1 ORDINANCE NO. 25-____
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PACIFIC GROVE ADDING CHAPTER 1.17, AMENDING
CHAPTER 1.18, REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER
1.19, REPEALING AND RESERVING CHAPTER 3.30,
AMENDING CHAPTER 6.09, AMENDING CHAPTER 7.40,
AND AMENDING CHAPTER 9.17 OF THE PACIFIC
GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING CODE
ENFORCEMENT PROCESSES
FINDINGS
1. The City of Pacific Grove is authorized by California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7 to make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws. Pursuant to California Constitution, Article XI, Section 5 and Pacific Grove City Charter Article 5, the City, as a charter city, has plenary authority to make and enforce within its limits all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs.
2. Government Code section 53069.4(a) authorizes a city to adopt an ordinance providing for imposition of administrative fines for municipal code violations.
3. Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5 provide that a city may, by ordinance, provide for the recovery of nuisance abatement costs, including attorneys’ fees, in any action, administrative proceeding, or special proceeding to abate a nuisance.
4. In accordance with these grants of authority, the City has adopted Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) Chapter 1.19 [Municipal Code and Ordinance Enforcement].
Chapter 1.19 with two distinct processes that would be more efficiently be included in separate provisions of the City Municipal Code ordinance: the administrative citation procedure (Sections 1.19.040–1.19.150) and the nuisance abatement procedure (Sections
1.19.150–1.19.290).
5. Infraction violations of local, state, and federal regulations governing the standing or parking of vehicles are subject to fines and are enforced by the civil administrative process in Vehicle Code sections 40200–40230. Anyone may contest a parking violation in accordance with the process set forth in Vehicle Code section 40215 and any implementing ordinance. In accordance with Vehicle Code section 40215, the City has adopted PGMC Chapter 1.18 [Motor Vehicle Parking Violation Enforcement].
6. The City places a high value on protecting community character, land values, and the general public, health, safety and welfare, and has previously adopted numerous ordinances to help ensure such protection. The purpose of this ordinance is to improve the efficiency of the City’s code enforcement processes in order to make the City’s code enforcement efforts more efficient and effective. The purpose of this ordinance is also to further modernize the code enforcement and nuisance abatement tools to help improve the efficiency of the City’s code enforcement processes and to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and to ensure cost recovery to the fullest extent as authorized by law.
PGCC 9-17-25
2 7. Further, the purpose of this ordinance is to authorize the City to retain a professional hearing officer to preside over administrative citation, nuisance abatement, and parking citation appeals, in lieu of the hearing officer panel. A single, professionally trained hearing officer ensures consistency of procedure and decision-making and efficient handling of matters.
8. The City Council finds that the adoption of this proposed ordinance is within the City’s power and authority to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents.
9. This ordinance amends the PGMC to create a new Chapter 1.17 entitled “Administrative Citations” to provide an efficient administrative mechanism to enforce the PGMC through the imposition of fines, as authorized by Government Code section 53069.4.
10. This ordinance amends the PGMC by repealing and replacing Chapter 1.19 with an ordinance entitled “Nuisance Abatement” to establish procedures for abating public nuisances and related cost recovery, Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5.
11. This ordinance amends the PGMC by amending Chapters 1.18, 6.09, 7.40, and 9.17 related to appeals and the hearing officer authority.
12. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of the ordinance have occurred.
13. 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
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Incorporation of Findings. The foregoing findings are adopted by the City Council as though set forth in fully within the body of this ordinance.
SECTION 2. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.17 is hereby added to read as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto.
SECTION 3. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.18 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto.
SECTION 4. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.19 is hereby repealed and replaced to read as set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto.
SECTION 5. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 3.30 is hereby repealed and reserved.
SECTION 6. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 6.09 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto.
SECTION 7. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 7.40 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit E attached hereto.
PGCC 9-17-25
3 SECTION 8. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 9.17 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto.
SECTION 9. 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 10. Effectiveness. In accordance with Article 15 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective on the thirtieth (30th) day following its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE this ______ day of ______________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
_______________________________
NICK SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST:
DATED:_______________________
_______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
BRIAN A. PIERIK, City Attorney
PGCC 9-17-25
5 EXHIBIT A
CHAPTER 1.17 - ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS
1.17.0 Purpose
This chapter provides an efficient, administrative mechanism to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code through the imposition of fines, as authorized by Government Code section 53069.4 and other applicable law.
1.17.0 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
“Appellant” means a citee who files an appeal.
“Citee” means a responsible person who has been issued an administrative citation under this chapter.
“City Manager” means the City Manager or their designee. “Enforcement officer” means any City employee or agent of the City designated by the City Manager who has the authority to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code. “Responsible person” means any person that, by their action or failure to act, causes, maintains, allows, permits, aids, abets, or suffers a violation of this code. For the purposes of this definition, “person” means any natural individual or any organization that the law recognizes as having rights or duties, including, without limitation, a firm, association, partnership, joint venture, trust, estate, receiver, limited liability company, corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
1.17.0 Scope and Authorization to Enforce Chapter
(a) The provisions of this chapter apply to any violation of this code or any violation of a condition of approval of any permit, license, or other approval issued by the City. (b) The City Manager has the authority to administer and enforce this chapter. The City Manager may adopt supplemental regulations or policies to implement and interpret this chapter.
These regulations or policies must conform with the purpose of this chapter.
1.17.0 Use of Administrative Citations
(a) Whenever an enforcement officer determines that a violation subject to this chapter has occurred, the enforcement officer may issue an administrative citation to a responsible person in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.
(b) Each day, or any portion thereof, that a prohibited condition, use, or activity under the code is committed, continued or permitted shall constitute a separate violation for which an administrative fine may be imposed. A single citation may charge multiple violations of the code; however, each violation is subject to a separate and distinct administrative fine. (c) The remedies and procedures provided by this chapter are cumulative to each other and to any other available under City, state, or federal law. The use of an administrative citation in place of or in addition to other remedies is at the discretion of the City.
PGCC 9-17-25
6 1.17.0 Fine Amount
(a) Default Fine. Unless the City Council adopts a different fine amount by ordinance or resolution, the default fine amount for each violation is as follows:
(1) A fine not exceeding $100 for a first violation;
(2) A fine not exceeding $200 for a second violation within one year; and (3) A fine not exceeding $500 for each additional violation within one year. (b) Fine Resolution Authorized. By resolution, the City Council may set, and later revise, fine amounts that differ from the default in subsection (a) for any particular violation or group of violations.
1.17.0 Citation Contents
(a) Required Contents. Each citation must contain the following information:
(1) The name of the responsible person.
(2) The date of the violation(s).
(3) The address or a clear description of the location where the violation was observed. (4) The code section(s) violated and a concise description of the facts. (5) The amount of the fine for each violation.
(6) Instructions for paying the fine, including the payment deadline. (7) An order to correct or cease the violation.
(8) A concise summary of the hearing and appeal process, including identification of the right to appeal and the appeal deadline.
(9) The name of the enforcement officer issuing the administrative citation. (b) Substantial Compliance. The purpose of the citation content requirements is to provide fair notice to the responsible person and to encourage compliance with applicable laws.
Substantial compliance with these content requirements is deemed sufficient to effectuate these purposes. Any defect in the form or content of a citation does not constitute a ground for invalidating the citation, provided that the citation substantially complies with the requirements of this section and under the circumstances affords the responsible person adequate notice of the alleged violation and the opportunity to respond.
1.17.0 Service Requirements
(a) Authorized Means of Service. Any document or notice required to be served under this chapter must be completed as follows:
(1) Personal service.
(2) Mail via first class mail to the last known address of the responsible person. (3) If notice via personal service or mail is not possible, for citations involving a real property-related violation, the document or notice may be served via posting in a prominent place on the real property.
PGCC 9-17-25
7 (b) Effectiveness of Service. Service by mail is complete upon deposit with the U.S. Postal Service. Service by posting is complete on the date of posting. Failure of any intended recipient to receive any properly mailed or posted notice does not affect the validity of the notice or any proceeding conducted under this chapter.
1.17.0 Satisfaction of Administrative Citation
(a) Payment. The responsible person must pay the fine to the City within 30 days after the citation is served, or within 30 days after service of a decision of the hearing officer upholding a fine in the event of an appeal. All fines assessed shall be payable to the City of Pacific Grove and submitted to the City or its designee. Payment of the fine waives the citee’s right to contest the citation. Payment of a fine does not excuse or authorize any continuing violation, discharge a failure to correct a continuing violation, or bar further enforcement action by the City. (b) Remedy the Violation. If the violation is of a continuing nature, pertains to building, plumbing, electrical, or other similar structural or zoning issues, is deemed by the enforcement officer not to create an immediate danger to health and safety, and is fully and timely corrected within the time given to correct or cease the violation, then no fine is imposed. (c) Request a Hearing. As an alternative to payment of the fine or correction of continuing violation as set forth in this section, a citee may appeal the administrative citation as set forth in Section 1.17.090.
1.17.0 Request for Hearing
(a) A citee may appeal an administrative citation and contest that there was a violation or that they are the responsible person by completing and filing a request for hearing form and returning it to the City within 14 days of service of the administrative citation, together with advance payment of the fine, unless a hardship waiver is granted under Section 1.17.100. No fee is due for the filing of an appeal.
(b) The request for hearing must contain the full name, mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone number of each appellant who is appealing the citation, the number of the citation, and the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer to understand the nature of the controversy.
(c) A failure to file a request for hearing with all of the requirements set forth in this section is a waiver of the right to appeal the citation and to seek judicial review. In this event, the citation is final and binding.
1.17.0 Advance Deposit Hardship Waiver
Any appellant who is financially unable to deposit the administrative fines required may file a request for an advance deposit hardship waiver. The request must be filed with the City Manager at the time the appellant requests a hearing. The City Manager may waive the advance deposit requirement if the appellant files a sworn affidavit, with any supporting documents, demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City Manager the person’s financial hardship or inability to deposit the fine. The City Manager’s decision whether to issue a hardship waiver is final and not appealable. Failure to timely submit a completed form is a waiver of the right to apply for a hardship waiver. If a hardship waiver is denied, the person requesting the waiver must deposit the fine amount within the timeframe set by the City Manager.
PGCC 9-17-25
8 1.17.0 Selection of Hearing Officer
The City Manager may select a qualified person to serve as the hearing officer for the administrative citation hearing. Hearing officers must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. For purposes of this section, a qualified person includes an individual with a background in the practice of law or local governance or enforcement matters, or who is otherwise deemed qualified by the City Manager.
1.17.0 Powers and Duties of Hearing Officer
(a) The hearing officer hears all appeals in accordance with the procedures contained in this chapter. The hearing officer is authorized to issue decisions and take all actions necessary and proper to carry out the functions of the hearing officer in this chapter, including administer oaths and affirmations, hear testimony, determine admissibility, relevancy, weight, and credibility of testimony and evidence, rule upon requests of the parties, and issue a final order which includes findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing officer must ensure that parties receive a fair hearing and are afforded due process in accordance with the applicable State and federal law governing such hearings.
1.17.0 Hearing Notice Procedures
(a) Hearing Preconditions. No hearing to contest an administrative citation may proceed unless a timely and proper request for hearing form has been submitted, and the fine has been deposited in advance, or a hardship waiver has been timely requested and approved. (b) Timeframe for Hearing. After receipt of the request for hearing form, and fine deposit or hardship waiver, a hearing before the hearing officer must be set for a date that is not less than 15 and not more than 45 days from the date that the request for hearing form is filed. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. (c) Notice of Hearing. The appellant must be notified of the time and place set for the hearing by first class mail at least 10 days before the date of the hearing. The notice of hearing may be served by any of the methods of service listed in Section 1.17.070. (d) Continuance of Hearing. The appellant may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing commence later than 60 days after receipt of the request for hearing form from the appellant. Further continuances or any continuance that will extend the commencement of the hearing beyond 60 days after receipt of the request for hearing may be granted at the discretion of the hearing officer for good cause or by stipulation of the appellant and the City.
1.17.0 Conduct of Hearing
(a) Participation. The hearing officer must be present at all times to preside over the hearing.
The failure of any recipient of an administrative citation to appear at the hearing constitutes a forfeiture of the fine and a bar to judicial review of the hearing officer decision, based upon a failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Hearings may be opened to the public at the discretion of the hearing officer.
(b) Evidence and Witnesses. Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party has the opportunity to present evidence in support of that party’s case, and to cross-examine witnesses. The rules of privilege are effective to the same extent that they are now or hereafter may be recognized in civil actions. Irrelevant PGCC 9-17-25
9 and unduly repetitious evidence may be excluded. Oral evidence may be taken only on oath or affirmation. The hearing officer may only consider evidence that is relevant to whether the violation occurred, and whether the responsible person has caused or maintained the violation on the date(s) specified in the administrative citation.
(c) Proof. The City bears the burden of proving the violation by a preponderance of the evidence. The administrative citation and any additional documents submitted by the issuing enforcement officer constitutes prima facie evidence of the respective facts contained in those documents.
(d) Interpretation and Recordation. The appellant may bring an interpreter to the hearing at the appellant’s sole expense. The City may, at its discretion, record the hearing by stenographer, court reporter, audio recording, or video recording.
1.17.0 Decision of the Hearing Officer
(a) Decision Requirements. The hearing officer must render their decision in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing and must set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing officer must serve a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. (b) Disposition of Deposited Fines. If the hearing officer determines the administrative citation should be upheld, then the fine amount on deposit with the City may be retained by the City. If the hearing officer determines the administrative citation should be canceled and the fine was deposited with the City, then the City must promptly refund the amount of any deposited fine.
1.17.0 Judicial Review
An appellant may seek review of the hearing officer’s decision in the Monterey County Superior Court in accordance with Government Code section 53069.4.
1.17.0 Late Charges and Fine Collection
(a) Late Charges. Failure to pay an administrative fine by the due date will result in the assessment of a late charge. The late charge will be equal to 100 percent of unpaid fine. Failure to pay an administrative fine by the due date may also result in the imposition of an interest charge at a rate established by resolution of the City Council. (b) Collection. Any unpaid fine, late charge, or interest is a debt that is immediately due and owing to the City. The City may collect any such debt through any method allowed by law.
Commencement of an action to collect the debt does not preclude issuance of additional administrative citations to the responsible person should the violations persist.
Lien and Special Assessment Authority. Any unpaid fine, late charge, or interest that is final and in connection with real property may be collected by means of a lien or a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred.” PGCC 9-17-25
10 EXHIBIT B
1.18.100 Administrative hearing officer selection.
The presiding officer of the hearing officer panel shall, by random lot, designate one of the members of the hearing officer panel to be the hearing officer for each administrative hearing.
Should that hearing officer be disqualified for cause, or should that hearing officer otherwise be unable to conduct the hearing, the presiding officer shall, by random lot, designate a successor hearing officer from available members of the hearing officer panel. The City Manager may select a qualified person to serve as the hearing officer for the administrative citation hearing.
Hearing officers must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. For purposes of this section, a qualified person includes an individual with a background in the practice of law or local governance or enforcement matters, or who is otherwise deemed qualified by the City Manager.
1.18.230 Hearing officer’s decision.
(c) After considering all of the testimony and evidence submitted at the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue a written decision to uphold or cancel the citation and shall list the reasons for that decision. The decision of the hearing officer shall be final for purposes of administrative review.
(d) If the hearing officer determines that the citation should be upheld, then the fine amount on deposit with the city shall be retained by the city. If the fine has not been deposited, the hearing officer shall set forth in the decision a payment schedule for the fine. (e) If the hearing officer determines that the citation should be canceled and the fine was deposited with the city, then the city shall promptly refund the amount of the deposited fine, together with interest. If the fine has not been deposited, the hearing officer shall cancel the obligation to tender the fine.
The hearing officer’s decision shall be personally served or served by first class mail. A copy of the decision shall be forwarded to all members of the hearing officer panel. ”
PGCC 9-17-25
11 EXHIBIT C
CHAPTER 1.19 - NUISANCE ABATEMENT
1.17.010 Purpose
This chapter establishes procedures for abating public nuisances and related cost recovery, as authorized by Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5. It supplements every other enforcement remedy available to the City. Use of this nuisance abatement process is at the sole discretion of the City.
1.17.020 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
“Abatement costs” means all costs, fees, and expenses, incidental or otherwise, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the City in investigating and abating a public nuisance. “City Manager” means the City Manager or their designee. “Enforcement officer” means any City employee or agent of the City designated by the City Manager who has the authority to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code. “Junk” means waste, rubbish, appliances, scrap metal, building materials, and similar miscellaneous items.
“Responsible person” means any person that, by their action or failure to act, causes, maintains, allows, permits, aids, abets, or suffers a violation of this code. For the purposes of this definition, “person” means any natural individual or any organization that the law recognizes as having rights or duties, including, without limitation, a firm, association, partnership, joint venture, trust, estate, receiver, limited liability company, corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
1.17.030 Scope
The provisions of this chapter apply to all real property in the City except those parcels owned by the City of Pacific Grove.
1.17.040 Administration and Enforcement
The administration and enforcement of this chapter is the responsibility of the enforcement officer, unless otherwise expressly stated herein.
1.17.050 Service
(a) Authorized Means of Service. Any document or notice required to be served under this chapter must be completed as follows:
(1) Personal service.
(2) Mail via first class mail to the last known address of the responsible person. (3) If notice via personal service or mail is not possible, for citations involving a real property-related violation, the document or notice may be served via posting in a prominent place on the real property.
PGCC 9-17-25
12 (b) Effectiveness of Service. Service by mail is complete upon deposit with the U.S. Postal Service. Service by posting is complete on the date of posting. Failure of any intended recipient to receive any properly mailed or posted notice does not affect the validity of the notice or proceedings conducted under this chapter.
1.17.060 Designated Nuisances
It is unlawful for any person owning, leasing, renting, occupying, or having charge or possession of any property in the City to maintain the property or allow the property to be maintained, with any of the following conditions:
(a) Junk, Trash, and Debris. Accumulations of junk, trash, or debris in a manner visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent property.
(b) Abandoned or Damaged Buildings. Buildings that are abandoned, partially destroyed, or permitted to remain unreasonably in a state of partial construction. (c) Broken Windows. Broken windows, which constitute hazardous conditions and invite trespassers and malicious mischief.
(d) Overgrown Vegetation. Overgrown weeds, grass, or vegetation. (e) Dead, Decayed, or Diseased Vegetation. Dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds, and other vegetation that is: (1) constituting unsightly appearance, (2) dangerous to public safety and welfare, or (3) detrimental to nearby property or property values. (f) Detriment to Public Health, Safety, and General Welfare. Maintenance of premises in such condition as to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare or in such manner as to constitute a public nuisance as defined by Civil Code section 3480. (g) Fire Hazard. All dry, dead shrubs, dead trees, combustible refuse and waste, or any material growing around the streets, sidewalks, or upon private property within the City, which by reason of its size, manner, or growth or location constitutes a fire hazard to any building, improvements, crops, or other property, or when dry, will in reasonable probability constitute a fire hazard.
(h) Detrimental to Enjoyment or Use of Property. Maintenance of premises so out of harmony or conformity with the maintenance standards of adjacent properties as to cause substantial diminution of the enjoyment, use, or property values of such adjacent properties. (i) Polluted Water. Any swimming pool, pond or other body of water which is abandoned, unattended, unfiltered, or not maintained, resulting in the water becoming polluted. “Polluted water,” for the purpose of this Chapter, means water contained in a swimming pool, pond, or other body of water, which includes, but is not limited to, bacterial growth, including algae, remains of rubbish, refuse, debris, papers, or any other foreign matter which, because of its nature or location, constitutes an unhealthy, unsafe or unsightly condition. (j) Graffiti. Graffiti or other defacement of real or personal property present or remaining on a building, structure or vehicle, or portion thereof, that is visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent property.
(k) Inoperable Vehicles. Abandoned, dismantled, inoperable or wrecked vessels, campers, motorcycles, trailers, vehicles, or parts thereof, unless kept, placed, parked, or stored inside of a completely enclosed, lawfully constructed building or structure.
PGCC 9-17-25
13 (l) Any violation of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code.
1.17.070 Compliance Orders
(a) Authority to Issue. An enforcement officer may issue a written compliance order to any responsible person when the officer determines that a violation is occurring or exists. (b) Required Contents. A compliance order issued under this chapter must contain the following information:
(1) The address of the real property on which the alleged nuisance condition exists; (2) A description of the alleged nuisance conditions and the code section prohibiting the alleged nuisance condition.
(3) A brief description of the required corrective actions. (4) The deadline to complete the corrective actions.
(5) A statement that the City may record a Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office against the premises
(6) The enforcement officer’s name.
(7) The period and manner in which a responsible person may contest the compliance order as set forth in Section 1.19.080.
(c) Additional Requirements for Demolition. Whenever the enforcement officer intends to abate a public nuisance by demolition of a building or structure if the responsible person fails to comply, then the City must comply with the following additional requirements:
(1) The compliance order must contain a statement that the City intends to abate the nuisance with City personnel or contractors by demolition of a building or structure if the nuisance conditions are not repaired, rehabilitated, removed, terminated, or demolished within the deadline set forth in the compliance order; and
(2) The City must serve the compliance order on all secured lienholders of record with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office.
(d) Service. Any compliance order issued under this section must be served in the manner required under Section 1.19.050.
(e) Exemption for Emergency Abatement. The provisions of this section do not apply in cases involving emergency abatement under Section 1.19.110.
1.17.080 Compliance Order Appeals
(a) Right to Appeal. Any person issued a compliance order has a right to appeal the City’s nuisance determination in accordance with this chapter. (b) Appeal Requirements. An appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the compliance order. A written notice of appeal must contain the full name, mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone number and the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer and City to understand the nature of the controversy.
PGCC 9-17-25
14 (c) Effect of Failure to Appeal. A person who does not properly and timely appeal a compliance order waives the right to challenge it and has failed to exhaust administrative remedies. In this event, the compliance order is final.
1.17.090 Appeal Hearings
(a) Selection of Hearing Officer. The City Manager may select the hearing officer. The hearing officer must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. (b) Scheduling and Noticing of the Hearing. If a timely and proper appeal is filed, then the City Clerk must schedule the hearing no sooner than 15 days and no later than 60 days from receipt of the notice of appeal, unless the parties waive such time limits. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. The City Clerk must notify the appellant in writing of the date, time, and location of the hearing at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing. The notice of hearing must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050.
(c) Issues on Appeal. The City bears the burden of proof to establish a nuisance exists by a preponderance of evidence. The issuance of a compliance order is prima facie evidence of the existence of a violation. The scope of the appeal is limited to whether any nuisance condition identified in the compliance order exists.
(d) Evidence, Witnesses, and Recording. All parties have the right to present evidence and witnesses. The formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. The rules of privilege apply as they do in civil actions. Irrelevant or unduly repetitious evidence may be excluded. Oral evidence may be taken only on oath or affirmation. The appellant and respondent may represent themselves or be represented by anyone of their choice. No party has the right to cross-examine any other party or witness except for good cause shown to the satisfaction of the hearing officer.
The appellant may bring an interpreter to the hearing at their sole expense. The City may, at its discretion, record the hearing by stenographer, court reporter, audio recording, or video recording.
(e) Decision of the Hearing Officer. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, order the abatement of any confirmed nuisance conditions within a deadline determined by the hearing officer to be reasonable, and include a statement that if the nuisance is not abated then it may be abated by the City. If the hearing officer determines that each nuisance condition described in the compliance order is nonexistent, the compliance order is deemed cancelled. The hearing officer must render a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer or automatically grant the appeal. The hearing officer’s decision must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050. The hearing officer’s decision is the final administrative decision of the City regarding the compliance order. The hearing officer’s decision is effective on the date of service of the decision. The decision must contain the following statement: “The decision of the hearing officer is final and binding. Judicial review of this decision is subject to the provisions and time limits set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 et seq.”
1.17.0 City Abatement
If a nuisance is not completely abated within the time prescribed by the compliance order, or, if appealed, in the hearing officer’s decision, the City is authorized to abate a nuisance by City staff PGCC 9-17-25
15 or private contractor. The City and its agents are expressly authorized to enter the premises for such purpose. Except in cases involving an imminent hazard, entry onto any real property to abate a public nuisance must be pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.
