Pinole City Council
April 18, 2023

PINOLE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL
Devin T. Murphy, Mayor
Maureen Toms, Mayor Pro Tem
Cameron Sasai, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member

TUESDAY
April 18, 2023
5:00 P.M
Please note: HYBRID MEETING FORMAT
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below How to Submit Public Comments:

In Person: Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.

Via Zoom:

Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.

From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89335000272
Webinar ID: 893 3500 0272
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 3 minutes to speak (subject to modification by the Mayor)
• Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.

When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.

Written Comments: All comments received before 3:00 pm the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website on the agenda page (Agenda Page Link) and provided to the City Council prior to the meeting. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting.

CORONAVIRUS ADVISORY
INFORMATION:

CLICK HERE for City Updates
CLICK HERE for County Updates
1 of 395
City Council
Agenda – April 18, 2023

Email comments to [email protected] Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.

Please note: Updated COVID-19 safety protocols will be posted outside the City Council Chambers. Please review this information before entering the Council Chambers.

OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following Thursday at 6:00 p.m. The Community TV Channel 26 schedule is published on the city’s website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us.

VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.ci.pinole.ca.us. and remain archived on the site for five (5) years.

If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact the City Clerk, Heather Bell at (510) 724-8928 or [email protected] .

Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.

Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected] .

Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
2 of 395
Pinole City Council
Agenda –April 18, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Manager Murray, City Attorney Casher, Human Services Director Shell
Employee organization: All groups
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1)
Number of Potential Cases: 1

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE

COVERSHEET OF THE AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments

1. Planning Commission [Action: Consider Appointments (Bell)] C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
3 of 395
City Council
Agenda – April 18, 2023

E. City Manager Report / Department Staff

F. City Attorney Report

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations

1. National Arbor Day

2. Arab American Heritage Month

3. Earth Day
B. Presentations
None

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Minutes of the March 28, 2023 Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting and the Minutes of the April 4, 2023 meeting.

B. Receive the April 1, 2023 – April 14, 2023 – List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,751,614.89 and the April 14, 2023, Payroll in the Amount of $ 473,889.10.

C. Approval of House Moving Permit [Action: Adopt resolution per staff recommendation (Mishra)]
D. Resolution of Local Support for OBAG 3 Grant Program [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Kaur)]
E. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Fourth Amendment to the Agreement with Client First Technology Consulting to Provide Professional Support Services During the Upgrade and Migration of the Permit Tracking and Online Application System and Appropriate Funding [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)]
F. Resolution of Support for Contra Costa County and the Inflation Reduction Act Conference [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Rogers)] G. Adopt A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement With CDW-G to Purchase Mobile Digital Computers (MDC) and Related Equipment to Replace Current MDCS at a Total Cost of $135,363 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Gang)
H. Approval Of Financial and Investment Policies for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Guillory) 4 of 395
City Council
Agenda – April 18, 2023

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.

None

11. OLD BUSINESS
None

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Traffic and Pedestrian Safety (TAPS) Committee Report [Discuss and Provide Direction (Mishra)]
B. City Road Condition and Pavement Management Program Update [Discuss and Provide Direction (Mishra)]
C. City Council Salaries and Benefits [Discuss and Provide Direction Provide Direction (Bell)]

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of April 18, 2023 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, and on the City’s website, not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda.
________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
POSTED: April 13, 2023 at 2:30 pm
5 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
FROM: HEATHER BELL, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS

RECOMMENDATION
Consider Interview Subcommittee recommendation and approval of three (3) appointments to the Pinole Planning Commission.

BACKGROUND
The Pinole Planning Commission is a seven-member panel of Pinole residents who take action on development requests and make policy recommendations to the City Council. Currently there are four (4) vacancies on the Planning Commission following the resignation of Simon Wong on March 31, 2022 and the upcoming expiration of (3) three seats with terms expiring on April 30, 2023 On December 19, 2022 an announcement was made to the public that a recruitment period was open and applications would be accepted by the office of the City Clerk.

The recruitment period was subsequently extended twice. In total, four (4) applications were received from Gabriel Sandoval, John Bender, Christy LamJulian, and Pamela Patzlaff. Franke Martinez (Incumbent) confirmed his interest in being considered for re-appointment.

The City Council will consider making appointments to the Planning Commission for the following term, in accordance with the Pinole Municipal Code. • Four (4) seats with a term that will expire on April 30, 2027 The Interview Subcommittee interviewed all five(5) candidates, on March 1, April 10, and April 11, 2023. The recommendation of the subcommittee is to appoint Franke Martinez, Christy Lam-Julian and John Bender to the Planning Commission.

The subcommittee recommends that the City Clerk continue recruitment efforts for the fourth seat until filled.
7B1
6 of 395
April 18, 2023 2

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Planning Commission Roster
B. Applications
7 of 395
2022-2023 ROSTER

PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission meets at 7 PM on the 4th Monday each month except when there is a holiday conflict. Additional meetings are held as needed.

1. Simon Wong
Term expires 4/30/2023
Resigned in 2022
Franke Martinez, Vice Chair
Term expires 4/30/2023

2. Adam Benzuly
Term expires 4/30/2024
Ann Moriarty, Chair
Term expires 4/30/2023

3. Rafael Menis
Term expires 4/30/2024

7. David Kurrent
Term expires 4/30/2023

4. Timothy J. Banuelos
Term expires 4/30/2024 Chair & Vice Chair Effective term:

May-April 30
Development Review Subcommittee:

Updated as of 11-10-2021 (Chair /Vice Chair Effective April)

ATTACHMENT B

CITY OF PINOLE

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE APPLICATION
COMMISSION/COMMITTEE APPLICATION: Thank you for your interest in a City Commission or Committee. To apply, you will need to complete the entire application (using N/A where items do not apply). All applications will be kept on file for one year only and applicants will be notified of any openings. Planning Commission and Community Service Commission members must be residents of the City of Pinole, and TAPS members shall be residents or business owners in Pinole. *This application must be accompanied with the separate supplemental questionnaire for the Commission/Committee for which you are applying. Please check applicable box below.

Planning Commission (PMC Chapter 2.40)*
Community Services Commission (PMC Chapter 2.36)*
Traffic & Pedestrian Safety Committee (R-2007-14)*
Fowler House Re-Use Committee (R-2018 -67)
Completed application packets must be filed with the City Clerk’s Office, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California 94564.

APPLICANT’S NAME: ________________________________________________________________ Last First M.I.

ADDRESS:

TELEPHONE:

BUSINESS ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________ BUSINESS TELEPHONE: __________________________________
EMAIL ADDRESS: _ _________________________________

1. How long have you been a Pinole resident? ________________

2. Are you registered to vote in Pinole? ______

3. Are you currently serving on any Commission or Committee? ______

4. Do you have a relative/household member who is: (a) City employee? ______ (b) City Council Member? ______ Or (c) Commission/Committee Member? ______ City of Pinole Commission / Committee Application /Date: ________ Applicant Name: ________________________

5. Have you ever attended any meetings of the Commission/Committee for which you are applying? ______ If so, number of times? ______

6. If applicable, why did you attend the meeting (e.g., personal interest or specific issue)? _______________________________________________________________________________

7. List your current occupation. Also list any work history related to the position you are seeking:
_______________________________________________________________________________

8. List educational background related to the position you are seeking: _______________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

9. Describe the community activities, volunteer experience and/or civic organizations in which you participate: _____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________

10. Describe your style of working with others on a committee: ____________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________

11. Describe how you might recommend policy or approach the City Council: _________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ I understand that if appointed, I must complete the California Fair Political Practices Commission Statement of Economic Interests, a public document, Form 700, and complete the Ethics Training pursuant to AB1234.
_______________________________________________ _______________________________ (Signature) (Date)
Attachment: Supplemental Questionnaire
s:\commissions\apps & supplemental, recruitments\planning commission supplemental questionnaire.doc

PLANNING COMMISSION

SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE
Name: ____________________________________________ Home Phone: _____________________________ Email Address: _ _ Cell Phone: ___________
Address: _____________________ City: _________________ Zip: ________________ ESSAY QUESTIONS (please attach a separate sheet of paper for your answers and sign your name at the end)
• What do you view as the role of the planning commission? Why did you apply/or why are you reapplying?
• How much time each week are you willing to commit to this task? For incumbents, what has been your attendance record?
• It is predictable in the planning environment for the commissioners to have diverse opinions on the various issues. How do you feel these conflicts of opinion should be resolved? • By ordinance, the planning commission is charged with the responsibility of bringing new issues and concerns to the attention of the Council. How do you propose the planning commission identify these issues and concerns?
• Give one example of a personal experience that demonstrates your past experience working in a group decision making environment.
• As a member of the planning commission, you are an extension of the “City” and are charged with protecting the best interests of the City. How will you handle a situation where your personal opinions or beliefs are in conflict with the direction you are instructed to pursue by the Council? • As redevelopment occurs, what three potential impacts on the character of the community do you deem to be of greatest concern and why?
I understand, if appointed, I must complete the California Fair Political Practices Commission Statement of Economic Interests, a public document, Form 700, and complete Ethics Training pursuant to AB 1234.
_______________________________________ _________________________________ Signature Date
Completed applications and supplemental questionnaire documents must be returned to the City Clerk’s Office, City Hall, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, CA 94564. Please attach a response sheet with signature and date.

You will be notified either by e-mail or phone for the oral interview date and time.

Gabriel Sandoval
Planning Commission Supplemental Questionnaire
What do you view as the role of the planning commission? Why did you apply/or why are you reapplying?
I believe the role of the Planning Commission is to work with the City Council, City Officials, and the community to be the architects of the long-term direction of the city. The Planning Commission works to develop multi-year plans for growth, economic development, and housing.

The Planning Commission should also ensure that the projects it reviews are in the best interest of the city and its people. The Planning Commission should also ensure that new projects approved by the city are equitable in their design and take into consideration the various aspect that may affect residents.

I am applying for a role on the Planning Commission because I would like to be more involved in the community and more engaged with our civic leaders. I think I would bring a unique perspective to the commission that adds another voice to the discussion table.

How much time each week are you willing to commit to this task? For incumbents, what has been your attendance record?
I am willing to commit as much time as needed to the task. I would plan to attend all scheduled meetings and attend additional meetings as needed.

It is predictable in the planning environment for the commissioners to have diverse opinions on the various issues. How do you feel these conflicts of opinion should be resolved?
Yes, I believe that a commission should have diverse opinions on various issues across the city and politics. I would not expect everyone to be able to easily agree on every subject matter. I think that these conflicts should be resolved through calm and respectful discussions on the matter that are inclusive to all the voices on the commission and the community. I believe that everyone on the commission should be able to discuss these issues in good faith to understand each other’s perspectives and then come to a consensus on the best course of action for the city and its residents.

By ordinance, the planning commission is charged with the responsibility of bringing new issues and concerns to the attention of the Council. How do you propose the planning commission identify these issues and concerns? There are two ways that the Planning Commission can bring issues to the City Council. The first way is through the lived experiences of the commissioners or concerns that they have noticed in the community. As residents of Pinole, each commissioner will bring their perspective on what issues need to be addressed. The second way that I think the commission can get input is by listening to what the needs of the community are through comments in meetings or surveys from residents. Community members will raise their concerns and the Planning Commission should lend an ear to do what is best for Pinole.

Give one example of a personal experience that demonstrates your past experience working in a group decision making environment.

When I was a leader of an academic organization, I facilitated meetings with other members of the organization and come to decisions for what was best for the team. I would regularly meet with other lead members within the organization and whenever there was a discussion item I would ensure that all members had a chance to speak. It could be difficult at times, whenever a discussion item was controversial, but I ensured to maintain a calm and respectful discussion.

As a member of the planning commission, you are an extension of the “City” and are charged with protecting the best interests of the City. How will you handle a situation where your personal opinions or beliefs are in conflict with the direction you are instructed to pursue by the Council?
As a commissioner, the interests of the City and the Council will go above all else. If my personal beliefs are against the intended direction of the Council, I will do my best to support the Council and the City. I understand the requirements of the role, and how I may need to put my personal beliefs aside. My professional role also requires discipline between the role and my personal opinions.

As redevelopment occurs, what three potential impacts on the character of the community do you deem to be of greatest concern and why? A concern to the character of the city is the rise of NIMBY sentiments across other cities. While new housing developments may take time, I would not want the community to be described as NIMBYs. I think there must also be a balance and caution with the speed of new developments to avoid the community being labeled as gentrifiers. I think the Planning Commission, alongside the City Council, must have a holistic review of new projects to ensure equity and sustainability, Another impact I think is of concern is the city being seen as outdated. I would not want the community or the city to have a negative connotation with its infrastructure. I believe the Planning Commission should make its best effort to improve the city with the resources it has. I would not want older infrastructure, contrasted with new developments, to have the character of the community feel or be seen as antiquated.

A final character of the city that can be of concern is Pinole having a reputation as being a “sleepy town”. I think that Pinole is much more and has a lot of great things to offer.

Redevelopment needs to be balanced in the way it brings new economic development, alongside with meeting the wants and needs of the community. I think that by listening to the Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

JOINT CITY COUNCIL and PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING

MINUTES
March 28, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Murphy called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov. Code § 87105.

A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Devin Murphy, Mayor
Maureen Toms, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Cameron Sasai, Council Member

COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT
Anthony Tave, Council Member

PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Ann Moriarty, Chairperson
Frankie Martinez, Vice Chairperson*
Tim Banuelos, Commissioner
David Kurrent, Commissioner
Rafael Menis, Commissioner
*Teleconference Location with Vice Chairperson Martinez reporting he had a disability and could not be present in the Council Chambers and sit for over 25-minutes, and no one else was present at his location.

PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
Adam Benzuly, Commissioner
9A
28 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

B. STAFF PRESENT
Andrew Murray, City Manager
Alex Mog, Assistant City Attorney
Neil Gang, Police Chief
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director
David Hanham, Planning Manager
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone announced the agenda had been posted on Friday, March 24, 2023 at 4:00 p.m. with all legally required written notices. No written comments had been received in advance of the meeting.

Following an inquiry, the Council and the Planning Commission reported no conflicts with any items on the agenda.

4. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Anthony Vossbrink, Pinole, suggested the City Council had failed to be open and transparent and announce webinar information for the meeting prior to the start of the meeting or post the information on Pinole Community Television (PCTV), which issue had been raised on multiple occasions. On another matter, he requested a formal discussion of positioning a satellite police station somewhere in the Fitzgerald Drive corridor as a future agenda item given the increase in crime and safety issues in that area. He reported that crime statistics on the police blotter were all around and related to Fitzgerald Drive. As an example, a recent incident on Simas Avenue involved multiple law enforcement vehicles at a high rate of speed which posed a safety hazard to the community.

5. BUSINESS
A. Overview of City of Pinole Land Use Policy/Regulation Documents [Action:

Receive Overview (Mog)]
Assistant City Attorney Mog provided a PowerPoint presentation on the land use policy in the City of Pinole that included an overview of the City’s General Plan and the Community Character, Growth Management, Land Use & Economic Development, Housing, Circulation, Community Services & Facilities, Health & Safety, Natural Resources and Open Space and Sustainability Elements of the General Plan; Three Corridors Specific Plan; Zoning Ordinance and Design Guidelines.

The General Plan Land Use Map, General Plan Land Use Designations, Density in Pinole, number of units per acre and Affordable Housing 101, housing that was required to be rented/sold at affordable prices to households with qualifying incomes were all highlighted 29 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commissioner Menis asked of the median income for the City of Pinole for 2022. He commented for the General Plan Land Use Designation, 15 percent had been identified for transportation and he asked if that had taken into account the WestCAT yard.

Assistant City Attorney Mog did not have the median income information for 2022 but he and Planning Manager David Hanham clarified the WestCAT yard would be identified as Public Quasi/Institutional Zoning.

Planning Commissioner Menis reported on ex parté communications and reported he had sent out a message about the meeting to his email list and had received no replies.

Council member Martinez-Rubin wanted to discuss the trends and the fact that local jurisdictions would have less discretion where construction occurred, which question had been raised by constituents as well as how that would affect local staff’s ability to determine what could be built in the City. Since 2017, she had noticed the attempt by state legislators to create greater opportunities for developers to build in the Suburban Residential Zone where most Single-Family homes were located. She asked if that was an accurate observation.

Assistant City Attorney Mog confirmed the state had made it easier to build certain types of projects in family neighborhoods but had also pushed to make it easier to build everywhere. Most of the larger projects in Pinole that had recently been approved involved density bonuses, which allowed a developer to go above the maximum density allowed in an area or waive certain standards, and those laws had been used more frequently in the state.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked whether a Single-Family dwelling located in a Suburban Residential Zone could be razed and built with apartments regardless of height, as an example.

Assistant City Attorney Mog explained that depending on the zoning, an Administrative Permit could be obtained to demolish a residence and one may be able to build multiple units, but there were limits on what could be built pursuant to state regulations. In most situations, it would not result in major high-rise apartment building development.

Mayor Murphy asked how the City had decided its zoning policies and how cities currently considered Zoning Ordinance processes.

Assistant City Attorney Mog described the public review process that would be similar to the Housing Element Update. While the City’s Zoning Ordinance had last been updated comprehensively in 2010, there had been amendments over the years and he offered examples and noted that the changes had generally been City Council directed.

Community Development Director Lilly Whalen stated the City Council may direct the wholesale update of the Zoning Ordinance but there was an opportunity in the next year to review the Three Corridors Specific Plan to make objective standards. Staff had captured areas of the Zoning Ordinance where interpretations over the years had been made or where there were inconsistencies which could be brought forward at the same time. Depending on the changes to be made, the City Council may want to consider a wholesale update to the Zoning Ordinance.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
30 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
B. Overview of Major Recent State Housing Laws (SB 9, SB 6, AB 2011 and AB 2097) [Action: Receive Overview (Mog)]
Assistant City Attorney Mog provided a PowerPoint presentation which included an overview of Density Bonus Laws including the criteria for Senate Bill (SB) 9, the California Home Act, which overrode existing density limits in Single-Family zones and was intended to support increased supply of starter, modestly priced homes by encouraging building of smaller houses on small lots.

Assembly Bill (AB) 2011 and SB 6 were new laws that allowed housing on sites where office, retail, or parking were a principley permitted use but which could not be adjacent to an industrial site. AB 2011 provided a streamlined ministerial approval pathway comparable to SB 35 for qualifying multifamily projects on commercially-zoned land that paid prevailing wages for construction work and met specified affordable housing targets. SB 6 did not create a ministerial approval process but projects were subject to the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) and the standard California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, with the projects to have a minimum density requirement of 30 units to the acre. For both laws, projects must comply with various other development standards for the site and the project. Examples were provided.

AB 2097 prohibited public agencies or cities from imposing a minimum automobile parking requirement on most development projects within a half-mile radius of a major transit stop.

Planning Commissioner Banuelos commented that as an architect he was familiar with the building of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and he recalled some cities had massive development fees until the state prohibited development fees. He asked the Assistant City Attorney to provide clarification.

Assistant City Attorney Mog explained that ADU laws allowed some objective standards and the City had an ADU Ordinance. He reported the State Attorney General had sued some bad actors who had not complied with SB 9 or ADU laws but the Attorney General and the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) had limited resources.

Community Development Director Whalen added that during the current Housing Element process, HCD was looking at the ADU Ordinances that had been adopted by cities, which were required to be submitted to the state after adoption, and HCD had flagged issues that required rectification.

Planning Commissioner Kurrent asked whether the 800 square-foot standard for an ADU was a minimum or maximum number and Assistant City Attorney Mog stated the City had to allow at least an 800 square-foot ADU unit.

Planning Commissioner Kurrent asked for clarification with respect to AB 2011 and SB 6 as it related to the development of the former Kmart site. He understood pursuant to the current legislation that residential by-right was allowed on commercial property and was informed by Assistant City Attorney Mog that was accurate in that the Kmart project was also required to comply with setback and other requirements.
31 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commissioner Menis asked what SB 35 and SB 330 covered, to which Assistant City Attorney Mog explained that SB 35 streamlined housing construction in the counties and cities that failed to build enough housing to meet state mandated housing construction requirements.

SB 330 shortened the timeframe for housing development approval under the Permit Streamlining Act pursuant to the criteria of the HAA.

Community Development Director Whalen added that development impact fees would be locked in. She noted that the Appian Village project was an SB 330 project.

Planning Commissioner Menis spoke to the criteria for SB 9 and the parking restrictions and asked for clarification.

Assistant City Attorney Mog again walked through the parking restrictions as shown in the PowerPoint presentation, which required a maximum of one parking space per unit except no parking space would be required if within one-half mile of a high-quality transit corridor or major transit stop, an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours, and within one block of a car share vehicle. State law included a definition of how that qualified, which was not a new regulation.

Planning Commissioner Menis again spoke to AB 2011 and SB 6 and the Kmart project and his understanding that often a developer may use density bonuses to get the changes desired rather than go through the legislative process. He asked why a developer would choose to comply with AB 2011 and SB 6 rather than just build a higher density project and reap the profits without having to comply with the regulations.

Assistant City Attorney Mog clarified that a density bonus could still be used with SB 6 and AB 2011 projects. If a project complied with AB 2011, it would require ministerial approval and would not require CEQA review saving time and money for a developer, and depending on the time a city may take for processing may offset the prevailing wage costs. He noted the Kmart developer had been able to use that legislation since residential was an allowed use on the site subject to some conditions.

Community Development Director Whalen clarified the site adjacent to Kmart, the former Best Buy, was in a Regional Commercial (RC) Zone and would not allow Residential as an allowed use as currently zoned.

Planning Commissioner Menis spoke to the requirements of AB 2097 and asked of the requirements for public transit for the intersection of two plus lines with 15-minute headways and if that meant headways had also taken into consideration the reliability of those headways or just the stated time, and Assistant City Attorney Mog clarified that would be “published” headways.

Planning Commission Vice Chairperson Martinez further clarified the criteria of SB 9 and the development of ADUs and asked how many lots in Pinole had been identified that met the criteria for ADUs.

Community Development Director Whalen clarified the minimum lot size for SB 9 projects was 1,200 square feet with a quarter of an acre in the 12,000 square-foot range. 32 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Assistant City Attorney Mog also clarified that any lot that was 2,400 square feet in size could be split in half into two 1,200 square-foot lots.

Planning Manager David Hanham reported that based on research of 10,000 square-foot lots, in Pinole there were around 150 lots that met the criteria but staff was still putting that information together.

Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty spoke to SB 9 and asked whether there were any locations in Pinole that were in the earthquake fault zone, in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or could be impacted by sea level rise that could be under the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Floodplain.

Community Development Director Whalen reported a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone was located in the valley area.

Planning Manager Hanham identified a small earthquake fault along Pinole Valley Road, specifically around 2801 Pinole Valley Road, although no one had identified where the fault started and stopped.

Assistant City Attorney Mog stated with respect to flood and High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, an SB 9 project could still be built in those areas but must address additional issues.

Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty clarified with staff pursuant to the Climate Central Maps that the City of Pinole would not be impacted by sea level rise at this point. As to the projects not subject to CEQA review, she asked if that posed a potential threat to the City and the environment.

Assistant City Attorney Mog commented that impacts from infill housing were different from other projects and any project could have impacts that must be considered individually.

Community Development Director Whalen explained that the projects would still be required to obtain building permits and comply with state building codes and fire protections.

Council member Sasai asked whether there were any unintended consequences with Short-Term Rentals (STRs) that SB 9 was trying to prevent, and Assistant City Attorney Mog explained the legislators’ intent of the legislation was as previously described.

Community Development Director Whalen added that the intent of SB 9 was to contribute to the housing stock and not to the hotel industry.

Council member Sasai asked whether there was any data related to complaints associated with STRs in Pinole, to which Community Development Director Whalen reported there had been under five complaints during her tenure with the City.

Council member Sasai asked for an update of the legislative efforts to update SB 9, and Assistant City Attorney Mog commented that every year the Legislature proposed new laws, some of which had become law, and he provided some examples.
33 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Council member Martinez-Rubin spoke to the criteria for SB 9 and asked about the type of alterations that could or could not be made to a residence and how those alterations were gauged and measured.

Assistant City Attorney Mog detailed the specific measures that could be considered such as more than 25 percent of the exterior walls could not be demolished. The intent was that alterations not be done to the basic unit that would change the structure from what had been a three-bedroom house to something else, as an example, and he again clarified the criteria for SB 9.

Council member Martinez-Rubin also clarified with the Assistant City Attorney the definition of STRs was “less than 30-days.”
Mayor Pro Tem Toms spoke to the development fees for ADUs and asked for clarification on the fees that could be charged.

Assistant City Attorney Mog clarified that if under 750 square feet in size, the City could not charge any impact fees but there was potentially an exception for a sewer connection fee. If above 750 square feet in size, the fee must be proportionate to the size of the Single-Family home.

Mayor Murphy again clarified the traditional approval process for a project that had been impacted by state legislation which limited local controls. He asked staff how the public was being informed of those projects that were being approved ministerially.

Assistant City Attorney Mog explained the City currently did not have a process for that but the City Council may consider how it wanted to handle that situation and create new processes. The City’s website could be used to post major updates but no mailers had been mailed to the public for items that did not involve a public hearing. Some cities held a Town Hall or workshop on projects that involved ministerial approval, but that could be misleading to the public. It was up to the City Council how to address that issue.

Community Development Director Whalen suggested through the process of developing objective standards the City could ensure robust community input.

Mayor Murphy suggested testing what a ministerial approval looked like in the City of Pinole and possibly projects that had been approved ministerially could be posted on the City website with the possible creation of standard policies when moving forward, which was something the Planning Commission could recommend.

Planning Commissioner Banuelos detailed his experience with the ministerial approval criteria for ADUs and noted that no ADU process was to continue beyond 60-days.

Mayor Murphy asked whether it was possible for a city to create an objective standard to require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a project.

Assistant City Attorney Mog explained that CEQA was state law and there would be no objective standard that required an EIR since that was all subjective and there was no way to make CEQA an objective standard.
34 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Objective standards to address some of the impacts could be a way to address construction noise, as an example, where construction hours could be changed to address some of the impacts by adopting a new standard as opposed to relying on the CEQA process.

Community Development Director Whalen suggested staff could potentially explore disclosure through the application and there could be certain categories of environmental impacts that could be disclosed through the CEQA process, which the applicant may disclose through the application form.

Mayor Murphy understood that EIRs all looked different but there were pieces that were standard, which could be a way to codify that within the ordinances.

Assistant City Attorney Mog confirmed there could be a way for disclosure as staff had described.

The CEQA process took that information and if there was an impact it was mitigated with a mitigation measure identified as part of the process, which he suggested would be difficult to do since the City had no mechanism to impose an ad hoc impact, which was where they must consider the most common impacts and address them in the objective standards and also consider what disclosure requirements could be imposed outside of the project approval requirement.

Mayor Murphy commented he had seen the cities of Santa Clara and Fremont map out how their communities could look being SB 9 friendly. He asked whether Pinole could do the same, and also asked of the status of the valley study staff was doing.

Planning Manager Hanham reiterated that staff was conducting an informal study of the number of lots that may be SB 9 eligible, although that process would take some time possibly six months to a year in order to capture all of the lots.

Community Development Director Whalen commented as part of identifying where SB 9 lots may be allowed, staff would also identify potential constraints to development or splitting lots and creating additional parcels on those lots, which would be helpful to determine what may or may not be a constraint in developing SB 9 lots.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
C. Update on the Status of Private Development Projects in the City [Action:

Receive Update (Whalen)]
Community Development Director Whalen provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Status of Private Development projects in the City of Pinole, which included a map of the location of current development and tenant improvement projects in Pinole; a summary of new housing in 2022 including the housing type, number of units; whether planning permits had been approved; building permits issued; and whether construction had been completed and an occupancy permit granted.
35 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

The following multifamily projects were described in detail along with presentations of color renderings and project timelines:
• SAHA, 811 San Pablo Avenue, 33 rental housing units with a $15.8 million dollar valuation. • Vista Woods, 600 Roble Avenue, 1109 San Pablo Avenue and 1230 San Pablo Avenue, 179 senior housing units with a $30.4 million valuation. • Appian Village, 2151 Appian Way, 154 condominium for-sale units with a $62.5 million valuation.
• BCRE, 2801 Pinole Valley Road, 233 housing units, anticipated $20 to $30 million valuation; and
• Pinole Vista, 1500 Fitzgerald Drive, 233 housing units, anticipated $55 million dollar valuation.

Other housing projects under construction and timelines included:
• New single-story residence at 1169 Pinole Valley Road • New Triplex at 1479 San Pablo Avenue
• New two-story single-family residence and ADU at 472 Limerick Road • New two-story single-family residence and ADU at 2525 Brandt Street • Four-lot subdivision at 1630 Hazel Street; and
• New single-family residence and ADU at 8 N. Rancho Court Since 2018, 30 ADUs and 4 JADUs had been constructed, and nine ADU applications had been received thus far in 2023. Numerous commercial, industrial and tenant improvement projects and the status of all entitlements were also highlighted.

Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty appreciated the map of all projects that had been highlighted, and reported the Planning Commission had asked for information on what projects would look like in the City as it was being built out. She expressed her hope that at some point a digital conceptual rendering could be prepared, particularly for Old Town. She added the Planning Commission had also been asked continually by the public how the projects would address transportation and whether transportation infrastructure would be provided to get people out of cars, particularly getting seniors into Old Town and safely across San Pablo Avenue. She also asked about the City’s process for permitting ADUs as compared to other cities.

Community Development Director Whalen walked through the ADU review process that had been streamlined into one review as part of the building permit process.

Planning Commission Vice Chairperson Martinez commented on how the City was looking at traffic improvements for the Tennent Avenue Corridor.
36 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commission Vice Chairperson Martinez noted that while the City had been required to increase density and build more housing, it was not addressing needed traffic improvements in the area. The SAHA development had existing bus service across the street but he asked whether the existing bus service would be increased or whether a plan was in place to integrate safety and transportation needs. He asked whether a workshop could be considered to solicit input on the transportation needs future residents of the identified developments in the pipeline would need to ensure gaps were covered and whether or not there was a Master Plan in place for the community.

Community Development Director Whalen and Planning Manager Hanham explained that staff had worked with the developers of Vista Woods on traffic demand strategies that included a shuttle service for the project, and some shared vehicles could be brought in when needed such as a van to transport residents to local medical facilities. Rideshare parking would also be provided in the development. The SAHA development would have staff on-site who could provide assistance with transportation modes.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms reported as a WestCAT Board member, most residents in the senior project and some or all in the veterans’ project would qualify for using paratransit with WestCAT. Also, as part of the Traffic Demand Management Plan (TDMP) they would be eligible for on-site transit training, a program offered through WestCAT and the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC), which had been folded into the TDMP programs.

Planning Commission Vice Chairperson Martinez asked whether or not the City would consider stop lights or other safety measures in the areas identified given the increase in density in those areas, and asked whether the City would consider a three- or five-year plan to improve public safety.

Community Development Director Whalen explained as part of the entitlement review of the projects, traffic studies had been completed to identify the need based on the use and demand at the two sites (SAHA and Pinole Vista). Those traffic studies had not identified the need for additional traffic lights as part of the projects.

Planning Commissioner Menis commented the Planning Commission met on March 27, 2023 and discussed the comparison of the Complete Streets goal for the City, what had been planned more broadly for Appian Way, and whether it was possible to have something similar to that for San Pablo Avenue to mitigate the traffic risks to the vulnerable population that would be added with new development. He asked staff whether that was possible.

Planning Commissioner Menis referenced the SAHA project and the subsidies provided by the City, and asked whether or not units would be provided for Extremely Low income persons or whether the subsidies were just for eligible veterans to bring that up to the Very Low income threshold at the minimum.

Community Development Director Whalen noted the affordability mix was at 30 to 60 percent of the Average Median Income (AMI).

Planning Commissioner Menis asked for more detailed data for the affordability mix for Vista Woods and asked that the PowerPoint be updated with that information, and Community Development Director Whalen confirmed that clarification could be provided. 37 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commissioner Menis spoke to the Appian Village project and clarified with Community Development Director Whalen it would include eight Low income units.

Planning Commissioner Menis referenced the BCRE project and noted the number of housing units had been copied from the Pinole Vista project and should be updated. He also clarified with Community Development Director Whalen the affordability mix for Pinole Vista would be 14 Very Low and 13 Low income units, with the applicant having elected to modify the mix and enhance the number of Very Low units and remove some units from the Low category.

Planning Commissioner Menis referenced the Summary Major Multifamily Timeline in the PowerPoint presentation, which had shown that most projects would have a one- to two-year timeline for construction with Appian Village at a three-year timeline, and asked for clarification.

Community Development Director Whalen reiterated the Appian Village project would be a phased project comprised of nine different phases with building permits to be submitted one phase at a time.

Planning Commissioner Menis spoke to the chart for Status in Progress Commercial/TI/Industrial Locations and asked how tenant improvements had been defined, to which Community Development Director Whalen explained the intent was to highlight new businesses coming to the City, with tenant improvements taking the existing space and modifying it for a new business, and while there may be some exterior improvements, there was no expansion of square footage.

Planning Commissioner Kurrent commented on the ADU constructed by the Property Brothers years ago, which he described as a coup for the City. As to the Commercial and Industrial locations, he noticed that Pinole Square had not been included and asked of the status of the project.

Community Development Director Whalen reported there was a new property owner for Pinole Square as of January 2023, who had been reviewing the entitlements and existing buildings on the site to determine what could be done with the site. She had no further information on what the property owner planned to do at this time.

Planning Commissioner Banuelos asked how ancillary review was handled with ADUs and was informed by Planning Manager Hanham that prior to the City’s consolidation with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD), the City’s plan checker had checked for Fire Code compliance as part of the building permit process. That process would have to be updated with the new consolidation with the CCCFPD.

Planning Commissioner Banuelos asked of the number of ADUs currently permitted in the City and how many had been illegal but later legitimized, to which Community Development Director Whalen stated she would have to return with that information.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms thanked staff for the complete information, particularly the valuation of the developments and the investment in Pinole.

Council member Martinez-Rubin noted the valuation figures were private investments with the figures provided by the parties and the flip side of the investment were the costs associated with the infrastructure such as safety and transportation improvements. 38 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked whether staff had looked at that flip side and could offer a sense of what that was to make the projects actually happen over a certain period of time, as shown.

Community Development Director Whalen explained that valuation provided by the applicants was for materials and labor to construct the project and staff had taken a hard look at those figures to ensure the applicant was providing a fair number given that the building permit fee was derived upon that valuation. For each new unit of housing, the City also had development impact fees for multifamily housing that the City used to address different impacts and make other investments for the City.

Assistant City Attorney Mog added that valuation helped and while not a direct correlation it provided an idea of the value of the property increasing the property tax. Impacts the property may have on the City was something the City Council may consider and he noted for the Kmart property, as an example, an expert had provided information on the valuation for that project.

That was something the City may consider on a project-by-project basis, or consider a study of the impacts from future development in general.

Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested having that information informed when a project came about that there was a figure based on that valuation and she wanted to keep in mind the longterm effects of all construction and the fact that increased housing and increased valuation was great. While that increased the value of nearby properties, at the same time demands for infrastructure would continue and the City did not have the budget to accommodate that need.

She suggested the comments from the public about repairing City streets spoke to that concern.

Council member Martinez-Rubin also commented on her recollection the former owner of the Pinole Square property had until June 2023 to do something with the property. While she understood staff was unaware of the new property owner’s intention, she expressed concern the City may have to wait years for a new application.

Community Development Director Whalen confirmed the entitlements for Pinole Square expired in June 2023, and while there was still the possibility the new owner could exercise those entitlements it was unlikely plans would come through and it depended on what the new owner wanted to do with the site. She described the process if the new property owner submitted a new application.

Council member Sasai clarified with Community Development Director Whalen that all of the new housing that had been proposed would be “all electric” but staff was unaware of legislation requiring “all electric” homes in the future, although it may be a requirement of the building codes in the next two to three years.

Council member Sasai asked for more information on the commercial and industrial projects in progress such as the lot between the Bank of Pinole and the community corner, Pinole Shores II and Rebel Gas Station.

Planning Manager Hanham reported the applicant for the lot near the Bank of Pinole had applied for building permits, was completing tenant improvements for outdoor space and had permits for the shed and new trash enclosure. The irrigation for the project had also been installed. 39 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Manager Hanham stated that Pinole Shores II was owned by the City and the project was in the entitlement process for two warehouse projects and had been tentatively scheduled to go before the Planning Commission in the next 30 to 45-days. He did not have information on Rebel Gas Station and would have to return with an update.

Mayor Murphy thanked staff for the presentation, the information provided and the visualization and timelines for the projects. He too appreciated the valuation information which was important for the public. He advised the information was also being provided as part of the Mayoral Monthly Updates, and suggested there could be a creative way to replicate the PowerPoint for PCTV as well. He also asked for clarification with respect to the SAHA project and of the available funds to support the construction of affordable housing projects in Pinole as well as the status of those funds.

Community Development Director Whalen confirmed the City had an Affordable Housing Fund for Low and Moderate income projects, did not know the exact figures but understood it would be $6.5 million in June 2023 absent SAHA leaving a balance of $2.5 or $3 million. There was also a program in the Housing Element to develop an Affordable Housing Fund Policy which would guide the use of the funds for future projects.

Assistant City Attorney Mog reported the next City Council meeting agenda would include an item related to the Successor Agency Report, which would include detailed information on the assets.

He commented that some cities had replenished their Affordable Housing Fund by encouraging inclusionary units and payment of in-lieu fees.

Community Development Director Whalen further added as part of the Housing Element there was a program that would consider in-lieu fees for inclusionary units.

As to what the funds in the Affordable Housing Fund could be used for in addition to affordable housing, Assistant City Attorney Mog stated $250,000 per year could be used for homelessness services/expenses and $200,000 for administration, which would specifically be identified in the Successor Agency Report to the presented to the City Council.

Planning Commissioner Menis thanked staff for the nicely presented information and charts.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
D. Overview of How the 6th Cycle Housing Element Will Streamline Creation of New Housing and Status Update on Other General Plan Elements [Action: Receive Overview (Whalen)]
Community Development Director Whalen provided a PowerPoint presentation on the 6th Cycle Housing Element that would streamline the creation of new housing and status update on other General Plan Elements.
40 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Included in the presentation was an overview of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update process for the 2023-2031, 6th Cycle Housing Element. The Housing Element contents were also highlighted and included a review of accomplishments, needs assessments, housing resources, constraints, AFFH and implementation plan. The three main components of the Housing Element Plan included the goals, policies and actions. The following housing production programs were highlighted:
• Program 4: Facilitate ADU Production
• Program 5: SB 9 Technical Assistance and Facilitation • Program 6: Incentives for Mixed-Use Developments
• Program 7: Development of Housing Successor Agency’s Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund Policy
• Program 8: Affordable Housing Incentives
• Program 9: Housing for Extremely Low, Very Low and Moderate. • Program 10: Income Households and Special Needs Households, Including Persons with Disabilities
• Program 11: Senior Housing Incentives
• Program 12: Home Sharing and Tenant Matching
• Program 13: Objective Design Standards and SB 35 Streamlining • Program 14: Fee Evaluation and Publicization
• Program 15: Permit Streamlining
• Program 16: Rehabilitation Assistance
• Program 17: Acquisition/Rehabilitation of Properties
• Program 18: Housing Preservation/Below Market Rate Regulations and Conversion • Program 19: Place-Based Improvements
• Program 20: Fair Housing Resources and Services
• Program 21: Displacement Prevention/Housing Mobility
• Program 22: Housing Resources Education
• Program 23: ADU, JADU, and SB Education and Promotion An overview of Other General Plan Element Updates included the simultaneous effort to update the Health & Safety Element and create a new Environmental Justice Element. A summary of the General Plan Update Timeline was also provided, with the Health & Safety and Environmental Justice Elements to be presented to the Planning Commission in June 2023 and with adoption of the elements by the City Council in July 2023.

Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty reported the Planning Commission was pleased to receive the Housing Element Update presented by Michael Baker International (MBI) and City staff at its March 27, 2023 meeting, at which time the Planning Commission had recommended City Council adoption of the document.

Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty acknowledged with the Community Development Director that some of the program numbers may not have been updated from the most current version of the Housing Element as compared to the slides in the PowerPoint presentation but all information would be clarified and updated. Any discrepancies were to be brought to staff’s attention.
41 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commission Vice Chairperson Martinez commented on the work everyone had done collectively to ensure there was new housing stock on-line for people that were not yet ready to buy but needed a place to live such as the development of housing on the former Kmart property and senior housing on San Pablo Avenue. He asked whether there was a current program or whether a program would be created to educate the public on the different housing stock options that could be available in the community.

Community Development Director Whalen stated that was not currently part of the outreach and education program in the Housing Element but could be a component of the website where information on recently-approved developments in the City could be provided. She reported the Vista Woods development had its own website and the City could consider cross promotion.

Planning Commissioner Menis also found the PowerPoint presentation had not matched the presentation on the City’s website or the information in the agenda packet and was informed by Community Development Director Whalen she had prepared the slides in the PowerPoint presentation prior to the revised Housing Element going out on Friday, March 24 and updates were needed. She would email the City Council and the Planning Commission her PowerPoint presentation.

Planning Commissioner Menis reported he had expressed detailed questions and concerns with respect to the Revised Housing Element during the Planning Commission meeting on March 27.

The meeting had been recorded and he planned to submit additional questions in writing he had not been able to raise during the meeting. As to the PowerPoint presentation, he referred to Program 4 in particular and noted the fee waiver for affordable ADUs may potentially reduce the affordability time period from fifteen to five years depending on the level of affordability, and he expressed concern with the net benefit to the City and the community having covenants with such a short duration.

Community Development Director Whalen commented that the Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) provided a proportional development fee for ADUs above 750 square feet in size but the fee could be waived if the ADU was restricted for 55-years as an affordable unit. No one had taken advantage of that fee waiver and the City could not require the ADU be deed restricted. Of the ADUs the City had approved none included affordability covenants.

Planning Commissioner Menis stated as someone within the Extremely Low income category, he had unease with the affordability constraint at five years duration and rather suggested ten years at a minimum should be considered. As to Program 11, he asked whether there would be any impacts to treating senior housing as fractional units other than for parking requirements and Community Development Director Whalen stated it would be for parking only.

Planning Commissioner Menis spoke to Program 19 and noted the details for the program had not been included in the PowerPoint presentation and was informed by the Mayor the information had been shown on Page 86 of 92 of the agenda packet.

Planning Commissioner Banuelos thanked staff for the comprehensive presentation. He spoke to the reference for an electronic permitting system and clarified with the Community Development Director that a Central Square Technologies track-it system would be used as part of upgrades to the City’s current antiquated system and would include an on-line component. 42 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Planning Commissioner Kurrent commented he had not realized that this was the 6th Cycle Housing Element and that the City had done half of the Housing Element already. He also had not realized that private development projects had meshed with the Kmart project with apartments and affordable components, and that the Doctors Hospital property would provide entry-level housing and end of life care in the senior housing project.

Planning Commissioner Kurrent acknowledged affordable housing carried a stigma and there had been comments from the public expressing concern with the potential increase in crime with the development of the Kmart property with affordable housing. Affordable housing allowed people to remain in the community and the City had a public relations job to convince the public that affordable housing was needed, would not create crime and was a positive. He otherwise commented that for the past three years public meetings had been held via Zoom and he had been unable to meet some members of City staff and members of the City Council. He was impressed with the work done by City staff, the City Council and MBI and he applauded everyone for a job well done.

Council member Martinez-Rubin spoke to the Housing Element’s focus on the disadvantaged and vulnerable communities, which had grabbed her attention given the different communities in Pinole. She suggested the perception that there was crime associated with poverty may or may not hold true but there were disadvantages for members of the community who were experiencing displacement, unemployment, lower levels of education and the impacts from moving from one socio-economic level to the next even for median incomes. Work was still needed on the City’s objectives to have an outreach program to address the needs of the disadvantaged in the community. She asked whether those communities had been dispersed through the City of Pinole or were in a particular geographic area of the City such as the west side of Pinole bordering the unincorporated area of San Pablo Avenue.

Planning Manager Hanham explained that it had been found the City had certain areas facing those difficulties but it was not centralized in one area, and while most was on the western side it was throughout the City. He did not have the numbers involved at this time.

Assistant City Attorney Mog advised the agenda packet for the April 4, 2023 City Council meeting would include a larger discussion about that issue as part of the Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Council member Martinez-Rubin looked forward to the information given recent discussions how the City of Pinole had not qualified to receive state funding focused on addressing disadvantaged communities. If the numbers had changed, it placed the City in a position to apply for funding that involved specific criteria; however, Community Development Director Whalen noted the metrics used for that funding was different from the metrics evaluated in the Housing Element.

Community Development Director Whalen added that she had looked at opportunity zones for disadvantaged communities in Pinole and it had not fallen into that category. She also cited the Del Monte Center side of the City where a small portion of a census tract met the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) qualifications criteria.

Council member Martinez-Rubin pointed out the EPA qualifications or criteria did not mesh with the larger distribution of people that may fall into the disadvantaged category and who were dispersed in Pinole.
43 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Community Development Director Whalen again explained that the metrics for funding and the term disadvantaged communities as it related to different funding sources were different.

Council member Martinez-Rubin clarified she was not thinking about a particular funding source but about the updated piece of information if there were individual families dispersed throughout Pinole for whom services could be provided that could somehow be meshed with funding opportunities criteria the City had used.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms thanked staff and MBI for a heavy lift in getting them this far and also recognized the Planning Commission for its work. She hoped this was the last cycle for adoption issues and the next iteration of the Housing Element would be successfully certified by HCD.

Council member Sasai also expressed his appreciation to City staff and the Planning Commission for all of their hard work on the Housing Element. He otherwise agreed with the need to educate the public on the benefits of affordable housing and agreed there remained a stigma attached to the term affordable housing. He emphasized it was the City’s responsibility to educate the public.

Mayor Murphy also expressed his appreciation to City staff for all of its hard work and allowing the public to better understand what was happening in Pinole, for providing clarity, answering questions and the City Council and Planning Commission for its patience and grace in this process. He particularly thanked Planning Commission Chairperson Moriarty for her leadership and commitment to the City.

Mayor Murphy reported he had spoken at the Bay Front Chamber of Commerce, State of the Cities in the last week and he had been intrigued how the data informed the City’s work. He also commented on the importance and depth of partnership in that work. He recognized the last couple of years had been a challenge due to the pandemic leading to the creation of many projects but the City had changed, the City Council was the most diverse it had been in years and City staff was tremendous and the City organization had expanded. He questioned how a better community might be created, acknowledged it would take a lot of work, but with dedicated staff, courage and political will along with public engagement, participatory budgeting and volunteerism it could work.

Mayor Murphy again thanked everyone present and those at home watching the meeting and others who may be part of the conversation in the future. He wanted to see everyone continue to work together and think of the leaders of tomorrow who may be brought into the conversation.

He pointed out in the next year there would be different initiatives from the City Council and from other agencies, and he provided examples of potential initiatives that may be on future ballots in the state. He described the City of Pinole as a one of a kind and a strong city in the Bay Area which should never be underestimated and he was proud to represent the City of Pinole as Mayor.

He looked forward to more and to growing and scaling the work together.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Murphy opened public comment for any items not on the agenda. 44 of 395
Pinole Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – March 28, 2023

Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

Planning Commissioner Kurrent expressed his appreciation to the Public Works Department for its work during the recent storms and stated the Public Works Director had been very responsive to comments and emails.

6. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of April 4, 2023 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

At 9:57 p.m., Mayor Murphy adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting of April 4, 2023 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
45 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES
April 4, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Murphy called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:01 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov. Code § 87105.

A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Devin Murphy, Mayor
Maureen Toms, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Cameron Sasai, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
B. STAFF PRESENT
Chris Wynkoop, Acting City Manager/Fire Chief
Heather Bell, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director
David Hanham, Planning Manager
Jeremy Rogers, Community Services Director
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk Heather Bell announced the agenda had been posted on Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. with all legally required written notices. Written comments had been received in advance of the meeting and had been distributed to the City Council and staff, posted on the City website and made available in the Council Chambers.

Following an inquiry, the Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda. 9A-1
46 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Attorney Eric Casher, Human Resources Director Stacy Shell, Gregory Ramirez, IEDA
Employee Organizations: Pinole Police Employees Association (PPEA), AFSCME, Local 1, Local 512

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION At 6:01 p.m., Mayor Murphy reconvened the meeting into open session and announced there was no reportable action from the Closed Session.

Mayor Murphy modified the meeting agenda and moved onto Item 8 B(1) at this time.

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
B. Presentations

1. Pinole/Con Fire Transfer of Command Recognition Ceremony Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) Deputy Chief Brian Helmick described the transfer of command process from one Fire Chief to another and introduced Acting City Manager/Fire Chief Chris Wynkoop.

Acting City Manager/Fire Chief Chris Wynkoop stated it had been an honor and privilege to serve the City of Pinole, lead the Pinole Fire Department over the past three years and build on its tradition through the integration with the CCCFPD. Through that process there would be a more robust fire service model than had ever been provided to Pinole citizens under the leadership of CCCFPD Fire Chief Lewis Broschard with the transfer of command of the Pinole Fire Department to the CCCFPD.

The formal transfer of command between the Pinole Fire Department and the CCCFPD was conducted at this time.

CCCFPD Fire Chief Lewis Broschard commented on the quick and efficient ratification and approval of the contract to transfer command from the Pinole Fire Department to the CCCFPD, which effort involved numerous individuals and agencies. While he had previously shared his thoughts during the reopening ceremony of Fire Station 74, he again thanked and congratulated his colleague Fire Chief Wynkoop and wished him a long and happy retirement. 47 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

CCCFPD Fire Chief Lewis Broschard was honored to lead an excellent fire district with amazing people doing incredible work on a daily basis to serve and protect the public in a variety of roles and responsibilities. The CCCFPD would bring its collective experience, resources and passion to serve the City of Pinole, work hard to build and maintain the trust of the City and its citizens and provide the same level of distinction and professionalism provided to their entire service area.

He thanked the City of Pinole for its trust in the CCCFPD and he looked forward to serving the City of Pinole with distinction, honor and professionalism.

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors District 1 John Gioia acknowledged the team effort between the City of Pinole, CCCFPD and many others including Pinole voters who voted to tax themselves in the midst of a pandemic to fund increased fire and emergency medical services.

He recognized the City Council, City staff, County staff, County Fire Chiefs, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) and in particular Pinole Fire Chief Wynkoop, who he commended for his agreement to negotiate a new partnership which had ultimately transitioned him out of his job and whose leadership should be recognized.

Supervisor Gioia also recognized Vincent Wells, Union President, United Professional Firefighters of Contra Costa County, Local 1230, for his advocacy for the consolidation and greater partnerships between fire agencies to achieve economies of scale and better service for residents. This cooperation resulted ultimately in better service for residents and he looked forward to other partnerships between the City of Pinole and the County. He further recognized CCCFPD Fire Chief Broschard for his leadership, all firefighters in the CCCFPD and welcomed all Pinole firefighters into the CCCFPD.

Vincent Wells, Union President, United Professional Firefighters of Contra Costa County, Local 1230, thanked the two Fire Chiefs for the willingness to put a plan together that made this partnership possible. He also thanked Supervisor Gioia for his work on Measure X and all CCCFPD and Pinole firefighters. On behalf of Local 1230, he welcomed Pinole firefighters into the CCCFPD.

Mayor Murphy thanked both Fire Chief Wynkoop and CCCFPD Fire Chief Broschard for their service, thanked all firefighters for their honest work ethic, leadership and willingness to be part of the community and looked forward to the future partnership between the City of Pinole and the CCCFPD.

Council member Martinez-Rubin recognized all of the firefighters for their service to the community and she wished them good health, sanity and good humor in spite of all they may encounter as part of their service to the community. She also thanked everyone who had helped to fund this partnership.

Council member Sasai also thanked everyone for their service and all of the hard work which had led to this partnership and history being made.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms echoed the comments made including recognizing the voters who supported the passage of Measure X, County Fire Chiefs for creating the plan presented to the Measure X Committee, Measure X Committee members for their recommendations on the distribution of Measure X funds and the County Fire Board for approving their side of the partnership. She looked forward to sustaining this partnership into the future. 48 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Council member Tave also echoed the comments and was thankful for the sacrifices firefighters had made to serve the community. He stated the City was coming out of the pandemic with this agreement and service model which he suggested would be great for Pinole citizens. Pinole firefighters had been and would continue to be resilient, trustworthy, honest, professional, and transparent and provide expertise in leadership as part of the CCCFPD. He too thanked Fire Chief Wynkoop for his leadership as part of the process. He was confident the CCCFPD would continue to be as good to Pinole citizens as the Pinole Fire Department had been. He looked forward to growing the relationship and ensuring it was sustainable into the future. He again thanked everyone involved in the effort for this partnership on every level.

Mayor Murphy spoke to the values of resiliency, integrity and professionalism and again thanked everyone involved in this model of partnership, the voters of Pinole and across Contra Costa County willing to tax themselves for the betterment of the community, and everyone for their humility and leadership and those who worked to build emergency services for the community centered around resiliency. He was confident the partnership with the CCCFPD would succeed and grow. He again thanked Fire Chief Wynkoop for his leadership and for setting the tone.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, suggested Fire Chief Wynkoop’s team had done a wonderful job and he applauded him for his service to the City of Pinole.

Irma Ruport, Pinole, thanked everyone involved in reopening Fire Station 74 and for this partnership, particularly Fire Chief Wynkoop and Supervisor Gioia. She stated she had attended every meeting and workshop on this topic and had gotten to know Vincent Wells and Pinole Fire Captain Rich Voisey who never gave up, had the will to continue and had pride in Pinole firefighters. She also thanked all voters who supported Measure X, which was the best thing for the City of Pinole. She asked that Pinole firefighters Rich Voisey and Robert Ramos be recognized and that the key to the City be presented to Mr. Wells and Fire Chief Wynkoop. She also recognized the fallen firefighters who had a lot do with Fire Station 74.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Murphy again expressed his appreciation to all firefighters present and who formally filed out of the Council Chambers at this time. He welcomed everyone to continue to celebrate and partner together.

2. Easter Egg Hunt Video Presentation
Community Services Director Jeremy Rogers presented a brief video of the Annual City of Pinole Egg-Stravaganza event and thanked the Mayor for stepping in during the event and operating the camera.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, thanked Community Services Director Rogers and Pinole Community Television (PCTV) staff for the video and for the well-attended and fun community event. He looked forward to the event in 2024.
49 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Pro Tem Toms reported she had attended the event with her grandchildren and it had been a well-run and well-attended event. She thanked staff and the Police Department for running the event.

Mayor Murphy also thanked staff and looked forward to the event in 2024.

A. Proclamations

1. National Pet Day
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing April 11, 2023 as National Pet Day.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, suggested having a pet was a wonderful opportunity, made people smile, and commented on his own personal experience with a pet and suggested pets were the most wonderful creatures on earth.

Anthony Vossbrink, Pinole, echoed the comments and inquired of the status of the former Pinole Animal Shelter. He suggested Contra Costa County Animal Services for the City of Pinole had deteriorated since the shelter had been closed and he provided examples. He also asked for an update on the dog park, which was in need of improvements, clean-up of debris and weeds and stated the women’s restroom remained inoperable.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Teresa Teller, wife of Nick Teller, Pastor of Our Savior Lutheran Church, Pinole, explained she was a self-described stigma fighting role model for people with mental illness, a composer and musician who also worked full-time in nursing homes and in recreation. She described her personal history when in 1999 she had been diagnosed with a mental illness and described her efforts to speak publicly about her personal experiences. She asked the City Council to consider proclamations for Mental Health Awareness Month for the month of May and Suicide Awareness Day on May 16, 2023, which she hoped to present at Our Savior Lutheran Church at the end of May. She referred to a book she was co-writing entitled My Brain Makes Me Proud; noted her efforts to share her story with the public; and requested the City Council allow her to present a brief video at a future City Council meeting to help promote her tuning out stigma event at Savoir Lutheran Church.
50 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Rafael Menis, Pinole, updated the City Council on the current COVID-19 case rate for the City of Pinole, which had the 7th highest rate in Contra Costa County and he hoped that Pinole would reach the levels of other communities in Contra Costa County which had lower case rates. He requested the City Council adjourn the meeting in memory of Joanie Shattuck, a resident who cared deeply about the reopening of Fire Station 74 and volunteerism and who he was honored to call his friend.

