff did not include funding for the MOU related expenses in the FY 2024-25 budget. Therefore, Staff will monitor the Police Department budget and recommend budget amendments at a future quarterly budget update.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
In April 2024, the City began labor negotiation sessions with the MPOA ahead of the existing MOU expiring on June 30, 2024. The City held multiple negotiation sessions with MPOA, and the parties recently reached a tentative agreement on a three (3) year MOU (Attachment A) effective July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. The tentative agreement has been ratified by the MPOA membership. The major provisions of the tentative agreement include:
• Base salary increases of seven percent (7%) effective July 2024, five percent (5%) effective July 2025, and two and one-half percent (2.5%) effective July 2026 • For current employees, Education Incentive Pay increase of $200 per month for possession of a Bachelor’s Degree or Advanced POST Certificate and $400 per month for possession of a Master’s Degree; for employees hired on or after September 1, 2024, Education Incentive Pay will be based on individual degree or POST Certificate possessed by the employee and removes the incentive pay for possession of Basic POST Certificate and Associate’s Degree • Special Assignment Pay of 3% for special assignments (e.g. Narcotics, Gangs, K- 9, etc.) as designated by the Police Chief
• Collateral Assignment Pay of $100 per pay period for collateral assignment details (e.g. Range Master, Taser Instructor, Use of Force Instructor, etc.) as designated by the Police Chief
• Shift Differential Pay of $100 per pay period for employees who are assigned to work swing/night shifts
• City Health Insurance Contribution increases of $360 per month for two (2) party coverage and $550 per month for family coverage effective January 2025 (No change to employee-only coverage or insurance opt-out incentive)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2024
• Clarifying language on other issues of employment as included in the MOU
As a full-service organization, the City depends on the experience, knowledge, and skills of the MPOA – individually and collectively – to maintain public safety, prevent and respond to criminal activity, and ensure the well-being of residents and property within the City’s jurisdiction. Moreover, the proposed MOU would allow the City to remain competitive in the marketplace when comparing total compensation for similar positions (e.g., Police Officer, Police Corporal and Police Sergeant) at other municipalities.
The City Council’s approval of Resolution No. 24-73 (Attachment B) would update the City’s compensation plan, table of organization, and job classifications to reflect the updated salary ranges for classifications represented by MPOA (e.g., Police Officer, Police Corporal and Police Sergeant).
ENVIRONMENTAL:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 24-72 (Attachment A) approving the proposed MOU between the City and the MPOA for the period of July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2027; adopt Resolution No. 24-73 (Attachment B) updating the compensation plan, table of organization, and job classifications; and direct staff to take such additional related, action that may be desirable.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Attachment A - Resolution No. 24-72 - Memorandum of Understanding - MPOA 2024-2027
2. Attachment B - Resolution No. 24-73 - Compensation Plan FY 2024-25
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 24-72
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO
APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND THE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT AFFECTING THE DESIGNATED
MONTEBELLO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (MPOA) EMPLOYEES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2024, THROUGH JUNE 30, 2027
RECITALS
WHEREAS the City of Montebello (City) values the work of all its employees and seeks to maintain fair and mutually beneficial terms and conditions of employment for the good of the City and the employees; and
WHEREAS representatives of the City and representatives of the MPOA have met, conferred, and negotiated in good faith regarding wages, hours , and terms and conditions of employment . As a result of good faith negotiations, the City and the MPOA agreed to a comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) attached hereto as Exhibit A.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO , CALIFORNIA HEREBY RESOLVES, FINDS, AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 : The MOU between the City and the MP OA dated July 1, 202 4, through June 30, 2027, and attached is hereby approved.
SECTION 2 : That the City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution and that the same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2024.
_______________________________
Scarlet Peralta, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk Arnold M. Alvarez-Glasman, City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF MONTEBELLO )
RESOLUTION NO. 24-72
I, Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk of the City of Montebello, County of Los Angeles, State of California, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 24-72 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Montebello, signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeti ng of said Council held on the 28th day of August 2024, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
The undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Montebello, does hereby attest and certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true, full and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of said City which was duly convened and held on the date stated thereon, and that said document has not been amended, modified, repealed or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.
DATE:
Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A:
• Memorandum o f Understanding No. 24-07 - Between the City of M ontebello and the Montebello Police Officers’ Association
EXHIBIT A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NO. 24-07
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO
AND THE
MONTEBELLO POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION
FOR JULY 1, 2024 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2027
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MONTEBELLO ADOPTING THE COMPENSATION PLAN AND
TABLE OF ORGANIZATION (POSITION LISTING)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Montebello has determined that the following listing of positions shall be the official and prescribed position titles and if applicable in accordance with the respective range numbers pertaining thereto and herein indicated in accordance with provisions of the Montebello Municipal Code and/or the Civil Service Rules and Regulations as previously enacted by this City Council:
ELECTED OFFICIALS
MONTHLY SALARY
RANGES
City Councilmembers $1,032 - $1,032
City Clerk $695 - $695
City Treasurer $695 - $695
CLASSIFIED MANAGEMENT RANGE
ANNUAL
MINIMUM
ANNUAL
MAXIMUM
Fire Battalion Chief 57 $135,307 $168,980
Fire Captain 46 $103,123 $128,787
Police Captain 67 $173,204 $216,308
Police Lieutenant 61 $149,354 $186,522
Police Sergeant 53 $122,581 $153,087
Senior Fire Inspector 38 $84,638 $105,702
CLASSIFIED NON-MANAGEMENT RANGE
ANNUAL
MINIMUM
ANNUAL
MAXIMUM
Account Clerk 7 $39,366 $49,163
Administrative Assistant 5 $37,470 $46,794
Assistant Engineer 33 $74,808 $93,425
Assistant Planner 30 $69,467 $86,754
Body Shop Mchanic 23 $58,440 $72,983
Building Inspector 27 $64,507 $80,560
Building Maintenance Tradeworker I 13 $45,653 $57,014
Building Maintenance Tradeworker II 16 $49,163 $61,398
Bus Operator 20 $54,267 $67,772
Business License Technician 12 $44,540 $55,624
Combination Building Inspector 37 $82,574 $103,123
Community Outreach Specialist 21 $55,624 $69,467
Community Risk Reduction Coordinator 32 $72,983 $91,146 Community Services Coordinator 13 $45,653 $57,014
Court Liaison 12 $44,540 $55,624
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
Custodian 7 $39,366 $49,163
Electrician 27 $64,507 $80,560
Engineering Technician 22 $57,014 $71,203
Finance Technician 16 $49,163 $61,398
Fire Engineer 40 $88,923 $111,053
Fire Inspector 21 $55,624 $69,467
Firefighter 35 $78,595 $98,154
Fleet Service Worker 12 $44,540 $55,624
Heavy Equipment Mechanic 28 $66,119 $82,574
Human Resources Technician 27 $64,507 $80,560
Lead Finance Technician 24 $59,901 $74,808
Maintenance Worker 10 $42,393 $52,944
Parking Control Officer 12 $44,540 $55,624
Payroll Coordinator 24 $59,901 $74,808
Payroll Specialist 23 $58,440 $72,983
Permit Technician 18 $51,652 $64,507
Plumber 27 $64,507 $80,560
Police Community Service Officer 16 $49,163 $61,398
Police Corporal 46 $103,123 $128,787
Police Dispatcher I 22 $57,014 $71,203
Police Dispatcher II 27 $64,507 $80,560
Police Officer 43 $95,760 $119,592
Police Records Technician 10 $42,393 $52,944
Property & Evidence Technician I 20 $54,267 $67,772
Property & Evidence Technician II 23 $58,440 $72,983
Public Information Coordinator 24 $59,901 $74,808
Public Safety Radio Technician 31 $71,203 $88,923
Public Works Inspector 28 $66,119 $82,574
Records Coordinator 22 $57,014 $71,203
Senior Building Inspector 34 $76,678 $95,760
Senior Finance Technician 22 $57,014 $71,203
Senior Permit Technician 21 $55,624 $69,467
Storekeeper 18 $51,652 $64,507
UNCLASSIFIED MANAGEMENT RANGE
ANNUAL
MINIMUM
ANNUAL
MAXIMUM
Accounting Manager 44 $98,154 $122,581
Accounting Supervisor 30 $69,467 $86,754
Assistant City Manager 77 $217,369 $274,464
Administrative Manager 44 $98,154 $122,581
Assistant Director of Finance 56 $132,007 $164,858
Assistant Director of Fire 54 $125,646 $156,915
Assistant Director of Human Resources 56 $132,007 $164,858 Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development 55 $128,787 $160,837
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
Assistant Director of Public Affairs 55 $128,787 $160,837 Assistant Director of Public Works 54 $125,646 $156,915 Assistant Director of Recreation & Community Services 51 $116,675 $145,711 Assistant Director of Transportation 54 $125,646 $156,915 Assistant Fire Chief 62 $153,087 $191,185
Assistant Police Chief 69 $178,405 $222,803
Associate Engineer 40 $88,923 $111,053
Building Maintenance Supervisor 30 $69,467 $86,754
Building Official 49 $111,053 $138,690
City Manager ^ $334,624 $334,624
Code Enforcement Manager 38 $84,638 $105,702
Construction Manager 48 $108,344 $135,307
Crime Prevention Supervisor 34 $76,678 $95,760
Deputy Director of Public Works 52 $119,592 $149,354
Deputy Director of Transportation 52 $119,592 $149,354
Deputy Director of Economic Development 52 $119,592 $149,354 Deputy Fire Chief 58 $138,690 $173,204
Director of Finance 71 $187,463 $234,082
Director of Human Resources 71 $187,463 $234,082
Director of Planning & Community Development 68 $174,053 $217,369 Director of Public Affairs/Information Technology 68 $174,053 $217,369 Director of Public Works/City Engineer 72 $192,222 $239,934 Director of Recreation & Community Services 67 $169,808 $212,067 Director of Transportation 69 $178,405 $222,803
Dispatch Supervisor 32 $72,983 $91,146
Economic Development Manager 50 $113,829 $142,157
Finance Supervisor 32 $72,983 $91,146
Finance Manager 44 $98,154 $122,581
Fire Chief 74 $201,848 $252,081
Fire Marshal 50 $113,829 $142,157
Fleet Maintenance Manager 44 $98,154 $122,581
Fleet Maintenance Supervisor 33 $74,808 $93,425
Fleet Services Manager 42 $93,425 $116,675
Fleet Services Supervisor 22 $57,014 $71,203
Golf Course Facilities Manager 35 $78,595 $98,154
Grants & Project Administrator 36 $80,560 $100,608
Housing Manager 48 $108,344 $135,307
Human Resources Analyst 34 $76,678 $95,760
Human Resources Manager 48 $108,344 $135,307
Information Systems Manager 49 $111,053 $138,690
Information Systems Supervisor 39 $86,754 $108,344
Management Analyst 30 $69,467 $86,754
Maintenance Manager 44 $98,154 $122,581
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
Office Manager 27 $64,507 $80,560
Park Maintenance Supervisor 30 $69,467 $86,754
Planner 35 $78,595 $98,154
Planning Manager 49 $111,053 $138,690
Police Chief 75 $206,895 $258,383
Police Records Supervisor 31 $71,203 $88,923
Principal Engineer 52 $119,592 $149,354
Principal Risk Officer 59 $142,157 $177,534
Public Affairs Manager 35 $78,595 $98,154
Public Information Officer 32 $72,983 $91,146
Public Safety Radio Supervisor 39 $86,754 $108,344
Public Works Inspector 28 $66,119 $82,574
Public Works Manager 37 $82,574 $103,123
Public Works Superintendent 43 $95,760 $119,592
Recreation Manager 35 $78,595 $98,154
Recreation Supervisor 29 $67,772 $84,638
Revenue Supervisor 30 $69,467 $86,754
Risk Management Analyst 30 $69,467 $86,754
Risk Manager 50 $113,829 $142,157
Senior Deputy City Clerk 39 $86,754 $108,344
Senior Economic Development Coordinator 34 $76,678 $95,760 Senior Human Resources Analyst 41 $91,146 $113,829
Senior Management Analyst 36 $80,560 $100,608
Senior Planner 41 $91,146 $113,829
Senior Procurement Analyst 33 $74,808 $93,425
Social Work Supervisor 40 $88,923 $111,053
Street Maintenance Supervisor 32 $72,983 $91,146
Superintendent/Facility Manager 38 $84,638 $105,702
Transit Administration Manager 45 $100,608 $125,646
Transit Assistant Manager 34 $76,678 $95,760
Transit Operations Manager 47 $105,702 $132,007
Transit Planner 36 $80,560 $100,608
Transit Supervisor 26 $62,933 $78,595
Warehouse Supervisor 26 $62,933 $78,595
^The City Manager’s salary is set by separate City Council approved contract.