1.17.0 Emergency Abatement
(a) If, in the reasonable opinion of the enforcement officer, there exists a condition that constitutes an imminent threat of harm to public health or safety, or imminent hazard to real or personal property, the enforcement officer may cause the conditions to be summarily abated in accordance with the following procedure. When determining whether a hazard is sufficiently imminent to warrant emergency abatement, the enforcement officer may consider whether there is insufficient time to follow the administrative process for non-emergency abatements described in this chapter.
(b) If time permits, the enforcement officer may attempt to contact the owner or occupant of the property to notify the responsible person that the condition must be immediately abated to eliminate the imminent hazard.
(c) If the enforcement officer is unable to make contact, or if after contact with the owner or occupant does not take action within the time prescribed by the enforcement officer, he or she is authorized to take all actions necessary to eliminate or mitigate the hazardous condition, utilizing the City’s own forces or private contractor.
(d) As soon as reasonably possible under the circumstances, following any emergency abatement action by the City to abate an immediate hazard, the City must provide each responsible person with a “Notice of Summary Abatement.” The Notice of Summary Abatement must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050 and contain the following information:
(1) A brief description of the condition and reasons why it constituted an imminent threat or hazard;
(2) A brief description of the law prohibiting or pertaining to the imminent threat or hazard; and
(3) A brief description of the actions the City took to abate the imminent threat or hazard. (e) The City’s determination that a condition constituted an imminent threat or hazard may be appealed as set forth in Section 1.19.080.
(f) The enforcement officer must keep an itemized account of the costs incurred by the City in abating the public nuisance. The City is entitled to recover all abatement costs incurred in the abatement of an imminent threat or hazard in accordance with the procedures set forth in this chapter.
1.17.0 Notice of Violation Recordation
(a) Recordation Authorization. If a nuisance is not completely abated as determined by the City within the time prescribed by the compliance order, if appealed, in the hearing officer’s decision, the City may record a Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office against the premises.
(b) Rescission. The City must record a Notice of Rescission of Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office within 10 business days of its determination that the violation has been fully abated or corrected.
PGCC 9-17-25
16 (c) Service. Upon recordation, the City must serve a copy of the recorded Notice of Violation or Notice of Rescission on each person having an ownership interest in the property.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Authorization
(a) City’s Right to Recover Nuisance Abatement Costs. Whenever the City incurs abatement costs in abating a public nuisance or seeking to abate a code violation or public nuisance, the City is entitled to recover the abatement costs related to those code enforcement efforts in accordance with the procedure set forth in this chapter. The City may commence cost recovery proceedings at any time.
(b) Recoverable Abatement Costs. Recoverable costs include all abatement costs.
Recoverable costs may not exceed the actual and reasonable costs of nuisance abatement.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Initiation
(a) Report of Abatement Costs. To initiate the process for recovery of abatement costs, the City must serve an itemized report of abatement costs on the responsible person identifying all abatement costs and demanding payment. The report must provide notice that any unpaid amounts may become a lien and special assessment against the property unless the City receives full and timely payment.
(b) Service of Report of Abatement Costs. The report of abatement costs must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050. If the code violation or public nuisance relates to real property, then the report of abatement costs must be served on each person with a recorded interest in the property.
(c) Payment. Timely, full payment of the abatement costs must be remitted to the City within 45 calendar days following the date of service of the report of abatement costs. (d) Right to Appeal. Any person issued a report of abatement costs has a right to appeal the report of abatement costs. An appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the report of abatement costs. The right to appeal and procedures must be specified in the report. A written notice of appeal must contain the following information: (1) the name and contact information of the appellant, and (2) the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer and City to understand the nature of the controversy. The failure of any person who has been served with proper notice to timely file an appeal is a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Hearings and Appeals
(a) Cost Recovery Appeal. These hearing procedures supplement and augment those above.
The scope of the appeal is limited to the appropriateness of the amount of the abatement costs, and the hearing officer’s decision may confirm, discharge, or modify the amount of costs. (b) Decision. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, and demand payment of any confirmed abatement costs within 30 calendar days following the date of service of the hearing officer’s decision. (c) Payment of Confirmed Costs. Any confirmed abatement costs must be tendered to the City within 30 calendar days following the date of service of the hearing officer’s decision.
PGCC 9-17-25
17 1.17.0 Cost Collection Initiation
(a) Upon expiration of 45 days after the report of abatement costs, or 30 days after the hearing officer’s decision in the event of an appeal, if the full amount of the final abatement costs has not been paid, any unpaid costs may be collected by the City in accordance with Sections
1.19.160 through 1.19.190.
(b) To collect the unpaid costs via a lien or special assessment, the City Council, after a public hearing, may adopt a resolution confirming imposition of the debt and approving filing a lien or special assessment against the subject real property.
1.17.0 Lien Cost Collection
(a) In accordance with Government Code section 38773.1, abatement costs may be levied by the City as a lien against the property on which the nuisance was abated. The City may record a lien against the nuisance property for any unpaid amount. Before recording a lien, the City must serve each person with a recorded interest in the subject property with notice of the lien. In addition, any owner of record must be served in accordance with Government Code section 38773.1.
(b) The nuisance abatement lien must be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Monterey County, California; and from the date of recording, the nuisance abatement lien will have the force, effect, and priority of a judgment lien, and will continue in effect until discharged by the City.
(c) The lien must specify the City as the agency for whose benefit the lien is established, the amount of the lien, the date of any abatement order, the street address, legal description, and assessor’s parcel number of the parcel on which the lien is imposed, and the name and address of the recorded owner of the parcel.
(d) The nuisance abatement lien may be foreclosed by an action brought by the City for a money judgment. All costs and expenses relating to the processing, recording, and enforcement of the abatement lien, including recording fees, noticing costs and attorney fees may be added to the amount of the lien and will be secured thereby.
(e) Upon payment or other satisfaction of the abatement lien, a notice of release of lien must be prepared and recorded by the City forthwith.
1.17.0 Special Assessment Cost Collection
(a) In accordance with Government Code section 38773.5, abatement costs may be levied by the City as a special assessment against the property on which the nuisance was abated. If the abatement costs have not been paid in full within the time required by this Chapter, the City may levy a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred. The City must serve each person with a recorded interest in the subject property with notice of the imposition of the special assessment. In addition, any owner of record must be served in accordance with Government Code section 38773.5. The notice must specify that the property may be sold after three years by the Tax Collector for unpaid delinquent assessments. (b) The notice of special assessment is entitled to recordation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office. A copy of the notice of special assessment must be transmitted to the County Tax Assessor and Tax Collector, whereupon the Tax Assessor and Tax Collector must add the amount of the special assessment on the next regular bill for real estate taxes levied against the PGCC 9-17-25
18 property identified in the notice of special assessment. Thereafter, the special assessment will be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary municipal taxes are collected, and will be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in the case of delinquency as provided by law for ordinary municipal taxes. After recordation, the special assessment may be foreclosed on as a lien in the manner and means provided by law.
1.17.0 Civil Action Cost Collection
(a) In addition to any other remedies set forth in this Code or otherwise provided by law, the City Attorney is authorized to bring a civil action, at the City Attorney’s discretion, to recover the City’s abatement costs.
1.17.0 Combined Notices
The notices that are authorized by this chapter may be combined in the discretion of the City.
1.17.0 Enforcement
(a) It is unlawful and declared a public nuisance for any person to violate any provision of this chapter. It is unlawful and declared a public nuisance for any person to violate any order of a hearing officer made under this chapter.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000, or by imprisonment in the County jail not exceeding six months, or by both, except the City Attorney or enforcement officer may prosecute a violation of this chapter as an infraction, in his or her discretion. (c) Violation of this chapter may be punished by issuance of an administrative citation fine, as set forth in Chapter 1.17.
(d) The City Attorney is authorized to bring a civil or equitable action, at his or her discretion, to seek the abatement of any violation of this chapter or enforcement of any provision of this chapter.
(e) Each and every day a violation is maintained, caused, aided, abetted, concealed, suffered, or permitted is a separate offense.
(f) The regulations, remedies, procedures, and penalties provided by this chapter are cumulative to each other and to any other available under City, State, or federal law.
1.17.0 Attorney Fee Recovery
The prevailing party in any judicial action, administrative proceeding, or special proceeding to abate a nuisance may recover its incurred attorney fees, provided that the City elected, at the initiation of such individual action or proceeding, to recover its own attorney fees. In no judicial action or administrative proceeding may an award of attorney fees to a prevailing party exceed the amount of reasonable attorney fees incurred by the City in the judicial action or administrative proceeding. A judicial action includes, but is not limited to, any civil action, inspection or abatement warrant, administrative proceeding, or appeal from an administrative proceeding. Any recovery of attorney fees for abatement of a nuisance must be in accordance with this section.”
PGCC 9-17-25
19 EXHIBIT D
6.09.080 Failure to collect and report tax – Determination of tax by tax administrator.
If any operator shall fail or refuse to collect said tax and to make, within the time provided in this chapter, any report and remittance of said tax or any portion thereof required by this chapter, the tax administrator shall proceed in such manner as he or she may deem best to obtain facts and information on which to base his or her estimate of the tax due. As soon as the tax administrator shall procure such facts and information as he or she is able to obtain upon which to base the assessment of any tax imposed by this chapter and payable by any operator who has failed or refused to collect the same and to make such report and remittance, he or she shall proceed to determine and assess against such operator the tax, interest and penalties provided for by this chapter. In case such determination is made, the tax administrator shall give a notice of the amount so assessed by serving it personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at his or her last known place of address. Such operator may within 10 days after the serving or mailing of such notice, make application in writing to the tax administrator for a hearing on the amount assessed. If application by the operator for a hearing is not made within the time prescribed, the tax, interest and penalties, if any, determined by the tax administrator shall become final and conclusive and immediately due and payable. If such application is made, the tax administrator shall give not less than five days’ written notice in the manner prescribed herein to the operator to show cause at a time and place fixed in said notice why said amount specified therein should not be fixed for such tax, interest and penalties. At such hearing, the operator may appear and offer evidence why such specified tax, interest and penalties should not be so fixed. After such hearing the tax administrator shall determine the proper tax to be remitted and shall thereafter give written notice to the person in the manner prescribed herein of such determination and the amount of such tax, interest and penalties. The amount determined to be due shall be payable after 15 days unless an appeal is taken as provided in PGMC 6.09.090.
6.09.090 Appeals.
Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, may appeal to the council by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk within 15 days of the serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The council shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal, and the city clerk shall give notice in writing to such operator at his or her last known place of address. The findings of the council shall be final and conclusive and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed in PGMC 6.09.080 for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice. (a) Right to Appeal. Any person aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, has a right to file a written appeal the within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the determination of tax due. (b) Effect of Failure to Appeal. Failure to appeal is waiver of the right to challenge the decision and failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In this event, the decision order is final, and any tax, interest, and penalties are immediately due and payable.
PGCC 9-17-25
20 (c) Selection of Hearing Officer. The City Manager may select the hearing officer. The hearing officer must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. (d) Scheduling and Noticing of the Hearing. If a timely and proper appeal is filed, then the City Clerk must schedule the hearing no sooner than 15 days and no later than 60 days from receipt of the notice of appeal, unless the parties waive such time limits. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. The City Clerk must notify the appellant in writing of the date, time, and location of the hearing at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing. The notice of hearing must be served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at their last known place of address.
(e) Burdens and Standard. The City bears the initial burden to produce evidence showing a reasonable basis for the estimate and assessment made under this chapter. If the City meets that burden, the operator bears the burden to produce records or other evidence sufficient to rebut the estimate and assessment.
(f) Decision. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, determine the proper tax to be remitted, and include a 15 -day deadline for payment of any upheld amount to the City. If the hearing officer determines that each nuisance condition described in the compliance order is nonexistent, the compliance order is deemed cancelled. The hearing officer must render a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer or automatically grant the appeal. The hearing officer’s decision must be served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at their last known place of address. The decision must contain the following statement: “The decision of the hearing officer is final and binding. Judicial review of this decision is subject to the provisions and time limits set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 et seq.” PGCC 9-17-25
21 EXHIBIT E
7.40.160 Appeal of tax.
Any person aggrieved by any decision of the city with respect to the amount of the transient occupancy tax or fees associated thereto may appeal to the administrative enforcement a hearing officer in accordance with Section 6.09.090panel under Chapter 1.19 PGMC by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk or delegate within 15 days after receipt of written notice from the city. The hearing officer assigned by the panel shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing such appeal. The city manager or delegate shall give notice to such person of the time and place of hearing in compliance with Chapter 1.12 PGMC. The hearing officer shall have authority to determine all questions raised by such appeal; provided, however, that no such determination shall conflict with any substantive provision of this chapter.
PGCC 9-17-25
22 EXHIBIT F
9.17.130 Enforcement.
(a) Beginning January 1, 2024, if the city determines that a generator, responsible party, selfhauler, hauler, tier one or tier two commercial edible food generator, food recovery organization, food recovery service, or other entity is not in compliance with this chapter, it shall document the noncompliance or violation, issue a notice of violation, and take enforcement action pursuant to this section, as needed.
(b) Violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute an infraction or misdemeanor and shall be punishable as set forth in Chapter 1.16 PGMC. (c) Notwithstanding any other legal remedy, violation of any of the provisions of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to Chapter 1.19 PGMC.
(d) Notwithstanding any other legal remedy, violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a public nuisance and shall be subject to abatement, injunction, or other civil remedy as appropriate.
(e) Notice of Violation.
(1) City enforcement officials or their designee will monitor compliance randomly and through compliance reviews, route reviews, investigation of complaints, and an inspection program (that may include remote monitoring).
(2) For incidences of prohibited container contaminants found in containers, city will issue a notice of contamination to any generator or responsible party found to have prohibited container contaminants in a container. Such notice will be provided via a cart tag or other communication immediately upon identification of the prohibited container contaminants or within 10 business days after determining that a violation has occurred. If the city observes prohibited container contaminants in a responsible party’s containers on more than three consecutive occasions, the city may assess contamination processing fees or contamination penalties on the generator. (3) City shall issue a notice of violation requiring compliance within a maximum of 60 days of issuance of the notice. Notices shall be sent to “Owner” at the official address of the owner maintained by the tax collector for the city or if no such address is available, to the owner at the address of the multifamily premises or commercial premises or to the responsible party for the collection services, depending upon available information. (f) Penalty Amounts for Types of Violations. Penalties may be assessed for violations as provided in Chapters 1.16 and/or 1.19 PGMC. Any person causing or permitting a violation of this code shall be regarded as committing a separate offense on each day that the violation occurs or continues.
(g) Appeals Process. Any persons aggrieved by any decision of the city with respect to uncorrected violation may appeal to the administrative enforcement a hearing officer panel under the process set forth in Chapter 1.19 PGMC by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk or delegate within 15 days after receipt of written notice from the city. The hearing officer assigned by the panel shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing such appeal. The city manager or delegate shall give notice to such person of the time and place of hearing in PGCC 9-17-25
23 compliance with Chapter 1.12 PGMC. The hearing officer shall have authority to determine all questions raised by such appeal; provided, however, that no such determination shall conflict with any substantive provision of this chapter.
PGCC 9-17-25
1 ORDINANCE NO. 25-____
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PACIFIC GROVE ADDING CHAPTER 1.17, AMENDING
CHAPTER 1.18, REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER
1.19, REPEALING AND RESERVING CHAPTER 3.30,
AMENDING CHAPTER 6.09, AMENDING CHAPTER 7.40,
AND AMENDING CHAPTER 9.17 OF THE PACIFIC
GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING CODE
ENFORCEMENT PROCESSES
FINDINGS
1. The City of Pacific Grove is authorized by California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7 to make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws. Pursuant to California Constitution, Article XI, Section 5 and Pacific Grove City Charter Article 5, the City, as a charter city, has plenary authority to make and enforce within its limits all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs.
2. Government Code section 53069.4(a) authorizes a city to adopt an ordinance providing for imposition of administrative fines for municipal code violations.
3. Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5 provide that a city may, by ordinance, provide for the recovery of nuisance abatement costs, including attorneys’ fees, in any action, administrative proceeding, or special proceeding to abate a nuisance.
4. In accordance with these grants of authority, the City has adopted Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) chapter 1.19 [Municipal Code and Ordinance Enforcement].
Chapter 1.19 with two distinct processes that would be more efficiently be included in separate provisions of the City Municipal Code ordinance: the administrative citation procedure (Sections 1.19.040–1.19.150) and the nuisance abatement procedure (Sections
1.19.150–1.19.290).
5. Infraction violations of local, state, and federal regulations governing the standing or parking of vehicles are subject to fines and are enforced by the civil administrative process in Vehicle Code sections 40200–40230. Anyone may contest a parking violation in accordance with the process set forth in Vehicle Code section 40215 and any implementing ordinance. In accordance with Vehicle Code section 40215, the City has adopted PGMC chapter 1.18 [Motor Vehicle Parking Violation Enforcement].
6. The City places a high value on protecting community character, land values, and the general public, health, safety and welfare, and has previously adopted numerous ordinances to help ensure such protection. The purpose of this ordinance is to improve the efficiency of the City’s code enforcement processes in order to make the City’s code enforcement efforts more efficient and effective. The purpose of this ordinance is also to further modernize the code enforcement and nuisance abatement tools to help improve the efficiency of the City’s code enforcement processes and to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and to ensure cost recovery to the fullest extent as authorized by law.
PGCC 9-17-25
2 7. Further, the purpose of this ordinance is to authorize the City to retain a professional hearing officer to preside over administrative citation, nuisance abatement, and parking citation appeals, in lieu of the hearing officer panel. A single, professionally trained hearing officer ensures consistency of procedure and decision-making and efficient handling of matters.
8. The City Council finds that the adoption of this proposed ordinance is within the City’s power and authority to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents.
9. This ordinance amends the PGMC to create a new Chapter 1.17 entitled “Administrative Citations” to provide an efficient administrative mechanism to enforce the PGMC through the imposition of fines, as authorized by Government Code section 53069.4.
10. This ordinance amends the PGMC by repealing and replacing Chapter 1.19 with an ordinance entitled “Nuisance Abatement” to establish procedures for abating public nuisances and related cost recovery, Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5.
11. This ordinance amends the PGMC by amending Chapters 1.18, 6.09, 7.40, and 9.17 related to appeals and the hearing officer authority.
12. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of the ordinance have occurred.
13. 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
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Incorporation of Findings. The foregoing findings are adopted by the City Council as though set forth in fully within the body of this ordinance.
SECTION 2. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.17 is hereby added to read as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto.
SECTION 3. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.18 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto.
SECTION 4. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 1.19 is hereby repealed and replaced to read as set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto.
SECTION 5. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 3.30 is hereby repealed and reserved.
SECTION 6. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 6.09 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto.
SECTION 7. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 7.40 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit E attached hereto.
PGCC 9-17-25
3 SECTION 8. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 9.17 is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto.
SECTION 9. 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 10. Effectiveness. In accordance with Article 15 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective on the thirtieth (30th) day following its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE this ______ day of ______________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
_______________________________
NICK SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST:
DATED:_______________________
_______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
BRIAN A. PIERIK, City Attorney
PGCC 9-17-25
5 EXHIBIT A
CHAPTER 1.17 - ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS
1.17.0 Purpose
This chapter provides an efficient, administrative mechanism to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code through the imposition of fines, as authorized by Government Code section 53069.4 and other applicable law.
1.17.0 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
“Appellant” means a citee who files an appeal.
“Citee” means a responsible person who has been issued an administrative citation under this chapter.
“City Manager” means the City Manager or their designee. “Enforcement officer” means any City employee or agent of the City designated by the City Manager who has the authority to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code. “Responsible person” means any person that, by their action or failure to act, causes, maintains, allows, permits, aids, abets, or suffers a violation of this code. For the purposes of this definition, “person” means any natural individual or any organization that the law recognizes as having rights or duties, including, without limitation, a firm, association, partnership, joint venture, trust, estate, receiver, limited liability company, corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
1.17.0 Scope and Authorization to Enforce Chapter
(a) The provisions of this chapter apply to any violation of this code or any violation of a condition of approval of any permit, license, or other approval issued by the City. (b) The City Manager has the authority to administer and enforce this chapter. The City Manager may adopt supplemental regulations or policies to implement and interpret this chapter.
These regulations or policies must conform with the purpose of this chapter.
1.17.0 Use of Administrative Citations
(a) Whenever an enforcement officer determines that a violation subject to this chapter has occurred, the enforcement officer may issue an administrative citation to a responsible person in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.
(b) Each day, or any portion thereof, that a prohibited condition, use, or activity under the code is committed, continued or permitted shall constitute a separate violation for which an administrative fine may be imposed. A single citation may charge multiple violations of the code; however, each violation is subject to a separate and distinct administrative fine. (c) The remedies and procedures provided by this chapter are cumulative to each other and to any other available under City, state, or federal law. The use of an administrative citation in place of or in addition to other remedies is at the discretion of the City.
PGCC 9-17-25
6 1.17.0 Fine Amount
(a) Default Fine. Unless the City Council adopts a different fine amount by ordinance or resolution, the default fine amount for each violation is as follows:
(1) A fine not exceeding $100 for a first violation;
(2) A fine not exceeding $200 for a second violation within one year; and (3) A fine not exceeding $500 for each additional violation within one year. (b) Fine Resolution Authorized. By resolution, the City Council may set, and later revise, fine amounts that differ from the default in subsection (a) for any particular violation or group of violations.
1.17.0 Citation Contents
(a) Required Contents. Each citation must contain the following information:
(1) The name of the responsible person.
(2) The date of the violation(s).
(3) The address or a clear description of the location where the violation was observed. (4) The code section(s) violated and a concise description of the facts. (5) The amount of the fine for each violation.
(6) Instructions for paying the fine, including the payment deadline. (7) An order to correct or cease the violation.
(8) A concise summary of the hearing and appeal process, including identification of the right to appeal and the appeal deadline.
(9) The name of the enforcement officer issuing the administrative citation. (b) Substantial Compliance. The purpose of the citation content requirements is to provide fair notice to the responsible person and to encourage compliance with applicable laws.
Substantial compliance with these content requirements is deemed sufficient to effectuate these purposes. Any defect in the form or content of a citation does not constitute a ground for invalidating the citation, provided that the citation substantially complies with the requirements of this section and under the circumstances affords the responsible person adequate notice of the alleged violation and the opportunity to respond.
1.17.0 Service Requirements
(a) Authorized Means of Service. Any document or notice required to be served under this chapter must be completed as follows:
(1) Personal service.
(2) Mail via first class mail to the last known address of the responsible person. (3) If notice via personal service or mail is not possible, for citations involving a real property-related violation, the document or notice may be served via posting in a prominent place on the real property.
PGCC 9-17-25
7 (b) Effectiveness of Service. Service by mail is complete upon deposit with the U.S. Postal Service. Service by posting is complete on the date of posting. Failure of any intended recipient to receive any properly mailed or posted notice does not affect the validity of the notice or any proceeding conducted under this chapter.
1.17.0 Satisfaction of Administrative Citation
(a) Payment. The responsible person must pay the fine to the City within 30 days after the citation is served, or within 30 days after service of a decision of the hearing officer upholding a fine in the event of an appeal. All fines assessed shall be payable to the City of Pacific Grove and submitted to the City or its designee. Payment of the fine waives the citee’s right to contest the citation. Payment of a fine does not excuse or authorize any continuing violation, discharge a failure to correct a continuing violation, or bar further enforcement action by the City. (b) Remedy the Violation. If the violation is of a continuing nature, pertains to building, plumbing, electrical, or other similar structural or zoning issues, is deemed by the enforcement officer not to create an immediate danger to health and safety, and is fully and timely corrected within the time given to correct or cease the violation, then no fine is imposed. (c) Request a Hearing. As an alternative to payment of the fine or correction of continuing violation as set forth in this section, a citee may appeal the administrative citation as set forth in Section 1.17.090.
1.17.0 Request for Hearing
(a) A citee may appeal an administrative citation and contest that there was a violation or that they are the responsible person by completing and filing a request for hearing form and returning it to the City within 14 days of service of the administrative citation, together with advance payment of the fine, unless a hardship waiver is granted under Section 1.17.100. No fee is due for the filing of an appeal.