Irma Ruport, Pinole, reported the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors had recently honored César Chavez, the founder of the United Farmworkers Union (UFW) in a celebration recognizing Mr.

Chaves’ commitment to social justice and respect of human dignity. She described the theme of the celebration, the speakers present, and Governor Newsom’s proclaiming March 31, 2023 César Chavez Day in the State of California. She read into the record the comments the Governor provided as part of the proclamation and also comments President Biden had provided as part of a federal proclamation. On behalf of all union and non-union workers, she asked that they strive for a better future and life and not forgot those leaders who had given up their lives. She also read into the record a famous quote from César Chaves, Yes I Can and urged everyone to remember the quote and never give up. She asked that the City Council meeting adjourn in memory of César Chavez.

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
Mayor Murphy reported he had attended Contra Costa County’s César Chavez celebration which had also included a celebration of the Countywide Youth Hall of Fame; and had attended the Pinole Finance Subcommittee meeting and briefed the City Council on the discussions. He thanked the City Council and City staff, particularly Community Development Director Whalen and Assistant City Attorney Mog for their presentations during the March 28, 2023 Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting and encouraged the public to view the meeting, with the video and all meeting materials posted on the City website. He had also attended the opening of a new RotaCare facility in the City of San Pablo and described the facility as a project of Rotary Clubs across the region, celebrating its 10th anniversary providing medical care including urgent care for uninsured and low-income residents in West Contra Costa County. He congratulated the City of San Pablo and Rotary Clubs across the region for making this possible along with LifeLong Medical Care, another partner.

Mayor Murphy also reported the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) for children in Contra Costa County was seeking volunteers to work with children in foster care and he described the CASA program, with more information at [email protected] or calling 925-256-7284, ext.

7. In addition, he encouraged the public to continue to provide feedback on what they wanted to see in the Pinole Community Corner at the corner of Tennent and San Pablo Avenues, through pinolecommunitycorner.com or by emailing any member of the City Council.

Mayor Murphy further reported on the efforts of Marin Clean Energy (MCE) to assist businesses to become certified with the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Supplier Clearinghouse, and briefed the City Council on the efforts. Those interested were encouraged to reach out to MCE via its website or to the Mayor via email.
51 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Mayor Murphy also provided an update on the enhancements at the Pinole Library, with the County Librarian investing funds in the facility to address the majority of deferred maintenance issues, which he detailed at this time along with the funding sources. Most work would be done by mid-2024. Residents were encouraged to provide feedback on what they wanted to see at the Pinole Library. He also reported that the Mayoral Updates were available on PCTV and the City website with the April Mayoral Update provided at this time. He thanked City staff for making the videos possible.

B. Mayoral & Council Appointments: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Mayor Pro Tem Toms reported she would attend via Zoom an upcoming Wildfire Prevention Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) discussion; announced the Pinole Police Department would sponsor a Bike Rodeo at St. Joseph’s School grounds on Saturday, April 8 from 10:00 a.m. to Noon, and she asked that residents check the City’s website for information on different upcoming Earth Month events.

Council member Sasai reported he had attended a West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Board meeting and briefed the City Council on the discussions and presentations. He had also participated in the Egg-Stravaganza event, had been pleased with the turnout and thanked City staff for organizing the event.

Council member Martinez-Rubin reported she had attended the League of California Cities East Bay Division meeting and briefed the City Council on the discussions. She also advised that April 12 through 14, 2023 would be legislative and advocacy days at the State Capital and she planned to attend with a joint session between representatives of the County Association of Governments and cities to discuss and address homelessness; water samples had been taken to test the health of Pinole Creek and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and the Watershed Project offered demonstrations and helped to clean-up the creek with the assistance of the Earth Team from Pinole Valley High School; and Pinole Creek had measured well at that time in terms of cleanliness. More information was available at the watershedproject.org website. She wished everyone a Happy Easter and Passover.

Council member Tave reported he had been unable to attend the March 28 Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting since his son Roman Tave had turned 10 on that same date but he had watched the videotape of the meeting and he looked forward to future discussions. He also reported that he had been invited by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 159 and Local 302 to tour their training facilities and shared some of the conversations from the apprentices. He provided photographs of potholes in the City to the Public Works Director and encouraged the community to keep an eye out for any potholes and email or telephone the Public Works Department with possible photographs so they could be addressed.

In addition, as of March 29, 2023, the $2 excessive water use surcharge imposed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) had been pulled back pursuant to a press release from EBMUD since the drought had been reduced to Stage 1. EBMUD customers would see that reduction on future water bills.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
52 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Toms/Mayor Murphy for staff to prepare a letter in opposition to Senate Bill (SB) 423 as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Tave/Mayor Murphy to hold a Closed Session to discuss the City Manager’s performance evaluation at a date in May as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Martinez-Rubin/Mayor Pro Tem Toms for staff to prepare a resolution opposed to State Initiative 21-0042A1 as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Martinez-Rubin/Mayor Murphy to direct staff to prepare a report for the City Council to consider a process for private projects to notify residents of projects that currently only received ministerial approval as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Sasai/Mayor Murphy to direct staff to draft a letter on behalf of the City Council to the United States Department of Transportation in support of funding for the East Bay Regional Parks Bay Trail Expansion to Point Pinole as a future agenda item.
53 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council members Sasai/Tave to direct staff to draft a letter of support for Assembly Bill 1, which would allow employees of the California State Legislature to unionize and negotiate over their pay benefits and working conditions, as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Murphy offered a motion, seconded by Council member Sasai to consider a resolution to work with the County Board of Education to build workforce housing as a future agenda item.

On the motion Mayor Pro Tem Toms understood the Housing Element included actions that would follow that direction, and the Mayor commented there were specific resolutions and a letter of support could be included in that.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Murphy/Council member Sasai to consider a resolution to work with the County Board of Education to build workforce housing as a future agenda item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Murphy requested a proclamation in recognition of Philippine Independence Day as a future agenda item and was informed by the City Clerk that was already on the annual list of events and a proclamation would be included on an upcoming agenda.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, requested a presentation on plans for the Port of Oakland as it was recovering from the pandemic and to invite EBMUD to provide a presentation on proposed water rates for the May 16, 2023 City Council meeting agenda.

Anthony Vossbrink, Pinole, requested the consideration of a Police satellite substation on or in a Fitzgerald Drive property on a six-month trial basis, or the addition of a Police Officer to patrol the area between August 2023 to January 2024 to reduce public health, safety impacts and crime issues in and around Fitzgerald Drive as a future agenda item. 54 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Mayor Murphy reported presentations from the Police Department and EBMUD were anticipated during future City Council meetings.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

E. City Manager Report / Department Staff: None
F. City Attorney Report: None

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Minutes of the February 21, 2023 and March 21, 2023 meetings.

B. Receive the March 18, 2023 – March 31, 2023 – List of Warrants in the Amount of $517,401.96 and the March 31, 2023 Payroll in the Amount of $449,788.64.

C. Approve an Amendment to the Employment Agreement for the City Clerk [Action:

Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Shell)]
D. Resolution of Support for Senate Bill (SB) 691 Regarding Dyslexia Risk Screening [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Rogers)] E. Housing Successor Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2021-22 [Action: Receive Report (Whalen)]
F. City Park Maintenance [Action: Receive Report (Bingaman)] Mayor Murphy referenced Item 9C and reported pursuant to Government Code Section 54953 (c)(3) this item recommended an amendment to the Employment Agreement for the City Clerk to provide a five percent merit increase, which would result in an increased payroll cost of $8,322.00, with the funding already included in the adopted budget for Fiscal Year 2022/23.

Speaking to Item 9A, City Clerk Bell advised that during the March 7, 2023 City Council meeting, the City Council had asked that the February 21, 2023 meeting minutes be continued to allow a review of the motion as shown on Page 22 of 565 of the agenda packet for Item 12A. 55 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

City Clerk Bell reported that the videotape of the meeting had been reviewed and the motion as shown reflected what had been stated, but if the City Council wanted to amend the intent of the motion that could be done at this time.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Sasai/Tave to amend the motion as shown on Page 22 of 565 of the agenda packet for Item 9A, the minutes of the February 21, 2022 meeting, as follows:

ACTION: Motion by Council members Sasai/Tave to direct staff to organize and host an informational event and send out invitations to tenants and landlords in Pinole and have conversations about Just Cause Eviction policies and include rent stabilization as part of that conversation.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Council member Tave thanked staff for the preparation of the resolution for Item 9D, a resolution he hoped would be shared with other cities.

Mayor Murphy offered a motion, seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem for the resolution in Item 9D to be sent to the author as well as to state legislators and that staff also consider a standing NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED clause which directed staff to prepare the letter and send it to the author and to State Legislators.

City Clerk Bell reported most letters did what the Mayor suggested but she was not opposed to adding the language recommended by the Mayor.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Murphy/Mayor Pro Tem Toms for the resolution in Item 9D to be sent to the author as well as to state legislators and that staff also consider a standing NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED clause, which directed staff to prepare the letter and send it to the author and to State Legislators.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
56 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Cordell Hindler, Richmond, referenced Item 9C, stated the City Clerk had done an incredible job with the agenda packets and meeting minutes and he would like to see her stay with the City.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Toms/Mayor Murphy to approve Item 9A (as modified), Items 9B and 9C, as shown, Item 9D (as modified), and Items 9E and 9F, as shown.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parté communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.

A. 2023-2031 Housing Element Adoption [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)]
Community Development Director Lilly Whalen reported that Dan Wery and Shannon Liska, Michael Baker International (MBI), would provide a presentation on the revisions to the 2023- 2031 Housing Element Update pursuant to review by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The changes being recommended had been provided to the City Council as a late email item with track changes and would be posted to the City website. A written comment had also been received prior to the meeting, and although some of the comments did not require changes to the Housing Element, staff would provide written responses after this meeting and MBI would identify which comments fell into which category.

Community Development Director Whalen recommended the City Council adopt the City of Pinole’s 6th Cycle 2023-2031 Housing Element and submit the revised draft to HCD for a 60-day review. Staff hoped to receive a letter of substantial compliance following the review.

Dan Wery, Michael Baker International (MBI), provided a PowerPoint presentation that detailed the background and timeline of the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and review of the comments from HCD. A meeting had been held on January 30, 2023 between City staff and HCD, at which time 30 comments had been provided from HCD. A Revised Draft of the Housing Element had been published and submitted to HCD on February 17, 2023. HCD responded on March 2, 2023 with 22 formal comments for review.

HCD requested additional detail to support analyses and conclusions, additional outreach and support from developers and real estate professionals. There were no changes to the sites inventory and only minor changes to programs. Revisions included more data on development disabilities, overpayment, local rent source, code enforcement, City-level fair housing data, local knowledge from developers and real estate professionals, review of voter initiatives and Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN) participation.
57 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

As part of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH), the City of Pinole was identified as the most integrated community in Contra Costa County, and more rationale was provided for Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) sites along the City’s three Mixed Use (MU) Corridors and comparison of census tracts, County-level historic development trends had been added, and two other contributing factors had been added to the local fair housing conditions.

As to the Sites Inventory, trends and examples of commercial-commercial development, comparison of non-vacant sites in the inventory to recent projects, and details on each pending project including demonstrating affordability of lower and moderate-income units had been added along with support letters from housing developers to finish projects. For Constraints, revisions included specifics on permit processing time, examples and details on comprehensive design review; clarification that inclusionary requirements were not a constraint on housing production by using recent project trends; and identified local amendments to the building code; provided information on requests to develop below the anticipated density on the 5th Cycle Housing Element sites; and added analyses reviewing height and setback standards of recent projects.

As to the Zoning, clarifications were provided for compliance of emergency shelter and supportive housing standards, Senate Bill (SB) 330, replacement of affordable housing units and streamlining of the parking reduction process. For Public Participation, efforts to reach out to lower and moderateincome individuals had been discussed.

A map of the Housing Sites Inventory included recently entitled projects and proposed Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) sites to meet the remaining RHNA obligations within the next eight years.

The Housing Element Program revisions were as follows:
• Program 5 added to address SB 9, Technical Assistance to streamline SB 9 units; • Program 1 to include a mid-cycle progress review in 2027; • Program 3 to include coordination with PG&E and include proactive outreach to developers of special needs housing;
• Program 4 to identify a timeline for additional actions should Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) trends not be met;
• Program 6 to add a timeline for updating environmental documents; • Program 9 to add details to ensure program assists all lower and special needs households and set a goal of 25 households for fee waiver program; • Program 11 to identify specific emergency shelter standards to comply with state law; • Program 12 to allow group homes in the R-Zone and define group homes, reviewed and revised the definition of household to ensure clarity, further studied and revised the parking standards, reduced the level of approval for parking standards from Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to Administrative Use Permit (AUP), and identified specific State Law Density Bonus requirements;
58 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

• Program 13 modified to ensure replacement of affordable units per state law (SB 35 and SB 330);
• Program 15 to include implementation of electronic permitting process by the end of 2023;
• Program 19 to include two efforts from the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) regarding park improvements; and
• Program 23 to include outreach at no less than two events per year.

Mr. Wery provided an overview of the comments from the March 27, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, which had led to some cleanup to language in the Housing Element including revisions to the language in Pages 139 through 141 regarding the Census Tract and RHNA Sites, and which section had been rewritten to be factual and supportive, although the intent remained the same that the City of Pinole was diverse and integrated with only small differences between the highest and lowest fair housing scores.

Mr. Wery added that a public comment letter had been received on April 4, 2023 from Rafael Menis.

Those comments had also been provided verbally during the March 27 Planning Commission meeting. He described the comments as technical corrections and some typographical errors, the changes would not affect policies or programs and these comments had been identified in Mr. Menis’ comment letter as Comments 7, 13, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 30. Comment 29 had been addressed in the AFFH revisions with the remainder of Mr. Menis’ comments to be responded to in writing with a copy to the City Council, which again would not result in any changes to the document.

In response to comments raised during the Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting of March 28, 2023, Mr. Wery provided an overview of Disadvantaged Communities in Pinole and how an area may qualify as a disadvantaged community with that information to be covered in the Environmental Justice Element to be discussed at a future meeting. An overview of Low-Moderate Income households in Pinole was also provided and areas based on Area Median Income (AMI) where the City of Pinole fell into two groups; households between $55,000 and $87,000 in household income, and households between $87,000 to $125,000 in household income, with the Housing Element having noted the majority of the City of Pinole fell between $68,000 and $88,000 in household income.

Mr. Wery reiterated the staff recommendation for the City Council to adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the April 4, 2023 staff report recommending adoption of the Revised Housing Element, with technical revisions to be made and with the document to be submitted to HCD on April 5, 2023.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms asked whether conversations had been held with HCD as to whether the responses to HCD’s comments had addressed its formal comments, and Mr. Wery explained that staff had previously met with HCD at which time the preliminary comments had been received. Staff and the consultants had been unable to have subsequent conversations with HCD even after reaching out on several occasions. Once the Housing Element was resubmitted, HCD would have a maximum of 60-days to review the document. He hoped the City would receive a letter of substantial compliance.
59 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

As part of the submittal to HCD, Mr. Wery stated a request for an expedited review would be made in the hopes the document would be turned around in less than 60-days. If HCD required final adjustments, he hoped that could be made without the requirement for another public review.

Council member Tave spoke to the language in SB 9 and his understanding that was strictly for R1 Zoning, which allowed a lot to be split into two lots. He asked if that included condominiums, and Mr. Wery explained that SB 9 was applicable to Single-Family, not condominium lots, and once split the lot could not continue to be split. The maximum one could get out of the lot was four units, if there was a split and each primary home had an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), as an example.

Council member Tave asked of the AMI and whether it was pre-tax and Mr. Wery advised that the AMI had been based on gross income.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked for clarification on the use of the terms “overpayment” and “local rent source.”
Mr. Wery and Shannon Liska clarified that “overpayment” had been defined as anything more than 30 percent of the gross household income towards housing, and had also been defined as an “overburdened” household. “Local rent source” was in response to HCD, which desired more local data on what was being paid for rental units in the City of Pinole, with Figure 8 added to the document as a source of data showing local rents.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked for more clarification on the community outreach efforts and was informed by Mr. Wery that as part of community outreach, MBI had access to a long list of contacts and input through the online survey. While he had hoped for better responses from the survey, MBI had also reached out to community based organizations. Stakeholder interviews had been held with a good mix of participation from a number of different housing advocates, developers and real estate professionals.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked for more clarification on Programs 3 and 9, and the definition of “special needs housing” and what category would be built.

Mr. Wery explained that “special needs housing” could be single-person households, disabled persons, Extremely Low income households, large and small households, and veterans and farmworkers since the category was broad. The most common group and focus were disabled and Extremely Low income households. He added as part of the Housing Element, they had identified the need and the programs that help, encourage, incentivize and facilitate those special needs.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, explained that most of his comments had been answered but he wanted to follow up on Comment 29 as part of his submitted written comments which stated: On page 164, it states that a difference of .3 in environmental opportunity score is “essentially in the same range.” I don’t agree - if a gradient block is .25, falling outside of that is a significant difference.

He read into the record the redline language as shown on Pages 164 and 165 of the Housing Element and disagreed with the language shown. He suggested a legend definition area on the map with a .25 range and a total range of outcomes in the City as a whole was broader than that range, and saying there was not that much of a discrepancy belied the point. 60 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Mr. Menis suggested a .3 difference between worst and best environmental outcomes was significant enough to warrant acknowledgment in the programs in the Housing Element rather than the redline language shown in this section.

Mr. Menis also referred to Comment 34 which stated: Page 182 states that maps and data show relatively subtle differences between census tracts. As per my previous questions, I dispute this.

I also think it would be worthwhile to reach out to the Pinole Historical Society for information on past discriminatory practices in Pinole and recommended Busing and Backlash, White Against White in a California School District by Lillian B. Rubin printed in 1972, as a point of historical data.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Council member Tave asked of the likelihood that HCD would provide additional comments after resubmittal, and Mr. Wery stated this was the third Housing Element draft that would be submitted to HCD. While he had hoped the prior drafts would do the trick, HCD had informed them no jurisdiction had received substantial compliance with less than three rounds of HCD comments.

If there were further comments, he hoped they would be minor and technical in nature and would not require another public review.

Council member Tave expressed concern with continual refinements, resubmittals, additional public hearings and the back and forth with HCD. He asked whether HCD provided any guidance on the status prior to reporting back to a city but Mr. Wery explained that HCD was pretty reserved with judgements and was not held to the same standards as local jurisdictions. Based on his experience, if the current submittal was not accepted, he was confident they would be extremely close.

Council member Martinez-Rubin requested clarification of the recently-provided redline revision and the scoring system referenced on Pages 164 and 165. She also asked for clarification of the statement in the redline language shown on Page 140, which read in part ….while listing a site does not require a development of affordable housing it decreases costs and therefore increases the feasibility and affordability of development of such sites …, and she asked how it decreased costs.

Mr. Wery explained that in terms of the scores, in some cases a low score was good or bad, with most of the scores based on how one would rank in comparison to similar criteria throughout the state. The individual scores were for environment, economy and education. Environment weighed towards any pollution, air quality in particular, and if one was near a major highway, railroad, as an example, it would have a low score due to diesel particulate, with the algorithms set by the state. If one was near transit, trains, or a freeway there would be worse air quality and lower scores. The scores would be the highest if located in remote areas and areas away from those features, typically Low Density areas with grass, trees and more vegetation, such as nature preserves and areas of low development. How the state used the algorithms and divided it by census tract to review each community for environment, education and economics was detailed.

Ms. Liska added there was more discussion on the maps provided which started on Page 160 of the Housing Element.
61 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

ACTION: Motion by Council member Tave/Mayor Pro Tem Toms to adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment 22-01 for the adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element and approval of the CEQA exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3) for the 2023-2031 Housing Element and authorize the City Manager to make technical modifications, refinements and clarifications (including but not limited to implementation details of the proposed housing plan programs) to the Housing Element Update without requiring a subsequent hearing and re-adoption: new goals, policies or programs would require re-adoption.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
B. A Resolution Confirming the Assessments and Ordering the Levy for the Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2023/24 [Action: Conduct public hearing (Whalen)]
The item had been recommended for continuance to a subsequent meeting ACTION: Motion by Council member Tave/Mayor Pro Tem Toms to continue Item 10B to the City Council meeting of May 17, 2023.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

11. OLD BUSINESS: None

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Framework for New Outdoor Dining Regulations [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction (Whalen)]
Community Development Director Whalen provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Framework for New Outdoor Dining Regulations, which included an overview of what outdoor dining could do for a community including enliven the street, support economic development and help re-prioritize public space for human use. The City’s existing regulations, Urgency Ordinance No. 2020-03, the number of temporary use permits granted during COVID and the framework categories for the requirements for outdoor dining included sidewalk dining, parklets and outdoor dining areas were all were highlighted. An overview of the Planning Commission’s discussion of the framework, recommendations and staff responses to each recommendation were also described as outlined in the April 4, 2023 staff report. The current Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) included a process pathway for outdoor dining on sidewalks and private outdoor areas in the City. The standards related to aesthetics, safety, design and durability were lacking and could be revisited and refreshed.
62 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Community Development Director Whalen explained that there was no clear process pathway for parklets or permanent outdoor dining on public property. Staff sought direction from the City Council whether or not staff should return with a specific proposal on modified outdoor dining regulations to support and encourage outdoor dining in the City. If the City Council directed staff to return with a specific proposal, staff would incorporate best practices from other jurisdictions.

If not, staff asked for direction on when the Temporary Use Permits (TUPs) should expire and have staff begin enforcing the removal of temporary outdoor dining structures. She added that staff could also be directed to contact local businesses to gauge the level of interest in more clearly defining the outdoor dining process, standards and opportunities for parklets.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked of the number of eating establishments that no longer had an active TUP for outdoor dining and why those businesses decided not to continue, to which Community Development Director Whalen understood one of the businesses had removed their temporary structure due to weather-related issues.

Planning Manager David Hanham reported that Applebee’s, as an example, had been able to return to its pre-pandemic operations inside the building. Some businesses had been impacted by the recent inclement weather conditions and had removed their temporary structures. Sue’s Place, Pear Street Bistro and Tina’s Place were the only establishments interested in continuing moving forward with outdoor dining.

Council member Martinez-Rubin understood the three businesses that wanted to continue to move forward with outdoor dining had been issued TUPs due to the pandemic and there were restrictions on proximity to other patrons.

Council member Sasai asked whether or not the TUPs included an expiration date and whether the TUPs had been informally extended.

Community Development Director Whalen stated the Urgency Ordinance allowed the Zoning Administrator to extend the TUPs, which had been done during the pandemic.

In response to Council member Sasai, Community Development Director Whalen reported the City had extended all requests for an extension and the business owners that no longer had a structure outside or had not pursued outdoor dining under their TUP had done so since they no longer needed it at this time, which could potentially be since they were meant to be temporary facilities, but more outreach to businesses was needed.

Council member Sasai asked of the benefits of conducting the outreach to businesses and what input staff hoped to receive and Community Development Director Whalen suggested it was to gauge the interest of the business owners to expand outdoor dining opportunities in the City and whether the City should expend the effort in that process, to solicit feedback, and engage the businesses in some of the best practice standards that could be recommended to the City Council.

Council member Sasai asked whether other jurisdictions had established a successful parklet program and how they had approved encroachment permits in the public right-of-way (ROW).

Community Development Director Whalen had no information on that topic at this time but she understood some cities had established parklet programs. 63 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Planning Manager Hanham confirmed a number of cities, including Contra Costa County, had created temporary parklet programs but were now transitioning to a more permanent program.

Council member Sasai asked whether the informal extensions would continue to be offered to the existing TUPs or whether City Council action was required, to which Community Development Director Whalen again detailed the staff recommendation including direction from the City Council whether or not to move forward with updated regulations. If not, staff would have a conversation with the City Council about the expiration of the existing TUPs. The Planning Commission had recommended that if new regulations were put in place, a six-month transition period should be considered. If not, a reasonable expiration date was 60-days to remove the temporary structures pursuant to the regulations of the Urgency Ordinance standards.

Council member Tave commented on discussions in 2020 about improving the downtown, providing wayfinding signage and walkable streets and noted the removal of parking may help to facilitate more seats and business activity. He questioned how this framework played into the larger vision for the downtown and whether there had been any consideration of how this framework fit in with other efforts. He also questioned how the sale of alcohol would be addressed in the public ROW and how it would be enforced by the Police Department, and the level of safety of traffic barriers when people were participating in outdoor dining. He was otherwise in favor of reaching out to local businesses to gauge their interest in new regulations.

Community Development Director Whalen stated that would be a component to address as part of new regulations. Outdoor dining and parklets were a component of the conversation referenced in 2020, but this item did not have to wait for that conversation to happen, and staff could be directed to start the conversations with business owners and bring back more fullyformed standards that would include numerous provisions including those mentioned.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms commented on the different types of locations and possibly the City already had a process in place to approve such uses as part of a regular use permit, which included properties that did not take up parking spaces and were not in the public ROW. As an example, one of the businesses was located between two buildings, another on a lot adjacent to the business and another in the front portion of the building. She asked staff whether those businesses could be considered for outdoor dining without making changes to the PMC.

Community Development Director Whalen confirmed the PMC had regulations which allowed sidewalk dining and outdoor dining on private property, with some standards related to accessibility requiring a clear path of travel.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms suggested moving forward with the TUP extensions in private parking lots or in the public ROW outside of the temporary use permit process that could be modified or streamline those on private property. She was interested in hearing from local businesses if this effort should be pursued. Of the two businesses with outdoor dining, one was in the parking lot and the other in the public ROW, and if they were to continue she was uncertain whether City staff should expend the time to create a process for only two businesses. She again wanted to see input from the local businesses. She added three years ago there had been concern with outdoor dining in the parking lot for one of the businesses and it should not be an automatic. She questioned staff going through a process for only two existing businesses, possibly more in the future and if more were proposed in the future, she preferred to see more permanent structures rather than the canopies that had been installed during the pandemic. 64 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Council member Tave referenced the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study, (Alta Design Group) dated March 2020 and a memorandum dated September 15, 2020, identified as Item 9A for the City Council meeting agenda for that date, which was related to his earlier comments about discussions in 2020.

Mayor Murphy asked whether or not staff had any recommendations related to native plant materials or sustainable materials, to which Community Development Director Whalen explained that staff would look to other communities that had implemented sustainable regulations or had encouraged them in parklet designs.

Mayor Murphy spoke to the options for outdoor dining in the public ROW and asked whether the City was responsible for incidents in the public street to pedestrians in the area. He cited Sue’s Place as an example.

Community Development Director Whalen stated the intent would be to prepare an agreement with the holder of a permit for a parklet that would transfer liability to the permit holder and not the City.

City Attorney Eric Casher confirmed that if the City was allowing a permitted use of the City’s ROW, the City would require the property owner to be responsible for any liability that would arise out of the use of the space, which would be reflected in a permit or agreement with any of those entities. Those requirements were not in the current TUPs.

Mayor Murphy was also interested in more permanent structures than the temporary tents that had been installed during the pandemic. In terms of signage, he asked whether there would be regulations for signage as part of the outdoor dining and Community Development Director Whalen advised the City Council could draft regulations as desired. Based on other regulations she had seen, no signage (advertising of a certain business) was allowed on parklets but the City Council could decide to allow the business to have signage and the regulations could be made clear on what was allowed.

Mayor Murphy understood that the existing TUPs expired 60-days after the Urgency Ordinance expired but the Zoning Administrator had the authority to extend a TUP, and Planning Manager Hanham clarified that once the Urgency Ordinance had been suspended, the Zoning Administrator did not have the authority to extend the TUPs. If the City Council did not want to continue further, the existing businesses with TUPs would have 60-days to remove their outdoor dining areas. The existing TUP holders had been informed by staff that the City was working on a potential new policy, but if that new policy was not pursued by the City Council, staff would work with the TUP holder on the removal of their temporary use.

Mayor Murphy asked whether or not shared use agreements or a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) could be considered if they moved forward with outdoor dining regulations if the City wanted to hold events in that space at minimal or no cost, as an example.

Planning Manager Hanham and Community Development Director Whalen both confirmed that was possible and clarified the Urgency Ordinance did not include a specific indemnity section or transfer of liability. It did include a section about the use of the public ROW and a requirement for the applicant to obtain an encroachment permit from the City and obtain and maintain appropriate insurance as required by the City.
65 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

City Attorney Casher commented that he was not aware of the encroachment permit language as part of the TUPs and could not comment on that at this time.

Mayor Murphy asked whether the PMC addressed rooftop spaces and asked whether there were limitations to address that opportunity in the conversations.

Planning Manager Hanham commented that if a business wanted to utilize a rooftop space for outdoor dining, as an example, the applicant would have to go through the City’s design review process. He cited the Safeway project as an example where the applicant had to go through the design review process for an outdoor area. He acknowledged that some apartment complexes may have rooftop activities, such as use of a barbeque and areas for people to gather, but that was for the residents of the building and not for use by the general public.

Mayor Murphy asked how the City had educated small businesses, particularly in Old Town, on the options for outdoor dining and Community Development Director Whalen suggested that would be an opportunity when staff reached out to businesses to solicit interest on outdoor dining to educate them on the current City processes. That could also be a way to identify whether there was a gap in what the business needed or wanted in the future and what the City’s regulations provided. That outreach and education had not been conducted at this point.

Planning Manager Hanham acknowledged that education about this process to local businesses would be key.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Oscar Soriano, Pinole, understood there had been safety concerns with outdoor dining during the pandemic. He suggested the businesses should have the right to have outdoor dining but the City should ensure there was adequate space and sidewalk width to accommodate the use.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Martinez-Rubin commented that the City Council had not discussed how Old Town should be revitalized other than a patchwork of projects and there was room for that discussion as part of strategic planning. As to what could enhance the dining experience, she cited other cities in California that had high traffic corridors where there was outdoor dining. While she was uncertain how those communities accomplished it, it may have involved a business district, which could be another avenue that could be pursued but which would require the involvement of the businesses which historically had been a constraint. She realized they would have to wait until staff had identified possible options that could be offered to the businesses, including the possibility of shared agreements.

Council member Martinez-Rubin recognized it remained to be seen whether businesses were interested in continuing with outdoor dining, whether it was necessary for the business, and whether the City had enough variety of eating experiences, noting there were 17 existing eating establishments in Old Town. She suggested a Needs or Interest Assessment would be necessary to provide a review of what other cities with comparable environmental conditions had done, which included the goal of sustainable environmental practices and enhancing the economic opportunity for small businesses, all remaining to be identified. She found the current process to be a patchwork as opposed to a larger vision or alternatives to the parklets. 66 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Given the need for more information on potential regulations, more clarity on the role of the City and the need to protect public safety and the City’s own liability, Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested it was possible a workshop with the businesses would be necessary.

Council member Tave read into the record the goals of the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study, dated March 2020, which effort the then-City Council had proposed to identify the vision for Old Town and whether it was consistent with the General Plan and Three Corridors Specific Plan. He suggested staff go back to that study as the starting point, which could be added to rather than pursue a patchwork solution and where the City could consider ways to make that vision come together. He pointed out that the sidewalk on San Pablo Avenue was not wide enough for outdoor dining, East Bay Coffee had a vacant lot which could be turned into something to attract people to the downtown, the Three Corridors Specific Plan was years old and he agreed that workshops and contact with the businesses was needed.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms agreed with the need to evaluate the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study to see how the context of parklets could be folded into the study but agreed the sidewalks along San Pablo Avenue were not wide enough to accommodate outdoor dining. There was an opportunity to provide outdoor dining on the corner lot of San Pablo Avenue depending on what was developed on that property. San Pablo Avenue also competed with parallel parking, bike lanes and high volumes of traffic. She suggested parklets on San Pablo Avenue were not feasible. In the meantime, she agreed the businesses should be surveyed to identify their interests. As an example, whether Pear Street Bistro would be interested in investing in a more permanent outdoor dining area. This area took up three to four parking spaces and it should be discussed whether that was a long-term solution in a shared parking lot.

Mayor Murphy recognized the challenges were not focused just on the City of Pinole. He cited the cities of Emeryville and Berkeley which also had challenges like Pinole but had been able to provide for outdoor dining. He wanted to allow the businesses that still had TUPs and outdoor dining to continue and it would be helpful for those businesses that had shown some interest in continuing with outdoor dining to continue until a more permanent solution had been proposed.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms agreed with allowing the businesses with TUPs to continue with their outdoor dining until a more permanent solution had been proposed.

Council member Martinez-Rubin commented that some of the outdoor dining establishments were different in appearance but she otherwise agreed to allow those businesses with a TUP to continue until a more permanent solution had been proposed.

Mayor Murphy suggested the City Council identify what questions should be part of a Needs Assessment. He also suggested recommendations be provided to staff about the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study and provide direction about a possible Master Plan/Revitalization of Old Town.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms reported the Specific Plan included implementation measures and staff did not need direction for a Master Plan for Old Town. She agreed it would be useful for staff to review the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study. 67 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Council member Tave wanted staff to incorporate what had been learned since the preparation of the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study and through the pandemic, and attempt to incorporate any information gleaned into the study and move forward with possible improvements such as bulb-outs on Tennent Avenue, parklets and tree lighting for Old Town and look at that through the lens of the big picture with input from local businesses.

Council member Sasai recognized the competing initiatives through discussions of this process.

He agreed with them all including the exploration of a Master Plan/Revitalization of Old Town. As to when the existing TUPs should be extended, he initially thought they could be extended through the process of community engagement but now recommended an extension until the City Council decided on when to consider a permanent program for outdoor dining.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Sasai/Tave to extend the active Temporary Use Permits until the end of the year.

Vote: Passed: 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Tave/Mayor Pro Tem Toms to direct staff to review the Old Town Pinole Parking and Pedestrian Safety Study (Alta Design Group) and return with suggestions regarding the report including parklets, bulb-outs, wayfinding and the other goals outlined in the study.

Vote: Passed: 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
In response to the Mayor as to how to incorporate rooftop gardens into the conversation, Community Development Director Whalen advised that staff could be directed to conduct business outreach, and as part of that outreach staff could incorporate a conversation about rooftop gardens with business owners. Staff could also conduct independent research.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms offered a motion, seconded by Council member Martinez-Rubin to direct staff to conduct some outreach with the goal of finding out if there was interest in doing permanent parklets or outdoor eating facilities.

Council member Martinez-Rubin, as the second to the motion, requested an amendment to identify the constraints among businesses that would keep them from having outdoor dining.

In response to the Mayor, Community Development Director Whalen clarified the motion would apply to any business that had some sort of component of food service. 68 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Council member Sasai recommended a further amendment to the motion to apply to entities with a business license in the City of Pinole with a food component that also had storefronts or had food preparation.

Community Development Director Whalen understood the direction was to reach out to businesses with business licenses that had a component of food service and that also had storefronts or dining in the City.

City Clerk Bell asked whether the motion included the rooftop component.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms commented that the motion could encompass the rooftop component but it would be a matter of someone improving their facilities to ensure it could be safely done.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Toms/Council member Martinez-Rubin to direct staff to conduct some outreach with the goal of finding out if there was interest in doing permanent parklets or outdoor eating facilities and identify the constraints among businesses (businesses with business licenses that had a component of food service and that also had storefronts or dining in the City) that would keep them from having outdoor dining.

Vote: Passed: 5-0
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
B. Options to Celebrate Pride in 2023 [Receive Report and Provide Direction (Rogers)]
Community Services Director Rogers provided a PowerPoint presentation which included an overview of the Options to Celebrate Pride in 2023. He clarified that during the month of June the City would also celebrate its 120th Anniversary, Juneteenth and Pride Month with the details for all activities planned highlighted in the April 4, 2023 staff report.

In response to Council member Tave, Community Services Director Rogers explained that fundraising for the events had not been planned and there were ample funds in the Special Events Fund to be used for a grand celebration.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms asked whether different organizations would have pop-ups and tables for the planned June 11, 2023 Fitzgerald Park event, and Community Services Director Rogers stated that anyone and everyone would be invited to attend with staff to reach out to as many organizations as possible.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms detailed the Fiesta Del Pinole which had been held in the City during a weekend years ago and which may be a celebration the City may want to bring back.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public. 69 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Martinez-Rubin encouraged staff to partner with the Pinole Historical Society to ensure that element was part of the celebrations planned. Aside from the Fiesta Del Pinole, she added the City had a Portuguese Fiesta in the past. Pinole had a Portuguese component to the community and there were active established groups in neighboring cities, and possibly that historical element could also be brought back.

Council member Sasai appreciated the events and activities planned but recalled the intent and purpose of Pride Month had been to focus on the LGBTQ+ community. He suggested that including the recognition of the other events in the same celebration diluted the intent of Pride Month. He suggested the focus should be on LGBTQ+ Pride. He was otherwise not opposed to bringing back past events, as mentioned, but that was a separate conversation.

Mayor Murphy explained when he had originally recommended the event it had been focused on LGBTQ+ Pride. As part of the next steps in planning, he wanted to see how they could be more intentional about the LGBTQ+ Pride celebration and suggested that staff could reach out to the Rainbow Community Center of Contra Costa to be a partner in the celebrations. He also clarified with staff that Concerts in the Park would continue to be held on Fridays, the events planned for June 11, 2023 would include two bands and other activities, as described in the staff report, and the events planned for Fernandez Park on June 11 were intended to be large enough where part of the baseball field would have to be used.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms asked how the event would be expressed, whether Pride or a combination of the different aspects since each piece was important but she did not want one to outshine the other.

Council member Tave suggested the City had a lot to celebrate. He liked the events but wanted to use the budget in the Special Event Fund as a baseline for each event. He was not opposed to bringing back the past events referenced but suggested each celebration did not have to be combined into one big event. He suggested there was a lot of opportunity for the community to become involved and he preferred the events not be combined into one, which would result in losing the focus on each event. Given the timeline, he envisioned the events would be larger and larger, which required more programming to keep people interested. He liked the ideas but opposed combining the events.

Council member Martinez-Rubin pointed out as staff had outlined there was room for each of the celebrations. She suggested the events planned for June 11 would not dilute any of the individual celebrations and she supported the staff recommendation.

Mayor Pro Tem Toms commented that since this would be the first year for such an event the City could start the baseline of celebrating the events, as proposed, while recognizing there could be expansion in the future where more focus could be provided as there was more time for planning.

Mayor Murphy added that another significant event during the month of June was June 29, 1903, the date of the incorporation of the City of Pinole.
70 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Council member Martinez-Rubin offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Toms for the City Council to approve and support the recommendations for the celebrations during the month of June 2023, as presented in the staff report.

On the motion, Council member Tave again clarified with the Community Services Director the events scheduled for Sunday, June 11, 2023, as shown in the staff report, with that date chosen since Fernandez Park had already been reserved for Saturday, June 10, 2023. He also clarified that staff had also conducted some research and had found the City’s June 11 celebration would not compete with other Pride celebrations in the Bay Area.

As to whether the events as planned could be split into individual dates for each event/activity and in response to the Mayor and Council member Tave, Community Services Director Rogers commented on the challenges for such scheduling due to other community events that had already been scheduled for Fernandez Park.

Council member Tave expressed concern with the volume of programming for one combined event and again clarified with the Community Services Director the events planned.

Community Services Director Rogers expressed the willingness to partner with the Pinole Historical Society, as recommended, and the Pinole Library as part of several options to highlight the accomplishments of the City and the community.

On the discussion, it was pointed out there were specific activities already planned for each of the accomplishments beyond the one Special Event planned for June 11, and there were also ways to program certain activities such as utilizing the Youth Center for the June 11 event, but there remained opposition to combining all events which could dilute the focus from Pride Month and there was a recommendation to having several events with a focus on each significant event separately at different sections of Fernandez Park, along with the acknowledgement that splitting the events was a heavy lift for staff within a short period of time that would also impact the budget.

It was noted that more intention could be focused on individual events in the future.

ACTION: Motion by Council member Martinez-Rubin/Mayor Pro Tem Toms for the City Council to approve and support the recommendations for the celebrations during the month of June 2023, as presented in the staff report.

Vote: Passed: 3-2
Ayes: Murphy, Toms, Martinez-Rubin
Noes: Tave, Sasai
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Community Services Director Rogers advised that staff would create marketing around the June 11 event, a banner would be displayed on San Pablo Avenue, and he would provide updated information on the next steps at a future meeting.

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.
71 of 395
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – April 4, 2023

Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist.

The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Anthony Vossbrink, Pinole, again requested a status update of the former Pinole Animal Shelter.

He also expressed his frustration at being cut-off when speaking and attempting to address issues and emphasized the public was entitled to some communication with regard to public comment or direction to staff to investigate and/or schedule a matter to a future meeting. He added that issues had been raised during Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee (TAPS) meetings over the past six to twelve months regarding traffic safety including striping, crosswalks and speed bumps that were faded.

Mayor Murphy reported an update on the Animal Shelter had been provided in the past but he asked that the next City Manager’s Report include a status update for the next City Council meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of April 18, 2023, in Remembrance of Amber Swartz, Joanie Shattuck and César Chavez.

At 10:40 p.m., Mayor Murphy adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting of April 18, 2023 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz, Joanie Shattuck and César Chavez Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
72 of 395
73 of 395
74 of 395
75 of 395
76 of 395
77 of 395
78 of 395
79 of 395
80 of 395
81 of 395
82 of 395
83 of 395
84 of 395
85 of 395
86 of 395
87 of 395
88 of 395
89 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9C
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF HOUSE MOVING PERMIT

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a house moving permit for the relocation of a Queen Anne style house from Hercules to 2525 Brandt Court in Pinole.

BACKGROUND
The Pinole Municipal Code (Section 15.16.060) requires that anyone wishing to move any house or structure on any public street or way in the city shall first obtain a permit for house moving. Before a house moving may be issued the person, firm or corporation that has applied for such permit must comply with the following specific requirements:

1. A special pre-moving inspection of the building has been made and approved.

2. Posted a performance bond in the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) payable to the city.

3. Provided a certificate of insurance for public and auto liability of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000); three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) bodily injury; and twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) property damage.

4. Payment of a permit fee of fifty dollars ($50) for each day or part thereof in which the moving operation will take place.

5. Agree to furnish adequate traffic control. Method and number of persons directing traffic must be approved by the chief of police.

6. Agree to pay the cost of any police and fire protection which may be required. A deposit of fifty dollars ($50) is required.

7. Provide a copy of signed agreement with the public utilities as to date, time, and route.

8. Post a time schedule with the public services department, building department and police department at least twenty-four hours in advance of any actual move. 90 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
In addition, the Pinole Municipal Code (under Chapter 12.28 – Moving of Buildings, Section 12.28.010) requires that a Council approval at a regular meeting is required for moving a house.

All removals made under such permits shall be done in a careful manner without allowing or causing any injury to property and shall be prosecuted with diligence and shall be under the control and to the satisfaction and approval of the superintendent of streets or such other officer as the Council may designate.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS
The applicant, Thomas White, has applied to move existing residential building on a vacant lot in City of Hercules to 2525 Brandt Ct in City of Pinole.

The building consists of approximately 2,596 square feet of living space, which would be split between a two-bedroom main residence upper level and a two-bedroom accessory dwelling unit lower level. A 400 square foot carport and site improvements are proposed on the lot. The building features cove rustic siding on the exterior walls and asphalt tile roofing, with details and colors shown in the plans (Attachment A).

The relocating involves moving the home from the City of Hercules to a vacant lot at 2525 Brandt Court. The house move will be conducted by Solares House Movers and will be conducted in two phases. The route for the move can be found in the Temporary Traffic Control Plan (Attachment D)
In preparation of the house move Thomas White and Dmitri Besler, on June 10, 2020, applied for a lot merger and development under PL20-0039 and was completed that same year. A design review application was also filed with the Planning Division on January 25, 2021, to relocate the Queen Anne House to 2525 Brandt Court and was approved on March 22, 2021, under PL21-0006 (DR21-03). The project will require grading of the planned location and onsite and offsite improvements.

The applicant has provided some background on the building from the Hercules Historical Society (Attachment B). The building, known as Building 54, was built around 1905. It was used as housing, likely for a company official, and later for office functions. It was one of 36 buildings comprising the plant village of the Hercules Powder Company. The remaining buildings in the district were placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980. In 2002, Building 54 was removed from its foundation to accommodate site grading. In 2010, the City of Hercules acquired the building and moved it a half mile south to their city property, which required cutting the building in two at the time. For this project, the building would be transported to and rehabilitated at the project site.

This project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that this proposal involves new construction or conversion of small structures.

The project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines because it involves location of a new single-family residence in a residential zone and within an urbanized 91 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 3
area and does not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource.

City staff has reviewed the application and confirmed that the application meets all City requirements. In addition, the applicant has received land use entitlements for the placement of the house at the new location as well as approval of a transportation permit.

With this house move it will provide a mix of sizes and housing types to meet the needs of Pinole’s diverse population.

The project would establish a single-family residence on a site surrounded by single family residences. The design is compatible with applicable residential design guidelines.

The two units provided through the upper-level single family residential living area and lower level ADU in the proposed building would expand the housing stock in the city.

The proposed project makes effective use of a vacant parcel within a residential area by placing a single-family residential building on the lot. The single-family residence complies with applicable development standards and the residential design guidelines.

Therefore, City staff is recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution approving issuance of the house moving permit.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to receiving this report.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Site Plan and House Detail
C. Historical Information About Hercules Powder Works Building 54 D. Engineer Assessment of San Pablo Ave Bridge
E. Temporary Traffic Control Plan
92 of 395
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A HOUSE MOVING PERMIT FOR 2525 BRANDT COURT
WHEREAS, Thomas White has submitted an application for a house moving permit to the City of Pinole;
WHEREAS, the application includes all necessary documentation, including proof of ownership of the property, a detailed plan for the house moving process, and evidence of insurance coverage;
WHEREAS, the house moving project has been thoroughly reviewed by Building and Public Works staff to ensure compliance with all relevant local ordinances, building codes, and safety regulations;
WHEREAS, the proposed house moving project is not expected to cause any significant disruptions to traffic, public utilities, or neighboring properties, and will be conducted in a safe and responsible manner;
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for and provided all necessary documents for the transportation permit and approvals from City of Hercules; WHEREAS, the applicant has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with the council and the local community by providing additional information and addressing any concerns or questions raised during the permit review process; WHEREAS, the house moving project is consistent with the overall development plans and goals of the city, and is not expected to have any adverse impact on the environment or quality of life of the residents; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby approves the house moving permit for 2525 Brandt Court as submitted by Thomas White, subject to the conditions and requirements specified in the permit application and as determined by the various departments (Building/Public Works/Police).

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City council of the City of Pinole directs the appropriate city officials and departments to issue the necessary permits and licenses, and to take any other actions deemed necessary to facilitate the safe and orderly completion of the house moving project in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Pinole may revoke or modify this approval at any time if the applicant fails to comply with the conditions and requirements of the permit, or if new information becomes available that warrants reconsideration of the approval.

ATTACHMENT A
93 of 395
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be provided to the applicant and all relevant city officials and departments for their records and appropriate action.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 18th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 18th day of April 2023.
____________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
94 of 395
5'
5'
20' 20'
18'-1"
5'-6"
21'-7"
32'-4"
10'-3"
15'-3"
SQ. FT. OF LANDSCAPED AREAS: 6029 SQ.FT.

BRANDT CT.

SUBJECT PROPERTY
(2525 BRANDT CT.)
UP
(E) PORCH
PARKING (20x20 CLR)
SIDE
YARD

REAR YARD

FRONT YARD
SIDE
YARD

ADJACENT

PROPERTY
(2519 BRANDT CT.)
LOT 5 LOT 6 LOT 7
(N) CONC. RETAINING
WALL
(N) DRIVEWAY
(N) RAISED

PLANTING
(N) CARPORT ROOF

TERRACED

PLANTING

PLANTING
35 40
50 45
55 60
65 45
40 50
55 60
55 35
(E) TREE TO
REMAIN
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN

STUMP TO BE

REMOVED
MAIN FLOOR @ 53.0 ADU FLOOR @ 44.0
DAYLIGHT @

PLANTING
STL. SOLDIER PILE RET. WALL (MAX 6')
42'' HIGH GUARDRAIL TYP.

DAYLIGHT &

PLANTING

43.25 43.5

44.0 42 - 42.5

43.0 42.5
(N) SIDEWALK
(N) CURB & GUTTER
(N) WATER METER
DAYLIGHT @
CURB
(E) CURBS TO BE

REPLACED W/

CONTINUOUS

SIDEWALKS, TBD
20' CURB CUT DAYLIGHT @ CURB
(E) CURB
(E) DRIVEWAY EDGE @

NEIGHBOR
SM. WD. RET. WALL
SM. WOOD
RET. WALL
DAYLIGHT @ PLANT BED

52.0 53.0

51.0 (MAX 7' HIGH)
CONC. RET. WALL
(N) PSL TO
(MAX 4' HIGH) CONCRETE RET. WALL
(E) DECK REBUILT
SB
SM. WD. RET. WALL
SB
DAYLIGHT @

PLANTING
DAYLIGHT @
CURB
SS
KEY:

ROOF LINE
U.G. RAINWATER LEADER

DAYLIGHTING ON PROPERTY

DOWNSPOUT

SB SPLASHBLOCK

53.0 ELEVATION
FOUNDATION DRAIN & RET. WALL DRAIN

DAYLIGHTING TO STREET

TREE TO
REMAIN

ADU ENTRY/ TERRACE

TREE TO
REMAIN

TREE TO
REMAIN

TREE TO
REMAIN

PARCEL D
147 PM 4

PARCEL C
147 PM 4

PARCEL B
147 PM 4

TERRACED PLANTING
(W/ WD RETAINING WALLS <36'' HT)
N 89° 15' E
S O° 45' E
100'
18' 0"
5' MAX
EXT.

FOR
STAIR
21'-6"
10'-0"
15' PL TO ADJ.

HOUSE
8'' TREE TO BE REMOVED
LOT 10
100'-0"
N0" 45'W
N 89° 15' E
100'
100'

FRONT YARD
20' 20'

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
CONC. CONCRETE
D.G.

SQ. FT. OF PAVED AREAS: 2374 SQ.FT.

CONC.

CONC.

WALK
CONC. WALK
CONC.

WALK
CONC.

D.G.

CONC. CONC.
(E) WOOD FENCE TO
REMAIN 4'-6' HT
(E) WOOD FENCE
4'-6' HT TO
REMAIN
(E) LATTICE FENCE
HT 5'-8' TO REMAIN
(E) WOOD WALL

TO REMAIN
N
N
N
1 0 1 2 3
ROCKHEAD HOUSE MOVE FOR:

DMTIRI BELSER & TOM WHITE
2525 BRANDT CT. PINOLE, CA 94564
9, MARCH 2021
NOTED

AB & PN
00-00BLACKBIRD DESIGNS Andus H Brandt, Architect Ownership of Documents: This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of Blackbird Designs and is not to be used, in whole or in part, for any other project without the express written authority of Andus Brandt, Blackbird Designs 1818 Harmon Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 ph: 510-601-1150 Revisions By
DATE
SCALE

DRAWN BY
JOB
SHEET
OF
SHEETS 6
SITE PLAN 1 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A1.0

SITE PLAN

VICINITY MAP
(LOTS 8 & 9, MERGED)
VICINITY MAP 2 N.T.S.

TRACED FROM GOOGLE MAPS - NOT ALL INFO. IS RELIABLE

ATTACHMENT B
95 of 395
UP
1'-6" 19'-4 1/2" 14'-8" 2' 2'
3'-11" 11'-7" 14'-11 1/2" 6'-7" 13'-4 1/2"
39'-6 1/2"
50'-5"
20'-10 1/2" 3'-10 1/2" 8'-10 1/2" 3'-11" 2'
39'-6 1/2"
5'-9 1/2" 30'-11" 6'-4 1/2" 7'-1"
50'-2"
15'-1" x 13'-11"
15'-8" x 15'-1"
15'-1" x 15'-5"
13'-8" x 13'-0"
11'-8" x 6'-2"
17'-8" x 13'-5"
8'-0" x 6'-2" 4'-11" x 36'-4"
6'-8" x 2'-6"
6'-8" x 2'-6"
[E] LIVING
F.P.
[E] DINING
[E] PANTRY
[E] KITCHEN
[E] HALL #1
[E] BEDROOM #2
[E] BEDROOM #1
[E] CL. #2
[E] CL. #1
[E] BATH
[E] PORCH
[E] PORCH
[E] STAIR
1 2
3 4
5 6
A A1 C D2 D1 D
2 5.1
A B C C1 D
N
UP
14 A3.0
2 A3.0
2 A3.0
3 A3.0
3 A3.0
3'
2'-8" x 5'-11"
6'-8" x 2'-0"
15'-1" x 13'-11"
15'-8" x 15'-1"
15'-1" x 11'-5"
13'-8" x 13'-0"
11'-8" x 6'-2"
10 17'-8" x 13'-5"'-2" x 10'-3"
4'-11" x 36'-4"
4'-6" x 4'-3"
6'-8" x 2'-6"
[E] LIVING
[E] DINING
[E] PANTRY
[N] ALT. @ [E] KITCHEN
[E] HALL #1
[E] BEDROOM #2
[E] BEDROOM #1
[E] CL. #2
[N] 1/2 BATH
[N] BATH
[E] PORCH
[E] STAIR
[N] LAUN.
[N] CL. #1

BUILT-IN BY OWNER
FIRE
PLACE
A D
A C D
1 3
4 5
6 2

5.1 DECK EXTENSION

TO GRADE
42'' HIGH
GUARDRAIL TYP.

NOTE: ATTIC AREA TO BE
CLOSED OFF @ TOP OF (E)
STAIR
CLR
[E] REAR PORCH

WALL TYPE LEGEND
(E) WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
(E) WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED:

SEE DEMO PLAN FOR MORE INFO.
(N) EXTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
(N) EXTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION @ PARAPET
(N) INTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
KEY
(E) WALL TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

HEADER OR BEAM
(E) WALL TO DEMO
N

WALL TYPE LEGEND
(E) WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
(E) WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED:

SEE DEMO PLAN FOR MORE INFO.
(N) EXTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
(N) EXTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION @ PARAPET
(N) INTERIOR WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION
KEY
(E) WALL TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

HEADER OR BEAM
(E) WALL TO DEMO
1 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 3
ROCKHEAD HOUSE MOVE FOR:

DMTIRI BELSER & TOM WHITE
2525 BRANDT CT. PINOLE, CA 94564
9, MARCH 2021
NOTED

AB & PN
00-00BLACKBIRD DESIGNS Andus H Brandt, Architect Ownership of Documents: This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of Blackbird Designs and is not to be used, in whole or in part, for any other project without the express written authority of Andus Brandt, Blackbird Designs 1818 Harmon Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 ph: 510-601-1150 Revisions By
DATE
SCALE

DRAWN BY
JOB
SHEET
OF
SHEETS 6
2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL PLAN - EXISTING 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED M
AIN
L
E
V
E
L
P
L
A
N - P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
M
AIN
L
E
V
E
L
P
L
A
N - E
XIS
TIN
G
A2.0

FOR DIMENSIONS, SEE (E) MAIN LEVEL PLAN
96 of 395
U
P 14 A3.0
2 A3.0
2 A3.0
3 A3.0 3
A3.0 12'-11 1/2" 7'-11" 6'-11 1/2" 9'-8 1/2" 37'-6 1/2" 3'-11" 11'-7" 2'-6" 13'-8 1/2" 5'-4" 37'-0 1/2" 21'-4 1/2" 3'-4 1/2" 8'-10 1/2" 3'-11" 21'-4 1/2" 16'-2" 20'-5" x 23'-8" 15'-8" x 14'-7" 7'-0" x 6'-9" 3'-0" x 3'-7" 6'-0" x 2'-0" 9'-8" x 12'-0" 2'-0" x 4'-11" [N] GREAT ROOM [N] BEDROOM #2 [N] BATH [N] BEDROOM #1 [N] CL. #1 [N] CL. [N] HALL AC1D
AA2D1
1 3.1 51 3 4 5 6
2 5.1

C (N) UTILITY

CRAWLSPACE

OUTLINEOFDECKABOVE

GREATROOM

CRAWLSPACE
BATH
CLOSET
HALL
DINING
PATIO
NOTE: ATTICLEVEL

TOBECLOSEDOFF
@TOPOFSTAIR. A
TTIC
HALL
PORCH

UTILITY
BATH
PORCH

GREATROOM
N 1 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 3
ROCKHEAD HOUSE MOVE FOR:

DMTIRI BELSER & TOM WHITE
2525 BRANDT CT. PINOLE, CA 94564
9, MARCH 2021
NOTED

AB & PN
00-00BLACKBIRD DESIGNS Andus H Brandt, Architect Ownership of Documents: This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of Blackbird Designs and is not to be used, in whole or in part, for any other project without the express written authority of Andus Brandt, Blackbird Designs 1818 Harmon Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 ph: 510-601-1150 Revisions By
DATE
SCALE

DRAWN BY
JOB
SHEET
OF
SHEETS 6
1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVE
LPLAN - PROPOSEDA.D.U. A3.0 LOWER LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED A.D.U. LONGITUDINAL SECTION CROSS SECTION

FORDIMENSIONS, SEE (E) MAINLEVELPLAN

LONGITUDINALSECTION
2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" CROSS SECTIO
N
3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
97 of 395
29'-7 1/2"
1/4" PER FT. MIN. SLOPE DG PATIO
MAX
HT
=
(+/- 28' 8")
(E) (E) (E) (E) (E)
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
UG RWL
UG RWL
25'-5 1/2" AVG
GRD
TO
PK
=
(+/- 25' 6")
(E) (E) (E)
(E)
(E) (E) (E) (E)
(N) (N)
GSM

DOWNSPOUT
TYP.