UNCLASSIFIED NON-MANAGEMENT RANGES
ANNUAL
MINIMUM
ANNUAL
MAXIMUM
Accountant 26 $62,933 $78,595
Code Enforcement Coordinator 10 $42,393 $52,944
Code Enforcement Officer 27 $64,507 $80,560
Crime Analyst 32 $72,983 $91,146
Deputy City Clerk 24 $59,901 $74,808
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
Economic Development Coordinator 26 $62,933 $78,595
Field Response Case Coordinator 11 $43,453 $54,267
Firefighter/Paramedic Trainee 21 $55,624 $69,467
Information Systems Analyst 36 $80,560 $100,608
Information Systems Technician 18 $51,652 $64,507
Police Trainee 41 $91,146 $113,829
Senior Accountant 35 $78,595 $98,154
Senior Administrative Assistant 14 $46,794 $58,440
HOURLY CLASSIFICATION
HOURLY
MINIMUM
HOURLY
MAXIMUM
Administrative Analyst 16.00 24.45
Administrative Secretary 18.55 23.41
Building Maintenance Tradeworker 16.00 20.31
Bus Operator 18.93 20.68
Clerical Assistant 16.00 18.33
Code Enforcement Technician 16.00 16.84
Community Services Aide - SYEP 16.00 16.00
Equipment Service Worker 16.00 19.11
Field Maintenance Worker 16.00 16.73
Fire Engineer 27.43 35.02
Fire Inspector 22.56 28.80
Heavy Duty Fire Equipment Mechanic 45.41 49.10
Human Resources Manager 42.22 51.32
Information Systems Specialist 16.00 18.33
Intern 16.00 18.33
Lifeguard 16.00 16.64
Maintenance Worker 16.00 20.31
Mechanic's Assistant 16.00 17.49
Park Ranger 16.00 19.30
Parking Control Officer 18.72 21.28
Police Cadet 16.00 19.33
Police Community Services Officer 16.00 16.66
Police Dispatcher 26.35 31.25
Police Officer 32.49 41.43
Police Trainee 18.99 24.06
Police Youth Program Coordinator 17.55 22.45
Pool Manager 16.66 20.00
Property & Evidence Technician 16.66 24.45
Public Works Manager 34.72 42.23
Recreation Leader I 16.00 16.22
Recreation Leader II 16.00 17.79
Recreation Leader III 16.00 18.75
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
Recreation Leader IV 16.71 20.55
Risk Management Assistant 16.00 21.45
Secretary 16.00 17.90
Senior Lifeguard 16.15 18.27
Senior Project Manager 63.87 77.66
Sports Official 16.00 24.45
Swim Instructor – Lifeguard 17.50 21.00
Transportation Revenue Coordinator 16.00 20.22
Transportation Specialist 16.00 24.45
SECTION 2. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution, shall distribute copies to the Director of Human Resources and the Director of Finance, and the resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon ratification.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
_______________________________
Scarlett Peralta, Mayor
ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk Arnold M. Alvarez-Glasman, City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF MONTEBELLO )
I, Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk of the City of Montebello, County of Los Angeles, State of California, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 24-73 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Montebello, signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 28th day of August, 2024 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
RESOLUTION NO. 24-73
The undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Montebello, does hereby attest and certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true, full and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of said City which was duly convened and held on the date stated thereon, and that said document has not been amended, modified, repealed or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.
DATE:
Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk
ITEM # 14
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Raul Alvarez, City Manager
BY: John Soria, Acting Director
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-68 AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF AN
APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) FOR GRANT FUNDING FROM THE 2024
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM – ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION & SAFETY
DATE: August 28, 2024
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 24-68 authorizing submission of an application to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for grant funding from the 2024 Sustainable Communities Program – Active Transportation and Safety (SCP Grant); and,
2. Take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to submitting an application for the SCP Grant. If awarded, the City Council will be asked to amend the adopted Fiscal Year 2024-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget as needed to appropriate the grant funds.
The maximum funding award for the SCP Grant is $900,000.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On November 18, 2020, the City Council authorized staff to submit an application for grant funding from SCAGs SCP Grant (Attachment A). The City of Montebello was awarded $150,000 to conduct a comprehensive analysis of Montebello Bus Lines’ (MBL)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2024
service area including, but not limited to, existing conditions at high-volume transit stops, traffic collision data, gathering community feedback and producing a First Mile/Last Mile (FMLM) Master Plan.
Since public transportation rarely stops directly in front of a passenger’s origin or destination, transit users often rely on other ways to get to and from their bus stop, like walking or using a wheelchair, riding a bike, using an e-scooter, or other forms of micromobility to access transit. These types of connections are referred to as “first and last mile” methods of travel. The purpose of a FMLM Master Plan was to provide the City with a roadmap to further assist and support residents and daily commuters to travel safely on their first and last mile trips within the service area through a Vision Zero approach.
On February 14, 2024, the City Council received and filed the City’s FMLM Master Plan (Attachment B). The plan included policy recommendations to ensure that pedestrians and cyclists completing the FMLM segment have more secure passages of travel, as well as cost estimates for five (5) proposed priority projects and funding opportunities the City can pursue to fund these projects as quick-build projects.
The five (5) priority projects identified that have the most public benefit while addressing traffic safety concerns are as follows:
• Priority Project 1: Beverly Boulevard and Maple Avenue • Priority Project 2: Whittier Boulevard and Garfield Avenue • Priority Project 3: Whittier Boulevard and Montebello Boulevard • Priority Project 4: Washington Boulevard and Greenwood Avenue • Priority Project 5: Madison Avenue Neighborway
ENVIRONMENTAL:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
The 2024 SCAG SCP Grant has two options available (Attachment C):
1. Community/Areawide Plans:
This option is focused on planning projects that benefit disadvantaged communities. Eligible projects under this category may include Active Transportation Plans, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, Safe Routes to School Plans, and other similar planning efforts. The maximum award for this option is $500,000, and the grant is provided in the form of technical assistance, where SCAG-procured consultants will lead the project development.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2024
2. Quick-Build Projects:
This option is designed for interim capital improvement projects that can be rapidly implemented using durable, low- to medium-cost materials. Quick-build projects are intended to address immediate community safety needs and typically have a shorter implementation timeline. The maximum award for this option is $900,000, and it includes both technical assistance and pass-through funds for project implementation.
Priority Project 5: Madison Avenue Neighborway, has been identified as a suitable Quick-Build Project. This project proposes establishing a neighborway (designated bike route) that runs on parallel streets to MBLs Lines 10, 20, 40, 70, and 90 to provide a lower stress route by prioritizing bicycle connections between the Rio Hondo Bike Path to north Montebello. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize submitting an application to SCAG for grant funding from the 2024 SCP Grant. Priority Project 5 focuses on community safety improvements while maintaining the accessibility of first responders and aligns well with the goals of the Quick-Build option. Funding for Projects 1 – 4 will be prioritized and allocated through the City’s and MBL’s respective FY 2024-25 CIP Budget.
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize submission of an application to SCAG for grant funding from the 2024 SCP Grant; and take such additional, related, action that may be desirable
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Attachment A - Staff Report for the SCAG SCP Grant application
2. Attachment B - FMLM Master Plan
3. Attachment C - SCAG 2024 SCP Grant Guidelines
4. Attachment D - Resolution No. 24-68
ATTACHMENT A
December 2023
City of Montebello
First Mile Last Mile Plan
ATTACHMENT B
Acknowledgements
City of Montebello
Alfredo Machuca, Transit Planner, Montebello Bus Lines
Monica Mercado-Rodriguez, Planning Manager
Rita Montalvo, Assistant Director of Public Works
KTUA
Joe Punsalan, Principal
Tom Bertulis, Senior Associate, Project Manager
Morgen Ruby, Senior Planner, Assistant Project Manager
Darren Jacobsen, Associate
SCAG
Stephen Fox, Senior Regional Planner
Krista Y ost, Assistant Regional Planner
Circulate Planning
Carlisle Dockery, Director of Planning
Octavio Garcia, Associate Planner
T echnical Advisory Committee
• Adam Mitchell, City of Montebello Police
Department
• Adrianna K
endricks, Montebello Bus Lines
• Ale
x Gillman, Public Affairs and Information
Technology
• Alfredo Machuca, Montebello Bus Lines
• Ale
xis Lucero, City of Montebello Public Works
• Chris Moorman , LA Metro
• David Huang, Metrolink
• Gary Robinson City of Montebello Fire
Department
•
Krista Y
ost, SCAG
• Horacio P
erez, Vail Continuation High School
• Joe Forgiarini, LA Metro
• Jose Ornelas, Adult School Principal
• L
aurie Aguilar, City of Montebello Parks &
Recreation
• Leticia Alvidrez, Montebello Unified School
District
•
Naomi Sotelo
, Eastmont Intermediate School
• P
aul Parzik, YMCA Metropolitan Los Angeles
• Serena Liu, Caltrans
• S
tephanie Hardaway, Applied Technology Center
High School
• S
tephen Fox, SCAG
• Timothy Greensavitch, Montebello Bus Lines
Contents
1.1 What is the “First and Last Mile?” 14
1.2 Study Area 14
1.3 Purpose of the Plan 14
Introduction
Existing Conditions
Community Outreach
Vision and Goals
Policy Development
Projects
Funding
2.1 Land Use 18
2.2 Existing Transit Network 20
2.3 Existing Pedestrian Network 25
2.4 Existing Bicycle Network 30
2.5 Micromobility 35
2.6 Microtransit 35
2.7 Mobility Hubs 35
2.8 Walk and Bicycle Audits 37
2.9 Data Analysis 62
2.10 Assessment of Existing Policies, Programs, and Practices 77
3.1 Engagement Objectives 82
3.2 Stakeholder Outreach and Engagement Goals 82
4.1 Vision, Goals, Objectives, and Implementation Strategies 96
4.2 Transit Agency Interviews 99
5.1 Best Practices and Recommended Policies 104
6.1 Implementation Plan and Monitoring Guide 112
6.2 First Mile Last Mile Toolbox 112
6.3 Prioritized Project List 121
6.4 Recommended projects 121
6.5 Expected Benefits of Proposed Projects 132
6.6 Making and Measuring Implementation Progress 132
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 7.1 Funding Sources 136
Executive
Summary
6 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
ES.1 Document Overview
The Montebello First Mile Last Mile (FMLM) Master
Plan is organized in the following chapters:
» Chapter 1: Introduction
» Chapter 2: Existing Conditions
» Chapter 3: Community Outreach
» Chapter 4: Vision and Goals
» Chapter 5: Policy Development
» Chapter 6: Projects
» Chapter 7: Funding
ES.2 Purpose
The City of Montebello is part of Los Angeles Coun-
ty, California and located southwest of San Gabriel
Valley with a population of about 63,000 (U.S. Cen-
sus). Montebello is inevitably surrounded by freeways
and transit lines as it is within proximity to the City of Los Angeles, known for its traffic and long commute
times. The Montebello First Mile Last Mile (FMLM)
Master Plan is a long range road map meant to assist
City staff as they work towards the betterment of the
first and last mile connections to transit of residents and commuters. The bus transit system in Montebel-
lo is operated by Montebello Bus Lines (MBL) and it
is the third largest municipal transport agency in Los
Angeles County. Guided by community feedback and
a Vision Zero approach - a traffic safety strategy with the objective of eliminating traffic fatalities and inju- ries through the pursuit of increasing safer mobility
for all people - the Montebello FMLM Master Plan will
guide the future infrastructure development and im-
prove the connections to and from transit for all users.
FMLM Goals
The following are the four goals that were developed
throughout the planning process and vetted by the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC):
» Goal 1: Provide Safe and Attractive Bus Stops
» Goal 2: Provide Safe, Comfortable, and Convenient
Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Non-motorized Access
to Bus Stops and Metrolink Station
» Goal 3: Coordinate Land Use and Transit Planning
» Goal 4: Programs to Encourage Transit Use and
Promote Safety, Comfort, and Accessibility
ES.3 Existing Conditions and Analysis
The development of the Montebello FMLM Master
Plan began with understanding the existing transit
network, pedestrian network, bicycle network, land
uses, and other context sensitive information. Data
collection was acquired from the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Trans-
portation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) and multiple
walk and bike audits conducted by the Project Team.
Outlined below is a summary of the various methods
of data collection used for the development of this
document.
Existing Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle
Networks
Initial maps were created to highlight the areas with-
in the City that have a concentrated number of bus
stops within and outside of city limits along with
maps showing the amount of boardings and alights.
Main transit corridors in the City are the most utilized and therefore exhibit the highest number of bus stops
and ridership.
The City of Montebello has an extensive network of
sidewalks connecting it to most areas, however, there
are numerous obstructions such as poorly placed util-
ities and pinch points impeding the walkways.
Walk and Bike Audits
Walk and bike audits were conducted along transit
corridors with high ridership volumes or collisions to
better understand the pros and cons of the existing
pedestrian infrastructure. Findings were then used to
inform infrastructure improvement recommendations.
Fullerton
Anaheim
Buena Park
Cypress
La Palma
Los Angeles
Glendale Pasadena
Monrovia
DuarteArcadia
Sierra Madre
Bradbury
Irwindale
San Marino
South
Pasadena
Temple City
San
Gabriel
Alhambra
Baldwin
Park
El Monte
Rosemead
Monterey Park South El
Monte
Industry
La Puente
Montebello
Whittier
Pico
Rivera
CommerceVernon
Bell
Maywood
Huntington
Park
Bell Gardens
La Habra
Heights
Santa Fe
Springs
Downey
Cudahy
South Gate
Lynwood
Norwalk
La Mirada
Compton
Paramount
Bellflower
Cerritos
Carson
Long Beach Artesia
Lakewood
Hawaiian
Gardens
Unincorporated
0 10.5 Miles
¯
City Boundary
!. Bus Stop MBL
Vail Ave
RosemeadMonterey Park
Montebello
Whittier
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Bell Gardens
Santa Fe
Springs
Downey
Unincorporated
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Sidewalk Gaps
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
7 ES |EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.4 Community Outreach
A critical component of the planning process for Mon-
tebello’s FMLM Master Plan was community outreach
with stakeholders and members of the community
who are daily users of the infrastructure that this Plan seeks to address. Engaging with the community was
able to bring awareness and educational resources
about the FMLM Master Plan to build support and
collect valuable feedback that limits first and last mile trips. Physical and digital material presented to the
public was made available in different languages (En-
glish, Spanish, and Mandarin) and created in a way to
be easily understood by all.