(b) The request for hearing must contain the full name, mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone number of each appellant who is appealing the citation, the number of the citation, and the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer to understand the nature of the controversy.
(c) A failure to file a request for hearing with all of the requirements set forth in this section is a waiver of the right to appeal the citation and to seek judicial review. In this event, the citation is final and binding.
1.17.0 Advance Deposit Hardship Waiver
Any appellant who is financially unable to deposit the administrative fines required may file a request for an advance deposit hardship waiver. The request must be filed with the City Manager at the time the appellant requests a hearing. The City Manager may waive the advance deposit requirement if the appellant files a sworn affidavit, with any supporting documents, demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City Manager the person’s financial hardship or inability to deposit the fine. The City Manager’s decision whether to issue a hardship waiver is final and not appealable. Failure to timely submit a completed form is a waiver of the right to apply for a hardship waiver. If a hardship waiver is denied, the person requesting the waiver must deposit the fine amount within the timeframe set by the City Manager.
PGCC 9-17-25
8 1.17.0 Selection of Hearing Officer
The City Manager may select a qualified person to serve as the hearing officer for the administrative citation hearing. Hearing officers must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. For purposes of this section, a qualified person includes an individual with a background in the practice of law or local governance or enforcement matters, or who is otherwise deemed qualified by the City Manager.
1.17.0 Powers and Duties of Hearing Officer
(a) The hearing officer hears all appeals in accordance with the procedures contained in this chapter. The hearing officer is authorized to issue decisions and take all actions necessary and proper to carry out the functions of the hearing officer in this chapter, including administer oaths and affirmations, hear testimony, determine admissibility, relevancy, weight, and credibility of testimony and evidence, rule upon requests of the parties, and issue a final order which includes findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing officer must ensure that parties receive a fair hearing and are afforded due process in accordance with the applicable State and federal law governing such hearings.
1.17.0 Hearing Notice Procedures
(a) Hearing Preconditions. No hearing to contest an administrative citation may proceed unless a timely and proper request for hearing form has been submitted, and the fine has been deposited in advance, or a hardship waiver has been timely requested and approved. (b) Timeframe for Hearing. After receipt of the request for hearing form, and fine deposit or hardship waiver, a hearing before the hearing officer must be set for a date that is not less than 15 and not more than 45 days from the date that the request for hearing form is filed. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. (c) Notice of Hearing. The appellant must be notified of the time and place set for the hearing by first class mail at least 10 days before the date of the hearing. The notice of hearing may be served by any of the methods of service listed in Section 1.17.070. (d) Continuance of Hearing. The appellant may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing commence later than 60 days after receipt of the request for hearing form from the appellant. Further continuances or any continuance that will extend the commencement of the hearing beyond 60 days after receipt of the request for hearing may be granted at the discretion of the hearing officer for good cause or by stipulation of the appellant and the City.
1.17.0 Conduct of Hearing
(a) Participation. The hearing officer must be present at all times to preside over the hearing.
The failure of any recipient of an administrative citation to appear at the hearing constitutes a forfeiture of the fine and a bar to judicial review of the hearing officer decision, based upon a failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Hearings may be opened to the public at the discretion of the hearing officer.
(b) Evidence and Witnesses. Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party has the opportunity to present evidence in support of that party’s case, and to cross-examine witnesses. The rules of privilege are effective to the same extent that they are now or hereafter may be recognized in civil actions. Irrelevant PGCC 9-17-25
9 and unduly repetitious evidence may be excluded. Oral evidence may be taken only on oath or affirmation. The hearing officer may only consider evidence that is relevant to whether the violation occurred, and whether the responsible person has caused or maintained the violation on the date(s) specified in the administrative citation.
(c) Proof. The City bears the burden of proving the violation by a preponderance of the evidence. The administrative citation and any additional documents submitted by the issuing enforcement officer constitutes prima facie evidence of the respective facts contained in those documents.
(d) Interpretation and Recordation. The appellant may bring an interpreter to the hearing at the appellant’s sole expense. The City may, at its discretion, record the hearing by stenographer, court reporter, audio recording, or video recording.
1.17.0 Decision of the Hearing Officer
(a) Decision Requirements. The hearing officer must render their decision in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing and must set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. The hearing officer must serve a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. (b) Disposition of Deposited Fines. If the hearing officer determines the administrative citation should be upheld, then the fine amount on deposit with the City may be retained by the City. If the hearing officer determines the administrative citation should be canceled and the fine was deposited with the City, then the City must promptly refund the amount of any deposited fine.
1.17.0 Judicial Review
An appellant may seek review of the hearing officer’s decision in the Monterey County Superior Court in accordance with Government Code section 53069.4.
1.17.0 Late Charges and Fine Collection
(a) Late Charges. Failure to pay an administrative fine by the due date will result in the assessment of a late charge. The late charge will be equal to 100 percent of unpaid fine. Failure to pay an administrative fine by the due date may also result in the imposition of an interest charge at a rate established by resolution of the City Council. (b) Collection. Any unpaid fine, late charge, or interest is a debt that is immediately due and owing to the City. The City may collect any such debt through any method allowed by law.
Commencement of an action to collect the debt does not preclude issuance of additional administrative citations to the responsible person should the violations persist.
Lien and Special Assessment Authority. Any unpaid fine, late charge, or interest that is final and in connection with real property may be collected by means of a lien or a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred.” PGCC 9-17-25
10 EXHIBIT B
1.18.100 Administrative hearing officer selection.
The City Manager may select a qualified person to serve as the hearing officer for the administrative citation hearing. Hearing officers must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. For purposes of this section, a qualified person includes an individual with a background in the practice of law or local governance or enforcement matters, or who is otherwise deemed qualified by the City Manager.
1.18.230 Hearing officer’s decision.
(c) After considering all of the testimony and evidence submitted at the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue a written decision to uphold or cancel the citation and shall list the reasons for that decision. The decision of the hearing officer shall be final for purposes of administrative review.
(d) If the hearing officer determines that the citation should be upheld, then the fine amount on deposit with the city shall be retained by the city. If the fine has not been deposited, the hearing officer shall set forth in the decision a payment schedule for the fine. (e) If the hearing officer determines that the citation should be canceled and the fine was deposited with the city, then the city shall promptly refund the amount of the deposited fine, together with interest. If the fine has not been deposited, the hearing officer shall cancel the obligation to tender the fine.
The hearing officer’s decision shall be personally served or served by first class mail. ”
PGCC 9-17-25
11 EXHIBIT C
CHAPTER 1.19 - NUISANCE ABATEMENT
1.17.010 Purpose
This chapter establishes procedures for abating public nuisances and related cost recovery, as authorized by Government Code sections 38773.1 and 38773.5. It supplements every other enforcement remedy available to the City. Use of this nuisance abatement process is at the sole discretion of the City.
1.17.020 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
“Abatement costs” means all costs, fees, and expenses, incidental or otherwise, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the City in investigating and abating a public nuisance. “City Manager” means the City Manager or their designee. “Enforcement officer” means any City employee or agent of the City designated by the City Manager who has the authority to enforce the Pacific Grove Municipal Code. “Junk” means waste, rubbish, appliances, scrap metal, building materials, and similar miscellaneous items.
“Responsible person” means any person that, by their action or failure to act, causes, maintains, allows, permits, aids, abets, or suffers a violation of this code. For the purposes of this definition, “person” means any natural individual or any organization that the law recognizes as having rights or duties, including, without limitation, a firm, association, partnership, joint venture, trust, estate, receiver, limited liability company, corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
1.17.030 Scope
The provisions of this chapter apply to all real property in the City except those parcels owned by the City of Pacific Grove.
1.17.040 Administration and Enforcement
The administration and enforcement of this chapter is the responsibility of the enforcement officer, unless otherwise expressly stated herein.
1.17.050 Service
(a) Authorized Means of Service. Any document or notice required to be served under this chapter must be completed as follows:
(1) Personal service.
(2) Mail via first class mail to the last known address of the responsible person. (3) If notice via personal service or mail is not possible, for citations involving a real property-related violation, the document or notice may be served via posting in a prominent place on the real property.
PGCC 9-17-25
12 (b) Effectiveness of Service. Service by mail is complete upon deposit with the U.S. Postal Service. Service by posting is complete on the date of posting. Failure of any intended recipient to receive any properly mailed or posted notice does not affect the validity of the notice or proceedings conducted under this chapter.
1.17.060 Designated Nuisances
It is unlawful for any person owning, leasing, renting, occupying, or having charge or possession of any property in the City to maintain the property or allow the property to be maintained, with any of the following conditions:
(a) Junk, Trash, and Debris. Accumulations of junk, trash, or debris in a manner visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent property.
(b) Abandoned or Damaged Buildings. Buildings that are abandoned, partially destroyed, or permitted to remain unreasonably in a state of partial construction. (c) Broken Windows. Broken windows, which constitute hazardous conditions and invite trespassers and malicious mischief.
(d) Overgrown Vegetation. Overgrown weeds, grass, or vegetation. (e) Dead, Decayed, or Diseased Vegetation. Dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds, and other vegetation that is: (1) constituting unsightly appearance, (2) dangerous to public safety and welfare, or (3) detrimental to nearby property or property values. (f) Detriment to Public Health, Safety, and General Welfare. Maintenance of premises in such condition as to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare or in such manner as to constitute a public nuisance as defined by Civil Code section 3480. (g) Fire Hazard. All dry, dead shrubs, dead trees, combustible refuse and waste, or any material growing around the streets, sidewalks, or upon private property within the City, which by reason of its size, manner, or growth or location constitutes a fire hazard to any building, improvements, crops, or other property, or when dry, will in reasonable probability constitute a fire hazard.
(h) Detrimental to Enjoyment or Use of Property. Maintenance of premises so out of harmony or conformity with the maintenance standards of adjacent properties as to cause substantial diminution of the enjoyment, use, or property values of such adjacent properties. (i) Polluted Water. Any swimming pool, pond or other body of water which is abandoned, unattended, unfiltered, or not maintained, resulting in the water becoming polluted. “Polluted water,” for the purpose of this Chapter, means water contained in a swimming pool, pond, or other body of water, which includes, but is not limited to, bacterial growth, including algae, remains of rubbish, refuse, debris, papers, or any other foreign matter which, because of its nature or location, constitutes an unhealthy, unsafe or unsightly condition. (j) Graffiti. Graffiti or other defacement of real or personal property present or remaining on a building, structure or vehicle, or portion thereof, that is visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent property.
(k) Inoperable Vehicles. Abandoned, dismantled, inoperable or wrecked vessels, campers, motorcycles, trailers, vehicles, or parts thereof, unless kept, placed, parked, or stored inside of a completely enclosed, lawfully constructed building or structure.
PGCC 9-17-25
13 (l) Any violation of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code.
1.17.070 Compliance Orders
(a) Authority to Issue. An enforcement officer may issue a written compliance order to any responsible person when the officer determines that a violation is occurring or exists. (b) Required Contents. A compliance order issued under this chapter must contain the following information:
(1) The address of the real property on which the alleged nuisance condition exists; (2) A description of the alleged nuisance conditions and the code section prohibiting the alleged nuisance condition.
(3) A brief description of the required corrective actions. (4) The deadline to complete the corrective actions.
(5) A statement that the City may record a Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office against the premises
(6) The enforcement officer’s name.
(7) The period and manner in which a responsible person may contest the compliance order as set forth in Section 1.19.080.
(c) Additional Requirements for Demolition. Whenever the enforcement officer intends to abate a public nuisance by demolition of a building or structure if the responsible person fails to comply, then the City must comply with the following additional requirements:
(1) The compliance order must contain a statement that the City intends to abate the nuisance with City personnel or contractors by demolition of a building or structure if the nuisance conditions are not repaired, rehabilitated, removed, terminated, or demolished within the deadline set forth in the compliance order; and
(2) The City must serve the compliance order on all secured lienholders of record with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office.
(d) Service. Any compliance order issued under this section must be served in the manner required under Section 1.19.050.
(e) Exemption for Emergency Abatement. The provisions of this section do not apply in cases involving emergency abatement under Section 1.19.110.
1.17.080 Compliance Order Appeals
(a) Right to Appeal. Any person issued a compliance order has a right to appeal the City’s nuisance determination in accordance with this chapter. (b) Appeal Requirements. An appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the compliance order. A written notice of appeal must contain the full name, mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone number and the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer and City to understand the nature of the controversy.
PGCC 9-17-25
14 (c) Effect of Failure to Appeal. A person who does not properly and timely appeal a compliance order waives the right to challenge it and has failed to exhaust administrative remedies. In this event, the compliance order is final.
1.17.090 Appeal Hearings
(a) Selection of Hearing Officer. The City Manager may select the hearing officer. The hearing officer must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. (b) Scheduling and Noticing of the Hearing. If a timely and proper appeal is filed, then the City Clerk must schedule the hearing no sooner than 15 days and no later than 60 days from receipt of the notice of appeal, unless the parties waive such time limits. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. The City Clerk must notify the appellant in writing of the date, time, and location of the hearing at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing. The notice of hearing must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050.
(c) Issues on Appeal. The City bears the burden of proof to establish a nuisance exists by a preponderance of evidence. The issuance of a compliance order is prima facie evidence of the existence of a violation. The scope of the appeal is limited to whether any nuisance condition identified in the compliance order exists.
(d) Evidence, Witnesses, and Recording. All parties have the right to present evidence and witnesses. The formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. The rules of privilege apply as they do in civil actions. Irrelevant or unduly repetitious evidence may be excluded. Oral evidence may be taken only on oath or affirmation. The appellant and respondent may represent themselves or be represented by anyone of their choice. No party has the right to cross-examine any other party or witness except for good cause shown to the satisfaction of the hearing officer.
The appellant may bring an interpreter to the hearing at their sole expense. The City may, at its discretion, record the hearing by stenographer, court reporter, audio recording, or video recording.
(e) Decision of the Hearing Officer. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, order the abatement of any confirmed nuisance conditions within a deadline determined by the hearing officer to be reasonable, and include a statement that if the nuisance is not abated then it may be abated by the City. If the hearing officer determines that each nuisance condition described in the compliance order is nonexistent, the compliance order is deemed cancelled. The hearing officer must render a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer or automatically grant the appeal. The hearing officer’s decision must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050. The hearing officer’s decision is the final administrative decision of the City regarding the compliance order. The hearing officer’s decision is effective on the date of service of the decision. The decision must contain the following statement: “The decision of the hearing officer is final and binding. Judicial review of this decision is subject to the provisions and time limits set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 et seq.”
1.17.0 City Abatement
If a nuisance is not completely abated within the time prescribed by the compliance order, or, if appealed, in the hearing officer’s decision, the City is authorized to abate a nuisance by City staff PGCC 9-17-25
15 or private contractor. The City and its agents are expressly authorized to enter the premises for such purpose. Except in cases involving an imminent hazard, entry onto any real property to abate a public nuisance must be pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.
1.17.0 Emergency Abatement
(a) If, in the reasonable opinion of the enforcement officer, there exists a condition that constitutes an imminent threat of harm to public health or safety, or imminent hazard to real or personal property, the enforcement officer may cause the conditions to be summarily abated in accordance with the following procedure. When determining whether a hazard is sufficiently imminent to warrant emergency abatement, the enforcement officer may consider whether there is insufficient time to follow the administrative process for non-emergency abatements described in this chapter.
(b) If time permits, the enforcement officer may attempt to contact the owner or occupant of the property to notify the responsible person that the condition must be immediately abated to eliminate the imminent hazard.
(c) If the enforcement officer is unable to make contact, or if after contact with the owner or occupant does not take action within the time prescribed by the enforcement officer, he or she is authorized to take all actions necessary to eliminate or mitigate the hazardous condition, utilizing the City’s own forces or private contractor.
(d) As soon as reasonably possible under the circumstances, following any emergency abatement action by the City to abate an immediate hazard, the City must provide each responsible person with a “Notice of Summary Abatement.” The Notice of Summary Abatement must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050 and contain the following information:
(1) A brief description of the condition and reasons why it constituted an imminent threat or hazard;
(2) A brief description of the law prohibiting or pertaining to the imminent threat or hazard; and
(3) A brief description of the actions the City took to abate the imminent threat or hazard. (e) The City’s determination that a condition constituted an imminent threat or hazard may be appealed as set forth in Section 1.19.080.
(f) The enforcement officer must keep an itemized account of the costs incurred by the City in abating the public nuisance. The City is entitled to recover all abatement costs incurred in the abatement of an imminent threat or hazard in accordance with the procedures set forth in this chapter.
1.17.0 Notice of Violation Recordation
(a) Recordation Authorization. If a nuisance is not completely abated as determined by the City within the time prescribed by the compliance order, if appealed, in the hearing officer’s decision, the City may record a Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office against the premises.
(b) Rescission. The City must record a Notice of Rescission of Notice of Violation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office within 10 business days of its determination that the violation has been fully abated or corrected.
PGCC 9-17-25
16 (c) Service. Upon recordation, the City must serve a copy of the recorded Notice of Violation or Notice of Rescission on each person having an ownership interest in the property.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Authorization
(a) City’s Right to Recover Nuisance Abatement Costs. Whenever the City incurs abatement costs in abating a public nuisance or seeking to abate a code violation or public nuisance, the City is entitled to recover the abatement costs related to those code enforcement efforts in accordance with the procedure set forth in this chapter. The City may commence cost recovery proceedings at any time.
(b) Recoverable Abatement Costs. Recoverable costs include all abatement costs.
Recoverable costs may not exceed the actual and reasonable costs of nuisance abatement.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Initiation
(a) Report of Abatement Costs. To initiate the process for recovery of abatement costs, the City must serve an itemized report of abatement costs on the responsible person identifying all abatement costs and demanding payment. The report must provide notice that any unpaid amounts may become a lien and special assessment against the property unless the City receives full and timely payment.
(b) Service of Report of Abatement Costs. The report of abatement costs must be served in accordance with Section 1.19.050. If the code violation or public nuisance relates to real property, then the report of abatement costs must be served on each person with a recorded interest in the property.
(c) Payment. Timely, full payment of the abatement costs must be remitted to the City within 45 calendar days following the date of service of the report of abatement costs. (d) Right to Appeal. Any person issued a report of abatement costs has a right to appeal the report of abatement costs. An appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the report of abatement costs. The right to appeal and procedures must be specified in the report. A written notice of appeal must contain the following information: (1) the name and contact information of the appellant, and (2) the grounds for appeal in sufficient detail to enable the hearing officer and City to understand the nature of the controversy. The failure of any person who has been served with proper notice to timely file an appeal is a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
1.17.0 Cost Recovery Hearings and Appeals
(a) Cost Recovery Appeal. These hearing procedures supplement and augment those above.
The scope of the appeal is limited to the appropriateness of the amount of the abatement costs, and the hearing officer’s decision may confirm, discharge, or modify the amount of costs. (b) Decision. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, and demand payment of any confirmed abatement costs within 30 calendar days following the date of service of the hearing officer’s decision. (c) Payment of Confirmed Costs. Any confirmed abatement costs must be tendered to the City within 30 calendar days following the date of service of the hearing officer’s decision.
PGCC 9-17-25
17 1.17.0 Cost Collection Initiation
(a) Upon expiration of 45 days after the report of abatement costs, or 30 days after the hearing officer’s decision in the event of an appeal, if the full amount of the final abatement costs has not been paid, any unpaid costs may be collected by the City in accordance with Sections
1.19.160 through 1.19.190.
(b) To collect the unpaid costs via a lien or special assessment, the City Council, after a public hearing, may adopt a resolution confirming imposition of the debt and approving filing a lien or special assessment against the subject real property.
1.17.0 Lien Cost Collection
(a) In accordance with Government Code section 38773.1, abatement costs may be levied by the City as a lien against the property on which the nuisance was abated. The City may record a lien against the nuisance property for any unpaid amount. Before recording a lien, the City must serve each person with a recorded interest in the subject property with notice of the lien. In addition, any owner of record must be served in accordance with Government Code section 38773.1.
(b) The nuisance abatement lien must be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Monterey County, California; and from the date of recording, the nuisance abatement lien will have the force, effect, and priority of a judgment lien, and will continue in effect until discharged by the City.
(c) The lien must specify the City as the agency for whose benefit the lien is established, the amount of the lien, the date of any abatement order, the street address, legal description, and assessor’s parcel number of the parcel on which the lien is imposed, and the name and address of the recorded owner of the parcel.
(d) The nuisance abatement lien may be foreclosed by an action brought by the City for a money judgment. All costs and expenses relating to the processing, recording, and enforcement of the abatement lien, including recording fees, noticing costs and attorney fees may be added to the amount of the lien and will be secured thereby.
(e) Upon payment or other satisfaction of the abatement lien, a notice of release of lien must be prepared and recorded by the City forthwith.
1.17.0 Special Assessment Cost Collection
(a) In accordance with Government Code section 38773.5, abatement costs may be levied by the City as a special assessment against the property on which the nuisance was abated. If the abatement costs have not been paid in full within the time required by this Chapter, the City may levy a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred. The City must serve each person with a recorded interest in the subject property with notice of the imposition of the special assessment. In addition, any owner of record must be served in accordance with Government Code section 38773.5. The notice must specify that the property may be sold after three years by the Tax Collector for unpaid delinquent assessments. (b) The notice of special assessment is entitled to recordation with the Monterey County Recorder’s Office. A copy of the notice of special assessment must be transmitted to the County Tax Assessor and Tax Collector, whereupon the Tax Assessor and Tax Collector must add the amount of the special assessment on the next regular bill for real estate taxes levied against the PGCC 9-17-25
18 property identified in the notice of special assessment. Thereafter, the special assessment will be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary municipal taxes are collected, and will be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in the case of delinquency as provided by law for ordinary municipal taxes. After recordation, the special assessment may be foreclosed on as a lien in the manner and means provided by law.
1.17.0 Civil Action Cost Collection
(a) In addition to any other remedies set forth in this Code or otherwise provided by law, the City Attorney is authorized to bring a civil action, at the City Attorney’s discretion, to recover the City’s abatement costs.
1.17.0 Combined Notices
The notices that are authorized by this chapter may be combined in the discretion of the City.
1.17.0 Enforcement
(a) It is unlawful and declared a public nuisance for any person to violate any provision of this chapter. It is unlawful and declared a public nuisance for any person to violate any order of a hearing officer made under this chapter.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000, or by imprisonment in the County jail not exceeding six months, or by both, except the City Attorney or enforcement officer may prosecute a violation of this chapter as an infraction, in his or her discretion. (c) Violation of this chapter may be punished by issuance of an administrative citation fine, as set forth in Chapter 1.17.
(d) The City Attorney is authorized to bring a civil or equitable action, at his or her discretion, to seek the abatement of any violation of this chapter or enforcement of any provision of this chapter.
(e) Each and every day a violation is maintained, caused, aided, abetted, concealed, suffered, or permitted is a separate offense.
(f) The regulations, remedies, procedures, and penalties provided by this chapter are cumulative to each other and to any other available under City, State, or federal law.
1.17.0 Attorney Fee Recovery
The prevailing party in any judicial action, administrative proceeding, or special proceeding to abate a nuisance may recover its incurred attorney fees, provided that the City elected, at the initiation of such individual action or proceeding, to recover its own attorney fees. In no judicial action or administrative proceeding may an award of attorney fees to a prevailing party exceed the amount of reasonable attorney fees incurred by the City in the judicial action or administrative proceeding. A judicial action includes, but is not limited to, any civil action, inspection or abatement warrant, administrative proceeding, or appeal from an administrative proceeding. Any recovery of attorney fees for abatement of a nuisance must be in accordance with this section.”