DOTS INDICATE (e)

LANDSCAPE CONTOUR
UG RWL
SPLASHBLOCK, TYP.
30'-5 1/2" MAX
HT
=
30'-5 1/2"
(E) (E)
(E) (E)
(E)
(E)
(N)
(E)
(N)
(N)
(N) (N) (N)
(N)
20'-4 1/2"
1/4" PER FT. MIN. SLOPE DG PATIO
HT
@
REAR
=
20'-4 1/2"
(E)
(E)
CONC. BULLHEAD
& WALK
UG RWL
(E) LANDSCAPE

CONTOUR
UG RWL
UG RWL
1 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 3
1 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 3
ROCKHEAD HOUSE MOVE FOR:

DMTIRI BELSER & TOM WHITE
2525 BRANDT CT. PINOLE, CA 94564
9, MARCH 2021
NOTED

AB & PN
00-00BLACKBIRD DESIGNS Andus H Brandt, Architect Ownership of Documents: This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of Blackbird Designs and is not to be used, in whole or in part, for any other project without the express written authority of Andus Brandt, Blackbird Designs 1818 Harmon Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 ph: 510-601-1150 Revisions By
DATE
SCALE

DRAWN BY
JOB
SHEET
OF
SHEETS 6
FRONT ELEVATION - PROPOSED (NORTH) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" LEFT SIDE ELEVATION - PROPOSED (EAST) 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" REAR ELEVATION - PROPOSED (SOUTH) 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - PROPOSED (WEST) 4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" E X
T. E
L
E
V
A
TIO
N
S - P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
A4.0
(LOTS 8 & 9, MERGED)
EXTERIOR APPEARANCE NOTES:

MATERIALS - COVE RUSTIC SIDING (MATCH E); 1X4 CASINGS (MATCH E); 1X4 CORNER TRIM (MATCH E); MATCH EAVES, BARGE BOARDS, ETC. ASPHALT ROOF SHINGLES.

COLORS: (BENJAMIN MOORE) BODY & DOWNSPOUTS: WHIPPLE BLUE HC-152; CASINGS, CORNER TRIM, BARGE BOARDS, FASCIA, GUTTERS, WINDOWS: STONE WHITE; EAVE UNDERSIDES, STAIR RISERS, RAILINGS, POSTS, ETC: COORDINATED STONE WHITE; ROOF: CERTAINTEED GEORGETOWN GREY.

NOTES: 1. TRIM @ WINDOWS & DOORS TO CONSISTENTLY MATCH (E) TREATMENTS & ALL SAME COLOR. 2. ROOFING TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED. 3. SIDING TO REMAIN & MATCH W/ NEW. 98 of 395
N
1 A5.0
2 A5.0
6'-3 1/2" 6'-8" 6'-3 1/2"
20'
20'
2'-8"
(N) CARPORT 20X20
CONCRETE RET. WALL

CONTINUES, LOW
7' HIGHT CONCRETE RET. WALL @ EAST SIDE
CONCRETE RET. WALL

CONTINUES
E
Q
E
Q
E
Q

COLUMNS & CEILING, ALL

PAINTED STONE WHITE

TO MATCH HOUSE

ASSEMBLY

LIGHT COLOR ROLL ROOFING

AC PLYWOOD
2x4 @ 16" O.C. 4x12 BMS. +/- 6' 5" O.C.

RETAINING WALL
1/2"/FT. PITCH

COLUMNS & FASCIA, ALL

PAINTED STONE WHITE

TO MATCH HOUSE

RETAINING WALL RETAINING WALL
ROCKHEAD HOUSE MOVE FOR:

DMTIRI BELSER & TOM WHITE
2525 BRANDT CT. PINOLE, CA 94564
9, MARCH 2021
NOTED

AB & PN
00-00BLACKBIRD DESIGNS Andus H Brandt, Architect Ownership of Documents: This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of Blackbird Designs and is not to be used, in whole or in part, for any other project without the express written authority of Andus Brandt, Blackbird Designs 1818 Harmon Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 ph: 510-601-1150 Revisions By
DATE
SCALE

DRAWN BY
JOB
SHEET
OF
SHEETS 6
3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" CARPORT FLOOR PLAN - PROPOSED
1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FRONT CARPORT ELEVATION - PROPOSED (NORTH) 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" RIGHT SIDE CARPORT ELEVATION - PROPOSED (WEST) A5.0
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
C
A
R
P
O
R
T
M
A
T
E
RIA
L
B
O
A
R
D
P
H
O
T
O
S
CERTAINTEED GEORGETOWN GREY ROOFING 7
ORIGINAL HOUSE BEFORE SPLIT & MOVE 9
STONE WHITE (MATCH MARVIN WINDOW) - ALL SURFACES OTHER THAN BODY OF HOUSE 5 COVE RUSTIC SIDING 6
(E) HOUSE SPLIT IN HALF & ON BLOCKS 8
BENJAMIN MOORE WHIPPLE BLUE - BODY OF HOUSE & DOWNSPOUTS 4 NOTE: SEE ELEVATIONS
SHEET A4.0 FOR COLOR
SCHEME
99 of 395
ABOUT HERCULES POWDER WORKS BUILDING 54
Built in about 1905, Building 54 is a two-story, wood frame residential building, originally with a brick foundation and basement. Its architecture is in the Queen Anne style. Building 54 was used as housing, probably for a company official, and later for office functions.

Its original address was 2 Kings Street, a site just northwest of Building 8103, the “Clubhouse”. It was part of the complex of administrative, technical and social buildings known as “The Hill”.

Building 54 is one of the thirty-six buildings identified as comprising the plant village of the Hercules Powder Company. This and the other remaining listed buildings are historically significant because they comprise the only remaining example of a company town of an explosives plant in the United States.

The City of Hercules, the State of California and the Department of Interior of the United States recognize the building as a historic resource. These buildings were placed on the National Register of Historic Places on August 22, 1980. This decision, taken by the Secretary of the Interior of the United States, required a finding and nomination by the California State Historic Preservation Officer. In addition, the City of Hercules took subsequent official actions to recognize and protect the historic resources, such as this building, within its adopted General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

In 2002, to accommodate site grading, the Bixby Company removed Building 54 from its foundation and relocated it about one hundred feet west of its original site. In 2010, the City of Hercules acquired Building 54 from Oso Trabuco, its owner, and moved it about a half mile south to City property.

This relocation required cutting the building in two.

ATTACHMENT C
100 of 395
www.quincyeng.com | 11017 Cobblerock Drive, Suite 100 | Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 | P: 916.368.9181 | F: 916.368.1308 August 19, 2022
Tom White
Phil Joy Housemoving
35 Sandy Beach Road
Vallejo, CA 94590
Dear Mr. White
Thank you for the opportunity to review your Transportation Permit to move a house within the City of Pinole. According to your Transportation Permit application, the proposed route for the house move includes the crossing of San Pablo Avenue Overhead (Bridge No. 28C0062). Currently this bridge has no weight restrictions for legal vehicles. Based on the information provided in the Transportation Permit application and the additional information that the heaviest load to be transported is approximately 46,000 lbs, this load is classified as a legal load. Therefore, it can be transported across the San Pablo Avenue Overhead bridge.

While the bridge is capable of carrying legal loads, we would recommend that you travel at a maximum speed of 15mph as you cross the bridge. If you have any questions regarding our findings, please do not hesitate to contact either myself at [email protected] or Matt Vaggione at [email protected]. Thank you for this opportunity and best of luck on the house move.

Sincerely,
Dace Morgan, PE C54408

ATTACHMENT D
101 of 395
Location of House to be moved
House move route
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR (OR LESS) ON WILLET AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4. RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 NO

PARKING
DATE
TIME
TYPE I BARR
WITH P­11
NO

PARKING
DATE
TIME
TYPE I BARR
WITH P­11
BARRICADES WITH NO
PARKING SIGNS TO BE PLACED
ALONG BOTH SIDES OF WILLET AVE
AND SYCAMORE AVE 72 HOURS
BEFORE HOUSE MOVE.

PHASE 1
PAGE 1
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

NO

PARKING
DATE
TIME
TYPE I BARR
WITH P­11
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED

AHEAD ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
FLAGGERS WILL HOLD TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION. SYCAMORE AVE. TO BE
OPENED AFTER HOUSE TURNS ONTO TSUSHIMA ST.
www.invarion.com

ATTACHMENT E
102 of 395
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR (OR LESS) ON WILLET AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 1
PAGE 2
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
ROAD
CLOSED

AHEAD ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
House move route
FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION. SYCAMORE AVE. TO BE
OPENED AFTER HOUSE TURNS ONTO TSUSHIMA ST.
www.invarion.com
103 of 395
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1 LEFT LANE
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ARROW

TRAILER
Warning Arrow
Trailer
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­30
LANE
CLOSED
R3­1
R3­1
C 19
C 20
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 40 MILES PER HOUR ON SAN PABLO AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 250 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2 PAGE 1
SYCAMORE AND
SAN PABLO DETAIL
www.invarion.com
104 of 395
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR ON SYCAMORE AVENUE AND TSUSHIMA ST.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2
PAGE 2
C­2
ROAD

CLOSED ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD R3­1
R3­1
SAN PABLO AVE WESTBOUND. WILL BE CLOSED AT SYCAMORE
BEFORE HOUSE IS MOVED ONTO SAN PABLO AVE
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

AS THE HOUSE IS MOVED DOWN
TSUSHIMA ST. FLAGGER WILL
DIRECT TRAFFIC TO MAKE A
RIGHT OR LEFT TURN AS THAT
DIRECTION IS OPEN AND
AVAILABLE. ONCE THE HOUSE
HAS MOVED SOUTH OF RIVERVIEW TERRACE THE TRAFFIC WILL
BE DIRECTED TO MAKE A LEFT TURN.

FLAGGER WILL HOLD TRAFFIC WHILE
THE HOUSE MOVES THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION. AFTER THE HOUSE
MOVES ONTO TSUSHIMA ST.

SYCAMORE AVE. WILL BE OPENED.
www.invarion.com
105 of 395
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
R3­1
C­30
LANE
CLOSED
C­30
LANE
CLOSED
R3­1
SAN PABLO AVE WESTBOUND. WILL BE CLOSED AT SYCAMORE
BEFORE HOUSE IS MOVED ONTO SAN PABLO AVE
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE IS MOVED THROUGH THE

INTERSECTION
FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE IS MOVED THROUGH THE

INTERSECTION
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 40 MILES PER HOUR ON SAN PABLO AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 250 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2 PAGE 3
House move route
www.invarion.com
106 of 395
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE

INTERSECTIONS
R3­1
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
R3­1
R3­1
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE

INTERSECTION
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
ROAD
WORK
AHEAD
W20­1
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR SAN PABLO AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2 PAGE 4
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
MATCH LINE A
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
R3­1
House move route
www.invarion.com
107 of 395
MATCH LINE A
R3­1
R3­1
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
R3­1
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE

INTERSECTIONS
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

MATCH LINE B
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR ON TENNANT AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2 PAGE 5
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
House move route
www.invarion.com
108 of 395
DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE
TOTAL PROJECT SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE
PLAN APPROVAL DATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS OFFICERS OR
AGENTS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF SCANNED
COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

NOT TO SCALE
Alameda
CAL SAFETY INC.
510­656­5544
Date: JULY 2022 Author: Cal Safety Inc. Project: ROCKHEAD AND QUARRY Comments:

NOTES: THE IMAGE IS NOT TO SCALE

1. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNS& METHODS SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND THE CURRENT CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS.

2. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES PER HOUR ON TENNANT AVENUE.

SO SIGNS SHALL BE SPACED 100 FT APART.

3. P­11 NO PARKING SIGNS POSTED ON TYPE I BARRICADES MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE HOUSE MOVE ROUTE 72 HOURS BEFORE THE START OF HOUSE MOVE.

4.  RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR DRIVEWAYS AT ALL TIMES AND ADVANCED WARNING SIGNS SHALL NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAYS.

5. AS HOUSE IS MOVED ALONG THE ROUTE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL CREW WILL OPEN THE STREET CLOSURES AS SOON AS IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
04 PHASE 2 PAGE 6
R3­1
R3­1
MATCH LINE B
R3­1
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
R3­1
R3­1
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
C­2
ROAD
CLOSED
SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

WHILE HOUSE IS NORTH OF PEACH ST. ON TENNANT AVE.

FLAGGER WILL DIRECT ALL TRAFFIC SOUTH ON TENNANT AVE.

AFTER HOUSE HAS MOVED SOUTH OF PEACH ST. FLAGGER
WILL DIRECT TRAFFIC TO GO NORTH ON TENNANT AVE.

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGERS WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION.

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGER WILL HOLD CROSS TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION AND ONTO BRANDT CT.

SLOW
STOP
Flagger With a
Paddle and a
Two­Way Radio .

FLAGGER WILL HOLD DOWNER ST. TRAFFIC
UNTIL HOUSE HAS MOVED THROUGH THE
INTERSECTION. WHILE THE HOUSE IS SOUTH
OF DOWNER ST. THE FLAGGER WILL DIRECT TRAFFIC
NORTH ON PINOLE VALLEY ROAD.

AFTER THE HOUSE MOVES NORTH OF DOWNER ST.

ALL TRAFFIC WILL BE DIRECTED SOUTH ON
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD.

House move route
www.invarion.com
109 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9D
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MISHA KAUR, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL

PROGRAM MANAGER
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF LOCAL SUPPORT FOR OBAG 3 GRANT PROGRAM

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) to:

1. Authorize the City Manager to execute and file an application with Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for $1,020,000 in funding assigned to MTC for programming discretion for the Bay Trail Gap Closure at Tennent Avenue project, also known as Pedestrian Improvements at Tennent Avenue (CIP Project – RO1902, the “Project”); and

2. Commit $345,000 in matching funds for the Project; and

3. State assurances to complete the Project as described in the application with adequate staffing resources and in compliance with procedures, delivery milestones, and funding deadlines set forth by MTC.

BACKGROUND
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) functions as the regional transportation planning agency, a State of California designation, and the region’s metropolitan planning organization, a Federal designation. MTC is charged with establishing the criteria and policies for allocating federal transportation funding in the San Francisco Bay Area. In 2012, MTC integrated various transportation programs with California’s climate law (Senate Bill 375) and the Sustainable Communities Strategy to create the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Program. The OBAG Program offers flexibility to invest in various transportation categories including Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC), bicycle and pedestrian improvements, local streets and road preservation, and planning activities.

In 2015 and 2016, MTC adopted the selection criteria and programming policy for the second round of the OBAG, known as OBAG 2 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 through FY 2021-22. Over the years, the City has received OBAG 2 grant funds to rehabilitate various sections of San Pablo Ave. between the western city limits and Sunnyview Drive. 110 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
The third round of OBAG 3 was adopted by MTC in January 2022 and includes $750 million in federal funding for projects from 2023 to 2026. The OBAG 3 program is divided into a regional program, managed by MTC, and a County and Local Program managed by MTC in partnership with the 9 Bay Area County Transportation Agencies (CTAs).

Jurisdictions in Contra Costa County are estimated to receive $47.3 million in funding.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS
A total of 29 applications were submitted by various jurisdictions in Contra Costa County to Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) for scoring and project prioritization.

CCTA prioritized 10 projects, one of which included Pinole’s Bay Trail Gap Closure at Tennent Avenue, also known as Pedestrian Improvements at Tennent Avenue (CIP Project – RO1902, the “Project”). CCTA submitted project recommendations to MTC, and in January 2023, the MTC commission determined final funding awards of OBAG 3 funds.

As part of the grant application, MTC requires a Resolution of Local Support, approved by City Council to ensure compliance with the terms of the grant.

The City received $100,000 in grant funds from West Contra Costa Transportation Authority for preliminary engineering and design for the Project. The Project closes a 600- foot gap in the San Francisco Bay Trail in the City of Pinole where it crosses the Union Pacific tracks at Tennent Avenue near Bayfront Park. The Project will improve safety of the at-grade crossing of the Union Pacific tracks including conforming to accessibility guidelines.

The Project estimated total construction cost including contingency is $1,365,000; with $1,020,000 provided as part of OBAG 3 grant funds, and $345,000 in matching funds.

The Resolution of Local Support (Attachment A) serves three purposes:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute and file an application with MTC for regional discretionary funding for the Project;

2. Commits to providing matching funds to successfully complete and deliver the Project; and

3. States assurance by the City to complete and deliver the Project with adequate staffing and in compliance with procedures, delivery milestones, and funding deadlines set forth by MTC.

FISCAL IMPACT
If the requested, $1,020,000 OBAG 3 grant funds are awarded, local matching funds in the amount of $345,000 will be required to complete the Project. The Project is eligible to seek additional STMP funds from WCCTAC and staff intends to prepare an application in 111 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 3
response to an upcoming solicitation for STMP Cycle 2 Call for Projects to secure matching funds for the Project. Other sources of matching funds could include the General Fund or Measure S-2014.

ATTACHMENT(S)
A. Resolution
112 of 395
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE

FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIGNED TO METROPOLITAN

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND

COMMITTING ANY NECESSARY MATCHING FUNDS AND STATING ASSURANCE

TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole (herein referred to as APPLICANT) is submitting an application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for ($1,020,000) in funding assigned to MTC for programming discretion, which includes federal funding administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and federal or state funding administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) such as Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) funding, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funding, Transportation Alternatives (TA) set-aside/Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding, and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) funding (herein collectively referred to as REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING) for the (Bay Trail Gap Closure at Tennent Avenue) (herein referred to as PROJECT) for the OBAG-3 Program (herein referred to as PROGRAM); and
WHEREAS, the United States Congress from time to time enacts and amends legislation to provide funding for various transportation needs and programs, (collectively, the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT) including, but not limited to the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) (23 U.S.C. § 133), the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) (23 U.S.C. § 149) and the Transportation Alternatives (TA) set-aside (23 U.S.C. § 133); and WHEREAS, state statutes, including California Streets and Highways Code §182.6, §182.7, and §2381(a)(1), and California Government Code §14527, provide various funding programs for the programming discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT, and any regulations promulgated thereunder, eligible project sponsors wishing to receive federal or state funds for a regionally-significant project shall submit an application first with the appropriate MPO, or RTPA, as applicable, for review and inclusion in the federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and
WHEREAS, MTC is the MPO and RTPA for the nine counties of the San Francisco Bay region; and
WHEREAS, MTC has adopted a Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) that sets out procedures governing the application and

ATTACHMENT A
113 of 395
use of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
WHEREAS, APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor for REGIONAL
DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, MTC requires a resolution adopted by the responsible implementing agency stating the following:
• the commitment of any required matching funds; and
• that the sponsor understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING is fixed at the programmed amount, and therefore any cost increase cannot be expected to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
• that the PROJECT will comply with the procedures, delivery milestones and funding deadlines specified in the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised); and
• the assurance of the sponsor to complete the PROJECT as described in the application, subject to environmental clearance, and if approved, as included in MTC's federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and • that the PROJECT will have adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and
• that the PROJECT will comply with all project-specific requirements as set forth in the PROGRAM; and
• that APPLICANT has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective Congestion Management Agency (CMA), MTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation and transit projects implemented by APPLICANT; and
• in the case of a transit project, the PROJECT will comply with MTC Resolution No. 3866, revised, which sets forth the requirements of MTC’s Transit Coordination Implementation Plan to more efficiently deliver transit projects in the region; and
• in the case of a highway project, the PROJECT will comply with MTC Resolution No. 4104, which sets forth MTC’s Traffic Operations System (TOS) Policy to install and activate TOS elements on new major freeway projects; and
• in the case of an RTIP project, state law requires PROJECT be included in a local congestion management plan, or be consistent with the capital improvement program adopted pursuant to MTC’s funding agreement with the countywide transportation agency; and
WHEREAS, that APPLICANT is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and
114 of 395
WHEREAS, there is no legal impediment to APPLICANT making applications for the funds; and
WHEREAS, there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of APPLICANT to deliver such PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, APPLICANT authorizes its City Manager, or designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and
WHEREAS, MTC requires that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the APPLICANT is authorized to execute and file an application for funding for the PROJECT for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING under the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT or continued funding; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT will provide any required matching funds; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT understands that the REGIONAL
DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the project is fixed at the MTC approved programmed amount, and that any cost increases must be funded by the APPLICANT from other funds, and that APPLICANT does not expect any cost increases to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT understands the funding deadlines associated with these funds and will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) and APPLICANT has, and will retain the expertise, knowledge and resources necessary to deliver federally-funded transportation and transit projects, and has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective Congestion Management Agency (CMA), MTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA- and CTCfunded transportation and transit projects implemented by APPLICANT; and be it further RESOLVED that PROJECT will be implemented as described in the complete application and in this resolution, subject to environmental clearance, and, if approved, for the amount approved by MTC and programmed in the federal TIP; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT has reviewed the PROJECT and has adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and be it further
RESOLVED that PROJECT will comply with the requirements as set forth in 115 of 395
MTC programming guidelines and project selection procedures for the PROGRAM; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING funded projects; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and be it further RESOLVED that there is no legal impediment to APPLICANT making applications for the funds; and be it further
RESOLVED that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of APPLICANT to deliver such PROJECT; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT authorizes its Executive Director, General Manager, City Manager, or designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and be it further
RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution will be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application; and be it further RESOLVED that the MTC is requested to support the application for the PROJECT described in the resolution, and if approved, to include the PROJECT in MTC's federal TIP upon submittal by the project sponsor for TIP programming.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 18th day of April by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 18th day of April 2023.
____________________________
Heather Bell,CMC
City Clerk
116 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9E
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LILLY WHALEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE

FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CLIENT FIRST

TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL

SUPPORT SERVICES DURING THE UPGRADE AND MIGRATION OF

THE PERMIT TRACKING AND ONLINE APPLICATION SYSTEM AND

APPROPRIATE FUNDING

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution that:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the fourth amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with Client First Technology Consulting to include the following tasks:
• Project Management ($42,960);
• Configuration Improvements and Workflow Updates ($78,005); and • 22/23 Fee Schedule Update and Ongoing Fee Changes ($11,200).

2. Appropriate $132,165 from the General Fund and Building and Planning fund to support the project.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole was an early adopter of an electronic building and planning permit tracking system, acquiring permitting software from the firm CRW 23 years ago, in 1999.

The City continues to use the software system TRAKiT to track the submittal, processing, and retention of building and planning permits, code enforcement cases, and business licenses. The software was last updated in 2015, is not web-based, and is currently outdated, unsupported, and in need of an upgrade. CentralSquare Technologies acquired the software in 2018 and now offers a secure cloud-based Community Development Suite of technology solutions that replaces TRAKiT.

On June 7, 2022 the City Council authorized the approval of a number of contracts to upgrade the City’s current TRAKiT system to the secure cloud-based Community Development Suite which automates work processes, allows field staff remote access, 117 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
and engages citizens and customers by providing 24/7 online access to apply for and track a permit.

The City has contracted with Client First Technology Consulting (Client First) since February 2022 for assistance with the City’s contract negotiations with CentralSquare Technologies and help in configuring the new version of TRAKiT and migrating data to it.

The original Client First contract amount was not to exceed $49,959. In June 2022, the City Council authorized a contract fee increase of $30,000 for Client First to provide continued support though implementation phase of the permitting system. In September 2022, the City Council authorized a contract fee increase of $48,850 for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) services and the complete restructuring of all new user fees adopted by the Council in June 2022. This fourth amendment is to provide additional budget for continued support though the implementation phase of the permitting system.

The expected go-live date of the new system is prior to the end of the current fiscal year, however, work will occur up to and through the go-live date to ensure a smooth transition.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
ClientFirst has been and is able to help the City with the efforts to migrate to the newest version of the TRAKiT and to build out the public portal for online applications, online credit card payments, online inspection scheduling, online license renewals, and data searches. Additionally, ClientFirst is working with each department (Building, Planning, Public Works, Code Enforcement, and Finance) to reassess the current configuration with a smooth public portal experience and internal process streamlining in mind. These changes require a complete reconfiguration of the system, which ClientFirst is completing for the City. City staff leads will also be working with ClientFirst to establish new internal processes, test the new configuration internally and from the public portal, update printed documents, and test the integrations to Laserfiche, SelectTXT, and CSLB. ClientFirst has also been assisting the City with its fee schedule updates and fee finetuning in 2022 as well as 2023.

The public’s use of the public portal has been top of mind for staff and ClientFirst. This includes working to accomplish the following improvements:

1. Full utilization of the new software features like checklists, automations, auto email, etc.;

2. Strategic streamlining of processes for all departments;

3. Optimal reconfiguration for public portal usability; and

4. Printed/Issued documents redesign and streamlining.

With the exception of GIS services, which are on a fixed fee structure, Client First has been working on an as-needed time and materials basis to bring enhanced and streamlined permitting services to the Pinole community. Due to the extensive nature of the reconfiguration necessary, which was not anticipated at project initiation in September 2022, all contracted funds have been expended on the implementation of the permitting system. A contract amendment is necessary at this time in order to continue receiving 118 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 3
valuable support from Client First and meet the City’s projected go-live date by June 30, 2023.

These additional funds will support project management and configuration improvements and workflow updates. A small portion of the additional funds will support updates required in July-September for user fees modified by the annual CPI increase.

FISCAL IMPACT
The total additional cost to increase the contract is $132,165. These costs are to be allocated among the Planning and Building Fund ($79,299) and the General Fund ($52,866) to support the services from Client First. The specific allocations are as follows per Department:
• Finance (100-115-46124): $26,433
• Public Works (100-341-46124): $26,433
• Planning (212-461-46124): $26,433
• Building (212-462-46124): $26,433
• Code Enforcement (100-465-46124): $26,433

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
Exhibit A- Contract Amendment
B. Client First Proposal
119 of 395
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE APPROVING AN

AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH CLIENT FIRST TECHNOLOGY
CONSULTING AND AMENDS THE FY 22/23 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE $132,165

FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND PLANNING & BUILDING FUND
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole was an early adopter of an electronic building and planning permit tracking system, acquiring current permitting software TRAKiT in 1999; and
WHEREAS, the current TRAKiT system, which is offered by Central Square Technologies is outdated, unsupported by the vendor and must be updated to retain functionality;
WHEREAS, the City engaged Client First to assist with the City’s Community Development permitting needs, contract negotiations with Central Square, and eventual implementation of an upgraded product to provide planning, permitting, inspections, code enforcement, business licensing, GIS management, and cashiering services with a focus on improving efficiency, project management, and customer service; and WHEREAS, to support the work of implementation of the new system, including project management, configuration improvements and workflow updates in addition to fee update services, additional IT consulting services from Client First is desired; and WHEREAS, additional funding will be required to support the project and meet the project schedule.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the above recitals are true and correct and made part of this resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole takes the following actions:
1- The City Manager to amend a Consultant Services Agreement with First Client (Exhibit A, herein) in an amount not to exceed an additional $132,165 for continued project management, configuration improvement and workflow update services, in addition to fee update services, in a form approved by the City Attorney; and
2- Amends the FY2022/23 budget to appropriate $79,299 from the Planning and Building Fund and $52,866 from the General Fund to support the services from Client First.

ATTACHMENT A
120 of 395
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 18th day of April, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 18th day of April, 2023
____________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
121 of 395
AMENDMENT No. 4 TO THE

CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF PINOLE AND

CLIENT FIRST TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING
This Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement (the “Amendment”), is made by and entered into between the City of Pinole, a California municipal corporation, (“City”) and Client First Technology Consulting (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as “Parties”) as of the date executed below.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties previously entered into a Consulting Services Agreement dated February 22, 2022 (the “Agreement”) with a Scope of Services in Exhibit A and total compensation in Section 2, with the term of the contract to end on March 1, 2023 unless otherwise extended as provided for in Section 8.2 of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, on August 25, 2023 the Parties agreed to modify the Scope of Services in Exhibit A and increase the total compensation in Section 2 from Forty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty- Nine Dollars ($44,959), to a total not to exceed amount of Seventy-Four Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifty-Nine Dollars ($74,959); and WHEREAS, on October 31, 2023 the Parties agreed to modify the Scope of Services in Exhibit A and increase the total compensation in Section 2 from SeventyFour Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifty-Nine Dollars ($74,959) to a total not to exceed amount of One Hundred and Twenty-Four Thousand, Eight Hundred and Nine Dollars ($124,809); and
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2023 the Parties agreed to extend the term of the Agreement through December 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Parties now wish to modify the Scope of Services and increase the total compensation in Section 2 by One Hundred and Two Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty-Five Thousand Dollars ($132,165) to a total not to exceed amount of Two Hundred and Fifty-Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy-Four Dollars ($256,974); and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

Effect of Amendment. The terms and conditions of this Amendment are intended by the Parties to modify the Agreement. To the extent there is any inconsistency between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the Agreement and/or its Appendix, the terms of this Amendment shall control.

Exhibit A of the Agreement shall be amended to include the Consultant’s scope of work listed on page 1-2 of the Consultant’s proposal of March 21,

EXHIBIT A
122 of 395
2023 to support project management, configuration improvements, workflow updates and user fee modifications.

Section 2 of the Agreement shall be amended to increase the total fee by One Hundred and Two Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty-Five Thousand Dollars ($132,165) to a total not to exceed amount of Two Hundred and Fifty-Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy-Four Dollars ($256,974).

With the exception of the foregoing, all other terms and conditions in the Service Agreement, as previously amended, remain in force and effect.

The Parties have executed this Amendment to the Agreement as of the date signed by the City.

City of Pinole
___________________________
Andrew Murray, City Manager
Dated: __________________
Contractor
___________________________
David W. Krout, Managing Partner
Dated: __________________
Attest:
___________________________
Heather Bell, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
___________________________
Eric S. Casher, City Attorney
123 of 395

OPTIMAL TECHNOLOGY GUIDANCE
California • Illinois • North Carolina • Texas • 800.806.3080 • Fax 888.478.0495 1 | 2
March 21, 2023
Mrs. Lilly Whalen
Community Development Director
City of Pinole
2131 Pear St
Pinole, CA 94564
RE: Proposal for the extension of TRAKIT System Migration Assistance Services Dear Mrs. Whalen:

Please accept this letter as our proposal for ClientFirst to provide an extension of the TRAKIT System Migration Assistance Services.

Scope of Work
The deliverables for this proposal are an extension of the services included in the Agreement for Services dated January 18, 2022, and the initial Extension of these services dated August 25, 2022, and October 31, 2023, with the City of Pinole. The services are being extended to accommodate the reconfiguration of the TRAKIT system for the Building, Planning, and Public Works departments with the use of the public portal in mind. ClientFirst has been closely working with City subject matter experts to accomplish the below improvements.

1. Utilization of the new software features like checklists, automations, auto email, etc.

2. Streamlining of processes for all departments

3. Optimal reconfiguration for public portal usability

4. Printed documents redesign and streamlining
Fees
Our professional fees are based on the estimated time required to complete the consulting requests and the individuals performing the specific elements of those requests. Travel, if necessary, will be invoiced at cost and will be submitted to the City for approval prior.

This engagement will be billed on a time-and-materials basis using the hourly rates outlined below which remain at the originally contracted rates. Consulting fees for this extension are estimated at $42,960 for Project Management, $78,005 for Configuration Improvements and Workflow Updates, and $11,200 for the 22/23 Fee Schedule Update and ongoing fee changes.

This estimation assumes migration support and assistance through the end of September 2023.

Alternative scope changes and fee adjustments are possible and are dependent on specific project needs and staff resources and capabilities. If the nature or scope of our work should change significantly during the project, we would discuss such matters and their effect on our fees and obtain written approval before proceeding.

ATTACHMENT B
124 of 395
Extension of TRAKIT System Migration Assistance

CLIENTFIRST TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING

OPTIMAL TECHNOLOGY GUIDANCE
2 | 2
The following is an estimated hourly rate schedule for consulting services covered by this extension:

Summary Rates
Time-and-Materials
Consultant Level Hourly Rate
Implementation Project Manager (PM) $ 175
Implementation Director (Dir) $ 195
Billing Terms
Invoices will be submitted monthly with detailed descriptions of the services rendered and hours invoiced.

Payment is expected within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the invoice.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 951.739.7989 or via email at [email protected] for additional information. We appreciate the continued opportunity of serving the City of Pinole.

Sincerely,
David Krout
Managing Partner
Management Consulting Practice Leader
Accepted by
City of Pinole, CA
Signature Date
Name and Title (print)
125 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9F
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JEREMY ROGERS, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

AND THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT CONFERENCE

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider approving a resolution of support (attached) for the Contra Costa County and the Inflation Reduction Act conference, to be held on May 18, 2023.

BACKGROUND
At its meeting on March 21, 2023, the City Council approved a future Council agenda item for a resolution of support for the upcoming Contra Costa County and the Inflation Reduction Act conference. The conference is being cohosted by 350 Contra Costa, Contra Costa College, the Greenbelt Alliance, Diablo Valley College, and Los Medanos College. It will be held at Diablo Valley College on May 18, 2023, from 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, and aims to bring together key stakeholders to explore how the County can maximize the opportunities presented by the Inflation Reduction Act. The attached conference brochure describes the conference’s format and content in more detail.

The conference will focus on three topics: all-electric energy transformations that bring health and safety to our communities as we address the climate crisis; programs that ensure equity and opportunities for low-income and environmentally impacted communities; and green economic development and workforce advancement. The event organizers expect that attendees will include staff and elected officials from Contra Costa cities and the County; environmental justice, climate action, and other non-profit organizations; climate technology companies; labor unions; and local college and university faculty and staff.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS
The cohosts of the event have provided a model resolution for the City Council’s consideration, which is attached. Through the resolution, the City would commit to the following:
• Be a partner at the event by lending its name and logo to show support for this opportunity to learn, connect and identify ways to benefit from these opportunities;
126 of 395
• Encourage attendance from the city manager, appropriate planning and sustainability staff, Council Members, and City commissioners; and • Let key stakeholder groups in the community know of this opportunity and how to register at cccira.org.

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no direct fiscal impact to the City created by submitting a resolution of support for this conference. Attending the conference would be $25 per attendee and would include breakfast, lunch, and reception.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Conference Brochure
127 of 395
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE IN SUPPORT AND PARTNERSHIP OF THE 2023 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT’ CONFERENCE
Whereas, the 2022 Federal Inflation Reduction Act is landmark, once in a generation legislation that provides $370 billion in investments that will lower energy costs for families and small businesses, accelerate private investment in clean energy solutions in every sector of the economy and every corner of the country, and strengthen supply chains to support these results;
Whereas, the State of California and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 provide complimentary funds that can weave with the Inflation Reduction Act and provide complimentary levers for resources to support local municipal, non profit and private sector action;
Whereas Contra Costa County, including its cities, can benefit from these opportunities through preparation and proactive measures to secure resources; Whereas, Diablo Valley College, Los Medanos College, Contra Costa College, 350 Contra Costa and Greenbelt Alliance have committed to convene a conference called Contra Costa and the Inflation Reduction Act to bring up to date information on opportunities for cities, businesses including clean tech, advocacy groups, non profit community serving organizations, workforce organizations, including labor and housing advocates;
Whereas, this Conference will seek to inform, connect and stimulate the opportunity for building on current action to maximize benefits from these opportunities; Whereas, Contra Costa County has agreed to be a partner to show support for this event;
Therefore, the City of Pinole wholeheartedly supports the county-wide conference to be held at Diablo Valley College on May 18, 2023, from 8:30 am to 3:30 pm.

Therefore, the City of Pinole agrees to be a partner at the event by lending its name and logo to show support for this opportunity to learn, connect and identify ways to benefit from these opportunities.

Therefore, the City of Pinole agrees to encourage attendance from:
● the city manager,
● appropriate planning staff
● sustainability staff;
● elected council members
● Appointed city commissioners

ATTACHMENT A
128 of 395
Therefore, as a partner, the City of Pinole will let key stakeholder groups in its community know of this opportunity and how to register at cccira.org

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the above recitals are true and correct and made part of this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 18th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 18th day of April 2023
____________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
129 of 395
Thursday, May 18, 2023
8:30 am to 3:30 pm
The Diablo Room @ Diablo Valley College
Pleasant Hill Campus
Co-hosted by
Summary & Agenda
Updated March 18, 2023

ATTACHMENT B
130 of 395
Bringing together key stakeholders to explore how we
maximize this opportunity for Contra Costa County
This past year has produced landmark federal legislation that will deliver billions of dollars to local communities in California. The regulations governing fund distribution are being written, and some programs are already launching.

This conference will help representatives of key stakeholder organizations in Contra Costa County connect and discuss this once-in-a-generation opportunity.

The conference covers three topics:

1. All-electric energy transformations that bring health and safety to our communities as we address the climate crisis;

2. Programs that ensure equity and opportunities for low-income and environmentally impacted communities; and

3. Green economic development and workforce advancement Networking
We invite city and county staff, elected officials, environmental justice, climate action and other non-profit organizations, climate technology companies, labor unions, and local college and university faculty and staff to attend.

Emphasis On Justice
The Inflation Reduction Act explicitly mandates that Justice40 principles be applied in allocating funds, ensuring that low-income and environmentally impacted communities benefit from going all-electric. This brings new opportunities to build capacity and bring community resources to east and west Contra Costa County.

Engaging Speakers
We will include speakers from federal, state, and local governments and private sector leaders who are experts on the IRA and can provide specific insights on the process and status of opportunities. The conference will include panel discussions, small group roundtables, and Updated March 18, 2023
131 of 395
workshops. The aim is to define clear, actionable, and collaborative next steps that engage cities, the county, and business and non-profit sectors.

Community Partners and Sponsors
We invite cities, the county, and local civic and nonprofit groups to help us build support and momentum for this conference by being a Community Partner. Community Partners commit to sending representatives, letting other organizations know about the event, and including your logo in our promotional materials. Please contact [email protected] for more information.

Register at: http://cccira.org
Updated March 18, 2023
132 of 395
Agenda
8:15 a.m. Coffee and Carbs Time for networking and review of resource materials and visuals in the conference room
8:45 a.m. Welcome and
Opening
Brief introductions by federal and local elected
representatives: Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors, Congressional representatives, and
leadership from the community college district office
Plenary Panel - The
IRA: Capitalizing on
Promise and
Avoiding Pitfalls at
the Local Level
A panel of experts on building electrification,
environmental justice, and state funding regulations
with moderated and audience Q&A
Round Table
Discussions
An opportunity to meet each other and share ideas and
experiences.
10:50 a.m. Break Grab refreshments, answer emails, and network.

Lightning Round -
Transformative
Elements of the IRA
A few very brief presentations by people working on
the front lines of economic and workforce development
as it relates to the IRA.

Panel - Current
Contra Costa County
initiatives
A sample of Contra Costa County initiatives and plans
to access the state and IRA opportunities
12:15 p.m. Lunch Box lunch provided by DVC Culinary Arts or a local caterer
Workshops -
Model Programs and
Innovations
Choose from five expert presentations with discussion
to generate new ideas and foster new possibilities
Updated March 18, 2023
133 of 395
Workshops -
Challenges and
Opportunities
Workshops
Choose from five data-informed discussions to
generate new ideas and foster new possibilities
3:20 p.m. Closing Remarks Brief wrap-up by conference organizers, including next steps, public comment, and opportunity to stay for
refreshments and networking
Updated March 18, 2023
134 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: NEIL H. GANG, POLICE CHIEF
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH CDW-G TO PURCHASE

MOBILE DIGITAL COMPUTERS (MDC) AND RELATED EQUIPMENT
TO REPLACE CURRENT MDCS AT A TOTAL COST OF $135,363

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with CDW-G to purchase new mobile digital computers (MDCs) and related equipment to replace the Police Department's outdated MDCs, at a total cost of $135,363.

BACKGROUND
The police vehicle fleet is currently equipped with MDCs that enable communication with dispatch and access to other information sources crucial to field officers. The current MDCs have been in use since 2015 and have reached the end of their serviceable life. Replacement parts are difficult to obtain, making the current MDCs unserviceable, and their production has been discontinued.

The Police Department recommends replacing the existing MDCs with eighteen Panasonic Toughbook CF-33 tablets and one Panasonic Toughbook G2, including the necessary docking stations, mounts, keyboards, and antennas, from CDW-G, with a purchase price of $135,362.84.

The agencies involved in the Tri-Cities Consortium (Pinole, San Pablo, and Hercules) tested the functionality of several different MDCs and determined that the Panasonic Toughbook CF-33 because it best meets the needs of our current operating systems, functionality, and size. The configuration of the upgraded MDCs will include a hardware warranty of 5 years.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The City purchased its current inventory of MDCs in 2015. At that time, the MDCs were configured to support staff for at least three years, given the minimum requirements of the software being used and estimating a reasonable increase in demand.
9G
135 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
As the MDCs have aged and since the original warranty has expired, we have experienced hardware failures that have forced the Information Systems Department to replace the failed hardware with spares from the inventory and we no longer have any reserves should another unit fail. The replacement of these MDCs is a project in the City’s adopted Information Technology Plan and funding for the replacement was included in the FY 2022/23 City budget.

The Police Department is a member of the Tri-City Consortium consisting of the Hercules and San Pablo Police Departments. Both of our consortium partners have replaced their mobile computers with the Panasonic Toughbook. Replacing MDCs with the same platform as our Consortium Partners will allow for standardization of the hardware configuration for all Information Services Departments and increase efficiency in maintaining the systemwide mobile computers.

The purchase will be made using competitively bid contracts through the California Department of General Services Cooperative Purchasing Contract 1-21-70-084H. The Cooperative Procurement provision in the City’s Procurement Policy allows the City to forego a formal bid process for equipment, materials, supplies, and services and buy said equipment directly from a vendor if the price was established by competitive bidding by another public jurisdiction.

FISCAL IMPACT
The total cost for the tablet computers, docking stations, mounts, keyboards, and antennas is $135,362.84. Funding for this was included in the FY 2022/23 budget.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Quote CDW-G
136 of 395
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH CDW-G TO

PURCHASE TABLET COMPUTERS AND RELATED PERIPHERAL EQUIPMENT TO REPLACE OUR CURRENT TABLET COMPUTERS AT A TOTAL COST OF $135,363.

WHEREAS, the police vehicle fleet is currently equipped with mobile data computers (MDCs) that enable communication with dispatch and other information sources crucial to field officers;
WHEREAS, the current MDCs have been in use since 2015, have reached the end of their serviceable life and their production has been discontinued; WHEREAS, the Police Department recommends replacing the existing MDCs with eighteen (18) Panasonic Toughbook CF-33 tablets and one (1) Panasonic Toughbook G2, including the necessary docking stations, mounts, keyboards, and antennas from CDW-G, Inc. with a purchase price of $135,362.84, to provide for the replacement and upgrade to the Police Department’s emergency vehicle fleet;
WHEREAS, the configuration of the upgraded MDCs also includes a hardware warranty of 5 years;
WHEREAS, the Tri-City Consortium reviewed and tested the functionality of several different systems and selected the Panasonic Toughbook because it meets the needs of our current operating systems, functionality, and size;
WHEREAS, the purchase will be made using the California Department of General Services’ competitively bid contract (State Contract 1-21-70-08H); WHEREAS, the Police Department is a member of the Tri-Cities Dispatch Services, which is a regional partnership with the Cities of Hercules and San Pablo; WHEREAS, the Hercules Police Department and San Pablo Police Department have purchased the Panasonic Toughbook tablets;
WHEREAS, replacing our MDCs with the same platform as our Consortium Partners will allow for standardization of the hardware configuration for all Information Services Departments and increase efficiency in maintaining the systemwide mobile computers; WHEREAS, the Cooperative Procurement provision in the City’s Procurement Policy allows the City to buy goods or services based on a competitively bid contract prepared by another public agency, and the use of the purchasing cooperative provides for value pricing and reduces administrative overhead; and
WHEREAS, funds were assigned in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget (100-118-47102); and

ATTACHMENT A
137 of 395
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby:

Section 1: Authorizes the City Manager to contract with CDW-G to purchase the tablet computers and related peripheral computers; and
Section 2: Authorizes the expenditure from the FY 2022/23 General Fund of an expenditure to unassigned fund balance in the amount of $135,363.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 18th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 18th day of April 2023.
___________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
138 of 395
Hardware Software Services IT Solutions Brands Research Hub Review and Complete Purchase
Thank you for choosing CDW. We have received your quote.

MATT AVERY,
Thank you for considering CDW•G for your technology needs. The details of your quote are below. If you are an eProcurement or single sign on customer, please log into your system to access the CDW site. You can search for your quote to retrieve and transfer back into your system for processing.

For all other customers, click below to convert your quote to an order.

Convert Quote to Order
QUOTE # QUOTE DATE QUOTE REFERENCE CUSTOMER # GRAND TOTAL NHJT086 3/28/2023 NHJT086 25000304 $135,362.84

IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ
Fees applied to item(s): 7143235, 7110149

QUOTE DETAILS
ITEM QTY CDW# UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
Panasonic Toughbook 33 - 12" - Core i5 10310U - vPro - 16 GB RAM - 512 GB S
18 7143235 $4,511.00 $81,198.00
Mfg. Part#: CF-33RZ-0BKM
Contract: California DGS PANASONIC - State (1-21-70-08H) Panasonic TOUGHBOOK G2 10.1" Core i5-10310U 16GB RAM
512GB Windows 10 Pro
1 7110149 $3,941.90 $3,941.90
Mfg. Part#: FZ-G2CFFBBKM
Contract: California DGS PANASONIC - State (1-21-70-08H) Panasonic Public Sector Service Package - extended service agreement - 2 ye
19 4195499 $535.35 $10,171.65
Mfg. Part#: CF-SVCPSY5
UNSPSC: 81112307
Electronic distribution - NO MEDIA
Contract: California DGS PC Good - Panasonic (L) (1-22-70-37) Panasonic Premium CF-VEK333LMP - keyboard - with
touchpad - US
3 6438933 $632.41 $1,897.23
Mfg. Part#: CF-VEK333LMP
Contract: MARKET
Panasonic AI-33SLGBL15 - antenna 15 6861840 $163.38 $2,450.70 Mfg. Part#: AI-33SLGBL15
Contract: MARKET
PANASONIC TRIMLINE LITE 16 6044149 $1,027.68 $16,442.88 Mfg. Part#: GJT-33-TVD2-L
Contract: MARKET

ATTACHMENT B
139 of 395

QUOTE DETAILS (CONT.)
iKey IK-TR-911 - keyboard 16 3672394 $344.16 $5,506.56
Mfg. Part#: IK-TR-911-RED
UNSPSC: 43211706
Contract: MARKET
LIND PA1580-1642 - car power adapter - 120 Watt 16 2090640 $138.23 $2,211.68 Mfg. Part#: CF-LNDDC120
UNSPSC: 39121006
Contract: California DGS PC Good - Panasonic (L) (1-22-70-37)

RECYCLING FEE DETAILS
ITEM QTY CDW# UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
RECYCLING FEE 4" TO LESS THAN 15"
Fee Applied to Item: 7143235,7110149
19 654809 $4.00 $76.00
SUBTOTAL $123,820.60
SHIPPING $385.46
RECYCLING FEE $76.00
SALES TAX $11,080.78
GRAND TOTAL $135,362.84

PURCHASER BILLING INFO DELIVER TO
Billing Address:

CITY OF PINOLE
880 TENNENT AVENUE. PINOLE CASA 945
PINOLE, CA 94564-1344
Phone: (510) 724-8962
Payment Terms: Net 30 Days-Govt State/Local
Shipping Address:

CITY OF PINOLE
880 TENNENT AVENUE. PINOLE CAS
PINOLE, CA 94564-1344
Phone: (510) 724-8962
Shipping Method: UPS Ground (2-3 days)
Please remit payments to:

CDW Government
75 Remittance Drive
Suite 1515
Chicago, IL 60675-1515
Sales Contact Info
Rashaad Boyd | (866) 461-9713 | [email protected]
Need Help?
My Account Support Call 800.800.4239
About Us | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions
This order is subject to CDW's Terms and Conditions of Sales and Service Projects at http://www.cdwg.com/content/terms-conditions/product-sales.aspx For more information, contact a CDW account manager
© 2023 CDW•G LLC, 200 N. Milwaukee Avenue, Vernon Hills, IL 60061 | 800.808.4239 140 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MARKISHA GUILLORY, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL AND INVESTMENT POLICIES FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2023/24

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Financial and Investment Policies for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24.

BACKGROUND
It is a best practice in public finance and recommendation of the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting (NACSLB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) that public agencies regularly review and update as appropriate their financial policies. Consistent with best practices, the City either reconfirms or updates its financial and investment policies each fiscal year as part of the annual budget process.

The financial policies are intended to set guidelines on how the City will manage its financial resources as well as to provide direction for financial decision-making.

City staff presented the proposed Financial and Investment Policies for FY 2023/24 to the Finance Subcommittees at its meeting of March 29, 2023. The proposed Financial and Investment Policies for FY 2023/24 contain only minor updates to the FY 2022/23 policies. The Subcommittee accepted staff’s recommendation to present the proposed policies to the City Council for adoption.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Staff is presenting the proposed Financial and Investment Policies for FY 2023/24 for City Council consideration. The policies are consistent with municipal finance best practices and align with standard financial policies recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and those implemented by other local government agencies. Therefore, staff is not recommending any substantial changes to any of the policies other than minor changes to the language in a few of 9H
141 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
the policies. Clean and redlined copies of the policies have been provided for review (Attachments A and B). The following section provides a summary of each policy.

1. Structurally Balanced Budget
The City will aspire to create a proposed General Fund operating budget that is structurally balanced whereby current expenditures will be funded by current year revenue. If the proposed operating budget is structurally imbalanced, the City will develop a plan to create a proposed General Fund operating budget for the subsequent fiscal year that is structurally balanced.

2. Reserve Policy
The City will establish and maintain reserves to meet certain anticipated future obligations as well as to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase.

3. Revenue Policy – One-Time (Non-Recurring) Resources
The City will strive to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base that is not overly dependent on any individual revenue type, land use, or major taxpayer.

One-time resources (also referred to as “non-recurring”) should be used for onetime (non-recurring) expenditures, including but not limited to establishing and rebuilding reserves, early retirement of debt, capital expenditures, and reducing unfunded pension liabilities (California Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB)).

4. Revenue Policy – User Fees and Charges
The City of Pinole is empowered to recapture, through fees, up to the full cost of providing specific services. Regular and consistent review of all fees is necessary to ensure that the costs associated with delivery of individual services have been appropriately identified, and that the City is fully recovering those costs. It is the City’s policy to set user fees at full cost recovery levels, except where a greater community benefit is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council, or when it is not cost effective to do so. The City will recover costs of new facilities and infrastructure necessitated through development impact fees consistent with state law.

5. Expenditure and Budget Policy
The City will deliver service in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. This includes utilizing the services of volunteers in areas where operationally and economically viable. The budget will state the objectives of the operating programs, and identify the resources being provided to accomplish the specified objectives.
142 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 3

6. Debt Policy
The City will limit the use of debt so as not to place a burden on the fiscal resources of the City and its taxpayers. Long-term borrowing will be limited to capital improvements or projects that cannot be financed from current revenues. When capital projects are financed, the City will amortize the debt within a period not to exceed the expected useful life of the project. The City will limit the total debt ratio (debt guaranteed by the General Fund) to 10% or as required by bond coverage ratios. The debt ratio is calculated by the relationship between the debt and the General Fund revenue.

7. Receivables Policy
The City will ensure the timely invoicing, monitoring, and collection of outstanding obligations owed to the City.

8. Grants Management Policy and Procedures
City departments actively pursue federal, state and other grant opportunities when deemed appropriate. Grant funding allows the City to leverage local public funds by extending and enhancing the services it offers to the community, and to introduce new initiatives.

9. Capital Assets Policy and Procedures
Purchased and donated assets meeting the City’s capitalization definition and threshold will be classified and recorded in the City’s financial records as capital assets. The value of the asset must meet the City’s capitalization threshold of $5,000 to be recorded as a capital asset.

10. Unclaimed Funds/Outstanding Checks Policy and Procedures The City of Pinole will account for unclaimed funds in a manner which follows Government Code Sections 50050 through 50056. Funds that remain unclaimed for at least three (3) years will become the property of the City of Pinole after the procedures identified herein have been followed.

11. Investment Policy
The purpose of this Policy is to define the parameters within which funds are to be managed. In methods, procedures, and practices, the policy formalizes the framework for the City of Pinole’s investment activities that must be exercised to ensure effective and judicious fiscal and investment management of the City’s funds.

12. Pension Investment Policy
The City of Pinole (the “City”) has established the City of Pinole Employee Benefit Pension Plan (the “Plan”), a Section 115 Trust. The goal of the Plan’s investment program is to provide a reasonable level of growth which will result in sufficient assets to offset a portion of the present and future obligations of retirement benefits provided by the California Public Employees Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for those eligible employees who meet the specified age and service requirements. 143 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 4
Future Financial Policies
Staff is working to develop a new policy to establish guidelines on the use and withdrawal of funds from the Section 115 Pension Trust. A draft policy will be presented to the City Council for its consideration in May 2023.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact due to reviewing and/or approving the proposed City of Pinole Financial and Investment Policies for FY 2023/24.

ATTACHMENTS
A – Resolution
B- Revised Proposed Financial and Investment Policies (Clean) C – Revised Proposed Financial and Investment Policies (Redlined)

144 of 395
RESOLUTION NO 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE APPROVING FINANCIAL AND INVESTMENT POLICIES FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2023/24 WHEREAS, it is a best practice in public finance and a recommendation of the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting (NACSLB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) that cities regularly review and update as appropriate their financial policies; and
WHEREAS, State law recommends that California cities have investment policies that are adopted by their city council; and
WHEREAS, it is the City of Pinole’s practice to submit its Financial and Investment Policies to the City Council for adoption on an annual basis; and WHEREAS, City staff has reviewed the policies and confirmed that they continue to meet best practices and legal requirements, and therefore is not recommending any substantial changes to the policies at this time; and
WHEREAS, staff recommended to the Finance Subcommittee at its meeting of March 29, 2023 that the policies updated in March 2023 serve as the City’s policies for FY 2023/24; and
WHEREAS, the Finance Subcommittee agreed with the recommendation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby approves the City of Pinole Financial and Investment Policies updated March 2023, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, as the policies for FY 2023/24.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 18th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced, passed and adopted on this 18th day of April 2023.
____________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk

ATTACHMENT A
145 of 395
City of Pinole
Financial and Investment Policies
Updated March 2023
Financial Policies
Structurally Balanced Budget .......................................................................................... 1 Reserve Policy ................................................................................................................ 3 Revenue Policy – One-Time (Non-Recurring) Resources............................................... 4 Revenue Policy – User Fees and Charges ..................................................................... 5 Expenditure and Budget Policy ....................................................................................... 6 Debt Policy ...................................................................................................................... 7 Receivables Policy .......................................................................................................... 8 Grants Management Policy and Procedures................................................................... 9 Capital Assets Policy and Procedures........................................................................... 14 Unclaimed Funds/Outstanding Checks Policy and Procedures .................................... 17 Investment Policies
Investment Policy………………………………………………………………………………20
Pension Investment Policy……………………………………………………………………27

ATTACHMENT B
146 of 395
1 Structurally Balanced Budget
Policy
The City will aspire to create a proposed General Fund operating budget that is structurally balanced whereby current expenditures will be funded by current year revenue. If the proposed operating budget is structurally imbalanced, the City will develop a plan to create a proposed General Fund operating budget for the subsequent fiscal year that is structurally balanced.