The primary community engagement strategies uti-
lized were:
» Six Technical Advisory Committee Meetings
» Three Community Events/ Workshops
» Branding and Social Media
» Physical and Digital Public Survey
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was com-
posed of representative groups identified by the Proj-
ect Team, the City of Montebello Staff, and SCAG
staff. Representative groups included The City of
Montebello departments, SCAG, Montebello Unified
School District, LA Metro, Metrolink, the YMCA, and
more, as listed in Appendix B.
All TAC meetings, except one hybrid, were all held
virtually for one hour on a bi-monthly basis. The TAC
provided their input and feedback on the different
parts of the project such as the engagement, find-
ings, and recommendations.
The TAC meetings took place on the following dates:
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 –
December 5, 2022
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 –
February 7, 2023
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #3 –
April 4, 2023
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #4 –
May 23, 2023
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #5 –
August 8, 2023
» Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #6 –
November 14, 2023
Tactical Advisory
Committee (TAC)
Meetings
6 3
Community
Events
#
1 Survey
Branding and
Social Media
8 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
Community Events/Workshops
In collaboration with the City of Montebello Staff, the Project Team created material and participated in
its distribution in three already scheduled citywide
in-person events. The events provided the opportu-
nity to set up booths and activities to interact with
members of the community regarding pertinent tran-
sit and infrastructural issues they face on a regular
basis.
The community events/workshops took place on the
following dates:
» Community Event #1 Heritage Festival – October
16, 2022
» Community Event #2 Downtown Street Fest –
July 29, 2023
» Community Event #3 Heritage Festival – October
7, 2023
During the first event, the Team was able to gain in-
sight on what the public would like to see installed in the City as participants placed stickers to cast their
votes on street treatments they most desired. Re -
sults indicated the top five potential transportation
treatments that were favored to be: multi-use paths,
urban greening, speed cushions, speed humps, and
high-visibility crossings.
The second event took place during the Heritage Fes-
tival and it provided the opportunity to showcase two
temporary infrastructure elements - separated bike
lane and creative crosswalk - from the SCAG’s Go
Human Kit of Parts. Providing the public with a tem-
porary element allowed them to determine whether
it was something they would like to be implemented
in the future. Votes were casted once more on boards
that displayed temporary infrastructure elements.
The top five selected were parklets, creative cross-
walks, median refuge islands, curb extensions, and
separated bike lanes.
The third and final community event, similarly to the
first event, allowed the Team along with Montebello
staff to host a booth where residents could receive
and update on the progress made on the FMLM Plan
and five additional input on the project. Boards were
once again displayed to collect votes on the intersec-
tions and projects that people deemed needed fund-
ing prioritization.
Community Event #1
Community Event #2
Community Event #3
9 ES |EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Branding and Social Media
Consistency with the City’s branding and graphic re-
quirements were met throughout the styles used in
all outreach material, surveys, and maps.
#10275b
#015aac
#ed8723
Surveys
Community input is a key component to the planning
process. Therefore, a survey was created to com-
pile the locations and transit routes where the pub -
lic identifies problem areas throughout the city. The
survey was available through the Project Website as
well as distributed at pop-up events and available
from October 2022 - February 2023. The survey was
promoted through flyers and social media (See Ap -
pendix D) over several weeks.
A total of 209 people participated in the survey where
they expressed the problems and challenges they
face when walking, bicycling, or accessing transit in
the City. The issues reported by participants ranged
from issues of poor connectivity to the lack of parking and pedestrian crossing distances.
207
Experience Problems Walking,
Cycling or Accessing Transit 61%
Top Three Problematic Routes Beverly, Whittier, & Washington Boulevard
Ideas for Improving Access
Lighting, Bike Lanes,
Crosswalks, Connections, Shade,
Sidewalks, Benches . . .
Survey Participants
10 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
Policy 1 Support and promote walking, biking, and
other non vehicular modes as an alternative to driv-
ing within Montebello. (General Plan 4.1)
Policy 2 Provide clean, safe, and comfortable bus
stops and bus stop access to encourage transit use.
Policy 3 Provide safety amenities at bus stops.
Policy 4 Utilize complete street strategies to im-
prove bus stop accessibility.
Policy 5 Utilize traffic calming and safety counter -
measures to improve accessibility to bus stops and
the Metrolink Station.
Policy 6 Develop programs to encourage transit
use and safety.
Policy 7 Develop programs to encourage safety at
bus stops and the Metrolink Station.
ES.4 Policy Development
Upon an in depth analysis of the data obtained from
the planning process, best practice policies recom-
mendations were made to help guide infrastructure
improvement. Specific FMLM Action items were cre -
ated in conjunction with Montebello’s 2023 General
Plan:
ES.4 Projects
Project recommendations were developed for fund-
ing prioritization with feedback from the TAC, the
public, the Level of Stress (LOS) analysis, as well as
from the existing conditions analysis.
The five prioritized projects identified focus on transit stops with high-volume and high-need. The Plan rec-
ommendations can be replicated in other areas where
bicycle, pedestrian, and traffic calming treatments are needed for the refinement of transit access.
» Priority Project 1: Beverly Boulevard and Maple
Avenue
» Priority Project 2: Whittier Boulevard and
Garfield Avenue
» Priority Project 3: Whittier and Montebello
Boulevard
» Priority Project 4: Washington Boulevard and
Greenwood Avenue
» Priority Project 5: Madison Avenue Neighborway
Priority Project 1
Priority Project 2
Priority Project 3
Beverly Boulevard + Maple Avenue
Whittier Boulevard + Garfield Avenue
Whittier + Montebello Boulevard
Maple AvenueMaple Avenue
Beverly BoulevardBeverly Boulevard
1 5
3 4
6 2
Garfield AvenueGarfield Avenue
Whittier BoulevardWhittier Boulevard
1 2
3 45
6 Montebello BoulevardMontebello BoulevardWhittier BoulevardWhittier Boulevard 4 5
1 3 26
11 ES |EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.4 Funding
The final chapter of this Plan was developed to serve
as a toolkit with the addition of Cost Estimates and
Funding Resource Tables to provide guidance to the
City of Montebello as they move forward in the plan-
ning process and the pursuit for grants and funding
to develop the desired changes outlined throughout
this Plan. It is important for the City to coordinate ef - forts with adjacent jurisdictions on projects as it can strengthen applications at the time of applying for
funding.
Priority Project 4
Priority Project 2
Washington Boulevard + Greenwood Avenue
Madison Avenue Neighborway
Greenwood Greenwood AvenueAvenueWashington BoulevardWashington Boulevard 1 3
4 7
6 5
2 21st St21st St
Madison AveMadison Ave
Whittier BlvdWhittier Blvd
Beverly BlvdBeverly Blvd
Montebello BlvdMontebello Blvd
7th St7th St
Cleveland AveCleveland Ave
2nd St2nd St
Los Angeles AveLos Angeles Ave
Bluff RoadBluff Road
Rio Hondo Bike PathRio Hondo Bike Path
Roosevelt AvenueRoosevelt Avenue
1 2
3 Non-infrastructureInfrastructure
Federal
Funds
State
Funds
Planning
Funding Typologies
Introduction
1
14 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
1.1 WHAT IS THE “FIRST AND LAST
MILE?”
First and last mile is the experience that links peo -
ple to and from transit and connects their origins and
destinations. Public transportation rarely stops di-
rectly in front of a passenger’s origin or destination.
That’s why transit users often rely on other ways to
get to and from their bus stop, like walking or using a wheelchair, riding a bike, using an e-scooter, or other forms of micromobility to access transit. These types
of connections are referred to as “first and last mile” methods of travel, although actual distances are of
course different for every person.
ductions to health benefits for its users traveling to
and from their destinations, usually by foot. The key
is determining the exact roadmap, starting with the
purpose of the plan.
Oftentimes, there are barriers that make accessing
transit less attractive, such as a busy intersection
or lack of bike lanes and sidewalks. While there are
numerous strategies that can close this first and last
mile gap, the emphasis of this Plan is on improving
the pedestrian and bicycling environment around bus
and transit stations.
1.2 STUDY AREA
Montebello, which is Italian for “Beautiful Mountain,”
is a city in Los Angeles County, California. It is located southwest of the San Gabriel Valley, and adjacent to
and just east of East Los Angeles. Montebello has an
area of 8.4 square miles and a population of 63,000
(U.S. Census).
Because the City of Montebello is located so close
to the second largest city in the United States, a city synonymous with excessive congestion, Montebello
has found itself surrounded by freeways and criss-
crossed by transit lines. The bus system in Montebel-
lo is operated by Montebello Bus Lines (MBL), which
has grown to be the third largest municipal transport
agency in Los Angeles County. Montebello Bus Lines
serves 15 communities, providing transport to 3 mil-
lion passengers on an annual basis.
MBL is continuously looking to expand its customer
base by developing first and last mile connections,
which results in everything from carbon footprint re -
Map of Los Angeles County
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
The purpose of the Montebello First Mile Last Mile
(FMLM) Master Plan is to provide City staff with a
roadmap to further assist and support residents and
daily commuters to travel safely on their first and last mile trips within the service area through a Vision
Zero approach. In order to do this, the FMLM analyz -
ed existing conditions at high-volume transit stops,
traffic collision data, and community feedback. Po -
tential solutions were evaluated to improve safety
for all modes of transportation in these areas, which
could then be applied in other locations throughout
the MBL service area.
The FMLM is one of the City’s first steps to compre -
hensively improving the reliability and safety of MBL’s service. This plan:
» Maximizes the Plan impact by prioritizing bus stops
more frequently used and located in the most con-
cerning transit corridors
» Produces a prioritized list of active transporta-
tion projects adjacent to major bus stops for future
rounds of grant funding
TRIP
FIRST
MILE
LAST
MILE
TRANSIT
RIDE
Montebello
15 CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION
» Identifies community-preferred non-infrastructure
safety improvements that have proven successful at
other agencies and are applicable to the City
» Pairs infrastructure improvements with a robust
safety campaign that educates residents on how to
reduce risk while using active transportation
» Proposes new metrics to track FMLM progress
Improving access to transit both enhances the expe -
rience for existing users and attracts potential new
transit users. This can be achieved by identifying real or perceived barriers from residential and commercial
areas to transit origins and destinations, and design-
ing cost-effective improvements to reduce or remove
these barriers.
Public Input in Montebello and Road Safety
at SCAG
Based on public feedback received at outreach events
in Montebello, improving both the perceived and ac-
tual safety (based on speed and volumes of motor ve-
hicles) at and to bus stops in Montebello is the most
critical issue to improving the first/last mile connec- tions. The safety issue is also one of SCAG’s top prior- ities. SCAG’s commitment begins with understanding
existing conditions and asking: What is happening?
Where is it happening? When is it happening? Who
is it happening to? And, most importantly- Why is it
happening? As part of its commitment to improving
safety across the regions, SCAG funds safety plans
such as this one.
Each February SCAG establishes safety targets for
five performance measures:
1. Number of Fatalities
2. Rate of Fatalities per 100 million Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT)
3. Number of Serious Injuries
4. Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 million VMT
5. Number of Non–motorized Fatalities and Non–
motorized Serious Injuries
“Southern California is home to roughly 19 million
people, about half the entire state’s population, and
13 million licensed drivers. We rely on our cars, bus-
es, rail lines, bicycles, and feet to get around. And
we’re getting around a lot. We travel almost 430
million miles every day. That’s equivalent to 17,911
trips around the world every day. The thing is, we
aren’t going around the world. We’re going to work,
the grocery store, to visit our grandma, and to our
child’s soccer game. With all that traveling, it’s not
surprising that mistakes are getting made. At the
wrong moment, we might take a quick glance at a
text message, rush to make it through a traffic sig-
nal, or forgo the intersection to cross midblock. The
consequences of these mistakes can last a lifetime.”
- From SCAG’s Regional Transportation Safety Ex -
isting Conditions Report
SCAG also developed a high-injury network (HIN) to
demonstrate where high concentrations of fatal and
serious collisions occur in the region. A HIN, however, is not an assessment of whether a street or location
is dangerous. Rather, an HIN suggests corridor char-
acteristics within a transportation network that carry
a higher risk of injury. This allows SCAG to help cities to:
» Identify areas of need
» Provide agency staff with more information on
where they can focus limited resources
» Provide opportunities to understand how com-
munities of concern or disadvantaged communities
are impacted by higher rates of collision and serious
injury
» Assist with building greater public and political
support.
In addition, SCAG provides additional resources in the
form of the Safe and Active Streets Working Group,
a Transportation Safety Program and the Go Human
Campaign.