PGCC 9-17-25
19 EXHIBIT D
6.09.080 Failure to collect and report tax – Determination of tax by tax administrator.
If any operator shall fail or refuse to collect said tax and to make, within the time provided in this chapter, any report and remittance of said tax or any portion thereof required by this chapter, the tax administrator shall proceed in such manner as he or she may deem best to obtain facts and information on which to base his or her estimate of the tax due. As soon as the tax administrator shall procure such facts and information as he or she is able to obtain upon which to base the assessment of any tax imposed by this chapter and payable by any operator who has failed or refused to collect the same and to make such report and remittance, he or she shall proceed to determine and assess against such operator the tax, interest and penalties provided for by this chapter. In case such determination is made, the tax administrator shall give a notice of the amount so assessed by serving it personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at his or her last known place of address. Such operator may within 10 days after the serving or mailing of such notice, make application in writing to the tax administrator for a hearing on the amount assessed. If application by the operator for a hearing is not made within the time prescribed, the tax, interest and penalties, if any, determined by the tax administrator shall become final and conclusive and immediately due and payable. If such application is made, the tax administrator shall give not less than five days’ written notice in the manner prescribed herein to the operator to show cause at a time and place fixed in said notice why said amount specified therein should not be fixed for such tax, interest and penalties. At such hearing, the operator may appear and offer evidence why such specified tax, interest and penalties should not be so fixed. After such hearing the tax administrator shall determine the proper tax to be remitted and shall thereafter give written notice to the person in the manner prescribed herein of such determination and the amount of such tax, interest and penalties. The amount determined to be due shall be payable after 15 days unless an appeal is taken as provided in PGMC 6.09.090.
6.09.090 Appeals.
(a) Right to Appeal. Any person aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, has a right to file a written appeal the within 15 calendar days following the date of service of the determination of tax due. (b) Effect of Failure to Appeal. Failure to appeal is waiver of the right to challenge the decision and failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In this event, the decision order is final, and any tax, interest, and penalties are immediately due and payable. (c) Selection of Hearing Officer. The City Manager may select the hearing officer. The hearing officer must be selected in a manner that avoids the potential for pecuniary or other bias. (d) Scheduling and Noticing of the Hearing. If a timely and proper appeal is filed, then the City Clerk must schedule the hearing no sooner than 15 days and no later than 60 days from receipt of the notice of appeal, unless the parties waive such time limits. The failure to hold the hearing within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer. The City Clerk must notify the appellant in writing of the date, time, and location of the hearing at least 10 PGCC 9-17-25
20 days before the date of the scheduled hearing. The notice of hearing must be served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at their last known place of address.
(e) Burdens and Standard. The City bears the initial burden to produce evidence showing a reasonable basis for the estimate and assessment made under this chapter. If the City meets that burden, the operator bears the burden to produce records or other evidence sufficient to rebut the estimate and assessment.
(f) Decision. The hearing officer’s decision must be in writing, set forth the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, determine the proper tax to be remitted, and include a 15 -day deadline for payment of any upheld amount to the City. If the hearing officer determines that each nuisance condition described in the compliance order is nonexistent, the compliance order is deemed cancelled. The hearing officer must render a decision within 15 days following the conclusion of the hearing. Failure of the hearing officer to render a decision within this time period does not invalidate any action of the hearing officer or automatically grant the appeal. The hearing officer’s decision must be served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at their last known place of address. The decision must contain the following statement: “The decision of the hearing officer is final and binding. Judicial review of this decision is subject to the provisions and time limits set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 et seq.” PGCC 9-17-25
21 EXHIBIT E
7.40.160 Appeal of tax.
Any person aggrieved by any decision of the city with respect to the amount of the transient occupancy tax or fees associated thereto may appeal to a hearing officer in accordance with Section 6.09.090.
PGCC 9-17-25
22 EXHIBIT F
9.17.130 Enforcement.
(a) Beginning January 1, 2024, if the city determines that a generator, responsible party, selfhauler, hauler, tier one or tier two commercial edible food generator, food recovery organization, food recovery service, or other entity is not in compliance with this chapter, it shall document the noncompliance or violation, issue a notice of violation, and take enforcement action pursuant to this section, as needed.
(b) Violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute an infraction or misdemeanor and shall be punishable as set forth in Chapter 1.16 PGMC. (c) Notwithstanding any other legal remedy, violation of any of the provisions of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to Chapter 1.19 PGMC.
(d) Notwithstanding any other legal remedy, violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a public nuisance and shall be subject to abatement, injunction, or other civil remedy as appropriate.
(e) Notice of Violation.
(1) City enforcement officials or their designee will monitor compliance randomly and through compliance reviews, route reviews, investigation of complaints, and an inspection program (that may include remote monitoring).
(2) For incidences of prohibited container contaminants found in containers, city will issue a notice of contamination to any generator or responsible party found to have prohibited container contaminants in a container. Such notice will be provided via a cart tag or other communication immediately upon identification of the prohibited container contaminants or within 10 business days after determining that a violation has occurred. If the city observes prohibited container contaminants in a responsible party’s containers on more than three consecutive occasions, the city may assess contamination processing fees or contamination penalties on the generator. (3) City shall issue a notice of violation requiring compliance within a maximum of 60 days of issuance of the notice. Notices shall be sent to “Owner” at the official address of the owner maintained by the tax collector for the city or if no such address is available, to the owner at the address of the multifamily premises or commercial premises or to the responsible party for the collection services, depending upon available information. (f) Penalty Amounts for Types of Violations. Penalties may be assessed for violations as provided in Chapters 1.16 and/or 1.19 PGMC. Any person causing or permitting a violation of this code shall be regarded as committing a separate offense on each day that the violation occurs or continues.
PGCC 9-17-25
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: Daniel Gho, Public Works Director/Deputy City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 2025
SUBJECT: Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvements Project CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize staff to begin working with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) to amend the funding agreement for the Cedar, Sunset and Congress Intersection Project, requesting a funding increase of $137,961, to continue with the Design Engineering Evaluation Report, for a Round-a-Bout at the intersection.
1. Bring back the TAMC funding agreement and GHD amendment at a future Council meeting for consideration.
2. 3. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2016, the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC), in partnership with the City of Pacific Grove (City) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), conducted a study of the State Route 68 Corridor (SR68) segment located in Pacific Grove City bounds, the Pacific Grove Hwy 68 Corridor Study.
https://www.tamcmonterey.org/pacific-grove-hwy-68-corridor-study The intent of the study was to identify improvements that would provide safer access for all modes of travel. The study identifies several areas along the SR68 corridor, managed by Caltrans and within the City boundary, that are ripe for safety improvements. The City, in coordination with TAMC, have focused on complete street and safety improvements to the five-legged intersection of Sunset Drive, Congress Avenue, and Cedar Street. This intersection has been selected because it is adjacent to two schools, is heavily trafficked, and has historically been an area of interest for improvement by the community and TAMC.
On November 8, 2016, TAMC placed the Transportation Safety & Investment Plan (Measure X) on the ballot, and the measure was approved with 67.7% approval from Monterey County voters. The measure, through retail transactions and use tax of three-eighths of one percent (3/8%) is anticipated to generate an estimated $20 million annually for 30 years. The revenue from the sales tax measure is used for transportation safety and mobility projects in Monterey County. 40% of the revenue is allocated to Regional Projects via the Regional Safety Mobility and Walkability Program. TAMC has identified and allocated funding for specific projects across the county; one of the projects identified includes improvements to the SR68 Corridor within Pacific Grove. A total of $5 million has been allocated.
PGCC 9-17-25
On October 19, 2022, the Council approved a Measure X funding agreement with TAMC for an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, of the larger $5 million bucket, to the initial phase and kick off the project. At the July 5, 2023, meeting, Council authorized the City to enter into an agreement with GHD for Phase I of the Congress, Cedar, and Sunset Intersection Safety Improvement Project in an amount not to exceed $797,574. Since the commencement of the project and the authorization of the agreement with GHD, significant progress has been made.
At the City Council’s July 17, 2024 meeting, the Council chose to pursue a single build alternative for the five-way intersection –a roundabout with Cedar access relocated. The report with background information can be found here.
Update
The City has requested to use the Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) process to document project initiation and project approval for the Project based on the single-build alternative presented to and accepted by City Council in July 2024. Subsequently, the City prepared draft studies and documents in support of the DEER, including preparation of draft Preliminary Design Drawings (30% design), a traffic analysis summarized in a draft Traffic Operations Analysis Report/Intersection Control Evaluation (TOAR/ICE) and a draft Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR). In May 2025, Caltrans provided an expectations memorandum that memorialized the decision to move forward with a DEER for Caltrans oversight and approval. This memorandum provided a brief project scope, applicability of the DEER process, and expectations of the City for utilizing the DEER process for the Project. Specifically, the memorandum provided that the project was eligible to use the DEER process for project initiation and project approval.
GHD’s scope of work under the current agreement with the City is to complete a Project Initiation Document (PID) only. With the use of the DEER process, both the PID and Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) are combined.
Caltrans had five specific expectations for completion of the DEER for the project, they include:
1. Project Schedule: The City shall submit a schedule for the Project to Caltrans that establishes target dates for the DEER document development. These target dates should include, but are not limited to, anticipated dates for document submittal for Caltrans review, significant project milestones, and the target completion date for the DEER document.
2. Environmental Documentation: Environmental documentation for CEQA and NEPA must be included as an appendix of the Project’s DEER document. The City should submit draft CEQA document to Caltrans for review and input.
3. Design Standard Decision Document: The proposed roundabout appears to include nonstandard features that require preparation of a Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD). The DSDD will be referenced in the DEER document and should be finalized before the DEER document is approved.
4. Cooperative Agreement: A cooperative agreement is required for projects utilizing a DEER document when the project requires oversight reimbursements, funds transfers, CTC allocations, or State-Furnished Materials. The City and Caltrans will develop the terms of any cooperative agreement based on the Project’s needs.
5. Regular Coordination Meetings: Meetings with Caltrans and City staff have been occurring on a monthly basis. These meetings should continue to encourage open and productive collaboration.
The DEER process is outside the original scope for GHD, so GHD proposed an amendment that would replace the existing scope of work with the scope of work noted below.
Scope of Work
1. Project Management, Coordination and Documentation
2. Data Collection and Base Mapping (Work Previously Completed)
3. Alternatives Analysis
4. Preliminary Environmental Analysis
5. Geotechnical Investigation / Pavement Design Report
6. Preliminary Design
7. Environmental Documentation: NEPA and CEQA Documents, the primary scope of the amendment (This amendment will finalize NEPA and CEQA documents, enabling the City to begin seeking construction funding)
8. Storm Drainage Analysis
PGCC 9-17-25
8. Storm Drainage Analysis
9. Right-of-Way Services
10. Caltrans Approval Documents
The budget request for this scope of work will be the difference between what is remaining in the current agreement and the budget needed to complete the scope of work for the DEER process. The proposed amendment would be an additional $340,387 on the original contract of $797,574.
Original Contract $797,574
This Amendment $340,387
Total $1,137,961
To date, the City has expended $444,110 of the $797,574 contract with GHD.
OPTIONS
1. Continuing with the recommended project, a Round-A-Bout at the intersection of Congress, Cedar and Sunset
2. Review alternative designs
3. Do nothing and discontinue the project
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
As noted, this project is funded via Measure X and is approved as part of the Capital Improvement Program. The requested GHD amendment exceeds the allotted $1,000,000 that has been allocated by TAMC through the Regional Measure X funding agreement. Staff is recommending that the City work with TAMC to amend the Measure X funding agreement and bring back the funding agreement, along with the GHD amendment, at a future Council meeting.
FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Infrastructure
Attachments
GHD Amendment
Funding Agreement
Project limits
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
GHD, Inc. 380
2235 Mercury Way, Suite 150
Santa Rosa, CA 95405
USA
www.ghd.com
Our ref: 12604714
6 June 2025
Mr. Daniel Gho, Public Works Director
City of Pacific Grove
300 Forest Ave.
Pacific Gove, CA 93950
RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER)
Dear Daniel
GHD is pleased to provide this proposal for an amendment to our current Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for design professional services for the State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project (Project). The project includes conversion of the existing 5-leg Congress, Sunset and Cedar all-way stop intersection to a 4-leg roundabout with Cedar realigned to Congress and selected by the City Council in July 2024; along with multi-modal corridor improvements between the intersection of Congress, Sunset and Cedar and Forest Avenue, along Sunset Avenue (SR 68).
It is anticipated that a combination of services will be required to deliver the project, including preparation of a Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER), environmental technical studies and preparation of CEQA document to allow for project initiation and approval with Caltrans.
Background
The City of Pacific Grove has requested to use the Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) process to document project initiation and project approval for the Project based on the single-build alternative presented to and accepted by City Council in July 2024. Subsequently, GHD worked with the City to prepare draft studies and documents in support of the DEER, including preparation of draft Preliminary Design Drawings/Geometric Evaluation Drawings (30% design), a traffic analysis summarized in a draft Traffic Operations Analysis Report/Intersection Control Evaluation (TOAR/ICE) and a draft Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR). In May 2025, Caltrans provided an expectations memorandum that memorialized the decision to move forward with a DEER for Caltrans oversight and approval. This memorandum provided a brief project scope, applicability of the DEER process, and expectation of the City for utilizing the DEER process for the Project. Specifically, the memorandum provided that the project was eligible to use the DEER process for project initiation and project approval.
GHD’s current scope of work under agreement with the City is to complete a Project Initation Document (PID) only. With the use of the DEER process, both the PID and Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) are combined.
Caltrans had five specific expectations for completion of the DEER for the project, they include:
1. Project Schedule: The City shall submit a schedule for the Project to Caltrans that establishes target dates for the DEER document development. These target dates should include, but are not limited to, anticipated dates for document submittal for Caltrans review, significant project milestones, and target completion date for the DEER document.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 2
2. Environmental Documentation: Environmental documentation for CEQA and NEPA must be included as an appendix of the Project’s DEER document. The City should submit draft CEQA document to Caltrans for review and input.
3. Design Standard Decision Document: The proposed roundabout appears to include nonstandard features that require preparation of a Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD). The DSDD will be referenced in the DEER document and should be finalized before the DEER document is approved.
4. Cooperative Agreement: A cooperative agreement is required for projects utilizing a DEER document when the project requires oversight reimbursements, funds transfers, CTC allocations, or State-Furnished Materials. The City and Caltrans will develop the terms of any cooperative agreement based on the Project’s needs.
5. Regular Coordination Meetings: Meetings with Caltrans and City staff have been occurring on a monthly basis. These meetings should continue to encourage open and productive collaboration.
This amendment would replace the existing scope of work with the scope of work included in this amendment. The budget request for this scope of work will be the difference between what is remaing in the current agreement and the budget needed to complete the scope of work for the DEER process.
Based on this understanding, our scope of work follows.
Scope of Work
The following outline scope of work was prepared by GHD to identify the services that will be provided to the City of Pacific Grove to move the SR 68 for Congress, Sunset, Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements through the Quality Management Assessment Process (QMAP) with preparation of a Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) and supporting documents and studies as described below. The DEER will document both project initiation and project approval eliminating the need for separate processing of a PID. The revised scope of work, showing tasks added and removed from the contract, is attached to this proposal.
Task 1 - Project Management, Coordination and Documentation Task 1.1 – Project Management and Coordination
Task 1.2 – Quality Management Plan
Task 1.3 – Project Meetings
Task 1.4 – Community Outreach and Presentations (Work Previously Completed) Task 1.5 – Stakeholder Outreach (Work Previously Completed) Task 2 – Data Collection and Base Mapping (Work Previously Completed) Task 2.1 – Data Collection (Work Previously Completed)
Task 2.2 Preliminary Survey/Base Mapping (Work Previously Completed) Task 3 – Alternatives Analysis
Task 3.1 – Develop Project Purpose and Need (Work Previously Completed) Task 3.2 – Conduct ICE Evaulation and Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment Task 3.3 – Alternatives Development (Work Previoulsy Completed) Task 3.4 – Right-of-Way Data Sheet (Task Rescoped)
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 3 Task 4 – Preliminary Environmental Analysis
Task 4.1 – Prelimimnary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) Task 4.2 – Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) (Short Form) (Task Rescoped) Task 4.3 – Additional PSR-PDS Attachments (Task Rescoped) Task 4.4 – PSR-PDS Submittals (Task Rescoped)
Task 5 – Geotechnical Investigation / Pavement Design Report Task 5.1 - Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report (PBDR) Task 5.2 - Pavement Memorandum
Task 6 – Preliminary Design
Task 6.1 - Preliminary Engineering (30%) Design
Task 7 - Environmental Documentation
Task 7.1 - NEPA/CEQA Supporting Technical Studies
Task 7.1.1 - Community Impact Assessment
Task 7.1.2 - Visual Impact Assessment Memorandum
Task 7.1.3 - Archaeological Survey Report, Historical Resources Evaluation Report and Historic Property Survey Report
Task 7.1.4 - Water Quality Memorandum
Task 7.1.5 - Paleontological Identification Report
Task 7.1.6 - Initial Site Assessment
Task 7.1.7 - Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist Task 7.1.8 - Construction Noise Memorandum
Task 7.1.9 - Energy and Climate Change Memorandum
Task 7.1.10 - Natural Environment Study Minimal Impact
Task 7.2 - CEQA IS/MND
Task 7.2.1 - Kickoff Meeting
Task 7.2.2 - Administrative Draft IS-MND
Task 7.2.3 - Public Review Draft IS-MND
Task 7.2.4 - Response to Comments, Final IS-MND, and MMRP Task 7.2.5 - CEQA Project Management
Task 8 – Storm Drainage Analysis
Task 8.1 SWDR – Long Form
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 4 Task 9 – Right-of-Way Services
Task 9.1 - RWDS
Task 10 – Caltrans Approval Documents
Task 10.1 - Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) Task 10.2 - Non-Standard Design Features
Task 10.3 - 11-page Estimate
Assumptions
• A Cooperative Agreement will be completed by the City with Caltrans and minimal support required from GHD.
• Concurrent City and Caltrans reviews will be completed for all submittals. • Unless stated specifically otherwise, all reviews and processing time on all submittals is assumed to be 6 weeks. If agency processing exceeds this estimate, additional budget may be required. • Unless stated specifically otherwise, all reports will be limited to one draft and one final version. • Assessor’s parcel maps, as-built drawings from current and former property owners, and any draft improvement plans showing the subject property, stationing, and project limits will be provided by the City/Caltrans/TAMC.
• Only one rendering is provided in this scope of the preferred Build Alternative in support of Public and Stakeholder Outreach.
• Surface and grading work will not begin until PS&E.
• Life Cycle Cost Analysis, pavement overlay, deflection testing, or pavement smoothness studies are not included in this scope.
• Geotechnical and Materials (borings and field investigation) work will not begin until PS&E. • Utility records to be imported are in 2-dimensional format only. No 3-dimensional drawings or pipe networks are to be prepared.
• Utility relocation design is not included and will be completed by the utility owner. • Project will utilize published State Plane NAD 83 horizontal control and NAVD 1988 vertical control. • Underground utility location, including utility potholing will not begin until PS&E. • Right of Way Engineering, including preparation of Acquisition Plats or Appraisal Maps; Filing of Record of Survey for monumentation or resetting missing property corners; Preparation of Plats and Legal Descriptions; Staking or Layout of proposed improvements will not begin until PS&E. • Final PEAR may vary from the draft, which is basis for the proposed scope of work. Other studies or documents can be added via contract amendment, should they be required. • Environmental technical studies and memoranda will not include an analysis of alternatives to the Project.
• For each Technical Study and Memorandum, this scope of work assumes one round of review from the City and Caltrans. This scope of work also assumes that for each Technical Study or Memorandum, comments will be provided to GHD in one consolidated document. • GHD assumes revisions based on comments, for all Technical Studies and Memoranda, will be minor and will not require substantive changes.
• Hard copies, ADA Accessible, or 508 Compliant documents will not be provided.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 5 • GHD will address one round of consolidated comments from each deliverable, to be provided as tracked changes in Word. If there are multiple reviewers between Caltrans and the City, the City will be responsible for reconciling conflicting comments prior to sending to GHD. • Comments from Caltrans/City will be in an editable electronic format and focus on new content in each deliverable. Addressing comments will not require substantial new analysis or field investigation.
• No archaeological resources requiring documentation will be identified. Should resources be identified, work associated with their documentation and assessment may be done under a cost amendment.
• The City will conduct AB 52 Tribal Consultation in support of the project and will not require assistance from the GHD team. Should assistance be needed, it may be provided as an additional service for an additional cost.
• This scope of work does not include attendance at public meetings or other in-person meetings.
However, should these be required, these can be added under a cost amendment. • Work on the IS-MND will commence only after the Technical Studies have been completed and approved by both the City and Caltrans.
• The DEER being preapred is for project initiation and approval, including the environmental documentation phase. PS&E and R/W phases will be completed at a later time. It may be the case that the DEER report cannot be finalized and will remain in draft form until such time as PS&E and R/W are completed and the proejct is ready to apply for an encroachment permit to complete construction.
Project Schedule
A preliminary schedule will be prepared to provide timeline to accomplish the work. It is anticipated that the project schedule will take 12 months from notice to proceed of the amendment.
Fee Estimate
The estimated fee to complete the remaining tasks in the attached scope of work is $693,851.
The remaining balance in the current agreement is $353,464, for a net amendment request of $340,387. The total contract amount is summarized below.
Original Contract $797,574
This Amendment $340,387
Total $1,137,961
Upon acceptance of this proposed amendment scope of work, GHD will update tasks accordingly.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | RE: State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements Project – Amendment No. 1 Proposal for Change to QMAP with Preparation of Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 6 Closing
It is assumed that upon agreement of the scope of work for these professional services, the City and GHD will enter into an amendment to our current agreement.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this proposal, please feel free to call me at 540-9689.
Sincerely,
GHD Inc.
Matt Wargula, P.E., T.E.
Project Manager | A GHD Associate
(707) 540-9689
Attachment: Fee Estimate Spreadsheet
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
City of Pacific Grove
State Route 68 (Sunset Drive)/Congress/Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements
REVISED Scope of Work
The following scope of work was prepared by GHD to identify the services that will be provided to the City of Pacific Grove to move the SR 68 for Congress, Sunset, Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements through the Alternatives Analysis and Caltrans Project Initiation Document (PID) phase and Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase, which will be documented in a Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) process. GHD is ready to provide the necessary assistance from the critical first steps (pre-PID/Alternatives Analysis) right through to the approved scoping document, with the intent of supporting the City to get to a single build alternative. For this project, at this time and for the purpose of this initial scope of work, it is expected that the required scoping document will be a Project Study Report – Project Development Support (PSR-PDS).
The scope of services was developed with the following goals in mind:
– Deliver a project that meets current and future operational requirements. – Develop a geometrically-approvable preferred alternative(s), with the intent of getting to a single alternative.
– Recognize active transportation, complete streets and equity are important transportation components for the project’s design.
– Build public and agency consensus around preferred alternative(s). – Efficiently manage the preparation of PSR-PDS supporting documents for the City’s and Caltrans’ approval.
– Implement an effective quality process that covers all work performed by the project team.
Future phases for PA/ED and PS&E and Right-of-Way (R/W) will be negotiated with the City once the draft DEER and environmental documentation is completed. PID phase is completed and a scope of the Build Alternative is better known.
Task 1 – Project Management
GHD will provide project management; coordination with and between project team members, coordination with the City of Pacific Grove project manager; and coordination with the Project Development Team (PDT).
1.1 – Project Management and Coordination
GHD will perform the following duties:
– Supervise, coordinate and monitor procedures for preparation of the Alternative Analysis, DEER preparation, environmental documentation, Project Study Report /Project Development Support (PSR/PDS), and other supporting studies consistent with and in conformance to the guidelines published in Caltrans “Project Development Procedures Manual” (PDPM). – Coordinate and monitor deliverables by sub consultants in accordance with this work plan. – Coordinate project reviews by the Project Development Team (PDT). – General correspondence, monthly progress reports, invoicing, and project schedule updates.
1.2 – Quality Management Plan
GHD will prepare a draft quality management plan (QMP) consistent with the plan outline and format provided in Caltrans PDPM. The draft QMP will be provided to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. Upon approval of the QMP, GHD will be responsible for maintaining the QMP and monitoring PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 2
project deliverables for conformance with the QMP throughout the length of this project. The QMP establishes a process to ensure:
– Personnel responsible for assuring quality are independent of those having direct responsibility for the work being performed.
