Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, October 1, 2024

Council Chamber,
580 Pacific St.

Monterey, California
City Council Agenda
Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, October 1, 2024
4:00 PM – 6:00 PM
City Council
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Kim Barber, Councilmember,
District 1
Gino Garcia, Councilmember
Alan Haffa, Councilmember
Ed Smith, Councilmember,
District 2
City Manager
Hans Uslar
HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING:
 Written comment: Members of the public may submit comment(s) to [email protected] until ½ hour before the start of the meeting. These messages are not read aloud during the meeting but are made available to the meeting body and public at https://monterey.gov/submitted-comments. All comments received become part of the record.
 In-Person: Please see the meeting location listed above. Wearing a mask is recommended and encouraged.
 Remote via ZoomGov Webinar:
o Join on a computer or smartphone: https://montereyorg.zoomgov.com/j/1607729333 An up-to-date version of the Zoom software must be used.
o Or join by telephone: Dial 833-568-8864 (Toll Free), 669-254-5252 (Campbell, CA) or 646-828-7666 (NY). If one number doesn’t work, please try another.  Enter Webinar ID: 160 772 9333 #
 If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #
 To “raise your hand,” dial *9. Once called upon, dial *6 to unmute o Need help using or updating Zoom? Read our Zoom Meeting Instructions (PDF)  This meeting will also stream live for viewing only on youtube.com/cityofmonterey (10 second delay) and on Comcast Channel 25 (up to 90-second delay).

PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES AND TIME LIMITS:

The total amount of time allocated for public comment on a particular issue and for each individual speaker is generally as follows:

1. Up to three minutes per speaker.

2. For regular City Council meetings, there are two 15-minute public comment periods, one in the afternoon and one in the evening. Speakers may only comment during one session.

3. The total time allocated for public comment:
a. Items pulled from the consent agenda – 15 minutes each item b. Public Appearance items – 30 minutes each item
c. Public Hearing items – 30 minutes each item
d. Closed session items – 15 minutes each item
At the time an item is considered, the Mayor will ask those attending the meeting in person to line up at the podium or raise their hands, and for remote participants to use *9 on the telephone or the “raise hand” function in Zoom, if they wish to address the City Council. The maximum amount of time for each person to speak and the total amount of time allotted for each item will be determined based on the number of people indicating an interest in speaking and the amount of business to be conducted on the agenda. In exceptional circumstances and when necessary to ensure a full opportunity for public input, the Mayor may, with the legislative body’s consent, adjust the amount of time allowed for public input and/or the time allotted for each speaker.

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt. Code section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is 10/1/2024 4:00:00 PM
2 required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official. Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well. The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.

TELECONFERENCE NOTICE
A “Just Cause” teleconference attendance notification was received from Councilmember Barber, who will make a brief statement at the beginning of the meeting regarding the general description of the circumstances requiring remote participation. ***Afternoon Session Agenda ***
4:00 - 5:30 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
The public may speak to any item that is not on the agenda and that is in the City of Monterey’s subject matter jurisdiction.

CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under Consent Agenda are routine and will be adopted by one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.

Approval of Minutes

1. September 17, 2024 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Award of Construction Contracts

2. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $331,327.00 to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. for the Old Town ADA Curb Ramp Improvements Project (35C1555) (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) ***Measure P/S*** Ordinances
An ordinance is a law adopted by the City Council and codified in the City Code. Through the adoption of an ordinance, the City may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other laws not in conflict with state or federal law. An ordinance generally becomes effective 30 days after approval at a second reading.

3. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 1-9.3 of the Monterey City Code to exempt City Administrative Citations from the $1,000 Maximum Penalty set forth in California Government Code Section 36901 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) 10/1/2024 4:00:00 PM
3 4. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance to Add Monterey City Code sec. 2-1.07, "Conflict of Interest Code" (FPPC Form 700) to Incorporate by Reference Regulations Adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission and Adopt a Resolution Approving Exhibit A to the Ordinance to Update the City’s Conflict of Interest Code (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Resolutions
A resolution is an expression of opinion or evidence of a decision made by the City Council and often relates to administrative business of the City. Resolutions generally become effective immediately upon adoption.

5. Award a Professional Services Agreement in an Amount Not-to-Exceed of $230,810.00 to BKF Engineers for the Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design and Environmental Document (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6) ***NCIP***

6. Authorize the Purchase of Banquet Chairs for the Monterey Conference Center (Not a Project Under CEQA, per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Other

7. Set a November 19, 2024 Public Hearing to Consider Vacating an Unimproved Portion of the Right of Way on Manzanita Street at Johnson Street (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5)

8. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 587 and 593 Van Buren Street; 424 and 450 Madison Street; Adjacent Parking Lot; and Area Behind the Parks and Recreation Administration Building Located at 546 Dutra Street; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole, Levi Hill and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: MP Madison Street Associates, L.P.; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for New Ground Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

STUDY SESSION
Study Session items are used to provide information to the City Council and answer their questions to clarify issues. Study Sessions provide a setting for informal discussions between staff, consultants, board, commission, committee members and the City Council regarding specific programs, projects or policies. Council does not take formal action on the items.

9. Receive a Report on the History of the Lower Presidio Lease Agreement and Receive Initial Feedback on Future Plans for the Lease (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmembers may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on their activities. In addition, Councilmember or the City Council may provide a referral to staff or other resources for factual information. (Government Code section 54954.2(a)(3).)
10/1/2024 4:00:00 PM
4 CITY MANAGER REPORTS
The City Manager may make a brief report on their activities or a brief announcement. They may also ask for clarification or direction regarding scheduling of Council meetings and study sessions.
*** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** The City Council will take public comments on closed session items before convening to closed session.

ADJOURNMENT
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on these matters within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, are available at: monterey.gov/submitted-comments and in the City Manager’s Office at 580 Pacific St., Room 1, Monterey, CA 93940 during regular business hours.

Information distributed to the Council at the Council meeting becomes part of the public record. Members of the public who submit written public comment on an agenda item may be subject to the Levine Act which requires disclosure of campaign contributions of more than $250 to an officer of the City within the preceding 12 months.

CITY OF MONTEREY'S 24-HOUR SUGGESTION HOTLINES:

Voicemail: (831) 646-3799 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.monterey.gov INTERPRETATION: The Monterey City Council invites and encourages public participation at its meetings. Requests for language interpretation may be made by contacting the City Clerk at [email protected] or 831-646-3935. The City Clerk will make every effort to accommodate requests for interpreter assistance. Requests should be made as soon as possible in advance of any meeting of the City Council. The City is committed to addressing language interpretation requests swiftly in order to maximize public participation.

ACCESSIBILITY: The City of Monterey is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at [email protected] or (831) 646-3935. Notification 30 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102-

35.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. For communicationrelated assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to City offices. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to the City Clerk's Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device.

Upcoming city meetings are listed at https://www.monterey.gov/agendas More information is available by calling (831) 646-3935

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, September 17, 2024
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber*, Garcia, Haffa (arrived at 4:05 p.m.), Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
* Attended remotely by teleconference pursuant to Gov. Code sec. 54953(f)(2)(A) for just cause
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Finance Director, Community Development Director, Police Chief, Parks and Recreation Director, Library & Museums Director, Public Works Director, City Clerk, Lieutenant, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Administrative Assistant (Library), HCD Coordinator, Housing Manager, Planning Manager, Senior Engineer, Technology Services Specialist (Library), Administrative Clerk (Library)
***Afternoon Session Agenda ***

CALL TO ORDER
This meeting was held with a combination of in-person and teleconference attendance, pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m.

TELECONFERENCE NOTICE
Councilmember Barber confirmed that she could hear the meeting proceedings, gave a brief description of the circumstances relating to her need to appear remotely pursuant to the “Just Cause” clause, and stated that no person over the age of 18 was present in the room with her during the meeting.

City Clerk Klein called the roll with Councilmember Haffa absent and the remainder of the Council present.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Smith led the Pledge.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognize City Employees for Milestone Anniversaries for the Third Quarter of 2024 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Recognized employees
Library & Museums Director Edwards recognized David Kuhn, Technology Services Specialist, for 40 years of service; Police Chief Hober recognized Brent Hall, Police Officer, for 25 years of Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 1.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 5 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
2 service; and Public Works Director Renny recognized Ethan Callihan, Streets and Utilities Supervisor, for 25 years of service and Daniel Bonanfant, Harbor Maintenance Craftsworker, for 20 years of service. Technology Services Specialist Kuhn made brief remarks about his career.

Early in the presentation, Councilmember Haffa arrived at 4:05 p.m.

Public comment was received from India Weeks, who expressed gratitude to David Kuhn and the Monterey Public Library.

The Council congratulated the recognized employees and thanked them for their service, and asked the public to express appreciation to the City's workers when possible.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
Based on the number of individuals requesting to speak, Mayor Williamson set the speaking time per person to two minutes for general public comments. Public comment on nonagendized matters was received from: Steve Lightfoot, India Weeks, Jim Burns, Wendy Brickman of Fisherman's Wharf Association, Sherri Tuioti of Fisherman's Wharf Association, Antoinette Saylor, Justin Barrett, Rodney Riggs of Fisherman's Wharf Association, Lance Koehler of Cannery Row Business Association, Barrie Riddoch, Bob Faulis, Robbie Torrise, Nina Beety, and Abraham Zavala.

CONSENT AGENDA
On question from the Council, City Attorney Davi provided context on Item 3, stating that approving the ordinance would not increase any penalties but would provide more flexibility in the future for any potential future desired increases.