Existing
Conditions2
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
18 2.1 LAND USE
Montebello is a city in Los Angeles County, located
just east of East Los Angeles and southwest of the
San Gabriel Valley. The surrounding cities are Mon-
terey Park, and Rosemead to the north, Commerce to
the south, Pico Rivera to the east, and Los Angeles to
the west. Understanding the existing roadway condi-
tions and land use as well as other context-sensitive
information in Montebello is critical for the first mile/ last mile planning process. This chapter uses various
datasets collected from GIS resources such as from
SCAG and the Transportation Injury Mapping System
(TIMS). Topics discussed in the following sections in-
clude Montebello’s land use, bicycle and pedestrian
collision history, and boarding and alighting volumes
at the bus stops across the City.
Aside from the aforementioned data from SCAG and
TIMS that is summarized and analyzed, this section
maps out the Existing Transit Network, Existing Pe -
destrian Network, and the Existing Bicycle Network.
It also delves into the numerous walk audits and bicy-
cle audits performed as part of this study.
The datasets in this chapter provide valuable infor -
mation and help create meaningful discussions on
how each of the topics supports or impedes first mile/
last mile planning within the City.
Figure 2-1 shows land uses within the City of Monte-
bello plus some surrounding City land uses for context
including the cities of Monterey Park and Rosemead
to the north, Commerce, Bell Gardens and Downey
to the south, Pico Rivera to the east, and East Los
Angeles to the west.
Existing land use patterns in Montebello are typical of many Southern California communities. Commercial
land uses primarily occur along major thoroughfares
such as Beverly Boulevard and Whittier Boulevard
near the middle of the City. Additional commercial
and concentrated industrial uses are in the southern
end of the City into the adjacent City of Commerce.
More recently developed commercial retail centers
are located at the north edge of the City off State
Route 60. A mix of residential land uses dominate the
central portion of the City with a classic grid pattern local road system and more recent meandering road
system in the northern quarter of the City. The four
maps in the subsequent four pages show the four
quadrants of the City with the aforementioned land
uses.
There are twenty-eight public elementary, intermedi-
ate, and high schools in the Montebello Unified School
District, twelve of which reside in Montebello city
proper. Most of the schools are located between the
Whittier Boulevard and Beverly Boulevard corridors,
with several others sprinkled through the City. Most
schools within the City are located within a quarter
mile, or five-minute walk, of a park. There are sev -
en parks sprinkled throughout the City, not including
open space such as the Whittier Narrows Recreation
Area outside the northeast edge of Montebello, the
Resurrection Cemetery, Rio Hondo Channel and the
Montebello Country Club. It is important that the bi-
cycle and pedestrian infrastructure exists to support
travel between educational institutions and public
parks to better connect people to places.
The City’s Downtown area spans three distinctive
walkable neighborhoods along Whittier Boulevard
running east to west through the heart of the City.
This major commercial and dining destination, along-
side the local schools and parks, are key land use ar - eas that draw both residents and visitors. Additional
regional retail centers are located at the City’s north edge off State Route 60. With the high quality MBL
transit system, plus all future improved active trans-
portation networks, the goal is for all the residents of Montebello to be able to access these destinations
safely, comfortably, and efficiently.
To be eligible for State funding to improve the net -
works, a City’s bicycle and pedestrian plan must ad-
dress connections between specific activity center
types. Identifying these centers, and their appeal for
the community, is essential to creating useful bicycle
and pedestrian networks, and securing necessary
funding for design and construction.
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
19 Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Legend
City Boundary
Land Use SCAG 2019
Residential
Mixed Resident, Comm.
General Office
Commercial and Services
Public Facilities
Education
Industrial
Transport, Utilities
Agriculture
Open Space, Rec.
Under Construction
Undevelopable
Vacant
Water
Figure 2-1: Montebello Land Use
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
20 2.2 EXISTING TRANSIT NETWORK
Montebello Bus Lines (MBL) is the third largest mu-
nicipal bus system in Los Angeles County, with a fleet
of 66 buses and provides service to the cities of Al-
hambra, Bell Gardens, Commerce, La Mirada, Los An-
geles, Montebello, Monterey Park, Pico Rivera, Rose-
mead, San Gabriel, Santa Fe Springs, South Gate,
Vernon, Whittier, and portions of Unincorporated Los
Angeles County. MBL operates seven local routes,
one express route connecting Montebello and Down-
town Los Angeles, a semi-fixed-route feeder service,
and a Dial-A-Taxi. Serving more than seven million
passengers over the past ten years, MBL is commit -
ted to providing comprehensive public transportation
services and maximizing the comfort and safety of all
users.
Figure 2-2 shows all 862 MBL bus stops that serve
the City of Montebello and adjacent cities.
Within the City of Montebello, there are 189 bus
stops, as seen in Figure 2-3. Primary transit corridors in the City of Montebello follow Beverly Boulevard,
Whittier Boulevard, Washington Boulevard, Wilcox
Avenue, Greenwood Avenue and Montebello Boule -
vard. Beverly Boulevard, Whittier Boulevard and
Washington Boulevard run east-west and the latter
three run north-south.
The most heavily utilized bus stops for both boardings
and alightings are along Whittier Boulevard, Monte -
bello Boulevard, Beverly Boulevard, and The Shops
at Montebello. Additionally, there are high numbers
of boardings at Beverly Boulevard and Wilcox Ave -
nue. As Beverly and Whittier Boulevards are the two
main east-west commercial corridors and Montebel-
lo Boulevard at Greenwood Avenue are the primary
north-south corridors, it is expected that they have
the heaviest transit use.
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
21 Fullerton
Anaheim
Buena Park
Cypress
La Palma
Los Angeles
Glendale Pasadena
Monrovia
DuarteArcadia
Sierra Madre
Bradbury
Irwindale
San Marino
South
Pasadena
Temple City
San
Gabriel
Alhambra
Baldwin
Park
El Monte
Rosemead
Monterey Park South El
Monte
Industry
La Puente
Montebello
Whittier
Pico
Rivera
CommerceVernon
Bell
Maywood
Huntington
Park
Bell Gardens
La Habra
Heights
Santa Fe
Springs
Downey
Cudahy
South Gate
Lynwood
Norwalk
La Mirada
Compton
Paramount
Bellflower
Cerritos
Carson
Long Beach Artesia
Lakewood
Hawaiian
Gardens
Unincorporated
0 10.5 Miles
¯
City Boundary
!. Bus Stop MBL
Figure 2-2: Montebello Bus Lines Bus Stops Systemwide
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
22 Vail Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
¥g¢ Bus Stop MBL
City Boundary
Figure 2-3: Montebello Bus Lines Bus Stops within City limits
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
23 Vail Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Boardings (2 years)
! Less than 5,000
! 5,001 to 15,000
! 15,001 to 35,000
#* 35,001 to 65,000
" 65,001 to 120,000
Figure 2-4: Montebello Bus Lines Boardings
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
24 Vail Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Alightings (2 years)
! Less than 5,000
! 5,001 to 15,000
! 15,001 to 35,000
#* 35,001 to 65,000
" 65,001 to 110,000
Figure 2-5: Montebello Bus Lines Alightings
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
25 2.3 EXISTING PEDESTRIAN
NETWORK
The City of Montebello is considered somewhat walk-
able with a walk score of 66, according to WalkScore.
com. Walk Score determines the central, west portion
of the City as the most walkable, which mirrors the
locations of some of the busiest transit stops: Whitti- er Boulevard at Garfield Avenue, Whittier Boulevard
at Montebello Boulevard, and Montebello Boulevard
at Beverly Boulevard. A strong transit corridor boosts
walkability through access, safety, and comfort. City
policy recommends safety improvements, where fea-
sible. Recommendations of this report look careful-
ly at improving perceived and actual safety at these
high-volume transit stops through the addition of
pedestrian amenities such as curb ramps, bus board-
ing areas, connecting sidewalks, improved sidewalks,
lighting, seating, and crossings.
The City of Montebello has an extensive network of
sidewalks that connect nearly all areas of the City
with the exception of a few relatively small gaps as
shown in Figures 2-6 through 2-9. KTUA developed
the sidewalk data layer by reviewing high resolution
aerial imagery to find gaps in sidewalks, then digitiz - ing a single line approximately at the center of each
sidewalk’s width and then lines were drawn for the
full length of the existing sidewalk gap. As shown
in the following figures, the sidewalk gaps are not
at locations with pedestrian collisions suggesting
the gaps in sidewalks are not the cause of pedes-
trian collisions with vehicles. Though not the cause
of many collisions, the lack of a continuous sidewalk
network inhibits a comfortable walking environment,
discourages pedestrian activity, and hinders wheel-
chair accessibility. Most sidewalk gaps are located
at residential front yards except for a few short seg-
ments of commercial area on Olympic Boulevard, 4th
Street, Greenwood Avenue, near the middle of the
City and Vail Avenue, Union Street and Gage Road
at the south end of the City. A continuous sidewalk
network would not only increase pedestrian activity,
but especially enhance the pedestrian experience for
persons with disabilities, mobility aids, strollers, and the elderly, who may rely on walking and transit as a
primary mode of travel.
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
26 Vail Ave
RosemeadMonterey Park
Montebello
Whittier
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Bell Gardens
Santa Fe
Springs
Downey
Unincorporated
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Sidewalk Gaps
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Figure 2-6: Sidewalk Gaps
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
27 Vail Ave
Monterey Park
Montebello
Commerce
Unincorporated
S GARFIELD AV
N W
ILCOX AV
W WHITTIER BLVD
W BEVERLY BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
S GREENWOOD AV
VIA CAMPO
N GARFIELD AV
MONTEBELLO WY
E WASHINGTON BLVD0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Sidewalk Gaps
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Figure 2-7: Sidewalk Gaps, Western Enlargement
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
28 Rosemead
Monterey Park
Montebello
Pico Rivera
Unincorporated
W WHITTIER BLVD
MONTEBELLO BLVD
W BEVERLY BLVD
E BEVERLY BLVD
ARROYO DR
N MONTEBELLO BLVD
POTRERO GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT BLVD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Sidewalk Gaps
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Figure 2-8: Sidewalk Gaps, Eastern Enlargement
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
29 Vail Ave
Montebello
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Unincorporated
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
GREENWOOD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
E SLAUSON AV
MONTEBELLO WY
TELEGRAPH RD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Sidewalk Gaps
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Figure 2-9: Sidewalk Gaps, Southern Enlargement
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
30 2.4 EXISTING BICYCLE NETWORK
The existing bicycle facility network in Montebello is
quite limited. A 5.2-mile segment of the Rio Hondo
multi-use bike path exists along the Rio Hondo Flood
Control Channel, a 2.2-mile segment of Class 2 buff-
ered and standard bike lanes on North Montebello
Boulevard, and a 0.8-mile bike lane on Avenida De La
Merced. Figures 2-10 through 2-13 show both exist-
ing bicycle facilities (marked with a solid line) and pro- posed bicycle facilities (marked with a dashed line).
The bicycle network was analyzed for connectivity
as part of the community and stakeholder engage -
ment process. The engagement process was used
to gather additional input on routes people feel are
important and should move forward as recommen-
dations. Although the City does not currently have a
substantial bicycle facility network, it has an excellent road grid network, showing the future potential for
a top-class bicycle network. The SCAG 2020-2045
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communi-
ties Strategy and the City of Montebello General Plan
propose additional bike routes to connect people to
City destinations and to the surrounding region.
As shown on the detailed bicycle network figures on
the following pages, collisions with vehicles occur
frequently on streets that are lacking bicycle lanes. A few streets worth noting in terms of missing bicycle
lanes and no plans to install new bike lanes are noted
below. If a bike lane, especially a separated bike lane, were installed on these noted streets, they would
help reduce, ideally eliminate, injury collisions.
» Beverly Boulevard across almost the entire City
width
» Wilcox Avenue around Schurr High School
» Via Campo paralleling Highway 60 at the north
edge of the City
» Maple Avenue near Washington Elementary and
Montebello Middle School
» Cleveland Avenue across the entire City width
» Los Angeles Avenue east of Park Avenue to the
east City limit
» South Montebello Boulevard south of Roosevelt
Avenue to Washington Boulevard
» Washington Boulevard across the entire City
width
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
31 Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
Lincoln Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Bike Facility - Existing
1-Class 1 Bike Path/Multiuse Path
2-Bike Lane Stripe
3-Bike Route Sharrow
Bike Facility - Proposed
1-Class 1 Bike Path/Multiuse Path
2-Bike Lane Stripe
3-Bike Route Sharrow
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
City Boundary
Figure 2-10: Bicycle Facilities
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
32 Vail Ave
Monterey Park
Montebello
Commerce
Unincorporated
S GARFIELD AV
N W
ILCOX AV
W WHITTIER BLVD
W BEVERLY BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
S GREENWOOD AV
VIA CAMPO
N GARFIELD AV
MONTEBELLO WY
E WASHINGTON BLVD0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Bike Facility - Existing
2-Bike Lane Stripe
Bike Facility - Proposed
2-Bike Lane Stripe
3-Bike Route Sharrow
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
! All Bike-Ped Collisions
Figure 2-11: Bicycle Facilities, Eastern Enlargement
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
33 Rosemead
Monterey Park
Montebello
Pico Rivera
Unincorporated
W WHITTIER BLVD
MONTEBELLO BLVD
W BEVERLY BLVD
E BEVERLY BLVD
ARROYO DR
N MONTEBELLO BLVD
POTRERO GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT BLVD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Bike Facility - Existing
1-Class 1 Bike Path/Multiuse Path
2-Bike Lane Stripe
Bike Facility - Proposed
2-Bike Lane Stripe
3-Bike Route Sharrow
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
! All Bike-Ped Collisions
Figure 2-12: Bicycle Facilities, Southern Enlargement
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
34 Vail Ave
Montebello
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Unincorporated
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
GREENWOOD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
E SLAUSON AV
MONTEBELLO WY
TELEGRAPH RD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
!. Bus stops
Bike Facility - Existing
1-Class 1 Bike Path/Multiuse Path
Bike Facility - Proposed
2-Bike Lane Stripe
3-Bike Route Sharrow
Schools, Education
Parks, Open Space
City Boundary
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
! All Bike-Ped Collisions
Figure 2-13: Bicycle Facilities, Southern Enlargement
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
35 2.5 MICROMOBILITY
Micromobility is generally defined as any small, low-
speed, human- or electric-powered transportation
device, such as bicycles, scooters, electric-assist bi- cycles, electric scooters (e-scooters), and other small, lightweight, wheeled devices. Micromobility devices
can be individually owned or part of a shared net -
work that includes docking stations and mobile appli-
cations. Shared micromobility systems are generally
deployed in targeted service areas with the intent to
close the “first- and last-mile” connections to com-
plete trips made via other modes, including transit.