– Review comments and recommended changes are properly addressed and/or resolved. – Project documents, correspondence, and memoranda are appropriately distributed. – Document control is established and maintained for proper storage and handling of project materials, providing only the current versions for use by the Project Team. – Discipline/Task Managers perform and/or certify required inter- and intra-disciplinary Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA) reviews are completed prior to deliverable submittals. – Project Manager approves the distribution of all deliverables and certifies that QMP requirements have been satisfactorily performed.
– Work products conform to nomenclature and formatting requirements and are free of typographical and syntax errors.
– Project activities are accomplished in accordance with appropriate design criteria, industry standards, and federal, state, and other regulatory requirements.
1.3 – Project Meetings
GHD’s Project Manager and select team members will organize and attend the following virtual (unless otherwise noted) meetings:
– Project kick-off meeting held in-person with GHD and City staff. – Attend one (1) DEER kick-off meeting to discuss issues such as design approach, project concepts and overall project review.
– Project Development Team (PDT) meetings with the City, Caltrans, and other agency/stakeholder staff, which will be scheduled to be conducted once per month (remote), for no more than 12 meetings. – Bi-weekly, remote 30-minute check in meetings with City staff (scope assumes no mor than 24 meetings)
– Field walk with GHD Project Manager, Project Engineer, City and Caltrans staff.
To facilitate these meetings, GHD will coordinate, schedule, and lead meetings. Prepare PDT meeting records and project schedule updates. GHD will coordinate the first or kick-off PDT meeting to initiate the PID project phase. Sub-consultants will attend based on their level of involvement at any time during the project, the scope of which is included in their overall tasks below.
Deliverables: Preparation of meeting agendas, notes, and as-needed progress reports.
1.4 - Community Outreach and Presentations (Work Previously Completed – No Further Community Outreach and/or Presentations are anticipated)
Public Information Open House (1)
GHD will provide assistance as needed with an open house to be held as the Alternative Analysis approaches completion, prior to the preparation of the Draft PSR-PDS. The project’s Purpose and Need will be presented, and the alternatives being considered displayed in a manner that will allow the public to ask questions and comment on the proposed alternatives. The input received will be presented in the study’s Draft PSR-PDS as public comments.
If the City desires an additional open house during the course of this study, a separate scope of work and fee estimate to provide GHD assistance will be submitted to the City for prior approval.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 3
Project Presentations (2) <<For minimized fee purposes, assume approximately $5,000 per meeting for preparation (including PowerPoint), coordination, and attendance>> GHD will be available to support the City in making two (2) presentations to the Pacific Grove City Council.
One is anticipated at the end of the Alternative Analysis phase, and another is anticipated after the Draft PSR-PDS is completed.
1.5 – Stakeholder Outreach << For minimized fee purposes, assume approximately $2,000 per meeting for preparation, coordination, and attendance>> (Work Previously Completed – No Further Community Outreach and/or Presentations are anticipated)
Stakeholder Outreach
GHD recommends these meetings be held one-on-one or in small groups of stakeholders with similar interests in-person. At least one (1) meeting should be held with each property owner affected by the project. The purpose and timing of the meeting(s) is to listen to their concerns and provide time for the design team to respond with potential solutions prior to the second project presentation.
At this time, it is anticipated that up to twenty (20) property owner meetings will be required with Stakeholders.
Task 2 – Data Collection and Base Mapping
2.1 – Data Collection (Work Previously Completed – No further data collection anticipated)
The types of information collected could include (but not be limited to) GIS data, as built plans, utility maps, record improvement drawings and reports and existing data including City/and Caltrans collision data, rightof-way information, records maps, title information, utility information, etc.
2.2 – Preliminary Survey/Base Mapping (Work Previously Completed – No survey anticipated)
The following services will be provided by Whitson.
Control and Aerial Mapping
– Research existing State Plane control and benchmark control. – Set local ground control and aerial control panels, as shown in the attached Aerial Mapping Exhibit. – Obtain aerial mapping for the mapping area shown on the attached Survey Exhibit. Mapping will be at a scale of 1” =20’ with a one-foot contour interval.
Utility Mapping
– Obtain system maps of public utilities from utility owners. Underground utilities will be plotted based on visible features and system maps (ASCE-38 Quality Level C). – Perform a field check of visible utility structures.
– Perform a supplemental field survey to locate sewer and storm drain structures, including invert elevations. Locate utility structures not identified in the aerial survey.
Boundary Mapping
– Review record maps and lay out record boundary.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 4
– Perform a limited field survey to recover monuments of record to corroborate the record boundary layout.
– Develop a boundary base map showing record rights-of-way within the subject project area. Please note: This will not constitute a boundary survey.
Task 3 – Alternatives Analysis
3.1 – Develop Project Purpose and Need (Work Previously Completed – No further development anticipated)
The “No Build” transportation conditions (existing and future) identified and evaluated within the ICE Step 1 report will primarily be used to draft the initial purpose and need statement. This information will be supplemented as needed with current Caltrans and SWITR collision data. The purpose and need statement will be incrementally reviewed and refined by the project development team members. The final Purpose and Need statement will then be prepared upon resolution of all provided comments.
3.2 – Conduct ICE Evaluation and Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment (TEPA)
GHD will perform the traffic analysis for the project utilizing the latest demand model and obtain new counts for the corridor and both the Congress and Forest intersections. The existing information shall be summarized in an existing conditions memo for review/approval by the City and Caltrans and only a Draft and Final version are assumed. The calibrated model will be summarized in a Forecasting Memo for review/approval by Caltrans and only a Draft and Final version are assumed.
Once forecasting and existing conditions are approved, GHD will prepare a Draft Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) – Note that this will probably morph into the Intersection Safety and Operational Analysis Process (ISOAP) once that has been formalized, potentially in fall 2023, however, an ICE has been scoped for the purpose of this project, but should be a similar level of effort as long as the style of evaluation stays the same once we begin compiling. Preliminary alternative layouts showing both the recommended signal and roundabout layouts, including approach roadway geometrics, will be prepared and provided within the Draft ICE. The Draft ICE shall also include all supporting capacity calculations and corresponding truck/bus turns. Upon review of the Draft ICE by the City and Caltrans and resolution of all comments, GHD will then prepare a Final ICE for approval. The following services represent the work that will be provided to prepare and process the ICE evaluations. In addition, sufficient information and data will be provided through both ICE evaluation as to prepare the Design Scoping Index, Preliminary Traffic Engineering Assessment and Division of Engineering Services Scoping Index scoping tools.
Traffic and Performance Analysis Findings
Design Checks/Optimization. Geometrics and operations associated with the signal and roundabout alternatives developed as part of Task 3.3 will be optimized. For each roundabout alternative the following design checks will be performed:
– Fast Paths
– View Angles
– Truck Turns
– Pedestrian/Bike Facilities
– Potential Project Phasing
VISSIM/Sim-Traffic Simulations. Micro-Simulation for both the roundabout and traffic signal alternatives will be evaluated under this task to ascertain queuing impacts from one location would not impact operations at the adjacent intersections. For the traffic signal alternative Sim-Traffic will be utilized to perform the queuing analysis and for the roundabout alternative, VISSIM will be utilized.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 5
Deviations from Design Standards. Possible deviations from Caltrans Design Standards for all alternatives will be identified. Possible design exceptions will be noted under this task. This task does not, however, include preparation of fact sheets.
Cost Analysis
Mobility Costs. The mobility costs (vehicle operating costs) and environmental costs will be estimated for both the alternatives using the cost module available in SIDRA. The vehicle operating cost parameters will be obtained from Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Economic Parameters published by Caltrans.
Collision Costs. Costs associated with each crash type will be quantified using the expected crash reduction (CMF) for the intersection type and the number of accidents obtained within the preliminary safety analysis section. Transportation Planning Division of Caltrans provides the costs associated with accident types in Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Economic Parameter. This information will be utilized to determine collision costs.
Environmental and Other Costs. Environmental costs will be computed for both the alternatives using the cost module available in SIDRA and other costs including operations and maintenance, landscape maintenance and pavement rehabilitation will be estimated based on input from City and Caltrans.
Life-Cycle/Investment Analysis Findings.
Opinion of Probable Cost. Cost estimates consistent with Caltrans requirements (eleven-page cost estimates) will be prepared under this task for the alternatives and include information obtained from Task
3.4 regarding right of way.
Service Life (Estimated Number of Years). To the extent feasible, FHWA suggests that it is a good practice to phase roundabout design to achieve improved safety. Based on the phasing for each alternative as appropriate, the expected service life will be identified for each alternative.
Life Cycle Cost Analysis – Benefit/Cost Index. A cost benefit index for each alternative will be estimated based on the cost estimates and various benefits estimated in the Traffic and Performance Analysis Findings.
Future Investment Needed to Extend Life. Costs will be estimated for each of the alternatives for interim and ultimate phases. This will enable estimating the future investment needed to extend the project life from an interim to the ultimate project phase. This information will provide the City with an idea of funding and phasing strategy for constructing the interim and ultimate design.
Prepare Draft and Final Study.
A draft report will be prepared consistent with the guidelines identified in the TOPD policy guidelines for review and comment by the City, Caltrans and other reviewing agencies. The study will include a comparison of the performance of each alternative based on previously agreed to Measures of Effectiveness. Provided comments will be responded to via a response to comment memorandum and/or update to the ICE study as appropriate.
GHD will then prepare a Draft TEPA utilizing the information described above, including the ICE, to document the existing and future traffic conditions and recommended roundabout and roadway geometry for the Project improvements to provide efficient traffic operations. Note that this will be a more robust document than is typical of a TEPA so as to support the conclusions required to ultimately end up with a single build alternative. Thus, this TEPA will end up being a mini–Draft Traffic Operations Analysis Report (TOAR), therefore limiting the potential rework during PA/ED for traffic documentation. Upon review of the Draft TEPA by the City and Caltrans and resolution of all comments, GHD will then prepare a Final TEPA for approval. For the basis of this proposal, this project is assumed to be non VMT inducing, and no additional documentation or analysis will be required.
GHD completed a draft Traffic Operations Analysis Report/Intersection Control Evaluation (TOAR/ICE) for City and Caltrans consideration of the DEER based on the single-build alternative.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 6
A draft report was prepared consistent with the guidelines identified in the TOPD policy guidelines for review and comment by the City, Caltrans and other reviewing agencies. The study includes a comparison of the performance of the alternative based on previously agreed to Measures of Effectiveness. Provided comments will be responded to via a response to comment memorandum and/or update to the ICE study as appropriate.
Upon review of the Draft TOAR/ICE by the City and Caltrans and resolution of all comments, GHD will then prepare a Final TOAR/ICE for approval.
Deliverables: Final Traffic Operations Analysis Report/Intersection Control Evaluation (TOAR/ICE, MS Word & PDF)
3.3 – Alternatives Development (Work Previously Completed – No further development anticipated)
Alternatives (up to three total) will be designed and evaluated based on impacts to right of way, utilities, and Caltrans facilities. The Alternatives will be compared to determine which should be included in the final PSR-PDS. Alternatives will be scoped for probable construction costs, potential environmental impacts, and compatibility with the City’s complete streets master planning. Alternatives under consideration will be reviewed by the City and Caltrans.
3.4 – Right of Way Data Sheet
In support of the Alternatives Analysis and for ultimate inclusion in the PSR-PDS, a right-of-way cost estimate and Caltrans Data Sheets are to be prepared by a qualified real estate consultant. Monument will evaluate the potential right-of-way requirements, affected parcels and associated capital costs related to each alignment alternative under consideration for the proposed interchange modernization project. As such, the following Scope of Work itemizes the tasks and deliverables that will be performed by Monument. – Take an inventory of the affected properties for each selected option. – Using public Assessor’s Roll information, investigate the ownership, lot size, and building size of each affected property.
– Visually inspect each property (exterior street view) and evaluate effects of proposed acquisition. List all businesses on each property and the approximate space they occupy. – Sort each property into product types to determine the universe of real estate data sets to research and create valuation data sets for each product type.
– Prepare an estimate of the probable cost of each full property acquisition or the cost of each partial acquisition (plus damages) using the data sets created and utilizing our various real estate value data bases.
– Prepare an estimate of the probable relocation assistance exposure for each residential or nonresidential occupant located on each property. – Prepare an estimate of the immoveable fixtures and equipment associated with each business property.
– Prepare an estimate of the total probable loss of business goodwill attributable to each operating business.
– Prepare an estimate of the inspection and demolition costs associated with delivering each cleared site.
– Prepare an estimate of the total services and incidental costs associated with each real estate acquisition program (appraisals, acquisition and relocation agents, title/escrow, and legal services). – Ascertain the estimated cost for potential utility relocations from the design engineer and/or utility coordinator (preparing a cost estimate for utility relocations is excluded from Monument’s scope of work).
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 7
The scope of work will be performed and delivered in the form of a report containing a description of the project areas studied, a summary of total probable costs of the study area itemized by major component and will include detailed spreadsheets showing how the summary sheets were calculated. The spreadsheets contain a parcel-by-parcel breakdown of all probable costs.
In the event that the acquisition program is to be phased or determined to be implemented at a future date, formulized spreadsheets will be created which apply the appropriate cost escalation factors to reflect the projected schedule.
The final cost information determined from the accumulation of data will then be transferred into the appropriate format for application to the Right of Way Data Sheets, or other format required by the project.
Task 4 – PSR-PDS Document Preliminary Environmental
Analysis
4.1 – Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR)
Rincon will prepare a Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR). Rincon will utilize the most recent PEAR template provided by Caltrans and coordinate with Caltrans District 5 Environmental staff on the latest procedures they are using in the development of PEARs. The purpose of this PEAR is to clearly outline and estimate the scope, schedule, and cost for completing the environmental process for the project (PA&ED) and identify the anticipated environmental commitments from the project. More specifically, the PEAR will identify those aspects of the preliminary designs of the project that may have a potential significant effect on the environment based on information known to date. The PEAR will identify the type of future studies and evaluations which must be performed and the required environmental document that would be required to meet all California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. This work effort will include the following tasks.
Coordination and Meetings
The Rincon project manager and technical staff will review existing and available information pertaining to the project area, including information on file with the City and Caltrans that relates to the project area and design information available and developed during the project. This task assumes coordination with Caltrans District 5 staff for the purpose of obtaining information and ensuring an approved format is used for the PEAR document. This task also includes general project management support.
Analysis
Rincon will conduct windshield surveys and provide a qualitative description of potential environmental resources and issues that could affect selection of the recommended alternative, including the types of permits that may be required. This will include the following analysis:
– Land Use/Growth/Socioeconomic/Community Impacts. Describe the general setting of the study area, the types and number of structures, and parcels affected by the project. Discuss potential issues related to the relocation of utilities.
– Farmlands/Timberlands. Describe that there are no agricultural land uses or timberland near the project area.
– Visual/Aesthetic Resources. Identify scenic resources and any adverse visual impacts that may be introduced by the project.
– Cultural Resources. A Rincon cultural resources specialist will conduct a background records search and literature review at the Regional Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). The records search and literature review will include the proposed project area as well as a 1-mile buffer around the area. Rincon will also contact the California Native American Heritage Commission to request a search of their Sacred Lands File database and a list of local Native American representatives that may have knowledge of resources, including potential tribal PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 8
cultural resources within the study area. The report will identify whether the project area has been previously surveyed for cultural resources and discuss possible effects that the project might have on recorded resources within or adjacent to the project area, including any potential cultural resource issues that might affect the alternatives, cost, or viability of the project. The report will also identify cultural resources studies that may be necessary for the project, such as an Archaeological Survey Report or Historical Resources Evaluation Report.
– Hydrology and Floodplain/Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff. Describe the hydrology and floodplain setting and identify water bodies that might be affected by the project. Describe discharge conditions that could affect the project design, scheduling, or construction techniques, discuss any agency coordination and permits, and map the locations of any constraints, including FEMA floodplains, that should be considered during preliminary design on the provided base map. – Geology, Soils, Seismic and Topography. Conduct a background document review of the project area and geologic mapping to identify potential geologic concerns including earthquakes, the suitability of soils to support the proposed development (e.g., shrink/swell, poor drainage, etc.), and the erosion potential across the project site.
– Palaeontology. A Rincon palaeontologist will conduct a background document review of the project area to identify potential paleontological sensitivity of the project area. – Hazardous Waste/Materials. Conduct a search of on-line hazardous materials records and assess the potential for the project to release hazardous waste or materials. – Air Quality. Describe existing air quality conditions in the project area, the air quality attainment status, and whether the proposed project is included in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.
– Noise and Vibration. Qualitatively assess the potential for noise impacts on noise-sensitive uses, including Pacific Grove High School and nearby residents. – Energy and Climate Change. Rincon will provide a qualitative discussion of project climate change effects based on regional planning strategies and the project’s effect on greenhouse production. The MTP/SCS and/or specific project traffic studies will be reviewed for information on the reduction of vehicle miles travelled and improved traffic flow for the area. – Biological Environment. A Rincon biologist will review existing information and conduct a reconnaissance survey of the project area to identify potential resource issues, including sensitive species habitat. Project issues related to removal of vegetation, including potential impacts on nesting birds, will be described as applicable. The PEAR will identify specific studies or focused surveys needed, any timing issues for conducting the surveys, and any required permits, agreements, or approvals that will be necessary to comply with local, state, and federal regulations. The effect of any potential mitigation on the project scope, cost, or schedule will be identified. – Cumulative Impacts. Consider potential impacts resulting from other projects known or projected to occur within the vicinity of the project within the foreseeable future. A recommendation will be provided as to whether a cumulative impact analysis is needed for a particular resource in the subsequent environmental document phase.
– Section 4(f) Issues. The Department of Transportation Act governs federally funded or authorized transportation projects that require the use of publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, State, or local significance, or land of an historic site of national, State, or local significance. “Recreational areas” include “formal and informal facilities, including after-school public use of school playgrounds and recreational facilities.” The project may require modifications to the Pacific Grove High School property at the southeast corner of Congress Avenue and Sunset Drive, immediately adjacent to the football field and track facility. As such, Section 4(f) may apply. The PEAR will identify any potential 4(f) lands in the study area and, if present, the type of “use” (fee title, temporary, or “constructive” use) that would likely occur with project implementation; the type of 4(f) compliance that would be needed (individual 4(f) evaluation, programmatic 4(f) evaluation, or temporary occupancy approval); and any other circumstances that have the potential to affect the viability or schedule of the project. Any areas of potential impact will be described.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 9
Draft PEAR Preparation
Rincon will prepare a draft and final PEAR to present the results of the environmental analysis, including identification of possible mitigation requirements. The report will follow the latest Caltrans PEAR template, including (but not limited to) a project description, purpose and need, anticipated environmental approval and anticipated environmental commitments, and PEAR technical summaries. The draft PEAR will be submitted electronically to the City to distribute to the PDT for review and return for comments.
Rincon prepared a draft PEAR to present the results of the environmental analysis, including identification of possible mitigation requirements. The report will follow the latest Caltrans PEAR template, including (but not limited to) a project description, purpose and need, anticipated environmental approval and anticipated environmental commitments, and PEAR technical summaries. The draft PEAR was submitted electronically to the City and Caltrans, but formal review has not commenced.
Final PEAR Preparation
Based on the comments received on the draft PEAR, changes will be incorporated, and a revised PEAR will be distributed. This scope of work assumes that one round of consolidated comments from the PDT will be received. After receiving what are anticipated to be minor comments on the revised PEAR, Rincon will prepare a final (electronic copy) PEAR for inclusion in the PSR.
Deliverables: Final Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR, MS Word & PDF)
4.2 – Stormwater Data Report (SWDR) (Short Form)
A storm water data report (SWDR) will be prepared commiserate with the level of information and detail required for a PSR-PDS as identified in Caltrans PDPM for approval by Caltrans. The evaluation will focus on determining if there will be any significant impacts to the project alternatives, right of way needs, or project costs due to the need to incorporate treatment best management practices (BMPs) for compliance with stormwater requirements. The Evaluation Documentation Form provided in Appendix E of Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks: Project Planning and Design Guide will be used to document the need to incorporate treatment BMPs for this project. The SWDR will summarize the stormwater quality issues and planning decisions made regarding how the project will comply with the Caltrans NPDES permit.
4.3 – Additional PSR-PDS Attachments
Risk Register
GHD will identify risks, probabilities, severities, impacted functions and ownership. GHD will provide information to Caltrans for Caltrans to complete their internal risk register.
Complete Streets Decision Document (CSDD)
GHD will provide a CSDD using the most current template provided by Caltrans.
Vehicle Miles Travelled Decision Document (VMTDD)
GHD will provide a VMTDD using the most current template provided by Caltrans.
Division of Engineering Services Scoping Document
Structures work, as defined by Caltrans, is not anticipated and preparation of this scoping document is not included in the scope.
Traffic Management Plan Data Sheet
GHD will provide a TMP Data Sheet using the most current template provided by Caltrans.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 10
Design Scoping Index
The design scoping index serves as a discussion document for the PDT to assist with identification of appropriate design principles and standards. GHD will prepare the scoping index in conjunction with referencing Caltrans DIB 78 design checklist. The scoping index will be reviewed and accepted by the PDT.
Transportation Planning Scoping Information Sheet
GHD will be responsible for preparing the Transportation Planning Scoping Information Sheet per guidance provided in the PDPM, specifically Article 4. GHD will work with the PDT, especially Caltrans Transportation Planning representative, to ensure that the Initial PID Information is provided within the information sheet.
GHD will also be responsible for providing the concluding information or Final PID Information that will complete the information sheet as the study approaches conclusion.
Develop Schedule
A schedule for delivery of major milestones of the PA&ED phase and the anticipated funding year for construction will be developed for inclusion in the PSR-PDS.
4.4 – PSR-PDS Submittals
Attachment Documents
As described above, GHD will prepare the required attachments for the PSR-PDS. It is assumed a draft version of each attachment will be provided to the City and Caltrans for concurrent review. The comments received will be addressed and the report/document will be resubmitted. It is assumed no more than two rounds of comments will be provided prior to signature/approval.
Administrative Draft PSR-PDS (ADPSR-PDS)
GHD will prepare the ADPSR-PDS for initial review by the PDT and will include draft products for the majority of the above items. This report will utilize data, conclusions and recommendations identified in the various scoping tools, studies, reports, data sheets and engineering designs completed within this Scope of Work. The document will be distributed in PDF format and distributed as required by City or Caltrans.
Comments received on the ADPSR-PDS will be addressed in writing and incorporated, as appropriate, into the second draft.
Draft PSR-PDS
Based on comments provided by the City and the PDT on the ADPSR-PSR, identified issues or concerns will be addressed in a response to comments memorandum. The ADPSR-PDS will then be updated to reflect changes resulting from the comments and the Draft PSR-PDS will be published for review by the PDT, district-wide Caltrans, and any stakeholders identified by the City. The scope assumes Caltrans will conduct the required safety and constructability reviews as an extension of a PDT meeting during this review phase. The document will be distributed in PDF format. Comments received on the draft PSR-PDS will be addressed in writing and incorporated, as appropriate, into the final signature-ready PSR-PDS.
Final PSR-PDS
GHD will prepare the signature-ready document for approval by the City and Caltrans. The signature-ready document will be routed as requested by the City and Caltrans. Upon final approval, GHD will provide an assembled final PDF. The approved report will be distributed via email and ground mail as requested by the City and Caltrans.
Task 5 – Geotechnical Investigation/Pavement Design Report GHD’s subconsultant, Parikh Consultants, Inc., will complete geotechnical field investigations and reports.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 11
Task 5.1 - Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report (PBDR) A Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report (PGDR) is proposed to provide preliminary recommendations to the design team and the agency as a supporting document for the PA&ED phase. The PGDR will be prepared according to Caltrans Geotechnical Design Reports guidelines (February 2021).
The proposed scope of the work consists of reviewing readily available data, including data from the GeoTracker website, published geologic maps, and other Agency records. The potential geotechnical/geologic impacts and mitigations will be discussed on a broad basis, including geotechnical conditions (geology, topsoil/soil survey, surface/subsurface conditions, groundwater, and seismic hazards), geotechnical design evaluations. The report will also provide preliminary geotechnical design considerations.
Generally, the geotechnical evaluation relevant to the proposed project will be presented qualitatively with no specific design recommendations.