Public comment on the Consent Agenda was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council approved the CONSENT AGENDA, except Item 5:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Approval of Minutes

2. September 3, 2024 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Ordinances

3. 1st Reading of Ordinance Amending Section 1-9.3 of the Monterey City Code to exempt City Administrative Citations from the $1,000 Maximum Penalty set forth in California Government Code Section 36901 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Passed ordinance to print
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 6 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
3 4. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Add Monterey City Code sec. 2-1.07, "Conflict of Interest Code" (FPPC Form 700) to Incorporate by Reference Regulations Adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission and Adopt a Resolution Approving Exhibit A to the Ordinance to Update the City’s Conflict of Interest Code (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Passed ordinance to print
Resolutions

5. Authorize Flock Group, Inc. Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Equipment Purchase and Three-Year Service Agreement with the Option to Renew for an Additional Two Years for a Total of $651,900, and Authorize the Appropriation of Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program ***(NCIP)*** Funds to Fund the Project (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3) Action: Pulled from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 24-148 C.S.

Police Chief Hober gave a brief verbal presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Bob Faulis, who spoke in support and expressed the importance of using the system only for criminal justice; Nina Beety, who spoke against the matter, citing concerns about privacy, security, and civil liberties; and Esther Malkin, who spoke in support, stating she had full faith in the integrity of the Monterey Police Department.

On question from the Council, Chief Hober reiterated information from the agenda report and said that the system was secure with all of the best methods. He said that he shared concerns around civil liberties with the speaker, and stressed that there was stringent law restricting the use of collected data to the investigation of crime. Kristen MacLeod, of Flock Group, Inc., said that the data was transmitted over the cellular network.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-148 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

6. Approve the Purchase of One (1) Backhoe in the Amount of $172,343.41 from Sonsray Machinery, LLC (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-149 C.S.

7. Adopt the FY 24/25 Salary Schedule for Regular Full-Time, Regular Part-Time, and PartTime/Seasonal Employees (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-150 C.S.

8. Amending Resolution 24-099, the Five Year Capital Improvement Program, to include the 30 Fisherman's Wharf Deck Repairs Project and Authorize an Appropriation of Unassigned fund balance in the Amount of $300,000 ***CIP*** (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301 Class 1)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-151 C.S.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 3, Packet Page 7 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
4 9. Award a Contract in the Amount of $89,116.20 to Duke's Root Control, Inc. for Annual Sewer Root Foaming 2024 (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-152 C.S.
*** End of Consent Agenda ***
The City Council adjourned to the Ocean View Community Services District meeting.

Adjourn to Ocean View Community Services District Meeting: Consent Agenda

10. Receive Ocean View Community Services District Quarterly Report (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received report
Public comment was received from Bob Faulis, who gave an update regarding the status of legal proceedings and development with regard to the Ocean View Plaza Project.

City Attorney Davi provided further context on the status of the matter before the Coastal Commission.

Adjourn to City Council Meeting
The Directors of the Ocean View Community Services District adjourned to the City Council meeting.

PUBLIC HEARING

11. Adopt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and Authorize Submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (Categorically Excluded from NEPA per 24 CFR Part 58 and Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-153 C.S.

HCD Coordinator Verania gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with Housing Manager Wyatt.

Public comment was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-153 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

12. Approve Planning Commission Recommendation to Amend the Downtown Specific Plan to Eliminate Minimum Parking Requirements for Residential Land Uses (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-154 C.S.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 4, Packet Page 8 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
5 Planning Manager Hill gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Kevin Dayton of Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, who spoke in support, citing expected increased vitality downtown; Laura Davis of Landwatch Monterey County, who spoke in support, citing expected increased housing; Esther Malkin, who said she was not opposed, but asked Council to consider seniors and people who need parking; Nina Beety, who opposed the matter and asked the City to increase the parking requirement, citing a lack of reliable frequent mass transit; and Alia Elyas of Monterey Bay Economic Partnership (MBEP), who spoke in support, citing expected increased housing.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Haffa, and seconded by Councilmember Garcia, to adopt Resolution No. 24-154 C.S.

The Council discussed the matter.

It was questioned how to have a policy that allows flexibility, in order to avoid such situations as a single-family home being torn down and its garage replaced with more density. Parking Manager Hill clarified that the proposed ordinance did not prohibit parking, it just did not require a minimum amount. Upon this clarification, for the need for flexibility was stated by the Council to have been resolved.

The Council stated that the proposed amendment was compliant with State law, that the Downtown Specific Plan area was within half a mile of a transit hub, and that developers would adjust to changing market conditions and may opt to include parking even if not required. It was stated that MBEP had reached out to the City regarding two developers who had properties downtown, and that staff had quickly identified that this amendment could resolve issues with AB 2097. Kudos were expressed to the staff for reacting quickly and flexibly to make conditions easier for housing to be built. It was stated that it had been unfortunate when Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) had removed some routes in Monterey, and it was stated that the proposed amendment could help the City express the need for MST to reprioritize routes to Monterey for residents and visitors. It was stressed that this project would prioritize infill projects over sprawl, would support the city's workforce and small businesses by providing the opportunity for employees to live closer to where they work. It was highlighted that this action would signal to the State that the City was making efforts to meet its housing goals.

The motion carried by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

13. Receive a Presentation on the Downtown Specific Plan Implementation: Intersection of Calle Principal/Polk Street/Hartnell Street/Madison Street - Americans with Disabilities Act Upgrades and Pedestrian Safety Improvements ***CIP*** (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received presentation
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 5, Packet Page 9 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
6 City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Easterling gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. During the presentation, Mayor Williamson left the Council Chamber at 6:13 p.m. and returned at 6:16 p.m.

Public comment was not received.

The Council discussed the matter. Staff was thanked for the work and research that had gone into the project. It was suggested that staff look at further potential improvements for the whole corridor, including the entrance to Monterey High and Hartnell Gulch. It was requested for staff to look further at bicycle safety as part of the project.

COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Smith reported that the prior week, the Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce hosted its Leadership Conference, consisting of all elected mayors, County supervisors and a few special districts, and said that it was good to hear an overview from all the other cities. He reported that the California Coastal Commission met on September 12, 2024 and approved Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) application for the SURF! bus line with conditions that the bus line be installed on the same area where the train tracks are, and leave it open for future rail use. He said that there would be a meeting of the MST Board in October to discuss the impact of the Coastal Commission's conditions on the SURF! timeline.

During Council Comments, Councilmember Garcia left the Chamber at 6:45 p.m. and returned at 6:48 p.m.

Councilmember Barber greeted the Council, staff, and attendees, and said she was grateful to be able to attend the meeting remotely. She thanked everyone present for the work that they do.

Mayor Williamson reported that State Senator John Laird hosted a recent closed-door meeting regarding water with key stakeholders, including a representative from the State Water Resources Control Board and all Monterey Peninsula mayors and city managers. He said that one take-away from the meeting was the opportunity to look at a mid-term solution to the area's water supply needs. He said that while there was debate around the reliability of source water from the Pure Water Monterey project expansion, it was clear that at least some water would be coming in, and said that the representative from the State Water Resources Control Board indicated that the cease and desist order might be lifted temporarily based on the additional water. He said that this could provide more data on the reliability of the source water and allow the region to create housing. He reported that he took the topic to the Mayors Association with all 12 Monterey County mayors, where he said that there had been discussion around agreeing on a pathway forward to get more housing built. On a separate subject, he said that he had heard from constituents renting in multifamily and single family unit who were upset that property owners were posting political signs on their properties without the renters' permission.

He stated that this was hurtful to the renters living in those units, and ended up looking like artificial support of a candidate, and asked what the City could do to address this issue.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Uslar said that today was National Voter Registration Day and urged residents to register to vote. He said that the City had created a partnership with Montage Health to provide events that promote health in the community. He said that the City would once again participate in Park(ing) Day on September 20, 2024, with various departments hosting booths and mini parks in parking spaces on Alvarado Street.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 6, Packet Page 10 City Council Minutes September 17, 2024
7 ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 7:00 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 7, Packet Page 11 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Max Rieser, Senior Engineer
SUBJECT: Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $331,327.00 to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. for the Old Town ADA Curb Ramp Improvements Project (35C1555) (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) ***Measure P/S***
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Approving the plans and specifications for the Old Town ADA Curb Ramp Improvements Project (“Project”) which are available in the office of the City Engineer (Room 7), and granting the Public Works Director, or their designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Awarding a Construction Contract for the Total Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., in the amount of $331,327.00;

4. Authorizing the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of the information required by the Project plans and specifications; and

5. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional 15% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the Project.

VALUE DRIVERS:

In collaboration with our community partners, work to improve the quality of life of all of our community members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion; championing equitable access to affordable housing; and maintaining a safe environment.

Serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships.

Expand opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with the City Council’s Value Drivers and Strategic Priorities of Quality of Life – “Recognize that public safety is a priority to ensure that our City is safe and welcoming to all, contributing to our economic vitality as a destination City;” Fiscal Stewardship – “Prioritize funding models and sources for facility rehabilitation, repair, and replacement” and “Identify and seek grant funding opportunities for City services and infrastructure, including parks, recreation, library, museums, public safety, fire prevention, and planning;” Active Mobility – “Expand Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 12 №10/24
opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.” This action is in accordance with Chapter 28- Purchasing of the City Code, which requires Public Works project contract awards exceeding $150,000 to be approved by City Council.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Four (4) bids were received and opened by the Finance Director’s designee on August 20, 2024 as follows:

Bidder Total Bid
FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. $331,327.00
Coastal Paving & Excavating Inc. $408,408.00
The Don Chapin Company $423,001.00
Monterey Peninsula Engineering $458,100.00
Basis of award for this project is based on the Total Base Bid.

