Agenda packet — Pacific Grove City Council, April 5, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, April 5, 2023, 6:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA The Council will not begin consideration of any item on this agenda later than 10:00 p.m. unless such consideration is approved. Any items on this agenda not considered this evening will be continued to a future meeting.

Copies of the agenda packet are available for review at the Pacific Grove Library, in the Finance Department, and electronically at www.cityofpacificgrove.org/agendas. The most effective method of communication with the City Council is by sending an email to [email protected]. In order to allow the City Council adequate time to review communication related to an agenda item, it is recommended that the communication be sent no later than 9:00 AM on the day prior to the City Council meeting.

THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY (HYBRID).

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/209579290
To participate telephonically, call any number below:
888 788 0099 US (Toll-free)
877 853 5247 US (Toll-free)
669 900 9128
669 219 2599
Webinar ID: 209 579 290#
If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #.

Help Line 831-648-3128

MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
The public may also view the meeting on the Peninsula Channel 25.

AGENDA

CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilmember McDonnell

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

2. PRESENTATIONS
A. Mayor's Proclamation: Fair Housing Month
Reference: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk
Recommended Action: Receive presentation.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Mayor's Proclamation: National Community Development Reference: Bill Peake, Mayor
Recommended Action: Receive presentation.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

3. COUNCIL AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) A. Report on Closed Session by City Attorney
B. Other

4. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
General Public Comment must deal with matters subject to the jurisdiction of the City and the Council that are not on the Regular Agenda. This is the appropriate place to comment as to items on the Consent Agenda, only if you do not wish to have the item pulled for individual consideration by the Council.

Comments from the public will be limited to three minutes and will not receive Council action. Comments regarding items on the Regular Agenda shall be heard prior to Council’s consideration of such items at the time such items are called. Whenever possible, written correspondence should be submitted to the Council in advance of the meeting, to provide adequate time for its consideration.

A. General Public Comment
Reference: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk
Recommended Action: Receive written general public comment if applicable.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

CONSENT AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda deals with routine and non-controversial matters, and may include action on resolutions, ordinances, or other public hearings for which testimony is not anticipated. The vote on the Consent Agenda shall apply to each item that has not been removed. Any member of Council, staff, or the public may remove an item from the Consent Agenda for individual consideration. When items are pulled for discussion, they will be automatically placed at the end of their respective section within the Regular Agenda. One motion shall be made to adopt all non-removed items on the Consent Agenda.

5. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Items pulled from this section will be placed under 12. Unfinished and Ongoing Business

A. Minutes of the City Council Special Meeting for March 8, 2023 Reference: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk
Recommended Action: Approve minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Minutes of the City Council Closed Session and Regular Meetings for March 22, 2023 Reference: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk
Recommended Action: Approve minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

6. RESOLUTIONS
Items pulled from this section will be placed under 12. Unfinished and Ongoing Business or 13. New Business

7. ORDINANCES
Items pulled from this section will be placed under 11. Public Hearings

A. Second Reading of an Ordinance to amend Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code to update the Streets and Sidewalk Sections
Reference: Laurel O'Halloran, Associate Planner & Economic Development Coordinator Recommended Action: Hold second reading and adopt an Ordinance to update Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code.

CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities

8. REPORTS – INFORMATION ONLY
Items pulled from this section will be placed under 12. Unfinished and Ongoing Business or 13. New Business

A. Monterey-Salinas Transit Minutes: February 13, 2023
Reference: Joe Amelio, Councilmember
Recommended Action: Receive minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Civicwell Policymakers Conference
Reference: Chaps Poduri, Councilmember
Recommended Action: Receive report.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

9. REPORTS – REQUIRING ACTION
Items pulled from this section will be placed under 12. Unfinished and Ongoing Business or 13. New Business

A. Contract Amendment for professional contract planner services with Harris & Associates, Inc.

Reference: Anastacia Wyatt, Community Development Director Recommended Action: Approve an agreement amendment not to exceed $208,145.00 up until June 30, 2024, approximately $58,145.00 through June 30, 2023, for Fiscal Year 22-23 and $150,000 for Fiscal Year 23-24 for professional contract planner services with Harris & Associates, Inc.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Library Board Appointment
Reference: Bill Peake, Mayor
Recommended Action: Approve Aparna Sreenivasan appointment to Library Board with term ending January 31, 2027.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
C. Public Hearing Procedure in Council Policy 000-9
Reference: Bill Peake, Mayor
Recommended Action: Direct the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution amending Council Policy 000-9 (Council Guidelines) to implement the proposed public hearing and appeal procedures.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

10. MEETING MINUTES OF COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES Items pulled from this section will be placed under 13. New Business

A. Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes: 8/11/2022, 9/22/2022, A. Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes: 8/11/2022, 9/22/2022, 10/13/2022, and 11/20/2022.

Reference: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk
Recommended Action: Receive minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

REGULAR AGENDA

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
For public hearings involving a quasi-judicial determination by the Council, the proponent of an item may be given 10 minutes to speak and others in support of the proponent’s position may be given three minutes each. A designated spokesperson for opposition to the item may be given 10 minutes to speak and all others in opposition may be given three minutes each. Very brief rebuttal and surrebuttal may be allowed in the sole discretion of the Council. In public hearings not involving a quasi-judicial determination by the Council, all persons may be given three minutes to speak on the matter.

A. First reading of an ordinance to amend the City Salary Classification Schedule - Adding a new classification
Reference: Leticia Livian, HR Director and Cathy Madalone, Chief of Police Recommended Action:

1. Request the City Attorney read the title of the ordinance;

2. Motion to waive further reading of the ordinance;
Introduce and hold a first reading of an ordinance to amend the salary classification schedule to establish a salary range for new classification of Property and Evidence Technician and approve the amendment; and

3. Direct that a summary of a proposed ordinance be published as approved by the City Attorney.

4. CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

12. UNFINISHED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
A. FY22/23 Street Rehabilitation Project
Reference: Joyce Halabi, Deputy Public Works Director
Recommended Action: Authorize an agreement with Monterey Peninsula Engineering for the FY22/23 Street Rehabilitation Project on segments of 13th, 15th and 16th St in an amount not to exceed $1,520,048 plus a 9% contingency.

CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities B. CONCEPT REVIEW: Proposed Skatepark Project
Reference: Joyce Halabi, Deputy Public Works Director
Recommended Action:

Recommended Action:

1. Determine if City Council consensus exists for a proposed skatepark project; If consensus exists, review Recreation Board proposed potential skatepark project location recommendations;

2. If Recreation Board location recommendations are accepted, direct staff to pursue discussions with Pacific Grove Unified School District (PGUSD) regarding feasibility for either site; and

3. 4. Return to City Council to present PGUSD discussion outcome.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

13. NEW BUSINESS

14. FULL PRESENTATIONS

15. CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Codified At 42 United States Code Section 12101 and 28 Code of Federal Regulations Part 35), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation in the provision of any services, programs, or activities. The City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. City Hall is an accessible facility. A limited number of assisted listening devices will be available at this meeting. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting or provide the requested agenda format.

Agenda No. 2 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Mayor's Proclamation: Fair Housing Month
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation.

Attachments
Proclamation

Mayor’s Proclamation
Fair Housing Month
April 2023
WHEREAS, April 2023 marks the 55th Anniversary of the passage of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing Act. The City of Pacific Grove celebrates the Month of April as the anniversary of the establishment of the Fair Housing Act. This Act outlines a national policy of fair housing for all individuals who live in the United States; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Fair Housing Act protects individuals from discrimination based on race, color, sex, disability, religion, familial status, and national origin; and WHEREAS, the California fair housing laws further protect individuals from discrimination based ancestry, citizenship, primary language, age, gender (including gender identity and expression), sexual orientation, genetic information, marital status, source of income, military or veteran status, or any other arbitrary characteristic; and WHEREAS, the City of Pacific Grove also prohibits discrimination against renting or buying a home, receiving a mortgage, seeking housing assistance, or engaging in other housing related activities; and
WHEREAS, Fair Housing is essential to the ethical commitment of the City of Pacific Grove and is crucial to serving our community. Therefore, we at the City of Pacific Grove recognize the month of April as Fair Housing Month and promote an inclusive community devoted to fair housing.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Bill Peake, Mayor of Pacific Grove, California, hereby proclaim the month of April 2023 as “FAIR HOUSING MONTH” advocating for equal housing opportunities for all residents and prospective residents of the City of Pacific Grove. Together, we will make our communities places where our rights are respected and where every one of us can enjoy a safe place to call home.
______________________
Bill Peake, Mayor
City of Pacific Grove
Agenda No. 2 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Mayor's Proclamation: National Community Development CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation.

Attachments
Proclamation

Mayor’s Proclamation
National Community Development Week
April 10th – 14th, 2023
WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program has operated since 1974 to provide local governments with the resources required to primarily meet the needs of low- and moderate-income persons by funding public infrastructure, economic development, and housing programs in this community; and
WHEREAS, the CDBG Program has provided the City of Pacific Grove with important and flexible assistance to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income residents by funding sewer and home rehabilitation projects. The City of Pacific Grove has approved 12 housing rehabilitation loans in our current CDBG funding cycle to provide this much-needed local assistance; and
WHEREAS, Pacific Grove recognizes that the CDBG program is a partnership of federal, state and local government with community efforts. The CDBG program thrives heavily on the dedication and commitment of our combined efforts.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Bill Peake, Mayor of Pacific Grove, California, hereby proclaim the week of April 10th – 14th, 2023 as “NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK”, giving a special thanks and appreciation to all participants whose tireless efforts to the community, inclusive of its low- and moderate-income residents help ensure the quality and effectiveness of the CDBG Program.
______________________
Bill Peake, Mayor
City of Pacific Grove
Agenda No. 4 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: General Public Comment
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive written general public comment if applicable.

Agenda No. 5 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Minutes of the City Council Special Meeting for March 8, 2023 CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Approve minutes.

Attachments
Draft Minutes
1 DRAFT MEETING MINUTES

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, March 8, 2023, 6:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA
THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY (HYBRID).

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/209579290

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Peake called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. City Clerk conducted roll call with the following Council present in Chamber: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember McDonnell led the pledge of allegiance.

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Action: Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Amelio, Council voted to approve the agenda.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT AS IT PERTAINS TO BUDGET WORKSHOP
A. Written Public Comment
Action: Received written public comment, if applicable.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

REGULAR AGENDA

3. NEW BUSINESS
A. Five-Year Fiscal Forecast and Budget Workshop
Public comment was received from Janet Gray, Dorothy Vriend, Wendy Giles, Andrew Kubica, Mike Gibbs, Mario Salazar, Vincent Tuminello, Irene Krasner, Nancy Parsons, Lisa Ciani, Casie Schoell, Peggy Gibbs, Marsha, Brittney, and Don Murphy.

DRAFT
2 Action: Council received the report.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:32 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
Sandra Kandell
City Clerk
Approved by Mayor: _______________________________Date________________ Attest by City Manager: ____________________________Date_________________ DRAFT
Agenda No. 5 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Minutes of the City Council Closed Session and Regular Meetings for March 22, 2023
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Approve minutes.

Attachments
Draft Minutes
1 DRAFT MEETING MINUTES

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL

CLOSED SESSION MEETING
Wednesday, March 22, 2023, 5:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY (HYBRID).

Join the Zoom Meeting to participate live at:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/692219855

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Peake called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. City Clerk conducted roll call with the following Council present in Chamber: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Action: Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Amelio, Council voted to approve the agenda.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

CLOSED SESSION

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION MATTERS
There was no public comment received.

A. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code § 54956.8) Property: 68 Asilomar (El Carmelo Cemetery)
Agency Negotiator(s): Ben Harvey, City Manager
Negotiating Party(ies): GTE Mobilnet of CA Limited
Under negotiation: Land Lease Agreement for Wireless Telecommunication Facility; Price and Terms of Payment
B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Pending Litigation (Gov. C. §54956.9) Michael Gonzalez v. City of Pacific Grove, California; Police Chief Cathy Madalone; City Manager Ben Harvey; Does 1 -10.

U.S. District Court, Northern District Action No. 5:22-cv-1079 SVK DRAFT
2 DRAFT MEETING MINUTES

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
THIS MEETING WAS ADJOURNED FROM 3/15/2023 TO 3/22/2023 @ 6:00 P.M.

DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS AND POWER OUTAGES
Wednesday, March 22, 15, 2023, 6:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY (HYBRID).

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/209579290

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Coletti led the pledge of allegiance.

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Action: Mayor Peake recommended Regular Agenda item 12A be heard immediately following the Consent Agenda.

Action: Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Amelio, Council voted to approve the agenda as amended.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

2. PRESENTATIONS

3. COUNCIL AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) A. Report on Closed Session by City Attorney
Conference with Legal Counsel – Pending Litigation (Gov. C. §54956.9) Michael Gonzalez v. City of Pacific Grove, California; Police Chief Cathy Madalone; City Manager Ben Harvey; Does 1 -10.

U.S. District Court, Northern District Action No. 5:22-cv-1079 SVK DRAFT
3 This item was heard prior to the other agendized closed session item. Assistant City Attorney Greg Rubens Pierik reported no reportable action was taken.

Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code § 54956.8) Property: 68 Asilomar (El Carmelo Cemetery)
Agency Negotiator(s): Ben Harvey, City Manager
Negotiating Party(ies): GTE Mobilnet of CA
Limited
Under negotiation: Land Lease Agreement for Wireless Telecommunication Facility; Price and Terms of Payment
This item was continued to the April 5, 2022 closed session meeting.

B. Council and staff made general announcements.

4. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
General public comment was received from Liz Jacobs, Vincent Tuminello, Mike Gibbs, Dixie Layne, and Inge Lorentzen Daumer.

A. General Public Comment
Action: Received written general public comment if applicable.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

CONSENT AGENDA
Action: Consent Agenda item 7A was pulled and considered as Regular Agenda item 12C.

Consent Agenda item 9C was pulled and considered as Regular Agenda 12D.

Action: Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Poduri, Council voted to approve the agenda as amended.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

5. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
A. Minutes of the City Council Closed Session and Regular Meetings for March 1, 2023 Action: Approved minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

6. RESOLUTIONS
A. Proposed Resolution amending Paragraph 3 b 3 of Council Policy 000-5 Regarding Residency Exceptions and adding Section 6 to Allow Any Member Of The City Council To Join Any City Committee Email Group
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-006 amending Paragraph 3 b 3 of Council Policy DRAFT
4 000-5 Regarding Residency Exceptions and adding Section 6 to Allow Any Member Of The City Council To Join Any City Committee Email Group.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

7. ORDINANCES
A. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 22/23 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget This item was pulled and considered as Regular Agenda item 12C.

Reference: Tori Hannah, Administrative Services Director/Assistant City Manager Recommended Action: Hold second reading and adopt an ordinance to amend the Fiscal Year 22/23 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

8. REPORTS – INFORMATION ONLY
A. Check Register Report - February 2023
Action: Received the report.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Core Revenue Report - February 2023
Action: Received the report.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

9. REPORTS – REQUIRING ACTION
A. Workers' Compensation Third Party Administration Agreement With Athens Administrators Action: Authorized the Mayor to sign an agreement with Athens Administrators.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. BNRC and Museum Board Appointments
Action: Approved appointments of Andree Brisson to Beautification and Natural Resources Commission (BNRC) with term ending January 31, 2025 and Christine Bertko to Museum Board with term ending January 31, 2027.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
C. Agreement with Pro Forma Advisors, LLC This item was pulled and considered as Regular Agenda item 12D.

Reference: Tori Hannah, Administrative Services Director/Assistant City Manager Recommended Action: Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Pro Forma Advisors, LLC for a golf course study, in an amount not to exceed $25,000.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

10. MEETING MINUTES OF COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES A. Beautification and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes: November 15, DRAFT
5 2022, December 20, 2022, and January 17, 2023
Action: Received minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

12.A. Pacific Grove Summer Lights Special Event
Public comment was received from Chris Evans, Carol Marquart, Lisa Ciani, Vince Tuminello, and Peggy Gibbs.

Action: Upon motion by Councilmember Coletti and seconded Councilmember Poduri, the Council voted to

1. Approve Pacific Grove Summer Lights for inclusion in the 2023-2024 Special Events Calendar;

2. Approve Pacific Grove Summer Lights as a City Sponsored Event and waive the fees for City staff support and equipment/facility usage.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

REGULAR AGENDA

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. First reading of an Ordinance to amend Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code to update the Streets and Sidewalk sections. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacific Grove finding the Parklet Program is categorically exempt project under CEQA guidelines and establishing Parklet Guidelines, and direction to staff regarding proposed Parklet Fees.

Public comment was received from Lisa Ciani, Marsha, Inge Lorentzen Daumer, Jordan Champagne, Steve Lilley, Julie Vivolo Davis, Liz Jacobs, Jenny MacMurdo, Jerry Register, Claudia Sawyer, and Sally Moore.

Action: Upon motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Amelio, the Council voted to

1. Request the Assistant City Attorney to read the title of the ordinance;

2. Introduce and hold first reading of an ordinance amending Pacific Grove Municipal Code Section Title 15, revising 15.01.010h as follows: 15.01.010 Definitions. (h) “Parklet” means the conversion of one or more parallel parking spaces or 3 – 4 angled spaces, that may vary according to the site, context, and desired character of the installation, and are subject to the review and approval of the City engineer under the Parklet Program adopted by the City Council Resolution and amending the appeal period section in 15.01.260 to reference that the Architectural Review Board will be the final decision DRAFT
6 maker on the matter; and

3. Directed that publication of the ordinance be satisfied by publication of a summary approved by the City Attorney.

Action: Councilmember Coletti requested a friendly amendment to 15.01.260 to reference that the Architectural Review Board will be the final decision maker as to parklet decisions only. The amendment was accepted by the maker of the motion Mayor Pro Tem Smith and seconded by Councilmember Amelio.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

Action: Upon motion by Councilmember Beck and seconded by Councilmember McDonnell, Council voted to form a City Council subcommittee comprising of Councilmembers Beck, Coletti, and McDonnell to conclude prior to May 31, 2023.

Motion carried 4-3, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Beck, Coletti, and McDonnell.

NOES: Mayor Peake and Councilmembers Amelio and Poduri.

ABSENT: None.

Action: A motion by Councilmember Poduri and seconded by Councilmember Amelio to continue recommended actions 3. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacific Grove finding the Parklet Program is categorically exempt project under CEQA guidelines and establishing parklet guidelines; and 4. Approve recommended Parklet fees to the Council’s April 5, 2023 meeting failed.

Motion failed 3-4 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake and Councilmembers Amelio and Poduri.

NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Beck, Coletti, and McDonnell.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities

12. UNFINISHED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
A. Pacific Grove Summer Lights Special Event During the Approval of the Agenda, this item was moved and heard immediately after the Consent Agenda.

Reference: Katie Clark, Recreation Manager
Recommended Action:

1. Approve Pacific Grove Summer Lights for inclusion in the 2023-2024 Special Events Calendar;

2. Approve Pacific Grove Summer Lights as a City Sponsored Event and waive the DRAFT
7 fees for City staff support and equipment/facility usage.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Resolution Amending Council Policy 000-9 to Add a Section Regarding Use of Electronic Communication Devices During City Council Meetings
Public comment was received from Inge Lorentzen Daumer.

Action: Upon motion by Councilmember Smith and seconded by Councilmember Coletti, Council voted to adopt Resolution Amending Council Policy 000-9 to Add a Section Regarding Use of Electronic Communication Devices During City Council Meetings, removing the word “family” from Section VIII, second paragraph, first sentence to read, “This policy does not prohibit using an electronic communications device in the event of an urgent matter.”
Motion carried 4-3, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: Mayor Peake and Councilmembers Beck and Coletti.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
C. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 22/23 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget This item was pulled from the Consent Agenda.

No public comment was received.

Action: Upon motion by Mayor Peake and seconded by Councilmember Beck, the Council voted to hold second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 23-003 to amend the Fiscal Year 22/23 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget.

Motion carried 7-0, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, Coletti, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
D. Agreement with Pro Forma Advisors, LLC This item was pulled from the Consent Regular.

No public comment was received.

Recommended Action: Upon motion by Councilmember Coletti and seconded by Councilmember Beck, Council voted to authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Pro Forma Advisors, LLC for a golf course study, in an amount not to exceed $25,000.

DRAFT
8 Motion carried 5-2, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Beck, Coletti, and McDonnell.

NOES: Councilmembers Amelio and Poduri.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

13. NEW BUSINESS
A. Formal Selection of Housing Element and General Plan Update consultant Public comment was received from Andy Kubica, Steve Lilley, Mike Gibbs, Inge Lorentzen Daumer, Lisa Ciani, and Marsha.

Action: Upon motion by Councilmember Amelio and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Council voted to authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to complete the 6th Cycle Housing Element update to the General Plan in an amount not to exceed $227,918.

Motion carried 6-1, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Mayor Peake, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Councilmembers Amelio, Beck, McDonnell, and Poduri.

NOES: Councilmember Coletti.

ABSENT: None.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

14. FULL PRESENTATIONS

15. CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:19 p.m.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Laurel O'Halloran, Associate Planner & Economic Development Coordinator MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Ordinance to amend Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code to update the Streets and Sidewalk Sections CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities

RECOMMENDATION
Hold second reading and adopt an Ordinance to update Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code.

DISCUSSION
There were no substantive changes made between the first and second read. The City Clerk caused a summary of the ordinance to be published on March 30, 2023.

The City's current Parklet Program sunsets on May 31, 2023. At its March 22, 2023 meeting, the City Council introduced and held first reading of an Ordinance to update Title 15 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code and directed that publication of the Ordinance will be satisfied by publication of a summary approved by the City Attorney. The City Council also created a Parklet Program City Council Subcommittee (Subcommittee) comprised of Councilmembers Beck, Coletti and McDonnell for work through May 31, 2023. The Subcommittee will review the draft Parklet Program Guidelines submitted by staff, and return to the City Council with proposed revisions.

Ordinance to Update Title 15
Updating Title 15 of the Municipal Code (Streets and Sidewalks) expands the Encroachment Permit process to allow Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way. Title 15 currently only recognizes utilities. Parklets will be authorized through an annual temporary Encroachment Permit. The Encroachment Permit will be reviewed by staff, with a final decision made by the Director of Public Works. All reviews will be completed in accordance with the proposed Parklet Guidelines and associated design standards. Issuing an Encroachment Permit for a Parklet allows the Parklets to remain temporary and revocable if the Parklet Guidelines conditions are not met. The Parklet operator does not have tenure in their Parklet, and the permit does not run with the land. While staff was updating Title 15 to address the addition of Parklets, other changes providing general code clean up were inserted at the suggestion of the City Attorney's Office and the Public Works Department. These additional updates bring the code current with best practices (red-line version of the proposed Ordinance is attached to this agenda report).

OPTIONS

1. Take no action.

2. Provide alternate direction.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
1 Title 15 Encroachment Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. 23-___

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE AMENDING TITLE 15 OF THE PACIFIC GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING STREETS AND SIDEWALKS; ADDING CHAPTER 15.01 STREET ENCROACHMENTS, AMENDING CHAPTERS 15.08- HOUSE NUMBERS, REPEALING CHAPTER 15.12 CEMENT CONSTRUCTION, REPEALING SECTION 15.16.050-RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION, AMENDING SECTION 15.16.060 CURBS AND ADDRESS NUMBERS, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.20, DRIVEWAYS, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.24 EXCAVATIONS, AND DELETING CHAPTER 15.32- HOUSE MOVING FACTS

1. The City of Pacific Grove (City) and other local agencies promulgated temporary rules to accommodate outdoor dining during the Covid-19 pandemic.

2. The City Manager, acting as the emergency services director pursuant to PGMC Section

3.20.070, implemented a “Parklet Program” that allows businesses to utilize parking spaces for dining and other purposes in a safe environment to encourage and promote sidewalk dining to help improve the local business economy, create a more urban pedestrian environment, and promote and protect public welfare in a healthy and safe manner.

3. On April 21, 2021, in order to clarify the scope and effect of the Parklet Program during the declared emergency created Temporary Outdoor Dining Rules.

4. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title 15 concerns the City Streets and Sidewalks. Chapter 15.01 concerns encroachments in the City Rights of Way. The City approved use of park lets in the City rights of way downtown pursuant to an emergency order and later an ordinance, set to expire on May 31, 2023.

5. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Section Chapter 15.01 is intended to update the City Encroachment Ordinance to allow for differing uses in the Rights of Way other than public and private utilities and provide authority of the City to ministerially approve such encroachments, where appropriate.

6. An amended Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title 15 would specifically allow parklets to temporarily use portions of the right of way where parking now exists, pursuant to a separate Parklet Program to be separately enacted by the City Council.

7. Enactment of this ordinance is subject to a categorical exemption under Section 15301(c) (Existing Facilities). The project is categorically exempt under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the actions identified in the program are limited to the permitting, leasing, and minor alteration of existing public facilities, including existing streets, sidewalks, bicycle and pedestrian trails, which would not result in the creation of additional automobile lanes. The program would result in a negligible expansion of existing commercial uses and a negligible expansion of the public’s use of City right-of-way, as the uses included in the program would not vary from the current uses of commercial businesses, residential areas, or public access within the City’s right-of-way. The proposed project consists of allowing minor site alterations to create temporary ancillary outdoor dining areas or curbside/storefront pick-up areas for existing retail businesses and restaurants. Moreover, encroachment permits issued annually would remain temporary, not permanent uses and subject to initial and annual ministerial approval under a Parklet Program. The project would not have a significant effect on the environment. The City Council, therefore, directs that a Notice of Exemption be filed with the County Clerk of the County of Monterey in accordance with CEQA Guidelines.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Incorporation of Facts. The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing Facts are true and correct and incorporates those Facts here by this reference.

SECTION 2. Revision to Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title 15 is to be amended as and shall read as described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or any part thereof, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any part thereof, or its application to other persons or circumstances. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted each provision, section, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. Effective Date. In accord with Article 15 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective on the thirtieth (30th) day following its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE this 5th day of April 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: ______________________________
NOES: ______________________________
ABSENT: ______________________________
APPROVED: _______________________________
BILL PEAKE, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED:_______________________
_
______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
BRIAN A. PIERIK, City Attorney
Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Title 15 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS

Page 1 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Title 15
STREETS AND SIDEWALKS1
Chapters:

15.01 Street Encroachments

15.08 House Numbers

15.16 Sidewalks

15.20 Driveways

15.24 Excavations

15.26 Telecommunications Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way

15.28 Utility Poles

15.29 Undergrounding Utilities

15.30 Utility Encroachments in Public Rights-of-Way

15.40 Refuse and Storage Containers on City Streets
Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 2 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.01

STREET ENCROACHMENTS
Sections:

15.01.010 Definitions.

15.01.020 Encroachment permit required.

15.01.030 Exceptions to permit requirement.

15.01.040 Right of lawful use by City and others.

15.01.050 Permit applications.

15.01.060 Liability and insurance.

15.01.070 Fees.

15.01.080 Agreement concerning continuing encroachments.

15.01.090 Duration of permit.

15.01.100 Commencement and conclusion of work.

15.01.110 Display of permit.

15.01.120 Inspections-Records-Corrective action.

15.01.130 Changes in permit.

15.01.140 Driveway approach permit-Conditions.

15.01.150 Safety provisions.

15.01.160 Standards, supervision and inspection.

15.01.170 Repair and restoration.

15.01.180 Relocation of encroachment.

15.01.190 Street cut notification.

15.01.200 Public access to facilities.

15.01.210 Street closure-When permission granted.

15.01.220 Coordination of work with other entities.

15.01.230 Pavement.

15.01.240 Prohibitions.

15.01.250 Monuments.

15.01.260 Appeal of denial of permit.

15.01.270 Findings on appeal.

15.01.280 Emergency suspension of permit.

15.01.290 Hearing on emergency suspension of permit.

15.01.300 Suspension or revocation of permit.

15.01.310 Hearing on suspension or revocation of permit.

15.01.320 Civil penalties and attorneys’ fees.

15.01.330 Administrative review.

15.01.340 Authority of Encroachment Officer and inspectors.

15.01.350 Penalties for violation.

15.01.360 Remedies cumulative.

15.01.010 Definitions.
(a) “City Engineer” means the City engineer of the City of Pacific Grove, or his or her authorized representative.
(b) Continuing encroachment” means an encroachment continuing for a period longer than one year. (c) Director of Public Works” means the Director of Public Works of the City of Pacific Grove, or his or her authorized representative.
(d) Emergency street cut” means any street cut by a utility to repair a facility within the right-of-way to remediate an immediate hazard or danger to life, health or property, as determined at the sole discretion of the City Director of Public Works..

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 3 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (e) “Encroach” or “encroachment” includes going upon, over or under a right-of-way, or using a right-of-way or an area adjacent to a right-of-way in such a manner as to prevent, obstruct or interfere with the intended use of that way, or a modification of its mode of use, including but not limited to:
(1) Excavation or disturbance;
(2) Erection, construction, placement, installation, repair, upgrade or maintenance of any physical improvement;
(3) Planting or maintaining any landscaping;
(4) Placement or maintenance of any waste material, except the placement of solid waste or recyclables in authorized receptacles for pick-up in accordance with Chapter 9-16. (f) Encroachment Officer” shall be those persons designated by the Director of Public Works to issue permits as provided herein or to enforce the provisions of this chapter. (g) Landscaping” means any tree, shrub, grass, groundcover, plant, solid landscape feature or growing thing. (h) “Parklet” means the conversion of one or more parking spaces, that may vary according to the site, context, and desired character of the installation, and are subject to the review and approval of the City Public Works Director or designee under the Parklet Program adopted by City Council. (i) “Permittee” means any person that has been issued an encroachment permit pursuant to this chapter. (j) Physical improvement” means any post, sign, pole, fence, guard rail, wall, facility, pathway, sidewalk, driveway, track, surfacing, culvert, drainage facility, pipe, conduit, cable, embankment or excavation. (k) Public street” means the portion of the public right-of-way of any road, street, lane or alley used by or for the general public for travel purposes, including sidewalks and areas between sidewalks and the vehicular travelway, whether or not those roads, streets, lanes and alleys have been accepted as and declared to be part of the City system of public streets, except streets forming a part of the State highway system or County roads or expressways. (l) Right-of-way” means land which by written instrument, usage or process of law is reserved for or dedicated to the public use for street, utility or highway purposes, or other transportation purposes. (m) Street cut” means the action or result, of opening, tearing up, excavating, removing or constructing in any portion of any roadway, street or thoroughfare, sidewalk, driveway, curb or gutter, or any other facility existing within the public right-of-way area for any purpose whatever within the jurisdiction of the City. (n) Utility” means any entity constituting a public utility under State law authorized to use the public streets pursuant to City or State franchise.
(o) Waste material” means any rubbish, brush, earth or other material of any nature which is unused, unwanted or discarded.

15.01.020 Encroachment permit required.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 15.01, it is unlawful for any person to encroach or to make or to cause to be made any encroachment without first having obtained an encroachment permit from the Director of Public Works or the Building Official or their designee. (b) Encroachment permits shall be issued by the Director of Public Works or designee upon such conditions the Director deems necessary to protect the public interest, health, safety or welfare. (c) All obligations, responsibilities and other requirements of the permittee as described in this chapter shall be binding on subsequent owners of the encroachment.
(d) Any encroachment for which a permit is required and for which no permit has been issued pursuant to this chapter shall be deemed a public nuisance under Chapter 1.16 of this code.

15.01.030 Exceptions to permit requirement.

Page 4 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. street cut shall apply for an emergency encroachment permit on the next City business day. The issuance of such permit shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Public Works or designee, based on a determination as to whether the work was necessary to for the preservation of life or property and in compliance with this code. In the event that the City Engineer determines issuance of an emergency permit is unwarranted, the person or persons who performed, or caused to be performed, any such work shall be in violation of this chapter.

15.01.040 Right of lawful use by City and others.
(a) The City reserves all rights to approve and construct municipal improvements under or over facilities or portions of facilities constructed pursuant to encroachment permits. (b) Any permit granted under this chapter shall be subject to the right of the City, or any other person entitled thereto, to use that part of the right-of-way for any purpose for which it may be lawfully used, and no part of the right-of-way shall be unduly obstructed at any time.

15.01.050 Permit applications.
(a) An application for a permit required by this chapter shall be made on a form prescribed by the Director of Public Works or designee. The application shall be signed by the contractor, property owner or other entity performing the work and shall include the following:
(1) The name, address and telephone number of the applicant; (2) The location, purpose, extent and nature of the proposed work; (3) The period of time when the proposed work will be performed; (4) A certificate of insurance for the applicant and contractor’s insurance carrier in a form satisfactory to the City;
(5) All other complete and descriptive information, including plans, specifications and analyses the City Engineer may require describing the work and its effect on the right-of-way, including the mode of operation, maintenance and use;
(6) The written order or consent to work thereunder, where required by law, issued by the California Public Utilities Commission or any other public district, agency or body having jurisdiction; (b) The application for a permit shall refer to, and incorporate by reference, all of the provisions of this chapter. (c) A permit shall not be issued unless and until the order or consent required pursuant to subsection (A) is first obtained and filed with the Director of Public Works or designee. The permittee shall be knowledgeable and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and orders which may in any manner affect the permit.

The permittee shall insure that its agents, employees and contractors are at all times in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and orders.

15.01.060 Liability and insurance.
(a) The permittee shall be responsible for all liability imposed by law for personal injury or property damage proximately caused by: (1) work done by permittee under the permit, including work beyond the scope of the permit; (2) failure on permittee’s part to perform obligations under the permit in respect to maintenance; or (3) the existence of any permitted encroachment. If any claim of such liability is made against the City, its officers or employees, permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold them, and each of them, harmless from such claim and liability insofar as permitted by law.
(b) Before a permit is issued, the applicant, or the contractor who is to perform the work, shall secure, at its expense, a policy of broad form commercial general liability insurance, on an “occurrence” basis issued by an insurer acceptable to the City. If the work to be performed involves any excavation, the policy shall include an endorsement that affords coverage for explosion, collapse and underground hazards. If the work to be performed involves vehicles or vehicular equipment, the insurance must cover any automobile for bodily injury and property damage. The policy shall by endorsement name the City and its officers, employees and agents as additional insureds and shall protect them from claims for personal injury, death or property damage suffered by third persons and arising out of the work performed pursuant to the permit or the manner of installation or construction. The insurance coverage afforded by this policy shall be primary. The policy shall include a cancellation clause requiring the issuing company or its authorized agent to provide a 30-day written notice of cancellation, suspension or modification, to the named certificate holder.
(c) The amount of liability insurance coverage shall be a minimum of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate or $1,000,000 aggregate if the policy separately applies to the permitted project. (d) Workers’ Compensation shall be maintained to meet minimum state requirements.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 5 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (e) A certificate or certificates of the insurance shall be filed with the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any work. The insurance shall be in effect on the date that the work is commenced and shall be maintained in effect until the work has been completed and the work has been accepted by the Director of Public Works.
(f) The City Risk Manager may increase, decrease or waive the insurance limits set forth above in those cases in which he/she determines that special circumstances justify such an increase, decrease or waiver. (g) An applicant seeking to do work himself or herself on the City street or in the public easement immediately adjacent to premises containing only one single-family dwelling or two authorized units, one of which is owned and occupied by the applicant, shall not be required to file with the City certificates evidencing general liability, property damage coverage, or workers’ compensation insurance.

15.01.070 Fees.
(a) All fees required to be paid under the provisions of this chapter shall be established by resolution of the City Council and may be subject to adjustment based on the nature, scope and duration of the proposed encroachment.
(b) In addition to any fees required under this chapter, permittee shall be responsible for payment of any other fees that may be required under this code.
(c) Unless waived in writing by the City Council, fees will be required of any public agency which is authorized by law to establish or maintain any works or facilities in, under or over any public street or right-of-way.

15.01.080 Agreement concerning continuing encroachments.

The issuance of an encroachment permit for a continuing encroachment shall, at the discretion of the Director of Public Works or designee, be contingent upon the execution between the City and the permit applicant, of an agreement providing for the use, operation and maintenance of the encroachment. The agreement shall contain specific conditions for the use, operation and maintenance of the encroachment, insurance and appropriate indemnification clauses to the benefit of the City. Any encroachment permit issued in conjunction with an agreement shall be valid only so long as the permittee is in compliance with the terms and conditions of that agreement.

15.01.090 Duration of permit.

The issuance of an encroachment permit for a continuing encroachment shall, at the discretion of the Director of Public Works or designee, be contingent upon the execution between the City and the permit applicant, of an agreement providing for the use, operation, and maintenance of the encroachment. The agreement shall contain specific conditions for the use, operation and maintenance of the encroachment, insurance, and appropriate indemnification clauses to the benefit of the City. Any encroachment permit issued in conjunction with an agreement shall be valid only so long as the permittee is in compliance with the terms and conditions of that agreement.

15.01.100 Commencement and conclusion of work.
(a) The permittee shall begin the work or use authorized by a permit issued pursuant to this chapter within 90 days from date of issuance, unless a different time period is stated in the permit. If the work is not timely begun, then the permit shall become void, unless a timely extension of time to commence work has been granted by the Director of Public Works in writing. Before beginning any work, which involves or includes excavation, construction of concrete sidewalks, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches, or making, placing or causing an obstruction in the traveled way, the permittee shall notify the City Engineer. (b) The permittee shall complete the work or use authorized by a permit issued pursuant to this chapter within the time specified in the permit and shall notify the Director of Public Works upon completion. No work shall be deemed to be complete, nor shall the work be operated or placed into service, without written authorization, notification of completion, or acceptance by the Director of Public Works. If at any time the Director of Public Works determines that the prosecution or completion of the work or use authorized is delayed due to lack of diligence on the part of the permittee, the permit may be canceled, and the right-of-way restored to its former condition. The permittee shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred by the City in restoring the right-of-way. (c) The Director of Public Works may extend any time period if commencement or completion of the work for which the permit was issued was delayed because of inclement weather, strikes, an act of God or other causes not within the control of the permittee.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 6 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

15.01.110 Display of permit
(a) A copy of any permit issued pursuant to this chapter shall be kept at the site of any construction work pertaining to the encroachment and shall be shown to any authorized representative of the City on demand. (b) An agreement or permit issued for continued use or maintenance of an encroachment involving the residence or place of business of the permittee may be kept at the residence or place of business, or otherwise safeguarded during the term of validity, and shall be made available to an authorized representative of the City within a reasonable time after demand therefor is made.

15.01.120 Inspections-Records-Corrective action.
(a) The Director of Public Works or designee may require the permittee to perform special inspections of and maintain records for certain facilities constructed in the right-of-way. The City also reserves the right to conduct periodic inspections throughout the construction phases of the project and to have access to any pertinent records of the permittee.
(b) Final inspection of construction may be conducted by the Director of Public Works or designee. At the Director of Public Works discretion, permittee may be required to be present. Permittee shall allow reasonable time for the City to prepare and provide a list of items requiring corrective action. Permittee shall undertake timely correction of all such items.
(c) All persons owning underground facilities located in City shall keep current, adequate and complete maps and records of same. Such maps and records shall be made available to the City upon request.

15.01.130 Changes in permit.
(a) No changes may be made in the location, dimension, character or duration of the encroachment, its mode of operation, maintenance, or use as granted by the permit except upon written authorization of the Director of Public Works. All construction and use of materials must adhere to approved plans and specifications. The permittee shall coordinate all construction activities with the Director of Public Works. (b) No additional permit shall be required for the continuing use of encroachments installed by public utilities, provided that such continuing use conform to the conditions of the original encroachment permit.

15.01.140 Driveway approach permit-Conditions.

All persons constructing new buildings shall apply for encroachment permits for both restoration of the curb to its original condition, where old driveways are abandoned, as well as for the installation of a new driveway approach prior to the final acceptance of the building by the building Official of the City, as required in this code.