Purpose
To ensure the sustainability of service and expenditure levels by requiring that ongoing General Fund operating expenditures be funded by ongoing revenues.

Definitions and Details

1. This policy applies to General Fund operating budgets.

2. Structural balance is defined as recurring (ongoing) revenues equaling or exceeding ongoing expenditures.

3. Under this policy, City staff will analyze whether the proposed General Fund operating budget is structurally balanced.

4. If City staff determines that the proposed budget is imbalanced, City staff will develop a plan to create a proposed General Fund operating budget for the following fiscal year that is structurally balanced, including possible revenue enhancements or expenditure decreases.

5. Internal service funds are intended to operate on a break-even basis.

6. To implement this policy, staff will identify General Fund operating revenue that is recurring and non-recurring. Recurring revenues are those that the City can reasonably expect to continue to receive on an annual basis over the next 5 to 10 years. Recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, property taxes, sales and use taxes, utility user taxes, franchise taxes, business license taxes, transient occupancy taxes, other taxes, fines and forfeitures, interest on investments, use of money and property, motor vehicle in-lieu, city interfund transfers, licenses and permits, resources from other governmental agencies, charges to other City funds, and other reimbursements and charges for services. Non-recurring revenues are monies that the City cannot reasonably expect to continue to receive over the next 10 to 15 years. Non-recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, fund balance, grant funds, financing proceeds, and sale of property and equipment.

Revenue from recurring sources that is significantly above normal levels will be considered non-recurring revenues.

7. Staff will also identify General Fund operating expenditures that are recurring and non-recurring. A recurring expenditure is an ongoing cost that relates to an ongoing City service or activity. Examples of recurring expenditures are salaries, benefits, utilities, debt service, maintenance, normal capital outlays, and other mandated costs. Non- recurring expenditures are costs that are incurred for one-time activities, 147 of 395
2 or services that are scheduled to "sunset". Typical non-recurring expenditures include those for grant-funded activities, special initiatives, and one-time capital expenditures.

8. A structurally balanced General Fund operating budget is a best practice. It is, however, appropriate and consistent with best practice to adopt a structurally imbalanced budget for a given fiscal year under certain circumstances. For example, it is appropriate and consistent with best practice to use designated reserves as a non-recurring revenue to cover recurring expenditures during times of fiscal duress.

If a budget is proposed with this characteristic, the Structurally Balanced Budget Policy provides appropriate direction, which is that staff should develop a plan to create a structurally balanced budget for the subsequent fiscal year. 148 of 395
3 Reserve Policy
Policy
The City will establish and maintain reserves to meet certain anticipated future obligations as well as to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase.

Purpose
To ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase.

Definitions and Details

1. The City shall establish a separate account in the financial system to reserve funds intended to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase. This account and the funds contained therein shall be referred to as the General Reserve. It shall be budgeted to contain an amount equivalent to 50% of the City's annual General Fund ongoing operating expenditures. Resources in the General Reserve account will be considered assigned1for the purpose of financial reporting per the standards of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54.

2. The City shall establish other separate accounts in the financial system to reserve funds for other appropriate purposes, such as for replacement of vehicles and major equipment; maintenance and replacement of capital assets; and long-term liabilities.

3. Funds held in the General Reserve can only be appropriated by a majority vote of the Council to address exceptional circumstances specifically related to a significant revenue shortfall, unanticipated expenditure, or other budget stabilization issue.

4. If the General Reserve funds are appropriated and expended, the City Council will endeavor to replenish them to the full amount noted above as part of the adoption of the subsequent budget, if not sooner.

5. This Policy shall be reviewed by the City Council periodically to ensure its consistency with current law and the City's current needs. 1 Per the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, “assigned” fund balance is comprised of amounts that are constrained by the government’s intent to be used for specific purposes but are neither restricted nor committed.
149 of 395
4 Revenue Policy – One-Time (Non-Recurring) Resources
Policy
The City will strive to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base that is not overly dependent on any individual revenue type, land use, or major taxpayer. One-time resources (also referred to as “non-recurring”) should be used for one-time (nonrecurring) expenditures, including but not limited to establishing and rebuilding reserves, early retirement of debt, capital expenditures, and reducing unfunded pension liabilities (California Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)).

Purpose
To ensure that the City appropriately uses one-time resources, including not using onetime resources on ongoing expenditures, which can contribute to a structurally imbalanced budget.

Definitions and Details

1. Non-recurring revenues are monies that the City cannot reasonably expect to continue to receive over the next 10 to 15 years. Non-recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, fund balance, grant funds, financing proceeds, and sale of property and equipment. Revenue from recurring sources that is significantly above normal levels will be considered non-recurring revenues. 150 of 395
5 Revenue Policy – User Fees and Charges
Policy
The City of Pinole is empowered to recapture, through fees, up to the full cost of providing specific services. Regular and consistent review of all fees is necessary to ensure that the costs associated with delivery of individual services have been appropriately identified, and that the City is fully recovering those costs. It is the City’s policy to set user fees at full cost recovery levels, except where a greater community benefit is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council, or when it is not cost effective to do so. The City will recover costs of new facilities and infrastructure necessitated through development impact fees consistent with state law.

Purpose
To determine the full costs of providing specific services so that the City Council can make informed decisions as to the appropriate levels of fees for services that may be imposed to avoid providing unwanted subsidies. The City Council may decide against full cost recovery in cases where greater community benefit is demonstrated.

Definitions and Details

1. Every service supported by user fees or charges will be analyzed bi-annually, or as required by statute or directed by City Council to determine the net cost of providing the service.

2. Net cost will be determined by identifying all revenues generated or attributed to the service and subtracting all cost elements (direct and indirect expenses, capital outlays and other one-time expenses). The resulting figure will be the level of subsidy, which the City Council will use as a basis for determining user fee increases or decreases.

3. If it is determined that there is a net cost to providing the service, the City Council will raise user fees to achieve full cost recovery, unless it is decided that the subsidy should be maintained.

4. Additional information may be necessary to aid in the decision as to whether or not a service should be subsidized (community benefit, cost-effectiveness, etc.) 151 of 395
6 Expenditure and Budget Policy
Policy
The City will deliver service in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. This includes utilizing the services of volunteers in areas where operationally and economically viable.

The budget will state the objectives of the operating programs, and identify the resources being provided to accomplish the specified objectives.

Purpose
To provide guidance to staff in developing spending plans that address the City’s priorities and policy objectives while ensuring benefit to the City.

Definitions and Details

1. Department expenditures are limited to:
a. Budgeted expenditures approved by the City Council as appropriated by major category:
i. Salary and Benefits;
ii. Services and Supplies: Travel and Training, Office Expenses, Repairs and Maintenance, Materials, Professional Services, etc.; and Capital Outlay.

2. The operating budget will be prepared to fund current year expenditures with current year revenue. However, surplus fund balances may be used to increase reserves, fund Capital Improvement Projects, reduce unfunded pension liability (California Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)), or carried forward to fund future years’ operating budgets when necessary to stabilize services and fund capital outlay.

3. Budget transfers require the approval of the City Manager or designee except those affecting personnel and capital projects which must be approved by the City Council.

4. Budget transfers required to hire additional permanent personnel require the City Council’s approval.

5. The City will periodically update replacement and maintenance financing plans, and incorporate them into the Budget.

6. The City will monitor and review methods of operation to ensure that services continue to be delivered in the most cost-effective manner possible. This review process encompasses a wide range of productivity issues, including:
a. Analyzing systems and procedures to ensure efficient delivery of services. b. Evaluating the ability of new technologies and related capital investments to improve productivity.
c. Developing the skills and abilities of all City employees. d. Developing and implementing appropriate methods of recognizing and rewarding exceptional employee performance.
e. Evaluating the ability of the private sector to perform the same level of service at a lower cost.
152 of 395
7 Debt Policy
Policy
The City will limit the use of debt so as not to place a burden on the fiscal resources of the City and its taxpayers. Long-term borrowing will be limited to capital improvements or projects that cannot be financed from current revenues. When capital projects are financed, the City will amortize the debt within a period not to exceed the expected useful life of the project. The City will limit the total debt ratio (debt guaranteed by the General Fund) to 10% or as required by bond coverage ratios. The debt ratio is calculated by the relationship between the debt and the General Fund revenue.

Purpose
To maintain fiscal viability by not encumbering the General Fund with excessive debt payments or using debt to support operating expenses.

Definitions and Details

1. For purposes of computing the percentage of debt payments the proposed budget expenditures will be used.

2. The ratio of debt payments to operating expenditures will be presented in the annual budget.

3. The City will investigate the use of special assessment, revenue or other selfsupporting bonds to limit the General Fund obligation for debt service payments.

4. The City will not use long-term debt for current operations.

5. The City will not use short-term borrowing to support routine operations, provided however, that it may be used to meet temporary cash flow needs.

6. The City will maintain strong communications with bond rating agencies about the City’s financial condition and will follow a policy of full disclosure on financial reports and bond prospectus.

7. The City will strive to maintain or improve the City’s bond rating.

8. The City will utilize inter-fund loans when possible to reduce the cost of financing capital improvements.

9. The City is required to enter into an agreement for inter-fund loans beyond the current fiscal year.
153 of 395
8 Receivables Policy
Policy
The City will ensure the timely invoicing, monitoring, and collection of outstanding obligations owed to the City.

Purpose
To maintain appropriate oversight of all receivables and maintain sound fiscal management and accounting practices related to all receivables.

Definitions and Details

1. For the purpose of this policy, receivables are defined to include outstanding obligations owed to the City for services or goods supplied.

2. All receivables shall be recorded in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

3. Accounts receivable will be administered by the Finance Department.

4. Accounts receivable shall be established for services or goods provided in advance of a payment and should include terms for collection. Invoices should be prepared in a timely manner but not less than on a monthly basis. Invoices should include a description of the goods or services provided, payment terms and remittance address.

5. All accounts receivable should be recorded in a manner that allows for aging analysis. Reconciliation of accounts receivable may be performed on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis depending on the type of receivable.

6. Collection options should be evaluated and pursued to maximize collections. The use of collection agencies and programs such as the State Interagency Intercept Collection Program or the County Tax lien process may be used based on the type of receivable.

7. An allowance for doubtful accounts should be recorded after a bad debt expense is estimated. Write-off of bad debt should be performed on an annual basis to ensure that accounts receivable and allowance balances are not overstated.

8. The City will establish written procedures to document the accounts receivable process and bad debt write-off process for adequate internal controls and proper management oversight. These procedures should be reviewed annually as part of the year end audit process.
154 of 395
9 Grants Management Policy and Procedures
Policy
City departments actively pursue federal, state and other grant opportunities when deemed appropriate. Grant funding allows the City to leverage local public funds by extending and enhancing the services it offers to the community, and to introduce new initiatives.

Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to specify circumstances when grant funding is appropriate and to establish a standardized set of procedures for the fiscal administration, management, and monitoring of public and private grants. This policy is intended to ensure compliance with all applicable administrative, financial, reporting, and monitoring requirements established by the funding agency as well as all applicable administrative and fiscal directives and guidelines established by the City of Pinole. The policy and procedures established herein shall apply to all Federal, State, County and private grants administered by the City.

Definitions and Details

1. Staff Responsibilities
a. City Department seeking and managing grant funding is responsible for:
i. Preparation of grant application materials;
ii. Providing sufficient data to allow City Management to evaluate the costs and benefits of the proposed grant;
iii. Obtaining appropriate approvals for submission of grant, if necessary; iv. Obtaining City Council approval for acceptance of grant; v. Understanding the operational and budgetary impact the grant has on the City;
vi. Accumulating the appropriate accounting detail and
supporting documentation;
vii. Preparation of reports required by the grantor;
viii. Providing the Finance Department with the following:

1. Grant Award Letter;

2. Grant Contract;

3. City Council minutes of action or Council Resolution approving the grant;

4. An administrative manual (this includes program guidelines and accounting procedures). This will allow Finance to maintain grant files which are accurate and complete.
155 of 395
10 ix. Providing Finance copies of all grant amendments, program reporting, reimbursement requests and other communications to all agents involved in the grant administration process for review prior to submission.
a. The Finance Department (Finance Director) is responsible for:
i. Reviewing all financial reports to the grantor prior to submission to ensure its accuracy;
ii. Assisting departments with any problems or questions regarding the grant submission process;
iii. Scheduling audit of grant programs when requested by Grantee Agency. City staff will aid in the auditing process providing available source documents as requested by the auditing agency;
iv. Coordinating the accounting for all receipts and disbursements related to the grant. Finance Department will determine setup and maintain the most appropriate method (s) of accounting for the grant in the financial system.

2. Pre-Application
Prior to submitting an application for any grant award, the applicant department shall thoroughly review the grant requirements outlined in the solicitation to ensure that the department is aware of and has the capacity to meet all administrative, fiscal, programmatic, reporting and monitoring requirements.

3. Post-Award
a. Set-Up
All new grants should be reviewed by the Finance Director to ensure that all grant details are accurate and grant budget is established in the financial system in accordance with any special conditions required by the funder. i. Acceptance of all grants must be approved by action of the City Council. Said approval shall include authorization to appropriate funding to revenue and expenditure accounts.
ii. For grants that were not included in the annual adopted budget, the applicant department will submit a request to appropriate revenue and expenditures to the City Council for review and approval. Once the grant budget has been approved by the City Council, department staff should submit a request to the Finance Department to establish the approved budget in the financial system.
iii. The term of grant-funded positions must be clearly identified and disclosed to the City Council prior to approval. If the expiration of a grant requires the application of General Fund revenue for continued funding, this stipulation must also be disclosed.
156 of 395
11 iv. One-time or fluctuating grant sources should not be used for ongoing programs.
v. The awarded department assumes the lead role in grant management in collaboration with the Finance Department.
b. Cash Handling
Grant funds are received from various funding agencies via checks and electronic wire/ACH transfers only and should be sent to the Finance Department. Hard copy checks are deposited weekly and promptly recorded in the City’s financial system.

4. Grant Monitoring and Quarterly Reporting
a. Grant Award Monitoring
Award monitoring shall be the responsibility of the applicant department to ensure that grant funds are expended for eligible activities in accordance with the guidelines established by the funder, including, but not limited to:

The applicant department shall obtain all documentation necessary to fully and accurately support all grant expenditures, including expenditures incurred by sub- recipients. Examples of supporting documentation may include, but not be limited to:
i. Employee timesheets
ii. Personnel Activity Reports
iii. Personnel Action Forms
iv. Payroll reports
v. Invoices and proof of payment
vi. Purchase receipts
vii. Workshop/Training itineraries
viii. Travel documents
b. Quarterly Reporting
Finance Department staff should review grant expenditures and cash position as needed to ensure proper oversight and fiscal administration of the grant.

Claims for reimbursement based grants should be sent to the funder timely to ensure prompt reimbursement. If grant reimbursements are not received within the timeframe prescribed by the funder - generally 60 to 90 days - the appropriate applicant department staff should follow up to check on the status of the reimbursement request.

Grants are required to be reconciled at least quarterly as part of the Finance 157 of 395
12 Department’s grant reconciliation process. Grant reconciliation should include review of all of the following:
i. Grant expenditure to revenue balance
ii. Grant budget to actual balance
iii. Status of reimbursement requests submitted to the funder for purpose of reversing revenue accruals
iv. Grant advances and whether or not funds should be recognized v. Grant end dates, closeouts
vi. Review grant information against the general ledger to ensure accuracy of information listed

5. Record Retention
The City is committed to ensuring that all necessary grant records and documents are adequately retained as required by federal, state, and private funding agencies.

The below Record Retention Schedule is approved as the retention schedule for grant records and documents maintained by the applicant department. The schedule is applicable to all physical and electronic grant records maintained by the department as part of the administration and management of federal, state, and private grant funds.

Record Retention Schedule: Grant Records
Record Type* Retention Period
Original grant proposal
Grant-specific policies and procedures
Grant award letter
Grant agreement and subsequent
modifications, if applicable
Grant budget and subsequent
modifications, if applicable
All pertinent funder correspondence,
including emails, phone log notes, letters,
site visit/monitoring/corrective action/audit
reports, etc…
All pertinent sub-recipient/sub-grantee
correspondence including emails, phone
At least 5 years following official
notification by the awarding agency that
the grant has been fiscally and
programmatically closed OR at least 5
years following the closure of its audit
report covering the entire award period,
whichever is later.
158 of 395
13 log notes, letters, site
visit/monitoring/corrective action/audit
reports, etc…
Fiscal and program/performance reports
submitted to the funder including
explanation of data collection/reporting
methodology, if not evident
Wire transfers and/or copies of
reimbursement checks received
Documentation of required matching
funds
All documentation relating to grantee
compliance with the grant agreement
All evidence of returned grant funds
All supporting documentation necessary
to fully and adequately justify grant
expenditures including timesheets, payroll
reports, Personnel Activity Reports,
receipts, invoices, etc.

Other documents deemed necessary and
important by grant program/fiscal staff
and/or documents required to be
maintained by the funder
* All grant documents and records should be organized and maintained in designated grant files or other systematic organizational structure. 159 of 395
14 Capital Assets Policy and Procedures
Policy
Purchased and donated assets meeting the City’s capitalization definition and threshold will be classified and recorded in the City’s financial records as capital assets. The value of the asset must meet the City’s capitalization threshold of $5,000 to be recorded as a capital asset.

Purpose
To define costs eligible and establish thresholds for capitalization in conformity with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 34 Basic Financial Statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments and Statement No. 51 Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Capital Assets.

Definitions and Details

1. Definition of a Capital Asset
A capital asset is any tangible or intangible asset purchased for use in the day-to- day operations of the City with a useful life greater than one year and has an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more. Donations with an estimated appraised value of $5,000 or more and have a useful life greater than one year is also considered a capital asset. Capital assets include items such as land, sewer lines, buildings, vehicles, equipment, and furniture.

2. Major Asset Classes
a. (100) Land – includes land under infrastructure and preparation costs. Costs can include acquisition prices and cost of initially preparing land for its intended use (basic site improvements, removal, excavation, relocation, reconstruction). Usually has an indefinite useful life and is not depreciated. b. (200) Improvements other than buildings - permanent improvements (nonmoveable), other than buildings that add value to land, but do not have an indefinite useful life. Examples include fences, retaining walls, parking lots, and landscaping.
c. (300) Buildings - permanent structures. Costs can include purchase of new building or cost of an improvement to an existing building. An entire building can be classified as one asset or be reported as separate capital assets if discrete portions of the building have significantly different useful lives (e.g. roof separate from building).
d. (400) Infrastructure - capital assets that normally are stationary in nature and normally can be preserved for a significantly greater number of years than most capital assets. Examples include roads, bridges, tunnels, drainage 160 of 395
15 systems, water and sewer systems, and lighting systems. e. (600) Furnishings and Equipment - moveable assets that includes all costs to place equipment into service (freight, installation, warranties, and sales tax).

Each piece of equipment must meet the minimum capitalization threshold and is not recorded in bulk. Examples include vehicles, furnishings, machinery, servers, and appliances.
f. (700) Other Capital Assets – capital assets that do not fit into any of the major asset classes. This can include:
i. Intangibles – assets that are not physical in nature. Generally, this includes software and easements (can also include water rights, trademarks).
ii. Easements - intangibles with an indefinite useful life and are not depreciated.
iii. Software - both internally generated and off-the-shelf. g. (900) Construction in Progress - construction projects in progress at the conclusion of the fiscal year. These costs are not depreciable until the project is completed and booked into the correct category of improvements, buildings, or infrastructure.

3. Capital Asset Useful Life
The capital asset useful life is the determining factor for the number of accounting periods over which the asset is to be depreciated. The City can determine the useful life of an asset by using historical information or by seeking guidance from other external resources to determine the proper useful life of the asset. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset as follows:

Class Useful Life
Bridges 75 years
Buildings 50 years
Equipment 5-10 years
Parks 70 years
Street drainage 100 years
Streets and roads 50 years
Vehicles 5-10 years
Wastewater infrastructure 50 years

4. Capital Asset Review
The City relies on a decentralized method to verify the accuracy of capital assets.

Departments are responsible for evaluating the condition and functionality of existing capital assets assigned to their department to determine if the asset is still providing the most appropriate method to deliver services. Capital assets should be assessed on an annual basis.

5. Disposal of Capital Assets/Surplus Property
161 of 395
16 When an asset will no longer be used in operations, voluntarily or involuntarily, the asset shall be removed from the City’s financial records and removed from service.

Disposal of equipment, material, or inventory will be in accordance with the City’s surplus property guidelines.
“Surplus Property” is used generically to describe any City property that is no longer needed or useable by the holding department. The City Council shall declare item(s) surplus prior to disposal.

6. Methods of Disposition
a. The department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director shall determine or approve one of the following methods of disposition that is most appropriate and in the best interests of the City. b. All surplus property is for sale “as is” and “where is”, with no warranty, guarantee, or representation of any kind, expressed or implied, as to the condition, utility or usability or the property offered for sale. Appropriate methods of sale are as follows:
i. Public Auction - Surplus property may be sold at public auction. City staff may conduct public Auctions, or the City may contract with a professional auctioneer including professional auction services. ii. Bids - Bids may be solicited for the sale of surplus property. Surplus property disposed of in this manner shall be sold to the highest responsible bidder.
iii. Selling for Scrap - Surplus property may be sold as scrap if the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director deems that the value of the raw material exceeds the value of the property as a whole.
iv. Negotiated Sale - Surplus property may be sold outright if the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director determines that only one known buyer is available or interested in acquiring the property.
v. No Value Item – Where the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director determines that specific supplies or equipment are surplus and of minimal value to the City due to spoilage, obsolescence or other cause, or where the Finance Director, serving as the Purchasing Officer, determines that the cost of disposal of such supplies or equipment would exceed the recovery value, the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director shall dispose of the same in such a manner as he or she deems appropriate and in the best interest of the City.
c. Surplus property that remains unsold will be donated to a non-profit organization or transferred to an appropriate recycle center. d. Proceeds from the sale or trade-in of surplus property shall be submitted to Finance for returning to the appropriate fund.
162 of 395
17 Unclaimed Funds/Outstanding Checks Policy and Procedures Policy
The City of Pinole will account for unclaimed funds in a manner which follows Government Code Sections 50050 through 50056. Funds that remain unclaimed for at least three (3) years will become the property of the City of Pinole after the procedures identified herein have been followed.

Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the proper disposition of unclaimed funds and outstanding checks in accordance with government statutes.

Definitions and Details

1. Definitions
a. Unclaimed Funds - Consists of funds which are not the property of the City but remain in the City Treasury for three (3) or more years without a claim being filed by the legal owner(s). Unclaimed funds do not include individual items of less than $15.00, any amounts in which the depositor’s name is unknown, or restitution to victims.
b. Warrant – Instrument issued to pay for goods and/or services rendered, issue refunds, etc. (i.e. a check).
c. Stale Dated – A check that is older than six (6) months. d. Escheat – refers to state escheat laws that require agencies to transfer unclaimed property or funds to the state after three years and reasonable efforts locate the property owner.

2. Guidelines
The City of Pinole has established the policy to hold unclaimed payroll and accounts payable checks rather than escheating the unclaimed funds to the State of California.

This unclaimed funds policy applies to all outstanding payroll and accounts payable checks abandoned three years after the issue date.

3. Procedures: Items over $15.00
a. Quarterly during the bank reconciliation process, the outstanding warrant register will be reviewed for items six (6) months and older. For the warrants six months and older, a letter and unclaimed property claim form will be mailed to the address on record for the issued warrant. See Exhibit 1 and 2 for examples.
b. Every June 30th and December 31st, (final evaluation dates) all remaining 163 of 395
18 outstanding warrants will be evaluated. Any warrants issued more than 12 months prior to evaluation date will receive a second letter and affidavit form. If no response is received within 30 days for the warrants 12 months or greater, the warrant will be identified as stale dated. Stale dated warrants shall be cancelled and voided in the system. A journal entry shall be prepared to record the total amount of stale dated checks in a hold account called “Aged Unclaimed Warrants”.
c. A list of stale date warrants containing the warrant number, issue date, amount, and payee shall be maintained by the Finance Department. If a cancelled warrant is presented, or the payee files a claim after cancellation, the warrant shall be reissued by debiting the “Aged Unclaimed Warrants” account, and the original warrant shall be removed from the stale dated list.
d. Also, on June 30th and December 31st, the stale dated list shall be evaluated to determine which warrants are more than 3 years old from the date of issue. Warrants that are more than 3 years old will be handled as follows:
i. A notice must be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Pinole stating the payee, the amount, the fund in which the money is held, and that it is proposed that the money will become the property of the City of Pinole on a specific date (not less than 45 nor more than 60 days after the first publication). See Exhibit 3 for example. ii. Upon or prior to publication, a party of interest may file a claim (Exhibit 2) for the funds with the Finance Director. The claim must contain the claimant’s name, address, amount, tax identification number, and grounds for claim prior to the date the funds become property of the City of Pinole. The Finance Director can require additional information to help substantiate the claim.
iii. On the day identified in the notice, the total dollar amount (on which no claims were filed) becomes the property of the City. A journal entry will be prepared to recognize the revenue. The money will be moved from “Aged Unclaimed Warrants” to the fund the warrant was originally issued from.

4. Procedures: Items under $15.00 or items where the depositor is unknown a. Quarterly during the bank reconciliation process, the outstanding warrant register will be reviewed for items six (6) months and older. For the warrants six months and older, a letter and unclaimed property claim form will be mailed to the address on record for the issued warrant. See Exhibit 1 and 2 for examples.
b. Every June 30th and December 31st, (final evaluation dates) all remaining outstanding warrants will be evaluated. Any warrants issued more than 12 months prior to evaluation date will receive a second letter and affidavit form. If no response is received within 30 days for the warrants 12 months or greater, it becomes the property of the City of Pinole. Stale dated warrants shall be cancelled and voided in the system. A journal entry will 164 of 395
19 be used to record the total amount of these warrants as revenue. c. Any individual check of less than fifteen ($15) dollars, or any amount if the depositor’s name is unknown, which remain unclaimed for a period of one (1) year may be transferred from the funds which the money was originally drawn from by the City Council to the General Fund without the necessity of publication of notice in a newspaper. (Gov. Code Section 50055)
165 of 395
20 City of Pinole

INVESTMENT POLICY
I. Introduction
The purpose of this Policy is to define the parameters within which funds are to be managed. In methods, procedures, and practices, the policy formalizes the framework for the City of Pinole’s investment activities that must be exercised to ensure effective and judicious fiscal and investment management of the City’s funds.

II. Governing Authority
The investment program of the City of Pinole (“the City”) shall be operated in conformance with federal, state, and other legal requirements. All funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy, and California Government Code Sections 5360l, 5360l.l, 5360l.5, 5360l.6, 53635, 53646, 53635.5, and l648l.2.

III. Scope
It is intended that this policy cover all funds (except retirement funds) and investment activities under the direction of the City. The investment of bond proceeds will be in accordance with the provisions of relevant bond documents.

IV. Objectives
The primary objectives, in priority order, of the investment activities of the City shall be:

1. Safety
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program.

Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the portfolio.

2. Liquidity
The investment portfolio of the City will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet its cash flow requirements.
166 of 395
22 3. Return
The investment portfolio of the City shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return on its investments consistent with the constraints imposed by its safety objective and cash flow considerations.

V. Standards of Care

1. Prudence
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the “prudent person” standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse development.

The “prudent person” standard states that,
“Investments shall be made with judgment and care under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.”

2. Ethics and Conflict of Interest
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial decisions.

3. Delegation of Authority
The management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to the City Treasurer or designee who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the limits of this policy. The City Council may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor. The advisor shall follow the policy and such other written instructions as are provided.
167 of 395
23 VI. Permitted Investment Instruments

1. U.S. Treasury and other government notes, bonds, bills, or obligations that carry the full faith and credit guarantee of the United States for the payment of principal and interest. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length. No more than fifty (50) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in instruments defined under this section.

2. Federal Agency or U.S. government sponsored enterprises (GSE) bonds and note obligations, participations or other instruments. This includes but is not limited to obligations issued by Banks for Cooperatives, Federal Land Banks, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, Federal Farm Credit Banks, Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or in obligations, participations, or other instruments of, or issued by, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the Federal National Mortgage Association; or in guaranteed portions of Small Business Administration notes. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length, unless the funds to be invested are moneys generated from the proceeds of the sale of real estate assets restricted to a reserve account, and the investment security is “AA” rated by at least two of three nationally recognized rating agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch) in which case maturities shall not exceed ten years in length. No more than 40 (forty) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in instruments defined under this section.

3. Certificates of Deposit (CDs) which are Federal Deposit Insurance Company (FDIC) insured or fully collateralized time CD’s in financial institutions in California. No more than 10 percent of the City’s portfolio shall be invested in FDIC insured or fully collateralized time certificates of deposit. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length.

4. Negotiable FDIC insured Certificates of Deposit or deposit notes issued by a nationally or state-chartered bank or a state or federal savings and loan association or by a state-licensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchase of negotiable CD’s may not exceed 30 percent of the City’s investment portfolio.

Maturities shall not exceed five years in length, and must have an IDC number greater than 165 (excellent rated).
168 of 395
24 5. Bankers’ Acceptances issued by domestic or foreign banks, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System, the short-term paper of which is rated in the highest category by Moody’s Investors Services or by Standard & Poor’s Corporation. Purchases of Bankers’ Acceptances may not exceed 180 days maturity or 40 percent of the City’s investment portfolio. No more than l0 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in the Banker’s Acceptances of any one commercial bank.

6. Medium-term corporate notes issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the U.S. or any state and operating within the U.S. Medium-term corporate notes shall be rated in a Double-AA rating category “AA” or its equivalent or better by a nationally recognized rating service. Additionally, corporate notes shall be widely diversified across all market sectors. Purchase of medium-term corporate notes may not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the City’s investment portfolio. No more than five (5) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in a medium-term note of any one corporation. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length.

7. Commercial paper rated in the highest tier of “prime quality” as provided by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., or Standard & Poor’s Corporation, provided that the issuing corporation is organized and operating within the United States, has total assets in excess of $500 million and has an “A” or higher rating for its long-term debt, if any, as provided by Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed l80 day’s maturity nor represent more than l0 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Purchases of commercial paper may not exceed l5 percent of the City’s investment portfolio. An additional l5 percent or a total of 30 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested only if the dollar weighted average of the entire amount does not exceed 3l days.

8. Repurchase Agreements used solely as short-term investments not to exceed 30 days. The following collateral restrictions will be observed: Only U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities, as described in VI.l and 2, will be acceptable collateral. All securities underlying Repurchase Agreements must be delivered to the City’s custodian bank versus payment or be handled under a tri-party repurchase agreement. The total of all collateral for each Repurchase Agreement must equal or exceed, on the basis of market value plus accrued interest, l03 percent of the total dollar value of the money invested by the City for the term of the investment unless the term of the investment is overnight, in which case the total of all collateral for the Repurchase Agreement must equal or exceed, on the basis of market value plus accrued interest, l00 percent of the total dollar value of the 169 of 395
25 investment. For any Repurchase Agreement with a term of more than one day, the value of the underlying securities must be reviewed on a regular basis. Market value must be calculated each time there is a substitution of collateral. The City or its trustee shall have a perfected first security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code in all securities subject to Repurchase Agreement.

The City may enter into Repurchase Agreements with (l) primary dealers in U.S. Government securities who are eligible to transact business with, and who report to, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and (2) California and non-California banking institutions having assets in excess of $l billion and in the highest short-term rating category as provided by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or Standard & Poor’s Corporation. The City will have specific written agreements with each firm with which it enters into Repurchase Agreements. No more than 10 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in Repurchase Agreements.

9. State of California’s Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Up to l00 percent of the City’s portfolio may be invested in LAIF or up to the maximum permitted by California State Law. The LAIF portfolio should be reviewed periodically.

10.Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered Money Market Mutual Funds as authorized by Government Code Sections 5360l and/or 53635. To be eligible for investment pursuant to this subdivision these companies shall either:
a. Attain the highest ranking letter or numerical rating provided by not less than two of the three largest nationally recognized rating services; b. Have an investment advisor registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years experience investing in securities and obligations authorized by Government Code Section 5360l;
c. Assets under management in excess of $500,000,000;
d. The purchase price of the share of beneficial interest shall not include any commission charged by these companies; and,
e. Purchases shall not exceed l5 percent of the investment portfolio of the City.

Under no circumstances shall any funds of the City be invested in inverse floaters, range notes, or interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages. Nor 170 of 395
26 shall any of the City’s funds be invested in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity.

VII. Reporting Requirements
Quarterly investment reports shall be submitted by the City’s Treasurer or designee to the City Council. The reports shall include, at a minimum, the following information for each individual investment:
• Type investment instrument;
• Institution/Issuer;
• Maturity date;
• Cost of security (par value) and dollar amount in all securities; • Description of the funds and investments;
• Maturity distribution and of the portfolio;
• Current market value of all securities;
• Rate of return for the portfolio;
• A statement of compliance of the portfolio with the City’s Investment Policy, and its ability to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 53646 (e), the Treasurer may supply to the governing body, chief executive office and the external auditor a copy of the most recent statement received by the City on those investments in the State Local Agency Investment Fund in lieu of the above required statement.

VIII. Safekeeping and Custody
The assets of the City shall be secured through the third-party custody and safekeeping procedures. Bearer instruments shall be held only through third-party institutions. Collateralized securities such as repurchase agreements shall be purchased using the delivery vs. payment (DVP) procedure. 171 of 395
27 I. Introduction
City of Pinole

PENSION INVESTMENT POLICY
The City of Pinole (the “City”) has established the City of Pinole Employee Benefit Pension Plan (the “Plan”), a Section 115 Trust. The goal of the Plan’s investment program is to provide a reasonable level of growth which will result in sufficient assets to offset a portion of the present and future obligations of retirement benefits provided by the California Public Employees Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for those eligible employees who meet the specified age and service requirements.

II. Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this Pension Investment Policy is to establish a comprehensive strategy for assets invested under the Plan, and outline prudent and acceptable parameters in which pension funds are to be managed.

The primary objectives of this policy are to:
• Facilitate the process of ongoing communication between the Plan Sponsor and its plan fiduciaries;
• Confirm the Plan’s investment goals and objectives and management policies applicable to the investment portfolio;
• Provide a framework to construct a well-diversified asset mix that can potentially be expected to meet the account’s short and long-term needs that is consistent with the account’s investment objectives, liquidity considerations and risk tolerance;
• Identify any unique considerations that may restrict or limit the investment discretion of its designated investment managers;
• Help maintain a long-term perspective when market volatility is caused by short-term market movements.

III. Roles and Responsibilities
Governing Authority
The pension investment program of the City of Pinole (“the City”) shall be operated in conformance with federal, state, and other legal requirements. All funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s Pension Investment Policy, and applicable California Government Code Sections.
172 of 395
28 Delegation of Authority
The management responsibility for the pension investment program is hereby delegated to the City Manager and/or Assistant City Manager or designee as Plan Administrator who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the limits of this policy. The City Council may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor.

The advisor shall follow the policy and such other written instructions as are provided.

Duties and Responsibilities (Refer to Appendix for who serves in these roles) Plan Administrator
The Plan Administrator for the City of Pinole is responsible for:
▪ Confirming the accuracy of this Investment Guidelines Document, in writing.
▪ Advising Trustee and Investment Manager of any change in the plan/account’s financial situation, funding status, or cash flows, which could possibly necessitate a change to the account’s overall risk tolerance, time horizon or liquidity requirements; and thus would dictate a change to the overall investment objective and goals for the account. ▪ Monitoring and supervising all service vendors and investment options, including investment managers.
▪ Avoiding prohibited transactions and conflicts of interest.

Trustee
The plan Trustee is responsible for:
▪ Valuing the holdings.
▪ Collecting all income and dividends owed to the Plan. ▪ Settling all transactions (buy-sell orders).

Investment Manager
The Investment Manager is responsible for:
▪ Assisting the Plan Administrator with the development and maintenance of this Investment Policy document.
▪ Meeting with the Plan Administrator to review portfolio structure, holdings, and performance.
▪ Designing, recommending and implementing an appropriate asset allocation consistent with the investment objectives, time horizon, risk profile, guidelines and constraints outlined in this Policy. ▪ Researching and monitoring investment advisers and investment vehicles. 173 of 395
29 ▪ Purchasing, selling, and reinvesting in securities held in the account. ▪ Monitoring the performance of all selected assets.
▪ Voting proxies, if applicable.
▪ Recommending changes to any of the above.
▪ Periodically reviewing the suitability of the investments, and being available at such other times within reason at your request. ▪ Preparing and presenting appropriate reports.
▪ Informing the Plan Administrator if changes occur in personnel that are responsible for portfolio management or research.

Standards of Care
Prudence
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officers shall be the “prudent person” standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse development.

The “prudent person” standard states that,
“Investments shall be made with judgment and care under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.”
Ethics and Conflict of Interest
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial decisions.

IV. Asset Allocation
The goal of the Plan’s investment program is to provide a reasonable level of growth, which will result in sufficient assets to pay a portion of the present and future obligations of the Plan. The following objectives are intended to assist in 174 of 395
30 achieving this goal:
• The Plan should seek to earn a return in excess of its policy benchmark over the life of the Plan.
• The Plan’s assets will be managed on a total return basis which takes into consideration both investment income and capital appreciation. While the Plan Sponsor recognizes the importance of preservation of capital, it also adheres to the principle that varying degrees of investment risk are generally rewarded with compensating returns. To achieve these objectives, the Plan Sponsor allocates its assets (asset allocation) with a strategic perspective of the capital markets.

Investment Time Horizon: Intermediate-term
Anticipated Cash Flows: Assets in the Plan will seek to mitigate the impact of future rate increases from CalPERS. Typically,
increases in rates come with a one-year advance
warning; however the Plan Administrator may
request disbursement of assets at any time.

Investment Objective: The primary objective is to generate a reasonable level of growth over time. The assets in this Plan
will eventually be used to fund Pension Plan
obligations for assets managed in the CalPERS
Trust.

Risk Tolerance: Custom – The account’s risk tolerance has been rated moderate, which demonstrates that the
account can accept price fluctuations to pursue
its investment objectives.

Strategic Asset Allocation
As of the date of this Pension Investment Policy adoption, the asset allocation ranges for the City of Pinole Employee Benefit Pension Plan is as follows:

Strategic Asset Allocation Ranges
Cash Fixed Income Equity
0-20% 45%-75% 25%-45%
Policy: 4% Policy: 60% Policy: 36%
175 of 395
31 Market conditions may cause the account’s asset allocation to vary from the stated range from time to time. The Investment Manager will rebalance the portfolio no less than quarterly and/or when the actual weighting differs substantially from the strategic range, if appropriate and consistent with the Plan’s objectives.

V. Investment Guidelines
Security Guidelines
Equities
With the exception of limitations and constraints described above, the Investment Manager may allocate assets of the equity portion of the account among various market capitalizations (large, mid, small) and investment styles (value, growth).

Further, the Investment Manager may allocate assets among domestic, international developed and emerging market equity securities.

Total Equities 25%-45%
Equity Style Range
Domestic Large Cap Equity 12%-35%
Domestic Mid Cap Equity 0%-10%
Domestic Small Cap Equity 0%-15%
International Equity (incl. Emerging Markets) 0%-15%
Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) 0%-8%
Fixed Income
In the fixed income portion of the account, the Investment Manager may allocate assets among various sectors and industries, as well as varying maturities and credit quality that are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the portfolio.
*High Yield securities may be purchased, but they will be held using a diversified exchange traded fund, or mutual fund vehicle.

If individual fixed income securities are purchased for the Plan, the following guidelines will be adhered to in the management of the fixed income segment:

Total Fixed Income 45%-75%
176 of 395
32 Eligible Investments
• Debt obligations of the U.S. Government, its agencies, and Government Sponsored Enterprises
• Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS)
• Asset Backed Securities (ABS)
• Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMO)
• Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS)
• Corporate debt securities issued by U.S. or foreign entities including, but not limited to, limited partnerships, equipment trust certificates and enhanced equipment trust certificates
• Eligible instruments issued pursuant to SEC Rule 144(a) • Municipal Bonds
With the exception of Debt obligations of the U.S. Government, its agencies, Government Sponsored Enterprises and US TIPS, the total investment in any fixed income security issuer shall not exceed 3% of total plan assets. These restrictions do not apply to fixed income funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

Quality
The portfolio will maintain a minimum weighted average quality of A- at all times.

Individual securities shall have a minimum quality rating of Baa3 by Moody’s or BBB- by Standard & Poor’s (S&P).

Duration
The Investment Manager will maintain the portfolio duration within +/- 25% of the benchmark duration at all times.

Diversification
• No more than 5% of the portfolio assets may be invested in any individual issuer, with the exception of securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S.

Government, its agencies, and Government Sponsored Enterprises. • No more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in securities issued under Rule 144A.
177 of 395
33 Performance Benchmarks
The performance of the total Plan shall be measured over a three and five-year periods. These periods are considered sufficient to accommodate the market cycles experienced with investments. The performance shall be compared to the return of the total portfolio blended benchmark shown below.

Total Portfolio Blended Benchmark

19.00% S&P 500 Index

3.50% Russell Mid Cap Index

5.50% Russell 2000 Index

2.50% MSCI Emerging Market Index

4.50% MSCI EAFE Index

1.00% Wilshire REIT Index

45.50% Bloomberg Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index

13.00% ML 1-3 Year US Corp/Gov’t Index

1.50% US High Yield Master II

4.00% Citi 1Mth T-Bill
Asset Class/Style Benchmarks
Over a market cycle, the long-term objective for each investment strategy is to add value to a market benchmark. The following are the benchmarks used to monitor each investment strategy:

Large Cap Equity S&P 500 Index
Growth S&P 500 Growth Index
Value S&P 500 Value Index
Mid Cap Equity Russell Mid Cap Index
Growth Russell Mid Cap Growth Index
Value Russell Mid Cap Value Index
Small Cap Equity Russell 2000 Index
Growth Russell 2000 Growth Index
Value Russell 2000 Value Index
REITs Wilshire REIT Index
International Equity MSCI EAFE Index
Investment Grade Bonds Bloomberg Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index High Yield US High Yield Master II
178 of 395
34 Security Selection
The Investment Manager may utilize a full range of investment vehicles when constructing the investment portfolio, including but not limited to individual securities, mutual funds, and exchange-traded funds. In addition, to the extent permissible, the Investment Manager is authorized to invest in shares of mutual funds in which the Investment Manager serves as advisor or sub-adviser.

Investment Limitations
The following investment transactions are prohibited:
• Direct investments in precious metals (precious metals mutual funds and exchange-traded funds are permissible).
• Venture Capital
• Short sales*
• Purchases of Letter Stock, Private Placements, or direct payments • Leveraged Transactions*
• Commodities Transactions Puts, calls, straddles, or other option strategies* • Purchases of real estate, with the exception of REITs • Derivatives, with exception of ETFs*
*Permissible in diversified mutual funds and exchange-traded funds VI. Reporting Requirements
Quarterly reports shall be submitted by the Investment Manager to the Plan Administrator of the City of Pinole. These reports will be submitted by the City’s Treasurer or designee to the City Council.
179 of 395
35 APPENDIX
Plan Sponsor Account Information as of the date this pension investment policy is adopted:

Plan Sponsor: City of Pinole
Plan Administrator: City Manager and/or Assistant City Manager or designee
Governance: Pinole City Council
Plan Name (“Plan”) City of Pinole Employee Benefits Pension Plan Trustee: US Bank
Type of Account Pension Plan
ERISA Status: Not subject to ERISA
Investment Manager: US Bank, as discretionary trustee, has delegated investment management
responsibilities to HighMark Capital
Management, Inc. (“Investment Manager”), an
SEC-registered investment adviser
Investment Authority: Except as otherwise noted, the Trustee, US Bank, has delegated investment authority to
HighMark Capital Management, an SECregistered investment adviser. Investment Manager has full investment discretion over the
managed assets in the account. Investment
Manager is authorized to purchase, sell,
exchange, invest, reinvest and manage the
designated assets held in the account, all in
accordance with account’s investment
objectives, without prior approval or
subsequent approval of any other party(ies).
180 of 395
City of Pinole
Financial and Investment Policies
Updated March 2023
Financial Policies
Structurally Balanced Budget .......................................................................................... 1 Reserve Policy ................................................................................................................ 3 Revenue Policy – One-Time (Non-Recurring) Resources............................................... 4 Revenue Policy – User Fees and Charges ..................................................................... 5 Expenditure and Budget Policy ....................................................................................... 6 Debt Policy ...................................................................................................................... 7 Receivables Policy .......................................................................................................... 8 Grants Management Policy and Procedures................................................................... 9 Capital Assets Policy and Procedures........................................................................... 14 Unclaimed Funds/Outstanding Checks Policy and Procedures .................................... 17 Investment Policies
Investment Policy………………………………………………………………………………20
Pension Investment Policy…………………………………………………………………… 27

ATTACHMENT C
181 of 395
1 Structurally Balanced Budget
Policy
The City will aspire to create a proposed General Fund operating budget that is structurally balanced whereby current expenditures will be funded by current year revenue. If the proposed operating budget is structurally imbalanced, the City will develop a plan to create a proposed General Fund operating budget for the subsequent fiscal year that is structurally balanced.

Purpose
To ensure the sustainability of service and expenditure levels by requiring that ongoing General Fund operating expenditures be funded by ongoing revenues.

Definitions and Details

1. This policy applies to General Fund operating budgets.

2. Structural balance is defined as recurring (ongoing) revenues equaling or exceeding ongoing expenditures.

3. Under this policy, City staff will analyze whether the proposed General Fund operating budget is structurally balanced.

4. If City staff determines that the proposed budget is imbalanced, City staff will develop a plan to create a proposed General Fund operating budget for the following fiscal year that is structurally balanced, including possible revenue enhancements or expenditure decreases.

5. Internal service funds are intended to operate on a break-even basis.

6. To implement this policy, staff will identify General Fund operating revenue that is recurring and non-recurring. Recurring revenues are those that the City can reasonably expect to continue to receive on an annual basis over the next 5 to 10 years. Recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, property taxes, sales and use taxes, utility user taxes, franchise taxes, business license taxes, transient occupancy taxes, other taxes, fines and forfeitures, interest on investments, use of money and property, motor vehicle in-lieu, city interfund transfers, licenses and permits, resources from other governmental agencies, charges to other City funds, and other reimbursements and charges for services. Non-recurring revenues are monies that the City cannot reasonably expect to continue to receive over the next 10 to 15 years. Non-recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, fund balance, grant funds, financing proceeds, and sale of property and equipment.

Revenue from recurring sources that is significantly above normal levels will be considered non-recurring revenues.

7. Staff will also identify General Fund operating expenditures that are recurring and non-recurring. A recurring expenditure is an ongoing cost that relates to an ongoing City service or activity. Examples of recurring expenditures are salaries, benefits, utilities, debt service, maintenance, normal capital outlays, and other mandated costs. Non- recurring expenditures are costs that are incurred for one-time activities, Deleted: .
182 of 395
2 or services that are scheduled to "sunset". Typical non-recurring expenditures include those for grant-funded activities, special initiatives, and one-time capital expenditures.

8. A structurally balanced General Fund operating budget is a best practice. It is, however, appropriate and consistent with best practice to adopt a structurally imbalanced budget for a given fiscal year under certain circumstances. For example, it is appropriate and consistent with best practice to use designated reserves as a non-recurring revenue to cover recurring expenditures during times of fiscal duress.

If a budget is proposed with this characteristic, the Structurally Balanced Budget Policy provides appropriate direction, which is that staff should develop a plan to create a structurally balanced budget for the subsequent fiscal year. 183 of 395
3 Reserve Policy
Policy
The City will establish and maintain reserves to meet certain anticipated future obligations as well as to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase.

Purpose
To ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase.

Definitions and Details

1. The City shall establish a separate account in the financial system to reserve funds intended to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase. This account and the funds contained therein shall be referred to as the General Reserve. It shall be budgeted to contain an amount equivalent to 50% of the City's annual General Fund ongoing operating expenditures. Resources in the General Reserve account will be considered assigned1for the purpose of financial reporting per the standards of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54.

2. The City shall establish other separate accounts in the financial system to reserve funds for other appropriate purposes, such as for replacement of vehicles and major equipment; maintenance and replacement of capital assets; and long-term liabilities.

3. Funds held in the General Reserve can only be appropriated by a majority vote of the Council to address exceptional circumstances specifically related to a significant revenue shortfall, unanticipated expenditure, or other budget stabilization issue.

4. If the General Reserve funds are appropriated and expended, the City Council will endeavor to replenish them to the full amount noted above as part of the adoption of the subsequent budget, if not sooner.

5. This Policy shall be reviewed by the City Council periodically to ensure its consistency with current law and the City's current needs. 1 Per the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, “assigned” fund balance is comprised of amounts that are constrained by the government’s intent to be used for specific purposes but are neither restricted nor committed.

Deleted: and Details
Deleted: ¶
Formatted: Underline
Deleted: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(GAAP)…
Deleted: .
184 of 395
4 Revenue Policy – One-Time (Non-Recurring) Resources
Policy
The City will strive to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base that is not overly dependent on any individual revenue type, land use, or major taxpayer. One-time resources (also referred to as “non-recurring”) should be used for one-time (nonrecurring) expenditures, including but not limited to establishing and rebuilding reserves, early retirement of debt, capital expenditures, and reducing unfunded pension liabilities (California Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)).

Purpose
To ensure that the City appropriately uses one-time resources, including not using onetime resources on ongoing expenditures, which can contribute to a structurally imbalanced budget.

Definitions and Details

1. Non-recurring revenues are monies that the City cannot reasonably expect to continue to receive over the next 10 to 15 years. Non-recurring revenues include, but may not be limited to, fund balance, grant funds, financing proceeds, and sale of property and equipment. Revenue from recurring sources that is significantly above normal levels will be considered non-recurring revenues.

Deleted: PERS
185 of 395
5 Revenue Policy – User Fees and Charges
Policy
The City of Pinole is empowered to recapture, through fees, up to the full cost of providing specific services. Regular and consistent review of all fees is necessary to ensure that the costs associated with delivery of individual services have been appropriately identified, and that the City is fully recovering those costs. It is the City’s policy to set user fees at full cost recovery levels, except where a greater community benefit is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council, or when it is not cost effective to do so. The City will recover costs of new facilities and infrastructure necessitated through development impact fees consistent with state law.

Purpose
To determine the full costs of providing specific services so that the City Council can make informed decisions as to the appropriate levels of fees for services that may be imposed to avoid providing unwanted subsidies. The City Council may decide against full cost recovery in cases where greater community benefit is demonstrated.

Definitions and Details

1. Every service supported by user fees or charges will be analyzed bi-annually, or as required by statute or directed by City Council to determine the net cost of providing the service.

2. Net cost will be determined by identifying all revenues generated or attributed to the service and subtracting all cost elements (direct and indirect expenses, capital outlays and other one-time expenses). The resulting figure will be the level of subsidy, which the City Council will use as a basis for determining user fee increases or decreases.

3. If it is determined that there is a net cost to providing the service, the City Council will raise user fees to achieve full cost recovery, unless it is decided that the subsidy should be maintained.

4. Additional information may be necessary to aid in the decision as to whether or not a service should be subsidized (community benefit, cost-effectiveness, etc.) 186 of 395
6 Expenditure and Budget Policy
Policy
The City will deliver service in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. This includes utilizing the services of volunteers in areas where operationally and economically viable.

The budget will state the objectives of the operating programs, and identify the resources being provided to accomplish the specified objectives.

Purpose
To provide guidance to staff in developing spending plans that address the City’s priorities and policy objectives while ensuring benefit to the City.

Definitions and Details

1. Department expenditures are limited to:
a. Budgeted expenditures approved by the City Council as appropriated by major category:
i. Salary and Benefits;
ii. Services and Supplies: Travel and Training, Office Expenses, Repairs and Maintenance, Materials, Professional Services, etc.; and Capital Outlay.

2. The operating budget will be prepared to fund current year expenditures with current year revenue. However, surplus fund balances may be used to increase reserves, fund Capital Improvement Projects, reduce unfunded pension liability (California Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)), or carried forward to fund future years’ operating budgets when necessary to stabilize services and fund capital outlay.

3. Budget transfers require the approval of the City Manager or designee except those affecting personnel and capital projects which must be approved by the City Council.

4. Budget transfers required to hire additional permanent personnel require the City Council’s approval.

5. The City will periodically update replacement and maintenance financing plans, and incorporate them into the Budget.

6. The City will monitor and review methods of operation to ensure that services continue to be delivered in the most cost-effective manner possible. This review process encompasses a wide range of productivity issues, including:
a. Analyzing systems and procedures to ensure efficient delivery of services. b. Evaluating the ability of new technologies and related capital investments to improve productivity.
c. Developing the skills and abilities of all City employees. d. Developing and implementing appropriate methods of recognizing and rewarding exceptional employee performance.
e. Evaluating the ability of the private sector to perform the same level of service at a lower cost.

Deleted: (PERS and OPEB)
Deleted: capital outlay
187 of 395
7 Debt Policy
Policy
The City will limit the use of debt so as not to place a burden on the fiscal resources of the City and its taxpayers. Long-term borrowing will be limited to capital improvements or projects that cannot be financed from current revenues. When capital projects are financed, the City will amortize the debt within a period not to exceed the expected useful life of the project. The City will limit the total debt ratio (debt guaranteed by the General Fund) to 10% or as required by bond coverage ratios. The debt ratio is calculated by the relationship between the debt and the General Fund revenue.

Purpose
To maintain fiscal viability by not encumbering the General Fund with excessive debt payments or using debt to support operating expenses.

Definitions and Details

1. For purposes of computing the percentage of debt payments the proposed budget expenditures will be used.

2. The ratio of debt payments to operating expenditures will be presented in the annual budget.

3. The City will investigate the use of special assessment, revenue or other selfsupporting bonds to limit the General Fund obligation for debt service payments.

4. The City will not use long-term debt for current operations.

5. The City will not use short-term borrowing to support routine operations, provided however, that it may be used to meet temporary cash flow needs.

6. The City will maintain strong communications with bond rating agencies about the City’s financial condition and will follow a policy of full disclosure on financial reports and bond prospectus.

7. The City will strive to maintain or improve the City’s bond rating.

8. The City will utilize inter-fund loans when possible to reduce the cost of financing capital improvements.

9. The City is required to enter into an agreement for inter-fund loans beyond the current fiscal year.
188 of 395
8 Receivables Policy
Policy
The City will ensure the timely invoicing, monitoring, and collection of outstanding obligations owed to the City.

Purpose
To maintain appropriate oversight of all receivables and maintain sound fiscal management and accounting practices related to all receivables.

Definitions and Details

1. For the purpose of this policy, receivables are defined to include outstanding obligations owed to the City for services or goods supplied.

2. All receivables shall be recorded in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

3. Accounts receivable will be administered by the Finance Department.

4. Accounts receivable shall be established for services or goods provided in advance of a payment and should include terms for collection. Invoices should be prepared in a timely manner but not less than on a monthly basis. Invoices should include a description of the goods or services provided, payment terms and remittance address.

5. All accounts receivable should be recorded in a manner that allows for aging analysis. Reconciliation of accounts receivable may be performed on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis depending on the type of receivable.

6. Collection options should be evaluated and pursued to maximize collections. The use of collection agencies and programs such as the State Interagency Intercept Collection Program or the County Tax lien process may be used based on the type of receivable.