Total Project Construction Estimate:

Construction Contract (Total Base Bid) $331,327.00
Construction Contingency, 15% $49,700.00
Total Project Construction Estimate (This Authorization) $381,027.00 Construction Management $49,700.00
Total Estimated Cost to Complete the Project $430,727.00 Funding Sources:
(35C1555) $9,095,169.83
As of August 20, 2024, sufficient funding is available to complete the project. The Project is funded by Measure P-ADA funds.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) because the project consists of the demolition and replacement of existing curb ramps with ADA compliant curb ramps. All work is within the public-right-of-way. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 13 №10/24
Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project does not involve the creation of additional automobile lanes.

Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. No unusual circumstances are anticipated due to improvements' limited scope and distinct locations.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report {EIR). The project would not be visible from a scenic highway.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. No impact to sites included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government code would occur.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The project would not impact historic resources as project improvements would only occur in the public right-of-way. The project would not involve digging; therefore, the project would not have an impact on historical or archeological resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to award the construction project for this Project; however, the proposed project implements maintenance activities with additional safety and accessibility benefits that support the maintenance of existing infrastructure.

DISCUSSION:

The Old Town Ramp Curb Improvements Project consists of curb ramp improvements to 12 locations (5 intersections) in the Old Town Neighborhood. The project will reconstruct existing ramps to achieve compliance with current ADA standards. The City developed an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan in 2013 and is currently in the process of updating it again. These improvements help the City implement steps identified in the ADA Transition Plan and create a more walkable and rollable Old Town neighborhood. The intersections scheduled for curb ramp improvements (subject to change due to conditions in the built environment) include:
 Monroe Street at Jefferson Street (2 ramps)
 Monroe Street at Johnson Street (2 ramps)
 Monroe Street at Madison Street (1 ramp)
 Clay Street at Harrison Street (2 ramps)
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 14 №10/24
 Jefferson Street at Clay Street (2 ramps)
 Jefferson Street at Manzanita Street (3 ramps)
Measure P/S is a 1% sales tax approved by voters in 2014 and continued in 2018 for fixing streets, sidewalks and storm drain systems. Since its adoption, the tax has been effective in improving the City’s accessibility. Measure P/S funds are a dedicated and reliable resource for fixing and maintaining the City’s streets, curb ramps, sidewalks, and storm drains. Over the past decade, Measure P/S funds have been used to maintain City streets, sidewalks, and storm drains and upgrade ADA ramps. Without this resource, the City would not be able to maintain its streets and sidewalks to the same level of service.

The project plans and specifications were developed by City staff and consultants Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. The Project was extensively advertised for construction bids and is available for public review in the Office of the City Engineer (580 Pacific St., Room 7). On April 16, 2024, the city received four (4) bids. The lowest responsive, responsible bid was submitted by FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., in the amount of $331,327.00.

FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. has performed and successfully completed work in the City of Monterey, including the Citywide Sidewalk Repair Project, Phase 1. They have submitted references for their work product. Staff has checked the firm’s references and is comfortable with the ability of the contractor to perform the work successfully. The work is expected to begin in late 2024 and has a contract duration of 40 working days. The specific dates of construction will be announced to the public in advance, with information posted on the City of Monterey’s Construction News webpage at monterey.gov/construction. Construction is anticipated only to involve shoulder and lane closures; minor traffic impacts are anticipated.

MR/ab
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Bid Tabulation Table
e: FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $331,327.00 TO FBD VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE OLD TOWN ADA CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (35C1555) (EXEMPT FROM CEQA, ARTICLE 19, SECTION 15301, CLASS 1) ***MEASURE P/S***
WHEREAS, on the 20th day of August 2024, the City received four (4) electronic bids through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, OpenGov Procurement, for the Old Town ADA Curb Ramp Improvements Project;
WHEREAS, FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., Coastal Paving & Excavating Inc., The Don Chapin Company, and Monterey Peninsula Engineering submitted responsive, responsible bids;
WHEREAS, the basis for determining the low bidder is the Total Base Bid; WHEREAS, FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive, responsible bid in the amount of $331,327.00;
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in account MEASURE P-ADA (35C1555) to complete the project;
WHEREAS, the Project is funded by MEASURE P-ADA (35C1555); WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) because the project consists of the demolition and replacement of existing curb ramps with ADA compliant curb ramps. All work is within the public-right-of-way. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project does not involve the creation of additional automobile lanes.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 5, Packet Page 16 Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. No unusual circumstances are anticipated due to improvements' limited scope and distinct locations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:

1. Approves the plans and specifications for the Old Town ADA Curb Ramp Improvements Project (“Project”) which are available in the office of the City Engineer (Room 7), and granting the Public Works Director, or their designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepts all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Awards a Construction Contract for the Total Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., in the amount of $331,327.00 from Measure P & S funds;

4. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of the information required by the Project plans and specifications; and Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 6, Packet Page 17

5. Authorizes staff to expend up to an additional 15% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the Project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 7, Packet Page 18 City of Monterey
Finance Department
Rafaela King, Finance Director
580 Pacific Street, Monterey, CA 93940

EVALUATION TABULATION
General Solicitation - OLD TOWN ADA CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (35C1555)

Page 1 ends

EVALUATION TABULATION
GEN No. TBD
OLD TOWN ADA CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (35C1555)
RESPONSE DEADLINE: August 20, 2024 at 2:00 pm
Tuesday, August 20, 2024

SELECTED VENDOR TOTALS
Vendor Total
FBD Vanguard
Construction, Inc.
$331,327.00
Coastal Paving &
Excavating Inc.
$408,408.00
The Don Chapin Company $423,001.00
Monterey Peninsula
Engineering
$458,100.00
TABLE 1
Vendor Total
FBD Vanguard
Construction, Inc.
$331,327.00
Coastal Paving &
Excavating Inc.
$408,408.00
The Don Chapin Company $423,001.00
Monterey Peninsula
Engineering
$458,100.00
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 8, Packet Page 19 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/24
AMENDING SECTION 1-9.3 OF THE MONTEREY CITY CODE TO EXEMPT CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS FROM THE $1,000 MAXIMUM FINE AMOUNT SET FORTH IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 36901
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, Article 2, Division 1 of Chapter 1 of the Monterey City Code provides for the issuance of administrative citations for violations of the City Code, which are in addition to civil and criminal remedies; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 36901 states that a city legislative body may impose fines, penalties and forfeitures for violations of ordinances, and may fix the penalty by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00); and WHEREAS, case law has established that a charter city may enact an ordinance that provides for different penalties than those established by state law, as long as such penalties do not exceed any maximum limits set forth by its charter and are not excessive; WHEREAS, the Monterey City Charter does not establish or limit any maximum penalty amounts and specifically states in Section 1.4 that the City “shall have all powers to make and enforce all laws and regulations with respect to its municipal affairs, subject only to such limitations and restrictions as may be provided in this Charter and in the Constitution of the State of California”;
WHEREAS, the City’s administrative fine schedule established by Council resolution currently sets a limit of one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) for any single administrative citation; and
WHEREAS, the City would like the ability to charge certain violations of the Monterey City Code, particularly repeat violations by the same offender, with administrative fine amounts exceeding $1,000.00, as long as those amounts are deemed reasonable under the law.

NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 3: A new subsection D is hereby added to Section 1-9.3 of Chapter 1 of the Monterey City Code, which section shall read in its entirety as follows:
“Sec. 1-9.3. Amount of fines.

A. The amounts of the fines for code violations imposed pursuant to this Article shall be Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 20 set forth in the schedule of fines established by resolution of the City Council.

B. The schedule of fines shall specify any increased fines for repeat violations of the same code provision within thirty-six months from the date of an administrative citation.

C. The schedule of fines shall specify the amount of any late payment charges imposed for the payment of a fine after its due date.

D. In accordance with Section 1.4 of the City Charter, the provisions of California Government Code section 36901 which limit the maximum fine allowed for violation of local regulations to one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), shall not apply to administrative fines imposed for violations of the City Code.”
SECTION 4: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 21 ORDINANCE NO. __-___ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24

ADOPTING THE MONTEREY CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act, Government Code sections 81000, et. seq., requires local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes; WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has adopted a regulation, 2 California Code of Regulations section 18730, that contains the terms of a standard Conflict of Interest Code, which can be incorporated by reference in an agency’s code. After public notice and hearings, the standard code may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act;
WHEREAS, incorporation by reference of the terms of the aforementioned regulation and amendments to it, saves the City time and money by minimizing the actions required to keep the Conflict of Interest Code in conformity with the Political Reform Act; WHEREAS, Monterey City Charter section 4.10 authorizes codes to be incorporated by reference by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 3: Monterey City Code Section 2-1.07 is hereby adopted to read as follows:
2-1.07. Conflict of Interest Code.
a. The Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000, et. seq. requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate Conflict of Interest Codes.

Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 22 The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal Code of Regs. Section 18730, which contains the terms of a standard Conflict of Interest Code which can be incorporated by reference, and which may be amended by the FPPC to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act after public notice and hearings. The terms of such standard Conflict of Interest Code set forth in 2 Cal. Code of Regs. Section 18730 and any amendments to it adopted by the FPPC are hereby incorporated by reference, and together with Exhibit A, which shall be that current Council resolution designating positions and disclosure categories of reportable financial interests, shall constitute the Conflict of Interest Code for all departments and agencies of the City of Monterey.
b. Pursuant to Section 4 of said standard Conflict of Interest Code, the City Council is the code reviewing body for the City of Monterey, and individuals holding positions designated in Exhibit A shall file Statements of Economic Interest according to the Code.

SECTION 4: All previously adopted resolutions and ordinances and parts of resolutions and ordinances in conflict herewith and/or approving various separate Conflict of Interest Codes are hereby rescinded and superseded.

SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 23 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Marissa Garcia, Engineering Assistant
SUBJECT: Award a Professional Services Agreement in an Amount Not-to-Exceed of $230,810.00 to BKF Engineers for the Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design and Environmental Document (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6) ***NCIP*** RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding a Professional Services Agreement for preliminary engineering and environmental analysis services for the Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design and Environmental Document (“Project”) to BKF Engineers with a not-to-exceed fee of $230,810.00 and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Expand opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with the City Council’s Value Drivers and Strategic Priorities of Quality of Life – “Respond effectively to neighborhood concerns;” Fiscal Stewardship – “Prioritize funding models and sources for facility rehabilitation, repair, and replacement”; Active Mobility – “Maintain and repair core street, roadway, and storm drain infrastructure” and “Continue to enhance mobility for people of all ages and abilities.” CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 24 №10/24
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

This project is funded through the FY23/24 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program and approved by City Council on October 17, 2023:

Anticipated Project Expenditures:

Professional Services Agreement to BKF Engineers $230,810.00 Total Estimated Cost $230,810.00
Funding Sources:

Mark Thomas Separated Bike/Path Design (NCIP2404) $693,842.86 As of August 30, 2024, sufficient funding is available to complete this phase of the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6) because the project consists of preliminary design and environmental analysis services, which involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities to determine the project scope and initiate the environmental analysis. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project involves information collection, research, and resource evaluation activities.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities; therefore, there would be no impacts to scenic highways.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 25 №10/24
Government Code. No impact to sites included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government code would occur.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The project involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities; therefore, there would be no impacts to historical resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council may choose not to award a contract for preliminary design and environmental services; however, it is not recommended as it will delay the completion of the approved NCIP project.

DISCUSSION:

This Project was first conceived in the FY23/24 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) project cycle. The project was tied for the third-highest rank project of the over 90 projects in the FY23/24 NCIP cycle. The project scope is to provide the funds to design a “shovel-ready” project to connect the North Fremont Bike Path to Fairground Road / Mark Thomas Drive to Sloat Avenue to Del Monte Avenue and the Recreational Trail.

As shown in the Project Map (Attachment 2), the eastern end of this Project will eventually connect the North Fremont Median Bike Lanes, which extend from Casa Verde Way to Casanova Avenue on North Fremont Street. The Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) and the City are awaiting the results of a joint Active Transportation Program (ATP) Grant application to fund the construction of the North Fremont Gap and Fort Ord Recreation Trail and Greenway Project, which would provide a connection from North Fremont Street to the Monterey Recreation Trail. On the western end of the project, the Bike & Pedestrian connection will connect the eastern side of the City to the Naval Postgraduate School on Sloat Avenue and provide a second separated Bike/ Ped connection to the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation Trail at Sloat Avenue. Bike and Pedestrian Path Users can also exit the path at Sloat Avenue and Third Street to access El Estero Park.

This Project is also included in the City’s Multimodal Project list in the Appendix of the adopted 2021 Multimodal Plan, Move Monterey, and is consistent with City of Monterey’s Vision Zero Emphasis Area, Chapter 8 of the Multimodal Plan, to create “Safer Streets for Everyone” by providing enhanced bike and pedestrian safety through separated bike and ped connections.

The project development process typically begins with a planning phase, where project alternatives are compared, analyzed, and prioritized. The NCIP process can bypass the conventional Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project development process where preliminary engineering plans are developed, and the environmental document is completed. A critical first step in developing “shovel-ready” design plans for the Project, is to finalize the geometric footprint of the project through preliminary engineering design. The preliminary engineering phase analyzes different alignments, cross sections, and geometry of the proposed path. The analysis considers trade-offs with right-of-way impacts, utility considerations, safety improvements, costs, and environmental impacts. A preferred design is selected, and once the geometry is finalized, an environmental document will be prepared. Once the preliminary engineering is complete, the project can progress into final design and become a “shovel-ready” project.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 26 №10/24
A request for proposals for preliminary design and the environmental document was prepared by staff and extensively advertised on April 25, 2024, to solicit proposals from qualified firms.

Selection of the best-qualified firms was made in accordance with the City’s Purchasing Ordinance. On May 23, 2024, three (3) proposals were received, evaluated, and ranked by a selection committee of Engineering and Planning staff. A Committee then interviewed the top two (2) firms. The interview committee unanimously agreed that BKF Engineers was the most qualified firm for this project.

The Project may be split into multiple phases to most efficiently utilize the funding. The preliminary design phase allows Staff to evaluate multiple alternatives while reserving funding for the final design of the preferred alternative. Staff will also evaluate splitting the project into multiple segments to better align with grant funding.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution that awards a Professional Services Agreement for preliminary engineering and environmental analysis services for the Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design and Environmental Document (“Project”) to BKF Engineers with a not-toexceed fee of $230,810.00 and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement.

MG/ar
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Project Map

3. RFP Scoring Summary
e: Andrew Easterling, City Engineer
BKF Engineers
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 27 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TOEXCEED OF $230,810.00 TO BKF ENGINEERS FOR THE MARK THOMAS DRIVE AND

SLOAT AVENUE SEPARATED BIKE/PEDESTRIAN PATH STUDY, PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT ***NCIP***
WHEREAS, the Mark Thomas Drive - Separated Bike/Ped Path Design, N. Fremont - Mark Thomas - Sloat - Rec Trail (Design Only) (NCP2404) was approved by City Council on 17th of October 2023 with an appropriation of $700,000.00 (Resolution No. 23-122 C.S.); WHEREAS, a request for proposal was prepared by staff and extensively advertised on April 25, 2024, to solicit proposals from qualified firms; WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of May 2024, at 5:00 pm the City of Monterey received three (3) electronic proposals through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, Open Gov Procurement, for the Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design and Environmental Document (NCP2404) (“Project”); WHEREAS, the three (3) electronic proposals were received, evaluated, and ranked by a selection committee consisting of Engineering Staff and Planning Staff; WHEREAS, the committee unanimously agreed that BKF Engineers was the most qualified firm for this project; and,
WHEREAS, The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6) because the project consists of preliminary design and environmental analysis services, which involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities to determine the project scope and initiate the environmental analysis. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project involves information collection, research, and resource evaluation activities.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities; therefore, there would be no impacts to scenic highways.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The project involves information collection, research and resource evaluation activities; therefore, there would be no impacts to historical resources;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 29

1. Award a Professional Services Agreement to BKF Engineers with a not-to-exceed fee of $230,810.00; and

2. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 7, Packet Page 30 Project Map
ATTACHMENT 2
Recreational Trail
North Fremont
Median Bike
Lanes
Project Route
Sloat Ave
Mark Thomas Rd
Fairground Rd
North Fremont St
Del Monte Ave
Garden Rd
Casa Verde Wy
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 8, Packet Page 31 Engineering Division

RFP REVIEW
Project Name: NCP2404
Service Area: N/A
Criteria
Max
Points
#1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3
Firm Qualifications
and Experience
20 Project References 20
Project Team 20
Work Plan 30
Schedule 10
Total Points: 100
Rater
Top 2, Moved on to Interview Top 2, Moved on to Interview

SUMMARY SCORE SHEET
PS&E & Environmental Docs Include On-Call Services:

BKF Engineers Kimley-Horn Sandis
Mark Thomas Drive and Sloat Avenue Separated Bike/Pedestrian Path Study, Preliminary Design, and Environmental Document
Project Code:

Page 1 of 1 ends

ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 9, Packet Page 32 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared By: Tonya Hufford, Conference Center Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Purchase of Banquet Chairs for the Monterey Conference Center (Not a Project Under CEQA, per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution for the purchase of banquet chairs for the Monterey Conference Center (MCC). The purchase of these chairs will complete the intended aesthetic as set out in the 2015-2018 renovation of the facility.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Support business retention and business attraction efforts through partnerships with local business, business associations, and the chamber of commerce.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The action is consistent with the City policy to replace City equipment when they have fulfilled their useful life cycle and are no longer economical to operate or maintain.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

A total of $391,312.80 is required for the purchase of 1,800 new banquet chairs. The Conference Center’s Operations Budget has adequate funding for the purchase of these chairs and has been appropriated in the FY 2024-25 adopted budget. The expenditure would come from account 101-600-6231-0000-4205.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 33 №10/24
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to not authorize the purchase of 1,800 banquet chairs for the Monterey Conference Center, but that is not recommended as the purchase of these chairs were part of the architectural design of the Conference Center’s 2015-2018 renovation.

Additionally, the current chairs scheduled for replacement are nearly 25 years old. The purchase of these additional chairs will complete the original order that was put on hold due to other fiscal obligations. The pricing of these chairs is part of the CMAS procurement purchasing policy.