15.01.150 Safety provisions.
(a) Permittee shall at all times obey and enforce all applicable safety orders, rules and recommendations of the state Division of Industrial Safety and shall comply with all applicable state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations.
(b) During construction, permittee shall immediately remedy all hazardous conditions or nuisances upon receipt of any notice from the City. The Director of Public Works may take any action necessary to remedy any hazardous condition or nuisance if there is insufficient time, under the circumstances, to first provide notice to permittee, or should permittee fail to take immediate and appropriate action upon receipt of notice from the City. (c) Permittee shall provide, erect and maintain any lights, warning sign, signals, flares, patrols and other appropriate safeguards necessary to protect the public during the course of work or maintenance of an encroachment. Where the permit involves excavation, obstruction or similar work within the right-of-way, permittee shall place and maintain lights at 50 foot or lesser intervals, and at each end of the excavation or obstruction, from one-half hour before sunset to one-half hour after sunrise the following day for each day until the right-of-way has been made safe for use. Reflectorized warning signs conforming to the requirements of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices issued by the California Department of Transportation shall be placed at 200 and at 400 feet from each excavation or obstruction to provide adequate warning. (d) Warning signs, lights and other safety devices shall conform to the requirements of the California Vehicle Code and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices issued by the California Department of Transportation, or other recognized, applicable standards.
(e) The standards and requirements set forth in this chapter are intended to be the minimum required standards.

The failure of the City to require any specific safety device or procedure shall not excuse permittee from complying with any other requirements or standards or to take reasonable, appropriate and prudent safety precautions indicated Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 7 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. by the specific circumstances. At any time, the City may provide, erect, relocate or remove any safety device or measure as necessary or cancel the permit and restore the right-of way at the expense of the permittee.

15.01.160 Standards, supervision and inspections.
(a) All work done under a permit shall conform to the specifications and to the conditions of approval established by the City or, in the absence of established specifications, to recognized standards of design and construction and approved practices in connection with the work to be done. All work shall be done subject to the satisfaction and approval of the Director of Public Works. (b) If the work, use or encroachment authorized in the permit issued pursuant to this chapter interferes with the established drainage, the permittee shall provide for proper drainage as directed by the Director of Public Works. (c) Backfilling of an excavation shall be in accordance with the standard details and specifications of the City, or those other specifications required by the Director of Public Works for the particular project, both as to material and method. Backfill shall not be placed in any excavation without compaction of the material used therein, the degree and method thereof to be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. (d) All operation, maintenance and repairs to a continuing encroachment shall conform to the conditions of approval of the underlying encroachment permit, to the terms of any applicable agreement with City, and to established and recognized standards of construction, design, operation and maintenance for the particular type of encroachment.

15.01.170 Repair and restoration.
(a) Upon completion of the project for which the permit was issued, or when required by the Director of Public Works, the permittee shall replace, repair or restore the public right-of-way to its prior condition unless otherwise provided in the permit. The permittee shall remove all obstructions, impediments, material or rubbish caused or placed upon the right-of-way under the permit, and shall do any other work or perform any act necessary to restore the public street to a safe and usable condition.
(b) By the acceptance of the permit the permittee agrees to exercise reasonable care in inspecting and maintaining the area affected by the encroachment after completion of all work. (c) The permittee shall immediately repair any injury, damage or nuisance, in any portion of the right-of-way, resulting from the work done under the permit. In the event that the permittee fails to act promptly or should the exigencies of the injury or damage require repairs or replacement to be made before the permittee can be notified by the Director of Public Works or can respond to notification, the City may at its option make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and the permittee shall be charged with all the expenses incurred in the performance of the work.

15.01.180 Relocation of encroachment.
(a) If any future construction, reconstruction or maintenance work by the City on the right-of-way necessitates the relocation, removal or abandonment of an encroachment, the permittee shall relocate, remove or abandon the encroachment at the permittee’s sole expense.
(b) When relocation is required, the Director of Public Works shall make written demand of the permittee that the encroachment be relocated within the right-of-way to a satisfactory location provided by the Director of Public Works, and shall designate a reasonable time for such relocation or removal. In determining what is a reasonable time under this section, the Director of Public Works shall take into consideration the nature of the encroachment, the urgency of the need for its removal, the cost of its removal, the difficulty of its removal, the value of the property to the owner, and other facts peculiar to the particular situation. If the permittee fails to comply with such instructions, the City may relocate or remove the encroachment at the expense of the permittee. (c) The provisions of this section shall apply to all permittees, including public agencies and public utilities having authority to occupy public rights-of-way pursuant to a franchise or an express provision of state statute, unless in conflict with a franchise agreement with the City, or in conflict with a state statute applicable to a charter city.

15.01.190 Street cut notification.

When the encroachment involves a street cut, the permittee shall notify every public utility having facilities in the vicinity of the street cut regarding the issuance of the permit and its provisions. If a subsurface excavation is required, the permittee shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) and have all utilities located and marked prior to commencement of any work. The permittee shall, upon uncovering any pipe or underground facility not previously located or anticipated, cease work immediately and notify the Director of Public Works. The permittee Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 8 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. shall proceed with the work only after the proper utility has been notified and permission is granted by the Director of Public Works to proceed.

15.01.200 Public access to facilities.
(a) The permittee shall so plan the work as to cause the minimum of interference with traffic and inconvenience to the public and perform all street cut work in a neat and professional manner. Roadways and walks shall not be unnecessarily obstructed. At no time shall a public street be closed, or its function reduced or modified or the use thereof denied in whole or in part to the general public, without the written permission of the Director of Public Works. (b) The permittee shall provide free and unobstructed access to all mailboxes, fire hydrants, water gates, valves, manholes, drainage structures and other public service structures and property that may be required for emergency use. The permittee shall not remove such structures and property or relocate or manipulate them without proper coordination with the authorities responsible for their control and maintenance.

15.01.210 Street closure-When permission granted.

Upon written application, the Director of Public Works may grant written permission to permittee to close or cause to be closed, for limited periods, City streets, driveways or areas not under control of the State or the County if in the opinion of the Director of Public Works the public interest can best be served thereby.

15.01.220 Coordination of work with other entities.

The permittee shall coordinate all street cut work with other entities working in the area so that public convenience is least impaired and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The permittee shall at all times notify the Police and Fire Departments of any and all obstructions and closures within the public right-of-way which might impair or prevent passage of an emergency vehicle.

15.01.230 Pavement.
(a) The permittee shall be required to construct pavement, whether temporary or permanent, in accordance with the standard specifications of the City, unless otherwise specified on the permit. (b) All construction work performed pursuant to a street cut encroachment permit shall be performed by contractors who have current and valid licenses issued by the state of California Contractor’s License Board, for the type of work being performed.

15.01.240 Prohibitions.

It is unlawful to do any of the following:
(a) Store materials used in connection with the work within five feet of a public street, or stockpile materials in the right-of-way, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer. Excess earth materials from trenching or other operations shall be removed from the pavement, travel way or shoulder as the trench is backfilled or other work carried forward unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer; (b) Plant any landscaping across any existing walkway in a sidewalk area or roadway shoulder; (c) Erect or maintain a fence or similar structure in a right-of-way without a permit, except as provided in this chapter;
(d) Erect or maintain a fence or similar structure across any existing walkway in a sidewalk area or roadway shoulder;
(e) Permit or maintain any encroachment of any nature which impedes, obstructs or denies pedestrian or other lawful travel within the limits of a public street, or which impairs adequate sight distance for safe pedestrian or vehicular traffic;
(f) Construct or maintain a freight loading platform upon or in the right-of-way.

15.01.250 Monuments.

No person shall remove or disturb, or cause to be removed or disturbed any monument of granite, concrete, brass, iron or other material set for the purpose of locating or preserving the lines and/or elevation of any public street or right-of-way, property subdivision or precise survey or reference point without first obtaining permission from the Director of Public Works. Permission shall be subject to and in conformance with the requirements set forth in specifications established by the City Engineer. Replacement of removed or disturbed monuments will be at the expense of the permittee
Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 9 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

15.01.260 Appeal of denial of permit.

Any person aggrieved by the denial of a permit required by this chapter may appeal to the Public Works Director or designee, by submitting a written appeal within 15 days of the date the application was denied. The Public Works Director or designee shall thereafter give written notice to the applicant of a hearing to be held within 30 days of receipt of the appeal. The decision by the Public Works Director or designee on the appeal shall be final. For appeals of decisions regarding Parklets, the decision of the Public Works Director or designee may be appealed t the Architectural Review Bord whose decision on such appeals shall be final.

15.01.270 Findings on appeal.

The Public Works Director or designee, or Architectural Review Board where applicable shall grant the appeal and issue a permit, subject to any appropriate conditions, if all of the following findings are made:
(a) That the applicant will be substantially damaged by the refusal to grant the permit as requested; (b) That no other reasonable method of obtaining the desired results is available except as proposed by applicant;
(c) That the granting of the permit will not be materially detrimental to the public interest, safety, health and welfare or injurious to other property;
(d) That the project for which the permit is sought will not adversely affect the safety, capacity, or integrity of the City’s right-of-way;
(e) That the applicant has substantially complied with the provisions of any prior permits issued to the applicant, and has paid or posted all required fees or bonds, and maintained all required insurance coverage; (f) That the environmental effects are not significant; (g) That an additional maintenance cost to the City is not created by the encroachment; (h) That the granting of the permit will not be materially detrimental to the rights, interests or revenues of the City

15.01.280 Emergency suspension of permit.

Whenever the Director of Public Works finds that a suspension of an encroachment permit is necessary to protect the public health or safety from imminent danger, the Director of Public Works may immediately suspend any such permit pending a subsequent hearing for remedial action or revocation. The Director of Public Works shall, within three working days of the emergency suspension of the permit, notify the permittee of such suspension by written notice, personally served upon the permittee, or mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the last known address of the permittee. The permittee may, within 10 days after service of such a written notice of suspension, request a hearing before the Director of Public Works with regard to such emergency suspension. The Director of Public Works shall schedule a hearing on the suspension within 10 days of receipt of a request for hearing.

15.01.290 Hearing on emergency suspension of permit.
(a) If the Director of Public Works, after the hearing, finds that cause exists for remedial action, the director shall impose one or more of the following:
(1) A warning;
(2) An order to correct any particular noncompliance;
(3) A revocation of the encroachment permit;
(4) A continued suspension of the encroachment permit;
(5) A modification or reinstatement of the encroachment permit, with conditions. (b) The director shall, within 10 days of the hearing, render a written opinion, stating the findings upon which the decision is based, and the action taken. The decision of the director shall be final.

15.01.300 Suspension or revocation of permit.

Any permit issued pursuant to this chapter may be suspended or revoked upon recommendation of the Director of Public Works:
(a) The permittee has violated any provision of this chapter, or of any agreement entered into with the City related to the permit; or
(b) The permittee has failed to pay any required fees, or to post or maintain any bond or insurance required by this chapter; or
(c) The encroachment for which the permit was granted adversely affects the safety, capacity or integrity of the City’s right-of-way; or
(d) The encroachment is causing the City to incur substantial additional maintenance costs; or Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 10 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (e) Material misrepresentations were made in the application for the permit.

15.01.310 Hearing on suspension or revocation of permit.

The Director of Public Works shall give the permittee at least 10 days’ written notice of a hearing before the Director of Public Works on the suspension or revocation of a permit issued pursuant to this chapter, setting forth the grounds for such action. The hearing shall be held within 30 days after service of written notice of the hearing.

The decision of the Director of Public Works shall be final.

15.01.320 Civil penalties and attorneys’ fees.

Any person who violates any provision of this chapter, or any provisions of any permit issued or agreement entered into pursuant to this chapter, shall be civilly liable to City in the sum not to exceed $1000.00 for each day in which such violation occurs. The City may petition the superior court to impose, assess and collect such sums pursuant to this chapter. The court, in any action brought by the City either for civil penalties, pursuant to this section, or for abatement of any encroachment which is a public nuisance, shall award to the City its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees in bringing such action

15.01.330 Administrative review.

In addition to any other remedies provided herein, violation of any provision of this chapter shall be subject to an administrative fine or penalty as provided under Chapter 1-30

15.01.340 Authority of Encroachment Officer and inspectors.

The Encroachment Officer and any inspectors acting on his/her behalf shall have authority to enforce any of the provisions set forth herein. In addition, for purposes of the Administrative Review of Ordinance Violations as provided in Chapter 1.16, the Encroachment Officer and any inspectors acting on his/her behalf shall be included within the definition of “Code Enforcement Officer” for purposes of issuing an administrative notice and order.

15.01.350 Penalties for violation.

Any person violating any provision of this chapter, or any permit issued pursuant to this chapter, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punishable as set forth in Chapter 1.16

15.01.360 Remedies cumulative.

The remedies provided for in this chapter shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall be in addition to any and all other remedies available to the City.

Chapter 15.08

HOUSE NUMBERS
Sections:

15.08.010 House numbers required – Map – Assigning – Display.

15.08.010 House numbers required – Map – Assigning – Display. (a) Every house and building in the city shall bear a street number in accordance with the city’s house numbering map, on file in the office of the community development department. (b) The street number of a new house or building shall be that assigned on the building permit for said house or building.
(c) Street numbers affixed to a location on a house or building less than 50 feet from the fronting roadway shall be a minimum of four inches in height. Street numbers so affixed 50 feet or more from the fronting roadway shall be a minimum of five inches in height. Houses and buildings located more than 100 feet from the fronting roadway shall be approved by the fire chief as to the location and position of posted addresses. All numbers shall have a minimum width of one-half-inch stroke.
(d) The numbers shall have or be affixed upon a contrasting background and shall be clearly legible and visible from the roadway.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.08 HOUSE NUMBERS

Page 11 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (e) Street number signs exceeding either (1) two per address, or (2) one square foot per premises in commercial and industrial areas or 124 square inches in residential areas, shall require review pursuant to Chapter 20.04 PGMC. (f) In the case of new construction, renovation or remodel, street numbers shall be posted from the first day of such new construction, renovation or remodel.
(g) A violation of this section shall be an infraction, and may be prosecuted pursuant to Chapter 1.16 PGMC. [Ord. 08-006 § 57, 2008; Ord. 1662 N.S. § 1, 1989; Ord. 833 N.S. § 12, 1975; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-510, 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 12/33
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 13 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.16

SIDEWALKS
Sections:

15.16.010 Definitions.

15.16.020 Sidewalk width, curb lines established.

15.16.030 Repair procedure.

15.16.040 Sidewalk encroachment.

15.16.060 Curbs – Address numbers.

15.16.010 Definitions.

Except as otherwise provided, the following words shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section:
“Curb line” means the established line to which the edge of curb nearest the center of the street shall be constructed. “Encroachment” means any unmovable object that impedes the free flow of pedestrian traffic, and includes but is not limited to such things as walls, fences, hedges, trees, shrubbery or ground cover. “Encroachment” also means gravel, rocks, bark, wood chips or other loosely placed material susceptible to scattering beyond the area of initial placement.
“Gutters” means the portion of roadway adjacent to the curbs. “Retaining wall” means any structure placed for the purpose of retaining earth. “Roadway” means the portion of street between the curb lines. “Sidewalk” means the graded or paved portion of the sidewalk space, and also includes curbing, retaining walls or other works for the protection of the sidewalk space.
“Sidewalk space” means the portion of street between the property line and the nearest curb line. [Ord. 1827 N.S. § 1, 1992; Ord. 1697 N.S. § 1, 1989; Ord. 525 N.S., 1965; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-201, 1952].

15.16.020 Sidewalk width, curb lines established.

The establishment of curb lines and the width of sidewalk space on all public streets shall be fixed by the city through the council. Installation and maintenance of sidewalks shall be in accordance with Council Policy 700-4, “Sidewalk Development.” [Ord. 18-007 § 2, 2018; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-202, 1952].

15.16.030 Repair procedure.

Owners of property abutting sidewalks, or possessors of sidewalks, shall have the duty of maintaining the same and shall be subject to all of the liabilities and procedures prescribed by Chapter 22, Division 7, Part 3, commencing at Section 5600, of the Streets and Highways Code of the state of California. The Streets and Highways Code, Chapter 22, Maintenance of Sidewalks, provides that the owners of lots or portions of lots fronting any portion of the public street are responsible for maintaining sidewalks in a condition which will not interfere with the public convenience in their use. The city shall have all of the rights therein provided, including the right to lien and collection. No person except city employees, or persons under contract with the city, shall install or repair any curb, gutter, corner ramp, or sidewalk within or along any street in the city without having applied for and received an encroachment permit from the city. Utility encroachments shall also be subject to Chapter 15.30 PGMC. Application for any such permit will be made in writing on a form or forms supplied for that purpose by the city. [Ord. 19-002 § 3, 2019; Ord. 18-007 § 2, 2018; Ord. 877 N.S. § 1, 1975; Ord. 285 N.S., 1956; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-203, 1952].

15.16.040 Sidewalk encroachment.

It is unlawful to construct, plant, or maintain any encroachment in a sidewalk space, except for city-sponsored amenities and activities, public utilities, mailboxes, bus shelters and benches.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 14 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

15.16.060 Curbs – Address numbers.

An owner of property may affix the property’s address number to an abutting curb.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.20 DRIVEWAYS

Page 15 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.20

DRIVEWAYS
Sections:

15.20.010 Permit to construct, maintain – Required.

15.20.020 Construction to conform to plans and specifications.

15.20.030 Size for single, double – Number per site.

15.20.040 Distance from crosswalk.

15.20.060 Apron not to extend into street.

15.20.070 Alteration to conform – Procedure – Lien.

15.20.090 Exemption.

15.20.010 Permit to construct, maintain – Required.

No person, firm or corporation shall construct or maintain, or cause to be constructed or maintained any driveway across any public sidewalk or curbing in the city of Pacific Grove without first obtaining a permit therefor from the city engineer. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 1, 1954].

15.20.020 Construction to conform to plans and specifications.

All construction of such driveways shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner and in conformity with the plans and specifications for such work on file in the office of the city clerk, and here referred to for further particulars. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 2, 1954].

15.20.030 Size for single, double – Number per site.

No driveway shall exceed 10 feet for a single driveway or 18 feet for a double driveway on streets 40 feet or more in width, and 12 feet for a single driveway or 20 feet for a double driveway on streets less than 40 feet in width. Only one driveway shall be permitted for any one building site, or for more than one building site when such building sites are in the same block and are used in the conduct of one business. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 3, 1954].

15.20.040 Distance from crosswalk.

In the construction of driveways no curbing shall be disturbed within four feet of the regular street crosswalk. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 4, 1954].

15.20.060 Apron not to extend into street.

No driveway apron shall extend out into the street further than the face of the curb, and under no circumstances shall such driveway apron extend into the gutter area. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 6, 1954].

15.20.070 Alteration to conform – Procedure – Lien.

Any existing driveway violating any of the provisions of PGMC 15.20.020 through 15.20.060 inclusive shall be altered to conform to said sections whenever in the judgment of the council the public interest, convenience or safety requires such alteration; provided, however, that the owner, or owners, of the premises affected shall be afforded an opportunity for a hearing prior to any such alteration or alterations being ordered by the council and at least five days’ notice of such hearing in writing, which shall be mailed to such owner, or owners, by the city clerk, postage prepaid, at the Post Office, Pacific Grove, California, addressed to such owner, or owners at their last known address, or in the event the same is unknown, to General Delivery, Pacific Grove, California, and a similar notice shall be posted on the property affected by the city engineer at least five days prior to such hearing. The failure of the clerk to mail such notice shall not, however, affect the jurisdiction of the council to order said work. Upon such hearing the council shall have jurisdiction to order the work done as noticed and the owner, or owners, shall have 10 days thereafter within which to commence said work and a reasonable time thereafter to complete the same. In the event that said work is not commenced by such owner, or owners, within said period of 10 days the city engineer shall cause the same to be done and upon the completion thereof, the cost bill for the same shall be filed by said city engineer in the office of the city clerk and a copy thereof mailed by said clerk, postage prepaid, to the last known address of said owner, or to General Delivery, Pacific Grove, California, and if the bill is not paid into the city treasury by said owner, or owners, within 10 days thereafter the same shall be and become a lien upon the real property affected or benefited by said improvement and shall be a charge against said property on the tax roll and Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.20 DRIVEWAYS

Page 16 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. shall be collected at the time and in the manner the general municipal taxes of the city are collected, and shall bear like penalties and carry like interest charges for delinquencies. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 7, 1954].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.24 EXCAVATIONS

Page 17 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.24

EXCAVATIONS
Sections:

15.24.010 Permit required – Resurfacing.

15.24.010 Permit required – Resurfacing.
(a) Permit Required. Before any person, firm or corporation may cut any pavement or sidewalk or make any excavation in any public street for the purpose of installing or repairing any sewer, water, gas, electric or other utility pipes, conduits, wires or other structure, he or she shall secure a written permit therefor from the proper city authority, in accordance with any regulations then in effect and pertaining thereto, and shall pay the required fees and deposits.
(b) Resurfacing. After any such cut is made in any pavement, sidewalk or street, the person or firm doing such work shall immediately upon completion of the work, refill, settle and resurface such cut, to the satisfaction of the city manager. If such work is not done satisfactorily the city may complete the same, and such person or firm will be liable to the city for all costs and expenses in completing such work. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-101, 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 18 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.26

TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Sections:

15.26.010 Authority.

15.26.020 Purpose.

15.26.030 Scope.

15.26.040 Definitions.

15.26.050 Administration.

15.26.060 General standards for wireless telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way.

15.26.070 Application submission requirements.

15.26.080 Termination of permit/breach.

15.26.090 Vertical infrastructure controlled by city.

15.26.100 Nondiscrimination.

15.26.010 Authority.

The city derives the authority for this chapter from the City Charter Articles 4 and 5, and Chapter 2.04 PGMC. This chapter, and any rules, regulations, specifications and agreements adopted pursuant to this chapter, complies with all applicable federal and state law. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.020 Purpose.

This chapter establishes a process for managing, and uniform standards for acting upon, requests for the placement of wireless telecommunications facilities within the rights-of-way of the city of Pacific Grove consistent with the city’s obligation to promote the public health, safety and welfare, to manage the public rights-of-way, and to ensure that the public is not incommoded by the use of the rights-of-way for the placement of wireless telecommunications facilities. The city recognizes the importance of wireless telecommunications facilities to provide high-quality communications service to the residents and businesses within the city, and the city also recognizes its obligation to comply with applicable federal and state law regarding the placement of wireless telecommunications facilities in its rights-of-way, and this chapter shall be interpreted consistent with those provisions. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.030 Scope.
(a) In General. Unless exempted, every person who desires to place a wireless telecommunications facility in the rights-of-way or modify an existing wireless telecommunications facility must obtain a wireless placement permit authorizing the placement or modification.
(b) Exemptions. Except as to this section and PGMC 15.26.050, this chapter does not apply to:
(1) The placement or modification of wireless telecommunications facilities on supporting structures owned, or under the control of, the city, the use of which is subject to a contract for use of the facility between the city and the entity or entities that own or control the wireless telecommunications facility. (2) The placement or modification of wireless facilities by the city or by any other agency of the state solely for public safety purposes.
(3) Modifications to an existing wireless telecommunications facility that makes no material change to the footprint of a facility or to the surface or subsurface of a public street if the activity does not disrupt or impede traffic in the traveled portion of a street, and if the work activity does not change the visual or audible characteristics of the wireless telecommunications facility. The city, by wireless regulation, may also exempt wireless telecommunications facilities that otherwise are subject to the provisions of this section from the obligation to obtain a permit to install or modify a wireless telecommunications facility where it is determined that because of the physical characteristics of the proposed facilities, and the work associated with them, such a permit is not required to protect the public health, welfare or safety, to maintain the character of a neighborhood or corridor, or to otherwise serve the purposes of this chapter.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 19 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (4) Installation of a “cell on wheels,” “cell on truck” or a similar structure for a temporary period in connection with an emergency or event, but no longer than required for the emergency or event; provided, that installation does not involve excavation, movement or removal of existing facilities. (5) Installation of a wireless facility on the strand between two utility poles; provided, that the cumulative volume of all wireless facilities on the strand shall not exceed one cubic foot; and provided further, that the installation does not require replacement of the strand, or excavation, modification or replacement of the utility poles.
(c) Other Applicable Requirements. In addition to the wireless telecommunications permit required herein, the placement of a wireless telecommunications facility in the public rights-of-way requires the persons who will own or control those facilities to obtain the franchises and permits required by applicable law, and to comply with applicable law.
(d) Public Use. Except as otherwise provided by California law, any use of the right-of-way authorized pursuant to this chapter will be subordinate to the city’s use and use by the public. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.040 Definitions.

Terms used in this chapter shall have the following meanings:
“Applicant” means a person filing an application for placement or modification of a wireless telecommunications facility in the rights-of-way.
“Application” means a formal request, including all required and requested documentation and information submitted by an applicant to the city, for a wireless placement permit.

Base Station. The term “base station” shall have the same meaning as in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.40001, as may be amended.
“Certificate of completion” means a document that is required from and issued by the city confirming all work described in the application, as approved: (a) was properly permitted, including, without limitation, all required permits for building, electrical work, street or curb cutting, and excavation; (b) was done in compliance with and fulfillment of all conditions of all permits, including all stated deadlines; (c) was fully constructed or placed as approved and permitted; and (d) was finally inspected by the city, and was approved by the city after said final inspection.
“Rights-of-way” means any portion of any road or public way which the city has the responsibility to maintain or manage.
“Support structure” means any structure capable of supporting a base station. “Tower” means any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated site. This definition does not include utility poles. “Underground areas” means those areas where there are no electrical facilities or facilities of the incumbent local exchange carrier in the right-of-way; or where the wires associated with the same are or are required to be located underground; or where the same are scheduled to be converted from overhead to underground. Electrical facilities are distribution facilities owned by an electric utility and do not include transmission facilities used or intended to be used to transmit electricity at nominal voltages more than 35,000 volts. “Utility pole” means a structure in the rights-of-way designed to support electric, telephone and similar utility lines.

A tower is not a utility pole.
“Wireless infrastructure provider” means a person that owns, controls, operates or manages a wireless telecommunications facility or portion thereof within the right-of-way.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 20 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. “Wireless permit” means a permit issued pursuant to this chapter and authorizing the placement or modification of a wireless telecommunications facility of a design specified in the permit at a particular location within the rights-ofway; and the modification of any existing support structure to which the wireless telecommunications facility is proposed to be attached.
“Wireless regulations” means those regulations adopted pursuant to PGMC 15.26.050 and implementing the provisions of this chapter.
“Wireless service provider” means an entity that provides wireless services to end users. “Wireless telecommunications facility” or “facility” means a facility at a fixed location consisting of a base station, any accessory equipment, and the tower, if any, associated with the base station. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.050 Administration.
(a) City Manager. The city manager or designee is responsible for administering this chapter. As part of the administration of this chapter, the city manager or designee may:
(1) Adopt regulations governing the placement and modification of wireless telecommunications facilities consistent with the requirements of this chapter, including regulations governing collocation and resolution of conflicting applications for placement of wireless telecommunications facilities; (2) Interpret the provisions of this chapter;
(3) As part of the foregoing, develop acceptable designs for wireless telecommunications facilities in particular corridors, taking into account the zoning districts bounding the rights-of-way; (4) Issue any notices of incompleteness, requests for information, or conduct or commission such studies as may be required to determine whether a permit should be issued; (5) Develop forms and procedures for submission of applications for placement or modification of wireless telecommunications facilities, and proposed changes to any support structure consistent with this chapter; (6) Collect, as a condition of the completeness of any application, any fee established by resolution of the city council;
(7) Require, as part of and as a condition of completeness of any application, notice to members of the public that may be affected by the placement or modification of the wireless telecommunications facility, and proposed changes to any support structure;
(8) Establish deadlines for submission of information related to an application, and extend or shorten deadlines where appropriate and consistent with federal laws and regulations; (9) Subject to appeal as provided herein, determine whether to grant, grant subject to conditions, or deny an application; and
(10) Take such other steps as may be required to timely act upon applications for placement of wireless telecommunications facilities, including issuing written decisions and entering into agreements to mutually extend the time for action on an application.
(b) Appeal.
(1) Any person adversely affected by the decision of the city manager may appeal the decision to the city council, which may decide the issues de novo, and whose written decision will be the final decision of the city.

An appeal by a wireless infrastructure provider must be taken jointly with the wireless service provider that intends to use the wireless telecommunications facility. (2) Where the city manager grants an application based on a finding that denial would result in a prohibition or effective prohibition under applicable federal law, the decision shall be automatically appealed to the city Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 21 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. council. Otherwise, appeals that involve eligible facilities requests, as defined in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.40001, as may be amended, must be filed within five business days of the written decision of the city manager; all other appeals must be filed within 10 business days of the written decision of the city manager, unless the city manager extends the time therefor. An extension may not be granted where extension would result in approval of the application by operation of law.
(3) Any appeal shall be conducted so that a timely written decision may be issued in accordance with applicable law. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.060 General standards for wireless telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way. (a) Generally. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in this chapter and the wireless regulations, in addition to the requirements of any other applicable law. (b) Regulations. The wireless regulations and decisions on applications for placement of wireless telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way shall, at a minimum, ensure that the requirements of this section are satisfied, unless it is determined that applicant has established that denial of an application would, within the meaning of federal law, prohibit or effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services, or otherwise violate applicable laws or regulations. If that determination is made, the requirements of this chapter and the wireless regulations manual may be waived, but only to the minimum extent required to avoid the prohibition. (c) Standards. Wireless telecommunications facilities shall be installed and modified in a manner that minimizes risks to public safety, avoids placement of aboveground facilities in underground areas, avoids installation of new support structures or equipment cabinets in the public rights-of-way and otherwise maintains the integrity and character of the neighborhoods and corridors in which the facilities are located. City shall ensure that wireless telecommunications facilities are subject to periodic review to minimize the intrusion on the rights-of-way; that the city bears no risk, liability, or expense as a result of the installations; that the facilities do not inconvenience the public, or interfere with the primary uses of the public rights-of-way; and that the facilities do not hinder the ability of the city or other government agencies to improve, modify, relocate, abandon or vacate the public rights-of-way or any portion thereof, or damage or otherwise unduly interfere with other structures in the rights-of-way. (d) Concealment. Permits for wireless telecommunications facilities shall incorporate specific concealment elements to minimize visual impacts, and design requirements ensuring compliance with all standards for noise emissions.

Unless it is determined that another design is less intrusive, or placement is required under applicable law:
(1) Antennas located at the top of support structures shall be incorporated into the structure or placed within shrouds of a size such that the antenna appears to be part of the support structure. (2) Antennas placed elsewhere on a support structure shall be integrated into the structure or be designed and placed to minimize visual impacts.
(3) Radio units or equipment cabinets holding radio units and mounted on a utility pole shall be placed as high as possible on a support structure, placed to avoid interfering or creating any hazard to any other use of the public rights-of-way, and located on one side of the utility pole. Unless the radio units or equipment cabinets can be concealed by appropriate traffic signage, radio units or equipment cabinets mounted below the communications space on utility poles shall be designed so that the largest dimension is vertical, and the width is such that the radio units or equipment cabinets are minimally visible from the opposite side of the support structure on which they are placed.
(4) Wiring and cabling shall be neat and concealed within or flush to the support structure, ensuring concealment of these components to the greatest extent possible. (5) Ground-mounted equipment associated with a wireless telecommunications facility shall be permitted only where consistent with the portion of the corridor in which it is to be placed, and may be required to be underground, located in alleys or otherwise shielded. In no event may ground-mounted equipment interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 22 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (6) No permit shall be issued or effective unless it is shown that the wireless telecommunications facility will comply with FCC regulations governing radio frequency (“RF”) emissions. Every wireless facility shall at all times comply with applicable FCC regulations governing RF emissions, and failure to comply shall be treated as a material violation of the terms of any permit or lease. (7) No towers shall be permitted in the public rights-of-way, and no wireless telecommunications facilities shall be permitted above-ground in underground areas; provided, that the city may permit placements where all elements of the wireless telecommunications facility are concealed, and the facility does not appear to a casual observer to be a wireless telecommunications facility.
(8) No permit shall issue except to wireless service providers with immediate plans for use of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility, or wireless infrastructure providers with contracts with wireless service providers which require the service provider immediately to use the proposed wireless telecommunications facility. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.070 Application submission requirements.
(a) Submission. Unless the wireless regulations otherwise provide, applicant shall submit a paper copy and an electronic copy of any application, amendments or supplements to an application, or responses to requests for information regarding an application to the city manager. (b) Content. An application must contain:
(1) Any information required pursuant to the wireless regulations. (2) The name of the applicant, its telephone number and contact information, and if the applicant is a wireless infrastructure provider, the name and contact information for the wireless service provider that will be using the wireless telecommunications facility.
(3) A complete description of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility and the work that will be required to install or modify it, including but not limited to detail regarding proposed excavations, if any; detailed site plans showing the location of the wireless telecommunications facility, and specifications for each element of the wireless telecommunications facility, clearly describing the site and all structures and facilities at the site before and after installation or modification; and describing the distance to the nearest residential dwelling unit and any historical structure within 500 feet of the facility. Before and after 360-degree photo simulations must be provided. The electronic version of an application must be in a standard format that can be easily uploaded on a web page for review by the public. (4) If the application is an eligible facilities request, within the meaning of 47 C.F.R. Section 1.40001, as may be amended, the application must contain information sufficient to show that the application qualifies as an eligible facilities request, which information must show that there is an existing wireless telecommunications facility that was approved by the city pursuant to this chapter. Before and after 360-degree photo simulations must be provided; which and detailed specification of the (1) An application for a permit shall be submitted in the format and manner specified by the wireless facilities regulations, as applicable. For permits for wireless telecommunications facilities, if no form or manner has been specified, applications must contain all information necessary to show that applicant is entitled to the permit requested. (5) If applicant contends that denial of the application would prohibit or effectively prohibit the provision of service in violation of federal law, or otherwise violate applicable law, the application must provide all information on which the applicant relies in support of that claim. Applicants are not permitted to supplement this showing if doing so would prevent city from complying with any deadline for action on an application. (6) Proof that notice has been mailed to owners of all property within 300 feet of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility.
(7) Any required fees.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 23 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (c) Fees. For wireless telecommunications facilities, applicant must provide an initial deposit and agree as part of its application to pay all costs reasonably incurred by city in reviewing the application, including costs incurred in retaining outside consultants. Fees shall be reviewed periodically and raised or lowered based on costs the city expects to incur, with a review commencing by the first anniversary of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter.
(d) Waivers. Requests for waivers from any requirement of this section shall be made in writing to the city manager or designee. The same may grant a request for waiver if it is demonstrated that, notwithstanding the issuance of a waiver, the city will be provided all information necessary to understand the nature of the construction or other activity to be conducted pursuant to the permit sought. (e) Rejection for Incompleteness. For personal wireless facilities, as that term is defined under federal law, and eligible facilities requests, as that term is defined under federal law, applications will be processed, and notices of incompleteness provided, in conformity with state, and local and federal law. If such an application is incomplete, it may be rejected by a written order specifying the material omitted from the application, or the city may notify the applicant of the material omitted and provide an opportunity to submit the missing material. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.080 Termination of permit/breach.
(a) For Breach. A wireless telecommunications permit may be revoked for failure to comply with the conditions of the permit, franchise or applicable law. Upon revocation, the wireless telecommunications facility must be removed; provided, that removal of support structure owned by city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the right-of-way need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city. All costs incurred by the city in connection with the revocation and removal shall be paid by entities who own or control any part of the wireless telecommunications facility. (b) For Installation without a Permit. A wireless telecommunications facility installed without a wireless permit (except for those exempted by this chapter) must be removed; provided, that a support structure owned by city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the right-of-way need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city. All costs incurred by the city in connection with the revocation and removal shall be paid by entities who own or control any part of the wireless telecommunications facility.
(c) Term. A wireless permit, other than a permit issued pursuant to an eligible facilities request, shall be valid for a period of 10 years. An eligible facilities permit shall expire at the same time the permit for the underlying existing wireless telecommunications facility expires. A person holding a wireless telecommunications permit must either remove the wireless telecommunications facility upon expiration (provided, that a support structure owned by city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the right-of-way need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city); or, at least 90 days prior to expiration, must submit an application to renew the permit, which application must demonstrate that the impact of the wireless telecommunications facility cannot be reduced. The wireless telecommunications facility must remain in place until it is acted upon by the city, and any appeals from the city’s decision exhausted. (d) Municipal Infraction. Any violation of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to Chapters 1.16 and 1.19 PGMC. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.090 Vertical infrastructure controlled by city.

The city, as a matter of policy, will negotiate agreements for use of city owned or controlled light standards and traffic signals in the public rights-of-way. The placement of wireless telecommunications facilities on those structures shall be subject to the agreement. The agreement shall specify the compensation to the city for use of the structures. The person seeking the agreement shall additionally reimburse the city for all costs the city incurs in connection with its review of, and action upon, the person’s request for an agreement. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

15.26.100 Nondiscrimination.

In establishing the rights, obligations and conditions set forth in this chapter, it is the intent of the city to treat each applicant or public right-of-way user in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner, to the extent required Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 24 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. by law, and with considerations that may be unique to the technologies, situation and legal status of each particular applicant or request for use of the public rights-of-way. [Ord. 18-019 § 2, 2018].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.28 UTILITY POLES

Page 25 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.28

UTILITY POLES
Sections:

15.28.010 Regulation of placement on Lighthouse Avenue.

There shall be no telephone, telegraph, electric light, or other light or power poles or posts in or upon Lighthouse Avenue from its intersection with the westerly line of Nineteenth Street to the easterly line of Fountain Avenue, but nothing herein shall apply to the street lighting system of the city for said street. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-102, 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 26 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.29

UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES
Sections:

15.29.010 Definitions.

15.29.020 Public hearing by council.

15.29.030 Designating districts by resolution.

15.29.040 Unlawful acts.

15.29.050 Exception for emergency or unusual circumstances.

15.29.060 Other exceptions.

15.29.070 Notice to property owners, utility companies.

15.29.080 Responsibility of utility companies.

15.29.090 Responsibility of property owners.

15.29.100 Responsibility of city.

15.29.110 Extension of time.

15.29.120 Enforcement.

15.29.010 Definitions.

Whenever in this chapter the words or phrases hereinafter in this section defined are used, they shall have the respective meanings assigned to them in the following definitions:
“Commission” means the Public Utilities Commission of the state of California. “Person” means and includes individuals, firms, corporations, partnerships, and their agents and employees. “Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures” means poles, towers, supports, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, crossbeams, braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances located aboveground within a district and used or useful in supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service.
“Underground utility district” or “district” means that area in the city within which poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures are prohibited as such area is described in a resolution adopted pursuant to the provisions of PGMC 15.29.030.
“Utility” includes all persons or entities supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service by means of electrical materials or devices. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.020 Public hearing by council.

The council may, from time to time, call public hearings to ascertain whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures within designated areas of the city and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or similar or associated service. The city clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned by mail of the time and place of such hearings at least 10 days prior to the date thereof.

Each such hearing shall be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each such hearing all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard. The decision of the council shall be final and conclusive. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.030 Designating districts by resolution.

If, after any such public hearing, the council finds that the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires such removal and such underground installation within a designated area, the council shall, by resolution, declare such designated area an underground utility district and order such removal and underground installation. The resolution shall include a description of the area comprising the district and shall fix the time within which the removal and underground installation shall be accomplished and within which affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service. A reasonable time shall be allowed for removal and underground installation, having due Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 27 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. regard for the availability of labor, materials and equipment necessary for removal and for the installation of such underground facilities as may be occasioned thereby. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.040 Unlawful acts.