7. An allowance for doubtful accounts should be recorded after a bad debt expense is estimated. Write-off of bad debt should be performed on an annual basis to ensure that accounts receivable and allowance balances are not overstated.

8. The City will establish written procedures to document the accounts receivable process and bad debt write-off process for adequate internal controls and proper management oversight. These procedures should be reviewed annually as part of the year end audit process.
189 of 395
9 Grants Management Policy and Procedures
Policy
City departments actively pursue federal, state and other grant opportunities when deemed appropriate. Grant funding allows the City to leverage local public funds by extending and enhancing the services it offers to the community, and to introduce new initiatives.

Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to specify circumstances when grant funding is appropriate and to establish a standardized set of procedures for the fiscal administration, management, and monitoring of public and private grants. This policy is intended to ensure compliance with all applicable administrative, financial, reporting, and monitoring requirements established by the funding agency as well as all applicable administrative and fiscal directives and guidelines established by the City of Pinole. The policy and procedures established herein shall apply to all Federal, State, County and private grants administered by the City.

Definitions and Details

1. Staff Responsibilities
a. City Department seeking and managing grant funding is responsible for:
i. Preparation of grant application materials;
ii. Providing sufficient data to allow City Management to evaluate the costs and benefits of the proposed grant;
iii. Obtaining appropriate approvals for submission of grant, if necessary; iv. Obtaining City Council approval for acceptance of grant; v. Understanding the operational and budgetary impact the grant has on the City;
vi. Accumulating the appropriate accounting detail and
supporting documentation;
vii. Preparation of reports required by the grantor;
viii. Providing the Finance Department with the following:

1. Grant Award Letter;

2. Grant Contract;

3. City Council minutes of action or Council Resolution approving the grant;

4. An administrative manual (this includes program guidelines and accounting procedures). This will allow Finance to maintain grant files which are accurate and complete.
190 of 395
10 ix. Providing Finance copies of all grant amendments, program reporting, reimbursement requests and other communications to all agents involved in the grant administration process for review prior to submission.
a. The Finance Department (Finance Director) is responsible for:
i. Reviewing all financial reports to the grantor prior to submission to ensure its accuracy;
ii. Assisting departments with any problems or questions regarding the grant submission process;
iii. Scheduling audit of grant programs when requested by Grantee Agency. City staff will aid in the auditing process providing available source documents as requested by the auditing agency;
iv. Coordinating the accounting for all receipts and disbursements related to the grant. Finance Department will determine setup and maintain the most appropriate method (s) of accounting for the grant in the financial system.

2. Pre-Application
Prior to submitting an application for any grant award, the applicant department shall thoroughly review the grant requirements outlined in the solicitation to ensure that the department is aware of and has the capacity to meet all administrative, fiscal, programmatic, reporting and monitoring requirements.

3. Post-Award
a. Set-Up
All new grants should be reviewed by the Finance Director to ensure that all grant details are accurate and grant budget is established in the financial system in accordance with any special conditions required by the funder. i. Acceptance of all grants must be approved by action of the City Council. Said approval shall include authorization to appropriate funding to revenue and expenditure accounts.
ii. For grants that were not included in the annual adopted budget, the applicant department will submit a request to appropriate revenue and expenditures to the City Council for review and approval. Once the grant budget has been approved by the City Council, department staff should submit a request to the Finance Department to establish the approved budget in the financial system.
iii. The term of grant-funded positions must be clearly identified and disclosed to the City Council prior to approval. If the expiration of a grant requires the application of General Fund revenue for continued funding, this stipulation must also be disclosed.
191 of 395
11 iv. One-time or fluctuating grant sources should not be used for ongoing programs.
v. The awarded department assumes the lead role in grant management in collaboration with the Finance Department.
b. Cash Handling
Grant funds are received from various funding agencies via checks and electronic wire/ACH transfers only and should be sent to the Finance Department. Hard copy checks are deposited weekly and promptly recorded in the City’s financial system.

4. Grant Monitoring and Quarterly Reporting
a. Grant Award Monitoring
Award monitoring shall be the responsibility of the applicant department to ensure that grant funds are expended for eligible activities in accordance with the guidelines established by the funder, including, but not limited to:

The applicant department shall obtain all documentation necessary to fully and accurately support all grant expenditures, including expenditures incurred by sub- recipients. Examples of supporting documentation may include, but not be limited to:
i. Employee timesheets
ii. Personnel Activity Reports
iii. Personnel Action Forms
iv. Payroll reports
v. Invoices and proof of payment
vi. Purchase receipts
vii. Workshop/Training itineraries
viii. Travel documents
b. Quarterly Reporting
Finance Department staff should review grant expenditures and cash position as needed to ensure proper oversight and fiscal administration of the grant.

Claims for reimbursement based grants should be sent to the funder timely to ensure prompt reimbursement. If grant reimbursements are not received within the timeframe prescribed by the funder - generally 60 to 90 days - the appropriate applicant department staff should follow up to check on the status of the reimbursement request.

Grants are required to be reconciled at least quarterly as part of the Finance 192 of 395
12 Department’s grant reconciliation process. Grant reconciliation should include review of all of the following:
i. Grant expenditure to revenue balance
ii. Grant budget to actual balance
iii. Status of reimbursement requests submitted to the funder for purpose of reversing revenue accruals
iv. Grant advances and whether or not funds should be recognized v. Grant end dates, closeouts
vi. Review grant information against the general ledger to ensure accuracy of information listed

5. Record Retention
The City is committed to ensuring that all necessary grant records and documents are adequately retained as required by federal, state, and private funding agencies.

The below Record Retention Schedule is approved as the retention schedule for grant records and documents maintained by the applicant department. The schedule is applicable to all physical and electronic grant records maintained by the department as part of the administration and management of federal, state, and private grant funds.

Record Retention Schedule: Grant Records
Record Type* Retention Period
Original grant proposal
Grant-specific policies and procedures
Grant award letter
Grant agreement and subsequent
modifications, if applicable
Grant budget and subsequent
modifications, if applicable
All pertinent funder correspondence,
including emails, phone log notes, letters,
site visit/monitoring/corrective action/audit
reports, etc…
All pertinent sub-recipient/sub-grantee
correspondence including emails, phone
At least 5 years following official
notification by the awarding agency that
the grant has been fiscally and
programmatically closed OR at least 5
years following the closure of its audit
report covering the entire award period,
whichever is later.
193 of 395
13 log notes, letters, site
visit/monitoring/corrective action/audit
reports, etc…
Fiscal and program/performance reports
submitted to the funder including
explanation of data collection/reporting
methodology, if not evident
Wire transfers and/or copies of
reimbursement checks received
Documentation of required matching
funds
All documentation relating to grantee
compliance with the grant agreement
All evidence of returned grant funds
All supporting documentation necessary
to fully and adequately justify grant
expenditures including timesheets, payroll
reports, Personnel Activity Reports,
receipts, invoices, etc.

Other documents deemed necessary and
important by grant program/fiscal staff
and/or documents required to be
maintained by the funder
* All grant documents and records should be organized and maintained in designated grant files or other systematic organizational structure. 194 of 395
14 Capital Assets Policy and Procedures
Policy
Purchased and donated assets meeting the City’s capitalization definition and threshold will be classified and recorded in the City’s financial records as capital assets. The value of the asset must meet the City’s capitalization threshold of $5,000 to be recorded as a capital asset.

Purpose
To define costs eligible and establish thresholds for capitalization in conformity with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 34 Basic Financial Statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments and Statement No. 51 Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Capital Assets.

Definitions and Details

1. Definition of a Capital Asset
A capital asset is any tangible or intangible asset purchased for use in the day-to- day operations of the City with a useful life greater than one year and has an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more. Donations with an estimated appraised value of $5,000 or more and have a useful life greater than one year is also considered a capital asset. Capital assets include items such as land, sewer lines, buildings, vehicles, equipment, and furniture.

2. Major Asset Classes
a. (100) Land – includes land under infrastructure and preparation costs. Costs can include acquisition prices and cost of initially preparing land for its intended use (basic site improvements, removal, excavation, relocation, reconstruction). Usually has an indefinite useful life and is not depreciated. b. (200) Improvements other than buildings - permanent improvements (nonmoveable), other than buildings that add value to land, but do not have an indefinite useful life. Examples include fences, retaining walls, parking lots, and landscaping.
c. (300) Buildings - permanent structures. Costs can include purchase of new building or cost of an improvement to an existing building. An entire building can be classified as one asset or be reported as separate capital assets if discrete portions of the building have significantly different useful lives (e.g. roof separate from building).
d. (400) Infrastructure - capital assets that normally are stationary in nature and normally can be preserved for a significantly greater number of years than most capital assets. Examples include roads, bridges, tunnels, drainage Deleted:
195 of 395
15 systems, water and sewer systems, and lighting systems. e. (600) Furnishings and Equipment - moveable assets that includes all costs to place equipment into service (freight, installation, warranties, and sales tax).

Each piece of equipment must meet the minimum capitalization threshold and is not recorded in bulk. Examples include vehicles, furnishings, machinery, servers, and appliances.
f. (700) Other Capital Assets – capital assets that do not fit into any of the major asset classes. This can include:
i. Intangibles – assets that are not physical in nature. Generally, this includes software and easements (can also include water rights, trademarks).
ii. Easements - intangibles with an indefinite useful life and are not depreciated.
iii. Software - both internally generated and off-the-shelf. g. (900) Construction in Progress - construction projects in progress at the conclusion of the fiscal year. These costs are not depreciable until the project is completed and booked into the correct category of improvements, buildings, or infrastructure.

3. Capital Asset Useful Life
The capital asset useful life is the determining factor for the number of accounting periods over which the asset is to be depreciated. The City can determine the useful life of an asset by using historical information or by seeking guidance from other external resources to determine the proper useful life of the asset. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset as follows:

Class Useful Life
Bridges 75 years
Buildings 50 years
Equipment 5-10 years
Parks 70 years
Street drainage 100 years
Streets and roads 50 years
Vehicles 5-10 years
Wastewater infrastructure 50 years

4. Capital Asset Review
The City relies on a decentralized method to verify the accuracy of capital assets.

Departments are responsible for evaluating the condition and functionality of existing capital assets assigned to their department to determine if the asset is still providing the most appropriate method to deliver services. Capital assets should be assessed on an annual basis.

5. Disposal of Capital Assets/Surplus Property
Formatted: Font: Bold
Deleted: Class ...
196 of 395
16 When an asset will no longer be used in operations, voluntarily or involuntarily, the asset shall be removed from the City’s financial records and removed from service.

Disposal of equipment, material, or inventory will be in accordance with the City’s surplus property guidelines.
“Surplus Property” is used generically to describe any City property that is no longer needed or useable by the holding department. The City Council shall declare item(s) surplus prior to disposal.

6. Methods of Disposition
a. The department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director shall determine or approve one of the following methods of disposition that is most appropriate and in the best interests of the City. b. All surplus property is for sale “as is” and “where is”, with no warranty, guarantee, or representation of any kind, expressed or implied, as to the condition, utility or usability or the property offered for sale. Appropriate methods of sale are as follows:
i. Public Auction - Surplus property may be sold at public auction. City staff may conduct public Auctions, or the City may contract with a professional auctioneer including professional auction services. ii. Bids - Bids may be solicited for the sale of surplus property. Surplus property disposed of in this manner shall be sold to the highest responsible bidder.
iii. Selling for Scrap - Surplus property may be sold as scrap if the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director deems that the value of the raw material exceeds the value of the property as a whole.
iv. Negotiated Sale - Surplus property may be sold outright if the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director determines that only one known buyer is available or interested in acquiring the property.
v. No Value Item – Where the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director determines that specific supplies or equipment are surplus and of minimal value to the City due to spoilage, obsolescence or other cause, or where the Finance Director, serving as the Purchasing Officer, determines that the cost of disposal of such supplies or equipment would exceed the recovery value, the department head or designee in consultation with the Finance Director shall dispose of the same in such a manner as he or she deems appropriate and in the best interest of the City.
c. Surplus property that remains unsold will be donated to a non-profit organization or transferred to an appropriate recycle center. d. Proceeds from the sale or trade-in of surplus property shall be submitted to Finance for returning to the appropriate fund.

Deleted: Purchasing Officer
197 of 395
17 Unclaimed Funds/Outstanding Checks Policy and Procedures Policy
The City of Pinole will account for unclaimed funds in a manner which follows Government Code Sections 50050 through 50056. Funds that remain unclaimed for at least three (3) years will become the property of the City of Pinole after the procedures identified herein have been followed.

Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the proper disposition of unclaimed funds and outstanding checks in accordance with government statutes.

Definitions and Details

1. Definitions
a. Unclaimed Funds - Consists of funds which are not the property of the City but remain in the City Treasury for three (3) or more years without a claim being filed by the legal owner(s). Unclaimed funds do not include individual items of less than $15.00, any amounts in which the depositor’s name is unknown, or restitution to victims.
b. Warrant – Instrument issued to pay for goods and/or services rendered, issue refunds, etc. (i.e. a check).
c. Stale Dated – A check that is older than six (6) months. d. Escheat – refers to state escheat laws that require agencies to transfer unclaimed property or funds to the state after three years and reasonable efforts locate the property owner.

2. Guidelines
The City of Pinole has established the policy to hold unclaimed payroll and accounts payable checks rather than escheating the unclaimed funds to the State of California.

This unclaimed funds policy applies to all outstanding payroll and accounts payable checks abandoned three years after the issue date.

3. Procedures: Items over $15.00
a. Quarterly during the bank reconciliation process, the outstanding warrant register will be reviewed for items six (6) months and older. For the warrants six months and older, a letter and unclaimed property claim form will be mailed to the address on record for the issued warrant. See Exhibit 1 and 2 for examples.
b. Every June 30th and December 31st, (final evaluation dates) all remaining 198 of 395
18 outstanding warrants will be evaluated. Any warrants issued more than 12 months prior to evaluation date will receive a second letter and affidavit form. If no response is received within 30 days for the warrants 12 months or greater, the warrant will be identified as stale dated. Stale dated warrants shall be cancelled and voided in the system. A journal entry shall be prepared to record the total amount of stale dated checks in a hold account called “Aged Unclaimed Warrants”.
c. A list of stale date warrants containing the warrant number, issue date, amount, and payee shall be maintained by the Finance Department. If a cancelled warrant is presented, or the payee files a claim after cancellation, the warrant shall be reissued by debiting the “Aged Unclaimed Warrants” account, and the original warrant shall be removed from the stale dated list.
d. Also, on June 30th and December 31st, the stale dated list shall be evaluated to determine which warrants are more than 3 years old from the date of issue. Warrants that are more than 3 years old will be handled as follows:
i. A notice must be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Pinole stating the payee, the amount, the fund in which the money is held, and that it is proposed that the money will become the property of the City of Pinole on a specific date (not less than 45 nor more than 60 days after the first publication). See Exhibit 3 for example. ii. Upon or prior to publication, a party of interest may file a claim (Exhibit 2) for the funds with the Finance Director. The claim must contain the claimant’s name, address, amount, tax identification number, and grounds for claim prior to the date the funds become property of the City of Pinole. The Finance Director can require additional information to help substantiate the claim.
iii. On the day identified in the notice, the total dollar amount (on which no claims were filed) becomes the property of the City. A journal entry will be prepared to recognize the revenue. The money will be moved from “Aged Unclaimed Warrants” to the fund the warrant was originally issued from.

4. Procedures: Items under $15.00 or items where the depositor is unknown a. Quarterly during the bank reconciliation process, the outstanding warrant register will be reviewed for items six (6) months and older. For the warrants six months and older, a letter and unclaimed property claim form will be mailed to the address on record for the issued warrant. See Exhibit 1 and 2 for examples.
b. Every June 30th and December 31st, (final evaluation dates) all remaining outstanding warrants will be evaluated. Any warrants issued more than 12 months prior to evaluation date will receive a second letter and affidavit form. If no response is received within 30 days for the warrants 12 months or greater, it becomes the property of the City of Pinole. Stale dated warrants shall be cancelled and voided in the system. A journal entry will 199 of 395
19 be used to record the total amount of these warrants as revenue. c. Any individual check of less than fifteen ($15) dollars, or any amount if the depositor’s name is unknown, which remain unclaimed for a period of one (1) year may be transferred from the funds which the money was originally drawn from by the City Council to the General Fund without the necessity of publication of notice in a newspaper. (Gov. Code Section 50055)
200 of 395
20 City of Pinole

INVESTMENTPOLICY
I. Introduction
The purpose of this Policy is to define the parameters within which funds are to be managed. In methods, procedures, and practices, the policy formalizes the framework for the City of Pinole’s investment activities that must be exercised to ensure effective and judicious fiscal and investment management of the City’s funds.

II. Governing Authority
The investment program of the City of Pinole (“the City”) shall be operated in conformance with federal, state, and other legal requirements. All funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy, and California Government Code Sections 5360l, 5360l.l, 5360l.5, 5360l.6, 53635, 53646, 53635.5, and l648l.2.

III. Scope
It is intended that this policy cover all funds (except retirement funds) and investment activities under the direction of the City. The investment of bond proceeds will be in accordance with the provisions of relevant bond documents.

IV. Objectives
The primary objectives, in priority order, of the investment activities of the City shall be:

1. Safety
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program.

Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the portfolio.

2. Liquidity
The investment portfolio of the City will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet its cash flow requirements.
201 of 395
22 3. Return
The investment portfolio of the City shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return on its investments consistent with the constraints imposed by its safety objective and cash flow considerations.

V. Standards of Care

1. Prudence
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the “prudent person” standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse development.

The “prudent person” standard states that,
“Investments shall be made with judgment and care under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.”

2. Ethics and Conflict of Interest
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial decisions.

3. Delegation of Authority
The management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to the City Treasurer or designee who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the limits of this policy. The City Council may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor. The advisor shall follow the policy and such other written instructions as are provided.
202 of 395
23 VI. Permitted Investment Instruments

1. U.S. Treasury and other government notes, bonds, bills, or obligations that carry the full faith and credit guarantee of the United States for the payment of principal and interest. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length. No more than fifty (50) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in instruments defined under this section.

2. Federal Agency or U.S. government sponsored enterprises (GSE) bonds and note obligations, participations or other instruments. This includes but is not limited to obligations issued by Banks for Cooperatives, Federal Land Banks, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, Federal Farm Credit Banks, Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or in obligations, participations, or other instruments of, or issued by, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the Federal National Mortgage Association; or in guaranteed portions of Small Business Administration notes. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length, unless the funds to be invested are moneys generated from the proceeds of the sale of real estate assets restricted to a reserve account, and the investment security is “AA” rated by at least two of three nationally recognized rating agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch) in which case maturities shall not exceed ten years in length. No more than 40 (forty) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in instruments defined under this section.

3. Certificates of Deposit (CDs) which are Federal Deposit Insurance Company (FDIC) insured or fully collateralized time CD’s in financial institutions in California. No more than 10 percent of the City’s portfolio shall be invested in FDIC insured or fully collateralized time certificates of deposit. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length.

4. Negotiable FDIC insured Certificates of Deposit or deposit notes issued by a nationally or state-chartered bank or a state or federal savings and loan association or by a state-licensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchase of negotiable CD’s may not exceed 30 percent of the City’s investment portfolio.

Maturities shall not exceed five years in length, and must have an IDC number greater than 165 (excellent rated).
203 of 395
24 5. Bankers’ Acceptances issued by domestic or foreign banks, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System, the short-term paper of which is rated in the highest category by Moody’s Investors Services or by Standard & Poor’s Corporation. Purchases of Bankers’ Acceptances may not exceed 180 days maturity or 40 percent of the City’s investment portfolio. No more than l0 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in the Banker’s Acceptances of any one commercial bank.

6. Medium-term corporate notes issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the U.S. or any state and operating within the U.S. Medium-term corporate notes shall be rated in a Double-AA rating category “AA” or its equivalent or better by a nationally recognized rating service. Additionally, corporate notes shall be widely diversified across all market sectors. Purchase of medium-term corporate notes may not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the City’s investment portfolio. No more than five (5) percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in a medium-term note of any one corporation. Maturities shall not exceed five years in length.

7. Commercial paper rated in the highest tier of “prime quality” as provided by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., or Standard & Poor’s Corporation, provided that the issuing corporation is organized and operating within the United States, has total assets in excess of $500 million and has an “A” or higher rating for its long-term debt, if any, as provided by Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed l80 day’s maturity nor represent more than l0 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Purchases of commercial paper may not exceed l5 percent of the City’s investment portfolio. An additional l5 percent or a total of 30 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested only if the dollar weighted average of the entire amount does not exceed 3l days.

8. Repurchase Agreements used solely as short-term investments not to exceed 30 days. The following collateral restrictions will be observed: Only U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities, as described in VI.l and 2, will be acceptable collateral. All securities underlying Repurchase Agreements must be delivered to the City’s custodian bank versus payment or be handled under a tri-party repurchase agreement. The total of all collateral for each Repurchase Agreement must equal or exceed, on the basis of market value plus accrued interest, l03 percent of the total dollar value of the money invested by the City for the term of the investment unless the term of the investment is overnight, in which case the total of all collateral for the Repurchase Agreement must equal or exceed, on the basis of market value plus accrued interest, l00 percent of the total dollar value of the 204 of 395
25 investment. For any Repurchase Agreement with a term of more than one day, the value of the underlying securities must be reviewed on a regular basis. Market value must be calculated each time there is a substitution of collateral. The City or its trustee shall have a perfected first security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code in all securities subject to Repurchase Agreement.

The City may enter into Repurchase Agreements with (l) primary dealers in U.S. Government securities who are eligible to transact business with, and who report to, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and (2) California and non-California banking institutions having assets in excess of $l billion and in the highest short-term rating category as provided by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or Standard & Poor’s Corporation. The City will have specific written agreements with each firm with which it enters into Repurchase Agreements. No more than 10 percent of the City’s investment portfolio may be invested in Repurchase Agreements.

9. State of California’s Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Up to l00 percent of the City’s portfolio may be invested in LAIF or up to the maximum permitted by California State Law. The LAIF portfolio should be reviewed periodically.

10.Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered Money Market Mutual Funds as authorized by Government Code Sections 5360l and/or 53635. To be eligible for investment pursuant to this subdivision these companies shall either:
a. Attain the highest ranking letter or numerical rating provided by not less than two of the three largest nationally recognized rating services; b. Have an investment advisor registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years experience investing in securities and obligations authorized by Government Code Section 5360l;
c. Assets under management in excess of $500,000,000;
d. The purchase price of the share of beneficial interest shall not include any commission charged by these companies; and,
e. Purchases shall not exceed l5 percent of the investment portfolio of the City.

Under no circumstances shall any funds of the City be invested in inverse floaters, range notes, or interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages. Nor 205 of 395
26 shall any of the City’s funds be invested in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity.

VII. Reporting Requirements
Quarterly investment reports shall be submitted by the City’s Treasurer or designee to the City Council. The reports shall include, at a minimum, the following information for each individual investment:
• Type investment instrument;
• Institution/Issuer;
• Maturity date;
• Cost of security (par value) and dollar amount in all securities; • Description of the funds and investments;
• Maturity distribution and of the portfolio;
• Current market value of all securities;
• Rate of return for the portfolio;
• A statement of compliance of the portfolio with the City’s Investment Policy, and its ability to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 53646 (e), the Treasurer may supply to the governing body, chief executive office and the external auditor a copy of the most recent statement received by the City on those investments in the State Local Agency Investment Fund in lieu of the above required statement.

VIII. Safekeeping and Custody
The assets of the City shall be secured through the third-party custody and safekeeping procedures. Bearer instruments shall be held only through third-party institutions. Collateralized securities such as repurchase agreements shall be purchased using the delivery vs. payment (DVP) procedure. 206 of 395
27 I. Introduction
City of Pinole

PENSION INVESTMENT POLICY
The City of Pinole (the “City”) has established the City of Pinole Employee Benefit Pension Plan (the “Plan”), a Section 115 Trust. The goal of the Plan’s investment program is to provide a reasonable level of growth which will result in sufficient assets to offset a portion of the present and future obligations of retirement benefits provided by the California Public Employees Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for those eligible employees who meet the specified age and service requirements.

II. Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this Pension Investment Policy is to establish a comprehensive strategy for assets invested under the Plan, and outline prudent and acceptable parameters in which pension funds are to be managed.

The primary objectives of this policy are to:
• Facilitate the process of ongoing communication between the Plan Sponsor and its plan fiduciaries;
• Confirm the Plan’s investment goals and objectives and management policies applicable to the investment portfolio;
• Provide a framework to construct a well-diversified asset mix that can potentially be expected to meet the account’s short and long-term needs that is consistent with the account’s investment objectives, liquidity considerations and risk tolerance;
• Identify any unique considerations that may restrict or limit the investment discretion of its designated investment managers;
• Help maintain a long-term perspective when market volatility is caused by short-term market movements.

III. Roles and Responsibilities
Governing Authority
The pension investment program of the City of Pinole (“the City”) shall be operated in conformance with federal, state, and other legal requirements. All funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s Pension Investment Policy, and 207 of 395
28 applicable California Government Code Sections.
208 of 395
29 Delegation of Authority
The management responsibility for the pension investment program is hereby delegated to the City Manager and/or Assistant City Manager or designee as Plan Administrator who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the limits of this policy. The City Council may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor.

The advisor shall follow the policy and such other written instructions as are provided.

Duties and Responsibilities (Refer to Appendix for who serves in these roles) Plan Administrator
The Plan Administrator for the City of Pinole is responsible for:
▪ Confirming the accuracy of this Investment Guidelines Document, in writing.
▪ Advising Trustee and Investment Manager of any change in the plan/account’s financial situation, funding status, or cash flows, which could possibly necessitate a change to the account’s overall risk tolerance, time horizon or liquidity requirements; and thus would dictate a change to the overall investment objective and goals for the account. ▪ Monitoring and supervising all service vendors and investment options, including investment managers.
▪ Avoiding prohibited transactions and conflicts of interest.

Trustee
The plan Trustee is responsible for:
▪ Valuing the holdings.
▪ Collecting all income and dividends owed to the Plan. ▪ Settling all transactions (buy-sell orders).

Investment Manager
The Investment Manager is responsible for:
▪ Assisting the Plan Administrator with the development and maintenance of this Investment Policy document.
▪ Meeting with the Plan Administrator to review portfolio structure, holdings, and performance.
▪ Designing, recommending and implementing an appropriate asset allocation consistent with the investment objectives, time horizon, risk profile, guidelines and constraints outlined in this Policy. ▪ Researching and monitoring investment advisers and investment vehicles. 209 of 395
30 ▪ Purchasing, selling, and reinvesting in securities held in the account. ▪ Monitoring the performance of all selected assets.
▪ Voting proxies, if applicable.
▪ Recommending changes to any of the above.
▪ Periodically reviewing the suitability of the investments, and being available at such other times within reason at your request. ▪ Preparing and presenting appropriate reports.
▪ Informing the Plan Administrator if changes occur in personnel that are responsible for portfolio management or research.

Standards of Care
Prudence
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officers shall be the “prudent person” standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse development.

The “prudent person” standard states that,
“Investments shall be made with judgment and care under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.”
Ethics and Conflict of Interest
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial decisions.

IV. Asset Allocation
The goal of the Plan’s investment program is to provide a reasonable level of growth, which will result in sufficient assets to pay a portion of the present and future obligations of the Plan. The following objectives are intended to assist in 210 of 395
31 achieving this goal:
• The Plan should seek to earn a return in excess of its policy benchmark over the life of the Plan.
• The Plan’s assets will be managed on a total return basis which takes into consideration both investment income and capital appreciation. While the Plan Sponsor recognizes the importance of preservation of capital, it also adheres to the principle that varying degrees of investment risk are generally rewarded with compensating returns. To achieve these objectives, the Plan Sponsor allocates its assets (asset allocation) with a strategic perspective of the capital markets.

Investment Time Horizon: Intermediate-term
Anticipated Cash Flows: Assets in the Plan will seek to mitigate the impact of future rate increases from CalPERS. Typically,
increases in rates come with a one-year advance
warning; however the Plan Administrator may
request disbursement of assets at any time.

Investment Objective: The primary objective is to generate a reasonable level of growth over time. The assets in this Plan
will eventually be used to fund Pension Plan
obligations for assets managed in the CalPERS
Trust.

Risk Tolerance: Custom – The account’s risk tolerance has been rated moderate, which demonstrates that the
account can accept price fluctuations to pursue
its investment objectives.

Strategic Asset Allocation
As of the date of this Pension Investment Policy adoption, the asset allocation ranges for the City of Pinole Employee Benefit Pension Plan is as follows:

Strategic Asset Allocation Ranges
Cash Fixed Income Equity
0-20% 45%-75% 25%-45%
Policy: 4% Policy: 60% Policy: 36%
211 of 395
32 Market conditions may cause the account’s asset allocation to vary from the stated range from time to time. The Investment Manager will rebalance the portfolio no less than quarterly and/or when the actual weighting differs substantially from the strategic range, if appropriate and consistent with the Plan’s objectives.

V. Investment Guidelines
Security Guidelines
Equities
With the exception of limitations and constraints described above, the Investment Manager may allocate assets of the equity portion of the account among various market capitalizations (large, mid, small) and investment styles (value, growth).

Further, the Investment Manager may allocate assets among domestic, international developed and emerging market equity securities.

Total Equities 25%-45%
Equity Style Range
Domestic Large Cap Equity 12%-35%
Domestic Mid Cap Equity 0%-10%
Domestic Small Cap Equity 0%-15%
International Equity (incl. Emerging Markets) 0%-15%
Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) 0%-8%
Fixed Income
In the fixed income portion of the account, the Investment Manager may allocate assets among various sectors and industries, as well as varying maturities and credit quality that are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the portfolio.
*High Yield securities may be purchased, but they will be held using a diversified exchange traded fund, or mutual fund vehicle.

If individual fixed income securities are purchased for the Plan, the following guidelines will be adhered to in the management of the fixed income segment:

Total Fixed Income 45%-75%
212 of 395
33 Eligible Investments
• Debt obligations of the U.S. Government, its agencies, and Government Sponsored Enterprises
• Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS)
• Asset Backed Securities (ABS)
• Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMO)
• Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS)
• Corporate debt securities issued by U.S. or foreign entities including, but not limited to, limited partnerships, equipment trust certificates and enhanced equipment trust certificates
• Eligible instruments issued pursuant to SEC Rule 144(a) • Municipal Bonds
With the exception of Debt obligations of the U.S. Government, its agencies, Government Sponsored Enterprises and US TIPS, the total investment in any fixed income security issuer shall not exceed 3% of total plan assets. These restrictions do not apply to fixed income funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

Quality
The portfolio will maintain a minimum weighted average quality of A- at all times.

Individual securities shall have a minimum quality rating of Baa3 by Moody’s or BBB- by Standard & Poor’s (S&P).

Duration
The Investment Manager will maintain the portfolio duration within +/- 25% of the benchmark duration at all times.

Diversification
• No more than 5% of the portfolio assets may be invested in any individual issuer, with the exception of securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S.

Government, its agencies, and Government Sponsored Enterprises. • No more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in securities issued under Rule 144A.
213 of 395
34 214 of 395
35 Performance Benchmarks
The performance of the total Plan shall be measured over a three and five-year periods. These periods are considered sufficient to accommodate the market cycles experienced with investments. The performance shall be compared to the return of the total portfolio blended benchmark shown below.

Total Portfolio Blended Benchmark

19.00% S&P 500 Index

3.50% Russell Mid Cap Index

5.50% Russell 2000 Index

2.50% MSCI Emerging Market Index

4.50% MSCI EAFE Index

1.00% Wilshire REIT Index

45.50% Bloomberg Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index

13.00% ML 1-3 Year US Corp/Gov’t Index

1.50% US High Yield Master II

4.00% Citi 1Mth T-Bill
Asset Class/Style Benchmarks
Over a market cycle, the long-term objective for each investment strategy is to add value to a market benchmark. The following are the benchmarks used to monitor each investment strategy:

Large Cap Equity S&P 500 Index
Growth S&P 500 Growth Index
Value S&P 500 Value Index
Mid Cap Equity Russell Mid Cap Index
Growth Russell Mid Cap Growth Index
Value Russell Mid Cap Value Index
Small Cap Equity Russell 2000 Index
Growth Russell 2000 Growth Index
Value Russell 2000 Value Index
REITs Wilshire REIT Index
International Equity MSCI EAFE Index
Investment Grade Bonds Bloomberg Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index High Yield US High Yield Master II
215 of 395
36 Security Selection
The Investment Manager may utilize a full range of investment vehicles when constructing the investment portfolio, including but not limited to individual securities, mutual funds, and exchange-traded funds. In addition, to the extent permissible, the Investment Manager is authorized to invest in shares of mutual funds in which the Investment Manager serves as advisor or sub-adviser.

Investment Limitations
The following investment transactions are prohibited:
• Direct investments in precious metals (precious metals mutual funds and exchange-traded funds are permissible).
• Venture Capital
• Short sales*
• Purchases of Letter Stock, Private Placements, or direct payments • Leveraged Transactions*
• Commodities Transactions Puts, calls, straddles, or other option strategies* • Purchases of real estate, with the exception of REITs • Derivatives, with exception of ETFs*
*Permissible in diversified mutual funds and exchange-traded funds VI. Reporting Requirements
Quarterly reports shall be submitted by the Investment Manager to the Plan Administrator of the City of Pinole. These reports will be submitted by the City’s Treasurer or designee to the City Council.
216 of 395
37 APPENDIX
Plan Sponsor Account Information as of the date this pension investment policy is adopted:

Plan Sponsor: City of Pinole
Plan Administrator: City Manager and/or Assistant City Manager or designee
Governance: Pinole City Council
Plan Name (“Plan”) City of Pinole Employee Benefits Pension Plan Trustee: US Bank
Type of Account Pension Plan
ERISA Status: Not subject to ERISA
Investment Manager: US Bank, as discretionary trustee, has delegated investment management
responsibilities to HighMark Capital
Management, Inc. (“Investment Manager”), an
SEC-registered investment adviser
Investment Authority: Except as otherwise noted, the Trustee, US Bank, has delegated investment authority to
HighMark Capital Management, an SECregistered investment adviser. Investment Manager has full investment discretion over the
managed assets in the account. Investment
Manager is authorized to purchase, sell,
exchange, invest, reinvest and manage the
designated assets held in the account, all in
accordance with account’s investment
objectives, without prior approval or
subsequent approval of any other party(ies).
217 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
12A
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY (TAPS) COMMITTEE REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council consider a request from the Traffic and Pedestrian Safety (TAPS) Committee for funding for two efforts.

BACKGROUND
The TAPS Committee meets regularly to discuss concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety in the community. The Committee discussed several items during its last few meetings and would like to request that the City Council appropriate funding for the following items:

1. Repair and repave the creek side asphalt trail from Sarah Court to the pedestrian bridge over Pinole Creek; and

2. Fund advertisement of TAPS committee activities to residents.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS

1. Repair and repave the creek side asphalt trail path from Sarah Court TAPS recommends to the City Council that it appropriate adequate funds to complete a repair and re-surfacing of the trail pathway. This trail starts from Sarah Court and continues alongside of the Pinole Creek and connects to the shopping plaza by a pedestrian bridge. The trail continues between Pinole Valley High School property and Pinole Creek and terminates at Pinole Valley Road. A lot of high school students and nearby residents use this to frequent the shopping plaza. The asphalt pathway is weathered, spalled, and needs rehabilitation. This trail is partly in City right of way and partly on a private property. Approximately 250 linear feet of this trail (from Sarah Ct to the Pedestrian Bridge over the Pinole Creek) is within City property. Staff estimates that the cost to grind and repave this portion of the trail would cost between $25,000 to $30,000 if done with the City’s own Public Works operations and maintenance team.

2. Fund advertisement of TAPS Committee activities to the residents 218 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
TAPS recommends to the City Council that it appropriate adequate funds to advertise activities of the TAPS Committee to the residents by sending flyers or other means to the residents. TAPS members feel that a lot of Pinole residents are not aware of the existence of the TAPS Committee and its activities. An effort to publicize the TAPS Committee and its purpose will invite engagement from the residents and the City can benefit from informed and engaged residents.

If the City Council would like, it can direct City staff to include appropriations for these two matters in the proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 operating and capital budget.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost to in repave the 250 linear feet of trail is estimated to be no more than $30,000 if completed with the City’s own staffing resources. The cost to advertise TAPS (i.e., sending city wide flyers or other means) is expected to be around $7,000. There are sufficient funds in the General Fund unassigned fund balance to support these two efforts.

ATTACHMENTS
None
219 of 395

CITY COUNCIL
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CITY ROAD CONDITION AND PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive an update on the condition of the City’s roads and the City’s Pavement Management Program, review the present funding sources, and review the pavement sections targeted for treatment in the upcoming fiscal year.

BACKGROUND
The City Council requested a future City Council agenda item on the state of the City’s roads and a strategy to address the road conditions.

The City operates a Pavement Management Program, which involves regularly assessing the condition of all of the City’s public roads; identifying where to invest the City’s limited resources for road repair and maintenance to achieve the highest return on investment; scheduling repair and maintenance projects; preparing plans, specifications, and engineer’s estimates for projects; and implementing repair and maintenance projects. The Pavement Management Program is a key component of the City’s Capital Improvement Program.

The City of Pinole participates with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in their Pavement Technical Assistance Program (P-TAP). Through P-TAP, the City receives funding through which an MTC-selected consultant assesses the conditions of all of the City’s public roads, resulting in a pavement condition index (PCI) score for the City’s public roads.

The City of Pinole participates in P-TAP once every two years, which is the typical cycle.

The City last participated in P-TAP Round 22 (PTA-22, 2021/2022), at which time the citywide PCI for Pinole was determined to be 57. There is a decrease from the PCI of 62 determined in 2019.

In total, 52.02 centerline miles (118.63 lane miles) in the City were inspected. Each of 351 pavement sections were inspected and assigned an index score. This most recent inspection shows the City of Pinole has a backlog of approximately $32 million in 12B
220 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 2
pavement maintenance and repair work. The backlog is the accumulated cost of road rehabilitation projects that would be required to bring the City’s PCI score to 70 but have been deferred due to funding constraints.

The following table is a breakdown of the City’s current road network pavement condition categories.

Approximately 37.9% of the City’s road network has a PCI of 70 or better.

Table 1: Current Pavement Condition Categories
Current Condition Categories Arterial Collector Residential Network Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100) 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 37.9% Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69) 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 22.7% Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49) 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 22.5% Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24) 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 16.9% Total 20.5% 16.2% 63.4% 100.0%
Funding for the City’s Pavement Management Program historically has come from our local tax Measure S 2014 and other occasional State and federal grants. The City has historically allocated $500,000 per year for pavement maintenance from Measure S 2014.

Senate Bill 1 (SB1) increased funding for Pinole by approximately $350,000 annually.

In the past, the City has performed slurry seals and some overlays with this funding allocation. The PTAP-22 Pavement Condition Report includes a decision matrix to aid in selecting the most opportunistic sections of roadway to schedule for maintenance and rehabilitation.

The five funding scenarios detailed below are five‐year projections and provide useful “what‐if” information on expected PCI and backlog values that may occur at different funding constraints. The attached P-TAP 22 report analyses the following five scenarios.

Scenario 1 – Current Budget
Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI Conditions
Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
Please note the budget figures are not adjusted for inflation and represent costs in 2022 dollars.

Based on the current roadway conditions, it is estimated that it would cost the City approximately $55 million over the next five years to bring the entire network to an average PCI of optimal (79‐84 PCI range) by the end of 2026. 221 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 3
If the City were to maintain its current level of expenditures on road maintenance and repair, approximately $1,000,000 annually, it is anticipated that the City’s average PCI will decrease from 57 to 52 over the next five years.

The Pavement Condition Report advises spending on preventive maintenance, which follows the advice of P-TAP, as it generates better results and saves money in the long run, rather than repairing failed pavements. ATTACHMENT A – 2021/22 Pavement Management Report provides a cost summary (Section III – Page 65 of the report) and a Network Condition Summary for all the above scenarios and provides an in-depth analysis. The report also lists road segments that can be programmed for rehabilitation under different budget scenarios.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The lifecycle of a typical road is 25 to 30 years. The road deteriorates by 35% in its first 10 to 12 years. Cities are tasked with directing limited resources to a road system that has varying PCI scores throughout. The roads with the lowest PCI most often receive the most complaints from drivers. But getting the most out of our limited resources means choosing the right roads to treat at the right stage of life. MTC, our technical partner, calls it “fix it first”. This means we fix the roads that are in good shape first to extend their useful life.

There are three primary types of treatment relied upon to extend the life of a road. They include preventative treatment, cape seal/thin overlay, and reconstruction. • Preventive treatment, which includes minor patching, crack sealing, and slurry seal, is typically for a road with a PCI of 70 and costs an estimated $5 per square yard;
• A cape seal or thin overlay is for a road with a PCI of 50 to 70 and costs $20 to $40 per square yard; and
• Once the road is below a PCI of 25, replacement is the only option and can cost in excess of $130+ per square yard, or 30 time the cost of preventive measures.

The economics of road repair clearly show that the City can treat four times more road miles with a slurry seal than a thin overlay. Preventative treatments are recommended every five years for roads with a PCI of 70 or higher. For one mile of road in the worst shape, if we continue to defer its rehabilitation, we can direct the same amount of resources to 30 times or 30 miles of roads still in good shape.

Street condition is a service level decision that each community needs to make, in consideration of financial resources and competing demands. Over the next few months, there will be a public engagement process to determine the appropriate street condition level. After gathering community feedback, staff will make a recommendation to City Council about the appropriate street condition level and associated funding needs to incorporate into the City’s Long Term Financial Plan.
.
222 of 395
City Council Report
April 18, 2023 4

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to receiving this report.

ATTACHMENTS
A: 2021/2022 Pavement Management Report

223 of 395
Page | 1
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 2021/2022 Pavement Management Report
Final Report (04/25/22)
Pavement Management Technical
Assistance Program (P‐TAP) Round 22
Prepared By:

AMS Consulting
5627 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 320
Pinole, CA 94588

ATTACHMENT A
224 of 395
Page | 2
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................7 What is a Pavement Management System? .....................................................................................7 Why is a Pavement Management System important? .....................................................................8 Scope .................................................................................................................................................8 CURRENT STATE OF ROADS.................................................................................................................... 9 Road Network....................................................................................................................................9 Arterial ...........................................................................................................................................9 Collector.........................................................................................................................................9 Residential/Local..........................................................................................................................10 Pavement Condition Assessment....................................................................................................11 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) .....................................................................................................12 Local PCI Comparison ......................................................................................................................13 Maintenance and Rehabilitation Strategies ...................................................................................15 Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI between 70 – 100 (Light Maintenance) ...................16 Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI between 60 – 90 (Heavy / Light Maintenance)........17 Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI 69 or Less (Light / Heavy Rehab)..............................18 Mill and AC Overlay ‐ Rehabilitation Treatment.............................................................................18 AC Overlay with Rubberized Chip Seal ‐ Rehabilitation Treatment................................................19 Full‐Depth‐Reclamation (FDR).........................................................................................................19 Reconstruction.................................................................................................................................19 Pavement Needs..............................................................................................................................20 BUDGET SCENARIOS............................................................................................................................. 21 Scenario 1 – Current Funding Scenario ...........................................................................................23 Scenario 2 – Constant PCI................................................................................................................26 Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase ......................................................................................................28 Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI Conditions...............................................................................................30 Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario .....................................................................................................32 CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................................34 APPENDices..........................................................................................................................................37 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FIGURES  Figure ES  1 – Overview of City’s Current Pavement Condition..............................................................4

225 of 395
Page | 3
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 FIGURES  Figure 1. Pavement Life Expectancy.....................................................................................................10 Figure 2. Sample of Pavement Distress Types......................................................................................12 Figure 3. Sample of PCI Condition Categories......................................................................................12 Figure 4. Street‐by‐Street Map of Pavement Condition Index (2021) ..................................................13 Figure 5. Local Agency PCI Comparison................................................................................................14 Figure 6. Standard Deterioration Curve ...............................................................................................16 Figure 7. Current Budget PCI and Backlog Breakdown.........................................................................23 Figure 9. Current Budget Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary ...................................................25 Figure 9. Constant PCI and Backlog......................................................................................................26 Figure 10. Constant PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary .....................................................27 Figure 11. Plus 5 PCI Increase PCI and Backlog.....................................................................................28 Figure 12. Plus 5 PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary ..........................................................29 Figure 13. Optimal PCI and Backlog......................................................................................................30 Figure 14. Optimal PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary.......................................................31 Figure 15. Unfunded PCI and Backlog ..................................................................................................32 Figure 16. Unfunded PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary....................................................33 Figure 17. 5‐Year Scenario PCI Summary .............................................................................................35 Figure 18. 5‐Year Scenario Backlog Summary ......................................................................................36

TABLES   Table 1. City Network Summary Statistics............................................................................................11 Table 2. Current Pavement Condition Categories................................................................................15 Table 3. 5‐Year Needs Breakdown .......................................................................................................20 Table 4. Scenario Summary..................................................................................................................22 Table 5. Current Budget Scenario.........................................................................................................24 Table 6. Current Budget ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary.............................................................24 Table 7. Constant PCI Summary ...........................................................................................................26 Table 8. Constant PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary.................................................................27 Table 9. Plus 5 PCI Scenario..................................................................................................................28 Table 10. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary....................................................................29 Table 11. Optimal PCI Scenario ............................................................................................................30 Table 12. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary....................................................................31 Table 13. Unfunded PCI Scenario.........................................................................................................32 Table 14. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary....................................................................33

226 of 395
Page | 4
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Pinole’s street network is 52.02 centerline miles in length and covers approximately 10,296,208 square feet of pavement.  This network is an essential asset and is among the most valuable assets maintained by the City.   This asset is worth over $130.8 million to replace1. Through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Pavement Management Technical Assistance Program (P‐TAP), the City completed a comprehensive pavement management update that included field inspections and an update of the City’s pavement management software.  With the most recent inspection information and treatments, the City’s overall pavement condition index (PCI) is 57, which is classified as “At‐Risk to Fair” for MTC standards.  The PCI is a numerical rating from 0 – 100, with 0 being a failed street, and 100 being a brand new pavement.  Approximately 37.9% of the City’s roads have a PCI of 70 and above (Figure ES 1)
Figure ES  1 – Overview of City’s Current Pavement Condition 1 The valuation is assessed by the assumption of replacing the entire street network with a new street valued in today’s dollar.

37.9%

22.7%

22.5%

16.9%
Current Pavement Condition (%)
227 of 395
Page | 5
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 An adequately designed asphalt street typically lasts twenty years without the need of total reconstruction.  However, if conditions change, such as higher daily traffic usage, then reconstruction of the pavement may be warranted sooner.   Extending the life of the pavement with pavement preservation, as opposed to the replacement of pavement is the goal of a pavement management program.

Five budget scenarios were evaluated as part of the P‐TAP update.  AMS used the MTC StreetSaver pavement management software to run various budget scenarios.  Based on a series of assumptions, StreetSaver allocates available funds across the street network, recommends improvements, and forecasts future PCI if recommendations are implemented.

The five funding scenarios detailed below are five‐year projections and provides useful “what‐if” information on expected PCI and backlog values that may occur at different funding constraints.

Backlog is the cost of a project that is recommended for treatment in the first year but deferred to the following years due to funding constraints.  The following scenarios were analyzed and detailed below.

Scenario 1 – Current Budget
 Average funding of $1.0 million per year on maintenance and rehabilitation.  PCI decreases from 57 to 54
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $48.0 million
 46% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
 Average funding of $1.7 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI is constant at 57 at the end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $42.5 million
 50.2% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 228 of 395
Page | 6
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
 Average funding of $3.0 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI increases to 62 at the end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $39.2 million
 62.2% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI Conditions
 Average funding of $11 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI increases to 84 at end of five years
 Backlog decreases from $31.8 to $1.8 million
 95.3% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
 Average funding of $0 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI decreases to 47 at end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $49.8 million
 32.0% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Table ES 1 – Summary of different funding levels (Scenarios) Scenario 1. Current
Budget ($1M
Budget)
Scenario 2.

Constant
PCI
Scenario 3.

Plus 5 PCI
Increase
Scenario 4.

Optimal PCI
Conditions
Scenario 5.

Unfunded
$0 (PCI)
Average Yearly Budget   $1,000,000   $2,227,482   $3,470,017   $11,016,647   $0 Total Budget for 5 Years $5,000,000 $11,137,408 $17,350,084 $55,083,235 $0 Current PCI 57 57 57 57 57
Current Backlog $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 Current % in 'Good' condition 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% PCI after 5 years (change) 54 (‐3) 57 (0) 62 (+5) 84 (+27) 47 (‐10) Backlog after 5 years $48,087,650   $42,520,326   $39,243,160   $1,782,564   $49,794,929 % 'Good' in 5 years 41.4 50.9 62.2 95.1 31.9
% 'Fair' in 5 years 14.4 14.0 10.9 2.2 16.4
% 'Poor' in 5 years 17.8 8.8 1.5 1.5 25.4
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 26.4 26.3 25.4 1.2 26.3
229 of 395
Page | 7
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22

INTRODUCTION
Paved streets in the City of Pinole are among the many assets utilized by every resident, visitor, and business.  A good street network enhances public safety, promotes mobility, and enables economic activity.  The City is responsible for 52.02 centerline miles of roads or 118.63 lane miles2.  This asset comprises over 10.2 million square feet of asphalt concrete and is estimated at $130.8 million to replace.

AMS Consulting (AMS) was selected as the City’s Pavement Management Consultant through the MTC P‐TAP program.  The program helpslocal agenciesin the San Francisco Bay Area update their pavement management program through inspection surveys and reporting.  The program is designed to help agencies stretch their pavement expenditures by:
 Implementing, updating, and maintaining pavement management databases; and  Providing updated pavement condition data of the network and each street segment.

What is a Pavement Management System?
Pavement Management is the systematic process that is used to oversee the City’s paved surfaces by measuring the condition, tracking the maintenance and rehabilitation of pavement sections.  These pavement sections can be organized by area, zones, and functional classifications.  Effective pavement management strategies include condition assessment, life‐cycle costs analysis, and budget projections that can identify segments of pavement in need of maintenance or repair.

Please note, the pavement management software is a network‐level support tool for planning and budgeting purposes.  The City is not bound by StreetSaver’s recommendation and is not a substitute for sound engineering judgment.  Pavement management projects can be manually added or removed 2 Lane mile is equal to 5,280 linear feet multiplied by the number of lanes. 230 of 395
Page | 8
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 from the StreetSaver’s recommended sections selected for treatment based on other special considerations.

Why is a Pavement Management System important?
The City’s paved surfaces are a vital asset to the community.  It is essential that this asset is preserved and maintained.   The pavement management program seeks a balance between pavement maintenance and rehabilitation of existing surfaces.  The most cost‐effective way to correct any paved surface problem is to address issues when they first appear.  That is why funds are targeted to paved areas or sections rated in fair or good condition for preventative maintenance.  Without maintenance, these paved asphalt concrete surfaces would quickly deteriorate and be more expensive to fix in the future.

Scope
As part of the P‐TAP Round 22 grant, AMS was responsible for inspecting Arterial, Collector, and Residential streets.  For each pavement section, a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score was assigned, which gives a numerical indication of the pavement's current condition.

The condition assessment results are used to determine the remaining useful life and develop on‐going major maintenance strategies.  Cost analysis also provides the City with an understanding of its short‐ term pavement needs.   This information projects the annual costs for maintenance and rehabilitation to bring the overall network PCI to optimal conditions. 231 of 395
Page | 9
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 CURRENT STATE OF ROADS
Road Network
The City’s road network is classified into three functional classifications:

Arterial
These roadways provide a high degree of mobility while allowing direct access to abutting properties.

These roadways serve major activity centers in an urban setting and have the highest volume and longest trip demand within a city. They interconnect other major corridors to accommodate trips entering and leaving the City. These roads also serve the need for “intra‐area” travel between the business district and outlying residential areas. An example of an arterial in Pinole is Pinole Valley Road.

Also, Arterials primarily serve intra‐urban or local travel, carrying traffic from Collector streets to and from other parts of the City and limited access roadways. Access to properties bordering these streets is subordinate to the primary function of moving traffic. The typical design speed on an arterial is 45 miles per hour, and it has two or four lanes. Parking is generally not provided on arterials.

Collector
The primary function of Collectorstreetsis a combination of access and mobility. These streets provide links between Local streets and Arterials. They are designed to serve neighborhood traffic rather than cross‐town traffic, including trips between adjacent neighborhoods. The design speed for collectors is typically 35 miles per hour. On‐street parking is usually provided. 232 of 395
Page | 10
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Residential/Local
Unlike other categories, local roads are not intended for long‐distance travel except at the origin or destination end of a trip. These roads are typically classified by default after arterial and collector streets have been identified. Local roads provide the highest level of accessibility and carry no through traffic movement. The primary function of local streets is access to adjacent land uses. Parking is usually offered along local roads, and speed limits are typically 25 miles per hour.

Each street is not built the same and therefore does not share the same deterioration curves or have the same life expectancy.  Figure 1 is an example of the City’s current life expectancy for pavement.

The useful life for an arterial is much shorter than a residential street, which is due to the amount of traffic.

Figure 1. Pavement Life Expectancy
233 of 395
Page | 11
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 The City of Pinole owns and manages 52.02 centerline miles of pavement.   This equatesto 118.63 lane miles.  Table 1 is a summary of the City’s road network.

Table 1. City Network Summary Statistics
Functional
Classification
Total
Sections
Total
Center
Miles
Total Lane
Miles
Total Area
(SF) PCI
Arterial 25 7.26 24.97 2,113,863 58
Collector 23 7.3 18.75 1,655,413 51
Residential/Local 302 37.46 74.91 6,526,932 56
350.00 52.02 118.63 10,296,208

Pavement Condition Assessment
A pavement surface assessment is completed by identifying surface distresses within each pavement management section.  Inspections entail evaluating a representative sample (10% of the area) and identifying eight different types of pavement surface distresses; three severities (low, medium, and heavy), and quantifying them.   Figure 2 is an example of eight different surface distress types.

Inspectors use StreetSaver as a tool to calculate the condition of each management section.

StreetSaver is an industry‐standard (modified ASTM 6433) software used to generate a pavement rating known as a PCI (Pavement Condition Index).  A PCI rating index is a numerical value between 0 to 100, with 0 being a failed road and 100 being a brand‐new street (Figure 3).  The PCI is calculated using StreetSaver system algorithms that MTC developed. 234 of 395
Page | 12
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 2. Sample of Pavement Distress Types
Figure 3. Sample of PCI Condition Categories
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
After the 2021 pavement management update and recent pavement projects (slurry and resurfacing), the City’s overall network PCI is 57 PCI. The overall network condition is a weighted average PCI, which is equal to each managementsection PCI multiplied by its area and divided by the network'stotal area. 235 of 395
Page | 13
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 4 is a street‐by‐street map of the pavement condition index.

Figure 4. Street‐by‐Street Map of Pavement Condition Index (2021) Local PCI Comparison
Figure 5 is a PCI comparison of local agencies Contra Costa County.  Results were obtained from the MTC Vital Signs website.  MTC results3 show that the City’s overall network PCI is 10 points below the San Francisco Bay Area average PCI (67).
3 PCI Results are from the latest MTC Pothole report 2019.

Current Condition Categories
Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100)
Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69)
Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49)
Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24)
236 of 395
Page | 14
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 5. Local Agency PCI Comparison
237 of 395
Page | 15
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Table 2 is a breakdown of the City’s current road network pavement condition categories.

Approximately 37.9% of the City’s road network has a PCI of 70 or better.

Table 2. Current Pavement Condition Categories
Current Condition Categories Arterial Collector Residential Network Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100) 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 37.9% Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69) 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 22.7% Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49) 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 22.5% Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24) 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 16.9% Total 20.5% 16.2% 63.4% 100.0%
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Strategies
The City’s current maintenance activities vary from project to project; each maintenance activity is based upon the section’s functional classification (arterial, collector, and local), surface type, and PCI.