Micromobility can also provide an alternative form of
transportation for those with short trips or commutes
to reduce vehicular congestion. Example systems in
the region include Lyft Scooters and Veo Micromo -
bility in Santa Monica and Lime Scooter in the City of
Los Angeles.
Currently, the City of Montebello does not have an
e-scooter or bikeshare program. However, from the
General Plan’s Part C, Our Accessible Community
chapter, strategies and action items have been devel-
oped to improve mobility and first-last mile connec-
tions. The implementation of bicycle and pedestrian
facilities will be an integral component of the street if micromobility programs are introduced. The following
strategies and action items are identified to help the
City integrate micromobility and are derived from the
Public Transit and Rideshare section of the General
Plan, verbatim.
Strategies
» Support rideshare and shared mobility by provid-
ing sufficient curb space for passenger loading at
key destinations.
» Incorporate micromobility (e.g., bike share and
scooter share) into transit and active transporta-
tion improvements.
Action Items
» A4.3a The development and implementation of
first-last mile (FLM) improvements could include
bikeshare and scootershare stations at key des-
tinations.
2.6 MICROTRANSIT
Microtransit refers to pooled rides in shared van
shuttles running on fixed or on-demand routes and
schedules. An MBL program with similarities is the
Metrolink Shuttle which accommodates passengers
arriving at the Montebello/Commerce Station to their
desired location. Like buses and ride-hailing services, such as Uber and Lyft, microtransit shuttles can serve
unmet mobility needs of underserved populations.
Microtransit can benefit many Montebello residents,
especially those that live more than a half mile away
from the Montebello/Commerce Station or popular
destinations within the City. Many low-income tran-
sit-dependent households reside where transit ser -
vice is limited to infrequent circulator buses, limited operating hours, and the need to make multiple trans-
fers to complete trips. Microtransit will make it easier for these underserved residents and those with disa-
bilities to get around.
Fortunately, the General Plan’s Part C, Our Acces-
sible Community chapter, has included strategies to
explore microtransit within the City. The following
strategies and action items are derived from the Pub-
lic Transit and Rideshare section of the General Plan,
verbatim.
Strategies
» Study options for supplementing local bus service
and improving connections to local destinations
and rail stations such as local shuttles, demand
responsive services, or microtransit services.
Action Items
» Improve connectivity within growth neighbor -
hoods, areas of opportunity and for transit-de -
pendent populations to enhance access to local
and regional transit services.
» Explore the feasibility of establishing a micro -
transit or fixed-route shuttle service to provide
convenient access between the future Gold Line
Greenwood Station and key local destinations
such as the Downtown Specific Plan area, City
Hall, and the Beverly Boulevard corridor.
2.7 MOBILITY HUBS
A mobility hub consists of a transit station that pro - vides multimodal transportation options to and from
the station and surrounding area. They serve an im-
portant function in the regional transportation system
as an origin, destination, or transfer point for a signif- icant number of trips. Mobility hubs provide connec-
tivity where different modes of transportation, such
as micromobility, ride sharing or car sharing, all come together seamlessly. Ideally a concentration of land
uses that support work, live and play is adjacent to
a mobility hub but that’s not always the case. Mobil-
ity hubs can also have additional amenities such as
lighting, shelters, bicycle parking and micromobility
docking stations.
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
36 Mobility hubs may result in a number of benefits:
» Increased first and last mile improvements within
the surrounding area
» Increased transportation choices for residents,
employees, and visitors
» Increased transportation choices for residents in
disadvantaged communities
» Decreased dependence on single occupancy ve -
hicles
» Reduced traffic congestion and vehicle miles
traveled
» Reduced transportation costs
Mobility hubs should be explored at the Montebello/
Commerce Metrolink Station, the future Metro light
rail Greenwood Station and potentially popular des-
tinations within the City such as the downtown area.
The General Plan’s Part C, Our Accessible Commu-
nity chapter, has included objectives to explore mo -
bility hubs and generally improve the Montebello/
Commerce Station and supporting transit-oriented
development within the City. The following strategies
and action items are derived from the Public Transit
and Rideshare section of the General Plan, verbatim.
Strategies
» Implement small- and large-scale mobility hubs
at key multimodal transfer points.
Action Items
» A4.2d Enhance bus stops in the city incorporat -
ing high-quality transit stop design and amenities
that create a simple, legible, and pleasant experi-
ence at the bus stop.
» A4.2f Coordinate land use and transportation
planning efforts to develop transit-supportive
land uses near existing and future major transit
hubs.
» A4.3c Create small-scale mobility hubs at key
multimodal transfer points.
» A4.3d Implement larger-scale mobility hubs
along Montebello Boulevard and Greenwood Av-
enue to facilitate multimodal access to/from the
future Gold Line Station.
Micromobility example
Mobility Hub example
Microtransit example
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
37 2.8 WALK AND BICYCLE AUDITS
Objective
Walk and bike audits were conducted along identified
corridors in Montebello to better understand existing
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, or lack thereof, that may limit active transportation trips to and from
transit service. Findings will be used to inform rec-
ommendations for infrastructure improvements to
improve first-last mile connections to transit stops.
Methodology
Twelve audits were conducted over two days in
February 2023. Audit routes were identified along
corridors with a higher propensity of pedestrian
and bicycle crashes to better understand challeng-
es and opportunities in different parts of Montebel-
lo. Collision data, available from the TIMS, between
2011-2021 were used to identify walk and bike au-
dit routes. All the walk and bike audits were open to
the public except the four conducted with Montebello
High School and Schurr High School. Audit routes are
listed below and described in more detail in the sub -
sequent section.
» Walk Audit #1 (Washington Boulevard, Date
Street, Montebello Boulevard, and Greenwood
Avenue)
» Walk Audit #2 (Whittier Boulevard from Monte -
bello Boulevard to Bluff Road)
» Walk Audit #3 (Greenwood Avenue from Date
Street to Elm Street)
» Walk Audit #4 (Beverly Boulevard, Poplar Ave -
nue, Victoria Avenue, and Montebello Boulevard)
» Walk Audit #5 (Beverly Boulevard from 21st
Street to Via Val Verde)
» Walk Audit #6 (Beverly Boulevard from Maple
Street to Montebello Boulevard)
» Walk Audit #7 (Montebello High School and sur-
rounding area)
» Walk Audit #8 (Montebello High School and sur-
rounding area)
» Walk Audit #9 (Wilcox Avenue, Hay Street, Mor-
ris Place, and Lincoln Avenue)
» Walk Audit #10 (Wilcox Avenue, Donta Way,
Morris Place, and Hay Street)
» Bike Audit #1 (Olympic Boulevard, Greenwood
Avenue, Beach Street, Vail Avenue, Washington
Boulevard and Maple Avenue)
» Bike Audit #2 (Lincoln Avenue, Poplar Avenue,
Madison Avenue, and Maple Street)
For each walk and bike audit, a data collection tool
was developed. Each tool included a map of the area
to be surveyed and a questionnaire to be completed
during the audit. The questionnaire asked participants
about the condition and usability of the pedestrian or
bike network, including safety, comfort, behaviors,
and other general questions. Participants were asked
to indicate on the map any issues they encountered
during the audit using a number that corresponded
to that topic in the questionnaire. Discussions and
feedback during the walk and bike audits were also
recorded and compiled by the project team.
The audits, the exception being the ones conducted
with the high school students, were open to the pub-
lic. A trilingual flyer (English, Spanish, and Mandarin) was created to invite the public to participate. It was posted on Montebello Bus Line buses and in two lo -
cal libraries, Montebello City Hall, multiple community centers, and high-volume bus stops within Montebel-
lo city proper. The flyer was also posted on Montebel-
lo social media channels and the project website.
The following pages provide detailed summaries of
the existing conditions observed on each walk and
bicycle audit. Included are maps of each route, site
photos, and an elaborated explanation of the gaps
and deficiencies in the pedestrian and bicycle net -
works, such as substandard sidewalks, insufficient
street lighting and/or crosswalks, lack of adequate
bicycle infrastructure, and high-volume, high-speed
corridors. It also highlights opportunities where im-
provements or targeted programs could be expected
to result in increased pedestrian and bicycle activity.
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
38 2.8.1 WALK AUDIT #1
The walk audit route is in the southern region of
Montebello, along Washington Boulevard between
Greenwood Avenue and Date Street, and adjacent
residential streets. Montebello Boulevard has primar-
ily industrial and residential land uses. The area near the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Green-
wood Avenue is the site of the proposed Metrolink
Gold Line extension stop. Nearby bus routes include
Lines 20, 50, and 70.
Throughout the walk audit, there were various fea-
tures, or lack thereof, that were observed that con-
tribute to real or perceived safety issues and concerns for pedestrians, as demonstrated in Figure 2-14.
Crosswalk markings were observed to be faded, some
of the curb ramps were missing truncated domes, and
there were a frequent number of obstructions along
the sidewalk. These obstructions included utility box-
es and light poles. Speeding was also observed along
Washington Boulevard and Greenwood Avenue.
Faded Crosswalk markings at Montebello Boulevard and
Washington Boulevard
Sidewalk obstruction just south of Greenwood Avenue
and Washington Boulevard
The sidewalks were observed to be in good condi-
tion with no major breakages or missing portions
along the walk audit route, however the number of
obstructions would be difficult for someone with a
mobility aid, stroller, or visual impairment. The lack of adequate lighting makes people feel unsafe between
dusk and dawn and less inclined to walk, roll, or bicy- cle if they do not have to.
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
39 Figure 2-14: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #1 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
40 2.8.2 WALK AUDIT #2
The walk audit route was conducted during the
post-morning hours in Downtown Montebello along
Whittier Boulevard between Montebello Boulevard
and Bluff Road. The area is a popular pedestrian des-
tination, especially during the night-time, stressing
the importance of lighting and safe crossings. Nearby
bus routes include Lines 10 and 20.
The project team observed conditions that would
contribute to real or perceived safety issues and con-
cerns for pedestrians. Traffic-controlled intersections were missing audible and pedestrian countdown sig-
nals and some of the curb ramps were missing trun-
cated domes. Obstructions, such as utility boxes in
the middle of the sidewalk, were observed in a few
locations but otherwise, the sidewalk is in good con-
dition.
Unlike other parts of the City, this portion of Whitti- er Boulevard has pedestrian-scale lighting and side -
walks are slightly wider than seen in other parts of
the City, which led to a more positive pedestrian ex -
perience. Both parallel and high-visibility crosswalks
were observed along the walk audit route. The mark-
ings in many locations were faded which is primarily
true for the parallel crosswalks.
The corridor was equipped with some bicycle park -
ing along the sidewalk . Bicyclists were also observed
riding on the sidewalk since there were no low-stress
bicycle facilities in the high-speed, high-volume pub-
lic right-of-way. This can increase potential conflicts with pedestrians and can create a high-stress pedes-
trian experience.
Bicycle parking on the sidewalk of Whittier Boulevard
Bicyclist riding on the sidewalk
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
41 Figure 2-15: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #2 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
42 2.8.3 WALK AUDIT #3
The walk audit route included the portion of Green-
wood Avenue between Date Street and Elm Street.
This corridor is adjacent to industrial and residential land uses. Line 20 bus route is nearby, running along
Greenwood Avenue.
Figure 2-16 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, traffic-controlled intersections
were missing audible and/or pedestrian countdown
signals, some of the curb ramps were missing trun-
cated domes, and several obstructions along the
sidewalk. These obstructions included utility boxes,
light poles, fire hydrants and bus benches/shelters.
The sidewalks are in good condition with only one
breakage observed along the route. However, the
sidewalks are narrow in some locations, which could
be challenging for people to walk side by side, for
those with strollers, and for those using wheelchairs
or other mobility devices. Another perceived issue
seemed to be the lack of proper lighting for pedes-
trians along the roads. Lack of proper lighting for pe - destrians leads to uncomfortable walking conditions
during the early morning and evening hours.