Whenever the council creates an underground utility district and orders the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures therein as provided in PGMC 15.29.030 hereof, it is unlawful for any person or utility to erect, construct, place, keep, maintain, continue, employ or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures in the district after the date when the overhead facilities are required to be removed by resolution, except as the overhead facilities may be required to furnish service to an owner or occupant of property prior to the performance by such owner or occupant of the underground work necessary for such owner or occupant to continue to receive utility service as provided in PGMC 15.29.090 hereof, and for such reasonable time required to remove the facilities after the work has been performed, and except as otherwise provided in this chapter. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.050 Exception for emergency or unusual circumstances.

Notwithstanding the provisions of this chapter, overhead facilities may be installed and maintained for a period, not to exceed 10 days, without authority of the council in order to provide emergency service. The council may grant special permission, on such terms as the council may deem appropriate, in cases of unusual circumstances, without discrimination as to any person or utility, to erect, construct, install, maintain, use or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.060 Other exceptions.

This chapter and any resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof shall, unless otherwise provided in such resolution, not apply to the following types of facilities:
(a) Any municipal facilities or equipment installed under the supervision and to the satisfaction of the city engineer; (b) Poles, or electroliers used exclusively for street lighting; (c) Overhead wires (exclusive of supporting structures) crossing any portion of a district within which overhead wires have been prohibited, or connecting to buildings on the perimeter of a district, when such wires originate in an area from which poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures are not prohibited; (d) Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures used for the transmission of electric energy at nominal voltages in excess of 34,500 volts;
(e) Overhead wires attached to the exterior surface of a building by means of a bracket or other fixture and extending from one location on the building to another location on the same building or to an adjacent building without crossing any public street;
(f) Antennas, associated equipment and supporting structures, used by a utility for furnishing communication services;
(g) Equipment appurtenant to underground facilities, such as surface-mounted transformers, pedestal-mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts; (h) Temporary poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures used or to be used in conjunction with construction projects. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.070 Notice to property owners, utility companies.

Within 10 days after the effective date of a resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof, the city clerk shall notify all affected utilities and all persons owning real property within the district created by the resolution of the adoption thereof. The city clerk shall further notify such affected property owners of the necessity that, if they or any person occupying such property desire to continue to receive electric, communication, or similar or associated service, they or such occupant shall provide all necessary facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new location, subject to applicable rules, regulations and tariffs of the respective utility or utilities on file with the commission.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 28 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Notification by the city clerk shall be made by mailing a copy of the resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC

15.29.030, together with a copy of this chapter, to affected property owners as such are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.080 Responsibility of utility companies.

If underground construction is necessary to provide utility service within a district created by any resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof, the supplying utility shall furnish that portion of the conduits, conductors and associated equipment required to be furnished by it under its applicable rules, regulations, and tariffs on file with the commission. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.090 Responsibility of property owners.
(a) Every person owning, operating, leasing, occupying or renting a building or structure within a district shall construct and provide that portion of the service connection on his or her property between the facilities referred to in PGMC 15.29.080 and the termination facility on or within the building or structure being served, all in accordance with applicable rules, regulations and tariffs of the respective utility or utilities on file with the commission. If the above is not accomplished by any person within the time provided for in the resolution enacted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof, the city engineer shall give notice in writing to the person in possession of such premises, and a notice in writing to the owner thereof as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, to provide the required underground facilities within 10 days after receipt of such notice. (b) The notice to provide the required underground facilities may be given either by personal service or by mail. In case of service by mail on either of such persons, the notice must be deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid, addressed to the person in possession of such premises at such premises, and the notice must be addressed to the owner thereof as such owner’s name appears, and must be addressed to such owner’s last known address as the same appears on the last equalized assessment roll, and when no address appears, to General Delivery, city of Pacific Grove. If notice is given by mail, such notice shall be deemed to have been received by the person to whom it has been sent within 48 hours after the mailing thereof. If notice is given by mail to either the owner or occupant of such premises, the city engineer shall, within 48 hours after the mailing thereof, cause a copy thereof, printed on a card not less than eight inches by 10 inches in size, to be posted in a conspicuous place, on said premises.
(c) The notice given by the city engineer to provide the required underground facilities shall particularly specify what work is required to be done, and shall state that if the work is not completed within 30 days after receipt of such notice, the city engineer will provide such required underground facilities, in which case the cost and expense thereof will be assessed against the property benefited and become a lien upon such property. (d) If upon the expiration of the 30-day period, the required underground facilities have not been provided, the city engineer shall forthwith proceed to do the work; provided, however, if such premises are unoccupied and no electric or communications services are being furnished thereto, the city engineer shall in lieu of providing the required underground facilities, have the authority to order the disconnection and removal of any and all overhead service wires and associated facilities supplying utility service to said property. Upon completion of the work by the city engineer, he or she shall file a written report with the city council setting forth the fact that the required underground facilities have been provided and the cost thereof, together with a legal description of the property against which such cost is to be assessed. The council shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing protests against the assessment of the cost of such work upon such premises, which time shall not be less than 10 days thereafter. (e) The city engineer shall forthwith, upon the time for hearing protests having been fixed, give a notice in writing to the person in possession of such premises, and a notice in writing thereof to the owner thereof, in the manner hereinabove provided for the giving of the notice to provide the required underground facilities, of the time and place that the council will pass upon such report and will hear protests against the assessment. Such notice shall also set forth the amount of the proposed assessment.
(f) Upon the date and hour set for the hearing of protests, the council shall hear and consider the report and all protests, if there be any, and then proceed to affirm, modify or reject the assessment. (g) If any assessment is not paid within five days after its confirmation by the council, the amount of the assessment shall become a lien upon the property against which the assessment is made by the city engineer, and the city Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 29 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. engineer is directed to turn over to the assessor and tax collector and record with the county recorder a notice of lien on each of the properties on which the assessment has not been paid. The assessment shall be due and payable at the same time as the property taxes are due and payable, and if not paid when due and payable, shall bear interest at the rate of six percent per annum. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.100 Responsibility of city.

The city shall remove at its own expense all city-owned equipment from all poles required to be removed hereunder in ample time to enable the owner or user of such poles to remove the same within the time specified in the resolution enacted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.110 Extension of time.

In the event that any act required by this chapter or by a resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC 15.29.030 hereof cannot be performed within the time provided on account of shortage of materials, war, restraint by public authorities, strikes, labor disturbances, civil disobedience, or any other circumstances beyond the control of the actor, then the time within which such act will be accomplished shall be extended for a period equivalent to the time of such limitation. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.120 Enforcement.

It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter. Any person violating any provision of this chapter or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and may be prosecuted pursuant to Chapter 1.16 PGMC. [Ord. 08-006 § 58, 2008; Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.30 UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS IN

PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 30 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.30

UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Sections:

15.30.010 Scope.

15.30.020 Administration.

15.30.010 Scope.

Any permanent structure or object of any kind or character placed in, over or under any street, alley, sidewalk, or right-of-way (collectively, the “right-of-way”) by a public utility or entity holding a state or local franchise authorizing right-of-way occupancy shall be subject to the control of the city as to matters affecting the health, convenience, and safety of the general public, including but not limited to matters such as the use and repair of public streets, or the location of the poles, wires, mains, or conduits on, under, or above any rights-of-way within the limits of the city. [Ord. 19-002 § 2, 2019].

15.30.020 Administration.

The city public works director, building official or designee may adopt forms, manuals and regulations or implement practices to ensure that a public utility or entity holding a state or local franchise authorizing occupancy of the rights-of-way bears the risks and expense associated with their use of the rights-of-way; to protect the public health, safety and welfare; to ensure that the construction, installation, maintenance and operation of any facility does not incommode the public use of the rights-of-way; and to control the time, place, and manner in which rights-of-way are accessed. [Ord. 19-002 § 2, 2019].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.40 REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS

ON CITY STREETS

Page 31 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.40

REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS ON CITY STREETS
Sections:

15.40.010 Definitions.

15.40.020 Permit required for storage container or refuse container on city street.

15.40.030 Permits for storage containers.

15.40.040 Permits for large refuse containers.

15.40.050 Permitted use with a valid building permit.

15.40.010 Definitions.

For the purpose of this chapter the following terms shall apply:
“City” shall mean the city of Pacific Grove.
“Large refuse containers” shall mean refuse containers in excess of 100-gallon capacity used for collection of garbage, rubbish and/or refuse, which containers are kept on or placed for collection on any city streets, roadway or alley.
“Storage containers” shall mean any container, storage unit, shed-like container, “portable on-demand storage structures (PODS),” or other portable structure that can be or is used for any purpose and is placed on any public street, roadway or alley. [Ord. 07-019 § 2, 2007].

15.40.020 Permit required for storage container or refuse container on city street. (a) No person shall cause or allow a large refuse container or storage container to be placed on any city street, roadway or alley without first obtaining a permit from the city. (b) Before placing a large refuse container or storage container on any city street, roadway or alley a person must submit an application and receive a permit from the police department. An insurance certificate providing liability insurance in the amount of $100,000 provided by the company supplying the refuse container or storage container must accompany the permit application. The fee for such permit shall be set forth by the city council. [Ord. 07-019 § 2, 2007].

15.40.030 Permits for storage containers.

Storage container permits will be granted for a period of seven days. At the expiration of the seven-day period applicants may seek a one-time extension of their permits for an additional seven days by submitting an extension application for cause to the police department. Permit fees and any fee for extension thereof will be set forth by resolution of the city council. No applicant shall be granted more than two storage container permits within any 12- month period. An extension of a permit shall be deemed to be a second permit. Only one refuse container or storage container unit may be placed pursuant to a permit and permits shall not be granted so as to run either concurrently or consecutively except in the case of an extension. [Ord. 07-019 § 2, 2007].

15.40.040 Permits for large refuse containers.

Large refuse container permits will be granted for a period of seven days. At the expiration of the seven-day period, applicants may seek a one-time extension of their permit for an additional seven days by submitting an extension application for cause to the police department. Permit fees and any fee for extension thereof will be set forth by resolution of the city council. No applicant shall be granted more than two refuse container permits within any 12- month period. An extension of a permit shall be deemed to be a second permit. Only one refuse container unit may be placed pursuant to a permit and permits shall not be granted so as to run either concurrently or consecutively except in the case of an extension. [Ord. 07-019 § 2, 2007].

15.40.050 Permitted use with a valid building permit.
(a) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the use or placement of construction refuse containers or storage containers pursuant to a valid building permit.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.40 REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS

ON CITY STREETS

Page 32 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (b) Persons obtaining a building permit from the city must receive approval from the police department and the community development department for the location and duration of the placement of the refuse container and/or storage container prior to the issuance of said building permit. There shall be no fees associated with the approved placement of the construction refuse container or the storage container with a valid building permit if said container is placed on private property. [Ord. 07-019 § 2, 2007]. .

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 1/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Title 15 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
Title 15
STREETS AND SIDEWALKS1
Chapters:

15.01 Street Encroachments

15.08 House Numbers

15.12 Cement Construction

15.16 Sidewalks

15.20 Driveways

15.24 Excavations

15.26 Telecommunications Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way

15.28 Utility Poles

15.29 Undergrounding Utilities

15.30 Utility Encroachmentsin Public Rights-of-Way

15.32 House Moving

15.40 Refuse and Storage Containers on City Streets
1 Obstructing with goods, etc. – See Chapter 11.32 PGMC.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 2/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.01

STREET ENCROACHMENTS
Sections:

15.01.010 Definitions.

15.01.020 Encroachment permit required.

15.01.030 Exceptions to permit requirement.

15.01.040 Right of lawful use by City and others.

15.01.050 Permit applications.

15.01.060 Liability and insurance.

15.01.070 Fees.

15.01.080 Agreement concerning continuing encroachments.

15.01.090 Duration of permit.

15.01.100 Commencement and conclusion of work.

15.01.110 Display of permit.

15.01.120 Inspections-Records-Corrective action.

15.01.130 Changes in permit.

15.01.140 Driveway approach permit-Conditions.

15.01.150 Safety provisions.

15.01.160 Standards, supervision and inspection.

15.01.170 Repair and restoration.

15.01.180 Relocation of encroachment.

15.01.190 Street cut notification.

15.01.200 Public access to facilities.

15.01.210 Street closure-When permission granted.

15.01.220 Coordination of work with other entities.

15.01.230 Pavement.

15.01.240 Prohibitions.

15.01.250 Monuments.

15.01.260 Appeal of denial of permit.

15.01.270 Findings on appeal.

15.01.280 Emergency suspension of permit.

15.01.290 Hearing on emergency suspension of permit.

15.01.300 Suspension or revocation of permit.

15.01.310 Hearing on suspension or revocation of permit.

15.01.320 Civil penalties and attorneys’ fees.

15.01.330 Administrative review.

15.01.340 Authority of Encroachment Officer and inspectors.

15.01.350 Penalties for violation.

15.01.360 Remedies cumulative.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 3/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (e) “Encroach” or “encroachment” includes going upon, over or under a right-of-way, or using a right-ofway or an area adjacent to a right-of-way in such a manner as to prevent, obstruct or interfere with the intended use of that way, or a modification of its mode of use, including but not limited to:
(1) Excavation or disturbance;
(2) Erection, construction, placement, installation, repair, upgrade or maintenance of any physical improvement;
(3) Planting or maintaining any landscaping;
(4) Placement or maintenance of any waste material, except the placement of solid waste or recyclables in authorized receptacles for pick-up in accordance with Chapter 9-16. (f) Encroachment Officer” shall be those persons designated by the Director of Public Works to issue permits as provided herein or to enforce the provisions of this chapter. (g) Landscaping” means any tree, shrub, grass, groundcover, plant, solid landscape feature or growing thing.
(h) “Parklet” means the conversion of one or more parking spaces, that may vary according to the site, context, and desired character of the installation, and are subject to the review and approval of the City Public Works Director or designee under the Parklet Program adopted by City Council. (i) “Permittee” means any person that has been issued an encroachment permit pursuant to this chapter. (j) Physical improvement” means any post, sign, pole, fence, guard rail, wall, facility, pathway, sidewalk, driveway, track, surfacing, culvert, drainage facility, pipe, conduit, cable, embankment or excavation. (k) Public street” means the portion of the public right-of-way of any road, street, lane or alley used by or for the general public for travel purposes, including sidewalks and areas between sidewalks and the vehicular travelway, whether or not those roads, streets, lanes and alleys have been accepted as and declared to be part of the City system of public streets, except streets forming a part of the State highway system or County roads or expressways.
(l) Right-of-way” means land which by written instrument, usage or process of law is reserved for or dedicated to the public use for street, utility or highway purposes, or other transportation purposes. (m) Street cut” means the action or result, of opening, tearing up, excavating, removing or constructing in any portion of any roadway, street or thoroughfare, sidewalk, driveway, curb or gutter, or any other facility existing within the public right-of-way area for any purpose whatever within the jurisdiction of the City. (n) Utility” means any entity constituting a public utility under State law authorized to use the public streets pursuant to City or State franchise.
(o) Waste material” means any rubbish, brush, earth or other material of any nature which is unused, unwanted or discarded.

15.01.030 Exceptions to permit requirement.

No encroachment permit shall be required for any of the following:
(a) Marquees, awnings and other projecting structures and building appendages over the right-of-way, which comply with the requirements of the current California Building Code for use of public streets and projections over public property, and are part of a building or structure which has been granted a valid building permit in accordance with the applicable provisions of this code; (b) Any sign erected, constructed and maintained in compliance with this code; (c) The actions of any officer or employee of the City engaged in the discharge of official duties; (d) The performance of work under contract to the City; (e) The placement or maintenance of newsracks in compliance with this code or state or federal law; Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 4/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (f) The making of an emergency street cut by a utility to repair a broken or defective pipe, facility or conduit lawfully on or under a public street, or excavating by a utility as may be necessary for the preservation of life and property when an urgent necessity therefor arises when the offices of the City are closed. Any utility making such street cut shall apply for an emergency encroachment permit on the next City business day. The issuance of such permit shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Public Works or designee, based on a determination as to whether the work was necessary to for the preservation of life or property and in compliance with this code. In the event that the City Engineer determines issuance of an emergency permit is unwarranted, the person or persons who performed, or caused to be performed, any such work shall be in violation of this chapter.

15.01.050 Permit applications.
(a) An application for a permit required by this chapter shall be made on a form prescribed by the Director of Public Works or designee. The application shall be signed by the contractor, property owner or other entity performing the work and shall include the following:
(1) The name, address and telephone number of the applicant; (2) The location, purpose, extent and nature of the proposed work; (3) The period of time when the proposed work will be performed; (4) A certificate of insurance for the applicant and contractor’s insurance carrier in a form satisfactory to the City;
(5) All other complete and descriptive information, including plans, specifications and analyses the City Engineer may require describing the work and its effect on the right-of-way, including the mode of operation, maintenance and use;
(6) The written order or consent to work thereunder, where required by law, issued by the California Public Utilities Commission or any other public district, agency or body having jurisdiction; (b) The application for a permit shall refer to, and incorporate by reference, all of the provisions of this chapter.
(c) A permit shall not be issued unless and until the order or consent required pursuant to subsection (A) is first obtained and filed with the Director of Public Works or designee. The permittee shall be knowledgeable and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and orders which may in any manner affect the permit. The permittee shall insure that its agents, employees and contractors are at all times in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and orders.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 5/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (c) The amount of liability insurance coverage shall be a minimum of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate or $1,000,000 aggregate if the policy separately applies to the permitted project. (d) Workers’ Compensation shall be maintained to meet minimum state requirements. (e) A certificate or certificates of the insurance shall be filed with the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any work. The insurance shall be in effect on the date that the work is commenced and shall be maintained in effect until the work has been completed and the work has been accepted by the Director of Public Works.
(f) The City Risk Manager may increase, decrease or waive the insurance limits set forth above in those cases in which he/she determines that special circumstances justify such an increase, decrease or waiver. (g) An applicant seeking to do work himself or herself on the City street or in the public easement immediately adjacent to premises containing only one single-family dwelling or two authorized units, one of which is owned and occupied by the applicant, shall not be required to file with the City certificates evidencing general liability, property damage coverage, or workers’ compensation insurance.

15.01.070 Fees.
(a) All fees required to be paid under the provisions of this chapter shall be established by resolution of the City Council, and may be subject to adjustment based on the nature, scope and duration of the proposed encroachment.
(b) In addition to any fees required under this chapter, permittee shall be responsible for payment of any other fees that may be required under this code.
(c) Unless waived in writing by the City Council, fees will be required of any public agency which is authorized by law to establish or maintain any works or facilities in, under or over any public street or right-ofway.

15.01.080 Agreement concerning continuing encroachments.

15.01.090 Duration of permit.

15.01.100 Commencement and conclusion of work.
(a) The permittee shall begin the work or use authorized by a permit issued pursuant to this chapter within 90 days from date of issuance, unless a different time period is stated in the permit. If the work is not timely begun, then the permit shall become void, unless a timely extension of time to commence work has been granted by the Director of Public Works in writing. Before beginning any work which involves or includes excavation, construction of concrete sidewalks, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches, or making, placing or causing an obstruction in the traveled way, the permittee shall notify the City Engineer. (b) The permittee shall complete the work or use authorized by a permit issued pursuant to this chapter within the time specified in the permit and shall notify the Director of Public Works upon completion. No work shall be deemed to be complete, nor shall the work be operated or placed into service, without written authorization, notification of completion, or acceptance by the Director of Public Works. If at any time the Director of Public Works determines that the prosecution or completion of the work or use authorized is delayed due to lack of diligence on the part of the permittee, the permit may be canceled and the right-of-way restored to Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 6/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. its former condition. The permittee shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred by the City in restoring the right-of-way.
(c) The Director of Public Works may extend any time period if commencement or completion of the work for which the permit was issued was delayed because of inclement weather, strikes, an act of God or other causes not within the control of the permittee.

15.01.140 Driveway approach permit-Conditions.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 7/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (d) Warning signs, lights and other safety devices shall conform to the requirements of the California Vehicle Code and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices issued by the California Department of Transportation, or other recognized, applicable standards. (e) The standards and requirements set forth in this chapter are intended to be the minimum required standards. The failure of the City to require any specific safety device or procedure shall not excuse permittee from complying with any other requirements or standards or to take reasonable, appropriate and prudent safety precautions indicated by the specific circumstances. At any time, the City may provide, erect, relocate or remove any safety device or measure as necessary or cancel the permit and restore the right-of way at the expense of the permittee.

15.01.160 Standards, supervision and inspections.
(a) All work done under a permit shall conform to the specifications and to the conditions of approval established by the City or, in the absence of established specifications, to recognized standards of design and construction and approved practices in connection with the work to be done. All work shall be done subject to the satisfaction and approval of the Director of Public Works. (b) If the work, use or encroachment authorized in the permit issued pursuant to this chapter interferes with the established drainage, the permittee shall provide for proper drainage as directed by the Director of Public Works.
(c) Backfilling of an excavation shall be in accordance with the standard details and specifications of the City, or those other specifications required by the Director of Public Works for the particular project, both as to material and method. Backfill shall not be placed in any excavation without compaction of the material used therein, the degree and method thereof to be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. (d) All operation, maintenance and repairs to a continuing encroachment shall conform to the conditions of approval of the underlying encroachment permit, to the terms of any applicable agreement with City, and to established and recognized standards of construction, design, operation and maintenance for the particular type of encroachment.

15.01.170 Repair and restoration.
(a) Upon completion of the project for which the permit was issued, or when required by the Director of Public Works, the permittee shall replace, repair or restore the public right-of-way to its prior condition unless otherwise provided in the permit. The permittee shall remove all obstructions, impediments, material or rubbish caused or placed upon the right-of-way under the permit, and shall do any other work or perform any act necessary to restore the public street to a safe and usable condition. (b) By the acceptance of the permit the permittee agrees to exercise reasonable care in inspecting and maintaining the area affected by the encroachment after completion of all work. (c) The permittee shall immediately repair any injury, damage or nuisance, in any portion of the right-ofway, resulting from the work done under the permit. In the event that the permittee fails to act promptly or should the exigencies of the injury or damage require repairs or replacement to be made before the permittee can be notified by the Director of Public Works or can respond to notification, the City may at its option make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and the permittee shall be charged with all the expenses incurred in the performance of the work.

15.01.180 Relocation of encroachment.
(a) If any future construction, reconstruction or maintenance work by the City on the right-of-way necessitates the relocation, removal or abandonment of an encroachment, the permittee shall relocate, remove or abandon the encroachment at the permittee’s sole expense. (b) When relocation is required, the Director of Public Works shall make written demand of the permittee that the encroachment be relocated within the right-of-way to a satisfactory location provided by the Director of Public Works, and shall designate a reasonable time for such relocation or removal. In determining what is a reasonable time under this section, the Director of Public Works shall take into consideration the nature of the encroachment, the urgency of the need for its removal, the cost of its removal, the difficulty of its removal, the value of the property to the owner, and other facts peculiar to the particular situation. If the permittee fails to comply with such instructions, the City may relocate or remove the encroachment at the expense of the permittee. (c) The provisions of this section shall apply to all permittees, including public agencies and public utilities having authority to occupy public rights-of-way pursuant to a franchise or an express provision of state statute, Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 8/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. unless in conflict with a franchise agreement with the City, or in conflict with a state statute applicable to a charter city.

15.01.190 Street cut notification.

When the encroachment involves a street cut, the permittee shall notify every public utility having facilities in the vicinity of the street cut regarding the issuance of the permit and its provisions. If a subsurface excavation is required, the permittee shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) and have all utilities located and marked prior to commencement of any work. The permittee shall, upon uncovering any pipe or underground facility not previously located or anticipated, cease work immediately and notify the Director of Public Works. The permittee shall proceed with the work only after the proper utility has been notified and permission is granted by the Director of Public Works to proceed.

15.01.210 Street closure-When permission granted.

15.01.220 Coordination of work with other entities.

The permittee shall coordinate all street cut work with other entities working in the area so that public convenience is least impaired and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The permittee shall at all times notify the Police and Fire Departments of any and all obstructions and closures within the public right-ofway which might impair or prevent passage of an emergency vehicle.

15.01.240 Prohibitions.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 9/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

15.01.250 Monuments.

15.01.260 Appeal of denial of permit.

5.01.270 Findings on appeal.

The Director of Public Works or designee, or Architectural Review Board where applicable shall grant the appeal and issue a permit, subject to any appropriate conditions, if all of the following findings are made:
(a) That the applicant will be substantially damaged by the refusal to grant the permit as requested; (b) That no other reasonable method of obtaining the desired results is available except as proposed by applicant;
(c) That the granting of the permit will not be materially detrimental to the public interest, safety, health and welfare or injurious to other property;
(d) That the project for which the permit is sought will not adversely affect the safety, capacity, or integrity of the City’s right-of-way;
(e) That the applicant has substantially complied with the provisions of any prior permits issued to the applicant, and has paid or posted all required fees or bonds, and maintained all required insurance coverage; (f) That the environmental effects are not significant; (g) That an additional maintenance cost to the City is not created by the encroachment; (h) That the granting of the permit will not be materially detrimental to the rights, interests or revenues of the City

15.01.280 Emergency suspension of permit.

The Director of Public Works shall schedule a hearing on the suspension within 10 days of receipt of a request for hearing.

15.01.300 Suspension or revocation of permit.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 10/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Any permit issued pursuant to this chapter may be suspended or revoked upon recommendation of the Director of Public Works:
(a) The permittee has violated any provision of this chapter, or of any agreement entered into with the City related to the permit; or
(b) The permittee has failed to pay any required fees, or to post or maintain any bond or insurance required by this chapter; or
(c) The encroachment for which the permit was granted adversely affects the safety, capacity or integrity of the City’s right-of-way; or
(d) The encroachment is causing the City to incur substantial additional maintenance costs; or (e) Material misrepresentations were made in the application for the permit.

15.01.310 Hearing on suspension or revocation of permit.

15.01.320 Civil penalties and attorneys’ fees.

15.01.330 Administrative review.

In addition to any other remedies provided herein, violation of any provision of this chapter shall be subject to an administrative fine or penalty as provided under Chapter 1-30

15.01.340 Authority of Encroachment Officer and inspectors.

15.01.350 Penalties for violation.

15.01.360 Remedies cumulative.

The remedies provided for in this chapter shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall be in addition to any and all other remedies available to the City.

Chapter 15.08

HOUSE NUMBERS
Sections:

15.08.010 House numbers required – Map – Assigning – Display.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 11/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (b) The street number of a new house or building shall be that assigned on the building permit for said house or building.
(c) Street numbers affixed to a location on a house or building less than 50 feet from the fronting roadway shall be a minimum of four inches in height. Street numbers so affixed 50 feet or more from the fronting roadway shall be a minimum of five inches in height. Houses and buildings located more than 100 feet from the fronting roadway shall be approved by the fire chief as to the location and position of posted addresses. All numbers shall have a minimum width of one-half-inch stroke.
(d) The numbers shall have or be affixed upon a contrasting background and shall be clearly legible and visible from the roadway.
(e) Street number signs exceeding either (1) two per address, or (2) one square foot per premises in commercial and industrial areas or 124 square inches in residential areas, shall require review pursuant to Chapter 20.04 PGMC. (f) In the case of new construction, renovation or remodel, street numbers shall be posted from the first day of such new construction, renovation or remodel.
(g) A violation of this section shall be an infraction, and may be prosecuted pursuant to Chapter 1.16 PGMC. [Ord. 08-006 § 57, 2008; Ord. 1662 N.S. § 1, 1989; Ord. 833 N.S. § 12, 1975; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-510, 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code Page 12/35
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.12

CEMENT CONSTRUCTION
Sections:

15.12.010 Compliance with state standards.

All portland cement concrete construction work on all public property, within the city of Pacific Grove, shall conform to the appropriate section, or sections, of “Standard Specifications” published by the state of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways, dated January, 1949, and any subsequent amendments thereto. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-511, 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 13 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.16

SIDEWALKS
Sections:

15.16.010 Definitions.

15.16.020 Sidewalk width, curb lines established.

15.16.030 Repair procedure.

15.16.040 Sidewalk encroachment.

15.16.045 Sidewalk seating and sidewalk dining. Suspended Ord. 22-006

15.16.050 Retaining wall construction.

15.16.060 Curbs – Address numbers.

15.16.010 Definitions.

15.16.020 Sidewalk width, curb lines established.

15.16.030 Repair procedure.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 14 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

15.16.040 Sidewalk encroachment.

It is unlawful to construct, plant, or maintain any encroachment in a sidewalk space, except for city-sponsored amenities and activities, public utilities, mailboxes, bus shelters and benches, and except as permitted under PGMC

15.16.045. [Ord. 15-005 § 3, 2015].

15.16.045 Sidewalk seating and sidewalk dining. Suspension Ord. 22-006 The zoning administrator, after holding a duly noticed public hearing, shall have the authority to allow, deny, or condition placement of tables, chairs, benches, and other normally associated furniture to encroach on public sidewalks abutting eating establishments for sidewalk dining purposes within all commercial zoning districts, subject to the following restrictions and conditions:
(a) Tables, chairs, benches, umbrellas, waiter stands, barriers, tray stands, planters, trash receptacles, and other furniture normally associated with dining (collectively hereafter, for convenience, “furniture”) may be placed on the sidewalk but shall not be placed so as to obstruct the minimum unobstructed pedestrian travel width of the sidewalk defined as a minimum of five feet. All applicable Americans with Disabilities (ADA) requirement minimums shall be met. Sidewalk dining furniture placed on the sidewalk shall be of a consistent design and employ similar materials and colors as approved by the city to complement all other approved sidewalk furniture and fixtures, such as street lights and bicycle racks, throughout the city. (b) Furniture shall not be attached, drilled into, adhered to, chained to, or otherwise affixed to the sidewalk, tree, pole, or other furniture, or to any permanent structure or building. (c) Sidewalk dining furniture shall be placed immediately adjacent to and abutting the eating establishment and shall not be placed adjacent to the curb. Exceptions to this requirement may be made for self-serve seating (i.e., no table service).
(d) Eating establishments serving alcohol shall delineate and separate the sidewalk dining area with a painted line on the sidewalk surface delineating the allowable area for the sidewalk dining establishment as defined below in subsection (h) of this section approved by the zoning administrator. Eating establishments that do not serve alcohol are not permitted to delineate the sidewalk dining area with a barrier in order to keep the appearance of an open sidewalk.
(e) The line shall be painted a color and width specified by the zoning administrator. (f) Eating establishments, and all others, are prohibited from making any modification to the public sidewalk. Minor patching of holes and cracks, and the elimination of trip and fall hazards, are to be referred to the public works department for modification.
(g) Use of sound amplification on the exterior of an eating establishment is prohibited. (h) Sidewalk dining and associated furniture as listed in subsection (a) of this section is prohibited on any public sidewalk that is less than seven feet wide unless the storefront is set back from the back of sidewalk. Further, sidewalk dining and associated furniture shall not occupy more than 45 percent of the gross total width of any public sidewalk.
(i) The eating establishment placing the furniture shall provide proof of public liability insurance, naming the city as an additional insured, in the amount and form subject to approval of the city attorney. (j) Businesses placing furniture shall be responsible for keeping the furniture and immediately surrounding area clean and presentable at all times, and to this end shall promptly clean and remove all litter, spillage, and other materials.
(k) Approved sidewalk dining permits allowing placement of furniture or associated furniture may be revoked by the zoning administrator at any time, for violation of any of these restrictions or conditions. (l) Application for sidewalk dining and placement of furniture shall be made on a form provided by the community and economic development department. The zoning administrator may refer the application to any city department, Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 15 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. commission or committee for a recommendation. The decision of the zoning administrator shall be subject to direct appeal to the planning commission in accord with PGMC 23.74.020(b) and 23.74.030. (m) At least 10 days prior to the zoning administrator’s public hearing on the sidewalk dining permit, the property abutting the sidewalk location shall be posted with notice of the request for and pending decision on the permit. Two identical notices shall be posted on public property within 200 feet of the property site in positions clearly visible to the public.
(n) Sidewalk dining permits are interruptible and terminable licenses for use granted by the city. No property interest shall be conveyed to the eating establishment or to any other person. The city shall have the right and power, acting through the zoning administrator, to revoke, prohibit, or limit operation and use of a sidewalk dining permit at any time by reason of anticipated, threatened, or actual problems or conflicts in the use for the sidewalk area. Such circumstances may arise from, but are not limited to, changing patterns of sidewalk use, scheduled festivals or similar events, parades or marches, repairs to the street or sidewalk, or for any other reason. (o) Sidewalk dining furniture, equipment, and other amenities must be removed from the public sidewalk dining area for extended periods of eating establishment closure (two weeks or more). The city may require removal during special events, etc. The city shall have the right to unilaterally remove unapproved exterior furniture and/or equipment from the sidewalk dining space, and costs of removal shall be borne by the eating establishment. (p) Sidewalk dining furniture, equipment, and other amenities shall be constructed of metal, unless an alternative material is approved in advance by the zoning administrator. (q) Each eating establishment may use umbrellas provided each shall maintain the seven-foot minimum sidewalk clearance for the entire height of the umbrella. The base weight of the umbrella shall be of appropriate size and design to avoid tipping over in the wind. Freestanding gas heaters shall not be utilized where umbrellas are present, for fire safety. Umbrellas shall not bear commercial logos. (r) Each sidewalk dining permit shall require payment of two fees: (1) the general encroachment permit fee (a onetime fee for placing furniture on the public sidewalk); and (2) an annual sidewalk dining license fee associated with continued use of the public sidewalk. The city council shall set both fees by resolution in its master fee schedule. (s) Applications for each sidewalk dining permit must submit:
(1) Description. A brief written description to include the name and address of the eating establishment, a description of the proposed sidewalk dining space, the number of tables and seats, whether the eating establishments intends to serve alcohol, and whether water credits or water allocations are needed for the proposed permit.
(2) Site Plan. A plan, drawn to scale, showing the proposed sidewalk dining space including all tables, seats, associated furniture, and barrier lines; the plan shall show all sidewalk clearance dimensions and elevations.

Specifications shall be provided for any sidewalk heaters. (3) Photos or Drawings. Color photos, renderings, and/or graphics shall show the setup, type of furniture, and materials to be used for all surfaces, including barrier lines or umbrellas. (t) The zoning administrator is authorized to place or modify conditions under this section on sidewalk dining adjacent to eating establishments to promote public health and/or safety, or to address unique site factors that apply to a specific location.
(u) Sidewalk dining permits and/or encroachment permits issued under this section do not afford an exclusive right for use by the eating establishment or its patrons. The general public may make reasonable temporary use of the area and furniture at that location provided this public use does not interfere with the sidewalk dining use. [Ord. 17-008 § 3, 2017; Ord. 16-004 § 3, 2016; Ord. 13-003 § 7, 2013].

15.16.050 Retaining wall construction.

All retaining walls and fences require a building permit. Retaining walls shall be constructed as follows:

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.16 SIDEWALKS

Page 16 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. (a) For heights up to 12 inches, there are no construction requirements. (b) For heights from 12 to 36 inches, retaining walls must be of permanent type material. Detailed plans and reinforcing steel are recommended but not required under ordinary conditions. (c) For heights from 36 inches, a continuous concrete footing is required, with a width equal to not less than onethird the height of the wall, and a thickness of not less than eight inches. The entire footing should be below the grade of undisturbed soil, or other method of keying giving equivalent resistance should be provided. (d) The minimum thickness of the wall for concrete or masonry shall be eight inches. All hollow masonry walls shall be poured solid with grout and contain one-half-inch reinforcing bars 24 inches center to center horizontally and vertically with one bar in the top bond beam. A building permit is required and a plan must be provided showing the location of the wall on the site, any surcharge, and detailing a section of the wall at its maximum height. (e) For heights of 72 inches and over, permits will be issued only on designs of a registered engineer or architect. (f) Drainage must be provided to carry trapped water by pipe from behind a retaining wall to the face of the curb and constructed so as not to create an unsafe condition.

Variations from the above may be granted if built in conformance with engineered plans. A copy of said plan must be on file in the community development department. No fee shall be charged for building permits issued for fences, and no fee shall be charged for retaining walls up to 12 inches in height. [Ord. 525 N.S. § 3, 1965].

15.16.060 Curbs – Address numbers.

An owner of property may affix the property’s address number to an abutting curb., subject to the following restrictions:
(a) The color, size of numerals, paint or other substance used to so affix, and location of the address number on the curb shall be as established by the director of public works. (b) Any person proposing to affix an address number shall first obtain the permission of the public works director. (c) Any person in the business of affixing address numbers shall be required to obtain other appropriate permits, including, without limitation, a business license and solicitor’s license. (d) The provisions of this section shall not be construed to excuse the requirement, found at Chapter 15.08 PGMC, that house numbers shall be affixed to a location on a building or house on a property. [Ord. 96-17 § 1, 1996].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.20 DRIVEWAYS

Page 17 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.20

DRIVEWAYS
Sections:

15.20.010 Permit to construct, maintain – Required.

15.20.020 Construction to conform to plans and specifications.

15.20.030 Size for single, double – Number per site.

15.20.040 Distance from crosswalk.

15.20.050 Adjoining driveways – Safety space between.

15.20.060 Apron not to extend into street.

15.20.070 Alteration to conform – Procedure – Lien.

15.20.080 Variance.

15.20.090 Exemption.

15.20.010 Permit to construct, maintain – Required.

15.20.020 Construction to conform to plans and specifications.

15.20.030 Size for single, double – Number per site.

15.20.040 Distance from crosswalk.

In the construction of driveways no curbing shall be disturbed within four feet of the regular street crosswalk. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 4, 1954].

15.20.050 Adjoining driveways – Safety space between.

Where two or more adjoining driveways are provided for the same property, a safety island space of at least 20 feet measured along the outer or street edge of the sidewalk shall be provided between said driveways. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 5, 1954].

15.20.060 Apron not to extend into street.

No driveway apron shall extend out into the street further than the face of the curb, and under no circumstances shall such driveway apron extend into the gutter area. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 6, 1954].

15.20.070 Alteration to conform – Procedure – Lien.

Page 18 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022. event that said work is not commenced by such owner, or owners, within said period of 10 days the city engineer shall cause the same to be done and upon the completion thereof, the cost bill for the same shall be filed by said city engineer in the office of the city clerk and a copy thereof mailed by said clerk, postage prepaid, to the last known address of said owner, or to General Delivery, Pacific Grove, California, and if the bill is not paid into the city treasury by said owner, or owners, within 10 days thereafter the same shall be and become a lien upon the real property affected or benefited by said improvement and shall be a charge against said property on the tax roll and shall be collected at the time and in the manner the general municipal taxes of the city are collected, and shall bear like penalties and carry like interest charges for delinquencies. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 7, 1954].

15.20.080 Variance.

Nothing contained herein shall prohibit the owner of any property, where exceptional circumstances exist, from applying to the planning commission of the city for variances from the terms of PGMC 15.20.020 through 15.20.070 inclusive, after first obtaining the recommendation of the city manager and/or city engineer. [Ord. 249 N.S. § 8, 1954].