Figure 6 illustrates a general pavement life cycle curve.  The curve shows that pavements deteriorate only 40 percent in quality in the first 75 percent of theirlife; this deterioration subsequently accelerates rapidly, resulting in another 40 percent drop in quality in the next 12 percent of life.   Therefore, investing in preventative maintenance in the good streets(70 and above) can save the City a significant amount of money in rehabilitation and reconstruction costs in the future.  MTC recommends that the City continues its efforts in utilizing the recommended cost‐effective treatments such as crack seals, slurry seals, and microsurfacing.  City staff has reviewed the maintenance strategies, and AMS has updated the StreetSaver pavement management system.  Part of the update was to review and revise the system unit costs.  These unit costs are used to calculate total funding and budget need calculation.

These unit costs are “Total Project Costs” that include but are not limited to administration, construction, design, etc.
238 of 395
Page | 16
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 6. Standard Deterioration Curve
Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI between 70 – 100 (Light Maintenance) Crack Sealing4
Surface Crack is an inevitable distress and is one of the first signs of distress that occurs at the pavement surface.  If this distress is neglected over time, it can grow to a pothole and eventually sub‐ base failure if left untreated.  Crack Sealing is a cost‐effective treatment and can treat all types of cracks greater than 1/8”.   This treatment slows the deterioration and can extend a pavement life three to five years.

Fog Seals5
Fog Seal is a single application, typically light, of emulsified asphalt to an existing asphalt surface.  This maintenance treatment can be used to renew an oxidized road (weathered), improve the surface appearance, seal minor cracks and surface voids, and inhibit raveling.  This treatment extends the pavement life two to four years.
4 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/crack_seal 5 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/fog_seal $4.00/sy
$26.00/sy
$55.00/sy
$126.75/sy
239 of 395
Page | 17
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Slurry Seals6
Slurry seal is a surface treatment designed to extend the life of asphalt pavements in good condition by providing skid resistance, restricting moisture intrusion, protecting the structure from further oxidation and raveling, and restoring a uniform black appearance. The slurry seal provides quick construction times and minimal disruption to the traveling public. This treatment can extend the life of the pavement by five to seven years.

Microsurfacing7
Microsurfacing is a surface treatment designed to extend the life of asphalt pavements in good condition by providing skid resistance, restricting moisture intrusion, protecting the structure from further oxidation and raveling, and restoring a uniform black appearance. It is the most economical choice when leveling is required. Micro surfacing boasts quick construction times and minimal disruption to the traveling public.  This treatment extends the pavement life six to eight years.

Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI between 60 – 90 (Heavy / Light Maintenance) Chip Seal8
A chip seal is a roadway surface treatment that consists of a layer(s) of asphalt binder (hot or emulsion) with a layer(s) of embedded aggregate. Chip seals provide a new skid‐resistant wearing surface, stops raveling, seals minor cracks, and retards further deterioration of the existing roadway.   Chip seal binders can be polymer‐modified to improve aggregate retention and provide for a quicker return to traffic.  This treatment can be used on roads with a PCI of 60 and above and can extend the pavement life five to seven years.

Cape Seals9
A cape seal is a roadway surface treatment designed to extend pavements' lives in fair to good condition, consisting of a chip seal treatment covered by a slurry seal or microsurfacing treatment.

Cape seals provide the benefits of both the chip seal and the slurry seal or micro surfacing treatment, 6 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/slurry_seal 7 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/micro_surfacing 8 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/chip_seal 9 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/cape_seal 240 of 395
Page | 18
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 namely sealing moderate cracks, providing skid resistance, sealing the pavement against moisture intrusion, protecting the structure further oxidation, and raveling, and restoring a uniform black appearance.

The chip seal can be polymer‐modified to improve aggregate retention and provide for a quicker return to traffic.  Cape seals boast short construction times and reasonable disruption to the traveling public.

This treatment excels in urban areas where stand‐alone chip seals are not be welcomed, but the need for sealing cracks is warranted.  This treatment can be used on roads with a PCI of 60 and above and can extend the pavement life eight to ten years.

Types of Treatments for roads with a PCI 69 or Less (Light / Heavy Rehab) Cold‐in‐Place Recycling
10 A cost‐effective, long‐lasting, greener alternative to conventional maintenance and rehabilitation techniques. Cold In‐place Recycling (CIR) is a process that cold mills and recycles the top 2‐5 inches of asphalt using a continuous train operation. CIR significantly reduces trucking, time, and natural resources to substantially lower project costs by reusing existing material. Generally, any road that is a candidate for mill & fill is a candidate for CIR.   This treatment adds fifteen‐twenty years with a combined appropriate wearing course.   This treatment is typically 20%‐50% less expensive than conventional maintenance and reconstruction methods.

Mill and AC Overlay ‐ Rehabilitation Treatment
This treatment targets streets in at‐risk to fair condition with signs of load‐related distresses with necessary profile grade adjustment.   The treatment consists of cold milling (also known as cold plane/grinding) the existing surface to a pre‐determined depth with specialized milling equipment to provide properly required grades.  A new layer of asphalt concrete is then placed after the completion of the milling operation.
10 https://roadresource.org/treatment_resources/cold_in_place_recycling 241 of 395
Page | 19
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 AC Overlay with Rubberized Chip Seal ‐ Rehabilitation Treatment This treatment targets streets in poor condition that need to be rehabilitated.   This construction method involves grinding the edges of the existing pavement, placing a 3/8” layer of asphalt‐rubber binder and aggregate pre‐coated with paving asphalt (called rubberized chip seal), and then placing a new surface course of 1.5” to 1.75” thick of asphalt concrete over the newly established chip seal layer.  This method is known as Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer (SAMI).  The rubberized chip seal interlayer provides increased flexibility and reduces the likelihood of surface reflective cracking.

Full‐Depth‐Reclamation (FDR)
FDR is a cost‐effective, long‐lasting, greener alternative to deep rehabilitation or removal and replacement techniques. Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) is an engineered rehabilitation technique. The entire thickness of the asphalt pavement and a predetermined portion of the underlying materials (base, subbase, and subgrade) is uniformly pulverized and blended to provide an upgraded, homogeneous material. The reclaimed materials may be improved and strengthened by using Mechanical, Chemical, or Bituminous stabilization. FDR isn't only for roads in poor condition; it is also a viable design process for increasing pavement's structural capacity in good condition.

Reconstruction
Pavement reconstruction is a treatment that is needed when a road has reached the end of its design life, or the pavement has severe cross‐section deficiencies due to traffic or environmental factors.  These roadstypically have a PCI of 25 and below, and reconstruction isrequired to restore the service life.  Reconstruction is equivalent to a new pavement that involves rebuilding the pavement layers from the ground up to replace the pavement.   This treatment is the most expensive in comparison to the other treatments in the maintenance strategy. 242 of 395
Page | 20
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Pavement Needs
The pavement management program develops a maintenance strategy that will improve the road network's overall condition to an optimal PCI (79‐84 PCI range).  The overall weighted average PCI is 57 PCI, which falls under the “At‐Risk to Fair” Category.  This scenario answers the most common question, “if the City had all the money in the world, what would it cost to update the road network?” Table 3 below represents the 5‐Year breakdown to get the road network into optimal conditions and addressthe backlog.  Currently, the City’s backlog is approximately $31.8 million. The backlog is derived from the work scheduled in prior years but deferred due to insufficient funding resources.  Please note that the cost of the needs has been front‐loaded.  The front‐loaded costs are due to the pavement management system's need to bring the entire pavement network to optimal conditions and maintain those conditions for the next five years.   To keep the PCI at optimal levels, the City would need to spend approximately $55 million by the end of year 2026.  The pavement management software is more cost‐effective to repair the street in the first year rather than waiting to fix them in the subsequent years.  Generally speaking, roads appear to be in good condition for a long time; however, when roads fail, they fail quickly, and repair costs can increase if the recommended maintenance treatments are deferred.  Should the City not invest in maintenance or rehabilitation treatments on streets for the next five years, the overall network PCI will decrease to 47.

Table 3. 5‐Year Needs Breakdown
City Needs
Year PM Rehab Cost Total PCI
Treated
PCI
Untreated
2022 $520,919 $31,263,287 $31,784,206 79 57
2023 $112,469 $7,066,461 $7,178,930 80 54
2024 $39,254 $6,736,222 $6,775,476 82 52
2025 $49,785 $6,035,231 $6,085,016 84 49
2026 $54,886 $3,204,721 $3,259,607 84 47
$777,313 $54,305,922 $55,083,235
243 of 395
Page | 21
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 BUDGET SCENARIOS  Following the inspection of the City’s road network and analyzing maintenance and rehabilitation needs, the next step in developing a cost‐effective maintenance and rehabilitation strategy is to run “what‐if” scenarios.  The advantages of a pavement management program such as StreetSaver, the ability to forecast the treatments and conditions based on budget constraints or predict future costs based on targeted network PCI goals.  The following scenarios have been analyzed:

Scenario 1 – Current Budget
 Average funding of $1.0 million per year on maintenance and rehabilitation.  PCI decreases from 57 to 54
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $48.0 million
 46% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
 Average funding of $1.7 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI is constant at 57 at the end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $42.5 million
 50.2% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
 Average funding of $3.0 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI increases to 62 at the end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $39.2 million
 62.2% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI Conditions
 Average funding of $11 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI increases to 84 at end of five years
 Backlog decreases from $31.8 to $1.8 million
 95.3% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 244 of 395
Page | 22
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
 Average funding of $0 million per year for maintenance and rehabilitation  PCI decreases to 47 at end of five years
 Backlog increases from $31.8 to $49.8 million
 32.0% of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 Table 4. Scenario Summary
Scenario 1. Current
Budget ($1M
Budget)
Scenario 2.

Constant
PCI
Scenario 3.

Plus 5 PCI
Increase
Scenario 4.

Average
Needs
Scenario 5.

Unfunded
$0 (PCI)
Average Yearly Budget   $1,000,000   $2,227,482   $3,470,017   $11,016,647   $0 Total Budget for 5 Years $5,000,000 $11,137,408 $17,350,084 $55,083,235 $0 Current PCI 57 57 57 57 57
Current Backlog $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 $31,784,206 Current % in 'Good' condition 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% 37.90% PCI after 5 years (change) 54 (‐3) 57 (0) 62 (+5) 84 (+27) 47 (‐10) Backlog after 5 years $48,087,650   $42,520,326   $39,243,160   $1,782,564   $49,794,929 % 'Good' in 5 years 41.4 50.9 62.2 95.1 31.9
% 'Fair' in 5 years 14.4 14.0 10.9 2.2 16.4
% 'Poor' in 5 years 17.8 8.8 1.5 1.5 25.4
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 26.4 26.3 25.4 1.2 26.3
245 of 395
Page | 23
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 1 – Current Funding Scenario11
The City’s current budget is approximately $1 million per year or $5 million at the end of five years.  Implementing this budget scenario (Figure 7, Table 5) decreases the overall network PCI to 52 by the end of 2026.  By the end of the analysis, the backlog increases to $48.1 million.

Figure 7. Current Budget PCI and Backlog Breakdown
11 Estimated current budget values were obtained from: http://www.californiacityfinance.com/#TRANSPORTATION 246 of 395
Page | 24
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Table 5. Current Budget Scenario
Scenario 1. Current Budget ($1M Budget)
Year Budget Backlog PCI
2022 $1,000,000 $30,784,625 58
2023 $1,000,000 $35,859,607 56
2024 $1,000,000 $41,267,710 54
2025 $1,000,000 $46,085,892 53
2026 $1,000,000 $48,087,650 52
Table 6 is a breakdown of the City’s network condition at the end of the year 2026.  Results show

41.4% of roads with a PCI of 70 or better.

Table 6. Current Budget ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Scenario 1.

Current
Budget
($1M
Budget)
% Change
at end of 5
years
% 'Good' in 5 years 41.4 3.5
% 'Fair' in 5 years 14.4 ‐8.3
% 'Poor' in 5 years 17.8 ‐4.7
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 26.4 9.5
Figure 9 is a projected PCI map of 2026 if the current budget scenario is implemented. 247 of 395
Page | 25
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 8. Current Budget Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Current Condition Categories
Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100)
Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69)
Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49)
Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24)
248 of 395
Page | 26
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
This scenario (Figure 9, Table 7) analyzes the cost to maintain the overall network PCI at 57 at the end of five years.  It would cost approximately $11.1 million to implement this scenario.  System results show that the overall backlog increases to $42.5 million at the of the year 2026.

Figure 9. Constant PCI and Backlog
Table 7. Constant PCI Summary
Scenario 2. Constant PCI
Year Budget Backlog PCI
2022 $289,700 $31,494,468 57
2023 $2,274,579 $34,946,634 57
2024 $3,012,092 $38,315,045 57
2025 $2,677,863 $41,410,446 57
2026 $2,883,174 $42,520,326 57
249 of 395
Page | 27
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Approximately 50.9% (Table 8) of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 PCI (Condition Category I).

Table 8. Constant PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Scenario 2.

Constant
PCI
% Change
at end of 5
years
% 'Good' in 5 years 50.9 13.0
% 'Fair' in 5 years 14.0 ‐8.7
% 'Poor' in 5 years 8.8 ‐13.7
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 26.3 9.4
Figure 10 is a projected PCI map of 2026 if the Constant PCI is implemented.

Figure 10. Constant PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Current Condition Categories
Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100)
Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69)
Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49)
Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24)
250 of 395
Page | 28
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
Figure 11, Table 9 represents the costs and impacts of increasing the overall network by 5 points to a PCI of 62.  Implementing this scenario would cost approximately $17.4 million by the end of five years.

System results show that the backlog increases to $39.2 million.

Figure 11. Plus 5 PCI Increase PCI and Backlog
Table 9. Plus 5 PCI Scenario
Scenario 3. Plus 5 PCI Increase
Year Budget Backlog PCI
2022 $5,212,807 $26,571,370 62
2023 $2,914,624 $31,137,891 62
2024 $3,393,069 $34,250,174 62
2025 $2,621,687 $38,540,630 62
2026 $3,207,897 $39,243,160 62
251 of 395
Page | 29
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Approximately 62.2% (Table 10) of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 PCI (Condition Category I).

Table 10. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary
Scenario 3.

Plus 5 PCI
Increase
% Change
at end of 5
years
% 'Good' in 5 years 62.2 24.3
% 'Fair' in 5 years 10.9 ‐11.8
% 'Poor' in 5 years 1.5 ‐21.0
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 25.4 8.5
Figure 12 is a projected PCI map of 2026 if the Plus 5 PCI Increase is implemented.

Figure 12. Plus 5 PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary 252 of 395
Page | 30
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI Conditions
Figure 13, Table 11 represents the costs and impacts of bringing the City’s road network to optimal conditions. This scenario uses the City’s total needs and distributing the costs evenly over five years.

Distributing costs evenly equeates to approximately $11M/year for the next five years.  System results show that the City’sroad network achieves optimal PCI conditions, while the backlog decreasesto $1.8 million at the end of the year 2026.

Figure 13. Optimal PCI and Backlog
Table 11. Optimal PCI Scenario
Scenario 4. Optimal PCI Conditions
Year Budget Backlog PCI
2022 $11,016,647 $20,767,637 65
2023 $11,016,647 $17,384,359 69
2024 $11,016,647 $13,292,011 74
2025 $11,016,647 $9,003,266 79
2026 $11,016,647 $1,782,564 84
253 of 395
Page | 31
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Approximately 95.1% (Table 12) of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 PCI (Condition Category I).

Table 12. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary
Scenario 4.

Optimal PCI
Conditions
% Change
at end of 5
years
% 'Good' in 5 years 95.1 57.2
% 'Fair' in 5 years 2.2 ‐20.5
% 'Poor' in 5 years 1.5 ‐21.0
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 1.2 ‐15.7
Figure 14 is a projected PCI map of 2026 if the Optimal PCI is implemented.

Figure 14. Optimal PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Current Condition Categories
Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100)
Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69)
Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49)
Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24)
254 of 395
Page | 32
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
Figure 15, Table 13 represents the costs and impacts of implementing an unfunded scenario.

Implementing this scenario would decrease the overall network PCI to 47, while the backlog would increase from $31.8 million to $49.8 million by the end of the year 2026.

Figure 15. Unfunded PCI and Backlog
Table 13. Unfunded PCI Scenario
Scenario 5. Unfunded $0 (PCI)
Year Budget Backlog PCI
2022 $0 $31,784,206 57
2023 $0 $37,518,280 54
2024 $0 $43,143,461 52
2025 $0 $47,634,604 49
2026 $0 $49,794,929 47
255 of 395
Page | 33
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Approximately 31.9% (Table 14) of City streets will have a PCI equal to or greater than 70 PCI (Condition Category I).

Table 14. Plus 5 PCI ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary
Scenario 5.

Unfunded
$0 (PCI)
% Change
at end of 5
years
% 'Good' in 5 years 31.9 ‐6.0
% 'Fair' in 5 years 16.4 ‐6.3
% 'Poor' in 5 years 25.4 2.9
% 'Very Poor' in 5 years 26.3 9.4
Figure 16 is a projected PCI map of 2026 if the Unfunded PCI is implemented.

Figure 16. Unfunded PCI Map ‐ 2026 Condition Category Summary Current Condition Categories
Condition I ‐ Good to Excellent (PCI 70 ‐ 100)
Condition II/III ‐ At Risk to Fair (PCI 50 ‐ 69)
Condition IV ‐ Poor (PCI 25 ‐ 49)
Condition V ‐ Failed to Very Poor (PCI 0 ‐ 24)
256 of 395
Page | 34
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 CONCLUSIONS  The City of Pinole currently has 52.02 centerline miles of paved roads or 118.63 lane miles. After updating the City’s pavement management system with inspections and recent maintenance and rehabilitation treatments, the City’s overall network condition is 57 PCI.  Approximately 37.9% of the City’s road network has a PCI of 70 or better.  The City’s current backlog is about $31.8 million.

The first recommended scenario the City should consider is the Optimal PCI Conditions/Optimal PCI Scenario.   This scenario distributes the total needs' costs evenly over five years and averages to approximately $11 million per year.  System resultsshow that the City’sroad network achieves optimal PCI conditions (Figure 17), while the backlog decreases to $1.8 million at the end of the year 2026 (Figure 18).  In addition, this scenario shows that 95.1% of City streets will have a PCI of 70 or better.

The second scenario recommended is increasing the overall network by 5 PCI points to 62 (Figure 17).

This scenario shows that it would cost approximately $3.5 million per year or $17.4 million by the end of five years. Results also show that the backlog increases to $39.2 million (Figure 18).  In addition, this scenario shows that 62.2% of City streets will have a PCI of 70 or better.

The third scenario recommended is keeping the overall network PCI constant at 57 at the end of five years (Figure 17).  In order to maintain a constant PCI it would cost approximately $11.1 million by  the end of 2026.  Results show that the backlog increases to $42.5 million (Figure 18), while 50.9% of City streets will have a PCI of 70 or better.

The fourth scenario recommended is using the City’s current budget of $5 million over five years.

System results show that implementing this scenario decreases the overall network PCI to 54 (Figure 17), while the backlog increasesto $48 million (Figure 18). In addition, 41.4% of City streets will have a PCI of 70 or better.
257 of 395
Page | 35
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 The fifth and least recommended in comparison to the otherscenariostested isthe unfunded PCI.  This scenario shows that the overall network PCI decreases to 47 (Figure 17), while the backlog increases to $49.8 million (Figure 18).  32.0% of city streets will have a PCI of 70 or better.

Figure 17. 5‐Year Scenario PCI Summary
258 of 395
Page | 36
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 Figure 18. 5‐Year Scenario Backlog Summary
259 of 395
Page | 37
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22

APPENDICES
SECTION I – PCI REPORT
SECTION II – NEEDS AND NETWORK SUMMARY STATISTICS
SECTION II – NETWORK CONDITION AND COST SUMMARY
SECTION IV – SECTIONS SELECTED FOR TREATMENT
SECTION V – OTHER BACKUP DOCUMENTS
260 of 395
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 SECTION I
 PCI REPORT1 (sorted by Road Name)
1 Summer 2021 Projects have been entered and calculated 261 of 395

SECTION PCI
The Section PCI contains a PCI reported sorted by Street Name (ascending) ST ID – Street Identification
SEC ID – Street Section Identification
STREET NAME – Street Name
BEGIN LOCATION – Start of the management section
END LOCATION – End of the management section
FC – This is a group of streets or roadway subsystems that are classified pending on the level of service and traffic.

A – Arterial
C – Collector
R – Residential/Local
O – Other (user defined)
SURFACE TYPE – Type of pavement surface. A – Asphalt Concrete, O – Asphalt Concrete over Asphalt Concrete P-Portland Cement Concrete,
LENGTH – Length of management section
WIDTH – Width of management section
AREA – Area of management section
LAST M&R TREATMENT – Recent treatment (maintenance or rehabilitation) M&R DATE – Date of most recent treatment
PCI – Pavement Condition Index of the management section – Last Calculated PCI The Pavement Condition Index is a rating derived from the Pavement Management System (PMS). The rating is based from the visual distress inspection information that consists of the MTC inspection guidelines (Alligator Cracking, Block Cracking, Distortion, Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, Rutting, and Weathering and Raveling) or any maintenance and rehabilitation information that was entered into the PMS.
262 of 395

Below are images of what streets look like in the condition category:

CONDITION CATEGORY RATING
Condition Category I (PCI 70 – 100, Pavement is classified in Very good to excellent condition and has little distress).

Condition Category II/III (PCI 51-69, Pavements are classified in the Good Category and have significant non-load and load related distresses).
263 of 395

Condition Category Good IV (PCI 26-50, Pavement are classified in the Poor Category and have major distress).

Condition Category V (PCI 0 – 25, Pavement is classified in the very poor to failed category and has extensive amounts of major distress)
264 of 395
City of Pinole
Printed: 4/25/2022
Section PCI/RSL Listing
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
2NDAVE 010 2ND AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 566 27 15,282 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 8.45 3RDAVE 010 3RD AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 585 27 15,795 R - Residential/Local A - AC 60 15.45 4THAVE 010 4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 263 26 6,838 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 85 40.03 4THAVE 020 4TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 611 26 15,886 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.74 5THAVE 010 5TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 656 26 17,056 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 29.94 ADOBE 005 ADOBE ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD PAVEMENT CHANGE 621 21 13,041 R - Residential/Local A - AC 93 33.33 ADOBE 015 ADOBE ROAD PAVEMENT CHANGE CUL-DE-SAC 318 34 10,812 R - Residential/Local A - AC 92 32.83 010 ALAMO STREET ESTATES AVE 100 FT. EAST OF 968 32 30,976 R - Residential/Local A - AC 21

HIGUERA AVE
ALAMO 0.00
020 ALAMO STREET 100 FT. EAST OF 1,086 32 34,752 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46

HIGUERA AVE
ALAMO PONDEROSA TR 7.78
ALBERC 010 ALBERDAN CIRCLE SHAWN DR SHAWN DR 2,001 36 72,036 R - Residential/Local A - AC 29 1.36 ALBECT 010 ALBERDAN COURT ALBERDAN CIR CUL DE SAC 211 36 7,596 R - Residential/Local A - AC 15 0.00 ALFRED 010 ALFRED DRIVE BELFAIR DR HAZEL ST 376 31 11,656 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 29.35 ALHAMB 010 ALHAMBRA WAY MORAGA DR CUL DE SAC 1,568 36 56,448 R - Residential/Local A - AC 56 12.29 ALICE 010 ALICE WAY HENRY AVE HENRY AVE 2,171 31 67,301 R - Residential/Local A - AC 51 10.38 ALTAMI 010 ALTAMIRANO CIRCLE FRANCISCA CT FRANCISCA CT 628 24 15,072 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 37.16 ALVARE 010 ALVAREZ AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE 672 29 19,488 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46 7.59 AMEND 010 AMEND STREET MANN DR CUL DE SAC 973 36 35,028 R - Residential/Local A - AC 92 32.83 ANNECT 010 ANNE COURT HENRY AVE CUL DE SAC 174 31 5,394 R - Residential/Local A - AC 56 13.10 ANTONI 010 ANTONIA CIRCLE OAK RIDGE RD OAK RIDGE RD 994 24 23,856 R - Residential/Local A - AC 75 23.03 ANTOCT 010 ANTONIA COURT ANTONIA CIRCLE CUL DE SAC 279 33 9,207 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 36.31 APPACT 010 APPALOOSA COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC 388 30 11,640 R - Residential/Local A - AC 42 5.83 APPATR 010 APPALOOSA TRAIL SIMAS AVE BUCKSKIN RD 222 52 11,544 R - Residential/Local A - AC 27 0.68 APPATR 020 APPALOOSA TRAIL BUCKSKIN RD GOULARTE DR 802 45 36,090 R - Residential/Local A - AC 40 5.20 APPIAN 010 APPIAN WAY SOUTH CITY LIMITS MICHAEL DR 1,386 54 74,844 A - Arterial A - AC 30 1.23 APPIAN 020 APPIAN WAY MICHAEL DR I-80 EAST ON RAMP 1,237 74 91,538 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 79 22.50 APPIAN 030 APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON RAMP I-80 WEST ON RAMP 482 74 35,668 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 79 22.50 APPIAN 040 APPIAN WAY I-80 WEST ON RAMP MANN DR 1,276 76 96,976 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 80 23.28 APPIAN 050 APPIAN WAY MANN DR SAN PABLO AVE 3,276 61 199,836 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 80 23.28 ARROYO 010 ARROYO AVENUE MADERA ST VICTOR ST 566 32 18,112 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.19 AVISWY 010 AVIS WAY SHEA DR HOUSE #3130 500 32 16,000 R - Residential/Local A - AC 28 1.00 AVISWY 020 AVIS WAY HOUSE #3130 CUL DE SAC 295 32 9,440 R - Residential/Local A - AC 34 3.26 BANTRY 010 BANTRY ROAD O`CONNOR RD HANLEY DR 724 33 23,892 R - Residential/Local A - AC 61 15.85 BARKLE 010 BARKLEY COURT KILDARE WAY CUL DE SAC 482 36 17,352 R - Residential/Local A - AC 14 0.00 BARRET 010 BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 163 36 5,868 R - Residential/Local A - AC 74 22.40 Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
265 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
BAYVIE 010 BAY VIEW FARM ROAD SUNNYVIEW DR HOUSE #1059 333 38 12,654 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 BAYVIE 020 BAY VIEW FARM ROAD HOUSE #1059 PINON AVE 1,352 38 51,376 R - Residential/Local A - AC 53 11.33 BELDEN 010 BELDIN STREET APPIAN WAY CUL-DE-SAC 405 38 15,390 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 7.77 BELFAI 010 BELFAIR DRIVE BAYVIEW FARM RD PINON AVE 1,413 31 43,803 R - Residential/Local A - AC 67 20.23 BELMON 010 BELMONT WAY MARLESTA RD CUL-DE-SAC 734 36 26,198 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 79 31.71 BELMON 020 BELMONT WAY SAN PABLO END 228 28 6,384 R - Residential/Local A - AC 26 0.44 BERNAR 010 BERNARDO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC 228 31 7,068 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 37.16 BETTY 010 BETTY AVENUE MEADOW AVE EAST MEADOW AVE 407 24 9,768 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 8.19 BLUEJA 010 BLUE JAY CIRCLE GALBRETH RD END OF LOOP 1,212 25 30,300 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 41.94 BOXCAN 010 BOX CANYON ROAD BUCKSKIN RD DEAD END 295 31 9,145 R - Residential/Local A - AC 45 7.20 BOYLE 010 BOYLE COURT KILKENNY WAY CUL DE SAC 203 36 7,308 R - Residential/Local A - AC 43 6.43 BRANDT 010 BRANDT COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 244 34 8,296 R - Residential/Local A - AC 0 0.00 BRAZIL 010 BRAZIL COURT WRIGHT AVE DEAD END 485 36 17,460 R - Residential/Local A - AC 13 0.00 BRENDA 010 BRENDA COURT BELFAIR DR CUL DE SAC 214 31 6,634 R - Residential/Local A - AC 92 32.83 BRETT 010 BRETT COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC 371 34 12,614 R - Residential/Local A - AC 91 32.47 BUCKSK 010 BUCKSKIN ROAD APPALOOSA TR SHADY DRAW 736 31 22,816 R - Residential/Local A - AC 38 4.66 BUENAV 010 BUENA VISTA DRIVE QUINAN AVE/PARK DR HOUSE #440 1,507 23 34,661 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 66 17.72 BUENAV 020 BUENA VISTA DRIVE HOUSE #440 END OF LOOP 788 23 18,124 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 93 46.23 CALAIS 010 CALAIS DRIVE CUL DE SAC (EAST) ORLEANS DR 915 24 21,960 R - Residential/Local A - AC 18 0.00 CANYON 010 CANYON DRIVE APPIAN WAY EL TORO WAY 1,144 38 43,472 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 39.28 CANYON 020 CANYON DRIVE EL TORO WAY FOOTHILL AVE 1,176 38 44,688 R - Residential/Local A - AC 35 3.35 CAROLO 431 CARLOTTA CIRCLE GATELY DRIVE GATELY DRIVE 1,403 33 46,299 R - Residential/Local A - AC 71 23.29 CARMEL 010 CARMELITA WAY RAMONA ST DEAD END 1,372 36 49,392 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 CARMEN 010 CARMEN COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC 155 30 4,650 R - Residential/Local A - AC 36 3.88 CAROL 010 CAROL STREET WRIGHT AVE REMUDA WAY 1,409 36 50,724 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 CHAPPA 010 CHAPPARAL COURT TAMALPAIS DR CUL DE SAC 425 32 13,600 R - Residential/Local A - AC 14 0.00 CHARLE 010 CHARLES ST VALLEY RD SAN PABLO AVE 534 33 17,622 R - Residential/Local A - AC 57 13.06 CHRIST 010 CHRISTIAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 272 36 9,792 R - Residential/Local A - AC 71 20.56 CLARK 010 CLARK COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC 429 32 13,728 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 32.97 COLINA 010 COLINA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC 137 30 4,110 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 35.97 010A COLLINS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD - 614 32 19,648 R - Residential/Local A - AC 75

WEST ENTRANCE
COLLIN TOMAR CT 24.61
010B COLLINS AVENUE TOMAR CT PINOLE VALLEY RD - 754 32 24,128 R - Residential/Local A - AC 75

EAST ENTRANCE
COLLIN 24.61
COLUSA 010 COLUSA STREET ESTATES AVE LA REINA ST 2,486 36 89,496 R - Residential/Local A - AC 66 19.23 CORTE 010 CORTE CRUZ COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC 544 33 17,952 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 93 46.23 COSTA 010 COSTA COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC 421 31 13,051 R - Residential/Local A - AC 44 6.62 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 2 MTC StreetSaver
266 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
CRESTV 010 CRESTVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE END OF LOOP 2,339 31 72,509 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.51 CUADRA 010 CUADRA COURT TENNENT AVE DEAD END 382 32 12,224 R - Residential/Local A - AC 58 13.98 CURRAN 010 CURRAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 356 36 12,816 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 8.40 CURRYC 432 CURRY COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC 101 37 3,737 R - Residential/Local A - AC 73 25.07 DALESS 010 DALESSI DRIVE APPIAN WAY END 400 33 13,200 R - Residential/Local A - AC 2 0.00 DANNY 010 DANNY COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC 405 36 14,580 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 34.64

DE LA BRIANDAIS
COURT
DELABR 010 GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC 568 30 17,040 R - Residential/Local A - AC 38 4.42 DEANCT 010 DEAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 379 36 13,644 R - Residential/Local A - AC 53 11.40 DELARO 010 DEL AROSA COURT STOKES AVE CUL DE SAC 126 27 3,402 R - Residential/Local A - AC 17 0.00 DELMON 010 DEL MONTE DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DR CITY LIMITS 701 30 21,030 R - Residential/Local A - AC 49 9.32 DELMON 020 DEL MONTE DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE BRIDGE 525 37 19,425 R - Residential/Local A - AC 7 0.00 DIABLO 010 DIABLO CIRCLE SIMAS AVE SIMAS AVE 1,081 32 34,592 R - Residential/Local A - AC 93 33.33 DIABCT 010 DIABLO COURT SIMAS AVE CUL DE SAC 492 32 15,744 R - Residential/Local A - AC 23 0.00 DOIDGE 010 DOIDGE AVENUE WRIGHT AVE MOORE CT 1,366 35 47,810 R - Residential/Local A - AC 50 9.19 DOIDGE 020 DOIDGE AVENUE MOORE CT MARCUS ST 2,144 31 66,464 R - Residential/Local A - AC 0 0.00 DOIDGE 030 DOIDGE AVENUE MARCUS ST WRIGHT AVE 881 35 30,835 R - Residential/Local A - AC 6 0.00 DOIDGE 040 DOIDGE AVENUE WRIGHT AVE DEAD END 1,577 31 48,887 R - Residential/Local A - AC 26 0.40 DOLORE 010 DOLORES COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 311 31 9,641 R - Residential/Local A - AC 21 0.00 DOOLIN 010 DOOLIN COURT KILLARNEY RD CUL DE SAC 190 29 5,510 R - Residential/Local A - AC 52 10.38 DORACT 010 DORA COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC 406 31 12,586 R - Residential/Local A - AC 56 13.09 DOWNER 010 DOWNER STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD HENRY AVE 1,394 37 51,578 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.72 DUNCAN 010 DUNCAN ROAD SARAH DR DEAD END 412 38 15,656 R - Residential/Local A - AC 35 3.41 DUTRA 010 DUTRA COURT HAZEL ST CUL DE SAC 189 31 5,859 R - Residential/Local A - AC 74 22.41

EAST MEADOW
AVENUE
EMEADO 010 MEADOW AVE MEADOW AVE 1,211 24 29,064 R - Residential/Local A - AC 64 18.06 EBSEN 010 EBSEN COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC 213 36 7,668 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 79 31.69 ELTORO 010 EL TORO WAY CANYON DR CUL DE SAC 739 32 23,648 R - Residential/Local A - AC 73 24.58 ELLERH 010 ELLERHORST STREET TENNENT AVE DEAD END 303 36 10,908 R - Residential/Local A - AC 5 0.00 ELMST 020 ELM STREET LAUREL AVE FERN AVE 213 28 5,964 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 37 4.71 EMMADR 010 EMMA DRIVE ALICE WAY HENRY AVE 1,737 31 53,847 R - Residential/Local A - AC 61 15.84 ENCINA 010 ENCINA AVENUE ROBLE AVE DEAD END 386 28 10,808 R - Residential/Local A - AC 56 13.10 ENLOWC 010 ENLOW COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 245 36 8,820 R - Residential/Local A - AC 83 28.25 ESTATE 010 ESTATES AVENUE SIMAS AVE RAMONA ST 2,330 38 88,540 C - Collector A - AC 94 22.65 ESTATE 020 ESTATES AVENUE RAMONA ST PINOLE VALLEY RD 2,090 38 79,420 C - Collector A - AC 34 1.80 ESTREL 010 ESTRELLA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 174 27 4,698 R - Residential/Local A - AC 18 0.00 FAHEY 010 FAHEY COURT HENRY AVE CUL DE SAC 228 31 7,068 R - Residential/Local A - AC 57 13.67 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 3 MTC StreetSaver
267 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
FARIAV 010 FARIA AVENUE ESTATES AVE CLARK CT 500 32 16,000 R - Residential/Local A - AC 13 0.00 FARIAV 020 FARIA AVENUE CLARK CT PONDEROSA TR 1,427 38 54,226 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 12.54 FARICT 010 FARIA COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC 104 61 6,344 R - Residential/Local A - AC 50 9.89 FERNAV 010 FERN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE VALLEYVIEW ST 519 28 14,532 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 93 46.23 FERNAN 010 FERNANDEZ AVENUE PRUNE ST PEAR ST 401 34 13,634 R - Residential/Local A - AC 2 0.00 FERNAN 015 FERNANDEZ AVENUE PEAR ST SAN PABLO AVE 148 29 4,292 R - Residential/Local A - AC 59 13.82 010 FITGERALD DRIVE CALTRANS RIGHT OF 892 82 73,144 C - Collector O - AC/AC 57 WAY
FITZGE JOVITA LN 10.03
FITZGE 020 FITGERALD DRIVE JOVITA LN APPIAN WAY 3,198 70 223,860 C - Collector O - AC/AC 81 25.98 FLAMIN 010 FLAMINGO COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC 234 33 7,722 R - Residential/Local A - AC 90 32.00 FOOTHI 010 FOOTHILL AVENUE CANYON DR RIDGECREST RD 827 38 31,426 R - Residential/Local A - AC 18 0.00 FRANCI 15 FRANCIS DRIVE CUL DE SAC DEAD END (NORTH) 2,042 32 65,344 R - Residential/Local A - AC 58 14.26 FRANCT 010 FRANCISCA COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC 864 32 27,648 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 29.98 FRASER 010 FRASER COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC 509 31 15,779 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 29.57 GALBRE 15A GALBRETH ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD BLUE JAY CIR 2,026 33 66,858 R - Residential/Local A - AC 90 42.83 GALBRE 15B GALBRETH ROAD BLUE JAY CIR END OF CUL DE SAC 608 33 20,064 R - Residential/Local A - AC 90 42.83 GARRIT 010 GARRITY COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 476 36 17,136 R - Residential/Local A - AC 32 2.57 GATLEY 010 GATLEY DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DRIVE CARLOTTA CIR 119 25 2,975 R - Residential/Local A - AC 79 25.58 GEOFFR 010 GEOFFREY COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC 158 26 4,108 R - Residential/Local A - AC 34 3.08 GERZCT 010 GERZ COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC 227 32 7,264 R - Residential/Local A - AC 81 26.84 GLENCT 010 GLEN COURT MARIONOLA WAY CUL DE SAC 382 32 12,224 R - Residential/Local A - AC 90 32.00 GOULAR 010 GOULARTE DRIVE MENDOCINO CT APPALOOSA TR 1,212 38 46,056 R - Residential/Local A - AC 42 5.99 GOULAR 020 GOULARTE DRIVE APPALOOSA TR POULOS CT 892 30 26,760 R - Residential/Local A - AC 33 2.79 GRANAD 010 GRANADA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 431 27 11,637 R - Residential/Local A - AC 15 0.00 GREENF 010 GREENFIELD CIRCLE RIDGECREST DR END OF LOOP 1,228 25 30,700 R - Residential/Local A - AC 22 0.00 HAMILT 010 HAMILTON DRIVE DOIDGE AVE DEAD END 329 35 11,515 R - Residential/Local A - AC 17 0.00 HANLCT 010 HANLEY COURT MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC 276 30 8,280 R - Residential/Local A - AC 63 17.18 HANLDR 010 HANLEY DRIVE LIMERICK RD MARLESTA RD 480 38 18,240 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 34.41 HANSEN 010 HANSEN PLACE ROBLE AVE CUL DE SAC 236 26 6,136 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 8.13 HAZEL 005 HAZEL STREET SUNNYVIEW DR DEAD END 270 36 9,720 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 HAZEL 015 HAZEL STREET DEAD END PINON AVE 798 36 28,728 R - Residential/Local A - AC 57 13.38 HELENA 010 HELENA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 252 27 6,804 R - Residential/Local A - AC 17 0.00 HEMLEB 010 HEMLEB COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC 501 31 15,531 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 28.75 HENRY 010 HENRY AVENUE RIDGECREST RD LEWIS LN 266 38 10,108 R - Residential/Local A - AC 59 12.39 HENRY 020 HENRY AVENUE LEWIS LN OAK RIDGE DR 1,044 38 39,672 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 HENRY 030 HENRY AVENUE OAK RIDGE DR PINOLE VALLEY RD 1,901 38 72,238 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 HENRY 040 HENRY AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD ALICE WAY 1,606 37 59,422 R - Residential/Local A - AC 66 19.23 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 4 MTC StreetSaver
268 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
HENRY 050 HENRY AVENUE ALICE WAY FRANCIS DR 926 37 34,262 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 29.98 HENRY 060 HENRY AVENUE FRANCIS DR DEAD END 1,437 31 44,547 R - Residential/Local A - AC 69 19.36 HERMCT 010 HERMOSA COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC 141 27 3,807 R - Residential/Local A - AC 51 9.90 HERMST 010 HERMOSA STREET ESTATES AVE LUCAS ST 940 32 30,080 R - Residential/Local A - AC 65 18.49 HERMST 020 HERMOSA STREET LUCAS AVE SIMAS AVE 1,217 32 38,944 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 38.83 HIGUER 010 HIGUERA AVENUE RAMONA ST ALAMO ST 379 32 12,128 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.42 HILLVI 010 HILL VIEW LANE FARIA AVE PONDEROSA TR 1,079 36 38,844 R - Residential/Local A - AC 70 19.96 HOKECT 010 HOKE COURT CORTE CRUZ CUL DE SAC 552 33 18,216 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 94 51.00 HOKEDR 010 HOKE DRIVE SHEA DR CORTE CRUZ 951 36 34,236 R - Residential/Local A - AC 14 0.00 HOLLID 010 HOLLIDAY COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC 207 36 7,452 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 12.41 HOYTT 010 HOYTT COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 138 31 4,278 R - Residential/Local A - AC 39 4.88 HUTCHI 010 HUTCHINSON COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC 521 34 17,714 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 29.98 IGNACI 010 IGNACIO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC 106 40 4,240 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 JOHANN 010 JOHANNA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 242 27 6,534 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.05 JOHNST 010 JOHN STREET SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE 686 25 17,150 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.42 JONES 010 JONES AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE 700 19 13,300 R - Residential/Local A - AC 41 5.68 JORDAN 010 JORDAN WAY WRIGHT AVE CUL DE SAC 625 36 22,500 R - Residential/Local A - AC 0 0.00 JULIA 010 JULIA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 137 27 3,699 R - Residential/Local A - AC 22 0.00 KELLEY 010 KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC 234 26 6,084 R - Residential/Local A - AC 73 24.96 KENMAR 010 KENMAR COURT MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC 254 30 7,620 R - Residential/Local A - AC 66 19.39 KILDAR 010 KILDARE WAY SHAWN DR TARA HILLS DR 1,289 36 46,404 R - Residential/Local A - AC 23 0.00 KILDAR 020 KILDARE WAY TARA HILLS DR MARLESTA RD 665 36 23,940 R - Residential/Local A - AC 7 0.00 KILKEN 010 KILKENNY WAY KILDARE WAY TARA HILLS DR 1,792 36 64,512 R - Residential/Local A - AC 38 4.53 KILRUS 010 KILRUSH COURT KILKENY WAY CUL DE SAC 399 36 14,364 R - Residential/Local A - AC 12 0.00 KITTER 010 KITTERY WAY KILDARE WAY SHAWN DR 951 36 34,236 R - Residential/Local A - AC 8 0.00 KYERST 010 KYER STREET HERMOSA ST ESTATES AVE 491 32 15,712 R - Residential/Local A - AC 64 17.87 LACANA 010 LA CANADA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC 424 32 13,568 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 36.33 LAREIN 010 LA REINA STREET HERMOSA ST RAMONA ST 525 36 18,900 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 LASALC 010 LA SALLE COURT LA SALLE DR CUL DE SAC 239 24 5,736 R - Residential/Local A - AC 10 0.00 LASALL 010 LA SALLE DRIVE TENNENT AVE CALAIS DR 367 24 8,808 R - Residential/Local A - AC 26 0.36 LASSEN 010 LASSEN WAY SIMAS AVE DEAD END 704 36 25,344 R - Residential/Local A - AC 40 4.96 LAUREL 010 LAUREL AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE 586 28 16,408 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 84 28.28 LEFEBV 010 LE FEBVRE WAY SUMMIT DR TEMP DEAD END 477 29 13,833 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46 8.00 LEROY 010 LEROY AVENUE LE FABVRE WY CUL DE SAC 407 28 11,396 R - Residential/Local A - AC 53 10.85 LEWIS 010 LEWIS LANE HENRY AVE CUL DE SAC 421 26 10,946 R - Residential/Local A - AC 17 0.00 LIMERI 010 LIMERICK ROAD TARA HILLS DR O`CONNER DR 1,313 34 44,642 R - Residential/Local A - AC 68 20.77 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 5 MTC StreetSaver
269 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
LUCAS 010 LUCAS AVENUE ESTATES AVE RAMONA ST 970 32 31,040 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 29.98 LUCAS 020 LUCAS AVENUE RAMONA ST CUL DE SAC 175 29 5,075 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 12.36 LYNNDR 010 LYNN DRIVE SARAH DR MICHAEL DR 827 38 31,426 R - Residential/Local A - AC 30 1.67 MADERA 010 MADERA STREET DOIDGE AVE WRIGHT AVE 488 32 15,616 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 MADRON 010 MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE 141 16 2,256 R - Residential/Local A - AC 74 25.70 434 MAIDEN LANE SAN PABLO DRIVE 52 21 1,092 R - Residential/Local A - AC 70 (DOES NOT INCLUDE
PCC)
MAIDEN TO ROAD NARROWS 22.47
434A MAIDEN LANE ROAD NARROWS (52' N. 115 21 2,415 R - Residential/Local P - PCC 87

OF SAN PABLO)
MAIDEN END OF PCC 65.94
MAJORV 010 MAJOR VISTA COURT CRESTVIEW DR CUL DE SAC 555 31 17,205 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.50 MANNDR 005 MANN DRIVE APPIAN WAY PAVEMENT CHANGE 642 37 23,754 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 MANNDR 015 MANN DRIVE PAVEMENT CHANGE MCDONALD DR 1,091 37 40,367 R - Residential/Local A - AC 67 18.20 MARCST 010 MARCUS STREET S/O DOIDGE AVE WRIGHT AVE 393 35 13,755 R - Residential/Local A - AC 30 1.81 MARCST 020 MARCUS STREET DOIDGE AVE CUL DE SAC 1,164 35 40,740 R - Residential/Local A - AC 8 0.00 MARIAC 010 MARIA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 127 27 3,429 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 MARION 010 MARIONOLA WAY TESORO CT HOUSE #1199 665 38 25,270 R - Residential/Local A - AC 38 4.55 MARION 020 MARIONOLA WAY HOUSE #1199 MARLESTA RD 694 32 22,208 R - Residential/Local A - AC 10 0.00 MARLES 010 MARLESTA ROAD HANLEY DR HOUSE #600 750 38 28,500 C - Collector A - AC 59 8.01 MARLES 020 MARLESTA ROAD HOUSE #600 KILDARE WAY 1,241 38 47,158 C - Collector A - AC 90 20.77 MARLES 030 MARLESTA ROAD KILDARE WAY MCDONALD DR 1,700 36 61,200 C - Collector A - AC 62 8.97 MARLES 040 MARLESTA ROAD MCDONALD DR APPIAN WAY 1,536 36 55,296 C - Collector A - AC 68 11.07 MARLES 050 MARLESTA ROAD APPIAN WAY CUL DE SAC 808 36 29,088 C - Collector A - AC 0 0.00 MARLIN 010 MARLIN COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 239 31 7,409 R - Residential/Local A - AC 29 1.28 MARTIN 010 MARTINEZ COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 468 36 16,848 R - Residential/Local A - AC 19 0.00 MCDONA 010 MCDONALD DRIVE MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC 1,844 37 68,228 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 36.31 MEADOW 010 MEADOW AVENUE MARLESTA RD NOB HILL AVE 687 24 16,488 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.42 MEADOW 020 MEADOW AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 927 24 22,248 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 29.35 MEENA 433 MEEHAN COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC 129 38 4,902 R - Residential/Local A - AC 77 24.30 MENDCT 010 MENDOCINO COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC 211 30 6,330 R - Residential/Local A - AC 30 1.72 MENDDR 010 MENDOCINO DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR 696 37 25,752 R - Residential/Local A - AC 83 28.11 MENDDR 020 MENDOCINO DRIVE TAMALPAIS DR GOULARTE DR 921 27 24,867 R - Residential/Local A - AC 48 8.52 MICHAE 010 MICHAEL DRIVE APPIAN WAY CUL DE SAC 636 32 20,352 R - Residential/Local A - AC 51 9.91 MONTCL 010 MONTCLAIR COURT SANTA BARBARA DR CUL DE SAC 204 32 6,528 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 32.97 MONTEV 010 MONTE VERDE DRIVE PINOLE VALLEY RD ALHAMBRA WAY 1,126 36 40,536 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.40 MONTVI 010 MONTE VISTA DRIVE PINOLE VALLEY DR ALHAMBRA WAY 1,403 36 50,508 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 12.21 MOORE 010 MOORE COURT DOIDGE AVE CUL DE SAC 377 32 12,064 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 6 MTC StreetSaver
270 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
MORAGA 010 MORAGA DRIVE SAVAGE AVE SIMAS AVE 918 36 33,048 R - Residential/Local A - AC 57 13.60 MORAGA 020 MORAGA DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR 854 32 27,328 R - Residential/Local A - AC 91 32.66 NAOMI 010 NAOMI COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC 328 27 8,856 R - Residential/Local A - AC 15 0.00 NEVACT 010 NEVA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 111 27 2,997 R - Residential/Local A - AC 26 0.41 NOBHIL 010 NOB HILL AVENUE MEADOW AVE SUNNYVIEW DR 949 24 22,776 R - Residential/Local A - AC 88 31.05 NOBHIL 020 NOB HILL AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR HOUSE #1100 502 32 16,064 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.41 NOBHIL 030 NOB HILL AVENUE HOUSE #1100 APPIAN WAY 1,353 32 43,296 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 93 48.53

NORTH RANCHO
PLACE
010 CITY LIMITS (OFF N 376 36 13,536 R - Residential/Local A - AC 64

RANCHO RD)
NRANCH CUL DE SAC 18.12
010 O CONNOR DRIVE CITY LIMITS (HOUSE 479 34 16,286 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 #401)
OCONNE BANTRY RD 30.52
OAKRID 010 OAK RIDGE ROAD HENRY AVE IGNACIO CT 472 30 14,160 C - Collector A - AC 75 13.43 OAKRID 020 OAK RIDGE ROAD IGNACIO CT SAN PABLO AVE 1,464 27 39,528 C - Collector A - AC 80 15.63 OLINDA 010 OLINDA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 172 27 4,644 R - Residential/Local A - AC 32 2.56 ORLEAN 010 ORLEANS DRIVE CUL DE SAC (WEST) TENNENT AVE 1,158 25 28,950 R - Residential/Local A - AC 21 0.00 ORLEAN 020 ORLEANS DRIVE TENNENT AVE NORTH DEAD END 483 24 11,592 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 89 38.38 OWENS 010 OWENS COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC 500 32 16,000 R - Residential/Local A - AC 50 9.41 PAGECT 010 PAGE COURT KILKENNY WAY CUL DE SAC 357 36 12,852 R - Residential/Local A - AC 23 0.00 PALOMA 010 PALOMA STREET ESTATES AVE DEAD END 802 38 30,476 R - Residential/Local A - AC 62 16.73 PALOS 010 PALOS COURT STOKES AVE CUL DE SAC 129 27 3,483 R - Residential/Local A - AC 16 0.00 PARKST 010 PARK STREET QUINAN AVE TENNENT AVE 235 35 8,225 R - Residential/Local A - AC 77 26.50 010 PATRICK DRIVE DEAD END SOUTH OF 1,030 25 25,750 R - Residential/Local A - AC 66

NOB HILL AVE
PATRIC SUNNYVIEW DR 19.31
PEACH 010 PEACH STREET TENNENT AVE DEAD END 362 32 11,584 R - Residential/Local A - AC 1 0.00 PEARST 010 PEAR STREET OAK RIDGE RD TENNENT AVE 613 32 19,616 R - Residential/Local A - AC 28 1.12 PEARST 020 PEAR STREET TENNENT AVE FERNANDEZ AVE 218 31 6,758 R - Residential/Local A - AC 18 0.00 PFEIFL 010 PFEIFFER LANE PFEIFER WAY DEAD END 234 21 4,914 R - Residential/Local A - AC 15 0.00 PFEIFW 010 PFEIFFER WAY DOIDGE AVE PFEIFER LANE 838 22 18,436 R - Residential/Local A - AC 6 0.00 PFEIFW 020 PFEIFFER WAY PFEIFER LANE CUL DE SAC 362 29 10,498 R - Residential/Local A - AC 29 1.45 PINEAV 010 PINE AVENUE SMITH AVE DEAD END 531 26 13,806 R - Residential/Local A - AC 20 0.00

PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
010 SAN PABLO AVE 100 SOUTH OF 531 65 34,515 R - Residential/Local A - AC 41

OVERPASS
PINOLE 5.69

PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
020 100 SOUTH OF 917 42 38,514 R - Residential/Local A - AC 45

OVERPASS
PINOLE DEL MONTE DR 7.50

PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
PINOLE 030 DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC 592 42 24,864 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 010 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD CITY LIMITS EAST OF 1,897 38 72,086 A - Arterial A - AC 46

MARLIN CT

PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE
#6
PINOLV 6.12
Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 7 MTC StreetSaver
271 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
020 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE 2,131 50 106,550 A - Arterial A - AC 50 #6

BRIDGE WEST OF

SAVAGE ST
PINOLV 7.61
030 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF 2,484 39 96,876 A - Arterial A - AC 44

SAVAGE ST

COLLINS AVE (NORTH
INT)
PINOLV 5.42
035 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD COLLINS AVE (NORTH 760 50 38,000 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 30 INT)
PINOLV SIMAS AVE 1.17
PINOLV 045 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD SIMAS AVE GRANADA CT 1,929 61 117,669 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 71 16.66 PINOLV 050 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD GRANADA CT ESTATES AVE 2,502 61 152,622 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 71 16.66 PINOLV 055 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD ESTATES AVE I-80 OFF-RAMP 840 60 50,400 A - Arterial A - AC 48 6.93 PINOLV 065 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD I-80 OFF-RAMP HENRY AVE 1,386 60 83,160 A - Arterial A - AC 56 9.78 PINOLV 070 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD HENRY AVE TENNENT AVE 751 42 31,542 A - Arterial A - AC 45 5.76 PINOLV 080 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD TENNENT AVE SAN PABLO AVE 1,650 32 52,800 A - Arterial A - AC 39 3.82 PINONA 010 PINON AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE BELFAIR DR 1,448 38 55,024 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46 7.98 PINONA 020 PINON AVENUE BELFAIR DR DEAD END 547 38 20,786 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 11.81 PLUMST 010 PLUM STREET SCHOOL ENTRANCE TENNENT AVE 410 36 14,760 R - Residential/Local A - AC 0 0.00 020 PLUM STREET TENNENT AVE DEAD END NORTH OF 341 36 12,276 R - Residential/Local A - AC 9

FERNANDEZ AV
PLUMST 0.00
PONDER 010 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE 2,036 36 73,296 R - Residential/Local A - AC 76 23.66 PONDER 020A PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE HOLIDAY CT 634 38 24,092 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 29.14 020B PONDEROSA TRAIL HOLIDAY CT DEAD END SOUTH OF 1,531 38 58,178 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85

ALAMO ST
PONDER 29.14
010 POQUITO COURT CUL DE SAC S. OF 253 34 8,602 R - Residential/Local A - AC 48

CANYON DR
CUL DE SAC N. OF

CANYON DR
POQUIT 8.79
POTRER 010 POTRERO COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 248 27 6,696 R - Residential/Local A - AC 36 3.67 POULOS 010 POULOS COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC 322 30 9,660 R - Residential/Local A - AC 40 5.16 PRIMRO 010 PRIMROSE LANE PINON AVE LOPES CT 546 32 17,472 R - Residential/Local A - AC 48 8.92 PRIMRO 020 PRIMROSE LANE LOPES CT CUL DE SAC 665 32 21,280 R - Residential/Local A - AC 91 32.47 PRUNE 010 PRUNE STREET DEAD END TENNENT AVE 301 34 10,234 R - Residential/Local A - AC 15 0.00 PRUNE 020 PRUNE STREET TENNENT AVE FERNANDEZ AVE 238 34 8,092 R - Residential/Local A - AC 12 0.00 010 QUINAN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE BUENA VISTA DR 533 36 19,188 R - Residential/Local A - AC 54 (SOUTH INT)
QUINAN 12.00
020 QUINAN AVENUE BUENA VISTA DR 258 27 6,966 R - Residential/Local A - AC 9 (SOUTH INT)