DISCUSSION:

The goal of the Monterey Conference Center (MCC) is to provide a modern, state-of-the-art meeting facility with world-class service to meet the needs of business-oriented visitors to the City of Monterey.

The Monterey Conference Center welcomes thousands of conference attendees each year, who typically stay overnight longer and spend more than the weekend leisure traveler. This directly results in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue from hotel stays and Sales Tax from conference meals and offsite meals, which, in turn, help fund core City services.

The Conference Center has seen an increase in business for FY 24/25 and is a recent Gold winner of the prestigious Stella Award for Best Conference Center, beating out others around the globe for consistently delivering quality service and innovation to meeting and event professionals.

The initial purchase of 1,000 chairs was made during the 2015-2018 renovation of the Monterey Conference Center (MCC). These 1,800 additional chairs would complete the original FF&E (furniture, fixtures, and equipment) order that was intended to be purchased over six years ago.

The purchase of these chairs would result in all MCC banquet and meeting spaces having matching chairs.

The chairs would be purchased and fulfilled by MityLite Inc., under the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) number 4-23-08-1021. California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) offers a wide variety of commodity, non-IT Services, and information technology products and services at prices that have been assessed to be fair, reasonable, and competitive. A cooperative procurement contract, such as CMAS, is an exception to the City’s competitive procurement requirements pursuant to Monterey City Code section 28-14(a).

The purchase of 1,800 banquet chairs will allow MCC to continue providing world-class services and amenities to group and business visitors, supporting an important economic engine in the community.

HU/th
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Rafaela King, Finance Director
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 34 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF BANQUET CHAIRS FROM MITYLITE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $391,312.80
WHEREAS, the Monterey Conference Center would be better served by having all conference banquet chairs be the same style, size, and color for the purposes of the intended aesthetics and mixing chairs throughout the facility;
WHEREAS, the purchase of 1,800 banquet chairs were originally part of the design of the Monterey Conference Center during the facility’s 2015-2018 renovation, but were not completed due to cost;
WHEREAS, the chairs requested for purchase will be replacing chairs that are nearly 25 years old. The total cost of the purchase of 1,800 chairs is $391,312.80; WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter a contract with MityLite, Inc. under the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) contract number 4-23-08-1021 for the purchase of 1,800 banquet chairs. A cooperative procurement contract, such as CMAS, is an exception to the City’s competitive procurement requirements pursuant to Monterey City Code section 28-14(a); WHEREAS, the Operating Supplies Fund has adequate funding for the purchase of these chairs and has been appropriated in the FY2024-25 adopted budget. The expenditure will come from account 101-600-6231-0000-4205; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter3 ("CEQA Guidelines"), Article 20, Section15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorize the purchase of 1,800 chairs for the Monterey Conference Center and authorizes the City Manager to sign any contracts for 1,800 banquet chairs utilizing the CMAS Contract number 4-23-08-1021 with MityLite, Inc. in the amount of $391,312.80.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 35 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 36 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Cody Hennings, Engineering Assistant II
SUBJECT: Set a November 19, 2024 Public Hearing to Consider Vacating an Unimproved Portion of the Right of Way on Manzanita Street at Johnson Street (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a Resolution to set a public hearing date of November 19, 2024 to hear evidence offered by persons interested and if the City Council finds from all evidence that the portion of the right-of-way is unnecessary for present or prospective it, it may vacate the proposed portion of the unimproved right of way on Manzanita Street.

VALUE DRIVERS:

In collaboration with community partners, work to improve the quality of life of all of community members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion, championing equitable access to affordable housing, and maintaining a safe environment.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The City of Monterey General Plan Map 5 (Showing Street Classifications) identifies Manzanita Street as a Local Street. The proposed vacation is consistent with the City of Monterey General Plan because the subject portion of the street is currently unbuilt and is infeasible for future improvements. Additionally, the remaining built portion of Manzanita Street will continue to function as a local street.

On May 15, 2024, pursuant to Streets & Highway Code section 8313 and Government Code section 65402, the Planning Commission considered the location, purpose, and extent of the proposed right-of-way vacation and determined it conformed with the General Plan.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

If the City of Monterey is not utilizing a public right of way, it reverts to the adjacent property owner. No fiscal exchange occurs for vacations.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 7.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 37 №10/24
The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5) because the project proposes to vacate a portion of unimproved Manzanita Street. This is a minor alteration in land use limitations.

Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located -a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. The vacation of a portion of the right of way will not impact any environmental resource; Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. The vacation of a portion of the right of way is a limited project scope and will not create cumulative impacts;
Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The vacation of a portion of the right of way will not have a significant effect because it is an ownership change that results in limited physical changes in the environment;
Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project area is not visible from a scenic highway;
Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project area is not located on a hazardous waste site; Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The vacation of a portion of the right of way will not have an impact on historic resources because it is a change of ownership that results in limited physical changes in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Not applicable.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 38 №10/24
DISCUSSION:

Jaedra Luke, property owner of 899 Johnson Street, has submitted a request that the City of Monterey vacate a portion of the public right of way along the unbuilt portion of Manzanita Street. The portion of the right of way to be vacated contains public utilities; therefore, an easement shall be established to allow for the maintenance of existing utilities. Additionally, the construction of any permanent structure within the easement will be prohibited.

Figure 1: Aerial image depicting the general area of right of way that is proposed to be vacated including a 10-footwide utility easement. 10 foot Wide Utility
Easement
Proposed Right-ofWay to be Vacated
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 39 №10/24
Figure 2: Site Survey depicting the general area of right of way that is proposed to be vacated including a 10-footwide utility easement.

The Streets and Highways Code (Section 8320) states:
“The City Council may initiate a proceeding to vacate a street or easement on its own initiative or upon a petition or request of an interested person, at the discretion of the City Council. The City Clerk then sets a hearing by fixing the date, hour and place of the hearing and cause the publishing and posting of the notice of the public hearing.” Based on Jaedra Luke’s request, the City Council is asked to set a public hearing date of November 19, 2024, to consider the matter. Notice of the public hearing on the proposed right of way vacation must be published for at least two successive weeks prior to the hearing in a newspaper. Also, notices are to be posted along the line of the right of way to be vacated for two successive weeks. At the hearing, the City Council must hear evidence offered by persons interested. If the City Council finds from all the evidence submitted that the portion of the right of way described in the notice of hearing is unnecessary for present or prospective use, the City Council may adopt a resolution vacating that portion of the right of way.

AR/ch
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A
10 foot Wide Utility
Easement
Proposed Right-ofWay to be Vacated
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 40 №10/24
e: Andrew Easterling, City Engineer
Max Rieser, Senior Engineer
Jaedra Luke, Applicant
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 41 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
SETTING A NOVEMBER 19, 2024 PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER VACATING AN

UNIMPROVED PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ON MANZANITA STREET AT

JOHNSON STREET
WHEREAS, the Streets and Highways Code (Section 8320) states, “The City Council may initiate a proceeding to vacate a street or easement on its own initiative or upon a petition or request of an interested person, at the discretion of the City Council. The City Clerk then sets a hearing by fixing the date, hour and place of the hearing and cause the publishing and posting of the public hearing”;
WHEREAS, Jaedra Luke has requested the City of Monterey vacate a portion of the unimproved right of way on Manzanita Street at Johnson Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5) because the project proposes to vacate a portion of unimproved Manzanita Street. This is a minor alteration in land use limitations.

Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 6, Packet Page 42 Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project area is not located on a hazardous waste site.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The vacation of a portion of the right of way will not have an impact on historic resources because it is a change of ownership that results in limited physical changes in the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:

1. Sets a public hearing date of November 19, 2024 to consider vacation of a portion of the right of way on Manzanita Street (Exhibit A);

2. Directs the City Clerk to publish notice of the hearing for two successive weeks pursuant to Streets & Highways Code section 8322 with proof of publication;

3. Directs staff to post conspicuous notices of the proposed vacation along the line of the right of way pursuant to Streets & Highways Code section 8323.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 7, Packet Page 43 Exhibit A
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 8, Packet Page 44 Exhibit A
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 9, Packet Page 45 Exhibit A
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 10, Packet Page 46 Exhibit A
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 11, Packet Page 47 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 587 and 593 Van Buren Street; 424 and 450 Madison Street; Adjacent Parking Lot; and Area Behind the Parks and Recreation Administration Building Located at 546 Dutra Street; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole, Levi Hill and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: MP Madison Street Associates, L.P.; Under Negotiation:

Price and Terms of Payment for New Ground Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint agency negotiators for a conference with real property negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 to discuss and provide confidential direction for price and terms of payment for a new lease agreement for the properties located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street; 424 and 450 Madison Street; Adjacent Parking Lot; and the area behind the Parks and Recreation Administration Building located at 546 Dutra Street.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

City Council approval is required for this type of real estate transaction. Closed session confidential review of real estate matters is allowed.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES : No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications related to the recommendation to appoint agency negotiators.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 CEQA Guidelines Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the Date: 10/1/2024
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 48 №10/24
environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to appoint negotiators or appoint different negotiators. This is not recommended by staff. It is appropriate that the Council appoint agency negotiators and authorize a confidential discussion regarding the price and terms of payment for the new lease agreement.

DISCUSSION:

The City Council appointed City negotiators for the property located behind City Hall in 2021.

Due to staffing changes, new negotiators are proposed to be appointed.