15.20.090 Exemption.

The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to developments being considered by the community development department under application for use permit., in cases where a use permit is required and where the planning commission prescribes the driveway requirements for the project in granting the use permit. The planning commission shall adhere to the general purposes of this chapter in prescribing driveway requirements. [Ord. 717 N.S. § 1, 1972].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.19 EXCAVATIONS

Page 19 ends

Chapter 15.19
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

EXCAVATIONS
Sections:

15.24.010 Permit required – Resurfacing.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 20 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.26

TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Sections:

15.26.010 Authority.

15.26.020 Purpose.

15.26.030 Scope.

15.26.040 Definitions.

15.26.050 Administration.

15.26.060 General standards for wireless telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way.

15.26.070 Application submission requirements.

15.26.080 Termination of permit/breach.

15.26.090 Vertical infrastructure controlled by city.

15.26.100 Nondiscrimination.

15.26.010 Authority.

15.26.020 Purpose.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 21 ends

15.26.040 Definitions.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 22 ends

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 23 ends

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 24 ends

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.26 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 25 ends

15.26.090 Vertical infrastructure controlled by city.

15.26.100 Nondiscrimination.

IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 26 ends

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.28 UTILITY POLES

Page 27 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.28

UTILITY POLES
Sections:

15.28.010 Regulation of placement on Lighthouse Avenue.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 28 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.29

UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES
Sections:

15.29.010 Definitions.

15.29.020 Public hearing by council.

15.29.030 Designating districts by resolution.

15.29.040 Unlawful acts.

15.29.050 Exception for emergency or unusual circumstances.

15.29.060 Other exceptions.

15.29.070 Notice to property owners, utility companies.

15.29.080 Responsibility of utility companies.

15.29.090 Responsibility of property owners.

15.29.100 Responsibility of city.

15.29.110 Extension of time.

15.29.120 Enforcement.

15.29.010 Definitions.

15.29.020 Public hearing by council.

15.29.030 Designating districts by resolution.

Page 29 ends

15.29.040 Unlawful acts.

15.29.050 Exception for emergency or unusual circumstances.

15.29.060 Other exceptions.

15.29.070 Notice to property owners, utility companies.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.29 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES

Page 30 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Notification by the city clerk shall be made by mailing a copy of the resolution adopted pursuant to PGMC

15.29.030, together with a copy of this chapter, to affected property owners as such are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities. [Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

15.29.080 Responsibility of utility companies.

Page 31 ends

15.29.100 Responsibility of city.

15.29.110 Extension of time.

15.29.120 Enforcement.

It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter. Any person violating any provision of this chapter or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be prosecuted pursuant to Chapter 1.16 PGMC. [Ord. 08-006 § 58, 2008; Ord. 598 N.S. § 1, 1968].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.32 UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS IN

PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY

Page 32 ends

Chapter 15.32
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

UTILITY ENCROACHMENTS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Sections:

15.30.010 Scope.

15.30.020 Administration.

15.30.010 Scope.

15.30.020 Administration.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.33 HOUSE MOVING

Page 33 ends

Chapter 15.33
The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

HOUSE MOVING
Sections:

15.32.010 Permit – Required – Deposit.

15.32.020 Deposit – Refund.

15.32.030 Notification of wire cutting – Duty.

15.32.040 Reimbursing city for damage.

15.32.050 Permit to specify location – Traffic not to be obstructed.

15.32.060 Owner liable for street damage.

15.32.010 Permit – Required – Deposit.

It is unlawful for any person to move any house, building, or other structure into, through, along, or across any public street, square, or place, without having first obtained a permit from the proper city authority, and deposited with the city treasurer a fee as established by resolution of the council. The sum shall be used for the purpose of paying for any damage caused by the moving of the building or other structure where such moving will necessitate the cutting or other interfering with any line or wire of any telegraph, telephone, electric light or power company, including the establishment of temporary connections, where necessary, and the restoration after the completion of such moving of the lines or wires to their former position. Any such damages shall be paid by the city treasurer out of the fund, upon a verified claim therefor duly filed within 10 days thereafter with the city treasurer, who must present the same to the council at its next regular meeting. If upon a hearing thereof, the council deems the applicant entitled to the whole or any part thereof, such claim shall be paid out of said funds so deposited with the treasurer.

Should there be an insufficient amount of money deposited to pay all of said claims, the council shall order the claims paid pro rata. [Ord. 1765 N.S. § 9, 1991; Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(1), 1952].

15.32.020 Deposit – Refund.

If no claim is filed within 10 days after the moving of any building or structure, or if there is a surplus after all claims are paid, the city treasurer shall deliver the money deposited or the certified check or such portions thereof as remains after paying all claims, upon demand therefor, to the party or parties depositing the same. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(2), 1952].

15.32.030 Notification of wire cutting – Duty.

It shall be the duty of the applicant, immediately upon obtaining the permit provided for in this chapter, to notify the person, firm or corporation whose line or lines, wire or wires, are to be cut or interfered with in such moving or interference, of such permit and of the date when such moving or interference will take place.

Such notice must be served at least 24 hours before such moving, cutting or interference with said lines will be commenced or become necessary. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(3, 4), 1952].

15.32.040 Reimbursing city for damage.

It shall be incumbent upon the owner of the house or structure being moved, to reimburse the city for any damage done to any public buildings, streets, alleys, ways, or sidewalks, and to reimburse the owner of any private property of whatever nature that may be damaged through the moving of said house or structure. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(5), 1952].

15.32.050 Permit to specify location – Traffic not to be obstructed.

No permit to move any house, building, or structure into, through, along, or across any public street, alley, square, or place shall be issued unless such street, alley, square or place shall be mentioned and described in the permit provided for in this chapter. Moving shall be performed and carried on in a manner and time so as not to wholly obstruct vehicular traffic upon such street, alley, square or place. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(6), 1952].

15.32.060 Owner liable for street damage.

The owner of such house or structure will be liable for any or all damages caused by the occupancy of the street by the house or structure. [Ord. 210 N.S. § 5-503(7), 1952].

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.40 REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS

ON CITY STREETS

Page 34 ends

The Pacific Grove Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 22-022, and legislation passed through December 7, 2022.

Chapter 15.40

REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS ON CITY STREETS
Sections:

15.40.010 Definitions.

15.40.020 Permit required for storage container or refuse container on city street.

15.40.030 Permits for storage containers.

15.40.040 Permits for large refuse containers.

15.40.050 Permitted use with a valid building permit.

15.40.010 Definitions.

15.40.030 Permits for storage containers.

15.40.040 Permits for large refuse containers.

Pacific Grove Municipal Code
Chapter 15.40 REFUSE AND STORAGE CONTAINERS

ON CITY STREETS

Page 35 ends

Agenda No. 8 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joe Amelio, Councilmember
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Monterey-Salinas Transit Minutes: February 13, 2023 CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive minutes.

Attachments
MST Minutes

Agenda No. 8 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Chaps Poduri, Councilmember
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Civicwell Policymakers Conference
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive report.

DISCUSSION
Civicwell (formerly known as the Local Government Commission) is a nonprofit organization supporting policies and policymakers to pursue innovative smart-growth and climate-resilient strategies.

The organization has been in existence since 1982.

This year Civicwell held its Policymakers Conference at the Asilomar Hotel and Conference Grounds from March 16-19, 2023. I attended the event which offered an avenue to connect with local and state representatives sharing common interests. Attached are some of the insights from various panels.

OPTIONS
N/A
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Public Comment
Ayala Remote Workforce
Gunda Offshore Wind
Pepper Solar Battery Storage
Wong Building Electrification
April 3, 2023
Re: Council Meeting April 5, 2023
Agenda Item 8B CivicWell Conference
Dear Mayor Peake and Council Members,
Thank you all for your service to Pacific Grove. And thanks to Council Member Poduri for attending this year’s CivicWell Conference to learn about policies that promote methods of GHG reductions for municipalities, and to network with like-minded elected officials that can share their successes with us.

It is important to discuss efforts such as this, so that the public is aware of what other cities are doing to combat climate change, and how we compare in our own efforts to act. This is an opportunity to move ideas forward, as we must continue to make progress in our GHG reductions.

Below is a chart of different grants that might help Pacific Grove either fund the development of our CAAP, or projects that fall within the CAAP. We are aware that time has lapsed for a few, but there is time to apply for others. Could we apply for some of this funding? Thank you for your consideration,
Colleen Ingram
Sustainable Pacific Grove
Program Lead Agency Total Funding
Available
Grant Amount Criteria (linked) Deadline
OPR
Adaptation
Planning Grant
Program
OPR $25,000,000 $300K-$500K Adaptation Planning Grant Program Round 1 Guidelines FY 2022-2023
(ca.gov)
3/31/23
Caltrans
Climate
Adaptation
Program
(STGP)
Caltrans $50,000,000 $100K-$1.5M
(single) $3M
(partner)
Climate Adaptation Program STGP
Caltrans
3/9/23
OPR Regional
Resilience
OPR $21,300,000 $150K-$650K
Planning, $800K-
$3M
implementation
Regional Resilience Grant Program Draft
Guidelines (ca.gov)
7/19/23
CTC Local
Climate
Adaptation
Program
CTC $252,500,000 Draft Guidelines
coming early 2023
https://catc.ca.gov/programs/localtransportation-climate-adaptationprogram6/28/23 PROTECT CTC $1,400,000,000 TBA https://dot.ca.gov/programs/localassistance/fed-and-stateprograms/protectTBA Climate, SLR,
Wildfire
Resilience
Coastal
Conservancy
$700,000,000 $200K-$5M https://scc.ca.gov/grants/ TBA
Air Quality and Teleworking & Teleconferencing
(and some equity considerations)
Alberto Ayala, PhD, MSE
Executive Director, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Adjunct Professor, Mechanical Engineering, West Virginia University fmr. Deputy Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board The Remote Workforce: Environmental and Equity Implications Transportation sector is
largest source of air and
climate pollution…
…due to near-exclusive
dependance on fossil
fuels
Making progress, but still
much more to be done
Lockdown Silver Lining: Air Pollution Reductions
4 https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146362/airborne-nitrogen-dioxide-plummets-over-china? Reductions in traffic-related
emissions, ozone precursors, and
CO2e observed across globe
https://roadecology.ucdavis.edu/files/content/projects/COVID_CHIPs_Impacts_updated_430.pdf Reference: UC Davis Special Report 3: Impact of COVID19 Mitigation on Traffic, Fuel Use and Climate Change; Fraser Shilling, Ph.D.

Week 1 March 2020 Week 2 April 2020

Shelter-In-Place Air
Quality Study
• Recommendations widely distributed in Sacramento region • Encouraging public entities use teleconferencing for public meetings based on “traditional” Brown Act provisions
• State agencies use similar provision under Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act
• Joining meetings remotely from publicly accessible locations w/in jurisdiction
• Posting locations at least 72 hrs prior to meeting
Promoting and encouraging teleconferencing for
public meetings and telework when possible
AQ Benefits of Telework Teleconference FINAL 2-28-23 (airquality.org) End of lockdown, start
of the “New Normal”
Lockdown ≠ Telework
• Childcare unavailable
• Distance learning
• Non-essential businesses closed
• Essential workers still commuting:
• Lower income than non-essential workers
• More likely to be people of color
• More likely to use transit during pandemic
VMT Per Worker Per Day For All Trips in Sacramento Area • Driving more
• More non-commute trips
• Shifting patterns away from sustainable
modes
Closing remarks
• Remote-centered employment will remain significant
• It can have important air quality benefits if it leads to less driving • However, more local trips throughout the day by teleworkers • Replacing combustion cars with sustainable modes a must • Is there an equitable alternative for essential workers? Offshore Wind in California
Siva Gunda, Vice Chair, California Energy Commission
• 100% Carbon Free
Electricity by 2045
• Carbon Neutrality by
2045
• 100% ZEV by 2035
• Protect 30% of land and
water by 2030
• August 2022: Offshore
Wind Planning Goal
2 California's Bold Climate Actions
3 California’s Bold Climate Actions
• 100% Carbon Free
Energy by 2045
• Carbon Neutrality by
2045
• 100% ZEV by 2035
• Protect 30% of land and
water by 2030
4 September 6 Demand and Generation
6 Wireless
Emergency Alert
52,061 MW
AB 525 Legislative Findings
7 Provides economic and environmental benefits
Advances climate goals and diversifying the energy portfolio Improves grid reliability
Serves electricity needs and improve air quality in
disadvantaged communities.

Stimulates state and local economic and workforce
development
8 AB 525 Required Interim Work Products
June 1, 2022 December 31, 2022 July 30, 2023
Evaluate and quantify
maximum feasible capacity
of offshore wind
Establish megawatt
planning goals for 2030 and
2045
Develop a permitting
roadmap
Preliminary assessment of
economic benefits related to
seaports and workforce
development needs and
standards
Develop a strategic plan for
offshore wind off the
California coast in federal
waters
9 CEC Established OSW Planning Goals
2022
2,000-5,000
megawatts by 2030
25,000 megawatts
by 2045
2030 2045
CEC Report: Offshore Wind Energy Development off the California Coast: Maximum Feasible Capacity and Megawatt Planning Goals for 2030 and 2045 California's 5 Provisional Leaseholders
10 11
OSW Strategic Plan
• Identify sea space.
• Focused actions for economic and workforce development and identification of port space and infrastructure.
• Assess transmission planning investments and upgrades. • Develop a permitting roadmap for offshore wind energy facilities and related infrastructure.
• Identify and address potential impacts to coastal resources, fisheries, Native American and Indigenous peoples, and national defense.

The Strategic Plan is due to CNRA and the Legislature by June 30, 2023 12 Coordination, Outreach, and Engagement
Interagency
Working
Groups
Interagency Working Groups: Topically
focused interagency working groups on
permitting, seas space, transmission, and
economic benefits
Targeted Outreach: Engaging with key
stakeholder groups based on legislative
directive, technical expertise, interest, etc.

Broader Public Outreach: Engaging
broader stakeholders and interested parties
Broader Public
Outreach
Targeted
Outreach
California Focused Activities
2021-2022 and 2022-2023 State Budget
Investments
•$20 million to support environmental research,
stakeholder engagement, and infrastructure
upgrades
•$45 million to support waterfront facility
improvements
•$4.1 million to support Assembly Bill 525
implementation
•Voluntary Offshore Wind and Coastal Resources
Protection Program
Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC)
•$8 million spent to advance offshore wind
•$14 million currently available
Integrated Resource and Transmission
Planning
• Assess within resource portfolios and in
longer-term transmission outlooks
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM)
• BOEM-CA Intergovernmental Task Force
• Coordination with the 5 California provisional
lease holders
Biden Administration
• Deploy 30 GW nationwide of OSW by 2030
• Floating Offshore Wind Shot- $45/MWh by
2035
• 15 GW of floating technology nationwide by
2035
13 Thank you
14 15
Tribal Outreach
CEC adopted Resolution to Support
Tribal Energy Sovereignty
• Support tribal sovereignty
• Enhance tribal consultation
• Increase tribal access to funding
opportunities
• Provide opportunities for economic
diversification for tribes
• Protect cultural resources
• Prioritize community benefits
CEC/CPUC Tribal En Banc, March 2023
Solar, Battery Storage, and
Grid Reliability
CivicWell Policymakers Conference at Asilomar
March 18, 2023
Jan Pepper, CEO, Peninsula Clean Energy
| 1
Peninsula Clean Energy
What is Peninsula Clean Energy?
• Community choice energy not-for-profit public
agency (JPA) launched in 2016 to reduce carbon
emissions and expand access to sustainable and
affordable energy
• 23-member board – every city, town and county in
San Mateo plus Los Banos - total population of
~810,000
• All residents and businesses automatically enrolled
to receive electricity generation services from PCE
o 50% renewable, 100% clean, priced at 5% less
than PG&E
• 2 investment grade credit ratings
2 Peninsula Clean Energy
How it works
3 Generation
Peninsula Clean
Energy
Delivery
PG&E
Savings
You
Peninsula Clean Energy 4
Community Impact
Since Peninsula Clean Energy
launched in October 2016:

Over $90 million in savings
for our electric customers

1.2 million metric tons CO2e
avoided from electricity generation
compared to 2016 baseline,
equivalent to 141 million gallons of
gasoline use
Peninsula Clean Energy
• Design a power portfolio that is
sourced by 100% renewable energy
by 2025 that aligns supply and
consumer demand on a 24x7 basis
o Reduces emissions
o Benefits grid
o Improves reliability
• Contribute to member jurisdictions
reaching the state’s goal to be 100%
greenhouse gas-free by 2035
Our Priorities: Renewable Energy & Decarbonization
5 Peninsula Clean Energy
2021 Peninsula Clean Energy 24/7 Emissions Footprint
due to use of California grid energy
6 Peninsula Clean Energy
Step 1: Diversify the Renewable Portfolio
7 Diversify Renewable Portfolio
Does not represent Peninsula Clean Energy’s Actual Portfolio Peninsula Clean Energy
Step 2: Use storage to shift renewable energy timing
8 Use Storage to Shift Renewable Energy Timing
Does not represent Peninsula Clean Energy’s Actual Portfolio Peninsula Clean Energy
Step 3: Shape and Shift Load on the Demand Side
9 Shape and Shift Load to Match Renewable Energy Availability Does not represent Peninsula Clean Energy’s Actual Portfolio Peninsula Clean Energy
Hourly average emissions intensity heatmap for Hourly 99% scenario in 2025 (26 lbs CO2e/MWh)
10 Peninsula Clean Energy
Goal: Accelerates local renewable energy and resiliency at local government and other public facilities
Peninsula Clean Energy is:
• Aggregating sites
• Contracting for installations
• Providing PPA to site at lower electricity rate
• First 2 rounds preserve NEM 2.0 tariff
First round:
12 municipal sites with nearly 2 MW of solar and 2 kW of storage Second round:

Underway with over 120 candidate sites
Solar & Storage on Public Buildings
11 Peninsula Clean Energy
Thank you!
Our vision:

A sustainable world with clean
energy for everyone
Jan Pepper, CEO
[email protected]
12 Building Electrification
What Local Governments Can Do
Policymakers Conference 2023
Garrett Wong
Climate Program Manager
County of Santa Barbara
Collaborative Manager
Santa Barbara County Regional
Climate Collaborative
Board Member
Local Government Sustainable
Energy Coalition
Sr. Sustainability Analyst (prior)
City of Santa Monica
Areas of Expertise
● Climate action & adaptation
● Energy policy, programs and projects
● Transportation policy, programs and projects
● Regional collaboration
● Community engagement
● Diversity, equity & inclusion
Building Electrification Potential
Existing Buildings >90%
● Least amount of control
● Largest source of building
emissions
● Most challenging
Municipal Buildings <5%
● Direct operational and
financial control
● Least amount of buildings
relative to community New Construction <10%
● Regulatory control
● Low-hanging fruit
What about the “What abouts”?
What about…
● Electricity costs
● Construction costs
● Market vs. Government
● Customer choice
● Availability of equipment and
contractors
● Equity
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources

4. Partner with others

5. Get involved in energy regulation
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources

4. Partner with others

5. Get involved in energy regulation
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources

4. Partner with others

5. Get involved in energy regulation
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources
EXTRA CREDIT: Secure external
funding or establish publicprivate partnership to accelerate transition

1. Partner with others

2. Get involved in energy regulation
Federal Tax Credits for Electrification Projects
Grants for Custom Programs and Projects
State
CA Energy Smart Homes - Incentives for New Construction & Alterations BUILD - Incentives for New Construction
TECH - Incentives for Heat Pump Appliance Replacements
HOMES program - Performance-based rebates for whole-house energy saving retrofits HEEHRA program - Point-of-sale rebates for qualified electrification projects in LMI households Equitable Building Decarbonization Program - Direct install and incentives targeted to low-income CA Electric Homes Program - Incentives for all-electric market rate homes + storage Grants for Custom Programs and Projects
Utilities Rate Design
Technical assistance
Incentive programs
CCEs & RENs Rate Design
Incentive programs
Workforce, education & training
Local Govt Local incentive programs
Streamlined permitting, reduced fees
Public-Private Partnerships
Public Private Partnerships
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources

4. Partner with others

5. Get involved in energy regulation
Reach Code Development:
● Technical assistance
● Stakeholder outreach
● Regional consistency
Ex. County of SB, Goleta and Carpinteria
Regional Funding & Implementation:
● Regional capacity building
● Collaborative grant applications
● Scaled implementation
Ex. Regional Climate and Electrification
Grant Administration (Monterey, Santa Cruz
& San Benito Counties)
Tips for Implementation

1. Hire sustainability staff

2. Join a Community Choice Energy
program and/or Regional Energy
Network (or start one!)

3. Provide a clearinghouse of
information and resources

4. Partner with others

5. Get involved in energy regulation
Do you care about…?
● Utility Actions
○ Programs, accountability, transparency
● Energy Reliability
○ Public safety power shutoffs, resilient infrastructure, microgrids ● Energy Equity
○ Utility rates, solar rates (NEM), utility programs, financing & funding, accessibility ● Gas Infrastructure
○ Safety, cost shifting, just transition, stranded customers [email protected] lgsec.org
LGSEC represents 39 local and regional
public agencies, non-profits, and
businesses.

LGSEC provides much needed capacity to its
members to advocate for policies, programs and
institutional reform to ensure local governments
and their communities have a greater role in
achieving a clean energy future.
[email protected] lgsec.org
Member Benefits
● Monthly Regulatory Engagement Calls
● Regulatory Advocacy
● Working Groups
● Newsletter
● Forums
● Webinars (public)
● Member Portal
● Member Network
LGSEC has been invaluable in helping our team keep
up with the latest State & Federal proceedings that
could impact our jurisdiction. As a small City, this
coalition has helped us leverage collective power to
get our needs heard at the State level, which we would
not have been able to otherwise do due to capacity
constraints.
- City of Goleta
● Proceeding Updates
● IOU Rate Forecasts
● Guest Speakers from
State Agencies
● Member Updates
[email protected] lgsec.org
LGSEC Regulatory Engagement
● Why do we engage in the regulatory space?
○ Local governments must adhere to statewide regulations ○ Local capacity and knowledge of the regulatory space is limited ○ IOUs and Local Government responsibilities overlap
○ Advocate for LGSEC members and other partner stakeholders ● How do we engage in the regulatory space?
○ Becoming parties to proceedings/dockets
○ Submitting joint letters of support/oppositions
○ Attendings workshops and hearings
○ Update members during monthly regulatory calls
Thank you Garrett Wong
[email protected]
Resources
● Local Energy Reach Codes
● Beneficial Electrification Toolkit
● Building Decarbonization Coalition
● California Climate & Energy Collaborative
● Local Government Sustainable Energy Coalition
Agenda No. 9 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Anastacia Wyatt, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Contract Amendment for professional contract planner services with Harris & Associates, Inc.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Approve an agreement amendment not to exceed $208,145.00 up until June 30, 2024, approximately $58,145.00 through June 30, 2023, for Fiscal Year 22-23 and $150,000 for Fiscal Year 23-24 for professional contract planner services with Harris & Associates, Inc.

DISCUSSION
In 2021, the City executed an agreement with Harris & Associates, Inc. (Harris) for a temporary contract planner to backfill the City's vacant Senior Planner position within the Community Development Department (CDD). The City's Senior Planner position remains vacant following unsuccessful recruitment efforts. The City recently lost its only full-time Associate Planner. The City has recently filled a full-time Assistant Planner position. In addition to this recent new placement, the City also has a 30 hour/week Associate Planner, who dedicates 8 of those 30 weekly hours towards economic development tasks.

Harris has been providing exemplary in-person service to the City, serving as a trusted urban planning subject-matter expert, staff liaison to the Planning Commission, counter planning services, and other duties within CDD.

Recent recruitment for Assistant and Associate Planner positions have been convened. The City is finalizing the hiring process for an Associate Planner candidate. Neither the recently-hired Assistant Planner nor the soon to be hired Associate Planner are able to fulfill the Senior Planner role. CDD intends to keep the Senior Planner role filled with the existing contract Harris staff planner that has key experience with understanding Coastal Commission, CEQA, and other core needs, including Planning Commission liaison. A strong Senior Planner position is necessary to assist lower level planners as they onboard and learn the unique planning needs of the City.

To provide business continuity, allow for a smooth transition, and ensure adequate resources for projects, it is recommended that the City contract with Harris for continued contract planner services until such time that new planners can be trained to adequately serve the planning needs of the community. The scope of Harris' services, which will serve as Attachment A to the proposed agreement, is attached to this agenda report for reference.

OPTIONS

1. Take no action. Note: taking no action would result in the conclusion of Harris' contract services to the City, and would result in an impact to CDD service delivery levels.

2. Provide alternative direction, such as authorizing a contract with Harris for a different amount and/or period of time.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

For Fiscal Year 2022-2023, the proposed funding for this contract would come from $34,662 in estimated salary savings, along with an additional appropriation of $23,483. If approved, a budget amendment will be brought forward for the additional appropriation. This amount will come from the Unassigned General Fund balance.

For Fiscal Year 2023-2024, estimated salary savings of $52,371 will be available to support this contract. An additional appropriation of $97,629 will be needed to fund the remaining balance of this agreement. If approved, these amounts will be incorporated into the Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Harris Planning Services Contract Amendment 2023-2024
AMENDMENT #1

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH HARRIS & ASSOCIATES WHEREAS, the City of Pacific Grove (“City”) and Harris & Associates, Inc. (“Contractor”) entered into a Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) dated July 1, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City and Contractor desire to amend certain terms of the Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

A. The Agreement is amended as follows:

1. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED. The City hereby engages CONTRACTOR to perform, and CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to perform, the services described in Exhibit A in conformity with the terms of this Agreement. The services are generally described as follows: Provide contract planning services.

3. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement is from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2024, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both CONTRACTOR and City and with City signing last, and CONTRACTOR may not commence work before City signs this Agreement.

B. All other terms of the Agreement remain the same.

Dated: ____________________
Dated: _____________________
Dated: _____________________
________________________________
Kate Elliott, Director, Environmental Planning +
Compliance
________________________________
Anastacia Wyatt, Community Development
Director
_________________________________
Tori Hannah, Administrative Services Director
Dated: ____________________
Dated: _____________________
________________________________
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
_________________________________
Bill Peake, Mayor

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES / PAYMENT PROVISIONS
CONTRACTOR shall provide contract planning services provided by a senior planner, as approved by the City Manager and/or Director of Community Development. The planner will provide in-person (City Hall) and/or remote contract planning services (as approved by the Director of Community Development) to support City planning staff. The planner will provide senior planning support up to four (4) days (32 hours) per week, as determined by the City Manager and/or Director of Community Development. Duties may include, but would not be limited to, the following:
• Customer service/counter support
• Phone calls and email correspondence
• Ministerial and discretionary project review
• Staff report/resolution and ordinance preparation
• Current planning support including large, controversial development applications • Public hearing support
City shall pay CONTRACTOR $170 per hour for existing senior planner at a discounted rate, and $200 per hour for Project Manager contract management. Project management services are anticipated to require one (1) hour per month. Payment shall be made by City after submittal of an invoice from CONTRACTOR itemizing the costs incurred by City.
1 of 10
Updated 06/20/22

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (OVER $40,000)1
This Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the City of Pacific Grove, a political subdivision of the State of California (hereinafter “City”) and Harris & Associates, Inc., (hereinafter “CONTRACTOR”).

In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows:

2. PAYMENTS BY CITY. City shall pay the CONTRACTOR in accordance with the payment provisions set forth in Exhibit A, subject to the limitations set forth in this Agreement. The total amount payable by City to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall not exceed the sum of $ 135,000.00. 1 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement is from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both CONTRACTOR and City and with City signing last, and CONTRACTOR may not commence work before City signs this Agreement.

4. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS/EXHIBITS. The following attached exhibits are incorporated herein by reference and constitute a part of this Agreement: Exhibit A: Scope of Services / Payment Provisions

5. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

5.01. CONTRACTOR warrants that CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR’s agents, employees, and subcontractors performing services under this Agreement are specially trained, experienced, competent, and appropriately licensed to perform the work and deliver the services required under this Agreement and are not employees of the City, or immediate family of an employee of the City.

5.02. CONTRACTOR, its agents, employees, and subcontractors shall perform all work in a safe and skillful manner and in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. All work performed under this Agreement that is required by law to be performed or supervised by licensed personnel shall be performed in accordance with such licensing requirements.

5.03. CONTRACTOR shall furnish, at its own expense, all materials, equipment, and personnel necessary to carry out the terms of this Agreement, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not use City premises, property (including equipment, instruments, or supplies) or personnel for any purpose other than in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement.

6. PAYMENT CONDITIONS.

6.01. CONTRACTOR shall submit to the Contract Administrator an invoice on a form acceptable to City.

If not otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR may submit such invoice monthly or at the completion of each phase of the project, as provided on page 6 of the proposal, but in any event, not later than 30 days after completion of services. The invoice shall set forth the amounts claimed by CONTRACTOR for the previous period, together 1 Approved by the Pacific Grove City Council on June 15, 2022. 2 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
with an itemized basis for the amounts claimed, and such other information pertinent to the invoice as the City may require. The Contract Administrator or his or her designee shall certify the invoice, either in the requested amount or in such other amount as the City approves in conformity with this Agreement, and shall promptly submit such invoice to the City Auditor-Controller for payment. The City Auditor-Controller shall pay the amount certified within 30 days of receiving the certified invoice.

6.02. CONTRACTOR shall not receive reimbursement for travel.

6.03 All payments by the City will be made by Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT). CONTRACTOR will provide the City with its bank ABA number, account number and designation of the account to which such EFT shall be made. CONTRACTOR will be responsible for notifying the City when CONTRACTOR’s EFT information changes. Payments shall be for the invoiced amount, with no retention.

7. TERMINATION.

7.01. During the term of this Agreement, the City may terminate the Agreement, with or without cause, by giving written notice of termination to the CONTRACTOR at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of termination. Such notice shall set forth the effective date of termination. In the event of such termination, CONTRACTOR shall cease immediately all work in progress.

7.02. CONTRACTOR may terminate this Agreement at any time upon thirty (30) days' written notice of termination to City.

7.03. If either CONTRACTOR or City fail to perform any material obligation under this Agreement, then, in addition to any other remedies, either CONTRACTOR or City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice.

7.04. Upon termination of this Agreement by either CONTRACTOR or City, all property belonging exclusively to City which is in CONTRACTOR’s possession shall be returned to City. CONTRACTOR shall furnish to City a final invoice for work performed and expenses incurred by CONTRACTOR, prepared as set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement. This final invoice shall be reviewed and paid in the same manner as set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement.

8. INDEMNIFICATION.

8.01. As respects all acts or omissions which do not arise directly out of the performance of professional services, including but not limited to those acts or omissions normally covered by general and automobile liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims, liabilities, and losses whatsoever (including damages to property and injuries to or death of persons, court costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees) occurring or resulting to any and all persons, firms or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims, liabilities, and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation for damage, injury, or death to the extent caused by CONTRACTOR’s negligence, negligent acts, errors or omissions.
❑ Exemption/Modification (Justification attached; subject to approval).

9. INSURANCE.

9.01. Insurance Coverage Requirements: Without limiting CONTRACTOR’s duty to indemnify, CONTRACTOR shall maintain in effect throughout the term of this Agreement a policy or policies of insurance with the following minimum limits of liability:
3 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
Commercial general liability insurance, no less broad than Insurance Services Office (ISO) CG 00 01, including but not limited to premises and operations, including coverage for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, Personal Injury, Contractual Liability, Broadform Property Damage, Independent Contractors, Products/Completed Operations, with minimum limits: $1,000,000 per Occurrence; $2,000,000 General Aggregate; $2,000,000 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate. The required limits may be provided by a combination of General Liability Insurance and Commercial Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance. If CONTRACTOR maintains higher limits than the specified minimum limits, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by CONTRACTOR.
❑ Exemption/Modification (Justification attached; subject to approval).

Business automobile liability insurance, covering all motor vehicles, including owned, leased, non-owned, and hired vehicles, used in providing services under this Agreement, with a combined single limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. ❑ Exemption/Modification (Justification attached; subject to approval).

Workers’ Compensation Insurance, if CONTRACTOR employs others in the performance of this Agreement, in accordance with California Labor Code section 3700 and with Employer’s Liability limits not less than $1,000,000 each person, $1,000,000 each accident and $1,000,000 each disease. ❑ Exemption/Modification (Justification attached; subject to approval).

Professional liability insurance, if required for the professional services being provided, (e.g., those persons authorized by a license to engage in a business or profession regulated by the California Business and Professions Code), in the amount of not less than $1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 in the aggregate, to cover liability for malpractice or errors or omissions made in the course of rendering professional services. If professional liability insurance is written on a “claims-made” basis rather than an occurrence basis, the retroactive date shall be no later than the commencement of the work. Coverage applicable to the work performed under this Agreement shall be continued for three (3) years after completion of the work. Such continuation coverage may be provided by one of the following: (1) renewal of the existing policy; (2) an extended reporting period endorsement; or (3) replacement insurance with a retroactive date no later than the commencement of the work under this Agreement. ❑ Exemption/Modification (Justification attached; subject to approval).

9.02. Other Insurance Requirements. All insurance required by this Agreement shall be with a company acceptable to the City and issued and executed by an admitted insurer authorized to transact Insurance business in the State of California. Unless otherwise specified by this Agreement, all such insurance shall be written on an occurrence basis, or, if the policy is not written on an occurrence basis, such policy with the coverage required herein shall continue in effect for a period of three years following the date CONTRACTOR completes its performance of services under this Agreement.

CONTRACTOR shall provide immediate written notice if (1) any of the required insurance policies is terminated; (2) the limits of any of the required policies are reduced; (3) or the deductible or self-insured retention is increased. In the event of any cancellation or reduction in coverage or limits of any insurance, CONTRACTOR shall forthwith obtain and submit proof of substitute insurance. Should CONTRACTOR fail to immediately procure other insurance, as specified, to substitute for any canceled policy, the City may procure such insurance at CONTRACTOR’s sole cost and expense.

Commercial general liability and automobile liability policies shall provide an endorsement naming the City of Pacific Grove, its officers, agents, and employees as Additional Insureds with respect to liability arising out of the CONTRACTOR’S work, including ongoing and completed operations, and shall further provide that 4 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
such insurance is primary insurance to any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City and that the insurance of the Additional Insureds shall not be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by the CONTRACTOR’S insurance. The required endorsement form for Commercial General Liability Additional Insured is ISO Form CG 20 10 11-85 or CG 20 10 10 01 in tandem with CG 20 37 10 01 (2000). The required endorsement form for Automobile Additional Insured endorsement is ISO Form CA 20 48 02 99.

The general liability policy shall cover inter-insured suits and include a “separation of Insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately.

CONTRACTOR shall provide to City an endorsement that the insurer waives the right of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.

Prior to the execution of this Agreement by the City, CONTRACTOR shall file certificates of insurance with the City’s contract administrator and City’s Contracts/Purchasing Division, showing that the CONTRACTOR has in effect the insurance required by this Agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall file a new or amended certificate of insurance within five calendar days after any change is made in any insurance policy which would alter the information on the certificate then on file. Acceptance or approval of insurance shall in no way modify or change the indemnification clause in this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect.

CONTRACTOR shall at all times during the term of this Agreement maintain in force the insurance coverage required under this Agreement and shall send, without demand by City, annual certificates to City’s Contract Administrator and City’s Contracts/Purchasing Division. If the certificate is not received by the expiration date, City shall notify CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR shall have five calendar days to send in the certificate, evidencing no lapse in coverage during the interim. Failure by CONTRACTOR to maintain such insurance is a default of this Agreement which entitles City, at its sole discretion, to terminate this Agreement immediately.

10. RECORDS AND CONFIDENTIALITY.

10.01. Confidentiality. CONTRACTOR and its officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors shall comply with any and all federal, state, and local laws which provide for the confidentiality of records and other information. CONTRACTOR shall not disclose any confidential records or other confidential information received from the City or prepared in connection with the performance of this Agreement, unless City specifically permits CONTRACTOR to disclose such records or information. CONTRACTOR shall promptly transmit to City any and all requests for disclosure of any such confidential records or information. CONTRACTOR shall not use any confidential information gained by CONTRACTOR in the performance of this Agreement except for the sole purpose of carrying out CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this Agreement.

10.02. City Records. When this Agreement expires or terminates, CONTRACTOR shall return to City any City records which CONTRACTOR used or received from City to perform services under this Agreement.

10.03. Maintenance of Records. CONTRACTOR shall prepare, maintain, and preserve all reports and records that may be required by federal, state, and City rules and regulations related to services performed under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall maintain such records for a period of at least three years after receipt of final payment under this Agreement. If any litigation, claim, negotiation, audit exception, or other action relating to this Agreement is pending at the end of the three-year period, then CONTRACTOR shall retain said records until such action is resolved.

10.04. Access to and Audit of Records. The City shall have the right to examine, monitor and audit all records, documents, conditions, and activities of the CONTRACTOR and its subcontractors related to services provided under this Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code section 8546.7, if this Agreement involves the expenditure of public funds in excess of $10,000, the parties to this Agreement may be subject, at the request of 5 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
the City or as part of any audit of the City, to the examination and audit of the State Auditor pertaining to matters connected with the performance of this Agreement for a period of three years after final payment under the Agreement.

10.05. Royalties and Inventions. City shall have a royalty-free, exclusive and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, and use, and authorize others to do so, all original computer programs, writings, sound recordings, pictorial reproductions, drawings, and other works of similar nature produced in the course of or under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not publish any such material without the prior written approval of City.

11. NON-DISCRIMINATION. During the performance of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR, and its subcontractors, shall not unlawfully discriminate against any person because of race, religious creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, age (over 40), or sexual orientation, either in CONTRACTOR’s employment practices or in the furnishing of services to recipients. CONTRACTOR shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of its employees and applicants for employment and all persons receiving and requesting services are free of such discrimination. CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor shall, in the performance of this Agreement, fully comply with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination. The provision of services primarily or exclusively to such target population as may be designated in this Agreement shall not be deemed to be prohibited discrimination.

12. COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS OF STATE OR FEDERAL GRANT. If this Agreement has been or will be funded with monies received by the City pursuant to a contract with the state or federal government in which the City is the grantee, CONTRACTOR will comply with all the provisions of said contract, to the extent applicable to CONTRACTOR as a subgrantee under said contract, and said provisions shall be deemed a part of this Agreement, as though fully set forth herein. Upon request, City will deliver a copy of said contract to CONTRACTOR, at no cost to CONTRACTOR.

13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. In the performance of work, duties, and obligations under this Agreement, CONTRACTOR is at all times acting and performing as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the City. No offer or obligation of permanent employment with the City or particular City department or agency is intended in any manner, and CONTRACTOR shall not become entitled by virtue of this Agreement to receive from City any form of employee benefits including but not limited to sick leave, vacation, retirement benefits, workers’ compensation coverage, insurance or disability benefits. CONTRACTOR shall be solely liable for and obligated to pay directly all applicable taxes, including federal and state income taxes and social security, arising out of CONTRACTOR’s performance of this Agreement. In connection therewith, CONTRACTOR shall defend, indemnify, and hold City harmless from any and all liability which City may incur because of CONTRACTOR’s failure to pay such taxes.

14. NOTICES. Notices required under this Agreement shall be delivered personally or by first-class, postage pre-paid mail to the City’s and CONTRACTOR’S contract administrators at the addresses listed below:

FOR CITY: FOR CONTRACTOR:

John Kuehl, Interim Director
Community Development Department
Kate Elliott, Director
Cc: David Mack, Joseph Sidor
Name and Title Name and Title
City of Pacific Grove
300 Forest Avenue
Harris & Associates, Inc.
450 Lincoln Avenue, Suite 103
6 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
Pacific Grove, CA 93950 Salinas, CA 93940
Address Address
(831) 648-3127 (831) 789-8670
Phone Phone

15. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

15.01. Conflict of Interest. CONTRACTOR represents that it presently has no interest and agrees not to acquire any interest during the term of this Agreement which would directly or indirectly conflict in any manner or to any degree with the full and complete performance of the professional services required to be rendered under this Agreement.

15.02. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by an instrument in writing signed by the City and the CONTRACTOR.

15.03. Waiver. Any waiver of any terms and conditions of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the City and the CONTRACTOR. A waiver of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any other terms or conditions in this Agreement.

15.04. Contractor. The term “CONTRACTOR” as used in this Agreement includes CONTRACTOR’s officers, agents, and employees acting on CONTRACTOR’s behalf in the performance of this Agreement.

15.05. Disputes. CONTRACTOR shall continue to perform under this Agreement during any dispute.

Contractor and the CITY hereby agree to make good faith efforts to resolve disputes as quickly as possible. In the event any dispute arising from or related to this Agreement results in litigation or arbitration, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred, including court costs, attorney fees, expenses for expert witnesses (whether or not called to testify), expenses for accountants or appraisers (whether or not called to testify), and other related expenses. Recovery of these expenses shall be as additional costs awarded to the prevailing party, and shall not require initiation of a separate legal proceeding.