Sidewalk obstructions near Greenwood Avenue and Oak-
wood Street
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
43 Figure 2-16: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #3 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
44 2.8.4 WALK AUDIT #4
This walk audit route included a portion of the Bev -
erly Boulevard corridor from Montebello Boulevard to
Poplar Avenue and a residential corridor in Victoria
Avenue. The audit took place in an area that is pri-
marily commercial/residential near the Montebello
Civic Center. Nearby bus routes include Lines 20, 40,
and 90.
Figure 2-17 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, some of the curb ramps were
missing truncated domes, and a frequent number of
obstructions along the sidewalk, including utility box- es and light poles.
Throughout the audit, the team noticed a few areas
of broken sidewalk along the Beverly Boulevard and
Victoria Avenue corridors. A pedestrian countdown
signal was observed at the intersection of Beverly
Boulevard and Poplar Avenue. A mid-block crossing
is located at the intersection of 2nd Street and Bever- ly Boulevard. Although the mid-block crossing exists,
vehicles were observed not yielding to pedestrians.
Another perceived issue seemed to be the lack of
proper lighting for pedestrians along the roads which
could lead to unsafe conditions for all users during the early morning and evening hours.
Faded crosswalk at Beverly Boulevard and Montebello Boulevard No sidewalks on the north edge of Victoria Avenue
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
45 Figure 2-17: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #4 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
46 2.8.5 WALK AUDIT #5
This walk audit took place in the post-morning rush
hours in a primarily commercial and residential area
along Beverly Boulevard corridor from 21st Street to
Via Val Verde. This area is important since it sits be - tween Montebello’s two biggest high schools, Mon-
tebello High School and Schurr High School. Student
foot traffic is high when students enter and leave the
school in the morning and afternoon hours of the day.
Nearby bus routes include Lines 40 and 90.
Figure 2-18 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, some of the curb ramps were
missing truncated domes, and a frequent number of
obstructions along the sidewalk. These obstructions
included utility boxes, light poles, and bus stop shel- ters and benches.
During the morning hours, 6:30 am to 9:00 am, this
portion of the Beverly Boulevard corridor is equipped
with signage not allowing people to park on the street
to increase traffic capacity along the roadway. How -
ever, during the audit, the project team encountered
multiple vehicles parked on the road at around 8:00
am. The signs are currently not being enforced and
offenders are not being ticketed.
At the intersection of Beverly Boulevard and 20th
Street, a High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK)
is currently installed. This infrastructure allows pe - destrians to safely cross the road as vehicles are sig- naled to stop by allowing pedestrians 25 seconds to
cross the road.
A Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) at Beverly Boulevard and 20th Street Car parked illegally on Beverly Boulevard
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
47 Figure 2-18: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #5 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
48 2.8.6 WALK AUDIT #6
This walk audit route took place in the mid-morn-
ing hours before noon in a primarily commercial area
along Beverly Boulevard corridor from Maple Avenue
to Montebello Boulevard. Nearby bus routes include
Lines 20, 40, and 90.
Figure 2-19 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, some of the curb ramps were
missing truncated domes, and there were a frequent
number of obstructions along the sidewalk. These
obstructions included utility boxes, light poles, and a bus stop (shelters and benches). Another perceived
issue seemed to be the lack of proper lighting for pe-
destrians along the roads which could lead to unsafe
conditions for all users during the early morning and
evening hours.
Bus shelter obstructs the sidewalk near Beverly Boulevard and Howard Avenue A few of the intersections along the Beverly corridor
were equipped with audible crossing signals to ac-
commodate those with visual challenges. Addition-
ally, the intersection of Howard Avenue and Beverly
Boulevard had both an audible crossing signal and a
pedestrian countdown signal. Pedestrian countdown
signals are required by the California Manual on Uni-
form Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), the state
traffic engineering manual.
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
49 Figure 2-19: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #6 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
50 2.8.7 WALK AUDIT #7
This walk audit focused on the surrounding blocks of
Montebello High School with students participating
to learn about the planning process and share their
personal experiences on how they get to school. The
corridors traveled include 21st Street, Whittier Boule- vard, Wilcox Avenue, and Beverly Boulevard. Due to
the large group of students, the group was split into
two where each group walked a different route. The
audit took place in the afternoon school hours in an
area that is primarily a mix of commercial and resi-
dential. Nearby bus routes include Lines 10, 40, 70,
and 90.
Many students in the group mentioned that they use
transit to get to and from school. The students who
ride transit commented that they would like to see
every bus stop equipped with benches and shelters.
The discomfort from rainy days or the summer heat is
undesirable while they wait for the bus.
Montebello High School students departing for the walk
Inconsistent sidewalk gaps on Wilcox Avenue
Figure 2-20 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, some of the curb ramps were
missing truncated domes, many sections of the side-
walk were broken and, in some cases, missing, and a
frequent number of obstructions along the sidewalk.
These obstructions included utility boxes and light
poles. Many portions of Wilcox Avenue had no side -
walk. Many students mentioned the lack of adequate
lighting during the morning and evening hours con-
tributes to unsafe walking conditions.
Montebello High School students departing for the walk
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
51 Figure 2-20: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #7 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
52 2.8.8 WALK AUDIT #8
This walk audit around Montebello High School was
joined by a high school class, including one student
using a wheelchair. They contributed invaluable input
on the conditions that may be uncomfortable for per-
sons who are handicapped or using mobility aids. The
corridors traveled included Cleveland Street, 18th
Street, and Beverly Boulevard. The audit took place
in an area that is primarily commercial and residential.
Nearby bus routes include Lines 10, 40, 70, and 90.
Figure 2-21 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, some of the curb ramps were
missing truncated domes, many sections of the side-
walk were broken and, in some cases, missing, and a
frequent number of obstructions along the sidewalk.
These obstructions included utility boxes and light
poles. Harding Avenue and Madison Avenue had por-
tions of missing sidewalk. Many students mentioned
the lack of adequate lighting during the morning and
evening hours contributes to unsafe conditions.
During the audit, many students pointed out the fact
that the sidewalks felt narrow to them. The sidewalk is missing in some areas or too narrow to allow passing
which pushes pedestrians into the landscaped areas
or the road, which is especially unsafe for those with
mobility aids, disabilities, and the elderly. The sum-
mer months in Montebello are hot and students noted
their discomfort during that time and mentioned they
would like to see more street trees for shade and for
reducing the urban heat island effect.
Narrow sidewalks are difficult for groups or passerby
Students walking on uneven sidewalk
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
53 Figure 2-21: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #8 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
54 2.8.9 WALK AUDIT #9
This walk audit route included a portion of the sur -
rounding area around Schurr High School. The corri-
dors traveled include Hay Street, Lincoln Avenue, and
Morris Place. The audit took place in an area that is
primarily residential. Students from the high school
were allowed to join the project team on the audit
and provide valuable input regarding first-mile/last-
mile connections. Nearby bus routes include Lines 30
and 70.
Figure 2-22 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded, a radar speed sign display was
observed to be malfunctioning, and a utility box was
obstructing the sidewalk on the intersection of Wil-
cox Avenue and Hay Street. A section of broken side-
walk was observed near the intersection of Lincoln
Avenue and Via Val Verde. Many students mentioned
the lack of adequate lighting during the morning and
evening hours contributes to unsafe walking condi-
tions.
Principal McKiernan mentioned that many students
take transit to get to and from school. During the
morning and afternoon hours when students are ar -
riving or departing, the sidewalks on Wilcox Avenue
and Hay Street are typically filled with students. Mul- tiple students are often seen waiting at bus stops.
Students reported that cars do not stop for crossing
students on Hay Street during drop off and pickup.
Students report cars speeding and not yielding to them even with vertical traffic calming elements on Hay Street Sidewalk missing or covered with dirt on Lincoln Avenue
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
55 Figure 2-22: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #9 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
56 2.8.10 WALK AUDIT #10
The Schurr High School walk audit with students
was split into two groups to cover more ground. The
second group’s route included Hay Street, Lincoln
Avenue, and Morris Place. Nearby bus routes include
Lines 30 and 70.
Figure 2-23 displays a map of the existing conditions
observed during the walk. Crosswalk markings were
observed to be faded and a utility box was obstruct -
ing the sidewalk on the intersection of Wilcox Avenue
and Hay Street. Many students mentioned the lack
of adequate lighting during the morning and evening
hours contributes to unsafe conditions as well as lack
of shade in the hot months.
During Schurr High School’s after school hours, the
project team observed conditions from students as
they departed campus. Students would move in large
groups crossing the intersection at Wilcox Avenue
and Hay Street and then disperse into the neighbor -
hood or wait at nearby bus stops. Due to the large
volume of students, vehicle traffic moving through
the intersection is impacted. Police members are on
standby to help ensure the safety of students depart-
ing the campus.
Minimal space for students to wait is especially problematic during pickup and drop-off Yellow high visibility crosswalks signal to cars that stu- dents cross here
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
57 Figure 2-23: Existing Conditions along Walk Audit #10 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
58 2.8.11 BIKE AUDIT #1
This bike audit occurred during rush hour in the morn-
ing hours and traveled through the southern half of
the City, passing by several mobile home parks, resi-
dential neighborhoods, industrial places of work, and
the Montebello/Commerce Metrolink station. In ad-
dition to the rail line, other first-mile/last-mile transit connections follow Lines 20, 50, and 70.
There are no bicycle facilities along the audit route
and riders typically either ride alongside moving vehi- cles or on the sidewalk. The industrial and residential streets had lighter traffic, but the major arterials, such as Greenwood Avenue and Washington Avenue, had
larger volumes of high-speed motor vehicles, creat -
ing uncomfortable conditions for non-motorized road
users.
There are no bicycle facilities on these streets which
adds to the level of stress, especially when sharing
the road with trucks.
The project team stops at a memorial of a woman who
was hit and killed by a car
Street has no dedicated space for bicyclists and is a bumpy ride
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
59 Figure 2-24: Existing Conditions along Bike Audit #1 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
60 2.8.12 BIKE AUDIT #2
This bike audit was done in the post-morning rush
hours in a rectangular route down Lincoln Avenue,
Poplar Avenue, Madison Avenue, and up Maple Av -
enue before connecting back to Lincoln Avenue. The
route passed Beverly Hospital, Washington Elemen-
tary School, Acuna Park, shopping centers, and other
destinations. Nearby bus routes include Lines 20, 40,
and 90.
While many key destinations were along the route or
nearby, the corridors consisted of shaded residential
streets. Vehicle traffic is mostly slow, and safe for bi- cyclists to share the road. Lincoln Avenue is a wide
street that has plenty of room for bicycle infrastruc-
ture. Cars traveled the fastest along this route due to the street width and hills, which is where bicyclists
are the most exposed along this route.
A shady bicycle ride along Fremont Elementary School
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
61 Figure 2-25: Existing Conditions along Bike Audit #2 Route
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
62 2.9 DATA ANALYSIS
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions analysis started with reviewing
and mapping data and reports of pedestrian and bi-
cyclist collisions, existing bus stop locations, adjacent land uses, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and
City policies. The goal of existing conditions analy -
sis is to show context and help identify projects and
priorities to improve accessibility and safety at and
around transit stops. Separate analysis sections for
each topic are provided below.
Mapping Data Sources
Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping and
supporting tabular data used in this report are based
primarily on data provided by the City of Montebel-
lo in September 2022. Additional data layers include
SCAG and Environmental System Research Institute
(ESRI) data layers. Collision data was downloaded
from TIMS. MBL provided transit data such as board-
ing, alighting, bus routes, and bus stops.
Additional GIS data source pages reviewed for data
not available from the City of Montebello include the
Los Angeles County Open Source Data (LACOSD)
web page and SCAG’s Regional Data Platform. The
mapping data source table noted above indicates lay-
ers that were downloaded from either of these data
sources and where no layer was available for po -
tentially useful data. The LACOSD is a County data
source of unincorporated jurisdictions, so it does not
include data layers at the Montebello specific level.
The SCAG data source page had a variety of useful
layers that are used in the mapping as noted in the
data source table.
Collisions Analysis
Collision analysis in this report is based on 2011 to
2021 pedestrian and bicycle collision data down-
loaded from the TIMS data source which is based
on the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
(SWITRS). Note that TIMS data includes fatalities
and injury related collisions only and does not include property damage only collisions.
Figure 2-26 shows all bike injury collisions and Fig-
ure 2-27 shows all pedestrian injury collisions that
occurred between 2011 and 2021. Each map has
the collisions “heat map” with shaded red “hot spots”
where the highest density of collisions has occurred
between 2011 to 2021. As shown in the figures,
both bicycle and pedestrian collisions follow a simi-
lar pattern in the street grid with the highest density of injury related collisions occurring on the following corridors/streets:
» Beverly Boulevard
» Whittier Boulevard
» Garfield Avenue
» Montebello Boulevard
» Greenwood Avenue
» Washington Boulevard
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
63 ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
E
Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
Lincoln Ave
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Monterey Park Rosemead
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Legend
E Bicyclist Fatality
ÑÑÑÑ
Bicyclist Collisions
City Boundary
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Figure 2-26: Bicycle Collisions and Collision Hot Spots
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
64 ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
ÑÑÑÑ
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
E
E
Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
Lincoln Ave
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Monterey Park Rosemead
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Legend
E Pedestrian Fatality
ÑÑÑÑ
Pedestrian Collisions
City Boundary
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Figure 2-27: Pedestrian Collisions and Collision Hot Spots
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
65 Census Tract Analysis
Census tract attributes are incorporated to provide
additional demographic and socio-economic infor -
mation that can be used to help prioritize future pro - jects. As shown in Figure 2-28 on the following page,
the City of Montebello includes thirteen census tracts
and a small corner of a census tract that is mostly in
the City of Commerce. Due to the small proportion
of this census tract within the City boundary, it is not included in further analysis.