Deliverables: Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report (PGDR, draft and final) Task 5.2 - Pavement Memorandum
For the preliminary pavement design of the roadway, no fieldwork or laboratory testing is proposed in this preliminary engineering phase. A Preliminary Pavement Design Memorandum will be prepared using an assumed R-value and Traffic Index (TI) provided by the design team to support the Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA). The pavement design will be based on both the Caltrans standard empirical design method and Mechanistic-Empirical (ME) methodologies by using the CalME software for comparison purposes.
GHD will prepare a summary traffic index calculation memo to support the Pavement Memorandum, which will summarize up to 3 days of vehicle classification counts and Caltrans data sources for calculating the 20- year Traffic Index.
Deliverables: Pavement Memorandum (PGDR, draft and final) Task 6 – Preliminary Design
Task 6.1 - Preliminary Engineering (30%) Design
GHD has prepared draft Preliminary Design Drawings/Geometric Evaluation Drawing for City and Caltrans review for Caltrans consideration of the DEER based on the single-build alternative. This task will be to coordinate and address City and Caltrans comments on the draft 30% Design Drawings/GED to provide final documentation for the DEER.
Plans will be prepared on Caltrans standard title block at 1”=20’ scale utilizing AutoCAD C3D 2023 or later edition. Up to six (6) Layout sheets and three (3) typical sections sheets will be provided (similar to draft documents already prepared).
Design check plan exhibits, including layout, fastest path, stopping sight distance, intersection sight distance angles of visibility and design vehicle turning templates (up to 17 sheets, as was prepared and submitted for DEER consideration) will be prepared and finalized for the Sunset/Cedar/Congress roundabout.
Assumptions:
• Design vehicles are per prepared design check which includes CA Legal for thru and u-turn movements on Sunset Drive, 45’ bus thru and u-turn movements on Sunset Drive and 40’ bus thru PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 12
and u-turn movements on Congress Avenue. Changes to design vehicles may require additional budget via an amendment.
Deliverables: Final Preliminary Design Drawings/GED (draft and final PDF and .dwg) Final Design Checks (draft and final PDF and .dwg)
Task 7 – Environmental Documentation
GHD’s subconsultant Rincon will lead the environmental technical studies preparation and CEQA documentation.
Task 7.1 - NEPA/CEQA Supporting Technical Studies
The NEPA and CEQA tasks were scoped based on the draft PEAR prepared for City and Caltrans review. Formal review and response to finalize the PEAR has not been completed. The following scope of work is based on the draft PEAR prepared. If the final PEAR and/or confirmed scope differs from the scope included, our team may require a contract amendment to include other studies not currently in the scope of work.
Task 7.1.1 - Community Impact Assessment
Rincon will prepare a Community Impact Assessment Scoping Checklist and Technical Memorandum to assess land use and community impacts from implementation of the Project. Although the Project would require acquisition of portions of properties, these acquisitions would be limited to vegetated areas without structures, and would not displace any buildings or residences. Nonetheless, a Community Impact Assessment Scoping Checklist and Technical Memorandum will be prepared to assess impacts on the local community during the temporary construction period phase of the Project. This memorandum will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans SER and Environmental Handbook Volume 4, and will include information such as parcel numbers and size of acquisitions, property owners, zoning, and replacement housing or potential areas for relocation. An assessment of temporary impacts will include the duration of use for any temporary easements, including size of areas potentially affected by any temporary easements. The memorandum will qualitatively discuss Land Use, Growth, Community Character and Cohesion, Economic Impacts, Relocations and Environmental Justice, and Traffic and Transportation as they relate to Community Impacts. The analysis will address the resources, impacts, and any Project measures to reduce impacts. An electronic copy of the Draft Community Impact Assessment Scoping Checklist and Technical Memorandum will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final Community Impact Assessment Scoping Checklist and Technical Memorandum, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• Right-of-way mapping will be provided to Rincon by GHD, identifying the location and size of all temporary and permanent acquisitions for the Project.
• Rincon will use publicly available information on the availability of housing in the region. No market analysis will be conducted.
• No quantitative economic analysis will be conducted.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 13
• The Project would not result in significant adverse community effects requiring the preparation of a full Community Impact Assessment. Rincon can prepare a full Community Impact Assessment for an additional fee to be determined on a time-and-materials basis, if required.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Community Impact Assessment Scoping Checklist and Technical Memorandum (MS Word & PDF)
Task 7.1.2 - Visual Impact Assessment Memorandum
Rincon will prepare a Scenic Resource Evaluation and Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) in accordance with the Caltrans SER. Rincon will initiate the assessment by completing the Caltrans Questionnaire to Determine VIA Level, to determine the type of VIA required for the Project. The questionnaire will evaluate the degree and breadth of possible visual issues. The questionnaire will be scored in accordance with the VIA Guide, and a recommendation regarding the general level of VIA that should be performed for the Project. For the purposes of this scope of work, it is assumed that the checklist scoring will indicate that a VIA Memorandum will be required. Rincon will conduct field work in the Project area and photo document sensitive and representative views that would be most affected by the Project. Following field work, Rincon will select one Key Observation Point (KOP) for the Project, for which a visual simulation will be prepared. Rincon will coordinate with GHD to obtain GIS and CAD data needed to prepare the visual simulation. Rincon will prepare a concise VIA Memorandum that evaluates Project changes to the visual environment and viewer sensitivity in the Project area. The VIA Memorandum will provide a description of the area of visual effect as well as the visual resources and scenic resources found in the Project corridor. The VIA Memorandum will also provide a description of landscape visual character, landscape visual quality, and Project viewers. The VIA Memorandum will provide a brief narrative detailing visual change based on viewer and viewpoint sensitivity and will characterize the overall visual impact of the Project. If necessary, avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures will be identified in coordination with GHD. An electronic copy of the Draft VIA Memorandum will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final VIA Memorandum, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• Rincon will subcontract with a landscape architect to be the preparer of record for the VIA Memorandum.
• Rincon will subcontract with a teaming partner to prepare one (1) visual simulation from 1 KOP.
Additional visual simulations can be prepared at request for an additional cost. • A conceptual landscape plan, if landscaping is proposed, will be provided by GHD. • GHD will provide GIS data showing Project components and CAD models for each of the Project components.
• Site and KOP photos will be captured during one, one-day site visit by one Rincon staff.
Deliverables: Caltrans Questionnaire to Determine VIA Level and Draft and Final VIA Memorandum (electronic)
Task 7.1.3 - Archaeological Survey Report, Historical Resources Evaluation Report and Historic Property Survey Report
Rincon will coordinate with Caltrans District 5 Professionally Qualified Staff in the preparation and approval of an Area of Potential Effects (APE) Map, Archaeological Survey Report (ASR), Historic Resources PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 14
Evaluation Report (HRER), and Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR), prepared pursuant to the Caltrans SER, Volume 2: Cultural Resources, and following the recommendations of the PEAR.
Area of Potential Effects
Using a Project footprint provided by GHD, Rincon will develop an APE map to Caltrans specifications. Rincon assumes one round of consolidated comments from GHD and Caltrans prior to the finalization of the APE map.
Native American and Local/Historical Group Consultation Assistance Rincon will contact the Native American Heritage Commission to request a Sacred Lands File search and list of Native American contacts. Rincon will prepare and send Section 106-specific letters to each of the Native American Heritage Commission-listed contacts to request information regarding Native American religious or cultural resources within or immediately adjacent to the APE, and to initiate Section 106 consultation. This does not constitute consultation under Assembly Bill 52 required under CEQA. Rincon will additionally contact individuals and organizations who may have knowledge of or concerns with historic-period cultural resources in the area. Outreach will include inquiries to applicable local government and local historic groups. As many as two telephone calls will be made to each contact to document a “good faith” effort. A table documenting both Native American and local/historical group outreach will be created and attached to the report in an appendix alongside an example letter and all replies.
Archaeological Survey Report
Rincon received the results of a records search from the California Historical Resources Information System at the Northwest Information Center in December 2023, making the previous records search more than one year old. Therefore, Rincon will conduct an updated records search of the California Historical Resources Information System at the Northwest Information Center to determine if any additional cultural resources have been identified, or cultural resource studies have been conducted within the APE since the December 2023 records search. Rincon assumes no additional cultural resources or cultural resource studies will be identified during the updated records search. Rincon will then conduct a pedestrian survey of exposed ground surfaces within the APE. For the purposes of this proposal and cost estimate, Rincon assumes that no archaeological resources will be identified during the survey. Following completion of the updated records search, Native American coordination, and pedestrian survey, a qualified archaeologist will prepare an ASR. If the locations of sensitive archaeological sites or Native American cultural resources or knowledge are depicted or described in the report, it will be considered confidential and may not be distributed to the public.
An electronic copy of the Draft ASR will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final ASR, based on the comment received.
Historical Resources Evaluation Report
Rincon will conduct archival research to ascertain the development history of the APE. Following archival research, a qualified architectural historian will conduct a survey of the APE to identify and document up to one built environment resource within the APE. Rincon assumes that the built environment resource will be recommended not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 15
An electronic copy of the Draft HRER will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final HRER, based on the comment received.
Historic Property Survey Report
Upon completion of the APE, consultation, ASR, and HRER, Rincon will prepare a short-format Caltrans HPSR. The short-format HPSR is the overarching document that summarizes the results of the cultural resources investigation. An electronic copy of the Draft HPSR will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review.
In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final HPSR, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• No additional cultural resources or cultural resource studies will be identified during the updated records search.
• No archaeological resources will be identified during the survey • Up to one built environment resource will be documented. • The built environment resource that is documented will be recommended not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources.
Deliverables: Draft and Final APE Map (electronic)
Draft and Final ASR (electronic)
Draft and Final HRER (electronic)
Draft and Final HPSR (electronic)
Task 7.1.4 - Water Quality Memorandum
Rincon will prepare a Water Quality Memorandum for the Project. The scope of work does not include preparation of a full Caltrans Water Quality Assessment Report. The memorandum will include a brief discussion of watersheds, surface receiving waters, groundwater basins, receiving waters conditions and impairments, water quality objectives, beneficial uses, and regulatory requirements. The Project’s potential impact on water quality will be evaluated and avoidance and minimization measures necessary to prevent adverse water quality impacts will be identified. The impact analysis will consider existing regulations and proposed Best Management Practices that are applicable to the Project. An electronic copy of the Draft Water Quality Memorandum will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final Water Quality Memorandum, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• A full Caltrans Water Quality Assessment Report will not be prepared. • Surface water, floodplain, or groundwater-related graphics will not be required by Caltrans and will not be included in the Memorandum.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 16
• GHD will provide the Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report, Storm Water Data Report for use in preparation of the Water Quality Memorandum.
• GHD will provide information on the disturbed soil area, new and replaced impervious surface area, proposed operational Best Management Practices, existing drainage patterns, change in peak flow, proposed drainage improvements, depth to groundwater, and depth of excavation, if this information is not provided in the Project-specific geotechnical, stormwater, and drainage/hydrology reports.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Water Quality Memorandum (electronic) Task 7.1.5 - Paleontological Identification Report
Rincon will prepare a Paleontological Identification Report (PIR), as defined by the Caltrans SER. The PIR will identify whether the Project poses a risk to significantly impact paleontological resources, based on the nature of the Project and the geologic setting. The PIR includes reviewing Project plans, geotechnical reports (if available), geologic maps, scientific literature, and online paleontological databases. This PIR will also include a description of the efforts required to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources, if impacts are found to be possible. A windshield survey will not be prepared, given that the Project area is completely disturbed. In the course of preparing the PIR, if it is determined that the Project poses a risk to paleontological resources, then Rincon will prepare a combined Paleontological Identification Report/Paleontological Evaluation Report (PIR/PER), as defined by the Caltrans SER. In addition to the elements of the PIR, explained above, the PIR/PER would include an assessment of whether avoidance of paleontological resources is possible, determination of the significance of the possible paleontological resource using the Caltrans paleontological sensitivity scale, and Caltrans' legal obligations with regards to the paleontological resource. An electronic copy of the Draft PIR or PIR/PER will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word.
Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final PIR or PIR/PER, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• No fieldwork and no paleontological records search will be conducted.
Deliverables: Draft and Final PIR or PIR/PER (electronic) Task 7.1.6 - Initial Site Assessment
Rincon will prepare an Initial Site Assessment (ISA), as defined by the Caltrans SER. The ISA will identify potential or known hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and contamination that may be encountered within the Project. According to Caltrans, the industry standard for preparing an ISA is found in the ASTM International (ASTM) Standard E1527-13 “Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.” The ASTM E1527-13 standard was revised and replaced with the ASTM E1527-21 standard in 2021. Therefore, Rincon’s scope of work for the ISA will comply with the 2013 and 2021 ASTM E1527 standards. The scope of the ISA will include the following: • Review of regulatory and historical sources of information, potentially including aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, building department records, chain of title documents, land use records, and government records, such as regulatory reports for both the Project site and nearby or adjoining properties; • Visual inspection of the Project site and of adjoining properties; • Interviews with past and present owners, operators, occupants, and Caltrans; and • Documentation of research, observations, and results of the environmental inquiry in a written report that specifically identifies whether the Project site will require an invasive site investigation. An electronic copy of the Draft ISA will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of redPGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 17
line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final ISA, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• One ISA report will be prepared.
• GHD will transmit interview questionnaires to the current site owners or designated representatives of the site owner, and/or operators/occupants (as identified by Client), on behalf of Rincon. • GHD will return one completed owner and user questionnaires within two weeks of authorization. • Environmental lien and title reports will not be provided or included as part of ISA. • Adjacent property owner interviews will not be conducted. • If additional technical analysis is required beyond what is included, a separate scope and fee will be prepared.
Deliverables: Draft and Final ISA (electronic)
Task 7.1.7 - Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist Rincon will prepare an Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist. The scope of work does not include preparation of a formal Caltrans Air Quality Report because the Project site is located in an area designated attainment/unclassified for all current National Ambient Air Quality Standards and conformity requirements do not apply. The Memorandum will include a brief Project Description, a regulatory background on conformity requirements, and an explanation of why a conformity analysis is not needed for the Project. A Transportation Air Quality Conformity Findings Checklist will also be prepared. This Checklist requires filling out the first step of the Checklist, and skipping the rest due to the NCCAB being in attainment for all pollutants.
An electronic copy of the Draft Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• A formal Caltrans Air Quality Report will not be prepared.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist Memorandum (electronic)
Task 7.1.8 - Construction Noise Memorandum
Rincon will prepare a Construction Noise Memorandum pursuant to Caltrans guidance. The Project is not considered a “roadway capacity increasing project”; therefore, it is not anticipated to meet the criteria of a Type 1 project, as defined in the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. A Caltrans-format Noise Study Report is not required. For construction noise activities, the Project is required to conform to the provisions identified in Section 14-8.02, “Noise Control,” of the Standard Specifications and Special Provisions (SSP 14- 8.02).
Pursuant to Caltrans guidance, a noise technical memorandum is warranted for projects that are not Type I, but where adverse construction noise is possible. Because construction noise may affect nearby residences in the area, a Caltrans-compliant Noise Technical Memorandum will be completed to qualitatively analyze the Project’s construction noise through compliance with Section 14-8.02, “Noise Control,” of the Standard Specifications and Special Provisions (SSP 14- 8.02). The memorandum will also include further discussion on the Project not being a Type I project and why the Project does not require a formal noise study. An PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 18
electronic copy of the Draft Construction Noise Memorandum will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word.
Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final Construction Noise Memorandum, based on the comment received.
Assumptions
• A Caltrans-format Noise Study Report will not be prepared.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Construction Noise Memorandum (electronic) Task 7.1.9 - Energy and Climate Change Memorandum
Rincon will prepare a technical memorandum that evaluates the effects of the Project related to energy, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and climate change by using the Climate Change Annotated Outline for a non-capacity increasing project, consistent with Caltrans SER guidelines. The GHG emissions analysis will discuss the State and local GHG emissions regulatory background and applicable Monterey Bay Air Resources District and Caltrans thresholds of significance, in conformance with Caltrans SER guidelines, Volume 1, Chapter 13 – Energy, and guidance for GHG and Climate Change.
Construction GHG emissions will be calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Because the Project will not increase vehicle miles travelled and would improve traffic flow, operational GHG emissions are expected to not increase with the Project and will be discussed qualitatively. The Energy and Climate Change Memorandum will also analyze the Project’s potential to result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. In support of this analysis, energy use will be quantified using in-house calculation spreadsheets based on data provided by the CalEEMod calculations for the GHG emissions analysis. The analysis will also qualitatively evaluate the Project’s consistency with applicable energy plans.
An electronic copy of the Draft Energy and Climate Change Memorandum will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of red-line strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final Energy and Climate Change Memorandum, based on the comment received.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Energy and Climate Change Memorandum (electronic) Task 7.1.10 - Natural Environment Study Minimal Impact
Rincon will prepare a Natural Environment Study (NES) in conformance with the Caltrans SER. The NES will utilize the most recent Caltrans NES template. Due to the conditions at the site, it is anticipated that the NES will be a “Minimum Impact (MI)” document. Rincon will review existing reports, Project Plans, aerial imagery and site photographs, and agency databases (i.e., California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Database and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Information for Planning and Consultation database), the National Wetlands Inventory, and available technical reports. After completing the background review, a Rincon biologist will conduct a site visit to document the site’s existing conditions and potential to support special status species and other sensitive biological resources. Any sensitive resources identified PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 19
during the site visit will be recorded. This scope of work assumes the field assessment will cover the Project site, including staging, ingress and egress, as well as up to a 50-foot buffer. Rincon will then prepare a NESMI describing the methods and results of the literature and database review, vegetation mapping, and field assessment, including a figure depicting vegetation communities, habitat types and other biological features observed during the field reconnaissance survey. The NES-MI will include discussion of regionally occurring special status species that may occur within the Project site. The NES-MI will consider both temporary and permanent impacts to sensitive natural communities and special status species, including migratory birds and species protected by the state and federal Endangered Species Acts and will provide simple avoidance and minimization measures depending upon the resource. The NES-MI will also address, as applicable, invasive species (Executive Order 13112), the protection of wetlands (Executive Order 11990), and floodplain management (Executive Order 11988), and other applicable laws and regulations. An electronic copy of the Draft NES-MI will be submitted to GHD, who will send it to the City and Caltrans for review. In this scope of work, Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will provide a consolidated set of comments in the form of redline strike out and comment bubbles in Microsoft Word. Rincon will revise the document and prepare a Final NES-MI, based on the comment received.
Deliverables: Draft and Final NES-MI (electronic)
7.2 - CEQA IS-MND
Task 7.2.1 - Kickoff Meeting
Rincon will schedule a brief kickoff meeting upon notice to proceed, held via conference call. The purpose of the meeting will be to allow GHD, the City, and Rincon to discuss the CEQA process and timeline for IS-MND completion.
Task 7.2.2 - Administrative Draft IS-MND
Rincon will prepare an Administrative Draft IS-MND for review by GHD and the City. The Administrative Draft IS-MND will address all items on the environmental checklist at a sufficient level of detail to allow for the determination of levels of significance. The IS-MND analysis will include relevant discussion of the project’s consistency with the City of Pacific Grove General Plan, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments’ Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and other relevant plans and regulations. The analysis will rely on desktop analysis and review of existing technical reports prepared for the PEAR including the following:
• Visual Technical Memorandum
• Historic Property Survey Report, which includes an Archaeological Survey Report and Historic Resources Evaluation Report
• Water Quality Memorandum
• Geotechnical Study
• Paleontological Identification Report
• Preliminary Site Investigation
• Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impact
• Caltrans Noise Memorandum
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 20
Rincon assumes that GHD and the City will have reviewed all technical reports and accepted the report findings prior to beginning work on the IS-MND. These reports will be incorporated into the IS-MND. Key issues are anticipated to include Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources. The analytical approach to each of these key issue areas are described briefly below.
• Aesthetics – The aesthetics analysis will include relevant discussion of the Pacific Grove General Plan regulations governing scenic quality. The analysis will be based on existing site photographs and the Visual Technical Memorandum. This segment of SR 68 is not classified as a scenic highway by Caltrans but is listed as eligible. This IS-MND section will discuss the potential for the proposed project to substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway or substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or surroundings. • Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions – To address impacts associated with air pollutant, energy, and GHG emissions, Rincon will consider both temporary construction and longterm operational emissions. The analysis will include the following tasks:
o Summarize the existing air quality conditions in the air basin using data for nearby air monitoring stations available from the California Air Resources Board and the Monterey Bay Air Resources District.
o Characterize the state of the climate and relevant federal, State, and local climate change regulations. Identify the GHGs of primary concern.
o Summarize the federal, State, and local standards and regulatory review requirements pertinent to air quality, energy, and GHG emissions.
o Use the California Emissions Estimator Model completed as part of the Energy and Climate Change Memorandum to determine project air quality emissions. o Evaluate the significance of air quality and GHG emissions impacts based on the thresholds defined by the Monterey Bay Air Resources District.
o Evaluate the potential for the project to cause odor impacts to off-site uses. o Qualitatively assess localized health risk from construction and operational activities o Determine the project’s compliance with local air quality plans. o Based upon the findings of the Energy and Climate Change Memorandum, analyze the project’s potential to result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. o Energy use will be quantified using the calculations provided in the Energy and Climate Change Memorandum.
o Provide mitigation measures for identified potentially significant air quality, energy, and GHG impacts.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 21
The findings of the air quality, energy, and GHG emissions analysis will be summarized in the respective IS-MND sections that document the methodology and results of air pollutant, energy, and GHG emissions modelling. An appendix with technical modelling data will be included. • Biological Resources – The proposed project has the potential to impact biological resources.
Accordingly, Rincon will utilize the findings of the Natural Environment Study which includes a review of existing reports, project plans, aerial imagery and site photographs, and agency databases, the National Wetlands Inventory, and available technical reports. • Cultural Resources – Previously unrecorded archaeological resources and built environment resources may have the potential to be affected by the project. Rincon will incorporate the findings of the Historic Property Survey Report, which includes an Archaeological Survey Report and Historic Resources Evaluation Report, into the cultural resources section of the IS-MND. • Geology and Soils – The project area is susceptible to ground shaking during an earthquake and onsite soils may also present innate risks, such as shrink-swell and liquefaction potentials.
Accordingly, the IS-MND will evaluate the project’s potential soil limitations and amenability to supporting the proposed project, and to address any potential issues related to seismic conditions.
The IS-MND will rely on the findings of the Geotechnical Report. The proposed project area is located within an area with the potential to contain paleontologically sensitive geologic units. The IS-MND will rely on the Paleontological Identification Report prepared for the PEAR to determine whether the project has the potential to significantly impact paleontological resources. • Hazards and Hazardous Materials – The area surrounding the proposed project is developed with residential, commercial, and educational land uses. Sources of hazardous materials may be identified as part of the Caltrans Initial Site Assessment which would identify potential or known hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and contamination. Rincon will rely on the findings of the Initial Site Assessment to inform the IS-MND analysis. Additionally, Rincon will conduct a desktop review of relevant databases to inform if the project would have potential to impact hazards. • Hydrology and Water Quality – The project could result in potential impacts to water quality as a result of construction site run-off and accidental spills of hazardous material such as petroleum. The IS-MND will incorporate the findings of the Water Quality Memorandum. • Noise – The noise analysis will be conducted in accordance with City of Pacific Grove guidelines, standards, and ordinances. The noise analysis will include the following tasks:
o Conduct noise measurements to document the ambient noise environment. The survey will consist of up to two (2) short-term (15-minute) noise measurements. o Conduct an analysis of construction activities to assess noise and vibration levels at nearby sensitive receptors based on equipment types and operations provided by the client. o Qualitatively discuss operational noise from the project. o As necessary, the analysis will recommend applicable mitigation measures for significant impacts.
The findings of the noise analysis will be summarized in the noise IS-MND section that documents the methodology and results of noise modelling and impacts. An appendix with technical modelling data will be included.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 22
• Transportation – The project area would alter travel modes along Sunset Drive and SR 68 through resolution of pedestrian and bicyclist conflicts by improvements to sidewalks, as well as the installation of a roundabout. However, as outlined within the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI; formerly Office of Planning and Research) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA,1, the installation of roundabouts or traffic circles are not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis. Additionally, active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and therefore are presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on transportation. Accordingly, Rincon will prepare a qualitative assessment of transportation impacts and will incorporate the findings of the PEAR to determine impacts of the proposed project on transportation and discuss the project’s consistency with existing plans.