15.06. Assignment and Subcontracting. The CONTRACTOR shall not assign, sell, or otherwise transfer its interest or obligations in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City. None of the services covered by this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior written approval of the City. Notwithstanding any such subcontract, CONTRACTOR shall continue to be liable for the performance of all requirements of this Agreement.

15.07. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and the rights, privileges, duties, and obligations of the City and CONTRACTOR under this Agreement, to the extent assignable or delegable, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors, permitted assigns, and heirs.

15.08. Compliance with Applicable Law. The parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations in performing this Agreement.

15.09. Headings. The headings are for convenience only and shall not be used to interpret the terms of this Agreement.

15.10. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in each and all of the provisions of this Agreement.

15.11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted under the laws of the State of California.
7 of 10
Updated 06/20/22

15.12. Non-exclusive Agreement. This Agreement is non-exclusive and both City and CONTRACTOR expressly reserve the right to contract with other entities for the same or similar services.

15.13. Construction of Agreement. The City and CONTRACTOR agree that each party has fully participated in the review and revision of this Agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendment to this Agreement.

15.14. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement.

By executing this Agreement, the City and CONTRACTOR also consent and agree that any electronic signature, as defined by Civil Code § 1633.2(h), affixed thereon shall have the full force and effect as a wet or manual signature.

15.15. Authority. Any individual executing this Agreement on behalf of the City or the CONTRACTOR represents and warrants hereby that he or she has the requisite authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of such party and bind the party to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

15.16. Integration. This Agreement, including the exhibits any documents incorporated by reference, represent the entire Agreement between the City and the CONTRACTOR with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement and shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral, between the City and the CONTRACTOR as of the effective date of this Agreement, which is the date that the City signs the Agreement.

15.17. Interpretation of Conflicting Provisions. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the provisions of this Agreement and the Provisions of any exhibit or other attachment to this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail and control.

15.18 Severability. If any of the provisions contained in the Contract are held illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, the enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be impaired thereby. Limitations of liability and indemnities shall survive termination of the Contract for any cause. If a part of this Contract is valid, all valid parts that are severable from the invalid part remain in effect. If a part of this Contract is invalid in one or more of its applications, the part remains in effect in all valid applications that are severable from the invalid applications.

This space is left blank, intentionally.
8 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and CONTRACTOR have executed this Agreement as of the day and year written below.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE CONTRACTOR
By: Harris & Associates, Inc.

City Mayor Contractor’s Business Name*
Date:

By: (Signature of Chair, President, or
Vice-President)*
By:

Department Head Diane Sandman, Vice President, EPC
Date:

Name and Title
Date:

By:

Approved as to Form
(Signature of Secretary, Asst. Secretary, CFO, or
Asst. Treasurer)*
By:

City Attorney Name and Title
Date:
2 Date:

Approved as to Fiscal Provisions
By:

Finance
Date:

Approved as to Liability Provisions 3
By:

Risk Management
Date:

City Agreement Number: ______________________________.
2 Approval by Finance necessary only if financial questions or issues raised in Council approval of agreement. 3 Approval by Risk Management is necessary only if changes are made in paragraph 8 or 9. 9 of 10
Updated 06/20/22
*INSTRUCTIONS: If CONTRACTOR is a corporation, including limited liability and non-profit corporations, the full legal name of the corporation shall be set forth above together with the signatures of two specified officers. If CONTRACTOR is a partnership, the name of the partnership shall be set forth above together with the signature of a partner who has authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the partnership. If CONTRACTOR is contracting in an individual capacity, the individual shall set forth the name of the business, if any, and shall personally sign the Agreement. 10 of 10
Updated 06/20/22

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES / PAYMENT PROVISIONS
CONTRACTOR shall provide contract planning services provided by a senior planner, as approved by the City Manager and/or Director of Community Development. The planner will provide in-person (City Hall) and/or remote contract planning services (as approved by the Director of Community Development) to support City planning staff. The planner will provide planning support up to three (3) days (24 hours) per week, as determined by the City Manager and/or Director of Community Development. Duties may include, but would not be limited to, the following:
• Customer service/counter support
• Phone calls and email correspondence
• Ministerial and discretionary project review
• Staff report/resolution and ordinance preparation
• Current planning support including large, controversial development applications • Public hearing support
City shall pay CONTRACTOR $165 per hour for Senior Planner staffing support services, and $190 per hour for Project Manager contract management. Project management services are anticipated to require one (1) hour per month. Payment shall be made by City after submittal of an invoice from CONTRACTOR itemizing the costs incurred by City.

Agenda No. 9 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Bill Peake, Mayor
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Library Board Appointment
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Approve Aparna Sreenivasan appointment to Library Board with term ending January 31, 2027.

DISCUSSION
The Aparna Sreenivasan appointment fills a current vacancy.

City committees play a vital role in city government and provide opportunities for residents to become engaged in civic activities and work to improve local governance. We are very fortunate to have many highly qualified and talented residents willing to serve on City committees.

The term for Library Board appointments is 4 years.

Mayoral appointments to City committees must be confirmed by Council (Charter Article 26). Further regulations and policy regarding appointments can be found in PGMC Chapter 3.02 and Policy 000-5.

OPTIONS
N/A
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Redacted App & CV

Agenda No. 9 C

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Bill Peake, Mayor
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Public Hearing Procedure in Council Policy 000-9 CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Direct the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution amending Council Policy 000-9 (Council Guidelines) to implement the proposed public hearing and appeal procedures.

DISCUSSION
The aim of this policy amendment is to provide a clear public hearing procedure and identify the appropriate city codes that govern hearings and appeals. In doing so, it is more likely that hearings will be conducted correctly, and everyone will know beforehand what steps are to be taken.

Only Sections II and IV of Policy 000-9 are being amended.

Clarification of public hearing and appeal procedures is needed for two reasons. Existing policy could be more precisely written. Current practice has evolved.

OPTIONS
Provide alternate direction or do not approve.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
1 Redlined amended Policy 000-9
2 Clean amended Policy 000-9

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL POLICY
Policy Governing Policy No. Effective Date Page
Council Guidelines 000-9 February 3, 2010 1 of 4
I. AGENDA PACKET PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION

1. Agenda packets will be prepared and distributed in accordance with PGMC 2.04.050 and the Ralph M. Brown Act. However, the deadline for agenda submittals may be sooner to account for any scheduled workdays off that are necessary for publishing and distribution.

Publishing/distribution of the agenda packet to Council is by email notification (preferred) unless otherwise instructed.

2. The goal is to have a complete agenda packet at the time of its distribution. If, however, staff receives substantiating information, reports, proposed emergency ordinances and other such information to the Council after packet distribution, including at the time of the Council meeting, staff may provide this material, so long as the public is correspondingly informed and is given access in accordance with the Brown Act.

3. Nothing contained in this policy shall prevent the normal flow of legally permissible information from staff to the Council needed to keep the Council informed.

II. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES
PGMC Chapter 23.86 Public Meeting and Hearing Procedures shall be adhered to.

Action on Coastal Development Permit applications require adherence to PGMC 23.90.070 CDP application public notice and hearing.

For public hearings involving a quasi-judicial determination by Council (e.g. where a decision modifies vested property rights, or when a matter is raised by appeal pursuant to the Municipal Code), the following procedure applies:

1. Council Ex parte communication is disclosed.

2. Staff provides a report on the public hearing item, including correspondence.

3. Public hearing is opened.

4. The applicant or appellant of the item shall be allocated a maximum of 10 minutes to speak. If a single designated spokesperson is provided to the City Clerk, in advance of the meeting, names of persons who request the spokesperson to speak on their behalf, such persons being 10 or greater in number, that single spokesperson shall be allocated an increased amount of time to speak, not to exceed an additional 10 minutes.

5. If a single designated spokesperson in opposition is provided to the City Clerk, in advance of the meeting, names of persons who request the spokesperson to speak on their behalf, such persons being 10 or greater in number, that single spokesperson shall be allocated a maximum of 10 minutes to speak.

6. Public speakers other than the applicant or appellant or designated spokesperson will each be allocated a maximum of 3 minutes or less to speak, whether in support or opposition.

7. Applicant or appellant of the item shall be allocated a maximum of 5 minutes to speak on rebuttal.

8. Opposition spokesperson shall be allocated a maximum of 5 minutes to speak on surrebuttal.

9. Public hearing is closed.

10. Council dialogue is followed by motion to adopt findings and decision.

Each public hearing on the City Council agenda will be called in the order noted on the agenda.

Staff will first present a brief report on the public hearing item, including correspondence.

The public hearing will then be opened. For public hearings involving a quasi-judicial determination by the Council (e.g. where a decision modifies vested property rights, or when a matter is raised by appeal pursuant to the Municipal Code), the applicant or proponent of an item shall be allocated a maximum of 10 minutes to speak. If a single designated spokesperson provides the City Clerk, in advance of the meeting, names of persons who request her or him to speak on their behalf, such persons being 10 or greater in number, that single spokesperson shall be allocated an increased amount of time to speak, not to exceed 10 minutes. Depending on time available and the number of people wishing to speak, all other speakers will be limited in their allocated time to 3 minutes each or less.

In public hearings not involving a quasi-judicial determination by the Council, all speakers will be limited in their allocated time to 3 minutes each or less, whether in support or opposition to the item.

Very brief rebuttal and surrebuttal may be allowed, at the sole discretion of the Council.

Questions by any speaker shall be directed to the Mayor.

Once all persons desiring to address the Council have done so, or the allotted time has expired, the matter will then be returned to the Council. All questions having been directed to the Mayor will then be addressed by staff, in the order and format as directed by the Mayor.

The Mayor has the option of requesting that a motion be made to move the item or first facilitating discussion of the issue at hand, to allow the Council to explore the various views and available options. Once a motion is made and seconded, Council Members will discuss and then vote on the motion. If the motion fails, additional discussion and motions can follow, until the matter is resolved.

III. RECOGNITION BY CHAIR
All persons, including members of the Council, wishing to speak shall first be recognized by the Chair.

IV. APPEAL HEARING FROM PLANNING COMMISSION
PGMC Chapter 23.74.050 (d) Processing of appeals and call-ups – Actions and Findings shall be adhered to.

PGMC Chapter 23.90.100 Appeals of CDP decisions shall be adhered to for Coastal Development Permit application appeals.

PGMC Chapter 12.70 Appeals shall be adhered to for tree decisions.

In accordance with Municipal Code Section 23.72.130, any person aggrieved by an action or decision of the Planning Commission, may appeal to the City Council, by paying a prescribed fee and submitting a written statement of the grounds for appeal. The Code also requires notice to the Planning Commission of such appeal, and a report submitted by the Planning Commission to the City Council, setting forth the reasons for action taken, or the Planning Commission shall be represented at the Council meeting. The City Council shall render its decision within 45 days after the filing of such appeal.

Further, Section 23.72.130(f) reserves the Council’s authority to review any action or decision of the Planning Commission, and to make its own decision on such action or matter. The Council shall always have until its next regularly scheduled meeting following such action for review.

The Council shall hold a hearing de novo on appeals and matters called. A de novo hearing on appeal is not dependent on the record of the body from which an appeal is taken. Evidence is taken, witnesses appear and statements are made, all without regard to whether precisely the same evidence, witnesses and statements were recorded at the hearing below. Thus, although the Municipal Code labels it an appeal, it is in fact a second (or third, if it is a hearing on the Planning Commission’s decision on appeal from the Architectural Review Board) full, de novo consideration of the issue.

The Council may also return an appeal to the Planning Commission because the Council has heard new evidence. From the description above, Council will infer that virtually no hearing de novo will result in a duplication of the hearing below─something, some statements, some piece of documentation, will be new.

Failure of the Council to reverse, uphold, or uphold with modifications the action appealed or called up, results in the Beautification and Natural Resources Commission or Planning Commission action standing as decided. (Such failure would occur, for example, in the event of a Council tie vote.)
V. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL COMMITTEES
From time to time, the Council may see fit to appoint an ad hoc committee. When a Council committee is appointed, the Mayor will assign a maximum of three Council Members.

The Mayor designates the Council Member to serve as Committee Chair. In the event of a change in Council or committee assignments, the senior member of the Council will serve as Committee Chair. If there is a Council-Planning Commission committee, a member of the Council shall serve as Chair for the group.

VI. VOTES REQUIRED FOR ACTION
Article 15 of the Charter provides that four affirmative votes of the Council are necessary to adopt ordinances, resolutions, or claims against the City. Except as specified elsewhere, it is also Council policy that all actions of the Council (except those calling for five votes, such as urgency ordinances) require the affirmative vote of four members, irrespective of the number in attendance when an action is taken.

VII. BROWN ACT PROCEDURES
The City Council operates in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act). The City Attorney shall provide training and written materials on the Brown Act.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

CITY COUNCIL POLICY
Policy Governing Policy No. Effective Date Page
Council Guidelines 000-9 February 3, 2010 1 of 4
I. AGENDA PACKET PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION

Publishing/distribution of the agenda packet to Council is by email notification (preferred) unless otherwise instructed.

3. Nothing contained in this policy shall prevent the normal flow of legally permissible information from staff to the Council needed to keep the Council informed.

II. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES
PGMC Chapter 23.86 Public Meeting and Hearing Procedures shall be adhered to.

Action on Coastal Development Permit applications require adherence to PGMC 23.90.070 CDP application public notice and hearing.

For public hearings involving a quasi-judicial determination by Council the following procedure applies:

1. Council Ex parte communication is disclosed.

2. Staff provides a report on the public hearing item, including correspondence.

3. Public hearing is opened.

6. Public speakers other than the applicant or appellant or designated spokesperson will each be allocated a maximum of 3 minutes or less to speak, whether in support or opposition.

7. Applicant or appellant of the item shall be allocated a maximum of 5 minutes to speak on rebuttal.

8. Opposition spokesperson shall be allocated a maximum of 5 minutes to speak on surrebuttal.

9. Public hearing is closed.

10. Council dialogue is followed by motion to adopt findings and decision.

III. RECOGNITION BY CHAIR
All persons, including members of the Council, wishing to speak shall first be recognized by the Chair.

IV. APPEAL HEARING
PGMC Chapter 23.74.050 (d) Processing of appeals and call-ups – Actions and Findings shall be adhered to.

PGMC Chapter 23.90.100 Appeals of CDP decisions shall be adhered to for Coastal Development Permit application appeals.

PGMC Chapter 12.70 Appeals shall be adhered to for tree decisions.

The Council shall hold a hearing de novo on appeals. A de novo hearing on appeal is not dependent on the record of the body from which an appeal is taken. Evidence is taken, witnesses appear and statements are made, all without regard to whether precisely the same evidence, witnesses and statements were recorded at the hearing below. Thus, although the Municipal Code labels it an appeal, it is in fact a second (or third, if it is a hearing on the Planning Commission’s decision on appeal from the Architectural Review Board) full, de novo consideration of the issue.

Agenda No. 10 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes: 8/11/2022, 9/22/2022, 10/13/2022, and 11/20/2022.

CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive minutes.

Attachments
EDC Minutes

Agenda No. 11 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Leticia Livian, Human Resources Director
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: First reading of an ordinance to amend the City Salary Classification Schedule - Adding a new classification
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION

1. Request the City Attorney read the title of the ordinance;

3. 4. Direct that a summary of a proposed ordinance be published as approved by the City Attorney.

DISCUSSION
The City’s salary schedule identifies job classifications that have been approved by Council (e.g., Administrative Technician) and the hourly rates of pay for each classification at each step authorized by the Personnel Rules. Pursuant to Charter Article 25 and the Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) Section 4.20.280, approval and amendment to the salary schedule must be adopted by the Council. The requested changes seek to establish a salary range for Property and Evidence Technician. All other classifications in the salary schedule remain the same. To view the entire salary schedule, please refer to the City’s website.

Staff is recommending an amendment to the salary classification schedule to establish a salary range for Property and Evidence Technician. This classification is non-exempt and aligns with the General Employees Association (GEA).

This new classification is responsible for receiving, transporting, verifying, storing, recording, safeguarding, releasing and disposing of evidence, including firearms, and other property booked into Police Department. Historically, these tasks have been performed by a Police Services Technician with specialized training, skills and certification.

A 5% Property and Evidence Management certification pay was provided to the incumbent in this role.

It is recommended the 5% certification pay be rolled into the proposed hourly rate for Management certification be required to obtain within the first six months of employment in this classification.

The proposed hourly salary starting step is 5% above Police Services Technician classification starting hourly rate. Steps 1 through 5 have a 5% spread between the steps. Steps 6 and 7 have a 3.75% spread between the steps as these were formal longevity steps and are consistent with the salary structure for classifications represented by the GEA.

Classification Step Step Step Step Step Step Step
Property and Evidence Technician 1A 2B 3C 4D 5E 6F 7G
Hourly Salary Rate 28.01 29.41 30.88 32.43 34.05 35.32 36.65

OPTIONS

1. Take no action.

2. Provide alternate direction.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The addition of the Property and Evidence Technician is cost neutral.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Ordinance
Property and Evidence Technician
ORDINANCE NO. 23-____

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

AMENDING THE SALARY SCHEDULE TO ADD THE PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE

TECHNICIAN CLASSIFICATION
Findings

1. Staff is recommending adding a new Property and Evidence classification to the salary schedule; and

2. This new classification is responsible for receiving, transporting, verifying, storing, recording, safeguarding, releasing and disposing of evidence, including firearms, and other property booked into Police Department; and

3. This work has historically been performed by a Police Services Technician with specialized skills; and

4. The salary schedule amendment seeks to establish salary ranges for Property and Evidence Technician; and

5. Amendment to the salary schedule classification plan must be adopted by the City Council pursuant to Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) Section 4.20.280; and

6. In the enactment of this ordinance, the City followed the guidelines adopted by the State of California and published in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000, et seq. Enactment of this ordinance action does not constitute a “project” as defined by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment pursuant Section 15378.

Ordinance

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE:

SECTION 1. The foregoing findings of the City Council are incorporated into this Ordinance as if set forth in full.

SECTION 2. The position classification plan approved and adopted by the City Council pursuant to PGMC § 4.20.280 is amended to add the Property and Evidence Technician classification.

Classification Step Step Step Step Step Step Step
Property and Evidence Technician 1A 2B 3C 4D 5E 6F 7G
Hourly Salary Rate 28.01 29.41 30.88 32.43 34.05 35.32 36.65 SECTION 3. The City Manager is directed to execute all documents and to perform all other necessary City acts to implement this Ordinance.

SECTION 4. In accord with Article 15 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective on April 19, 2023.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE this _____ day of April 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
________________________
BILL PEAKE, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
BRIAN PIERIK, City Attorney
Property and Evidence Technician
Classification/Job Description
SUMMARY:

Under general supervision, to receive, load, transport, verify, store, record, safeguard, release and dispose of evidence and other property booked into Police Department and maintain related property records, and perform related work as required.

The Police Property and Evidence Specialist handles a broad range of confidential and sensitive records, maintains the integrity and security of criminal evidence, including the handling of hazardous and bio-hazardous substances in a variety of containers and packaging.

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: As defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act, essential functions may include any of the following representative duties, knowledge, and skills. This is not a comprehensive listing of all functions and duties performed by incumbents of this class; employees may be assigned duties which are not listed below; reasonable accommodation will be made as required. The job description does not constitute an employment agreement and is subject to change at any time by the employer. Essential duties and responsibilities may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Essential duties and responsibilities may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Receives property and evidence, documents receipt, maintains the physical integrity and control and the chain of custody, and physically stores property and evidence in the designated property and evidence areas.
• Prepares evidence for submittal to the District Attorney’s Office, outside law enforcement agencies or labs for analysis; including packaging, securing, and preserving evidence items, preparing required forms, and submitting forms with evidence. • Coordinates with crime laboratories; determines and justifies which evidence to refer; prepares and transports evidence including weapons, narcotics, and biological specimens for analysis and processing by others.
• Manages digital evidence system, including recordings from body worn cameras, in-car cameras, surveillance footage and photographs; ensures files are properly maintained, processes duplication requests from the District Attorney’s Office and responds to Public Records Act requests.
• Releases and purges property and evidence following appropriate Federal, State, and local laws and regulations; prepares evidence and property for auction and/or disposal upon completion of court proceedings.
• Acts as liaison to the court and other offices requiring the transmission of property and evidence; prepares evidence for officers and investigators for court proceedings; maintains records and tracks such actions.
• Releases property to the public; prepares the proper paperwork and prepares evidence for pick-up; completes the necessary reports and documentation for release. • Performs difficult, complex, technical and/or specialized administrative work that requires the exercise of independent judgment, the application of technical skills, and a detailed knowledge of the activities and procedures specific to the Police Department. • Prepares correspondence, reports, forms, receipts, and specialized documents such as property claim letters to citizens, and other correspondence. • Performs general oversight of the Department's equipment and supply function, to include issuing and receiving equipment and other supplies to Department personnel, making equipment and supply purchases, and maintaining inventory records. • Supports the relationship between the City of Pacific Grove and the general public by demonstrating courteous and cooperative behavior when interacting with community members, visitors, and City staff; maintains confidentiality of work-related issues and City information; performs other duties as required or assigned. • Acts in a lead capacity through cross-training, developing, scheduling, and designating property and evidence-related tasks to secondary assigned staff person; trains department staff on best practices and safety protocols. • Works in the Police Records Unit as needed and performs other duties as assigned.

Minimum Qualifications:

Education, Training and Experience Guidelines:

High School Diploma or GED equivalent; AND two years of work experience in a law enforcement agency; OR an equivalent combination of education, training, and experience.

Knowledge of:
• City policies and procedures.
• Criminal codes, vehicle codes, and municipal codes.
• Policies, rules and regulations governing property and evidence management. • National Crime Information Center (NCIC), and California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) quality and security standards for police records. • Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) requirements for handling and disposing of evidence with blood borne pathogens, infectious diseases, and other related body fluid contamination.
• Principles and practices of confidential records management, and file maintenance. • Modern office practices, methods, and computer equipment and applications related to the work, including police records management systems, data tracking, word processing, and spreadsheet applications.
• Business arithmetic and basic statistical techniques. • English usage, grammar, spelling, vocabulary, and punctuation. • Procedures for the collection, processing and packaging of evidence.

Skill in:
• Interpreting and explaining standards and protocols for maintenance, analysis, release and disposal of property and evidence.
• Analyzing technical issues, evaluating alternatives, and making recommendations based on findings.
• Proper handling of property and evidence, including firearms and narcotics. • Explaining Federal and State rules and regulations, and City policies and procedures. • Assessing and prioritizing multiple tasks, projects and demands. • Using initiative and independent judgment within established procedural guidelines. • Dealing tactfully and courteously with the public.
• Establishing and maintaining cooperative working relationships with co-workers and members of outside agencies.
• Communicating effectively verbally and in writing.
• Conducting audits and inventories.
• Property and evidence guidelines and procedures.
• Use computers for word processing and information storage and retrieval. • Organize, research, and maintain technical and administrative files. • Enter data into a computer system and prepare written materials with sufficient speed and accuracy to perform the work.
• Organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.

Licensing and Certification:

LICENSE AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS:
• A valid California State Driver's License is required. • Terminal Operator Certification for access to NCIC/CLETS is required within thirty days of employment.
• Ability to complete Property and Evidence Management training through the International Association of Property and Evidence; California Property and Evidence Association; or California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) within eighteen months of employment.

PHYSICAL DEMANDS AND WORKING ENVIRONMENT:

Work is in a standard office environment and occasionally in the field. Required to handle firearms and narcotics. Exposure to strong unpleasant odors, infectious bio-hazardous materials such as blood, urine and semen; dust, pollens, chemical irritants; toxic substances; evidence that may be disturbing such as homicide evidence. Ability to lift and carry moderately heavy and bulky items.

Must be able to pass a law enforcement background investigation. Must be willing to work extended shifts or be called back in emergency situations and work with exposure to difficult circumstances.

Agenda No. 12 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joyce Halabi, Deputy Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: FY22/23 Street Rehabilitation Project
CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize an agreement with Monterey Peninsula Engineering for the FY22/23 Street Rehabilitation Project on segments of 13th, 15th and 16th St in an amount not to exceed $1,520,048 plus a 9% contingency.

DISCUSSION
The FY22/23 Street Rehabilitation Project was approved as part of the FY22/23 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to address the aging road infrastructure network on:
13th Street, between Lighthouse Ave & Central Ave (PCI 16) 15th Street, between Lighthouse Ave& Ocean View Blvd (PCI 9) 16th Street, between Central Ave & Ocean View Blvd (PCI 46) 16th Street, between Pine Ave & Spruce Ave (PCI 47)
These segments were selected for rehabilitation based on a thorough review of the City’s Pavement Management Program, existing road conditions, and in-field observations.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The segments of 13th St and 15th St, noted above, are classified as "failed" roadways, with PCIs of 16 and 9 respectively, and are in dire need of repair. Both segments of 16th St are classified in "poor" condition, with PCIs of 46 and 47 respectively, and are also in need of rehabilitation.

None of these roadways have received formal rehabilitation treatment since being constructed. Only one of the above noted segments, 16th St (from Ocean View Blvd to Central), has ever received a maintenance treatment, a crack & slurry treatment over 10 years ago. Despite the maintenance treatment, the road has significantly deteriorated.

ENGINEERING PROCESS
During the engineering phase, underground infrastructure was CCTV videoed to assess existing conditions. It was anticipated, based on age of the lines and construction records, that segments of the sewer infrastructure would need to be replaced. As such, the project budget included Sewer Enterprise Funds to address this anticipated need.

While videoing, staff discovered the sewer line on 16th Street from Pine to Junipero Ave was in a While videoing, staff discovered the sewer line on 16th Street from Pine to Junipero Ave was in a deteriorated state and in need of replacement. Although it was outside the bounds of the original segment of 16th St that was to be addressed, due to the critical nature of sewer infrastructure, improvements to 16th St between Spruce Ave and Junipero Ave were engineered.

Based on the engineers' estimate, there was sufficient sewer funding in the approved budget to accommodate these additional sewer improvements, but not sufficient funding via the street related funding sources (derived from a combination of General Fund, Measure X, and SB1) to accommodate pavement rehabilitation following the sewer improvements. As such, the street improvements on 16th St (from Spruce to Junipero) were included as a bid additive (bid additive 2). The sewer elements were included in the base bid.

Bid additives allow flexibility to add additional elements via the bidding process, that fall outside of the most critical project scope components (which serve as the 'base' bid), without being locked into funding those additional elements. This allows the City to obtain competitive pricing on additional scope elements and provides flexibility on a path forward (ex: options to fund or not fund additional elements). Including bid additives to a project often creates more competitive pricing as mobilization and material costs are often decreased as the scope of the project increases.

Additionally, due to public inquiries and the failed road conditions on the segment of 13th St from Central to Ocean View Blvd (PCI 16), this segment was also engineered as a bid additive (bid additive 1).

Attachment 1 provides a visual representation of the base bid and bid additive boundaries.

BIDDING PROCESS
Construction documents were completed in January 2023. On February 3, 2023, the City released a call for bids. On March 8, 2023, the bid period closed. Two (2) bids were received:

CONTRACTOR BASE BID BID
ADDITIVE 1
BID
ADDITIVE 2
Monterey Peninsula
Engineering $1,370,128 $149,920 $180,935
Coastal Paving &
Excavating $1,668,110 $168,010 $184,780
Monterey Peninsula Engineering (MPE) has been qualified as the lowest, responsible bidder. Their bid was competitive and well below the engineer's estimate. MPE is well qualified to perform this work and has successfully completed several paving and sewer projects for the city.

Due to insufficient project funding to fund the base bid and both bid additives, Staff is recommending authorization of an agreement for:

The base bid, which includes the most integral elements of the project, and the original project proposed as part of the CIP (noted in the Scope of Work below), and Additive 1 which will expand the scope of the 13th St pavement improvements to address an additional 10,000 SF of failed roadway from Central Ave to Ocean View Blvd.

The base bid and bid additive 1 equates to a total of $1,520,048.

Staff will return to Council soon to provide options to fund bid additive 2 via a non-general funding source. The competitive pricing for the bid additive, and the positive impact the work will have on the pavement conditions, make this work ideal. The contractor indicated interest in honoring the bid additive pricing, following award of this contract, should the council elect to proceed with the bid additive 2 at a future meeting.

SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work for the base bid includes:

Reconstruction of 48,200 SF of deteriorated pavement
Construction of 303 LF of curb and gutter
Reconstruction of 1,675 SF of sidewalk, construction of 395 SF of sidewalk Reconstruction of 22 curb ramps
Various sewer improvements including 1,240 LF of sewer line replacement, 1 sewer line spot repair, and reconstruction of 3 manholes
Various stormwater improvements including installation/replacement of 288 LF of storm drainpipe, construction of 8 storm drain inlets
Thermoplastic pavement markings
The scope of Bid Additive 1 work, includes an additional 10,000 SF of pavement reconstruction and various pavement markings on 13th Street between Central Ave and Oceanview Blvd.

As noted above, the staff recommendation is to authorize only the base bid and additive 1. If approved, the City’s standard agreement (reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, Risk Management and the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority) will be prepared for the Mayor’s signature per the standard contracting process.

The scope of work for bid additive 2, which will return to council for funding, includes 5,700 SF of pavement reconstruction on 16th Street between Spruce and Junipero Avenue. City Staff will evaluate the fund balances in the Sewer Fund or RMRA/SB1 fund as options to perform the street rehabilitation.

If additive 2 is not performed, trench rehabilitation will be completed.

Utility Agency Coordination
The City has worked closely with California American Water (CalAm) to coordinate vital water main replacements to occur on these segments of roadway within the project area. Project coordination with CalAm allows for improved long-term pavement preservation.

Construction Schedule
Following contract execution, a pre-construction meeting will be held to determine a project schedule.

It is anticipated that all work associated with the base bid and bid additive 1 will be completed by the end of the fiscal year. If bid additive 2 is approved at a future council meeting, staff will enter into a new contract for that segment of pavement rehabilitation and will develop a new schedule for additive

2. Updates on construction timelines will be provided to the Council and posted to the Clear Gov project page: https://pacificgrove-ca.cleargov.com/projects
Permitting
The City has received a Coastal Development Permit Exemption, in accordance with PGMC

23.90.040.C: Repair or Maintenance Activities, from the Community Development Department.

Tribal & Archeological Monitoring
Tribal and Archeological Monitoring will occur during ground disturbance activities in the coastal zone.

OPTIONS

1. Authorize an agreement for the base bid
Do not authorize an agreement for the base bid. Failure to authorize an agreement could impact the ability to meet MOE requirements and would significantly delay the project.

2. FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The approved project budget is $1,919,442 derived from the Capital Improvement Fund, Measure X, Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) and the Sewer Fund as specified below.

FUND FUND NAME AMOUNT
Fund 63 Capital Improvement Fund $300,000
Fund 17 Measure X $1,015,304
Fund 47 RMRA (SB1) $354,138
Fund 76 Sewer Fund $250,000
TOTAL $1,919,442
There is sufficient funding to accommodate a contract for the base bid and additive 1, $1,520,048 plus a 9% contingency. The remaining funding has been expended on engineering ($183,733) or will be expended on construction management services ($50,000) performed by the City Engineer, Neill Engineers Corp.

As noted above, Staff will return soon with options to allocate additional funding to proceed with bid additive two.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: City Asset Stewardship: Repair, maintain and improve City assets, including streets, sidewalks, sewer systems, buildings, and parks and trails.

Attachments
Attachment 1 - Scope of Work Overview Map
0 a::
..,
a.
i z
ftEJII.LA-011: 42 :LP' :::,
or SANITAltY -:t
SCWE'" M" AIN
•
>
,c
...J
,c
a::
...
z
l&I
0 ..,
fl>
.::,
0 :c
t
:c
0 .J
>
<
I!,.
�ii• i .
•
..
0 e,
O EB
�
"'O
--ss--
.,y-"-
==so==
�-?-o
l1Qil
c!p �
0 1 5TH
AN1 ooo-m1-oo:z
"
..

STREET
RE:CONST,.UCT PA VE:ME:NT ••
,-. i
!_ APPROX .

APM ooo-m-Ollfl ,,,,.,. ·-Y.J5.-1TT-rn,
I
..
>
<
-l'� r._
.. ..,
(IJ
:,
:c
'?
. I
l .,PN ooo-!77-0C! I /• .. .
= � d
....

PA� ¥"
Dffi\tEW� . 0
'IE
"
0 --►-
..
0 :,
..
..
•
"'
0 a 0 �m• .-,,r.,$5.11
.,..,_Ms
14Ttt" STREET

LEGEND (APPUES TO ALL SHEETS)
SURVEY CONTROL PT. --.-'(? POWER POLE
SPOT ELEVATION 181� WATER METER
NAIL & CIRCLE PROPERTY CORNER Q) -.i1--l WATER VALVE
SEWER CLEAN OUT e,0� CATCH BASIN

SEWER OR STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
e,0* REMOVE CATCH BASIN

NEW SANITARY SEWER

SEWER LATERAL RECONNECTION )( REMOVE CURB INLET
NEW STORM DRAIN 0 TREE - DID NOT LOCATE ALL

NEW OR RECONSTRUCT MANHOLE
·j.. FINISHED GRADE ELEV.
-1J,/ NEW CURB INL£T y TC = TOP OF CURB

NEW CATCH BASIN
SWK = SIDEWALK
FL = FLOWLJNE
REPLACE MANHOLE FRAME & COVER UP = LIP OF GUTTER
TREES
BID ADDITIVE 2

FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS PORTION
APH DOf'-4-J:;-Op;,
1 6TH STREET
LI" o,r: sAHiTAttY aa:we:Jt MAIN
.

RECONSTRUCT PAVEM£NT APPROX. :5 ,. 700 SF
�
A,P/'I 1)(}6--475-00:l �
1 6 TH
•
...
>
,c
-�
16TH STREET
':.,( ' ,.,.,,v"-,�),(·•v'V.
llf£PLACE :S-7• L-llr' OF'_ SA,NJTAltY ,•,;wrl'f M �IN
I

RE'CONSTRUCT
•

PAVEMENT
•
APPROX .. 8,. 400 SF
I Af"I IXl!i--<Sl-..,,.

I - 006·-ffl/-OOC,
STREET
BETWEEN JUNIPERO AVE. & PINE AVE.
•
(I) M'K nil�-15<•01:l A>'J< ODO••�·•·•O/.'
16TH STREET
1 5TH
"
II
WI
>
,c
RECONSTRUCT PAVEMENT .� '-
�p" ue6·••$',-�r� I �PI• oms-u:,-01; I MW--, .. ,,_,,,, I AN, =-,t�-M� 1 6TH
z
:::,
APPROX .. te.soo SF
STREET
BETWEEN CENTRAL AVE. & OCEAN VIEW BLVD.
15TH
1t1iP'l-AC£ .a•• i
.F or SANITARY s£W.£R MAIH • • < ---
•• -- • '''Si: . ·,a.· .

STREET
RECONSTRUCT PAVEMENT APPROX. SP.too SF
STREET
BETWEEN LIGHTHOUSE AVE. & OCEAN VIEW BLVD.

I
BID ADD IT IVE 1
I.F'II C<Jl!i-l/6---0:.'5
STREET
REOONSTlfUCT PAVEMENT APPROX. 10.000 SF
w--
w
G
--GS
SS--
---3 CAP
E
-=-m-OOI 0::

WATER MAIN

WATER SERVICE

GAS MAIN

GAS SERVICE

SANITARY SEWER MAIN
APPROX
.
. 10.400 SF
1 3 TH
CONSTll'UCT
S TOl'Utl OltAIH
HIPll'OVEll£'N TS
Af'lf OOS-l�-001
BETWEEN LIGHTHOUSE AVE. & OCEAN VIEW BLVD.

GREENWOOD PARk
�
SCALE: 1 w = 40' ---�
o' 40' 80'
CONST"UCT
STOlltM 011.AIH
JIIPROV.EIIENTS
0 n
"'
SAHIT'ARY Si!'W�lt
S�OT ltCP.Allt
120'
r
I
l
I
I
--T

CAPPED SANITARY SEWER

UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL

UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE DUCT BANK
==so==
-r-/- S07"--/--rIX><XI
I' '; · -··1 >· , _. ,. ·-�-� ·- ....
·.:�.

STORM DRAIN

REMOVE STORM DRAIN

RECONSTRUCT PAVEMENT

REPLACE PCC

PROJECT OVERVIEW
FY 2022/2023 STREET REHABILITATION

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE, CALIFORNIA
Agenda No. 12 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joyce Halabi, Deputy Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: CONCEPT REVIEW: Proposed Skatepark Project
CEQA: Does not constitute a “Project” per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION

1. Determine if City Council consensus exists for a proposed skatepark project; If consensus exists, review Recreation Board proposed potential skatepark project location recommendations;

2. If Recreation Board location recommendations are accepted, direct staff to pursue discussions with Pacific Grove Unified School District (PGUSD) regarding feasibility for either site; and

3. 4. Return to City Council to present PGUSD discussion outcome.

DISCUSSION
Background
As part of the FY22/23 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the City Council allocated $158,000 of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for a proposed skatepark project. If advanced beyond the exploration phase, the proposal would result in a multi-year project for the construction of an all ages skatepark suitable for multiple types of users and non-motorized wheeled riding.

Execution of a proposed large-scale project of this nature entails several steps, which have been enumerated in previous staff reports, provided here. The vital first step of this lengthy process requires determining a location for proposed skatepark development.

To create a transparent and robust public process, the various sub-steps of the location assessment process have been shepherded through the Recreation Board and the Board’s Skatepark Subcommittee.

Since the commencement of the project at the start of FY22/23, 6 agenda items have been brought forth to the Recreation Board and one (1) update on the process and approach has been brought forth to the City Council. The Skatepark Subcommittee, comprised of two Recreation Board Members and a member of the public, has also convened several times to review/assess information and provide recommendations to the Recreation Board.

Throughout this process, several sites have been assessed for feasibility. Thousands of community members have voiced their opinion via public meetings, the community survey, and emails to the Recreation Board and City Council. This process has revealed that there isn’t a “perfect site.” Each site presents its own unique challenges and opportunities. The Recreation Board has recommended that the presents its own unique challenges and opportunities. The Recreation Board has recommended that the City continue to pursue the two (2) Pacific Grove Unified School District (PGUSD) Sites (Forest Lodge Road and David Ave Community High School Field/ David Ave Community High School field*) and to remove George Washington Park from consideration.
*Please note, that although there is a name discrepancy between the Recreation Board’s recommendation (“David Avenue Community High School Field”) and the public survey (“David Avenue Charter School Field”) these reference the same parcel (Parcel #007102006000). A specific location within this parcel would ultimately be determined by PGUSD, as it is their property.

Below is a summary of the Recreation Board’s location assessment steps and, ultimately, their recommendation on a path forward to City Council.

LOCATION ASSESSMENT
Initial Site Skate Park Criteria Scoring Assessment. At their June 23, 2022, meeting, the Recreation Board recommended staff evaluate suitable locations using a Skatepark Site Selection Criteria Scoring Sheet. This scoring sheet, developed by skatepark industry expert, provides various lenses to assess and evaluate sites. Items assessed include skatepark user amenities such as restrooms, picnic tables, drinking fountains, benches, and other recreational features, including athletic facilities and children’s play structures.

1. 2. Community Survey. At their August 25, 2022, meeting, the Recreation Board recommended:

Proceeding with George Washington Park as the primary skate park location and Arnett Park as secondary location, and to simultaneously initiate discussions with PGUSD regarding Forest Lodge.

Removal of Caledonia and Berwick Parks from consideration due to infeasibility.