BUENA VISTA DR
(NORTH INT)
QUINAN 0.00
RAFAEL 010 RAFAELA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD JOHN ST 502 28 14,056 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 35.97 RAILAV 010 RAILROAD AVENUE TENNENT AVE END 300 35 10,500 R - Residential/Local A - AC 36 3.68 RAMEY 010 RAMEY COURT ORLEANS DR CUL DE SAC 121 25 3,025 R - Residential/Local A - AC 37 4.08 RAMONA 010 RAMONA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD LUCAS AVE 2,321 38 88,198 R - Residential/Local A - AC 42 6.08 RAMONA 020 RAMONA STREET LUCAS AVE SIMAS AVE 1,444 38 54,872 R - Residential/Local A - AC 59 14.71 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 8 MTC StreetSaver
272 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
REBECC 010 REBECCA DRIVE SARAH DR MICHAEL DR 1,027 32 32,864 R - Residential/Local A - AC 39 4.95 REMUDA 010 REMUDA WAY CAROL ST SIMAS AVE 932 36 33,552 R - Residential/Local A - AC 17 0.00 RIDGEC 010 RIDGECREST ROAD CANYON DR HOUSE #1569 367 32 11,744 R - Residential/Local A - AC 73 21.28 RIDGEC 020 RIDGECREST ROAD HOUSE #1569 TESORO CT 1,880 37 69,560 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 35.93 RISING 010 RISING GLEN ROAD MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC 897 32 28,704 R - Residential/Local A - AC 69 21.56 ROBERT 010 ROBERT COURT ALICE WAY CUL DE SAC 211 27 5,697 R - Residential/Local A - AC 55 12.50 ROBLE 010 ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE 251 28 7,028 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 85 40.04 ROBLE 020 ROBLE AVENUE ENCINA AVE PINON AVE 420 29 12,180 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 8.06 ROGERS 010 ROGERS WAY NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 650 32 20,800 R - Residential/Local A - AC 83 34.06 RUFFAV 010 RUFF AVENUE FARIA AVE PALOMA ST 1,113 32 35,616 R - Residential/Local A - AC 93 33.33 RUFFCT 010 RUFF COURT FARIA ST CUL DE SAC 371 32 11,872 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 33.97 SAMUEL 010 SAMUEL STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD DEAD END 369 19 7,011 R - Residential/Local A - AC 58 13.97 005 SAN PABLO AVENUE CITY LIMITS AT CHURCH PAVEMENT TRANSITION 440 70 30,800 A - Arterial A - AC 22

AT DURSEY DR
SANPAB 0.00
010 SAN PABLO AVENUE PAVEMENT TRANSITION 443 70 31,010 A - Arterial A - AC 35

AT DURSEY DR
SANPAB BELMONT WAY 2.60
SANPAB 020 SAN PABLO AVENUE BELMONT WAY PINOLE SHORES DR 1,813 58 105,154 A - Arterial A - AC 47 6.25 SANPAB 030 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES DR SUNNYVIEW DR 1,506 72 108,432 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 77 19.62 SANPAB 040 SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY 1,892 72 136,224 A - Arterial O - AC/AC 78 20.45 SANPAB 050 SAN PABLO AVENUE APPIAN WAY OAK RIDGE RD 1,706 66 112,596 A - Arterial A - AC 54 8.66 SANPAB 055 SAN PABLO AVENUE OAK RIDGE RD BRIDGE (HERCULES CL) 2,205 60 132,300 A - Arterial A - AC 51 7.67 SANDRA 010 SANDRA COURT REBECCA DR CUL DE SAC 288 26 7,488 R - Residential/Local A - AC 51 9.81

SANTA BARBARA
DRIVE
SANTAB 010 RAMONA ST SILVERADO DR 843 36 30,348 R - Residential/Local A - AC 83 33.70 SARACT 010 SARAH COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC 756 44 33,264 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 89 38.38 SARADR 010 SARAH DRIVE APPIAN WAY LYNN DR 168 52 8,736 C - Collector A - AC 37 2.47 SARADR 020 SARAH DRIVE LYNN DR HOUSE #1980 2,269 38 86,222 C - Collector A - AC 16 0.00 SARADR 030A SARAH DRIVE HOUSE #1980 SHEA DR 1,009 24 24,216 C - Collector A - AC 19 0.00 030C SARAH DRIVE HOUSE #1980 (PCC 1,009 24 24,216 C - Collector P - PCC 63 shoulders)
SARADR SHEA DR 23.09
SARITA 371 SARITA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC 106 27 2,862 R - Residential/Local A - AC 40 5.08 SAVAGE 015 SAVAGE AVENUE SIMAS AVE PINOLE VALLEY RD 2,425 38 92,150 R - Residential/Local A - AC 67 20.21 SEVILL 010 SEVILLE COURT MONTE VERDE DRIVE CUL DE SAC 569 32 18,208 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46 7.58 SHADYD 010 SHADY DRAW SIMAS AVE DEAD END 705 38 26,790 R - Residential/Local A - AC 33 2.68 SHAWN 010 SHAWN DR CITY LIMITS TARA HILLS DR 720 36 25,920 R - Residential/Local A - AC 3 0.00 SHEADR 010 SHEA DRIVE PINOLE VALLEY RD SARAH DR 2,579 35 90,265 C - Collector A - AC 22 0.00 SILVRC 010 SILVER COURT SIMAS AVE CUL DE SAC 307 36 11,052 R - Residential/Local A - AC 37 4.27 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 9 MTC StreetSaver
273 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
SILVAD 010 SILVERADO DRIVE SIMAS AVE PRIVATE DRIVE 1,524 38 57,912 R - Residential/Local A - AC 46 7.78 SILVCT 010 SILVERCREST COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC 554 31 17,174 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 37.20

SILVERCREST
STREET
SILVST 010 VICTOR AVE DEAD END 389 31 12,059 R - Residential/Local A - AC 90 32.00 SIMAS 005 SIMAS AVENUE DEAD END PINOLE VALLEY RD 144 34 4,896 R - Residential/Local A - AC 6 0.00 SIMAS 010 SIMAS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD DIABLO CT 1,746 38 66,348 C - Collector O - AC/AC 82 26.88 SIMAS 015 SIMAS AVENUE DIABLO CT APPALOOSA TR 2,628 38 99,864 C - Collector O - AC/AC 82 26.17 SIMAS 020 SIMAS AVENUE APPALOOSA TR PINOLE VALLEY RD 2,111 36 75,996 C - Collector O - AC/AC 82 25.74 SMITH 010 SMITH AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE DEAD END 711 19 13,509 R - Residential/Local A - AC 30 1.84 SONOMA 010 SONOMA WAY MORAGA DR MENDOCINO AVE 982 32 31,424 R - Residential/Local A - AC 88 31.09 STOKES 010 STOKES AVENUE DOIDGE AVE MOORE CT 1,074 32 34,368 R - Residential/Local A - AC 47 7.96 SUMMCT 010 SUMMIT COURT SUMMIT DR CUL DE SAC 118 30 3,540 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.42 SUMMDR 010 SUMMIT DRIVE CUL DE SAC (SOUTH) BUENA VISTA DR 493 24 11,832 R - Residential/Local A - AC 74 24.50 020 SUMMIT DRIVE BUENA VISTA DR CUL DE SAC (NORTH- 884 28 24,752 R - Residential/Local A - AC 83 EAST)
SUMMDR 27.80
SUNVCT 010 SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC 261 25 6,525 R - Residential/Local O - AC/AC 85 40.03 SUNVDR 010 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE MARELSTA RD SAN PABLO AVE 1,108 34 37,672 R - Residential/Local A - AC 89 31.42 SUNVDR 020A SUNNYVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE BAY VIEW FARM RD 600 38 22,800 R - Residential/Local A - AC 88 41.05 020B SUNNYVIEW DRIVE BAY VIEW FARM RD DEAD END AT WOY 1,197 38 45,486 R - Residential/Local A - AC 88 CIRCLE
SUNVDR 41.05
TAMALP 010 TAMALPAIS DRIVE SIMAS AVE MENDOCINO DR 2,281 36 82,116 R - Residential/Local A - AC 51 10.41 TAPER 010 TAPER STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD DEAD END 352 31 10,912 R - Residential/Local A - AC 24 0.00 010 TARA HILLS DRIVE CITY LIMITS(HOUSE 3,214 62 199,268 C - Collector A - AC 26 #885)
TARAHI APPIAN WAY 0.20
TENNAV 010 TENNENT AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD SAN PABLO AVE 1,411 36 50,796 A - Arterial A - AC 34 2.37 TENNAV 020 TENNENT AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE LA SALLE DR 1,368 36 49,248 A - Arterial A - AC 23 0.00 TENNAV 030 TENNENT AVENUE LA SALLE DR BRIDGE 1,576 36 56,736 A - Arterial A - AC 20 0.00 TENNCT 010 TENNENT COURT TENNENT AVE CUL DE SAC 158 24 3,792 R - Residential/Local A - AC 27 0.78 TERRY 010 TERRY COURT MENDOCINO DR CUL DE SAC 341 29 9,889 R - Residential/Local A - AC 35 3.50 TESORO 010 TESORO COURT RIDGECREST RD CUL DE SAC 447 32 14,304 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.51 THOMAS 010 THOMAS COURT TERRY CT CUL DE SAC 398 30 11,940 R - Residential/Local A - AC 31 2.09 TOMAR 010 TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC 107 32 3,424 R - Residential/Local A - AC 45 7.22 TOWNS 010 TOWNS COURT WRIGHT AVE CUL DE SAC 222 36 7,992 R - Residential/Local A - AC 21 0.00 VALLAV 010 VALLEY AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE CHARLES AVE 165 28 4,620 R - Residential/Local A - AC 56 12.60 VALLDR 010 VALLEY VIEW DRIVE FERN AVE BUENA VISTA DR 189 28 5,292 R - Residential/Local A - AC 85 29.14 VICTOR 010 VICTOR STREET DOIDGE AVE WRIGHT AVE 555 32 17,760 R - Residential/Local A - AC 12 0.00 VICTOR 020 VICTOR STREET WRIGHT AVE SILVERCREST ST 1,127 36 40,572 R - Residential/Local A - AC 84 34.11 Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 10 MTC StreetSaver
274 of 395
Street ID Section ID Length Width Area Functional Class Surface Type Current
Street Name From To PCI
Remaining
Life
VINCEN 010 VINCENT DRIVE DOIDGE AVE DEAD END 446 35 15,610 R - Residential/Local A - AC 21 0.00 010 VON DOLLEN COURT GOULARTE DR/POULOS 580 30 17,400 R - Residential/Local A - AC 44 CT
VONDOL CUL DE SAC 6.76
WALLAC 010 WALLACE COURT KILKENNY WAY CUL DE SAC 565 36 20,340 R - Residential/Local A - AC 27 0.73 WALTER 010 WALTER AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE DEAD END 419 21 8,799 R - Residential/Local A - AC 5 0.00 WALTON 010 WALTON COURT WRIGHT AVE CUL DE SAC 153 35 5,355 R - Residential/Local A - AC 11 0.00

WHIPPOORWILL
COURT
WHIPOR 010 GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC 609 33 20,097 R - Residential/Local A - AC 86 35.93 WILDE 010 WILDE COURT KILDARE WAY CUL DE SAC 201 36 7,236 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 30.74 WILLOW 010 WILLOW STREET PEACH ST DEAD END 284 28 7,952 R - Residential/Local A - AC 8 0.00 WOODSI 010 WOODSIDE COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC 561 31 17,391 R - Residential/Local A - AC 87 38.33 WRIGHT 010 WRIGHT AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD VICTOR ST 2,200 38 83,600 C - Collector A - AC 22 0.00 WRIGHT 020 WRIGHT AVENUE VICTOR ST DOIDGE AVE 2,294 38 87,172 C - Collector A - AC 3 0.00 WRIGHT 030 WRIGHT AVENUE DOIDGE AVE DEAD END 1,832 38 69,616 C - Collector A - AC 16 0.00 ZOECT 010 ZOE COURT ORLEANS DR CUL DE SAC 271 27 7,317 R - Residential/Local A - AC 44 7.00 Total Section Length: 275,661
Total Section Area: 10,296,208
Printed: 4/25/2022
City of Pinole Section PCI/RSL Listing
Criteria: 11 MTC StreetSaver
275 of 395
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 SECTION II
 Preventative Maintenance and Rehabilitation Decision Tree  Budget Needs – Projected PCI/Cost Summary
 Budget Needs – Preventative Maintenance Treatment/ Cost Summary  Budget Needs – Rehabilitation Maintenance Treatment/ Cost Summary 276 of 395

PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE (PM) DECISION TREE
Preventative maintenance is the most cost-effective application to extend the life of streets and investment. Preventive Maintenance is designed to slow pavement deterioration.

This preventative maintenance report shows treatments and costs associated with preventative maintenance (Category I PCI Range = PM Treatment greater than/equal to 70 PCI). The PM decision tree is broken down by functional class and surface type.

A management section with a PCI equal to/less than 70 is classified under the rehabilitation decision tree.

Below is a PM decision tree description:

Decision Tree Number/ID – This number is associated with the decision tree functional classification and surface type Functional Classification – This is a group of streets or roadway subsystems that are classified pending on the level of service and traffic.

A – Arterial
C – Collector
R – Residential/Local
O – Other (user defined)
Surface Type – Is the type of surface specific for a management section. The classifications are:

AC – Asphalt Concrete
AC/AC – Asphalt Concrete over Asphalt Concrete
PCC – Portland Cement Concrete
AC/PCC – Asphalt Concrete over Portland Cement Concrete Treatment Type and Descriptions – There are three categories for PM treatment (category I greater than equal to 70 PCI):

Cost per Square Yard – Unit cost assigned to each treatment with an exception of crack seal which is a linear foot unit.

Years Between Crack Seal – Defines the number of years between crack seal applications Years Between Seal – Defines the number of years between surface seal applications # of Surface Seals before Overlay – Sets the maximum number of surface seals that can be applied before a “restoration” treatment is recommended.
277 of 395

REHABILITATION MAINTENANCE DECISION TREE
This rehabilitation decision tree report shows treatments and costs associated with rehabilitation maintenance (Category II – V PCI range 0 to 69 PCI. The rehabilitation decision tree is broken down by functional class and surface type. A management section with a PCI equal to/greater than 70 is classified under the rehabilitation decision tree.

Below is a PM decision tree description:

Decision Tree Number/ID – This number is associated with the decision tree functional classification and surface type Functional Classification – This is a group of streets or roadway subsystems that are classified pending on the level of service and traffic.

A – Arterial
C – Collector
R – Residential/Local
O – Other (user defined)
Surface Type – Is the type of surface specific for a management section. The classifications are:

AC – Asphalt Concrete
AC/AC – Asphalt Concrete over Asphalt Concrete
PCC – Portland Cement Concrete
AC/PCC – Asphalt Concrete over Portland Cement Concrete Condition Category
Condition Category II (50-69 PCI)– Good, Non-Load Related – Light Rehabilitation Condition Category III (50-69 PCI)– Good, Load Related – Light Rehabilitation Condition Category IV (25-49 PCI) – Poor – Moderate Rehabilitation Condition Category V (0-24 PCI) – Very Poor – Heavy Rehabilitation Treatments – Treatment is assigned based on the management section PCI rating Cost per Square Yard – Unit cost assigned to each treatment 278 of 395
Arterial AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $53.00 IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $55.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
AC/AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $53.00 IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $55.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
AC/PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $3.50 5
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $15.00
III - Good, Load Related THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $33.50 IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $35.50
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
Surface Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 5
Restoration Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
II - Good, Non-Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
III - Good, Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
IV - Poor THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $33.50
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
# of Surface
Seals before
Overlay
Functional
Class
City of Pinole
Printed: 5/2/2022
Decision Tree
Surface Condition Category Treatment Type Treatment Yrs Between Crack Seals
Yrs Between
Surface Seals
Cost/Sq Yd,
except Seal
Cracks in LF:

Functional Class and Surface combination not used
Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
Selected Treatment is not a Surface Seal
279 of 395
Collector AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $55.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
AC/AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $55.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
AC/PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $3.50 5
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $23.50 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $15.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $15.00
IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $35.50
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
Surface Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 5
Restoration Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
II - Good, Non-Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
III - Good, Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
IV - Poor THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $55.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $126.75
# of Surface
Seals before
Overlay
Functional
Class
City of Pinole
Printed: 5/2/2022
Decision Tree
Surface Condition Category Treatment Type Treatment Yrs Between Crack Seals
Yrs Between
Surface Seals
Cost/Sq Yd,
except Seal
Cracks in LF:

Functional Class and Surface combination not used
Criteria: 3 MTC StreetSaver
Selected Treatment is not a Surface Seal
280 of 395
Residential/Local AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $20.75 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
IV - Poor THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $45.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $107.25
AC/AC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $4.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $20.75 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $26.00
IV - Poor THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $45.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $107.25
AC/PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment SEAL CRACKS $1.50 4 Surface Treatment SLURRY SEAL $3.00 8
Restoration Treatment THIN AC OVERLAY(1.5 INCHES) $20.75 4 II - Good, Non-Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $14.00
III - Good, Load Related RUBBER CAPE SEAL $14.00
IV - Poor MILL AND THICK OVERLAY $33.25
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $107.25
PCC I - Very Good Crack Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
Surface Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 8
Restoration Treatment DO NOTHING $0.00 4
II - Good, Non-Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
III - Good, Load Related DO NOTHING $0.00
IV - Poor THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) $45.00
V - Very Poor RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) $107.25
# of Surface
Seals before
Overlay
Functional
Class
City of Pinole
Printed: 5/2/2022
Decision Tree
Surface Condition Category Treatment Type Treatment Yrs Between Crack Seals
Yrs Between
Surface Seals
Cost/Sq Yd,
except Seal
Cracks in LF:

Functional Class and Surface combination not used
Criteria: 5 MTC StreetSaver
Selected Treatment is not a Surface Seal
281 of 395

BUDGET NEEDS – PROJECTED PCI/COST SUMMARY
The purpose for the budget needs report is to show your agency what it needs to do to fix the management sections that need to be fixed and the associated treatment costs with unlimited funds. The needs calculation is typically calculated over a 5-year period but can be adjusted by the user.

The budget needs project PCI/cost summary report shows what the PCI values would be over a five-ear period and how much the treatments would cost each year. In addition, the report would show what the network condition would be if no treatments were not applied. The costs are derived from the agency’s preventative and rehabilitation maintenance trees.

Below is a description of the Budget Needs – Project PCI/Cost Summary report Inflation Rate and Interest Rate – This value is user-defined and impacts the overall cost of the analysis period Year – Analysis year
PCI Untreated – Overall network PCI when treatments are not applied PCI Treated – Overall network PCI when treatments are applied Cost – The cost per analysis period when treatment costs are applied PM Cost – Preventative Maintenance (PM) Cost is the cost that is projected for preventative maintenance treatment over a 5-year period
% PM – Preventative Maintenance (PM) Percent is the percent value that is set aside for preventative maintenance Total Cost – Total cost over a 5-year period
282 of 395
Year PCI Treated PCI Untreated PM Cost Rehab Cost Cost
2022 79 57 $520,919 $31,263,287 $31,784,206
2023 80 54 $112,469 $7,066,461 $7,178,930
2024 82 52 $39,254 $6,736,222 $6,775,476
2025 84 49 $49,785 $6,035,231 $6,085,016
2026 84 47 $54,886 $3,204,721 $3,259,607
Total Cost
$55,083,235
PM Total Cost
$777,313
% PM

1.41% $54,305,922
Rehab Total Cost
Needs - Projected PCI/Cost
Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
City of Pinole
Inflation Rate = %3.00
Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
283 of 395

BUDGET NEEDS – PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE TREATMENT / COST SUMMARY This report shows the quantities and cost per year for preventative maintenance that is needed for the agency’s road network.

Below is a description of the Budget Needs – Preventative Maintenance Treatment/Cost Summary:

Treatment – The preventative maintenance treatment applied. All treatments can be referred back to the jurisdiction’s PM decision tree.

Year – The year the specific treatment is applied
Area Treated – The area treated is the projected quantity amount of the given treatment during the analysis year. Treatment unit costs are in sq.yd. with an exception of linear feet (seal cracks).

Cost – The cost is the projected cost that is associated with the specified treatment in the analysis period. 284 of 395
Treatment Year Area Treated Cost
SEAL CRACKS 2022 1,166.49 sq. yd. $1,752
2023 301.98 sq. yd. $470
2025 4,118.45 sq. yd. $6,784
2026 9,001.79 sq. yd. $15,285
Total 14,588.71 $24,291
SLURRY SEAL 2022 129,789.22 sq. yd. $519,167
2023 27,184 sq. yd. $111,999
2024 9,249.89 sq. yd. $39,254
2025 9,837.78 sq. yd. $43,001
2026 8,796 sq. yd. $39,601
Total 184,856.89 $753,022
Inflation Rate = %3.00
City of Pinole Needs - Preventive Maintenance
Treatment/Cost Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
Total Quantity 199,445.6 $777,313
285 of 395

BUDGET NEEDS – REHABILITATION MAINTENANCE TREATMENT/COST SUMMARY This report shows the quantities and cost per year for rehabilitation maintenance that is needed for the agency’s road network.

Below is a description of the Budget Needs – rehabilitation maintenance treatment/cost summary:

Treatment – The rehabilitation maintenance treatment applied. All treatments can be referred back to the jurisdiction’s rehabilitation decision tree.

Year – The year the specific treatment is applied
Area Treated – The area treated is the projected quantity amount of the given treatment during the analysis year. All treatment unit costs are in sq.yd.

Cost – The cost is the projected cost that is associated with the specified treatment in the analysis period. 286 of 395
Treatment Year Area Treated Cost
RUBBER CAPE SEAL 2022 108,219.11 sq.yd. $2,813,705
2023 10,447 sq.yd. $279,773
2024 57,856.78 sq.yd. $1,595,892
2025 9,161.11 sq.yd. $260,279
2026 16,474.33 sq.yd. $482,095
Total 202,158.33 sq.yd. $5,431,744
RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) 2022 193,430.56 sq.yd. $22,060,534 2023 32,088.89 sq.yd. $3,989,482
2024 32,662.33 sq.yd. $3,975,760
2025 29,340.67 sq.yd. $3,840,982
2026 14,193 sq.yd. $1,713,253
Total 301,715.44 sq.yd. $35,580,011
THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) 2022 86,454.89 sq.yd. $3,890,470 2023 27,913.11 sq.yd. $1,293,777
2024 9,102.89 sq.yd. $434,578
2025 18,103.56 sq.yd. $890,206
2026 19,929.11 sq.yd. $1,009,373
Total 161,503.56 sq.yd. $7,518,404
MILL AND THICK OVERLAY 2022 45,428.67 sq.yd. $2,498,578 2023 26,538.89 sq.yd. $1,503,429
2024 12,510.67 sq.yd. $729,992
2025 17,367.11 sq.yd. $1,043,764
Total 101,845.33 sq.yd. $5,775,763
Needs - Rehabilitation
Treatment/Cost Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
City of Pinole
Inflation Rate = %3.00
Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
Total Cost $54,305,922
287 of 395
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 SECTION III
• Budget Scenarios – Cost Summary
o Scenario 1 – Current Budget
o Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
o Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
o Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI
o Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
• Budget Scenarios – Network Condition Summary
o Scenario 1 – Current Budget
o Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
o Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
o Scenario 4 – Optimal PCI
o Scenario 5 – Unfunded Scenario
288 of 395

BUDGET SCENARIOS – COST SUMMARY REPORT
This report summarizes the test scenarios given a specific budget or goal a jurisdiction has in mind. This report is designed to maximize a jurisdiction’s funding cost-effectively.

Below is a description of the Cost Summary Report:

Year – Analysis year
PM Amt – Preventative Maintenance (PM) amount that is applied during the analysis year. This amount is subtracted from the given budget value
PM % - Preventative Maintenance (PM) % value that is applied during the analysis year. A percentage amount is subtracted from the overall budget and applied during each analysis year.

Budget – Dollar amount value that is used for calculation and analysis Condition Category – This category shows the amount allocated to management sections with PCI values in the condition category II – V range for treatment
Project Rehab – This column show the amount set aside for special projects. The special projects rehab are rehabilitation projects that the user can override the PMS system for any given analysis year Preventative Maintenance – The preventative maintenance column show the total dollar amount that is being applied to management sections during the analysis year
Project PM – This column show the amount set aside for special projects. The special projects PM are preventative maintenance projects that the user can override the PMS system for any given analysis year Funded Stop Gap – This column shows the dollar amount allocated to management sections that need stop gap. Stop gap is often defined as localized distresses such as potholes, etc.

Deferred Maintenance – This column shows the dollar amount of how much the jurisdiction is deferring each analysis year. These management sections were earmarked for treatment bud were not funded Surplus PM – This column shows the dollar amount not allocated after rehabilitation and PM funds were allocated Unmet Stop gap – This column shows the dollar amount of stop gap that was not met and deferred 289 of 395
City of Pinole Scenarios - Cost Summary
Interest: 4.70% Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
2022 $1,000,000
$967,507
$0
$0
$967,507
$0
$32,037 $0 $30,784,625 $0
$187,760
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2023 $1,000,000
$972,772
$3,250
$0
$969,522
$0
$26,800 $0 $35,859,607 $0
$37,721
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2024 $1,000,000
$967,100
$0
$0
$967,100
$0
$32,687 $0 $41,267,710 $0
$36,466
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2025 $1,000,000
$984,953
$0
$0
$984,953
$0
$12,693 $2,107 $46,085,892 $0
$33,261
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2026 $1,000,000
$982,837
$0
$0
$982,837
$0
$16,453 $0 $48,087,650 $0
$17,334
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
Functional Class Rehabilitation Prev. Maint. Stop Gap
Summary
Stop Gap
Funded Unmet
Arterial $4,051,918 $17,684 $0 $50,020
Collector $0 $31,458 $0 $70,980
Residential/Local $823,251 $71,528 $0 $191,542
Grand Total: $4,875,169 $120,670 $0 $312,542
Year PM Budget Rehabilitation Surplus PM Deferred Stop Gap Preventative
Maintenance
Criteria:

Scenarios Criteria:
1 290
MTC StreetSaver
of 395
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios - Cost Summary
Interest: 4.7% Inflation: 3% Printed: 5/2/2022
Target: Overall 57
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Maintain Current PCI (57)
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
2022 $0
$0
$0
$289,700
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $0
$0
$289,700 $31,494,468
2023 $0
$0
$1,923,950
$350,629
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $1,923,950
$0
$2,274,579 $34,946,634
2024 $0
$0
$2,972,838
$39,254
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $2,972,838
$0
$3,012,092 $38,315,045
2025 $0
$0
$2,628,078
$49,785
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $2,628,078
$0
$2,677,863 $41,410,446
2026 $0
$0
$2,841,680
$41,494
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $2,841,680
$0
$2,883,174 $42,520,326
Functional Class Rehabilitation Prev. Maint. Summary
Arterial $5,084,556 $303,100
Collector $1,120,061 $278,662
Residential/Local $4,161,929 $189,100
Total: $10,366,546 $770,862 Grand Total: $11,137,408
Year Rehabilitation Preventive Maintenance Total Cost Deferred Scenarios Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
291 of 395
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios - Cost Summary
Interest: 4.7% Inflation: 3% Printed: 5/2/2022
Target: Overall 62
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Plus 5 PCI Increase
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
2022 $0
$0
$4,691,888
$520,919
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $4,691,888
$0
$5,212,807 $26,571,370
2023 $0
$0
$2,802,155
$112,469
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $2,802,155
$0
$2,914,624 $31,137,891
2024 $828,395
$0
$2,525,420
$39,254
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $3,353,815
$0
$3,393,069 $34,250,174
2025 $0
$0
$2,571,902
$49,785
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $2,571,902
$0
$2,621,687 $38,540,630
2026 $150,540
$0
$1,430,314
$44,962
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Project
Total $3,162,935
$1,582,081
$3,207,897 $39,243,160
Functional Class Rehabilitation Prev. Maint. Summary
Arterial $7,697,799 $304,207
Collector $1,099,698 $275,596
Residential/Local $7,785,198 $187,586
Total: $16,582,695 $767,389 Grand Total: $17,350,084
Year Rehabilitation Preventive Maintenance Total Cost Deferred Scenarios Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
292 of 395
City of Pinole Scenarios - Cost Summary
Interest: 4.70% Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - S4 - Average Needs
2022 $11,016,647
$10,851,266
$2,192,075
$262,364
$6,389,048
$2,007,779
$165,277 $0 $20,767,637 $0
$140,226
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2023 $11,016,647
$10,845,715
$147,970
$46,999
$2,797,206
$7,853,540
$169,918 $0 $17,384,359 $0
$7,725
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2024 $11,016,647
$10,831,749
$1,408,324
$0
$1,164,570
$8,258,855
$182,476 $0 $13,292,011 $0
$8,558
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2025 $11,016,647
$10,849,145
$190,195
$96,206
$2,124,287
$8,438,457
$167,177 $0 $9,003,266 $0
$7,474
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2026 $11,016,647
$10,836,452
$369,395
$0
$1,430,314
$9,036,743
$101,881 $61,165 $1,782,564 $0
$965
1%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
Functional Class Rehabilitation Prev. Maint. Stop Gap
Summary
Stop Gap
Funded Unmet
Arterial $10,987,030 $308,999 $0 $0
Collector $12,619,712 $280,469 $0 $42,045
Residential/Local $30,607,585 $197,261 $0 $122,903
Grand Total: $54,214,327 $786,729 $0 $164,948
Year PM Budget Rehabilitation Surplus PM Deferred Stop Gap Preventative
Maintenance
Criteria:

Scenarios Criteria:
1 293
MTC StreetSaver
of 395
City of Pinole Scenarios - Cost Summary
Interest: 4.70% Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 5 - Zero Funding
2022 $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $31,784,164 $0
$191,321
0%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2023 $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $37,518,280 $0
$37,737
0%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2024 $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $43,143,461 $0
$36,466
0%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2025 $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $47,634,604 $0
$33,727
0%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
2026 $0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $49,794,929 $0
$20,197
0%
$0
$0
II
III
IV
V
NonProject
Project
Funded
Unmet
Project
Total
Functional Class Rehabilitation Prev. Maint. Stop Gap
Summary
Stop Gap
Funded Unmet
Arterial $0 $0 $0 $55,109
Collector $0 $0 $0 $70,980
Residential/Local $0 $0 $0 $193,360
Grand Total: $0 $0 $0 $319,448
Year PM Budget Rehabilitation Surplus PM Deferred Stop Gap Preventative
Maintenance
Criteria:

Scenarios Criteria:
1 294
MTC StreetSaver
of 395

BUDGET SCENARIOS – NETWORK CONDITION SUMMARY REPORT
This report shows the impacts on the overall network PCI given a specific budget or goal an agency wants to meet. An overall network PCI is generated for each analysis year. In addition, this report also shows the percent breakdown of condition category before and after the test budget scenario. The breakdown is categorized by Functional Classification. 295 of 395
Year Budget PM Year Budget PM Year Budget PM
2022 $1,000,000 1.48%
2023 $1,000,000 1.48%
2024 $1,000,000 1.48%
2025 $1,000,000 1.48%
2026 $1,000,000 1.48%
Projected Network Average PCI by Year
With Selected Treatment Treated Centerline
Miles
Treated
Lane Miles
Year Never Treated
2022 57 58 2.24 6.04
2023 54 56 1.93 4.47
2024 52 54 0.97 2.63
2025 49 53 9.76 19.53
2026 47 52 2.24 5.40
Percent Network Area by Functional Class and Condition Category Condition
Condition in base year 2022, prior to applying treatments.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2022 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 10.6% 6.4% 22.6% 0.0% 39.5%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 4.4% 2.8% 13.7% 0.0% 20.9%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2026 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 12.6% 6.2% 22.6% 0.0% 41.4%
II / III 2.6% 0.9% 10.8% 0.0% 14.4%
IV 2.1% 1.6% 14.1% 0.0% 17.8%
V 3.2% 7.4% 15.8% 0.0% 26.4%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Scenarios - Network Condition Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
City of Pinole
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Interest: 4.7% Inflation: 3%
Criteria: MTC StreetSaver
Scenarios Criteria:
1 296 of 395
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios
Network Condition Summary
Interest: 4.70% Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Projected Network Average PCI by year
Year Never Treated With Selected Treatment Without Selected Treatment Target: Overall 57
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Maintain Current PCI (57)
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
2022 57 57 57
2023 54 57 54
2024 52 57 52
2025 49 57 49
2026 47 57 47
Percent Network Area by Functional Classification and Condition Class Condition in base year 2022, prior to applying treatments.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition in year 2022 after schedulable treatments applied.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition in year 2026 after schedulable treatments applied.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 14.2% 7.9% 28.7% 0.0% 50.9%
II / III 2.6% 0.8% 10.6% 0.0% 14.0%
IV 0.5% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 8.8%
V 3.2% 7.4% 15.8% 0.0% 26.4%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Scenarios Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
297 of 395
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios
Network Condition Summary
Interest: 4.70% Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Projected Network Average PCI by year
Year Never Treated With Selected Treatment Without Selected Treatment Target: Overall 62
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Plus 5 PCI Increase
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
2022 57 62 57
2023 54 62 54
2024 52 62 52
2025 49 62 49
2026 47 62 47
Percent Network Area by Functional Classification and Condition Class Condition in base year 2022, prior to applying treatments.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition in year 2022 after schedulable treatments applied.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 13.1% 6.4% 26.7% 0.0% 46.2%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 1.9% 2.8% 9.6% 0.0% 14.3%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition in year 2026 after schedulable treatments applied.

Condition Class Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 18.3% 7.9% 36.0% 0.0% 62.2%
II / III 0.0% 0.8% 10.1% 0.0% 10.9%
IV 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 1.5%
V 2.2% 7.4% 15.8% 0.0% 25.4%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Scenarios Criteria: 1 MTC StreetSaver
298 of 395
Year Budget PM Year Budget PM Year Budget PM
2022 $11,016,647 1.48%
2023 $11,016,647 1.48%
2024 $11,016,647 1.48%
2025 $11,016,647 1.48%
2026 $11,016,647 1.48%
Projected Network Average PCI by Year
With Selected Treatment Treated Centerline
Miles
Treated
Lane Miles
Year Never Treated
2022 57 65 13.91 32.81
2023 54 69 7.19 18.96
2024 52 74 7.11 18.90
2025 49 79 16.19 33.64
2026 47 84 18.21 40.12
Percent Network Area by Functional Class and Condition Category Condition
Condition in base year 2022, prior to applying treatments.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2022 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 14.4% 6.9% 37.8% 0.0% 59.1%
II / III 4.2% 1.8% 8.4% 0.0% 14.4%
IV 1.9% 2.8% 6.3% 0.0% 11.0%
V 0.0% 4.6% 10.9% 0.0% 15.5%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2026 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 20.5% 15.8% 58.7% 0.0% 95.1%
II / III 0.0% 0.2% 1.9% 0.0% 2.2%
IV 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 1.5%
V 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 1.3%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Scenarios - Network Condition Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
City of Pinole
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - S4 - Average Needs
Interest: 4.7% Inflation: 3%
Criteria: MTC StreetSaver
Scenarios Criteria:
1 299 of 395
Year Budget PM Year Budget PM Year Budget PM
2022 $0 0%
2023 $0 0%
2024 $0 0%
2025 $0 0%
2026 $0 0%
Projected Network Average PCI by Year
With Selected Treatment Treated Centerline
Miles
Treated
Lane Miles
Year Never Treated
2022 57 57 0 0
2023 54 54 0 0
2024 52 52 0 0
2025 49 49 0 0
2026 47 47 0 0
Percent Network Area by Functional Class and Condition Category Condition
Condition in base year 2022, prior to applying treatments.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2022 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 9.1% 6.4% 22.5% 0.0% 37.9%
II / III 4.2% 2.4% 16.1% 0.0% 22.7%
IV 5.9% 2.8% 13.8% 0.0% 22.5%
V 1.3% 4.6% 11.0% 0.0% 16.9%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Condition
Condition in year 2026 after schedulable treatments applied.

Arterial Collector Res/Loc Other Total
I 5.4% 6.2% 20.2% 0.0% 31.9%
II / III 3.7% 0.9% 11.8% 0.0% 16.4%
IV 8.2% 1.6% 15.6% 0.0% 25.4%
V 3.2% 7.4% 15.8% 0.0% 26.4%
Total 20.5% 16.1% 63.4% 0.0% 100.0%
Scenarios - Network Condition Summary
Printed: 5/2/2022
City of Pinole
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 5 - Zero Funding
Interest: 4.7% Inflation: 3%
Criteria: MTC StreetSaver
Scenarios Criteria:
1 300 of 395
Pavement Management Technical Assistance (P‐TAP) Round 22 SECTION IV
• Budget Scenarios – Sections Selected For Treatment
o Scenario 1 – Current Budget
o Scenario 2 – Constant PCI
o Scenario 3 – Plus 5 PCI Increase
o Scenario 4 – Average Needs
301 of 395

BUDGET SCENARIOS – SECTIONS SELECTED FOR TREATMENT
The sections selected for treatment report shows in detail the management sections selected each analysis year for M&R treatment.

This report helps the jurisdiction with identifying which streets are needed for M&R each analysis year.

Below is a description of the sections selected for treatment:

Year – Analysis year
Street Name – Name of Street
Beginning Location – Start of the management section
End Location – End of the management section
Section ID – Management section identifier
FC – This is a group of streets or roadway subsystems that are classified pending on the level of service and traffic.

A – Arterial
C – Collector
R – Residential/Local
O – Other (user defined)
Surface – Type of management section surface (AC, AC/AC, PCC, etc.) PCI – Management section pavement condition index
Cost – Associated and projected cost applied to the management section Cost Effectiveness Rating – The rating is the weight cost – effectiveness ratio of the recommended treatment. The system is programmed to determine and select sections identified as needing treatment using a ratio. The sections with the highest ratios are selected first until all available funds have been exhausted. The management sections requiring PM/Rehab but not selected for the initial year are reconsidered in the following years of the analysis period. These are deferred maintenance costs and are based on the unmet needed treatments deferred in the present year.

Treatment – Treatment contains the type of treatment the system is recommending for the management section

302 of 395
Year Budget PM Year Budget PM Year Budget PM
2022 $1,000,000 1.48%
2023 $1,000,000 1.48%
2024 $1,000,000 1.48%
2025 $1,000,000 1.48%
2026 $1,000,000 1.48%
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2022
4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 4THAVE 010 263 26 6,838 R AC/AC 84 85 91 $3,040 27,948 SLURRY SEAL APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON
RAMP
I-80 WEST ON
RAMP
APPIAN 030 482 74 35,668 A AC/AC 79 80 87 $15,853 55,961 SLURRY SEAL

CURRY COURT CARLOTTA
CIRCLE
CUL-DE-SAC CURRYC 432 101 37 3,737 R AC 73 74 82 $1,661 32,350 SLURRY SEAL KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC KELLEY 010 234 26 6,084 R AC 73 74 82 $2,704 29,745 SLURRY SEAL MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE MADRON 010 141 16 2,256 R AC 74 75 83 $1,003 29,441 SLURRY SEAL ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE ROBLE 010 251 28 7,028 R AC/AC 84 85 91 $3,124 27,950 SLURRY SEAL SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC SUNVCT 010 261 25 6,525 R AC/AC 84 85 91 $2,900 27,948 SLURRY SEAL Treatment Total $30,285
BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 163 36 5,868 R AC 74 75 77 $37 427,230 SEAL CRACKS PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE PONDER 010 2,036 36 73,296 R AC 76 77 79 $418 442,016 SEAL CRACKS

SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES
DR
SUNNYVIEW DR SANPAB 030 1,506 72 108,432 A AC/AC 77 78 80 $594 1,188,648 SEAL CRACKS SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY SANPAB 040 1,892 72 136,224 A AC/AC 78 79 80 $703 1,254,700 SEAL CRACKS Treatment Total $1,752

PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF

SAVAGE ST

COLLINS AVE
(NORTH INT)
PINOLV 030 A AC $592,020 10,665 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
2,484 39 96,876 44 45 100
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD TENNENT AVE SAN PABLO AVE PINOLV 080 A AC $322,667 10,941 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
1,650 32 52,800 39 40 100
Treatment Total $914,687

HOYTT COURT PINOLE VALLEY
RD
CUL DE SAC HOYTT 010 R AC $21,390 7,954 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
138 31 4,278 39 40 100

SARITA COURT PINOLE VALLEY
RD
CUL DE SAC SARITA 371 R AC $14,310 7,943 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
106 27 2,862 40 40 100
TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC TOMAR 010 R AC $17,120 7,733 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
107 32 3,424 45 45 100
Treatment Total $52,820
Year 2022 Area Total 552,196 Year 2022 Total $999,544
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 1 MTC StreetSaver 303 of 395
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2023

MAIDEN LANE SAN PABLO DRIVE
(DOES NOT

INCLUDE PCC)

TO ROAD

NARROWS
MAIDEN 434 52 21 1,092 R AC 70 69 79 $3,250 4,464 RUBBER CAPE SEAL Treatment Total $3,250
BELMONT WAY MARLESTA RD CUL-DE-SAC BELMON 010 734 36 26,198 R AC/AC 79 79 86 $11,993 25,943 SLURRY SEAL EBSEN COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC EBSEN 010 213 36 7,668 R AC/AC 79 79 86 $3,511 25,940 SLURRY SEAL EL TORO WAY CANYON DR CUL DE SAC ELTORO 010 739 32 23,648 R AC 73 72 81 $10,826 27,142 SLURRY SEAL Treatment Total $26,330
5TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 5THAVE 010 656 26 17,056 R AC 86 85 86 $60 416,417 SEAL CRACKS CRESTVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE END OF LOOP CRESTV 010 2,339 31 72,509 R AC 87 86 87 $233 407,908 SEAL CRACKS MAJOR VISTA COURT CRESTVIEW DR CUL DE SAC MAJORV 010 555 31 17,205 R AC 87 86 87 $56 407,940 SEAL CRACKS NOB HILL AVENUE MEADOW AVE SUNNYVIEW DR NOBHIL 010 949 24 22,776 R AC 88 87 88 $68 387,122 SEAL CRACKS

O CONNOR DRIVE CITY LIMITS
(HOUSE #401)
BANTRY RD OCONNE 010 479 34 16,286 R AC 87 86 87 $53 407,754 SEAL CRACKS Treatment Total $470

PINOLE VALLEY ROAD CITY LIMITS EAST

OF MARLIN CT

PINOLE CREEK
BRIDGE #6
PINOLV 010 A AC $453,742 10,412 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
1,897 38 72,086 46 44 100
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD ESTATES AVE I-80 OFF-RAMP PINOLV 055 A AC $317,240 10,264 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
840 60 50,400 48 46 100
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD HENRY AVE TENNENT AVE PINOLV 070 A AC $198,540 10,477 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
751 42 31,542 45 43 100
Treatment Total $969,522
Year 2023 Area Total 358,466 Year 2023 Total $999,572
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2024

GATLEY DRIVE PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
CARLOTTA CIR GATLEY 010 119 25 2,975 R AC 79 76 85 $1,403 20,209 SLURRY SEAL

SIMAS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY
RD
DIABLO CT SIMAS 010 1,746 38 66,348 C AC/AC 82 80 88 $31,284 39,165 SLURRY SEAL Treatment Total $32,687

SAN PABLO AVENUE BELMONT WAY PINOLE

SHORES DR
SANPAB 020 A AC $681,743 10,243 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
1,813 58 105,154 47 42 100
Treatment Total $681,743
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 2 MTC StreetSaver 304 of 395
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2024
BOX CANYON ROAD BUCKSKIN RD DEAD END BOXCAN 010 R AC $48,510 7,480 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
295 31 9,145 45 40 100
HANSEN PLACE ROBLE AVE CUL DE SAC HANSEN 010 R AC $32,549 7,400 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
236 26 6,136 47 43 100

PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
100 SOUTH OF

OVERPASS
DEL MONTE DR PINOLE 020 R AC $204,298 7,462 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
917 42 38,514 45 41 100
Treatment Total $285,357
Year 2024 Area Total 228,272 Year 2024 Total $999,787
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2025
GERZ COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC GERZCT 010 227 32 7,264 R AC 81 77 85 $3,528 19,527 SLURRY SEAL

MEEHAN COURT CARLOTTA
CIRCLE
CUL-DE-SAC MEENA 433 129 38 4,902 R AC 77 73 82 $2,381 22,098 SLURRY SEAL Treatment Total $5,909

ADOBE ROAD PAVEMENT
CHANGE
CUL-DE-SAC ADOBE 015 318 34 10,812 R AC 91 86 87 $36 375,372 SEAL CRACKS ALTAMIRANO CIRCLE FRANCISCA CT FRANCISCA CT ALTAMI 010 628 24 15,072 R AC 85 83 85 $64 642,666 SEAL CRACKS AMEND STREET MANN DR CUL DE SAC AMEND 010 973 36 35,028 R AC 91 86 87 $114 375,372 SEAL CRACKS ANTONIA COURT ANTONIA CIRCLE CUL DE SAC ANTOCT 010 279 33 9,207 R AC 85 83 84 $40 610,707 SEAL CRACKS BAY VIEW FARM ROAD SUNNYVIEW DR HOUSE #1059 BAYVIE 010 333 38 12,654 R AC 87 83 84 $54 409,624 SEAL CRACKS BERNARDO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC BERNAR 010 228 31 7,068 R AC 85 83 85 $30 642,666 SEAL CRACKS BLUE JAY CIRCLE GALBRETH RD END OF LOOP BLUEJA 010 1,212 25 30,300 R AC 89 87 88 $94 671,000 SEAL CRACKS BRENDA COURT BELFAIR DR CUL DE SAC BRENDA 010 214 31 6,634 R AC 91 86 87 $22 375,465 SEAL CRACKS BRETT COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC BRETT 010 371 34 12,614 R AC 91 86 87 $44 385,037 SEAL CRACKS CANYON DRIVE APPIAN WAY EL TORO WAY CANYON 010 1,144 38 43,472 R AC 87 85 86 $162 668,643 SEAL CRACKS CLARK COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC CLARK 010 429 32 13,728 R AC 84 81 82 $69 538,996 SEAL CRACKS COLINA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC COLINA 010 137 30 4,110 R AC 85 82 84 $19 621,870 SEAL CRACKS

COLLINS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY

RD - WEST

ENTRANCE
TOMAR CT COLLIN 010A 614 32 19,648 R AC 75 71 74 $153 410,180 SEAL CRACKS

COLLINS AVENUE TOMAR CT PINOLE VALLEY

RD - EAST

ENTRANCE
COLLIN 010B 754 32 24,128 R AC 75 71 74 $187 410,180 SEAL CRACKS

DANNY COURT BAYVIEW FARM
RD
CUL DE SAC DANNY 010 405 36 14,580 R AC 84 82 83 $68 577,162 SEAL CRACKS Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 3 MTC StreetSaver 305 of 395
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2025

DOWNER STREET PINOLE VALLEY
RD
HENRY AVE DOWNER 010 1,394 37 51,578 R AC 89 85 86 $196 400,229 SEAL CRACKS ENLOW COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC ENLOWC 010 245 36 8,820 R AC 83 79 81 $49 411,896 SEAL CRACKS FLAMINGO COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC FLAMIN 010 234 33 7,722 R AC 90 85 86 $29 391,419 SEAL CRACKS FRANCISCA COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC FRANCT 010 864 32 27,648 R AC 86 82 83 $128 413,633 SEAL CRACKS FRASER COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC FRASER 010 509 31 15,779 R AC 85 81 83 $77 414,142 SEAL CRACKS

GALBRETH ROAD PINOLE VALLEY
RD
BLUE JAY CIR GALBRE 15A 2,026 33 66,858 R AC 90 88 89 $193 665,536 SEAL CRACKS

GALBRETH ROAD BLUE JAY CIR END OF CUL DE
SAC
GALBRE 15B 608 33 20,064 R AC 90 88 89 $58 665,536 SEAL CRACKS GLEN COURT MARIONOLA WAY CUL DE SAC GLENCT 010 382 32 12,224 R AC 90 85 86 $45 391,419 SEAL CRACKS HANLEY DRIVE LIMERICK RD MARLESTA RD HANLDR 010 480 38 18,240 R AC 84 81 83 $89 587,083 SEAL CRACKS HAZEL STREET SUNNYVIEW DR DEAD END HAZEL 005 270 36 9,720 R AC 87 83 84 $42 409,512 SEAL CRACKS HENRY AVENUE LEWIS LN OAK RIDGE DR HENRY 020 1,044 38 39,672 R AC 87 83 84 $169 409,596 SEAL CRACKS

HENRY AVENUE OAK RIDGE DR PINOLE VALLEY
RD
HENRY 030 1,901 38 72,238 R AC 87 83 84 $308 409,624 SEAL CRACKS HENRY AVENUE ALICE WAY FRANCIS DR HENRY 050 926 37 34,262 R AC 86 82 83 $159 413,633 SEAL CRACKS HERMOSA STREET LUCAS AVE SIMAS AVE HERMST 020 1,217 32 38,944 R AC 87 85 86 $147 654,484 SEAL CRACKS HIGUERA AVENUE RAMONA ST ALAMO ST HIGUER 010 379 32 12,128 R AC 89 84 85 $48 403,414 SEAL CRACKS HUTCHINSON COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC HUTCHI 010 521 34 17,714 R AC 86 82 83 $82 413,633 SEAL CRACKS IGNACIO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC IGNACI 010 106 40 4,240 R AC 87 83 84 $19 409,596 SEAL CRACKS JOHN STREET SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE JOHNST 010 686 25 17,150 R AC 89 84 85 $68 403,414 SEAL CRACKS LA CANADA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC LACANA 010 424 32 13,568 R AC 85 82 84 $61 638,048 SEAL CRACKS LA REINA STREET HERMOSA ST RAMONA ST LAREIN 010 525 36 18,900 R AC 87 83 84 $81 409,624 SEAL CRACKS LAUREL AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE LAUREL 010 586 28 16,408 R AC/AC 84 79 81 $92 499,751 SEAL CRACKS LUCAS AVENUE ESTATES AVE RAMONA ST LUCAS 010 970 32 31,040 R AC 86 82 83 $144 413,621 SEAL CRACKS MARLESTA ROAD HOUSE #600 KILDARE WAY MARLES 020 1,241 38 47,158 C AC 90 85 86 $174 536,317 SEAL CRACKS MCDONALD DRIVE MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC MCDONA 010 1,844 37 68,228 R AC 85 83 84 $295 610,707 SEAL CRACKS MEADOW AVENUE MARLESTA RD NOB HILL AVE MEADOW 010 687 24 16,488 R AC 89 84 85 $65 403,414 SEAL CRACKS

MONTCLAIR COURT SANTA BARBARA
DR
CUL DE SAC MONTCL 010 204 32 6,528 R AC 84 81 82 $33 538,996 SEAL CRACKS MORAGA DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MORAGA 020 854 32 27,328 R AC 91 86 87 $91 382,186 SEAL CRACKS

ORLEANS DRIVE TENNENT AVE NORTH DEAD
END
ORLEAN 020 483 24 11,592 R AC/AC 89 86 87 $24 1,096,038 SEAL CRACKS PARK STREET QUINAN AVE TENNENT AVE PARKST 010 235 35 8,225 R AC 77 73 76 $60 448,850 SEAL CRACKS

PINOLE SHORES
DRIVE
DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC PINOLE 030 592 42 24,864 R AC 87 83 84 $106 409,596 SEAL CRACKS PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE HOLIDAY CT PONDER 020A 634 38 24,092 R AC 85 80 82 $122 414,585 SEAL CRACKS Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 4 MTC StreetSaver 306 of 395
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2025

PONDEROSA TRAIL HOLIDAY CT DEAD END

SOUTH OF

ALAMO ST
PONDER 020B 1,531 38 58,178 R AC 85 80 82 $293 414,585 SEAL CRACKS PRIMROSE LANE LOPES CT CUL DE SAC PRIMRO 020 665 32 21,280 R AC 91 86 87 $73 385,037 SEAL CRACKS

RAFAELA STREET PINOLE VALLEY
RD
JOHN ST RAFAEL 010 502 28 14,056 R AC 85 82 84 $64 621,870 SEAL CRACKS RIDGECREST ROAD HOUSE #1569 TESORO CT RIDGEC 020 1,880 37 69,560 R AC 86 83 85 $292 579,183 SEAL CRACKS ROGERS WAY NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE ROGERS 010 650 32 20,800 R AC 83 80 82 $105 593,552 SEAL CRACKS RUFF COURT FARIA ST CUL DE SAC RUFFCT 010 371 32 11,872 R AC 84 81 83 $58 570,451 SEAL CRACKS

SANTA BARBARA
DRIVE
RAMONA ST SILVERADO DR SANTAB 010 843 36 30,348 R AC 83 80 82 $155 582,667 SEAL CRACKS SARAH COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC SARACT 010 756 44 33,264 R AC/AC 89 86 87 $69 1,096,038 SEAL CRACKS SILVERCREST COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC SILVCT 010 554 31 17,174 R AC 87 84 85 $68 596,012 SEAL CRACKS SILVERCREST STREET VICTOR AVE DEAD END SILVST 010 389 31 12,059 R AC 90 85 86 $45 391,419 SEAL CRACKS

SONOMA WAY MORAGA DR MENDOCINO
AVE
SONOMA 010 982 32 31,424 R AC 88 84 85 $129 405,878 SEAL CRACKS SUMMIT COURT SUMMIT DR CUL DE SAC SUMMCT 010 118 30 3,540 R AC 89 84 85 $14 403,422 SEAL CRACKS

SUMMIT DRIVE CUL DE SAC
(SOUTH)
BUENA VISTA DRSUMMDR 010 493 24 11,832 R AC 74 70 73 $94 414,090 SEAL CRACKS

SUMMIT DRIVE BUENA VISTA DR CUL DE SAC
(NORTH-EAST)
SUMMDR 020 884 28 24,752 R AC 83 78 80 $141 411,629 SEAL CRACKS SUNNYVIEW DRIVE MARELSTA RD SAN PABLO AVE SUNVDR 010 1,108 34 37,672 R AC 89 84 85 $149 403,414 SEAL CRACKS

SUNNYVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE BAY VIEW FARM
RD
SUNVDR 020A 600 38 22,800 R AC 88 86 87 $75 672,847 SEAL CRACKS

SUNNYVIEW DRIVE BAY VIEW FARM
RD

DEAD END AT

WOY CIRCLE
SUNVDR 020B 1,197 38 45,486 R AC 88 86 87 $149 672,847 SEAL CRACKS VALLEY VIEW DRIVE FERN AVE BUENA VISTA DRVALLDR 010 189 28 5,292 R AC 85 80 82 $27 414,587 SEAL CRACKS

VICTOR STREET WRIGHT AVE SILVERCREST
ST
VICTOR 020 1,127 36 40,572 R AC 84 82 83 $191 556,775 SEAL CRACKS

WHIPPOORWILL
COURT
GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC WHIPOR 010 609 33 20,097 R AC 86 83 85 $85 579,183 SEAL CRACKS WILDE COURT KILDARE WAY CUL DE SAC WILDE 010 201 36 7,236 R AC 87 83 84 $31 409,624 SEAL CRACKS WOODSIDE COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC WOODSI 010 561 31 17,391 R AC 87 85 86 $67 632,663 SEAL CRACKS Treatment Total $6,784

PINOLE VALLEY ROAD PINOLE CREEK
BRIDGE #6

BRIDGE WEST

OF SAVAGE ST
PINOLV 020 A AC $711,518 9,903 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
2,131 50 106,550 50 43 100
Treatment Total $711,518
2ND AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 2NDAVE 010 R AC $83,496 7,249 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
566 27 15,282 47 41 100