• Tribal Cultural Resources – Rincon will review the results of the AB 52 consultation efforts and provide a summary of those efforts in the Tribal Cultural Resources section of the IS-MND. Rincon assumes that the AB 52 results will be provided by the City and that no effort will be required of Rincon to complete AB 52 consultation.
Remaining issues will be addressed briefly in the Initial Study checklist. This scope of work assumes a low level of detail for remaining issue areas, with no other impacts requiring mitigation.
Task 7.2.3 - Public Review Draft IS-MND
Rincon will respond to one round of GHD/City comments on the Administrative Draft IS-MND and prepare the Public Draft IS-MND. We assume comments on the Administrative Draft will be provided in a consolidated, electronic, and editable format and will not be substantive or require additional analysis. Revisions will be provided in Microsoft Word utilizing the track-changes function. Rincon will make final revisions and prepare the Draft IS-MND for public circulation.
Rincon will prepare and assist with the online distribution of the Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an IS-MND.
The City will be responsible for publishing the NOI in a local newspaper. Rincon will provide one electronic (PDF) copy of the Public Review Draft IS-MND for posting on the City’s website and the NOI. Rincon will file all noticing needed by State Clearinghouse/LCI through their CEQA Submit online portal. This scope of work assumes Rincon will handle State Clearinghouse/LCI noticing only. The City will handle all noticing not related to State Clearinghouse/LCI, including filing with the County Clerk or other non-state agencies and all required public noticing.
Task 7.2.4 - Response to Comments, Final IS-MND, and MMRP Upon receipt of public comments on the Draft IS-MND, Rincon will prepare draft responses to comments for review by the City and GHD. Based on similar project types and previous work within and around the City of Pacific Grove, Rincon assumes engaged community input during the public review process. Accordingly, this scope of work assumes up to 12 comment letters will be received including 10 brief comment letters (under five pages) and 2 lengthy comment letters. It is assumed that these comment letters can be adequately responded to in a maximum of 60 professional staff hours. The actual level of effort required to respond will depend on the length, detail, and sophistication of the comments, in addition to the number of letters received.
We reserve the right to reevaluate the effort level and request a scope amendment upon close of the public comment period.
1 Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (formerly OPR). 2018. OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. https://lci.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 23
The draft responses to comments will be submitted to the City electronically and Rincon will address one round of consolidated comments and prepare the Final IS-MND. Rincon will provide electronic versions (PDF and Microsoft Word) of the Final IS-MND to the City.
Rincon will also prepare a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) in accordance with the City’s requirements. The MMRP will take the form of a detailed table that compiles all of the mitigation measures, as well as information necessary to monitor compliance with each measure. The MMRP will be submitted digitally (PDF and Microsoft Word).
Task 7.2.5 - CEQA Project Management
This task includes management and coordination through the duration of the project, including coordination with the GHD and internal project team; project oversight; budget and schedule management; and project accounting including billing and accounts receivable efforts. Additionally, this task assumes attendance of one Rincon staff member at one monthly meeting to discuss the project with GHD and/or the City. This scope of work assumes that each meeting would last one hour, and estimates one hour of professional time per meeting, totalling 16 hours for monthly meetings over the project duration or 16 months. Should the project extend beyond 16 months, more than one meeting be required per month, or if additional Rincon staff attendance should be required, Rincon reserves the right to reevaluate the effort level and request a scope amendment.
Assumptions
• Rincon will address one round of consolidated comments from GHD/ the City on each deliverable, to be provided as tracked changes in Word. Any additional revisions will be completed on a time and materials basis in accordance with our standard fee schedule (attached). If there are multiple reviewers between GHD and the City, GHD will be responsible for reconciling conflicting comments prior to sending to Rincon.
• Comments from GHD/the City will be in an editable electronic format and focus on new content in each deliverable. Addressing comments will not require substantial new analysis or field investigation.
• No archaeological resources requiring documentation will be identified as a result of analysis. Should resources be identified, work associated with their documentation and assessment may be done under a cost amendment.
• The City will conduct AB 52 Tribal Consultation in support of the project and will not require Rincon assistance. Should assistance be needed, it may be provided as an additional service for an additional cost.
• This scope of work does not include attendance at public meetings or other in-person meetings.
However, should these be required, these can be added under a cost amendment. • Work on the IS-MND will commence only after the Technical Studies have been completed and approved by both the City and Caltrans.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 24
Task 8 – Storm Drain Analysis
Task 8.1 - SWDR – Long Form
A storm water data report (SWDR) will be prepared commensurate with the level of information and detail required for a DEER as identified in Caltrans PDPM for approval by Caltrans. The evaluation will focus on determining if there will be any significant impacts to the project alternative, right of way needs, or project costs due to the need to incorporate treatment best management practices (BMPs) for compliance with stormwater requirements. The Evaluation Documentation Form provided in Appendix E of Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks: Project Planning and Design Guide will be used to document the need to incorporate treatment BMPs for this project. The SWDR will summarize the stormwater quality issues, and planning decisions made regarding how the project will comply with the Caltrans NPDES permit and follow the SWDR-Long Form Template.
Assumptions:
• Sizing of BMPs for water quality or volume, etc. will be completed at a later phase.
Deliverables: Storm Water Data Report – Long Form (SWDR – Long Form, draft and final) Task 9 – Right-of-Way Services
The impacted parcels are a mix of residential, school and commercial uses. GHD will prepare preliminary right of way needs exhibits for the single build alternative to support right-of-way data sheet development.
GHD’s subconsultant, Monument, understands that the Project requires the preparation of a Caltrans Rightof-Way Data Sheet to document updated right-of-way requirements and estimated right-of-way acquisition costs.
All services will be performed in accordance with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, including: the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (49 CFR Part 24), as amended; the Caltrans Right-of-Way Manual, the Real Property Acquisition Guidelines (Title 25, California Code of Regulations); and the City’s own policies and procedures.
Task 9.1 - RWDS
Monument will coordinate with the City and the City’s engineering consultant (Design Team) to confirm right-of-way acquisitions resulting from the proposed design. Additionally, Monument will provide information about existing conditions including ownership, land use, and any existing rights or encumbrances known to exist on the affected properties. The specific steps Monument will take to determine impacts and estimate costs are as follows:
• Coordinate with the Design Team to confirm new property and rights required to construct the project.
• Use publicly available data, aerial imagery, and other real estate resources to confirm ownership, land use, zoning, lot size, and improvements for each affected property. • Determine the size and location of permanent and temporary rights required based on information provided by the Design Team.
• Perform a desktop inspection of properties to confirm the probable acquisition type and confirm whether any consequential acquisitions or damages could result. • Estimate the total capital cost of acquisition for all affected parcels including permanent and temporary easement costs, severance damages (if applicable) and other applicable fees.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 25
• Estimate the total support cost for all parcels including appraisal fees, title and escrow fees, hazardous material investigations costs, and acquisition/negotiation costs. • Incorporate estimated utility protection/relocation costs provided by the Design Team or others. • Escalate costs to anticipated right of way acquisition date. • Prepare a draft Caltrans Right of Way Data Sheet using Caltrans Exhibit 17-EX-21 (Right of Way Data Sheet for Local Public Agencies)
• Update the RWDS based on comments from the Design Team and submit a final Draft RWDS to the City.
• Respond to comments from the City and Caltrans R/W as necessary, and make the necessary updates to the Data Sheets
Deliverables: Right of Way Data Sheet (RWDS, draft and final) Task 10 – Caltrans Approval Documents
Task 10.1 - Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) GHD will prepare a DEER, per guidelines in Appendix I of the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual that documents the engineering analysis of the proposed improvements. The analysis will include review of the proposed improvements to determine drainage (SWDR), maintenance, operation, and environmental impacts. The approved DEER will provide agreement on the geometric layout, scope of improvements, schedule and estimated cost of the project. The 30% PS&E submittal shall be utilized as an attachment to the DEER to document the basis of design. The format of the DEER will follow the template in Appendix I or as provided by District 5.
Deliverables: Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER, draft and final) Task 10.2 - Non-Standard Design Features
The geometries of the proposed roundabout and Sunset corridor will be checked for nonstandard design features and geometric refinements will be investigated to assess if any can be eliminated. A list of both BOLD faced and underlined design features that cannot be mitigated will be identified in a Design Standards Decision Document (DSDD) to be submitted to Caltrans for review, comment and approval.
Additionally, GHD will complete the DIB 78-04 Design Checklist and will prepare nonstandard feature exhibits to include with the DSDD.
Deliverables: Design Standards Decision Document (DSDD, draft and final) DIB 78-04 Checklist (draft and final)
Nonstandard Feature Exhibits (draft and final)
Task 10.3 - 11-page Estimate
A refined 11-page estimate will be compiled utilizing the standard Caltrans template in support of the DEER.
Unit costs will be based on both recent City bids and the Caltrans cost database. The estimate will be appropriate for the 30% concept level design plans/GED prepared for the project, with suitable contingency PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 26
for the level of design detail.
Deliverables: 11-page Estimate Template (draft and final .XLSX and PDF) Assumptions
– A Cooperative Agreement will be completed by the City with Caltrans and minimal support required from GHD.
– Concurrent City and Caltrans reviews will be completed for all submittals. – Unless stated specifically otherwise, all reviews and processing time on all submittals is assumed to be 6 weeks. If agency processing exceeds this estimate, additional budget may be required. – Unless stated specifically otherwise, all reports will be limited to one draft and one final version. – Assessor’s parcel maps, as-built drawings from current and former property owners, and any draft improvement plans showing the subject property, stationing, and project limits will be provided by the City/Caltrans/TAMC.
– Only one rendering is provided in this scope of the preferred Build Alternative in support of Public and Stakeholder Outreach.
– Surface and grading work will not begin until PS&E.
– Life Cycle Cost Analysis, pavement overlay, deflection testing, or pavement smoothness studies are not included in this scope.
– Geotechnical and Materials (borings and field investigation) work will not begin until PS&E. – Utility records to be imported are in 2-dimensional format only. No 3-dimensional drawings or pipe networks are to be prepared.
– Utility relocation design is not included and will be completed by the utility owner. – Long Form SWDR is required once project moves into PS&E. – Project will utilize published State Plane NAD 83 horizontal control and NAVD 1988 vertical control. – Underground utility location, including utility potholing will not begin until PS&E. – Right of Way Engineering, including preparation of Acquisition Plats or Appraisal Maps; Filing of Record of Survey for monumentation or resetting missing property corners; Preparation of Plats and Legal Descriptions; Staking or Layout of proposed improvements will not begin until PS&E. – Final PEAR may vary from the draft, which is basis for the proposed scope of work. Other studies or documents can be added via contract amendment, should they be required. – Environmental technical studies and memoranda will not include an analysis of alternatives to the Project.
– For each Technical Study and Memorandum, this scope of work assumes one round of review from the City and Caltrans. This scope of work also assumes that for each Technical Study or Memorandum, comments will be provided to GHD in one consolidated document. – GHD assumes revisions based on comments, for all Technical Studies and Memoranda, will be minor and will not require substantive changes.
– Hard copies, ADA Accessible, or 508 Compliant documents will not be provided. – GHD will address one round of consolidated comments from each deliverable, to be provided as tracked changes in Word. If there are multiple reviewers between Caltrans and the City, the City will be responsible for reconciling conflicting comments prior to sending to GHD. – Comments from Caltrans/City will be in an editable electronic format and focus on new content in each deliverable. Addressing comments will not require substantial new analysis or field investigation.
PGCC 9-17-25
The Power of Commitment
12604714 | DEER Scope 27
– No archaeological resources requiring documentation will be identified. Should resources be identified, work associated with their documentation and assessment may be done under a cost amendment. – The City will conduct AB 52 Tribal Consultation in support of the project and will not require assistance from the GHD team. Should assistance be needed, it may be provided as an additional service for an additional cost.
– This scope of work does not include attendance at public meetings or other in-person meetings.
However, should these be required, these can be added under a cost amendment. – Work on the IS-MND will commence only after the Technical Studies have been completed and approved by both the City and Caltrans.
– The DEER being prepared is for project initiation and approval, including the environmental documentation phase. PS&E and R/W phases will be completed at a later time. It may be the case that the DEER report cannot be finalized and will remain in draft form until such time as PS&E and R/W are completed and the project is ready to apply for an encroachment permit to complete construction.
PGCC 9-17-25
Jay Walter
A003 - Senior Technical Director 3
Heather Anderson
A003 - Senior Technical Director 3
Ron Boyle
A001 - Senior Technical Director 1
Kamesh Vedula
A002 - Senior Technical Director 2
Lindsey Van Parys
A002 - Senior Technical Director 2
Matt Wargula
A003 - Senior Technical Director 3
S002 - Construction Manager
A004 - Technical Director 1
A005 - Technical Director 2
A006 - Senior Professional 1
A007 - Senior Professional 2
A008 - Professional 1
B007 - Design Technician 2
A009 - Professional 2
Project Control
*Based on 3.5% annual escalation25/26 10-H1 Bill Rate ($/Hr.)*24/25 10-H1 Bill Rate ($/Hr.)*23/24 10-H1 Bill Rate ($/Hr.) $160 $126 $144 $131 $246 $286 $258 $212 $184 $301 $301 $378 $354 $316 $293 $263 $306 $276 $227 $197 $171 $135 $155 $140$290 $290 $366 $342 $306 $283 $254 $296 $267 $219 $191 $165 $130 $149 $136 $281 $281 $353 $331 $295 $273
PGCC 9-17-25
City of Pacific Grove
Congress, Sunset, Cedar Intersection Multi-Modal Safety Improvements GHD Draft Fee for PID Phase
Jay Walter
Matt
Wargula
Ron Boyle
Kamesh
Vedula
Lindsey
Van Parys
Emily
Shandy
Michael
Pitcock
Josh
Brechwald
Abdul Ali
Principal-InCharge
Project
Manager
Roundabout
Design
Traffic
QA/QC
QA/QC
Asst PM
Const
Manager
Tech
Director 1
Tech
Director 2
Senior Prof 1
Senior Prof 2
Prof 1
Design
Tech 2
Prof 2
Project
Coord
301$ 293$ 378$ 354$ 316$ 227$ 263$ 306$ 276$ 227$ 197$ 171$ 135$ 155$ 140$ Task 1 Project Management 448 104,468$
1.1 Project Management and Coordination 24 48 48 60 180 40,584$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 180 $ 40,584
1.2 Quality Management Plan 4 8 12 24 48 12,788$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 48 $ 12,7881.3 Project Meetings 4 56 12 56 12 12 56 12 220 51,096$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 220 $ 51,096
1.4 Community Outreach and Presentations - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 1.5 Stakeholder Outreach - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ Task 2 Data Collection and Base Mapping 0 -$
2.1 Data Collection - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - $ - 2.2 Preliminary Survey/Base Mapping - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ Task 3 Alternatives Analysis 92 $ 21,808
3.1 Develop Project Purpose and Need - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - $ - 3.2 Conduct ICE Evaluation and TEPA 8 4 16 8 16 40 92 21,808$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 92 $ 21,808
3.2A Conduct ICE Evaluation - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
3.2B TEPA (Mini TOAR) - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
3.3 Alternatives Development - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
3.4 Right of Way Data Sheet - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
Task 4 PSR-PDS Document Preliminary Environmental 14 $ 6,604
4.1 Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) 2 4 4 4 14 3,366$ - -$ - 3,238$ - -$ 14 $ 6,604
4.2 Stormwater Data Report (SWDR) (Short Form) - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
4.3 Additional PSR-PDS Attachments - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 4.4 PSR-PDS Submittals - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ Task 5 Geotechnical Investigation/Pavement Design Report 64 $ 42,245
5.1 Preliminary Geotechnical Design Report (PBDR) 4 2 8 14 2,994$ - -$ - -$ - 16,781$ 14 $ 19,775
5.2 Pavement Memorandum 16 8 2 24 50 12,078$ - -$ - -$ - 10,391$ 50 $ 22,469 Task 6 Preliminary Design (30%) Design 272 $ 50,888
6.1 Preliminary Engineering (30%) Design 16 8 16 32 80 120 272 50,888$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 272 $ 50,888 Task 7 Environmental Documentation 65 $ 269,382
7.1 NEPA/CEQA Supporting Technical Studies - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
7.1.1 Community Impact Assessment 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 11,612$ - -$ 4 $ 12,652
7.1.2 Visual Impact Assessment Memorandum 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 22,278$ - -$ 4 $ 23,3187.1.3 ASR, HRER and HPSR 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 36,779$ - -$ 4 $ 37,8197.1.4 Water Quality Memorandum 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 14,196$ - -$ 4 $ 15,2367.1.5 Paleontological Identification Report 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 8,472$ - -$ 4 $ 9,512
7.1.6 Initial Site Assessment 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 13,870$ - -$ 4 $ 14,910
7.1.7 Air Quality Memorandum and Conformity Checklist 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 7,036$ - -$ 4 $ 8,076
7.1.8 Construction Noise Memorandum 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 8,148$ - -$ 4 $ 9,1887.1.9 Energy and Climate Change Memorandum 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 11,006$ - -$ 4 $ 12,046
7.1.10 Natural Environment Study Minimal Impact 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 20,578$ - -$ 4 $ 21,618
7.2 CEQA IS-MND - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$ - -$
7.2.1 Kickoff Meeting 1 1 2 1 5 1,219$ - -$ - 1,726$ - -$ 5 $ 2,945
7.2.2 Administrative Draft IS-MND 4 4 8 2,080$ - -$ - 31,825$ - -$ 8 $ 33,905
7.2.3 Public Review Draft IS-MND 2 2 4 1,040$ - -$ - 9,106$ - -$ 4 $ 10,146
7.2.4 Response to Comments, Final IS-MND and MMRP 4 4 8 2,080$ - -$ - 19,663$ - -$ 8 $ 21,743
7.2.5 CEQA Project Management - -$ - -$ - 36,268$ - -$ - $ 36,268 Task 8 Storm Drain Analysis 182 $ 36,812
8.1 SWDR - Long Form 12 2 8 32 8 40 80 182 36,812$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 182 $ 36,812 Task 9 Right-of-Way Services 96 $ 32,648
9.1 RWDS 8 8 8 32 40 96 17,648$ - 15,000$ - -$ - -$ 96 $ 32,648 Task 10 Caltrans Approval Documents 540 103,496 $
10.1 Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER) 40 2 40 16 80 120 298 57,344$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 298 $ 57,344
10.2 Non-Standard Design Features 16 2 16 16 32 64 146 27,976$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 146 $ 27,976
10.3 11-Page Estimate 16 8 32 40 96 18,176$ - -$ - -$ - -$ 96 $ 18,176 Total Hours 35 283 12 36 18 240 0 32 0 140 12 429 0 476 60 1773 370,377$ 0 15,000$ 0 255,801$ 0 27,173$ 1,773 $ 668,351 7,500$ -$ -$ -$ $ 7,500
18,000$ -$ -$ -$ $ 18,000
Total
$ 10,535
$ 82,919
$ 4,536
$ 12,744
$ 5,688
$ 54,480
$ -
$ 9,792
$ -
$ 31,780
$ 2,364
$ 73,359
$ -
$ 73,780
$ 8,400
$ 395,877
$ 15,000
$ 255,801
$ 27,173 $ 693,851
*Hourly bill rates subject to annual escalation.
PROJECT TOTALS
GHD Total Hours
GHD Total Cost
Total Project Hours
Total Project Cost
Travel/Lodging, Counts, and Enviro Analysis Direct Costs Task Description (Assumes 12 month schedule) Monument
Total Hours
Monument
Total Cost
Parikh
Total Hours
GHD Monument Rincon Parikh
Direct Cost (Printing of Materials, Reports)
Rincon
Total Hours
Rincon
Total Cost
Parikh
Total Cost
PGCC 9-17-25
REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT
FOR THE PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PHASE OF
THE CEDAR, SUNSET & CONGRESS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
This Measure X Regional Funding Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into on _____________ by and between the City of Pacific Grove ("Sponsor") and the Transportation Agency for Monterey County ("TAMC"), collectively referred to herein as “Parties,” or in the singular, as “Party.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS on November 8, 2016, the voters of Monterey County, pursuant to the provisions of the Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act, California Public Utilities Code Section 180000 et seq. (the “Act”), approved the Transportation Safety & Investment Plan Measure X (TAMC Ordinance No. 2016-01) on the Monterey County Ballot, thereby authorizing TAMC to impose and administer the proceeds from a threeeighths cent transaction and use tax (“Measure X”); and WHEREAS Measure X identifies the Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvements (part of Holman Highway 68 Project) (the “Project”) as an eligible use of funds from Measure X revenues; and
WHEREAS Sponsor desires to receive Measure X regional funding from TAMC for the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase of the Project; and
WHEREAS up to $1,000,000 of Measure X funds are designated for the PA&ED phase of the Project; and
WHEREAS on May 11, 2022, Pacific Grove City Council approved authorization of the City Manager to evaluate the intersection of Congress, Sunset & Cedar and execute the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvement Project in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000; and WHEREAS TAMC is authorized to program funds to the Project and wishes to assist in the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Project; and WHEREAS the Parties understand and agree that as between TAMC and Sponsor, any cost savings developed in implementing the Project will be retained by TAMC and may be re-programmed for other components of the Project or eligible Measure X projects;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings herein made and the mutual benefits to be derived therefrom, the Parties hereto represent, covenant and agree as follows:
PGCC 9-17-25
SECTION I
Covenants of Sponsor
1.1 Project Definition. The Project Description and Scope of Work for the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Estimated Project Schedule is also attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Project’s estimate of probable cost, both as a whole and by activity, for this Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit C. The anticipated amount and type of funds, and fiscal year of funding, are specified in Exhibit C, Funding Summary. Exhibits A, B, and C are incorporated herein by this reference.
1.2. Change in Project Scope. No change in the Project Description or Scope of Work as described in Exhibit A may be approved or implemented until it has been reviewed and approved by TAMC as an amendment to Exhibit A. Changes implemented without TAMC approval will not be eligible for reimbursement.
1.3. Eligible Costs. Eligible costs to be reimbursed by TAMC pursuant to this Agreement are those costs directly related to the Project’s implementation of preliminary engineering and environmental analysis costs (including staff time and costs incurred by the City of Pacific Grove that are directly related to the Project) as specified in Exhibit B. City of Pacific Grove overhead costs are not eligible for reimbursement. In no event shall expenses incurred prior to the execution of this Agreement, or for purposes other than preliminary engineering and environmental analysis be considered eligible reimbursement costs under this Agreement.
1.4. Timing of TAMC Disbursements. TAMC shall issue payments in the form of reimbursements to Sponsor pursuant to a Request for Payment submitted by the Sponsor, as described in Section 1.5. As the Sponsor complies with the procedure set forth in Section 1.5, below, the Sponsor will submit its documentation in a sufficiently timely basis to allow TAMC to review Requests for Payment and to disburse funds directly to Sponsor within a period of twenty (20) business days. TAMC shall not be responsible for any penalties or charges related to late payments to Sponsor or Sponsor contractors, if TAMC has made a disbursement to the Sponsor within this period, or if TAMC has complied with Section 2.4 (“Suspension of Disbursements) for any invoices/Requests for Payments that are disputed. Sponsor understands that in no event shall payments from TAMC, when aggregated with previously approved reimbursement requests, exceed the amount listed as “Total Reimbursable Amount” in Exhibit C.
1.5. Invoices and Progress Reports. Starting one month after the execution of this Agreement, Sponsor will submit to TAMC monthly progress reports and Requests for Payments for activities conducted over the prior unbilled month. These documents will include the following specified information:
1.5.1. Invoices. Sponsor will provide TAMC with one (1) copy of all invoices submitted to Sponsor by every contractor, subcontractor, consultant, or subconsultant performing work related to the Project, timecards reflecting PGCC 9-17-25
hours invoiced for reimbursement by Sponsor’s employees and staff, and invoices supporting direct expenses billed to project by Sponsor.