City Staff to begin public outreach efforts, developing a survey noting George Washington Park, Arnett Park, Forest Lodge Road, and stemming from staff conversations with PGUSD staff, the field at the David Avenue Charter School parcel as a potential site.

The community survey was released on November 18, 2022, and was open through December 23, 2022. Availability of the survey was announced on the City’s social media accounts, the City Manager’s Report, mailers to every Pacific Grove address, and physical posters (in English and Spanish) at each of the sites. 2,329 responses were received. The final report, prepared by City vendor Zencity, provides an analysis of the survey responses. The final report can be found at:
www.cityofpg.org/skateparkproject.

At the January 26, 2023, Recreation Board meeting, City Staff presented the survey results which were harnessed by the Board as one source of feedback and data when considering a site recommendation to the City Council.

City staff meet with the Skatepark Subcommittee on January 30, 2023, to discuss the survey results and for the members of the skate park subcommittee to provide a recommendation to the Recreation Board.

SKATE PARK SUBCOMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO THE RECREATION BOARD At their February 23, 2023, meeting, after months of assessment and public feedback, the Recreation Board’s Skate Park Subcommittee brought forth a site location recommendation to the full Recreation Board. The Skatepark Subcommittee recommended that the Recreation Board recommend to the City Council to proceed with the David Ave Community High School field as the primary location for the proposed skate park. The Subcommittee recommendation was based on their assessment of the robust information obtained from the various data collection methods listed above. The Subcommittee also selected George Washington Park as the second desired location and Forest Lodge Road as the third desired location.

RECREATION BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
At their February 23, 2023, meeting, the Recreation Board voted 3-1-1 (with one recusal and one "no” vote) to recommend that the City Council:

Proceed with the two (2) PGUSD sites (Forest Lodge Road and David Ave Community High School Field), and
Remove George Washington Park as a potential site.

PRELIMINARY PGUSD DISCUSSIONS
Following the Recreation Board’s recommendation, City Staff met with PGUSD representatives to discuss the recommendation, gauge PGUSD's interest to proceed, and outline/understand the immediate next steps in the process if the Council were to direct staff to continue to pursue a proposed PGUSD skatepark project site.

PGUSD staff indicated that the previous PGUSD Board expressed willingness to explore the proposed skatepark project. PGUSD staff also indicated both PGUSD sites have deed restrictions that include non-reassignment clauses, meaning the property cannot be sold, and clauses that limit the use of the land to educational purposes.

NEXT STEPS
If City Council consensus exists for a proposed skatepark project, City staff (including the City Attorney's Office) should be directed to resume feasability discussions with PGUSD for both of the proposed locations, and return to the City Council with the discussion outcome for review/consideration.

OPTIONS
Determine that there is no City Council consensus for a proposed skatepark project. Selecting this option would end the City's effort in this area.

1. 2. Provide alternate direction (different proposed location, etc.).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

As part of the FY22/23 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the City Council allocated $158,000 of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for a proposed skatepark project. Less than $5,000 of this allocation has been spent to date, although significant Public Works Department staff time has been allocated towards this effort.

GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Public Comment

Yes for a Skateboard Park in PG, April 5 meeting
Claudia Sammis <[email protected]>
Wed 3/29/2023 1:48 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Yes, yes, yes. My preference would be for it to be in Washington Park, but anywhere that is centrally located is fine with me.

Sent from my iPad
Claudia Sammis
Salamander Field
Linda Shingu <[email protected]>
Wed 3/29/2023 8:37 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear Council Members:

I realize it has been challenging for your city to designate a place for skateboarders. I do not envy your decision making endeavors! Of course, I too, have an opinion.

I was recently able to set foot on Salamander Field and would like to state that, as an animal activist, I am totally opposed to paving this beautiful field. It is a natural site, full of natural life. Please reconsider this site! I was also privileged to visit other sites that have previously been passed over. Since they no longer are "natural," they would be much better choices. Both Forest Lodge sites looked great to me, and would be positioned far enough away from residents, so as not to cause angst.

In addition the Salamander Field site is much too far away from the bulk of children located in Pacific Grove.

Since all schools are closer to downtown, the site should be something all of the students of PG can easily access.

Thank you for your time! Good luck!
Linda Shingu, Former PGUSD Speech Therapist

SKATE PARK
robinaeschliman <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 12:19 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Pierik, Brian A. <[email protected]>;Rubens, Gregory J. <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Mayor Peake and Council members,
Considering land use, safety, city liability, noise, and the future it is my observation that Pacific Grove has no readily available and suitable place for a skateboard park.

Pacific Grove is not lacking Things To Do.

Miles of unequaled coastline to explore — dive, surf, swim, sunbathe, picnic, build castles . . .

Miles of walk / bike trail
Sports — both organized and free-play activities, several ball parks, a football field which the school district shares with scores of soccer and football organizations — PG residents as well as those of local communities
Readily accessible playground equipment for the littles among us.

As a participating grandmother, in recent years, I’ve spent a considerable amount of time at the Monterey Skate Park. I’ve visited the the Marina park. Monterey’s is closer, easily, and readily accessible.

Initially ambivalent about a skateboard park in Pacific Grove, but not at all about location — the suggestion of siting at Washington Park was received with disbelief that anyone who cares about the natural environment of Pacific Grove could consider appropriate such use there. I’m no longer “onthe-fence”.

In my opinion, the continued discussion of trying to fit a highly specialized use into an inappropriate location —one that is useful to a narrow segment of the population—fosters impassioned community divisiveness I find reminiscent of the well-remembered, observed, and profoundly experienced short term rental years’ long debate.

Please withdraw Council support for a skateboard park in Pacific Grove.

Thank you for your consideration,
Robin Aeschliman
Recently Retired 12-Year Pacific Grove Planning Commissioner “The truth is in the bits & pieces . . . “
Kern Jackson
Opposition to Skatepark
Spencer Greene <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 5:56 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] City of Pacific GroveI write this email in strong opposition of building a skatepark at Salamander Field on David Ave. There are several reasons for my opposition:

1. There are no sidewalks or street lights in in this area of town. Skaters will be riding in the street to access the park.

2. The noise of the skatepark will degrade the environment of a currently quiet neighborhood.

3. There is a skatepark available in Monterey that is 3.8 miles away from Salamander Field. This is not a prudent use of taxpayer money.

Thank you for taking my strong opposition to the proposed skatepark at Salmander Field into consideration
Sincerely,
Spencer Greene
1109 Buena Vista Ave
PacificGrove
Support for Skate Park
Jeff Haferman <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 10:18 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear Mayor and City Council:

I am in strong support of the creation of a skate park in Pacific Grove. Currently we travel to either Monterey, Seaside, or Marina to use their skate parks.

I understand that some people do not want a skate park near their home, or that some do not want to pave over open space. I would ask those people to help find a suitable location within the city for a skate park - certainly there must be somewhere within the city that could accommodate a skate park.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jeff Haferman
Pacific Grove Resident
City Council Member City of Monterey (2004-2012)
Continued Support for Skatepark (April 5 Council Meeting-Agenda Item 12B) Emily Haselbauer <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 2:05 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Recreation Board <[email protected]>
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear Recreation Board, Councilmembers, and Honorable Mayor Peake, The Skatepark is scheduled to come before you at the April 5th City Council meeting. If your schedules allow, please take the time to visit our existing active park spaces, including George Washington Park, Arnett Park, Caledonia Park, and the Community Center playground (Catapiller Park), as well as the proposed skatepark sites on PGUSD property; David Avenue, next to the Monterey Bay Charter School and Community High School, and Forest Lodge Road located directly behind PGHS.

Take note of the condition and demographics each space is currently serving. The proposed locations are both a reasonable distance from residences while keeping safety, visibility, and accessibility to a large population of children and families in mind. The community completed the skatepark survey, and the results strongly favor a skatepark in Pacific Grove. Many of our families live in small spaces, and our parks are critical outlets for movement, togetherness, and maintaining a healthy lifestyle. Public spaces belong to all community members, not just the immediate neighbors. In fact, most small skateparks are located in residential areas to create access and welcome children.

Pacific Grove has several open spaces for walking, reading, painting, meditating, birding, and quiet spaces to relax and observe. Unfortunately, our forested areas are not safe recreational spaces for children to gather, and loitering in Starbuck’s parking lot and Forest Hill shopping plaza are unsuitable alternatives. Updated parks and city facilities that truly engage and meet young people's physical and social needs are desperately needed. Children need connections to each other beyond the school campus and social media and access to public spaces that are safe, welcoming, and age and developmentally appropriate. Older youth need spaces to gather, not babysitting and programming. Is 10,000 sq ft of space for a skatepark and a place to sit that much to ask for? Please think of the positive physical and social impacts of this small footprint on our community in relation to the space dedicated to a golf course or perhaps a new hotel. A space for PG kids to hang out, be active, have fun, and make friends! Currently, there are no safe or legal spaces to practice skateboarding in Pacific Grove.

Children and families are underrepresented in city meetings. City surveys are overwhelmingly dominated by residents 55 and up. The Council’s job is to represent ALL Pacific Grove residents regardless of age or ability to attend meetings. Busy families and working parents do not have the time to devote to city business, and it is TIME that improving local parks and programming will give back to residents. The extra hours saved driving to and from neighboring communities several times a week and the free time and self-confidence developed when our kids can travel independently in our safe community is a fantastic gift to PG families.

The school board represents our young people and has a more accurate picture of what our students need to maintain their physical and social well-being, which correlates to improved academic success.

Please consider working with the PGUSD School Board to improve and create active public spaces and programs that best serve our families. Our student body is an untapped resource. Participatory planning with youth is an active civics lesson and a vital tool for creating thriving community spaces. A survey or questionnaire given to students could provide additional support for future planning of functional public spaces while preserving the quiet spaces also desired by residents. The City and School District are connected through our children and families, and improving city parks and programming builds a more robust and healthier community and student body.

Please work with the School Board to approve a location for a community skatepark and continue communications to define the needs of the youth in Pacific Grove clearly.

Lastly, please consider amending the April 5th Council Agenda to move the skatepark (Item 12B) to an earlier place in the evening to get our young people home before bedtime. We want to respect the Council’s time and other business, not take over the meeting.

Thank you for your consideration and dedication to the city of Pacific Grove, Emily Haselbauer
I have attached pictures to help visualize what a modern skatepark looks like.

Salamander Field
MICHAEL LYNN <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 6:31 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Pierik, Brian A. <[email protected]>;Rubens, Gregory J. <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] March 31 2023
Office of the Mayor and City Council
City Hall 300 Forest Avenue
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Dear Mayor Peake and City Council Members:

In regard to the skateboard park, I want to state my opposition to the use of the Salamander park site. It was not listed as a site when the survey was sent out and it should not have been selected as a last second replacement.

This has the scent of back room dealing and of corruption. I have lived in Del Monte park for over 50 years and have seen it transferred to the city from the county control. It was sold to us as getting better services but I seldom see police cars in this neighborhood except to visit houses on calls and they often don’t respond promptly or at all. Also putting a skateboard park next to a school and causing the school to lose use of the site for its students is beyond understanding. Traffic is often a problem on David Ave as it is the major access route for Del Monte park and having skateboarders traveling up and down the street will cause problems and potentially accidents with serious consequences. Drivers often don’t obey speed limits on this street even in the school zone. My kids went to school here and used the site area for school activities and after school recreation such as softball practice and the currant school uses the site for volleyball and other outdoor uses..Removing their access is possibly contrary to existing state law. Also I would mention that the fauna and flora depend on the existing green belt such as birds, deer etc. My first choice for the skateboard site was Arnett Park as it is on city owned property and is away from traffic and school sites. Please reconsider your choice.

Michael A. Lynn
1117 David Ave.

Pacific Grove
Save Salamander Field
Helen Ma <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 12:50 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Luke Coletti <[email protected]>;Debby Beck <[email protected]>;Lori McDonnell <[email protected]>;Chaps Poduri <[email protected]>;Joe Amelio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hi, Mr. Mayor Peake and City Council Members:

I am writing to request that you remove Salamander Field from consideration as a site for a skatepark. This field, identified by the Recreation Board as the baseball field adjacent to Community High and David Ave, is home to black-tailed deer, red-tailed hawks, foxes as well as species of other birds and a vast number of botanical species.

David Ave. is already a very busy street with school traffic, adding more traffic will pollute the air, be more noisy and not safe for the school kids.

School area should be peaceful, calm and quiet, putting a skatepark adjacent to the school will create many problems in the future.

A few blocks down we have a nursing home that requires quiet areas, and the traffic will delay the constant ambulance rushing to the facility.

We and neighbors love the green space and kids are running on the green grass, birthday parties, girls’ softball Pony League are using the field to practice, please do not deprive us.

We are supposed to go green and protect the trees and wild species, not cut the greenfield to put the concrete on, please find other suitable space.

Why was the Salamander field not included in the online survey in December? Why are we not notified of this selection? Why did we not get a chance to voice our opinion that a skatepark was unwanted?
Please remove Salamander Field, the field adjacent to Community High, from consideration as a site for the skatepark.

Sincerely
Helen Ma and David Smith
1127 David Ave.

Re: Skate Park info
Colette Queen <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 4:40 PM
To: Joe Amelio <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Cool!! If you need any help finding that info let me know! (There was a whole museum of skateboarding in Morro Bay before covid- not sure if its still open.) Much of the History during the 80s and 90s took place in Santa Cruz at shops such as Santa Cruz Skateboards so they would be a good resource. Skateboarding is really a majestic sport! Also i think it is important to factor in that there are no longer any rollerskating rinks on the peninsula. Del Monte Gardens closed and years ago there was a rink in PG on Grand Ave! (See photo) There also used to be a bowling alley in PG. There also used to be the carrousel/arcade spot on cannery row. What is there really to do in PG? The Aquarium? Go to the beaches? Golf? If you consider all ages of families that may visit here, many of the age groups are neglected. I know that money talks, and tourism is the main focus of what happens in the city. With that focus it is important to notice that the skatepark would be a bonus to some active tourist families. “Skater” or “surfer” families that travel from anywhere else in CA (since the vast majority of cities have had one or two skate parks since the 90s) would check to see where skateparks would be before they travel. When my son was 5 we traveled to SoCal for the California State Junior Olympics where he won a silver medal with the skate team sponsored by the city of Marina (worth researching -it was 2010 run by Terry Seichrist). Around here, my son was in a small group of under 10 skaters. I was blown away by the quantities of skating children and the number of and quality of skate parks in the area!! (A special facility to note is the YMCA owned facility in Encinitas CA. Their skate camps bring in the majority of their revenue and are world renowned!) Based on the current ludicrous state of us not having a single one (!), and the greater quantity of surf spots in Santa Cruz, we would not be on many families choice of vacation spots!!! Think of all the fun things to do in Santa Cruz! The Boardwalk, bowling, the train in the Redwoods, the beaches, surf lessons etc etc etc What do we have? A downtown full of vacancies or antiques? A golf course? Beaches? I think it is time to remember other age groups besides the 60+, either resident or visitor!!! 20 years ago when I bartended at a PG Mexicafe the joke was “time to roll up the sidewalk, its 7 pm here in Pacific Grave!” Too bad this is still the case!!! Life is beautiful and made for having fun!!! Remember that even “America’s Pastime” (Baseball) wasn’t well received when it came about. Old timers didn’t like that new fangled “stick ball” and now it is lauded as a symbol of American culture along with apple pie. Even before that there were old timers who didn't like the youngins rolling barrel hoops down the dirt roads with sticks. With out fun the mind-body-spirithealth circle cannot be complete. So at a certain point, the old timers griping is not the only thing that matters!!! Maybe in the near future Pacific Grove will be known for Monarchs and “sick” parks! (Sick meaning radical!) A change of values will be better for all! More visitors and tourist dollars and more quality of life for residents who work hard but will never even think of affording a home here where the baseline house price is 1million. At least while working 2-3 jobs to pay upwards of $3,000 in rent, they could go to the skatepark to unwind! Also on the financial note look at the Monterey Sports Center , opened in the 90s and all the revenue created just by providing space for physical movement! Thank you for looking into this further and helping others understand why fun is important and why it is important to care about all groups of people in a city, not just crochety, uninformed, selfish multimilliondollar home owners! Lets not embarrass our town anymore by fighting building a park that should be celebrating its 30th anniversary like the hundreds of skateparks all over the state that bring joy to many everyday!!!
Thank you,
Colette Queen

Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 31, 2023, at 1:07 PM, Joe Amelio <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you for your valuable input! If time permits, I will be showing some slides on some skateboards. best Joe Amelio, Councilperson
From: Colette Queen <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 12:56 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; City Council Members <[email protected]>
Subject: Skate Park info
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hello. I am a resident of Pacific Grove where we are currently struggling to help certain residents and the city Council see the value of building a skate park .From the time that my son was two years old, we went to the Monterey skate park every morning until about lunchtime, where he skated his heart out. He competed in many of the contests put on by On the Beach Surf Shop. He also loved to skate at the Marina skate park and participated in several of the skate camps. He also traveled down to the junior Olympics with the City of Maria skate team put together by Terry Seirgrist in 2010. It breaks my heart to see how resistant the citizens of Pacific Grove and the city Council are being to the idea of a skatepark! The City Council has already spent over $150,000 in researching this matter and now they still aren't sure if it is “needed”. They don’t see how far behind the times they already are by not having a skate park. In fact it took until 1995 for a basketball court to be installed due to worries of “out of town visitors” or “troublemakers”. These uninformed citizens are embarassing themselves by worrying more about the lives of trees than the lives of children, all while being age-ist and racist at the same time!! Most of these complainers won’t live many more years, why should the community suffer due to their baseless, ridiculous outcries? The only thing for youth to do in PG is go to Caledonia Park (usually only until the age of 4) or play baseball which not everyone is into. There is a Tennis court, where the elderly locals are so malignantly malicious that they fought against the use of the courts for Pickle Ball which is less injury causing and easier to start playing than tennis! None of these “concerned residents” have done any research or traveled to any areas where there are skate parks to see if their concerns are valid. They worry about the skate park being close to houses. In Marina, the skate park is at a school near houses and churches with no issues.Think of how many cities in California have multiple skateparks in city limits; it is actually embarrassing to not have a city skate park in 2023!! They worry that the skate park will cause drug use. There already is rampant drug abuse, but a well located and monitored park would prevent drug use for the window of time at which the individual was skating!! With the problems facing children’s and teens in this county, such as childhood obesity, ever increasing inside time on screens, and earlier onset of drug abuse, there is absolutely no reason not to fund an outdoor space that may help some of these kids find an outlet. At the end of the day, what is wrong with some people enjoying them selves by rolling around on some cement in a legally sanctioned area?!? Rollerskating dates back to the 1800s and Skateboarding made its advent in the late 60s. Skateboarding is now an olympic sport! In addition to kids, many adults enjoy the seratonin boost provided by challenging the balance and the brain by rolling on varied surfaces and enjoy teaching their kids how to skate. Do you have any information that may help me write an open letter to the city Council here in Pacific Grove? In Information such as the year that it was built, any issues that have occurred due to being built, security measures that are in place, any positive signs that it has helped teens, city reports, opinions from Police Staff or any information or data related to the skate park would would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you ,
Colette Queen
Sent from my iPhone
Skatepark site?
Susann LYNN <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 7:36 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> 1 attachments (19 MB)
IMG_5161.MOV;
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Please help us keep this open space for the well-being of all who come here for the quiet and peace.

Thank you, Susann Cate Lynn
"I am a (not) :) lonely painter; I live in a box of paints..." - Joni Mitchell No Consensus on Skatepark - Potential Crime Not Addressed Paul Walkingstick <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 10:41 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Bill Peake <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear City Council Members and Mayor Peake,
There has been a great deal of community strife and conflict surrounding the proposed skatepark project. There has been a steady ration of bullying, name calling, fabricated outrage news stories, and derision leveled at local residents who have the audacity to want to live a quiet life in Pacific Grove.

Legitimate concerns regarding the skatepark have consistently been dismissed, as if it was impossible that crime could be attracted to a skatepark. I’ve heard a great deal of anecdotal rebuttals to these concerns that go along the lines of “my kids don’t do drugs” or “I’ve never been offered drugs at a skatepark.” These anecdotes are cute, but dismiss the legitimate concerns of Pacific Grove citizens without ever addressing them.

I am writing this letter to show the City Council and the Mayor that there is a factual basis for the very legitimate concerns of our citizens. These concerns are not based on nothing. They are based on real events taking place in our area and deserve real consideration.

Natividad Creek Skate Park; Salinas
A 14 year-old boy was severely beaten by gang members during a MILPA event at Natividad Creek Skate Park. This was at an event that was supposed to promote community bonding and healthy outdoor exercise, which by this point sounds very familiar. Please click here to watch the video. You need to watch this.

El Estero Skate Park; Monterey
Pacific Grove local teen Angelo Callaú died of a fentanyl overdose that he got from a friend he made at the El Estero Skate Park. They met at the El Estero Skatepark and his skate buddy intentionally got him hooked on drugs at the skatepark in order to create a customer for his business dealing drugs… from the skatepark. Please click here to watch the video. It is important that you understand exactly why Pacific Grove citizens are justifiably concerned.

Other events never made it into the news, like the recent drugging of a child’s water bottle at El Estero Skatepark that resulted in the child having a violent reaction to the drug and being rushed to the CHOMP ER. Police indicated that this violent reaction may have actually saved the child from being kidnapped.

These are not cynical anecdotes meant to elicit a derisive laugh from the city meeting audience. These are actual events in our community that need to be soberly and earnestly addressed—not casually dismissed. Members of our community have been brutally impacted by skateparks, and it is not a laughing matter. Questions surrounding crime have in no way been seriously addressed, and indeed there have been zero negative community impacts identified or investigated. This is egregiously irresponsible.

Please determine that there is no City Council consensus for a proposed skatepark project.

Thank you.

Paul Walkingstick
702.912.9693

Salamander field
LJ Wik <[email protected]>
Fri 3/31/2023 9:54 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Pierik, Brian A. <[email protected]>;Rubens, Gregory J. <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] I have just heard from my neighbor about the proposed skate park at Salamander field.

Please do not pave over salamander field.

In its current state, Salamander Field is now a beautiful spot enjoyed by citizens of all ages as well as PG’s deer and turkeys. If converted to pavement, the former Salamander Field would serve a much narrower, specialized group.

I don’t know that PG should have to be all things to all people. But If the Council really believes a skate park is needed here, can it please be put somewhere that’s already been paved.

Respectfully,
Laurie Wik
1125 Miles Ave
Pacific Grove CA 93950
Sent from my iPhone.

P.G. Skatepark
Anne Downs <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 10:53 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Bill Peake <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] To the Mayor and City Council:

After visiting El Estero Skate Park on March 18 my husband and I decided not to support any skate park in Pacific Grove. We thought a sunny Saturday afternoon would be a peak time for park use-- given the larger population in Monterey and the close proximity of the park to P.G., but the only skaters were 6 young males.

The sign at the entrance says a lot about the contempt some skaters have for rules and property. (See picture)
Taking a look at the six skaters in the park confirmed it—not one was wearing a helmet or other protective gear. One unhappy skater repeatedly raised his board above his head and threw it to the ground. He was standing in the middle of the course and, at one point, flung the board all the way across where it smashed into the chain link fence. This guy never looked behind him to see if anyone might be heading in that direction—if they had it could have caused a catastrophic injury. This is a hazardous sport—in 2021, 152,390 young skaters (aged 5 - 24) wound up in the emergency room—many with head injuries.

What we didn’t see was equally telling. No parents or other adults, no police issuing warnings, let alone $100 fines. No girls skating—it’s an activity primarily for young males—of those skating at least once a week, only 16% are female.

Please don’t waste the city’s resources on this hazardous sport for a dwindling number of local kids. Our town offers a wealth of activities and venues for our youth—amazing beaches, bike and hiking trails, team and individual sports and much more provided by our parks and recreation department. We also have a world-class aquarium nearby with classes in marine biology for students.

Please vote against the Skate Park.

Thank you,
Anne Downs
The sign as it looked on March 18, 2023
Here’s what was covered up by our “law-abiding skaters." Skatepark
eileen catbagan <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 1:25 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Bill Peake <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] To the Mayor and City Council,
I remember how shocked I was to learn that this large concrete skatepark was to be constructed in George Washington Park. My first reaction was anywhere but GWP. Now I realize what neighbors to the other proposed skatepark locations must be feeling.

We visited the various sites before taking the survey. A sandwich board was placed at the Country Club Gate intersection to mark one site location and there was no indication of a site around the corner and down the street.

This is questionable as well as the fact that anyone indicating they were against a skatepark were not allowed to vote on a location. The survey also made no effort to limit it to residents of Pacific Grove.

My husband and I have visited all of the local skateparks and have yet to see anyone wearing a helmet.

There seems to be no location in Pacific Grove suitable for the skatepark as proposed. Pacific Grove could use their resources to benefit a larger group of youth.

Please vote against the skatepark.

Thank you,
Eileen Catbagan
Serious concerns about proposed skateboard park
Douglas Downs <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 10:50 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Pierik, Brian A. <[email protected]>;Rubens, Gregory J. <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear City Council members,
I am requesting the City Council vote against moving forward on the proposed Skateboard Park.

Why?

1. How many skateboarders, BMX and scooter riders there are in P.G.? That basic question was not on the survey.

2. No neighborhood of your fellow citizens wants a skateboard park next to them—every location for such a park has been massively opposed by the neighbors directly affected—this proposal has upset hundreds of your fellow towns people.

3. Pacific Grove’s student population continues to fall—not increase. Total of students in all schools in 2016-2017 2082 in 2021-2022 1802
https://www.pgusd.org/documents/Board/Board-Meetings-Agendas--Packets/Agendas-2021-

4. Nationally 76% of skateboarders are young males—one site under consideration, the Salamander Field, would take away a ball field currently used mainly by young women. According to an industry study done by GrandView Research, 23.9% of all skaters are female. Of people who skate at least 52 times a year (about once a week), only 16.6% are female. https://boardandwheels.com/can-girlsskateboard-obviously-yes/

5. Skateboarding is not as healthy as claimed. https://quotewizard.com/news/dangerous-sports-forhigh-school-and-college-students Injuries that sent people to emergency room:
2017 (5-24 year olds) 74, 780
2021 ( 5-24 year olds) 152,390——104% increase
Below is a notice on the Seaside Skateboard website
https://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/documentcenter/view/3560
WARNING – Skateboarding, SCOOTERING, BMX BICYCLING, and ROLLERskating AT THIS FACILITY are hazardous recreational activities. Use of this facility may result in death, paralysis, brain damage, concussion, broken bones, or other serious injury Use of this skate park is at your own risk

6. It has been a strategy of the Skateboard industry to have advocates send their children to City Council meetings across the nation to beg for the Covid Relief funds.

The Skateboard industry is in great decline with many companies going out of business. https://www.goskate.com/top/declining-popularity-of-skateboarding/ Fewer people are looking for skateboards and skate parks online than ever before, as shown by the fact that skateboarding searches on Google are decreasing.

Industry studies show skateboarding involvement is down for nearly every age group, including the youth.

Participation in skateboarding has declined. In the past ten years, parks are less crowded than they have ever been.

Skateboarding companies are closing.

Thank you for your devotion to Pacific Grove, Doug Downs 405 Alder Street Please remove Salamander Field, the field adjacent to Community High, from consideration as a site for the proposed skatepark
Alexis Krysyna <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 11:43 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Luke Coletti <[email protected]>;Debby Beck <[email protected]>;Lori McDonnell <[email protected]>;Chaps Poduri <[email protected]>;Joe Amelio <[email protected]>;Bill Peake <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;Recreation Board <[email protected]>
1 attachments (5 MB)
Office Of the Mayor & City Council.tif;
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Please read the attached letter regarding our response to the proposed construction of a skatepark in Salamander Field. There is a lot of concern in our neighborhood about the location of this project.

Thank you.

Public comment - CONCEPT REVIEW: Proposed Skatepark Project Wyatt Patry <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 12:59 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] PG City Council members,
Our family would like to express our support for the proposed skatepark project. We are supportive of the Forest Lodge and David Ave (Salamander Field) sites as they are the most accessible for PG’s kids.

We don’t think the GW Park location is very accessible; it is pretty far from every school and there are likely more children in the Del Monte Park area who don’t have sidewalks to ride on. We have two young children and would like to provide every opportunity for them to play outside in their neighborhood.

Thank you,
Wyatt Patry and Christina Vallin
Skatepark
Pishizuka <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 6:22 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] To all concerned
I know you have heard many arguments against having a skatepark in Pacific Grove so I will keep this short.

We feel that the spending of public funds and use of public assets should benefit the whole, not just a few with special interests
We do not want a skatepark at any of the proposed sites…we do not want it near any residential area…we do not want it .anywhere in Pacific Grove.

School owned property should be reserved for educational facilities and programs, not recreational.

Thank-you!
Patricia Ishizuka , Katherine Ishizuka, Momoyo Ishizuka, David Ishizuka Disposition of Skatepark at 4/5/23 City Council Meeting Bob Remen <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 9:26 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Pacific Grove City Council is scheduled to confront the question of a site for a prospective skateboard park at its April 5 meeting. The City Council initiated this process over a year ago by charging the PG Recreation Board with studying this matter and returning a recommended site to the City Council. By any measure, the Rec Board has failed in its assignment, as reflected by the dominant statements by three of the five Rec Board members at its last meeting. The so-called “public opinion” survey was subject to ballot box stuffing and interpreted subjectively. The list of candidate sites changed throughout the ongoing study. The underlying criteria for the size and function of the skatepark were ill-defined. The compatibility of a skatepark with its environmental and residential settings was not meaningfully or accurately examined. The actual demand, usage, amenities and capital and operating costs were not clarified.

What’s more, the skatepark has become a devicive matter within the PG community pitting neighborhood against neighborhood.

Now the City Council is faced with moving ahead with a skatepark next to a residential area OR recognizing that the groundwork for a decision has not been properly laid, and either tabling this matter OR at best, redirecting the Rec Board to start over in keeping with the dominant comments by three of its members. Moving ahead with such a weak foundation of understanding would only be adding insult to injury.

I urge the City Council to table this matter OR at best, redirect the Rec Board to take a step back and re-examine the skateboard matter, with the added direction that it’s need and usage be better established, that any such park should not impact Pacific Grove’s residential areas, that it be sized only as a local non-regional facility, and that a meaningful assessment of its amenities, capital and operating costs be determined. To act in the absence of this information would be irresponsible.

Sent from my iPhone
Download Attachment
Available until May 1, 2023
Our neighborhood open space
Susann LYNN <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 8:56 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] This short video shows what’s at stake for our neighborhood. Please help us keep the “Grove” in Pacific Grove. Thank you, Susann Cate Lynn
Click to Download
IMG_6079.MOV
0 bytes
"I am a (not) :) lonely painter; I live in a box of paints..." - Joni Mitchell Download Attachment
Available until May 1, 2023
Skatepark site?
Susann LYNN <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 11:35 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]> [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] This is our neighborhood serene, open space. Please help us keep this connection to nature and quiet.

Thank you, Susann Cate Lynn
Click to Download
IMG_1965.MOV
0 bytes
"I am a (not) :) lonely painter; I live in a box of paints..." - Joni Mitchell Fwd: Discrepancies in April 5, 2023 Agenda Report, Supporting Docs.

Save Salamander Field <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 8:48 AM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]> 8 attachments (11 MB)
Report Discrepancy.Council.3.31.23.pdf; Pacific Grove Skatepark Pulse Basic - FINAL SURVEY RESULTS.pdf; David.ave.School.landgrants.pdf; 1956.PB.landgrant.pdf; Deed #2047 6.29.49 Purchase from Del Monte Properties (David Ave. #1).pdf; 3127_August_Rec_Board_Minutes.pdf; 4 - [email protected] (1).pdf; PGUSD and City of Pacific Grove Ground Lease - Draft.docx - Google Docs.pdf; [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Save Salamander Field <[email protected]> Date: Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 8:44 AM
Subject: Discrepancies in April 5, 2023 Agenda Report, Supporting Docs.

To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Attached please find a detailed letter from Janet Gray regarding several significant misstatements and other discrepancies in the Public Works agenda report prepared regarding the skatepark project. The first attached document is the letter which details the most significant discrepancies. The rest are supporting documents, all of which are from either the City or County resources. Please consider this letter when reviewing the Agenda Report. Thanks for your time and consideration of these materials.

Janet Gray for Coalition to Save Salamander Field.
1 Janet Gray
Del Monte Park Resident
Founding Member of Coalition to Save Salamander Field
P.O. Box 51962
Pacific Grove, California 93950
March 31, 2023
Office of the Mayor and City Council
City Hall 300 Forest Avenue
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Dear Mayor Peake and City Council Members:

I am writing to address several inaccuracies and misleading statements in the Agenda Report submitted by Joyce Halabi, Deputy Public Works Director to the City Council for its consideration of the skatepark project. This report is dated March 31, 2023, in preparation of the Council's April 5, 2023 meeting.

The report claims to have created a "transparent and robust public process," even though what is now referred to as the David Ave Community High Site was not included on the described survey, or presented as an option to the community by the City at any point in this process. The current outcry over this selection has been the result of Del Monte Park citizens giving up their valuable spare time to contact impacted residents who stand to lose their only green space in this neighborhood.

The report attempts to assign the lack of outreach to a mere asterisk comment, again distorting the names as used in the original survey and public outreach. (Report, p.2.)
"Please note, that although there is a name discrepancy between the Recreation Board's recommendation ("David
Avenue Community High School Field") and the public
survey ("David Avenue Charter School Field") these
reference the same parcel (Parcel #007102006000). A
specific location within this parcel would ultimately be determined by PGUSD, as it is their property."
This statement is incorrect in several respects. It also demonstrates why not only should this Council reject what we call Salamander Field, (David Avenue Community High School Field) but also drop the project altogether due to the lack of transparency, and reliable, accurate information.
2 First, the survey described the location not as "David Avenue Charter School Field," per the agenda report, but as the "PGUSD Ball Field behind Monterey Bay Charter School." (See page 5, Survey, attached) In fact throughout the survey, "David Avenue" was never mentioned, nor the Community High School. The attempt to change the wording used in the survey is telling in terms of the smoke and mirrors that the agenda report is apparently relying on to justify the last-minute addition of Salamander Field, aka the field adjacent to Community High.

Additionally, the sandwich boards directing residents to the survey and location of the site subject to the survey were located outside of the ball field behind the Charter School, at the parking area just outside of the entry gate to Pebble Beach at the Country Club Gate entry.

Suggesting that PGUSD be in charge of determining where on the twenty-acre parcel the skatepark should go ignores the fact that the school district does not engage in land use decisions as a rule, and is undergoing some turmoil due to the recent resignation of the superintendent. The survey location, the PGUSD field behind the Charter School, does not front any residents, but is a thoroughfare for not only residents in Pacific Grove traveling to downtown, but also an entry point for Pebble Beach residents. Salamander Field is close to not only several residents along David Avenue but also Pebble Beach residents residing on Congress Road, in addition to being a de facto park.

To label this as a mere "naming" discrepancy demonstrates both the lack of transparency in this process, the disenfranchisement of the residents of Del Monte Park, and a serious undermining of the public process.

Second, while there is a single parcel of land, it was granted to PGUSD in three grant deeds years apart totaling nearly 20 acres of land. [See attached list of land grants from the Pebble Beach Company, then operating as Del Monte Properties].

There are three separate deeds. The land where Salamander Field is located, adjacent to Community High, was granted in 1956. The land where the survey location resides, was part of the original grant in 1949. This is important because the 1956 grant expressly requires that the Pebble Beach Company, approve any structures built on the property other than an actual school building. (See attached Deeds, 1949, 1956)
The "location assessment" section is misleading in many parts, though the most significant is the suggestion that the Recreation Board recommended at their August 25, 2022, meeting that public outreach efforts with the survey comment, with the field at the "David Avenue Charter School parcel." The public record reporting the agenda or the minutes from that meeting approved in October of 2022, do not support the validity of this statement. The minutes state, "After much discussion about wording, motion made by Hazen, with second by Smith, to 3 recommend following: proceed with GWP as primary park location for public outreach, and Arnett Park as secondary location, also included in public outreach; simultaneously initiate discussions with PGUSD regarding Forest Lodge as secondary location; and remove Caledonia and Berwick Parks from consideration due to infeasibility." (See Minutes Approved re August 25, 2022 meeting, October 2022 Rec. Board Meeting.) Note that now, the agenda report has shifted from dealing with the two distinct sites, Salamander Field, and Country Club Gate entry site, as one site that was part of the conversation months before the survey.

It is misleading, because as detailed above, the initial site was about a half a mile away by car from Salamander Field, on the opposite side of the over 20 acres of land owned by PGUSD at this site. It also creates the impression that the "David Avenue site" adjacent to the Community High was in contention as a site before the survey was undertaken, when it was not.

The name changes between the described sites suggest that creating confusion among the decision makers can be accomplished by simply marginalizing the defined area, as simply a "name discrepancy." The two areas between the original "PGUSD Ball Field behind Monterey Bay Charter School" and the Salamander Field, aka, Community High site are distinct in terms of location next to residences and uses by the community as green open space. It also ignores the physical reality that the Charter School ends well before Community High School--there is a preschool between them. The ball field behind the Charter School refers to the field near the Country Club Gate as a matter of physical reality.

The agenda report also claims that there were "months of assessment and public feedback," when in reality the residents of David Avenue and Del Monte Park, were not apprised of any use of Salamander Field by the City through the survey or otherwise. Most of us learned about it through a digital Herald article that appeared in a morning edition on February 22, 2023. The continuation of the term, "robust information gathering" is a complete misstatement of fact as to the Salamander Field, Community High site.

If there is any doubt about how the agenda report continues to confuse the issues, the agenda then reports that "[f]ollowing the Recreation Board's [February 23, 2023 meeting], City Staff met with PGUSD representatives to discuss the recommendation, gauge PGUSD's interest to proceed," and outline the next steps. (Report, p. 3.) In fact, PGUSD representatives were already discussing the Salamander Field site, aka Community High, weeks before the February 23 board meeting, and were given a proposed lease for the site. The enclosed email suggests that many of the conversations were done by cell phone, thereby eliminating a public record of the discussions. (See attached emails PGUSD to Public Works Dept., and proposed contract, obtained by public records request) The Salamander Field location was never subjected to any type of site assessment report or other 4 public scrutiny of any decision making as to this choice of site, that have been subject to review on public reports available online.

In short, the Public Works Department report in and of itself demonstrates the lack of transparency in this process, reliance on incomplete, misleading and in some cases outright false information.

We request that this site, Salamander Field, adjacent to Community High, be specifically dropped from consideration as a site for a skateboard park. We also request that the Council decide that there is no consensus for a skateboard park, thereby dropping the project from City consideration.

Sincerely,
Janet J. Gray
Coalition to Save Salamander Field
Enclosed: Attachments:

Skatepark Survey
Land grant map
1949 and 1956 Deeds
August 25, 2022 Approved Minutes, Recreation Board
Pacific Grove, CA
Skatepark Pulse Survey
December 2022
www.zencity.io
Total Survey Respondents: 2,329
Residents: 2,088
Non-Residents: 241
• Overall, respondents supported the planned skate park, with the PGUSD Forest Lodge Road Site attracting the most widespread approval as a proposed location, given its proximity to nearby schools and recreational facilities.
• Less than a fifth of resident respondents did not favor the project. • Respondents expressed mixed attitudes about George Washington Park, with disapproval outweighing support. Respondents disliked George Washington Park as a suggested site due to possible disruptions of the natural environment and the nearby residential neighborhoods. • Respondents largely disapproved of the Arnett Park site. • Transportation accessibility and safety were among the respondents' top factors in choosing their preferred location.
• Respondents' top concerns about the project focused on noise, parking spaces, and maintenance.