One challenge with using census tracts to quantify
high numbers of pedestrian and bicycle collisions
within the City of Montebello, is the location of census tract edges that coincide with roads, many of which
are also MBL bus routes. Whereas collision data
points have latitude and longitude coordinates, they
may not have exact location accuracy and collisions
near census tract edges may get counted in one tract
over the other potentially increasing one census tract
count slightly over another adjacent census tract. Be-
cause this potential data accuracy issue cannot be re-
solved within the existing data, the quantities shown
in the following tables are based on the collision point data using the x-y coordinate of the collision data and the census tract containing it.
Of the thirteen Montebello census tracts, nine have
existing bus lines running along their edges, and co -
incidentally have the highest levels of pedestrian and
bicycle collisions in the City highlighted by the “Heat Map” red shading. Darker shades of red circles on the
figures indicate high quantities of collisions at a loca- tion, and lighter red circles indicate lower quantities of collisions. The nine census tracts associated with
bus routes and high numbers of collisions, as shown
in Figure 2-29 will be focused on to identify proposed
projects.
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
66 Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
Lincoln Ave
530007
532303
502500
980036
532304
500700
482801
532200
530005
502303
550700
500800
530202
482522
500900
482600
502200
532101
532001
500402
530102
502602
482701
500600
500404
530101
532102
502401
502402
534002
531901
530203
482702
531902
500500
501001
530204
530006
482404
531800
482002
534001
482102
532002
500403
530302
501200
501002
482521 482521
531701
530400
530400
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Monterey Park
Rosemead
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Legend
All Bike-Ped Collisions
City Boundary
Census Tracts
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Figure 2-28: Montebello Census Tracts and Collision Density
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
67 Garfield Ave Telegraph Rd
Passons Blvd
Beverly Blvd
M
ontebello Blvd
Slauson Ave
Whittier Blvd
Greenwood Ave
SR 72
Norwalk Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Riggin St
Hill Dr
San Gabriel Blvd
Pomona Blvd
Broadway
Potrero Grande Dr
Atlantic Blvd
Paramount Blvd
Whittier Blvd
Paramount Blvd
SR 72
Washington Blvd
US 60
i-605
Lincoln Ave
W
ilcox Ave
Poplar Ave
Gerhart Ave
I-5
Garfield Ave
Greenwood Ave
Rail Line
Maple Ave
Beverly Blvd
Lincoln Ave
532200
530202
532101
532001
530102
530101
530204
530006
532002
Pico Rivera
Commerce
Monterey Park Rosemead
0 10.5 Miles
¯
Legend
City Boundary
Census Tracts
Selected for Analysis
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Figure 2-29: Montebello Census Tracts Selected for Analysis
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
68 Table 2-1 shows all pedestrian and bicycle injury col- lisions grouped by the thirteen census tracts in Mon-
tebello and counted by severity of injury. The under -
lying “Heat Map” red zones shown on the previous
maps highlight areas of highest number of pedestrian
and bicycle collisions within Montebello. Census Tract
530102, where Montebello High School and Wash-
CENSUS
TRACT FATAL SEVERE
INJURY
OTHER
VISIBLE
INJURY
COMPLAINT
OF PAIN
TOTAL
CRASHES
530005 0 1 7 6 14
530006 1 4 16 13 34
530007 1 2 13 17 33
530101 1 3 15 22 41
530102 1 0 37 41 79
530202 2 6 14 14 36
530203 0 1 13 14 28
530204 1 4 8 8 21
532001 0 1 11 14 26
532002 0 1 16 21 38
532101 1 3 22 22 48
532102 1 0 4 5 10
532200 3 4 15 16 38
Total 12 30 191 213 446
ington Elementary School are located, has the high-
est number of bicycle and pedestrian collisions of de-
gree of injury at 79 crashes between the years 2011
and 2021. Census tract 530202 in the northwestern
most part of the City as well as tract 532200, in the
southern most part of the City, both have the greatest
concentration of fatal and severe injury collisions.
Table 2-1: Bike and Pedestrian Collision Severity by Census Tract
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
69 CENSUS
TRACT 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
530005 19 20 24 18 23 26 23 34 24
530006 16 14 16 16 24 20 28 32 29
530007 19 26 24 18 24 26 19 19 20
530101 2 11 9 19 24 20 21 20 15
530102 27 31 23 18 22 21 30 20 20
530202 39 51 46 33 42 39 46 45 52
530203 18 21 25 22 25 16 32 28 22
530204 16 18 9 8 7 9 14 10 13
532001 11 13 23 10 10 16 14 13 11
532002 11 10 7 15 18 14 15 15 18
532101 21 29 23 15 17 16 31 10 14
532102 4 9 2 12 11 7 14 10 13
532200 17 22 30 23 22 23 38 38 41
Total for
Year 220 275 261 227 269 253 325 294 292
Table 2-2 groups all collisions for all thirteen census tracts by year to see if collisions increase or decrease by year. Whereas a clear pattern of increase or de -
crease is not obvious, the two tracts showing the
greatest increase of collisions over time include tract 530006, where the Mart of Montebello is located, and
tract 532200, the southern most portion of the City.
Table 2-2: Collision Density per Year per Census Tract
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
70 Primary Collision Factor by Census Tract
Table 2-3 provides a comparison of Primary Collision
Factors for the nine selected census tracts, previous-
ly highlighted in Figure 2-29. Violating a pedestrian’s right-of-way may entail a vehicle proceeding into the
crosswalk with pedestrians present or crossing the
street at intersections. Violating traffic signals and
signs may entail a vehicle not conforming to the pres-
ent signage, signals, or proceeding into the crosswalk
with people walking present. Bicyclists riding on the
wrong side of the road are likely due to the lack of
adequate bike facilities to meet desire lines which, for example, a two-way cycle track would mitigate.
Reported pedestrian violations frequently include
crossing a street outside of a designated crosswalk or
crossing against a red signal, which may be a result of reporting bias. Research published in the Journal for
Transport and Land Use notes that a deceased pe -
destrian or bicyclist is not able to give their perspec- tive on the collision and the person reporting the col- lision usually has the perspective of a motorist. These points tend to skew data resulting in pedestrians and
cyclists being blamed for a disproportionate number
of crashes. This should be considered when develop-
ing traffic safety countermeasures.
Collisions Along Bus Routes
Table 2-4 provides a summary of corridors with the
highest collisions, the primary collision factor, and ex- isting infrastructure that may be contributing to colli- sions. As noted in the table, and figures throughout
this section, most collisions occur on multi-lane col-
lector roads with high volumes of traffic and higher
speed limits.
Of the 189 bus stops, the 15 highest ridership bus
stops are shown in Table 2-5 and Figure 2-30. The
highest ridership stop is Whittier Boulevard and
Montebello Boulevard with over 140,000 boardings
and alightings for a two-year period. The next highest
stop is the adjacent bus stop, also at Whittier Boule - vard and Montebello Boulevard. Similarly, Whittier
Boulevard and Garfield Avenue have two adjacent
bus stops with very high ridership levels totaling
over 150,000 boarding and alightings. To further as-
sist the decision-making process regarding priority
bus stop locations for future projects, Figures 2-31
and 2-32 overlay high density collision areas as red
shaded ‘heat’ zones along with the bus stop boarding
and alighting volumes to see if high collision rates are occurring at high ridership bus stops. As may be ex -
pected, the highest collision rates occur along prima-
ry corridors which are also where nearly all bus stops
are located, including the highest ridership stops not- ed previously.
Table 2-5 on the following page shows bus stops
with the highest ridership volumes. Ridership volume
is one of the criteria in determining which projects
this plan will focus on, as well as number of collisions and input from stakeholders and transit users. Fig-
ures 2-30 through 2-32 on subsequent pages show
the bus stops with the top ridership levels as well as
the volumes of boardings and alightings in the var -
ious bus stops. The highest numbers of bicycle and
pedestrian crashes in the City are aligned with the
bus routes in the City.
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
Census Tract 530006 530101 530102 530202 530204 532001 532002 532101 532200 Primary Collision Factor Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Automobile Right of Way 5% 7% 5% 10% - 24% - 24% - - 14% 37% - 12% - 8% - 22% DUI - - - - 2% - - - - - - - - - 4% - - -
Hazardous Parking - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4% - - -
Improper Passing - - - 5% 4% 3% - 6% - - - - 5% - - - - - Improper Turning 5% - 10% 5% - 9% 5% 12% - 13% - 11% 5% 12% 4% 4% 5% 11% Not Stated 5% 7% - 5% 7% 3% - - 15% - - 5% 5% - 8% 8% 10% 17% Other Hazardous Violation - - - 15% - 12% - - - 13% - - - 12% - 16% - - Other Improper Driving - - - - 2% - - 6% - - - - 5% - - - - - Other Than Driver
(or Pedestrian) - - - - - - 5% - - - - - - - - - - 6%
Violating Pedestrian Right
of Way 48% - 57% 5% 42% - 37% 6% 8% - - - 29% - 38% - 35% - Pedestrian Violation 24% 7% 19% - 16% - 32% 6% 54% - 43% 5% 33% - 42% - 30% - Traffic Signals and Signs 5% 21% - 10% 7% 12% 5% 18% 8% 13% 29% 5% - 12% - 16% - 11% Unknown 5% 7% 5% 15% 9% 12% - - 15% - - - 5% 6% - 4% 15% 6% Unsafe Speed - - - 5% - - 16% - - 13% - 5% 10% 6% - - - 6% Unsafe Starting or Backing 5% - 5% - 11% - - - - - 14% - 5% - - - 5% - Wrong Side of Road - 50% - 25% - 26% - 24% - 50% - 32% - 41% - 44% - 22% Total by Mode and Census
Tract 21 14 21 20 45 34 19 17 13 8 7 19 21 17 24 25 20 18 Total by Census Tract 35 41 79 36 21 26 38 49 38
Table 2-3: Primary Collision Factor by Census Tract
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
Table 2-4: Existing Infrastructure and Crash Factors Along High Collision Corridors Census Tract 530006 530101 530102 530202 530204 532001 532002 532101 532200 Highest
Collision
Corridors
-Beverly Blvd. -Beverly Blvd.
-Whittier Blvd.
-Whittier Blvd. -Beverly Blvd.
-Garfield Ave.
-Whittier Blvd.
-Garfield Ave.
-Whittier Blvd. -Whittier Blvd.
-Greenwood
Ave.
-Whittier Blvd.
-Greenwood
Ave.
-Greenwood
Ave.