Existing Site Photos
Figure 1: 424 and 450 Madison Street

Figure 2: 587 and 593 Van Buren Street
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 49 №10/24
Figure 3: Dutra Street Parking Lot
Figure 4: Area Behind Parks and Recreation Building (546 Dutra Street) A closed session discussion with the City’s real estate negotiators is recommended to discuss the lease terms. Closed session discussions are allowed and appropriate to provide confidential discussion for real estate matters.

Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 50 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive a Report on the History of the Lower Presidio Lease Agreement and Receive Initial Feedback on Future Plans for the Lease (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council received a status report about the history of the Lower Presidio Lease Agreement with the Army and receive initial feedback on future plans for the lease.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The City of Monterey currently maintains a lease with the U.S. Army for public use of the Lower Presidio, a portion of the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey. The lease term is from August 16, 1996 to September 30, 2046. The City has the right to terminate the lease early by providing one year's prior written notice. It is within the City Council’s purview to discuss the history of the lease and future intentions of the lease.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No, however, action to approve or terminate a contract (lease) is subject to the Levine Act.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no direct cost for the City Council to discuss the history and future plans of Lower Presidio. The City spends approximately $80,000 annually for ongoing maintenance costs, including Museum and Museum Restroom cleaning and general park maintenance such as mowing and litter control. In addition, the U.S. Army has requested that the City fund and construct a full slope height retaining wall, which staff estimates would cost $1.5 million in General Fund dollars to design and construct. Environmental review costs are unknown for this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 51 №10/24
in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to receive an informational report on this item, but that is not recommended.

DISCUSSION:

Since 1847, the US Army has owned the land commonly known as the Lower Presidio. The City of Monterey has leased 25.15 acres of the Presidio from the U.S. Army with the understanding that it would be developed as a historic park. The rich history of this area contains historic sites dating back thousands of years from the Rumsen Ohlone First Peoples, through the 1602 and 1770 Spanish arrivals, and later Mexican and early American development. The site can be recognized as the founding site of Monterey and Alta California.

The agenda report describes the historical significance of this area, the improvements and investments made by the City as well as future needs for investments.

Historic Preservation and Interpretation
The Lower Presidio includes numerous sites of interests. These sites include areas supporting the diverse heritage of Monterey and Alta California. These stories include:
 Ohlone Rumsen and Esselen tribes: Very few sites are publicly identified by the Rumsen and Esselen tribes. Rumsen people call this site the Achasta Village located on Hunnukul (Lower Presidio Hill). A rain rock or birthing rock is accessible, and the site may have been part of a larger trading post. Rumsen and Esselen tribes are not federally recognized tribes.
 Buffalo Soldiers: The Lower Presidio is one of the few sites in California that speak to the story of the 9th and 10th calvaries also known as the Buffalo Soldiers. The 9th and 10th Cavalry units are unique as they were Black calvary units serving Pacific Grove and Monterey, and later became the first park rangers and backcountry rangers at Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks. The 9th and 10Th Cavalry story has an increased interest from the general public – not just the military.
 The first person buried in Alta California was Alexo Nino, a freed Black slave from Mexico, who was on board Father Serra’s ship and buried after Serra and Portola held mass. His records of burial by Father Serra are in the Book of the Dead with the Archdiocese of Monterey.
 The Serra Monument was donated by Jane Stanford (co-founder of Stanford University and the eighth First Lady of California) and looks over Monterey Bay. The monument Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 52 №10/24
was moved to the top of the hill to prevent vandalism in the early 1900s. The scale and size of the statue cannot be moved now based on the historic site CA-MNT-101.  Early California history: In 1846, Commodore Sloat landed by ship in Monterey and claimed California for the United States. In 1896, the Semi-Centennial Commission chose Monterey as the site in California to erect the Sloat Monument for the public. The 1906 earthquake delayed construction, and in 1910, Sloat Monument opened to the public.

These historical facts, plus numerous others not mentioned or not yet discovered, tell a significant story about our region. The stories from the past reach into present-day thinking, perceptions, and prejudices. Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) are terms of utmost relevance in knowing where we come from and who we are today in 2024.

Purpose of the Lower Presidio Lease: Preserve Open Space In the early 1980s, the U.S. Army proposed to dispose 123 acres of Lower Presidio and sell it to private developers. In September 1984, then-Congressman Leon Panetta successfully convinced the House Armed Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Military Installations to reject the Army’s request. As reported in the September 19, 1984 issue of the Monterey Peninsula Herald, Rep. Panetta’s advocacy “clear[ed] the way for the city of Monterey to lease the property to widen Lighthouse Avenue, uncover a historic Spanish fort and open a lowintensity public park.” Earlier in 1984, the Monterey City Council rezoned the property to prohibit any development should the Army sell the property to developers. The Army’s proposal in 1984 to sell 123 acres of the Lower Presidio also included a proposal to sell the 81-acre Huckleberry Hill site, which is a forest of Monterey Pines also under lease by the City for public recreational access.

In May 1986, then City Manager John Dunn drafted a memo about the potential long-term use of the Lower Presidio as the Presidio Historic Park. A significant underlying objective for the City was to ensure that through the lease, the area would be preserved as open space to preserve this “unrivaled historic resource.” At the start of the development of a long-term use plan, three agencies met to discuss the future of the land, including the Department of the Army, the California Department of Parks and Recreation, and the City of Monterey.

As stated by the City in November 1995, “There is an absolute need to properly preserve these qualities.” In 1996, the City entered into a fifty-year lease agreement with the Department of the Army “for the purpose of developing a Historic Park available to the public celebrating the rich history of this place since 1602.”
The City offered to take on the operation and maintenance of the Presidio Museum, as well as conduct minimal maintenance functions including mowing, litter control, and restroom maintenance. Items from the Presidio Museum owned by the U.S. Army were returned, and the City worked to create its own displays in partnership with the Monterey History and Art Association, donors, and Monterey Public Library and museums that told a broader history of the Lower Presidio Historic Park.

In 1984, the City indicated that it would like California State Parks or another agency to handle the restoration of the historic fort. Nevertheless, over the years, investments of more than $1M have been undertaken. The funding came from various sources, including General Fund, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 53 №10/24
(NCIP) funds, grants, as well as grants channeled through the Old Monterey Foundation (OMF).

Projects included the restoration of the Presidio Museum and the creation of an exhibit; Lower Presidio Park improvements, including entry signs and Serra Monument path; Sloat Monument assessment and restoration; public art security plan; Sloat Monument path; and many others.

The ongoing maintenance costs include Museum and Museum Restroom cleaning and general park maintenance such as mowing and litter control. The ongoing costs are approximately $80,000 annually.

Use of the Lower Presidio Historic Park
Annually, the City reports to the U.S. Army about the status of the park, the number of events and visitors, as well as maintenance efforts. The 2024 report, covering May 1, 2023 through April 30, 2024, is attached to this agenda report. The report contains a chronology of significant annual undertakings since the commencement of the lease in 1996.

Latest Developments/Challenges
Over the past few years, the Army’s approach to this lease has changed. For example, the U.S.

Army requested the City make more financial investments in the Park, including slope stabilization. The proposals from our Army partners included constructing a terraced or cantilever wall along Lighthouse Curve to prevent deposits from falling onto the sidewalk and potentially capping the entire hillside to further prevent deposits from burrowing animals. A March 2021 letter from the Army states: “POM [Presidio of Monterey] recognizes that COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on the City of Monterey’s tax base and budget. Still, POM, as the landowner, must ensure that the land leased as the LPHP [Lower Presidio Historic Park] is protected and managed in accordance with the law.” This same letter requested that the City fund and construct a full slope height retaining wall, which staff estimates would cost $1.5 million in General Fund monies to design and construct.

Removal of fallen debris requires archaeological monitors along the Lighthouse curve; however, there is inconsistent guidance on the length of areas of historic significance. This leads to maintenance issues for the pedestrian sidewalks leading between Old Town and New Monterey. The City has consulted with an archaeologist anytime debris is removed from the Lighthouse Curve sidewalk.

An important part of any future project is the required consultation with the Native American community. Staff anticipates that larger projects, such as significant slope stabilization projects, would involve robust consultation. It is important to note that the federal and state regulations have different consultation standards. For example, local governments are required to comply with AB 52, and projects on federal land are subject to Section 106 requirements.

Questions for Consideration
Questions City Council, staff, and residents should consider addressing as part of this study session are:
 Should the City continue this lease given that the land is now fully protected from future developments and turned into a historic park?
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 4, Packet Page 54 №10/24
 Will the U.S. Army continue to provide open access to the park if the City decides to terminate the lease early?
 Should the City continue to invest General Fund dollars into the maintenance and preservation of this area? Can the City afford to continue this lease, given its competing priorities with other City services and assets?
 Can the City remain in low-cost to no-cost compliance with the increasing demands expressed by the Department of the Amry representatives? How can the City manage increased expectations from our partner?
 Are other State and/or Federal agencies better equipped, staffed, educated, and funded to enter into a new lease?
 As federal land, should the City pursue and advocate for National Monument or National Historic Site designation to preserve public access in perpetuity and to secure permanent federal maintenance and upkeep through the National Park Service?  Since this land is truly a unique historical place, should a regional agency or non-profit enter into a new lease?
These and many other questions will need to be considered.