BETTY AVENUE MEADOW AVE EAST MEADOW
AVE
BETTY 010 R AC $53,369 7,266 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
407 24 9,768 47 40 100
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 5 MTC StreetSaver 307 of 395
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2025
CURRAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC CURRAN 010 R AC $70,022 7,253 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
356 36 12,816 47 41 100
ROBLE AVENUE ENCINA AVE PINON AVE ROBLE 020 R AC $66,548 7,274 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
420 29 12,180 47 40 100
Treatment Total $273,435
Year 2025 Area Total 1,773,922 Year 2025 Total $997,646 Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2026
BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 163 36 5,868 R AC 74 70 79 $2,936 19,584 SLURRY SEAL MENDOCINO DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MENDDR 010 696 37 25,752 R AC 83 77 85 $12,882 18,832 SLURRY SEAL Treatment Total $15,818
4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 4THAVE 010 263 26 6,838 R AC/AC 84 88 89 $3 7,150,767 SEAL CRACKS APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON
RAMP
I-80 WEST ON
RAMP
APPIAN 030 482 74 35,668 A AC/AC 79 83 85 $129 1,681,173 SEAL CRACKS BUENA VISTA DRIVE HOUSE #440 END OF LOOP BUENAV 020 788 23 18,124 R AC/AC 92 89 89 $3 16,694,218 SEAL CRACKS CORTE CRUZ COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC CORTE 010 544 33 17,952 R AC/AC 92 89 89 $3 16,694,218 SEAL CRACKS

CURRY COURT CARLOTTA
CIRCLE
CUL-DE-SAC CURRYC 432 101 37 3,737 R AC 73 79 81 $22 734,822 SEAL CRACKS FERN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE VALLEYVIEW ST FERNAV 010 519 28 14,532 R AC/AC 92 89 89 $2 16,694,218 SEAL CRACKS

HOYTT COURT PINOLE VALLEY
RD
CUL DE SAC HOYTT 010 138 31 4,278 R AC 39 87 88 $5 969,239 SEAL CRACKS KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC KELLEY 010 234 26 6,084 R AC 73 78 80 $36 558,095 SEAL CRACKS MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE MADRON 010 141 16 2,256 R AC 74 79 81 $13 558,713 SEAL CRACKS

PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF

SAVAGE ST

COLLINS AVE
(NORTH INT)
PINOLV 030 2,484 39 96,876 A AC 44 85 86 $262 1,001,607 SEAL CRACKS PINOLE VALLEY ROAD TENNENT AVE SAN PABLO AVE PINOLV 080 1,650 32 52,800 A AC 39 85 86 $143 1,001,607 SEAL CRACKS ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE ROBLE 010 251 28 7,028 R AC/AC 84 88 89 $3 7,275,110 SEAL CRACKS

SARITA COURT PINOLE VALLEY
RD
CUL DE SAC SARITA 371 106 27 2,862 R AC 40 87 88 $4 969,239 SEAL CRACKS SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC SUNVCT 010 261 25 6,525 R AC/AC 84 88 89 $3 7,150,767 SEAL CRACKS TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC TOMAR 010 107 32 3,424 R AC 45 87 88 $4 969,239 SEAL CRACKS Treatment Total $635
SAN PABLO AVENUE APPIAN WAY OAK RIDGE RD SANPAB 050 A AC $774,448 9,597 MILL AND THICK

OVERLAY
1,706 66 112,596 54 43 100
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 6 MTC StreetSaver 308 of 395
Treatment Total $774,448

DEL MONTE DRIVE PINOLE SHORES
DR
CITY LIMITS DELMON 010 R AC $118,348 7,047 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
701 30 21,030 49 40 100
OWENS COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC OWENS 010 R AC $90,041 7,036 THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5

INCHES)
500 32 16,000 50 41 100
Treatment Total $208,389
Year 2026 Area Total 460,230 Year 2026 Total $999,290
Grand Total Section Area: 3,373,086 Grand Total $4,995,839 Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Scenario: #PTAP 22 - Scenario 1 - Current
Funding ($1M)
Scenarios Criteria:
** - Treatment from Project Selection 7 MTC StreetSaver 309 of 395
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Target: Overall 57
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Maintain Current PCI (57)
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
Year: 2022
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating APPIAN WAY MICHAEL DR I-80 EAST ON RAMP APPIAN 020 A AC/AC 87 $40,684 55,961 APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON RAMP I-80 WEST ON RAMP APPIAN 030 A AC/AC 87 $15,853 55,961 APPIAN WAY I-80 WEST ON RAMP MANN DR APPIAN 040 A AC/AC 88 $43,101 57,396 APPIAN WAY MANN DR SAN PABLO AVE APPIAN 050 A AC/AC 88 $88,816 57,396 FITGERALD DRIVE JOVITA LN APPIAN WAY FITZGE 020 C AC/AC 89 $99,494 40,899 2022 - SLURRY SEAL Total $287,948
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 R AC 77 $37 427,230 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE PONDER 010 R AC 79 $418 442,016 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES DR SUNNYVIEW DR SANPAB 030 A AC/AC 80 $594 1,188,648 SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY SANPAB 040 A AC/AC 80 $703 1,254,700 2022 - SEAL CRACKS Total $1,752
Year 2022 Total $289,700
Year: 2023
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 4THAVE 010 R AC/AC 91 $3,131 27,914 ALFRED DRIVE BELFAIR DR HAZEL ST ALFRED 010 R AC 91 $5,336 16,336 ANTONIA CIRCLE OAK RIDGE RD OAK RIDGE RD ANTONI 010 R AC 83 $10,921 21,253 BELMONT WAY MARLESTA RD CUL-DE-SAC BELMON 010 R AC/AC 86 $11,993 25,943 CURRY COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC CURRYC 432 R AC 81 $1,711 30,993 DUTRA COURT HAZEL ST CUL DE SAC DUTRA 010 R AC 82 $2,683 21,339 EBSEN COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC EBSEN 010 R AC/AC 86 $3,511 25,940 EL TORO WAY CANYON DR CUL DE SAC ELTORO 010 R AC 81 $10,826 27,142 GATLEY DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DRIVE CARLOTTA CIR GATLEY 010 R AC 86 $1,362 20,323 GERZ COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC GERZCT 010 R AC 88 $3,326 19,413 HEMLEB COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC HEMLEB 010 R AC 90 $7,110 17,267 KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC KELLEY 010 R AC 81 $2,786 28,509 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 1 MTC StreetSaver 310 of 395
Year: 2023
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE MADRON 010 R AC 82 $1,033 28,297 MEADOW AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE MEADOW 020 R AC 91 $10,185 16,349 MEEHAN COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC MEENA 433 R AC 84 $2,245 23,042 MENDOCINO DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MENDDR 010 R AC 89 $11,789 18,087 OAK RIDGE ROAD HENRY AVE IGNACIO CT OAKRID 010 C AC 82 $6,483 23,481 OAK RIDGE ROAD IGNACIO CT SAN PABLO AVE OAKRID 020 C AC 86 $18,096 24,846 ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE ROBLE 010 R AC/AC 91 $3,218 27,915 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES DR SUNNYVIEW DR SANPAB 030 A AC/AC 87 $49,638 36,798 SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY SANPAB 040 A AC/AC 88 $62,361 37,385 SIMAS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD DIABLO CT SIMAS 010 C AC/AC 89 $30,373 39,897 SIMAS AVENUE DIABLO CT APPALOOSA TR SIMAS 015 C AC/AC 89 $45,716 35,147 SIMAS AVENUE APPALOOSA TR PINOLE VALLEY RD SIMAS 020 C AC/AC 89 $34,790 33,099 SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC SUNVCT 010 R AC/AC 91 $2,987 27,914 TESORO COURT RIDGECREST RD CUL DE SAC TESORO 010 R AC 92 $6,549 14,177 2023 - SLURRY SEAL Total $284,430
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 5TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 5THAVE 010 R AC 86 $60 416,417 CRESTVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE END OF LOOP CRESTV 010 R AC 87 $233 407,908 MAJOR VISTA COURT CRESTVIEW DR CUL DE SAC MAJORV 010 R AC 87 $56 407,940 NOB HILL AVENUE MEADOW AVE SUNNYVIEW DR NOBHIL 010 R AC 88 $68 387,126 O CONNOR DRIVE CITY LIMITS (HOUSE #401) BANTRY RD OCONNE 010 R AC 87 $53 407,758 2023 - SEAL CRACKS Total $470
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD CITY LIMITS EAST OF MARLIN CT PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE #6 PINOLV 010 A AC 100 $453,742 10,412 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF SAVAGE ST COLLINS AVE (NORTH INT) PINOLV 030 A AC 100 $609,781 10,532 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD HENRY AVE TENNENT AVE PINOLV 070 A AC 100 $198,540 10,477 SAN PABLO AVENUE BELMONT WAY PINOLE SHORES DR SANPAB 020 A AC 100 $661,887 10,375 2023 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $1,923,950
Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Year 2023 Total $2,208,850
** - Treatment from Project Selection 2 MTC StreetSaver 311 of 395
Year: 2024
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ADOBE ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD PAVEMENT CHANGE ADOBE 005 R AC 95 $6,149 9,289 DIABLO CIRCLE SIMAS AVE SIMAS AVE DIABLO 010 R AC 95 $16,311 9,271 RUFF AVENUE FARIA AVE PALOMA ST RUFFAV 010 R AC 95 $16,794 9,269 2024 - SLURRY SEAL Total $39,254
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE #6 BRIDGE WEST OF SAVAGE ST PINOLV 020 A AC 100 $690,794 10,025 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD ESTATES AVE I-80 OFF-RAMP PINOLV 055 A AC 100 $326,758 10,148 SAN PABLO AVENUE APPIAN WAY OAK RIDGE RD SANPAB 050 A AC 100 $729,992 9,787 SAN PABLO AVENUE OAK RIDGE RD BRIDGE (HERCULES CL) SANPAB 055 A AC 100 $857,738 10,017 2024 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $2,605,282
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BOX CANYON ROAD BUCKSKIN RD DEAD END BOXCAN 010 R AC 100 $48,510 7,480 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE 100 SOUTH OF OVERPASS DEL MONTE DR PINOLE 020 R AC 100 $204,298 7,462 SEVILLE COURT MONTE VERDE DRIVE CUL DE SAC SEVILL 010 R AC 100 $96,585 7,449 TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC TOMAR 010 R AC 100 $18,163 7,479 2024 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $367,556
Year 2024 Total $3,012,092
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ESTATES AVENUE SIMAS AVE RAMONA ST ESTATE 010 C AC 94 $43,001 19,302 2025 - SLURRY SEAL Total $43,001
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ADOBE ROAD PAVEMENT CHANGE CUL-DE-SAC ADOBE 015 R AC 87 $36 375,372 ALTAMIRANO CIRCLE FRANCISCA CT FRANCISCA CT ALTAMI 010 R AC 85 $64 642,666 AMEND STREET MANN DR CUL DE SAC AMEND 010 R AC 87 $114 375,372 ANTONIA COURT ANTONIA CIRCLE CUL DE SAC ANTOCT 010 R AC 84 $40 610,707 BAY VIEW FARM ROAD SUNNYVIEW DR HOUSE #1059 BAYVIE 010 R AC 84 $54 409,624 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment BERNARDO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC BERNAR 010 R AC 85 $30 642,666 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 3 MTC StreetSaver 312 of 395
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BLUE JAY CIRCLE GALBRETH RD END OF LOOP BLUEJA 010 R AC 88 $94 671,000 BRENDA COURT BELFAIR DR CUL DE SAC BRENDA 010 R AC 87 $22 375,465 BRETT COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC BRETT 010 R AC 87 $44 385,037 CANYON DRIVE APPIAN WAY EL TORO WAY CANYON 010 R AC 86 $162 668,643 CLARK COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC CLARK 010 R AC 82 $69 538,996 COLINA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC COLINA 010 R AC 84 $19 621,870

COLLINS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD - WEST

ENTRANCE
TOMAR CT COLLIN 010A R AC 74 $153 410,180

COLLINS AVENUE TOMAR CT PINOLE VALLEY RD - EAST

ENTRANCE
COLLIN 010B R AC 74 $187 410,180
DANNY COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC DANNY 010 R AC 83 $68 577,162 DOWNER STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD HENRY AVE DOWNER 010 R AC 86 $196 400,229 ENLOW COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC ENLOWC 010 R AC 81 $49 411,896 FLAMINGO COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC FLAMIN 010 R AC 86 $29 391,419 FRANCISCA COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC FRANCT 010 R AC 83 $128 413,633 FRASER COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC FRASER 010 R AC 83 $77 414,142 GALBRETH ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD BLUE JAY CIR GALBRE 15A R AC 89 $193 665,536 GALBRETH ROAD BLUE JAY CIR END OF CUL DE SAC GALBRE 15B R AC 89 $58 665,536 GLEN COURT MARIONOLA WAY CUL DE SAC GLENCT 010 R AC 86 $45 391,419 HANLEY DRIVE LIMERICK RD MARLESTA RD HANLDR 010 R AC 83 $89 587,083 HAZEL STREET SUNNYVIEW DR DEAD END HAZEL 005 R AC 84 $42 409,512 HENRY AVENUE LEWIS LN OAK RIDGE DR HENRY 020 R AC 84 $169 409,596 HENRY AVENUE OAK RIDGE DR PINOLE VALLEY RD HENRY 030 R AC 84 $308 409,624 HENRY AVENUE ALICE WAY FRANCIS DR HENRY 050 R AC 83 $159 413,633 HERMOSA STREET LUCAS AVE SIMAS AVE HERMST 020 R AC 86 $147 654,484 HIGUERA AVENUE RAMONA ST ALAMO ST HIGUER 010 R AC 85 $48 403,414 HUTCHINSON COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC HUTCHI 010 R AC 83 $82 413,633 IGNACIO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC IGNACI 010 R AC 84 $19 409,596 JOHN STREET SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE JOHNST 010 R AC 85 $68 403,414 LA CANADA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC LACANA 010 R AC 84 $61 638,048 LA REINA STREET HERMOSA ST RAMONA ST LAREIN 010 R AC 84 $81 409,624 LAUREL AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE LAUREL 010 R AC/AC 81 $92 499,751 LUCAS AVENUE ESTATES AVE RAMONA ST LUCAS 010 R AC 83 $144 413,621 MARLESTA ROAD HOUSE #600 KILDARE WAY MARLES 020 C AC 86 $174 536,317 MCDONALD DRIVE MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC MCDONA 010 R AC 84 $295 610,707 MEADOW AVENUE MARLESTA RD NOB HILL AVE MEADOW 010 R AC 85 $65 403,414 MONTCLAIR COURT SANTA BARBARA DR CUL DE SAC MONTCL 010 R AC 82 $33 538,996 MORAGA DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MORAGA 020 R AC 87 $91 382,186 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment ORLEANS DRIVE TENNENT AVE NORTH DEAD END ORLEAN 020 R AC/AC 87 $24 1,096,038 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 4 MTC StreetSaver 313 of 395
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PARK STREET QUINAN AVE TENNENT AVE PARKST 010 R AC 76 $60 448,850 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC PINOLE 030 R AC 84 $106 409,596 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE HOLIDAY CT PONDER 020A R AC 82 $122 414,585 PONDEROSA TRAIL HOLIDAY CT DEAD END SOUTH OF ALAMO ST PONDER 020B R AC 82 $293 414,585 PRIMROSE LANE LOPES CT CUL DE SAC PRIMRO 020 R AC 87 $73 385,037 RAFAELA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD JOHN ST RAFAEL 010 R AC 84 $64 621,870 RIDGECREST ROAD HOUSE #1569 TESORO CT RIDGEC 020 R AC 85 $292 579,183 ROGERS WAY NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE ROGERS 010 R AC 82 $105 593,552 RUFF COURT FARIA ST CUL DE SAC RUFFCT 010 R AC 83 $58 570,451 SANTA BARBARA DRIVE RAMONA ST SILVERADO DR SANTAB 010 R AC 82 $155 582,667 SARAH COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC SARACT 010 R AC/AC 87 $69 1,096,038 SILVERCREST COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC SILVCT 010 R AC 85 $68 596,012 SILVERCREST STREET VICTOR AVE DEAD END SILVST 010 R AC 86 $45 391,419 SONOMA WAY MORAGA DR MENDOCINO AVE SONOMA 010 R AC 85 $129 405,878 SUMMIT COURT SUMMIT DR CUL DE SAC SUMMCT 010 R AC 85 $14 403,422 SUMMIT DRIVE CUL DE SAC (SOUTH) BUENA VISTA DR SUMMDR 010 R AC 73 $94 414,090 SUMMIT DRIVE BUENA VISTA DR CUL DE SAC (NORTH-EAST) SUMMDR 020 R AC 80 $141 411,629 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE MARELSTA RD SAN PABLO AVE SUNVDR 010 R AC 85 $149 403,414 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE BAY VIEW FARM RD SUNVDR 020A R AC 87 $75 672,847 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE BAY VIEW FARM RD DEAD END AT WOY CIRCLE SUNVDR 020B R AC 87 $149 672,847 VALLEY VIEW DRIVE FERN AVE BUENA VISTA DR VALLDR 010 R AC 82 $27 414,587 VICTOR STREET WRIGHT AVE SILVERCREST ST VICTOR 020 R AC 83 $191 556,775 WHIPPOORWILL COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC WHIPOR 010 R AC 85 $85 579,183 WILDE COURT KILDARE WAY CUL DE SAC WILDE 010 R AC 84 $31 409,624 WOODSIDE COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC WOODSI 010 R AC 86 $67 632,663 2025 - SEAL CRACKS Total $2,602
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD I-80 OFF-RAMP HENRY AVE PINOLV 065 A AC 100 $555,324 9,509 2025 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $555,324
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 2ND AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 2NDAVE 010 R AC 100 $83,496 7,249 ALICE WAY HENRY AVE HENRY AVE ALICE 010 R AC 100 $367,709 7,072 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment BETTY AVENUE MEADOW AVE EAST MEADOW AVE BETTY 010 R AC 100 $53,369 7,266 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 5 MTC StreetSaver 314 of 395
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating CURRAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC CURRAN 010 R AC 100 $70,022 7,253 DEL MONTE DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DR CITY LIMITS DELMON 010 R AC 100 $114,901 7,174 DOIDGE AVENUE WRIGHT AVE MOORE CT DOIDGE 010 R AC 100 $261,217 7,173 FARIA COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC FARICT 010 R AC 100 $34,662 7,121 HANSEN PLACE ROBLE AVE CUL DE SAC HANSEN 010 R AC 100 $33,525 7,269 HERMOSA COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC HERMCT 010 R AC 100 $20,801 7,112 MENDOCINO DRIVE TAMALPAIS DR GOULARTE DR MENDDR 020 R AC 100 $135,865 7,238 MICHAEL DRIVE APPIAN WAY CUL DE SAC MICHAE 010 R AC 100 $111,196 7,111 OWENS COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC OWENS 010 R AC 100 $87,419 7,158 POQUITO COURT CUL DE SAC S. OF CANYON DR CUL DE SAC N. OF CANYON DR POQUIT 010 R AC 100 $46,999 7,221 PRIMROSE LANE PINON AVE LOPES CT PRIMRO 010 R AC 100 $95,461 7,208 ROBLE AVENUE ENCINA AVE PINON AVE ROBLE 020 R AC 100 $66,548 7,274 SANDRA COURT REBECCA DR CUL DE SAC SANDRA 010 R AC 100 $40,912 7,119 TAMALPAIS DRIVE SIMAS AVE MENDOCINO DR TAMALP 010 R AC 100 $448,652 7,067 2025 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $1,498,158
Year 2025 Total $1,498,158
Year: 2026
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 R AC 79 $2,936 19,584 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE PONDER 010 R AC 81 $36,665 19,557 2026 - SLURRY SEAL Total $39,601
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating APPIAN WAY MICHAEL DR I-80 EAST ON RAMP APPIAN 020 A AC/AC 85 $330 1,681,173 APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON RAMP I-80 WEST ON RAMP APPIAN 030 A AC/AC 85 $129 1,681,173 APPIAN WAY I-80 WEST ON RAMP MANN DR APPIAN 040 A AC/AC 86 $291 1,966,440 APPIAN WAY MANN DR SAN PABLO AVE APPIAN 050 A AC/AC 86 $600 1,966,440 BUENA VISTA DRIVE HOUSE #440 END OF LOOP BUENAV 020 R AC/AC 89 $3 16,694,218 CORTE CRUZ COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC CORTE 010 R AC/AC 89 $3 16,694,218 FERN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE VALLEYVIEW ST FERNAV 010 R AC/AC 89 $2 16,694,218 FITGERALD DRIVE JOVITA LN APPIAN WAY FITZGE 020 C AC/AC 87 $535 1,658,483 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment 2026 - SEAL CRACKS Total $1,893
** - Treatment from Project Selection 6 MTC StreetSaver 315 of 395
Year: 2026
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating FITGERALD DRIVE CALTRANS RIGHT OF WAY JOVITA LN FITZGE 010 C AC/AC 100 $503,093 6,708 MARLESTA ROAD HANLEY DR HOUSE #600 MARLES 010 C AC 100 $196,027 6,857 MARLESTA ROAD KILDARE WAY MCDONALD DR MARLES 030 C AC 100 $420,941 6,724 2026 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $1,120,061
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ALHAMBRA WAY MORAGA DR CUL DE SAC ALHAMB 010 R AC 100 $317,664 6,758 BAY VIEW FARM ROAD HOUSE #1059 PINON AVE BAYVIE 020 R AC 100 $289,121 6,870 DEAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC DEANCT 010 R AC 100 $76,783 6,864 DOOLIN COURT KILLARNEY RD CUL DE SAC DOOLIN 010 R AC 100 $31,008 6,953 FARIA AVENUE CLARK CT PONDEROSA TR FARIAV 020 R AC 100 $305,160 6,741 HOLLIDAY COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC HOLLID 010 R AC 100 $41,937 6,757 LEROY AVENUE LE FABVRE WY CUL DE SAC LEROY 010 R AC 100 $64,132 6,909 LUCAS AVENUE RAMONA ST CUL DE SAC LUCAS 020 R AC 100 $28,560 6,761 MONTE VISTA DRIVE PINOLE VALLEY DR ALHAMBRA WAY MONTVI 010 R AC 100 $284,236 6,775 PINON AVENUE BELFAIR DR DEAD END PINONA 020 R AC 100 $116,975 6,811 QUINAN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE BUENA VISTA DR (SOUTH INT) QUINAN 010 R AC 100 $107,982 6,799 ROBERT COURT ALICE WAY CUL DE SAC ROBERT 010 R AC 100 $32,061 6,748 VALLEY AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE CHARLES AVE VALLAV 010 R AC 100 $26,000 6,730 2026 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $1,721,619
Year 2026 Total $2,338,587
Grand Total $11,137,408
Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment ** - Treatment from Project Selection 7 MTC StreetSaver 316 of 395
Interest: 4.70%
City of Pinole Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Inflation: 3.00% Printed: 5/2/2022
Target: Overall 62
Scenario: PTAP 22 - S3: Plus 5 PCI Increase
Objective: Minimum Network Average PCI
Year: 2022
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 4THAVE 010 R AC/AC 91 $3,040 27,948 ALFRED DRIVE BELFAIR DR HAZEL ST ALFRED 010 R AC 92 $5,181 14,920 ANTONIA CIRCLE OAK RIDGE RD OAK RIDGE RD ANTONI 010 R AC 84 $10,603 21,645 APPIAN WAY MICHAEL DR I-80 EAST ON RAMP APPIAN 020 A AC/AC 87 $40,684 55,961 APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON RAMP I-80 WEST ON RAMP APPIAN 030 A AC/AC 87 $15,853 55,961 APPIAN WAY I-80 WEST ON RAMP MANN DR APPIAN 040 A AC/AC 88 $43,101 57,396 APPIAN WAY MANN DR SAN PABLO AVE APPIAN 050 A AC/AC 88 $88,816 57,396 BELMONT WAY MARLESTA RD CUL-DE-SAC BELMON 010 R AC/AC 87 $11,644 26,266 CURRY COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC CURRYC 432 R AC 82 $1,661 32,350 DUTRA COURT HAZEL ST CUL DE SAC DUTRA 010 R AC 83 $2,604 21,802 EBSEN COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC EBSEN 010 R AC/AC 87 $3,408 26,263 EL TORO WAY CANYON DR CUL DE SAC ELTORO 010 R AC 82 $10,511 28,242 FITGERALD DRIVE JOVITA LN APPIAN WAY FITZGE 020 C AC/AC 89 $99,494 40,899 GATLEY DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DRIVE CARLOTTA CIR GATLEY 010 R AC 87 $1,323 20,235 GERZ COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC GERZCT 010 R AC 89 $3,229 18,983 HEMLEB COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC HEMLEB 010 R AC 91 $6,903 16,141 KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC KELLEY 010 R AC 82 $2,704 29,745 MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE MADRON 010 R AC 83 $1,003 29,441 MEADOW AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE MEADOW 020 R AC 92 $9,888 14,937 MEEHAN COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC MEENA 433 R AC 86 $2,179 23,287 MENDOCINO DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MENDDR 010 R AC 91 $11,446 17,216 OAK RIDGE ROAD HENRY AVE IGNACIO CT OAKRID 010 C AC 84 $6,294 24,942 OAK RIDGE ROAD IGNACIO CT SAN PABLO AVE OAKRID 020 C AC 88 $17,568 25,759 ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE ROBLE 010 R AC/AC 91 $3,124 27,950 SIMAS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD DIABLO CT SIMAS 010 C AC/AC 90 $29,488 40,352 SIMAS AVENUE DIABLO CT APPALOOSA TR SIMAS 015 C AC/AC 90 $44,384 34,935 SIMAS AVENUE APPALOOSA TR PINOLE VALLEY RD SIMAS 020 C AC/AC 90 $33,776 32,631 SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC SUNVCT 010 R AC/AC 91 $2,900 27,948 TESORO COURT RIDGECREST RD CUL DE SAC TESORO 010 R AC 94 $6,358 12,215 2022 - SLURRY SEAL Total $519,167
** - Treatment from Project Selection 1 MTC StreetSaver 317 of 395
Year: 2022
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 R AC 77 $37 427,230 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE PONDER 010 R AC 79 $418 442,016 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES DR SUNNYVIEW DR SANPAB 030 A AC/AC 80 $594 1,188,648 SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY SANPAB 040 A AC/AC 80 $703 1,254,700 2022 - SEAL CRACKS Total $1,752
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD CITY LIMITS EAST OF MARLIN CT PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE #6 PINOLV 010 A AC 100 $440,526 10,522 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF SAVAGE ST COLLINS AVE (NORTH INT) PINOLV 030 A AC 100 $592,020 10,665 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD ESTATES AVE I-80 OFF-RAMP PINOLV 055 A AC 100 $308,000 10,349 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD HENRY AVE TENNENT AVE PINOLV 070 A AC 100 $192,757 10,599 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD TENNENT AVE SAN PABLO AVE PINOLV 080 A AC 100 $322,667 10,941 SAN PABLO AVENUE BELMONT WAY PINOLE SHORES DR SANPAB 020 A AC 100 $642,608 10,475 2022 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $2,498,578
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ALVAREZ AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE ALVARE 010 R AC 100 $97,440 7,689 APPALOOSA COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC APPACT 010 R AC 100 $58,200 7,875 APPALOOSA TRAIL BUCKSKIN RD GOULARTE DR APPATR 020 R AC 100 $180,450 7,938 BOX CANYON ROAD BUCKSKIN RD DEAD END BOXCAN 010 R AC 100 $45,725 7,735 BOYLE COURT KILKENNY WAY CUL DE SAC BOYLE 010 R AC 100 $36,540 7,822 COSTA COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC COSTA 010 R AC 100 $65,255 7,794 GOULARTE DRIVE MENDOCINO CT APPALOOSA TR GOULAR 010 R AC 100 $230,280 7,865 HOYTT COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC HOYTT 010 R AC 100 $21,390 7,954 JONES AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE JONES 010 R AC 100 $66,500 7,899 LASSEN WAY SIMAS AVE DEAD END LASSEN 010 R AC 100 $126,720 7,950 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE 100 SOUTH OF OVERPASS PINOLE 010 R AC 100 $172,575 7,898 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE 100 SOUTH OF OVERPASS DEL MONTE DR PINOLE 020 R AC 100 $192,570 7,713 POULOS COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC POULOS 010 R AC 100 $48,300 7,940 RAMONA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD LUCAS AVE RAMONA 010 R AC 100 $440,990 7,859 REBECCA DRIVE SARAH DR MICHAEL DR REBECC 010 R AC 100 $164,320 7,951 SARITA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC SARITA 371 R AC 100 $14,310 7,943 SEVILLE COURT MONTE VERDE DRIVE CUL DE SAC SEVILL 010 R AC 100 $91,040 7,691 TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC TOMAR 010 R AC 100 $17,120 7,733 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment VON DOLLEN COURT GOULARTE DR/POULOS CT CUL DE SAC VONDOL 010 R AC 100 $87,000 7,785 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 2 MTC StreetSaver 318 of 395
Year: 2022
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ZOE COURT ORLEANS DR CUL DE SAC ZOECT 010 R AC 100 $36,585 7,766 2023 - SLURRY SEAL Total $0
Year 2023 Total $0
Year: 2023
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE SHORES DR SUNNYVIEW DR SANPAB 030 A AC/AC 87 $49,638 36,798 SAN PABLO AVENUE SUNNYVIEW DR APPIAN WAY SANPAB 040 A AC/AC 88 $62,361 37,385 2023 - SLURRY SEAL Total $111,999
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 5TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 5THAVE 010 R AC 86 $60 416,417 CRESTVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE END OF LOOP CRESTV 010 R AC 87 $233 407,908 MAJOR VISTA COURT CRESTVIEW DR CUL DE SAC MAJORV 010 R AC 87 $56 407,940 NOB HILL AVENUE MEADOW AVE SUNNYVIEW DR NOBHIL 010 R AC 88 $68 387,126 O CONNOR DRIVE CITY LIMITS (HOUSE #401) BANTRY RD OCONNE 010 R AC 87 $53 407,758 2023 - SEAL CRACKS Total $470
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE #6 BRIDGE WEST OF SAVAGE ST PINOLV 020 A AC 100 $670,674 10,117 SAN PABLO AVENUE OAK RIDGE RD BRIDGE (HERCULES CL) SANPAB 055 A AC 100 $832,755 10,108 2023 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $1,503,429
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ALAMO STREET 100 FT. EAST OF HIGUERA AVE PONDEROSA TR ALAMO 020 R AC 100 $178,973 7,562 BELDIN STREET APPIAN WAY CUL-DE-SAC BELDEN 010 R AC 100 $79,259 7,547 BETTY AVENUE MEADOW AVE EAST MEADOW AVE BETTY 010 R AC 100 $50,306 7,516 CURRAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC CURRAN 010 R AC 100 $66,003 7,499 HANSEN PLACE ROBLE AVE CUL DE SAC HANSEN 010 R AC 100 $31,601 7,519 LE FEBVRE WAY SUMMIT DR TEMP DEAD END LEFEBV 010 R AC 100 $71,240 7,542 PINON AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE BELFAIR DR PINONA 010 R AC 100 $283,374 7,545 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment ROBLE AVENUE ENCINA AVE PINON AVE ROBLE 020 R AC 100 $62,727 7,525 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 3 MTC StreetSaver 319 of 395
Year: 2023
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating SILVERADO DRIVE SIMAS AVE PRIVATE DRIVE SILVAD 010 R AC 100 $298,247 7,562 STOKES AVENUE DOIDGE AVE MOORE CT STOKES 010 R AC 100 $176,996 7,533 2023 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $176,996
Year 2023 Total $176,996
Year: 2024
Street Name
Treatment: RUBBER CAPE SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD SIMAS AVE GRANADA CT PINOLV 045 A AC/AC 78 $360,635 7,263 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD GRANADA CT ESTATES AVE PINOLV 050 A AC/AC 78 $467,760 7,263 2024 - RUBBER CAPE SEAL Total $828,395
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ADOBE ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD PAVEMENT CHANGE ADOBE 005 R AC 95 $6,149 9,289 DIABLO CIRCLE SIMAS AVE SIMAS AVE DIABLO 010 R AC 95 $16,311 9,271 RUFF AVENUE FARIA AVE PALOMA ST RUFFAV 010 R AC 95 $16,794 9,269 2024 - SLURRY SEAL Total $39,254
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating SAN PABLO AVENUE APPIAN WAY OAK RIDGE RD SANPAB 050 A AC 100 $729,992 9,787 2024 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $729,992
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating 2ND AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 2NDAVE 010 R AC 100 $81,064 7,377 ALICE WAY HENRY AVE HENRY AVE ALICE 010 R AC 100 $356,999 7,172 DEL MONTE DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DR CITY LIMITS DELMON 010 R AC 100 $111,554 7,289 DOIDGE AVENUE WRIGHT AVE MOORE CT DOIDGE 010 R AC 100 $253,609 7,286 FARIA COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC FARICT 010 R AC 100 $33,652 7,229 HERMOSA COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC HERMCT 010 R AC 100 $20,195 7,216 MENDOCINO DRIVE TAMALPAIS DR GOULARTE DR MENDDR 020 R AC 100 $131,908 7,363 MICHAEL DRIVE APPIAN WAY CUL DE SAC MICHAE 010 R AC 100 $107,958 7,214 OWENS COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC OWENS 010 R AC 100 $84,872 7,269 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment POQUITO COURT CUL DE SAC S. OF CANYON DR CUL DE SAC N. OF CANYON DR POQUIT 010 R AC 100 $45,630 7,343 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 4 MTC StreetSaver 320 of 395
Year: 2024
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PRIMROSE LANE PINON AVE LOPES CT PRIMRO 010 R AC 100 $92,681 7,329 SANDRA COURT REBECCA DR CUL DE SAC SANDRA 010 R AC 100 $39,721 7,223 TAMALPAIS DRIVE SIMAS AVE MENDOCINO DR TAMALP 010 R AC 100 $435,585 7,166 2024 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $475,306
Year 2024 Total $475,306
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ESTATES AVENUE SIMAS AVE RAMONA ST ESTATE 010 C AC 94 $43,001 19,302 2025 - SLURRY SEAL Total $43,001
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ADOBE ROAD PAVEMENT CHANGE CUL-DE-SAC ADOBE 015 R AC 87 $36 375,372 ALTAMIRANO CIRCLE FRANCISCA CT FRANCISCA CT ALTAMI 010 R AC 85 $64 642,666 AMEND STREET MANN DR CUL DE SAC AMEND 010 R AC 87 $114 375,372 ANTONIA COURT ANTONIA CIRCLE CUL DE SAC ANTOCT 010 R AC 84 $40 610,707 BAY VIEW FARM ROAD SUNNYVIEW DR HOUSE #1059 BAYVIE 010 R AC 84 $54 409,624 BERNARDO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC BERNAR 010 R AC 85 $30 642,666 BLUE JAY CIRCLE GALBRETH RD END OF LOOP BLUEJA 010 R AC 88 $94 671,000 BRENDA COURT BELFAIR DR CUL DE SAC BRENDA 010 R AC 87 $22 375,465 BRETT COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC BRETT 010 R AC 87 $44 385,037 CANYON DRIVE APPIAN WAY EL TORO WAY CANYON 010 R AC 86 $162 668,643 CLARK COURT FARIA AVE CUL DE SAC CLARK 010 R AC 82 $69 538,996 COLINA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC COLINA 010 R AC 84 $19 621,870

COLLINS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD - WEST

ENTRANCE
TOMAR CT COLLIN 010A R AC 74 $153 410,180

COLLINS AVENUE TOMAR CT PINOLE VALLEY RD - EAST

ENTRANCE
COLLIN 010B R AC 74 $187 410,180
DANNY COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC DANNY 010 R AC 83 $68 577,162 DOWNER STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD HENRY AVE DOWNER 010 R AC 86 $196 400,229 ENLOW COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC ENLOWC 010 R AC 81 $49 411,896 FLAMINGO COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC FLAMIN 010 R AC 86 $29 391,419 FRANCISCA COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC FRANCT 010 R AC 83 $128 413,633 FRASER COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC FRASER 010 R AC 83 $77 414,142 GALBRETH ROAD PINOLE VALLEY RD BLUE JAY CIR GALBRE 15A R AC 89 $193 665,536 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment GALBRETH ROAD BLUE JAY CIR END OF CUL DE SAC GALBRE 15B R AC 89 $58 665,536 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 5 MTC StreetSaver 321 of 395
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating GLEN COURT MARIONOLA WAY CUL DE SAC GLENCT 010 R AC 86 $45 391,419 HANLEY DRIVE LIMERICK RD MARLESTA RD HANLDR 010 R AC 83 $89 587,083 HAZEL STREET SUNNYVIEW DR DEAD END HAZEL 005 R AC 84 $42 409,512 HENRY AVENUE LEWIS LN OAK RIDGE DR HENRY 020 R AC 84 $169 409,596 HENRY AVENUE OAK RIDGE DR PINOLE VALLEY RD HENRY 030 R AC 84 $308 409,624 HENRY AVENUE ALICE WAY FRANCIS DR HENRY 050 R AC 83 $159 413,633 HERMOSA STREET LUCAS AVE SIMAS AVE HERMST 020 R AC 86 $147 654,484 HIGUERA AVENUE RAMONA ST ALAMO ST HIGUER 010 R AC 85 $48 403,414 HUTCHINSON COURT PINON AVE CUL DE SAC HUTCHI 010 R AC 83 $82 413,633 IGNACIO COURT OAK RIDGE RD CUL DE SAC IGNACI 010 R AC 84 $19 409,596 JOHN STREET SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE JOHNST 010 R AC 85 $68 403,414 LA CANADA COURT SAVAGE AVE CUL DE SAC LACANA 010 R AC 84 $61 638,048 LA REINA STREET HERMOSA ST RAMONA ST LAREIN 010 R AC 84 $81 409,624 LAUREL AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE LAUREL 010 R AC/AC 81 $92 499,751 LUCAS AVENUE ESTATES AVE RAMONA ST LUCAS 010 R AC 83 $144 413,621 MARLESTA ROAD HOUSE #600 KILDARE WAY MARLES 020 C AC 86 $174 536,317 MCDONALD DRIVE MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC MCDONA 010 R AC 84 $295 610,707 MEADOW AVENUE MARLESTA RD NOB HILL AVE MEADOW 010 R AC 85 $65 403,414 MONTCLAIR COURT SANTA BARBARA DR CUL DE SAC MONTCL 010 R AC 82 $33 538,996 MORAGA DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MORAGA 020 R AC 87 $91 382,186 ORLEANS DRIVE TENNENT AVE NORTH DEAD END ORLEAN 020 R AC/AC 87 $24 1,096,038 PARK STREET QUINAN AVE TENNENT AVE PARKST 010 R AC 76 $60 448,850 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC PINOLE 030 R AC 84 $106 409,596 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE HOLIDAY CT PONDER 020A R AC 82 $122 414,585 PONDEROSA TRAIL HOLIDAY CT DEAD END SOUTH OF ALAMO ST PONDER 020B R AC 82 $293 414,585 PRIMROSE LANE LOPES CT CUL DE SAC PRIMRO 020 R AC 87 $73 385,037 RAFAELA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD JOHN ST RAFAEL 010 R AC 84 $64 621,870 RIDGECREST ROAD HOUSE #1569 TESORO CT RIDGEC 020 R AC 85 $292 579,183 ROGERS WAY NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE ROGERS 010 R AC 82 $105 593,552 RUFF COURT FARIA ST CUL DE SAC RUFFCT 010 R AC 83 $58 570,451 SANTA BARBARA DRIVE RAMONA ST SILVERADO DR SANTAB 010 R AC 82 $155 582,667 SARAH COURT SHEA DR CUL DE SAC SARACT 010 R AC/AC 87 $69 1,096,038 SILVERCREST COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC SILVCT 010 R AC 85 $68 596,012 SILVERCREST STREET VICTOR AVE DEAD END SILVST 010 R AC 86 $45 391,419 SONOMA WAY MORAGA DR MENDOCINO AVE SONOMA 010 R AC 85 $129 405,878 SUMMIT COURT SUMMIT DR CUL DE SAC SUMMCT 010 R AC 85 $14 403,422 SUMMIT DRIVE CUL DE SAC (SOUTH) BUENA VISTA DR SUMMDR 010 R AC 73 $94 414,090 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment SUMMIT DRIVE BUENA VISTA DR CUL DE SAC (NORTH-EAST) SUMMDR 020 R AC 80 $141 411,629 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 6 MTC StreetSaver 322 of 395
Year: 2025
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating SUNNYVIEW DRIVE MARELSTA RD SAN PABLO AVE SUNVDR 010 R AC 85 $149 403,414 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE BAY VIEW FARM RD SUNVDR 020A R AC 87 $75 672,847 SUNNYVIEW DRIVE BAY VIEW FARM RD DEAD END AT WOY CIRCLE SUNVDR 020B R AC 87 $149 672,847 VALLEY VIEW DRIVE FERN AVE BUENA VISTA DR VALLDR 010 R AC 82 $27 414,587 VICTOR STREET WRIGHT AVE SILVERCREST ST VICTOR 020 R AC 83 $191 556,775 WHIPPOORWILL COURT GALBRETH RD CUL DE SAC WHIPOR 010 R AC 85 $85 579,183 WILDE COURT KILDARE WAY CUL DE SAC WILDE 010 R AC 84 $31 409,624 WOODSIDE COURT VICTOR AVE CUL DE SAC WOODSI 010 R AC 86 $67 632,663 2025 - SEAL CRACKS Total $625
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating FITGERALD DRIVE CALTRANS RIGHT OF WAY JOVITA LN FITZGE 010 C AC/AC 100 $488,440 6,765 MARLESTA ROAD HANLEY DR HOUSE #600 MARLES 010 C AC 100 $190,317 6,919 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD I-80 OFF-RAMP HENRY AVE PINOLV 065 A AC 100 $555,324 9,509 2025 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $1,234,081
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating BAY VIEW FARM ROAD HOUSE #1059 PINON AVE BAYVIE 020 R AC 100 $280,700 6,968 DEAN COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC DEANCT 010 R AC 100 $74,546 6,961 DOOLIN COURT KILLARNEY RD CUL DE SAC DOOLIN 010 R AC 100 $30,105 7,062 FARIA AVENUE CLARK CT PONDEROSA TR FARIAV 020 R AC 100 $296,272 6,822 HOLLIDAY COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC HOLLID 010 R AC 100 $40,716 6,839 LEROY AVENUE LE FABVRE WY CUL DE SAC LEROY 010 R AC 100 $62,264 7,011 LUCAS AVENUE RAMONA ST CUL DE SAC LUCAS 020 R AC 100 $27,728 6,844 MONTE VISTA DRIVE PINOLE VALLEY DR ALHAMBRA WAY MONTVI 010 R AC 100 $275,958 6,859 PINON AVENUE BELFAIR DR DEAD END PINONA 020 R AC 100 $113,568 6,898 QUINAN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE BUENA VISTA DR (SOUTH INT) QUINAN 010 R AC 100 $104,837 6,887 ROBERT COURT ALICE WAY CUL DE SAC ROBERT 010 R AC 100 $31,127 6,829 2025 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $1,337,821
Year 2025 Total $2,572,527
Year: 2026
Street Name
Treatment: RUBBER CAPE SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment CARLOTTA CIRCLE GATELY DRIVE GATELY DRIVE CAROLO 431 R AC 76 $150,540 3,972 ** - Treatment from Project Selection 7 MTC StreetSaver 323 of 395
2026 - RUBBER CAPE SEAL Total $150,540
BARRETT COURT PONDEROSA TR CUL DE SAC BARRET 010 R AC 79 $2,936 19,584 PONDEROSA TRAIL FARIA AVE FARIA AVE PONDER 010 R AC 81 $36,665 19,557 2026 - SLURRY SEAL Total $39,601
4TH AVENUE MARLESTA AVE NOB HILL AVE 4THAVE 010 R AC/AC 89 $3 7,150,767 ALFRED DRIVE BELFAIR DR HAZEL ST ALFRED 010 R AC 86 $46 387,522 ALVAREZ AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE ALVARE 010 R AC 88 $23 969,239 ANTONIA CIRCLE OAK RIDGE RD OAK RIDGE RD ANTONI 010 R AC 80 $146 394,366 APPALOOSA COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC APPACT 010 R AC 88 $14 969,239 APPALOOSA TRAIL BUCKSKIN RD GOULARTE DR APPATR 020 R AC 88 $42 969,239 APPIAN WAY MICHAEL DR I-80 EAST ON RAMP APPIAN 020 A AC/AC 85 $330 1,681,173 APPIAN WAY I-80 EAST ON RAMP I-80 WEST ON RAMP APPIAN 030 A AC/AC 85 $129 1,681,173 APPIAN WAY I-80 WEST ON RAMP MANN DR APPIAN 040 A AC/AC 86 $291 1,966,440 APPIAN WAY MANN DR SAN PABLO AVE APPIAN 050 A AC/AC 86 $600 1,966,440 BELMONT WAY MARLESTA RD CUL-DE-SAC BELMON 010 R AC/AC 85 $96 769,859 BOX CANYON ROAD BUCKSKIN RD DEAD END BOXCAN 010 R AC 88 $11 969,239 BOYLE COURT KILKENNY WAY CUL DE SAC BOYLE 010 R AC 88 $9 969,239 BUENA VISTA DRIVE HOUSE #440 END OF LOOP BUENAV 020 R AC/AC 89 $3 16,694,218 CORTE CRUZ COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC CORTE 010 R AC/AC 89 $3 16,694,218 COSTA COURT HOKE DR CUL DE SAC COSTA 010 R AC 88 $15 969,239 CURRY COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC CURRYC 432 R AC 81 $22 734,822 DUTRA COURT HAZEL ST CUL DE SAC DUTRA 010 R AC 79 $38 393,434 EBSEN COURT SARAH DR CUL DE SAC EBSEN 010 R AC/AC 85 $29 769,168 EL TORO WAY CANYON DR CUL DE SAC ELTORO 010 R AC 80 $142 522,159 FERN AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE VALLEYVIEW ST FERNAV 010 R AC/AC 89 $2 16,694,218 FITGERALD DRIVE JOVITA LN APPIAN WAY FITZGE 020 C AC/AC 87 $535 1,658,483 GATLEY DRIVE PINOLE SHORES DRIVE CARLOTTA CIR GATLEY 010 R AC 83 $16 402,260 GERZ COURT ESTATES AVE CUL DE SAC GERZCT 010 R AC 84 $34 400,494 GOULARTE DRIVE MENDOCINO CT APPALOOSA TR GOULAR 010 R AC 88 $53 969,239 HEMLEB COURT BAYVIEW FARM RD CUL DE SAC HEMLEB 010 R AC 85 $63 391,470 HOYTT COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC HOYTT 010 R AC 88 $5 969,239 JONES AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE GATE JONES 010 R AC 88 $16 969,239 KELLEY COURT MANN DR CUL DE SAC KELLEY 010 R AC 80 $36 558,095 LASSEN WAY SIMAS AVE DEAD END LASSEN 010 R AC 88 $30 969,239 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment Street Name
Treatment: SLURRY SEAL
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ** - Treatment from Project Selection 8 MTC StreetSaver 324 of 395
Year: 2026
Street Name
Treatment: SEAL CRACKS
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating MADRONE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE PRIVATE DRIVE MADRON 010 R AC 81 $13 558,713 MEADOW AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE MEADOW 020 R AC 86 $87 387,654 MEEHAN COURT CARLOTTA CIRCLE CUL-DE-SAC MEENA 433 R AC 82 $27 582,431 MENDOCINO DRIVE SIMAS AVE TAMALPAIS DR MENDDR 010 R AC 85 $109 394,073 OAK RIDGE ROAD HENRY AVE IGNACIO CT OAKRID 010 C AC 77 $99 403,928 OAK RIDGE ROAD IGNACIO CT SAN PABLO AVE OAKRID 020 C AC 82 $213 468,576 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE SAN PABLO AVE 100 SOUTH OF OVERPASS PINOLE 010 R AC 88 $40 969,239 PINOLE SHORES DRIVE 100 SOUTH OF OVERPASS DEL MONTE DR PINOLE 020 R AC 88 $45 969,239 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD CITY LIMITS EAST OF MARLIN CT PINOLE CREEK BRIDGE #6 PINOLV 010 A AC 86 $195 1,001,607 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD BRIDGE WEST OF SAVAGE ST COLLINS AVE (NORTH INT) PINOLV 030 A AC 86 $262 1,001,607 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD ESTATES AVE I-80 OFF-RAMP PINOLV 055 A AC 86 $137 1,001,607 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD HENRY AVE TENNENT AVE PINOLV 070 A AC 86 $86 1,001,607 PINOLE VALLEY ROAD TENNENT AVE SAN PABLO AVE PINOLV 080 A AC 86 $143 1,001,607 POULOS COURT GOULARTE DR CUL DE SAC POULOS 010 R AC 88 $12 969,239 RAMONA STREET PINOLE VALLEY RD LUCAS AVE RAMONA 010 R AC 88 $102 969,239 REBECCA DRIVE SARAH DR MICHAEL DR REBECC 010 R AC 88 $38 969,239 ROBLE AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE ENCINA AVE ROBLE 010 R AC/AC 89 $3 7,275,110 SAN PABLO AVENUE BELMONT WAY PINOLE SHORES DR SANPAB 020 A AC 86 $284 1,001,607 SARITA COURT PINOLE VALLEY RD CUL DE SAC SARITA 371 R AC 88 $4 969,239 SEVILLE COURT MONTE VERDE DRIVE CUL DE SAC SEVILL 010 R AC 88 $21 969,239 SIMAS AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY RD DIABLO CT SIMAS 010 C AC/AC 87 $122 2,108,690 SIMAS AVENUE DIABLO CT APPALOOSA TR SIMAS 015 C AC/AC 87 $241 1,711,274 SIMAS AVENUE APPALOOSA TR PINOLE VALLEY RD SIMAS 020 C AC/AC 86 $207 1,497,680 SUNNYVIEW COURT MARLESTA DR CUL DE SAC SUNVCT 010 R AC/AC 89 $3 7,150,767 TESORO COURT RIDGECREST RD CUL DE SAC TESORO 010 R AC 87 $53 376,941 TOMAR COURT COLLINS AVE CUL DE SAC TOMAR 010 R AC 88 $4 969,239 VON DOLLEN COURT GOULARTE DR/POULOS CT CUL DE SAC VONDOL 010 R AC 88 $20 969,239 ZOE COURT ORLEANS DR CUL DE SAC ZOECT 010 R AC 88 $9 969,239 2026 - SEAL CRACKS Total $2,566
Street Name
Treatment: MILL AND THICK OVERLAY
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating MARLESTA ROAD KILDARE WAY MCDONALD DR MARLES 030 C AC 100 $420,941 6,724 Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment 2026 - MILL AND THICK OVERLAY Total $420,941
** - Treatment from Project Selection 9 MTC StreetSaver 325 of 395
Year: 2026
Street Name
Treatment: RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating PINOLE VALLEY ROAD COLLINS AVE (NORTH INT) SIMAS AVE PINOLV 035 A AC/AC 100 $602,335 3,928

SAN PABLO AVENUE CITY LIMITS AT CHURCH PAVEMENT TRANSITION AT DURSEY DR
SANPAB 005 A AC 100 $488,209 3,928

SAN PABLO AVENUE PAVEMENT TRANSITION AT DURSEY
DR
BELMONT WAY SANPAB 010 A AC 100 $491,537 3,928
2026 - RECONSTRUCT STRUCTURE (AC) Total $1,582,081
Street Name
Treatment: THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES)
Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface PCI Cost Rating ALHAMBRA WAY MORAGA DR CUL DE SAC ALHAMB 010 R AC 100 $317,664 6,758 ANNE COURT HENRY AVE CUL DE SAC ANNECT 010 R AC 100 $30,355 6,676 CHARLES ST VALLEY RD SAN PABLO AVE CHARLE 010 R AC 100 $99,169 6,673 DORA COURT FRANCIS DR CUL DE SAC DORACT 010 R AC 100 $70,829 6,674 ENCINA AVENUE ROBLE AVE DEAD END ENCINA 010 R AC 100 $60,823 6,673 HAZEL STREET DEAD END PINON AVE HAZEL 015 R AC 100 $161,669 6,641 HENRY AVENUE RIDGECREST RD LEWIS LN HENRY 010 R AC 100 $56,884 6,708 MORAGA DRIVE SAVAGE AVE SIMAS AVE MORAGA 010 R AC 100 $185,980 6,618 VALLEY AVENUE SAN PABLO AVE CHARLES AVE VALLAV 010 R AC 100 $26,000 6,730 2026 - THICK AC OVERLAY(2.5 INCHES) Total $1,009,373
Year 2026 Total $1,989,119
Grand Total $17,350,084
Target-Driven Scenarios - Sections Selected for Treatment ** - Treatment from Project Selection 10 MTC StreetSaver 326 of 395
Year Budget PM Year Budget PM Year Budget PM
2022 $11,016,647 1.48%
2023 $11,016,647 1.48%
2024 $11,016,647 1.48%
2025 $11,016,647 1.48%
2026 $11,016,647 1.48%
Area ID
Year:

Street Name Begin Location End Location Street ID Section ID FC Surface
Type Cost Rating Treatment
Current
Length Width Area PCI
PCI
Before
PCI
After
Treatment
2022
3RD AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 3RDAVE 010 585 27 15,795 R AC 60 61 71 $45,630 3,926 RUBBER CAPE SEAL 4TH AVENUE NOB HILL AVE SAN PABLO AVE 4THAVE 020 611 26 15,886 R AC 62 63 73 $45,893 3,979 RUBBER CAPE SEAL ARROYO AVENUE MADERA ST VICTOR ST ARROYO 010 566 32 18,112 R AC 62 63 73 $52,324 3,585 RUBBER CAPE SEAL BANTRY ROAD O`CONNOR RD HANLEY DR BANTRY 010 724 33 23,892 R AC 61 62 72 $69,022 3,679 RUBBER CAPE SEAL

BELFAIR DRIVE BAYVIEW FARM
RD
PINON AVE BELFAI 010 1,413 31 43,803 R AC 67 68 77 $126,542 4,306 RUBBER CAPE SEAL COLUSA STREET ESTATES AVE LA REINA ST COLUSA 010 2,486 36 89,496 R AC 66 67 76 $258,544 3,978 RUBBER CAPE SEAL

EAST MEADOW
AVENUE
MEADOW AVE MEADOW AVE EMEADO 010 1,211 24 29,064 R AC 64 65 74 $83,963 4,050 RUBBER CAPE SEAL EMMA DRIVE ALICE WAY HENRY AVE EMMADR 010 1,737 31 53,847 R AC 61 62 72 $155,558 3,678 RUBBER CAPE SEAL HANLEY COURT MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC HANLCT 010 276 30 8,280 R AC 63 64 74 $23,920 3,809 RUBBER CAPE SEAL

HENRY AVENUE PINOLE VALLEY
RD
ALICE WAY HENRY 040 1,606 37 59,422 R AC 66 67 76 $171,664 3,978 RUBBER CAPE SEAL HENRY AVENUE FRANCIS DR DEAD END HENRY 060 1,437 31 44,547 R AC 69 70 79 $128,692 3,386 RUBBER CAPE SEAL HERMOSA STREET ESTATES AVE LUCAS ST HERMST 010 940 32 30,080 R AC 65 66 75 $86,898 3,900 RUBBER CAPE SEAL

JOHANNA COURT PINOLE VALLEY
RD
CUL DE SAC JOHANN 010 242 27 6,534 R AC 62 63 73 $18,876 3,530 RUBBER CAPE SEAL KENMAR COURT MARLESTA RD CUL DE SAC KENMAR 010 254 30 7,620 R AC 66 67 76 $22,014 4,081 RUBBER CAPE SEAL KYER STREET HERMOSA ST ESTATES AVE KYERST 010 491 32 15,712 R AC 64 65 74 $45,391 3,879 RUBBER CAPE SEAL LIMERICK ROAD TARA HILLS DR O`CONNER DR LIMERI 010 1,313 34 44,642 R AC 68 69 78 $128,966 4,151 RUBBER CAPE SEAL

MANN DRIVE PAVEMENT
CHANGE
MCDONALD DR MANNDR 015 1,091 37 40,367 R AC 67 68 77 $116,616 3,367 RUBBER CAPE SEAL MARLESTA ROAD MCDONALD DR APPIAN WAY MARLES 040 1,536 36 55,296 C AC 68 69 78 $159,744 3,519 RUBBER CAPE SEAL