Custom Engagement Report 2
Introduction
• The following report provides a review and insights into Pacific Grove residents' attitudes toward the proposed skatepark.
• The report comprises an analysis of responses to a survey designed by Zencity and deployed by the City. The report provides a separate analysis between residents (90% of responses) and non-Pacific Grove residents (10% of responses), differentiated by the respondents' provided zip code. • The survey was conducted between November 18 — December 28, 2022, and received 2,329 responses. It included six closed-ended questions.
• The number of responses in some questions are greater than the total number of respondents due to some questions utilizing a “select all” functionality. This functionality allowed more than one response.

Executive Summary

DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS
Custom Engagement Report 3

1. Residency (according to zip code provided by respondents) 2,329 responses
Nearly all respondents indicated they reside within Pacific Grove (a total of 2,088 respondents). Only 241 respondents, 10% of the total responses, provided a zip code outside Pacific Grove.

2. Age Group
2,293 responses

DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS
Custom Engagement Report 4

3. Which of the following do you identify as?
2,329 responses

4. Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish origin?
2,329 responses

5. What is your race?
2,448 responses*
*Responses are not mutually exclusive, as respondents could select more than one answer.

CLOSE ENDED-QUESTIONS
Custom Engagement Report 5

1. Which of the following locations do you think would be best for the proposed skate park? Among residents responses, the PGUSD Forest Lodge Road Site was the most preferred location for the proposed skatepark, garnering over a third of responses (38%). Nearly a quarter of respondents replied that George Washington Park was the best location for the skate park (22%). The third leading location was the PGUSD Ball Field (13%). Arnett Park ranked lowest among the proposed locations, attracting 5% of responses. A little under a fifth did not support a skate park in Pacific Grove (17%).

Residents' and non-Pacific Grove residents' responses are analyzed separately in the following section:

Non-residents responses | 241 responses
Among non-local respondents, George Washington Park was the most popular location for the new skatepark (35% of responses), with the PGUSD Forest Lodge Road Site coming in a close second with 33% of responses. Non-residents were more supportive of the proposed skate park, as only 6% of respondents replied they did not favor it.

Residents responses | 2,088 responses
Custom Engagement Report 6

2. For which, if any, of the following reasons did you choose this as your preferred location for the proposed skate park?
*Responses are not mutually exclusive, as respondents could select more than one answer.

Residents responses | 3,130 responses
Non-residents responses | 368 responses
Ease of transport accessibility was the most important factor among resident responses regarding their preferred location, attracting nearly half of responses (43%). Safety was another prominent feature (18%). The offering of recreational activities and facilities and proximity to respondents' homes or schools garnered a similar share of responses (14% and 13%, respectively).

Respondents who offered additional input favored a site far from residential neighborhoods that would not cause noise disturbances or parking space shortages, largely referring to possible disruptions caused by choosing George Washington Park. Others wished to use underdeveloped spaces that were compatible with nearby land uses and would not disrupt residents or wildlife, largely referring to the Forest Lodge Road Site and its proximity to nearby schools and recreational facilities.

Non-local respondents displayed similar attitudes to residents, emphasizing accessibility and safety, followed by amenities and proximity. Mentions of noise disturbances and disruption of wildlife were also featured prominently in a group that answered "Other" and selected George Washington Park as their preferred location.

Custom Engagement Report 7

3. Which of the following locations do you think would be the least suited for the proposed skate park?
Residents responses | 1,657 responses
Non-residents responses | 200 responses
Almost half of the resident respondents selected George Washington Park as the least preferred site for the new skatepark (42%). A fifth (20%) of respondents were unsure, and a similar share disliked Arnett Park (18%). The PGUSD locations– the Ball Field and Forest Lodge attracted a similar share of responses (10% and 9%, respectively).

Comparing residents' attitudes regarding their preferred location indicates that the PGUSD Forest Lodge Road Site has a wider consensus among respondents as a suitable location for the skate park.

In contrast, more respondents dislike George Washington Park as a proposed location than approve of it. Additionally, respondents widely disapprove of Arnett Park as a suggested location.

Non-Pacific Grove residents were largely unsure of their least preferred site (43%). George Washington Park also ranked highly among non-resident disliked locations (18%), followed by the PGUSD Ball Field (14%). In contrast, as stated earlier, George Washington Park was the most popular location for the new skatepark (35% of non-resident' responses), showing that slightly more non-resident respondents preferred George Washington Park as a suggested location than not.

Custom Engagement Report 8

4. For which, if any, of the following reasons did you choose the above location as your least preferred location?
*Responses are not mutually exclusive, as respondents could select more than one answer.

Non-residents responses | 150 responses
Residents responses | 1,717 responses
Respondents mainly provided additional reasons for their least preferred location (41%). The most common themes from residents' feedback concerned George Washington Park. In addition to protecting the park's green space and habitat, they worried about its proximity to residential areas and the availability of parking spaces.

Lacking accessibility, missing amenities, and safety concerns were among the respondents' other top reasons (21%, 17%, and 15% of responses, respectively).

In the non-resident responses, George Washington Park's importance as a natural open space and its proximity to residential communities.

Custom Engagement Report 9

5. Which of the following facilities would you like to see located at the skate park? *Responses are not mutually exclusive, as respondents could select more than one answer.

Residents responses | 4,440 responses
Respondents ranked restrooms and water fountains as the most important amenities, attracting a third and a quarter of responses, respectively. Respondents also wish to see parking, lighting, and picnic tables.

Those who replied "Other" added having the park fenced and gated, seating that overlooks the rink, use of native plants, and trash cans.

Non-residents responses | 604 responses
Non-residents expressed similar attitudes, marking restrooms and water fountains as their desired amenities in the proposed park, followed by lighting, parking, and picnic tables.

Custom Engagement Report 10

6. Which of the following general concerns do you have about the proposed skatepark project? *Responses are not mutually exclusive, as respondents could select more than one answer.

Residents responses | 4,728 responses
Noise nuisance was the most frequent concern expressed by respondents, closely followed by maintenance and environmental concerns (20%, 18%, and 17% of responses, respectively). These attitudes correlate with respondents' reasoning for their least preferred site, George Washington Park.

To a slightly lesser extent, respondents worried about parking and traffic, crime and accessibility (14%, 12%, and 9% of responses, respectively). These concerns also appeared among respondents' preferences for their chosen locations. Other concerns included City liability for injuries and upkeep costs. We note that many respondents that replied "Other" emphasized that they do not have any concerns.

Non-residents responses | 604 responses
Maintenance was the leading concern among non-resident respondents (21%). Accessibility, parking, and traffic garnered a similar share of responses (16% each). The "Other" category mostly included respondents stating they had no concerns.

Report By:

Contact Me:
• Overall, respondents supported the planned skate park, with the PGUSD Forest Lodge Road Site attracting the most widespread approval as a proposed location, given its proximity to nearby schools and recreational facilities.
• Less than a fifth of resident respondents did not favor the project. • Respondents expressed mixed attitudes about George Washington Park, with disapproval outweighing support. Respondents disliked George Washington Park as a suggested site due to possible disruptions of the natural environment and the nearby residential neighborhoods. • Respondents largely disapproved of the Arnett Park site. • Transportation accessibility and safety were among the respondents' top factors in choosing their preferred location.
• Respondents' top concerns about the project focused on noise, parking spaces, and maintenance.

We would highly appreciate your feedback on this report by filling out this 2-minute survey.

Private & Confidential
[email protected]
Noa Landsberger
Conclusion and Takeaways
11 •.

. . ····~~~....-c; ,, •. ·• •11' ~ "·w-::·,.-~.-f--"'"'.;:-,...-:r.··· .,: ;~i/:::~:.-.Jr~)·i/·: :r:·~~~'t· ··; _; __ ~.· ,_
·~··j· ·.;.JC: l!•·.~•;1:•--,\~--!'w- -·••' i.
,•'•••· . ~l.lf~l:,- '.,;J. '.'lJ~•~•I < ?~• ,, ,I 't \' '._:l~ •·• . ,. • " .,.. , rJt_., .. ._ I 4~ ·~f it • : ; .. ~tf"'~ •.... ~ ... .-: . . / ' "'. {~ -~ i
... :' .
- I '
-;
t~~~• " '
,,.
,.,
.,
m1149,.10'J~ . . . -.,-J
•. ' -.. i
,.
4 ,. ...
•. -~ !':•~-- ,.,.. I·
.. :.,•
u•t• .... . ~:

U> 0 Jorth ;o 27' J:aat 7~1.85 !eet; thence
.. n~.,;. . .. - <~)
• ,,, ~ .. ii:' •'' : • . . :.., .... ,. ..
·:-.r- ;·. -,! ,
,,. .... ' . ·'·
;' ~ ,:: · .. '·. , ... ~~t
. ! 1,\ . ' ..
:~\ · '• .. , ~t > . , . .-,' i ,:O_ Rln ~ TC HOIJ>, all Ai1d li~ar the above ·--i· .,,. t,\'11·', ' .. :'•·· . '.,·. ,.,;. .. ' . .
:. ~.' .•~ _ .. /.~~:t:~t:lo~d.·~-~clo■cr~b•d premlaoe together with the appurte11a.11ce■ .{~i-~:-:.:;; ~t-~ ~ -•~\G~antae and Wlto eai~ Gra.11~•~'..\suc~euon and . '!; ' . . t r. ua1p1 !oNftr, .• •-~~ : .•. ·. "
. , 1l" · .,,5i. · ., · ·l · · . ' .,
· .. · .. ,ft-~~_;\~f ,'.i·,.', ..
1 "_t111• COATeJIID.C~ 11·'made and accepted.aubJect to the " . / t". ,i • • . • ' ' 11,· .. ""
1 ~:: .: }-:· folle1v1Dc_•ZJ1rot• c:OA41t1o~•• c:onnante. and_ ~~1trict1on1, ·tlul ,· V~ .. ;· "· u1A ol>Ject of vhi~ cond1t1oiie, covenaAta an4 re11tr1ct1oua .i l '•;1' ( «: . ,41'. I :Yi •' • . ·, '~.. . . ' ' . ~ .. ..l'.~ ~{ ~:: ·,. ti la ,o ~evut IUCA UH of the property hereinbe!ore described ; !: "'"Ii- • 't';,;" . : . ". : . r.< - ,, . 4 • •
, • ; ~i '- •. • -~':4 .. '!li&ht t84d · to 411111nhh e1 ther ~e valuable or plee.111rabla • _-: i . 1t~ ~~:;;~, ~oJmezi:/ci: ;~ 'other pr~erty- with~n the tract of which 'tho ·.:l · ·. ;;;,~~~ ·~;~~: :.,. '. · ·: · :--;:i ·_ ' . · · • , ·, ·, !~ F~H• AOf41~. 4••cr1be4 ~ a part, to-w1t:
.... ,. •"· ··•}~-.: .:. : - .- .. ' , t:11· '•,'i .. ' .-_ •;. · . · 1 .JWT1 lleither the Gran\ .. or it• auccenor■ or ; ' "'•f : t · .. : : ~ .. . : • ' ,, \. i~~;i,_-.;°. '. \:~alp•~ Zl!Jl' oq other p~reon or persona 'occupying an.id land • .:J~•• . • • C
.. ~:. :t;t~:, ; • < or. ·Femi~~• o~ -~ pa.rt thor~of, under t~ or an,y of them, · ·,:·~~:: .: './, ~l at ~=(l~~-permit ~- a:peciee of &ambl.lnt;,~ nor ~u!~tur•~ ·I · .• tilif!' • ; Ii-• . . . - .. ; ·, F • , ' • , •
.. \¥.~7· -·~- .. -~- cir ■all, or pve awii.,, or exchall6e, or trade,· or deal_liith 1A '.: -~;.,: \t).f "/;\ ·~ v~, ~- ~~d p~emiB~• or ~ pa:-t the;~ot, a:q ap1r1tuoue, • ·;;:~ru- -yi.{.~;~, ~~· •. : ~, ·~; other 1Atonc:u_;,-liquor1~ . '~, ,. r\, . . . ; •· t;~:~ . } ,,. : ~ :~ ~_., · . .' , · ~Olma ':bat n.c bu.1141114 for othar thaA dwellln&, .. :·:.,_
1 t(! •~r .. : ·r,~~•~-- pr 1dlool J\Ul)OH■ lball l)e trected or ma.111ta1ned upon '. · .~ ;• '.·.•~;:f:~~::: ll&id ;;~per~,- ~ n~ trade or\~a-1ne1a of~ clee,ript1ou other tha.a. • .'~• I "11::1"{.,'t.:•'~• . •. ,••• •• • . • :-' • •, • • I· . i_ '\ltf :,', ~i• ~~ o_f ~ •chool at.wlent_. ~tore _8A4/~r ~a.tateria,. ~ bo carried ~ \•t~"f•· .:·-:•:--: ~OA 11114 ~~~11fll b;r tho ~tee orb~ a,,,;j- o~er !•~•~ or per1011e . • .. -~ l; •·:'_~· uder o:r thro• ea14. Gra11tee. · · \·,

1. ·.: ,i•'-'·. : · -lf.:'l · . ·
. '· ... !'~··· .:: . ·,: .•. ,.,ti\_ ·- .,; ... , . : ~~ ~ " '. . 'I! ,.' . 1< ' . :.~ . :_ .,.i . ; ;.:, ,._ • :.: .. ~•• ._ '1 • •• I . ~ - ~ ..
. . ~I t"i I' . \, ' •
·. '• . ij·, r: . .,,•••, .. 't
. ft' ~- . . .. \'t l:. ·~. , .....
. ~ . ~-.,,r· ·t': ·- ·
. --.I~< "'·\-- :; . . . i.,i· l · -' ~ ,·.., '.·. :
_:~.i:-,r;.:,' .: _::~~ .{
~ ' , ;, ~ ,I \. ~ l '• •tf
.· ..... . ... .
• South 29° 51'
~ r .
coutainiq 7.250 aorea, more or leea, a11d bein& a portb.a. ket 515,62 teet to ths point ~r be&uin.inc,
:,
of Pol~\Jllno1 Ranc~o, Nc11tere7 County, Cal.1fcrn1a. '... ·., •'
., ·)
-". '
.j. I I ..
·i
Ill
~
,· :·
;-.J
--~-,)
ism, lo tc:hool bu1lcU.nc or other improvement ■hall be . ·. ,•
:41
. 2.
-•
'·
.;
I
•·• , c=
~
~tt",~/f~~~~~~ -11•·~ . "•11~F.
.-.. ..• ·,x . :· , .... -.,-,.-~- :,•• . •:. . "~-
-~ :• :<:·. /t ~:,- ' .. ?[ .. ;.:•. • . .'.:,:, .I;~:•·, • /.'::• . • · · r • •• "i't • •• · - . 4 • . • .. J. • ,, .. . . t
,:-'-''•.1•-~'..'':..\· .. .,-.Q\ii4,,M1Jl .· \~t41'&l\ffl40i-j ,. h, Upol& 1&14.prq1Hl1 Ut11 , •·•-'It;..~;:-) •1/ '',;,, •' ><~i~ ,), - ~ ;jA)~, '":f! • . . ' ,:, • , I -~- · ,';_;, . ..,..i -~ ""»~•• ·azit ■j1a1!tcatlou1 therefor ad th■ 11neral color 1ahem1 of 1-.. • • .. ., • •
. .... . .. '
: · ~I.; .tu ~terior
1 ~-reot ha.ti tint been 1ubm1tt1d to ani!. a:pproved by the , ,,t
1 , • r•'' . ,('~ • .. > ' ,·, ••.:.,
1 , ,· ,-\ , . . I
t/ ,~ \ i ~.,. ,. i-1Di.'li9¼0A, 01 ~!•Ot\\J:'1, itat• llepartment of 111bl1c Vorka, ad the ,: ' ... '· ~~·' ' :·:' . ; . . -.,·. . .
,: · 8tate.J2hil1O11 of Schoolhouu c.ui...wuig, or other a«•ncy au.thorhed. b7 •·.>. ;_ .. :>1\;}f~~~.:~•; ~•r, no ·11;n111& or .i:•■t4~' or ■truct~• of~ ,~114, /'.-. ;• ·:·. '_ .' .fl~\:••o~ bull4U.Ca
1 .lb.all be. ~reote4,. ~ta1iie4, altered ·o~ added
I J•:•,
1 .,,. _-,0 .~,, •• \-., • • • r 0
.: · ·>. · :· :~~J~·••::~~ •!114 ~~~ .. ,. bere~7 c0Zlve7e4, until the plu■ and IP•cifica.-_ J: ... '. · · ·;.~t1ou ~~efor:■hall ha~• 'bee aub~tted. to_ and approved 1n vritln& b;y , , I.·, ,. ,,,-a 1. ,
;\ '. ~ :~ ~: o~ th■ tir1t = part hereto. ·
·-. ·~t :·,~ · ·.,: · ... JOtmJ(• ,that the prem1111 h■re1Jl described lhall net be . . . ..,A~\ I '1 ~-l •·· ; • . ; ·•. . . . . •
, .•. ·, ·:: . .' t : . )·'~0Jl~ll!'11• _.trff~•r~ ,or a■eioied (vhather volwitarlly or 111volW1tar11.J', l-~\J\ •• ~, .t~'1f;,r-;. . . .,-
i'..: :"~ · ~: '.;· · .. r-~ ;:%tr-:~• d~~c:~\ ~~~ 4q11e) • ezc:~t aa ~ whale or a■ 'an 111t1ret1. ._ ... ·,· •'.;,,~ .. :· h\?!,' •·. -r~r. ~ bulldlAe or other 1tni.cture, e.xceptin& a ,ll l "f ,'I~ .. <j•·· .• • .
· : · ' . ~.;_ lt111c:11t~N~te4 cm •~4 _FllllbH •h&ll hAve a nut-back" ot no; ll!e■ ~b.an • • I • .. l }·· • \;. .. . ·• " . . .
~~- _ · .. · ~;, :; , ,~~:,•~ (l5l/eet fr~ -~he. line o! ea.eh 11freet abl.l.t ttr.g aa.1.! prec.1aea • ~+••. _ •·. ,'~£•--.-.~~~ : . .. SI~& !hat tho prom1aea herein 1eei:r1'!led 11h&l.l ::.ot, • '. ,'•t:•mar ~'.~i,art thereof• nor uq aat&te or ktereet therei:i, ar ~ ..{. • t- . ~~i~!,.:, .t~ ~r~~~: .:, ~ umo; be eold, conve;,ed, tensad or trll.lleforrdd. - ., ~; f~~• ~~:;. ,.:~ ~tecl_ ~~ ~~ -o~~upied ar uaed. b:t Ae1at1c■1 1:l'euoee, or a:.¥ rerar.Jl .• . . .• ·1• ' . : t- • . ..
" ',·. ~,)~~ ~,~,'rlu'ldlh Jbp~ro, nor~ l1neal'deecen4ant of such pereon, . \t~~(f\»~~•011■ of 1&14 race■ 111&.Y be •t~ent11 or empl019d 1::. ccnnection , ._ : -:}Pvt tk .•~i 1cl;col. . . r . , ·. ~; t. ·••J!i:· 'f4!· •••. ·'t.. ·•· ~; ;, :~ :~ : . -~~t;" · :'. }(: J!' ;· ~ ~~~·· ':h• Ckutor h•reb;y upreaal;y re11rvH •
1 ·;'/ \.'~~-l:._..,,~~-~r~-~1111 all ea■_~11ent 111 a_ •~~ip at lud 5 foe\~~~-"-. ,· I I . I~. .. . ·- . ~ .f. , , • 1, ~·~~ .~ ~ ~ 11d.• liziaa ~ ■-14 premi■ea to erect ~ole• . ·, :.' ·. ·':.·-~ ·.: r~~;~~o, ~8;Po~ vl:roa for the trulJlli■-ion of •leotrici\7 · .: ~ ;1 for. µP.tizle ~ other purpo■e■, an4 for the con1trucU011 ~ · ;;·;- !'~)~~t~ce of ~llll- aui~rt■ tor tho· coii~e~ of -~face water• ~: : . -.-~·, ~ . "•: . .•· t .. . . . ·• . t
.t : · \, 111 a ·amomat ziot to GC;H4 =• ■ec:Olld. foot of vater, an4 to !\,: .•. · '•'i '. . . . ~ . . ·,
. · · • i?ccmat~t. operate u4 lll&intaill pipe 111101 or aon41ut■_ under i . •· • • T '•
· ·l~~ ~~ o~ ~4 re■~natioA for aq lav.f'Ul P\UllO■o ~t■~ ·. · .),.er. lo. atruc\ure ■hall be built u11011 the property affeote4 . • •t I :
... , . . '~
.. -~Pii:-
•• • ••. _., t • :;.
.· ·.,,/ : ~- ~•'.-11""'. ,.
-~l ... ,.,.,.
• •.,.. 0 • ~ •• : . o\ I
· t~ ~. ~ . ':
•• ;, ·1~ t I _J::
. ·. ·•·:t~} ... -~~-
.' '. :.: .
-
777P nll -
,, -. ,,, •· • I
, ~
.. , ... _.
r '.
~
.. ,
ii1 !,
~
"? 9 ., ...
l:l .' \' \ ,.·: ., ,.
ta' I
. Ill':-! .
~
\ r.
.. ·••1•-'\'!' 'r.v'l' •~- ~{F . ·.• :· .,,·.-·:it! ... 1. .. .-\ .... •:,.. ·.~ . '. •• / •• ,,.-:. 'I;;; ti!,-, . :· -· ·, ... '1,-.' ,· f • . . -~- ' \ ·:,;f: ~t-• ,·\-~~:.;·.'!!~p:a.~~·:.~:.:·.~ ~; •
.. ·-:.\:l''·~--- .~,-,~.· .. ~,<-\·, J:i.· . • · I - •• ; ~ - • .:-~ .,_ t.. .1· , t 1'{. . ;; •• _. ·1 '· t .. ♦,, ' . .,~ ♦ ~ ~ • '-, ':"·t- ... '"" . I •(. 1"' • " .. . .•. - \rt· ·, ... ·~' . . . 'I •
I . • ':•··-~~t?·<_••~, • •: •~· '
~&.:' . . . . . . ·t. " t
~.1.:"." 1••~•-t: ~;, L f !'1~• ~ • •:•
,~, /,.· !:)-;y ~·-. _,.,:·_.
;. ...,.r' ~ ... ~ ' . : --:.
. 4•r I .... ;"! : •
-# •••• , \ ,· ...
' I ,·\ ' . .. • • • ..
'•t~• i\ ·.,fe/~ -;~{ ~~f~::!~';;;,!'t~~n- ot f1~t ?t way and said prop~i:ty ahall • _/_,., -~ ~~}\t~L.lll:l ;t~me.a ~:-~ op~n to_ the_ Qran~or and any public service · · ~ ~ _: .;_~ · : !~ _ C:'Of.P,Ofat1o~ wh1~}l may requJre the uae or aaid right or way. • • .. \ f:' ·; l fi. ,;,~ ,.t j., /:. t . : ... I •• • • • ~ • ... . o::_;. i~. ~ ·rfl':":f_::~r.: ... l~!~H, In the. 8V4'~~ ot a breach ot "" ot the '. •.: :;Jk• ·_.·\ 'J~~,~~o~••. ~.~:~;'~anta o~ .~_e•_tr1ct1ons herein __ c:~~~~1ned: the ·1 ••· 1.: (' .~ ... tapur_e. on th• wt. ot the Orantee1 ror a period or thirty l '"' f t • ; • 1 • \ , •• ., '\ • · a . • •
·_ ·_. :, ; '11·• . ;t '.:cjof 'days atteir. -~111ng ~t written notice ot ·said breach to .r;~--•~f,~·;\;~1~·.~··: .. ·l·;.'-~'· .• : ... :., ,-.- - : · . · .... •, ~ 1 ·: ~·; · ~-~• :a~~~J• o~ _owner ot -~•cord,· postage pr~paid1 addressed ?-;1;:!~'~ ~~:}?~1!f c Grove; Ca~1to_~n1a, t9 commence ~nd thereafter · ·: :l~!~f :~~fli.*,~~~~~ proc,ed to remove. or put an end ~•o·, any erection, , ~~ t~in, or cond1t~on that may be or exlat ln violation thereof, f ~ , l I •• • • , •
_: ~;~.-.- ~-\r: ~ll-_ hav, the)ttect of' teffl1nat1ng all rights or the Qr:rntee :. •; I\~ irt._ I • !• . .. • ". •
,.· ~/·•• ··· .. -: ljf'.re~det,, and_,;tie heNln described prof:erty shall thereby , ; : ;' ~•ft -' i .. ·, ~ • ~.;."• • . I~ •.•
.~ ·._-., · , · and theroupon revert to and veat in the Granter . • , .• ~ r V' • '• fl! ■ •. ,.
,•· ·,•:4·~- ":~· '{ .': .. :·:: . : NINTH: It 1a ur.derstcod and agreed tnar:. ;he fore - ;:,CfJ~ \ -~~1~ 'cb~dit1ona, qovenantis and reetrtcttons are part :r a . ·)Hr,',~- .· . .. .'
~--:-: ge,11eral plan ror the improvement·--or said tract and that H!d --- ·..tj••-'j •. , ' . ..
·· i.~.·o~D4_2,t1onp, ~ovenanta atid reatr1ctions are ror the benef.l.t of • ',,. 1• '•.• ' . • • • ' I • , . , •
.• !. •: ia14 ~tra,;t' and· each and everr par·cei" o"r land theretn and 11hall '' :•,.-~. ,},·t_ .

J'.:.jlf,if'.,,<~~\U'f. to and p~_u with the ,tract and each and eve~y parcel or ·-.•~;-,~it/r_i·tn~ therein· a~~ are ·hereby illlllo.sed upon th~ .premieea covered ·· \ .'. !:~ .. by _th1a opnveyance a11 a aerv1tude in favor .of the tract and . ; ::_ ~j ~-f :/~c~_.and every:~arcel or land,the~e1n~ aa :~ -ci~m:~ant_ tenement •:~ ·.: ; .. !,_ ,t•~; ·. o:r tentlll9nta. '. It 111 turther underatood that the ·~1rat two ot :•, ·. - ) ' . t, •. 'I; •• • • ..
_ · .. : '.~~i{.· .. ~~~-~orego1~--~ond1t1ona,_,_~ovenanta and r_~~tricti~na ahall _be -/:. ·~ .. _--,l/ . ,nror~•~~l• by- ~he Pao1t1c Grove ~•treat ·A~•~c.1ation; and that _i ' ·. •--~~~: _:;e~ch ·ants all ~r-·the toregoing oond1t1ona1• c~~e'!~n~a an~ r~a~~ict~_•._ / · )~:,·~t .: /f_n~ a~~ll be entorceable e1 ther by aaid ~~ to~te Propert1~8 . •. ·:· :·• ! f ,i,:_ , ·cQap&n¥ or 1ta grantees and aucoeasora 1n interest, ii,nd all ot ~ ·. ~ fl:i1 .:;,.' •. ' · •
··. ":: ;~~·::·--:·}-~: .. : ;:~ . ~- . ,_., ~;\,
. t.,., r
1 • • .., h • ' "' '••
~ "11:. ~- : ' : ' .. . '' "t • . ..• "'
) .. :.I#~•.. ~ : ::.. . '.~. .. .,.
t ~ \, l • :, - . ~-t\ • •. , • • ;, r
. . • . '. it ?,~. ,•
';" _· .:_. __ ;,·: < ~-, ;'_,:; :· . ' . . ' 1' ~
. ' ~ . '
• 1 ·• :'" I.,,,--,:,._-,., f t·· (
... • - ~,I ,.•,,.- ·.. •• ;. • • ! -.- .
dflll! IC] . ~' .
.
m~l49_,~,L1os -~.: ,.
,,
/1,
.. :,~ ·r-~·tJ· I
_., ..
;1,(' •
·,
• I
• .. ,,
!II
• -~ "
ll
► r
- 'I
!''-•\;. · ;f.i.ftlll.. .. ~ ~~~f.·.--~~··:i-~·.fi.•--· ; .-r-~~'.~:-,;::i;:;1:-.•,£.·•~· '···'t . .•• -:·· .r·~ .,- . ...:_p.1r~~---- ·•· .... ,. ••. . .-· . ~ .•. ••. . , ..... 4-~,· .,.-~,... • ,,t .. ' ;,· ,. . . '. ' .. · .. ,,. • ·-· ··.: - 11•9 . · . . . . . : . . . .1 -~-· :,,,t't :I•., 't . ·j '. .

I ,,,.' ; ·--1::i·,. ,. ,~~ . • .. , • ~l-,. • 1 • -.J
. , ,--J~t-•,,r1-•t.v,f.~;-1-·1.•-~.S·-~~":'· ···Jl.>·· '·".;t.: . . ,.4. . !-'.f',;•f./•.:~· ,~'Jj~i rl•'., '-+~t,,·~:},,·1:' '·1·1,'l;·j •••l' · . .,·.•• -~~'l·· r •.• , ..• l"•~• ,, ,1.I "™•"'11,\, t~: , .. 'l •i~ ,' I _I.; · • ·• · ;) · elf, ',. ' ,JI, ' ••• ,. - • ,. ~ JA • • ,:? . :.z •' ' • ""jii ~ t• I· ..... ii~- •I'. 1 • • •• , • 4 11 •• ~ 'I ~ • 1.' , , { • '· • ! • i~, If I • '\ • ••• - ' ;, • i ,.
. • • l 'lf. .. ·,,I ' . I ~
. • ... \r ~· ·r" r •. . , 1 • .
, lloo, .. •, ... r,:,.,. , I
. l\ ,.,:·,-~ •r..-,••.' '.' -~. -.
1 • _ • :... - ,
t:_· , · fl~-~llt_f,oond~U_ona! ·.~~v .. e~nta and reatr1ct1ona shall :-un with 'I· i ·• ... '.6 . ; , '·, • ~ . -!.. .• : ~ ' ....
.. , · •: . .i' -~ Jhe'J.~n~ ~4. be inc_arporated 1n any and all deeds and ,agree- ;; .. ··.· .//-J;r~~;.:o_t·~a.i:,· made by_aa1d Grantee, and the grantee or said <..,;..·, \! t'1 ,~9!1ftfj~~-•~1. deed. 0r agreement or aale, ahall alao in such . • > ,f' t... , . ' ..._,. · r- ·~~, ... , a . ' ·•.•,r. ' •, • •, • . . • . ' • \ ;: : · •: , · ·. t ... ~~ .!l!:~f~~(.•ai:ee■ent; ~t aale covenant ~d agree . that. llll ot: · . J · :r, , •. · ·· · .•!1~P~~-~~.~oz:ia, ~co~enanta a~d r111atr1,;t1ons ahall ~e 1ncorp- . . . ·-! I • I •; • 14 ,1,11 •.,.. ', ' , • •• t • ,. _,. ·• . • I •. '::_. ;•_·_·.·t Q~~~~f--~~:~~ ~• Nde a part or any contract, deed_or t_ransrer, . ,-1.\\ ,. . .. t . ·- ' , . • . . .
, :' .. -~ -,;:: f~ .. •¥.~,. ~rqp~rty ~e by s~ch grantee and ~y all aubsequent . t .... ,,, ' J'f t tt•_. :t_. • • I. • .. ".
, · ,;·~• ~-: ·• ,mera_; •1'4 holdera · ot aucl'l pt"operty, •: . , ,J -~.. • v:·:-i.".•,-y,,1 . ,!·. .~ ' ·•
I• , f . .. ~f;j' ~••· j:I , •, 1 , • • ~· >~:.
1 _•·:.::'ffr•i tf:·\.-1·~~HTH,:,;.~hat e~c~ and alJ or the atore_11&1d cond1tion:s, · ;1~:
l. ·,./:: ·:•,:•.;\,-!ff.-i-~•!~ .~114: reatr~ctiona a~all be_ enforceable by 1nJunct19n ... ··r t :· '-<: • ~i.~.}~!~~~~-?~~•~.to~m ·o~)L~~1on _ava1l~ble to the part1ee: ~ggr1eved · .t ~~ :_.·: ~'►-~i:''\\1'~~,1;~~~,.~~-~t~z:.-w_1ta succesaora 1n interest, and 1,n the , ·\.• {£/ .·.\::, · /~~:~~~f;"~., •o:~~ri or •~U-isha.11 ~e bro~ght arising_out or •·. ·, ~: ~:~:'\~.r·· :,~~!t~~~:~~e-:.•1a~c!m~n~ of\.~~ o.~~.h_e c_ond1t~ons~ reetr;ct1ons. , ... , ~\t·····<::t . :~~,~.t~i.,•sree~~~,"-~d pr~m1~es')1erej,l\·~c:mta~ne<;t, ,!ll~ether for - I ~- ·, .•••.;~ ·l,~•-.3 ·'•! l".i . t ., I' . , , -r•. . .~ :(:J~:-+lr it-tc.;.,~(~'. -~t~~rmaf1.cf ~d/or toreclosure ·and/or d~gea and/or ·'' .• • ,·· ·~ ,--.:._-.>•; .... ' ;~ • f -· ;.-. • . - :>- ' .• . : ~£: •;'. }~J~ -l~{q~~~ -~~ .~~f:l~a1nt1~:: 11ha~l r~~~ve~,fn euch action or . ir, ~t,c-:.~~~(.4~t~n~~t.:_~here1n __ •~all p_ay Hid pla1nttrt' a reaao!1abl~ · , , I • • ,• t'b' i • ,• • 't •• 0 , ~ , 9 : ' ' • •
.,. '· ·. -.~ 1· t~~in•Y.1• t•~ in 1uch action, wh1cl). 11hal~ ·be -~µed by the court 1 1 c ,; -~~;}> !f~.f~~~/~t the 'd~,J~· therein, ~d· np·:ac~1on bro~ght or Judgment i .' ,·• :< ;~::_,.~~';,,~~~~,;)~~itb~:°o\~natrue!1 :a~ ··,a ~f~er ot',.the _whol~ nor aa a : , . > -.~li:J~~l' !'tpt •~,. ac_t;on ~-~r eu~cetd1116,_ bre_a~hee. ~ · • •I ' • •" ;;{ ,.. ~ 'I }. ' ' . · . · 'I , .
'·' , ,'. :.'.,t~, f~--~tt •. ~•,; ~_t. ~~r:~~ reason any ·one nr ~9i"~/t the foregoing . -~; ( · . 5,~~~:\t~on1: . ~~vei:a1;1;a or reetr1ct1on~, . or .~Y. part_ thereof, ~- t·):1:-~~~d-lle, o:.~e.a~~r~ged t~, be, ~~O!'_at,:t~tiona~. or con~rary, · '-<ij:i:o any ·e~preea ·provte1on• ot_. law, or contrary ~o the pol1~J or. '· -:-· ·:~:f~~~~p;eal i~.;, •{~ough -~ot e.xpre.uly prohibited,;_ ·or ·othel'."f1&e con- ' , , , •~ . ;:'ii,lr- . r . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . · ... ·. : i·~f' .. 'ti-ary:to go,9d morala or agairiat publ1c•.iol1cy, ~h_en such r ,~.-. :._··~-~~
1 ;;~~-(~f~} .. ,oo_v_enant' or reatr1cUon, or ~~~h .P~rt. thereof, · a~all .,;,1~·1··~'-··'- .. ·
... .-,~~1~~i:/>~---!~ ... t~·-)-\.:·r.~ ::·,_ . ··-~ .. ~ ~~ · .. ,.· . ,t ... , •.. ·c·._, ... ·.., •. 5 I .~•••.,,:"' :•:.1 ~~--••• ... ~ .. ,,• ,, •
•· • , ·.1.• •
1 ,.. -~·--• 1:. r · .. ,
. ~ . '~ · ·. _;:.:,;..: 1 ~ : ~_:- ,"\ .~,-i . '·
• • , 11.,. . • ~-~. ,,.. . • .- . • ·;jt-·· .. ~. ·• - . .- . , . ' ' , .. '. ,,/r,:,f' ';,•,', ~f'(1\~.:~~; . ', I' _-;•• . -'. ••• :•:• •; : ,~ .:. ,,· ~- . - \: . ~ l .. , i,.H · ..... , • . ' , i'- . >·-\ ·, .\. h~ -~.f,. ., . • .. • I • , ,~. ,.,• ... • '°' • 1 .
• , . • •; ~ . . . 'l
. . . .: - ! . . . 'II,' • -i:. t ·: I •I J
. - •. <' . '
.. , . . ~ -~ ~\r.~··AL r:'° . .-~ ...
. ~ 4l• t t, tr. •: .• • '
"~: .. , .... ~- Jti:, .. · .. •,· ,,. . .,. '• . .' .
~
,, - I r:;•
, • .

I
11:!i
':'•·
.'.

I
.,..,
■f •••
J
""'· :·
•;:
·''·
..
li1 6 ... ,
·,i ._ . ., ..
. . -~ )
. \~
••;·
I ' •' f tl .•
·• ..