Attachments: 1. Lower Presidio Historic Park Annual Report to the U.S. Army e: Museums & Cultural Arts Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Historic Preservation Commission
Old Monterey Foundation
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 55

LOWER PRESIDIO HISTORIC PARK
Annual Report to the U.S. Army
Lease No. DACA05-1-96-554
7 June 2024
City of Monterey
Monterey, California

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 6, Packet Page 56 2 Pursuant to Clause 33, “Annual Reporting Requirements,” of Lease No. DACA05-1-96-554, the lease of the Lower Presidio of Monterey by the U.S. Army to the City of Monterey, the following is the City of Monterey’s 27th annual report for the period 1 May 2023 through 30 April 2024.

A. Historic Property Reporting Requirements

1. The City of Monterey carried out all maintenance and operations in compliance with the Operating Plan and Federal Laws and regulations regarding the preservation of the historic property in the manner stipulated in the lease.

2. Summary statement of maintenance and operations activities 1 May 2023 – 30 April 2024.

The City's Building Maintenance Division did not identify any required maintenance to buildings or monuments not referenced below.
a. Maintenance: The primary ground maintenance activity during the reporting period was mowing and tree maintenance. The grass areas were maintained to a fairly uniform height. Grounds were kept to standards. Tree maintenance was coordinated with US Army in accordance with Environmental
(i) 6 October 2023: One tree trimmed and one removed by the POM 152. (ii) 26 October 2023: Seven trees trimmed around POM 113. (iii) 27 October 2023: Two trees trimmed on Lighthouse Avenue. (iv) 25 March 2024: Branch failure at the LPHP parking lot. b. POM-112 (Restroom): Facility inspected weekly. There is substantial termite damage on all the wood in restrooms.
(i) Signage was replaced in the restroom closest to the Museum to make it gender neutral to comply with California mandates.
(ii) Replaced toilet, wax ring and bolts from leaking toilet. (iii) Bathroom door is splitting causing the latch and strike plate to loosen. (iv) The restrooms were snaked to main sewer line once per year. c. POM-113 (Presidio Museum): Facility inspected weekly. HVAC system serviced quarterly. Facility open Saturday and Sunday 1000 - 1600 for public hours and by appointment for private tours.
(i) Some shingles are missing on the roof and roof repair is needed by contractor.
(ii) The door on ramp is beginning to delaminate and needs to be repaired. (iii) Flags at Museum damaged by citizen and replaced.
(iv) Argentinean flag at Lower Presidio Historic Park was taken down due to poor condition from weather and sent back to Argentinean Consulate; flag was replaced.
(v) Door closer replaced due to weather damage. Interior light switches were damaged due to roof leak and replaced.
(vi) LED lights were installed inside of the Museum.
(vii) ADA ramp was repaired to prevent slipping hazards when wet. (viii) New HVAC control panel added
(ix) New igniter added to HVAC system
(x) New Presidio of Monterey Museum sign installed
d. POM -105 (Former Gun Shed). Facility inspected weekly. There is substantial rotting wood. There is an A/C unit attached to the building that needs to be removed. The door is weathered and starting to peel away.

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 7, Packet Page 57 3 e. POM-109 (Serra Monument): Grass removed or cut, as allowable. The security alarm camera provided effective surveillance of the historic structure. f. POM-118-119 (Stables): Removed in November 2020.
g. POM-121 (Blacksmith Shop): Facility inspected weekly. Paint and roof work is needed. There is significant rotting wood and paint is peeling off. h. POM 152 (Sloat Monument): Trash and debris regularly removed. (i) The light and solar panel were stolen and conduit was broken. New conduit was pulled through crawl space.

The City's Building Maintenance Division did not identify any required maintenance to buildings or monuments not referenced above.

It is hereby certified that all water and sanitary systems on the premises have been inspected and currently comply with the Federal, State, and local standards. Since November 2008 California American Water (CAL AM) is in charge of the water and checking the fresh water system.

3. Summary Statement of Lower Presidio Historic Park visitation:
a. The Presidio of Monterey Museum was open every Saturday and Sunday from 1000 to 1600, for DLI Language Day, and for Private Tours. Attendance was 3,355 individuals.
b. The Annual History Fest Civil War encampment in October has not been hosted since 2019.
c. Four organizations applied for approved group use of the Park this past year, for a total of 250 participants.
d. While attendee numbers are counted for special events, daily visitation numbers to the outdoor Lower Presidio Historic Park are not recorded. The City and Museums staff continue to promote the Lower Presidio Historic Park as a pedestrian destination for fresh air, breathtaking views, and historic monuments.

C. It is hereby certified that all pesticides were stored, handled, and used in compliance with all Federal, State, and local standards. No pesticides were stored on the property.

D. No significant modifications of policies or procedures were planned for 2023-2024.

E. The City of Monterey remains in compliance with the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, as required in the lease section, Non-discrimination.

Condition of Premises: The initial surveys of the conditions of contributing and non-contributing properties in the lease area were conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Monterey staff in October, 1998. The finalization of these surveys has been ongoing; the City submitted photographs to the U. S. Army corps of Engineers for the final assembly of the condition report.

Insurance: The City of Monterey has provided proof of insurance regarding liability: bodily injury and death. The City of Monterey maintains a standard fire and extended coverage insurance policy on the leased premises to the full replacement value.

Museum Operations: The Presidio of Monterey Museum reopened October 30, 2021 after 595 days of closure due to the COVID-19. The Museum is open two days per week, Saturday through Sunday 1000 to 1600. 3,355 people visited the Presidio Museum during regular open hours, and ten private tours during this period. Five volunteer guides serve as Presidio Museum Docents

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 8, Packet Page 58 4 down from 19 prior to the pandemic. The Artifact Specialist and Library & Museums Director continues to monitor the Presidio Museum and interpretation of the historic grounds.

Public Ingress and Egress: Walking Trails:

1. Pedestrian access from Van Buren Street in the City of Monterey to Artillery Street in the Lower Presidio Historic Park is by a stepped pathway and a small bridge over the Junipero Creek ravine that parallels Artillery Street.

2. The Lower Presidio Historic Park Master Plan includes access from the Custom House Plaza to the Serra and Vizcaino Oak site (California State Parks property at intersection of Artillery and Pacific Street). Current access is by a stairway from Pacific Street pedestrian overpass to the Heritage Harbor garage on Pacific and Scott streets. Street sidewalk. A Neighborhood Community and Improvement Program (NCIP) project to study options for improved public access paths to the Lower Presidio Historic Park from Old Town was paused.

3. Access from the Museum to the Sloat Monument and Ft. Mervine had previously required an uphill climb to the site. The two ADA-compliant and removable concrete pathways, the Vista Trail (to Sloat Monument and Fort Mervine) and the Bay Trail (to El Castillo site and Serra monument), continue to attract visitors and residents daily while protecting sensitive archaeological and historical sites. The information kiosk and 10 interpretive signs installed by the City of Monterey with assistance from the Old Monterey Foundation provide significant historical information on the Lower Presidio Historic Park.

The Lower Presidio Walk Path Project: This project allows for walkers to travel safely from New Monterey to the downtown area. Two sections remaining of the Lower Presidio Walk path are a concrete ramp at Private Bolio and an ADA complaint concrete ramp and decomposed granite sidewalk and ramp at Artillery. NCIP project, Phase 2, reconstructs the crosswalk at Lighthouse and Bolio Way and connects the proposed walkway with Phase 1, a decomposed granite walkway installed by volunteers across Lower Presidio.

Parking: The parking areas are adequate for current usage of the park without damage to historic and archaeological sites.

Signage: The development of interpretive signage is incorporated into the Master Plan for the Lower Presidio Historic Park. The Master Plan will site the interpretive signs to maximize their effectiveness in educating the public about the history of the site. Under no circumstances will the signs include reference to human remains, burials, or specific locations of archaeological sites or materials. No excavation for signposts or other soil disturbance was conducted, consistent with lease requirement and preservation of archaeological and historic property.

Supervision of the Area - Protection: Building Maintenance, Parks maintenance, Monterey Police and Federal police visit the Lower Park regularly. Sentry Alarm of Monterey monitors a security system alarm in the museum. Following the 2016 vandalizing, recovery, and restoration of the head of the Serra statue, the City identified and, with approval, installed a security camera and alarm at the Serra monument maintained by First Alarm.

Chronology of Previous Annual Activity Highlights
1998-1999: The City of Monterey considered the feasibility of developing a master plan for the Lower Presidio Historic Park, if funds are available. The growing realization that several buildings on the Lower Presidio would help interpret the story of the working region of the Presidio as a cavalry post, early American fort, and Spanish and Mexican fortifications to protect Monterey and the harbor.

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 9, Packet Page 59 5 1999-2000: The City of Monterey hired landscape architectural firm Bellinger Foster Steinmetz, to collaborate with archaeologist Rebecca Allen and architectural historian Edna Kimbro to develop the Lower Presidio Historic Park Master Plan. That project is still in process. A task force drawn from City of Monterey museum, parks, and planning staff, a community historian and representative of the Cultural Arts Commission, the District Planning Specialist for Monterey State Parks (Monterey District), and the Historic Architect for the Presidio of Monterey served as the task force on this project, meeting regularly with the consultants. Consultants and task force held a meeting with local representatives of Monterey’s Native Americans, who contributed a number of excellent suggestions to the planning of the park.
2000-2001: The City of Monterey hired a Presidio Museum Coordinator and completed the installation and opening of the Presidio of Monterey Museum. The design and operation of the museum was the first step in the overall plan and served as a cornerstone for the entire Lower Presidio Historic Park. The development of the Lower Presidio Plan continued. The construction of the Artillery Street gate was reviewed by city, state and federal preservation and environmental agencies and was completed in the spring of 2001.
2001-2002: Misunderstood publicity about the closing of the upper Presidio to through traffic in August 2001 greatly reduced traffic to the Lower Presidio Park. Museum operations between August 2001 and December 2001 were markedly reduced; however, since January 2002 visitation had increased. The development of the Lower Presidio plan continues. 2002-2003: In compliance with the lease, a Master Plan was prepared and approved by the Monterey City Council for development of the Lower Presidio Historic Park. The plan is consistent with the National Register designation of the site. The Master Plan is a record of the existing archaeological and historic resources on the site and a plan for future development as a historic park.
2003-2004: Budget constraints associated with city revenues have resulted in a delay in implementing the Master Plan. The Master Plan was sent to the Army and SHIPO for comments.