Pedestrian
Collisions
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
3 -Improper
turning
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
3 -Unsafe
starting or
backing
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
3 -Unsafe speed
1 -Pedestrian
violations
2 -Unknown or
Not Stated
cause
1 -Pedestrian
violations
2 -Traffic signals
and signs
3 -Violating
automobile
ROW
4 -Unsafe
starting and
backing
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
3 -Unsafe
starting or
backing
4 -Violating
automobile
ROW
1 -Pedestrian
violations
2 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
1 -Violating
pedestrian ROW
2 -Pedestrian
violations
3 -Unknown or
Not Stated
cause
Existing
Pedestrian
Infrastructure
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-Local road
intersections
lack signals and
crosswalks
-Numerous
driveways cross
sidewalks
-On street
parking blocks
view to see
pedestrians
Bike Collisions
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Traffic
signals and
signs
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Other
hazardous
violation
3 - Traffic
signals and
signs
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Violating
automobile
ROW
3 - Traffic
signals and
signs
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Violating
automobile
ROW
3 - Traffic
signals and
signs
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Traffic
signals and
signs
3 - Improper
turning
4 -Unsafe speed
1 -Violating
automobile
ROW
2 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
3 - Improper
turning
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Violating
automobile
ROW
3 - Traffic
signals and
signs
4 - Improper
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Traffic
signals and
signs
3 - Other
hazardous
violation
1 -Bicyclist on
wrong side of
road
2 - Violating
automobile
ROW
3 - Traffic
signals and
signs
4 - Improper
Existing
Bicycle
Infrastructure
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
-Lack of bike
lanes on both
sides of road
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
73 Stop ID Stop Description Routes Boardings Alightings Totals 10100 Whittier/Garfield 10 31,996 46,634 78,630
1033 Whittier/Garfield 10 59,210 27,011 86,221
1047 Whittier & Montebello 10 43,795 99,044 142,839
1082 Whittier/4th 10 41,834 20,130 61,964
1086 Whittier/Montebello 10 103,616 33,959 137,575
1096 Whittier/21st 10 27,497 34,839 62,336
2029 Montebello/Whittier 20 57,422 51,866 109,288
2035 Montebello Mart 20 / 90 31,343 36,357 67,700
2050 The Shops at Montebello 20 / 70 54,659 5,668 60,327 2055 The Shops at Montebello 20 / 70 10,868 44,300 55,168 2064 Montebello/Beverly 20 39,143 26,469 65,612
2072 Montebello/Whittier 20 55,489 46,402 101,891
40101 Beverly/Montebello 40 & 90 21,163 74,827 95,990
4032 Beverly & Montebello 40 & 90 87,178 21,393 108,571 4044 Beverly/Wilcox 40 & 90 43,125 13,921 57,046
Table 2-5: Bus Stop Boardings and Alightings
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
74 Rosemead
Monterey Park
Montebello
WhittierPico Rivera
Commerce
Bell Gardens
Santa Fe
Springs
Downey
Unincorporated
10100
1033
1047
10821086
1096
2029
2035
2050
2055
2064
2072
401014032
4044
0 10.5 Miles
¯
H Top 15 Ridership Level
!. Bus Stop MBL
City Boundary
Figure 2-30: Top 15 Highest Ridership Bus Stops
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
75 Vail Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
530102
532001 532101
530006
532002
532200
530202
530204
530101
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
City Boundary
Census Tracts
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Boardings (2 years)
! Less than 5,000
! 5,001 to 15,000
! 15,001 to 35,000
#* 35,001 to 65,000
" 65,001 to 120,000
Figure 2-31: Collision Density and Boardings
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
76 Vail Ave
Rosemead
Monterey Park
Pico Rivera
Commerce
530102
532001 532101
530006
532002
532200
530202
530204
530101
S M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N W
ILCOX AV
MONTEBELLOBLVD
N GARFIELD
AVE
W BEVERLY BLVD
W WHITTIER BLVD
W OLYMPIC BLVD
E BEVERLYBLVD
ARROYO DR
N M
ONTEBELLO BLVD
N GARFIELD AV
S GREENWOOD AV
POTRERO
GRANDE DR
PARAM
OUNT
BLVD
E WASHINGTON BLVD
SANGABRIEL
BLVD
E SLAUSON AV
VIA CAMPO
E WHITTIER BLVD
TELEGRAPH RD
0 10.5 Miles
¯
City Boundary
Census Tracts
Bike & Ped Collision
Density 2011-2021
High
Low
Alightings (2 years)
! Less than 5,000
! 5,001 to 15,000
! 15,001 to 35,000
#* 35,001 to 65,000
" 65,001 to 110,000
Figure 2-32: Collision Density and Alightings
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
77 Table 2-6: Planning Assessment for Local Planning Documents
2.10 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING
POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND
PRACTICES
The FMLM Plan can enhance the safety, access, and
comfort for first mile/last mile connections by adopting policies, programs, and practices of other successful
plans to encourage new transit riders as well as en-
hance the experience for existing users through im-
plementing infrastructure, amenities, and programs.
This section outlines key local and regional preced-
ing planning documents from the City of Montebel-
lo, SCAG, LA Metro, Caltrans, and Riverside Transit
Agency (RTA) to enhance efforts at and around bus
stops. Assessing existing planning documents helps
to inform the policy development of the FMLM Plan,
see Chapter 5 Policy Development. For each docu-
ment, relevant policies, programs, and practices are
provided in Appendix A.
CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
78 Table 2-7: Planning Assessment for Regional Planning Documents
CHAPTER 2 | EXISTING CONDITIONS
79 This page is left intentionally blank.
Community
Outreach3
82 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
3.1 ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
The overall objectives of the community engagement
were to identify a range of strategies to reach and
engage an appropriately diverse group of residents
and representative stakeholders, to build aware -
ness of and support for the FMLM Master Plan, and
to collect feedback about existing conditions of the
pedestrian and bicycle network that limit such trips.
This provided opportunities to introduce improve -
ments that would support an increase in walking,
biking, and rolling trips. Special attention was fo -
cused on strategies to engage the most vulnera-
ble users of the public right-of-way (e.g., people
aged 60 or older, children, people of color and other
minorities, low-income individuals, and those with
mobility challenges). These populations are the most
impacted by transportation planning and policy and
have traditionally not been well represented in the
decision-making process.
Focus on vulnerable users of the public right-of-
way. Children, older adults, those with disabilities,
and non-vehicle owners make up the largest percent-
age of traffic fatalities and serious injuries. People
biking and walking, in particular, make up a dispro -
portionate percentage of traffic fatalities and serious injuries. The KTUA Team ensured these populations
were a part of the discussion to push for further mo -
bility equity in Montebello.
Communicate in a way that residents will under -
stand. This begun with conducting outreach in the
language spoken by residents (primarily English,
Spanish, and Mandarin in this instance) and in a man-
ner that was easy for people to understand. This in-
cluded creating graphics for complex and technical
topics, avoiding acronyms and too much transporta-
tion jargon, and being mindful to explain the various
stages of the planning process.
use a variety of engagement strategies to
reach out to as many groups of the population
as possible. The KTUA Team participated in Mon-
tebello and SCAG approved citywide events that
attracted significant participation from diverse user
groups. The KTUA team also provided information to
the City for the project website, various social media
platforms, and in print for those with limited digital
access or personal preference.
The City’s social media platforms were used to cast
a wide net for potential engagement and were used
throughout the planning process to showcase the de-
velopment of the FMLM Master Plan. All community
engagement efforts were conducted in person at City
events. These information booths were interactive
and properly staffed with project team members. To
help further extend reach of project-specific messag-
ing, a short 2-minute video was developed to intro -
duce people to the FMLM Master Plan and opportuni-
ties to participate in the planning process.
Collect feedback on key components of the
FMlM Master Plan. One of the primary goals of
the outreach events was to collect resident and
stakeholder feedback on various aspects of the
FMLM Master Plan. The KTUA Team participated
in three (3) community workshops and provided a
number of other opportunities for the public to pro -
vide input. There was one (1) demonstration event,
organized in collaboration with SCAG’s Go Human
Campaign, that introduced potential treatments and
asked participants to choose which they would prefer
in specific locations.
Surveys were used during the project’s onset to solic-
it feedback. The first survey asked participants about
the physical barriers limiting access to transit service and potential solutions. This was available on the pro- ject website and in person during the first community
engagement event.
3.2 STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT GOALS
The project team designed, administered, and hosted
a variety of tools and techniques to engage stake -
holders and the public to increase awareness of and
solicit feedback for the FMLM Master Plan. Educa-
tional outreach was a critical component to the plan’s
success and focused on engaging the City’s most
vulnerable roadway users.
The three primary community engagement strategies
that were utilized for the ATP were:
» Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
» Community events and pop-ups
» Survey (hard copy and online) and a project website.
3.2.1 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(TAC)
As part of the Montebello FMLM, participation from
stakeholders throughout the planning process was
essential. Meetings were timed to help inform project
goals and public outreach strategies and activities,
83 CHAPTER 3 | OUTREACH
solicit feedback, and recommendations and will coin-
cide with other activities for which feedback is being
sought in order to solicit feedback on the same con-
cepts to the extent feasible and appropriate.
Technical Advisory Committee Meetings
The KTUA Team worked with the City of Montebello
and SCAG staff to identify an appropriately diverse
and representative group of partners to comprise the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The list includ-
ed representatives from various City departments,
including Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Mon-
tebello Unified School District, LA Metro, Metrolink,
YMCA and SCAG. A complete list of the participants
can be found in Appendix B.
The KTUA Team developed content for, facilitated,
and memorialized six (6) TAC meetings throughout
the planning process. TAC meetings had a duration
of one (1) hour and were held virtually. TAC meet -
ing #2 was held in a hybrid capacity. The TAC met
on a bi-monthly basis and was tasked with providing
feedback on engagement plans and findings, promot-
ing engagement opportunities to their networks, and
giving input on Plan needs and recommendations.
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 –
December 5, 2022
» Focus on the project overview and what
community engagement efforts were being
made
» Discussion of mobility challenges in the City of
Montebello
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 –
February 7, 2023
» Discussion of existing conditions with an
overview of existing pedestrian and bicycle
networks, including crash data
» Preview and discussion of the walk and bike
audits
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #3 –
April 4, 2023
» Discussion of the project survey results
» Focus on choosing locations for FMLM plan
projects
» Overview of future engagement
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #4 –
May 23, 2023
» Discussion of upcoming engagement and project
video
» Overview of Collision Analysis results (2011-
2021)
» Discussion of projects within the FMLM
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #5 –
August 8, 2023
» Discussion of previous and upcoming
community engagement
» Overview of potential treatments that are being
recommended on the FMLM
» Overview of the specific projects and their
development
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #6 –
November 14, 2023
» Discussion of the previous community
engagement
» Overview of the draft FMLM masterplan
3.2.2 COMMUNITY EVENTS
The KTUA team, in collaboration with Montebello
staff, designed materials for and participated in a se- ries of in-person events to promote the Montebello
FMLM and solicited feedback from the community.
In order to have maximum reach, the project team
used already scheduled citywide events to set up
booths and interactive activities to collect community
feedback. Engagement activities included interactive
boards where participants could provide opinions
regarding existing and future infrastructure within the City of Montebello. A summary of these events and
feedback received are summarized on the following
pages.
84 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
Community Event #1 – Heritage Festival,
October 2022
The KTUA team, in collaboration with Montebello
staff, hosted a booth at the annual Heritage Festival
on October 16, 2022. The pop-up served as an ideal
opportunity to speak with the community about the
Montebello FMLM project and collect input about
what infrastructure types the public would like to see
installed around the City. The KTUA team distributed
surveys, snacks, and giveaway items for those who
participated.
The team interacted with hundreds of event partic-
ipants and gained valuable insights regarding what
infrastructures the public would like to see installed
around the City of Montebello. Participants were
asked to place stickers on any street treatments they
would like to see in the City. These boards were avail- able in English, Spanish, and Mandarin.
At the conclusion of the event, the boards displayed
a distribution of votes across the various street treat- ments. Results of the boards are found in table 3-1.
Photos of the 2022 Heritage Festival event.
Table 3-1: Heritage Festival Input Summary
POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION
TREATMENT
NUMBER OF
VOTES
Multi-Use Path 33
Urban Greening 32
Speed Cushions 29
Speed Humps 26
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
(RRFB)
25 High-Visibility Crossings 24
Speed Tables / Raised Crosswalks 22
Speed Displays 19
Class I: Two-Way Multi-Use Path, with
Centerline
18 Class IV: Separated Bikeway +
Sidewalk
18 Edge Lane Markings 17
Extra-Wide Ramps at Crossings 16
Wide, Median Islands 15
Mid-Block Crossings 15
Class I: Two-Way Multi-Use Path, no
Centerline
13 Class II: Bicycle Lane 11
On-Street Edge Friction 10
Curb Extensions 9
Traffic Circle 8
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK
Signal)
7 Chicanes 5
Narrow Travel Lanes 1
85 CHAPTER 3 | OUTREACH
Community Event #2 - Downtown Street
Fest, July 2023
The KTUA team, in collaboration with Montebel-
lo staff, hosted a booth at the annual Downtown
Street Fest on July 29, 2023. The pop-up served as
an ideal opportunity to speak with the community
about the Montebello FMLM project and collect in-
put about what infrastructure types the public would
like to see installed around the City. As part of the
booth, the KTUA team showcased two temporary
infrastructure elements from the SCAG Kit of Parts.
These temporary elements included:
» Separated bike lane
» Creative crosswalk
Photos of the Downtown Street Fest event.
Figure 3-1: Results of the SCAG Kit of Parts input
board from the Downtown Street Fest.
Images of the SCAG Kit of Parts creative crosswalk from the Downtown Street Fest.
Median
Refuge Island
Separated
Bike Lane
Creative
Crosswalk
Curb
Extension
Parklet
21 8
16 13
8 Number of Votes
Montebello residents were able to physically interact
with these temporary infrastructures and provide in-
put about what they thought about them. Using stick-
ers, residents indicated which of the temporary infra-
structures they liked the most. The parklet received
21 votes, the creative crosswalk received 16 votes,
the separated bike lane received 13 votes, the curb
extension received 8 votes, and the median refuge is-
land received 8 votes, as shown in Figure 3-1.
86 CITY OF MONTEBELLO FIRST MILE LAST MILE PLAN
Community Event #3 - Heritage Festival,
October 2023
The KTUA team, in collaboration with Montebello
staff, hosted a booth at the annual Heritage Festival
on October 7, 2023. This is the same event that the
KTUA team previously participated in 2022. Due to
the success of the previous event, the team decided
to pursue the event once again. The pop-up served
as a way to update residents on the progress of the
FMLM and gain input on some of the current pro -
jects that the team has developed over the previous
months. The KTUA team distributed snacks and give-
away items for those who participated.
Photos of Heritage Festival Event
Whittier Boulevard &
Montebello Boulevard
Washington Boulevard
& Greenwood Avenue
Beverly Boulevard
& Maple Avenue
Madison Avenue
Neighborway
0 2
7 12
3 Number of Votes
The team interacted with hundreds of event partic-
ipants and gained valuable insights regarding what
projects the public would like to receive funding pri-
ority around the City of Montebello. Participants were
asked to place stickers on any intersection or priority project they would prioritize funding for. At the con-
clusion of the event, the boards displayed a distribu-
tion of votes across the various proposed projects, as
shown in Figure 3-2.
Figure 3-2: Results of the SCAG Kit of Parts input board from the Downtown Street Fest.