1.5.2. Progress Reports. The monthly progress reports will include a brief description of the status of the Project, including the work completed to date and public outreach efforts. This summary may be included on the invoices submitted to TAMC or be attached to those invoices.
1.5.3. Allocation of Funds as Between Sponsor and TAMC. Each Request for Payment shall allocate requested funds equally between the Sponsor Contribution and TAMC Reimbursable Funds until such time as all of Sponsor’s Contribution has been exhausted. That is, for each $100 invoiced, $50 shall be paid by Sponsor’s Contribution and $50 from TAMC funds until such time as all the funds identified in the Funding Summary as Sponsor’s funds have been used.
1.5.4. Request for Payments. A Request for Payment for an amount not to exceed the total invoice(s) for the prior month, shall accompany the invoices and progress reports. Requests for Payment shall consist of a cover letter stating the time period for which reimbursement is requested, a Progress Report as detailed in section 1.5.2 above, the name of the Project, total amount requested and contact name and telephone number, as well as all invoices and progress reports for which the Sponsor requests reimbursement.
1.6. Use of Funds. Sponsor will expend funds consistent with the Project’s Scope of Work described in Exhibit A and Estimate of Cost described in Exhibit C or approved by TAMC pursuant to Section 1.2. Sponsor shall encumber the funds no later than the Project schedule as listed in Exhibit B.
1.7. Submittal of Documents. Sponsor will provide copies to TAMC of all executed contracts which relate to the Project’s Scope of Work, as described in Exhibit A, or approved by TAMC pursuant to Section 1.2. Sponsor will retain records pertaining to the Project for as long as required by law, but not less than a minimum of five (5) years following completion of the Project.
1.8. Public Outreach. Sponsor will be responsible for the development and administration of a public outreach effort to ensure public awareness and TAMC involvement in the Project development and delivery process. Sponsor will provide a copy of the public outreach plan and all materials documenting the public outreach activities, including public notices, press releases, flyers, etc. to TAMC. The public outreach plan must accompany the first invoice/ Request for Payment from the Sponsor.
PGCC 9-17-25
1.9. Cost Savings and Excess Costs
1.9.1. Cost Savings. As between Sponsor and TAMC, after the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Project has been accepted by Sponsor as complete, any positive difference between the costs, as listed in Exhibit C or approved by TAMC pursuant to Section 1.2, and the total amount paid by TAMC shall be considered cost savings. All (100%) of the cost savings will be re-credited to TAMC for re-programming by TAMC on other components of the Project or eligible Measure X projects.
1.9.2. Excess Costs. In the event the actual Project cost exceeds the estimates shown in Exhibit C, this amount will be considered an excess cost. Sponsor is solely responsible for all costs over the amounts identified in Exhibit C as reimbursable project costs.
1.10. Errors and Omissions. Sponsor shall diligently monitor and manage all aspects of the work to be performed with funding from this Agreement and shall aggressively pursue any and all remedies, including full restitution and damages from any consultant, contractor or sub-contractor and their insureds and sureties suspected of any acts, errors, or omissions committed during business activities that economically or legally damage the Project.
SECTION II
Covenants of TAMC
2.1. Funding Commitments. TAMC shall provide funding to Sponsor in an amount not to exceed One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for eligible Project costs as specified in the Funding Summary included with Exhibit C consistent with the procedures described in Section 1.5.
2.1.1. Deadline to Submit Reimbursement Requests. Requests for Payment shall be submitted to TAMC on or before 5:00 p.m. on the tenth (10th) calendar day of the month in which the Sponsor requests reimbursement payments. Copies of invoices must be complete and legible, or the Request for Payment will be returned. TAMC shall make payments to Sponsor on or before the last day of the month for all timely submittals.
2.1.2. Late Submittals. If Sponsor fails to submit invoices, documentation or progress reports, as set forth in this agreement, to TAMC in a timely manner, then TAMC may delay the reimbursement payments until the required documentation is provided.
2.1.3. Costs Ineligible for Reimbursement. In addition to any other remedy detailed herein, or otherwise afforded by law, TAMC reserves the right to PGCC 9-17-25
adjust current or future reimbursement payments to Sponsor if an invoice includes ineligible costs.
2.1.4. Reimbursement Amount. The amount of reimbursement payments to Sponsor shall be equivalent to 50% of eligible expenditures for each invoice submitted to TAMC until such time as Sponsor’s Contribution is exhausted, as specified in Exhibit C and Section 1.5.3, except as provided in 2.2., below.
2.2. Delay or Suspension of Reimbursement Payments. Notwithstanding the reimbursement provisions listed above, if TAMC determines that an invoice includes ineligible costs, lacks adequate supporting documentation, or lacks a progress report, the TAMC Project Manager or Fiscal Officer shall provide the Sponsor with a written dispute notice outlining the reason for the return and the proposed remedy, if one exists, which would make the invoice acceptable. TAMC will delay payment until within 15 days of when the revised invoice or requested documentation is received. If Sponsor disputes the TAMC finding or request, Sponsor may immediately submit a new invoice representing only the amounts which are not in dispute, while setting aside the disputed amounts for review in accordance with the provisions set forth below.
2.3 Dispute Resolution Process.
2.3.1 If at any time either party hereto is considered to have failed to meet any of the conditions included in this Agreement, the parties shall meet and confer in a good faith effort to resolve the matter. Such meet and confer shall occur within thirty (30) days of a notice from one party to the other of non-compliance.
2.3.2 If, after meeting and conferring, there is still a dispute as to compliance or non-compliance with a term or condition of the Agreement, TAMC shall refer the matter to the eXcellent Oversight Committee for its review and recommendation. Consistent with the terms of the Ralph M.
Brown Act, the eXcellent Oversight Committee meeting may be a special meeting, provided that at least 72 hours prior notice is provided to the public and an agenda is posted. After considering the matter, the eXcellent Oversight Committee may make its recommendation to the parties to resolve the matter.
2.3.3 Pending the consideration and possible resolution of the issue by the eXcellent Oversight Committee, TAMC shall withhold disputed Measure X payments to the City of Pacific Grove under this Agreement, except for allocations required for bond payments, which shall not be withheld.
2.3.4 If, after receiving the recommendation from the eXcellent Oversight Committee the parties are still in dispute over compliance or nonPGCC 9-17-25
compliance of this Agreement, the matter shall be agendized at the next available TAMC Board meeting. Each party may submit up to five (5) pages in support of its position, as part of the agenda package to be submitted for such Board meeting. If the parties are still in dispute after the TAMC Board meeting, then the disputing party may file an action in Monterey Superior Court.
2.3.5 Resumption of funding distribution to the Sponsor can occur at any time during the life of Measure X but shall only occur after full repayment of any unauthorized expenditure(s) of Measure X funds, and confirmation by TAMC of Sponsor’s compliance with each of the conditions in this Agreement. Repayment of unauthorized expenditures may not be made by future Measure X funds.
2.4. Making of Payment Does Not Result In Waiver. TAMC payments pursuant to an approved Request for Payment does not result in a waiver of the right of TAMC to require fulfillment of all terms of this Agreement.
2.5. Right to Conduct Audit. TAMC shall, at TAMC’s expense, have the right to conduct an audit of all Sponsors’ records pertaining to the Agreement at any time during construction and up to a five (5) year period after completion of the Project. If any irregularities are found as a result of an audit, Sponsor shall reimburse TAMC for the cost of the audit.
SECTION III
Mutual Covenants
3.1. Term. This Agreement shall remain in effect until discharged or terminated as provided in Section 3.2 or Section 3.16.
3.2. Discharge/Termination. This Agreement shall be subject to discharge as follows:
3.2.1. Termination by Mutual Consent This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Parties. At the time of any such mutual termination, TAMC shall be obligated to provide funding for only such Requests for Payment as may be outstanding and approved at the time of termination.
3.3. Indemnity. It is mutually understood and agreed, relative to the indemnification of TAMC and Sponsor:
3.3.1. Sponsor shall, to the full extent permitted by law, fully defend, indemnify, and hold harmless TAMC, its Board and Directors, and any officer, agent, or employee of TAMC, against any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by Sponsor under the Agreement.
PGCC 9-17-25
3.3.2. TAMC shall, to the full extent permitted by law, fully defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Sponsor, and any officer or employee of Sponsor, against any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by TAMC under the Agreement.
3.3.3. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, each party’s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party, as expressed in these Indemnification Provisions, shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement for a term to include the applicable statute of limitations related to the Sponsor’s performance pursuant to the Agreement.
3.4. Liability. As TAMC is only providing certain funds and is not the primary or responsible agency for carrying out the Project herein identified, TAMC is not liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise as a result of the acts or omissions of Sponsor or its agents, contractors, consultants, engineers, or representatives. Nor shall TAMC be liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise because of TAMC’s provision of funds which may ultimately be utilized in, but not limited to, the acquisition of, the design, implementation, or construction of the Project herein described.
3.5 Contract Administrators. Sponsor’s designated principal responsible for administering Sponsor’s work under this Agreement shall be Daniel Gho, Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager; TAMC’s designated administrator of this Agreement shall be Dave Delfino, Financial Officer. TAMC’s Project Manager under this Agreement shall be Doug Bilse, Principal Engineer.
3.6 Notices. Any notice which may be required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given by personal service, or by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth below:
TAMC
Todd Muck
Executive Director
55B Plaza Circle
Salinas, California 93901
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
Daniel Gho
Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager
300 Forest Ave
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Either Party may change its address by giving notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this Section 3.6. All notices and other communications shall be deemed communicated as of actual receipt or after the second business day after deposit in the United States mail.
3.7. Additional Acts and Documents. Each Party agrees to do all such things and take all such actions, and to make, execute and deliver such other documents and PGCC 9-17-25
instruments, as shall be reasonably requested to carry out the provisions, intent and purpose of the Agreement.
3.8. No Promise or Representation of Approval. It is expressly agreed and understood that this Agreement is to fund Project Approval and Environmental Document phase of the Project and each Party retains their full discretion to agree or disagree to terms and conditions relating to future actions with respect to the Project and that by entering into this Agreement neither TAMC nor the Sponsor is making any promise, representation or commitment to give special treatment to, or exercise its discretion favorably with respect to the final consideration and possible approval of the Project or any entitlement to develop the Project on TAMC property.
3.9. Integration. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. No representations, warranties, inducements, or oral agreements have been made by any of the Parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements.
3.10. Amendment. This Agreement may not be changed, modified, or rescinded except in writing, signed by all Parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
3.11. Independent Agency. Sponsor renders its services under this Agreement as an independent agency and TAMC is also an independent agency under the Agreement. None of the Sponsor's agents or employees shall be agents or employees of TAMC and none of TAMC’s agents or employees shall be agents or employees of Sponsor.
3.12. Assignment. The Agreement may not be assigned, transferred, hypothecated, or pledged by any Party without the express written consent of the other Party.
3.13. Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successor(s), assignee(s) or transferee(s) of TAMC or Sponsor, as the case may be. This provision shall not be construed as an authorization to assign, transfer, hypothecate or pledge this Agreement other than as provided above.
3.14. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be determined to be unenforceable, invalid, or beyond the authority of either Party to enter into or carry out, such determination shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement which shall continue in full force and effect; provided that, the remainder of this Agreement can, absent the excised portion, be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the Parties.
3.15. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by the PGCC 9-17-25
Parties; each counterpart shall be deemed an original, but all counterparts shall constitute a single document.
3.16. Survival. The following provisions in this Agreement shall survive discharge:
3.16.1. Sponsor. As to Sponsor, the following sections shall survive discharge: Section 1.6 (obligation to apply funds to Project), Section 1.7 (obligation to provide copies and retain records), Section 1.8 (obligation to continue to manage Project).
3.16.2. TAMC. As to TAMC, the following section shall survive discharge:
Section 2.5 (right to conduct audit).
3.16.3. Both Parties. As to both Parties, the following sections shall survive discharge: Section 3. (indemnity) and Section 3.4 (liability), until the expiration of all relevant statutes of limitations.
3.17. Limitation. All obligations of TAMC under the terms of this Agreement are expressly contingent upon TAMC’s continued authorization to administer the reimbursable funds identified in the Funding Summary included with Exhibit B. If for any reason, TAMC’s right or ability to collect or expend such funds are terminated or suspended in whole or part so that it materially affects TAMC’s ability to fund the Project, TAMC shall promptly notify Sponsor, and the Parties shall consult on a course of action. If, after twenty-five (25) working days, a course of action is not agreed upon by the Parties, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated by mutual or joint consent. Any future obligation to fund this Project or any other project or projects of Sponsor, not already specifically covered by a separate Agreement, shall arise only upon execution of a new Agreement.
3.18. Time. Time is and shall be of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions in which performance is a factor.
3.19. Remedies Cumulative. No remedy or election of remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be deemed exclusive but shall be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. Each remedy shall be construed to give the fullest effect allowed by law.
3.20. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Monterey County.
3.21. Captions. The captions in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not a part of this Agreement. The captions do not in any way limit or amplify the provisions of this Agreement and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of its provisions.
PGCC 9-17-25
3.22. No Continuing Waiver. The waiver by any Party of any breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same, or of any other provision of this Agreement.
3.23. No Rights in Third Parties. Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer any rights or remedies on any third-party, nor is anything in this Agreement intended to relieve or discharge the obligation or liability of any third-party to any Party to this Agreement, nor shall any provision of this Agreement give any thirdparty any right of subrogation or action over or against any Party to this Agreement.
3.24. Signatory’s Warranty. Each Party warrants to each other that he or she is fully authorized and competent to enter into this Agreement in the capacity indicated by his or her signature and agrees to be bound by this Agreement as of the day and year first mentioned above upon the execution of this Agreement by each other Party.
PGCC 9-17-25
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above.
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR
MONTEREY COUNTY:
By: _____________________________
Todd Muck
Executive Director, TAMC
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE:
By: __________________________
Bill Peake
Mayor, Pacific Grove
Approved as to form:
By: ___________________________
Robert Brayer
TAMC Counsel
Approved as to form:
By: _________________________
Brian Pierik
City Attorney, Pacific Grove
PGCC 9-17-25
EXHIBIT A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION and SCOPE OF WORK
Project Name: Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvements Project Contact: Daniel Gho, Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager, City of Pacific Grove
Project Manager: Daniel Gho, Public Works Director / Deputy City Manager, City of Pacific Grove
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Responsible Agency: City of Pacific Grove
Project Limits: The project will construct safety and multi-modal improvements at the Congress, Sunset, & Cedar 5-way intersection south to 19th and Sunset (Pacific Grove).
Project Phase: Project Approval and Environmental Document This phase of work includes developing the Project Approval and Environmental Document. After a thorough community and public input process and reaching the 100% design milestone, the Pacific Grove City Council may exercise its discretionary authority to proceed into the construction phase of the project.
Project Purpose:
This intersection is a dangerous 5-way intersection that is near the Pacific Grove High School and Forest Grove Elementary School. The purpose of this project is to design and construct an intersection that is safe for all users.
Transportation Benefit:
Improved circulation, especially when school is out for the day. There is potential for a large development nearby for housing and a redesign of the intersection will improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle traffic.
PGCC 9-17-25
SCOPE OF WORK
The Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvement project is a multi-year, multimillion-dollar project that the City of Pacific Grove anticipates using the full $5 million TAMC Regional Project Measure X allocation that is earmarked for the Pacific Grove segment of the Highway 68 corridor. The City anticipates harnessing the first $1 million in FY22/23 for a segment of the scope of work noted below. This large-scale project will take several years to complete. The full project scope of work is noted below; moreover, the schedule in Exhibit B provides the tasks the City plans to complete in FY22/23.
This multi-year project allows for the design, permitting, environmental review and construction of safety and multi-modal improvements at the Cedar, Sunset & Congress 5-way intersection. This project was identified via the Highway 68 Corridor Study conducted in conjunction with the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) in 2016.
The Cedar, Sunset & Congress Intersection Improvement project will include a robust public feedback process, engineering, environmental review, a cooperative agreement with Caltrans for the proposed improvements, and after implementation, a maintenance agreement with Caltrans for post construction maintenance.
PGCC 9-17-25
EXHIBIT B
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE
Fall 2022 – Formalize Funding
o Execute Funding Agreement with approval from TAMC Board & Pacific Grove City Council
Winter 2022 - Spring 2023: Design
o Prepare and release RFP for planning & design services o Retain consultant
o Perform ICE study
o Submit CAL trans PID application
o Develop conceptual design options
Summer 2023 – Public Outreach & Feedback on Design Options o Perform robust public outreach on design options
o Obtain Pacific Grove City Council & TAMC Board feedback on design options
o Continue coordination with Caltrans on permitting
Fall 2023 – Winter 2024 – Environmental Permitting
o Conduct CEQA analysis
o Public review CEQA
Spring 2024 – Summer 2024 – Pre-Construction
o Finalize construction drawings & bidding documents
o Release bid
o Award construction contract
o Begin conversation with Caltrans regarding maintenance of intersection improvements
Fall 2024 – Summer 2026: Construction
o Construction to occur per drawings & specifications
o Finalize maintenance agreement with Caltrans
PGCC 9-17-25
EXHIBIT C
PROJECT ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST AND FUNDING SUMMARY
FUNDING SUMMARY
Project Phase Fund
Source
Fiscal
Year
Amount Reimbursable
by TAMC
Under This
Agreement?
Funding
Secured?
Project Approval
and Environmental
Document
Measure X 2022/23 $1,000,000 Yes Yes
Total Reimbursable Amount: $1,000,000
Total Cost: $1,000,000 Yes
PGCC 9-17-25
Scope of Improvements
l © 2023 GHD. All rights reserved.
PGCC 9-17-25
Agenda No. 13 A
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
MEETING DATE: September 17, 2025
SUBJECT: Responsibilities and Authority of the Historic Resources Committee CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to bring back to council a conceptual model that addresses two areas of concern discussed below.
DISCUSSION
Background
As part of the discussion about merging the Historic Resources Committee and Architectural Review Board, it is a good time to review the responsibilities and authorities of the HRC. Two stand out as needing Council review as to appropriateness. Suggested corrections are marked as cross outs and alternative wording is included in red.
1. The power to appoint citizens to Boards and Commissions belongs to the Mayor. Currently, the charter of the Historic Resources Committee hands that authority to a community organization, the Heritage Society. Changing this to allow the Heritage Society to nominate potential member(s) for the Mayor’s appointment is consistent with two other BCC’s practices. “The Historic Resources Committee consists of five members appointed to staggered terms of two years who demonstrate interest and knowledge of historic preservation and cultural resources. One of the members shall be a licensed architect with preservation experience, landscaping architect, engineer, or architectural historian, or be a licensed general contractor with preservation experience. , and one shall be a representative of the Pacific Grove Heritage Society (Heritage Society shall appoint its member). The Heritage Society may nominate a member for one of the seats on the Committee.”
2. Inclusion in the Historic Resources Inventory may add or subtract value from a property and should be disclosed to a property’s buyer upon sale as being pertinent to the value of the property.
To include a property on the Inventory without the owner’s consent can add complications, cost and negatively impact the value of that property. Perhaps, in practice, property owners are consulted, or notified but this section says that the owner has no say. “Inclusion on the Inventory is based on the criteria listed in Municipal Code Section 23.76.025 and is not limited to a specific year of construction. The PGCC 9-17-25
Section 23.76.025 and is not limited to a specific year of construction. The consent of the property owner is not required for inclusion on the Inventory. The Pacific Grove Historic Context Statement, Guidelines for Historic Assessment, and Historic Resources Inventory can be found on the City's Historic Resources webpage: Historic Resources”
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
None.
OPTIONS
1. Leave one or more of the areas of concern as they stand
2. Provide alternative intent and wording
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact.
GOAL ALIGNMENT: Not Applicable.
PGCC 9-17-25
Agenda No. 14 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: September 17, 2025
SUBJECT: Hopkins Marine Station Update
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation.
Attachments
PPT
PGCC 9-17-25
HOPKINS MARINE STATION
Community Brief
Prepared for: City Council, City of Pacific Grove
September 17, 2025
Earth. Climate. Society.
Bill Sherrod
Associate Director
Hopkins Marine Station
PGCC 9-17-25
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 2 2
Three Perspectives
Past, Present, and Future
Hopkins has a 130-year legacy of
scientific breakthroughs in
marine biology and ecology.
Today, Hopkins is Stanford’s
gateway to the sea, home to
faculty from Oceans and Biology.
Our future is as a nexus of discovery,
technology, and solutions in impact
areas benefiting our community and
humanity.
PGCC 9-17-25
3 A History Intertwined
Here Because of Pacific Grove
How destiny manifests
• Louis Agassiz, champion of experiential learning
and direct observation of nature.
• The Pacific Grove Methodist Retreat
• The Chautauqua Movement and the Summer
School of Science
• David Starr Jordan, Stanford University’s first
president and former student of Agassiz
• The gift of Point Aulon
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 3
PGCC 9-17-25
Hopkins Marine Station Through the Years
Evolution of the Campus
1892 1917 1928 1931 1946 1963 1967 1989 1994 2004 2015 2022 Today https://seaside.stanford.edu
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 4
PGCC 9-17-25
5 C.B. van Niel established the universal biochemical equation for photosynthesis, unifying a core concept in biology that is now textbook knowledge worldwide.
Hopkins scientists discovered that the collapse of the Cannery Row sardine fishing industry resulted from the combined pressures of intense overfishing and natural climate cycles.
Pioneering research at the station isolated and identified the fundamental chemical components of bioluminescence which explains how living organisms produce light.
Discovered that physical stresses and biological competition create distinct bands of life along the rocky shoreline, establishing the core ecological principles of intertidal zonation.
Hopkins scientists revealed the unique warm-blooded physiology and elite swimming biomechanics of tuna, uncovering the secrets to their power and endurance.
Hopkins Marine Station Through the Years
Groundbreaking Discoveries
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 5
PGCC 9-17-25
6 Conservation management in marine protected areas help kelp forests survive marine heatwaves by supporting predator populations that control destructive sea urchins.
Developed nanoscale sensors use light to identify DNA shed by organisms into the environment; this allows scientists to identify species present in an area from a simple sample of water enable adaptive forecasting for biosystem sustainability.
Researchers are studying how underwater waves move cold, deep water up to the ocean surface replenishing nutrients for marine photosynthesizers, which in turn remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and provide nutrients for coral reef resilience.
Hopkins Marine Station Today
Groundbreaking Discoveries
Researching carbon cycling in kelp forests to better understanding the ability of kelp to sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and respond to climate stressors.
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 6
PGCC 9-17-25
Hopkins Marine Station Today
A Coastal Dependent Campus
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 7
Growth Limited
• 11.98 acres
• Archeological Significance
• 13 buildings
• Over 70,700 GSF
• Within Local Coastal Plan
• Vulnerable to sea rise
PGCC 9-17-25
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 8
Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability
From Idea to Impact at Global Scale
The Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability
advances knowledge, solutions, and impact
through research and education
to create a thriving, enduring future
for humanity and the planet.
For life on Earth.
Forever.
PGCC 9-17-25
9 Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability
A New School is Launched
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 9
139 5 2
Faculty from all
7 Schools
Existing
Departments
New Departments
Launched
2 Institutes
2 Sustainability Campuses
Accelerator Created
Advisory Council
Established
3 Interdisciplinary
Programs
1 1
PGCC 9-17-25
10 Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability
An Impact-Driven Approach to a School
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 10
PGCC 9-17-25
11 Hopkins Marine Station Faculty
Leaders in Biology and Ocean Sciences
Fiorenza Micheli
Vanessa Barone
Barbara Block
Larry Crowder
Giulio DeLeo
Mark Denny
Robin Elahi
William Gilly
Jeremy Goldbogen
Chris Lowe
Stephen Palumbi
Stuart Thompson
Ayelet Voskoboynik
Brooke Weigel
September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 11
PGCC 9-17-25
Protecting Our Ecosystem
Science and Conservation
Interdependence of Science and Conservation
• Hopkins Marine Life Refuge established in 1931
• Area of Special Biological Significance in 1974
• Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge in 1984
• Lovers Point-Julia Platt State Marine Reserve in 2007 September 17, 2025 | Community Brief 12
PGCC 9-17-25
Thank you
PGCC 9-17-25