Comments by the DLI-FLC Environmental and Natural Resources Management have been received by the city and are currently under review by city staff. 2004-2005: Budget constraints continue to delay the implementing of the Master Plan. Comments by the DLI-FLC Environmental and natural Resources were received by the City’s Planning Department and responded too. Both DLI-FLC Environmental and City’s Planning Department along with the SHIPO continue to review the Master Plan and how best it can be instituted.

In February 2005 the President’s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation met in Monterey. As part of the orientation they toured the Lower Presidio Historic Park where City Staff, along with the Commandant, Garrison Commander and Command Historian of DLI-FLC briefed them on ongoing activities and the history of the site.
2005-2006: No progress in implementing the Master Plan due to a lack of funding associated with the down-turn in the City’s budget. Following the 2002-2003 period. City and other agencies made a concerted effort over the last year to change the perception that the park is not open to the public because it is part of the closed Presidio Military installation. National coverage of the site, a part of the city’s ongoing heritage tourism and promotions, has helped to mediate that perception.
2006-2007: The pedestrian bridge between Van Buren Street and Artillery Street was installed over Junipero Creek ravine. Approaches to the bridge were completed. The bridge is not ADA accessible. The 2005 modification to the Master Plan for the pedestrian trail from Lighthouse Avenue to Artillery Street was not been installed due to environmental concerns. Completion of

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 10, Packet Page 60 6 the trail project was scheduled for the spring of 2007. Maintenance on the Sloat and Serra Monuments, funded by the City of Monterey’s Neighborhood Improvement Program, was planned for spring of 2007.
2007-2008: The approaches to the Van Buren Street and Artillery Street bridge over Junipero Creek were completed and the connection to the Path of History completed. In September the repairs and conservation of the Serra Monument were completed and a detailed conservation report for the Sloat Monument was submitted to the City. In October, during History Fest, the Monterey Bay Symphony performed in the Lower Presidio Park. Approximately 350 attended and set on the grounds looking toward the bay.
2008-2009: The City sought funding for the essential maintenance needed on the Sloat Monument. It is mostly a drainage issue that required some engineering and moving of soil around the base of the monument. In September approximately 500 people attended a Labor Day concert on the grounds. The first week in October, during History Fest, 184 people from throughout Northern California visited the Lower Presidio to learn the history of the site and its national importance.
2009-2010: Funding from the City’s 2009/10 Neighborhood Improvement Program was received for essential drainage work around the base of the Sloat Monument. It was anticipated that work will begin in 2010. Staff planned recognition of the Sloat Monument’s 100th anniversary in 2010. 2010-2011: The City of Monterey installed additional directional signage to the Presidio Museum.

The City of Monterey conducted survey and design work to support a permit application for drainage work at the Sloat Monument site in May/June 2011. Drainage construction was planned in fall 2011, pending permit approval. Plans were also initiated for phased conservation repairs at a later date. History Fest activities included military reenactors’ demonstration of a 1860s encampment.
2011-2012: The Sloat Monument Project: The survey and proposed design were completed. The design consisted of removing the pavement in the area around the monument and re-grading to drain moisture collection away from the foundation of the monument. The area will be seeded with native vegetation. The project application was submitted to the City Planning Division for environmental determination. Following City review a request for environmental review was submitted to the Army.

During Historic Monterey’s “History Fest” (October), military reenactors presented military 1860s camp life, mounted cavalry and horse drawn ambulance service as well as musket and cannon firing demonstrations.
2012-2013: The City completed plans for the Sloat Monument Renovation of Essential Elements Project through the Neighborhood Improvement Program funding (NIP Project No. 30N1018).

The City submitted the project specifications application for Army environmental clearance. City planning staff also met with the representative from the Native American community on April 24, 2013. The project will resolve drainage problems at the monument. Upon completion, the next phase of repair and renovation of the Sloat Monument (NIP Project No. 30N1234) itself will begin.

During History Fest 2012, held in mid-October, over 650 people visited the Civil War-era Army reenactors’ camp. Mounted cavalry, horse drawn supply wagon, infantry, townspeople, and scheduled musket and cannon firing demonstrations were features of the event. History walking and bus tours were also provided
2013-2014: The City completed the Sloat Monument Renovation of Essential Elements Project, Phase I through Neighborhood Improvement Program funding. The pavement surrounding the monument (causing water build-up) was removed, the site re-graded for improved drainage away

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 11, Packet Page 61 7 from the site, seeded the area with natural grasses, and cleaned drain and installed dyke along parking area. Monterey’s History Fest, held in October, featured 1860s’s Army re-enactors, their camp, historic displays and demonstrations, and cannon and musket firings. Almost 400 people attended the three-day event.
2014-2015: Monterey’s History Fest, held in October 2014, featured 1860s’s Army re-enactors, their military encampment, historic displays and demonstrations, including scheduled cannon and musket firings. 1,322 people visited the Civil War encampment during History Fest, October 3-

5. Initiated Phase II of Sloat Monument Renovation project with preparation of a condition assessments report and specific conservation recommendations. 2015-2017: The City Neighborhood Improvement Program Committee (NIP), with City Council approval, provided funding to design and implement approved interpretive and wayfinding signage and ADA-compliant accessible pathways to the Serra Monument / El Castillo site which features bay views. Path designs were developed and submitted for necessary approval. In addition, preliminary designs for the pathway for visitors and residents to visit the Sloat Monument are in progress. A new entrance sign welcoming visitors to Lower Presidio Historic Park was unveiled on February 3, 2017. The Old Monterey Foundation (OMF), a local non-profit, partnered with the City to raise funds from many sources for all of these improvements. No excavation will be involved. Once finalized, the creation of the two history pathways, along with interpretive signage, will implement major components of the Lower Presidio Historic Park Master Plan, as approved by the Army, City, and State Parks. The annual History Fest Civil War Encampment remained a popular event at the Park despite the windstorm on Sunday resulting in closure of the encampment and activities.
2018-2019: Interpretive wayfinding draft signage on the history along with vista views continued to attract visitors. City’s artifact specialist assessed Presidio Museum collection and exhibit and installed a temporary exhibit on the 411th Telegraph Corp stationed at the Presidio and dispatched to Europe during World War I. Volunteer docents assisting in the Lower Presidio numbered 28, with 20 operating the Civil War encampment. The park historic ADA-compliant pathways grew in popularity and, with the final approval and installation of historic interpretive signage and the informational kiosk, we expect greater use and enjoyment of the Lower Presidio Historic Park during the next reporting period.
2019-2020: Finalized and installed ten historic wayfinding, an informational kiosk and two trailhead signs along Sloat and Serra Monument ADA-compliant park pathways, Vista and Harbor trails. Funds raised by local non-profit OMF helped make this possible. On March 14th, the City of Monterey following State and local directives, implemented Shelter in Place and social distancing to reduce the spread of the COVID19 pandemic. Along with other City-operated museums, library, and other public service institutions, the Presidio Museum was closed during this time.

The Lower Presidio Historic Park remained open to individuals. All group use of the park was suspended.
2020-2021: The Army and SHPO approved the removal of the two buildings due to their hazardous condition in 2019, and the City received Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act clearance for demolition. Demolition took place in November 2020, and was limited to above grade material with no excavation of subsurface material due to the buildings location within the NRHP listed “El Castillo” Historic District and multicomponent site CA-MNT-101/H. Asbestos and lead based paint was remediated in accordance with applicable regulations. Following remediation, clean topsoil was brought in to cover the structure footprints and will later be planted with vegetation. A project archeologist and OCEN Native American representatives were on site to monitor the demotion. The building removal did not impact any known or previously unknown cultural resources. The report prepared archaeologist Ryan T. Brady, MA, RPA of Dudek and provided to the Army’s Archaeologist and Cultural Resource Manager on March 19, 2021 reported no adverse effect on historic properties.

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 12, Packet Page 62 8 Along with other City-operated museums, library, and other public service institutions, the Presidio Museum remained closed in response to State and local directives regarding COVID-19.

The Lower Presidio Historic Park remained open to individuals. All group use of the park was suspended.
2021-2022: The Presidio of Monterey Museum reopened October 30, 2021 after 595 days of closure due to the COVID-19. The Museum reopened with a reduction in hours due to a lack of docents to provide museum interpretation. Annual History Fest Civil War encampment in October was cancelled.
2022-2023: The Presidio of Monterey Museum added exhibits for Buffalo Soldiers inside and received positive media coverage and feedback from the public. Regular maintenance and upkeep of Lower Presidio Historic Park continued.

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 10/1/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 13, Packet Page 63

Monterey City CouncilOctober 1, 2024

Monterey City Council
October 1, 2024