I 's
., ''
' '
. \~
....... !.
, .
:\_ ·~ ·:
~. \, •·. <o •
: . ;"lf•r:'~f•~•''U,~•. 11 •.•• i_~• ..• •. . ~. ".£ - ~J;f~F:: L ""' :";f. . . • ~, l- 't !""'- ,, ,~ • ~ ~., a.~ • :• • • .a, •
. . ,,1:.,~ ·~ 11,,, •• v.,,. . Ii' • . . i. •
• '•· Y ~ti~ '. :\. t·.; •1,•~.11'J.-1,.'.-,jt .
.>. ;." .. i:"';~ i~":1•~'( • ;'1) • ~t ~ · ... -~- ~-/{: ~ !•,j,)l\i;,, .. , ••l\•'fti,J,.,.t-•,(,,. 1 ·:· • ·.,.1!J"-
: ',l'f,,f~J)•~~~· 1,:.· (?,. . .
. ;.: ~~L•\~~~~--,;i.. ~: •:1• • !• • .. • :-•~
. ~j ': ~~- •,• ,/ . ~ . . '
,, \t:,.iti . * • •,~ •· •• l ~••
. .,i·I:, ..... ;.-,, <.. ~~: .. , .. ~ \"1>,
. , '.•;i~~~\::::_:,\ :: _,:, ./ ... ·.·1<
•• ' ~:a • •• ~ I f ·•, •
. . ,~ ; ''1. ~ . . : .. : ,... .. t ..
· .: J: 1 •.• ~:•·bo·i,null and void.: and ehall be deemed separable t'rom the :.'.\/.)}t,\.;~1ni~~ ·cond1ti6~e. · covonanta ~n~ restr1ct1one and every :;,l ... , . . . . ,· t ':i.rema~~~g _poz:t10~. thereor, and shall in no way attect the .. ~\>:viihd1t;y ot thJt,:de,d, or·aey or the remaining conditions, • ~
0 :~ •:.~.;.,. • I •• • • I • •
.. · . .-!ili.~ .cio1~nante ·or re~t;-,1at1ona !)1' the remaining rortiona thereof. • ~ •, ... •,._ '• t J)oP • ~ : _.: '.:'i~/ r/.,;{\. ' !, · .. IN.: ~1:~!SS WHERltOP ~. th~ DEL MONTE; PROPE~TIP COMPANY ·: ·:\/r JShil~ 'qa~a~d th•••. preaenta to be !1!!5_ned by its Pre·sident and .. : \tf~.- ~
1~_Jt,: 3~.oretary~ ·'and 1ta corporate 11eal to be hereunto affixed, ' C r,j; ' I , •. ,.°" ' . ' . .
·Y'ri\f 1anci ,'.thf~ PACIPIC GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT has e auae d these • ~~ ' ~• ;:_ 'I I • •• . •
I . 15:'". '
• l :J\:.~.r~~ij•~~t~--~~ .~_e. ~x~c:.uted ~y ."1ta of~lcera the~eunto (1uly author- ?;~~!\·:· ~z:~~ .. J~~ .d~~. :~d: ~ear tirat above written. •'!&~.·.~ · -!,.,. , . .-~,~.,~c,. :;o;,
·. d11~1:: : '.'-·: :i.-~. ·r ,. , : · ..... ,.,. ,.
• I Jr,,., , 1' • ~ , - \ • . ,. • •• • •
• .• •. _;. ~ •' ... 1•1 ~ ~· -'" ....• -=.... · .. ,· ·r-:" · .. :•,:: ."•€.1t·. ),~:- .. \ :-{~·::.- .. :! ,·:·=-_;· .. ~-. t' ~ '. _t :,'f_
1 ,. ·. __ .. .!;---· .. ' L~ ·', • ." /; .. ;1• . •.\ ... _:. • _- .f -..:'If_'' .. ,.-~,.·t.::" ',~ '.,. : · • • .,,_ ... _ • ··: By ·. · . · .-ii~ . •• v.r, ,.i:' ·t1~ ,; -;i .'. • · .· · . '~i\•ft 1,1••-:-.:f'!~ .. ' -~ ,..., ·,. - _.· ... : • ~-• . '• '.,; 'tt· .. .,.r-\,.,, ..• -:. '"~•.·.~ ,- ' •·, ·•· .... . ' ~ :·~t-;'i-~f.\-~) }. ·.':\"~~\·-.:.: :,_::-' .. \'• ·:.;- -~-:, . ; ! Yi!;.- ... ,<-~:~t✓t • ·~ ., :1·····•'· ,. 1' 1/1!' -~" {, .......•. ,: ... , ,'t ,,,, 1-- .. ~.>. •. ~~~_,_., ...... •··.it'l'..:: ·•~,-i,• '
1 i0~~~tu-: •• .. ~ j} :~~--~"(".'.\ j ·.,..tl • ' ff
,'C,; .... , .. :; .,., .... : ·~, ,• . . ';·. , ~ -·r· •,,r•~.-• , ... : . . . ,f'~. ·11 ..,i?~~••t?.-.•"· '. .• : ., •
::''1 ••~lf:•:•,;t,;.a:i·'.;: · · ·:• ·.i: ;:
. ~- '{ ~~! . ~---... Ii •• • •. ' •
-~: ·, ·:,a t-,,•:,r .. · ,, . .,\:\. '.' :· .. .,.
.. , !' ,· :-..:.~·•::{·\.-·-·. ~\<".::.>/(.
'· :11..,,.. .. ,. ·' ·. ' ' '•
·'t- ~-r :i ·;•iia• ,.· . ._ •• : .·•· .• • .. '. , ...... _..._...,;;...""'~;;w:r..'-~,W'..; -~ .. ~.-.. i ·r~:>.-~·, :· .,. ::;, · · . :• . .,. , "',... '-""'' I t.2', , ... • - .,.. • ~ - .: I • •, .... 1\ : • ~ ..,_, • • I 1,,• I• ~~ • ~
· -s-iA'.i ... op, .. ~-LIFORNiX.}·,.·f:•.:,. i· ·: · ... ;. - I 1 ·, ') , Jo411'" ' · I&, • , • •• • I • < • '!I 0/ .lfqi,lfft'J • ! • • '• · i • •• •
) •• ft I•: ,"t, • .. ' • I • • I ~ : : • • • • : • •. , • . ,_... • . ;,-.:,..~ ... •tiret .~ · .... Julv • • · 1 · 1 • h .. ~ 4 · ~~·. __.,...--------...-·uvY►-·· _:# •. • ia '•• ,ru 011'"· I 11J1tU011, N111t u-r, a,r d/ ..,,.t} . - - - n .
i ....ne .
..:t 1 -
1~ • ,: • .. • •. , ... fa,, 111". IIP.LBNB i f.lt:H4kP.R\ a .\•ut&J"}' /'uMu 10 ,111A J •r 1/,# ~ • 1"), f tf .. , •'· •r~. ~• • .. ~ ,! • · .. flal#' nf Caiafa"""• r1'11Jireo lltrrrw, tl rnt111n1, rr,,,.,,l a,111 ztfl'l"II• f· r•o• 'Iv 11/''''"'" I i- ... . ~9..Htl .. Jk.l"l.Qfl~t .. a.mt .PA .. ,_s. _W!tl~I.0!" .. ■
lllll ;'~
s
rail ..
..
.•f:--. · . • . .. ...,
: fiinr1149 ·,.,,lif107 r:t
( ·;-=~;
.. t·'.•,
..
'., .... ~
"
\'
I
. '.I
·1.
!1•
·=· ,·.
~
,.
~
.,·

COMPANY
. ~-
i\
II
I '
,~......,_ ... ~
-=-
... -~ ... ~
~
,. ~~ - ..
. ''
Ii
'4
:, :::
·-·~
• >
..,1..:_._ .. ·•·•··--····~·· - ..... - .. . ·• - . - . ... . ..... _.. . · ._,a11·•'" ,.,~ ,0 b, ,1,,. Pree 1dent an~ Se1:retary,. re~pec_t ~y_el_;y ~,-~~~_MOJ!TE .. PR(2?ER"n;S __ ~Q_l'1PA~L -·-· ,.. -·---•►- __ ... ...
.• .1·;
I 't \ti \
I I .I .•,,
. ,
. • I > r, '·•
. . : J. l>'f-I, ...'',J... . ·
!: \
. r·-., - .•) .
.... ·• . :-. ll~ ..
-i·. t.. ., ..
.. .. ~ 1 : -r · -.s \ ••
. • ,. . ._, ,t·· .; .. . . .. , •r.: ,. ~,, ,. ,. t. :; "1 ~\~ :-:t ,.... . ! \ •
----·---- -------· -------- ·-··-·--·-·- -·-··-. - - - .. -- - - · IN co-r,-.,,at,on d11crihrd i11 011t:l tAtd 1zrn,r1d 1hr u;thi,, iu1l"'"''"'• a,rd 0/10 it1 .ou.,. la "" · ~ Y
fo t, ,., 1nso~_lfu;licJ 1.r,nd1d llu 11.,11110 ilu1'mff<nl 1)■ llclt4JI of ,It" :o.-,,,.,.a110• 1h1rrt•• · -"• alMI ach1111:l,d11•d to 111• IAGI nu/, co,,aralioa ,,auttd 1A, 1a•"· _ IN WITNES£ IVJ/EHf.OF, / lun·,· h,,,u,,. 1t1 my Aulld an,J o~srJ "'1 o#ci41,r~I. al • •• .
1 ~ll a#c, ;,. rh, CeMnly of Jfo,uaey I •day""'~~• , '1"rftftrqfr ft~,, ob91·~ "'"_. ·11,,.. i. · ·' , ; I · •i;;
I ,-.~L..:""'.A""'-'L..l. • N-l,.-..,....._,..,_ ; ' , ;. •~· (C"-..••• .. •) Sn1ary i"~hc. an •~f for 11•• Cau11lf et .1,,.,.,.,.. :!harPaf l•ltf.,,n,~ :--,-- ,. · (My co111111iuton expires June .15, 1953)-r'.;"
. . . . . . (
.- ..
:,•~ I
.,. Ill
CALL TO ORDER – The meeting was called to order at 6:01 pm.

1. ROLL CALL –Jay Tulley, Chair; Elliot Hazen; Daryl Smith; Colleen Goldsmith; Charles Gibson Also present: Katie Clark, Recreation Manager; Dan Gho, PW Director; Amy Tomlinson, City Council Liaison.

2. Approval of Agenda: Approved 5-0-0

3. Board and Staff Announcements: Goldsmith thanked PW for assistance with the Legends of the Autobahn event on behalf of the Audi Club organizers; Legends’ organizers were very pleased to be able to hold event in PG and hope to be invited back 2023; they acknowledged that set up could be improved to minimize inconvenience and disruption to residents nearby the golf course. Gibson inquired about remaining ARPA funds designation which Tulley suggested be added to next agenda.

Clark noted that fall programming for rec programs will commence; full recruitment for a 30 hour per week Recreation Coordinator has been launched.

4. Council Liaison Comments: Amy Tomlinson thanked PW for pet parade, auto events and swimming pool weekend access; noted a candidate forum is scheduled for 9/20/2022.

5. General Public Comments: none

6. Approval of Minutes: not available; will be approved September meeting.

7. Regular Agenda:

A. Skatepark Site Assessment: presentation by PW Director Gho (see agenda report) that project entails several steps---with first step of determining suitable location for skatepark.

Top ranked park is GWP, within the recreation zone of the park, which offers access and amenities. Forest Lodge location ranked low because site is not city owned property and challenges include land use rules for school districts; city may have to purchase land.

Calendonia and Berwick sites ranked low on several measures, while Arnett Park has traffic and parking challenges. Next steps include site assessment and public outreach, using money allocated by city council, for determining scope of project and retaining engineer.

With secured funding, CEQA review would be initiated and process expected to take 9 mos to one year. Public would have ample opportunity to weigh in and comment. Recommenda- tion: proceed with GWP as the skatepark location; consider Forest Lodge as secondary site; remove Caledonia, Berwick and Arnett from consideration.

Commission Comments: Gibson noted that while report states 25 trees might be removed from GWP, sub-committee feels number of trees removed would be less; Hazen suggested that Arnett location be kept on list. Gho said that is up to board to determine.

Public Comment: written emails against GWP location: Jane Flury, Sharon Nelson, Claudia Verneisel, Lori McDonnell, Jennifer Gorman, Audubon Society, Cathy Wooten, Jan Loomis, Lisa Ciani. Emails supporting skatepark and/or GWP location: Kelsea Richmond, Holly Dow; Janna Dreisbach, Ginger Root, Andrew Grant, Elise Grant, Sarah Boyle, Claudia Sammis.

Other Emails: Tess Kenny re press; Tony Ciani re EIR, Gina Puccinelli (2) re dog park; Anna Torrea/KION.

Public Comment: positive comments re PG skatepark and/or GWP location: Theresa Burnham, Justin Noren, Colleen Ingram, Christie Thomas, Dick Paquette, Dan Valentine, Stephen Thompson, Kelsea Richmond, Holly Dow, Manny, Jack Camp, Emily Haselbauer, Deaven Keller, Tiffany, Sarah Boyle, Socorro, Nicole Reik, Lauren W. Comments generally supportive of PG skatepark and/or another location: Thom Akeman, Patrick, Rebecca Lee, Kavitha Venkate, Kim Akeman, Vicki Pearse, Lisa Ciani, Amanda Preece, Lori McDonnell, Cari Rotoli, Atticus Rotoli, Inge Lorentzen-Daumer, Melissa & Chris Wooley, Alex White, Tony Ciani, Dave Lugo, Lucy Moore, Kari, and Paul Walkingstick.

Commission Comment: Goldsmith noted that commission received 23 written comments; thinks that final selection of skatepark location is key to success of this project; Smith noted public support of project and would like to see city support residents; Gibson optimistic about skatepark and board is listening to the public about urban forest and recreation; does not support removal of 25 trees at GWP; necessary to hear from PGPD and PW; skatepark will not be a lighted facility as council concerns about the cost. Tulley expressed interest in markers to indicate size; Hazen commented about Monterey skatepark; noted that 10k size is adequate for multiple uses like BMX biking and skating. PW Director Gho stated that until there is “actual design” for skatepark, there would be no markers due to unknown design details. Tulley inquired about other sites like Jewell Park. Gibson noted that sub- committee began with parks large enough for a skatepark, with consideration of environmental impact (such as coastal zone locations). Tulley responded that philosophically, the concept to develop and build in sites that are in need of repair, not the most beautiful sites, should be considered. Arnett and Forest Lodge sites are presently sites that are not attractive and are in need of repair. Also noted that public outreach is critical so that resi- dents do not feel blindsided by skatepark proposal. Tulley questioned the way the scoring matrix was scored. There were questions that were very subjective that were scored in a questionable way. And there were questions that needed more data to provide evidence of the scoring. The template was provided by skatepark organization---is matrix in line with community values? Further, he stated that Arnett has alternative areas in park for skatepark (without removing handicap parking). The ballpark is not utilized much by Pony League.

Gibson made motion to approve recommendations by staff and recommend to City Council:
proceed with GWP as the desired skatepark development site and with the next step including public outreach; consider Forest Lodge Rd. as a secondary site; proceed with discussions with the school district; and remove Caledonia, Arnett and Berwick parks from consideration due to infeasibility. In discussion, Tulley modified motion to: remove first item GWP approval; initiate outreach before additional action is taken; and keep Arnett as a site under consideration. Motion failed with lack of second.

After much discussion about wording, motion made by Hazen, with second by Smith, to recommend following: proceed with GWP as primary park location for public outreach, and Arnett Park as secondary location, also included in public outreach; simultaneously initiate discussions with PGUSD regarding Forest Lodge as secondary location; and remove Caledonia and Berwick Parks from consideration due to infeasibility. Motion passed 4-0-1. Tulley voted against motion.

B. Hybrid model for Rec Board Meetings: Clark presented information that hybrid meetings can be held in city council chambers with online participation. At least one board member must be present in council chambers. Alternately, continue with online meetings only through December.

Public Comment: Tony Ciani supports hybrid meeting model; Inge Lorentzen Daumer: also supportive of hybrid model.

Commission Comment: Smith supports hybrid; Tulley supports hybrid model; Hazen reiter- ated that one commissioner be present. Clark said that is best practices.

Motion by Smith, Tulley seconded, that rec board meetings be hybrid. Passed 5-0-0.

Next meeting scheduled for September 22nd at 6 pm in PG Council Chamber Meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm.

Submitted by:

Colleen Goldsmith, Secretary

I sent an invite to get it on our calendars. We will call your cell.

Daniel Gho
City of Pacific Grove
Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager
831-648-5722 Ext 4203
From: Joshua Jorn <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2023 8:22 AM
To: Daniel Gho <[email protected]>
Cc: Joyce Halabi <[email protected]>; Ralph Gomez Porras <[email protected]>; Mandi Ackerman <[email protected]>; Carly Adams <[email protected]> Subject: Re: PGUSD Introduction
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Good morning Daniele and Joyce,
Tuesday at 1pm will work for me. Please call my cell
phone 831-264-3055 as I will be in and out of the office or please provide me with a call in line.

Thank you and I am very much looking forward to
working with you all.

Joshua R. Jorn
Assistant Superintendent Business Services (CBO)
Pacific Grove Unified School District
435 Hillcrest Ave. | Pacific Grove | CA 93950
Desk: 831.646.6509 | Cell: 831.264.3055 | Email: [email protected] CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication, including its contents and all attachments, may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee), you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute this message (or any information contained in or attached to it) to anyone. Unauthorized interception, review, use, or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the California Evidence Code, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication.

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:01 AM Daniel Gho <[email protected]> wrote:

Nice to meet you virtually Joshua. I have included Joyce Halabi, the Public Works Deputy Director on this email as she is instrumental in the development of the skatepark project. A call next week would be great as we prepare to present the skatepark to the Recreation Board and then City Council. How is Tuesday at 1:00? If that works I can send out a teams meeting invite.

Daniel Gho
City of Pacific Grove
Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager
831-648-5722 Ext 4203
From: Joshua Jorn <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2023 4:52 PM
To: Daniel Gho <[email protected]>
Cc: Ralph Gomez Porras <[email protected]>; Mandi Ackerman <[email protected]>; Carly Adams <[email protected]>
Subject: PGUSD Introduction
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Good afternoon Dan,
I am new to PGUSD, but a long time Pacific Grove
resident. Quick introduction as I came from Monterey
County Office of Education and was in a cabinet level
leadership role overseeing School Facilities and
components of Finance.

By this email, I was hoping to start a dialogue with you on two topics. One being the Skate Park proposed site,
and the other is related to the relationship and use of PG Municipal Softball Park. I have included in this email a draft starting point for a ground lease should the City decide to pursue a skate park at either of the District locations. PGUSD will need some historical input on the original zoned use of the site at Forest Lodge Road, and are hoping that we can gather any pertinent information as it was originally deeded.

As it relates to PG Muni, I would like to dialog on some suggested improvements that PGUSD can help with at the
site. There have been numerous requests and I want to
talk with the City about the historical relationship and how we can address everyones wants jointly.

All the best and I hope that we can set up a
meeting soon to go into further detail on these two items.

Thanks,
Joshua R. Jorn
Assistant Superintendent Business Services (CBO)
Pacific Grove Unified School District
435 Hillcrest Ave. | Pacific Grove | CA 93950
Desk: 831.646.6509 | Cell: 831.264.3055 | Email: [email protected] CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication, including its contents and all attachments, may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee), you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute this message (or any information contained in or attached to it) to anyone. Unauthorized interception, review, use, or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the California Evidence Code, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication.
10 YEAR LAND LEASE AGREEMENT:
10 YEAR LAND LEASE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN PACIFIC GROVE

UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (PGUSD) AND THE CITY OF PACIFIC

GROVE (PG)
This 10 year Land Lease (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ___ day of ___________, 20___, between Pacific Grove Unified School District (“District”) and City of Pacific Grove (City of PG), a municipality duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California, (“City”) (together, the “Parties”).

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City requested use of a portion of the Site owned by PGUSD at 1004 David Ave Pacific Grove CA, for the intended purpose of a community skateboard park; WHEREAS, a Ground Lease Agreement (“Agreement”) is required with the District for a period not to exceed forty (10) years;
WHEREAS, the PGUSD and the Pacific Grove Unified School District Board of Trustees have agreed to allowed use by the the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, in light of the foregoing facts and in further consideration of the promises and agreements of the Parties set forth herein below, it is mutually agreed as follows:

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the commitments expressed herein, the parties agree that:

1. Agreement to Lease. The District, in consideration of the Lease payments provided in this Lease, leases the Ground to the City based upon the terms and conditions herein set forth.

2. Term. The term of this Lease shall be for a period of forty (10) years (the Term") commencing on __________ ____, 2023 (the 'Commencement Date"), and terminating on ___________ _____, ______, provided, however, that the District or the the City may terminate this Lease on ninety (90) days' notice to either party.

A. The CIty shall have the right to renew the term of this Agreement for one additional term of ten (10) years. The City will automatically be deemed to have exercised its option to renew pursuant to this Agreement, unless it notifies the District in writing of its intent not to renew the term of this Agreement on or before the date that is one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the term. During each option term, this Agreement will be on the same terms and conditions as during the original Agreement term, except that provisions relating to changes in lease rate.

B. Any holding over by the City after expiration of the Term of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a month-to-month tenancy. Except as expressly agreed, no holding over of the possession of the Property by the City beyond the Term of this Agreement shall be deemed an extension of such Term.

3. Lease Payments. The City shall pay PGUSD annual installments of _____ Dollar ($_______), which shall be due and payable in advance on the July 1st of each year.

Pro rata payment shall be made for any partial month of the Lease term.

A. If the City fails to pay such Payments within five (5) days of the date it is due, it must pay a late fee in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the monthly Payments, together with the late Payments. This fee shall be presumed to be the amount of damages which would be sustained by the District in the event of the City’s failure to timely submit its Payments.

B. The City is familiar with California Education Code section 17219 et seq., and realizes that the District may be subject to non-use payments on the Site. The City shall pay the District any such non-use payments which are imposed on the District as a result of this Agreement, within twenty (20) days from the date the District gives the City written notice of the assessment of such a payment.

4. Improvements. the City may construct a skate park which consists of___________ (“Facilities”) which are necessary or desirable to perform the services described in paragraph 1, and make any future alterations, additions or improvements to the Facilities, at its sole cost, provided that:

A. the District must approve plans, specifications and the proposed location of the alterations, additions or improvements to the Facilities; B. the City must develop and submit appropriate documentation to the Division of the State Architect for the construction of improvements to the Facilities, unless otherwise assumed by the District; and
a. the design and construction of improvements to the Facilities must be in compliance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, laws, rules and regulations as hereinafter set forth.

C. the City shall have the right to use adjacent portions of the Site for the purposes of construction or installation of the Facilities, upon the District’s approval of the area to be used.

D. the City shall keep the Site free and clear of all stop notices.

E. the City must remove or relinquish ownership of any alterations, additions and improvements to the Site which it has constructed upon termination of the Lease, unless otherwise elected by the District.

F. The Facilities constructed on the Site shall be deemed personal property of the City, and not a part of the District’s real property. the District shall retain title to all improvements, unless there is a modification to this Agreement.

G. the City shall maintain an inventory and retain ownership of furniture and equipment during the term of this lease.

5. Utilities. the City may connect to existing utility lines in order to build the Facilities.

A. The City agrees to permit individual metering of utilities for the City’s use after construction.

B. the City shall pay all charges for utilities furnished to the Site during the Term of this Agreement on a timely basis.

6. Repairs; Waste. the City shall maintain and repair the Site and all improvements thereto, including but not limited to, landscaping, at its own cost and shall not commit or permit any waste or damage on the Property or any improvements thereon.

7. Hazardous Materials. the City shall not keep or have on the Site any article or thing of a dangerous, flammable or explosive character that might substantially increase the danger of fire or that might be considered hazardous by a responsible insurance company, unless the District gives prior written consent and the City provides proof of adequate insurance protection to the District.

8. Assignment and Subletting. the City is prohibited from assigning this Agreement or subleasing the Site, or assigning, leasing or subleasing any of the improvements thereon. the District may assign this lease only if the City’s rights hereunder are undisturbed.

9. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, the City shall maintain, at its sole cost, liability insurance of the types and in the amounts described below.

A. Commercial General and Umbrella Liability Insurance. the City shall maintain at a minimum liability insurance coverage of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence with a four million dollars ($4,000,000) annual aggregate liability limit of coverage. Liability Insurance shall include coverage with primary and non-contributory coverage, including coverage for sexual abuse and sexual molestation. The coverage for sexual molestation and sexual abuse shall cover all incidents which may occur during the term of this agreement regardless of when a claim is made.

B. Workers’ Compensation Insurance, including Employers’ Liability Insurance, with limits not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for each accident or disease.

C. Automobile and Umbrella Liability Insurance with a limit of liability of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence with a four million dollars ($4,000,000) annual aggregate.
a. Such insurance shall cover liability arising out of any vehicle, including owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles.

D. the District shall be included as an additional insured under each policy except the Professional Liability Insurance policy. Each policy shall be primary with respect to any other insurance or self-insurance programs afforded to the District. There shall be no endorsement or modification of the CGL to make it excess over other available insurance.
a. Within ten (10) days of the commencement of the Agreement, the City shall furnish the District with a certificate(s) of insurance, executed by a duly authorized representative of each insurer, showing compliance with the insurance requirements set forth above. the City shall provide certified copies of all insurance policies within ten (10) days of the District’s written request for said copies.
b. Failure to maintain the required insurance may result in the termination of this contract at the District’s option.
c. The foregoing insurance requirements do not replace, waive, alter or limit the indemnification provisions of this Lease.

10. Indemnification. the City shall defend, indemnify and hold the District harmless from and against any and all claims of liability for any injury or damage to any person or property related to or arising from (a) the City’s occupation or use of the Site or from the conduct of the City’s business; (b) any activity, work or thing done, permitted or suffered by the City in or about the Site or elsewhere; (c) any breach or default in the performance of any of the City’s obligations under this Agreement; or (d) any negligence of the City or its agents, contractors or employees; and all costs, fees and expenses of any type whatsoever associated with such claims.

11. Time. Time is of the essence to this Agreement and each and every provision hereof.

12. Compliance with Laws. the City shall comply with all Federal, State, County, municipal and other governmental statutes, ordinances, laws, rules and regulations affecting the Site and all improvements now or hereafter located thereon, or any activity or condition on or in the Site and any such improvements.

13. Prohibited Activities. All use or sale of tobacco products and use, sale, or possession of alcoholic beverages is prohibited on the Property.

14. Non-Discrimination. Neither party shall employ any discriminatory practices in its performance hereunder, including its employment practices, on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, sexual orientation or physical or mental disability.

15. Right To Inspect And Post Notices. the District may enter the Site at all reasonable times to inspect the same or post notices of non-responsibility for any work to be performed or for any other lawful purpose.

16. Notices. All notices, statements, demands, requests, consents, approvals, authorizations, appointments or designations hereunder by either Party to the other shall be in writing. Either Party may give written notice either by (a) personal service; (b) delivery by a reputable document delivery service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery such as, but not limited to, Federal Express; or (c) United States Mail, sent certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the address of the party as set forth below or to any other address as that party may later designate by written notice. Any notice personally given or delivered by a reputable document delivery service as described above shall be effective upon receipt. Any notice given by mail shall be effective two (2) business days after deposit in the United States mail.

Pacific Grove Unified School District (the District)
435 Hillcrest Ave
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
The City of Pacific Grove (the City)
300 Forest Ave
Pacific Grove, CA 93950

17. Corporate Authority. Each individual executing this Lease represents and warrants that s/he is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Lease on behalf of the party for which s/he signs.

18. Joint Preparation of Lease. Each party has had the opportunity to have this Lease reviewed by counsel, and neither party shall be considered the drafter of the Lease.

19. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This instrument constitutes the entire agreement between the District and the City relative to the Site. All prior or contemporaneous oral agreements between the Parties are revoked by this Agreement.

This Agreement may be amended or revoked only by a writing signed by both Parties.

The existing Master Lease Agreement Between the District and the City as it relates to the trade Agreement of real property still remains in effect, and the Agreement is secondary to that Agreement in nature.

20. Non-Agency. This Agreement is by and between two independent Parties and is not intended to and shall not be construed to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture or association between the Parties.

21. Choice Of Law. This Lease shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its choice of laws rules.

22. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found or deemed to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction, all other provisions that are otherwise lawful shall continue in full force and effect provided the omission does not render this Agreement inconsistent with the overall purpose.

23. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Of Suit. If either party brings an action for relief against the other party related to or arising out of this Lease, the losing party shall pay the successful party a reasonable sum for attorney's fees and costs, which shall be paid whether or not such action is prosecuted to judgment.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE (the City)
___________________________
City Manager
___________________________
Date

PACIFIC GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL
(the District)
___________________________
Ralph Porras
Superintendent
___________________________
Date

EXHIBIT A
David Ave School Legal Description
1004 David Ave, Pacific Grove CA 93950
Site lease refers to a portion of the David Ave School Site property as noted in yellow No CEQA-Required Environmental Review Done on Skatepark Project Paul Walkingstick <[email protected]>
Sat 4/1/2023 2:14 PM
To: City Council Members <[email protected]>;Bill Peake <[email protected]> 2 attachments (267 KB)

4.5.23.skatepark.Agenda Report.pdf; PGUSD and City of Pacific Grove Ground Lease - Draft.docx - Google Docs.pdf; [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Pacific Grove email system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hello Members of City Council and Mayor Peake,
The Proposed Skatepark Project Agenda (attached) claims on line 5 of the document that no CEQA review is required for the Skatepark Project as per CEQA Section 15378, which defines the term Project as it relates to CEQA law.

The relevant section of Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15378 – Project states:
(a) "Project" means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is any of the following:
(2) An activity undertaken by a person which is supported in whole or in part through public agency contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies.

This exactly describes the structure and relationship of the city subsidizing the design and engineering for the skatepark, even if the entirety of the skatepark were funded by outside donations—donations which have thus far not materialized. Further, the city will further subsidize the project as outlined in the proposed draft lease agreement presented to the school district (also attached) in which the City of Pacific Grove agrees to provide ongoing repairs and maintenance on the project, Commercial General and Umbrella Liability Insurance to cover two million dollars per occurrence, in addition to paying to lease the land itself from the school district. This adds up to a great deal of subsidization for the Skatepark project and very much makes it subject to Environmental Review, as per CEQA.

Because this is very clearly a Project as defined by CEQA, Environmental Review is legally required to be presented to a decision-making body, such as the City Council, prior to voting on the approval of said project. Voting on or approval of this project without prior Environmental Review would be a clear violation of CEQA law.

On a related note, when our group Save George Washington Park contacted CEQA and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, we discovered that there were zero projects from the City of Pacific Grove registered and tracked by CEQA. With everything going on in the City of Pacific Grove, it is highly concerning that not a single project case was open with CEQA prior to us contacting them. This issue warrants further investigation.

Thank you for your attention and your service.

Sincerely,
Paul Walkingstick
702.912.9693

AJHQGa NR. 12 B
CI7< OF 3ACIFIC G5O9E
300 FRUHVW AYHQXH, PDFLILF GURYH, CDOLIRUQLD 93950
TO: Honorable Ma\or and MemberV of Whe CiW\ CoXncil
FROM: Jo\ce Halabi, DepXW\ PXblic WorkV DirecWor
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2023
SUBJECT: CONCEPT REVIEW: PropoVed SkaWepark ProjecW
CEQA: DoeV noW conVWiWXWe a ³ProjecW´ per California EnYironmenWal QXaliW\ AcW GXidelineV SecWion 15378

RECOMMENDATION

1. DeWermine if CiW\ CoXncil conVenVXV e[iVWV for a propoVed VkaWepark projecW;

2. If conVenVXV e[iVWV, reYieZ RecreaWion Board propoVed poWenWial VkaWepark projecW locaWion recommendaWionV;

3. If RecreaWion Board locaWion recommendaWionV are accepWed, direcW VWaff Wo pXrVXe diVcXVVionV ZiWh Pacific GroYe Unified School DiVWricW (PGUSD) regarding feaVibiliW\ for eiWher ViWe; and

4. ReWXrn Wo CiW\ CoXncil Wo preVenW PGUSD diVcXVVion oXWcome.

DISCUSSION

BDFNJURXQG
AV parW of Whe FY22/23 CapiWal ImproYemenW Program (CIP), Whe CiW\ CoXncil allocaWed $158,000 of American ReVcXe Plan AcW (ARPA) fXnding for a propoVed VkaWepark projecW. If adYanced be\ond Whe e[ploraWion phaVe, Whe propoVal ZoXld reVXlW in a mXlWi-\ear projecW for Whe conVWrXcWion of an all ageV VkaWepark VXiWable for mXlWiple W\peV of XVerV and non-moWori]ed Zheeled riding.

E[ecXWion of a propoVed large-Vcale projecW of WhiV naWXre enWailV VeYeral VWepV, Zhich haYe been enXmeraWed in preYioXV VWaff reporWV, proYided here. The YiWal firVW VWep of WhiV lengWh\ proceVV reqXireV deWermining a locaWion for propoVed VkaWepark deYelopmenW.

To creaWe a WranVparenW and robXVW pXblic proceVV, Whe YarioXV VXb-VWepV of Whe locaWion aVVeVVmenW proceVV haYe been Vhepherded WhroXgh Whe RecreaWion Board and Whe Board¶V SkaWepark SXbcommiWWee. Since Whe commencemenW of Whe projecW aW Whe VWarW of FY22/23, 6 agenda iWemV haYe been broXghW forWh Wo Whe RecreaWion Board and one (1) XpdaWe on Whe proceVV and approach haV been broXghW forWh Wo Whe CiW\ CoXncil. The SkaWepark SXbcommiWWee, compriVed of WZo RecreaWion Board MemberV and a member of Whe pXblic, haV alVo conYened VeYeral WimeV Wo reYieZ/aVVeVV informaWion and proYide recommendaWionV Wo Whe RecreaWion Board.

ThroXghoXW WhiV proceVV, VeYeral ViWeV haYe been aVVeVVed for feaVibiliW\. ThoXVandV of commXniW\ memberV haYe Yoiced Wheir opinion Yia pXblic meeWingV, Whe commXniW\ VXrYe\, and emailV Wo Whe RecreaWion Board and CiW\ CoXncil. ThiV proceVV haV reYealed WhaW Where iVn¶W a ³perfecW ViWe.´ Each ViWe preVenWV iWV oZn XniqXe challengeV and opporWXniWieV. The RecreaWion Board haV recommended WhaW Whe CiW\ conWinXe Wo pXrVXe Whe WZo (2) Pacific GroYe Unified School DiVWricW (PGUSD) SiWeV (ForeVW Lodge Road and DaYid AYe CommXniW\ High School Field/ DaYid AYe CommXniW\ High School field*) and Wo remoYe George WaVhingWon Park from conVideraWion.
*POeaVe QRWe, WhaW aOWhRXgh WheUe iV a QaPe diVcUeSaQc\ beWZeeQ Whe RecUeaWiRQ BRaUd¶V UecRPPeQdaWiRQ (³DaYid AYeQXe CRPPXQiW\ High SchRRO FieOd´) aQd Whe SXbOic VXUYe\ (³DaYid AYeQXe ChaUWeU SchRRO FieOd´) WheVe UefeUeQce Whe VaPe SaUceO (PaUceO #007102006000). A VSecific ORcaWiRQ ZiWhiQ WhiV SaUceO ZRXOd XOWiPaWeO\ be deWeUPiQed b\ PGUSD, aV iW iV WheiU SURSeUW\.

BeloZ iV a VXmmar\ of Whe RecreaWion Board¶V locaWion aVVeVVmenW VWepV and, XlWimaWel\, Wheir recommendaWion on a paWh forZard Wo CiW\ CoXncil.

LOCATION ASSESSMENT

1. IQLWLDO SLWH SNDWH PDUN CULWHULD SFRULQJ AVVHVVPHQW. AW Wheir JXne 23, 2022, meeWing, Whe RecreaWion Board recommended VWaff eYalXaWe VXiWable locaWionV XVing a SkaWepark SiWe SelecWion CriWeria Scoring SheeW. ThiV Vcoring VheeW, deYeloped b\ VkaWepark indXVWr\ e[perW, proYideV YarioXV lenVeV Wo aVVeVV and eYalXaWe ViWeV. IWemV aVVeVVed inclXde VkaWepark XVer ameniWieV VXch aV reVWroomV, picnic WableV, drinking foXnWainV, bencheV, and oWher recreaWional feaWXreV, inclXding aWhleWic faciliWieV and children¶V pla\ VWrXcWXreV.

2. CRPPXQLW\ SXUYH\. AW Wheir AXgXVW 25, 2022, meeWing, Whe RecreaWion Board recommended:

Proceeding ZiWh George WaVhingWon Park aV Whe primar\ VkaWe park locaWion and ArneWW Park aV Vecondar\ locaWion, and Wo VimXlWaneoXVl\ iniWiaWe diVcXVVionV ZiWh PGUSD regarding ForeVW Lodge.

RemoYal of Caledonia and BerZick ParkV from conVideraWion dXe Wo infeaVibiliW\.

CiW\ SWaff Wo begin pXblic oXWreach efforWV, deYeloping a VXrYe\ noWing George WaVhingWon Park, ArneWW Park, ForeVW Lodge Road, and VWemming from VWaff conYerVaWionV ZiWh PGUSD VWaff, Whe field aW Whe DaYid AYenXe CharWer School parcel aV a poWenWial ViWe.

The commXniW\ VXrYe\ ZaV releaVed on NoYember 18, 2022, and ZaV open WhroXgh December 23, 2022.

AYailabiliW\ of Whe VXrYe\ ZaV annoXnced on Whe CiW\¶V Vocial media accoXnWV, Whe CiW\ Manager¶V ReporW, mailerV Wo eYer\ Pacific GroYe addreVV, and ph\Vical poVWerV (in EngliVh and SpaniVh) aW each of Whe ViWeV. 2,329 reVponVeV Zere receiYed. The final reporW, prepared b\ CiW\ Yendor ZenciW\, proYideV an anal\ViV of Whe VXrYe\ reVponVeV. The final reporW can be foXnd aW: ZZZ.ciW\ofpg.org/VkaWeparkprojecW.

AW Whe JanXar\ 26, 2023, RecreaWion Board meeWing, CiW\ SWaff preVenWed Whe VXrYe\ reVXlWV Zhich Zere harneVVed b\ Whe Board aV one VoXrce of feedback and daWa Zhen conVidering a ViWe recommendaWion Wo Whe CiW\ CoXncil.

CiW\ VWaff meeW ZiWh Whe SkaWepark SXbcommiWWee on JanXar\ 30, 2023, Wo diVcXVV Whe VXrYe\ reVXlWV and for Whe memberV of Whe VkaWe park VXbcommiWWee Wo proYide a recommendaWion Wo Whe RecreaWion Board.

SKATE PARK SUBCOMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO THE RECREATION BOARD AW Wheir FebrXar\ 23, 2023, meeWing, afWer monWhV of aVVeVVmenW and pXblic feedback, Whe RecreaWion Board¶V SkaWe Park SXbcommiWWee broXghW forWh a ViWe locaWion recommendaWion Wo Whe fXll RecreaWion Board. The SkaWepark SXbcommiWWee recommended WhaW Whe RecreaWion Board recommend Wo Whe CiW\ CoXncil Wo proceed ZiWh Whe DaYid AYe CommXniW\ High School field aV Whe primar\ locaWion for Whe propoVed VkaWe park. The SXbcommiWWee recommendaWion ZaV baVed on Wheir aVVeVVmenW of Whe robXVW informaWion obWained from Whe YarioXV daWa collecWion meWhodV liVWed aboYe. The SXbcommiWWee alVo VelecWed George WaVhingWon Park aV Whe Vecond deVired locaWion and ForeVW Lodge Road aV Whe Whird deVired locaWion.

RECREATION BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
AW Wheir FebrXar\ 23, 2023, meeWing, Whe RecreaWion Board YoWed 3-1-1 (ZiWh one recXVal and one "no´ YoWe) Wo recommend WhaW Whe CiW\ CoXncil:

Proceed ZiWh Whe WZo (2) PGUSD ViWeV (ForeVW Lodge Road and DaYid AYe CommXniW\ High School Field), and
RemoYe George WaVhingWon Park aV a poWenWial ViWe.

PRELIMINARY PGUSD DISCUSSIONS
FolloZing Whe RecreaWion Board¶V recommendaWion, CiW\ SWaff meW ZiWh PGUSD repreVenWaWiYeV Wo diVcXVV Whe recommendaWion, gaXge PGUSD'V inWereVW Wo proceed, and oXWline/XnderVWand Whe immediaWe ne[W VWepV in Whe proceVV if Whe CoXncil Zere Wo direcW VWaff Wo conWinXe Wo pXrVXe a propoVed PGUSD VkaWepark projecW ViWe.

PGUSD VWaff indicaWed WhaW Whe preYioXV PGUSD Board e[preVVed ZillingneVV Wo e[plore Whe propoVed VkaWepark projecW. PGUSD VWaff alVo indicaWed boWh PGUSD ViWeV haYe deed reVWricWionV WhaW inclXde nonreaVVignmenW claXVeV, meaning Whe properW\ cannoW be Vold, and claXVeV WhaW limiW Whe XVe of Whe land Wo edXcaWional pXrpoVeV.

NEXT STEPS
If CiW\ CoXncil conVenVXV e[iVWV for a propoVed VkaWepark projecW, CiW\ VWaff (inclXding Whe CiW\ AWWorne\'V Office) VhoXld be direcWed Wo reVXme feaVabiliW\ diVcXVVionV ZiWh PGUSD for boWh of Whe propoVed locaWionV, and reWXrn Wo Whe CiW\ CoXncil ZiWh Whe diVcXVVion oXWcome for reYieZ/conVideraWion.

OPTIONS

1. DeWermine WhaW Where iV no CiW\ CoXncil conVenVXV for a propoVed VkaWepark projecW. SelecWing WhiV opWion ZoXld end Whe CiW\'V efforW in WhiV area.

2. ProYide alWernaWe direcWion (differenW propoVed locaWion, eWc.).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

AV parW of Whe FY22/23 CapiWal ImproYemenW Program (CIP), Whe CiW\ CoXncil allocaWed $158,000 of American ReVcXe Plan AcW (ARPA) fXnding for a propoVed VkaWepark projecW. LeVV Whan $5,000 of WhiV allocaWion haV been VpenW Wo daWe, alWhoXgh VignificanW PXblic WorkV DeparWmenW VWaff Wime haV been allocaWed WoZardV WhiV efforW.

GOAL
ALIGNMENT:

NoW Applicable.
10 YEAR LAND LEASE AGREEMENT:
10 YEAR LAND LEASE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN PACIFIC GROVE